Kenneth Mikkelsen explores why leadership is so hard to exercise today in a conversation with professor Barbara Kellerman from Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. This is a must read for everyone interested in leadership and management trends.

1. Leaders
in
Search
of
Followership
By
Kenneth
Mikkelsen
5
October
2012
On
a
breezy
evening
of
November
4th
2008,
thousands
of
people
flocked
to
the
streets
of
downtown
Chicago.
The
excitement
grew
as
the
crowds
made
their
way
down
Michigan
Avenue
and
its
neighbouring
streets
towards
Grant
Park.
Finally,
after
nearly
two
years
of
intense
campaigning
in
primaries
and
the
general
election,
people
would
learn
the
name
of
the
44th
president
of
America.
Just
after
11
pm,
as
the
polls
closed
on
the
West
Coast,
Obama
was
named
the
winner
of
the
election
and
caused
the
crowd
in
and
around
the
park
to
erupt
into
an
historic
moment
of
jubilation.
Everywhere,
people
let
their
emotions
run
free
as
the
Blues
Brothers’
song,
“Sweet
Home
Chicago”,
rocked
the
air.
Around
midnight,
the
newly
elected
president,
Barack
Obama
walked
onto
the
blue-­‐carpeted
stage
with
his
wife,
Michelle,
and
their
daughters,
Malia
and
Sasha,
to
celebrate
the
victory.
“It’s
been
a
long
time
coming,
but
tonight,
because
of
what
we
did
on
this
day,
in
this
election,
at
this
defining
moment,
change
has
come
to
America,”
Obama
told
the
roaring
crowd
in
Grant
Park.
Barack
Obama’s
remarkable
journey
to
the
White
House
and
his
role
as
the
world’s
most
powerful
leader
is
a
central
story
in
a
recent
book,
The
End
of
Leadership,
by
Barbara
Kellerman,
professor
in
Public
Leadership
at
Harvard
University’s
John
F.
Kennedy
School
of
Government,
and
an
esteemed
expert
on
leadership
and
followership.
In
her
book,
Barbara
Kellerman
takes
a
critical
look
at
modern
leaders
and
why
we
are
so
fascinated
by
them
and
often
blindly
pursue
the
idea
of
great
leaders.
The
End
of
Leadership
challenges
a
widely
spread
perception
that
learning
about
and
copying
the
traits
and
characteristics
of
a
few
good
men
and
women
is
a
fast
track
to
success.
Kellerman
urges
us
to
increasingly
support
the
focus
on
individual
leaders’
personal
traits
with
a
broader
understanding
of
followership
and
the
context
that
leaders
operate
within
when
we
develop
leaders.
The
illusion
of
hero-­‐leaders
When
Americans
rallied
to
support
Barack
Obama
during
the
2008
presidential
campaign,
it
reflected
widespread
wishful
thinking
−
that
here
was
a
hero
of
our
times,
a
great
man
who
had
overcome
difficult
odds
to
bring
about
change
and
to
cure
what
is
ailing
the
American
society;
a
human
incarnation
of
“the
audacity
of
hope.”
But
according
to
Barbara
Kellerman,
reality
has
caught
up
with
Obama
and
his
followers.
“We
looked
at
Obama
as
our
first
black
president,
a
different
kind
of
leader.
He
promised
change
and
we
believed
in
it.
But
within
weeks,
months,
it
was
clear
that
this
presidency
would
be
quite
similar
to
other
presidencies.
There
are
those
who
argue
that
we
are
hardwired
to
look
for
and
long
for
hero-­‐leaders.
If
you
look
throughout
the
entire
course
of
human
history,
you
will
see
that
in
the
past,
much
more
than
the
present,
we
have
had
individual
leaders,
whether
queens
and
kings,
whether
presidents
or
prime
ministers,
who
are
much
more
powerful
and
authoritative
than
leaders
seem
to
be
now.

2. But
leadership
changes
all
the
time.
