What makes a great leader? Is it an MBA or the title of President of the United States? Is a great leader born with certain personality traits? Do they develop certain skills that anyone could learn?

Do I have what it takes to be a great leader? Do you?

If you look back through history, you will find that great leaders do not all share the same set of skills or personality traits. You may find a lot who were talented speakers. Others possessed spectacular minds. Some were unexpected leaders like Harriet Tubman who shocked the world with their bold actions.

Being a great leader is not about skills or personality traits. While your skills and personality traits will impact how you lead, great leadership is much more than that.

Being a great leader is about heart. If you study the great leaders throughout history, you will find that they shared five qualities. These five qualities are not the only qualities of a great leader. However, they are five qualities that every great leader possessed.

Quality #1 – Great Leaders Care Deeply About a Group of People

Behind every movement, every cause, and every vision is a group of people who need help. Great leaders don’t see a cause – they see a child dying of a preventable disease or an abused woman who needs compassion and help to break free from an abuser and begin a new life.

Great leaders don’t see employees. They see individuals who have dreams, goals, families to support, and a desire to be valued. They see people who deep down want to make a difference in the world and who want to matter.

Great leaders see people not as what they are, but as who they can become. Then great leaders make it their vision to see those people transformed.

Quality #2 – Great Leaders Are Deeply Passionate About Justice

Great leaders possess a strong sense of right and wrong. They believe that injustice must never be tolerated. More often than not, it is this deep-seated sense of justice that spurs them to their initial actions.

They have a vision for what their world could be as opposed to what it is. It is the closing of this gap that motivates them.

Quality #3 – Great Leaders Confront Fear and Take Risks

It is impossible to be a great leader without fear and risk. If it were possible, anyone could do it. It’s easy to see great leaders as fearless men and women filled with a supernatural courage. But this is not at all accurate.

It’s not the lack of fear that makes a leader great. It’s acting in spite of the fear that makes them great. Risk will always involve fear and it is the presence of fear that paralyzes so many of us. Only those who acknowledge the fear and still choose to act can hope for greatness.

Quality #4 – Great Leaders Don’t Need A Title

Too often, we buy into the lie that to be a great leader requires a position of influence. We think being a great leader requires the title of CEO, vice president, pastor, team leader, etc. What we fail to remember is that people who hold those positions were great leaders before getting them.

Great leaders believe they can make a difference without a title. They don’t see titles as prerequisites for leadership. They understand that people don’t follow titles – people follow passionate leaders who believe in them and inspire them to greatness.

Quality #5 – Great Leaders Recognize Their Dependence on Others

It’s easy to look at a great leader and perceive them as above the movement and people they led. However, great leaders doesn’t view themselves in the same light. Instead, they think of themselves as a component of the movement. Great leaders recognize that they are fully dependent on others to see out their vision.

Consequently, great leaders inspire others to greatness. Martin Luther King inspired a generation. Winston Churchill and Teddy Roosevelt inspired nations to greatness. A movement has to be greater than the leader if it hopes to survive since leaders come and go.

Bonus Quality – Great Leaders Are People of Character

Originally, I wasn’t going to add this one in. Not all great leaders have been people of character. You can have all of the above and not have character. When that happens, evil generally results. Let me give you an example: Adolf Hitler. Hitler was an evil man. However, he was also a great leader. Hitler possessed all of the above qualities but they were born out of a heart that desired evil.

If attaching the word “great” to Hitler makes you uncomfortable, I’m thankful. It should. It should also make it clear to you that there is a vast difference between great leadership and Great Leadership.

True greatness is more than just the ability to get people to buy into your vision. True greatness is about leading people into a vision born out of character and integrity. It is ultimately your character that determines whether you will be a great leader or a Great Leader.

That’s also why many of those whom we consider great leaders were people of faith. Their faith instilled in them the character which directed the above qualities.

Share Your Thoughts

What do you think it takes to be a great leader? Who do you think of when you hear the term “Great Leader”? Are there Great Leaders in your life? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

I’ve decided to start a new feature on this blog inspired by John Jantsch of Ducttape Marketing fame. I do a lot of reading on the weekends and during the week. Each week, I’ll compile some of the best articles into a post like this.

I won’t spend much (if any) time on a synopsis of each article. The headlines will often tell you a lot about what each link will provide.

I hope you find it useful! Feel free to share you weekly finds in the comments section. I would love to know what you’re reading.

