Min 1

Bryson Min
Exploring Leadership
Erin Alanson
10 April 2016
A Philosophy of Leadership
The chief executive who knows his strengths and weaknesses as a leader is likely to be far more
effective than the one who remains blind to them.
- John Adair
Since its inception in the era of early philosophy, leadership has been one of the most
studied topics of human interactions to date. Over the course of thousands of years it is only
expected that multiple different theories describing the most effective way to lead have sprouted,
grown, and branched out even further into the endless realm of philosophy. Knowing this, is it
exceptionally difficult to condense what the most effective form of leadership really is. To
effectively begin to communicate what I consider to be the best philosophy on leadership I will
employ a quote by Albert Einstein, renowned theoretical physicist, who said, If you cant
explain it simply, you dont understand it well enough. My theory of effective leadership is
quite simple in its explanation, with basic concepts and little exceptions. However, before I can
convincingly say what it is, I will begin instead by stating what it is not, and should not become.
Something that has become increasingly evident to me in the current day is that
leadership must be much more emotionally and moralistically oriented; that the most effective
philosophy on leadership is one that ensures every individual is content and comfortable with the
actions of the leader. Recent theories of authentic leadership have increased emphasis on the
idea that morals should be the chief guide in distinguishing a leader not only that, but that they

Min 2
must be good morals. This was discussed in class and I was able to connect it with this cultural
shift that I see happening within the United States. There is an increasing demand for more
personalized care and nurturing of individuals past the age of childhood, so it makes sense that
this new modern theory albeit arbitrary in its definition of good morals from Exploring
Leadership demands that real leadership ability be that of a good Samaritan. The issue I run
into here is this; emotions can never be continually positive and sustainable, which increases in
difficulty with every augmentation in the size of a group, and that leading with good morals is a
100% unempirical statement. The issue that presents itself here is that this uses the arbitrary as a
foundation, and when that is the case no solid structure can ever manifest.
I should note that I see life in a much more empirical and rational based lens than most
other people, seeing efficiency before ethicality and the practical before personal. Still though, I
see relationships as an extremely integral part of leadership, just in a more situational and
utilitarian manner. I will admit that one of resolutions that I admitted to in the closing activity of
the leadership class is improving my leadership is to be at least a little more open and empathetic
to those around me, as it is impossible to lead with a 100% empirical mindset. However, in my
philosophy of leadership I do not count the emotions of the individual or the moral value of a
judgment as substantial in determining the effectivity of my philosophy of leadership.
Furthermore, my philosophy of leadership valuates its efficiency through the eyes of the leader
utilizing their followers as opposed to how the followers are utilizing their leader.
The most effective form of leadership is identifiable when an individual is able to
pragmatically determine the strengths and weaknesses of their followers and utilize them in order
to efficiently reach a predetermined goal. The leader would display, the Disney approach, which
emphasizes the importance of strong, responsive leadership and active participation (Guiney).

Min 3
My take on leadership demands that the group acts as a cohesive unit, complimenting each
individuals strengths and weakness, all whilst under the organization of the leader. This
philosophy of leadership breaks down into three basic parts; the determinations of strengths and
weaknesses, the efficient practice of them, and the necessity for a predetermined goal. These
three aspects combined will lead to what I believe is the most practical and accessible way to
determine effective leadership.
The most integral part to my philosophy of leadership is that the leader is capable of
determining not only the strengths and weaknesses of himself, but the strengths and weaknesses
of their followers as well. There are empirical evaluations that people can undertake in order to
have a computer run an algorithm and determine their strengths and weaknesses, and I believe
that this is an incredibly helpful basis in not only understanding yourself, but others as well.
However, a leader also must understand and employ the ability to sense strengths and
weaknesses within others that they themselves may not know about. An example of this would
be in my Business Essentials class when we did our Project Innovation and had to create a
business. I stepped up to a leadership role here by my definition in that I facilitated
organizing people into their best suited teams (being Management, Marketing, or Finance) which
allowed us to move forward efficiently and with great strength as a group. This I believe is a
more rare intrinsic ability found within people, but its application to this leadership philosophy is
without bounds. It really comes down to being able to read a person for lack of better words;
really being able to identify the capacity to which people can do various tasks.
Following this, the second facet of my leadership philosophy involves the
implementation of these strengths and weaknesses (both of the leader and their followers) in
order to move efficiently towards a common goal. This is where the philosophy transforms into