It
is
not
now
what
it
was,
and
even
if
we
are
still
hardwired
to
look
or
long
for
hero-­‐leaders,
the
evidence
certainly
is
that
there
are
so
few
and
far
between.
Every
time
a
person
is
asked
who
their
favourite
leader
is,
the
person
that
comes
to
mind
is
invariable
for
a
decade
or
two
–
Nelson
Mandela.
Now
why
does
everybody
name
Nelson
Mandela?
It
is
because
there
are
very
few
like
him.
Very
few
in
the
21st
century
who
feel
they
can
be
called
hero-­‐leaders.
The
consequences
of
our
longing
are
that
we
are
certain
or
doomed
to
be
disappointed,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
In
the
19th
century,
The
Great
Man
Theory
of
Leadership
was
propounded
by
historian
Thomas
Carlyle,
who
declared:
“The
history
of
the
world
is
but
the
biography
of
great
men.”
Nowadays,
the
appraisal
of
the
great
man
doesn’t
resonate
well
with
reality.
Kellerman
states
that
humankind
writ
large
is
suffering
from
a
crisis
of
confidence
in
those
who
are
charged
with
leading
wisely
and
well,
and
from
a
surfeit
of
mostly
well-­‐intentioned,
but
in
the
end
false,
promises
made
by
those
who
were
supposed
to
make
things
better.
“The
recession
has
likely
played
a
part
in
this
perception,
as
have
a
rash
of
recent
corporate
scandals.
Still,
this
lack
of
confidence
in
corporate
leaders
is
part
of
a
broader
picture,
in
which
those
at
the
top
are
much
less
trusted,
appreciated,
and
admired
than
previously.
The
situation
in
business
is
different
from
the
situation
in
government.
In
government
we
have
leaders
who
are
perceived
by
and
large
as
unable
to
do
what
they
are
supposed
to
do,
to
lead.
In
business
we
have
leaders
who
are
perceived
by
and
large
as
able
to
do
what
they
are
supposed
to
do,
to
lead,
but
who
nevertheless
do
so
in
ways
that
disappoint
and
dishearten,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
As
a
result,
the
level
of
trust
in
and
approval
of
leaders
and
the
companies
they
represent
is
at
an
all-­‐time
low.
In
2011,
a
Gallup
poll
confirmed
that
corporate
America
is
in
disrepute.
62
per
cent
of
Americans
want
major
corporations
to
have
less
influence
in
the
future
than
they
do
at
present,
up
10
per
cent
from
a
decade
earlier.
Additionally,
corporate
America
is
considered
to
be
too
powerful:
fully
67
per
cent
of
those
polled
said
they
resented
the
influence
of
big
business.
Leadership
is
an
equilateral
triangle
In
1998,
Caroline
Alexander
published
a
remarkable
book,
The
Endurance:
Shackleton’s
Legendary
Antarctic
Expedition.
The
book
tells
the
story
of
28
shipwrecked
sailors
and
their
heroic
survival
in
1914-­‐15.
The
men,
led
by
polar
explorer
Sir
Ernest
Shackleton,
had
set
sail
from
Europe
in
August
1914,
just
days
before
the
outbreak
of
the
First
World
War,
with
the
mission
of
becoming
the
first
expedition
to
cross
the
Antarctic.
In
the
Weddell
Sea,
their
ship
was
trapped
in
the
drifting
pack
ice
and
left
the
expedition
stranded
on
an
ice
floe.
Shackleton
eventually
ordered
everyone
into
the
open
lifeboats
and,
after
five
days,
the
crew
came
upon
the
deserted
ice-­‐covered
Elephant
Island.
Here,
Shackleton
picked
six
men
to
cross
the
world’s
stormiest
seas
in
an
attempt
to
reach
a
whaling
station
800
miles
away
on
the
island
of
South
Georgia.
Two
weeks
later,
the
six
men
made
it
ashore.
