[August 17, 2026] My favorite leader of all time is Hopalong Cassidy. He was a cowboy and a TV fictional character on a show by the same name; that came out in the late 1940s. I liked him because he always got the bad guy without ever sacrificing his morals or getting his friends killed. He was the good guy.
Ultimately, that’s what leadership is about: mission, morality, and men.
Sacrifice any of these and it matters not how strong the others are, failure comes in like a storm. And we all know what that failure can mean. I can tell you what all of us combat veterans knew instinctively; a good leader is rare, dangerous, and necessary.
My favorite definition of leadership goes something like this: “Good leadership is getting people to do things they would not ordinarily do. Great leadership is getting people to do it because they want to.” I’m going to improve that definition because it lacks the moral dimension; leadership without morality is like a gun without its sites, loud and deadly, but worthless.
Anytime there is research on how to “be a good leader” we can expect there to be hundreds of books, articles, and academic papers giving advice. The subject is not new. In fact, human leadership goes back to the time when man first walked toward his mission to hunt, fish, or farm. The challenges of leadership have largely remained unchanged. Technology might change, but the heart of man remains the same; a drive toward a valued goal.
I plan to take a closer look at the idea that leadership is best understood as a meta-game of life. It’s about a lifetime of struggle, hard work, being articulate, reciprocity, and focused on a shared higher life’s goal. And, of course, dedicated to seeking truth and responsibility.
My starting point will be five core dimensions of leadership:
- Competence plus contribution that elevates the group.
- Being a “good sport” who gets invited back.
- Voluntary subordination to a shared higher goal.
- Reciprocal altruism combined with pragmatic skill.
- Honesty, morality, responsibility, and synthesizing the group.
Of course, these are all very Prof. Jordan Peterson-like ideas. He has influenced much of my past writings as well as this idea of being a good leader.
So what does it take? That is the purpose of this and a series of follow-on articles.
What I’d like to do is to tackle this subject but from a bit of a different perspective; looking at common sense explanations of why being a good leader is so important. If we are willing to commit a substantial part of our life to something, we should have deep reasons for pursuing it.
Leaders should be able to communicate what that higher goal is and in a manner that appeals to other people’s sense of purpose. Those reasons for achieving that goal should be more justifiable than anything else we could be doing at that time. And, the leader can then say that by achieving that goal, here’s what is in it for him and for you. All of us working together can further the enterprise.
Piaget took this idea one step further and said that the best method to achieve a goal is through voluntary participation. He tells us that the leader can say, “Here’s the goal, here’s your role in achieving this goal, and here’s what this will add to your life.” That’s the optimal circumstances under which to engage with other people.
“We’re all in the same boat. We all have a role to play. We’re all in this together. And, it’s working out for each of us.” To really get people on board with this, be able to tell this as a good story and how they integrate into that narrative. You want them to see how working for that leader actually services their own purposes.
The purpose of leadership is to make that happen at every level of the group. It is very difficult to do so, where only the best leaders can make it happen.
I still watch the old television shows, and Hopalong Cassidy remains my favorite.
————
Please read my books:
Sir, your piece on being a good leader hits the mark from the start with Hopalong Cassidy. He showed that a real leader sticks to his morals while getting the job done and keeping his people safe. Mission, morality, and men form the solid base you describe, and dropping any one of them brings failure fast. Your improved definition of leadership adds the needed moral side that so many others skip. Looking at leadership as a lifelong meta-game of hard work, truth-seeking, and shared higher goals makes sense. The five core dimensions you list: competence that lifts the group, being a good sport, voluntary focus on a higher aim, reciprocal skill, and honest responsibility, give a clear path forward. These ideas feel practical and rooted in real life rather than empty theory. Leaders who can tell the story of the goal so others see their own place in it create true buy-in. That voluntary participation you mention from Piaget turns followers into partners who want the same success. Only the best leaders pull this off at every level of the group. I look forward to the rest of the series as you unpack each part.
Another classic, Gen. Satterfield. I’m looking forward to this new series, although I do believe you have a lot of material already here. It’s just a matter of pulling it all togehter.