From Popes to Politicians - What is good leadership?

I voted yesterday at the local pre-polling booth and it seemed like half the electorate had the same idea.  While I waited, two men stood together in a small pop up cabana near the front of the line handing out flyers as the endless line of voters shuffled impatiently past them, looking away, suddenly fascinated by their phones or maybe a glance saying "no thanks mate" or muttering something else less kind. 

These two men were not your regular volunteers, they were the sitting Liberal member and his young gun Labour counterpart. I've known the Liberal member for many years, a good man,  and I've also met  with his younger Labor rival. They both looked utterly shattered, pale and pasty in the late afternoon rush, as though both had run a two month marathon of smiles, handshakes and smalltalk. When I reached them in the line, I had 30 seconds to  shake their hands, thank them for their work and wished them well.....before I went to cast my vote on their political fate. Thats democracy!

In this unique week between a Papal funeral and a federal election a lot of us are pondering the nature of good leadership and how to get it. Seems most of the world judged Pope Francis to have been a good leader, and today we will make a judgement about our political leaders who, for weeks have been magically appearing in strange places, pumping petrol or cuddling kids at childcare centres hoping that by doing so, public opinion may tip in their favour as the best leadership option for the electorate.  

But we are a cynical mob when it comes to leadership, especially political. We carry unbelievably high expectations of leaders and low confidence they will deliver. We critique them more than we praise them, as if we could do a better job fulfilling the one utilitarian task we assign them all - raise our standard of living right now!

People rightly want good leaders in all spheres of life, be they Popes, PM's, principals or pastors. But it is worth pausing on this election day to recognise that good leadership is neither comfortable nor easy, for both the leader and the led. If you want a high approval rating, getting a job as a Santa or selling ice cream may be a better option. And if you want to be led well, anticipate discomfort.

Good leadership is tough for the leader and the led and perhaps thats why the leadership genre is a bit of a bottomless pit. The classical idea of leadership was leader-centric. By that I mean the power dynamic was almost entirely tipped toward the hero, warlord, commander & chief  or CEO  who autocratically influences people to do what they probably don't want to do (there are a few world leaders who seem to like this style at the moment). 

But in more recent decades, leadership has become increasingly follower-centric where the power dynamic has shifted toward the follower. Barbara Kellerman says that the social contract in the 21st Century, between leader and led has changed from “have to” to “want to” be led - though she admits this is still dependent on context and “carrot and stick” leadership will always be a factor in many organisational settings.1 

The digital age, particularly  social media, has been emancipatory for the majority handing people power and knowledge they could never have imagined in previous generations. As a consequence Kellerman writes "there is less respect for authority across the board—in government and business, in the academy and in the professions, even in religion. Power and influence have continued to devolve from the top down—those at the top having less power and influence; those in the middle and at the bottom having more. For their part, followers, ordinary people, have an expanded sense of entitlement—demanding more and giving less."2 

I think what Kellerman is saying is that everyone today wants to live like they are in charge, only without the burden leadership. 

Perhaps the art of good leadership is in stewarding power in both a directive and collective way simultaneously.