Explore leadership skills definition by authors from Drucker to Covey. Compare how scholars define leadership capabilities and what these definitions reveal.
Written by Laura Bouttell • Fri 9th January 2026
Leadership skills definition by authors reveals the field's evolution from trait-based assumptions to capability-focused frameworks—and exposes the continuing disagreement about what leadership actually requires. Scholars from Peter Drucker to Daniel Goleman, John Maxwell to Stephen Covey, have offered competing definitions that shape how organisations develop leaders and how individuals understand their own leadership journeys. Examining these definitions provides not just academic interest but practical guidance: how you define leadership skills determines how you develop them.
What emerges from surveying authoritative definitions is both convergence and divergence. Most authors agree that leadership involves influence, that skills can be developed, and that effectiveness matters more than position. Yet they differ significantly on whether leadership is primarily about character or capability, whether certain skills are universal or contextual, and whether leadership can be meaningfully separated from management. These disagreements aren't academic—they shape organisational development programmes and individual career strategies.
Early leadership scholars established frameworks that continue influencing contemporary understanding.
Peter Drucker, often called the father of modern management, defined leadership in terms of results and responsibility rather than traits or charisma. His famous assertion—"The only definition of a leader is someone who has followers"—shifts attention from leader characteristics to leader effectiveness. Drucker emphasised that leadership skills are learnable through practice, not innate gifts bestowed on the fortunate few.
Drucker's key leadership principles:
| Principle | Implication | Practical Application |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership is work | Not personality trait | Skills can be developed |
| Results matter | Effectiveness over style | Focus on outcomes |
| Leadership is responsibility | Not privilege | Accountability for followers |
| Leaders create followers | Not through position | Through trust and results |
| Leadership can be learned | Not born | Deliberate development |
Warren Bennis distinguished leadership from management through his memorable formulation: "Managers do things right; leaders do the right things." His research identified four competencies common to effective leaders: attention through vision (creating compelling direction), meaning through communication (making vision understandable), trust through positioning (consistency between words and actions), and positive self-regard (confidence without arrogance).
Bennis's four leadership competencies:
John Kotter, Harvard professor and change management expert, defined leadership through its difference from management. Leadership, in Kotter's view, involves setting direction, aligning people, and motivating and inspiring—whilst management involves planning and budgeting, organising and staffing, and controlling and problem-solving. Both are necessary; neither is sufficient alone.
Kotter's leadership vs management:
| Leadership | Management |
|---|---|
| Setting direction | Planning and budgeting |
| Aligning people | Organising and staffing |
| Motivating and inspiring | Controlling and problem-solving |
| Producing change | Producing predictability |
Modern authors focus on practical application and development.
John Maxwell offers perhaps the most cited contemporary definition: "Leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less." This deliberately simple definition strips leadership of positional authority, expertise, or charisma to focus on what Maxwell considers essential: whether others follow your direction. His framework then identifies specific skills that build influence capacity.
Maxwell's influence framework:
| Level | Basis of Influence | What Leaders Do |
|---|---|---|
| Position | Rights | Lead from title |
| Permission | Relationships | Build connections |
| Production | Results | Demonstrate effectiveness |
| People Development | Reproduction | Invest in others |
| Pinnacle | Respect | Earn through character |
Stephen Covey's leadership definition centres on character and principle-centred living. He distinguished between primary greatness (character) and secondary greatness (recognition), arguing that sustainable leadership effectiveness requires character foundation. His Seven Habits framework provides a leadership development pathway from private victory (self-mastery) to public victory (interpersonal effectiveness).
Covey's leadership foundations:
Daniel Goleman revolutionised leadership definition by emphasising emotional intelligence—arguing that EQ matters more than IQ for leadership effectiveness. His research identified five EI components: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. Goleman later identified six leadership styles, each effective in different contexts.
Goleman's emotional intelligence components:
| Component | Definition | Leadership Application |
|---|---|---|
| Self-awareness | Knowing emotions, strengths, weaknesses | Accurate self-assessment |
| Self-regulation | Managing impulses and emotions | Trustworthiness, adaptability |
| Motivation | Drive to achieve | Initiative, optimism |
| Empathy | Sensing others' emotions | Developing others, service |
| Social skill | Managing relationships | Influence, collaboration |
Scholars provide research-based definitions grounded in empirical study.
Academic definitions tend toward complexity, acknowledging leadership's multidimensional nature. Gary Yukl defines leadership as "the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives." This comprehensive definition captures influence, direction, and collective achievement.
Academic definition themes:
Research on universal leadership skills, including the GLOBE study of 62 societies, identifies some characteristics valued across cultures: integrity, charisma, team orientation, and participative style consistently emerge as leadership positives. However, significant cultural variation exists in how these manifest and which specific behaviours are preferred.