Shackleton
and
two
of
his
men
then
crossed
a
mountain
range
and,
after
36
hours,
made
it
to
the
whaling
station.
He
then
sent
a
boat
to
rescue
the
men
who
had
stayed
behind
on
the
south
shore.
After
an
appeal
to
the
Chilean
government,
Shackleton
borrowed
a
steam
ship
and
was
finally
able
to
rescue
the
22
remaining
men
on
Elephant
Island,
who
had
waited
patiently
for
him
for
almost
five
months.
Alexander’s
book
catapulted
the
mesmerising
story
to
a
larger
contemporary
audience.
Now,
more
than
a
decade
later,
the
story
has
been
turned
into
a
stream
of
management
books
that
praise
Shackleton
as
a
great
leader,
from
whom
you
can
learn
all
there
is
to
know
about
successful
leadership.
Today,
the
US

3. Naval
Academy
cites
Shackleton
as
a
model
leader,
and
esteemed
business
schools
also
refer
to
his
merits
in
their
leadership
curriculum.
This
fixation
on
the
leader
by
the
leadership
industry
is
another
strong
point
in
Barbara
Kellerman’s
book.
In
her
opinion,
the
industry
also
thrives
on
the
assumption
that
leadership
is
a
skill,
which
everyone
everywhere
should
aspire
to
acquire;
that
all
sorts
of
people,
from
different
backgrounds,
and
with
different
experiences
and
areas
of
expertise
can
acquire
leadership
skills.
And
that
it
can
be
learned
quickly
and
easily—over
a
period
of
months,
or
even
a
weekend.
In
Kellerman’s
words,
being
a
leader
has
become
a
mantra
and
yet
the
tireless
teachings
about
leadership
have
brought
us
no
closer
to
leadership
nirvana.
“I
wish
that
my
own
industry
would
take
a
less
reductionist
approach
to
leadership
education.
If
you
are
only
going
to
look
at
leaders
as
so
many
leadership
training
and
management
programs
do,
and
if
you
are
going
to
ignore
followers
and
context,
you
are
unfortunately
going
to
miss
two
sides
of
what
I
consider
an
equilateral
triangle,”
Barbara
Kellerman
emphasizes.
The
leadership
industry
is
focusing
too
narrowly
on
the
individual
leader
and
less
on
the
context
and
followership,
because
it
is
easily
marketable
to
busy
executives
with
short
attention
spans.
It
is
a
logic
that
speaks
directly
to
some
of
our
deepest
and
most
primitive
human
needs.”
“Even
if
the
leadership
industry
is
now
global,
it
originates
from
the
US
and
it
is
very
much
in
keeping
with
the
American
how-­‐to
mentality.
We
Americans
tend
to
believe
that
we
can
learn
how
to
do
almost
anything,
whether
it
is
swimming
or
playing
the
piano
or
becoming
a
leader.
That
is
part
of
our
culture.
There
is
also
the
presumption
that
being
a
leader
−in
sharp
contrast
to
being
a
follower
−is
good
in
and
by
itself.
It
is
considered
a
path
to
having
power,
authority
and
influence,
and,
usually,
money.
And
it
is
considered
a
path
to
personal
and
professional
fulfilment
as
well
as
to
goal
achievement,”
Barbara
Kellerman
tells.
It
is
interesting
to
look
at
why
Shackleton
excelled
during
the
expedition
in
1914-­‐15
in
connection
with
Barbara
Kellerman’s
equilateral
triangle
where
the
leader,
the
followers,
and
the
context
each
play
their
part.
When
the
context
changed
from
a
mission
of
exploration
to
a
mission
of
survival,
Shackleton
managed
to
reinvent
the
team’s
goals
and
he
improvised,
adapted
and
used
every
resource
at
hand
to
achieve
it.
He
also
earned
and
was
granted
the
respect
of
his
fellow
crewmembers
by
leading
as
an
example
and
showing
them
loyalty
and
obligation,
for
instance
by
climbing
the
mountains
on
South
Georgia
to
reach
the
whaling
station.
