#1 Posted by Aegon (5840 posts) -

Among the group that you associate yourself with (friends, job, culture, nation, religion, etc.), how do you know if you should be or even fit as the correct leader?

Is it something unexplainable? Do you simply find yourself in the position without understanding how it came about? Is it the result of a lust for power or achievement / success in the group? Does it happen out of a belief that you're undoubtedly the necessary leader?

#2 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

*taps crown*

#3 Edited by Pr1mus (3951 posts) -

Just keep talking louder then everyone else until they get in line. If they do you're the leader. If they tell you to fuck off then you know you're not. That is of course if there is a need for some form of leadership to begin with.

It has worked reasonably well for me at work or in sports in the past.

I don't do it with friends cause i'm not comfortable being an asshole with people i like.

#4 Posted by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

You'll be the guy not watching anime and collecting dolls. Then you're the man.

#5 Posted by Aegon (5840 posts) -

You'll be the guy not watching anime and collecting dolls. Then you're the man.

Kojima says hi.

#6 Posted by Levio (1786 posts) -

I just judge whom is most fit to lead the group, and if that happens to be me, then I just do it. Though I can't say I've ever had to lead anything of consequence.

#7 Posted by BaneFireLord (2957 posts) -

I'm invariably the tallest, so I just stare people down until I'm put in charge.

#8 Posted by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

@aegon: Mr.Kojima would never collect anime. That's horrible of you to say. He's a 100% bona fide westaboo.

#9 Posted by Aegon (5840 posts) -

I'm invariably the tallest, so I just stare people down until I'm put in charge.

The question was not how to become the leader, it's how do you know if you should be the leader.

#10 Posted by wjb (1697 posts) -

When I defeat Ric Flair in a submissions-only match for the NWA Heavyweight Title.

Then I'll know.

#11 Edited by MB (13138 posts) -

If you find yourself wondering if you're supposed to take the lead or not, then you already have your answer...an unequivocal no.

Moderator
#12 Posted by TowerSixteen (544 posts) -

Anyone who gives you a simple answer is talking nonsense, I think. The paths that people take to leadership are multitudinous and not possible to boil down to a few sentences. And that's without even considering less traditional leadership solutions- after all, responsibilities and privileges usually associated with leadership can easily be divided and/or rotated, depending on situation. There is no easy answer, it's one of those things that always needs to be taken case-by-case.

#13 Posted by allworkandlowpay (873 posts) -

If you have to ask, then you already aren't leadership material.

#15 Edited by Viking_Funeral (1900 posts) -

The first question is why does the group need a leader.

Then, the next question is if you, in that position, would facilitate the actions that this leader would supposedly be required for.

That's the hypothesis. Then you have to actually test it. It's one thing to claim you can do something, it's another to actually prove it.

#16 Posted by TowerSixteen (544 posts) -

@allworkandlowpay: Yes, because unwavering and unquestioning faith in oneself has traditionally been such a great trait in leaders.

#17 Posted by allworkandlowpay (873 posts) -

@allworkandlowpay: Yes, because unwavering and unquestioning faith in oneself has traditionally been such a great trait in leaders.

Unfortunate reality. Leadership often is given to you by others because you have several or all of some of these traits: Charisma, Confidence, Wisdom. Asking how you would know if you are leadership material is already wavering in your own self-confidence, and establishing a lack of applied wisdom to the situation. That's simply not what a leader does. It inspires no confidence in others of you. It's like "The Game," If you are thinking about it, you already lost.

#18 Posted by TruthTellah (9475 posts) -

Should be the leader?

No one -should- be the leader. You can't know that you should be the leader. Anyone can potentially lead at some point or another, and it varies on what the situation is and whether someone is willing to step up to be the leader.

Usually, it's whoever steps up or who the most people want to be the leader. That person that raises their hand. The willing find a way to lead.

#19 Posted by Aegon (5840 posts) -
#20 Posted by TruthTellah (9475 posts) -

@towersixteen said:

@allworkandlowpay: Yes, because unwavering and unquestioning faith in oneself has traditionally been such a great trait in leaders.

Unfortunate reality. Leadership often is given to you by others because you have several or all of some of these traits: Charisma, Confidence, Wisdom. Asking how you would know if you are leadership material is already wavering in your own self-confidence, and establishing a lack of applied wisdom to the situation. That's simply not what a leader does. It inspires no confidence in others of you. It's like "The Game," If you are thinking about it, you already lost.

