- List of Contributors
- Puzzles of Political Leadership
- Western Political Thought
- Theory of Democratic Leadership
- Political Science
- Public Administration
- Political Psychology
- Psychoanalytic Theories
- Social Psychology
- Rational Choice Approaches to Leadership
- Institutional Analysis
- Contextual Analysis
- Decision Analysis
- Social-Constructionist Analysis
- Rhetorical and Performative Analysis
- Experimental Analysis
- Observational Analysis
- At-A-Distance Analysis
- Biographical Analysis
- Personality Profiling Analysis
- Civic Leadership
- Party and Electoral Leadership
- Populism and Political Leadership
- Performative Political Leadership
- Political Leadership in Networks
- Political Leadership in Times of Crisis
- Leadership and the American Presidency
- Presidential Communication from Hustings to Twitter
- Executive Leadership in Semi-Presidential Systems
- The Variability of Prime Ministers
- The Contingencies of Prime-Ministerial Power in the UK
- Prime Ministers and their Advisers in Parliamentary Democracies
- Cabinet Ministers: Leaders, Team Players, Followers?
- Local Political Leaders
- Regional Political Leadership
- Leadership and International Cooperation
- Leadership of International Organizations
- Political Leadership in China
- Latin American Leadership
- Post-Communist Leadership
- African Political Leadership
- Can Political Leadership be Taught?
- Does Gender Matter?
- What Have We Learned?
- Name Index
- Subject Index
Abstract and Keywords
The key subject of this chapter is the inherently paradoxical idea of democratic leadership. The theoretical and empirical kinship between different styles of leadership and different models of democracy is at the centre of the study, analysing which forms of democracy thrive under the guidance of which types of leaders. The authors argue that political leaders increasingly operate in more hybrid forms of democracy—that is, democratic regimes in which characteristics of different models of democracy are combined, and for that reason are required to develop innovative political repertoires that could be characterized as ‘kaleidoscopic leadership’. They posit that the interaction between the theoretical modelling of democracy and the empirical expressions of leadership must be central to political leadership studies.
Frank Hendriks is Professor of Comparative Governance at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. He deals with cross-border comparison of policies and governance systems, including the comparative analysis of democratic and decisionmaking models at the national and the subnational level. He has conducted extensive research, partly commissioned by public bodies, on governance and democracy at the local, regional, national and European level. Hendriks has published in international journals such as Public Administration; Democratization; Local Government Studies; Administrative Theory and Praxis; Journal of Crises and Contingencies, International Review of Administrative Sciences, and more.
Niels Karsten is a researcher at the Demos-Centre for Better Governance and Citizenship, Tilburg University. He specializes in local political-executive leadership. His PhD thesis investigates public leadership accountability in consensual democracies, with an international comparative case study of how local executives regain authority when making controversial decisions. He has published in journals such as Administration & Society and Local Government Studies.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.