As much as I enjoy learning about leadership, I realize it is NOT something to be taught in the classroom. One of the modules I'm currently taking is titled, "Consulting Skills for Transformational Leaders". Heck of a boring module, especially since the lecturer reads off the textbook.
But today he mentioned something interesting. A longitudinal experiment once done on the few children was shown to clearly display a trait that was strongly positively correlated to effective leadership in the future.
The experiment was pretty simple. Every kid was brought to a room which had a table, a chair, and a piece of chocolate of a well-known brand. He or she was then told that in 5 minutes, if the chocolate was still there, another piece would be brought in. And so on and so forth, until the kid eventually ate the chocolates. Scientists soon found out that the kids who could withstand temptation for long periods of time eventually went on to become effective leaders in the future who could plan long-term, take hardships and set model examples for their followers.
Interesting, I thought. I wonder how I would have reacted if I took this experiment as a kid.
Firstly, as a kid, I didn't really like chocolate. As in I don't have cravings for them. So I'd probably have asked for a book to read or some toys to create my own fantasy world, as I always did.
Secondly, even at that age, I knew that other kids liked chocolate. So I'd have probably accumulated as much of them as I could so I can distribute them later to my friends. And I'll definitely keep some for Andrew and Nicholas. I understood at an early age that you could "buy" friendships to a certain extent.
Thirdly, I would have known that the things I craved for as a kid, money couldn't buy. And I can see myself walking out of the room with that big plastic bag of chocolates, hoping that for once, the guy in the white lab coat standing by the door would pat my head and smile, instead of looking at me like a failed experiment.
Delayed gratification. Being able to calculate and bear initial sacrifice for long-term gains. Sometimes when people look back at those men and women in history who sacrificed all they had, they are inclined to label these figures as great examples of self-sacrifice. But I think not. Some of them might just be craving something else, something this world couldn't offer.
A nod of approval from the Most High.
P.S. An apology to those who found me unusually quiet during cell last Tuesday. When the topics are about core values, apologetics, the Christian walk, it's all fine and good with me. But when the topic is about the stewardship of money, I automatically switch off. I have a burning and intense dislike, no, hatred for money and the way it changes people, and verses like Luke 16:13 only reinforce it, to the point I sometimes take unnecessary pride in my orientation.
Sometimes, to understand the value of "sacrifice", it would be prudent to first understand the subject's perspectives and priorities. It is truly harder for an ordinary South African, Indian or Black to sacrifice his life then for Mandela, Gandhi or King, so how can we say that these great men made huge sacrifices? The only thing they did differently was to have an unshakable understanding of their priorities. After that, "sacrifice" simply became not much of a sacrifice at all! Instead, they were simply ordinary men craving for something else that the rest of the world did not value as much. And that thing, they would not sacrifice. -Valentino Casanova
You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me. -Jesus (Luke 18:22)
No comments:
Post a Comment