Are Your Leaders Fit for Purpose?
Several years ago, I came across an intriguing piece by Ben Horowitz exploring the differences between ‘peacetime’ and ‘wartime’ CEOs and leaders. Drawing on several corporate examples, Horowitz highlighted how certain leadership qualities thrive in peacetime, while others are more effective during wartime. He also concluded that some leaders are naturally better suited to peacetime environments, whereas others excel in wartime conditions.
One of the most frequently cited examples of leadership in context is that of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Churchill led Britain during the Second World War, embodying the nation’s resilience with his characteristic “bulldog” spirit, which resonated deeply during the darkest days of the conflict. However, when the war ended and the country’s focus shifted to rebuilding, Churchill’s leadership style seemed increasingly out of step with the public mood. In 1945, one of the greatest leaders in British history was defeated at the general election, with many concluding that the leadership qualities so effective during wartime were less suited to peacetime.
Horowitz’s argument touches on an important principle: leadership is not defined by a single context but is deeply influenced by the prevailing conditions. He further points out that traditional views of leadership often focus on peacetime qualities, overlooking the broader spectrum of contexts that shape leadership success.
While Horowitz’s binary framework of peacetime versus wartime leadership is a useful starting point, in my experience, the reality is far more nuanced. Leadership challenges come in many forms, and the ability to adapt to different contexts is critical. Recent years, for instance, have presented a unique and evolving set of conditions, many of which have tested leaders in unprecedented ways.
Ready for What?
In leadership and leadership development, we often discuss the concept of ‘leadership readiness’—how prepared an individual is to step into a leadership role or meet its challenges. However, we frequently default to a generic list of competencies and behaviours rather than tailoring readiness to the specific priorities and challenges at hand. If we adopt Horowitz’s perspective, we should instead be asking: Ready for what? Leadership readiness must align with the specific needs and priorities of the organisation.
How Can We Achieve This?
One way to address this question is to identify the leadership imperatives—the specific priorities that leaders must deliver on to advance the organisation’s operational, strategic, and cultural goals. In most organisations, especially larger ones, multiple imperatives exist, and these can vary significantly across divisions.
If we recognise the importance of context, these imperatives should form the foundation of leadership development and succession planning. While core leadership skills remain relevant, organisations must also assess an individual’s ability to meet specific business requirements based on relevant capabilities, experience, and personal attributes. This enables organisations to deploy the right talent to meet the right business needs.
Moreover, as Horowitz suggests, we must acknowledge that some leaders may be highly effective in certain contexts but struggle in others. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to leadership.
From an individual perspective, leaders should reflect on the following questions: What is required of me? What strengths do I bring to this challenge? And what aspects of my leadership might hinder my effectiveness?
Fit for Purpose
For some time, I have struggled with the overly prescriptive approach often taken towards talent and leadership. In today’s complex and dynamic business environment, it is impossible to define leadership through a singular lens. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that any one individual will possess the perfect mix of skills, experiences, and attributes to succeed in every context.
Horowitz’s analysis of peacetime and wartime leadership underscores the dangers of adopting a one-size-fits-all approach to performance and readiness. Perhaps it’s time to embrace a new paradigm—one that focuses on leadership being fit for purpose.
by Mark Busine