My piece last week on leadership and function attracted an interesting response. This was along the lines that it’s better to think about the function rather than the purpose of leadership, as purpose “smacks of intention and input”. The illustration was offered of people leading by example without any purpose in mind.

Obviously, leadership can be understood in different ways. One of these – not one that I would favor - is that leadership is simply the act of being a leader. Such usage is reflected in, for instance, media reports of a political leader being removed from her position. “She’s lost the leadership,” the headlines might say.