This article develops an integrated theoretical and empirical framework for understanding leadership as a relational, ethical, and historically embedded process co-constructed by leaders and the people. Challenging leader-centric and purely instrumental approaches, the study conceptualizes leadership not as an inherent property of exceptional individuals or formal office holders, but as a morally contingent and socially conferred phenomenon grounded in legitimacy, collective agency, and ethical reciprocity. Drawing upon interdisciplinary scholarship from political theory, sociology, organizational studies, psychology, and governance research, the article advances a people-centered conception of leadership that emphasizes the active role of citizens, followers, and stakeholders in constituting, evaluating, and sustaining leadership legitimacy. The study advances three central arguments. First, leadership is ontologically relational and exists only through the continuous interaction between leaders and the people, whose consent, interpretation, and moral judgment determine the durability of authority. Second, ethical positivity, encompassing hope, empathy, integrity, moral courage, and visionary responsibility, functions not merely as a desirable leadership trait but as a structural precondition for sustainable and transformative leadership. Third, historical and contemporary evidence demonstrates a persistent moral divergence between emancipatory leadership oriented toward justice, inclusion, and collective flourishing, and destructive leadership grounded in coercion, manipulation, exclusion, and domination. The article synthesizes classical leadership theories, including trait, behavioral, contingency, transformational, Weberian, and ethical leadership traditions, while extending them through a relational-normative framework of legitimacy. It further incorporates contemporary political challenges, including electoral legitimacy crises, corruption, populism, regime change, narrative construction, globalization, and the tension between genuine revolution and elite-driven political manipulation. Through comparative historical analysis, the article examines the leadership trajectories of Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman alongside destructive authoritarian cases such as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, illustrating how ethical orientation fundamentally shapes leadership outcomes and historical consequences. The study argues that modern leadership legitimacy is increasingly contested within fragmented informational environments where symbolic narratives often compete with empirical realities. Consequently, leadership must be understood as a continuously negotiated social process shaped by institutional constraints, ethical accountability, and the interpretive agency of the people. The article concludes by proposing an integrative framework for people-centered leadership that emphasizes democratic participation, institutional safeguards, moral legitimacy, and active civic consciousness as foundational conditions for humane, sustainable, and transformative governance in the twenty-first century.
| Published in | Journal of Human Resource Management (Volume 14, Issue 2) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18 |
| Page(s) | 179-193 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Leadership, Legitimacy, Democracy, Ethics, People-centered Governance, Corruption, Regime Change, Transformational Leadership
| [1] | Alam, Z. Return of the hero. The New Nation. January 15, 2017. Available from: The New Nation. |
| [2] | Alam, Z. The people and the leadership. The New Nation. December 19, 2017. Available from: The New Nation. |
| [3] | Alam, Z. Resetting the compass: Governance, legitimacy, and the crisis of direction. Journal of Public Policy and Administration. 2026. |
| [4] | Alam, Z. Revolution vs. conspiracy: Reinterpreting political upheaval in the modern state. Journal of Public Policy and Administration. 2026. |
| [5] | Alam, Z. Between myth and metrics: Leadership, perception, and policy reality. Journal of Public Policy and Administration. 2026. |
| [6] | Arendt, H. On Violence. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace; 1970. |
| [7] | Arendt, H. Crises of the Republic. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace; 1971. |
| [8] | Barker, C. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London, UK: Sage; 2010. |
| [9] | Bass, B. M. Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York, NY: Free Press; 1985. |
| [10] | Bass, B. M. From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics. 1990; 18(3): 19–31. |
| [11] | Benkler, Y. The Wealth of Networks. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2006. |
| [12] | Branch, T. Parting the Waters: America in the King Years, 1954–63. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster; 1988. |
| [13] | Brown, J. M. Gandhi: Prisoner of Hope. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1991. |
| [14] | Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly. 2006; 17(6): 595–616. |
| [15] | Burns, J. M. Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row; 1978. |
| [16] | Cameron, K. S. Positive Leadership: Strategies for Extraordinary Performance. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler; 2012. |
| [17] | Carlyle, T. On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History. London, UK: James Fraser; 1841. |
| [18] | Castells, M. Networks of Outrage and Hope. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; 2012. |
| [19] | Chenoweth, E., Stephan, M. J. Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 2011. |
| [20] | Ciulla, J. B. Ethics, the Heart of Leadership. 3rd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger; 2014. |
