Formula for Genius : 10000 Hour Rule

Genius“Genius is 1% talent and 99% percent hard work…”  – Albert Einstein

Nobody in history has ever been able to quantify the genius. What makes a person gifted? Why does he or she scale heads and shoulders above rest of the mankind? What makes them tick? We don’t understand it so we just use words like God gifted or genius. Remarkable achievements of eminent individuals have traditionally been explained by the concept of innate talent or giftedness. Some arguments for innate talent derive from the assumption that many extreme individual differences defy explanation in terms of known mechanisms for learning and development. If the above quote by Albert Einstein is true then there is nothing called as Genius? If given, everything remains constant and everybody does the same level of hard work, Will that make everybody a genius? Is there some kind of a Formula for genius?

Anders Ericsson, in his research paper approached the issues of gifts and innate talent a little differently. Rather than create new definitions and global theories, he applied the analytical methods of the expert performance approach and focused on the empirical evidence for reproducibly superior performance. In 1980, Ericsson and Bill Chase tried to replicate an early study where several students were able to double their performance on a test of short-term memory with a few weeks of practice. They invited a college student to engage in memory practice for a few hours per week. Before the start of training, the student could recall around seven presented digits—the typical performance for almost all of the college students. After several hundred hours of practice he dramatically exceeded the original target of doubling his memory performance and was able to perfectly recall over 80 presented digits—an enormous improvement of performance corresponding to an effect size of over 70 standard deviations. These large training effects on memory performance have been replicated many times with many participants in several independent laboratories. So the question that has bothered many scientists for long is, does training have an effect on becoming a genius? Did that memory training make an average student a Genius? The question came back to same – Is there a formula for Genius?

Exceptional achievements attributed to innate ‘gifts’ are typically thought to arise abruptly and naturally, that is, without additional training. Ericsson in his detailed research found that the development of performance assessed by representative tasks and competitions can be charted for individual experts from the time they are first introduced to the domain until they reach their superior expert performance. Ericsson found compelling evidence that even the most ‘talented’ need 10 years or more of intense involvement before they reach a level where they can consistently demonstrate superior performance in international adult competitions in sports, sciences and the arts.

In the early 1990s, a team of psychologists in Berlin, Germany studied violin students. Specifically, they studied their practice habits in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. All of the subjects were asked this question: “Over the course of your entire career, ever since you first picked up the violin, how many hours have you practiced?” All of the violinists had begun playing at roughly five years of age with similar practice times. However, at age eight, practice times began to diverge. By age twenty, the elite performers averaged more than 10,000 hours of practice each, while the less able performers had only 4,000 hours of practice. One fascinating and astounding point that came out of the study: No “naturally gifted” performers emerged. If natural talent had played a role, we would expect some of the “naturals” to float to the top of the elite level with fewer practice hours than everyone else. But the data showed otherwise. The psychologists found a direct statistical relationship between hours of practice and achievement. No shortcuts. No naturals.

Let’s pick a genius of our generation. Bill gates had to be a genius. Right? It’s that simple: Drop out of college, start a company, and become a billionaire, right? Wrong. Study reveals that Gates and Allen had thousands of hours of programming practice prior to founding Microsoft. First, the two co-founders met at Lakeside, an elite private school in the Seattle area. The school raised three thousand dollars to purchase a computer terminal for the school’s computer club in 1968. A computer terminal at a university was rare in 1968. Gates had access to a terminal in eighth grade. Gates and Allen quickly became addicted to programming. The Gates family lived near the University of Washington. As a teenager, Gates fed his programming addiction by sneaking out of his parents’ home after bedtime to use the University’s computer. Gates and Allen acquired their 10,000 hours through this and other clever teenage schemes. When the time came to launch Microsoft in 1975, the two were ready. They already had 10000 hours of practice behind them.

In 1960, while they were still an unknown high school rock band, the Beatles went to Hamburg, Germany to play in the local clubs. The group was underpaid. The acoustics were terrible. The audiences were unappreciative. So what did the Beatles get out of the Hamburg experience? Hours of playing time. Non-stop hours of playing time that forced them to get better.As the Beatles grew in skill, audiences demanded more performances – more playing time. By 1962 they were playing eight hours per night, seven nights per week. By 1964, the year they burst on the international scene, the Beatles had played over 1,200 concerts together. By way of comparison, most bands today don’t play 1,200 times in their entire career.

