We can see frecuently posts of many kinds comparing Hives development with Leo, as if this two platforms were rivals or would been competing with each other but this isn't true.
Hive is a first layer token which allows you to have a voice in Hives governance, as Leo you can stack it having various benefits, you can do more actions in the blockchain thanks to the RC (resource credits).
Leo hasn't these utilities, as a second layer token governance isn't what the token is designed for, you can stack it and have more voting power, curation and mining (with Leo miners) are other sources of income for this token.
Leo doesn't have a governance, is developed by @Khameelkazi and his team of devs, this has some big advantages because in order to implement new upgrades in Leo the only requirement is the will of the dev team. Of course this centralized way of taking decisions is much more agile than reach to a consensus in Hive, that is quite complex as needs the will of many people involved (stakeholders and witnesses).
Lately 
If Leo has succeed lately is because the dev team has listened to its users and has been very quick to implement their suggestions, also their focus on the economy of Leo has been much more aggresive than Hive's.
Many things but mainly that the feedback with the users is important. Listen to the community, I ask myself if this is acceptable:
So 
Leadership is also to know your users opinions and thoughts and be able to respond to their requirements.
