Part 2: The 4 Qualities of the Chosen "Passive" Leader. Leadership Lessons from Horses Part 2 of 3

🎥 I thought you might prefer watching a video instead of reading, so I created a special "Blog Post to Video" Playlist on my Youtube Channel

Check out the video for this article right here, or, if you prefer reading, read on below 📖🤓💗

Welcome to the Leadership & Business Lessons from Horses Series of 3 posts where I share valuable MBA-worthy lessons that these fascinating animals can teach us.

Here in Part Two of our Leadership & Business Lessons from Horses, we continue our discussion about the ultimate qualities of the leader that horses choose to follow - a “passive leader.” Don’t forget to check “Part One; Horse’s Worldview and The Three Engines of Motivation,” – where we discuss how horse’s innate wiring drives their behavior and why, as well as what the label “passive leader” represents, as it doesn’t refer to the style of leadership, but rather defines how the leader is chosen in the first place; and Part Three – Leading with Purpose & Direction," that discusses how great leaders inspire exceptional performance.

Throughout this article series, I quote a distinguished horse whisperer, Mark Rashid, and his wonderful book “Horses Never Lie.”

Mark’s remarkable ability allowed him to observe and single out the ultimate qualities exhibited by the leaders that horses choose to follow: Quiet Confidence, Dependability, Consistency and Willingness NOT to Use Force.

I can’t think of a better combination of qualities for a true leader within an organization or any social or family setting, so it looks like the horses got their criteria on point!

Cross-referencing the world of business and inspired performance within great organizations, we can point to multiple studies that have shown that those very qualities correlate perfectly with the qualities we can observe in great leaders that built strong cultures, and highly adaptive business models - resilient to sudden market fluctuations and industry shifts.

I’d like to briefly touch on each of those qualities in the context of leadership within teams and organizations.

“Quiet confidence” is a very distinctive combination of words, because the word “confidence” by itself can be perceived as boastfulness or arrogance. The use of the word “quiet” adds an element of humility/humbleness. In fact, research shows that “humility” is one of the essential qualities of great team players and leaders.

Patrick Lencioni, the author of “The Ideal Team Player: How to recognize and Cultivate The Three Essential Virtues” names “humbleness” as the first of the three essential virtues of an ideal team player.

I’d like to quote Patrick's definition of the term "humility," as I think this is one of the best ways to put it:

“Humility isn't thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less.”

Nevertheless, some perceive “humility” or “humbleness” as a sign or trait of vulnerability, which is why this very combination – “quiet confidence,” in my opinion, makes for such a great description of the essential character trait of a “passive/chosen leader.”

To further this point, I’d like to quote Harry S Truman, the 33rd President of the United States, who said:

“You can accomplish anything in life, provided that you do not mind who gets the credit.”

This is yet another sample of the fiber of thought of someone who embodies the quality of “quiet confidence” – it is the attitude of relentless pursuit with a strong, yet quiet resolution.

The easiest definition of dependability is – the quality of being trustworthy and reliable. Dependability, like no other quality, relates to how one interacts with others – to which extent they feel they can trust him/her and to which degree they can rely on him/her.

Let’s look at both of those elements separately to get to the core of what “dependability” represents.

Trustworthiness

Did you ever think - what makes us trust someone? Could you pinpoint the moment when you knew you could trust a particular person? Chances are - you can’t, and if you try to think back, you are most likely to think of trust as something that was built over time and on its own. To a certain extent, it is true, but I’d like to invite you to look behind the scenes into the actual process of how we determine whether the person is worthy of our trust.

People tend to think that we evaluate who we can trust in order to decide who we can be vulnerable with. In fact, research supports the opposite – it is those who we share vulnerability with, whom we end up trusting. Daniel Coyle, the author of “The Culture Code: The Secters of Highly Successful Groups” – a book that resulted from his search for the secret sauce of exceptionally performing teams, shares this discovery. He refers to the process he calls “the vulnerability loop,” where one person sends a signal of vulnerability, another person receives it, and sends their own signal of vulnerability back, and it is this exchange of vulnerability between two people that creates closeness and thus builds trust. If that original signal of vulnerability is not reciprocated though, people get actually pushed apart instead.

