Do you think that visionary leaders make great CEOs?

[btc78]

I believe that a leader should be able to find the balance between being a visionary and a team player at the same time

I really believe that a leader is a good member as well they should be able to listen well and take others’ opinions in consideration because not at all times, leaders would have the best ideas and this is something they should accept if they want to succeed as leaders

[slapper]

To invent, don't visionaries need great attention and drive? Their communication style may hinder teamwork. However, isn't their ability to see ahead and lead the organization into unexplored territory significant? What about their unmatched ability to predict market trends and make bold, strategic decisions? We often hear about their human management issues. In an innovative, fast-paced market, aren't these traits essential?

You emphasize teamwork and inclusive decision-making, and I agree. Perhaps we're creating a false dichotomy? Must visionary leadership or collaboration be chosen? But what if the ideal CEO is less charismatic and visionary but excellent at combining both? They combined the visionary's zeal with sensitivity and teamwork. What's the true problem for firms to blend visionary audacity with inclusive leadership pragmatism?

[348Judah]

We are awed by so-called visionary leaders because may possess unique strengths and charisma. However, I have found that most of them have a weakness in communication, being adaptable, and in team collaboration. 

Some people want to be this and that in life but yet they lack the understanding that they are incapacitated for doing or becoming such, i understand that there's this way we can get determined of building ourselves and positioning well enough to fit in some certain portfolios, but that doesn't always equally means we shouldn't know our boundaries or how limited we are in some certain conditions like this.

[Rruchi man]

My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO. I believe the success of a company should not solely rely on the charisma and vision of one leader but should be built on a foundation of effective teamwork and inclusive decision-making. Do you support this argument?

I will rather say Visionary leaders do not always make great CEO's because since not all visionary leaders have the opportunity of heading a company, it is not a sure statement. There could actually be visionary leaders who would have made great CEO's, but because they never had the chance, we will never know. Visionary leader who actually understand people management can make great CEO's because that is also required. With a proper understanding of people management skills, your staffs will be kept happy, and happy staffs are productive staffs.

[Accardo]

It's important to have a visionary to build something fresh and strong, and initially a visionary can in practice be a CEO. But a visionary may or may not have strong management skills, abilities to make people feel welcome and valued in the company, and even focus on the business goals (because perhaps this person cares about doing the best possible thing and isn't being realistic). So, depending on a particular case, it can be wise to appoint a professional CEO, so to speak, to take the practical side of things into their hands, while the visionary can remain an inspiration and representation of the company.

In the starting point of the journey, appointing a different CEO won't be achievable. This can only be done after they've achieved the initial goal of the company, and team mates have seen or trusted the visions of their boss. At that point, most people would still want him as the leader, because he's now more valid. Those who argued his decisions, confirms him. And are filled with more loyalty. Handing over immediately, his office, during the argument stage can derail the growth or prepared achievement of the company. Continuing with his team, when the main goals has been achieved, helps a solid decision, business growth and vision. The next person can become a CEO after many years of running the business with the visionary leader. Once, he's proven to understand the basic structures of the company; people management, critical thinking and financial economy of the business. He can take over the company, while under the supervision of the visionary leader, then push further without facing much dispute. As he's had the experience. We've noticed companies hand over like I illustrated. And this would take years before it happens. Changing administrator immediately and substituting the visionary to become only a foresight man could lead to an argument between the leader and the newly appointed CEO.

[el kaka22]

Depends, if they are visionary and capable of making that vision into reality then yeah they can be, but if they are visionary and they can't make it work and will fail and just ruin everything for trying to achieve something they can't  then they are not good at all. I have personally seen both, people who built amazing things by spending insane amount of money, and people who fail.

I can give Elon Musk as example for both of them, Elon Musk took over Tesla, did not build it, did not created it, was not the owner, was not even shareholder, he had nothing to do with it, and yet the old owners focused way too much on building an amazing car, and didn't care about selling, they just raised funds, eventually bankrupted themselves and Elon swooped in, bought the company, started to sell whatever functioning car they had, build more whatever they can build that is working, and that small but sure income was used to build more cars, and made him rich.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

visionary PEOPLE become inventors and recruit investors in and managers to run as CEO
visionary LEADER run as CEO (emphasis on the leader part the OP stipulates)

a visionary LEADER is someone that can see outside of the box AND LEAD .. which is the positive aspects..
a general CEO can be a a-hole 'boss' and just want to be "the boss" and not seeing the big picture(not visionary) nor inventive

so visionary leaders make great CEOS
idiot "bosses" make bad CEO's

Thanks for spelling it out, sir franky1. From the OP's judgment, I think it's wrong. A company with a visionary CEO can thrive when there are serious-minded employees who are ready to do the job that they were employed for(by the CEO) , but a boss in some cases can just become overly familiar with some employees, and it can even cause some bad situations in the company.



OP, just as was said above, a visionary can actually make a good CEO because they will know how, when, and what to invest or build that will make the company thrive. They know how to push their employees to get serious about their jobs, and they can quickly study and know the work force they need to execute a certain project. Even though they themselves don't like teamwork, when they require it, they still know people (class of employees) they can select from among their employees to get the job done as a team. In conclusion, visionaries have more vision than just a boss.