3 Universal Goals to Influence People (PSYBlog)
HOW TO: Get the Most Out of Your Business Facebook Page (mashable.com)
HOW TO: Set Up a Winning Facebook Fan Page (mashable.com)
7 Secrets Graphic Designers Won’t Tell You about Effective Website Design (blog.kissmetrics.com)

A $200 Million Headlock on Mixed Martial Arts
I’m a huge MMA fan so this story about TapouT and how it came to be a $200 Million company is fascinating. Think a CEO named “Punkass” would doom a company to failure? Not so fast.

Interesting side note: There are two MMA fighters named Travis Robertson. I am not them. Though I used to train, I don’t any longer. And I was never that great to begin with. I would lose in a fight to the either of the other Travis’ in case you are heading to vegas. I’m thinking there’s something to this name. We apparently like hitting people.

Is it Time for Generation Y to “Grow Up?”
I’ve spent a lot of time discussing how to lead Gen Y and Millennials on this blog. I came across Rosetta this week and really enjoyed her perspective on all of this. Rosetta is also a Millennial who is promoting a new generation of leadership. I think you’ll enjoy this post. Then, head over and download my free e-book and MP3 titled The Millennial Revolution.

Photo Credit: Paul Bence

Oh…YouTube…and Digg…and Facebook…and anything else that lets me vote. Thank you for teaching us a valuable lesson about Millennials and how to understand my generation.

If you manage or work with Millennials, take a second to look at all of the sites where Millennials spend so much of their time and ask yourself one thing: “Why do they all have some sort of voting or ‘like’ feature?”

Hear Us Out

Millennials have had a say in just about everything we’ve been a part of since we could talk. We’ve been asked if we want blue or red, Chicken McNuggets or a Cheeseburger, Nikes or Reeboks, a truck or a coupe, and on and on.

Now we want and expect to be heard. So we upload videos to YouTube, share photos on Facebook, tell you what we’re doing on Twitter, and then engage in some sort of voting and commenting on everything that’s shared.

Then we show up at work and are told to sit down, shut up, and do what we’re told. We’re rarely even asked our opinion unless it’s voting for employee of the month.

Offer Us Choices

Many people hear this and cringe. Because when you offer someone a choice, you have to release a bit of control. How much control you release is ultimately up to you. But if you hope to attract Millennials to your company, you’re going to have to release some.

Here are a few “starter” areas where choices could be offered:

• Dress Code – If you still require ties be worn to work, don’t expect Millennials to line up at your door. One of my banks now lets their tellers wear jeans and button-down shirts. And they don’t even force them to tuck them in. It’s a banking revolution. Plus it’s fun to walk into.
• Project Selection – Let your employees volunteer for projects they want to work on. Not only are you likely to get employees on the project who actually want to do it, they’re more likely to volunteer for projects they are interested in or gifted at.
• Free Days or Free Time – Some companies are giving their employees opportunity to take one day every quarter, every month or every week to work on whatever company-related ideas and projects they can come up with. Generally, these focus around innovation or improvement. The only requirement is that they disclose what they’re doing. Those that do have notice drastic improvements efficiency, job satisfaction, and innovation.
• Alternate Shifts/Schedules – Maybe you’re not ready to let your employees work from coffee shops just yet. However, why assume they’re all at their best from 8am – 5pm? Maybe let them come in from 10am – 7pm. Or, if they’re a morning person, 6am – 3pm.
• Rewards – Think all your employees want to be rewarded in the same way? Think again. Let employees tell you how they want to be rewarded.
• Desk Decoration – I know this sounds trite, but try it. Many companies restrict employees to things like one family photo and a calendar. Who cares? As long as it’s not a violation of ethics, morality or common workplace decency, let employees use their desk as an extension of who they are. People work and operate better in different environments. Don’t assume that blank cubicle walls equate to productivity.

By offering up choices, you let your team know that you care about what they think and how they work best. You don’t have to make radical changes overnight. Just loosen up a bit and watch as people become more engaged in the company and it’s culture.

Question: This is certainly not a comprehensive list. What other “starter” areas could choice be offered to employees?

Photo Credit: theresasthompson

[Note: I had every intention of posting a resources list on Friday for additional reading on Millennials in the Workplace. I still plan on doing that later this week. I just have to organize/compile the information. Thanks for your patience!]

Coming off my last week of looking at Millennials in the workplace, I want to tackle the idea of “working for” vs. “working with.” Understanding this concept will be critical to attracting and retaining Millennials.

