Human and chimpanzee leaders share a taste for risk

What makes the findings compelling is that the link between leadership and risk-taking emerges in both humans and chimpanzees. As both species share a common ancestor, this relationship may have deep evolutionary roots. The study thus provides new evidence that traits associated with leadership and social influence are not shaped exclusively by modern social structures but may already have played a role in early forms of social coexistence. 

For the study, the research team analyzed data from more than 40,000 respondents in the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), a representative longitudinal study in Germany. The researchers compared the respondents’ self-reported general risk-taking with their leadership status and income. The results showed that people with leadership responsibilities reported, on average, a higher risk-taking propensity than those without leadership roles. Higher income was likewise associated with higher risk-taking. The relationship between leadership status and risk-taking did not differ across the sexes. 

To investigate whether a similar pattern emerged among our closest living relatives, the team also analyzed data from 86 chimpanzees at sanctuaries in Uganda and Kenya. Long-time caregivers rated each animal’s willingness to take risks. These ratings were compared with assessments of the chimpanzees’ social status within their groups. Higher-ranking chimpanzees were rated as more risk-taking than lower-ranking animals. 

“The results suggest that the link between leadership and risk-taking may have deep evolutionary roots. The parallels between human and chimpanzee leaders in terms of their willingness to take risks suggest that this trait may have evolved in both species as an adaptive strategy for coping with competition in social hierarchies, as well as with the demands of uncertain and often hostile environments,” says lead author Lou Marie Haux, a postdoctoral researcher in the Center for Adaptive Rationality at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development. Interestingly, the relationship was stronger in chimpanzees than in humans. According to the researchers, this could indicate that modern human societies have developed other routes to leadership positions—such as education, professional qualifications, and institutional frameworks—that reduce the need for aspiring leaders to take significant risks. In chimpanzee groups, where status is contested directly, a willingness to take risks may be a greater asset in climbing the hierarchy. 

“Our findings establish a correlation, not a causal relationship,” says Haux. “We can’t be certain whether risk-taking humans are more likely to be selected into leadership positions or whether leadership roles make people more willing to take risks.” The longitudinal SOEP data, however, tend to support the first explanation: A higher propensity for risk-taking is often apparent even before people assume leadership roles. Whether this is indeed the case is a question for further studies. 

The authors emphasize that their findings should be seen as a starting point for further research. Future longitudinal and experimental studies could help to better understand the complex interplay between risk-taking, social status, and leadership—and shed more light on the evolutionary origins of these relationships. The researchers also plan to investigate whether similar patterns occur in other great ape species, such as bonobos.  

At a glance:  

• More than 40,000 humans and 86 chimpanzees studied: The study is based on data from the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) and on observational data from chimpanzee sanctuaries in Uganda and Kenya. 
• Leadership and risk: Humans in leadership positions report a higher willingness to take risks than those without leadership responsibilities. 
• Cross-species approach: The same holds for chimpanzees: Individuals with a higher rank in the social hierarchy are more willing to take risks. 
• Evolutionary roots: The parallels between humans and chimpanzees suggest that risk-taking is a fundamental aspect of leadership and hierarchical structures.