Leadership 2.0

I started blogging in 1998—before it was called blogging. I simply posted new articles to my web site, because I noticed that people would come back if the content kept changing. But it was a hassle. It wasn’t easy to change the content or structure of your site. Everything was fairly static.

Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto.com/mtrommer, Image #4328001

Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto.com/mtrommer

But in 2002–2003, things began to change. They started becoming more dynamic. In fact, in December 2003, Eric Knorr, executive editor of InfoWorld, coined the phrase “Web 2.0” to describe the movement to a different kind of Web experience that was more focused on the user rather than the publisher.

According to Wikipedia, Web 2.0:

refers to a perceived second generation of web development and design, that facilitates communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web-based communities, hosted services, and applications such as social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies.

I think that a similar paradigm shift has occurred in our understanding of leadership. Our interaction with the Web and the expectations it creates have shaped what we expect from our leaders.

Therefore, if leaders are going to be effective with the current generation of Internet-savvy web-users, they must shift their leadership style. I call this Leadership 2.0. Here’s how it compares to Leadership 1.0:

  1. Leadership 2.0 embraces change. Like Web 1.0, old-style leadership was fairly static. Leaders resisted change and were more focused on preserving the status quo. However, Leadership 2.0 embraces change. New-style leaders are on the cutting edge of experimentation. If something doesn’t work, they change course quickly. They are more concerned about driving the right outcomes than maintaining business-as-usual.
  2. Leadership 2.0 demonstrates transparency. Old-style leaders were opaque. They wouldn’t tell you anything they didn’t have to tell you. They kept themselves shrouded in mystery. (Think of “Oz.”) New-style leaders are open and transparent. They let you see them for who they are—warts and all. They risk self-disclosure, preferring to acknowledge the truth of who they are rather than pretend to be something they are not.
  3. Leadership 2.0 celebrates dialogue. Old-style leaders delivered a monologue. They did all the talking. The fact that they were the boss was proof enough that they were smarter than everyone else n the room. New-style leaders listen more than they talk. They ask questions. They lead powerful conversations. Why? Because they know that “all of us are smarter than some of us” to quote James Surowiecki in The Wisdom of Crowds.
  4. Leadership 2.0 employs collaboration. Old-style leaders were competitive. They held all the cards close to their vest. They didn’t “play well with others.” They refused to help anyone they perceived as the competition, even if they were theoretically on the same team. New-style leaders are all about teamwork. They are inclusive in the way they lead, drawing you in and making you feel that you are doing something great—together. They enroll others as “colleagues” and “partners.”
  5. Leadership 2.0 practices sharing. Old-style leaders hoarded their resources—their contacts, their insights, their time, energy and money. They played a zero-sum game. Their didn’t believe they could be generous without depleting their own pile of stuff. New-style leaders are just the opposite. They have an abundance-mentality. They freely share their resources, believing that “there is plenty more where that came from.” They know “it is more blessed to give than to receive” (see Acts 20:35)
  6. Leadership 2.0 welcomes engagement. Old-style leaders were aloof and detached. They didn’t expect to get their hands dirty by actually talking to customers and other constituents. They stood above the fray, dispassionately observing the masses. New-style leaders don’t think in terms of hierarchy, as if something is beneath them. They jump in with both feet, happily and passionately engaging with anyone and everyone.
  7. Leadership 2.0 builds community. Old-style leaders were rugged individualists. They pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps. They didn’t need anyone else. They could do it all themselves, “thank you very much.” New-style leaders, on the other hand, enjoy working with others and building a sustainable community that will go on long after they are gone. They get great satisfaction from working together rather than working alone.

Leadership 2.0 represents a quantum leap forward in effectiveness. It enables leaders to connect with their followers in ways that Leadership 1.0 could never do.

The irony is that this may not be so new after all. Jesus Himself was this very kind of leader. But that is a post for another day.

Question: what aspects of Leadership 2.0 are the easiest for you to embrace? What are the most difficult?
Want to launch your own blog or upgrade to self-hosted WordPress? Watch my free, twenty-minute screencast. I show you exactly how to do it. You don’t need any technical knowledge. Click here to get started.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are snarky, offensive, or off-topic. If in doubt, read My Comments Policy.

  • http://www.davidteems.com/ David Teems

    Great insights. Thanks, Mike. We're all being shuffled to 2.0, with or without our consent, and this helps. Makes life a bit more fluid, kind of like it actually is.

  • http://www.davidteems.com/ David Teems

    Great insights. Thanks, Mike. We're all being shuffled to 2.0, with or without our consent, and this helps. Makes life a bit more fluid, kind of like it actually is.

  • Pingback: Valuable Internet Information » Leadership 2.0 | Michael Hyatt

  • http://blurthelines.typepad.com/ Tim Young

    God has blessed me with a leadership position and placed a passion for 'others oriented' leadership within my heart. I'm learning that relationship is foundational to this as your 7 points suggest. My desire is to remain teachable, so thank you for this insight.

  • http://blurthelines.typepad.com/ Tim Young

    God has blessed me with a leadership position and placed a passion for 'others oriented' leadership within my heart. I'm learning that relationship is foundational to this as your 7 points suggest. My desire is to remain teachable, so thank you for this insight.

