# What is the make up of a leader? What makes them real?



## Justme (May 27, 2012)

I've heard a lot about this and that character being a hero or heroine. Is breathing the Alpha and Omega of any  heroic person? Did they begin this way? Where they born the person who they are or are they made into this unique individual? 

Are these people driven by a desire for glory or did they find themselves in a situation, where they became fed up with the B.S. and took charge of the situation. Were they placed into a position of authority or did they find themselves in a situation that required an authority figure. 

What lies in the deepest place of the heart of a true leader? Is it those he leads? Is it those he let behind? Is it the loss of someone who died in the hands of those he/she now fights? 

What demons does a leader keep inside them. Taring at his/her soul and driving him/her on to what fate has in store to him/her? What will make a reader adopt his/her struggle and make them want to follow his/her exploits to the bitter end. What makes this individual believable and how will his/her passing bring tears to the eyes of those who follow?

Is a leader a hero or a hero a leader, even if there is no one to lead? Can there be leadership without the ability to sacrifice for the goal they've set?


----------



## Aidan of the tavern (May 27, 2012)

You know I'm really starting to like your questions, Justme.

I believe there are many kinds of leader, not all are good.  Some are natural leaders, others must learn.  Of course there are traits which I believe would be necersarry for a good leader.

A leader must know her/his limits.  They must know the value of those that follow them, be willing to make difficult decisions.  They must place themselves of equal importance to those who have faith in them, and maintain the objectives shared by the group.  A leader must be strong to defend not just themselves, but the entire group.  They must understand why people follow them, must impart their knowledge to those who would listen, but also be ready to learn from them.  A leader must keep the big picture in mind, and have a variety of options in their mind.  And if the need is greatest, they must have someone capable to take their place.  

I was just thinking there of leader in terms of a small group, so I suppose different values would be needed for a leader of a country or something.


----------



## Devor (May 27, 2012)

In class, they talked about different skill sets which make up leadership, and that nobody would really possess all of them.  Some people are better speakers or writers or negotiators or networkers or visionaries or doers or so on, to the point that good leaders look very different and are more successful at some tasks than at others.

Which moves into the more important point - there are people in this world who spend their lives meeting different people and making a strong impression on them, looking for those who have such strengths as the ones above.  And then one day, they decide they want to set out and accomplish something, so they put in calls to these people they've cultivated all their life and put together a team which balances out all these skills.

That person, with that skill, is a leader - the leader of leaders, as it were, capable of pulling together the best people they've ever met in their life.


----------



## Justme (May 27, 2012)

Isn't there also the person who sincerely cares about those around him/her and even before there is a need for a leader, he feels their pain. He/she brings those who are lost and empty together and actively concerns himself with their welfare. This person asks nothing but is available anytime when there is a need. Is this not a leader or are more skills needed?

Would this person be any more or less of a leader if he had the requisite skills to lead or if he gathered competent people together to fill the gaps in his/her abilities?


----------



## Devor (May 27, 2012)

Empathy is a skill like any other, Justme, and it's value to a leader would depend a lot on how it's used and what that person is setting out to accomplish.  It can be valuable for a leader who needs to focus on the individual, and harmful when their focus needs to be on the needs of the broader group.  It's not remotely useful, for instance, for someone heading up the security detail at a nuclear reactor.  But within the context of a highly functioning team, it is one of the skills that should usually be present, but not necessarily by everyone or even by the person ultimately leading the team.


----------



## Telcontar (May 27, 2012)

I think the primary trait of a leader is the willingness to take personal responsibility for the success or failure of a group.

There are a myriad of other useful traits, but this one is the biggie. We often talk about people 'stepping up' in a crisis, assuming the mantle of leadership even if they have no formal capacity that would thrust it upon them. By assuming leadership these people are also assuming responsibility - when things go wrong, they will be blamed along with the people who _truly_ bear the fault through direct action or inaction.

All your other questions are tied to exactly who the character/person is. Drives are as varied as for any other class of goals. Glory, sure. Empathy, sure. Love of power/control (doesn't have to be a bad thing!), sure. Fears will be related to what drives them and other parts of their personality. In other words, there is no easy or short answer for the rest.


----------



## Justme (May 27, 2012)

Just how many traits do you think would be important to a leader and what traits would be important enough to make that leader into a hero?


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (May 28, 2012)

"Some are born great; some achieve greatness; and some have greatness thrust upon them." - Maria (by way of Malvolio), _Twelfth Night_


----------



## Jess A (May 29, 2012)

This thread might be a useful writing/character building tool. Could it go into a writing section?


