Titles Don’t Make You a Leader

There’s a lot that comes with a big title. More pay, more responsibility, more control, and more recognition.

But there’s one thing that doesn’t come with a title: the ability to call yourself a leader.

Titles don’t make you a leader. Your people do.

Leadership can’t be decreed, no matter how much power comes alongside a fancy title. While titles are awarded from above, respect is earned from below. It’s colleagues under the boss that will decide when leadership is earned. It’s never given on day one.  

Noted Silicon Valley coach Bill Campbell, in the book Trillion Dollar Coach, explains:

If you’re a great manager, your people will make you a leader. They acclaim that, not you…You need to project humility, a selflessness, that projects that you care about the company and about people.

One test of organizational health is how often titles or positions are used to justify decisions. As in, “I’m the boss and I’m telling you what to do.” Or, “I’m the highest ranking official in the room so it’s my call.”

Underperforming organizations rely on titles, rather than discussion, to make decisions.

Former General Colin Powell, as quoted in The First Basic Teaching Guide for Introducing High Reliability Organizing to the Wildland Fire Community, reiterates the point:

Organization charts and fancy titles count for next to nothing. In well-run organizations, titles are also pretty meaningless. At the best, they advertise some authority, an official status conferring the ability to give orders and induce obedience. But titles mean little in terms of real power, which is the capacity to influence and inspire. Have you ever noticed that people will personally commit to certain individuals who on paper possess little authority, but instead possess pizzazz, drive, expertise, and genuine caring for teammates and products?

Weak leaders depend on their titles. It’s a crutch that removes accountability and critical thinking, two things that terrify a weak leader. While titles are an easy way to force a decision, it’s also an easy way to destroy a team.

Teams need to understand why decisions are being made, not just what the decisions are.

Former Navy Seal Jocko Willink, in his book The Dichotomy of Leadership, explains:

…the most important explanation a leader can give to the team is “why?” Particularly when a leader must hold the line and enforce standards, it must always be done with the explanation of why it is important, why it will help accomplish the mission, and what the consequences are for failing to do so. It must never be done with the attitude of “because I said so.”

…he clearly misunderstood how effective leaders in the military lead their teams. It was not through rigid authoritarianism: Do this because I said so, or you’ll be punished. Sure, there were those in the military who tried to lead like this. But it was never effective.

A respected leader always gives a full explanation, never relying on authority. Abuse your authority and people give up on you.

The military has a reputation for relying on titles and superiority to dictate orders. However, former Army General James Mattis disagrees and explains what really works in his book, Call Sign Chaos:

In the Corps, I was taught to use the concept of “command and feedback.” You don’t control your subordinate commanders’ every move; you clearly state your intent and unleash their initiative. Then, when the inevitable obstacles or challenges arise, with good feedback loops and relevant data displays, you hear about it and move to deal with the obstacle. Based on feedback, you fix the problem. George Washington, leading a revolutionary army, followed a “listen, learn, and help, then lead,” sequence. I found that what worked for George Washington worked for me.

Notice how “lead” came after “listen, learn, and help.” You only get to lead after you’ve done the other three. And nowhere did titles play a role in the process.

Just because you have a title, doesn’t mean you can lead.