The longevity of leaders and enterprises varies from one to another. Likewise there are varied reasons and contexts for this. Some things are obvious and some not so much. However, there are some things that can translate across variables.
One of those things are leaders. Leaders’ influence can wane. No matter how great a leader is or has been, he is never immune from losing his influence. This danger always exists.
One of the things that leads to a leader’s decline in influence is the leader himself. All leadership starts with self. Any leader’s ability to lead others is significantly proportional to the ability to lead himself.
Investing In Growth
Organizations (should) always look for growth. The great ones understands that growth only comes with some investments of sort. It is always the result of some strategies in action. Decline in influence often starts with overlooking the importance of investing in themselves and the leaders in their enterprise.
I’ve already alluded to this but I do need to state it explicitly: Overlooking the connectedness of a leader herself and the performance of their enterprise is detrimental. For instance, the integrity of a leader at a personal level (if there ever is such a thing) affects his influence at an organizational level.
A leader must be the epitome of the values of his enterprise. When he fails to lead himself in this regard, he cannot lead others. Thus a decline in his influence ensues.
Again: the influence of any enterprise is connected to the influence of its leaders primarily within its walls. This means leaders must always keep themselves in check when it comes to translating their organisation’s values in their personal capacity.
You can’t lead effectively if your personal values don’t align with the enterprise you lead [Click to Tweet]
[image: John Haslam, cc | Published via DeskPM]