  • http://www.lawrencewilson.com/ Lawrence W. Wilson

    Great analysis, Mike, but there are also pitfalls for Leader 2.0. Just as the old-school leader tended to be too rigid and isolated, new-style leader can fail to demonstrate authority (people still want to know someone is in charge) and stability (too much change or too poorly managed invites desertion).

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I agree. However, I think influence is far more important than authority. The best option is to have both.

  • http://www.lawrencewilson.com/ Lawrence W. Wilson

    Great analysis, Mike, but there are also pitfalls for Leader 2.0. Just as the old-school leader tended to be too rigid and isolated, new-style leader can fail to demonstrate authority (people still want to know someone is in charge) and stability (too much change or too poorly managed invites desertion).

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I agree. However, I think influence is far more important than authority. The best option is to have both.

  • http://blog.artistgardenentertainment.com/ Keith Stancil

    Great post Michael! You must be a great man to work for. I have found myself over the years working for leaders with no vision and they were very afraid to embrace the future. That kind of leadership stifles the potential of all employees at a company. I wish there were more leaders like you who aren't afraid of being transparent and sharing with the world.

  • http://blog.artistgardenentertainment.com/ Keith Stancil

    Great post Michael! You must be a great man to work for. I have found myself over the years working for leaders with no vision and they were very afraid to embrace the future. That kind of leadership stifles the potential of all employees at a company. I wish there were more leaders like you who aren't afraid of being transparent and sharing with the world.

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0

  • http://terripatrick.wordpress.com/ terri patrick

    You've given an insightful analysis of the shift taking place on many levels. You're also correct in stating Leadership 2.0 is not new, and is effective. I only have issue with your word choice. :) What you describe as the 1.0 version was called, "Controller". As Lawrence stated, the challenge for leaders is still Authority and Stability while bringing the balance of innovation to the status quo and the needs of the many.

  • http://terripatrick.wordpress.com/ terri patrick

    You've given an insightful analysis of the shift taking place on many levels. You're also correct in stating Leadership 2.0 is not new, and is effective. I only have issue with your word choice. :) What you describe as the 1.0 version was called, "Controller". As Lawrence stated, the challenge for leaders is still Authority and Stability while bringing the balance of innovation to the status quo and the needs of the many.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/evaulian EvaUlian

    I will pass your url onto a fellow twitter@ellenfweber who was asking for suggestions on "Leadership" for her research department.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/evaulian EvaUlian

    I will pass your url onto a fellow twitter@ellenfweber who was asking for suggestions on "Leadership" for her research department.

  • http://frogblog.biz/ Fred H Schlegel

    Funny how the 'tools make the leader' (or the leader's style). I'm wondering if part of this shift also comes from years of reading biographies that have become more comfortable with the 'warts and all' approach. If the reality is everyone has failings, then can I be more comfortable with mine exposed?

  • http://frogblog.biz/ Fred H Schlegel

    Funny how the 'tools make the leader' (or the leader's style). I'm wondering if part of this shift also comes from years of reading biographies that have become more comfortable with the 'warts and all' approach. If the reality is everyone has failings, then can I be more comfortable with mine exposed?

  • ML Eqatin

    Hmm– Jesus-style leadership versus Pharisee -style leadership?
    Almost every comparison on the list applies equally to the contrast of humilty as opposed to pride.

  • ML Eqatin

    Hmm– Jesus-style leadership versus Pharisee -style leadership?
    Almost every comparison on the list applies equally to the contrast of humilty as opposed to pride.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ClayofCO ClayofCO

    Very helpful and challenging post. My wife and I lead a small family-run ministry (15 years), and we are trying to make the transition to a Web 2.0 approach to how we can build a sustainable national and international movement. I have no staff to lead, but we have a following to lead, and good assets to put to use. I believe the principles should be the same for a large corporation or a small ministry.

    The challenge I see for me in Web 2.0 leadership is two-fold: first, understanding how to lead a volunteer team network and retain the authority and control to shape and direct the vision of the ministry long term; and second, mastering Web 2.0 technology without getting tangled up in time and resource intensive, well-intentioned but unproductive internet strategy choices.

    I benefit from your leadership and tech wisdom, and your blog is very cool and a great model. (I'm also a PC guy in houseful of Macs, so the pressure in on in that arena, too.)

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      You make a good point about volunteers. I think in today's environment, you have to treat everyone as a volunteer. You can compel physical attendance, but you can't compel a person's heart. Instead, you have to enroll them. Thanks again.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ClayofCO ClayofCO

    Very helpful and challenging post. My wife and I lead a small family-run ministry (15 years), and we are trying to make the transition to a Web 2.0 approach to how we can build a sustainable national and international movement. I have no staff to lead, but we have a following to lead, and good assets to put to use. I believe the principles should be the same for a large corporation or a small ministry.

    The challenge I see for me in Web 2.0 leadership is two-fold: first, understanding how to lead a volunteer team network and retain the authority and control to shape and direct the vision of the ministry long term; and second, mastering Web 2.0 technology without getting tangled up in time and resource intensive, well-intentioned but unproductive internet strategy choices.

    I benefit from your leadership and tech wisdom, and your blog is very cool and a great model. (I'm also a PC guy in houseful of Macs, so the pressure in on in that arena, too.)

