here’s a clear picture of what this kind of leadership looks like.
by anthony zecca
leading from the edge
let’s take a stroll down memory lane and think about the leaders you have had in the past.
more on edge leadership: assessing your firm | the 4 traits of great cpa leaders | why leaders must ensure clarity | incremental vs. exceptional success | do you lead or just manage? | managing vs. leading | is your leadership team at the edge? | 6 leadership challenges through covid and beyond | edge leaders share 7 strengths | leadership must drive culture | leading from the edge
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
if you are like me, your experience reflects some really good leaders and some poor leaders, with most being in the middle, i.e., average center leaders.
what attributes did they exhibit that you thought were really good? what attributes did you think were negative and not focused on teamwork, values, client, etc.?
“if your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are an excellent leader.” – dolly parton
so, what makes a great edge leader? what reflects a leader who truly leads from the edge? there are many leaders in professional service firms who are decent leaders. most, however, lead from the center, generally content with the firm’s history and average growth. center leaders are content with incremental performance improvement and are happy to win skirmishes even if that diminishes their ability to win the war. they celebrate when a new client is won (skirmish) but do little to reduce the number of opportunities the firm lost (the war).
we can often learn from history and if we reflect on two great military leaders, most center leaders today might have held the rank of lieutenant, leading some troops into a skirmish, but never generals leading the entire army into battle. below are two examples from an article written by patrick alain (industry leaders magazine website in april 2012) that highlight two great historical edge leaders:
julius caesar: easily one of the greatest military leaders of all time, caesar was also one of the best political leaders the world has ever seen. he led several campaigns with numerous victories and was singlehandedly responsible for the expansion of the roman empire. he was also responsible for reforming the roman government and thus laying the foundation for a great empire. his greatest traits were his decisiveness, boldness, eagerness, motivation, opportunism and strategic planning.
george washington: washington, known as the founding father of the united states of america, was the leader of the american revolution and the first president of the u.s. he was a true visionary whose vision has endured for more than 200 years. what made washington great was his foresight, vision, strategic planning and his ability to lead people to success.
both men were leaders in very different times but who had some key attributes in common. they were bold and confident, and their vision was not limited by fear or concern about what their soldiers would think or by fear of losing the battle. they were decisive in everything they did and, in most cases, made decisions with input from their commanders. once decisions were made, those decisions were communicated with confidence and 100 percent conviction. both edge leaders were great strategists and were exceptional at understanding what needed to be done to win and how to motivate their soldiers to win. finally, and in certain ways most critical, was their ability to lead their troops (their teams) to success, to the end zone, to the win regardless of the obstacles they faced. they were inspirational, believable and committed to their vision.
another hallmark of a great leader is the ability to grow from failure because mistakes are bound to occur in any leader’s world. edge leaders never give up. they are persistent and unwavering in their self-confidence, which propels them from failure to astounding success in most situations. here are examples of great leaders whose successes were born out of failure.
walt disney: when you look at how disney’s animated movies have become a household name, you would find it difficult to imagine that their creator once faced rejection and was fired because “he lacked imagination and had no original ideas” according to a newspaper editor (i wonder how this editor’s career went). disney’s first foray into animation was a failure and he was turned down time and again when seeking financing for the walt disney company. fast forward and the disney empire had annual revenue in excess of $30 billion (2019 usd) and has won more than 30 academy awards for his animated films.
elizabeth arden: elizabeth arden was born florence nightingale graham and went on to establish one of the most influential companies in the beauty industry. however, success did not come easily. before she found her niche in the beauty industry, elizabeth arden experienced several failures. she dropped out of nursing school after realizing that the responsibilities depressed and even frightened her. afterward, she tried a number of different careers, such as being a receptionist, bank teller and secretary. however, all of these fizzled out too. her first business venture also failed, but this failure did not deter her from going after her dream. she took a loan in order to set up her next business venture – a cosmetics and beauty salon company – and it was a success. these days, elizabeth arden inc. earns around $1 billion every year.
