I’d like to offer some perspective on leadership, which became more evident to me in recent times with the disproportionate number of dangerous people in positions of power today. I don’t have to name them, anyone can see them.
Leaders come into power essentially through 3 means:
They are elected based on their rhetoric, promises and lies, the popular system in vogue in the United States and other nations where just about anyone can prance on the stage, make all manner of promises, sling mud at their opponents, and win a popular vote, not based on their skills as a leader, but their words.
They were next in line and stepped into the shoes because someone expired, died or resigned.
They are dictators and simply took office using force.
I propose a 4th and new school of thought when it comes to leadership roles, and offer it up by way of an example.
Imagine, you go to the hospital, you’re in pain, you need treatment or surgery to save your life, or the life of a loved one, and the “doctor” who presents himself/herself is not certified, but achieved that position by claiming they were a good doctor. In other words, they were never schooled, tested or licensed. Would you put your life in their hands?
You step on a commercial flight and discover that the pilot has never been trained for the job. He just talked his way into the position - no training, no testing, nothing. Would you fly in that plane?
A person claiming to be an engineer, but who has never been trained or certified as one, is building a bridge nearby your home. Would you cross it when completed? Would you trust that it was structurally sound?
The point here is that we permit people into leadership roles without one iota of training, testing or certification which assures that they are qualified and capable of performing the job - and yet leaders are responsible for entire nations, millions of lives and have the power to start wars, or end them with THE war.
Why is that?
Why does society set stringent requirements for people in medical fields, engineering, commercial piloting, many fields, and yet there is not a single bar required for a leadership role, particularly one that affects millions of lives.
Of course, by democratic standards, anyone should be permitted to stand on a soapbox and declare his or her leadership aims, but why do we permit them in the front door, particularly in leadership roles which affect millions of lives, without first requiring that they:
a. Have been trained for the job.
b. Have demonstrated actual leadership and diplomatic skills.
c. Are not themselves criminal.
d. Lastly and most importantly, they have passed the acid test demonstrating they are not a sociopathic personality, someone who is solely interested in power in order to accomplish their own selfish aims.
To accomplish a-c above, is simply to establish a bar, like any bar set for a doctor or pilot; basic training, schooling and testing that ensures they know what leadership is truly all about and they have demonstrated they can do the job before being certified. This being a basic requirement for anyone to be considered as a candidate for a city, regional, state or national role as a leader.
As to d) this is another factor, how do you determine if someone is a hidden sociopath, because we know, from studying them, that sociopaths are extremely capable at hiding their true motivations. Sociopaths have no remorse, they don’t feel guilt for anything they do and this makes them extremely dangerous in positions of power. They are accomplished actors, they know how to smokescreen, divert attention, how to gaslight and turn attention from themselves to others by creating forest fires and disruption. So, how do we expose them before they get into positions of power where they have the means of abusing that power?
The answer is pretty simple. The one thing that a sociopath CANNOT do is to truly help other people. Helping others defies their very existence, because a sociopath has no interest in seeing others get better - they want people subjugated and under their control. The bar, should include the necessity that the candidate offering himself or herself up for a position of leadership, must present sufficient evidence of having helped improve the lives of other people, of their community or their nation - and that help must be given over a sufficient time period to show that it is real and not fake, it should not be help in the form of financial support because anyone can do that, it must not be done through a proxy nor must they claim the work of others as their own. In other words, the acid test is CAN THEY HELP OTHERS - and this test alone is the one thing that a sociopath cannot fake. It truly defies everything they stand for, and if closely inspected, no matter what wealth or success they claim, will expose those who are not eligible to be good leaders.
Society expects professionals to have met and passed certain standards and to be certified for those professions - so why are we not doing the same with leaders? Why are we permitting people into positions of power who simply make claims, who use rhetoric and verbal abuse to win their way into offices of power which cause harm to people?
Obviously, such criteria wouldn’t necessarily be applicable to leadership roles such as the manager of a store, restaurant franchise, coach of a basketball team or even CEO of a company - but when we move into the realm of who we permit or elect to lead a city, a state, a nation or a global-level entity, it is suicidal not to take measures to ensure that those people pass the bar, a bottom line, before being permitted to have the power to affect millions, even billions of lives.
Four simple steps, managed by a certification board at city, regional, state and national level would establish standards of leadership - and while it might not be a perfect system, it is without a doubt one that will provide us with better leaders and less social disruption. And of course, those certifying the leaders, must themselves have passed a-d above.
Réal Laplaine
Author of high-concept thrillers
Commenti