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      You make a good point about volunteers. I think in today's environment, you have to treat everyone as a volunteer. You can compel physical attendance, but you can't compel a person's heart. Instead, you have to enroll them. Thanks again.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/fogbound fogbound

    Thanks for that perspective on leadership. After an eight year break in pastoral leadership I am about to re-enter the ministry. I realize that even in those few years there have been major changes in ministry leadership. I have done my best to try and keep up on them but it will be different to be actually moving into practicing them.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/fogbound fogbound

    Thanks for that perspective on leadership. After an eight year break in pastoral leadership I am about to re-enter the ministry. I realize that even in those few years there have been major changes in ministry leadership. I have done my best to try and keep up on them but it will be different to be actually moving into practicing them.

  • http://thinkwiki.wordpress.com/ Bryan

    Excellent points and perspective Michael, this is a great collection outlining the differences in a new leadership model. One great book that adds to this perspective and gives people more detail on how to be successful in it is "A Whole New Mind" by Daniel H. Pink. Daniels outline of 6 abilities; design, story, symphony, empathy, play, and meaning, can extend and provide application to each of the 7 principles you note here.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Yes, I have read Daniel's book and it is excellent.

  • http://thinkwiki.wordpress.com/ Bryan

    Excellent points and perspective Michael, this is a great collection outlining the differences in a new leadership model. One great book that adds to this perspective and gives people more detail on how to be successful in it is "A Whole New Mind" by Daniel H. Pink. Daniels outline of 6 abilities; design, story, symphony, empathy, play, and meaning, can extend and provide application to each of the 7 principles you note here.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Yes, I have read Daniel's book and it is excellent.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JoeSlaughter JoeSlaughter

    Thanks.The overall tone (transparency, dialogue, sharing, community) seems to be that of Servant Leadership advanced by Robert Greenleaf instead of the "Top-down" style used by many leaders.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JoeSlaughter JoeSlaughter

    Thanks.The overall tone (transparency, dialogue, sharing, community) seems to be that of Servant Leadership advanced by Robert Greenleaf instead of the "Top-down" style used by many leaders.

  • http://www.michaelsgray.com/ Michael Gray

    Mr. Hyatt, thanks for another great post with excellent, challenging insights for leaders and leaders-to-be.

    Now that we have Web 2.0 and Leadership 2.0, I wonder when we can expect Government 2.0.

    • http://thinkwiki.wordpress.com/ Bryan

      But Michael, President Obama is demonstrating improved change, transparency, dialogue, collaboration, sharing, engagement, and community. I would argue that we are witnessing the beginning of Government 2.0!

      • http://www.michaelsgray.com/ Michael Gray

        Bryan, I would definitely agree with you that President Obama is demonstrating change — whether its positive change or not is a matter of opinion. I'm not sure that drastically increased spending can qualify as a new path for government.

        On television, he does seem to exhibit the qualities you mention, but the true measure of his leadership will be in the quality of the change he promotes, not on whether or not a change is made.

        Based on what I know about America's remarkable legacy, he seems to be moving in the wrong direction.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I'm not going to hold my breath on that one!

  • http://www.michaelsgray.com Michael Gray

    Mr. Hyatt, thanks for another great post with excellent, challenging insights for leaders and leaders-to-be.

    Now that we have Web 2.0 and Leadership 2.0, I wonder when we can expect Government 2.0.

    • http://thinkwiki.wordpress.com/ Bryan

      But Michael, President Obama is demonstrating improved change, transparency, dialogue, collaboration, sharing, engagement, and community. I would argue that we are witnessing the beginning of Government 2.0!

      • http://www.michaelsgray.com Michael Gray

        Bryan, I would definitely agree with you that President Obama is demonstrating change — whether its positive change or not is a matter of opinion. I'm not sure that drastically increased spending can qualify as a new path for government.

        On television, he does seem to exhibit the qualities you mention, but the true measure of his leadership will be in the quality of the change he promotes, not on whether or not a change is made.

        Based on what I know about America's remarkable legacy, he seems to be moving in the wrong direction.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I'm not going to hold my breath on that one!

  • Pingback: The New Leader - - livingthedash.tv

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Peter_P Peter_P

    I love the application of web 2.0 principles to leadership and then the cross application of biblical principles on top of that.

    Great post, Michael.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Peter_P Peter_P

    I love the application of web 2.0 principles to leadership and then the cross application of biblical principles on top of that.

    Great post Michael.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Peter_P Peter_P

    I love the application of web 2.0 principles to leadership and then the cross application of biblical principles on top of that.

    Great post Michael.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Peter_P Peter_P

    I love the application of web 2.0 principles to leadership and then the cross application of biblical principles on top of that.

    Great post, Michael.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/patriciazell patriciazell

    Mr. Hyatt, as a high school English teacher, I use the aspects of Leadership 2.0 on a daily basis to encourage my students to complete their work and learn. However, as I was reading your blog entry, I kept thinking of God and His leadership in my prayer closet. I know that sounds strange, but I believe God wants to bring us to the point where He can be transparent with us so we can understand the extent of His love, where He can talk and collaborate with us to bring His will to pass in our world, where He can freely share all that He has with His creation, and where He can engage with us to build the community of His kindom here on this earth. And, above all, God wants us to understand and experience the change that Christ brought to our world through his death and resurrection.

