Observing leadership as behavior in teams and herds – An ethological approach to shared leadership research

Both Shared Leadership Theory and evolutionary theories of leadership emphasize the role of team-level patterns of influence on team or group success. Yet, most of the empirical work on the effects of shared leadership assesses the concept through patterns of subjective perceptions of leadership and behavior. Although these studies give us important insights, subjective perceptions of leadership are prone to biases. In this paper, we draw on evolutionary theories of the development of leadership in groups and argue that group-level patterns of observable behavior have a direct effect on team outcomes above and beyond patterns of leadership and behavior perceptions. On the basis of a brief review of ethological assessment methods of leadership in animal groups, we derive implications for team leadership research methods to test hypotheses on team-level influence patterns and performance. Emphasizing the role of influence in terms of interpersonal behavior we formulate implications for the assessment and analysis of verbal and nonverbal behavior in teams. Finally, we discuss how technological advances may be utilized to promote behavioral observations in team leadership research.     

Same difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower outcomes

This paper aimed to provide insights into the different mediating mechanisms through which servant leadership (SL) and transformational leadership (TFL) affect followers. We also investigated environmental uncertainty as a moderator of the effects of servant leadership and transformational leadership. Based on the results of two experimental studies and one field study, we concluded that both SL and TFL were related to organizational commitment and work engagement; however, the manner in which they exerted their influence differed. SL worked primarily through follower need satisfaction, whereas TFL worked mainly through perceived leadership effectiveness. The moderating influence of uncertainty was inconsistent across the studies.     

What explains cultural differences in leadership styles? On the agricultural origins of participative and directive leadership

Why do we observe either participative or directive leadership in organizations? I test an evolutionary-informed theory suggesting that organizational leadership is currently less participative (i.e., close supervision, rare delegation) among societies that used intensive forms of agriculture in the past. Intensification caused increased social complexity and skewed power distribution, promoting the emergence of directive leaders and eventually shaping followers' preferences for and perceptions of leadership. Combining evidence, secondary data, and methods developed in economics, anthropology, and applied psychology, I document a negative relationship between traditional agricultural intensity and followers' participative leadership prototypes. I then study the link between traditional agriculture and reliance on delegation to subordinates across firms. I discuss competing hypotheses, explore the interplay between traditional agriculture and organizational-level factors, and show that traditional agricultural intensity does not predict most other leadership prototypes and management practices. Implications for leadership theory–with a focus on evolutionary approaches–are finally discussed.     

Is trust in leadership a mediator between transformational leadership and in-role performance among small-scale factory workers?

Globalization and the transformation of the organizational scene are increasing the pressure and threshold for employees to constantly perform maximum output. As such, the measure of success for many organizations is determined by their productivity level. Therefore, we believe that the leadership style adopted by the leader and the level of trust subordinates have in such a leader may be salient in determining the level of in-role performance of the subordinates in question. This study therefore tries to shed light on this issue by testing the hypotheses that transformational leadership and trust in leadership would significantly predict in-role performance, and that trust in leadership would further mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance. A sample of 170 factory workers (subordinates) and 6 supervisors participated in the study. The subordinates completed measures of transformational leadership and trust in leadership while that of in-role performance of these subordinates was based on the ratings of their immediate supervisors. The results of the Hierarchical Multiple Regression showed that only transformational leadership positively predicted in-role performance, whereas trust in leadership failed to predict or even mediate this relationship. The study discussed the implications of the findings, limitations, and suggestions for prospective research.     

Does shared and differentiated transformational leadership predict followers' working conditions and well-being?

Transformational leadership has been widely researched and is associated with followers' performance, attitudes, and subjective well-being at the individual level. Less research has focused on transformational leadership as a group phenomenon. In a survey study (425 followers and 56 leaders), we examined how group-level and differentiated transformational leadership shape followers' perceptions of their working conditions and individual subjective well-being. There was stronger evidence that differentiated transformational leadership's relationships with indicators of well-being was mediated by perceptions of working conditions, in that 10 out of 20 tests for mediation using differentiated transformational leadership were significant, compared to just three out of 20 for group-level transformational leadership. The results suggest that transformational leadership needs to be studied as a group phenomenon considering how group-level perceptions may impact on followers' well-being and that leaders need to realize that there is an “I” in groups and addition to a “we” in groups.     

