Charisma under crisis revisited: Presidential leadership,perceived leader effectiveness,and contextual influences

This study investigates the influence of crisis on leader use of charismatic rhetoric. We examine leader charismatic rhetoric across two major crises, longitudinally exploring potential long-term influences of charismatic rhetoric on perceptions of leader effectiveness. Using an inductive approach to theory generation, we draw upon findings from the data analysis of eight charismatic rhetoric constructs (collective focus, temporal orientation, followers' worth, similarity to followers, values and moral justifications, tangibility, action, and adversity) to advance propositions regarding potential time and ceiling effects of charismatic rhetorical leadership on followers. Additionally, we discuss the relationships between characteristics of the crisis and the use of charismatic rhetorical leadership. In doing so, we identify potential boundary conditions for the use of charismatic rhetoric (as an element of charismatic leadership) within the context of different crises.     

Leader character, ethos, and virtue: Individual and collective considerations

Character is an indispensable component of leadership and its development, and thus warrants future research focus. Before a purposeful research stream on character can proceed, however, it is critical that we fully define and conceptualize the character construct (the ontological basis) and then consider how we might best measure this construct and test it across a diverse array of contexts (the epistemological basis). We pursue these ends by first unpacking the definition of leader character and then by posing a series of questions. Following our initial thoughts related to the locus of character and how leader character is transmitted to and received by followers, we proceed by discussing how character relates to or serves as an antecedent to exemplary leadership styles, how character is contextualized, and how character is developed.     

Leadership and generations at work: A critical review

We present a critical review of theory, empirical research, and practical applications regarding generational differences in leadership phenomena. First, we consider the concept of generations both historically and through contemporary arguments related to leadership. Second, we outline and refute various myths surrounding the idea of generational differences in general, and critique leadership theories that have been influenced by these myths. Third, we describe the results of a literature review of primary empirical studies that have invoked the notion of generational differences to understand leadership phenomena. Finally, we argue that the lifespan developmental perspective represents a useful alternative to generational representations, as it better captures age-related dynamics that are relevant to leadership, followership, and leadership development. Ultimately, our work serves as a formal call for a moratorium to be placed upon the application of the ideas of generations and generational differences to leadership theory, research, and practice.     

Social cognitive neuroscience and leadership

We provide an overview of how the emerging field of social cognitive neuroscience can be linked to leadership theory and practice. A number of challenges are addressed, including theory development, as well as technical, measurement and methodological issues. In addition, we review recent leadership research that involves neuroscience applications, as well as areas that are closely related to leadership, such as emotional regulation and ethical reasoning and decision-making. Consideration is also given to how neuroscience might inform leadership development processes. We conclude with a discussion of the institutional challenges in conducting leadership research that incorporates neuroscience, and we consider potential limitations of such applications.     

The awestruck effect: Followers suppress emotion expression in response to charismatic but not individually considerate leadership

This study examines how followers regulate their outward expression of emotions in the context of two types of leadership that are commonly associated with transformational leadership, namely charismatic leadership and individually considerate leadership. Based on new theorizing and a series of three studies involving experiments and field work, we show that the two types of leadership have different effects on followers' emotional expressiveness. Specifically, we find that followers under the influence of leaders' charisma tend to suppress the expression of emotions (we call this the “awestruck effect”), but followers express emotions when leaders consider them individually. Awestruck followers may suffer from expressive inhibition even as charismatic leaders stir their hearts.     

Traditional Chinese philosophies and contemporary leadership

We discuss three traditional Chinese philosophies—Daoism, Confucianism, and Legalism—as they relate to Western-originated leadership theories. We analyze articles reporting interviews with fifteen contemporary Chinese business leaders to determine how their leadership practices reflect the traditional philosophies. We discuss future research directions for Chinese and global leadership. In a response to world-wide call for developing indigenous theories and knowledge about management, we encourage scholars to consider cultural settings and traditional wisdom in their studies of contemporary leadership practices.     

