Leadership Styles of European Mayors: How Much Have They Changed Over the Past 12 Years?

  • Nikos Hlepas
  • Thanos Chantzaras
  • Panagiotis Getimis
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)


The main purpose of this chapter is to trace persistence and change in leadership styles. Empirical findings show that mayoral leadership has changed considerably over the previous 12 years. Nowadays, the European mayors adopt an open and more cooperative exercise of power, instead of the authoritarian track. Strategic leadership predispositions increased substantially, and a visionary leadership style became the most common. Additional contextual and personal factors that were included in the last survey show that the correlation between the financial situation of the municipality and the leadership style was the strongest one. The increase in strategic predisposition and cooperative exercise of power seems reasonable, when taking into account the growing complexity of local governance, the ongoing fiscal stress and growing competition among cities: A demanding environment that puts the mayors under extreme pressure.


Leader(s) Leadership styles (cooperative authoritarian strategic reproductive) City boss Visionary Consensus facilitator Protector 


  1. Alesina, A., & Rodrik, D. (1992). Distribution, Political Conflict and Economic Growth. A Simple Theory and Some Empirical Evidence. In A. Cukierman, Z. Hercowitz, & L. Leiderman (Eds.), Political Economy, Growth, and Business Cycles (pp. 23–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Andersson, S., Bergman, T., & Ersson, S. (2014). The European Representative Democracy Data Archive. Release 3. Retrieved from
  3. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Axelrod, R. (2000). On Six Advances in Cooperation Theory. Analyse & Kritik, 22, 130–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baldersheim, H., & Rose, L. (2010). Territorial Choice. The Politics of Boundaries and Borders. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Budge, I., Klingemann, H.-D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., & Tanenbaum, E. (2001). Mapping Policies Preferences. Estimates for Parties, Electors and Governments 1945–1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Council of Europe. (2017). Comparative Analysis on the Implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government in 47 Member States on the Basis of the Adopted Congress Recommendations on Local and Regional Democracy in Member States. Rapporteur: K. Overmeire, Expert: N. Hlepas. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Retrieved from
  8. Denters, B. (2011). Local Governance. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Governance (pp. 313–330). London: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elgie, R. (1995). Political Leadership in Liberal Democracies. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Getimis, P., & Hlepas, N. (2006). Aspects of Leadership Styles: An Interaction of Context and Personalities. In H. Bäck, H. Heinelt, & A. Magnier (Eds.), The European Mayor. Political Leaders in the Changing Context of Local Democracy (pp. 177–199). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  11. P. Getimis and G. Terizakis (2016) Can the Interplay of Urban Leadership and Local Discourses in Cities Under Fiscal Stress Lead to Policy Innovation for Local Development? The Cases of Athens in Greece and Kassel in Germany. Paper presented at the EURA Conference in Torino 2016.Google Scholar
  12. Hambleton, R. (2015). Place-based Leadership: A New Perspective on Urban Regeneration. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal, 9(1), 10–24.Google Scholar
  13. Hambleton, R., & Sweeting, D. (2014). Innovation in Urban Political Leadership. Reflections on the Introduction of a Directly-elected Mayor in Bristol, UK. Public Money & Management, 34(5), 315–323.Google Scholar
  14. Heinelt, H., & Bertrana, X. (Eds.). (2011). The Second Tier of Local Government in Europe: Provinces, Counties, Départements and Landkreise in Comparison. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Heinelt, H., & Lamping, W. (2015). The Development of Local Knowledge Orders: A Conceptual Framework to Explain Differences in Climate Policy at the Local Level. Urban Research & Practice, 8(3), 283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hlepas, N., & Getimis, P. (2011). Greece. In H. Heinelt & X. Bertrana (Eds.), The Second Tier of Local Government in Europe: Provinces, Counties, Départements and Landkreise in Comparison (pp. 126–145). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. John, P., & Cole, A. (1999). Political Leadership in the New Urban Governance: Britain and France Compared. Local Government Studies, 25(4), 98–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., & Baldersheim, H. (2016). Measuring Autonomy in 39 Countries (1990–2014). Regional and Federal Studies, 26(3), 321–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moode, C. (2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563.Google Scholar
  20. Mouritzen, P. E., & Svara, J. H. (2002). Leadership at the Apex. Politicians and Administrators in Western Local Governments. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rokeach, M. (1968). A Theory of Organization and Change Within Value-Attitude Systems. Journal of Social Issues, 24(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rooduijn, M. (2014). The Nucleus of Populism: In Search of the Lowest Common Denominator. Government and Opposition, 49(4), 573–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. G. Soos and G. Dobos (2014) Against the Trend: Recentralization of Local Government System in Hungary. Paper presented at the IPSA World Congress, Montreal Canada.Google Scholar
  24. Spanou, C. (2016). Policy Conditionality, Structural Adjustment and the Domestic Policy System. Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. EUI Working Paper RSCAS 2016/60.Google Scholar
  25. Steiner, R. (2016). A Comparative Analysis of Amalgamation Reforms in Selected European Countries. In S. Kuhlmann & G. Bouckaert (Eds.), Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis (pp. 23–42). Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Steyvers, K. (2013). A Knight in White Satin Armour? New Institutionalism and Mayoral Leadership in the Era of Governance. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(3), 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stolzenberg, P., Terizakis, G., Hlepas, N., & Getimis, P. (2016). Cities in Times of Crisis. Fiscal Consolidation in Germany and Greece. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  28. Stone, C. (1989). Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta 1946–1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  29. Swianiewicz, P. (2010). Territorial Consolidation Reforms in Europe. Budapest: Open Society Institute.Google Scholar
  30. Swianiewicz, P. (2014). An Empirical Typology of Local Government Systems in Eastern Europe. Local Government Studies, 40(2), 292–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Swyngedouw, E., Page, B., & Kaïka, M. (2002). Sustainability and Policy Innovation in a Multi-level Context: Crosscutting Issues in the Water Sector. In H. Heinelt, P. Getimis, G. Kafkalas, R. Smith, & E. Swyngedouw (Eds.), Participatory Governance in Multi-level Context (pp. 107–129). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Teles, F. (2013). Facilitative Mayors in Complex Environments: Why Political Will Matters. Local Government Studies, 40(5), 809–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Teles, F. (2016). Local Governance and Intermunicipal Cooperation. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikos Hlepas
    • 1
  • Thanos Chantzaras
    • 1
  • Panagiotis Getimis
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration, Section of Administrative Science and Public LawNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of Economics and Regional DevelopmentPanteion UniversityAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations