I was inspired to write this blog by a meeting with one particular client but I have to say that I had similar conversations with many people all week. Funny how lots of people seem to be thinking the same things at the same time.

This client was frustrated with the shortcomings of one of the leaders in his organization and spent a good part of the meeting complaining about the mistakes this leader had made. Rightly so, the leader is not perfect.

But who is perfect and why do we expect our leaders to be perfect? I'd like to suggest that there are two reasons for our high expectations. One, management literature has done a disservice to all of us in setting up standards around the "perfect leader". We all look for a leader who is inspirational and personally attractive to us. We look for a leader who knows what to do in every situation.

Two, there may be an answer rooted in psychology. We put leaders on pedestals and then are disappointed when they don't measure up. Sound like any teenagers you know? Sometimes when I listen to clients it reminds of Eric Bern and his theory of Transactional Analysis. He says we can analyze our transactions and determine if we are in either Parent-Child or Adult-Adult relationships with our peers. Our disappointment with leaders is much more closely aligned with Parent-Child than it is with Adult-Adult. An angry child might say to a parent "You let me down. You didn't give me what I wanted." An Adult relationship would look more like "Help me understand why you decided to implement this decision." Adult relationships according to Bern are relationships where both parties learn from one another.

There are probably other reasons for this "leader on a pedestal" phenomena. However, if you follow this blog, you'll know that the "why" for me is less important than the "what are you going to do about it?"

Here is what my client is going to do about it. Every time he feels frustrated with the inadequacies of leaders, he is going to think the following, "Sixty percent is good enough." Why did we pick sixty percent? It reminds us both that people (and leaders) are not perfect. Eighty percent seems too close to perfect. It also reminds us that leadership of a large group of people is complex and constantly changing. I work with a large number of very smart people. Not even a very smart person knows the right thing to do in every situation.

Sound like my standards aren't high enough? Maybe, but last time I checked leading an organization is very complex and no one, not even a leader, is perfect.