Economic assumptions and economic context: Implications for the study of leadership

Separated by longstanding differences, mainstream leadership scholarship and economics have rarely conversed. In this paper, we contribute to the emerging conversation between the two fields by (1) summarizing how economic assumptions about leadership may broadly inform leadership scholarship, and (2) offering a framework for conceptualizing the economic context in which leaders operate. We argue that inclusion of economic context in models of leadership antecedents, processes and outcomes is likely to offer rich insights for leadership selection, behavior, performance outcomes, and evaluation. We review recent studies that integrate economics and leadership and further consider how economic approaches both inform and refine current areas of interest to leadership scholars (e.g., shared leadership and values-based ethical, servant, and authentic approaches) and point to new pathways of focus in mainstream leadership (e.g., leader discretion).     

Determining causal relationships in leadership research using Machine Learning: The powerful synergy of experiments and data science

Machine Learning (ML) techniques offer exciting new avenues for leadership research. In this paper we discuss how ML techniques can be used to inform predictive and causal models of leadership effects and clarify why both types of model are important for leadership research. We propose combining ML and experimental designs to draw causal inferences by introducing a recently developed technique to isolate “heterogeneous treatment effects.” We provide a step-by-step guide on how to design studies that combine field experiments with the application of ML to establish causal relationships with maximal predictive power. Drawing on examples in the leadership literature, we illustrate how the suggested approach can be applied to examine the impact of, for example, leadership behavior on follower outcomes. We also discuss how ML can be used to advance leadership research from theoretical, methodological and practical perspectives and consider limitations.     

Which leadership roles matter to whom? an examination of rater effects on perceptions of effectiveness

Using a 360-degree feedback approach, we examined the extent to which raters vary in the leadership roles they associate with effectiveness, as well as the extent to which self-ratings reflect those of other raters. Using data from 252 managers and their subordinates, peers, and superiors from the public utility industry, we found that, depending on the rater-ratee relationship, different leadership roles are associated with effectiveness. The managers themselves resembled their superiors the most in terms of the leadership roles they associated with effectiveness. These results lend support for the importance of 360-degree feedback for both practitioners and researchers. Organizational researchers, then, should not only examine levels of rater agreement, but also try to better understand what different raters consider critical leadership roles. This article is a step in that direction.     

Putting emergence back in leadership emergence: A dynamic,multilevel, process-oriented framework

The study of leadership emergence has increased substantially over the past few decades. However, due to a lack of integrative theory, we believe limited advancement has been made regarding the full process of leadership emergence. To address this concern, first, we conceptualize the leadership emergence process from a complexity perspective and define emergence as a dynamic, interactive process grounded in three principles of emergent phenomena. Second, we review how previous research has modeled leadership emergence by focusing on the content areas of the lower-level elements, the mechanisms that facilitate their emergence, and the dynamism of the process once it has emerged. Third, based on the findings from the review, we introduce a process-oriented framework of leadership emergence. Fourth, we offer propositions to guide developing and testing emergent leadership processes, and we conclude with recommendations for future leadership process research. Our hope is that by realigning the study of leadership emergence with complexity and multilevel theory, we can reorient this area to focusing more on the process mechanisms within emergence, connecting back to research progress made over 60?years ago.     

Leadership déjà vu all over again

Much leadership literature neglects its historical-contextual antecedents and as a result over-emphasizes zeitgeist, or tenor of the time's social forces. This neglect impedes leadership research by encouraging academic amnesia and promoting a strong feeling of research déjà vu among many researchers and practitioners. In this article, we develop a leadership historical-contextual superstructure consisting of evolutionary antecedents, paradigmatic antecedents, purpose and definitional antecedents, stakeholder antecedents, levels of analysis and temporal antecedents, and research dissemination antecedents. We use this superstructure to analyze current work in the increasingly important relational leadership research stream to illustrate how the superstructure's use can aid leadership researchers and practitioners in avoiding leadership déjà vu and academic amnesia and help build a more cumulative field.     

