The Three Archetypes of Power: Which One Fits You Best?

There are 3 types of people — leaders, followers, and observers.

Coming up with classifications like this always smells of elitism. We don’t like talking about power differences or if we do, it is from a point of denouncing them.

Realistically, though, power differences are everywhere. Look at families, the education system, the corporate ladder, and politics. Some lead, many follow.

And it stands to reason that it is not just the power-hungry leaders trying to make everybody else follow them. If you ever had to act as a leader, you know how much work and responsibility that is. Most people would rather live their lives.

Also, you can opt out of this dynamic. If you don’t like the relationship between the masses and their chieftains, you can step out and observe from afar. But there is a price to pay here, too — loneliness.

Some Philosophy

In philosophy, these dynamics have always been acknowledged.

A prime example is Hegel’s master-slave dialectic. Two individuals meet. As they try to prove themselves as superior to each other, a fight ensues. One ends up the master, the other the slave.

But now an interesting reversion follows. Hegel argues that the master, by subjugating the slave, cuts themselves short. They continue to see themselves as the center of the universe. Thus, their self-consciousness is limited.

Vice versa, through defeat and work, the servant arrives at true self-awareness. Over time, they surpass the master.

Marx took this one step further and argued for the violent removal of all leaders. The working class should triumph over the bourgeoisie.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have thinkers like Nietzsche, lamenting the rise of the masses and their “slave morality” or what Ortega y Gasset referred to as the “mass man.” Here, the repressed have reversed the hierarchy and established a reign of mediocrity.

Maybe the most level-headed take is by Georg Simmel. In his view, domination is a reciprocal relationship: The master depends on the servant for their status and the servant depends on the master to take care of things. Here, power is not so much a moral issue, as a fundamental mode of social being. As such, it’s unlikely to go anywhere soon.

The only way out that Simmel hints at is individual freedom. If you don’t want to play the game, step out of the game — which is in effect what all the aforementioned philosophers have done. They didn’t play, they observed.

Why This Matters

If we assume these three categories — follower, leader, observer — exist, then this has implications for the way we live our lives.

You need to understand where you currently fit it. And you need to make a decision if you want to stay in that role or take up a different role.

To better make that decision, let’s look at what each option entails.

Option 1: Being a Follower

In terms of numbers, this is by far the biggest group. Statistically speaking, most people are followers. Their beliefs and values can be summed up like this:

• The follower has a strong sense of belonging. They need to feel at home somewhere. They embrace group affiliations and labels, as they make them feel grounded.

• The follower's morality is not so much based on the pursuit of truth, but on what their chosen tribe considers to be right. They don’t want to deviate.

• The follower believes they have little control over how things shake out. That is why they look to someone else to take care of things.

• The follower is prone to an “us vs. them” mindset. “If you are not with us, you are against us.”

Option 2: Being a Leader

The leader places themselves at the head of a group. Naturally, their number is small. Their characteristics can be summed up like this:

• The leader draws on their natural charisma to enthrall the masses. Think Caesar, Napoleon, or Margaret Thatcher.

• The leader’s morality is pragmatic. “Does it serve my purpose?” Then it’s good. “Does it counteract my purpose?” Then it’s bad.

• The leader believes in their ability to change their own destiny, but they also believe they need the masses to do so.

• The leader looks at the masses as something to be worked with; they are the sculptor who forms the clay.

• Ultimately, the leader does not care about the individual, but about the mission. If push comes to shove, the few have to be sacrificed to ensure the “greater good.”

Option 3: Being an Observer

Of all the three groups, the observers are the smallest faction. You could even argue that a true observer is not a faction, but an army of one. Their characteristics can be summed up like this:

• The observer sees through the symbiotic relationship between leader and followers; but to do so, he cannot be part of that relationship.

• The observer is (somewhat) self-sufficient. Where the masses and the leaders need each other, they primarily need themselves.

• The observer’s morality is neither based on majority opinion nor their will to power. At their best, their inclination is to understand. At their worst, their inclination is to feel superior to everyone else.

• The observer suffers from self-inflicted isolation. Sitting on a mountaintop might give you a great view, but it’s also a lonely endeavor.

Hybrids

In addition to these three archetypes, there are also three hybrids:

The Follower-Leader

Someone who will lead smaller groups of people, but doesn't want to take on too much responsibility; in the corporate world, the follower-leader can often be found in middle-management positions. Or they might be running a small brick-and-mortar business. In a military context, the follower-leader is your typical sergeant.

The Leader-Observer

The leader-observer realizes they cannot be part of the collective; they are too far gone. But they are not quite ready to become a hermit yet, either. Often, they opt for becoming some kind of thought leader, with minimum obligations to others, but still some touchpoints with “real life.”

The Observer-Follower

There is a set of followers who are more conscious than your average follower. They are aware of the mass dynamics they are part of. At the same time, they are not quite able to resist the social pull of the herd. They understand the pattern, but they are still moved along with the current.

Choosing

You probably have some idea of where you currently fit in. The question is: Do you feel happy there? Or would you rather play a different role?

This is not just an idle thought experiment. These types lead vastly different lives. For example, followers typically gravitate towards 9 to 5 jobs, while leaders are often self-employed. Observers tend to go with creative endeavors.

Likewise with relationships. Do you desire to be led by your partner? Or do you want to get your way? Or do you prefer arrangements that offer a lot of autonomy?

The better you understand where you fit in (or where you would like to fit in), the more congruent your lifestyle choices will be. And that equals happiness.

Factors To Consider

First, when choosing your type, it is important to rid yourself of prejudices. “Follower” is often used as a derogatory term, while the term “leader” has a positive connotation.

Forget about that.

Some of the nicest (and smartest) people I have ever met were followers (or a follower hybrid). Some of the most obnoxious people I have ever met were leaders or observers.

Likewise, happiness doesn’t necessarily coincide with achievements. There are under-achieving followers who are very content, and there are over-achieving leaders who will never be satiated.

Maybe the best criterion to go by is the difference between private vs. public vs. integrated fulfillment.

The follower tends to live in the private sphere. Their job/duty is something they suffer through, but happiness is found elsewhere: Hobbies, love, the home, family.

The leader tends to live in the public sphere. They are driven by accomplishment, and they want to be seen by others while accomplishing. In comparison, their private life is an afterthought.

The observer tends to live in an integrated sphere. Here, the private and the public sphere dissolve. Writers will know what I am talking about: You never stop thinking about what you are currently working on. Everything you experience is connected to that. For some people, that is heaven, for others, that is hell.

So, ask yourself what way of life resonates the most with you. Then optimize for it.

I am curious: Where do you see yourself and why? With one of the three basic archetypes? With one of the hybrids? Somewhere else altogether? Shoot me a message.

Until next time,

Niels