The absence of a crystal clear definition of leadership and a standard of measurement has confused everyone. When people talk about entirely different things, they experience different views which lead to different terms and implications. The outcomes will also be different. The interpretability of leadership has confused people as it means different things to different people. Quantifying the qualities and traits that distinguish the leaders do not work towards a standard that is unanimously agreed upon among people.
Although passion, courage, enthusiasm, integrity, ability to communicate and delegate are a must have, but they do not make great leaders. Also, the different leadership styles such as the strategic leadership, transformational, cross-cultural, facilitative, servant, democratic, situational, charismatic and many other styles can be confusing. The confusion comes from the difficulty in choosing the best style that is suitable for a particular circumstance.
How do we measure leadership?
There should be a mark or standard upon which the leaders’ contributions are measured and easily judged. The measurement should be beyond money making and short terms interests. Establishing a universally agreed standard enables people and all organizations to understand what they are working towards and aspiring to. The definiteness of the definition and the standard limits the ambiguity and clear the confusion.
Who are the true contributors? Who are the true leaders? There should be a scale at which, people would be able to discern the contributors from the non-contributors and the leaders from the non-leaders.