Though the definition itself is somewhat derogatory, that author has dispelled this notion through this book. As a believer in the law of averages, and quoting from his own experience of around forty years, the author says that there would be more good guys in organizational corridors of power than bad ones. Yet there is big room for improvement for the good guys too. A leader has a much larger role to play which affects performance and progress of the entire organization.

At the core of leadership lies vision, mission, direction, wisdom, sacrifice and also a moralistic stance. In contrast, the role of a boss is more 'hands on' and largely revolves around and is focused towards 'people management' and interpersonal relations with the employees of the organization. The boss subordinate relationship becomes very personal and that is why one would say 'He is my boss, and you will seldom get to hear anything like, 'he is my leader.' It is the softer part of leadership which is the hardest to manage! Putting it in another way, a boss is in your immediate vicinity with whom you deal on a daily basis, whereas a leader may be visible only from a distance.

During the Gilded Age, in the 19th century in the United States, bossism was a system of political control centering around a single powerful figure-the boss. The central figure had tremendous clout and influence in terms of political control. In that context also, boss was to do more with "control" and perhaps nothing to do with leadership. In the modern environment, bossism is about 'atmospherics', which has a direct impact on a subordinate's performance as well his personal life and happiness too. Therefore, bossism is skewed more towards emotional intelligence rather than the IQ of a boss.