Bumped into a friend today. He's a contemporary of mine - and I won't explain what that means. Let's put it this way; he's done something hard for me to imagine doing at this stage of my life: He enrolled to be an Officer in the Air Force Reserves.
Enrolled. Graduated.
His career, to-date, has nothing to do with such an aspiration. When I asked him why he did what he did, he explained to me that he wanted to test himself, do something meaningful, do something new - and get acquainted with his will and discipline.
He then explained to me that his training was largely about mental endurance, emotional capacity, leadership... and followership.
We talked about the importance of knowing when to lead - and when to follow.
I never quite thought about it - - but how true it is. When does/should one challenge leadership? When should one follow? When should one lead?
People followed German "leaders" during World War II. Maybe they shouldn't have. Certain people lead others in Vietnam. Maybe they shouldn't have.
We "follow" people on Twitter. What are we doing when we "follow" them? Why do we? Who do we? When & why should we?
I don't know the answer at this moment, but I do know this:
Maybe we need to think about the times when "leaders" need to follow - and "followers" need to lead.
And, perhaps, the answer lies within ourselves - i.e., maybe we should follow our hearts - follow our intuition... and lead change - whether by title we're the "leader" or "follower".
craig a. james.smart .simple .mobile 2010
Recent Comments