Millennials Don’t Want to “Work For”

Working for someone or something implies that your time and ideas are not your own. Instead they are owned by the person you do the work for. Your work is not your own. It implies they control many things about you: when you show up, when you leave, what you do, who you do it with, where you do it, when you do it, etc. It implies obligation not cooperation.

Millennials Want to “Work With”

Almost everyone wants to be part of something greater than themselves. But how can you feel like you matter when you feel like you’re owned? You can’t.

When you work with someone, you matter. You aren’t controlled by people you work with – you’re included. When you work with people, you share common goals and values that you all want to see accomplished. You partner. You share in the highs and lows.

Most Consultants and Companies “Work With”

Have you ever noticed that most companies in the service sector will talk about the clients they “work with”? Rarely will they say, “We work for Google,” or, “We work for Coca-Cola.”

Why? Because they want to be viewed as peers. They don’t want to be viewed as the lesser-valued parter in the relationship.

Those same companies will then turn around and refer to the employees that “work for” them rather than “work with” them. I would argue that any company looking to create a culture that Millennials (and truthfully anyone) would love to work for, needs to focus on shifting this perspective. Value them the same way you value your clients.

Leading vs. Managing

Remember my post on leading versus managing? Leaders work with you. Managers expect you to work for them.

Work with your employees; don’t let them work for you.

Today is shaping up to be an incredibly busy day for me. I thought I’d share some articles with you that I’ve found incredibly valuable this week. Read them, then share any that you’ve found valuable in the comments section below so we can all learn and grow.

The Top Idea in Your Mind

Paul Graham is the founder of YCombinator – a seed stage incubator for startups. He doesn’t write often. When he does, it’s usually gold. Click on the link/headline above to read his post. A definite must-read for the week.

What Separates Me From…

I discovered Jason’s blog this week thanks to a tweet by Chris Brogan. Ever wonder what separates you from media rockstars like Chris Brogan, Brian Clark, Gary Vaynerchuk, et al? Then read this post.

Don’t Wrestle With Pigs

If you don’t read Michael Hyatt’s blog, you really should. This post is incredibly short and pithy. If you’re dealing with any negative feedback in your life right now, check it out. Then make sure you’re not being the pig!

11 Essential Online Resources for Consultants

I think this list is great for anybody with a service-based business. Sure, you may not use them all. But I think you’ll find some nuggets here.

Lack of Experience Isn’t the Problem

Okay…what would a post like this be without a shameless plug? This is the most popular article of the week. If you haven’t read it, I think you’ll find some value in it.

Which posts, articles, or resources impacted you this week? Share them in the comments below so we can all learn from each other!

Photo credit: Carlos Porto

We’ve all heard the axiom “Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he’ll never go hungry.”

What happens if the man you’re trying to teach to fish doesn’t want to learn to fish? Instead, he wants you to catch him a fish each day. What do you do? If you’re a teacher, this can be a frustrating scenario.

If you’re a business person, you sell him the fish. I lost sight of this fact the other day.

Is there a scenario in your business where you’re trying to teach someone to fish who really doesn’t want to learn? Is there an opportunity to sell the person the fish instead?

Photo courtesy of Millzero

Almost every day, I speak with people who work with ideas. They are responsible for communicating those ideas to clients, customers or coworkers. Maybe it’s the plan for a new department. Maybe it’s how a software product can fix a decade-old problem in a local government. No matter what it is, they are responsible for clearly communicating something so that people can act appropriately on that information.

Don’t miss this: The point of communication is to tell others what they should care about, why they should care about it, and what they should do as a result. Anything less is a waste of your audience’s time. I don’t care if this is written or spoken word that we’re talking about – the point is the same.

The problem arises when we confuse a simple message with one that is dumbed-down. I can’t tell you how many times in my day I hear the phrase, “I have a sophisticated audience. I don’t want to dumb it down.”

When did ensuring your audience understood what you were saying become “dumbing it down”?

Can I let you in on a little secret? The person who says this to me is not concerned about his audience. He’s concerned about his pride and worried the audience will assume he is dumb.

Most people could give a rat’s butt about their audience – except as it pertains to how their audience perceives them.

They believe that by saying a department is “focused on building individual and organizational capabilities for improved project performance” that they will sound sophisticated. Is saying, “We improve performance on projects through training,” really dumbed-down because people can understand it?

Sure, you may sound smart. But tell me who is more effective: the person who sounds smart at the expense of comprehension, or the person who is clearly understood by the audience.

