Status Updates From Selected: Why Some People L...

... we value the same qualities in our leaders. These include trustworthiness, persistence, humility, competence, decisiveness and vision – the same qualities that propel individuals to Big Men status in pre-industrial societies.

The fact remains, though, that, when choosing between two politicians, we often judge them not on what they say but on the conviction, sincerity and empathic resonance with which they utter it.

The truth is, voters approve of candidates who look, sound and behave in a certain way. Height, physique and attractiveness matter.

...the Dark Triad comes into play: men who score highly on all three traits – narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy – often rise to leadership positions because their cunning allows them to present a likable face to the world. Only once enthroned do they unveil their manipulative, selfish and power-hungry personalities.

There is evidence to suggest that people who ascend to power are similarly transformed by their new-found status. People who acquire power, for example, walk faster and are less emotionally expressive. Those in lower ranks laugh and cry more often and, notably, tend to laugh at jokes made by their superiors, suggesting that the laughter is a form of ingratiation.

There is evidence to suggest that people who ascend to power are similarly transformed by their new-found status. People who acquire power, for example, walk faster and are less emotionally expressive. Those in lower ranks laugh and cry more often and, notably, tend to laugh at jokes made by their superiors, suggesting that the laughter is a form of ingratiation.

A darker shade of disobedience is the act of deposing errant leaders. Denuded of their status, these disgraced individuals are then returned to the rank and file of the hunter-gatherer group, or ostracised.

Since a king without a kingdom is not much of a ruler, the prospect of being deserted – especially by an influential follower whose actions trigger an exodus – should have tempered any domineering tendencies. An aspiring leader would need to keep subordinates happy and offer them protection to induce them to stay.

Coalitions can curtail the power of any particular individual very effectively, certainly more successfully than any one wimp going it alone. This has been a major force in the evolution of egalitarian and democratic societies in humans.

There is, though, an unstated quid pro quo: in return for an apprenticeship at the feet of a master, the disciple must show a deferential allegiance. Only on these terms will a leader share his hard-won wisdom.

This is clearly a legacy of our ancestral past, in which following authority figures and gaining their social approval would have been important for our survival, even if it involved harming others.

And so the avenue of evolutionary reasoning brings us to this conclusion: the three main benefits of followership for our ancestors were group cohesion (safety in numbers), knowledge during a time of uncertainty (not eating the poisonous mushroom) and the opportunity to be groomed for a leadership position.

We crave in our leaders maturity in a time of uncertainty, and youth and vibrancy when we ourselves yearn for societal change. We want leaders who conform to a certain physical stereotype – because they flick a subconscious switch in our brains that most of us probably don’t even know we have.

Often, the shared objective is the leader’s objective. So becoming a leader is a good way of achieving whatever it is you want to achieve, whether it is building a well or building up support for an ideology.