We pledge allegiance to all kinds of things; some explicitly, most implicitly. The grandiose allegiances to flag, country and alma mater are the ones that make our hearts swell. They bring a quiver to the lip and tear to the eye. Even our most stalwart are moved. The grandiose conjure visions of the small, the insignificant, looking up to character, strength, accomplishment and other qualities that inspire awe. Sometimes those qualities are embodied in our leaders and evoke similar strong reactions.

Our leaders would do well to understand another, more effective and inspiring behavior: allegiance to their staff, to the very people who would look up to and revere them. The allegiances of leadership are overlooked at a cost. The power of allegiance has the potential to move people, yet is too often unattended and consequently underused.

Underused allegiance is a casualty of our culture. We accept and expect subordinates to show allegiance to their superiors, to pledge fealty and enjoy the benevolent guidance and protection afforded those who come to their leaders on bended knee. Ah, what nostalgic blather. Indeed, loyalty to a company is admirable, and appreciated by those in the head offices. But where upward allegiance delivers merely a one-to-one ratio of return, downward allegiance has limitless potential. One leader demonstrating commitment and loyalty to subordinates is noticed and appreciated well beyond each singular act.

Leaders, though, can become addicted to the allegiance of others. At first it is exciting, even a little unsettling, but over time leaders build a tolerance to it and then expect it. If you don’t believe me, try removing it from a seasoned leader and observe the response: indignation, frustration, anger, even vengeance. It is a dark and predictable part of our makeup. Our thirst for power and recognition can skew our view of the world.

The real magic happens when leaders offer praise and practice demonstrable allegiance to their staff. Colin Powell points to a time when he and his cohort were pushing an agenda with which President Ronald Reagan did not agree. Reagan made his dissension clear, but Powell prevailed. The project failed in a very public way, reflecting poorly on Reagan’s administration. Before the media, Reagan owned the project and the failure when he could have thrown others, including Powell, under the bus for their actions. Reagan’s actions secured the loyalty of Powell and everyone else associated with the project.

True strength is demonstrated by openness and deference even to those with less experience, education or intelligence. Effective leaders gain great insight from the least likely sources: children, service providers, doctors. The mere fact that the source is not considered an expert in the leader’s field is seen by the strong leader as an advantage. Indeed, the uninformed source may notice things that an expert’s closeness to the subject may obscure. It takes a mature, secure, confident leader to realize that experience is also baggage and that baggage can burden creativity. The challenge is to accept input and genuinely act on it when to do so is to admit that something was missed.

The challenge before us is not to prove how smart we are or how much we deserve our titles, pay, accolades or perks. It serves us much more powerfully to prove to others that they deserve every bit as much; that our achievements owe much to others who helped, and that who and what others are is of more interest and importance than anything we might be or say. Sometimes the return on that investment comes not from the content of their contributions, but by the connections we make, the lives we touch and the renewed commitment we inspire.