The Myth of the Strong Leader

1. The Myth of the "Strong" Leader: Power Isn't Always Strength

The central misconception, which I set out to expose, is the notion that strong leaders in the conventional sense of leaders who get their way, dominate their colleagues, and concentrate decision-making in their hands, are the most successful and admirable.

Challenging the conventional view. The book dismantles the idea that a "strong" leader, defined by their ability to dominate and centralize power, is inherently desirable. It argues that this perception is a dangerous myth, often leading to poor decisions and negative outcomes. True leadership encompasses a broader range of qualities beyond mere dominance.

Qualities of effective leaders:

• Integrity, intelligence, and articulateness
• Collegiality, shrewd judgment, and a questioning mind
• Willingness to seek diverse views and absorb information
• Flexibility, good memory, courage, vision, empathy, and boundless energy

Collective leadership is superior. The book advocates for collective leadership, emphasizing that placing excessive power in one person's hands is inappropriate in a democracy. Effective governance requires the input and expertise of multiple individuals, not just the singular vision of a "strong" leader.

2. Context is King: Leadership is Shaped by History, Culture, and Psychology

Leadership is highly contextual and what is appropriate or possible in one situation may be inappropriate or unattainable in another.

Historical evolution of leadership. The book traces the evolution of leadership from primitive societies to modern democracies, highlighting how different stages of social development have shaped the nature of authority and power. It emphasizes that leadership is not a static concept but is constantly evolving.

Cultural and psychological influences:

• Political culture: Deep-seated beliefs and values that shape how people view government and leadership
• Psychological factors: The tendency to admire power and greatness, and the emotional aspects of political decision-making
• Institutional context: The formal and informal rules that constrain and enable leaders

Contextual understanding is crucial. Effective leadership requires an understanding of the specific historical, cultural, psychological, and institutional context in which it is exercised. What works in one situation may not be appropriate or effective in another.

3. Redefining Leadership: Moving the Center, Not Just Occupying It

Redefining leaders, whether as individuals or collectively, seek to move the centre in their direction. They aim to alter people’s thinking on what is feasible and desirable.

Beyond the status quo. Redefining leaders are not content with simply occupying the existing political center. They actively seek to shift the center itself, challenging conventional wisdom and pushing the boundaries of what is considered politically possible.

Characteristics of redefining leaders:

• They alter the political agenda and redefine what is feasible and desirable
• They seek to change people's thinking and move the center in their direction
• They are not afraid to challenge established norms and push for radical change

Examples of redefining leaders:

• Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal
• Lyndon B. Johnson and the Great Society reforms
• Margaret Thatcher and her radical economic policies

Redefining leaders are not simply managers of the status quo; they are agents of change who reshape the political landscape and alter the course of history.

4. Transformational Leadership: Systemic Change for the Better

By a transformational leader I mean one who plays a decisive role in changing the economic system or political system of his or her country or who, even more remarkably, plays a crucial part in changing the international system.

Systemic change is the hallmark. Transformational leaders are those rare individuals who bring about fundamental changes to the economic, political, or international systems. They are not simply reformers but agents of profound and lasting transformation.

Distinction from revolutionary leaders:

• Transformational leaders achieve change without resorting to violence or coercion
• Revolutionary leaders often rely on force and establish new forms of authoritarian rule

Examples of transformational leaders:

• Mikhail Gorbachev and his role in ending the Cold War
• Nelson Mandela and his role in ending apartheid in South Africa
• Adolfo Suárez and his role in Spain's transition to democracy

Transformational leaders are not only agents of change but also catalysts for progress, leaving a lasting positive impact on their societies and the world.

5. Revolutionary Leadership: Forceful Change, Often with Unintended Consequences

Revolutionary leaders are, therefore, to be distinguished from those who play a decisive role in transforming the political or economic system of their country without resort either to violent seizure of power or to the physical coercion of their opponents.

Violent overthrow of the old order. Revolutionary leaders are those who come to power through the violent overthrow of existing state structures. They often inaugurate new forms of authoritarian rule, even when their initial goals are democratic and egalitarian.

Characteristics of revolutionary leaders:

• They rely on force and coercion to achieve their goals
• They often establish new forms of authoritarian rule
• They frequently create a cult of personality around themselves

Examples of revolutionary leaders:

• Vladimir Lenin in Russia
• Mao Zedong in China
• Fidel Castro in Cuba

Revolutionary leaders often bring about significant change, but their methods and outcomes are frequently marked by violence, repression, and unintended consequences.

6. Authoritarian and Totalitarian Leadership: The Perils of Unchecked Power

In a totalitarian system, one man (and all such systems have been male-dominated) holds preponderant, and frequently overwhelming, power. Authoritarian regimes, in contrast, can be either autocracies or oligarchies.

Concentration of power is the key. Totalitarian regimes are characterized by the concentration of power in the hands of a single leader, while authoritarian regimes may be ruled by a single dictator or a more collective leadership. Both types of regimes, however, place far more power in the hands of leaders than is possible in a democracy.

Totalitarian vs. authoritarian:

• Totalitarian regimes: One leader holds overwhelming power, often with a cult of personality
• Authoritarian regimes: Power may be held by a single dictator or a collective leadership

Dangers of unchecked power:

• Leaders become convinced of their own infallibility
• They are less likely to listen to dissenting views
• They are more prone to making disastrous decisions

The book emphasizes that the more power is concentrated in the hands of one person, the greater the risk of abuse and the more likely are the worst extremes of policy.

7. Foreign Policy Illusions: The Dangers of Overconfidence and Self-Deception

Yet, for all its limitations, the strong–weak theme has become a constant in discussions of leadership in democracies, not least in Great Britain.

The allure of the "strong" leader. Leaders who are perceived as "strong" are often more prone to making serious errors in foreign policy. This is because they tend to be overconfident in their own judgment and less willing to listen to expert advice.

Dangers of self-deception:

• Leaders may believe their own propaganda and ignore inconvenient facts
• They may be more likely to engage in military interventions based on flawed assumptions
• They may be less likely to seek consensus and compromise

Examples of foreign policy miscalculations:

• Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler
• Anthony Eden's invasion of Suez
• Tony Blair's decision to join the Iraq War

The book argues that effective foreign policy requires a willingness to listen to diverse perspectives, a commitment to international law, and a healthy dose of skepticism about one's own infallibility.

8. Desirable Leadership: Collegiality, Accountability, and Vision

Good leadership requires many attributes, whose relative importance varies according to time, place and context. It should never be confused with the overmighty power of overweening individuals.

Beyond the strong-weak dichotomy. The book argues that the strong-weak dichotomy is a limited and unhelpful way of assessing leaders. Effective leadership requires a broader range of qualities, including integrity, intelligence, and a willingness to seek diverse views.

Key attributes of desirable leadership:

• Collegiality and a willingness to share power
• Accountability to the people and the rule of law
• A clear vision for the future and the ability to inspire others
• A commitment to ethical behavior and the common good

The importance of process. Effective government requires a commitment to due process, involving all relevant stakeholders in decision-making and ensuring that actions are in conformity with the rule of law.

The book concludes that good leadership is not about the accumulation of power but about the ability to inspire, empower, and serve others, while also being accountable to them.

Last updated: February 1, 2025