[Renampun]

First I don't like involving myself with an argumentative discussion because it often leads to disagreement between two parties or groups of persons. Then boiled down to what your title and content saying, I will say it depends on individuals boldness and there are people who are born with the mantle of leadership they always appears to be the head of family and in every meeting be international and national. While making a good CEO required a discipline, whomever that is not discipline can not make a good CEO this could be someone whose discipline is in financial study & department and or that has acquired lot of degree in business and finance.

agree with your opinion, not everyone can be a CEO, people must be truly competent - disciplined - hardworking - able to solve problems under any pressure - have a good leadership spirit to be able to become a CEO.  look at how CEOs of large companies lead their companies, of course their charisma is different from ordinary employees and Experience is also one of the which for a good leader, there is a wise person who says, a knife will not be sharp if it is not sharpened.

[mirakal]

We are awed by so-called visionary leaders because may possess unique strengths and charisma. However, I have found that most of them have a weakness in communication, being adaptable, and in team collaboration.  For example, a visionary leader Steve Jobs though he was praise for all the great stuff he did for Apple there where complaints of his intense and demanding nature. This negatively impacted the morale of his employees and lead to high turnover rates. Obviously employees would naturally seek out more collaborative and supportive work environments. My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO. I believe the success of a company should not solely rely on the charisma and vision of one leader but should be built on a foundation of effective teamwork and inclusive decision-making. Do you support this argument?

Well, not all visionary leaders tend to be bossy and demanding. There are a lot I know that are actually expert in team building and collaboration, that they value their staff and appreciate their contribution. Maybe, you are saying this from a sole visionary leader point of view, so I can't also blame you for that.

However, what I say is also from my own experience. Visionary leaders can be assets in the company, as long as they also practice putting their shoes on their low positioned staffs and deal with them with equality to higher positions. But if you mean those visionary leaders do not make good CEOs, well if they don't have other positive traits other than having brilliant visions and ideas, then they can never be good and effective CEOs.

[Natsuu]

My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO.

That's because CEOs shouldnt only be visionary alone. Steve Jobs was a genius with Apple, but let's be real that thats note enough and no CEO is perfect. His business had to work on this and the employees had the option to leave. A visionary leader is okay but if they can't communicate, adapt or play nice with the team it's not getting the business very far. Let's not put all our eggs in one charismatic basket.

[avikz]

We are awed by so-called visionary leaders because may possess unique strengths and charisma. However, I have found that most of them have a weakness in communication, being adaptable, and in team collaboration.  For example, a visionary leader Steve Jobs though he was praise for all the great stuff he did for Apple there where complaints of his intense and demanding nature. This negatively impacted the morale of his employees and lead to high turnover rates. Obviously employees would naturally seek out more collaborative and supportive work environments. My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO. I believe the success of a company should not solely rely on the charisma and vision of one leader but should be built on a foundation of effective teamwork and inclusive decision-making. Do you support this argument?

It is a highly debateable topic. Unfortunately there is no straight answer to it. Historically visionary leaders are a different species of human race. They are not easy to understand by commoners like us.

You have given an example of Steve jobs. I would like to present an example of Elon Musk. There is no doubt that Elon mask is a visionary leader. But if you ask about his behaviour while in the office, it is extremely toxic. People who have worked for him had said, Elon is extremely demanding and he wants everybody around him to think as fast as he can.

Now CEOs thrive in a collaborative environment. My example of a good CEO is Jack Ma. This fellow is not a visionary leader. She could not invent something new. But he is good at collaboration. He knows how to make smart people work for him.

So visionary leaders are not good CEOs. Leaders cannot be created, they are born. CEOs are created in business schools. Hope this explanation helps!

[southerngentuk]

Do you support this argument?

The path to success is rarely a solitary endeavor. It is often paved with the collective efforts of individuals working together towards a common goal, each contributing their unique skills and perspectives. While visionary leaders can undoubtedly play a pivotal role in shaping a company's direction and inspiring innovation, their effectiveness is significantly enhanced when they recognize and harness the power of teamwork.

A successful company is not merely a collection of individuals; it is a cohesive unit where every member feels valued, respected, and empowered to contribute their best. Visionary leaders who can foster a supportive and collaborative environment, where employees feel heard and appreciated, are more likely to lead their teams to achieve remarkable results.

[Kelward]

I think that at the end of the day it's the quality of output that comes out from the teamwork that really counts, there might be flaws to reach perfection, but it's the end that justifies the means. So the leadership approach of an organization might not be very cordial, but if their renumeration and output are very competitively high compared to their competitors in the same industry, then some personal temperament of management or CEO can be overlooked. But abuse of power should not be condoned.

Employees should be value driven, because management can be strict in order to get the best output, a work friendly atmosphere is important, but it's not the ultimate goal, job security and well paid is the most important. A rumpled $100, is better and more valuable than a newly minted $1 note.

