The most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently committed to particular principles and objectives. Any leader who is quickly and easily influenced by shifts in popular opinion will accomplish little.
Ever wondered about the most essential quality of an effective leader? Outstanding intellect? High standard morality and ethos? Or the consistence committed to particular principles and objectives?According to me, since leaders are playing such an important role in every aspect of our society,including politics, academia, business and so forth, they need myriad qualities to gain success,therefore making every mentioned ability indispensable. It is hard to say which one is more important. On the other hand, consistence to certain principles and objectives do have advantages,including help the leaders realize their policies and hang on ideals, but such concerns should be carefully taken or certain risks of democracy, development and awareness will be caused.
Being committed to particular principles and objectives can help a leader make his leadership unique and defined. In many fields, leaders often take a lot time to accomplish their missions of directing the enterprises. If their ideas shift easily from time to time, their followers will feel confused and cannot concentrate their power. For instance, the former head coach of England soccer team, Sven Eriksson, led his team to gain little feats in the World Cup 2006 in Germany,even before the game most people are taking them as the most competitive team according to their super stars. After defeated by Portugal, the academia analyzed reasons, and drew to a conclusion that Eriksson did little independent thinking when leading his team, just following the strategies pointed out by public. It is the unstable strategy that caused England's failure. An opposite example involves the world champion coach, Aim Jacquet, who led France to win 1998 World Cup in their own country. Jacquet excluded many outstanding and popular players before the game started, and was widely condemned by public. But the reality turned out to support his choice, with a champion cup. This comparison can tell us about the importance of being committed to particular principles and objectives, and reason lays in that public are often trapped by ostensible phenomenon, while leaders can gain more information and experience, as well as to take a more comprehensive and effective thinking. Jacquet was believed considering sufficient aspects of those outstanding players and made the choice correctly after striking a balance among these aspects. Sometimes the public are easily cheated by media and a few people, therefore agitated to wrong way.
Nevertheless, only upholding principles and objectives cannot help a leader gain his success,because such principles and objectives should be carefully chosen and realized by the leader's abilities at other aspects. Otherwise, the leader will find himself abandoned by public, hard to take steps. It seems to me that leaders can only benefit the society in the premise that they are intellectual enough to consider about situation comprehensively and predict the outcomes accurately, as well as to hold a high moral and ethic standard, or they may be even more harmful to the society.
Firstly, leaders need levelheaded thoughts on the complicated social issues that they are facing.When given a situation, leaders may want to realize their principles and objectives by dealing with it. But sometimes this is very hard. For instance, the "Shock Therapy" advised and directed by Harvard economist, Jeffrey Sachs, was thought to be the main reason of nowadays flagged economy of Russia. Although Sachs kept his way of dealing with the dangerous planned economy,which made the country's economy suddenly stopped and helped some other countries such as Bolivia, he failed to see the huge and complex Russian economy when taking his consistence. As a result, only "shock" occurred, no "therapy". So even the most intellectual leaders should take care when they commit their principles and objectives, checking whether they are feasible and how they can be realized.
Secondly, leaders are required for high moral and ethic standards, which ask them to take their possible outcomes of principles and objectives they commit to into consideration. Otherwise, they cannot persuade the public to obey their orders, or, even worse, cause disastrous result to the society if they gain supports. In my opinion, popular opinions have often gave their reasons of existence, or they cannot be accepted by public. Despite of the possibility that people are misled,every people has their ways to think logically. So when the leaders' principles and objectives conflict with public ideas, they should concern why such confliction take place, and make their decision after a careful scrutiny. Adolf Hitler, an undoubted leader who committed to his will of conquer and racism, even persuaded the German in 1930s to follow him. The autocrat was holding on ideals which do not meet humanity and morality, causing the world suffer from millions of death during the World War II. The Hitler's lesson tells about the importance of other qualities of a leader which may be needed when establishing his particular principles and objectives.
To sum up, leaders are asked for many qualities besides their consistence committed to particular principles and objectives and such principles and objectives should be careful taken after considering about the society's material situation. As long as the leaders in every field keep an open mind to popular opinions, and as long as they think comprehensively on the reasons and reality, they will certainly lead us to a better future.