I never thought of leadership in this way until now. I could not stop thinking about it for the next 15 minutes. For some, this concept may be familiar, but it was new to me and really resonated.
Using the normal triangle places the executives/CEOs at the point. To me, this is the selfish diagram - it focuses on those in superior positions and places them above everyone else. When at the top, who do you have to look up to? To answer to? Where's there left to go when you're presumably at the highest point? I think sometimes when we reach the top of our triangle, we may grow complacent. We begin to think inside the box, because why exert the extra effort when you're already where you want to be? It is so important that as a leader you are always raising the bar for yourself - because if you don't, those who you are serving will suffer.
An inverted triangle is ideal. When you're in a serving position, who should truly be at the top? The inverted triangle shifts the importance to the people you are serving. With higher positions at the bottom, it becomes visually clear that your duty is to help others, those you are carrying. With the inverted pyramid, you can look up at all the people you are responsible for, an ever-changing population, which perpetuates growth in leadership. Any group of people you are serving will never be identical and for that reason, you cannot always lead these groups the same. It is so important that we are always seeking new and diverse ways to lead, and that we always keep those we are serving in mind when choosing how to lead.
"A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where they don't necessarily want to go, but ought to be." - Rosalynn Carter