----------



## Chilari (May 29, 2012)

Moved to writing questions.

In my experience you don't need a cause to be the sort of person to take charge in, say, a social or work situation. And often leaderships skills in an individual are recognised by others before they are recognised by the individual - or at least that was the case with me; it constantly surprised me when I was at uni how frequently people asked me to take on responsible roles. I was asked to become a co-ML of NaNoWriMo in my second year attempting it, was asked to be a moderator on a webcomic forum and then asked to be co-chair for the awards that webcomic forum ran for a few years. I did volunteer myself for a few leadership roles - such as secretary of the uni sci-fi and factasy society - but mostly I was invited. I've got no big cause to rise to (unless you count watching sci fi and fantasy films on a weekly basis in the uni film theatre a cause), it's just stuff that happened.

So why not have a character in that sort of position - someone who just does stuff, who takes part in things to the extent that their natural ability to lead becomes obvious to others who then ask them to take a formal leadership role? In fact I'm going to have that sort of a character arc for one of the characters in the story I'm currently planning. Someone who acts in the interests or her daughters and grandchildren and the community as a whole, who attends meetings and offers her opinion and makes suggestions and argues her position, and ultimately becomes the leader of the resistance just through assuming increasing levels of responsibility and being offered more, and repeatedly performing well enough to be offered more until she is the sole undisputed leader. She does not start out deciding to lead the resistance - far from it, she seeks it only for shelter and a sense of moral outrage at the situation in the town. Even when everyone else thinks of her as a major player she still doesn't even imagine herself as having any more influence on the decisions of the resistance than anyone else, and it's only when her position as leader is formalised - something which surprises her - that she really starts to realise how others view her.


----------



## ScipioSmith (May 29, 2012)

I've often thought that if it comes to a toss up between efficiency and charisma, it is far more important for a leader to be a charismatic, charming individual. Such a person could, as others have mentioned, persuade others to follow them who could make up for the skills the leader lacks. A charismatic man who surrounds himself with talent can take credit for their abilities, and keep them loyal to him. But a competent dullard surrounded by charmers will only expose his lack of personality, and encourage the charmers to covet the top job.


----------



## Jess A (May 29, 2012)

ScipioSmith said:


> I've often thought that if it comes to a toss up between efficiency and charisma, it is far more important for a leader to be a charismatic, charming individual. Such a person could, as others have mentioned, persuade others to follow them who could make up for the skills the leader lacks. A charismatic man who surrounds himself with talent can take credit for their abilities, and keep them loyal to him. But a competent dullard surrounded by charmers will only expose his lack of personality, and encourage the charmers to covet the top job.



Depends on the leader's followers. If he/she is a military leader who commands respect, then he or she may be followed for that alone. To an extent.

----

On another note, I do agree that sometimes leadership comes when one is pushed into the role. I've experienced that. Something as simple as taking charge of a high school group project because nobody else will step up to the role, or facilitating/guiding a conversation in a university situation. Plus becoming a manager with staff to guide and manage as well as other professionals to liaise with. Leadership roles are everywhere in everyday life. But on saying that - why was it that I took charge of those situations and not somebody else? Was it something about my personality? I certainly didn't seek those roles and the responsibilities that came with them, but I saw it as necessary. 

In my novel I have some characters who were raised to be leaders, and there are those who are pushed into the role. Some may succeed in the role and some may not. Others are quiet achievers; they are leaders in their own right, but one of my characters leads through the written word, much like a media company. She is otherwise somewhat a quiet, gentle personality.


----------



## Ankari (May 29, 2012)

The question will give you too many answers.  A leader is a person that people want to follow.  Why they want to follow that person could be for various reasons.  You have:

*Leader because of need:*  You see an example of this in the movie "The Grey."  The survivors follow Liam Neeson's character because he is perceived to be the best suited to survive their dire situation.  Rand Al' Thor is another example.  He must be leader to lead the his armies against the Forsaken and the Dark One. (He also can fit into the role of _The Righteous Leader_ as described below).

*Affluent Leader:*  Simply someone who provides your sustenance.  He pays for his followers, yes, but does that negate the fact that he is a leader and those that follow him see him as such?  I would consider anyone who hires a mercenary company, such as Soulcatcher in the Black Company, as such a leader.  Soulcatcher's role did change later, but at that point she was an Affluent Leader.  Another example is Tyrion Lannister who hired Bronn.  

*Leader with a cause:* Robb Stark is a great example of this.  His father died, the North is angry, and he wants revenge.  The fact that he won a few wars helped cement his role.