[oktana]

For most companies or industries I’ve seen, there may be a CEO but he alone doesn’t make the rules. There’s normally a board (even though they are hired, they do their job of making calculated decisions for the company). Most times, the deductions we see aren’t from CEOs. Just like kings have personal advisers, so do CEOs. Visionary leaders can make great CEO too. You should say “not all”. In fact I think it’s even more interesting when the CEO is the leader; someone you can relate with and work with. Someone that respects you and your opinion.

[Peanutswar]

Having a mission and vision leader, CEO, Boss, etc, makes a good path towards giving a good and bright future to the business, or economy because they have a goal and of course, if they care under them they value each person with their strengths and weaknesses this lead to making efficient way to work, at all cost because they know they are part and important of the company, so if those leaders don't care at all to the people and just the money sooner or later the economy will suffer with the crisis of their business or country due to mishandling of leadership. A leader who keeps guiding under him and a Boss who just tells what they do without proper training so they are different.

[moneystery]

but isn't it what steve jobs did that made apple what it is today?

it's true that visionary people tend to demand a lot of things because they have big ambitions to realize the vision and mission of their company and make it in line with what they think. but on average, large companies do not become what they are today by leaders who can communicate well or who are gentle with their employees, but by someone who is charismatic and visionary who can see future changes and can respond to challenges.

people who are charismatic and visionary tend to be more aggressive towards their employees because they have a more advanced view of the future with limited time, different from employees who only see things in front of their screen. even though sometimes they are hated by their employees because of their fast, stressful and annoying work ethic, but it is people like them who make many companies big.

[Fiatless]

We are awed by so-called visionary leaders because may possess unique strengths and charisma. However, I have found that most of them have a weakness in communication, being adaptable, and in team collaboration.  For example, a visionary leader Steve Jobs though he was praise for all the great stuff he did for Apple there where complaints of his intense and demanding nature. This negatively impacted the morale of his employees and lead to high turnover rates. Obviously employees would naturally seek out more collaborative and supportive work environments. My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO. I believe the success of a company should not solely rely on the charisma and vision of one leader but should be built on a foundation of effective teamwork and inclusive decision-making. Do you support this argument?

When people get the vision of a profitable or beneficial business idea, recruit workers to help them achieve the aim of the business. Before employment, the employer would have to unveil the goals and aspirations of the business and the diverse means to achieve them. It is now the responsibility of the visionary leader to lead and guide these workers to enable them to help him in achieving these goals. Sometimes they might push the workers too hard which might make the workplace terrible, I don't blame them sometimes because predicted goals could intoxicate these visionaries.

Many visionary leaders have proved to be good leaders or business executives, while others might have treated workers inhumanely. Humans have individual differences so for me the actions of these CEOs might be based on their behavior or character. Visionary leaders can make great CEOs if they abide by the labour laws of the nations and treat workers as humans and not machines. Visionary leaders should be allowed to run their businesses because some hired executives might derail from the goals of the company.

[Mpamaegbu]

For example, a visionary leader Steve Jobs though he was praise for all the great stuff he did for Apple there where complaints of his intense and demanding nature. This negatively impacted the morale of his employees and lead to high turnover rates. Obviously employees would naturally seek out more collaborative and supportive work environments.

Of course, naturally people don't like to put in the works but they want to earn. Most people won't mind asking to be paid even when they nap all through in the office or put in less work. To such people, Steve Jobs would be a pain in the ass. Again, Mr Jobs was able to attain should an enviable height by dint of brain work and sleepless nights. It's indeed very sad he didn't live long to reap all he laboured for.

My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO.

Being a visionary doesn't mean one will be great at business. There's a difference between leadership and business. It's the same way we've great leaders who fail at home as fathers.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I will have to agree wit the op, visionary leaders don't completely make great CEOs as most people assume, it is commonly said that a single tree does and will never make an island, every big and successfully company we see today was not built by one man alone, even though people tend to attribute the success a company to the CEO of that company alone, this is a big mistake if I am asked, because, the CEO alone can not run a company, he needs subordinates, boards members, workers, even family and friends who can step in and advice on what to do when on a cross road.

So, the success of a company is often a result of collective efforts, not the effort of one man alone, so, that statement that, a visionary leader makes great CEOs, is a wrong statement.

[Zoomic]

I believe that a leader should be able to find the balance between being a visionary and a team player at the same time

I really believe that a leader is a good member as well they should be able to listen well and take others’ opinions in consideration because not at all times, leaders would have the best ideas and this is something they should accept if they want to succeed as leaders

You are right. There needs to be a balance between being a visionary leader and a team player.  Most visionary leaders are too strict in their modes of operation.Visionary leaders usually have lots of great ideas in their head and would make sure these ideas come to reality at all cost. In trying to achieve this, they may step on toes, yield to little or no advice from their team members and in the process they even frustrate their employees and make the work environment tensed up. This is not a good sign.

Most employees/team members have better ideas than the visionary leader himself but most times, these ideas from the subordinates might not be appealing to the leader because the ideas do not tally with the big picture he (the leader) has already painted in his head.

No one person knows it all. A good leader should be democratic in nature. Every member of the team should be allowed to make inputs but the final decision still rests on the leader. Giving the team members this right makes them feel valued and it is a big motivation to work.