Our very last speaker spoke on a book by Robert K. Greenlead, who wrote about servant-leadership, which he said came from a natural feeling of wanting to somehow serve. I don't think this feeling ever really comes to the surface in some people, who want only to serve themselves, but I suppose there can only be so many good leaders in the world. Anyway, he believed that this feeling was followed by a conscious choice to lead. This goes along with what Mr. Rusevlyan spoke on a while back, becasue it has the principles of making decisions based on how it affects others:
The test our speaker presented us with is whther those firsr served, then led, are either benfited or not fiurther deperived. Perhaps they will, themselves, become servants. This abides by the concept of preserving what is good and then making it better: "Responsible people build; they do not destroy." This also holds to our forum's theme of sticking to our g uns and dreaming about how to help the world around us, no matter how daunting or time-consuming, because it is worth it. He said, "Not much happens without a dream.
The enemy of this way of thinking, we were told, lies in the strong natural servants who either have the potential to lead but do not, or choose to follow a non-servant, or someone who is into himself. That inactive or misled person of potential is at fault, even if he stays out of the limelight and even if his actions are someone else's idea, simply because he shrugged off his responsibilty.
The test our speaker presented us with is whther those firsr served, then led, are either benfited or not fiurther deperived. Perhaps they will, themselves, become servants. This abides by the concept of preserving what is good and then making it better: "Responsible people build; they do not destroy." This also holds to our forum's theme of sticking to our g uns and dreaming about how to help the world around us, no matter how daunting or time-consuming, because it is worth it. He said, "Not much happens without a dream.
The enemy of this way of thinking, we were told, lies in the strong natural servants who either have the potential to lead but do not, or choose to follow a non-servant, or someone who is into himself. That inactive or misled person of potential is at fault, even if he stays out of the limelight and even if his actions are someone else's idea, simply because he shrugged off his responsibilty.
No comments:
Post a Comment