Our View: Thinking outside the book

Former Washington Gov. Dan Evans was known for being book smart and people smart. While governor, he used his civil engineering degree and work experience to manage the structural details of running the state. And he could talk with everyone, from presidents to student protesters.

The best leaders need book smarts, because this kind of intelligence “gives you a basis of historical and intellectual context. You have to understand the moving parts, to see where you’ve gone and where you’re going,” said Stan Finkelstein, executive director of the Association of Washington Cities. Finkelstein has worked for the nonpartisan group for 33 years and has met nearly 5,000 candidates and elected officials.

But strong leaders also need so-called emotional intelligence. This enables them to socialize with citizens from all walks of life and communicate well verbally, as well as non-verbally. And the best leaders are “not emotionally bruised by failures,” Finkelstein said.

This is the fifth installment of the Leadership Dialogues. The leadership characteristic in focus today is intelligence. Without it, leaders can struggle miserably through the intellectual demands – and the emotional burdens – of elected office. Mary Selecky, head of Washington’s Department of Health, exemplifies this intelligence characteristic. She earned a history degree from a first-rate institution – University of Pennsylvania – before venturing to rural Stevens County in the early 1970s. There, she honed her people skills, which she is known for to this day.

History possesses plenty of examples of leaders who fell short due to intellectual shortcomings of one kind or another. Former Washington Gov. Dixy Lee Ray, for instance, was head of the Atomic Energy Commission before becoming governor in 1977. Finkelstein said Ray was “extraordinarily intellectual but could not work with the Legislature.” Jesse Ventura, pro wrestler turned governor of Minnesota, possessed the common touch but lacked the intellectual vigor needed to effectively run the state.

How can voters gauge intelligence in candidates? Academic grades are not foolproof evidence of book-smart ability, but a candidate’s educational record provides insight into how the candidate met intellectual challenges. Emotional intelligence is hard to judge, but watching a candidate work a crowd can help. And smart leaders are never afraid to hire people smarter than themselves.

Above all, the greatest leaders don’t flaunt their intelligence. They have an “absence of arrogance,” as Finkelstein puts it. They understand that the power they possess is linked to the office, not to the person.

In rare instances, a leader remains influential long after handing over the power of the office to a successor. Evans is now 81 and busy speaking, writing and serving on boards. He finished his third term as governor 30 years ago. Yet when asked what leader they would most like to emulate, many modern-day candidates – both Republicans and Democrats – say “Governor Dan Evans.”