In 2008, Malcolm Gladwell published his immensely successful book called Outliers: The Story of Success. In Outliers, Gladwell examines the factors that contribute to high levels of success. Throughout the book, Gladwell repeatedly mentions the “10,000-Hour Rule”, claiming that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practicing a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours. Gladwell claims that greatness requires enormous time, using the source of The Beatles’ musical talents and Gates’ computer savvy as examples.

But, is it this Simple? Pick a field, Practice for 10000 hours and become a master in that field. The believers of Ericsson and Gladwell school of thoughts thinks so but the critics consider it as too much simplification of a very complex problem. The critics argue, Practice is necessary, it makes them perfect but to become a master of that perfection requires something else, something unknown. “No one disputes that practice is important,” says psychologist David Zachary Hambrick of Michigan State University in East Lansing. “Through practice, people get better. The question is whether that is all there is to it.” In last year’s Intelligence study, Hambrick’s team looked again at case studies of master musicians and chess players, the subjects of Ericsson’s research. After quizzing the players on their lifetime hours of deliberate practice (as opposed to performances or play), they concluded that practice accounted for only 30 percent of success in music and 34 percent in chess. They also found wide variability in the hours of practice. Chess grand masters had put in from 832 to 24,284 hours of work, although the average was around 10,530 hours. Musicians’ efforts ranged from 10,000 to 30,000 hours. This kind of variability in hours of practice washes away any meaning from the 10,000-hour rule.A recent study by a group of psychologists from five universities, further rebuffs Gladwell’s wisdom. The study found that different levels of deliberate practice can only explain one third of the variation in performance levels in chess players and musicians, the authors found, “leaving the majority of the reliable variance unexplained and potentially explainable by other factors.” In other words, practice is great! But practice alone won’t make you Master. It could also have to do with personality, the age you started, intelligence, or something else entirely.

Gladwell counters the above criticism by further refining the term practice. What should amount to practice and what should be counted towards 10000 hours?

A formula for Genius has been arrived at but the debate about its validity and accuracy is just starting.

 

Strategy Management – Definition, Keywords and Benefits

Strategy Management“If a man takes no thought about what is distant, he will find sorrow near at hand. He who will not worry about what is far off will soon find something worse than worry.” -Confucius

The joke mentioned below captures the notion and essence of Strategy Management, which is to achieve and maintain the Competitive advantage.

“Once there were two company presidents who competed in the same industry. These two Presidents decided to go on a camping trip to discuss a possible merger. They hiked deep into the woods. Suddenly, they came upon a grizzly bear that rose up on its hind legs and snarled. Instantly, the first president took off his knapsack and got out a pair of jogging shoes. The second president said, “Hey, you can’t outrun that bear.” The first president responded, “Maybe I can’t outrun that bear, but I surely can outrun you!” “

Origins

The strategic management discipline originated in the 1950s and 1960s. Among the numerous early contributors, the most influential were Peter Drucker, Philip Selznick, Alfred Chandler, Igor Ansoff, and Bruce Henderson. The discipline draws from earlier thinking and texts on ‘strategy’ dating back thousands of years. A strong military heritage underlies the study of strategic management. Terms such as objectives, mission, strengths, and weaknesses first were formulated to address problems on the battlefield. The word strategy comes from the Greek strategos, which refers to a military general and combines stratos (the army) and ago (to lead). The history of strategic planning began in the military. A key aim of both business and military strategy is “to gain competitive advantage.” In many respects, business strategy is like military strategy, and military strategists have learned much over the centuries that can benefit business strategists today. Both business and military organizations try to use their own strengths to exploit competitors’ weaknesses. If an organization’s overall strategy is wrong (ineffective), then all the efficiency in the world may not be enough to allow success. Business or military success is generally not the happy result of accidental strategies. Rather, success is the product of both continuous attention to changing external and internal conditions and the formulation and implementation of insightful adaptations to those conditions. The element of surprise provides great competitive advantages in both military and business strategy; information systems that provide data on opponents’ or competitors’ strategies and resources are also vitally important. Of course, a fundamental difference between military and business strategy is that business strategy is formulated, implemented, and evaluated with an assumption of competition, whereas military strategy is based on an assumption of conflict.

Defining Strategic Management

Strategic management can be defined as the art and science of formulating, implementing, and evaluating cross-functional decisions that enable an organization to achieve its objectives. As this definition implies, strategic management focuses on integrating management, marketing, finance/accounting, production/operations, research and development, and information systems to achieve organizational success.

Stages of Strategic Management

 The strategic-management process consists of three stages: strategy formulation, strategy implementation, and strategy evaluation. Strategy formulation includes developing a vision and mission, identifying an organization’s external opportunities and threats, determining internal strengths and weaknesses, establishing long-term objectives, generating alternative strategies, and choosing particular strategies to pursue. Strategy-formulation issues include deciding what new businesses to enter, what businesses to abandon, how to allocate resources, whether to expand operations or diversify, whether to enter international markets, whether to merge or form a joint venture, and how to avoid a hostile takeover.

Strategy implementation requires a firm to establish annual objectives, devise policies, motivate employees, and allocate resources so that formulated strategies can be executed. Strategy implementation includes developing a strategy-supportive culture, creating an effective organizational structure, redirecting marketing efforts, preparing budgets, developing and utilizing information systems, and linking employee compensation to organizational performance.

Strategy evaluation is the final stage in strategic management. Managers desperately need to know when particular strategies are not working well; strategy evaluation is the primary means for obtaining this information. All strategies are subject to future modification because external and internal factors are constantly changing. Three fundamental strategy-evaluation activities are (1) reviewing external and internal factors that are the bases for current strategies, (2) measuring performance, and (3) taking corrective actions. Strategy evaluation is needed because success today is no guarantee of success tomorrow!

Strategy Management: The Art and Science (Intuition vs Analysis)

The strategic management process can be described as an objective, logical, systematic approach for making major decisions in an organization. It attempts to organize qualitative and quantitative information in a way that allows effective decisions to be made under conditions of uncertainty. Yet strategic management is not a pure science that lends itself to a nice, neat, one-two-three approach. Based on past experiences, judgment, and feelings, most people recognize that intuition is essential to making good strategic decisions. Intuition is particularly useful for making decisions in situations of great uncertainty or little precedent. It is also helpful when highly interrelated variables exist or when it is necessary to choose from several plausible alternatives. Some managers and owners of businesses profess to have extraordinary abilities for using intuition alone in devising brilliant strategies. For example, Will Durant, who organized GM, was described by Alfred Sloan as “a man who would proceed on a course of action guided solely, as far as I could tell, by some intuitive flash of brilliance. He never felt obliged to make an engineering hunt for the facts. Yet at times, he was astoundingly correct in his judgment.” Although some organizations today may survive and prosper because they have intuitive geniuses managing them, most are not so fortunate. Most organizations can benefit from strategic management, which is based upon integrating intuition and analysis in decision making. Choosing an intuitive or analytic approach to decision making is not an either–or proposition. Managers at all levels in an organization inject their intuition and judgment into strategic-management analyses. Analytical thinking and intuitive thinking complement each other. The strategic-management process is an attempt both to duplicate what goes on in the mind of a brilliant, intuitive person who knows the business and to couple it with analysis.

Key terms in Strategic Management

 Before I delve deeper into Strategic Management, mentioned below are some of the key terms that are very integral to understanding of the Strategic Management.

Competitive Advantage

Strategic management is all about gaining and maintaining competitive advantage. This term can be defined as “anything that a firm does especially well compared to rival firms.” When a firm can do something that rival firms cannot do, or owns something that rival firm’s desire, that can represent a competitive advantage. Having less fixed assets than rival firms also can provide major competitive advantages in a global recession. For example, Apple has no manufacturing facilities of its own, and rival Sony has 57 electronics factories. Apple relies exclusively on contract manufacturers for production of all of its products, whereas Sony owns its own plants. Less fixed assets has enabled Apple to remain financially lean with virtually no long-term debt. Sony, in contrast, has built up massive debt on its balance sheet. Normally, a firm can sustain a competitive advantage for only a certain period due to rival firms imitating and undermining that advantage. Thus it is not adequate to simply obtain competitive advantage. A firm must strive to achieve sustained competitive advantage by (1) continually adapting to changes in external trends and events and internal capabilities, competencies, and resources; and by (2) effectively formulating, implementing, and evaluating strategies that capitalize upon those factors.

