Throughout the development of civilization, humans have learned that effective leadership is the key to its success. An effective leader means to complete goals efficiently and in a practical manner, resulting in a better future for their followers. William Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Caesar”, showcases leadership and all of its elements in their most undisguised form: the play’s namesake Julius Caesar, loyal Mark Antony, honorable Brutus, and clever Cassius. Among these figures, Cassius has proven himself to be the most effective leader due to his pragmatism and his ability to persuade others.
Rather than formulating tactics on theoretical situations, Cassius approached his problems in a realistic and sensible manner. After the conspirators murder Caesar, Cassius argued that they should also rid themselves of Antony:
Mark Antony, so well belov’d in Caesar,
Should outlive Caesar; we shall find of him
A shrewd contriver; and you know, his means,
If he improves them, may well stretch so far
As to annoy us all; which to prevent,
Let Antony and Caesar fall together
(Shakespeare, II.i.154-161)
Cassius claimed that since Antony idolized Caesar, the possibility that Antony wouldn’t avenge Caesar’s death was slim to none; and he was correct. In comparison to Brutus, who mistakenly believed that Antony wouldn’t betray them, Cassius understood that man’s nature isn’t as pure as one would like to believe. If the plan had gone the way Cassius wanted, failures in leadership could’ve been avoided. Leadership scientist Sunnie Giles March made an interesting discovery about the mechanics of leadership: “No leader can do anything themselves… it’s critical to distribute power throughout the organization. Research has repeatedly shown that empowered teams are more productive and proactive… and show higher levels of job satisfaction and commitment to their team and organization,” (The Most Important Leadership Competencies, According to Leaders Around the World). Cassius was pragmatic in the sense that he understood that in order to execute his plan, he needed the help of others. He carefully formulated a sensible plan by recruiting credible figures that the people of Rome knew and trusted instead of singularly carrying out the plan. Instead of hoarding all the power to himself, he entrusted his co-conspirators to carry out his agenda for the good of Rome. As a result, his recruitees trusted one another, seized their opportunities, and successfully accomplished their goal.
As Cassius had a talent for seeing situations through clear lenses, he also had the gift of persuasion. Optimist and author Simon Sinek presents his perspective on effective leadership in his Ted Talk, Why Good Leaders Make You Feel Safe. Sinek claims that when a leader makes a group of people feel secure, they are more willing to combine their individual talents to create a unified operation. When Cassius convinced reputable individuals to willingly take part in the assassination of their leader, he persuaded them in a way that made them feel secure. If he hadn’t made them feel safe as a good leader is said to do, those individuals wouldn’t have participated in the assassination. By using his power of persuasion and eloquence, Cassius single-handedly managed to create resistance against Caesar’s overwhelming grip on power. Cassius didn’t only manage to recruit dissidents of Caesar’s reign, but he convinced his best friend, Brutus to turn against him:
I know that virtue to be in you, Brutus,
As well as I do know your outward favor.
Well, honor is the subject of my story:
(...) I had as lief not be as live to be
In awe of such a thing as I myself.
I was born free as Caesar; so were you;
(Shakespeare, I.ii.90-97)
Intelligent Cassius, being the dangerous threat whom Caesar feared, immediately sensed Brutus’ sense of honor and used it to manipulate Brutus into joining his conspiracy. Keep in mind that Brutus claimed to have an unconditional love for Caesar, and when people claim that kind of devotion, only intellectuals such as a master orator could convince them to betray that person. By using his oratory skills, Cassius arranged an entire insurrection against Rome’s increasingly powerful dictatorship and managed to turn Caesar’s most trusted companion against him.
Advocates of the other characters in Shakespeare’s play may make the argument that Cassius couldn’t have been an effective leader since his moral obligations weren’t up to par with those of Brutus, Antony, or Caesar. However, that argument is illogical considering the fact that these characters weren’t exactly saints themselves. Brutus claims to be a man of honor then proceeds to murder his best friend. No honorable person would betray their loved ones and would find a better way to deal with a problematic situation. Antony plunged Rome into civil war with the aim of avenging Caesar’s death. No magnanimous and rational leader would consider impetuously sacrificing their own countrymen to satisfy a personal agenda. Caesar was easily coaxed by flattery and showed up to the Capitol on the day of his death, disregarding all of his previous warnings. No selfless leader would give in to vanity and be so gullible as to ignore numerous warnings. To claim that Cassius couldn’t have been an effective leader due to his immoral tendencies, one must show that their character is the embodiment of moral perfection. However, none of the characters possess these characteristics, therefore, it is hypocritical to present said argument.
As a man of many talents, Cassius productively put them to use, proving that he was an effective leader. His realistic way of thinking and his oratory skills put him above the rest of the figures in Julius Caesar. An effective leader always has initiative and the will to carry it out for the betterment of the people’s future. Although Cassius may not have had the most scrupulous ideals, he accomplished his goals in a manner that wasn’t reflected among the other characters.