One of the things that deeply struck me in the book is that the definition of leadership and the qualities in a leader that are thought highly of differ from generation to generation. Wartime generations (those who were adults in the 1940s-60s) respect leaders like FDR and Gen. McArthur who can command respect, take decisive action, and act deliberately. Boomers and younger generations often see those leadership attributes as invalidating their opinions, efforts, and contributions, and as “lording over”. I realized that the very definition of “lording over” can have a totally different meaning from one person to the next, one generation to the next, and one culture to the next.

I cannot remember all the points that were given in the talk, but I think the take-home message is that no single group, generation, or culture should think that it has the “right” answer and its own understanding of good and bad leadership practices is the “true” one. There needs to be a generosity towards each other and a mutual trust that each has the best interests of the group at heart. My observation is that this is VERY hard when there is a power imbalance in the relationship between senior and junior leaders and when real dialogue is fettered by lack of opportunities, sincerity, and openness. In the story presented in the author’s book, I recall it was the failure in these things that made the leadership transition very rocky.