Wild Leadership

Organisations and their leaders: what to read.

The case that institutions tame the people who lead them has been made carefully since 1911. It sits in sociology rather than on the leadership shelf, which is why so few leaders have read it.


A century of argument that never reached the people it describes.


The foundations

Where the idea starts.

Max Weber

On the routinisation of charisma. The origin of the whole idea. Personal authority is unstable, so organisations convert it into procedure in order to survive themselves.

The leader ends up as custodian of a machine built to outlast them.

Robert Michels, 1911

Political Parties. Michels found the same pattern empirically, and in the least likely place. Organisations founded to overturn something become conservative, because the organisation itself becomes the thing being protected.

Written about parties. Describes companies exactly.


The fieldwork

The ones who went inside and looked.

1988

Moral Mazes

Robert Jackall. The essential one. He embedded inside corporations and found managers’ ethics were not personal at all. What counted as right was whatever the person above needed to be true, produced reliably in people who were decent outside the building. The fieldwork means it cannot be waved away as theory.

1977

Men and Women of the Corporation

Rosabeth Moss Kanter. The most rigorous structural case. Behaviour everyone reads as character is produced by position. Her account of how managers under uncertainty select the people who feel most predictable is the clearest description of domestication by selection anywhere.

1956

The Organization Man

William H. Whyte. The popular classic, less dated than it should be. His argument is not that the corporation crushes people. It is that they come to believe, sincerely, that the group is the source of good judgement.

Ethnography

Engineering Culture

Gideon Kunda. Why modern organisations do not need to issue instructions. People internalise what the culture requires, and then experience it as their own preference.


The mechanisms

How it actually operates.

Chris Argyris

Defensive routines

The one to read if the interest is psychological rather than structural. People self-censor automatically and beneath awareness, and the most important problems become undiscussable. Then the fact that they are undiscussable becomes undiscussable too.

DiMaggio and Powell, 1983

Institutional isomorphism

Why organisations in a field converge on each other’s forms regardless of whether the forms work. The reason your competitor’s reorganisation shows up in your business eighteen months later.

Alvesson and Spicer

Functional stupidity

Bright people in organisations systematically avoid thinking, not from incapacity but because it is rewarded. The least flattering description of professional life available, and it holds up.

Rakesh Khurana, 2002

Searching for a Corporate Savior

Works the other end of the process. Boards select on external legitimacy and the appearance of charisma rather than demonstrated ability, which means the domestication happens at appointment, before anyone has done anything.


The contemporary

Working now.

Dan Davies

The Unaccountability Machine

Accountability sinks. Organisations evolve structures whose function is to make decisions unattributable to any person. Not corruption. Design.

Margaret Heffernan

Wilful blindness

Organisational blindness is chosen rather than accidental, and resilience requires the slack that optimisation removes.

Megan Reitz

Speak Out, Listen Up

Silence treated as a power problem rather than an interpersonal one, which makes it more useful than most of the psychological safety literature.

Gianpiero Petriglieri

Leadership and identity

The insider who criticises leadership development while working inside it, which makes the critique harder to dismiss.

Dacher Keltner

The power paradox

The qualities that get people promoted are the ones power erodes. Worth reading alongside Sukhvinder Obhi on how power degrades the neural machinery for reading other people.


The limits

Where the literature stops.

Three honest limitations, and they are the same three every time.

It is about the middle

Almost all of it studies middle managers. The sociology assumes constraint in the middle and agency at the top, and mostly declines to ask whether the domestication continues into the chief executive’s chair.

It is fatalistic

These writers explain the mechanism and offer little about resisting it, partly because as sociologists they doubt individuals can. Accurate diagnosis is scarcer than advice, so this is not fatal. It does leave a gap.

It is written from outside

Jackall observed. Kanter studied. Whyte reported. The account by someone who noticed it happening to them, said so plainly, and then had to work out what to do about it is not really there.

The gap

The account written from inside the seat is the one that is missing.

That is the territory Wild Leadership occupies. Whether it fills the gap is a question about the writing, which is published weekly and in the open.


Find out more

Where to go deeper.

The Domestication of Leaders, the essay the argument grew from.

The mechanism, set out in full.

What Wild Leadership is, and the way into the rest of the thinking.

The work

The thinking, as it happens.

A Field Note on Monday. An essay on Thursday. If the gap above is the one you have been reading around, that is where it gets filled or fails to, in public.