Vision and Vigilance: The Part That Leaders Play

In the past week the UK went to the polls (sort of) to elect the latest newly-established public officials, onto whom local powers are to be devolved. The elected police commissioners, along with elected mayors, can be seen part of a persistent narrative. That narrative centres on the perception that leaders play a dominant role in their relationship with 'followers'.

Why is this limited notion of leaders as nothing more than dictatorial administrators so persistent?

Why - even as huge groups of people act concertedly through organisations like Occupy that build support networks offering mutual aid (Wilkins, 2012) - are we still seeking to create more positions, carrying more centralised power?

These questions need to be considered - especially when there are discussions centring on who should be tasked with leading Europe through its present crisis. Due to its strong economic position much of the expectation has fallen on upon Germany. Despite this, there is a reluctance amongst Germans to carry an extra share of the weight (Connolly & Traynor, 2012). That reluctance seems to suggest a profound loss of faith in the responsibilities cast upon the country due to its dominant role.

There is some sense behind that attitude - founded in the problem that a lot is expected of a leader and yet there is only so much that a leader can do. As Stephanie Flanders (2012) points out at the BBC:

'...the notion of a pivot state goes beyond sheer power, or economic heft - the pivot state isn't necessarily or even usually the biggest country. Rather, it's the fulcrum that helps to tip history one direction, or another.'

Regardless the truth, the dominant perception in Germany seems to have become that it is expected to do the majority of the work necessary to carry everyone through. What leaders need, what Germany wants, are partners - others to work alongside from an even footing for a common goal. It was precisely that kind of relationship that made the post-unification bailouts to eastern cities, such as Leipzig, a success (Dowling, 2012).

It is the kind of relationship that makes micro-financing projects such as Kiva so successful. Micro-financing agrees with the findings of many studies; people are capable and driven. They don't need dictators, they need facilitators. The success of projects like Leipzig or Kiva, and further more the existence of willing contributors as shown by movements like Occupy, should be the stone that casts down the negative perceptions that generate the kind of reluctance being felt in Germany at present. These projects show us that people are only in want of an opportunity to flourish and helping them to do so is an investment that pays off in the long run.

And to that end, people do not need greater control exerted over them. They need leaders to facilitate. They need leaders to offer oversight. These are the kind of non-executive roles through which elected officials could really make a contribution. Vision and vigilance; to guard against misdeeds and to illuminate positive outlets for our energies.

==========
References:
==========
+ Brett Wilkins' 'Where FEMA fails, Occupy Sandy delivers storm relief'; in digitaljournal.com; 12 November 2012.

+ Kate Connolly & Ian Traynor's 'Germany's savers feel resentment and guilt over pressure to end euro crisis'; in The Guardian; 16 September 2012.

+ Siobhan Dowling's 'A leap worth taking: how Leipzig was saved from economic decline'; in The Guardian; 16 September 2012.

+ Stephanie Flanders' 'Who will dictate Europe's future?'; on the BBC; 16 November 2012.