The difference between “leading” and “being in front”

// July 23rd, 2010 // Behaviour

Being better is always about metrics. You need to define the scale on which you measure ‘good’ before you can become better. “Better” as a label always leads to “better… at what?” So knowing how you’ll measure a good performance (and subsequent improvement) is always the right place to start. The issue is that so many companies use a group metric to label themselves as ‘leaders’.

Leadership is about knowing the path you’re walking, and being prepared to push a few branches out of the way to get there.  Leading an industry, or a market, or a sector, isn’t about comparison to everyone else – it’s about comparison between you and where you want to be. It’s working to reach an ideal, not to outpace a crowd.

Many businesses use competition to define success. “We’re better than XYZ, so we can’t be doing that badly.” “We’re in the top ten in our sector!” The internal picture of success is defined by other businesses, or through financial results. An average across the sector for service/price/skill is reached. The average experience then becomes the benchmark of a decent performance, and as long as the business does better than that, everything’s okay.

This is not leading. This is just running faster than the rest. This is being in front. In front of the curve. Of where you think everyone else is . And as long as your only goal is to be just a little cheaper, smarter or quicker than your nearest competitor, you’ll always find yourself scrabbling. And without knowing it, you’ll let the pack define where you go, rather than having a direction and following it.