I don't think that's quite the whole story. A good leader also inspires confidence through wisely putting his confidence in the right people. A leader should never let their self-confidence keep them from admitting that they aren't an expert at everything, and they can't do it alone. You know your strengths and weaknesses and find people that will help make up for those weaknesses. That's applied wisdom through a realistic assessment of yourself and others.

#21 Posted by MarkWahlberg (4610 posts) -

Only a true leader will know what is best.

#22 Posted by TowerSixteen (544 posts) -

@allworkandlowpay: You know what? There IS sometimes virtue in not letting others SEE your self-questioning, but frankly, the ideas of unquestioning confidence and wisdom are inherently opposed. What you say would make sense if we lived in a world where it was impossible to put on a public face at odds with your inner world. We don't. Furthermore, the idea that all good leadership is the "charismatic figurehead" type is untrue. Furtherfurthermore, admitting- to yourself- that you don't know something and seeking an answer does NOT show a lack of wisdom, but a relatively high level of maturity.

#23 Posted by PandaBear (1384 posts) -

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

#24 Edited by Aegon (5840 posts) -

@pandabear said:

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

Someone trying to pick a fight over the internet is telling me to grow balls? Ha.

You assume quite a bit. It's a question. Answer it or move along. I didn't ask you to judge my character.

For those who insist on doing so, you should know that the origin of the question came from listening to a series of podcasts focusing on major figures in a revolutionary time of a nation driven by ambition (Rome). There were a lot of prominent figures and leaders in the story and it was mentioned several times that it was difficult to answer the question of what their motivations might be. With that in mind, I thought it'd be interesting to ask this question here.

Also, you do realize that leaders go beyond a group of friends. Some people want to become the president, or a CEO, or whatever.

#25 Edited by zFUBARz (637 posts) -

@allworkandlowpay Yeah dude you're way off base. unwavering certainty and confidence are more likely the signs of a person with a severe personality disorder. Now often Leaders present themselves this way, but that doesn't make that a good leader, and it's almost never true that they actually think that way.

As for the OP, no idea man, well rather a million ideas, and all of them valid. I could give you some literature on it if you really want, but it's all pretty specious. That being said I'm often looked to as a leader, damned if I know why though, I'm not loud, I'm not imposing, I'm not well organized. i am fairly logical and not a complete idiot. but that's about it, still though I usually end up being stuck in the leadership role.

Basically the group dictates who the leader will be, and the type of leader they need.

#26 Posted by MikeFerrari7 (212 posts) -

If you are confident you can get the best results, and know what to do, you just do it. I was a go with the flow type of personal for a while, but my desire to be a leader ended up trumping that, and I've been taking the reins on projects quite a bit lately, and I really enjoy it.

#27 Posted by DaddyCabinet (225 posts) -

Nobody is/has to be in charge. Didn't you guys watch Cube?

#28 Posted by dudeglove (8299 posts) -

Some are born great, some achieve it, and some have it thrust upon them.

#29 Posted by PandaBear (1384 posts) -

@aegon said:

@pandabear said:

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

Someone trying to pick a fight over the internet is telling me to grow balls? Ha.

You assume quite a bit. It's a question. Answer it or move along. I didn't ask you to judge my character.

For those who insist on doing so, you should know that the origin of the question came from listening to a series of podcasts focusing on major figures in a revolutionary time of a nation driven by ambition (Rome). There were a lot of prominent figures and leaders in the story and it was mentioned several times that it was difficult to answer the question of what their motivations might be. With that in mind, I thought it'd be interesting to ask this question here.

Also, you do realize that leaders go beyond a group of friends. Some people want to become the president, or a CEO, or whatever.

Among the group that you associate yourself with (friends, job, culture, nation, religion, etc.), how do you know if you should be or even fit as the correct leader?

That's why I "assumed" you meant that.

And I'm not picking a fight over the Internet. I'm saying it's an immature question that's very broad and has no definitive answer.

#30 Edited by Aegon (5840 posts) -
@pandabear said:

@aegon said:

@pandabear said:

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

Someone trying to pick a fight over the internet is telling me to grow balls? Ha.

You assume quite a bit. It's a question. Answer it or move along. I didn't ask you to judge my character.

