Humble Hounds and Boardroom Lions

In a New York Times column, David Brooks suggested that there are two models of leadership: boardroom lions and humble hounds.

Boardroom lions are super confident, forceful and charismatic. They tend to be mavericks, always calling for serious and systemic change. These characteristics can be quite useful for leaders- whether in business or politics, or even one’s personal life. Yet research shows that these types of leaders can also be risky. Their confidence coupled with a propensity towards change can create achievements that are either fabulously successful or dismally miss their mark.

Brooks contrasts the boardroom lion with what he terms the humble hound model of leadership. Humble hounds are less interested in their achievements and more interested in looking ahead for any weaknesses and areas of potential improvement. They are more likely to make calculated, less-sweeping changes and only after consultation with others. They depend more on team efforts, and are not interested in highlighting personal achievement. Jim Collins, author of the book How the Mighty Fall sums up the character of humble hounds as, “extreme personal humility with intense professional will.”

In Parshat Shemini, Moshe said to Aharon: Kerav El Hamizbeiach ``Come close to the Altar to perform your sacrificial service.” The Midrash picks up on the word “Come near” and notes Aharon’s hesitance. He was ashamed to take on his role as Kohen due to his involvement with the Golden Calf. Only after being encouraged by Moshe does Aharon take up his priestly place.

Moshe and Aharon are prime examples of the humble hound school of leadership. By the Torah’s own account, Moshe was the most humble of all men. In Parshat Shemini he demonstrates this humility by deferring to Aharon to take over in the Mishkan. When his words go unheeded, he is willing to respectfully listen to his brother explain his logic. And when Aharon’s logic is convincing, not only is Moshe willing to admit his mistake but “Vayitav B’einav- he is willing to do so happily, without any hard feelings whatsoever. (In this week’s Parsha we also see Aharon’s humility up close. He is willing to face the consequences of his involvement in the Golden Calf episode. This is besides that fact that his entire life Aharon was willing to serve a secondary role to his younger brother Moshe.)

Whereas Moshe and Aharon are models of humble hound leadership, Nadav and Avihu were boardroom lions. They were intent on systemic change. According to rabbinic tradition, Nadav and Avihu would talk amongst themselves and ask concerning Moshe and Aharon, “When will these old men pass on so that we will become the new leaders of the nation?” Their fatal flaw was their arrogance. Rashi quotes the opinion that their sin was “Shehoru Halacha Bifnei Moshe Raban.” They did not show Moshe the deference that he deserved. Perhaps the clearest example of their arrogance emerges from the opinion in the Midrash that Nadav and Avihu never married. According to Midrash Rabba:

“They were conceited, many women awaited them eagerly (to marry them) but what did they say? ‘Our uncle is King, our other uncle is a head of a tribe, our father is High Priest, we are his two assistants. What woman is worthy of us?’”

The story of Nadav and Avihu reminds us of the challenges inherent in leadership and the dangers of arrogance. If Moshe and Aharon were willing to reassess and reevaluate their actions then all of us should be willing to do so, as individuals and as a community.