Reliability

Let’s look at “reliability.” Essentially, the word is self-descriptive - it is an ability to rely on someone. Being able to rely on someone is most relevant in times of uncertainty. Naturally then, the sense of reliability comes from people who exhibit traits such as: staying true to their word; taking ownership of mistakes, instead of making up excuses or assigning blame; and keeping the course in the face of obstacles.

One thing I’d like to add here regarding dependability is a simple, yet powerful analogy introduced by Stephen R. Covey in his “7 Habits of Highly Effective People,” where he introduces a concept of an “emotional bank account,” where the level of trust and dependability are likened to money in a regular bank account, and actions and attitudes are likened to deposits and withdrawals. These emotional bank accounts and balances in them essentially define how we evaluate the dependability of the person we are dealing with. If a person constantly makes deposits (keeps commitments, seeks to truly understand another, attends to little things, shows personal integrity, owns mistakes, etc.), then the emotional account balance is high and it can weather the storm of occasional misunderstandings or other tough times. However, if the account balance is low or even overdrawn because a person keeps making withdrawals (by breaking commitments, assigning blame to others, making up excuses when making a mistake, lying, etc. ), then even small deposits won’t be able to make a difference, and a person will be seen as unreliable and untrustworthy and thus – non-dependable.

This quality is easy to overlook, as it sounds very unassuming – after all, what is consistency? It is doing the same thing. What can be easier, right? Actually, being consistent is one of the hardest things to do, especially when things change. A lot of people are most consistent in saying how consistent they are. As such, what we demand of others is often not what we reward- and if that isn't inconsistency, then I don't know what is. One of the most vivid examples is how we treat our dear people when they open up to us (as we ask them to), by penalizing them for what they say. We want honesty and trust, yet we scold each other the moment that honesty reveals something we don't like... Un-learning that, is one of the best gifts we can give to ourselves and our loved ones.

Moreover, people are prone to be reactive – meaning that we tend to react to an outside stimulus, which makes consistency in our behavior pretty dependent on the consistency of outside sources and events. Has anybody had a surprise-free life, job, or business? Of course not! And what do we do when life throws a curveball? We either react (in a subconscious automatic way), or we respond based on a conscious adaptation to new circumstances. The "choice" between the two often depends on the level of our emotional intelligence and defines the level of our success in business and in life, as well as attests to our level of consistency (and dependability, for that matter).

I find the easiest way to explain the virtue of consistency would be to illustrate it in action – and for that, I’d like to once again quote “Good to Great” by Jim Collins:

“Those who launch revolutions, dramatic change programs, and wrenching restructurings will almost certainly fail to make the leap from good to great. No matter how dramatic the end result, the good-to-great transformations never happened in one fell swoop. There was no single defining action, no grand program, no one killer innovation, no solitary lucky break, no miracle moment. Rather, the process resembled relentlessly pushing a giant heavy flywheel in one direction, turn upon turn, building momentum until a point of breakthrough, and beyond.”

All of the qualities discussed above - quiet confidence, dependability, and consistency – paint a picture of a leader who recognizes that great things are built with continuous effort and the right kind of tools – good strategy, teamwork, a healthy corroborative environment, resilience, and patience.

It is the kind of leadership that reflects and responds, as opposed to reacts and attacks. This is not to say that this kind of leader doesn’t take rapid action or make aggressive moves, but there is a big distinction between someone displaying aggression or power and someone who acts with strong resolve, knowing the capability of his arsenal and responding with strength and assertiveness commensurate to a threat at hand.

There are times when force is necessary, but we know who from our environment keeps it in their back pocket and who keeps it as a remedy of the last resort. Which leader would you choose to follow...?

Liked this post? Share (the link for social sharing is at the top of the post), leave a comment, and don't forget to sign up for updates on new posts and announcements 📖🤓🧠💪

If you haven't already, check out Part One of this series: “Leadership & Business Lessons From Horses; Part One - Horse’s Worldview and The Three Engines of Motivation" to learn more about horse’s innate wiring and how and why it drives its behavior, as well as what the label “passive leader” represents, as it doesn’t refer to the style of leadership, but rather defines how the leader is chosen in the first place.

Check out Part Three of this series – “Leading With Purpose & Direction,” where we discuss how great leaders inspire exceptional performance 🤩