Transformational/charismatic leadership's tranformation of the field: An historical essay

I use a framework by Reichers and Schneider (1990) to explore the evolution of leadership research across time. This analysis leads to development of the doom and gloom arguments about the field in the 1970s and early 1980s. Transformational and charismatic leadership is discussed as it takes off following the doom and gloom period. That takeoff is followed by revisiting the shift to transformational/charismatic leadership and considering why some of the leading and next-generation scholars set off in this new direction. I then link transformational/charismatic leadership with more traditional approaches and finish with conclusions concerning forces for change, assessing where the leadership field is currently, and providing a future assessment with some caveats. I conclude that a crucial contribution of transformational/charismatic leadership has been in terms of its rejuvenation of the leadership field, regardless of whatever content contributions it has made. This rejuvenation came about because of what most would consider a paradigm shift that has attracted numerous new scholars and moved the field as a whole out of its doldrums.     

Leadership in the digital era: A review of who,what, when,where, and why

Leadership as a social influence process has always involved a complex set of phenomena that demands an interdisciplinary lens. Leadership scholarship has now entered into a digital era. In a digital era, the overall phenomenon is changing, as are the tools through which we study it, demanding a new “lens” through which we view leadership. Yet, this raises the question, to what extent is leadership different in a digital era? In acknowledgement of this trend, a special issue was commissioned at The Leadership Quarterly that sought to stimulate the imagination of leadership scholars and practitioners. In the current work, we begin with a brief review of who, what, when, where and why of digital leadership. We cover leadership in informal contexts (e.g., social media), generalization from face-to-face to virtual contexts, computational modeling, the leveraging of technology (e.g., machine learning; Big Data), as well methodological how-to guides. We then plot a path forward for leadership scholars in the dawn of the digital era.     

Estimating return on leadership development investment

When making capital investment decisions organizational leaders are trained to consider the financial return on investment. Yet, the same expectation typically does not exist for investments in leadership training. We suggest that decisions regarding leadership training and development ought to use a similar approach as the process leads to organizations incurring cost for an anticipated benefit, like any other investment. In the current paper, we describe how to estimate the return on leadership development investment (RODI) and the implications for measuring organizational effectiveness from such analyses. Using different guiding assumptions, scenarios, length of the intervention, and level of management participating in the leader development program, the expected return on investment from leadership development interventions ranged from a low negative RODI to over 200%.     

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.     

In search of missing time: A review of the study of time in leadership research

Many studies describe leadership as a dynamic process. However, few examine the passage of time as a critical dimension of that dynamism. This article illuminates this knowledge gap by conducting a systematic review of empirical studies on temporal effects of leadership to identify if and how time has been considered as a factor. After synthesizing key findings from the review, the article discusses methodological implications. We propose that a computational science approach, particularly agent-based modeling, is a fruitful path for future leadership research. This article contributes to leadership scholarship by shedding light on a missing variable (time) and offering a novel way to investigate the temporal, dynamic, emergent, and recursive aspects of leadership. We demonstrate the usefulness of agent-based modeling with an example of leader-member exchange relationship development.     

Complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing: A meso model

We consider Complexity Leadership Theory [Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity Leadership Theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly.] in contexts of bureaucratic forms of organizing to describe how adaptive dynamics can work in combination with administrative functions to generate emergence and change in organizations. Complexity leadership approaches are consistent with the central assertion of the meso argument that leadership is multi-level, processual, contextual, and interactive. In this paper we focus on the adaptive function, an interactive process between adaptive leadership (an agentic behavior) and complexity dynamics (non-agentic social dynamics) that generates emergent outcomes (e.g., innovation, learning, adaptability) for the firm. Propositions regarding the actions of complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing are offered.     

Combinative aspects of leadership style: The ordering and temporal spacing of leadership behaviors

This article introduces the concept of combinative aspects of leadership style, which addresses elements of leadership style such as the ordering and temporal spacing of leadership behaviors. The major purpose is to show that perceptions of leadership are influenced by the manner in which leadership behaviors are combined. Different combinations of task-oriented leadership statements and socioemotionally oriented leadership statements were examined. All of the participants were full-time employees. In all three of the studies, combinative aspects of leadership style clearly influenced perceptions of leadership statements. The findings indicate that task-oriented leadership should not be provided without socioemotional leadership and that socioemotionally oriented leadership should generally be provided immediately before task-oriented leadership. Further work is needed to investigate the applicability of combinative aspects of leadership style to components of transactional and transformational leadership.