How Crazy Can You Be and Still Succeed as a Leader?

David Brooks' column in yesterday's New York Times raises an interesting point. Using Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya as a case example, Brooks posits that craziness--real, over-the-top, psychotic craziness--may in some instances be a way to hang onto leadership.  He concludes the the notion that, "If you’re going to be a tyrant, be a wacko. It’s safer."  

In a less dramatic way and on a much smaller stage, we have known school leaders who also hang onto power despite significant narcissism and grandiosity, some to a point where they would no doubt have trouble staying employed were they not the head of school.  There are perks that come with being at the top of any organization, and one of those is that wacky behavior is frequently accommodated by subordinates and governing board members alike.  This is especially true when the wackiness is blended with even a small amount of charisma.

The problem is that there is an inevitable price that comes with whatever successes the leader achieves.  We have seen that proved again and again.