A Meritocracy Demands Teachable Humility in Leaders and Followers
|
|
Date Published: January 4, 2025
|
President Lincoln Receiving Visitors at the White House from Ida M. Tarbell’s “The Life of Abraham Lincoln.”
A Meritocracy Demands Teachable Humility in Leaders and Followers
- Worldwide Sages on the Effect of Humility and Success on Individuals
- “American” Individuality is at the Heart of a Workable Meritocracy
- A Critical Trait of Leaders and Followers in a Meritocracy Is Teachable Humility
A Meritocracy Demands Teachable Humility in Leaders and Followers
“Superior minds offer us treasures; but to avail oneself of instruction from another involves ‘teachable’ humility. An individual without the capacity to let themselves reach out to other individuals in friendly trust or to welcome new illumination on their thoughts with grateful faith will be shut out from the priceless treasures of humanity.”
Harry Emerson Fosdick, American Preacher, 1917
Humility summons forth one of humanity’s most priceless of treasures—new opinions and ideas.
Humility has been recognized as a hallmark of great leadership through the ages. …
But it is also a hallmark of great followers.
Humility has been recognized as a hallmark of great leadership through the ages. …
But it is also a hallmark of great followers.
Worldwide Sages on the Effect of Humility and Success on Individuals
|
“Humility keeps me from putting myself before others. … Avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men."
Lao-Tzu, China
“We come nearest to the great when we are great in humility.”
Rabindranath Tagore, India
|
|
“Success is a ruthless competitor. It flatters and nourishes our weaknesses and lulls us into complacency. We bask in the sunshine of accomplishment and lose the spirit of humility which helps us visualize all the factors which have contributed to our success. We are apt to forget that we are only one of a team, that there is strength in unity, and that we are strong only as long as each unit in our organization functions with precision.”
Samuel J. Tilden, United States
The threat facing a meritocracy without an infrastructure of teachable humility is the eventual building of an aristocratic autocracy—an upper class of despots, who only hear their own voices, who only receive their own counsels, and who dispense repetitive, monotonous inanities in the place of honest, thoughtful discourse.
Many of America’s early political leaders believed that the United States had a unique form of individualism that supported its meritocracy.
Herbert Hoover, the Thirty-First President of the United States, was one of these politicians.
Many of America’s early political leaders believed that the United States had a unique form of individualism that supported its meritocracy.
Herbert Hoover, the Thirty-First President of the United States, was one of these politicians.
“American” Individuality is at the Heart of a Workable Meritocracy
Herbert Hoover believed in a form of individuality he described as “American Individualism.”
This unique form of individuality guarded against the stratification of society—the establishment of a class structure, by requiring two features: (1) preserving within society an equal opportunity for the able and ambitious to rise from the bottom; and (2) ensuring that the sons and daughters of the successful and powerful should not by any mere right of birth or special privilege continue to occupy their parents’ places against a new generation rising up from the bottom.
Simply put, every individual is allowed to either rise to the top or fall to the bottom based on their individual merits. Hoover believed that winnowing both of these groups fashioned a competitive, service-oriented spirit to build a workable meritocracy—a society without an aristocratic autocracy.
For Herbert Hoover, American Individualism differed from other forms of individualism—such as European Individualism, because of the following five characteristics:
This unique form of individuality guarded against the stratification of society—the establishment of a class structure, by requiring two features: (1) preserving within society an equal opportunity for the able and ambitious to rise from the bottom; and (2) ensuring that the sons and daughters of the successful and powerful should not by any mere right of birth or special privilege continue to occupy their parents’ places against a new generation rising up from the bottom.
Simply put, every individual is allowed to either rise to the top or fall to the bottom based on their individual merits. Hoover believed that winnowing both of these groups fashioned a competitive, service-oriented spirit to build a workable meritocracy—a society without an aristocratic autocracy.
For Herbert Hoover, American Individualism differed from other forms of individualism—such as European Individualism, because of the following five characteristics:
|
No matter their social standing, every individual must withstand the “emery wheel of competition.”
|
The last of these criteria sometimes proves the most problematic for many.
They wish to excuse their children’s or their proteges’ failures to forces outside their control, not assign ownership of success or failure to an individual’s fundamental character, intelligence, ambition or ability. Of course, this criteria is much easier to apply to those in society who are only numbers on a chart—unrelated to us, than it is to apply it to our friends, relatives or associates.
But to preserve American Individuality, this last criteria must be met—the grinding wheel of competition must be released without distinction, or a society of class will result: an aristocracy will seek to protect those individuals at the top of a society rather than allowing those who possess superior intelligence, flawless character, outstanding ability, and overwhelming ambition to bubble to the surface—sometimes, as circumstances change, most pleasantly and quite unexpectedly.