Emotional labor and leadership: A threat to authenticity?

Building on the emotional labor and authentic leadership literatures, we advance a conceptual model of leader emotional displays. Three categories of leader emotional displays are identified: surface acting, deep acting and genuine emotions. The consistency of expressed leader emotions with affective display rules, together with the type of display chosen, combines to impact the leader's felt authenticity, the favorability of follower impressions, and the perceived authenticity of the leader by the followers. Emotional intelligence, self-monitoring ability, and political skill are proposed as individual differences that moderate leader emotional display responses to affective events. We also look at followers' trust in the leader and leader well-being as key outcomes. Finally, we explore the influence on leader emotional labor of contextual dimensions of the environment, including the omnibus (national and organizational culture, industry and occupation, organizational structure, time) and discrete (situational) context. Directions for future research are discussed.     

Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed?

This study focuses on culturally endorsed implicit theories of leadership (CLTs). Although cross-cultural research emphasizes that different cultural groups likely have different conceptions of what leadership should entail, a controversial position is argued here: namely that attributes associated with charismatic/transformational leadership will be universally endorsed as contributing to outstanding leadership. This hypothesis was tested in 62 cultures as part of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Research Program. Universally endorsed leader attributes, as well as attributes that are universally seen as impediments to outstanding leadership and culturally contingent attributes are presented here. The results support the hypothesis that specific aspects of charismatic/transformational leadership are strongly and universally endorsed across cultures.     

Just how multi-level is leadership research? A document co-citation analysis 1980–2013 on leadership constructs and outcomes

The use of multi-level theories and methodologies in leadership has gained momentum in recent years. However, the leadership field still suffers from a fragmented and unclear evolution and practice of multi-level approaches. The questions of how and to what extent multi-level research has evolved in both leadership phenomena and leadership outcomes, and which informal research networks drove this evolution, remain vastly unexplored. In this study, the extent of literature published between 1980 and 2013 is analyzed using a document co-citation analysis and invisible colleges' framework. This allows us to map the evolution of the multi-level intellectual structure of the leadership field. Specifically, we identify a number of distinct colleges – their conceptualization of leadership and outcomes – and trace their evolution paths over thirty years. We find a considerable fragmentation of the field, with the usage of multi-level leadership conceptualization mostly embraced by more peripheral clusters. Finally we discuss implications for further research with regard to a set of distinct trajectories for the future evolution of multi-level approaches in the leadership domain.     

Is leadership born or made?

Is leadership born or made? By profiling three colleagues who made the transition from clinician to top-flight executive in a health care organization, the author provides case studies from which to discuss leadership issues. An evolutionary pattern has developed with respect to physicians changing careers: The first model was the medical director, followed by the vice president for medical affairs, and finally the move to managing the health care system, group practice, or managed care organization. Are physician executives fundamentally different from clinicians in terms of leadership characteristics? What are the essential qualities needed to lead health care organizations? These questions are explored in-depth.     

Out of sight and out of mind? A literature review of occupational safety and health leadership and management of distributed workers

Distributed workers – those who work autonomously and remotely from their organisation’s main locations for at least some of their work-time – are an important and growing proportion of the workforce that share common characteristics of temporal and spatial distance. Yet, many leadership styles and management practices assume face-to-face interaction, potentially rendering them less helpful in trying to ensure good occupational safety and health (OSH) outcomes for distributed workers. We conducted a systematic literature review to examine the leadership and management of OSH for distributed workers. Twenty-three papers were identified. Eleven papers identified established leadership styles, including leader-member exchange, (safety specific) transformational and considerate leadership. Twenty papers examined management. Findings from these 20 papers were interpreted as representing resources, deployed through management and utilised by managers to ensure OSH for distributed workers, including communication technologies, social support and a good safety climate. Despite limited research in this area, findings indicate the importance of both leadership and management in ensuring OSH for distributed workers. Findings suggest a fertile area for future enquiry.     

