Absolutely agree. Theories of leadership have developed a lot since the end of the last century. It used to be the top-down synonyms that I found on line: controlling, dominant. Leadership must include extensive consultation as you say -- taking in a lot of information -- but ultimately, making decisions based on the best information; then getting others on board through relationship and trust not through fear. This conversation reminded me to check these principles of what has been called feminist leadership. It also reminds me of why I need to participate on hubski to stretch my own thinking.One is the ability to take in a lot of information (some contradictory) and a lot of opinions, and maintain an ability to separate the signal from the noise to make a decision about a course of action.
Two is the ability to get others on board with one's decision making, which is primarily dependent on one's ability to communicate and connect with people.
That's an interesting link. I have a bit of a hard time with broad statements like, "Everyone will be heard and respected." One of the problems that leaders face is in deciding who should be heard. There are people who and opinions that are inherently bad. It takes a careful sort of mind to shut out pure noise. Letting bad opinions into a conversation can at times be harmful, if, say, the forum is big enough. I'm not one to think that words are too dangerous to be spoken, but I am one to think that those with their hands on the levers of power have a responsibility to filter inherently dangerous opinions from the mainstream.
AGREED. Broad statements need to be qualified and there have to be mechanisms for filtering out ideas based ONLY on greed and ignorance -- as hubski well knows. When I see "everyone will be heard and respected," I think of a meeting, any sort of meeting -- there are people who have earned a place at the table -- who are silent. I feel strongly that if you are at the table (or a virtual table, like a hubski jitsi meetup) then those who are doing all the talking should invite everyone to speak up. Still, even Tsar Nicholas II had his Rasputin. One last thing about seeing Biden talk last night: he seemed to have a moral compass that was rooted in ideas beyond his own whims. A moral compass is something like a personal mission statement or set of values and ideas that you look to when making difficult decisions.The definition of Moral Compass: An internalized set of values and objectives that guide a person with regard to ethical behavior and decision-making.
George W Bush has a moral compass. It's something but it's not everything. One area where I think women might excel compared to men is in terms of flexibility. Men tend to fall into camps of idealists and rationalists, the former being absolutist in their thinking and the latter being heartless followers of Realpolitik--pure motive vs. pure outcome driven thinking. Where I think women could improve on that is in being better at balancing competing interests that values vs. outcomes often present. I've had several powerful female bosses, and to me that's what tended to stand out the most vs. male counterparts. But of course that's a very broad generalization, which is itself maybe not helpful.