What’s Next for Leadership after the Hero Rides Off? A Critical Reflection on Collective and Processual Approaches to Leadership

This paper discusses and critiques how collective and processual approaches to leadership risk replacing heroic romanticism with new idealisations. It identifies several underexamined areas in need of further attention: the neglect of power, hierarchy, and accountability; the romanticization of collective practice as inherently democratic; the assumption that purpose is morally ‘good’; the downplaying of intent within strong process ontologies; and the omission of formal managers in research with a collective leadership lens. The paper calls for a more realistic leadership scholarship that attends to the everyday practices through which leadership is accomplished within organizational realities.MAD statementThis reflective piece aims to Make a Difference by challenging a proposed romanticism surrounding collective and processual leadership theories. It does so by arguing for a more realistic scholarship that foregrounds power, intent, accountability, and the role of formal managers. By critiquing the critique of leadership theory and research proposed in JCM, it illuminates how well-intended leadership theories risk overlooking everyday organizational life and human complexity. The critique provided is pivotal to further develop the theory of leadership as being collective and processual.