Photo source: CNN
What makes a leader truly consequential? Is it the ability to communicate, the courage to challenge conventional thinking or simply being the right person at a moment when history is about to change?
CNN's Dana Bash offers some fascinating perspectives on these questions in her conversation on That Said With Michael Zeldin, discussing her new book, The Elections That Changed the World: 15 Pivotal Moments That Shaped How We Live, co-authored with David Fisher.
While the book explores elections that changed history, what makes Dana's perspective so interesting are the people behind them. Some were expected to change the world. Others were underestimated, chosen as temporary leaders or thrust into circumstances they could never have anticipated. Their stories offer some wonderful insights into leadership, communication and the decisions that shape our future.
One of the most interesting examples involves Ronald Reagan. Following Barry Goldwater's overwhelming defeat in the 1964 presidential election, many believed the conservative movement had lost its appeal. As Dana explains, Reagan showed that sometimes the messenger can make all the difference.
His ability to articulate ideas and connect with audiences helped revive the conservative movement. His election as governor of California in 1966 ultimately set the stage for a much larger transformation in American politics. It's a terrific example of something we know well in communications: The person delivering the message can be just as important as the message itself.
I was particularly struck by Dana's story about Martin Luther King Jr. While we all know his extraordinary role in the civil rights movement, many may not know how he first emerged as a leader.
King was just 26 years old when a small group of civil rights organizers selected him to lead the Montgomery Improvement Association during the bus boycott. They recognized his ability to communicate, connect with people and inspire them to act.
Think about that. A small group of people recognized something special in a young pastor, and their decision helped launch one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century.
Dana also shares the remarkable stories of Indira Gandhi and Golda Meir, two women who were initially viewed by political insiders as temporary leaders who could be managed or influenced. Both proved those expectations wrong, becoming powerful figures who helped shape their countries during critical periods.
Their experiences are a reminder of how often leadership potential can be overlooked, particularly when someone doesn't fit traditional expectations.
The discussion of Franklin D. Roosevelt offers another interesting perspective on leadership, particularly the challenge of making decisions without knowing what lies ahead.
When Roosevelt was elected in 1932, Americans were struggling through the Great Depression. His New Deal programs fundamentally changed the relationship between the federal government and the people it served. But his election to an unprecedented third term in 1940 would have consequences that voters could not have fully anticipated.
Roosevelt would lead the United States through much of World War II, drawing on the experience and relationships he had developed over years in public service. As Dana points out, the true significance of an election often becomes clear only with the passage of time.
Another fascinating example involves Pope John XXIII. Selected in 1958 with the expectation that he would serve as a caretaker pope, he instead initiated major changes within the Catholic Church.
Dana describes how he reached beyond the Vatican to engage directly with people, visiting schools and prisons and embracing new ways of communicating. He also convened the Second Vatican Council, setting in motion reforms that would make the church more accessible to its followers, including the expanded use of local languages in worship.
What was expected to be a period of continuity became an important chapter of institutional change.
The conversation also explores Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and Mikhail Gorbachev, whose decisions had consequences far beyond their own time in power.
Dana's discussion of Gorbachev is particularly revealing. She describes how a man who had spent his career rising through the Communist Party of the Soviet Union came to recognize the need for change. His efforts to open Soviet society helped set in motion developments that ultimately contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
What I especially enjoyed about Dana's perspective is her curiosity. Despite spending her career covering politics, she discovered stories and connections that surprised her while researching the book. She brings that same curiosity to the conversation, exploring not only what happened but what might have happened if different leaders had been chosen or different decisions had been made.
It's one of the reasons the discussion is so engaging. History isn't always predictable, and neither is leadership. Toward the end of the conversation, Dana shares what she considers the biggest takeaway from researching the book.
"We should not take for granted the ability to vote," she says. She reminds us that elections can have unintended consequences, both good and bad, and that their full significance may not be understood for years or even generations.
For those of us in communications, there is another important thread running through these stories. The ability to connect with people, earn their confidence and communicate a vision has played an extraordinary role in shaping history. And the people who ultimately make the greatest difference are not always the ones we expect.
We hope you'll take some time to listen to Dana's conversation. Her stories remind us that leadership often emerges in unexpected places, that communication can change the course of events and that the decisions we make today may have consequences far beyond what we imagine.
