
Why aren't you striving to be a leader in your field? - jasonlbaptiste
http://www.thisisgoingtobebig.com/2009/05/why-arent-you-striving-to-be-a-leader-in-your-field.html
======
coglethorpe
Striving for leadership seemed like a path of diminishing, even negative
returns for me in a corporate job. Those at the top worked twice as hard (at
least) for maybe 10% more pay and were just as subject to layoffs as I was.
The economics dictated that I just go with the flow.

There's also a risk in the corporate world. Bad managers see leaders as
threats and terminate them. I've seen it happen too many times in my careeer.

Now I'm on an different path, where leadership is demanded and rewarded
(startups), so my attitude is very different. I have a long ways to go.

~~~
buugs
I think this is a good point and think it has been brought up with google many
times here on HN such as why google recruiters look for As in all their
subjects. Employers want someone who will follow the rules and follow them
well, especially if they are smart; but if you want to succeed with a product
or as a company you kind of need to start to lead.

~~~
nostrademons
Dude, if you think Google is looking for people who will follow the rules and
follow them well, you must know a different Google than the one I work at...

~~~
buugs
I don't have a primary source so I'll take your word the only reason I said
this was because of a few articles submitted like:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=553254> (
[http://www.chriskopec.com/blog/2009/apr/08/great-students-
ar...](http://www.chriskopec.com/blog/2009/apr/08/great-students-are-great-
employees-not-great-found/) ) and another on the leaders of many big companies
that I couldn't find.

~~~
nostrademons
The vast majority of things you read in the press (including blogs) are wrong.
Not just about Google. Compare what the media says about any topic with which
you have expertise vs. what your actual expertise tells you.

FWIW, I had a 3.0 GPA and flunked two physics courses, and they still hired
me.

------
whacked_new
Disagree with "If I said that the top people in your field, at your experience
level, are active participants professional societies, write popular blogs
about your industry, get asked to write articles for magazines and regularly
speak on conference panels, that's probably a reasonable estimation of what it
means to be on top, right?"

That isn't a reasonable estimation of being on top. It's a reasonable estimate
of someone who fits into that kind of [rather social] professional circle.
Doesn't apply everywhere.

In any esoteric field, you find out who are the top people after you enter,
and swim around for a while. The ones with the most exposure are just the ones
with the most popular appeal.

I have a friend who is wicked smart. I asked him why he isn't full of
ambition. He just doesn't give a frolicking fancy. He feels like he has what
he needs. Who is just the opposite? Napoleon. Is there something going on
here?

Maybe some top fellow will write about it in Psychology Today.

------
jwvgoethe
First of all, what is with the recent deluge of poorly written trite?

secondly, this guy is failing to see that being a "leader" in the field is
different from being at the top. Being at the top connotates that one is the
best; their abilities are superior to others. A leader can simply be him who
recognizes a vacuum in power and seizes it. Being a leader in no way implies
that one is at the top of their field.

The best programmers/hackers I've met were quite content to hone their skills
without the public attention that only the "leadership types" seem to require.

~~~
tezza
Is this "thought Leader" stuff a specific American thing? Not being
derogatory, I am wondering if this style of "being a leader" obsession is
common amongst _some_ Americans and few other nationalities.

And if there is a noted concern amongst other nationalities, how much of that
is trying to mimic the Americans versus actual concern with being a leader.

I just got back from EuroDjangoCon, and the American speakers were much more
evangelistic than the British/Euro/Australian.

\---

> deluge of poorly written trite?

It's depressing, isn't it. Especially when written by someone who is trying to
take on the Mantle of "Being a Leader"

------
kiba
Striving for a "leadership" position seem like a zero sum game to me. It is
like trying to make into major league football or something.

Rather, I prefer to play a game where I'll win eventually like working on some
pretty cool library that everybody want or a semi popular game. If it happen
that I got to be in the top 10 hacker list, than that's just an unintentional
bonus.

Pick battles you know you're going to win like building a successful startup,
working on libraries that everybody wants but can't find, having a semi
popular blog, and other ultimately winnable events.

For me, I am learning game programming and dream of making a living as a
developer of open source games. I know it is going to be rough. However, I
believe if I pick my niche right, than I should be able to stake out a small
piece of the market just enough for decent living.

------
shib71
I agree that being a leader in the field does offer flexibility and choice.
But I don't think that's always (or even mostly) why people work to that
position. They do it because they LIKE writing and speaking, or because
networking is a key part of their responsibilities.

I'm a nuts and bolts, head and shoulders deep in code kind of guy. The stuff
that gets my crank going never requires an audience. TOP-of-field is my career
ambition. Being so good at what I want to do that people will pay me to do it.

------
jrockway
Everyone in the Rails community is trying to be the leader in their field. The
result is a lot of blog posts about how everyone else is worse than them.

------
TomOfTTB
Someone I admire a lot once told me "we get bad politicians because anyone who
wants power so much that they’d allow the media to humiliate themselves and
their family is someone who wants power too much to use it responsibly"

At the time I thought it was a really cynical thing to say but as I’ve gone
along in life I’ve often seen how right he was. How people who desire power
for power’s sake generally aren’t worthy of that power.

That’s the category I’d put this article in. He’s basically saying "you should
strive to be a leader because it makes you important." But I’d counter that by
saying leaders should only lead if they see things headed in the wrong
direction. If you work in an industry where you’re happy with the direction
it’s going in you probably don’t need to be a leader.

I guess what I'm saying is that leadership is a response to an external
stimuli not an internal desire.

------
tophat02
Short version: There's no traffic jam on the extra mile.

------
dkarl
Maybe it's because I'm in the wrong field. I'm not a technology junky. I don't
run my own email server, DNS server, and token ring network at home. I'm
frankly not interested in how something works unless it's not obvious how it
_could_ work. The most valuable people in my company are the ones who know the
(to me) excruciating details of every technology we use, the excruciating
details of how every part of our system works, the excruciating details of all
of our customer relationships, and the excruciating details of exactly which
person out of thousands to talk to about every issue.

Frankly, all of that bores me. I like solving logical and algorithmic puzzles.
My work provides me with a regular but meager diet of such things. My ability
at such stuff makes my code correct, performant, and reliable, and I'm valued
for that, but I'd probably be a more productive employee (a better Software
Engineer, in other words) if I couldn't write recursive code but could
remember the names of all the people I've been in meetings with in the last
six months.

------
barrkel
Having leadership in your field as a goal implies that one makes that a strong
part of one's self-identity. Or more simply, you need to self-identify with
your work, that you feel you _are_ the work you do.

However, work is not the top priority for many people, particularly those with
families and significant life outside work, and nor should it be.

------
jderick
I think a lot of it comes down to initiative. It's the difference between
saying "man, somebody should do X" and just doing it.

------
sown
I wonder if by leadership he means someone of high caliber or skill in their
chosen field.

