This paper explores a number of paradoxes embedded in new models of leadership, which are commonly called post heroic. It argues that although these models emphasize leadership as a social process dependent on social networks of influence, the concepts are often presented as gender- and, to a lesser degree, power-neutral, not only in theory, but in practice. The paper explores this phenomenon, arguing that the concepts are not gender-, power-, or sex- neutral, but instead are rooted in a set of social interactions in which “doing gender,” “doing power,” and “doing leadership” are linked in complicated ways. It explores these dynamics and suggests that theories of leadership that fail to consider the gender/power implications of social interactions and networks of influence may unwittingly undermine organizational efforts to move to these new models and/or result in the co-optation of the models, bringing them into the mainstream discourse in a way that undermines their radical challenge to current work practices, structures, and norms.
