Following the Followers

I must follow my followers, for I need to know where it is that they want me to lead them.

- Gurvinder Singh    (untitled work)

_____________________________________________________________

A leader is someone who leads. Conversely leaders need followers. 

People however need to be motivated, to follow. Leaders resort to two primal motivating forces, fear and greed.

Nothing moves people better and faster than fear. Fear is born out of our need for survival. Fear in most cases is manufactured and induced by leaders.

Greed is fed by inducement or some sort of rewards, we could even call it a bribe. Rewards could include money, property, sex, rank, power, even heaven and paradise in the after-life.

Military, political, social, religious, business, philosophical, fashion, etc, Leaders can be of all types. Whatever the field, leadership is a lonely job, with the leader inevitably setting the agenda and getting people to follow.

Politicians in democracies make possibly the worst leaders. The followers are whimsical and opportunistic. Politicians have be even more opportunistic than the electorate, because the time window to act is extremely short. They see which way the wind blows and then they move in that direction. They are compelled to lead the mobs by following them. 

Following the followers benefits only a small group of the people, and achieves little for the vast majority, hence the frustration with democracies. Three thousand years of history reveal, that every democracy continuously decays and eventually descends into a dictatorship.

If a people are fortunate, there emerges amongst them a breed of politicians called 'statesmen', they look at the next generation not at the next election. 

Winston Churchill said "I have nothing to offer you but blood, sweat and tears", and the people of Great Britain rallied behind him. In spite of his numerous shortcomings and his cruel treatment of the people of the British colonies especially India he is considered a great leader if you consider the British view point.

There are many types of leaders but how do we judge them?

* A poor leader is someone who has to draw on rank, title, position etc to keep on announcing that he is the leader. People are always dismissive of such a leader.

* A leader is worst when his people despise him. 

* The best leader is one who the people do not even notice he is there. He or she creates an environment that makes people move as if it is their own agenda. They work on principles, beliefs and often through a self regulating constantly improving system. 

Beware of the leader who follows the followers.

________________________________________

Adapted from the quote by Mahatma Gandhi

“There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.”

Ineptocracy

Power hungry people always find a way to get to the top of the pyramid of power or die trying. They know how to use and discard people and manipulate levers of power effectively. Power is so intoxicating that people who acquire it become insatiable and typically want more and more until they themselves are consumed by power itself.

Democracy as it was born gave relief to the masses and a good shot at changing their means of survival and progress. It however requires that the people exercise wisdom in the choices they make. Democracy is unfortunately under siege. Instead of providing a better world and India, it has in fact mutated into something toxic called an 'ineptocracy'.

People are made to believe that democracy provides a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Nothing can be further from the truth. Leaving aside the rhetoric, the press briefings and speeches, it is now 'a government of the evil, by the cunning and power hungry for the benefit of a select few.'

History clearly shows that across the world across nearly all time that a group of people representing a marginal percentage of  the population are the 'haves' and the vast majority are the 'have nots'. The politician needs the money and resources of the haves and the voting numbers of the 'have nots', while promising to protect each group from the other.

Our current model of government evolved a long time ago and the result is INEPTOCRACY, which can be defined as; 

A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

When a state reaches a position where approximately 50% of it's citizens rely on the largess of the state for their continued sustenance, the form of government becomes one of ineptocracy.

The least capable to lead are not fools, they are extremely intelligent and cunning with questionable morals. They just know how to game the system and devote their whole lives in manipulating the system. The only consolation for Indians is that this disease is not restricted to our country but even to most of the developed countries.

People making choices on careers and electing their leaders should do a bit of homework and then make informed choices on how to proceed. I for one, am not going to vote for people that will push us further towards an ineptocracy. 

______________________________

What are the management lessons I can share with you?

An outcome of my many years of teaching and consulting with organisations and families, it is observed that there are 3 possible types of leaders, based on rewards and punishments. 

The first is the briber. This person is normally an incompetent person and has no other choice but to keep bribing the people to support him or her. This is not difficult to implement because one can always be gracious with someone else's money and resources. This is why the government of India under the UPA leadership has been compelled to spend Rs 11 trillion in past decade in programs of highly questionable value. The follower or employee gladly takes the bribes but often feels offended and alienated. When the sops dry up the followers leave and seek other alternatives.  A problem for bribers is that the followers or dependents become addicted to sops and soon grow dissatisfied and they need even larger doses of bribes. Such leaders are initially lauded but soon despised, and they are almost always never respected. 

The second type are the slave drivers or 'intimidators', the primary tool they use is fear. They so intimidate the followers that they do not dare disobey. They work towards crushing the individuality and collective identity of people. Once implemented this approach delivers very fast results and impact of change can be rapid. This is possibly what is happening in China. Unfortunately gains tend to reverse as soon as the fear factor diminishes. The performance of followers is also just above bare minimum so that they escape punishment. Many school teachers and administrations also use this approach. Such leaders are often hated. They demand respect but almost never get it. 

The third type are the true leaders, they use a blend of positive reinforcement while wielding a big stick.  They normally have a well thought out strategy which is communicated and excites their followers. The leader's dream becomes the dream and vision of the followers. This is based on educating, facilitating, supporting and encouraging followers. Performers are suitably rewarded after evaluation by a transparent system, and non performers are encouraged to perform better after due dialogue and analysis. The laggards are often cast aside and supported to survive but fall behind the main group.  This approach is the foundation and builds a meritocracy. Typically leaders adopting this style of leadership are hated and loved at the same time, but always command respect.