• What makes an ideal leader has been a question of the ages 
• Can science qualify ideal leadership? 
• New research shows that our conceptions of ideal leadership change during elections

What does the “ideal” leader look like? What qualities do they possess? Since the dawn of humans living together we have designed societies with hierarchical systems so that the “best” person can be selected to lead the rest. From Homeric councils of lords and Plato’s philosopher kings to modern-day dictators and the democratically elected prime ministers and presidents.

We’ve cycled through various forms of God-given or self-appointed leaders and popularly-elected representatives, but what is it that helps us to make the decision of who to put in charge?

Leadership is an intangible concept. The qualities that were deemed valuable in a leader in 1700 or 1920 are markedly different from what we want now – indeed the image of an “ideal” leader has shifted significantly since the turn of the millennium, and continues to do so with every generation that reaches adulthood, bringing differing demands and requiring something a little different from those they choose to look up to.

Attitudes toward leadership, then, change. But what of the impact that leaders make on us, and our own perceptions of what “ideal” leadership should look like?

Election time

Elections do more than shape future governance, they redefine the public perception of leadership itself. A cornerstone of societal life for a majority of the global population (in 2024 alone more than 70 countries will hold elections, determining who will become the political leaders of over two billion people), elections captivate nations, influencing discussions from media rooms to dinner tables.

The outcome of elections affect people’s lives in numerous ways; from healthcare, foreign policy, and social justice to how much they might end up paying for a weekly shop – never mind the impact that politics can have on relationships with friends and family.

They’re also, it turns out, highly influential when it comes to shaping what people believe “ideal” leadership should look like, according to new research from Durham University Business School, by inspiring others to act in the same manner in their own leadership roles.

Undertaken by Olga Epitropaki, Professor of Management at Durham University Business School, alongside Theodore Masters-Waage at the University of Houston, Nicolas Bastardoz at KU Leuven, and Jayanth Narayanan of  Northeastern University, the study explores the ripple effects of the seismic 2020 US Presidential Election.

Pitting two very different kinds of leader against each other, the research suggests, shaped people’s ideas of what an “ideal” leader should be. But “ideal” is not necessarily the same as “good” or “effective” leadership, the researchers caution. Ideal leadership is, instead, people’s broad perceptions of what they want in a leader. It is the stuff of heroization.

Elections have a profound impact on societies through tonal shift, media deluge, political tribalism, the threat or promise of policy change, and through general societal impact, the study notes. However, whilst a wealth of research exists on this fact – that the elections shift and shape political consciousness – little exploration into the role of elections in shifting people’s perceptions of “ideal” leadership has been conducted.

But, according to Prof Epitropaki, understanding what drives perceptions of “ideal” leadership is extremely important.

“Individuals hold their own ideas of what makes an “ideal” leader, which we call leadership prototypes,” says Prof Epitropaki. “These prototypes shape how we interact with leaders and can even affect how we see ourselves as leaders. Understanding how and why leadership ideals shift is important as they influence not only how people engage with their leaders in work contexts, but also how leaders themselves behave.”

Looking back on 2020

The 2020 US election provided an ideal test site for the researchers due to the polarised styles of the candidates, who were opposed in presidential style as well as policy.

Given that the US system is presidential, and that the president is elected through a mandate of the people, and that the US is a place of mythicization and heroization – think of John Wayne, Elvis, Raegan – the US president is a representative ideal leader over many other political systems. Often held up as a figure whose power extends beyond their country’s borders – both in reality and in works of fiction.

To gather their evidence, a sample of 200 Republicans, 200 Democrats and 200 Independents were surveyed eight times between October 2020 and Inauguration Day in January 2021. The surveys encouraged respondents to share their perceptions of what characteristics they felt make an ideal leader.

Each time, participants were asked to place value on seven categories of traits deemed as essential for leaders to possess; charisma, sensitivity, dedication, intelligence and dynamism, as well as less favourable traits like tyranny and masculinity.

Researchers then used this evidence to examine whether the change in political leadership – from Donald Trump to Joe Biden – led to a significant and stable shift in how people viewed “ideal” leadership.

As most supporters of either candidate would reasonably argue their chosen leader held and valued traits such as sensitivity, dedication or intelligence, the study focused particularly on the presence of tyranny and masculinity. Trump, the researchers say, is typically viewed as more tyrannical and masculine than Biden by all. Such traits were only deemed as valuable to some sections of those surveyed.

Furthermore, the results revealed that, over the three-months covering the lead-up to and aftermath of the US election, there was a notable and persistent shift. The presence of tyranny and masculinity in what was deemed an “ideal” leader diminished.

The shift was to favour a more “Biden-like” and less “Trump-like” leadership prototype.

This reveals that the average US idea of what an “ideal” leader is can be profoundly shaped by the political environment they’re in and how a presidential candidate comports themselves, the image that they project to the people.

Who is influencing who?

This means, the researchers say, that elections stand to do more than simply shape future governance. Elected leaders not only mirror public perceptions of ideal leadership they redefine the public perception of leadership itself.

Politics, it seems, affects us in more ways than even the politically paranoid believe. People do not have quite such a solid, immovable idea of ideals – they are fluid and malleable and deeply shaped by events. They evolve with time and in reaction to the environment around them.

The change of president from Trump to Biden not only shifted policy but also reshaped the qualities that the American public—knowingly or not—values in its leaders.

Politics is, then, a theatre not only for electing a leader but for redefining ideals ourselves.

By Thomas Willis

Interested in this topic? You might also like this…