Opinion: Leadership in changing age
By Jose-Francisco Jimenez-Diaz In all ages there have been public leaders. It is a historical constant and a recurring sociocultural fact. Human societies require leaders, at different levels, who guide and inspire personal actions. One of the central purposes of political leadership is to contribute to social cooperation and collective action. For this reason, each […]
By Jose-Francisco Jimenez-Diaz
In all ages there have been public leaders. It is a historical constant and a recurring sociocultural fact. Human societies require leaders, at different levels, who guide and inspire personal actions. One of the central purposes of political leadership is to contribute to social cooperation and collective action.
For this reason, each culture, from a particular point of view, has generated its own idea of a good ruler. Thus, in the past, a variety of idealisations or mythical images of the leader have been forged. While Plato extolled the intellectual qualities of the “philosopher-kings” to govern the ancient Greek cities (polis), Machiavelli praised the multiple precautions of the Renaissance “new prince”. For his part, Hobbes attributed religious and political powers to a “mortal God” (Leviathan) who could placate the civil conflicts of modern absolute monarchies.
This article exposes some relevant ideas about political leadership that are usually undervalued and ignored.
Crisis, Myths, Errors
During crises or times of socio-political changes, the “people” usually demand strong leaders, rather than wise or prudent, who make immediate and effective decisions to face uncertainties. For example, in the German elections of 1932, and after the Teutonic people experienced various crises since 1914, Hitler was the most voted candidate.
However, giving all the power to the leaders may involve more mistakes than successes. In the medium and long term, rulers who have or claim a lot of power tend to abuse it, and this compromises the survival of the community. This was verified in the case of Hitler.
For his part, the “strong” political leader is a sociocultural myth due to the human need to placate anxiety, uncertainty and fear in the face of unforeseeable and unexpected events. To mythologise leaders implies attributing to them qualities and aptitudes that they lack.
Thus, the “leader attribution error” is frequently made. So when things go well or badly in an organisation or community, “we quickly attribute the result to the leader: he often becomes the scapegoat, although he is often more a symbol of failure than its cause.” Likewise, it has been shown that “the greatest achievements and failures of a government have less to do with the person in charge than with other members of his team”.
An example of this is the political management of the economic crisis between 2008 and 2014 in Spain. As is known, the European union (EU) imposed budget cuts which, in turn, were assumed by presidents Rodríguez Zapatero and Rajoy. The economic policies of both presidents adhered to the guidelines imposed by the EU, and they agreed to reform article 135 of the Constitution . But there is little analysis of this complicated process of political leadership.
Complexity, Interdependencies
Occupying a position of institutional power does not enable one to exercise political leadership. This, on many occasions, is shown in people who occupy subordinate and intermediate positions. Most human beings do not hold relevant positions, but many “lead from the middle, attracting and persuading up and down ”. Therefore, in complex societies leadership can be found at different social and institutional levels. For example, the young Greta Thunberg (2003) has led the protests against climate change, an issue relegated to the institutional agenda in many countries.
Furthermore, leadership cannot be adequately studied by focusing on the analysis of one person. To approach the study of leadership, the same importance must be given to the context and the followers as to the leaders (and their teams). These parts are both independent and interdependent: each affects and is affected by the other two.
The aforementioned process of leadership implies that the leader is a very interdependent person. On many occasions, the leader is the first supporter of a cause. This seems to be evident in the case of President Zelenskyy, who has become the first defender of Ukraine against the invasion perpetrated by Putin’s army. It is very significant that the Ukrainian president appears dressed as a soldier, as this seems to raise the morale of the invaded country.
No leader can lead in isolation. To isolate the leader is to take away his condition as guide and inspirer. In other words, all leadership depends on a support network. This network is dynamic and varies depending on the changing context, the will of the followers and the style of leadership. Therefore, leading implies building and sustaining interdependencies.
The concepts of leadership and power are related, but should not be confused. Leadership requires power, but not all power relationships involve leadership. Power exercised through the sheer use of force is not leadership, but coercion and/or violence and cannot be justified in the long run.
In societies led by dictators, the naked exercise of power is mistakenly confused with the various guises of leadership. Every person aspiring to lead must know how to wear such clothes to legitimise his leadership. As Rousseau said : “The strongest is never strong enough to always dominate if he does not transform his strength into right and obedience into duty.”
Democratic Leadership
Since the end of the 20th century, various studies show a growing disappointment and distrust of citizens in leadership and representative institutions. This is a widespread problem in all Western democracies. These demand greater effort and quality from their leaders, since the rulers must be accountable and have citizen consent and legitimacy.
In the present circumstances of social acceleration and political change, many leaders are left out of date. Those who rule soon decline in their potential ability to lead. This is aggravated when the leaders are not very credible, not very competent, do not know the context and incorporate personalistic and non-adaptive attitudes.
The above ideas may lead to a global rethinking of democratic leadership in this changing age. We risk free coexistence and human dignity in our world.
(The author is Professor of Political Science and Administration, Pablo de Olavide University. theconversation.com)
Now you can get handpicked stories from Telangana Today on Telegram everyday. Click the link to subscribe.
Click to follow Telangana Today Facebook page and Twitter .
