When Putin sent his troops over the border last year, at the beginning of his so called ‘special operation’ against his neighbour, many (presumably Putin included) thought Ukraines’s President Zelensky would either be dead or out the country in exile within a few days.   Here we are approaching the first anniversary of the invasion and Ukraine’s leader seems to be more secure in his leadership than ever before.  But why?  What is it about this former actor turned statesman that has allowed him so successfully to rally a nation behind him as well as force the hand, time and again, of other leaders across the Western World (if not beyond)?

I’m currently in the midst of building a new leadership programme for partners at a major consultancy firm and I’m finding myself reflecting a great deal on what it is to be a leader.   We’ve all worked for good leaders and we can all cite examples of leaders who weren’t up to very much.  What fascinates me is what makes the difference between a great leader and a less effective one.

As I write this article, it’s President Zelensky’s birthday.   He’s all over the news today as he’s done a pretty robust job of pressuring Germany to release its state of the art tanks for his war effort.  Because of a contracting issue, other countries are unable to send German made tanks to the Ukraine without approval from Berlin.  This change of policy from the German government will allow Zelensky to begin his ambition to acquire 300 new tanks and, hopefully, turn the tide of the war.  Now Germany has agreed to release the tanks, other European nations will follow suit.  The US has declared their intent to supply tanks too.  Zelensky has done what he set out to do.  

Again. 

There’s no simple answer to the question of why Zelensky has been successful as a leader and much will be said and written on the subject for years to come.  Whilst I’m ruminating on the essence of leadership, however, let me wager an opinion or two.

Edgar Schien, the Swiss-American academic, who has written a great deal on the subject of organisational culture, speaks of the importance of congruence, when it comes to leadership.   In other words, there needs to be a correlation between what leaders stand for and how they behave. 

So leaders need to be congruent, but what else?  Goldman Sachs published a model some time back which speaks of the Shadow of a Leader.  In the GS model, leaders are said to do four things; say things (the messages they broadcast to those around them, what they emphasise, how often they communicate), do things (act, lead, decide, role model, mentor), prioritise things (their focus, their time, their energy) and measure things (personal accountability, results, analysis and feedback, recognition).   Where these areas overlap the shadow is strongest.  If all four areas align perfectly, the sweet spot in the middle is the darkest shadow and here they are at their most congruent.    

Enter Zelensky, stage right, pursued by a (Russian) bear, as our case study…   Let’s examine his leadership through the model:

What I say.

Zelesky speaks regularly in his belief in Ukrainian victory.   He speaks of the importance of standing up to an aggressor, of doing all one can, giving all to the cause.  He stresses the importance of pulling every lever possible to achieve victory.   His rhetoric is strong and his communication is clear.

What I do.

How about his actions? Well, they appear congruent with what he says.  He broadcasts ever night to his people.  He puts unwavering pressure on his allies.  He wears the uniform of a soldier.  He has remained in the capital, Kyiv.  Yep. Congruent with the message.

What I prioritise.

His energy is deployed in raising weapons to fight back.  He appeals to parliaments, prime ministers and presidents or anyone with influence, who will listen.  He goes to the UN to state his case.  Not only that, at home, he is regularly at the front line and highly visible to his people. He puts the mission first.  

What I measure.

Who has given arms?  Who hasn’t?  He holds them all to account – for better or for worse.  What about war crimes?  They are logged and stated.  Every atrocity is highlighted. Every death mourned.   He applauds his friends and chastises his critics, or even those on the fence.  He is congruent to the message with what he measures. 

So through the prism of the Shadow of a Leader model, Zelensky seems congruent in his leadership.  All four areas align, and he is consistent across each.  If his shadow is strong, so is his leadership.  His people will continue to follow him and the leaders he seeks to rally will continue to sponsor his cause. 

However, at the heart of this leadership is a man who understands the power of communication.  

Of course he does.   The man was an actor.  For his last significant role, he learnt how to play a politician who could influence others and make things happen.  As life has imitated art, those core skills have served him well.   

Any leader who wants to truly lead, not only needs to command respect through congruence and integrity but also needs to be a great communicator.   They need to listen and really understand.  They need to be able to hold a room when they speak.  They need to be clear, insightful, to the point.  They need to be able to tell a story.  They need others to not only believe them, but believe in them.  

If you can communicate well, and act with congruence, others will follow you.  When you can do that, you can do it all.   On the face of it, Ukraine’s chances against the might of Russia seem limited.  But cometh the hour, cometh the person.  If anyone can make victory a reality, Zelensky can.  

Just so long as he stays congruent.