POWER HUNGRY

The dominant paradigm of leadership reflects an intriguing fascination with power in all its political, economic, military, and nontangible dimensions.

In the realist view of international relations, for instance, power is the ultimate aim of all transactions. In his seminal book Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (Knopf, 1948), Hans J. Morgenthau writes: “International politics, like all politics, is a struggle for power. Whatever the ultimate aims of international politics, power is always the immediate aim.”

Michael Platt, an assistant professor of neurobiology at Duke University, has shown that the fascination with power may be a biological urge not limited to the human species. Male monkeys apparently value status within their hierarchical kingdom and similarly associate leadership with power. Platt has found that male monkeys will give up a considerable quantity of fruit juice for the privilege of just looking at a picture of a higher-ranking leader in the monkey group.

In a story reported by the Associated Press this past April, John Thain, CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, commenting on the exchange's merger with an electronic rival, said, “This is an essential step to maintaining our global competitiveness and leadership.” He explicitly associated leadership with global competition and dominant position in the marketplace.

Consider as well the following example from an April article in the New York Times by Thomas Hammes, a fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies of the National Defense University in Washington, D.C. Hammes excused unethical conduct in the new Iraqi government and automatically associated government with leadership. “The establishment of a national government in Baghdad is the most obvious encouraging sign,” wrote Hammes. “While some in the West complained about how long it took to name a leadership, and there are legitimate concerns about favoritism within some ministries, the fact is that the leaders of the Iraqi parties have steadily worked at compromises and they now have a prime minister, president and Parliament in place.” In other words, individuals appointed to positions of power and authority, though they may be presiding over corrupt ministries, are automatically called leaders.

Wess Roberts, in his book Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun (Warner, 1989), urges leaders of nations and armies to emulate Attila's leadership qualities, which included loyalty, emotional and physical stamina, decisiveness, competitiveness, and tenacity.

All these examples continue to reinforce the dominant paradigm of leadership as the power and authority that come from a superior hierarchical position. This is understandable because the dominant paradigm in Western culture is derived from the biological concept of survival of the fittest. Culturally, economically, and politically, the powerful fight to move to the top, eliminate competitors, dominate the group, and impose their vision of leadership.