Since I’m new to your blog let me just say, hello.  I like what you have to say here.  It’s written well.

That said, let me get down to disagreeing with you.

I’m not sure this is a distinction which needs to be made.  It’s a value judgment, a moral judgment, and will be different for everyone.

You ask, did it create value?  Did the benefit outweigh the costs?  But we have no way of measuring “value” or “benefit” except subjectively.  (Assuming you don’t mean financial value which would be much easier to calculate but also much easier to dispute as a measure of leadership.)

What if you had a passion for preventing or even reversing global climate change?  Let’s say you brought together a massive following and implemented restrictions which prohibited the use of any energy source that caused pollution.

You have accomplished something.  But what?  Was is good?

By defining “leadership” as the ability to influence others we can say without equivocation you were a good leader because you mobilized followers to accomplish your vision.

If we use your definition of “good leadership” we would have to make an assessment of whether people are better off in the world you created than the world before.  That’s an impossible task.

I think it also creates unnecessary confusion to define good leadership as leadership we agree with.
.-= Siddhartha´s last blog ..<a href="http://principlesoffailure.blogspot.com/2010/05/most-criticism-is-unjustified-different.html" rel="nofollow">Most Criticism is Unjustified; Different and Weird Are Okay</a> =-.