The Ego, is the enemy within; but the kind of invincible enemy. Egoless leadership, as troubling as the concept of [human] leadership is, were it possible, would be the best form of leadership. But leadership is not without the Ego.
Egoless leadership would not be driven internally by the “Me”, the “I” or the “self”, which is the Ego that comes, not from a place of internal harmony, but insecurity. We’re naturally and largely driven (and motivated) more by fear than by solely the desire to achieve something. It’s the fear of failure, that’s naturally driving our motivation to accomplish tasks, to pursue our goals and objectives.
It’s the fear of what might or might not happen (will go wrong) if; (a) we fail to do something that we think or have been conditioned to think must be done; b) the fear of failure even if we do what we necessarily think must be done; that pushes or [sometimes] motivates us into action. But too often, we measure the outcome of the action without asking the internal influence, the internal push [in]to action.
We measure and judge failure or success, according to [based on] action, and sometimes goals/objectives and intent; but hardly based on the internal push- fear or the desire for achievement. The reality is that it’s the Ego that’s behind everything, outward.
Leadership is believed, and therefore widely trumpeted as a human practical skill; which means, like all skills, it’s a learnable skill and not, contrary to some fallacious claims, a natural ability. Except for the ability to learn, process information fast and apply it appropriately; there’s arguably nothing ‘natural’ about leadership but everything about nurture.
No one is born to lead, with leadership ability and skills, unless one has been leading in the womb. But since leadership requires the interaction with, the willing cooperation (without willingness, it’s coercion) of others, then leadership in the womb is practically impossible.
Since it’s practically impossible to practise and therefore acquire leadership ability and skills while in the womb; it reasons and further proves the thesis that leadership is a learnable skill.
We all inevitably learn leadership skills as we learn to live in society because society, like a jungle, must be navigated, and one must emphasise; with caution. Caution, in this case, is determined by the individual, according to the situation; it’s not universally determined.
Since society must be navigated, we must acquire essential social navigation skills. We’re essentially, in our individual capacities, all leaders.
The challenge of leadership, is always about area or field, if you will, of leadership. But every individual in society, is a leader in their own individual capacity; unless their individual leadership capacity has been impaired by society. The ability to lead oneself is as essential as the ability to lead others.
Learnable [social and practical] skills are not without objectives- an agenda- whether it’s consciously acknowledged or not. There’s always a reason we learn something, why we’re motivated and what pushes us to learn something. It’s not always without a reason, although, and admittedly, it’s sometimes, in fact, most times, not easy to explain the reason or reasons. This is partly because it’s equally not easy to qualitatively quantify reasons as to why we learn and acquire a skill; and party because the quality of any skill is usually proven in the outcome of that which we set and demonstrate our skill on. The quality of a carpenter’s carpentry skills, is manifested in the quality or lack thereof, of the carpenter’s final products.
Behind all the skills acquisition process, whether it’s society- our environment- that urges us to acquire this skill or that skill; there’s, ultimately, the Ego. Leadership, as any learnable skill, therefore, is not without Ego.
It’s the Ego that’s the source of social conflicts; wars and such. Social victory- victory out of a social conflict- or war victory, means the defeat and thus victory over the Ego of the defeated side. A defeated Ego is not usually a crushed (completely destroyed) Ego; which means, it can re-organise itself and comeback to fight. This explains why social conflicts have a tendency to recur, even after one side suffering a massive defeat (loss).
It’s only Egoless leadership that can bring about true peace and harmony.
Organisations, social and business alike, are led by the Ego; that means, they are led by and from a place of insecurity.
Most of us are inwardly poverty-stricken, which is a source of and therefore what drives our fear; as such, we strive to prove ourselves, to prove a point but often to others – outward show. We want to show our positions, prove our power and authority; and too often, it’s this insecurity that leads to authoritarian behaviour in organisations and from either an individual or group in positions of power and authority.
Authoritarianism provokes resistance; and authoritarianism responds and treats resistance with brutality; resistance responds accordingly, destruction is inevitable. Animosity is sown and animosity breeds conflicts; this creates a vicious cycle of vicious conflicts.
Organisations are led by the Ego; the Ego is the invincible enemy within, therefore, equally, the enemy of the organisation.