The possibilities of leadership: revisiting J.C. Rost’s leadership writings

In the 90s, J.C. Rost highlighted the possibilities for leadership to become inclusive, participative, and socially responsible. He explicitly questioned the leadership paradigm of the previous two centuries encouraging a new paradigm for the twenty-first century. His contribution to leadership studies was recognized through the International Leadership Association’s lifetime achievement award in 2008. However, his work has largely been overlooked within management and organization studies and today’s dominant leadership paradigm remains largely unchanged from that of the previous century. In this paper, the major elements of Rost’s approach; influence relationships, real intended change, and mutual purpose and their implications for developing good leadership are revisited and explained. Rost was unable to shift the dominant leadership paradigm which he encountered, but he was able to highlight the possibilities of what leadership could become. Conclusions are drawn with regards to the enduring separation between leaders and followers, the vested interests of stakeholders in leadership and the influence of a mythical leadership narrative.     

Responsible leadership development – crucible experiences and power relationships in a global professional services firm

There is increasing consensus that Human Resource Development (HRD) has a central role to play in promoting the principles and practices of corporate responsibility (CR). An important HRD intervention involves developing responsible leaders able to attract support for CR throughout the organisation, but empirical research is lacking in this area. This article contributes to the theoretical and practical knowledge of responsible leadership development (RLD) by addressing two questions: first, how does RLD engender learning that goes beyond basic cognitive awareness? Second, what affects participants’ abilities to manifest this learning in the workplace? A review of the RLD literature reveals a ‘knowing-doing gap’, which, it is posited, may be linked to a lack of theorisation around power. This issue is investigated by means of a case study on a responsible leadership development programme run by a professional services firm. Drawing on Bourdieusian concepts of language and power, the study reveals some of the mechanisms that inspired new socially responsible values whilst also demonstrating some of the contextual barriers inhibiting their manifestation in the workplace. It is argued that HRD professionals need to engage with Bourdieusian ideas of language and power to promote deeper learning around responsible leadership, which can more easily be embedded into the workplace.     

Born to lead? A twin design and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy

We address leadership emergence and the possibility that there is a partially innate predisposition to occupy a leadership role. Employing twin design methods on data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, we estimate the heritability of leadership role occupancy at 24%. Twin studies do not point to specific genes or neurological processes that might be involved. We therefore also conduct association analysis on the available genetic markers. The results show that leadership role occupancy is associated with rs4950, a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) residing on a neuronal acetylcholine receptor gene (CHRNB3). We replicate this family-based genetic association result on an independent sample in the Framingham Heart Study. This is the first study to identify a specific genotype associated with the tendency to occupy a leadership position. The results suggest that what determines whether an individual occupies a leadership position is the complex product of genetic and environmental influences, with a particular role for rs4950.     

A model of relational leadership: The integration of trust and leader–member exchange

This article presents a model of relational leadership based on a review of leader-member exchange (LMX) and interpersonal trust. This model asserts that the LMX relationship is built through interpersonal exchanges in which parties to the relationship evaluate the ability, benevolence, and integrity of each other. These perceptions, in turn, influence the behaviors predicted by LMX researchers. This integrated model of relational leadership provides insights into the dynamics of leader-subordinate relationships and resolves some of the inconsistencies in the LMX research without losing the richness and uniqueness of the exchange theory. A number of propositions for future research in relational leadership are also suggested.     

In learning mode? The role of mindsets in derailing and enabling experiential leadership development

In comparison to the vast literature on leadership theories, concepts, and behaviors, relatively less is known about why leaders often learn little from their leadership experiences, as well as how to support them in doing so. We propose that leaders learn more from their challenging leadership experiences when they are in learning mode, defined as intentionally framing and pursuing each element of the experiential learning process with more of a growth than a fixed mindset. We describe how the extent to which leaders are in learning mode stems from salient mindset cues and guides whether they work through the experiential learning process with a predominantly self-improvement or self-enhancement motive. We theorize about several other likely mediators and moderators of when being in learning mode will manifest in experiential leadership development. Practical implications at the micro, meso, and macro levels, as well as within management education are outlined.     

