Introduction: Although leadership roles are often framed as opportunities for personal growth and achievement, not all individuals aspire to lead—and some accept such roles reluctantly. Reluctant leaders may experience heightened stress and diminished well-being, which could manifest in destructive or toxic leadership behaviours.
Purpose: The present research examined the construct of reluctance to lead (RTL) among naval and officer cadets at the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC), where occupying a leadership position is mandatory.
Method & Results: In Study 1, 77 naval and officer cadets holding a leadership role completed measures of their own RTL, leadership self-efficacy, and leadership behaviours. Results indicated that, even when they were employed in a position they had not sought out, most cadet leaders did not endorse being reluctant to lead. RTL was also not significantly related to leadership self-efficacy or to self-reported leadership behaviours. In Study 2, a group of 52 naval and officer cadets in follower roles rated their cadet leaders' reluctance and destructive leadership behaviours. Followers' perceptions of their leaders' reluctance were positively associated with three forms of destructive leadership, including passive management by exception, laissez-faire, and inconsistent leadership.
Conclusions: Together, these findings suggest that individuals may be hesitant to acknowledge their own leadership reluctance, especially when holding a leadership role. In contrast, cadet followers perceived reluctance in their leaders, and that reluctance was associated with their evaluations of the leaders' destructive leadership including passive, laissez-faire, and inconsistent leadership behaviours. These studies raise important questions about how socially desirable responding may mask leadership reluctance, emphasizing the need for future research using multi-source or longitudinal designs to better capture its relationship with destructive leadership behaviour.