By Hoover’s criteria, society is responsible for stimulating or encouraging the drive of each individual to exert the effort. Society should also ensure that the individual understands and accepts responsibility and ownership for their own achievements … or lack thereof.
As a society, we easily acknowledge and accept this concept as a fundamental truth in the sports arena; but we need to go further as a society and accept it in other significant arenas of life: in business, in politics and in education.
They wish to excuse their children’s or their proteges’ failures to forces outside their control, not assign ownership of success or failure to an individual’s fundamental character, intelligence, ambition or ability. Of course, this criteria is much easier to apply to those in society who are only numbers on a chart—unrelated to us, than it is to apply it to our friends, relatives or associates.
But to preserve American Individuality, this last criteria must be met—the grinding wheel of competition must be released without distinction, or a society of class will result: an aristocracy will seek to protect those individuals at the top of a society rather than allowing those who possess superior intelligence, flawless character, outstanding ability, and overwhelming ambition to bubble to the surface—sometimes, as circumstances change, most pleasantly and quite unexpectedly.
By Hoover’s criteria, society is responsible for stimulating or encouraging the drive of each individual to exert the effort. Society should also ensure that the individual understands and accepts responsibility and ownership for their own achievements … or lack thereof.
As a society, we easily acknowledge and accept this concept as a fundamental truth in the sports arena; but we need to go further as a society and accept it in other significant arenas of life: in business, in politics and in education.
A Critical Trait of Leaders and Followers in a Meritocracy Is Teachable Humility
“Humility must be carefully distinguished from a groveling spirit. … Humility is not a weak and timid quality. …
“Though we may be servants of all, we should be servile to none.”
“Living Words,” E. H. Chapin, American Minister and Poet, 1860
Humility is associated all too often with obsequiousness—servility, sycophancy, submissiveness and compliance.
Yet, one of the most inspiring of America’s political leaders, Abraham Lincoln, was known for his fortitude, self-assuredness, directness … and humility. One of the world’s most successful father-and-son business teams was the Watsons of International Business Machines (IBM). They were known for their open-door policy. Individuals were not only encouraged but were expected to enter the corner office’s “always-open door” with any issue or complaint … along with suggestions for improvements.
While displaying humility, these leaders encouraged assertiveness, discussion, interaction and boldness within their teams. Humility is a character trait needed not just in a leader but in the multitude of followers who monitor, execute and dynamically adapt to a leader’s decisions as conditions change.
Individuals of superior mind reserve their treasures—their ideas, for leaders who know how to “reach out in friendly trust and welcome new insights.”
Yet, one of the most inspiring of America’s political leaders, Abraham Lincoln, was known for his fortitude, self-assuredness, directness … and humility. One of the world’s most successful father-and-son business teams was the Watsons of International Business Machines (IBM). They were known for their open-door policy. Individuals were not only encouraged but were expected to enter the corner office’s “always-open door” with any issue or complaint … along with suggestions for improvements.
While displaying humility, these leaders encouraged assertiveness, discussion, interaction and boldness within their teams. Humility is a character trait needed not just in a leader but in the multitude of followers who monitor, execute and dynamically adapt to a leader’s decisions as conditions change.
Individuals of superior mind reserve their treasures—their ideas, for leaders who know how to “reach out in friendly trust and welcome new insights.”
|
The truest of leaders are open, approachable and, in a few words: teach-ably humble; and the best followers know how to speak humbly without obsequiousness. “Teachable humility” must scorn servility, sycophancy and submissiveness because acquiring new knowledge and accumulating innovative insights demands an inquiring mind which is the polar opposite of a submissive mind.
Submissive minds only concern themselves with execution—following orders, not evaluating the rationale, the motive, or the reasoning behind a decision which might expose a wrong path taken too far and offer new paths forward! An autocracy demands submissive minds, while inquiring minds are the empowering, regenerative force in a meritocracy. A team instilled with teachable humility is open to new, stimulating ideas; they accept new, challenging concepts; and when obstacles arise before them, they are undeterred because they know that there is not just strength in unity but an overcoming, superior strength. |
Abraham Lincoln sought out the opinions and views of the soldiers during the Civil War.
|
“Superior minds offer us treasures; but to avail oneself of instruction from another involves ‘teachable’ humility.”
Harry Emerson Fosdick, American Preacher, 1917
Maybe even an early twentieth-century preacher had some relevant, treasured ideas that are still applicable for today’s twenty-first-century business, political and social leaders?
But only if we – leader and follower alike – pursue, possess and practice teachable humility!
Do you pursue, possess and practice teachable humility?
Cheers,
Peter E. Greulich. Author and Public Speaker
But only if we – leader and follower alike – pursue, possess and practice teachable humility!
Do you pursue, possess and practice teachable humility?
Cheers,
Peter E. Greulich. Author and Public Speaker