Definition - #301 - #23 - New Leadership? Yeah!! But “who” are we going to “lead”?

What’s “leadership” anyway?
If you have no one to “lead”; what’s “leadership”/

So “who” are you going to “lead”?
Is there only one group or are there many?
If there are many groups, which group are you going to “lead”?

Do you expect to “lead” many at one time?
What can you say to “many”?

If you want to address one group at a time, what do you want to say to that group that’s different than what you are going to say to another group? How many “sayings” do you have?

Do you really understand what it takes to be a “leader”?

Perhaps a definition of a real “leader” should be........

A “leader” is a voice or image that most people seem to “understand” and want to emulate... to follow! The content of this communication should be understood and appeal to most people. It should be something they all seem to want. The content is a “policy”; not a specific “how to”. (Most people would have their own way to achieve this “policy” anyhow.)

If the policy is too general or too vague, either most people won’t understand or won’t be interested.
The “content” is what makes a leader!

What general things do I want to achieve?
What “general way” do I propose to achieve these things?

It is the success in presenting this “content” that will make a “leader”!
If you are too vague (We’ll do more!.... We’ll do better!... You’ll have two chickens in every pot! ...etc.) or are too complicated; you will lose your audience!

You will not become a leader!

It is the “mystique of relevance” that makes a leader. It is the way he proposes to present his content.
If it changes group to group; most people will be able to track this. If he offers different things to different groups; most people will be able to track this.
It is in the “message” that one becomes a leader!

So!..... Who are “you” speaking to?
Who do “you” want to lead?

Does the government really create jobs? .... How?
Can we really have a specific, detailed conclusion in Iraq? ..... Is it possible? .... How?

What does the general “leadership” in Washington now think about jobs, the economy, war and peace, terrorist threats worldwide, the real threat to the American way.....

What will a “change” be? What changes in positions are being proposed? What “should” the new Washington positions be?

This is the rhetoric, this is the “content” the people should be hearing.
This should be the basis for a “leadership” decision!