“It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favour of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office.”
H. L. Mencken
As someone who is interested in the psychology of leadership, I find politics fascinating. More accurately, I find politicians fascinating and as the next presidential election looms nearer, I wonder, what could possibly drive otherwise seemingly sane and accomplished people to thrust themselves into the turmoil of modern politics? Think about the scrutiny and the harsh spotlight thrown upon those who choose to run for national office. Who would want that for themselves or their families?
In 1972, the Democratic Presidential nominee George McGovern named Thomas Eagleton, the Senator from Missouri, as his vice presidential nominee. However, shortly thereafter, it was revealed that Eagleton had previously been hospitalized and treated for depression. After initially stating that he would back Eagleton “1000 percent,” McGovern dropped him – simply because he had been treated for depression. So much for confidentiality and patient privacy!
Today, privacy is essentially nonexistent. Virtually every news report is accompanied by the phrase, “surveillance video shows . . .” and everybody walks around with a high definition video camera in his or her pocket. If you do not want it recorded, do not say it, and certainly, do not do it.
The way in which we consume our news has dramatically changed. We have transitioned from the nightly 6:00 pm news report to 24-hour cable news channels to internet sites to the virtually instantaneous world social media. As a result of these changes, public figures are now under constant and increasingly intrusive observation. What years ago might have been a private off-the-cuff comment, can now “go viral” in mere seconds. So, I ask again, who would voluntarily seek out such scrutiny?
Are politicians naturally masochistic? I doubt it, but they are obviously willing to pay a high price to achieve their ends. What drives them? I believe that most politicians want to make a difference and “do good,” but clearly, that is only part of the story. I believe most politicians have at least some narcissism. A large ego is required to believe one is worthy of such power and to be willing to endure what it takes to obtain elected office. However, it seems that the nature of our leaders has changed.
After winning the battle of Trenton, George Washington ordered his troops to treat captured soldiers “with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands.” In contrast, the British routinely tortured and executed American captives. Regardless of what his troops had been subjected to, Washington possessed a moral compass that defined his character and therefore, he would not allow his men to act in a similar manner. Character is evident in how we react when our values are most tested. In a dark winter 240 years ago, after crossing the Delaware on Christmas, Washington’s order for humanity taught our nation something about character. Sadly, too many of today’s leaders seem to be “characters” rather than exemplars of high character. As a result of this perceived lack of character, we the public no longer trust our leaders.
Trust is the force that connects people to a leader and by extension, to his vision. When people do not trust their leaders, they are reluctant to buy into that vision and they are less likely to follow. Since the 1960’s trust in government has plummeted. According to the Pew Research Center, in 1964, 77% of the US public stated that they trusted the government in Washington always or most of the time. In contrast, today only 24% hold that same level of trust. Without trust, leaders cannot lead and they become increasingly disconnected from their constituents.
When it comes to great leadership skills, people generally think about someone who is brave, honest, and driven, which of course are all very important traits. But, which, if any of these traits is the most important . . . the key ingredient?
As a result of my work with business leaders, I have come to see that perhaps the most essential leadership skill that differentiates a good leader from a great leader is what has been commonly termed “Emotional Intelligence.” There are many other key factors, but emotional intelligence is central to good leadership.
Emotional intelligence is the ability to perceive, understand and manage emotions and feelings – both in oneself and in others. This ability allows a leader to connect and motivate. In many ways, leading is a process by which someone joins with and inspires others to embark on a shared journey.
Mature, grounded leaders, who can understand and collaborate with others are approachable and easy to work with. They are thoughtful and considerate in their dealings with others and though they may expect a great deal from others, they are no less demanding of themselves. Such leaders command, rather than demand respect.
Sadly, such leadership traits seem to be lacking among too many of our political leaders. In fact, the upcoming presidential election may feature two candidates with unfavorability ratings that top 50%. Our world is constantly changing – just not always for the better. If we have leaders who create innovative companies such as Apple, Google and Facebook, we should be able to find leaders who can bring similar excellence to the public sector as well.
