There is no best way to lead

We talk a lot about good leadership:

Empower people.Give autonomy. Be participative. Create psychological safety. Move decisions closer to the work.

And I agree with much of this.

But I increasingly wonder whether the search for the right way to lead is actually the wrong question.

Because leadership doesn't happen in a vacuum:

A team dealing with an acute crisis may need something different from a team exploring a new idea.

An experienced team may need more autonomy. A new team may need more direction.

A highly regulated process may require standardization. An uncertain situation may require experimentation.

None of these responses is inherently better.

What matters is whether the response fits the context.

And perhaps this is where leadership becomes difficult:

We don't perceive situations objectively. We bring our experience, beliefs, preferences and habits with us.

A leader who strongly believes in empowerment may hesitate to provide direction when direction is exactly what is needed.

Someone who values control may create structure when the situation actually requires exploration.

So perhaps adaptability in leadership isn't about becoming more participative, more empowering or more agile:

It is about increasing our range of possible responses – and our ability to recognize when each of them is useful.

Instead of asking:

“What does good leadership look like?”

Maybe we should ask:

“What does this situation require – and am I able to respond accordingly?”