Vision and Mission Statements

The Vision statement of an organization is nothing but answer to the following question “What do we want to become?” Developing a vision statement is often considered the first step in strategic planning, preceding even development of a mission statement. Many vision statements are a single sentence. For example, the vision statement of Stokes Eye Clinic in Florence, South Carolina, is “Our vision is to take care of your vision.” Mission Statements addresses the basic question that faces all strategists: “What is our business?” Mission statements are “enduring statements of purpose that distinguish one business from other similar firms. A mission statement identifies the scope of a firm’s operations in product and market terms.” A clear mission statement describes the values and priorities of an organization. Developing a mission statement compels strategists to think about the nature and scope of present operations and to assess the potential attractiveness of future markets and activities. A mission statement broadly charts the future direction of an organization. A mission statement is a constant reminder to its employees of why the organization exists and what the founders envisioned when they put their fame and fortune at risk to breathe life into their dreams.

External Opportunities and Threats

External opportunities and external threats refer to economic, social, cultural, demographic, environmental, political, legal, governmental, technological, and competitive trends and events that could significantly benefit or harm an organization in the future. Opportunities and threats are largely beyond the control of a single organization—thus the word external.

Some examples of External opportunities and threats are as follows:

  • Consumers expect green operations and products.
  • Marketing has moving rapidly to the Internet.
  • The double whammy of falling demand and intense price competition is plaguing most firms, especially those with high fixed costs.
  • The business world has moved from a credit-based economy to a cash-based economy.
  • There is reduced capital spending in response to reduced consumer spending.

Other opportunities and threats may include the passage of a law, the introduction of a new product by a competitor, a national catastrophe, or the declining value of the dollar. A competitor’s strength could be a threat. Unrest in the Middle East, rising energy costs, or the war against terrorism could represent an opportunity or a threat. A basic tenet of strategic management is that firms need to formulate strategies to take advantage of external opportunities and to avoid or reduce the impact of external threats. For this reason, identifying, monitoring, and evaluating external opportunities and threats are essential for success.

Internal Strengths and Weaknesses

 Internal strengths and internal weaknesses are an organization’s controllable activities that are performed especially well or poorly. They arise in the management, marketing, finance/accounting, production/operations, research and development, and management information systems activities of a business. Identifying and evaluating organizational strengths and weaknesses in the functional areas of a business is an essential strategic management activity. Organizations strive to pursue strategies that capitalize on internal strengths and eliminate internal weaknesses.Strengths and weaknesses are determined relative to competitors. Relative deficiency or superiority is important information. Also, strengths and weaknesses can be determined by elements of being rather than performance. For example, strength may involve ownership of natural resources or a historic reputation for quality.  Internal factors can be determined in a number of ways, including computing ratios, measuring performance, and comparing to past periods and industry averages. Various types of surveys also can be developed and administered to examine internal factors such as employee morale, production efficiency, advertising effectiveness, and customer loyalty.

Long-Term Objectives

Objectives can be defined as specific results that an organization seeks to achieve in pursuing its basic mission. Long-term means more than one year. Objectives are essential for organizational success because they state direction; aid in evaluation; create synergy; reveal priorities; focus coordination; and provide a basis for effective planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling activities. Objectives should be challenging, measurable, consistent, reasonable, and clear. In a multidimensional firm, objectives should be established for the overall company and for each division.

Strategies

 Strategies are the means by which long-term objectives will be achieved. Business strategies may include geographic expansion, diversification, acquisition, product development, market penetration, retrenchment, divestiture, liquidation, and joint ventures. Strategies are potential actions that require top management decisions and large amounts of the firm’s resources. In addition, strategies affect an organization’s long-term prosperity, typically for at least five years, and thus are future-oriented. Strategies have multifunctional or multidivisional consequences and require consideration of both the external and internal factors facing the firm.

Annual Objectives

Annual objectives are short-term milestones that organizations must achieve to reach long term objectives. Like long-term objectives, annual objectives should be measurable, quantitative, challenging, realistic, consistent, and prioritized. They should be established at the corporate, divisional, and functional levels in a large organization. Annual objectives should be stated in terms of management, marketing, finance/accounting, production/operations, research and development, and management information systems (MIS) accomplishments. A set of annual objectives is needed for each long-term objective. Annual objectives are especially important in strategy implementation, whereas long-term objectives are particularly important in strategy formulation. Annual objectives represent the basis for allocating resources.