Last
but
not
least
he
had
faith
in
himself
and
his
abilities.
But
does
this
qualify
him
to
be
proclaimed
as
one
of
the
greatest
leaders
in
history?
The
truth
is
that
there
is
another
side
to
the
story
that
is
often
left
out.
After
his
return
to
England
in
1917,
Shackleton
started
several
ill-­‐fated
business
ventures.
Among
them
were
a
tobacco
company,
a
collector
stamp
printing
business
and
a
Hungarian
mining
company.
Each
of
them
failed,
and
in
the
end
he
died
heavily
in
debt.
It
is
fair
to
say
that
Shackleton
was
a
successful
leader
of
one
of
the
most
difficult
missions
in
human
history,
but
the
truth
is
also
that
he
had
difficulty
replicating
it
in
other
aspects
of
his
life
when
he
faced
a
new
situation
and
was
not
surrounded
by
the
27
followers
from
the
expedition
to
Antarctica.

4. A
shifting
power
balance
As
the
financial
crisis
continues
to
influence
most
of
the
world,
there
is
a
growing
concern
about
the
lack
of
responsible
leadership.
But
is
it
in
reality
also
a
crisis
of
followership?
A
cultural
evolution
and
technological
revolution
have
shifted
the
balance
of
power
between
leaders
and
followers
over
time
−
with
leaders
becoming
weaker
and
followers
stronger.
Barbara
Kellerman
argues
that
it
makes
leading
even
more
difficult
−
not
only
because
we
have
too
many
bad
leaders,
but
also
because
we
have
too
many
bad
followers.
In
the
United
States
many
people
don’t
vote
at
all,
or
vote
along
strict
or
even
extreme
ideological
lines,
which
makes
it
difficult
for
political
leaders
to
do
what
they
must−
to
collaborate
to
compromise.
“Bad
followers
come
in
all
different
varieties.
Sometimes
they
are
bad
because
they
stand
by
and
do
absolutely
nothing.
Particularly
when
it
comes
to
pocketbook
issues
and
understanding
that
if
they
want
to
receive
these
benefits,
these
benefits
actually
need
to
be
paid
for.
So
how
do
you
pay
for
them?
Among
other
things,
it
can
be
solved
by
paying
higher
taxes
and
increasing
the
age
at
which
you
start
receiving
benefits.
But
these
things
are
politically
very
difficult,
and
I
am
always
reminded
of
the
case
of
Sarkozy
in
2010.
He
wanted
to
raise
the
retirement
age
from
60
to
62,
and
two
million
French
people
took
to
the
streets
to
protest.
Now
is
that
good
followership?
Not
particularly;
at
least
not
in
my
book,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
A
digital
revolution
In
just
15
years
the
Internet
has
profoundly
impacted
the
relations
between
leaders
and
followers.
Especially
the
emergence
of
social
media
has
made
information
instant
and
available
to
nearly
everyone
everywhere
–
with
serious
implications.
WikiLeaks,
the
Arab
Spring
and
the
rise
of
the
Occupy
Wall
Street
movement
are
just
some
of
the
more
recent
events
where
the
engagement
in
collective
conversation
and
dissemination
of
information
has
shifted
the
balance
of
power.
Facebook,
Twitter
and
YouTube
have
in
other
words
become
powerful
weapons
in
the
hands
of
dissatisfied
voters,
employees
and
customers
around
the
world.
The
development
also
signifies
an
important
generational
gap
between
the
young
tech-­‐
savvy
generation
and,
in
most
cases,
those
who
are
a
generation
or
two
older
and
act
in
leadership
positions.
As
recently
as
late
2010,
64
per
cent
of
American
CEOs
were
not
using
social
media
of
any
kind
for
the
purpose
of
connecting
with
their
boards,
employees
and
customers.