For those who insist on doing so, you should know that the origin of the question came from listening to a series of podcasts focusing on major figures in a revolutionary time of a nation driven by ambition (Rome). There were a lot of prominent figures and leaders in the story and it was mentioned several times that it was difficult to answer the question of what their motivations might be. With that in mind, I thought it'd be interesting to ask this question here.

Also, you do realize that leaders go beyond a group of friends. Some people want to become the president, or a CEO, or whatever.

Among the group that you associate yourself with (friends, job, culture, nation, religion, etc.), how do you know if you should be or even fit as the correct leader?

That's why I "assumed" you meant that.

And I'm not picking a fight over the Internet. I'm saying it's an immature question that's very broad and has no definitive answer.

You assumed you knew why I asked the question, and then you proceeded to judge me based on that assumption. I explained clearly to you the origins of the question (they deviate from your assumption). The first two words you highlighted were examples I stated as part of the question and aren't relevant to your argument. They can't be, because I didn't include my reasons for asking the question in my first post. And why would I? I just wanted opinions / answers to the question, not judgments based on the assumed reasoning behind it.

Also, lol at you claiming that you somehow conveyed that it was an immature question. You just said something about Donatello and balls. Very mature.

#31 Posted by PandaBear (1384 posts) -
@aegon said:
@pandabear said:

@aegon said:

@pandabear said:

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

Someone trying to pick a fight over the internet is telling me to grow balls? Ha.

You assume quite a bit. It's a question. Answer it or move along. I didn't ask you to judge my character.

For those who insist on doing so, you should know that the origin of the question came from listening to a series of podcasts focusing on major figures in a revolutionary time of a nation driven by ambition (Rome). There were a lot of prominent figures and leaders in the story and it was mentioned several times that it was difficult to answer the question of what their motivations might be. With that in mind, I thought it'd be interesting to ask this question here.

Also, you do realize that leaders go beyond a group of friends. Some people want to become the president, or a CEO, or whatever.

Among the group that you associate yourself with (friends, job, culture, nation, religion, etc.), how do you know if you should be or even fit as the correct leader?

That's why I "assumed" you meant that.

And I'm not picking a fight over the Internet. I'm saying it's an immature question that's very broad and has no definitive answer.

You assumed you knew why I asked the question, and then you proceeded to judge me based on that assumption. I explained clearly to you the origins of the question (they deviate from your assumption). The first two words you highlighted were examples I stated as part of the question and aren't relevant to your argument. They can't be, because I didn't include my reasons for asking the question in my first post. And why would I? I just wanted opinions / answers to the question, not judgments based on the assumed reasoning behind it.


I don't know why people bother making these sort of philosophical threads with vague questions and broad concepts. I mean do you really care about the answer a bunch of dudes on a video game forum will give you? Really?

#32 Edited by Aegon (5840 posts) -

@pandabear said:
@aegon said:
@pandabear said:

@aegon said:

@pandabear said:

I sincerely hope you're under the age of about 13 and are trying to start some stupid school gang and need a "leader" to be Donatello of the group. Seriously, if you're any older and still think your group needs a leader you need to grow some figurative balls.

Someone trying to pick a fight over the internet is telling me to grow balls? Ha.

You assume quite a bit. It's a question. Answer it or move along. I didn't ask you to judge my character.

For those who insist on doing so, you should know that the origin of the question came from listening to a series of podcasts focusing on major figures in a revolutionary time of a nation driven by ambition (Rome). There were a lot of prominent figures and leaders in the story and it was mentioned several times that it was difficult to answer the question of what their motivations might be. With that in mind, I thought it'd be interesting to ask this question here.

Also, you do realize that leaders go beyond a group of friends. Some people want to become the president, or a CEO, or whatever.

Among the group that you associate yourself with (friends, job, culture, nation, religion, etc.), how do you know if you should be or even fit as the correct leader?

That's why I "assumed" you meant that.

And I'm not picking a fight over the Internet. I'm saying it's an immature question that's very broad and has no definitive answer.

You assumed you knew why I asked the question, and then you proceeded to judge me based on that assumption. I explained clearly to you the origins of the question (they deviate from your assumption). The first two words you highlighted were examples I stated as part of the question and aren't relevant to your argument. They can't be, because I didn't include my reasons for asking the question in my first post. And why would I? I just wanted opinions / answers to the question, not judgments based on the assumed reasoning behind it.

