Three perspectives of practicing leadership
(c)2002 by Ben Brink
The Prince, The Servant-Leadership, and a historical perspective of the ancient origins of fresh ideas: universal selfless service from The Highest of the High.
introduction
Leadership is a thread of ever changing constants in the measure of power and its influence. Fundamental understanding and issues in leadership pivot on answering these questions: How does one measure power if it is not directly observable as a potential? In an experiment on leadership, how does one measure the influence of power when the number of control variables are far exceeded by environmental ones? This paper outlines three operating perspectives of leadership based on the differences between the objectively measurable and the experienced yet objectively immeasurable --the subjective, and draws some basic conclusions about the paradox of learning and teaching leadership dynamics.
The Prince
The Prince's method of leadership is based on a set of limited assumptions of collective human behavior in which actions are the result of applying consistently cynical social values. For instance, in chapter XVII, Machiavelli writes:
Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely
Machiavelli measures the use and mis-use of power from historical political records. Modern society professionalism draws similar conclusions from current marked patterns of behavior. Modern leadership measures intensity of leadership ability in ways not too different from Machiavelli: Loyalty of subjects, power to coerce or rule by authority, availability and mastery in using measurable resources such as military strength etc.
Legal practitioners make cynical Machiavellian assumptions of what to expect from others when protecting their clients. A grave misapplication of the practice of law happens when business and trade relationships are postured on the assumption that others will only exhibit cynical Machiavellian behavior. The worst of humanity may be witnessed in courtrooms, but these incidents are infrequent compared to the greater potentiality for positive moments experienced throughout life.
The Machiavelli perspective also carries into business decision-making. Business decisions are largely based on game-theory and competition. The one who wins is the one who doesn't play by the rules --the defector. MBA's love to shift risk to someone else without due compensation. Again, this is based on limited thinking. From an expanded perspective, according to Hardin's Tragedy of the Commons, eventually everyone loses in a competitive environment.
Economics is based on an inaccurate postulate that markets are most efficient when competitive. However, common experience suggests that markets are most efficient when cooperative. That is the basis for concepts like supply-chain management; where cooperation is valued, though limited in scope. Also, economics does not address the fact that few markets are 100 percent effective in trading resources. In competition, there are always losers. Economics assumes that some mechanism exists for losers to recover losses by changing, but opportunities may not be available. Machiavelli would have the prince discard any concerns for losers, because essentially the attitude is interpersonal competition ie. "each person for themselves" in an ocean of self-focused power mongers. Concerning oneself with the few losers is counter to maintaining Machiavellian prince status.
The Servant-Leadership
Servant-Leadership is essentially about the dual servant-master role of leadership, first defined by Robert K. Greenleaf (1904-1990) in 1970 as a new approach to leadership. He writes:
The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived? (Greenleaf)
Essentially, one leads by serving others in supporting their life-long personal growth and while striving for and meeting common goals. Larry C. Spears identifies ten character traits of a servant-leader as essential for leadership development. Listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community (Spears) are characteristics that can be measured objectively in much the same way that metrics valuate performance of Machiavelli's power-authority-leadership principles. Servant-Leadership addresses microleadership concerns that Machiavelli's macroleadership techniques ignore.
The idea of voluntary behavior control through persuasion instead of coercion is a significant difference between Machiavelli's leadership and servant-leadership. Yet, persuasion implies that the individual does not already possess the knowledge latently. This is a significant flaw in the practice of leadership. In part, the limitation is created by the very foundation of academic and scientific thinking that Servant-Leadership uses to establish integrity.
How does one differentiate between coercion and submission? Essentially they are two branches of the same tree --the imposing of one's viewpoint on another --voluntary or not. Needing to persuade also suggests a level of disrespect or contempt for the beliefs of others. Machiavelli makes the point that many of the prince's subjects will voluntarily submit to the prince's leadership because of a lack of will to fight it. In practice, one cannot wholly differentiate between subtle forms of coercion and persuasion. That is the basis of some ethics laws, for example on relationships in organizations --where one of two intimate parties holds a position of authority.
