Since ancient times, the merits of humility in a leader have been extolled by people who know a thing or two about leadership.
As the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu wrote 1,500 years ago, “I have three precious things which I hold fast and prize. The first is gentleness; the second frugality; the third is humility, which keeps me from putting myself before others. Be gentle and you can be bold; be frugal and you can be liberal; avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men.”
But what does it mean to practice humility?
It does not mean being indecisive.
It does not mean having false modesty, or deferring important decisions to others, or avoiding the responsibilities of leadership.
It means placing the highest value on doing the best thing for the organization. Or as Ezra Taft Benson, former president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, wrote, “Pride is concerned with who is right. Humility is concerned with what is right.”
It’s tempting to admire and even strive to emulate the “hero” leader whom we see in the movies. But in reality, humility pays. As a leadership approach, you’re much more likely to keep your team ahead of the competition with quiet, persuasive leadership than by strutting around like General Patton.
In their study “Inclusive Leadership: The View From Six Countries,” researchers Jeanine Prime and Elizabeth R. Salib interviewed a total of 1,512 employees from six different countries—Australia, China (Shanghai), Germany, India, Mexico, and the United States. They found that while research suggests that we most readily associate leadership competence with attributes like charisma, self-promotion, speaking up first, and speaking longest, in fact humility was one of the most significant indicators, after empowerment, of altruistic leadership. Qualities like “standing back,” humility, and self-sacrifice can go a long way in making leaders more inclusive and effective, which directly impacts their organization’s ability to innovate.
And as J. Andrew Morris and others revealed in “Bringing humility to leadership: Antecedents and consequences of leader humility,” effective leadership tends to operate as a contingency theory—an organizational approach that claims that there is no single best way to organize a corporation, lead a company, or make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the internal and external situation. They wrote, “The romanticized notion of celebrity CEOs that has been lionized in the popular business press has its place in the leadership pantheon, but, like any other approach to leadership, has limitations in its application…. This apparent obsession with the charismatic appeal of individual leaders stands in contrast with a small but growing call for humility in leadership.” Sustained innovation that keeps the organization ahead of the curve is more likely to be the result of the celebrity’s antithesis: a leader possessing a blend of humility and strong personal will.
Recent Comments