Leaders Eat Last (Leadership in Jediism)

Excellent video Kit.

Thank you for sharing this with us.

It was interesting about the alpha. I was discussing this with Ms Adder last night, she was adamant the alpha was the most aggressive and I was sure it was the one with the most authority. While there clearly is an overlap, in practical terms our workplace relationships probably transition across a range between work and social, with the people stronger in the social leveraging that to gain authority, and people stronger in authority leveraging that to be social... seemingly.

I think then, as discussed in the video, that clear roles in the hierarchy are important and also that they are accepted by all as important.

So I'd say all parties need to contribute within the purview of their roles and that their roles are effectively integrated and reinforcing to the groups overall intentions in the longer term, but leadership attributes I think besides all that need to bring;
1. capability in all activities within the group (operations)
2. integration in the groups functional output (operations)
3. capability of related activities existing outside of the group (intelligence)
4. integration with required functional relationships outside of the group (liason, C2)
5. acceptance and adherence by group to participation (performance?)

So I do not think a leader can force a group to work at its best, but they can certainly force a group to fail - such that I think a good leader can still be ignored and undermined under normal circumstances, and indeed under normal circumstances a good leader might not be as evidently capable if their particular capabilities are performance in abnormal circumstances. Indeed a great leader probably only becomes apparent when the group is tested to the limit and the leader shows why they are the leader. So there probably also needs to be quantifiable testing of performance to determine who can achieve those first 4 types of attributes under abnormal conditions to reinforce the 5th.

Importantly that might need to be done within the scope of the work and not the social domains in the workplace - because the failure of the leader will most likely be manifest as a result of the followers using whatever mechanism is available to replace the leader.... unless its a social club!!! That said, we are all human and while we might participate in a group with a work function, it does need to be balanced to ensure the health of the members as health failings in the group participants due to work will reduce effectiveness no matter how well the group could theoretically function.

Replying to Adder’s last post…

I don’t think it is by force that a leader causes a group to be its best. But, rather by the example and the sense of security provided to the group and a kind of focal point that others can rally to when needed. Some of the best leaders I have known give you a feeling that you can go forward and do what needs to be done without fear of reprisal; having a feeling that if it goes wrong or something happens you won’t be alone when dealing with whatever happens.

Aggression, and this is all just my opinion, is not the sole sign of a alpha… more of a bully. Real authority comes from the support of those one leads. So, in any group, the alpha would be the one that has the capability of aggression but does not use it unless needed. Having that ability but using it for the good of the group causes the group to grant the authority of alpha to the leader. Of course, this is all subconscious and we seldom think about why we follow others or others follow us. And in any given group, one may be the alpha of that group. But when in another group, not.

I do agree that it is completely possible, and happens far too often, that a leader causes a group to fail. In the previous paragraphs I was focusing on what might values a leader might provide a group for them to succeed.

I also think that a good leader knows that they cannot do it all on their own and that they do not know everything. So a good leader will play to the strengths of the subordinates. Allowing them to have small leadership roles within the larger group. Thus delegating authority. This, in turn, also strengthens the authority of the alpha in the group because the alpha is shown to be the leader above other leaders. And gives more structure and purpose to the group and members.

That all sounds kind of circular and confusing… LOL :laugh:

EDIT: Oh yea, great video Kit, thanks!



In todays terms, I find that a good 'Alpha' is like you and Wes descibes it...

A good leader...

But, a leader yells at you constructively when you need it, and praises you when you deserve it, and works with you when they doo-doo is hitting the fan...

I am an Alpha, I dont mind being the Beta...

I have a team, and I delegate to that team to support their strong points, and try to do the crap none of us are good at till someone better comes along...

I am seen as arrogant by some, but, I cant worry what they think, Ive got stuff to do, lol...

Good leader, or bad leader a leader is a leader and will always have something to teach you. A good leader can teach you how to do something and a bad leader can teach you how not to do something. In my time in the military I've seen both. I've seen and E-5 you didn't want the job only had because had to but he was quick to scold when his soldier did wrong but not praise when when his soldiers did right. I've seen an E-4 lead the his fellow E-4's on training missions and be vary successful. I can take things from both soldiers to make me a better leader.
Leaders come in all shapes and sizes. To me a leader doesn't have to know everything but they have to be willing to admit that. A leader shouldn't hold your hand but give you guidance. When you fail or mess up they should let you know it then pick you up and send you on your with a little more knowledge. A leader could be freaking out on the inside but should maintain his composure on the outside. I ask for a lot in a leader but its the same kind of little I strive to be.
There is a lot to being a good leader but not a bad one. Number one thing to being a bad leader is if they create a hostile space. The only thing is if they are lazy and over bearing a strictly lead from the rear with an iron fist.

When it comes to describing a good leader, I am always reminded of a quote from an anonymous soldier that described the leadership style of U.S. Civil War General and Irish revolutionary Thomas Francis Meagher.

"It was never 'go boys, go', but 'come boys, follow me'".

To be an effective leader, you must be willing to set an example and do whatever it is you would ask those under your authority to do. It is important to delegate, but you must be ready to get your own hands dirty as well. As Jedi, we can set an example and we can encourage others to follow, but it is more important that we are always also doing the work ourselves.