The intelligence of a communicator is not demonstrated by the number of syllables in the words they use but by the number of people motivated to change as a result of what they said.

Stop making the simple complex for the sake of your ego.

How are you likely to respond if I ask you the question “Who are you”?

“My name is Stephanie.” That’s your name. Who are you?

“I’m a project manager at Acme Design.” That’s what you do. Who are you?

Do you see where I’m going with this? Those are descriptors of you, but they tell me no more about who you are than the other project manager named Stephanie at Acme Warehouse in Toledo, Ohio.

In his book Victory Over the Darkness, author Neil Anderson posed a great question that I’m going to steal here: “Is who you are determined by what you do? Or is what you do determined by who you are?” While Anderson posed this as part of a book on Christianity, I’m going to use it a bit differently.

Let me rephrase it: Do you define yourself by the work you do (that I know so many of you hate) rather than choosing work that is an extension of who you are at your core?

Too often we let things outside of ourselves define us. We go to jobs that suck the life out of us so that we can keep up with the mortgage payment on the house we bought next to the Joneses. And when people ask us who we are, we use that miserable existence as the definition.

News Flash: The Joneses are miserable. I don’t want to keep up with them and you shouldn’t either.

I wonder how much more fulfilling life would be if we looked deep inside of ourselves and asked the question “Who am I?” then followed it up with “And what would I be great at?”

Don’t let what you do define who you are. Instead, figure out who you are and let that revolutionize what you do.

Question: Who are you?

I think too many companies focus on training people. When you train people you focus on the “how” of something. Here’s how to use the software. Here’s how to follow the procedures. Here’s how to use this system.

It’s not that people don’t need some of that. It’s just that most of those things change. Software gets upgraded. New procedures are introduced. Then what? More training on how to do it the new way.

I think we need to focus on teaching people not just training them. When you teach people, you guide them not just on the “how” of what they’re doing but on the “why.” You encourage them to ask, challenge, learn and grow. You encourage them to understand – not just follow directions.

So why don’t more companies teach rather than train?

Because it’s harder. You have to invest in people, not just procedures. You have to care about their growth, not just their ability to function.

I’ve worked with people who have been trained. They’re rigid and rote. They don’t adapt well to change. They need consistency and structure because they were trained to operate it those conditions. Change the conditions or environment and they appear nothing short of panicked.

Have you ever heard a child ask a parent “Why” and the parent responds with “Because I said so”? That’s what training is. Don’t ask questions. Don’t do it differently. Do it this way because I said so. Kids sometimes need that. Adults rarely do.

Stop telling people how and start discussing the why.

You train animals. You teach people.

Question: Do you find yourself training or teaching others?

One of the more exciting parts of my job is working on brand development and partner relationships. Ethos3 is in the middle of a brand consolidation and update which should wrap up in a couple of weeks.

Late last week, we received an email from one of our corporate partners expressing frustration about an article they found while searching for some information on Ethos3.

The first result was a blog post published on one of Ethos3′s other web properties that’s in the process of being consolidated under the main blog. As part of the consolidation, our blog software (WordPress for those who care) changed the “posted on” date to a more recent date giving the appearance that it was just created.

While the post in question was not negative in any way, it was dated and contained incomplete information from prior to the partnership. The CEO expressed his concern that perhaps we didn’t understand the value proposition of the relationship.

His concern was understandable as we’re supposed to be working closely with them to help each others’ businesses grow.

Is This A Problem?

If you look at this as a problem, the questions then become, “How can we smooth this over? How should we respond? Should we remove the offending post?”

Once you go on damage control, you’re on the defensive. Opportunity doesn’t happen when you’re thinking defensively. You manage in crisis, you lead in opportunity.

Shift Your Perspective

However, we saw an opportunity.

We sent a letter to the CEO apologizing for the confusion, briefly explained what happened, and let him know the post would remain. Then, we offered up a chance for him to appear on our new presentation TV channel called E3 TV which will be launching in the next couple of weeks. We thought it would be great if we conducted a Skype interview with him during which we could discuss the benefits of his company’s service along with the tremendous evolution since the original post was written.

He gladly accepted and we now have a stronger relationship with our partner along with a great episode of E3 TV planned.

Sure an apology letter alone would have “smoothed things over.” But we wanted to use this as an opportunity to deepen that relationship and demonstrate our commitment to the partnership.

Question: Take a moment to look at your work or personal environment. Where are there problems that could use a good perspective shift? Is there a different way of looking at this “problem” to actually move from damage control to opportunity development?