One of the things that comes to mind for me is the “Myth of the lone genius” and, in part, it sounds like you are continuing that myth in your use of the word “hero”. A single person doing something to better the world. But I don’t think such people actually exist. All of the heroes, all of the geniuses, have near armies of people beneath them that make their impact on the world happen. No single person has that kind of impact.
Very plainly said, if we investigate any person that you identify as “hero” we will find a lot of additional people contributing to the hero’s success.
Is it helpful to re-frame the discussion to be, you want to contribute to rather than be contributed to? I think that’s a valid distinction that people can make choices on.
But in terms of effective impact upon the globe, I don’t think it’s possible to accumulate power into a small subset to enact change upon the world. That’s essentially what heroes are supposed to be, concentrate power to enact change. Instead, I think change happens through the small contributions of a wide system, where the “hero” is but the symbol, image, or figurehead. It is the breadth of the system that has the true power to change, not the concentrated power of a single individual.
Very plainly said, if we investigate any person that you identify as “hero” we will find a lot of additional people contributing to the hero’s success.
Who gathered those people together, to work for that success?
The larger the effort, the more people involved in the gathering.
Who gathers the gatherers?
Are you suggesting that the gathering function is more important than any other function?
Gathering and leading are essential functions of a hero. Without them, outside of a few examples in mathematics and the arts, nothing heroic is accomplished.
And yet the gatherer or leader is incapable of doing as much as we claim they do. Frodo didn’t gather anyone. Samwise, Merry, and Pippin all forcefully followed Frodo. Aragorn led the army against Mordor but the Stewards had gathered the army, Gandalf pushed Aragorn into the position, Boromir and Theoden led them until Aragorn arrived and took his place.
Real life examples. Steve Jobs was hired by a board of directors. The majority of hiring (gathering) that happens at Apple goes through middle management. It’s the recruiters and the managers that do the real gathering.
A leader can do nothing without followers and most of the time it is the followers who make the leader and not the other way around. There is no power in a leader that exists apart from the followers. Heroes are most often myths and not actually real. Reality shows that most heroic efforts are done through a massive collaborative effort and the leader in such a situation is filling but a small role surrounded by many other small roles.
Or to put it another way, Steve Jobs convinced a board of directors to hire him. And the vision from which Apple’s new products come from happens in a room at the heart of Apple that only a small number of people ever see.
It’s the recruiters and the managers that do the real gathering.
Companies are really run by their HR department? I’ve heard that some HR people think so.
One of the things that comes to mind for me is the “Myth of the lone genius” and, in part, it sounds like you are continuing that myth in your use of the word “hero”. A single person doing something to better the world. But I don’t think such people actually exist. All of the heroes, all of the geniuses, have near armies of people beneath them that make their impact on the world happen. No single person has that kind of impact.
Very plainly said, if we investigate any person that you identify as “hero” we will find a lot of additional people contributing to the hero’s success.
Is it helpful to re-frame the discussion to be, you want to contribute to rather than be contributed to? I think that’s a valid distinction that people can make choices on.
But in terms of effective impact upon the globe, I don’t think it’s possible to accumulate power into a small subset to enact change upon the world. That’s essentially what heroes are supposed to be, concentrate power to enact change. Instead, I think change happens through the small contributions of a wide system, where the “hero” is but the symbol, image, or figurehead. It is the breadth of the system that has the true power to change, not the concentrated power of a single individual.
Who gathered those people together, to work for that success?
Depends on the size of the effort. The larger the effort, the more people involved in the gathering.
Are you suggesting that the gathering function is more important than any other function?
Who gathers the gatherers?
Gathering and leading are essential functions of a hero. Without them, outside of a few examples in mathematics and the arts, nothing heroic is accomplished.
And yet the gatherer or leader is incapable of doing as much as we claim they do. Frodo didn’t gather anyone. Samwise, Merry, and Pippin all forcefully followed Frodo. Aragorn led the army against Mordor but the Stewards had gathered the army, Gandalf pushed Aragorn into the position, Boromir and Theoden led them until Aragorn arrived and took his place.
Real life examples. Steve Jobs was hired by a board of directors. The majority of hiring (gathering) that happens at Apple goes through middle management. It’s the recruiters and the managers that do the real gathering.
A leader can do nothing without followers and most of the time it is the followers who make the leader and not the other way around. There is no power in a leader that exists apart from the followers. Heroes are most often myths and not actually real. Reality shows that most heroic efforts are done through a massive collaborative effort and the leader in such a situation is filling but a small role surrounded by many other small roles.
Or to put it another way, Steve Jobs convinced a board of directors to hire him. And the vision from which Apple’s new products come from happens in a room at the heart of Apple that only a small number of people ever see.
Companies are really run by their HR department? I’ve heard that some HR people think so.
Also known as “You didn’t build that”.