I don't know why people bother making these sort of philosophical threads with vague questions and broad concepts. I mean do you really care about the answer a bunch of dudes on a video game forum will give you? Really?

I'm curious and post regularly on an active forum. Why not? And humans on the internet are still humans.

#33 Posted by laserguy (455 posts) -

@wjb: To be the man, you gotta beat the man. Only then you will be a true leader my son.

#34 Edited by fisk0 (4500 posts) -

@mb said:

If you find yourself wondering if you're supposed to take the lead or not, then you already have your answer...an unequivocal no.

If you have to ask, then you already aren't leadership material.

There's also the Dunning-Kruger effect to take into consideration, according to that hypothesis incompetent people tend to overestimate their skill, while competent people underestimate theirs by assuming most people are on the same level as them. So it's pretty likely that a person that believes himself to be leadership material is the farthest from being that.

#35 Posted by AMonkey (116 posts) -

You don't know, you just do. In some groups I've been I'm the leader, other times I'm one of them, other times I'm a follower.

#36 Posted by TobbRobb (4848 posts) -

You just feel it in your heart. The realistic reason for why you do however is most likely ignorance (or in the better cases a good understanding) of social workings.

#37 Posted by Kovie (206 posts) -

@fisk0:Lay down that knowledge!

Yes, unsurprisingly, leadership is a bit more dense a concept than the innately unfaltering anime protagonist approach. Apologies to @mb and @allworkandlowpay.

#38 Posted by ToTheNines (839 posts) -

If you're the guy who wants so badly to lead other people and strives to be a leader in every area of your life, then in my eyes you shouldn't be a leader. peace!

#39 Posted by flushpockets (85 posts) -
#40 Edited by PandaBear (1384 posts) -

@aegon: Sorry, I can be a troll. Ignore me.

#41 Edited by Tireyo (6451 posts) -

When no one else gives a shit or moves their ass to get something done, then you should be leader.

When you know what you've got to do where no one else has a clue, then you should be a leader.

When you have an idea and want the support of others to help implement it, then you should be leader.

When you want to inspire and cause some sort of ruckus, then you should be leader.

When you want to build it all up to bring it back down for just the hell of it, then you should be leader.

When you're looking for an answer and need help finding it, then you should be leader.

When you're born into it and don't have a choice, then suck it up and accept it you lucky son of a bitch or bitch.

There you go! A crash course on how you know if you should be a leader.

#42 Posted by 49th (2850 posts) -

It just depends on the people you are with. For me it's often been group projects with people I don't know, where it's unorganised and people are often not too smart - I will end up being the leader just to get stuff done.

#43 Posted by mlarrabee (3064 posts) -

@mb said:

If you find yourself wondering if you're supposed to take the lead or not, then you already have your answer...an unequivocal no.

I'd say rather, if you're certain that you should take the lead, you probably shouldn't.

#44 Edited by Korwin (3034 posts) -

You don't know, everyone else does. True leadership is offered, not taken.

#45 Posted by SgtSphynx (1572 posts) -

Good old JJ DID TIE BUCKLE.

Technically, anyone can be a leader, being a good leader is the trick. There are two extremes in leadership, the Tyrant and the Diplomat. The best leaders are a blend of the two; too much of a tyrant, and your subordinates will resent you, too diplomatic and they will walk all over you.

#46 Posted by Andorski (5367 posts) -

You tired of taking shit from anyone?

If yes, then you should be a leader.

Online
#47 Posted by TheHT (11800 posts) -

you need to be more alpha bro. alpha up.

#48 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -

When the time comes up when you need to be a leader, you'll know and you'll spring to action. If you're thinking "when does that happen?" then you're probably not a leader.

#49 Posted by Nightriff (5362 posts) -

Don't be a leader, be a follower, makes life easier.

In my group with friends before I got married it was really who ever took "control" and made the decisions for the evening/day. We were pretty indecisive people and so pretty much alternated who made the decisions and led the day. More often than not I decided but that was more I had the car.

#50 Edited by Liquidus (942 posts) -

I was often a "leader" in school when the teacher would put us in groups. Why? Not because I wanted to be but because everyone else looked around awkwardly with their thumb up their ass when asked who should be the leader. So it was out of reluctancy and wanting to get shit done.