Min 4
action; meaning that a leader will apply those who excel in an area in order to move the group
forward while utilizing the strengths of others in order to bolster the weaknesses of those moving
the group forward into order to prevent backwards progress. Now this is not to be supplemented
with management, as John Rost writes in his book Leadership for the Twenty-First Century,
"Confusing leadership and managementis pervasive in the mainstream [view of] leadership."
(129) The responsibly of implementing the practice is to go about as a leader, putting ones
followers on their own shoulders; contradictory to a manager who would better insist their
followers hold them up. It is very similar thinking to how the military operates in combat, a
general will utilize his soldier where they exceed and then ensure that they will see little to no
complications by partnering them with people who prevent them from having weaknesses (i.e. a
sniper and his spotter allow for accurate firing and defense in an ambush, or a spy and his relay
to allow for incognito information transfer). Through the effective implementation of the groups
strengths and the bolstering of their weaknesses a group will thrive and definitively move
towards the goal.
The final part of the philosophy is really more of a technicality, in that there must be a
predetermined goal. This is just a logical argument as it is impossible to move forward is ones
end position is not determined. Moving back to its purpose in the philosophy, it really does fall
apart if the group does not have an end goal in mind, as it would be impossible to determine what
each member must do or where their strengths and weaknesses would come into effect. Further
details include the fact that when determining an end goal, achievability must be possible. When
it comes to leaders, the most successful are able to conjure visions through their words and
infect others with their confidence, (West) in such a way that whatever goals they choose to
pursue, their followers will understandably follow suit; still keeping with the pragmatic and

Min 5
empirical ideology behind this philosophy. The end goal must be determined as something that
will signify a conclusion; this could be a product, a status, or even a milestone as long as it is
something that the group can empirically state it has accomplished.
Following this final portion of my leadership philosophy, the leader now has the
opportunity to conduct in-depth feedback, both for themselves and for their colleagues. Tyler
Moore gave us an exceptional demonstration about this when he came in with ROTC to teach us
how to better conduct feedback. And it applies very well to my philosophy as the feedback
method we saw was conducted after the performance. While feedback throughout the process is
practical and likely, it is absolutely necessary that feedback be conducted in order to better
conclude and improve the leaders ability and their followers contributions.
When it comes to implementing this leadership style in order to make change on campus,
I can show its effectiveness within the Lindner College of Businesss newest organization, Out in
Business. Out in Business was first proposed in the fall of 2015 by two graduate students who
wanted to see change in the business college. Currently I now serve as the President of Out in
Business alongside my VP of Communications Maryum and my VP of Operations Arushi. This
philosophy can first see itself implemented in the selection of this board as our staff coordinator
Theresa Lyon utilized it when determining the startup board. I was chosen to be President due to
my communication and activator skills, allowing me to drive upward and outward the
organization. I have Maryum help me establish an official means of contact as well as a social
media presence due to her exceptional organization and communication skills. I have Arushi help
me coordinate events we plan to have as she shows dedicated management and organization
skills.

Min 6
It is important to realize that everyone is able to contribute, and a leader that realizes this
is already miles ahead of the one who only sees those right in front of him. In fact, many group
work advocates argue that most any topic can be made interesting by actively involving students
in the topic through some form of collaborative learning (Payne). This theory is transferable in
that its core idea active contribution increases output value can be applied to any setting a
leader would be in. Not only is it crucial to involve all the members, but to do so actively as to
better utilize all the resources the group as a whole has to offer. Out in Businesss current goal is
to officially establish itself as an organization which we are currently but in terms of more
future goals we want to establish a speaker panel or networking event with certain corporations.
We utilize our faculty as they have a strong network that will allow us the ability to access such
companies. We contacted students from other colleges as they bring an outside perspective to the
working world in order to diversify further our skillset repertoire. The staff of Lindner has
brought on contacts that allow for a better access into the marketing and funding departments in
order to better reinforce our organization.
A metaphor to describe this philosophy of leadership is having the ability to successfully
serve a five course meal out of a kitchen to a waiting guest and know that the saut chef does not
prepare the crme brle and the pastry chef does not prepare the hollandaise. This includes the
idea in that it has: the identification of strengths and weaknesses with each chefs specialty, the
utilization of that specialization in assigning them the appropriate dish, and achieving an end
goal of serving the meal to the guest efficiently and with quality.

Min 7
References
Komives, Susan R., Nance Lucas, and Timothy R. McMahon. Exploring Leadership: For
College Students Who Want to Make a Difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.
Print.
Meaghan, Guiney C. "Lessons from the Disney Approach to Leadership." National Association
of School Psychologists 42.7 (2014): n. pag. Questia. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
Payne, Brian K., and Elizabeth Monk-Turner. "Improving Group Work: Voices of Students."
Education 126.3 (2006): n. pag. Questia. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
Rost, Joseph C. Leadership for the Twenty-First Century. Westport: Praeger, 1993. Print.
West, Michael A. Effective Teamwork: Practical Lessons from Organizational Research.
Malden: Wiley, 2012. Print.