The role of leadership can be better understood in organizational change as a multidimensional phenomenon. Depending on the conceptualization of organizational change one adopts, the leader's role could be perceived as a variety of things, from that of an initiator/visionary, the culture influencer, a trigger for followers' organizational identification, someone who redefines resistance, or a sense-maker who introduces new discourses. The most useful approach may be to consider a problem from several theoretical perspectives before determining the most effective intervention. Leadership has been conceptualized in a multitude of different ways ranging from Great Man theory (Borgatta, Bales, & Couch, 1954 ; Cawthon, 1996), trait theories (), and style theories (). More recent conceptualizations of leadership include contingency theory () and transformational leadership (). Each of these theoretical models has a contribution to make in forming a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between leadership and organizational change and we will explore how adopting one definition of leadership or organizational change infers the role of the other. However we define leadership, the concepts It can be argued that organizational change and leadership are inextricably linked. If a leader were unable to effect any change within an organization, then it is difficult to imagine a way in which they could be effective in their role. Therefore organizational change is at the heart of a leader's role. This article will argue that a pluralist approach to understanding the role of leadership in organizational change holds the greatest utility in informing practice. In doing so, he will present a series of different concepts... in the center of the paper... of universal meaning since in doing so he "mistakes the map for the terrain". The role of leadership in organizational change is a multidimensional phenomenon that, as argued in this article, can be most usefully understood by employing a pluralist perspective. That is, “a pluralist approach aimed at comparing multiple plausible models of reality is essential for developing objective scientific knowledge” (Campbell, 1988: 389, in Van de Ven & Poole, 2005). While there are numerous lenses through which to understand both leadership and change, it is more useful to consider a range of perspectives and only then evaluate the usefulness of each perspective and its appropriateness for informing a real-world intervention. In the words of Pettigrew (2001) “In the absence of an unambiguous fundamental truth… the only sensible way forward may be conscious pluralism."