Leadership is a statistical Algorithm.

There are a plethora of Leadership books in print, and more are invading the marketplace constantly. Ultimately Leadership remains a statistical algorithm and great leaders understand the algorithm and how to manage it properly.

In essence, the algorithm contains 20% of positive people who will embrace ideas follow instructions with unconditional commitment. At the other end of the algorithm is another 20% of negative people who oppose all ideas. In between is that 60% critical mass that can sway in either direction.

It is a statistical algorithm, and it exists in all groups although in some (typically larger) groups is the demographic more visible.

To be classified as a Leader you need followers. These followers can be assigned to you through a job assignment, promotion or your views and beliefs. As a Leader, you will inherit the statistical algorithm and your statistical profile may alter but the baseline metric will remain the same.

So ultimately every group has in essence 2 leaders: the one that is leading the positive side of moving forward and the negative leader who can be very vocal or the silent saboteur of progress. Often your Negative Leader can also be your organization’s Spiritual Leader - not in a religious sense, but that individual that everyone informally gravitates to for message clarification and endorsement. The fact remains that on both sides you have strong leaders.

The battleground becomes how as a leader you enlist that 60% critical mass that sits in the middle. Remember you will never win over that negative 20% it will always exist … because Leadership is a Statistical algorithm. But here is where all of the leading publications provide the fodder to engulf that 60% (not 80% since that is statistically impossible). So we know that 20% will follow through with unconditional commitment but we need to reach through to engulf as much of the 60% that we can, but first, let us eliminate a few myths. Jettison the Negative Leaders! Yes, sounds good in theory but leadership is a statistical algorithm and what you jettison will be statistically replaced so sometimes it is better to have the devil that you know than dealing with the devil you do not know. A better approach is to formulate a box around your known negative group in such a manner that they can create only minimal damage or their activities can be constantly monitored and their actions quickly curtailed.

The most important aspect regarding negative contingent is to void them of any attention. Do not impose Policies, Rules and Procedures that specifically target potential actions coming from your negative contingent. This form of attention gives them the fuel they crave to substantiate their position and could raise questions in that 60% that perhaps they may be right.

The 60% will always be sitting on the fence and can sway constantly. Your requests need to constantly address what is of value to them: "what's in it for me". It could be easier, simpler tasks which speak to their aspirations and beliefs. It is a constant battleground.

Leaders seem to think that all people have the same capability towards passion and commitment which is ultimately and often classified as commitment. Wrong !!! Many people, especially within that 60%,