*The Righteous Leader:*  A person who flogs the guilt of faith against the masses. He may not possess any desired leadership trait except for the mantle he wears.  It is enough.  People will follow him.

*The Proven leader:*  A person who has earned his leadership.  Such leaders are often seen in the military.  They've lived the horrors and survived.  They're intellect and courage has earned them a following.  Coltaine and Whiskey Jack from the Malazan Book of the Fallen are great examples.

*The Inheritor:*  One who is a descendant of a proven lineage.  They are leaders because they are the symbol of continued success.  As long as their line remains so will the bounty.  Royalty is an obvious example of this.  It's no wonder that when a war of succession takes place the peasants suffer.  They prefer the unbroken peace of lineage as long as they do not suffer.

I'm sure there are more examples, but the point is that leaders are not defined solely by their personal traits, but by a combination of character and situation.  What traits should a leader possess?  It all depends on the situation.  How many people have you met that left you wondering "Why isn't this guy a CEO?"  Most likely it's because the situation never arose for him to fit such a leadership role.  

My two cents, don't spend it all in one place.


----------



## Jess A (May 30, 2012)

You'd be surprised how far that two cents might go in this topic.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (May 30, 2012)

Leadership has always been an interesting topic for me and one that I had studied all through my life, which is only 23 years but hey I still studied it. Anyways, my studies followed from I would expect to be a different perspective than most as it comes from my own religious upbringing--a religion that is in the minority in the US and abroad I might add. 

Here are some traits that I think are essential for a good leader:

Humility: Humility as it is defined in my life is not that one must always do what one is told or not have confidence in one's self or abilities. Rather, it is to have confidence in ones own abilities and the ability to be able to know where you fall short and be willing to ask for advice and help while appreciating the advice and help

Compassion: A true leader as I understand it has compassion for those he leads and for those he could lead. That doesn't mean that he does not rebuke a wrongdoer that he leads. No, the leader does so swiftly and efficiently only correcting the wrong doers action and trying to treat the underlying cause of the action. In other words they care more for those they lead than for themselves.

There are more but these two I think are the foundations.


----------



## Devor (May 30, 2012)

Brian Scott Allen said:


> There are more but these two I think are the foundations.



I would think we sometimes forget, or else assume it goes without saying. . . but I'd think _competence_ would come first, wouldn't it?  You've got to have a thorough understanding of the problem you set out to solve.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (May 30, 2012)

Devor that's a bit of an axiom at least in my mind and would therefore go without saying, but you are right.


----------



## Steerpike (May 30, 2012)

I agree with Little Storm Cloud regarding respect, and I'd even add that fear may be a substitute. Look at someone like Alexander, or his father Philip of Macedon, both of whom were successful leaders (especially the son), and neither of whom, as far as I can tell, possessed the more altruistic and humanistic traits suggested in the thread. I think great leaders certainly can have those traits, and even should have them, but they do not appear to me to be necessary by any stretch.


----------



## Jess A (May 31, 2012)

Humility is certainly a good one, as Brian noted. A leader should be able to accept the advice and help of others. They should be willing to listen to ideas as well and implement those which are good - giving credit to the person who suggested it. It can boost morale. 

They should also be able to admit their mistakes.


----------



## Lord Darkstorm (May 31, 2012)

I think another important question is what type of leader you are talking about.  I've been reading a few books on leadership, since I have a personal interest in it for my day job.  One of the things I've discovered is that there are many leaders, and many types of leaders, and each vary according to the groups of people they are leading.  Having been in the military I've seen some good leaders, and quite a few bad ones.  The good ones could transfer some of that skill to a non military environment decently enough, but some of the skills don't work.  In the military a leader gives orders and is obeyed, often times without question.  Outside of a military, there can be, and usually are, questions on whether the decisions are the right ones if everyone doesn't actually agree.  Which makes the style of leadership different for different groups.

The leader of a mage college would be most likely different than one for the military, since we would expect a mage to have more intelligence than the average soldier, and thus would ask more questions of the leader.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jun 1, 2012)

I agree with you there Lord Darkstorm, to a degree. Certainly the way a leader operates is different but the principle that dictates the action should be the same. For example a military leader would need courage. This may mean he would have to charge an army to inspire his troops. A politician would have to introduce an unpopular but ultimately good piece of legislation and risk his political career in the process, or in some extreme cases his life. Two different operations both based on the courage of a leader.