Do we measure leadership effectively? Articulating and evaluating scale development psychometrics for best practice

Leadership assessment has been a particular point of difficulty for contemporary scholarship, with many practitioners rejecting academically-driven leadership instruments and scales and preferring their own, less rigorous, scales. We believe that current conceptualizations and measurements of leadership are problematic, indicated by contemporary challenges that can be widely understood as failures of leadership (e.g. the Australian Banking Royal Commission and Volkswagen's ‘Dieselgate’). Also, how effective leadership is measured needs to change. This paper presents a systematic review of 17 leadership scales developed in the new millennium. The majority of scales lack some degree of rigor. Our response has been to conduct eighteen critical checks over four stages of scale development: theory generation, item development, content validity, and empirical evaluation. On the premise that understanding past practices, with their limitations, can be used to drive forward a suite of more effective organizational tools, we provide best practice recommendations using contemporary psychometric research.     

Does valuing androgyny and femininity lead to a female advantage? The relationship between gender-role,transformational leadership and identification

The notion of ‘think manager–think male’ has been demonstrated in many studies. The current study examines whether leaders are perceived as more effective when they have ‘feminine’, ‘masculine’ or ‘androgynous’ characteristics, and how this relates to the leader's and followers' sex. Using carefully matched samples of 930 employees of 76 bank managers, we studied the relationship between managers' gender-role identity (perceived ‘femininity’, ‘masculinity’ and ‘androgyny’) and how this relates to leadership effectiveness in terms of transformational leadership and personal identification with the leader. Our findings show that among both male and female leaders, ‘androgyny’ was more strongly related to transformational leadership and followers' identification than ‘non-androgyny’, and that leaders' ‘femininity’ was more strongly related to leadership effectiveness than ‘masculinity’. Furthermore, the results show that women paid a higher penalty for not being perceived as ‘androgynous’ (mixing ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’), in comparison to men with regard to personal identification. When examining same- versus cross-sex relationships, we found that ‘non-androgynous’ male managers were rated higher by their male employees than by their female employees. Our findings suggest that women and men who are interested in being perceived as effective leaders may be well advised to blend ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ behaviors, and even more so when they are in situations of non-congruency (i.e., women in leadership roles and leading in cross-sex relationships). We discuss the implications of these findings for both theory and practice.     

Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development

The scientific advancement of leader and leadership development has offered various conceptualizations and operationalizations of evaluation criteria. However, because the complex learning that occurs during leader and leadership development is typically ignored, current leader and leadership development evaluation criteria do not fully capture the multidimensional and temporal nature of learning which serves as a critical mediating mechanism between training and more distal outcomes. Further, evaluations of leadership programs tend to focus on individual (i.e., leader development) outcomes without consideration of collective (i.e., leadership development) outcomes. Thus, we present a comprehensive typology of leader and leadership development learning outcomes that elucidates the multidimensional and multilevel nature of such outcomes and provides greater construct definition and precision. Our purpose is to integrate multiple theoretical perspectives, generating a more precise classification to provide researchers and practitioners assistance in 1) designing and evaluating the effectiveness of leader and leadership development, and 2) clarifying the limits of generalizability of both conceptualizations and empirical research across learning outcomes.     

Blazing new trails or opportunity lost? Evaluating research at the intersection of leadership and entrepreneurship

More than a decade ago, scholars formally conceptualized the potential synergy between leadership and entrepreneurship scholarship. Our work highlights research accomplishments occurring at the interface of these two intellectual areas as well as identifying untapped possibilities for continued research. We highlight how recent efforts have witnessed a mutual exchange of ideas that present opportunities benefiting both fields. Drawing from four key domains of entrepreneurship previously proposed to mutually inform future leadership research efforts, we make suggestions for integrating entrepreneurial opportunities, the roles of individual and entrepreneurial teams, the modes of organizing entrepreneurial ventures, and differing entrepreneurial environments with key trends important to leadership research, such as servant leadership and leader-member exchange theory. Overall, our work provides an assessment of the state of the art surrounding the coalescence of leadership and entrepreneurship research and sets an agenda for the next decade of research at this intersection.