"It was never 'go boys, go', but 'come boys, follow me'".

To be an effective leader, you must be willing to set an example and do whatever it is you would ask those under your authority to do. It is important to delegate, but you must be ready to get your own hands dirty as well.

Maybe an oversimplification, and something bad followers love to try to use when you ask them to do something

"Mop the floor"

"Be a good leader and do it for us"

Yeah...Nah. My job is not mopping floors. I am not good at mopping floors, and if I'm mopping floors, are you going to do my spreadsheets?

I am good at spreadsheets. My job is spreadsheets. Your job is mopping floors. We have our spots, and we do our duty, but that duty varies.


Now, arguably, if I was a "Good" leader, my team would know that I put my hours in at my duty (and in some way, that benefits them, because we all get to keep our jobs and have a day off every week), so they are happy to do the hours at their duty, because that benefits me. We've made a lovely exchange of skill and labour, and we can all afford fresh food and other first world luxuries.

Still, you can be the best leader and still be surrounded by bad followers who want a larger slice of the pie, or all the pie, or pie AND cake.

At some point, a good Leader probably needs to cut some individuals loose and let them drift off.

What's my point?

Ah yes, strive to be a good Leader if that is your lot in life- Learn from other leaders, your own past, and insightful seminars, books or whatever - but you can't win them all, and while it usually is your fault when the team fails, some people can't be helped


Also: If you're a follower, there's no harm in that. The world runs on people diligently doing their duty with individual pride in work. It still earns respect and it is valued, and if only person sees it, and wants to improve their self because of it - Then you've become a leader anyway.

When I think of a leader I am reminded of two quotes.

“A leader is one who knows the way, goes the way, and shows the way.”
- John C. Maxwell

To me, this means a leader has the knowledge (even if it's just how to care for their people), applies it, lives it, and teaches it.

Jestor wrote: But, a leader yells at you constructively when you need it, and praises you when you deserve it, and works with you when they doo-doo is hitting the fan...

And this brings me to my second quote

“The challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude; be kind, but not weak; be bold, but not bully; be thoughtful, but not lazy; be humble, but not timid; be proud, but not arrogant; have humor, but without folly.”
― Jim Rohn

This I really feel sums up what I admire in a good leader. The balance between all of that.

I agree that you can learn as much from bad leaders as good ones. My most recent one taught me two things. Take the time to listen to your people, that'll be a good start to earn trust. And without it, you won't have it. And people who can't trust their leadership to take care of them, will spend more time ensuring they are taking care of themselves, rather than taking care of the mission.

Two things I hear in the military so often they should trademark it.

"Never tell your people to do something you wouldn't do yourself."

For example, whenever I have the time, I'll go out and clean the bathrooms with the lower ranking. Why? Because it's not beneath me to do so. There are times when my skills and knowledge are better utilized in the workplace at that moment. But showing them I'm willing to clean the bathroom (or take out the trash, or Crew Chief a flight) shows them that I consider myself a person little different then they themselves. That I'm willing to take on a crap job to give them a break they may need, or to help the team. It'll hopefully build trust and camaraderie, both of which are vital importance if I'm to act as their supervisor to the extent that I should be. If I can't make a personal connection with them, they will never trust me with the information of what they're having problems with. And I can't help them with something I don't know.

"Lead by example"

Pretty damn self-explanatory. No one will respect you with a "do as I say, not as I do" example. And talk about resentment!

And all of this is applicable to who I want to be as a Jedi.

JamesSand wrote: I am good at spreadsheets. My job is spreadsheets. Your job is mopping floors. We have our spots, and we do our duty, but that duty varies.

This is being a manager, not a leader. Managers deal in results, leaders deal in people.

Kit wrote:

JamesSand wrote:
I am good at spreadsheets. My job is spreadsheets. Your job is mopping floors. We have our spots, and we do our duty, but that duty varies.

This is being a manager, not a leader. Managers deal in results, leaders deal in people.

Hence my paragraph that followed

Being a "Leader" doesn't necessarily require "doing the same task as your followers", as put forward by a Dead Guy Quote - I know it sounds romantic, gung-ho, and appeals to an "equality" that some people want in leaders.
I see it as meaning your followers know you contribute to the Team, and are willing to contribute as well.
It's about them wanting to Invest in You because they know, and respect your Investment in Them.

Great videos - thank you for sharing Kit and Cayce

There is much to take on board and I think the parallels between the selflessness of a good leader and the selflessness of the Jedi Way are quite clear. This notion is a current running right through our doctrine - especially the creed:

I shall never seek so much to be consoled as to console;
To be understood as to understand;
To be loved as to love;
For it is in giving that we receive;
It is in pardoning that we are pardoned;

This could be as much a formula for good leadership, as it is the creed of the Jedi.

The only issue I have is the means of the explanation - the proposed (common) idea that human interactions, moods, emotions and responses are caused by 5 (or 25) different chemicals in the brain. I won't derail this thread with all that. Might be worth discussing in another thread though . . .