jack ma: the rags-to-riches story of alibaba founder jack ma will inspire you to never give up on your dreams. born as ma yun in 1964, he was the second child in a family of three. at that time, china was isolated from the rest of the world, and jack ma was often bullied for being scrawny. he’d get into fights because he never backed down from bigger kids who harassed him. ma figured that education was his gateway to a better life, but he failed his university entrance exams twice. he did pass on his third try, and ultimately attended hangzhou teachers institute. finding a job after graduating from university was also a challenge. he experienced dozens of rejections before a local university hired him as an english teacher. after that, he launched his own business ventures that failed. but jack ma wasn’t deterred by failure. just a few years after his last failed business venture, he founded alibaba, an e-commerce business and ma’s answer to amazon. this time, the business was a resounding success. according to forbes estimates, as of july 2020, jack ma’s net worth was around $45.9 billion.
the bottom line is that leaders from the edge all share the same strengths and they win regardless of failures and challenges they encounter along the way. they accept responsibility and never look to blame. they grow from failure and from challenges to become stronger, more insightful leaders.
edge leaders share the same seven strengths:
- clarity – they are clear in all messaging and communications.
- confidence – they have complete confidence in their leadership, and they accept responsibility.
- courage – they have the courage to lead and take necessary actions.
- conviction – they know what needs to be done and are committed to the necessary actions to build a great culture and drive the firm to become a standout, high-performing firm.
- consistency – they are consistent in their actions, communications and leadership to ensure that everyone builds trust in that leadership.
- compassion – they take the time to know their team, their hopes, dreams and fears and they always lead with a focus on the basic belief that it is their responsibility to motivate and inspire everyone to become what they never imagined they could be.
- consensus – they have the ability to mold consensus and agreement on critical issues and ensure that those who provided input are given the respect of understanding the final decision, whether it reflected their input or not.
let’s dig further into some of the stark differences between edge leaders and center leaders in terms of how they lead and give life to the above seven strengths:
differences between center and edge leaders
center leaders look to blame. center leaders tend to look at where to point the finger. they are quick to abandon the longer-term strategies based on what today looks like, reactive to daily fires. center leaders don’t have the leadership strength to accept responsibility and stay the course when issues and challenges arise; instead they look to lay the blame on others.
by contrast, leaders from the edge accept responsibility and look at the mistakes of others or their own as a teaching moment. edge leaders keep their team focused on the end goal and the roadmap to get there and fully understand that a culture of blame will only result in partners and staff being afraid to take on the challenges of transforming the firm. edge leaders exhibit and communicate leadership strength, courage and conviction through decisions and actions that tell everyone it is ok to make a mistake. they work to understand what happened and why and not who to blame, thus helping their team members learn from mistakes, grow and remain focused on the long-term plan.
center leaders operate from a tactical vision versus a longer-term strategic vision. where a strength of leading from the edge is being strategic, leaders from the center tend to be more tactical, with their forward view limited to the next quarter or the next year. center leaders spend too much time looking in the rearview mirror to form their tactical view, as opposed to being able to imagine a different future.
edge leaders always learn from the past but lead within a constant focus on the future. they understand that it is their responsibility not only to communicate and inspire everyone to move toward the overall strategic objectives and outcomes, but also to motivate everyone to “personally care” about the strategic outcomes. edge leaders are great in communicating their message with clarity, in understandable terms and not the abstract. they understand the importance of ensuring that every team member shares the future vision and understands their role in achieving it.
center leaders tend to view success through the filter of financial metrics. center leaders focus on financial results, creating a short-term vision and making decisions that might be good for today but may not be good for the longer-term vision of the firm.
edge leaders see financial metrics as a result and not as a measure of success. they measure success against the vision, mission and core values of the firm and the longer-term strategy that drives financial success. they provide the insights and clarity to help everyone fully understand the longer-term strategy and through that process make it easier for everyone to make directionally correct day-to-day decisions that positively impact the firm’s financial results and metrics.
center leaders tend to have difficulty making challenging decisions. when decisive action is needed or difficult personnel decisions are needed, center leaders delay, defer, procrastinate and all too often just don’t make the decision. indecision ends too often in being the decision. this lack of initiative to make decisions, particularly difficult personnel decisions, reflects poorly on their leadership skills and affects the performance of the firm. everyone knows when there is a difficult personnel or partner decision that has to be made – and when the center leader does not make the call, it demotivates everyone and builds a culture of “why should i work at 100 percent?”
edge leaders, by contrast, are seen by their subordinates as thoughtful and compassionate, but decisive when they need to be. edge leaders mold and build consensus around issues but make the decision whereas center leaders seek to find consensus and end up procrastinating and indecisive. as author and leadership consultant john maxwell stated, “the inability to make decisions is one of the principal reasons executives fail.”
