COVID-19 can be described as what the philosopher Giorgio Agamben would call a ‘state of exception’, a crisis allowing political leaders to extend the reach of their power beyond the usual reach of the law, privileging further the voices of those in power and diminishing the rights of citizens. Dissenting voices, challenging the ‘truths’ of those in power, come to be seen as treacherous, diverting time and resources away from dealing with ‘the enemy’. In this chapter, we explore how in both setting aside the desire to be ‘in control’ and in stepping away from the competitive discourses of ‘us versus the enemy’, what may emerge is a form of active citizenship that both complies and resists but is neither compliant nor resisting. We have termed the acts and practices associated with this ‘unleadership’ as they turn our views of leadership on their head.

Leadership

Received notions of leadership portray leaders who mobilize people towards a vision, inspire action and model the way, who set the pace and expect self-direction and excellence. The stories of the heroic efforts of these leaders teach us lessons on the importance of clarity of purpose, acts of boldness and courage, dedication and self-sacrifice. Those who are not leaders are life's bystanders – ‘hollow men’ as T.S. Eliot would have described them – infants afraid to take responsibility and act; shirkers preoccupied with self-interest, stripped away from their creative capacities. More contemporary, post-heroic, leadership theories encourage shared or distributed leadership practices. But these still assume an individual or small cadre to ‘empower’ followers to act and to provide a fertile ground for others to flourish by nurturing them along the way.