Leadership of Queen Elizabeth II

The current Queen of England has always intrigued me personally, like any great historical figure. But she has never been a great personality, like the Kennedy’s, or revolutionary, like Nelson Mandela. Her intelligence isn’t noteworthy like Edison or Tyson. Most famous women are known for either hyperfeminine personalities, like Marilyn Monroe, or hypermasculine personalities, like Margaret Thatcher. As a part of my american culture I want a leader to have expert power, where they got their position at least partially because of a skillset or knowledge they possess, but Queen Elizabeth became ruler at the young age of 27 without a formal education. What is it about her that is so beloved and noteworthy that her relevance exceeds England into the rest of the world?

Before I get started analyzing her leadership, I would like to also identify that I believe there are multiple sources of Queen Elizabeth II’s notability, including the historical imperialism of Great Britain as well as the global reach of the Catholic church. For the purpose of this essay I want to focus on solely the Queen, from a psychological perspective.  

First, I want to talk about the source of the Queen’s power. As like any monarchy, her power is not expert power. Since the creation of the English Parliament, who are now voted upon by the people, the role of the queen is highly symbolic. So where does she get her power? A lot of it is Legitimate Power. Basically she was born a princess and became a queen and it is accepted. Traditionally monarchy was seen in many cases appointed by god, but it can also be seen as a representative of the Church. While this is still true, I would argue the power she possesses that makes the crown functional is her referent power, and if it was just legitimate power the Queen’s reach would be lessened greatly. When she became a Queen it was acknowledged that the country would be her greatest priority, and her personal life of herself and her family has suffered because of that. It is still traditional for women and children to take a man’s family name, but as a part of the royal family they took the Windsor name. Historically many members of the family couldn’t marry for love, and the Queen’s own uncle abdicated the crown to marry a divorcee. The Royal family always had to reflect the opinions of a country, or they would lose the support of the country that their leadership relied on.

The Queen is also an excellent Authentic leader. While there is no standard definition of an authentic leader, we are going to use the 2003 Approach version. This involves 5 topics: purpose, self-discipline, values, relationship, and heart(Hamel, 2021). There is no need for perfection in each category, instead they are seen as opportunities for improvement. As the monarch of Great Britain, she is going to have one major purpose- the prosperity of the Country. This role has so many perks but Country above all can be a set back too, and not a sacrifice every citizen can make. The fact that the Queen upholds this ideal for the rest of the country cements her as a leader. As the Matriarch of the royal family, she above everyone else has shown the self-discipline needed for the prosperity of this role. The values of the general public in England is on the end of more reserved compared to other cultures globally, and the Queen presents a reserved as well as other traits held by Great Britain not only currently but historically. 

As far as the relationship between the Queen and her people, it is the second greatest trait that makes her a great leader. Her father was ruler during World War II and both her parents were incredibly involved with both the soldiers and the factory workers back home, raising morale. This extended to the Queen herself, as she gave radio speeches as young as 14 and has had a history of volunteering for her country. She came into power after her father’s death when she was 27, and next year will be her 70th year reigning. The relationship between her and England has not always been perfect, but it has been reliable. Since WWII and all the change to come after, Queen Elizabeth II is a comfortable constant. Finally, what I think gives the Queen the global notoriety she has now, is her heart. I wouldn’t say that it is something the Queen is known for, and most of the time she presents as reserved and serious. This was highlighted when she met with the charismatic Kennedy’s, and something the Queen has faced criticism for in the past. But the best moments of the Queen is when she is more human than monarch- a product of WWII, a proud mother and grandmother, a lover of horse racing. The crown forced her into a very important role which she dutifully fulfills for her people but her moments of humanity, that shows that no matter how power she becomes at the very core she is just a person who is trying her best for her country, makes her the most endearing and earnest. This authenticity is something that inspires others and gives power behind an otherwise superfluous role.

Queen Elizabeth is intriguingly mundane. While most public figures with her notoriety appear larger than life, she is astoundingly human. Even her reserved personality is relatable, as Queen she leads for England and the role comes with the spotlight, but most people will understand not wanting to be so vulnerable to the world. She is authentic even in her class distance from her subjects, and gets her power from her relationship to the people of Great Britain and across the globe. Her being a Queen was not an act of greatness, she isn’t larger than life. On the contrary many times she comes across just as she is- a woman doing her best for her country. And because of this, she is a great leader.

References 

Hamel, R. (2021). Lesson 7: Power and Influence

Hamel, R. (2021). Lesson 12: Authentic Leadership