Mastery in Servitude
In 1938, Meher Baba (1894-1969) declared "Mastery in Servitude" to be the motto highlighting His leadership style of selfless service in universal work. His universal message declares the importance of "living the humility, purity and truth" (Baba, Universal Message) of divine messages given by past Avatars--Buddha, Krishna, Mohammed, Jesus, Zoroaster, Ram etc. that can be summarized as "Love God." How can loving God be a legitimate form of leadership? Note the parallels to servant-leadership in the following statement by Baba about practical psychological indicators of loving God:
To love God in the most practical way is to love our fellow beings. If we feel for others in the same way as we feel for our own dear ones, we love God. If, instead of seeing faults in others, we look within ourselves, we are loving God. If, instead of robbing others to help ourselves, we rob ourselves to help others, we are loving God. If we suffer in the sufferings of others and feel happy in the happiness of others, we are loving God. If, instead of worrying over our own misfortunes, we think ourselves more fortunate than many many others, we are loving God. If we endure our lot with patience and contentment, accepting it as His Will [karmic fate], we are loving God. If we understand and feel that the greatest act of devotion and worship to God is not to hurt or harm any of His beings, we are loving God. To love God as He ought to be loved, we must live for God and die for God, knowing that the goal of life is to Love God, and find Him as our own self. (Baba, 1986)
All but one of the servant-leadership characteristics appear to be an attempt to intellectually categorize properties of divine love (not an easy task): Listening, empathy, healing, awareness, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community. Of Machiavelli's coercion and servant-leadership's persuasion leadership characteristics, Baba takes no part: "I have come not to teach but to awaken. Understand therefore that I lay down no precepts." (Universal Message). By awakening, he implies that the knowledge and wisdom of a universal self exists latently inside everyone. Respect for individual variation of awareness is paramount. Furthermore, he explains an important characteristic of love:
Love has to spring spontaneously from within; it is in no way amenable to any form of inner or outer force. Love and coercion can never go together; but while love cannot be forced upon anyone, it can be awakened through love itself. Love is essentially self-communicative;" (Baba, 1987, p. 8)
Mastery in Servitude is about loving God by loving others, yet God and concepts of the spirit (spirituality) is in the realm of subjective experience; God cannot be proven objectively. Baba states the limits of spiritual experience in an objective environment:
Spiritual experience has a hold on the deeper truths that are inaccessible to mere intellect; it cannot be born of unaided intellect. Spiritual truth can often be stated and expressed through the intellect, and the intellect surely is of some help for the communication of spiritual experience. But by itself, the intellect is insufficient to enable man to have spiritual experience or to communicate it to others. ...Intellectual explanation can never be a substitute for spiritual experience; it can at best prepare the ground for it." (Baba, 1987, p. 5)
conclusion
This report outlines the development of leadership from the objective to the human, with far-reaching truths about leadership from Machiavelli, progressing to Servant-Leadership, and ending with Mastery in Servitude. In breaking the rigid intellectual framework of leadership to its primary individual, spiritual perspective of loving God [self], leadership is ultimately viewed as subjective and therefore a lonely journey, since one cannot competently convey a subjective, intellectual interpretation of leadership measurement to others who do not view similarly. Nor can one ethically persuade others to accept that which they do not see or understand, but remains latently in them.
Bibliography and Citations
Baba, Meher. (1986) The Path of Love. San Francisco: Sufism Reoriented. (p.109). [online]. available from http://www.avatarmeherbaba.org/erics/lovegod.html
Baba, Meher. (1987). Discourses. (7th ed.). Myrtle Beach, SC: Sheriar P. [online]. (pp. 260-265) available from http://www.avatarmeherbaba.org/erics/sadhanas.html
Baba, Meher. Universal Message. In C. B. Purdom. (1971). God-man (pp. 343-344). [online]. available from http://www.avatarmeherbaba.org/erics/univmsg.html
Greenleaf, Robert K. (1970). The Servant as a Leader. In Larry C. Spears. (circa 2002) On Character and Servant-Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders. [online]. available from http://greenleaf.org/leadership/read-about-it/articles/On-Character-and-Servant-Leadership-Ten-Characteristics.htm
Hardin, Garret. (1968) The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162. [online]. available from http://dieoff.com/page95.htm
Machiavelli, Nicolo. (circa 1520). The Prince. In W. K. Marriott (translator). (1998). [online]. available from ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext98/tprnc10.txt
Spears, Larry C. (circa 2002). On Character and Servant-Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders. [online]. available from http://greenleaf.org/leadership/read-about-it/articles/On-Character-and-Servant-Leadership-Ten-Characteristics.htm