Policies

Policies are the means by which annual objectives will be achieved. Policies include guidelines, rules, and procedures established to support efforts to achieve stated objectives. Policies are guides to decision making and address repetitive or recurring situations. Policies are most often stated in terms of management, marketing, finance/accounting, production/operations, research and development, and computer information systems activities. Policies can be established at the corporate level and apply to an entire organization at the divisional level and apply to a single division or at the functional level and apply to particular operational activities or departments. Policies, like annual objectives, are especially important in strategy implementation because they outline an organization’s expectations of its employees and managers. Policies allow consistency and coordination within and between organizational departments.

Advantages of doing Strategy Management

  • It allows for identification, prioritization, and exploitation of opportunities.
  • It provides an objective view of management problems.
  • It represents a framework for improved coordination and control of activities.
  • It minimizes the effects of adverse conditions and changes.
  • It allows major decisions to better support established objectives.
  • It allows more effective allocation of time and resources to identified opportunities.
  • It allows fewer resources and less time to be devoted to correcting erroneous or ad hoc decisions.
  • It creates a framework for internal communication among personnel.
  • It helps integrate the behavior of individuals into a total effort.
  • It provides a basis for clarifying individual responsibilities.
  • It encourages forward thinking.
  • It provides a cooperative, integrated, and enthusiastic approach to tackling problems and opportunities.
  • It encourages a favorable attitude toward change.
  • It gives a degree of discipline and formality to the management of a business.

The above extract is basically my understanding of the book written by Fred R. David. The book can be downloaded from http://202.28.25.105/e-learning/courses/703309/document/StrategicManagementDavid.pdf?cidReq=703309

 

8 words that Define Leaders and Leadership

Leadership Traits
Leadership Traits

Since last couple of weeks, the question that has been keeping me busy has been if all men are born equal why some of them turn out to be great leaders while others turn out to be followers and worse of all some of them turn out to be bad leaders. I have been reading, researching and going through materials to find an answer to that. Who are the leaders? What differentiates them from the rest of the people? What accounts for good leadership? Leadership has long intrigued humankind and has been the subject of extensive research for centuries. There are numerous approaches that tries to explain the Leadership: The Trait approach, Situational approach, Relation approach, Emerging and New Leadership Approach. The more I read, the more I researched, I found a pattern in all the leaders. More or less all of them could be defined by the eight words – Honesty, Positive, Goals, Decisiveness, Learning, Communication, Persistence, and Charisma.

Honesty: Time and again various research studies have shown that the topmost thing that employees want from their leaders is integrity and Honesty. Always, always do the right thing. It makes employees feel like they know where they stand with you at all times. Be honest, fair, candid and forthright, and treat everyone in the same way that you yourself would want to be treated. Defined as the correspondence between work and deed, and as being truthful and non-deceitful (Locke, 1991). In Hoffman and other’s (2011) meta-analysis, honesty/integrity was found to be positively related to leadership effectiveness. One’s business and its employees are a reflection of yourself, and if you make honest and ethical behavior a key value, your team will follow suit. Openness and candor are characteristics that most people appreciate. There are a few people who will take advantage of such traits, but the vast majority will appreciate them. Bad Leaders are one’s that try to fake honesty, some of them even gain success in the short run but most of them always get caught in the long run. Faking honesty is never a good decision and a leader is as good as his last action. Once caught at being dishonest, he will never be able to regain the trust. The age-old Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is a good standard to follow both today and tomorrow.

Positive: By the very definition of leadership, a Leader is one who exudes confidence, a one who gives hope in desperate of times and a one who is able to show a ray of light during the darkest of hours. No matter what the circumstances, no matter what the situation, a leader should always project an image of Positive thinking. The future should always be seen as bright and optimistic. Tomorrow will be better than today. W. I. Thomas wrote many years ago about self-fulfilling prophecies. If a person or group believes a thing to be true and operates, as though it were true, often it becomes true. This has been proven often in education and other fields. If a leader takes a positive stance, it will be more popular and the desired action is more likely to occur. A motto that always holds true is that: “Pessimism breeds negativity. Optimism breeds opportunity.” Everybody wants to work with people who lift them up into the clouds instead of dragging them down into the mud.  A leader makes sure seek out the positives in their people, helping them overcome their own feelings of self-doubt and spreading optimism throughout their organization.

