Two Icons, Two Different Approaches to Leadership
Yesterday’s headline revealed that Steve Jobs was stepping down from Apple. Today, Warren Buffett announced a $5 billion investment in Bank of America. These two stories—though vastly different—give us an important moment to reflect on what makes a leader truly effective in business.
Steve Jobs: The Visionary with an Edge
Jobs was more than just a tech entrepreneur—he became a legend in Silicon Valley. He co-founded Apple, was fired, and then returned to lead it to even greater heights. His bold vision and relentless pursuit of excellence gave us some of the most iconic consumer products ever created.
Apple’s success is undeniable. Yet, one area where the company has faced questions is in governance—particularly its succession planning. Many believe Apple’s board delayed planning for a future without Jobs simply because no one could fill his shoes. It’s a classic example of short-term success clouding long-term decisions.
But what about the man behind the products?
People who worked closely with Jobs describe him in very different terms. Some say he was a brilliant, uncompromising innovator. Others… well, they’d just call him difficult—some even using harsher words. This raises an interesting question: Do great leaders have to be tough, demanding, or even ruthless to succeed at the highest levels? Is Jobs’ leadership style so different from someone like General Patton—a man known for intensity and results?
Warren Buffett: The Steady Hand in Crisis
While Jobs was stepping back, Buffett was stepping in—yet again—as a stabilizing force. His $5 billion investment in Bank of America came at a time when doubts were growing about the bank’s financial health. The deal guarantees Buffett a six percent return and echoes his 2008 investment in Goldman Sachs, which helped calm a panicking market during the financial crisis.
Buffett’s moves are often seen as reassuring in shaky times. But over the years, even the Oracle of Omaha has faced questions. When his authorized biography came out in 2008, some parts reportedly contradicted things Buffett had earlier opposed—yet later approved. Since then, he’s become more visible on news networks, like CNBC, sometimes raising eyebrows about how often he steps into the public eye.
And then there’s politics. When President Obama needed public backing for a debt deal, he quoted “my friend, Warren Buffett” in press conferences. Suddenly, Buffett wasn’t just a business figure—he was part of the political narrative.
Too Much Exposure?
All of this brings us to a larger question about leadership today: Are we hearing too much from our leaders? In a 24/7 news world, does constant exposure erode their authority or mystique? Is there a risk of overexposure diluting their credibility?
We’re interested in your thoughts on this. What does effective leadership look like in today’s noisy, high-speed world?