Exploring the Depths of Leadership

Leadership is an important but ambiguous notion. If asked, we fairly easily can identify examples of a good leader: perhaps someone we find inspiring; someone who successfully motivates others to join in a collective endeavour; someone who dares to create foundations for meaningful change. In equal measure, we can probably summon examples of poor leaders: someone who creates divisions rather than cohesion; someone who does not make decisions, or makes poor decisions; someone who betrays the trust bestowed on them. Yet, do these examples sum up what leadership is? 

Leadership has over the years been described as personality traits, as behaviour, as a process, as a relationship, as a quality or as an ideal. Metaphors abound in an attempt to capture the essence of leadership, which indeed suggests that leadership is a rather mysterious, symbolic matter.

Some scholars have suggested that leadership is archetypal and that the ancient myths (such as Greek mythology) can teach us much about the underlying dynamics of leadership: some leaders are Zeus-like, the Olympian ruler; others showcase Hermes-like qualities, the messenger and shape-shifting god; yet others follow the path of Gilgamesh, the hero from one of the oldest epic myths recorded. The leading question asked here is: to what extent and how is leadership archetypal? 

Another crucial question presents itself when we start exploring leaders instead of leadership as such. Here, we are faced with individuals just like us – no heroes, no superhuman beings, but mere individuals with their stories and their personalities who have ended up in a leadership role. The way each of these individuals interpret, experience and enact their leadership role is greatly influenced by their own psychodynamics. In other words, the leader that one becomes mirrors the state of one’s psyche. In turn, the leader’s psychodynamics can shed light onto the collective dynamics – both conscious and unconscious – at play within the community they lead. 

The first step towards exploring the psychodynamics of a leader is to start appreciating the role of the shadow in the leadership experience. Given the basic psychological principles of opposites and equivalence, the brighter the shine of a leader, the darker the shadow they carry. This does not necessarily mean the leader themselves are hiding anything or are being dishonest – although that is of course a possibility. Rather, it means that in the dynamic relationship between the leader and the community, some ‘dark stuff’ is accumulating and that stuff will need to be acknowledged consciously by all before it creates serious damage. If ignored for too long, we easily can fall into the patterns so well captured by Henrik Ibsen in his 1882 play An enemy of the people. In this incredibly modern play, two brothers embody two very different experiences and interpretations of leadership, each mirroring their psychodynamics and each highlighting the ‘dark stuff’ that lie at the heart of that quiet community.  

Without acknowledging and exploring the depths, leadership may not deliver what we hope for.