Monday, July 9, 2012

Alexander, "The Character of a Leader," ?

Summary: I'm not sure where this came from or when it was published, but it cites sources in the late aughts. Alexander draws from his experience in the intelligence community (as well as using quotes from a variety of classical and modern sources to bolster his argument) to identify and justify several key qualities of a leader. Alexander identifies his two main themes as "in leadership, character counts," and "effective leadership is necessarily predicated on the consent of the governed." He makes the point that you earn that consent not only by your performance, but by your character. Alexander takes issue with (his characterization of) post-modern situated morality, arguing that there are universal values and morals that a leader must tap into. His sources, examples, and argumentative structure are strongly masculine; however, there are interesting crossovers to some of the feminine leadership articles. For example, he argues that a leader's key functions include setting goals and a vision for the group, creating conditions that help the group work, providing resources, and getting her hands dirty and working alongside the group. He does not advocate micromanagement, but rather the empowerment of everyone in the group to decide how best to realize the vision. Alexander writes that "leadership comprises three basic elements [...]: character--purity of motive; vision--the ability to set a course of action against a difficult task; and effectiveness--the ability to successfully implement this vision and accomplish the mission." Among other qualities, he addresses command of rhetoric in detail as "one of the most essential skills you must develop to succeed as a leader." And his definition of rhetoric is, I think, quite fair and focused on how to articulate a plan or problem to different audiences within the organization. Alexander also explores respect for others (a necessary quality for a leader) and tribalism (a regrettable condition in all organizations and one that must be navigated by leaders), both of what are applicable to colleges.

Response: The tone in this piece was an abrupt shift from our other sources. However, I greatly appreciate the readings from non-English sources in this course; they provide some interesting perspective on how the wider world perceives leadership and organizations. I saw many resonances to the Ancient Greeks and Romans in Alexander's piece; they were also invested in the morality of leaders.  As I said above, I was also interested in the cross-overs between this piece and the leadership pieces I've read coming from a feminist perspective; I do not find them mutually exclusive.

Uses: Leadership, contrast between masculine and feminine styles.

2 comments:

  1. I'll explain this source when we meet. But I particularly wanted to have students read about leadership from perspectives of people who are not afraid of power, but also not seekers of power for its own sake. I introduced this article by asking people if they had ever had a leader they truly admired, looked up to, would trust. . . few had. My nephew, who died in Iraq, was that kind of leader. I also thought it was important to see that feminist characterizations of "masculine" leadership are not necessary correct. I agree on the cross overs.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am very sorry to hear about your nephew. I have noticed a trend of leaders needing to pick up the responsibility of leadership, and I appreciated the thread of morality and honor through this piece. I look forward to talking with you more about it! (Mark)

    ReplyDelete