I'm glad I read Solitude and Leadership

TL;DR of the Speech

William Deresiewicz's essay "Solitude and Leadership" argues that true leadership requires independent thinking, which is cultivated through solitude. If I took nothing else away from the essay, I'd want to remember these points:

• Independent Thinking: Effective leaders must think for themselves and act on their convictions, rather than conform to external expectations.

• Role of Solitude: Solitude is essential for introspection and concentration; it enables developing original ideas and understanding ones' own beliefs.

• Constant Connectivity: Continuous exposure to media and attempts to multitask can hinder deep thought; You should seek time away from these distractions to cultivate focus.

For lack of better terminology, reading William Deresiewicz's Solitude and Leadership altered my brain chemistry.

It's a piece that I've revisited multiple times, after initially being assigned it in Philip Su's seminar at UW (CSE 492P1, Patterns for Career Success). The essay is a speech that Deresiewicz gave at West Point in 2009, but I think it will resonate with anyone who's ever seen themselves in a serious leadership position.

One of my favorite parts about this essay is that it looks past the superficial aspects of leadership, like charisma, or the strategies at play in a meeting. Instead, it lasers in on a very personal aspect of leadership that I've never heard talked about.

While reading it I couldn't help but apply the lens of thinking to my own past experiences. To qualify, I've never been in a professional leadership position; this is only referring to experiences in student organizations and group projects. That being said, I say that being a leader has in some ways alienated me from the groups I've led. Not just in the sense of making unpopular decisions, but in the sense that you're under different expectations than the rest of the group, and have more responsibility for failure.

I'm wholeheartedly unsure whether this is a me problem or a leadership problem. I'll have to ask a person wiser than myself eventually.

One pattern that I've noticed is that some of the most effective managers/leaders I've had in the past were somewhat alienated from their team, and I can definitely recall why. Even managers I liked and respected, I still felt a certain distance from. I've had managers who clearly wanted to be accepted and fully integrated socially with the rest of the team, but on the subordinate side I don't think I've ever fully let go of my sense of distance from them.

How much of this should be self-driven (from the leader) vs. team-driven?