Humble People Make the Best Leaders

I always wonder, when people make such claims, if it is true.

So I am upvoting this for the simple reason that she spent so much time going over the research that demonstrates that humble leaders are more effective.

edit: p.s. alternative theory of why we choose Charisma over Consensus. Consensus minded people tend to pick many different leaders whereas the charisma influenced people, even though they are in the minority tend to end up picking the single leader who displays the most charisma (in the narrow sense of negative, narcissistic and authoritarian charisma defined in the article).

Reminds me of something from my quotes.txt:

"The problem is that by standing for public office, the candidate is showing that they are unsuitable for the job."

The US military tries to sort out the loudmouths from the competent officers. They don't always succeed, but there's an organized process.

China's leadership tends to be promoted step by step. Read Li Keqiang's resume.[1] Promotions are faster for the well connected (the "princelings"), but leaders go through a lot of jobs on the way up.

[1] http://www.chinavitae.com/biography/Li_Keqiang/career

If you look back at the source for the "Humble People Make the Best Leaders" source, it's a little less straight forward than that. It's not about humble leaders, it's mainly a study about how altruistic leaders make their employees feel:

https://hbr.org/2014/05/the-best-leaders-are-humble-leaders

And that supposedly helped in somewhat ambiguous fields: Uniqueness, Belongingess, Team Citizenship, and Innovation

"At the outbreak of the Civil War, Grant wanted back in the Army, but the Army wasn’t interested. His reputation as a drunkard preceded him. Eventually they did offer him a unit to lead, one nobody else wanted. The 21st Illinois Artillery was one of the rowdiest, least disciplined, and most troubled units in the Union Army. When Grant took command on 14 June 1861, the restless men were only two weeks from the end of their enlistment. They couldn’t wait to go home. Then they met Grant. At the end of June, nearly every man signed up for another three years. “We knew we had the best commander and the best regiment in the State,” remarked one of them.

Grant turned the unit around by demonstrating a leadership style borrowed from Zachary Taylor in the Mexican-American War, marked by thoughtfulness, decisiveness, simple orders, and—above all—humility. This, his soldiers admired most of all. Grant shunned ostentation, flamboyance, and even a commander’s uniform. He dressed like his men did and looked “plain as an old shoe,” according to one Army doctor."

It seems like people tend to listen to the loudest speakers first -- everybody else is forced to play keep up. Bla bla bla, something about portraying authority.

Brain's not on point for elucidating further. If somebody else understands or agrees and cares to take the mantle, I'd appreciate it.

I think this is pretty much the thesis statement of "The Road to Character". Another interesting insight I am picking up from that book is that the best leaders are really the ones who know how to identify and pick the "Best Leaders". While those who are humble and reserved do a great job of actually doing the work of leadership, the absolute best leaders don't actually have those same virtues, but they recognize the quality and enable humble people to do good work.

So, create crisis, stress, and confusion... then hire media to make you appear charismatic, and you could be the next president?

Perhaps also because they tend make more money in the short term by sacrificing the long term? Sadly, a practice which aligns with the rest of modern society...