    • http://michaelsgray.blogspot.com Michael Gray

      Ms. Zell, I noticed in your comment that you said you were a high school English teacher. I recently wrote two blog posts about my experiences as a public school teacher (3rd grade) and thought you might be interested. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issues I present – http://www.michaelsgray.com

      I hope you don't mind me doing this, Mr. Hyatt. :)

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

        No problem!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/patriciazell patriciazell

    Mr. Hyatt, as a high school English teacher, I use the aspects of Leadership 2.0 on a daily basis to encourage my students to complete their work and learn. However, as I was reading your blog entry, I kept thinking of God and His leadership in my prayer closet. I know that sounds strange, but I believe God wants to bring us to the point where He can be transparent with us so we can understand the extent of His love, where He can talk and collaborate with us to bring His will to pass in our world, where He can freely share all that He has with His creation, and where He can engage with us to build the community of His kindom here on this earth. And, above all, God wants us to understand and experience the change that Christ brought to our world through his death and resurrection.

    • http://michaelsgray.blogspot.com/ Michael Gray

      Ms. Zell, I noticed in your comment that you said you were a high school English teacher. I recently wrote two blog posts about my experiences as a public school teacher (3rd grade) and thought you might be interested. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issues I present – <a href="http://www.michaelsgray.com” target=”_blank”>www.michaelsgray.com

      I hope you don't mind me doing this, Mr. Hyatt. :)

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

        No problem!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JimMartin JimMartin

    Mike, this post was particularly helpful. I appreciate you clarity here regarding the difference between old style leadership and 2.0. This caused me to reflect upon my own leadership and how I handle myself in my role.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JimMartin JimMartin

    Mike, this post was particularly helpful. I appreciate you clarity here regarding the difference between old style leadership and 2.0. This caused me to reflect upon my own leadership and how I handle myself in my role.

  • http://www.aworshipfulheart.typepad.com/ Jan Owen

    Michael, This is actually much more my natural leadership style than the older way of doing things. As I read it I was pleasantly surprised. Do you know what strikes me most about it? It's much more "right brained" and even has some wonderfully feminine qualities. For instance in the book "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus in the Workplace", the point is made that female leaders are much more highly collaborative and dialogue driven than their male counterparts. As a woman who leads, and as a creative person, this gives me hope. There might actually be a place for me after all!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Maybe it's because I love with a house full of women—one wife and five daughters!

  • http://www.aworshipfulheart.typepad.com/ Jan Owen

    Michael, This is actually much more my natural leadership style than the older way of doing things. As I read it I was pleasantly surprised. Do you know what strikes me most about it? It's much more "right brained" and even has some wonderfully feminine qualities. For instance in the book "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus in the Workplace", the point is made that female leaders are much more highly collaborative and dialogue driven than their male counterparts. As a woman who leads, and as a creative person, this gives me hope. There might actually be a place for me after all!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Maybe it's because I love with a house full of women—one wife and five daughters!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Tyler_Braun Tyler_Braun

    You totally nailed this for me. I completely agree with every point. Now the question is what do we do with leadership who are 1.0 leaders within a world that needs 2.0 leadership.

    I wrote something very similar to this a couple weeks ago:

    http://manofdepravity.com/2009/05/07/facebook-gen

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I'll have to take a look at this. Thanks.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Tyler_Braun Tyler_Braun

    You totally nailed this for me. I completely agree with every point. Now the question is what do we do with leadership who are 1.0 leaders within a world that needs 2.0 leadership.

    I wrote something very similar to this a couple weeks ago:

    http://manofdepravity.com/2009/05/07/facebook-gen

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      I'll have to take a look at this. Thanks.

  • http://www.danieldecker.net/ Daniel Decker

    One of your best posts yet. The Next Generation Leader is returning to the basics of what it truly means to lead. Ego and greed have corrupted some aspects of Leadership 1.0. I just hope Leadership 2.0 can avoid that same trap.

  • http://www.danieldecker.net/ Daniel Decker

    One of your best posts yet. The Next Generation Leader is returning to the basics of what it truly means to lead. Ego and greed have corrupted some aspects of Leadership 1.0. I just hope Leadership 2.0 can avoid that same trap.

  • http://www.studentlinc.net/ Tim Milburn

    Love this quote-worthy post. I've spent the last few minutes tweeting about it to the masses. I think the part of leadership that excites me the most is collaboration. My feeling is that the next wave of leadership trends will heavily involve one's ability to leverage partnerships for the benefit of all involved. It takes the concepts of teams, win-win, and strengths and combines them in some new and revolutionary ways.

    Thanks for your transparency and willingness to embrace social media as an outlet for your thoughts and leadership. I have enjoyed it immensely.

  • http://www.studentlinc.net Tim Milburn

    Love this quote-worthy post. I've spent the last few minutes tweeting about it to the masses. I think the part of leadership that excites me the most is collaboration. My feeling is that the next wave of leadership trends will heavily involve one's ability to leverage partnerships for the benefit of all involved. It takes the concepts of teams, win-win, and strengths and combines them in some new and revolutionary ways.

    Thanks for your transparency and willingness to embrace social media as an outlet for your thoughts and leadership. I have enjoyed it immensely.

  • http://emilysutherland.wordpress.com/ Emily

    I have to admit, it's great hearing this from a leader in the publishing industry. Creative industries (including the music industry where my work is primarily focused) need to be thought leaders if the rest of the world is going to catch on. We can either ignite passion with 2.0 leadership… or get swallowed up by others who do. Thank you for this. I just signed up to be a book reviewer for Thomas Nelson — another truly 2.0 idea.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Thanks for your encouraging words.

