Leadership, Moderation, & Compromise
Merriam-Webster defines moderation as “one who holds moderate views or who belongs to a group favoring a moderate course or program.” It represents a compromise as a way “to find or follow a way between extremes.” In the context of leadership, learning to activate a sense of moderation and compromise become essential considerations if you want to change the status quo. But does it mean changing your commitment to the cause?
Moderation is a trait that helps guide leaders in reaching a compromise. Moderation is the starting point of compromise. As leaders begin their journey of challenging the status quo, moderation cannot reveal itself only during or near a compromise. Immoderate or intemperate stances are typically non-starters and often lead to disaster. Compromise as a positive provides--at a minimum--something for all sides, but not everything for one side. Yet, the concept of compromise, viewed through a leadership lens, limits how much and how often one can retain the coveted role of a leader. For example, a leader who comprises too much may be viewed as directionless or void of principles and integrity. A leader who refuses to compromise full-stop places him/herself in a no-win situation.
Leadership is often about the long-term. Northouse (2012) provides us with positive and negative attributes that serve as the building blocks to moderation and compromise. Generally, leaders who espouse traits of trustworthiness, foresight, and intelligence often are seen as positive attributes; conversely, leaders who moderate from an isolationism, non-cooperative, or dictatorial attributes violate standards of societal norms (p.7). Leaders who do not value compromise are likely the same leaders who do not value moderation.
The balance between the two terms is rooted in respect for the other side (s) in an atmosphere of civil discourse. Yet, this notion should not be taken alone. Instead, the art of moderation leading to compromise hinges on individual values, attitudes, and beliefs. Leaders ought not to forego their fundamental principles to derelict duties (to themselves and their constituents).
Reflecting on my leadership, I view the following considerations relative to moderation and compromise:
1. Maintain respect for all sides of the issue and the individuals or groups.
2. Before getting yourself cornered and wrongly labeled as supportive or non-supportive, challenge your understanding of the other side (e.g., how much do I know about how others view the issue?)
3. Ask if the issue presented is immediate, or has it been an ongoing problem yet to be addressed? Is there a sense of urgency?
4. What is the likelihood that my personal and professional skills, network, and capabilities will genuinely impact the issues?
5. Finally, will my integrity and legitimacy stand in the way of compromise?
Successful leaders of change recognize that the act of moderation and comprise is about the greater good. It is not about the leader, per se; it is about orchestrating the leadership process to get as much as possible for the greater good and the continue to advance the very thing you were attempting to change.
References
Moderation. (n.d.) In Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moderation
Compromise. (n.d.) In Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compromise
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice. Third edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
About Dr. Rick Arrowood
Dr. Rick Arrowood has taught in undergraduate and graduate education for three decades, held high-level leadership positions in nonprofit organizations and published numerous articles and research studies. He has given keynote speeches and presented on various subjects of nonprofit management and leadership in the USA, Australia, China, Russia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Malaysia, and the Netherlands (The Hague). His academic areas include nonprofit management, law, global leadership, human resource management, and financial management. He holds several professional certifications in cultural competency, intercultural effectiveness, and leadership practices. He attained a Juris Doctor from Massachusetts School of Law, North Andover, Massachusetts, and a Doctor of Law and Policy from Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Previously, former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick credited him as a change agent in leading a grassroots effort to attain a legislative mandate providing the first-ever pioneering state-wide registry later replicated nationwide for individuals living with Lou Gehrig’s disease overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Bureau of Environmental Division.
