Leadership Myths: Rethinking leadership

We are steeped in a dominant story: the leader as hero. A figure who stands at the front, sees further, acts faster, and bears more responsibility than the rest. It’s a compelling tale; clean, linear, reassuring. Especially in uncertain times.

But the hero myth is heavy. It expects leaders to know, to plan, to protect, to transform. To be the first to act, the last to rest, and the one to answer for everything in between. And too often, we accept this story without question. We reward it, promote it, and replicate it in ourselves.

This series names the quieter, more subtle versions of that myth. We look at the pressure to be the one with the answers. The belief that change must be driven, planned, and owned. The idea that leadership is presence; physical, vocal, constant. And the assumption that being needed is the same as being useful.

Each post exposes one of these threads. Not to dismiss leadership altogether, but to untangle it from its most isolating and performative forms.

Because these myths do harm. They cultivate dependency. They erode trust. They shrink the space for shared contribution, for uncertainty, for learning. And they’re tiring. To the leader. To everyone else.

What if we stopped equating leadership with centrality? What if the work was not to lead from the front, but to convene the room?

Not to solve, but to surface? Not to provide answers, but to hold better questions? These reflections are an invitation to reconsider what leadership is for. And to wonder, gently: what myths are you still living, and are they still worth it?

If you have some myths you would me to explore leave a comment or reach out. Let’s myth-bust together!