  • http://emilysutherland.wordpress.com/ Emily

    I have to admit, it's great hearing this from a leader in the publishing industry. Creative industries (including the music industry where my work is primarily focused) need to be thought leaders if the rest of the world is going to catch on. We can either ignite passion with 2.0 leadership… or get swallowed up by others who do. Thank you for this. I just signed up to be a book reviewer for Thomas Nelson — another truly 2.0 idea.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Thanks for your encouraging words.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Lorraine_R Lorraine_R

    Michael, a case in point–you have shown Leadership 2.0 in proactively allowing your author's books to be accessible on the digital Kindle 2 though the built-in speech function. Thank you! Today Random House told Amazon to turn off that function for all their authors–including author Barack Obama. (Sigh) Can you address some sane words about "embracing change" and 'building a community" of readers not yet served to your fellow publishers for the 15 million print-disabled readers, including my blind friends, who are potential book buyers?

    It takes nearly a year for the National Library Service for the Blind/Library of Congress to put a best seller into Braille or recorded form. Those books are free on loan to my friends; but NLS will never have available the breadth and depth of knowledge even one large publishing house makes available to the sighted. The new technology is there; the leadership is holding back. How very Leadership 1.0 of them, and how lovely it would be for my friends if the talking digital book machines now coming out are not held back to a leadership 1.0 standard.

    Michael, you rock!
    The Reading Rights Coalition Website is <a href="http://www.ReadingRights.org.” target=”_blank”>www.ReadingRights.org.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Thanks Lorraine. I don't understand Random's thinking. In fact, I blogged on this when the Author's Guild reacted to Amazon. It makes about as much sense as the music industry suing their customers.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Lorraine_R Lorraine_R

    Michael, a case in point–you have shown Leadership 2.0 in proactively allowing your author's books to be accessible on the digital Kindle 2 though the built-in speech function. Thank you! Today Random House told Amazon to turn off that function for all their authors–including author Barack Obama. (Sigh) Can you address some sane words about "embracing change" and 'building a community" of readers not yet served to your fellow publishers for the 15 million print-disabled readers, including my blind friends, who are potential book buyers?

    It takes nearly a year for the National Library Service for the Blind/Library of Congress to put a best seller into Braille or recorded form. Those books are free on loan to my friends; but NLS will never have available the breadth and depth of knowledge even one large publishing house makes available to the sighted. The new technology is there; the leadership is holding back. How very Leadership 1.0 of them, and how lovely it would be for my friends if the talking digital book machines now coming out are not held back to a leadership 1.0 standard.

    Michael, you rock!
    The Reading Rights Coalition Website is http://www.ReadingRights.org.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/michaelhyatt Michael Hyatt

      Thanks Lorraine. I don't understand Random's thinking. In fact, I blogged on this when the Author's Guild reacted to Amazon. It makes about as much sense as the music industry suing their customers.

  • http://from-scratch-again.blogspot.com/ Oleg Borisov

    Great analogy for new age of leadership. Thanks Mike! I guess the biggest challenge for Leadership 2.0 is the balance between openess and authority, colloboration and taking ownership for decisions that have to be taken against the popular view, etc…Furthermore, with transparancy of business and private matters will be merged and for me it is a risk to lose some aspects of you privacy.

  • http://from-scratch-again.blogspot.com/ Oleg Borisov

    Great analogy for new age of leadership. Thanks Mike! I guess the biggest challenge for Leadership 2.0 is the balance between openess and authority, colloboration and taking ownership for decisions that have to be taken against the popular view, etc…Furthermore, with transparancy of business and private matters will be merged and for me it is a risk to lose some aspects of you privacy.

  • http://www.FitForJesus.com/ Jeremy Nelms

    Thank you, Michael, for this brief, yet immensely powerful, checklist that we can use as an individual guideline for effective leadership. As I start the Fit For Jesus website, I will be sure to periodically check myself against your observations. Thank you, sincerely, for a great blog, as well as your great Tweet today about Seth Godin's presentation at TED.

    Sincerely,

    Jeremy Nelms at http://www.FitForJesus.com

  • http://www.FitForJesus.com Jeremy Nelms

    Thank you, Michael, for this brief, yet immensely powerful, checklist that we can use as an individual guideline for effective leadership. As I start the Fit For Jesus website, I will be sure to periodically check myself against your observations. Thank you, sincerely, for a great blog, as well as your great Tweet today about Seth Godin's presentation at TED.

    Sincerely,

    Jeremy Nelms at http://www.FitForJesus.com

  • http://www.torbenrick.eu/ Torben Rick

    Great post – Thanks.

    In these uncertain times, it’s more important than ever to heighten the sense of trust, commitment, and urgency within your organization. Large-scale change – the shifting of strategies, implementation of new systems, significant revamping of structures and processes – is critical to the success of every company today.

    Successful Change Management & Turnaround. Make sure that you don’t end up like Bad Schandau. View the presentation: http://tinyurl.com/d5pajz

  • http://www.torbenrick.eu Torben Rick

    Great post – Thanks.

    In these uncertain times, it’s more important than ever to heighten the sense of trust, commitment, and urgency within your organization. Large-scale change – the shifting of strategies, implementation of new systems, significant revamping of structures and processes – is critical to the success of every company today.

