Perspective Chapter: Leadership under Morocracy – The Ontology of Incapable Authority and the Paradoxes of Institutional Blindness

<jats:p>This chapter examines morocracy as a pattern of institutional life in which people poorly equipped for judgment and responsibility are repeatedly advanced into positions of authority. Its concern is not simply that leadership performs badly in such circumstances, but that the practice and meaning of leadership itself are reshaped by an order organized around incapable authority. The argument proceeds through four propositions that question familiar assumptions in leadership studies. Their common claim is that the difficulty in a morocracy is not merely a lack of capable leaders. It lies in an institutional arrangement in which competence can be experienced as disruptive, while loyalty and conformity appear safer grounds for advancement. From this reversal arises the morocratic leadership paradox: Practices associated with selection, development, and accountability may remain in place, yet serve chiefly to protect authority rather than strengthen the capacity to govern. The discussion considers the processes through which that arrangement endures across the organization, including symbolic mimicry, epistemic immunity, and the normalization of pathology. It concludes that meaningful change cannot be achieved through technical remedies alone. It requires a more demanding alteration in the norms by which authority is conferred, competence is recognized, and loyalty is rewarded.</jats:p>