It is a fact of life that whether it is in the realm of our personal life or on the professional side, we constantly look for role models who can inspire us, and whom we can possibly emulate. Through various sources, we constantly keep getting names from a range of fields such as Politics, Science, Religion, Business and others, and we read, share, discuss and debate whether these names and their contributions are worth inspiration and emulation.
And the man whose leadership style has been most debated in the recent times is none other the late Steve Jobs, then CEO of Apple Inc, one of the most admired and valued companies in the world today.
In a number of platforms, people from very diverse fields, have shared their perspectives and views on Steve's leadership style and what is there for us to learn, and possibly, emulate.
Judging from the onslaught of books, articles, and blog posts extolling Steve Jobs' virtues and condemning his vices, the question of whether leaders can replicate Jobs' results by emulating his methods is an important one. Since most managers quantitatively analyze the factors that affect the performance of their firms, we find it surprising that this great debate has raged in a context largely uninformed by any hard data.
To the contrary, numerous commentators have passionately presented their anecdotal perspectives, either revering or reviling Job's take-no-prisoners approach; there is no middle ground. In his recent Wired article, Ben Austen aptly labeled these two camps acolytes and rejecters. Acolytes see Jobs as brilliant, citing his leadership as the reason behind Apple's phenomenal results. Rejecters see him as arrogant and deeply flawed, leading Apple to meteoric success in spite of his often boorish behaviour.
