Some people possess a natural ability called Command. It is one of those natural-talent gifts. It provides a natural ability to magnetize, influence, and lead people.

But that natural ability can only be put to successful use if the talent of Command operates within 'fair' boundaries. And ‘fairness’ is an extremely subjective thing.

People have a very broad range of views about what is ‘fair’ in the area of Command and leadership. For example, Napoleon Bonaparte was either one of the greatest leaders of all time or he was the Antichrist. It all depends on your definition of ‘fairness’ [often moral fairness] as it relates to leadership. Most people have trouble seeing both sides of the argument and seeing both sides, of course, is essential if we are to truly understand let alone appreciate great leadership.

As a rule - With great strengths come great weaknesses.

Often, the most gifted leaders possess great flaws. If we choose to judge leaders by focusing on their flaws then we can generally find material flaws, deliver our harsh judgments, and diminish [at least in our minds] the truly gifted contributions of the leaders. Aside from satisfying our troubled egos, what good does that do? In my view, that delivers no value and misses the reality of leadership.

Leadership isn’t about perfection.

Leadership is about forerunning human excellence, with specific directions in mind and in action.

Leadership is about inspiring people and influencing people to follow.

PS: Napoleon Bonaparte is one of my heroes.