No one ever became a leader by submission. No sycophants. Be You.

One definition of a leader is “one who is followed by others.” Another is “one who has influence or control over others.” This is accomplished by force (including authority based on position) and charisma (people want you to lead them).

This implies that a leader is a person who expects others to follow. Or a person who is confident enough to seek to influence others. We're not talking good or bad leaders, or people who abuse their office of authority. Just making some generalizations.

The rest of this is at personal excellence.

Problem is sycophancy

Problem is sycophancy

The problem with corporate America and bureaucratic government is that promotions are based on sycophancy not personal excellence.

Sycophancy is defined as “fawning obsequiousness. Synonyms:  grovelling, servility, cringing, fawning, kowtowing, bootlicking, toadyism, slavishness.”  Obviously, these are negative terms.  Being a sycophant is a negative thing.

This is a difficult topic, because there is a fine line between good and bad here.  Companies promote people into management that they trust and they can work with, as well as people who are competent.  This is good, because these people become trusted advisers to the people above them.  These people focus on their personal excellence, but not in a narcissistic way.

To read the entire article, please go to personal excellence.