According
to
Barbara
Kellerman,
they
are
missing
out
on
a
considerable
advantage
and
wasting
an
opportunity
to
lead
and
manage
in
cyberspace.
“This
is
not
to
say
that
CEOs
don’t
reach
out—they
do.
But
the
large
majority
of
them
continue
to
do
so
in
ways
that
are
decidedly
old-­‐fashioned,
by
being
quoted
in
the
news
or
by
speaking
directly
to
different
audiences
at
different
events.
This
leaves
only
about
a
third
of
CEOs
who
engage
with
their
stakeholders,
their
followers,
by
employing
technologies
such
as
their
own
corporate
websites,
podcasts,
blogs,
or
YouTube
channels,
or
through
social
networks
such
as
Facebook,
Twitter
and
LinkedIn,”
Barbara
Kellerman
explains.
The
new
social
contract
On
March
14th
2012,
Greg
Smith
handed
in
his
resignation
after
almost
12
years
of
service.
It
was
an
act
that
must
have
caused
his
bosses
at
Goldman
Sachs’
headquarters
in
New
York
to
choke
on
their
coffee
as
they
sat
down
to
read
the
morning
newspaper.
In
the
opinion
section
of
The
New
York
Times,
his

5. resignation
was
delivered
in
the
shape
of
a
frank
column.
Mr.
Smith,
who
was
the
head
of
Goldman’s
United
States
equity
derivatives
business
in
Europe,
the
Middle
East
and
Africa,
claimed
that
clients’
interests
were
side-­‐lined
in
how
the
firm
operated
and
thought
about
making
money.
According
to
Mr.
Smith,
leadership
in
the
firm
used
to
be
about
ideas,
setting
an
example
and
doing
the
right
thing.
But
something
went
wrong
along
the
way.
And
the
now
former
employee
blamed
this
cultural
change
personally
on
Goldman
Sachs’
CEO,
Lloyd
C.
Blankfein
and
its
president,
Gary
D.
Cohn.
The
incident
shows
how
the
life
of
leaders
is
more
and
more
exposed.
But,
according
to
Barbara
Kellerman,
it
is
also
a
manifestation
of
a
changing
social
contract
between
leaders
and
followers.
“We
presume
that
people
get
elected
president
or
prime
minister,
or
for
that
matter
mayor,
because
they
deserve
to,
because
their
capacities
attest
to
the
legitimacy
of
their
claims
to
power,
authority,
and
influence.
And,
similarly,
we
presume
that
people
are
selected
to
be
chief
executive
officer
based
on
their
excellence,
a
professional
history
that
testifies
to
their
superiority
as
leaders
and
managers.
But
when
the
contract
between
leaders
and
followers
is
based
on
merit,
as
opposed
to
self-­‐interest,
the
game
changes.
That
is,
if
merit
is
perceived
to
be
lacking,
either
because
the
leader
is
seen
as
being
in
some
serious
way
corrupt,
or
because
the
leader
is
seen
as
being
in
some
serious
way
inept,
the
contract
is
weakened
or
even
abrogated
altogether.
Again,
we
go
along
with
our
leaders
and
managers,
particularly
in
the
workplace,
for
any
number
of
self-­‐interested
reasons,
including
the
benefits
of
material
reward
and
the
fear
of
personal
or
professional
punishment.
But
the
best
reason,
certainly
the
ideal
reason,
to
follow,
is
that
we
want
to
follow
−
because
we
genuinely
believe
in
the
integrity
and
competence
of
those
with
power,
authority
and
influence.
Small
wonder,
then,
that
when
merit
matters
most,
and
when
merit
is
viewed
as
meagre
or
even
absent
altogether,
disappointment
and
disillusionment
set
in,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
“A
good
leader
must
be
ethical
and
a
good
leader
must
be
effective.”
Tarred
and
feathered
Maintaining
privacy
as
a
leader
is
harder
than
ever
with
smartphones
present
on
every
street
corner
and
24/7
publication
channels
like
Twitter
and
YouTube.
