The Magic Of Leadership—And The Science Behind It

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” — Arthur C. Clarke

It is often said that leadership is as much about the art of managing people as the science of leading them. And when it’s done professionally, it seems like magic. But most leaders emphasize one approach more than the other. And both have merits and pitfalls.

Assuming that a special, innate talent is required (like a magical power) can discourage emerging leaders from aiming higher and taking on new challenges. But on the other hand, solely focusing on trying to optimize a team and turning it into a well-oiled machine based on logic and numbers can dismiss the complexity of people and the way they interact with each other.

There is another challenge, though. As much as we love the idea that leadership is about inspiring and empowering people, at the end of the day, it is about building business; otherwise, the organization cannot function, the jobs disappear and there is no one to lead and inspire.

Does that mean that we must choose between business performance and caring about people? No. At least, not anymore.

Two Theories Of Management

In 1960, Douglas McGregor came up with Theory X, a concept that assumed that most people don’t really want to work. They resist change, responsibilities and their manager’s need to provide them with clear direction, close supervision and motivation in the form of reward and punishment.

McGregor’s other approach was Theory Y, which was much more positive. It was based on the assumption that if the job is rewarding, people would be loyal and committed. They would appreciate responsibilities, organize themselves and make the most of their skills and capabilities.

As nexxworks notes, “In 1975 tangible, physical assets comprised 84% of enterprise value on the S&P 500, while only 17% of that value was intangible, notably human capital.” By 2018, the numbers flipped. And today, over 90% of value is created by humans. They are no longer considered to be only a cost to contain, but a real competitive advantage.

What does this have to do with the two types of theories?

Theory X worked well during and after the Industrial Revolution, when most of the leadership and management models used today were developed. The challenge is that the world has completely changed, and what worked in the past might be holding back businesses today.

Theory Y is based on people skills, how much leaders know themselves and those they are trying to lead. The “carrot and stick” approach needs to be replaced with understanding what truly drives employees and how they can turn their differences into synergy. There is a blueprint to it and when it is used properly, it looks like art.

Key Human Indicators

JP Largement, a well-known coach and trainer, has a fresh take on this old problem. His innovative key human indicators (KHIs) approach is based on measuring and optimizing metrics that are usually not captured by companies even though they are directly correlated with organizational success.

He addresses three critical drivers that we cannot really see but can certainly feel the effects of, which we intentionally or subconsciously pass on to our team members and clients:

• Psychological Safety: The number one trait of high-performing teams, psychological safety involves the feeling that the consequences of making mistakes, bringing up ideas or having opposing views would not be negative but rather constructive, fueling growth and innovation.

• Motivational Drivers: Intrinsic motivation stemming from what we truly value and need is also required for action. What if smart people with great insights just can’t be bothered to say anything? Then potential gets lost even if the environment is safe.

• Cognitive Diversity: This invisible layer is proven to have benefits in terms of performance. This is the difficult one responsible for a wide range of perspectives and ways of solving problems.

These concepts might sound familiar from the DEI field. But in my experience, while there are a lot of discussions about them, the lack of a data-driven, human approach prevents them from delivering the results they promise. What gets measured gets improved, so the question is, what exactly is being measured and will it improve what people think it will?

DEI is often seen as change management, but in reality, it is not; it is the foundation of leadership and high-performing teams. Propelling the topic forward requires a methodology and up-to-date tools rooted in science that go beyond what’s visible and focus on optimizing team dynamics—the invisible forces that make or break a team.

Final Thoughts: Elevate Your Leadership Skills

So what can you start doing today to elevate your leadership skills?

• Start reading about the latest insights into the psychology of leadership and motivation by authors such as Adam Grant and Daniel Pink.

• Test the ideas that resonate with you on yourself first. It might sound strange; however, the foundation of strong leadership is based on the trust and ability to lead ourselves first.

• Try smarter, not harder. It is human nature that when something does not work, we just try the same thing harder, instead of trying it differently. This is normal as change is often uncomfortable, and we feel less confident and prepared. But once we realize that discomfort is a sign of growth, we can turn that experience into something more positive.

The goal is not to have as many techniques as possible but to master the most efficient ones so that they become part of you and the results come to you so effortlessly that it seems like magic to others.

The article was originally published on Forbes by Csaba Toth

Copyright © 2025 ICQ Global. All Rights Reserved.