Goals: All the good leaders are pretty clear in their head on what they want to achieve and where they want to reach. Of course all of them are visionaries but the ones that have clear plan of action and set of goals defined are the ones that stand out. Many a times, it has been seen that leaders who can’t match with action what they preach are the ones who turn out to be ineffective.  A leader must be knowledgeable about his or her goals and means for reaching the goals. An effective leader must be both organized and prepared. Many leaders have opened their mouths and inserted their foot and suddenly found that they were no longer regarded as leaders. A more modern folk saying is that “you should not have your mouth in gear while your mind is in neutral.” Great leaders are outstanding atStrategic planners and goal setters. They have the ability to look ahead, to anticipate with some accuracy where the industry and the markets are going. Leaders have the ability to anticipate trends, well in advance of their competitors and set goals accordingly.

Decisiveness: Goals without action/execution or without decisiveness is like having a great looking car without an engine. All the goals, plans and visions amount to nothing if they are not executed or put into action.  Decisiveness is easy to understand but sometimes difficult to achieve.  Some of us are inherently decisive, and some of us are not.  But regardless of your personality, decisiveness is an important part of leadership.  Especially in environments of fear and intense change, it feels unsafe to commit to a decision and move ahead. Avoid the crutch of ‘analysis paralysis’ and make the decision.  Forward movement is always better than being stuck in place. One good thing about decisiveness is that it can be learned and honed over time. Leaders who don’t take action on their goals and who aren’t decisive and who can’t make a decision will spin their organization into a frozen state where employees are unmotivated, wasting time, and discouraged. Passion, Drive, Vision, and Salesmanship, these are all important leadership traits, but without the proven ability to execute, they are just gravy. Successful leaders must cultivate the ability to execute. To do so, focus your time and energy on doing the right things at the right times — and get the job done.

Learning – A Leader is always learning and I am not only talking about academic learnings. A leader learns from his employees, from his competitors and from his mistakes.  Wisdom is priceless. When you get on a learning path, it is the best time of your life. Every day means something; every lesson provides the clarity you clamor for. You move forward, evolve, grow, and become more fulfilled as the big picture, the dream even, emerges from the shadows and into the light. A leader should first and foremost remain a learner. When a leader is constantly working on himself, he sets an example for the people who follow him.

 Communication: This word can’t be overstated. There is a reason why Communication ranks so high as the most important trait when it comes to leadership skills. This word differentiates a good leader from a bad leader. This word may very well be the difference between the Goals and it execution. A leader can have a good vision, a great plan and an awesome team but all these things boils to nothing unless the leader is able to communicate his vision and inspire his team to act on his vision and goals. Communication should not be confused with just being a good speaker; it is much more than that. A good leader is one who can fit his message according to the audience. Large words and complex sentences will not work with people of limited formal education. Writing or speaking in technical terms may help in a few instances, but writing or speaking in clear simple terms helps in almost all cases. The ability to listen, read body language, ask questions, provide feedback, and generate effective two-way communication builds trust and can prevent performance problems down the road. In addition, the ability to comfortably use a variety of communication styles in order to articulate goals and objectives paves the way for healthy working relationships at every level.

Persistence: Great leaders are persistent. Period. Persistence is one of the key characteristics of great leaders. Gaining it requires determination and a mindset that — no matter what happens — you will stick to your principles and goals. There are ample examples of talented men not fulfilling their potential; there are numerous examples where geniuses are left unrewarded. The reason being they all lacked Persistence. Former U.S. President Calvin Coolidge once said: “Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination are omnipotent. The slogan ‘press on’ has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.”

Charisma: Charisma is the most debated word when it comes to leadership. There is a great deal of controversy about whether charisma is made or born with, and if charismatic leaders are actually effective. If we look into history and look at all the great leaders we will find that apart from having all the traits that are mentioned above they all had certain effusive quality that made them stand out, that made their followers follow, that made them connect to their followers at a deeper, emotional level. Charismatic leaders have style, personality and confidence. True charisma is a measure of a person’s maturity and character. Charismatic leaders recognize that leadership is not about showmanship, but the application of wisdom built over years of experience. Charisma is not a single trait; it is a mixture of lots of words: Communication, Confidence, and Ability to Focus, Ability to Analyze, Maturity, and Humility etc.

Do you think that I have covered all the traits that make a good leader? I would love to get your views on this and would like to improve on this blog based on your suggestions. Feel free to comment.