    Successful Change Management & Turnaround. Make sure that you don’t end up like Bad Schandau. View the presentation: http://tinyurl.com/d5pajz

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 « Panagiotis Leontios

  • Olivier

    Michael, it's interesting you raising this issue, we're currently making some collaborative work regarding leadership 2.0 on the group I am running on linkedin : Leadership Think Tank (http://tinyurl.com/oeop76). We came out with a draft presentation on how organization should evolve to meet the Capitalism 2.0 in order to face the zombieconomy we've been in since the Industrial Revolution, and more importantly that has brought us to where we are.

    These are some shared ideas:
    Leadership 1.0

    * Build in layers.
    * Higher layers decide who is in the lower layers and what they do.
    * Higher layers get more than the lower ones
    * If leader is compromised the organization is at risk of crumbling.
    * Reorganizations are very complex and difficult.
    * Top bottom structure

    Leadership 2.0

    * No top and no bottom, just one fluid dynamic system
    * The network is formed by common passion
    * Leaders form naturally and only inspire to bind and direct group. They are among them as one of them.
    * Groups are more fluid, dysfunctioning members can connect with other groups
    * No way to bring down complete organization by compromizing members
    * Reorganizations happen all the time and are easy.
    * Network/ lava lamp structure

    Leadership 2.0 should work as an open source or crowdsouring system allowing transparency and more than that mutual gift economy between the organization and its employees (if they are still called that way), the clients (and they will participate in the design, the production, the marketing and sales..) and the services providers.

    In fact we could take this crisis as an "creative destruction" process in order to move to another model, but we have to understand that Leadership 2.0 is disruptive and will not be found on the main business street and surely not in Wall Street. Therefore the question is How will the Capital Human Developers emerge with a new training to teach the relevant skills for this new born and train leaders?

    If you want to have a look at the discussion, you can find it here: TinyURL.com/rylalw and the presentation :http://prezi.com/69743/ . I personally believe two of the key skills in Leadership 2.0 are ability to open and engage conversations and learn from others, we can see how some business have started to do just : Dell, Starbucks, Threadless…. they're leveraging the creativity of the community…. We're no longer in the mass market but in the mass of niches.

  • Olivier

    Michael, it's interesting you raising this issue, we're currently making some collaborative work regarding leadership 2.0 on the group I am running on linkedin : Leadership Think Tank (http://tinyurl.com/oeop76). We came out with a draft presentation on how organization should evolve to meet the Capitalism 2.0 in order to face the zombieconomy we've been in since the Industrial Revolution, and more importantly that has brought us to where we are.

    These are some shared ideas:
    Leadership 1.0

    * Build in layers.
    * Higher layers decide who is in the lower layers and what they do.
    * Higher layers get more than the lower ones
    * If leader is compromised the organization is at risk of crumbling.
    * Reorganizations are very complex and difficult.
    * Top bottom structure

    Leadership 2.0

    * No top and no bottom, just one fluid dynamic system
    * The network is formed by common passion
    * Leaders form naturally and only inspire to bind and direct group. They are among them as one of them.
    * Groups are more fluid, dysfunctioning members can connect with other groups
    * No way to bring down complete organization by compromizing members
    * Reorganizations happen all the time and are easy.
    * Network/ lava lamp structure

    Leadership 2.0 should work as an open source or crowdsouring system allowing transparency and more than that mutual gift economy between the organization and its employees (if they are still called that way), the clients (and they will participate in the design, the production, the marketing and sales..) and the services providers.

    In fact we could take this crisis as an "creative destruction" process in order to move to another model, but we have to understand that Leadership 2.0 is disruptive and will not be found on the main business street and surely not in Wall Street. Therefore the question is How will the Capital Human Developers emerge with a new training to teach the relevant skills for this new born and train leaders?

    If you want to have a look at the discussion, you can find it here: TinyURL.com/rylalw and the presentation :http://prezi.com/69743/ . I personally believe two of the key skills in Leadership 2.0 are ability to open and engage conversations and learn from others, we can see how some business have started to do just : Dell, Starbucks, Threadless…. they're leveraging the creativity of the community…. We're no longer in the mass market but in the mass of niches.

  • Pingback: When Leaders Run By Themselves | A Place For The God-Hungry

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 | Michael Hyatt « Innovation Forum of the Post University Institute

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 | Michael Hyatt « Carl’s Notepad

  • http://scotweb2.co.uk/ alex stobart

    Government 2.0 is well and truly alive in the USA

    Try govloop or govscomed to see

  • http://scotweb2.co.uk alex stobart

    Government 2.0 is well and truly alive in the USA

    Try govloop or govscomed to see

  • Pingback: A Place For The God-Hungry » Places I’ve Been

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 « ThinkWiki

  • Pingback: Fortuitous Bouncing « man.of.depravity

  • http://www.renaissancecreative.com/ Tim Hamby

    Michael,

    A wonderful article! Succinct and insightful. I saw it on Linkedin where it was posted by Hans van't Riet in the group, Innovate the Future. I shared my thoughts there, but wanted to leave them here, as well.

    I've always believed in more collaborative, horizontal-style leadership. I learned years ago that no matter how many "brilliant" ideas I had myself, I wasn't always going to be the smartest or most creative person in the room. There are exceptions to every rule (many are capable of hitting solo home runs), but generally, leveraging the experience and expertise of others via the sharing and layering of ideas has always been a powerful way to make good work great and more importantly- to truly bust down doors and be innovative.

