
30 Dec Why Leaders Crave Personal Impact Beyond the Boardroom
“The higher you climb, the more you miss the ground.”
Leaders, even those at the top of their game, often feel an unexpected void: the absence of a direct personal contribution. Despite steering entire organizations, crafting visions, and making decisions that ripple through industries, they may yearn for something simpler yet deeply fulfilling—a personal impact. Why does this happen?
The Missing Connection: From Strategy to Skin in the Game
Corporate leadership is an abstract art. As a leader, you deal in visions, strategies, and decisions, often carried out by others. While impactful, this distance can be alienating. Freud (1923) suggested that human beings derive satisfaction from direct engagement with the world, and the lack of this can trigger an unconscious sense of inadequacy.
Leaders, like everyone else, need tangible evidence of their own influence—something more immediate than quarterly reports or PowerPoint slides. Klein (1946) would call this an attempt to reconcile the internal split between one’s ideal self (the visionary leader) and the real self (a human being longing for authentic, grounded interactions).
Why Leaders Teach, Counsel, and Coach
Activities like teaching, counseling, or mentoring offer what Winnicott (1960) called a “holding space.” These roles allow leaders to directly shape and nurture others, creating immediate, visible change. This type of work provides:
1. Tangible Outcomes: You see the results of your effort—a student learning, a mentee thriving.
2. Emotional Connection: Personal interaction satisfies our deep need for relatedness, as highlighted by Bowlby (1969) in his attachment theory.
3. Self-Development: Engaging in direct roles fosters a deeper understanding of one’s own abilities and limits, resonating with Bion’s (1962) idea of growth through emotional work.
The Power of Skin in the Game
Leadership often demands delegation, but nothing replaces the fulfillment of rolling up your sleeves and participating directly. Lacan (1953) might argue that this need stems from the “desire of the Other”—a longing to reaffirm your symbolic identity through action and feedback.
When leaders engage directly, they:
• Build credibility (“I’ve been there, done that”).
• Develop empathy for the challenges faced by their teams.
• Experience a psychological balance between thinking and doing, as Ogden (1989) emphasized in his exploration of balancing inner and outer worlds.
Finding Balance: Leadership with Direct Involvement
The best leaders master the art of balance. They don’t abandon their strategic roles but carve out time for activities that connect them to the world on a personal level. They understand that leadership is not just about delegating—it’s about leading by doing.
As Fairbairn (1944) highlighted, humans are relational beings, and our fulfillment often comes from meaningful interactions. Whether lecturing, counseling, or even taking on a personal project, these activities ground leaders in the reality of their impact, fostering both personal growth and professional authenticity.
References
• Bion, W. R. (1962). Learning from experience. London: Heinemann.
• Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Volume I. New York: Basic Books.
• Fairbairn, W. R. D. (1944). Endopsychic structure considered in terms of object-relationships. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 25, 70-92.
• Freud, S. (1923). The ego and the id. Standard Edition, 19, 1-66.
• Klein, M. (1946). Notes on some schizoid mechanisms. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 27, 99-110.
• Lacan, J. (1953). The function and field of speech and language in psychoanalysis. Écrits, 30-113.
• Winnicott, D. W. (1960). The theory of the parent-infant relationship. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 41, 585-595.
• Ogden, T. H. (1989). The primitive edge of experience. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
#Leadership #Psychology #SkinInTheGame #PersonalImpact #Coaching #Mentorship