| [21] | Crevani, L., Lindgren, M., Packendorff, J. Leadership, not leaders. Scandinavian Journal of Management. 2010; 26(1): 77–86. |
| [22] | Dahl, R. A. The concept of power. Behavioral Science. 1957; 2(3): 201–215. |
| [23] | Edmondson, A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1999; 44(2): 350–383. |
| [24] | Fairhurst, G. T., Grant, D. The social construction of leadership. Management Communication Quarterly. 2010; 24(2): 171–210. |
| [25] | Fiedler, F. E. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1967. |
| [26] | Foucault, M. Power/Knowledge. Gordon C, editor. New York, NY: Pantheon; 1980. |
| [27] | Freeman, R. E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman; 1984. |
| [28] | Fredrickson, B. L. The role of positive emotions. American Psychologist. 2001; 56(3): 218–226. |
| [29] | Gardner, J. W. On Leadership. New York, NY: Free Press; 1995. |
| [30] | Habermas, J. Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1996. |
| [31] | Hogg, M. A. A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2001; 5(3): 184–200. DOI pending. |
| [32] | Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F. Transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004; 89(5): 755–768. |
| [33] | Kellerman, B. Bad Leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2004. |
| [34] | Kershaw, I. Hitler: A Biography. New York, NY: W. W. Norton; 2008. |
| [35] | Kidder, R. M. Moral Courage. New York, NY: HarperCollins; 2005. |
| [36] | Kotkin, S. Stalin: Paradoxes of Power. New York, NY: Penguin; 2014. |
| [37] | Kotter, J. P. A Force for Change. New York, NY: Free Press; 1990. |
| [38] | Linz, J. J., Stepan, A. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1996. |
| [39] | Lukes, S. Power: A Radical View. 2nd ed. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2005. |
| [40] | McPherson, J. M. Battle Cry of Freedom. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1988. |
| [41] | McPherson, J. M. Tried by War. New York, NY: Penguin; 2009. |
| [42] | Miller, A. H., Listhaug, O. Political parties and trust. European Journal of Political Research. 1999; 35(1): 41–61. |
| [43] | Morris, A. The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement. New York, NY: Free Press; 1984. |
| [44] | Northouse, P. G. Leadership: Theory and Practice. 9th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2021. |
| [45] | Nye, J. S. The Powers to Lead. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2008. |
| [46] | Pearce, C. L., Conger, J. A. Shared Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003. |
| [47] | Putnam, R. D. Bowling Alone. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster; 2000. |
| [48] | Rose-Ackerman, S. Corruption and Government. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999. |
| [49] | Sampson, A. Mandela. New York, NY: Knopf; 1999. |
| [50] | Schaubroeck, J., et al. Destructive leadership. Journal of Management. 2012; 38(1): 923–958. |
| [51] | Schwartz, M. S. Business Ethics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2010. |
| [52] | Snyder, C. R., et al. Hope theory. Psychological Inquiry. 2002; 13(4): 249–275. |
| [53] | Stogdill, R. M. Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology. 1948; 25(1). |
| [54] | Suchman, M. C. Managing legitimacy. Academy of Management Review. 1995; 20(3): 571–610. |
| [55] | Suddaby, R. Construct clarity. Journal of Management Studies. 2010; 47(6): 1033–1057. |
| [56] | Tufekci, Z. Twitter and Tear Gas. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2017. |
| [57] | Uhl-Bien, M. Relational leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly. 2006; 17(6): 654–676. |
| [58] | Weber, M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Henderson A. M., Parsons T., translators. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1947. |
| [59] | Weber, M. Economy and Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1978. |
APA Style
Alam, Z. (2026). People and Leadership: Ontological Foundations, Historical Agency, and the Ethics of Transformative Change. Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(2), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18
ACS Style
Alam, Z. People and Leadership: Ontological Foundations, Historical Agency, and the Ethics of Transformative Change. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2026, 14(2), 179-193. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18
@article{10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18,
author = {Zahurul Alam},
title = {People and Leadership: Ontological Foundations, Historical Agency, and the Ethics of Transformative Change},
journal = {Journal of Human Resource Management},
volume = {14},
number = {2},
pages = {179-193},
doi = {10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jhrm.20261402.18},
abstract = {This article develops an integrated theoretical and empirical framework for understanding leadership as a relational, ethical, and historically embedded process co-constructed by leaders and the people. Challenging leader-centric and purely instrumental approaches, the study conceptualizes leadership not as an inherent property of exceptional individuals or formal office holders, but as a morally contingent and socially conferred phenomenon grounded in legitimacy, collective agency, and ethical reciprocity. Drawing upon interdisciplinary scholarship from political theory, sociology, organizational studies, psychology, and governance research, the article advances a people-centered conception of leadership that emphasizes the active role of citizens, followers, and stakeholders in constituting, evaluating, and sustaining leadership legitimacy. The study advances three central arguments. First, leadership is ontologically relational and exists only through the continuous interaction between leaders and the people, whose consent, interpretation, and moral judgment determine the durability of