What Makes Leadership Worth Following?

We often associate leadership with influence, confidence, authority, and the ability to inspire others. We admire people who speak with conviction, challenge established systems, and demonstrate an unwavering commitment to their beliefs.

But I've often wondered whether these qualities are enough to make someone a good leader.

After all, history is filled with influential people whose decisions have produced profoundly different consequences.

Influence alone is not evidence of ethical leadership. Neither is popularity, ambition, or the ability to persuade others.

Perhaps a more meaningful question is not whether someone has the power to lead, but what they choose to do with that power, whom it benefits, and how they respond when their decisions are challenged.

In March 2019, while pursuing my Master of Social Work at the University of Southern California, I completed a leadership analysis examining the career and leadership style of then-U.S. Senator Cory Booker.

Through the frameworks of servant leadership, strengths-based leadership, and ethical decision-making, I explored the relationship between personal values, political authority, and social responsibility.

Revisiting that research has encouraged me to think more critically about what leadership actually requires.

The Difference Between Having Power and Exercising Leadership

One of the central concepts I examined was legitimate power, the authority individuals receive because of their formal positions.

A senator, organizational director, or school administrator may possess the authority to make decisions that affect large groups of people.

However, holding a position of authority does not automatically make someone an effective or ethical leader.

Power determines what someone is permitted to do. Leadership involves how they use that authority and the responsibilities they accept alongside it.

In my original analysis, I examined Booker's career as mayor of Newark and later as a U.S. senator, particularly his emphasis on community engagement and criminal justice reform.

His public approach to leadership provided an opportunity to consider how leaders communicate their values through their actions.

But there is an important distinction between demonstrating personal commitment and producing meaningful institutional change.

A leader may perform an extraordinary act of service while still facing limitations in their ability to transform larger systems.

This raises a question worth considering:

Should leadership be evaluated by individual acts of compassion, or by the lasting conditions those actions help create?

Perhaps both matter, but they tell us different things.

Servant Leadership: When Leadership Begins With Service

Servant leadership challenges traditional assumptions about power.

Rather than positioning leadership primarily as the ability to direct others, this framework emphasizes serving the needs of individuals and communities.

A servant leader seeks to understand the experiences of others and use their position to support collective well-being.

In my original paper, I explored examples of Booker's involvement in community service, including his willingness to personally assist Newark residents during difficult circumstances.

These examples illustrated an approach in which a public official was willing to participate in work often considered outside the expectations of political leadership.

What I find particularly interesting about servant leadership, however, is its underlying ethical question.

Are leaders willing to prioritize the needs of others when doing so offers little personal recognition?

Public acts of service can demonstrate compassion and accessibility. Yet ethical leadership also requires attention to the less visible responsibilities of governance, accountability, and institutional decision-making.

True service should not depend on whether someone is watching.

It should be reflected in the decisions leaders make when recognition is absent and the consequences are difficult.

Can Good Intentions Produce Harmful Outcomes?

Another important aspect of leadership involves the relationship between intention and impact.

We often evaluate people based on what they claim to value.

A leader may express a commitment to justice, equality, compassion, or community well-being.

But values alone do not guarantee that decisions will produce the intended outcomes.

A policy introduced with the goal of improving public safety may create unintended consequences for vulnerable communities.

An organizational change intended to increase efficiency may place additional burdens on employees.

A well-intentioned intervention may fail to account for the experiences of those most directly affected.

This is where ethical reflection becomes essential.

Rather than assuming that good intentions justify particular actions, leaders must be willing to examine evidence, seek feedback, and reconsider decisions when their consequences differ from what was anticipated.

Ethical leadership requires the ability to distinguish between believing we are doing something beneficial and demonstrating that our actions are producing meaningful benefits.

It also requires acknowledging that we may be wrong.

Leadership, Collaboration, and the Limits of Individual Influence

One leadership quality I explored in Booker's career was his emphasis on collaboration.

Throughout his public service, Booker has described the importance of bringing together community organizations, elected officials, businesses, and residents to address complex social issues.

This reflects a broader understanding of leadership as a collective process rather than an individual achievement.

In social work, we frequently encounter problems that cannot be resolved through the efforts of one person or profession.

Poverty, housing instability, educational inequality, and barriers to employment are influenced by interconnected systems.

Addressing these concerns often requires collaboration across organizations, disciplines, and communities.

Yet collaboration introduces its own challenges.

People may disagree about priorities, resources, or what constitutes a successful outcome.

Compromise may be necessary, but not every compromise is equitable.

A decision that satisfies the greatest number of people may still disadvantage those with the least power.

This leads to another important question:

When leaders seek consensus, how do they ensure that the voices of marginalized individuals are not lost in the process?

Meaningful collaboration requires more than inviting people into a conversation.

It requires considering whether they have the opportunity, resources, and influence necessary to participate in decisions that affect their lives.

The Ethical Responsibility of Influence

In my original paper, I examined Booker's advocacy concerning criminal justice reform and the barriers individuals may experience after incarceration.

People returning to their communities may encounter difficulties obtaining employment, securing housing, and rebuilding their lives.

These challenges illustrate how institutional policies can continue influencing individuals long after a formal sentence has ended.

From a social work perspective, the question extends beyond whether someone has fulfilled a legal obligation.

It involves examining how communities balance accountability, rehabilitation, public safety, and opportunities for reintegration.

This is where political leadership and social work share an important responsibility.

Both require decisions about how resources, opportunities, and protections are distributed.

The consequences of those decisions are not experienced equally.

For individuals already navigating poverty, discrimination, or social exclusion, policy choices may carry especially significant implications.

Leadership therefore requires an awareness of how power operates within larger systems.

An ethical leader should consider not only those who support a decision, but also those who may be adversely affected by it.

What Leadership Has Come to Mean to Me

When I completed this assignment in 2019, I was developing my understanding of leadership through theories, assessments, and public examples.

I was particularly interested in qualities such as confidence, empathy, strategic thinking, and the ability to motivate others.

I still believe these characteristics can contribute to effective leadership.

But I've come to appreciate that leadership is more complicated than possessing an impressive collection of strengths.

Confidence without reflection can become rigidity.

Empathy without boundaries can interfere with sound judgment.

Collaboration without accountability can produce decisions for which no one accepts responsibility.

And influence without ethical consideration can become an instrument of harm.

Perhaps the qualities we associate with leadership are most valuable when they are balanced by a willingness to question ourselves.

For me, this is particularly relevant to social work, where our decisions can affect the autonomy, dignity, and well-being of the people we serve.

We may enter helping professions because we want to improve people's lives.

But wanting to help does not automatically mean we understand what another person needs.

Leadership requires listening, examining assumptions, and recognizing when those we hope to support may see the situation differently.

Final Reflections: Leadership as a Responsibility, Not an Identity

Looking back on my original analysis of Cory Booker, I recognize that the most enduring lessons extend beyond any single political figure.

Leadership is not simply a personality trait, professional title, or collection of accomplishments.

It is an ongoing relationship between influence, responsibility, and the people affected by our decisions.

We should be able to appreciate a leader's strengths while critically examining their limitations.

We should be willing to distinguish meaningful outcomes from compelling public narratives.

And we should recognize that ethical leadership is not established once and for all. It must be demonstrated through decisions, accountability, and a willingness to evolve.

Perhaps the true measure of leadership is not how many people are willing to follow us, but whether our influence creates conditions in which others can exercise greater agency, dignity, and opportunity.

After all, the purpose of leadership should not simply be to accumulate power.

It should be to understand the responsibility that comes with having it.