I agree! You need to be able to respond and adapt to the circumstance, so the most critical thing is having a group of people that have the best chance of working together effectively and start with a clean slate, so things like 'ownership' don't create feelings of insecurity or festering malcontent that make it harder to start down the road of efficiency, effectiveness and equality.TeeDee wrote:I don't think there is a lot of point getting hung up on Leadership styles at this point , leadership and leaders will forutunately /unfortunately change with the situation depending on what style of leadership is required to make the best choices in that situation.
It would be nice to sit down now and say 'right , this is how its going to work and whats going to happen' , but the situation is fluid and as of yet , unmaterialised.
I think the best way would be to find people 1st that you can work with and think may make suitable inclusions and then when the time is right to make an official invite discuss the 'grand plan and ethics'.
If the need for leadership arises then it must never be forced (respect is earned not taken). If 'the group' was fractionalising then 'the group' would have to decide whether it required a leader, what the contraints of leadership should be, how the leader was determined and for how long etc. This is something that can be resolved with a few hours of discussion in a small group, so doesn't really require urgent emphasis imo.
Leadership only becomes a big problem when the group gets really large, or members of a small group lack emotional intelligence/empathy, or perhaps start to feel disenfranchised/threatened/insecure and respond 'out of character' to the inevitable stresses.
One love!