Reading Michael Hyatt’s blog early this morning I saw his recounting of a podcast by Andy Stanley, a well-known pastor in the Atlanta, GA metropolitan area. Andy Stanley is of the opinion that the greater or higher the level of leadership that a person reaches, the less accessible they must make themselves.
Andy Stanley is quoted as saying:
“The harsh reality of leadership is that the more successful we are, the less accessible we become. As things grow and as more people become involved, a leader can’t be equally accessible to all people. So then we are faced with the dilemma of who gets my time and who doesn’t, when do they get it, and how much of it do they get.”
l sort of equate that to the movie star who becomes famous by making movies. And then they go on countless TV interviews to become even more famous. And then they complain because they never have any privacy. Does that sound familiar?
l would submit to you that the things that made a great leader great are the same things that will keep them great. And one of those things is accessibility and approach-ability. Every person needs a certain amount of privacy and down time. And as followers we need to recognize and respect that. But I don’t see a significant reason for someone to become markedly less accessible in order to become more effective.
Absence, or aloofness, doesn’t make the heart grow fonder. It makes the heart wander. And the opposite of accessible could be defined as aloof. And who thinks that is a leadership trait?
Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.