    I call this "creative courage"- not just the willingness to try a new approach, but to work within the framework of a team and without ego. And indeed, it takes courageous leadership, a trust in your people and the ability to rise above your own ego to foster and implement it effectively.

    I'm a tail-end Boomer / early Gen-Xer and my own sensibilities have always leaned towards those of younger generations. As a result, for 13 years, we've always offered flexible hours; unlimited vacation (you trust your people to be self-responsible); and a non-hierarchal work environment where team-members are able to wear multiple hats and gravitate naturally to where they are most passionate and as a result– most effective.

    That said, while I've always encouraged transparency, dialogue, engagement, sharing and collaboration, I do find myself still learning. The GENUINE passion and level of conviction that I see in young leaders today to adhere to altogether higher levels of ethics, honesty, selflessness and the building of sustainable communities continues to SURPRISE and DELIGHT me!

    Additionally, although our firm has long operated this way internally, Web 2.0 is increasingly allowing and encouraging all of us to explore this type of engagement outside of our offices and across the globe. I'm still waiting to see exactly what kind of tangible results this produces and how it will all work- but it is certainly interesting and exciting and seems the logical way of the future.

    Last, while I see amazing young leaders emerging from the Web 2.0 generation, I would encourage "old-school" leaders not to lose themselves in self-doubt. As powerful a force as youthful new ideas (and new idealism!) are, it is equally easy for all of us to get lost in the hype. Like all things in life, balance is key.

    There is value in common sense, wisdom and experience. There is always a need for someone to "take the point", guide and make decisions. There is always a benefit to balancing idealism with practicality. Mentor these young leaders. They'll decide –or learn from experience– what to throw out and what to hang on to. Share of yourself as they share of themselves, and help them reach their full potential (and by virtue of this, help all of us).

  • http://www.renaissancecreative.com Tim Hamby

    Michael,

    A wonderful article! Succinct and insightful. I saw it on Linkedin where it was posted by Hans van't Riet in the group, Innovate the Future. I shared my thoughts there, but wanted to leave them here, as well.

    I've always believed in more collaborative, horizontal-style leadership. I learned years ago that no matter how many "brilliant" ideas I had myself, I wasn't always going to be the smartest or most creative person in the room. There are exceptions to every rule (many are capable of hitting solo home runs), but generally, leveraging the experience and expertise of others via the sharing and layering of ideas has always been a powerful way to make good work great and more importantly- to truly bust down doors and be innovative.

    I call this "creative courage"- not just the willingness to try a new approach, but to work within the framework of a team and without ego. And indeed, it takes courageous leadership, a trust in your people and the ability to rise above your own ego to foster and implement it effectively.

    I'm a tail-end Boomer / early Gen-Xer and my own sensibilities have always leaned towards those of younger generations. As a result, for 13 years, we've always offered flexible hours; unlimited vacation (you trust your people to be self-responsible); and a non-hierarchal work environment where team-members are able to wear multiple hats and gravitate naturally to where they are most passionate and as a result– most effective.

    That said, while I've always encouraged transparency, dialogue, engagement, sharing and collaboration, I do find myself still learning. The GENUINE passion and level of conviction that I see in young leaders today to adhere to altogether higher levels of ethics, honesty, selflessness and the building of sustainable communities continues to SURPRISE and DELIGHT me!

    Additionally, although our firm has long operated this way internally, Web 2.0 is increasingly allowing and encouraging all of us to explore this type of engagement outside of our offices and across the globe. I'm still waiting to see exactly what kind of tangible results this produces and how it will all work- but it is certainly interesting and exciting and seems the logical way of the future.

    Last, while I see amazing young leaders emerging from the Web 2.0 generation, I would encourage "old-school" leaders not to lose themselves in self-doubt. As powerful a force as youthful new ideas (and new idealism!) are, it is equally easy for all of us to get lost in the hype. Like all things in life, balance is key.

    There is value in common sense, wisdom and experience. There is always a need for someone to "take the point", guide and make decisions. There is always a benefit to balancing idealism with practicality. Mentor these young leaders. They'll decide –or learn from experience– what to throw out and what to hang on to. Share of yourself as they share of themselves, and help them reach their full potential (and by virtue of this, help all of us).

  • Pingback: Week Review (or start)- Highlights « brad lomenick :: on the journey

  • http://www.withoutwax.tv/ pete wilson

    Brilliant! I couldn't agree more!

  • http://www.withoutwax.tv/ pete wilson

    Brilliant! I couldn't agree more!

  • Pingback: Some Friday Reading : Arthur Mace

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/breakthrumentor breakthrumentor

    Fabulous comparisons – I'm sure the Breakthrough Leaders who follow me will enjoy and gain benefit from reading this article. Thanks

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/breakthrumentor breakthrumentor

    Fabulous comparisons – I'm sure the Breakthrough Leaders who follow me will enjoy and gain benefit from reading this article. Thanks

  • Pingback: Monday Magic | DSWA Coaching Center.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/marywmcloughlin Mary Woodman McLough

    A colleague of mine, Shan Eisler, wisely stated, "Learn to lead from the back of the room." This develops other leaders, and is the true test of leadership. A 2.0 leader is focused more on developing other leaders, than their own accolades. The leadership adventure is much more enjoyable when the focus is on others. It removes the strain of perfection as leaders allow themselves to be more vulnerable. Thanks for the words of wisdom!

