A Tale of Two Leaders

Introduction

There are many theories of leadership, from Great Man theory to trait theory to situational theory. Though they are all different in their orientation, there is a great deal of overlap from one to the otherand this is because at the end of the day leaders, no matter how they are approached, all tend to have some of the same things in common: they are good communicators, they have a vision that they want to communicate, they tend to want to change a bad situation for the better; they tend to put others first; they tend to have noble values and ideals; they tend to be willing to sacrifice everything in order to reach their goal or objective; they tend to be selfless, giving themselves over wholly to the vision and to whoever is willing to help bring that vision to fruition. Whether these leaders are born to lead, whether they are made into leaders by the situation in which they find themselves, whether they develop or have the traits that are characteristic of great leadersit is all up for interpretation. However, because great leaders tend to have several traits in common, trait theory is an enticing leadership theory from which to analyze two leadersNelson Mandela and Moses.

Mandela and Moses: Two People There to Save Their People

If there is one trait of great leaders that they all seem to have in common it is this: they are not there to serve their own interests; rather, they are there to serve the interests of their peoplethose in their community, those who follow them, those who work for them, those who are in need of their assistance. They put people before profits. They put people before their own lives even. They put the vision they have for their people above their own safety and security. Nelson Mandela famously said, I am prepared to die, in 1964, in his most famous speech at his trial just before being sent to prison where he would spend years before his triumphant return. What was Mandela prepared to die for? He was prepared to die for the ideal that he held in his head and in his heart. He stated to his judges: I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realized. But, My Lord, if it needs to be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die (Mandela, 1964). Mandela wanted whites and blacks in South Africa to live in harmony, and for that vision he was prepared to serve a harsh jail sentence. Yet his perseverance and commitment to the cause eventually led to his vision coming to fruition.

When Stanley Milgram conducted his experiments on obedience, he saw that people were willing to obey the trusted authority so long as they believed that person to know what he was about. Milgram (1974) showed that people would even harm others if an authority told them to do so. Such people would be called followers: they do not take action on their own authority, but rather give up authority to someone else and simply deign to take orders from that person. What do they lack in terms of character, personality, vision or strength of will? People who lead are the opposite of such individuals. They lead from an inner conviction that they are right. They lead...

…in his own dedication to his vision. The two leaders had the same traits in this regard. Moses preferred not to speak, but when it came to the mission, he set aside his own preferences and summoned up the strength of will within himself to get the job done. He went back to confront Pharaoh again and again. Lesser men might have run and fled and hid themselves from God, the way Jonah did after God bid the prophet to go to Nineveh. Moses, once he accepted the mission, stayed true to it, and met the Pharaoh time after time, insisting that pain was coming if the Pharaoh did not relent and submit to the God of the Hebrews. Both Moses and Mandela were pursuing a change in their own waya change for their people. They did not become leaders because they wanted to be celebrities or because they wanted the limelight. They became leaders because there was work to be done, a vision to be spread, a mission to be accomplished. They were transformational leaders just as much as they were servant leaders; indeed, leaders who pursue a vision or a mission are often transformational by nature and style (Yaslioglu & Erden, 2018). Leaders do not have be of just one leadership style or approach, after all.

Conclusion

From the perspective of the trait theory of leadership, one can see that great leaders tend to possess similar traits, whether they are in their personality or in their characters. For Moses and Mandela, the similarities were primarily in their characters and in their leadership approaches. Each was dedicated to a vision or mission that was larger than his own self. They were committed to others, to their own people, to changing the state of things for the better for their people. They were…