Similarly, a military leader would need to know what his troops abilities are and know when to retreat and when to stand. Further a politician would need to know that he lacks knowledge in a certain area of legislating and would need to ask some questions and gain an education of the subject area.


----------



## Lord Darkstorm (Jun 1, 2012)

On the military side, yes, but any politician today seems to only have courage when it's election time.  I think there is more desperation than courage though.  I would also think that anyone leading  a group of highly intelligent people would benefit more from a healthy supply of patience over courage.


----------



## Jess A (Jun 2, 2012)

Lord Darkstorm said:


> On the military side, yes, *but any politician today seems to only have courage when it's election time*.  I think there is more desperation than courage though.  I would also think that anyone leading  a group of highly intelligent people would benefit more from a healthy supply of patience over courage.



-chuckle- Indeed.

----

Leadership comes in all shapes and sizes, I think. Everybody assumes the role of leader at some point in their lives, whether it is because your teacher in school said 'everybody take turns', or because life has thrust you there in work, in group situations, in the military, as a politician or a social leader (etc).


----------



## Reaver (Jun 2, 2012)

A good leader can make tough decisions...especially those involving life and death.


----------



## Lord Darkstorm (Jun 2, 2012)

But what of leaders who aren't leading a battle, or some other form of life or death situation?  What about the political battles that happen in courts that normally don't end in death, but loss of favor or reputation?  Being more devious, or skilled at manipulating others will have far more value in that area.

My point is that a leader in one situation can fail in another.  The skills needed for a good leader depends on who they are trying to lead.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jun 2, 2012)

Lord Darkstorm said:


> But what of leaders who aren't leading a battle, or some other form of life or death situation?  What about the political battles that happen in courts that normally don't end in death, but loss of favor or reputation?  Being more devious, or skilled at manipulating others will have far more value in that area.
> 
> My point is that a leader in one situation can fail in another.  The skills needed for a good leader depends on who they are trying to lead.



Indeed, one need look no further than _A Game of Thrones_ to find a leader (Robert Baratheon) who was a fierce, nigh-unstoppable warrior and conqueror, easily able to seize the throne, but was an absolutely lousy ruler once he had it.

In fact a lot of ASOIAF is about people being unsuited for the roles they end up in. Cersei's an excellent schemer but lacks the benevolent touch to be a beloved ruler; Tyrion is incredibly clever and manages to make people like him _despite_ the fact that he's a dwarf and a Lannister, but he sabotages himself by not keeping his mouth shut, and by underestimating his enemies' ruthlessness. Jon Snow is highly moral, and easily manipulated, until he tries to override those who would manipulate him -- but he misapprehends how much his actions piss off vested interests. Etc. Danaerys is incredibly impatient, and doesn't really know how to make or carry out long-term plans. Robb Stark is a strategic genius and inspires men to follow him, but he's young and starts thinking with his dick, which gets him in trouble.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jun 4, 2012)

Lord Darkstorm said:


> Being more devious, or skilled at manipulating others will have far more value in that area.
> trying to lead.



"All warfare is based on deception." Sun Tzu

Manipulation in war is admittedly different but it is still manipulation. The way one deceives in war is different than in politics but again I would argue that the principle remains true.


----------



## Helen (Jun 5, 2012)

Justme said:


> Just how many traits do you think would be important to a leader and what traits would be important enough to make that leader into a hero?



I think your confusing leadership with heroism and "hero."

If I'm reading your question right, you just need somebody with an ability that puts her into a decision-maker role who then makes the right choice.


----------



## Jess A (Jun 5, 2012)

Helen said:


> I think your confusing leadership with heroism and "hero."
> 
> If I'm reading your question right, you just need somebody with an ability that puts her into a decision-maker role who then makes the right choice.



Making the 'right choice' may not be seen as 'heroism' by the majority of those under the leader's command/protection, even if it is for the greater good.


----------



## Devor (Jun 5, 2012)

Brian Scott Allen said:


> Devor that's a bit of an axiom at least in my mind and would therefore go without saying, but you are right.



It's just that you'd be amazed how many times leaders are chosen for traits like _empathy_ and _humility_ who don't end up having the slightest idea what they're doing.

I had to take courses on leadership and organizational development in college, and my wife works in an HR department, and every once in a while I still pick up Harvard Business Review, so I hear a lot about this kind of stuff.  The reality is that once you've narrowed down the list of competent individuals, you're usually down to just a couple of people.

Leadership is hard, but the biggest barrier to entry is just understanding the subject matter.  There are so many bad leaders because there are so few people who can handle just the work which comes with it.


----------