  • http://www.facebook.com/marywmcloughlin Mary Woodman McLoughlin

    A colleague of mine, Shan Eisler, wisely stated, "Learn to lead from the back of the room." This develops other leaders, and is the true test of leadership. A 2.0 leader is focused more on developing other leaders, than their own accolades. The leadership adventure is much more enjoyable when the focus is on others. It removes the strain of perfection as leaders allow themselves to be more vulnerable. Thanks for the words of wisdom!

  • Pingback: Powerful Conversations in Business « The Idea Log

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 | Michael Hyatt « Post University Institute for Innovation & Entrepreneurship

  • Pingback: Spur Leadership Conference | Michael Hyatt | Chief Executive Officer | Thomas Nelson, Inc.

  • Pingback: Maximum Impact Club Interviews Me on Leadership | Michael Hyatt | Chief Executive Officer | Thomas Nelson, Inc.

  • Pingback: Guillermo Lutzky: Liderazgo 2.0 para frenar la irrelevancia de las instituciones educativas

  • Pingback: Espíritu Emprendedor » Blog Archive » Homenaje a Guillermo Lutzky

  • Pingback: Michael Hyatt is the man « Leadership, Technology, Innovation

  • Pingback: Leadership Paradigm Shifts : Life and Leadership

  • Pingback: Prizes, Sponsors, EPIC Loot – The ChurchCrunch Party Hookup! - ChurchCrunch

  • http://twitter.com/dpontefract @dpontefract

    very very cool insight & thought leadership on the difference and definition between yesterday's leader and tomorrow's leader http://bit.ly/U3GsS

  • http://twitter.com/dpontefract @dpontefract

    very very cool insight & thought leadership on the difference and definition between yesterday's leader and tomorrow's leader http://bit.ly/U3GsS

  • Pingback: Leadership 2.0 « LEADERSHIP 101

  • Pingback: 6 Facets of the Servant Leadership Diamond « White Stone Shaping

  • http://jeffgoins.myadventures.org/ Jeff Goins

    Good article. Don't know how I missed it.

  • http://jeffgoins.myadventures.org/ Jeff Goins

    Good article. Don't know how I missed it.

  • Pingback: Year in Review – Personal Favourites! | The Blog of Matt MacDonald

  • Pingback: Shift: The Essence of Leadership

  • Pingback: Learn to share | Leadership, Technology, Innovation

  • Pingback: The Leadership Strategy of Jesus « Dream, Believe, Dare, Do

  • http://forums.3dtotal.com/member.php?u=56233 wrmachine

    How you find ideas for articles, I am always lack of new ideas for articles. Some tips would be great

  • http://www.trail-running-blog.com/ Timex Road Trainer

    This is definitely a new way to think about leadership, something that everybody should at least be aware of. Great post!

  • http://www.arenewalenterprise.com kelly fryer

    This is a fantastic post. As a church consultant, it kills me how wedded to old top-down models of leadership most church leaders are today. Most of the really creative stuff I see in terms of leadership is happening in the secular world. Open-source, wiki-, decentralized leadership, etc. It is great to see a church leader describing Leadership 2.0 and taking a stand for collaborative, participatory models. I shared your list of characteristics of Leadership 2.0 – with commentary about how top down leadership sucks the life out of people and may just be killing the planet – in my post today. Thanks for the work you're doing! http://www.arenewalenterprise.com/2010/06/leaders

  • Pingback: ¿Hacia un nuevo liderazgo? –M&K Lógica

  • ChristineSine

    I really like this summary of new leadership.  Have been grappling with it myself in our small organization.  Have found great help from my Quaker friends who have always seen leadership as a more collaborative method.  THought that you might enjoy this summary of Quaker discernment process which we have adapted for our team meetings.  makes leadership very collaborative and interactive.  http://godspace.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/more-on-quaker-discernment/

  • Rachel Burn

    Hi Mike, first time I’ve come to your blog (via a MINemergent email that quoted you), and think it’s insightful, thank you for sharing. I have two thoughts: 

    1) You have painted leadership 1.0 only in negative light, whereas, as with ‘web 1.0′, it seems like it’s not that it was bad, as such, just that it was all that could be then, in terms of concept, it still served a good purpose (and I think more than just to get us to leadership 2.0). And also, what will leadership 2.0 look like compared to a 3.0? Whatever that might be. Am I taking the analogy too far? :-)

    2) This is off topic but about leaders USING the web. I sometimes watch a speaker online, who are talking to their church community, wherever they are, but posting the message online making it readily available to the whole world (which I don’t think a bad thing in itself), but find myself thinking ‘I don’t think this message is FOR the whole world, I think it’s only FOR your church community, and it actually might cause more confusion or disagreement than edification when heard by people in completely other contexts than the one the talk was written for.’ Makes me think that the web is a leadership 2.0 tool that leaders maybe feel compelled to use… but it’s not necessarily the best tool in the box for every job. Is that a fair thing to think? Thoughts?

    Thanks again for sharing, I’ll stop by again.

    • http://michaelhyatt.com Michael Hyatt

      You might be right on the first point. As to the second point, this is really no different than the New Testament epistles. They were written to specific, local congregations but had global, universal application.

  • Pingback: ¿Hacia un nuevo liderazgo? | Crónicas de MyKLogica