We all have really good ideas. Some of them we remember the next day, and some we don't.
I was reading a book by Simon Sinek called Start with Why. And in that book's first chapter, Simon makes a comparison between the Wright brothers, who were the first to fly an airplane, and a competitor who was heavily backed by government funding. He was backed by corporate mogul such as Andrew Carnegie. And there was a lot of interest in the competitors' attempt to fly the first plane. And Simon Sinek talks about the Wright brothers being from a small town having almost no funding, having no publicity of any kind, literally just operating as a threadbare startup and having support from the community of that small town. The book goes on to say that both the inventors had support from the community, they both were motivated, they both were smart, and he basically goes on to say that they both had the resources they needed to succeed. So why did the Wright Brothers succeed and the other more-well-funded inventor didn't? Or essentially -why did the Wright Brothers succeed first?
Simon Sinek says that the reason the Wright Brother succeeded was because they were able to inspire people. Which is what leadership means - somebody who's not just able to motivate people but to actually inspire greatness.
Think back to the feeling you get with a burst of positive energy. It could feel like your favorite song just came on. You'll know a good leader because you'll feel that feeling around them all the time.
So, back to Simon Sinek's inspiring words. He says that the Wright brothers were able to inspire the other people, and that's why they succeeded. But I think that they had to succeed first to become the oens who inspired their supporters to a great cause. Think about it; if the Wright Brothers had not flown the first airplane, would we be talking about them? Probably not. We would attribute the invention of flight to that other inventor, and his supporters including Andrew Carnegie.
To become a good leader, a person must not only inspire, but also succeed.
True leadership, the kind that inspires people, only happens when you succeed. When people know that you can do what you claim to do. Only when Martin Luther King Jr was able to organize millions of people into the civil rights movement as its head, was he considered a success. He would have been a great leader in retrospect, but if his organization of the civil rights movement had failed, he would not be the legendary icon he is today. There were other people who were just as driven to the cause, charismatic, motivated, and just as affected by the pre-civil rights movement as MLK was.
Sometimes we confuse people of importance with people of leadership. Leadership is very important. It is one of the most important things in terms of helping people and inspiring other people but being inspirational is not good enough. You have to succeed; people listen to winners. They don't listen to people who came in second - they listened to winners and are inspired by those people.
On another note, also gotta find the right people to continue the legacy. How many people (or at least descendants of people) from the Wright Brothers' early days in Kitty Hawk, NC are in the airline business, or into flight innovation? I can't recall ever hearing about how Kitty Hawk turned into a airplace technology mecca, or how it pioneered other scientists and engineers to greatness. So it matters with whom you choose to succeed. If success is with a passionate but mismatched group, once success fades, leadership and inspiration also fade. But with the right group, Insiration + Success + Leadership make a great combo.
Keywords:
Philosophical terminology
Personal life
Ontology
wright brothers
simon sinek
rights movement
people
leadership
inspiration
competitor
difference
comparison
resources
inspire
support
winners
leader
considered
things
reason
succeed
listen
plane
motivated
government
inspired
punishment
community
Soul
Being
Affection
Motivation
Actualism
Reality