Presenting models describing a monolithic power structure, a pluralist power structure, and variations of these, this paper asserts that the monolithic power structure traditionally associated with rural areas is no longer valid for rural development. It is suggested that the following decision making mandate would serve as a better touch stone when considering leadership in rural development: "the mandate is for participation, not direction...and the message obviously not yet heard by the leaders surveyed, is that people want to be included and informed, not managed and ignored". Maintaining that "powerful is not the same as competent", this paper builds the following argument: in complex matters, nobody knows and nobody can do all that is needed; therefore, edict management is out, and since our systems today work in a way that everybody is not dependent on a few, interdependence is the key relationship; complex operations require diffuse competence, so looking for leaders may be a good deal less productive than looking for and using a variety of people with many different abilities, experiences, interests, and styles so that a system can be developed that includes all the necessary competencies; the democratic process is the best way to put together all that is needed to give good direction to development, because democracy is a good protection from the threat that some segment of society will be allowed to do the wrong things very efficiently. (JC)