Most leaders are “made” as adults and do not come to this through the process of growing up and being lucky enough to have good parenting. On the other hand, the leader of leaders is nurtured throughout their childhood to be as much themselves as possible. Their parents are aware that they need to feed, clean, love, and protect their child, but that the child is its own person and not a lump of clay to be molded and shaped as they, the parents, wish their child to be. This is never easy to do. Wanting the best for one’s child is the desire of every parent. Yet, wanting this for the child has its way of having force.
So, parents simply by being parents have a powerful say in their children’s becoming what and who they become. Still, influence and power come from other sources too. These include extended family, school, friends, and those serendipitous events to which I often refer. Hence, growing into a unique self is complex. And growing into being oneself is an equal mix of miracles and accidents.
So, whether you agree with me or not, I believe those who are “made leaders” do not express themselves at all costs and, because of their inability to do so, cannot become leaders of leaders. They lack a creator’s drive, while leaders of leaders have an abundance of it. I argue that many organizations fail or disappear when the prime leader leaves. It matters not why they go, but without a true leader of leaders serving as an umbrella and resource for the “made leaders,” there is no drive for innovation and growth. I also feel that training people to be prime leaders is a hopeless journey. Leaders of leaders exist because a child grows up in an environment that nurtures uniqueness and self without being selfish. If formal education could do the job, families and the world would be far better off.
Sy