Cross-cultural leadership findings:
| Universally Positive | Culturally Variable |
|---|---|
| Integrity | Autonomy |
| Charisma | Status consciousness |
| Team orientation | Individualism |
| Participative style | Risk-taking |
| Visionary | Formality |
Analysing definitions reveals patterns and divergences.
Author definitions differ primarily in emphasis: some prioritise character (Covey), others capability (Drucker); some focus on influence (Maxwell), others on results (Kotter). These differences reflect both author perspective and intended audience—practitioners receive simpler frameworks; academics receive more nuanced models.
Definition comparison:
| Author | Core Definition | Primary Emphasis |
|---|---|---|
| Drucker | Someone who has followers | Results and responsibility |
| Bennis | Doing the right things | Vision and trust |
| Kotter | Setting direction, aligning, motivating | Change leadership |
| Maxwell | Influence—nothing more, nothing less | Relationship-based influence |
| Covey | Principle-centred character | Character foundation |
| Goleman | Emotional intelligence | Self and relationship management |
Despite differences, definitions share common ground: leadership involves influence (moving others), direction (toward goals), relationship (connection with followers), development (skills can be learned), and effectiveness (results matter). These convergent themes provide foundation for practical leadership development.
Common definition elements:
How leadership is defined shapes how it is developed.
Definitions guide development by identifying what matters to develop. If leadership is influence (Maxwell), development focuses on relationship skills. If leadership requires emotional intelligence (Goleman), development addresses self-awareness and empathy. If leadership is principle-centred (Covey), development emphasises character formation. Choosing development focus requires choosing definitional framework.
Definition-development alignment:
| Definition Focus | Development Priority | Practical Activities |
|---|---|---|
| Influence | Relationship building | Networking, communication |
| Emotional intelligence | Self-awareness | Assessment, feedback, reflection |
| Character | Principle formation | Values clarification, ethical practice |
| Results | Execution capability | Goal-setting, accountability |
| Vision | Strategic thinking | Planning, future orientation |
Rather than selecting one definition, effective leaders integrate insights from multiple perspectives: Drucker's focus on results, Goleman's emotional intelligence, Maxwell's influence framework, and Covey's character emphasis all contribute to comprehensive leadership effectiveness. The question isn't which definition is correct but which combination addresses your development needs.
Integrated definition approach:
No single "best" definition exists—different definitions emphasise different aspects. Peter Drucker focuses on results ("someone who has followers"), John Maxwell on influence, Daniel Goleman on emotional intelligence, and Stephen Covey on character. The most useful approach integrates insights from multiple definitions to create comprehensive understanding.
Academic scholars define leadership as the process of influencing others toward shared goals. Gary Yukl's comprehensive definition describes leadership as "influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives."
John Maxwell defines leadership as "influence—nothing more, nothing less." This definition deliberately strips away positional authority to focus on whether others follow your direction. His Five Levels of Leadership framework then describes how influence develops from position through permission, production, and people development to pinnacle.
Daniel Goleman's research positions emotional intelligence—self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill—as central to leadership effectiveness. His definition emphasises that IQ and technical skills are threshold capabilities; EQ distinguishes outstanding leaders from adequate ones.
Common elements across definitions include: influence (moving others), direction (toward goals), relationship (connection with followers), development (skills can be learned), and effectiveness (results matter). Despite different emphases, these core elements appear consistently across authoritative definitions.
Definitions guide development by identifying priorities. If leadership is influence, develop relationship skills. If emotional intelligence, focus on self-awareness and empathy. If character-centred, emphasise values and principles. Most effective development integrates multiple definitional perspectives for comprehensive capability building.
Research, including the GLOBE study, finds some universally valued leadership characteristics (integrity, vision, team orientation) whilst significant cultural variation exists in specific behaviours preferred. Effective leaders adapt their style to cultural context whilst maintaining core capabilities that transcend cultural boundaries.
Leadership skills definition by authors provides multiple lenses for understanding what leadership requires—from Drucker's results focus to Goleman's emotional intelligence, Maxwell's influence framework to Covey's character emphasis. No single definition captures leadership's full complexity; each illuminates different dimensions of effective leadership practice.
Rather than choosing one definition, integrate insights from multiple perspectives. Consider: What results must you achieve (Drucker)? How effectively do you influence others (Maxwell)? What's your emotional intelligence profile (Goleman)? What principles guide your leadership (Covey)? How do you create and communicate direction (Kotter)? These questions identify development priorities across leadership's multiple dimensions.
Use definitional understanding to guide practical development. If your leadership requires stronger influence, focus on relationship-building and communication. If emotional intelligence needs development, invest in self-awareness and empathy cultivation. If character foundation needs strengthening, clarify values and practise principle-centred decision-making. Definitions become useful when they guide action—when understanding what leadership means shapes becoming the leader you need to be.