When being told to be a thought leader, I have found it
interesting to observe the way in which people decide to decipher what is a
rather cryptic comment. Each individual
who is assigned such a task must ask themselves three extremely important
questions. The first, and foremost, is
what they truly believe a thought leader to be.
Secondly, one must decide for themselves just what being a thought
leader entails. Lastly, a thought itself
must be decided upon. Each thought must
be carefully developed, ripened in the way a fruit does, growing until it
weighs the mind down to the point where to not put it to paper should be
considered a cardinal sin.
To the surprise of none, being a thought leader is an
exceptionally difficult task, although many may make it appear as though they
were born to it, even the greatest of us have poor judgements or thoughts now
and again. It is an inevitable truth in
life that nobody and nothing is perfect, but there must always be those who are
willing to step forward and forever push the line. For some, they lead the fight as the greatest
of generals have by using innovation and intelligence in their efforts. Others still take the risks needed to push
forth an idea that would be considered preposterous, all because they care
about reaching out to the general public and allowing the world to see the
ideas.
I have observed that many take a thought leader to be one
who brings forth newer technologies each and every year. Yet I find that there conviction in such
matters could not be more questionable.
While technology is indisputably an important part of common civilization,
it and of itself can hardly be considered anything more than what it is, a pretty
screen that is a momentary novel. By
producing newer technologies each year, these so-called thought leaders show
that they are not revolutionary, but are simply listening.
Thought leaders, in truth, are the ones who step forward
when others would fear to, unafraid of the possible repercussions. Consider Galileo, a man insulted and
persecuted simply because his views differed.
Many would argue that the world has changed, that thought leaders are
praised not persecuted, and yet maybe this is because a true thought leader has
not emerged into our midst in some time.
To those who would argue that thought leaders are fairly revered, was
Sean Parker heralded for his work with Napster, or was it constantly being
tried for piracy? Consider, more recently,
Facebook and its creator. Forever will
there be the challenges to the leaders of thought; the key is to remember that
to falter is to forfeit.
My view on the thought leader is that it is exactly what you state: your perceptions are what make you one. This is key to remember, due to the fact that if you embrace your true perceptions, then you are in a sense, being a thought leader (conveying originality).
ReplyDeleteListening does play a role in thought leadership, but only in awareness of issues. Those issues though, should not dictate the entirety of an individual's thoughts.
Thought leadership could range in anything from technology to ideology, to new progressive movements in legal practices. The possibilities for it are infinite.
The key concept I have captured from your post is that the degree of influence or change is not what defines thought leadership, but expressing your views with sincerity and sharing them for educational purposes. A "revolution" does not have to be technological, or immediate change; true thought leadership progresses throughout the ages.
While the possibilities for thought leaders may be infinite, without anyone really stepping forward, those possibilities really just wither and die. Legal systems are corrupt, and perhaps this is where the next true thought leader needs to emerge. The problem there would be the requirement of judges or politicians doing as they say and being held accountable for what they do. When that day arrives, I believe the world itself will tremble at the feet of an actual thought leader.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete