Is there a way to measure how good a leader we are? In the typical maturity model (like CMMI for software or system integration development), there is a rating of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning non-existence or ad hoc, 2 for managed, 3 for defined, 4 for quantitative managed, and 5 for optimizing. That is probably a good measure for a process, or process control, to be more precise. What about these more intangible things called “Leadership”? How do we measure the quality or level of leadership?
Leadership is about leading and managing people to accomplish a mission together.
Achievement of the mission is the outcome measure of the team leader + the people/followers. What about just the leader alone? How do we measure him besides the outcome measure of goal accomplishment? We are left with the other key parameter – the people or the followers. What do the followers think of their leader? This was in fact what Lao Zi did, writing about 2600 years ago in Dao De Jing Chapter 17. Below is a mind-map of the Chinese and the English translation:
If we go by Level 0 as no leadership, or not a leader, then we can base on Lao Zi’s rating and come out with the rating as follows:
- Level 1: Not a leader. May be a competent individual or worker.
- Level 2: A leader who is despised and hated by his followers. Lao Zi explained that such a leader lacks integrity. The followers do not trust him. This is likely that such a leader tries to lead them by spinning stories and telling them lies. He led them by hiding information, distorting stories, hiding the truth, and trying to manipulate them through their lack of knowledge. It may work for the short term, but the people found out the truth.
- Level 3: A leader whom they feared. The leader rules by strict laws and punishments. He rules by creating fear. Follow me exactly, or else. He is likely exhibiting the behavior of an autocratic leader. His model of people is Theory X – people are lazy and need to be forced to work hard.
- Level 4: A leader that people love and honor, and praise. This is a leader who shows concern for his followers and takes good care of them. He is also a leader with wisdom that do things productively, rightly, and fair, gaining the respect and praise of his followers. He probably practices situational leadership and servant leadership.
- Level 5: An invisible leader that no one knows! This is because the people thought that they accomplished the mission by themselves! Or they accomplish the mission together. The credit belongs to no one but everyone in the team! The leader does not see the accomplishment of the team as more important than himself. He just wants to see the mission accomplished and the team succeed. Once the mission is accomplished, he does not fight for rewards or credits but gives the rewards to his people. He stepped down and stepped out quietly. This is the principle of Lao Zi's’ Self-directed team or “Non-violating the Way/Dao Action management”, 无为而治.
- Give them a mission-vision-values that they can believe in and adopt as their own. They will naturally try to achieve the vision without being forced to. This belief, the philosophy is the Dao, the 1st factor of Sun Zi's Art of War's 5 factors.
- Foresee and prevent the problems that may arise. Because there are no problems, people will never be aware of it. Leadership is taken for granted.
- Do not demand or fight for credits and rewards. Pass to able hands and leave when the mission is accomplished.
- Giving the resources, setting up the infrastructure, and the operating procedures that enable the people to work together effectively. They follow the system and forget about the leaders who make all this possible in the first place.
How productive is such a team?
- No leadership is a gathering, may be social, that does not accomplish any mission (no one sets the mission).
- Bad leadership does not accomplish much, and may continue the loss-making.
- Fearful leadership accomplishes the mission with a minimum standard.
The people, due to fear, do the very minimum to satisfy the standard requirements. Why? Because any attempt to do new things may end in a mistake. Any such mistake will be heavily punished. Hence, it is better for people to do as little as possible to minimize mistakes. This kind of leadership may still work well in situations and processes that are stable and well-known. However, in a situation of change, such leadership and method will fail. - In this world of knowledge and conceptual economy, of increasing complexity and increasing pace of change, the knowledge to do things well does not reside in a few people, whether the chairman, CEO, or COO, by everywhere in the organization. It is better to consolidate and aggregate the wisdom of everyone in and even without (the customers, the suppliers, partners, etc) to define the strategies and work together to accomplish the mission and vision of the organization. This present world needs the leadership of Level 4 Honored Leader and 5 Invisible Leader to succeed, especially in the long run.
