I think that this also overlooks the (perhaps blindingly) obvious issue of "if they are all '9's then who is DOING all of the activities that these people are 'leading' on campus, anyway?"
I mean, I hate to ask the STUPID question there, but if you are "organizing" community service activities for MLK day, you
do need "participants."
There's a reason for the aphorism about "too many Chiefs and not enough Indians." Top-heavy social structures fail because of a plethora of decision-makers and a paucity of people willing to follow others' good ideas. KWIM?
So yes, I find the myopic focus on "leadership" (to the exclusion of other worthy activities in which "active participation" is listed) kind of bizarre.
Some of my DD's less savory classmates playing this game come off as both petulant and sulky-- DEFINITELY as poor sports and not team players-- because they don't DO anything unless they are the titular "president" or "leader" or "organizer." They say "no thanks" to group efforts.
How is
that good citizenship?? That's like refusing to vote unless you're anticipating being elected to office.
