Leadership Philip Sanborn Summary

Individuals are conditioned to merge the role of a leader to a title. Often times, an individual’s understanding of leadership is based upon the title they are given. Consequently, leadership is merely reduced to obtaining a specific title. Mark Sanborn attempts to dissect the meaning of a leader from merely a title one possesses. Sanborn proposes that even if a person does not hold a title, that individual can still be a leader. Sanborn begins his book with laying the foundation of his definition of leadership. Sanborn (2006) argues, “Anyone at any level can learn to be a leader and help to shape or influence the world around them” (p. xii). Thus, Sanborn suggests that anyone has the ability to make a positive difference in the world. Sanborn goes further and challenges the reader, “If you had no title or ability to reward or
I also found his leadership principles to be beneficial to my own leadership development. Sanborn’s first leadership principle challenged me to focus with myself before turning my attention to others. Sanborn (2006) contends, “To truly lead, and make a difference in the world, you must always start with yourself” (p. 28). I cannot expect others to do what I am failing to do. If I desire a set of characteristics from my subordinates, then I must first model those characteristics. In addition, Sanborn’s third leadership principle was thought-provoking. In his third leadership principle, Sanborn contrasts a manager with a leader. The basis of Sanborn’s contrast “is how they develop those under them” (2006, p. 50). According to Sanborn, managers and leaders view their subordinates differently. As a result, managers do not actively seek to cultivate those under them. Conversely, leaders seek to bring out the individual’s best characteristics and qualities. Having had to work with managers and leaders, I have found Sanborn’s assessment