In
this
day
and
age,
followers
feel
entitled
to
pry
into
their
leaders’
private
lives
−
and
to
hold
them
accountable
for
what
they
do.
As
the
culture
changes
and
technology
along
with
it,
followers
today
are
familiar
with
the
flaws
of
leaders,
with
the
foibles
of
leaders,
as
they
never
were
before.
Chief
executives’
every
move
is
scrutinised,
analysed
and
criticised,
not
only
what
they
do
in
the
present,
but
also
what
they
did
in
the
past.
“Barack
Obama,
for
example,
has
been
looked
at
every
which
way:
where
he
was
born;
what
was
the
impact
on
him
of
his
black
African
father
and
his
white
American
mother;
what
is
the
nature
of
his
faith
and
of
his
marriage;
how
does
his
mind
work
and
what
motivates
him;
what
is
his
core
character
and
is
he
introverted
or
extroverted;
what
is
the
nature
of
his
leadership
style;
and
what,
given
everything
we
know
about
him,
will
he
do
next?
This
brings
us
to
the
leader’s
position.
Whether
president
or
prime
minister,
chancellor
or
royal,
senator
or
mayor,
the
office
at
the
top
has
been
diminished
−
and
is
unlikely
ever
to
be
restored
to
its
former
glory,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
It
seems
like
the
more
we
know
about
how
leaders
lead
and
managers
manage,
the
more
they
tend
to

6. shrink.
What
this
familiarity
has
bred,
according
to
Barbara
Kellerman,
is
contempt.
”CEOs
of
large
publicly
held
companies,
will
increasingly
come
under
the
same
kind
of
pressure
as
political
leaders.
They
already
are.
The
tenure
of
corporate
leaders
is
shorter
than
it
used
to
be.
The
number
of
corporate
shareholder
activism
is
going
up
and
in
my
view
it
is
not
much
longer
before
shareholders
will
be
able
and
will
make
use
of
the
technology
for
connecting
and
for
voting
against.
We
have
already
seen
this
with
increasing
frequency,
whether
it
is
voting
against
pay
raises
for
CEOs
or
decisions
CEOs
would
like
to
make.
Both
blogs
and
shareholder
activists
will
be
more
difficult
for
CEOs
to
deal
with
in
the
future
than
they
have
been
in
the
past,”
says
Barbara
Kellerman.
In
2011,
the
German
Minister
of
Defence,
Karl-­‐Theodor
zu
Guttenberg,
one
of
the
country’s
most
popular
politicians
and
widely
regarded
a
potential
future
chancellor,
was
forced
to
withdraw
from
politics.
His
downfall
was
caused
by
a
persistent
group
of
online
activists
that
proved
he
had
plagiarised
large
parts
of
his
four-­‐hundred-­‐page
doctoral
thesis.
The
online
campaign
against
him
was
so
relentless
that
he
finally
withdrew
from
public
life.
Lessons
for
leaders
When
King
Juan
Carlos
of
Spain
broke
his
hip
on
the
way
to
the
bathroom
in
a
luxury
safari
camp
in
Botswana
earlier
this
year,
he,
too,
was
taught
a
lesson
in
modern
leadership.
The
accident
revealed
that
the
King
was
in
Africa
to
hunt
elephants
during
one
of
the
worst
crises
in
Spain’s
history.
When
this
became
known
to
the
general
public,
it
caused
a
previously
unheard-­‐of
public
outcry
in
Spain.
The
King
was
openly
criticised
for
setting
a
bad
example
and
for
being
insensitive
to
both
the
endangered
animal
and
the
economic
situation
in
the
country.
In
the
end,
the
King
finally
did
apologise
for
his
actions.
The
End
of
Leadership
is
packed
with
examples
of
leaders
who
have
not
understood
how
the
recent
years’
cultural
and
technological
changes
impact
their
profession.
