In this chapter the concept of leadership is first assessed, with attention being drawn to the difficulties of reaching a consensus on its definition. The development of political leadership in British local government is next considered, emphasising the variety of leadership styles that have emerged. A framework for understanding local political leadership, and the impact of the new leadership arrangements introduced by the government in 2001, is then set out. This framework draws on the ‘new institutionalist’ perspective, which was outlined in Chapter One. Finally the government's enthusiasm for strong leadership is critically evaluated, drawing on evidence from recent research.

Different concepts of leadership

It is important to reflect on what is meant by leadership, because there is some variety and confusion in the ways in which the language of leadership is used. Until fairly recently, the focus in the academic literature, has been on leaders as individuals. Bryman et al (1996, p 866) describe this as ‘the tendency to focus on the mythologizable deeds of free-wheeling executives’. However, for local political leadership, this view is often tempered by the notions of collective responsibility, the electoral mandate and the role of the political party, such that leadership can be seen as more of a shared responsibility. On the other hand, the innovation of the elected mayor option in English local government is focusing greater attention on so-called ‘strong leaders’.

Leadership is indeed a complex construct, open to subjective interpretation. The way leadership is defined and understood is strongly influenced by one's theoretical stance:

Northouse (2004, p 3) also offers some useful comparisons as to how leadership is currently conceived:

• • Trait versus process leadership: the trait approach proposes that leadership is a quality that resides within specific individuals, whereas the process view sees it as a phenomenon that resides in the context and behaviours of interacting people.