It may be good to compare with Jim Collins (‘Good to Great’ Book Author), Level 5 Leadership.
The levels are:
Level 1 Capable Individual
Level 2 Contributing Team Member
Level 3 Competent Manager – Organizes people and resources to achieve predetermined objectives.
Level 4 Effective Leader – Motivates people to achieve a clear, compelling vision with high performance standards.
Level 5 Executive – Humility+Will Power to accomplish great and lasting missions with people.
Level 2 Contributing Team Member
Level 3 Competent Manager – Organizes people and resources to achieve predetermined objectives.
Level 4 Effective Leader – Motivates people to achieve a clear, compelling vision with high performance standards.
Level 5 Executive – Humility+Will Power to accomplish great and lasting missions with people.
Jim Collins has the additional descriptions for the Level 5 Leader:
- Face the facts and handle the realities. Do whatever is right and needed. Stick to Core Values.
- The right person on the bus in the right Seat and the Wrong person off the bus and sets the direction.
- Hedgehog perseverance to be the Best =Passion of People + What the Organization is Best at + Its Best Economics
- Culture of Discipline = Disciplined People, Disciplined Thought, Disciplined Action.
- Use of Technologies as Accelerators
- Flywheel – build up from small and increase to a breakthrough.
- Core Values: Focus on Organization, People, and NOT self. Be Ethical.
- Succession Planning for Creating a Lasting Organization
Lim Liat (c)
Update 18-1-2026 with help from DeepSeek:
Here is a summary of our
discussion, tracing the evolution of an idea from an observation about
leadership to a holistic philosophy of organizational design:
Core Idea
True leadership is not defined by
title or authority, but by influence. The most profound influence often
operates invisibly, shaping conditions so that excellence arises naturally and
ownership rests with the people.
The Progression of Thought
- The Paradox of Invisible Leadership
We began with the insight that a leader’s title is secondary to their influence. Drawing from Lao Zi, we discussed the concept of the most powerful leader being one whom people barely know exists. Their success is measured when the group says, “We did it ourselves.” - A Crucial Distinction: Authority vs. Influence
A key refinement was made: the principle isn't about asserting leadership less, but about asserting positional authority less. This shifts the source of power from formal title to earned trust, wisdom, and service—the hallmarks of servant leadership. - From Personal Style to Systemic Design
The conversation then expanded beyond individual behavior. The highest form of this leadership is architecting the entire organizational ecosystem. The invisible leader’s primary work becomes designing: - Culture: The invisible compass that
makes people want to excel.
- Infrastructure & Resources: Systems
that enable “effortless action” (wu wei) by removing friction.
- Branding: An internal and external
beacon that attracts talent and guides decisions.
- The Ultimate Metaphor: The Leader as Gardener
We arrived at the metaphor of the leader as a gardener or ecosystem architect. They do not command growth but tend to the conditions—soil (culture), water (resources), light (purpose)—that allow the garden (the organization) to thrive on its own. Their presence becomes most evident in the health and beauty of the system itself.
Conclusion
The thread running through our
discussion is a move from control to cultivation, from ego to
ecosystem. The ultimate leader’s legacy is not a dependent following,
but a self-sustaining, vibrant culture where excellence is
organic, ownership is widespread, and their greatest influence is felt
precisely when it is least seen.
In essence: The
highest leadership is institutional—it embeds itself so deeply in the culture
and systems that it becomes the natural “way” of the organization, long after
the leader is gone.
Final Integration: Leadership as Embedded Order
Your conclusion can now be stated even more sharply:
The highest leadership does not reside in a person.
It resides in a way of being that outlives the person.Such leadership:
- Replaces dependence with dignity
- Replaces control with coherence
- Replaces charisma with continuity
It is leadership that disappears into the system, becoming indistinguishable from “how things are done.”
Or, in true Lao Zi spirit:
When the work is complete,
the people say: “It happened naturally.”
No comments:
Post a Comment