Great leaders and poor leaders
One of the most pernicious tropes in management is a lack of skin in the game.
Good leaders inherently feel that they're responsible for their own outcomes. Great leaders feel that they're responsible not only for their outcomes, but for the outcomes of the people who follow them as well.
Mediocre leaders avoid the responsibility. When good things happen, they often aren't even sure why, because they didn't know how to intentionally make it happen. Mediocre leaders have a tendency to grouch when things don't go their way, and blame it on others.
A great leader gives battlefield orders, and respects the varying skill levels of their reports. Go here, do this, etc. If their orders are followed, and the outcome is not achieved, the manager sees that as their fault. If the person they placed in charge was unable to carry out orders that were clearly given, either the person was incapable or the orders were not achievable - either way, it's the leader's fault for allowing that situation to happen.
"Teamwork" is a trap to avoid responsibility. When a leader is placed in charge of someone else, has hire/fire authority over that person, writes performance reviews that change that person's career, there is not a teamwork scenario because there is an unequal power dynamic.
Mediocre leaders don't always get shown up. They didn't know what they were doing. They fell into the positive outcomes just as much as they fell into the negative outcomes. And sometimes, people just get lucky.
But on a long enough timeline, both great leaders and poor leaders get shown up.