In
her
book,
Barbara
Kellerman
refrains
from
providing
a
ready-­‐made
recipe
for
how
to
develop
better
leaders,
but
she
suggests
that
we
take
a
stroll
back
in
time
when,
in
many
ways,
leadership
was
taken
much
more
seriously
than
now
and
where
mastery
thereof
was
perceived
to
be
a
journey
of
lifelong
learning.
Two
of
the
world’s
leading
thinkers,
Confucius
and
Plato,
were
both
strong
advocates
of
this
viewpoint.
According
to
Confucius,
the
ideal
leader
was
a
role
model
and
a
gentleman
worth
emulating
and
following,
because
he
was
older,
wiser
and
more
farsighted.
Whereas
Plato’s
ideal
education
would,
in
effect,
be
lifelong
and
deeply
rooted
in
a
range
of
topics,
most
of
them
not
in
any
obvious
way
connected
to
leadership
as
we
perceive
it,
including
literature,
music,
basic
and
advanced
mathematics,
philosophy
and
metaphysics,
physical
exercise,
and
experience
in
both
the
civil
service
and
military.
“If
we
are
talking
about
growing
people
who,
whether
in
the
economic,
political,
religious
or
educational
realm,
have
a
broader
approach
to
the
common
good,
then
we
need
to
re-­‐examine
the
way
we
are
raising
or
educating
leaders
and
even
followers.
Plato’s
idea
of
how
you
grow
a
leader
is
not
exactly
by
taking
leadership
courses,
from
one
semester
to
one
weekend
or
two
months.
I
am
not
saying
that
we
have
to
adapt
it
precisely,
but
I
think
there
are
some
valuable
lessons
to
be
learned.
It
was
a
far
longer
process,
a
much
richer
process.
He
believed
that
in
order
to
grow
leaders,
it
was
years
of
learning,
years
of
experience,
different
kinds
of
experiences
in
everything
from
music
to
math
–
he
believed
in
the
broadest
possible
approach.

7. And
so
did
several
of
the
great
leader
thinkers
who
go
back
in
many
cases,
hundreds
and
in
some
cases
thousands
of
years.
It
is
the
contemporaneous
type
of
leadership
industry
that
has
assumed
without
any
other
evidence
whatsoever,
that
leadership
can
be
taught
to
many
people
simultaneously,
a
large
class
of
people,
and
that
it
can
be
taught
in
a
very
short
period
of
time,
and
those
are
the
assumptions
that
I
very
much
question,”
Barbara
Kellerman
finishes.
About
Barbara
Kellerman
Barbara
Kellerman
is
the
James
MacGregor
Burns
Lecturer
in
Public
Leadership
at
Harvard
University’s
John
F.
Kennedy
School
of
Government.
She
was
the
Founding
Executive
Director
of
the
Kennedy
School’s
Center
for
Public
Leadership,
from
2000
to
2003;
and
from
2003
to
2006
she
served
as
the
Center’s
Research
Director.
She
also
served
as
Dean
of
Graduate
Studies
and
Research
at
Fairleigh
Dickinson,
and
as
Director
of
the
Center
for
the
Advanced
Study
of
Leadership
at
the
Academy
of
Leadership
at
the
University
of
Maryland.
Kellerman
was
cofounder
of
the
International
Leadership
Association
(ILA),
and
is
author
and
editor
of
many
books,
among
others:
Bad
Leadership
(2004);
Followership
(2008);
Women
and
Leadership
(co-­‐edited
in
2008
with
Deborah
Rhode);
Essential
Selections
on
Power,
Authority,
and
Influence
(2010);
and
The
End
of
Leadership
(2012).
Visit
Barbara
Kellerman’s
personal
blog.
Barbara
Kellerman
discusses
some
of
the
core
topics
of
her
book
in
this
video.
Get
inspirered
from
this
video
entitled:
Leadership
from
a
dancing
guy.