authority. Second, ethical positivity, encompassing hope, empathy, integrity, moral courage, and visionary responsibility, functions not merely as a desirable leadership trait but as a structural precondition for sustainable and transformative leadership. Third, historical and contemporary evidence demonstrates a persistent moral divergence between emancipatory leadership oriented toward justice, inclusion, and collective flourishing, and destructive leadership grounded in coercion, manipulation, exclusion, and domination. The article synthesizes classical leadership theories, including trait, behavioral, contingency, transformational, Weberian, and ethical leadership traditions, while extending them through a relational-normative framework of legitimacy. It further incorporates contemporary political challenges, including electoral legitimacy crises, corruption, populism, regime change, narrative construction, globalization, and the tension between genuine revolution and elite-driven political manipulation. Through comparative historical analysis, the article examines the leadership trajectories of Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman alongside destructive authoritarian cases such as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, illustrating how ethical orientation fundamentally shapes leadership outcomes and historical consequences. The study argues that modern leadership legitimacy is increasingly contested within fragmented informational environments where symbolic narratives often compete with empirical realities. Consequently, leadership must be understood as a continuously negotiated social process shaped by institutional constraints, ethical accountability, and the interpretive agency of the people. The article concludes by proposing an integrative framework for people-centered leadership that emphasizes democratic participation, institutional safeguards, moral legitimacy, and active civic consciousness as foundational conditions for humane, sustainable, and transformative governance in the twenty-first century.},
year = {2026}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - People and Leadership: Ontological Foundations, Historical Agency, and the Ethics of Transformative Change AU - Zahurul Alam Y1 - 2026/05/26 PY - 2026 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18 DO - 10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18 T2 - Journal of Human Resource Management JF - Journal of Human Resource Management JO - Journal of Human Resource Management SP - 179 EP - 193 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2331-0715 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20261402.18 AB - This article develops an integrated theoretical and empirical framework for understanding leadership as a relational, ethical, and historically embedded process co-constructed by leaders and the people. Challenging leader-centric and purely instrumental approaches, the study conceptualizes leadership not as an inherent property of exceptional individuals or formal office holders, but as a morally contingent and socially conferred phenomenon grounded in legitimacy, collective agency, and ethical reciprocity. Drawing upon interdisciplinary scholarship from political theory, sociology, organizational studies, psychology, and governance research, the article advances a people-centered conception of leadership that emphasizes the active role of citizens, followers, and stakeholders in constituting, evaluating, and sustaining leadership legitimacy. The study advances three central arguments. First, leadership is ontologically relational and exists only through the continuous interaction between leaders and the people, whose consent, interpretation, and moral judgment determine the durability of authority. Second, ethical positivity, encompassing hope, empathy, integrity, moral courage, and visionary responsibility, functions not merely as a desirable leadership trait but as a structural precondition for sustainable and transformative leadership. Third, historical and contemporary evidence demonstrates a persistent moral divergence between emancipatory leadership oriented toward justice, inclusion, and collective flourishing, and destructive leadership grounded in coercion, manipulation, exclusion, and domination. The article synthesizes classical leadership theories, including trait, behavioral, contingency, transformational, Weberian, and ethical leadership traditions, while extending them through a relational-normative framework of legitimacy. It further incorporates contemporary political challenges, including electoral legitimacy crises, corruption, populism, regime change, narrative construction, globalization, and the tension between genuine revolution and elite-driven political manipulation. Through comparative historical analysis, the article examines the leadership trajectories of Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman alongside destructive authoritarian cases such as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, illustrating how ethical orientation fundamentally shapes leadership outcomes and historical consequences. The study argues that modern leadership legitimacy is increasingly contested within fragmented informational environments where symbolic narratives often compete with empirical realities. Consequently, leadership must be understood as a continuously negotiated social process shaped by institutional constraints, ethical accountability, and the interpretive agency of the people. The article concludes by proposing an integrative framework for people-centered leadership that emphasizes democratic participation, institutional safeguards, moral legitimacy, and active civic consciousness as foundational conditions for humane, sustainable, and transformative governance in the twenty-first century. VL - 14 IS - 2 ER -