This week I came across Haslam, Alvesson and Reicher’s (2024) paper on Zombie Leadership. It struck a chord with much of what I have observed in both the NHS and occupational health practice.
Leadership is often presented as the solution to organisational problems. When staff engagement falls, sickness absence rises, or burnout becomes widespread, the response is often the same: managers need more training, leaders need coaching, and organisations need stronger leadership.
Zombie Leadership challenges this assumption. The authors argue that many leadership ideas persist despite limited evidence, particularly the belief that leaders are the primary drivers of organisational outcomes. While leadership undoubtedly matters, overemphasising it can divert attention from the wider systems in which people work.
Occupational health has traditionally focused on the relationship between workers and their work environment. When investigating health risks, we do not simply look at individuals; we examine the hazards, systems and organisational conditions that create them. Yet when it comes to psychosocial risks, organisations often default to individual explanations.
High stress? The manager needs leadership training.
Burnout? Leaders need to be more compassionate.
Poor morale? Better leadership is required.
These responses may help, but they can overlook the root causes of harm.
The HSE Management Standards offer a useful contrast. Their six psychosocial hazards—demands, control, support, relationships, role and change—are organisational factors rather than leadership traits.
Consider clinician burnout. A leadership-focused response might emphasise coaching and communication skills. A systems-focused perspective raises different questions:
• Are staffing levels adequate?
• Are workloads sustainable?
• Can staff take breaks?
• Is organisational change being managed effectively?
Leadership may influence how these pressures are experienced, but it may not be the primary cause.This feels particularly relevant in the NHS. Significant investment has been made in compassionate and inclusive leadership, yet no leadership style can fully compensate for workforce shortages, excessive workloads, rising demand, or resource constraints.
Perhaps the lesson for occupational health is not that leadership is unimportant, but that it should be considered alongside workload, staffing, job design, role clarity and organisational justice.
Ultimately, Zombie Leadership echoes a principle familiar in occupational health: prevention is most effective when we address hazards at source rather than relying on individuals to compensate for them.
When investigating stress, burnout, bullying or sickness absence, perhaps the most important question is not “What are leaders doing?” but rather “What organisational conditions are producing these outcomes?”
Leave a Reply