Changing The Language Of Leadership
For a long time now I’ve believed that the L word in all its forms has been abused and corrupted and I’ve haven’t been shy about saying so. Further, I hate words that are defined using variations of themselves. When that happens there is nothing concrete against which to check the meaning of the word or its usage.
I’m also not a lover of people who rant and whine about what’s wrong, but offer no ideas to fix the problem/situation.
So it’s time to start working on solutions.
Perhaps a new acronym would jump-start changing the career slant of ‘leader’.
That way we can offer leadership skills to all, so that they can indeed lead whenever it’s appropriate to the situation—leaders in the instance—instead of anointing a chosen few.
How about POF (person-out-front) to refer to someone at the front of the organization.
Or perhaps it would be better to use upper and lower case for the person in front who may or may not be a Leader, but is a leader.
For example, Richard Fuld is a leader, whereas Lou Gerstner is a Leader.
Of course, that may be worse, since people in those roles already consider themselves ’special’ and might start thinking of the likeness between god and God.
That’s as far as I’ve gotten, but I’m hoping that y’all, AKA, my brilliant readers, will add your ideas and suggestions.
Together we can make a difference.
Your comments—priceless
Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL
Image credit: sxc.hu
Tags: leader, leadership, Lou Gerstner, Richard FuldRelated Stories
POSTED IN: About Leadership, Change, Communication, What Do You Think?
4 opinions for Changing The Language Of Leadership
Simon Cooper
Nov 21, 2008 at 3:12 am
Hi Miki
How about:
LEADER - Let Empowerment And Development Enrich Results
Regards
Simon
Miki Saxon
Nov 21, 2008 at 10:52 am
Hi Simon, I don’t think an acronym does it. No insults meant, but that just becomes more industry hype.
I’d like a new term because it’s possible that if there was an alternative then ‘leader’ might regain some of it’s meaning.
But it would have to have widespread, high profile usage and that isn’t very likely.
But one can dream:)
Simon Cooper
Nov 22, 2008 at 1:39 am
Hi Miki,
I take your point. I think the real issue here is that people don’t really know (or agree) what leadership means and it ends up becoming interchangeable with management.
On a forum earlier this week I asked a group of ‘leaders’ what they did to inspire their people to engage in the performance review process. One response I got was, “make it one of their objectives”. ‘Nuff said.
Good luck on your quest, I’ll pop back in if I have a suitable creative thought.
Miki Saxon
Nov 22, 2008 at 2:10 am
Simon, leadership should be an integral part of an organization and so-called leadership skills are a necessary part of every manager’s toolbox if, that is, he wants to productively manage today’s workforce.
Not only were the people you asked not leaders, they weren’t managers, either.
And I hope you pop back with or without the thought.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: