Leadership Numbers

“Happy New Year!” A message that you might have sent to tens, hundreds or even thousands of colleagues or associates! What about followers? As a leader, how many followers did you reach out to personally (not just a broadcast mailshot)? On reflection, you might be wondering how many people you can lead and if the number you are targeting is large, what is the most effective way to organise for effective leadership? The answer might be found in “Dunbar’s number and other evolutionary quirks” (R. Dunbar, 2010, Faber). This evolutionary anthropologist asserts that there a maximum number of followers that you can “conceivably juggle”.

Here are the numbers relating to leadership along with further considerations (“et alors”):

Leadership Numbers

Drawing on the work of Dunbar and others, here are the key numbers:

One

You can’t lead anyone if you can’t lead yourself! If you do not know yourself, then you cannot expect that others will know you; and if they are confused, doubtful or distrusting, then they are not going to follow you. Potentially the most important number in leadership: 1!

Six

Your immediate “group” is what might be known as a team. Various definitions of “effective” teams put the number of participants between 4 and 12 persons; however many researchers assert that the optimal number is six. 6 should be your immediate group of followers.

Thirty

Dunbar cites military platoons of around thirty persons being similar to the size of an “extended family” and accordingly members of this group (if united by a leader) are “prepared to sacrifice themselves in defence of the group.” 30 should be your next circle of followers.

One-hundred-and-fifty

Dunbar’s research into friendship (those to whom you would lend a small amount of money and whom you contact at least once a year) highlights that if the group is cohesive and less than 150 persons, then everyone will be prepared to fight for everyone else. 150 is your “direct” limit.

Et alors?

After 150, leadership becomes “indirect”. This is important to know in organisations as you will no longer have the direct impact on all the individuals and the group itself will be a “group of groups” with each subgroup subject to other forces or influences. So how can big organisations “unite” behind the one leader at the top? Can a New Year’s corporate broadcast really be effective when the numbers are greater than 150? Potentially not – more effort has to be made if the leader wants to unite the whole organisation. What is needed is essentially an engaging hierarchy (not just a bureaucratic hierarchy): the leader will have to inspire, motivate and engage the 6, the 30 and the 150 to such an extent that not only are they engaged themselves, but they can then further lead others. Senior leaders really have to be the “leader of leaders”!