Leadership more stage than age

Leadership is a word so overused it seems less carefully considered as time goes by. Trite as it may be, I consider what's written on my husband's coffee cup:

"Leader: A person who inspires others, commands respect, directs influence through integrity; one driven by unselfish motives, often associated with philanthropic causes..."

Unselfish, inspirational integrity.

Clayton Jones in his Christian Science Monitor editorial, "Great Lessons in Leadership" writes,

"(T)he best leaders are ones who realize that there is too much to know for one person to know it all. That requires humility, which is usually not found in leaders who exude pride, grandeur, infallibility, and, eventually, entitlement."

Humility.

Both young and old can inspire. How many leaders, or - apropos of election day - potential leaders, exude unselfishness, integrity, humility? Age is no guarantee, but does it help? Certainly there are especially capable, driven, and creative young adults whose talents can help others. Whether or not that's enough to lead is reflected in our cultural perceptions and historically recent obsession with youth.

In 1955 the American Journal Science reported on the relationship of age to leadership, discussed at a conference of the American Psychological Association and National Institute of Mental Health. Their conclusion was briefly this: (adult) youth is idea time, and the best way to nurture that is by doing, by trial and error, by application under the leadership and counsel of others who've already been there.

As one gains experience, the article continued, wisdom increases and overreactions decrease. Leadership skills occur in progressive stages, phases which engender maturity and shouldn't be cut short. Rushing breeds mistakes in daily work and personal growth. However, an effective older leader encourages youthful ideas, energy, and open discussion.

That was half a century ago. Today's leadership experts emphasize skills more than experience, perhaps to the detriment of mature decision-making and seeing "the big picture." A 2004 U.K. study on leadership and aging from Queen's University School of Management concluded that (a) young and older leaders have different styles, (b) older managers consult with and include others more when making decisions (suggesting humility), and (c) both groups direct and delegate to about the same degree.

Several other essays on the topic suggest a lack of respect in some areas (out of touch, slow), but not others (strong relationships, experience), by younger adults regarding their seniors. Seniors are stereotyped within organizations as more feeble, with poor memories, low energy, and entrenched ideas.

The job market isn't much better. It takes a skilled 50-year-old up to 12 months longer to find employment than a similarly educated 30-year-old; youth is more economically valued than in 1955. On the other hand, clients remain more confident in older service providers, believing they have more experience and knowledge, and will address problems more calmly and deftly.

Is this a subconscious adherence to the old adage, "respect your elders?" After placing so much cultural value on youth - dying gray hair, being 40 while dressing 20, restaurants and gyms catering to younger vs. older customers (just consider the music), are we tempted to swing back the other way? If not, why are some young people now dying theirs white to look older? The new trend is perplexing. And perhaps encouraging.

May is Older Americans Month. Maturity is worth celebrating.

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network. Contact her at [email protected].