“to be a great leader, you need to be great at molding consensus. you have to reach out and communicate what you are thinking. you need to listen.” – kevin keane, leader of pkf o’connor davies
center leaders put the firm at the center of their universe. center leaders operate from the perspective of the firm and make most decisions through the optics of the firm.
in contrast, edge leaders put the client at the center of their universe and make most decisions based on what is best for the client, understanding that through that filter, decisions will also be best for the firm. edge leaders understand that complex or inefficient internal systems are among the biggest performance and client relationship killers, so they ensure that all internal systems are operating within a client-centric model. putting the client at the center makes life easier for all partners and staff, simplifies all internal processes, and strengthens client satisfaction and loyalty to the firm.
the contrast between edge leaders and center leaders is stark and real. if you look at any professional service firm and interview just a few people, it quickly becomes evident what type of leader the firm has. a center leader is not a bad leader and can move the firm forward to achieve growth and reasonable profitability. in fact, many center leaders exhibit glimpses of edge leadership at times, but all too often fail to lead from the edge. they are too comfortable in letting history drive the future. their leadership, and more importantly, their expectations of their partners and the overall firm are based on past performance. their approach to leading is to build on the past to create the present because their vision is so short-term. the problem with letting the past dictate not only the present but also the future is that the firm will always remain stuck in the middle, just another “me-too” firm.
as napoleon stated, “if we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we lose the future.”
an edge leader, by contrast, learns from the past and creates the future based on a vision and strategy of what the firm should be five years from today. they understand that to achieve the goal of creating the best standout, high-performing firm, they need to plan for the future based on a vision of what the future can be and not from the past and what the firm has been. yesterday might be comfortable and tomorrow scary, but tomorrow is what edge leaders are always thinking about and building their actions upon.
“you can’t do what you did yesterday. if you come in today and do what you did yesterday, you are failing yourself and you are failing the firm. you must always look forward and not rely on history.” – jane scaccetti, leader of drucker & scaccetti
one last point. all leaders must earn trust – trust of their partners, trust of the staff, trust of internal administrative personnel and trust of the clients. trust is built over time and is earned based on how the firm leader leads and whether he reflects the seven strengths enumerated earlier. is there clarity in how he communicates and what he expects from others? does he have the confidence to make hard decisions seeking input and molding consensus? does he make course corrections when needed, coaching and building strong teams? does he always take responsibility, admit when course corrections are needed, surround himself with a strong team and generally lead with full transparency? does he lead with conviction, compassion and consistency? does he have the courage to empower others and give responsibility and only move to the front to take responsibility if issues develop? when the answer to each of these questions is yes, trust – which is the strongest currency for an edge leader in any firm – is earned.
“the mark of a good leader is he looks for ways to accept blame and deflect compliments. a good leader deflects the compliment to the team and always accepts responsibility if an issue comes up.” – robert minkler, jr., leader of anders cpas
transitioning from a center to an edge leader takes courage, patience and a good bit of stubbornness. moving from the center to the edge for most is not just tweaking their leadership style but letting go of old habits, which is not easy. it takes courage and confidence to move out of a leadership model that is comfortable to one that requires change in so many aspects of how you have operated in the past in terms of leadership.
it also takes patience because this leadership transition takes time. it does not happen because you wake up one morning and announce to the firm that you are now an “edge leader.” it’s like a rookie on a sports team who comes to the team with a ton of talent but without the ability to transform that talent into actual performance on the field. for most, that takes a few years, a bunch of mistakes and a good coach.
finally, you need to be really stubborn because it is so easy to give up and move back into the cocoon of the past. you have to make the decision, lay out the game plan (with a coach) and then stick to the plan. the reward for you and for your firm will be worth the effort and angst.