The tense meeting captured on live television between President Trump of the United States and President Zelensky of Ukraine was an uncomfortable sight. The meeting was likely not going to end well, whether behind closed doors or in the open. In the end, the public benefited most from a soured diplomatic effort streamed live around the world. What we had a chance to witness in the raw without public relations specialists, television interviews, or pundit analysis was a failure in leadership. The public now unequivocally knows what it has long assumed: our leadership models at the highest levels are breaking down.

Overshadowed by the grandstanding of deal-making for minerals, security guarantees, military failures, cease-fires, and a lecture on respect, there was agreement on one thing: we are hurdling toward a more precarious future. In a fit of frustration, President Trump seemed to have exposed his ultimate motivating fear when he angrily accused President Zelensky, “You’re gambling with World War III. You’re gambling with World War III!” It was a rare moment of honesty and real anxiety about what was already at stake and shared by both parties, including Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden. 

The public now unequivocally knows what it has long assumed: our leadership models at the highest levels are breaking down.

As the war progresses, Zelensky and the Ukrainians appear increasingly unphased by such threats of another World War breaking out. Their country is already torn apart by the carnage of a war they didn’t invite, resulting in significant loss of life, safety, economic growth, and vital human services. They want their sovereignty back and a better future for their citizens—just like anyone else in a free society. The rest of the world, however, is increasingly nervous about prolonged unresolved military, economic, and ideological conflicts such as the one between Russia and Ukraine. Nuclear warfare is very much on the table. The problem is that no one seems to know how to back down without escalating the conflict, holding Russia accountable, or selling out the Ukrainians who have been the repeated victims of an unjust crime. (Trump’s approach seemed to involve an economic deal over minerals and resources that somehow he presumes Russia will also stand to benefit from.)

This points to the broader issue: the breakdown of an increasingly antiquated leadership model based on hierarchy and influence. In this form of leadership, the strongest, most popular, or “qualified” are hired, elected, or appointed to serve as a leader to make decisions while carrying the weight and responsibility for the success or failure of an organization. They are known for brokering deals, forging alliances, charismatically rallying people around their ideas, acting as the final defense between good and evil, and unilaterally making the “hard calls.” While this form of leadership has broadly served humanity for generations, we find ourselves in a time when a new model is urgently required. 

Now, with two United States presidents and other world leaders openly expressing their very real and secret intelligence-informed worries in the open about the growing threat of nuclear conflict, the time is now to turn the page on inadequate methods and look to the future. A new wave of leadership is needed with younger, diverse, informed voices. The leadership model of tomorrow is not based on hierarchical power and authority but on plurality and mutuality.

A new wave of leadership is needed with younger, diverse, informed voices.

Working like a living organism, integrative leadership is built on collective decision-making among stakeholders where no single individual or office holds authority, influence, or responsibility for success or failure. Instead, compassionate, insightful, and collaborative leaders naturally become key voices where information and feedback flow freely among all people. Shared leadership ensures the community and organization upholds its core values, maintains healthy connections to the broader human and environmental systems, and pursues equitable outcomes that lead to a better world.

Such progressive ideas are not far-fetched because traditional hierarchical leadership models are already failing us. The good news is we don’t have to wait for systemic change, even within the government or from appointed leaders. At the community level, civic organizations, churches, nonprofits, businesses small and large, and local governments can begin to implement these practices that can reshape society through integrative leadership. 

The leadership model of tomorrow is not based on hierarchical power and authority but on plurality and mutuality.

Movements of hope and change rarely begin or are sustained by the most influential or powerful. Hope is inspired by the shared aspirations, values, and resiliency of a society. There is no better time to embrace a new model of leadership that no longer abides by the old order but inspires something better. We don’t have to tear institutions down because their leadership approaches are already crumbling. Instead, it’s on us to build an alternative and better tomorrow, together