They say we need to be leaders not followers, but we have to be great followers before we become great leaders.We have to follow before we're being followed. We have to obey before we're being obeyed. Tha't what we call set a good example. Do it first before we ask someone else to do it. Action speaks louder than words. A leader is a follower; he/she follows to lead.
Dude, what's the deal with the Donald Rumsfeld-like statements (known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns)? See <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=126828" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=126828</a><p>I like the thoughts, but personally don't think they belong on Hacker News. If they do impart great words of wisdom, some evidence from the startup world would be nice, right?
My answer: Not necessarily.<p>Leadership, especially for start-ups, is about creating, communicating and empowering in relation to a vision. You can learn by following, but most likely you will become an outstanding leader by doing instead of following, ie. by doing what leaders do.<p>All your statements statements "lead" towards the follow then lead direction. In my opinion its more interesting to know your followers, as there are good and bad. Especially for start-ups it is useful to have the _right_ type of followers, namely in activists and diehards. There's a pretty good HBR article about this from this past December titled "What Every Leader Needs to Know About Followers." A must read for aspiring leaders!<p>-oscar