Why we seek "strong" leaders in a crisis – and why we should embrace collective leadership instead

When the world feels unstable, we want someone to step in and take control. Historically, this has resulted in the rise of heroic leadership – the idea that in times of crisis, a single, strong leader will emerge to guide us through.

Laura Empson, professor of Leadership and Organization at CBS, and expert in leading professionals, explains why this instinct is so deeply ingrained in us.

"In times of crisis, there’s a phrase: ‘Cometh the hour, cometh the man.’ The idea is that great challenges throw up great leaders, typically men, who will protect us from the things we’re scared of," she says.

The heroic leader is someone who is big and brave and strong, someone who can fight for us. This is deeply rooted in us from childhood. When we are afraid, we turn to a paternalistic figure, a protector.  - Laura Empson, Professor

Heroic leaders infantilise us

This tendency to seek out a singular, dominant leader is evident in both politics and business. Laura Empson points out that charismatic figures who project confidence are often elevated as saviours, even if their actual solutions are flawed.

"This is not just about protection, but about aggressively pushing forward, overcoming obstacles, and winning – supposedly on behalf of all of us," she says.

"Populist leaders, both in politics and business, present themselves in this way so that we project onto them all our hopes and fantasies about a saviour."

However, the problem is that this type of leadership can be deeply misleading.

"We turn to the people who present us with simple solutions. We turn to the people who are driven by ego. We turn to them because they have answers, but they do not necessarily have the right answers," Laura Empson warns.

She also points out a major flaw in the heroic leadership model:   

"It infantilises us. It makes us dependent. It encourages us to think, ‘I don’t have to take responsibility because this great leader will fix everything.’ And that is never healthy."

An alternative: Collective Leadership

If heroic leadership is problematic, what should we turn to instead?

Laura Empson argues that collective leadership – a model where leadership is shared across a group rather than concentrated in one person – can be far more effective, particularly for complex challenges.

While strong and decisive leadership may be necessary in a short-terms crisis, collective leadership can be more effective when trying to address complex challenges or so-called “wicked” problems, involving multiple stakeholders with diverse interests.

"Collective leadership isn’t about a single person driving change," she explains. "It’s about leadership as a process—something that happens between people, rather than something one person does."

In organisations with complex structures or high levels of expertise among an extended group of peers, this model often arises naturally."You often see it in professional organisations where many people are at the same level, all with their own autonomy. No single leader has absolute authority, so leadership is about negotiation, influence, and collective decision-making."

This approach, Laura Empson explains, is not just about fairness – it’s about resilience.

"When leadership is shared, organisations are less dependent on a single figure. They become more adaptable, more responsive. And in a world of constant disruption, that is a real strength."

Why we resist Collective Leadership

Despite its advantages, collective leadership can feel unnatural, especially in times of uncertainty.

"It’s messy. It’s volatile. It takes time," Laura Empson admits. "People crave stability, and collective leadership doesn’t always offer that. It requires the balancing of different interests, constant negotiations – an unstable equilibrium. And it can feel frustratingly slow."

She also notes that our cultural expectations of leadership are still heavily shaped by the heroic idea.

"Particularly in business, the idea of a singular, visionary leader is reinforced by the media. The business press loves a strong character with a clear message – it makes for a great story. But in reality, leadership is often much more complex and nuanced."

So, how do we overcome our resistance and begin to embrace collective leadership?

Shifting our mindset

Laura Empson believes that changing the way we think about leadership begins with rethinking what it means to be a strong leader.

"Often, people assume that a strong leader is someone who projects absolute confidence and decisiveness. But real strength in leadership is about being able to listen, to engage with different perspectives, and to empower others."

One of the biggest challenges, she says, is getting leaders to slow down and truly listen.

"Often people who see themselves as visionary and very clear-sighted are already halfway down the path and don’t understand why no one’s following them. And people like that need to spend far more time than they could ever imagine listening to people’s concerns, even up to the point when they feel like they can’t do it any longer. And then they need to stay and listen some more."

Another key shift is moving away from an individual taking on the overwhelming responsibility of the leader, to focusing on giving others the means to perform.

"Many leaders, particularly in difficult times, feel an enormous burden – they think they have to fix everything themselves," Laura Empson says.

"But actually, their job is to help others step up and share that burden. Leadership isn’t about knowing all the answers. It’s about creating the conditions where others can work together to develop solutions."

The future of leadership: Can we move beyond the strongman?

Will we ever move away from our obsession with heroic leadership? Laura Empson believes leadership trends go in cycles.

"We have periods when we elevate the hero, and then we become disillusioned when they fail us. It happens in politics, it happens in business. We invest everything in one person, and when they inevitably fall short, we experiment with a different approach for a while."

In the geopolitical sphere, she recognises that collective leadership is not in the ascendancy at the moment, noting that populist figures continue to rise in response to global instability. But in business and organisations, she believes there is an opportunity for change.

"Organisations that embrace collective leadership will be better equipped to navigate uncertainty. They will be more adaptable, more resilient. And if leaders can learn to share power rather than hoard it, they will ultimately be more effective."

But making this shift requires a cultural and psychological change—one that challenges our deeply ingrained instinct to seek a single, dominant leader.

"The world is changing rapidly. No one person can have all the answers. It’s time we stopped looking for heroes and started looking for each other."