Recently, I have been looking at how political and business leadership have changed over the last fifty years. Every now and then, it is a good idea to get behind the news headlines. Leadership styles in politics and business tend to blend into each other. I have been trying to understand shifts in decision-making, power dynamics, and societal impact, and to see whether today’s leaders, when faced with similar challenges, stand on the shoulders of those who came before, or whether leadership is really something that evolves in fits and starts, capable of both progress and regression depending more on the environment it confronts rather than the personalities involved.
My thinking was that if history tends to rhyme with itself, then it is perhaps helpful to look back to an earlier period that in many ways mirrors our own, to see how leaders navigated some of the most complex political, economic, and corporate challenges of their time and what those insights could mean for today.
A lot has obviously evolved over the last fifty years; however, the mid-1970s were such a pivotal time that they seem to have marked a turning point in the leadership style of political and business leaders. The oil crisis, rising inflation, and the first waves of modern globalisation tested leaders’ ability to navigate complexity.
However, while they all faced the same macro environment, this period reveals contrasting styles of leadership that continue to shape the political and business world today.
Back then, President Gerald Ford approached the White House with a pragmatic, situational style; In the U.K., Prime Minister Harold Wilson tended to rely on a more democratic consensus approach at 10 Downing Street; while in France, President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing brought a visionary approach to the Élysée Palace with modernisation efforts, social reforms, and closer European integration.
In the corporate world, the titans of the era faced their own array of complex threats. CEO’s such as Reginald H. Jones at General Electric had a pragmatic, cooperative approach in dealing with sprawling operations and rising regulatory scrutiny, while the transformative visionary Walter B. Wriston at Citicorp confronted modernity by helping to build the technological and global financial networks, ATMs, electronic transfers, and cross-border currency systems that would transform banking. At Royal Dutch Shell, the leadership team fostered a culture of foresight that pioneered scenario planning, helping the company anticipate energy shocks and geopolitical uncertainty.
This got me thinking in broader terms about how different styles of leadership have evolved over much longer time frames and across various geographies. While there are also other influences on successful leadership styles in other parts of the world that emphasise harmony or community over individualism, one thing seemed clear: leadership style tends to move with history, changing form as societies evolve, economies expand, and institutions rise or fall.