In the line of your presentation of your question & also in the respect of your views some time back I have expressed my views in the similar line which I submit with herewith for your kind information .
Leaders are born & not made .The critical is very clear in the sense that for their individual ,& career development they have to follow their own footsteps to move forward to desire goal.
Such born leaders are not born in ivory tower & they don't have the advantage of the environment of the family ,social back ground & even social standing so that they have to make out their pathway from their own ,the task of which demands hard labor sincere & honest approach with their behavior so that they may find out their way for the progressive sign .
In my own work (therefore my own opinion), like the artist and the entrepreneur, the leader emerges in a situational context. In this sense, leadership defies dialectic idealisation; the leader is always becoming and never is. The vast array of types of leader arises as an ontological fallacy, since the concept resists generalisation. A leader can be found in a transformative situation, but that does not suggest that that leader can necessarily be transposed into another transformative situation and succeed. Of course, this has never prevented social science from attempting to conceptualise such a concept. And again, the emperor is presented with new clothes of the finest invisible threads. :)
Thank you David A. I find your contribution very interesting. Leadership is so very multi and gross with many studies yet there is not one ideal that captures everything. Hmmm. ..leadership uniquely the way each researcher views it according to the perspective, perception, time, culture, gender e.t.c