In this article, I focus on the role of leaders and how they affect social change. The importance of leadership, as a strategic process, will become evident from two points of view: those of leaders and followers. I highlight the importance of the latter because leadership theories are generally leader-focused and ignore central questions like "why do some individuals emerge as leaders and how they are attributed charisma?" "Why are some individuals influential as leaders whereas others are not?" "Why do followers trust some leaders more than they do others?" It is important that leaders understand how they are legitimized because as it will become evident, leaders must reflect the collective aspirations of their constituencies (followers)--whether these aspirations are follower or leader induced--in order to influence them toward a common ideal while instituting veritable social change. Leadership does not exist in a void. Therefore, looking at the leadership process from the eyes of followers will be addressed in various aspects of this article. Also based on a universalist-generalist perspective not tied to any particular domain (e.g., political, military, sport, educational, etc.), I will also focus on what leaders do, or more specifically what leaders should do, by reviewing what leadership is in terms of its antecedents and consequences. My review will be rooted in various competing but complementary research traditions that have dotted the historical landscape of leadership research, culminating in a brief analysis of the 2004 U.S. presidential race.