Naming

From the chapter's own abstract

This chapter examines “naming” as one of the most basic ways in which narrative constitutes leadership. Drawing on Austin’s idea that words go beyond description to actually “doing” things, it argues that naming someone a leader casts them into a role, installs a hierarchy, and opens a hero slot around which others become followers. In keeping with the book’s broader claim that stories are constitutive, the chapter argues that when we use the ‘language of leadership’ (words like lead, leader, leadership and so on) that is not a neutral description of events, or of a quality, role, or practice, or of a person or process, and neither does it simply describe a set of characteristics or behaviours. Instead, and much like strong plots squeeze complex events into precast templates, these readymade terms ‘do’ things to social situations. As speech acts, calling something ‘leadership’, or naming someone a ‘leader’, changes the nature of social reality. The chapter shows a drift towards this language that naturalises hierarchy and, by celebrating individualism, makes it harder to see conflict and collective resistance. Concluding with examples from film, the chapter shows why we might want to refuse naming someone “leader”.

1. What changes if we substitute manager, colleague or group for leader in this sentence?
2. Who is being converted into a follower by this description?
3. What collective work is being attributed to one person?
4. Why does this role need the word leadership attached to it?
5. Which forms of authority have become harder to see without the word?

• Performative utterance
• Hero slot
• Semantic drift
• Collocation
• Leader and manager
• Followership
• Individualisation
• Substitution test
• Naturalised hierarchy

• Refusing to name leaders

Related lens: Naming

Related tools: Critical Narrative Review

Status: abstract quoted directly from the manuscript · questions and concepts are site-written · author review required