Take a look at any leaders, past or present, who you and others consider truly great.  Now consider those leaders, past or present, who you and most sane people consider terrible.  What’s the main difference?

Charisma (dynamic personality)?  Competence (skill and talent)?  Chemistry (appearance and attractiveness)?  All of these factor in, but only one can swing the pendulum from terrible to great or back again– Character.

To put this to the test, let’s observe our immediate reactions to various famous-name leaders in history:

–Martin Luther King Jr.

–Mao Zedong (Chairman Mao)

–Mahatma Gandhi

–Adolf Hitler

–Abraham Lincoln

–Joseph Stalin

–Mother Teresa

–John D. Rockefeller

–Winston Churchill

–Ivan the Terrible (big hint here)

What made the difference in your reactions?  All of these leaders accomplished a lot—enough to become very famous.  They all had quite a bit of competence—i.e., they were skilled at what they set out to do.

Some had a lot of charisma, and some even looked appealing. Others didn’t. But that could apply to both the ones we react positively and negatively to.

Our gut reaction comes from what we know of their character and how that affected their actions, leadership, and the outcomes they produced.

Sure, some historic leaders have the title “great”—for ex., Alexander the Great, or Catherine the Great.  But ask any historian or anyone who knew them (if you could), and they’d tell you—no one wanted to serve under them or be affected by their leadership!  In other words “They weren’t so great!”

Then there are modern day leaders, about whom we may have mixed feelings, or who receive mixed reviews when it comes to true greatness:  Bill Gates; Steve Jobs; Jeff Bezos; etc.

Again, just because someone is successful in accomplishing their goals doesn’t mean they’re great. They will likely achieve great fame and even attain great wealth because of it.  But if no one likes or wants to follow them, they’re not great.

This reminds me of what one friend told me about the CEO of a company he used to work for.  Note—used to. He himself had been a top executive in that very successful company, but quit because he couldn’t take the bad character of the CEO anymore.  His comment:  “If this guy were working anywhere else, he’d be fired!”

Likewise, when we think about going to a movie, we often ask a trusted friend who’s already seen it, “How about that movie? Do you recommend it?”  If our friend says, “No, it’s not that great”, they mean, “it’s not worth spending time and money to see it.”

At that point neither of us is thinking about how famous it is, or how much revenue it brought in.  We’re thinking about the quality of the content.

Now, bringing it closer to our own lives, think of leaders you know—those you work for, serve under, and associate with—those who directly affect you, such as:  Your boss; your team leader; your pastor; your parents; etc.

How would you describe their character?  Then, how much do you admire them and why?  How do you feel about being part of the team, family, or group they lead?  Glad?  Proud? Indifferent? Stuck?  Ashamed?  Frustrated?  Ask yourself why.  I’m sure you’ll see a direct correlation between their character and how you feel about being led by them.

To be great, we have to be good. Or, as Martin Luther King Jr. put it, “Not everybody can be famous, but everybody can be great, because greatness is determined by service.”  What he was getting at was our character.

What, then, constitutes the kind of good character needed to be a great leader?  The same qualities all of us need to be great people, except that with leaders, these qualities become even more vital, due to the larger sphere of influence and impact that leaders have on those around them. See 2 Pet. 1:5-7.  These include being:

C aring—empathetic, kind, generous, compassionate, good listener, attentive to others’ concerns.

H umble—teachable, accurate view of oneself (not too high or low), modest, authentic, willing to admit mistakes, service- oriented.

A ctive—all-in, enthusiastic, involved, fully engaged, present when present

R ighteous—having integrity, honest, right-thinking, doing the right thing even if it involves sacrifice.

A daptable—flexible, willing and able to adjust, calm, agile, able to course-correct easily, has a growth mindset.

C omitted– loyal, trustworthy, dedicated, wholehearted, faithful, reliable, dependable, keeps promises

T enacious—persevering, persistent, determined, full of grit, don’t give up, courageous—willing to take risks, keep going in the face of opposition

E ncouraging—believes and brings out the best, gives meaningful and sincere praise, positive outlook and expectations (without being unrealistic), not critical or perfectionistic

R elational—prioritizes and builds connectedness and community; puts people above projects; friendly; enjoys social interaction…

Granted, some of these seem counterintuitive when we think of what it takes to be a great leader.  Humble? Servant-hearted? Relational? Flexible? Encouraging?

It almost seems like I’m advocating a wishy-wishy, doormat type of person who doesn’t know how to get things done, let alone rally people behind them to do it!  And what about decisiveness or drive?

But none of these character qualities listed above render high-performance, decisiveness, initiative, or quality results impossible.  In fact, they enhance them.

In Part 2, I’ll unpack these character-traits of a great leader examining each in further detail.  For now, it’s enough to know that character is king among the “royalty” of leaders.