Generational Differences in Work Values: A Review of Theory and Evidence

This paper presents a critical review of the theoretical basis and empirical evidence for the popular practitioner idea that there are generational differences in work values. The concept of generations has a strong basis in sociological theory, but the academic empirical evidence for generational differences in work values is, at best, mixed. Many studies are unable to find the predicted differences in work values, and those that do often fail to distinguish between ‘generation’ and ‘age’ as possible drivers of such observed differences. In addition, the empirical literature is fraught with methodological limitations through the use of cross‐sectional research designs in most studies, confusion about the definition of a generation as opposed to a cohort, and a lack of consideration for differences in national context, gender and ethnicity. Given the multitude of problems inherent in the evidence on generational differences in work values, it is not clear what value the notion of generations has for practitioners, and this may suggest that the concept be ignored. Ultimately, it may not matter to practitioners whether differences in the values of different birth cohorts reflect true generational effects, provided one can reliably demonstrate that these differences do exist. However, at present this is not the case, and therefore significant research is required first to disentangle cohort and generational effects from those caused by age or period. The suggestion that different groups of employees have different values and preferences, based on both age and other factors such as gender, remains a useful idea for managers; but a convincing case for consideration of generation as an additional distinguishing factor has yet to be made.     

Follower transformation as the linchpin of transformational leadership theory: A systematic review and future research agenda

Transformational leadership theory represents a cornerstone in leadership research. Despite an impressive empirical record highlighted by both the breadth of its nomological network and magnitudes of effects, scholars raise serious construct and content validity concerns. In this article, we address a remarkable oversight in the transformational leadership literature. Few studies have assessed the theory assumption that the positive individual, group, and organizational effects of transformational leadership are due to the transformation of followers in specific and enduring ways. We offer a systematic review of empirical evidence related to follower transformation as the conceptual foundation of transformational leadership theory. Findings from this review highlight the radical leap in the evolution of transformational leadership theory from nascent phenomena to mature paradigm. Calling for a return to nascent and intermediary phases of theory development, we conclude with a research agenda aimed at creating a stronger theory, better measures, and more actionable leadership models.     

The use of constructive-developmental theory to advance the understanding of leadership

Constructive-developmental theory is a stage theory of adult development that focuses on the growth and elaboration of a person's ways of understanding the self and the world. In this article we review how the constructive-developmental frameworks of Kegan [Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press], Torbert [Torbert, W. R. (1987). Managing the corporate dream: Restructuring for long-term success. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.], and Kohlberg [Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive developmental approach to socialization. In D. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research. New York: Rand McNally] have been applied in the theoretical and empirical literature on leadership and management. Although the literature has produced a number of propositions, the notion that a leader's order of development should impact his or her leadership effectiveness or managerial performance has generated the most research. We found mixed support for this proposition as well as a number of limitations in the research in general. To have a greater impact on the leadership field, constructive-developmental theory needs to generate more robust research, to link more clearly with on-going streams of leadership research, and to explore the contribution of aspects of the theory beyond individual order of development.     

A systematic and critical review of research on respect in leadership

Respect is an important psychological and interpersonal phenomenon that has been included in various theoretical and empirical approaches to leadership for nearly 70 years. In this systematic and critical review article, we provide a comprehensive summary and critique of theories, definitions, measures, and empirical studies of respect in leadership. We first provide an overview of the historical and theoretical background, including the most common theories, definitions, and measures that inform empirical studies of respect in leadership. Second, we present a systematic literature review of empirical studies on respect in leadership, including a critical evaluation of research designs and statistical analyses that support claims of the validity of various conceptualizations of respect that pertain to the study of leadership. Finally, we offer a new working definition of respect in leadership, and an accompanying conceptual framework which informs a number of recommendations for future theory development, empirical research, and leadership practice.     

Incorporating social networks into leadership development: A conceptual model and evaluation of research and practice

Multilevel and relational views of leadership are expanding the focus of leadership development beyond individuals' knowledge, skills, and abilities to include the networked patterns of social relationships linking members of dyads and larger collectives. In this review, we present a conceptual model explaining how three distinct approaches for network-enhancing leadership development can improve the leadership capacity of individuals and collectives. We then present a review of the leadership development literature and the results of a survey of 282 practitioners to assess the extent to which these approaches have been examined in research and implemented in practice. Our review revealed that leadership research and leadership development practice are outpacing leadership development research in terms of incorporating networks. We aim to spur future research by clarifying the targets, objectives, and underlying mechanisms of each network enhancing leadership development approach in our conceptual model. Further, we identify additional literature, not traditionally considered within the realm of leadership development that may help advance empirical examinations of these approaches.     

Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory

The development of effective leaders and leadership behavior is a prominent concern in organizations of all types. We review the theoretical and empirical literature on leader and leadership development published over the past 25 years, primarily focusing on research published in The Leadership Quarterly. Compared to the relatively long history of leadership research and theory, the systematic study of leadership development (broadly defined to also include leader development) has a moderately short history. We examine intrapersonal and interpersonal issues related to the phenomena that develop during the pursuit of effective leadership, describe how development emerges with an emphasis on multi-source or 360-degree feedback processes, review longitudinal studies of leadership development, and investigate methodological and analytical issues in leader and leadership development research. Future research directions to motivate and guide the study of leader and leadership development are also discussed.     

Advancing the science of 21st-century leadership development: Theory,research, and practice

Leadership development seeks to understand, predict, and intervene effectively in addressing the questions of how individuals develop as leaders and how collections of individuals develop a capacity for leadership. These questions are attracting scholars interested in the factors and processes involved in developing leaders and leadership. Presented in the special issue is a set of state-of-the-science empirical studies and theory development articles representing 21st century leadership development. We also provide a brief overview of issues related to the leadership development field – broadly construed to include individual leader development – that are especially pertinent and where the research evidence is scarce or contradictory. These areas are theoretical foundations of leadership development, practices and methods of development and talent selection for development, accurately estimating return on investment for leadership development initiatives, the role of time in developing leaders and leadership, understanding and remedying biases and inequities in leadership development, and the role of development in mitigating the so-called dark side of leadership. Although we have learned much about leader and leadership development over the past 20 years, there is an ongoing need for more research and theory development especially with respect to identifying causally and practically relevant knowledge able to inform policy.     

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.     

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.     

Shared Leadership in Commercial Organizations: A Systematic Review of Definitions,Theoretical Frameworks and Organizational Outcomes

The importance of context has been well established in studies of leadership (Bryman, A. and Stephens, M. (1996). The importance of context: qualitative research and the study of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 7, pp. 353–371; Pettigrew, A. and Whipp, R. (1991). Managing Change for Competitive Success. Oxford: Blackwell). However, recent reviews of shared leadership have tended to merge findings across commercial and non‐commercial settings, disregarding contextual differences in these distinctive domains. Acknowledging that the challenges of leadership may vary in different organizational contexts, this paper argues that a focused review of shared leadership in commercial organizations (COs) is needed. The authors thus systematically review findings from over twenty years of empirical research on the practice of shared leadership in commercial organizations, critically reviewing definitions, theoretical dispositions and measurement approaches adopted in the field, before evaluating the impact of shared leadership on performance in this context. Findings from commercial and non‐ commercial organizations are then compared, highlighting significant differences in the conceptualization of shared leadership in these distinct settings. Contributing to theory in this field, a framework is developed, mapping the landscape of current research in commercial contexts, revealing critical gaps in our present understanding of shared leadership processes. Consequently, a model summarizing a proposed research agenda for future studies is provided, highlighting the need for such research to focus on the interactions of individuals as they share in the leadership of their team.     

Leading day-to-day: A review of the daily causes and consequences of leadership behaviors

A recent trend in leadership research is to explore the daily causes and consequences of leadership behaviors. As this type of research has grown dramatically in the past several years, we seek to provide a systematic review of existing empirical research that has used a daily ESM study design to examine the leadership process. In this review, we reflect on the unique and important benefits a daily perspective on leadership provides for leadership research. We also provide a systematic review of the existing research on daily leadership, discuss the methodological and theoretical aspects of the studies identified in the review, and highlight the important findings of this research. Finally, we conclude by drawing upon the reviewed articles to provide recommendations for future scholarly work. Specifically, we give recommendations that will both broaden scholars' understanding of the daily leadership process as well as deepen understanding.     

Do “protean” employees make better leaders? The answer is in the eye of the beholder

While the protean career (Hall, 1976, 2002) has been lauded for its advantages in helping individuals adapt to changing career contexts, it is not clear how this career orientation may impact how others perceive a person's leadership ability. In this study, we hypothesized that those with a protean career orientation would receive higher leadership ratings from subordinates and superiors, but lower leadership ratings from peers, in part based upon social comparison theory. Using structural equation modeling, our hypotheses regarding subordinates and peers were supported, but not with respect to superiors, who, along with peers, rated those with a protean career orientation lower in terms of transformational leadership as measured by the MLQ. We discuss potential reasons for these findings and the consequences for research and theory. Also, we examine the implications of this research for leadership development, workforce recruitment and retention, and possible generational significance.     

8 Leadership Research in Healthcare

Abstract

This chapter's purpose is to advance leadership research in the healthcare field in particular and in organizational studies more broadly. Based on a review of 60 empirical papers, we conclude that leadership is positively and significantly associated with individual work satisfaction, turnover, and performance. Despite these important results, however, we argue that researchers are missing opportunities to develop general leadership theory in the health sector, for example, by (a) examining the role of professionals as leaders and (b) developing understanding of the role of gender in leadership. Nonetheless, we also argue that we are not likely to advance leadership research until we address barriers to collaborative, multidisciplinary studies that develop conceptual models of leadership that makes it neither heroic nor impotent.     

Applying mixed methods to leadership research: A review of current practices

Leadership research has a long history of a quantitative approach, and it remains the most commonly used approach among leadership researchers. Researchers in a variety of fields have been applying mixed methods designs to their research as a way to advance theory. Mixed methods designs are used for collecting, analyzing, and mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or series of studies to both explain and explore specific research questions. This article provides a review of the basic characteristics of mixed methods designs. A broad series of leadership approaches is offered to help emphasize how the application of mixed methods designs have already been applied and where they might be directed in future research. Our review of articles published in the Leadership Quarterly between 1990 and June 2012 revealed a slight occurrence of existing application of mixed methods designs to leadership research. Of the articles reviewed, only 15 studies were found to represent mixed methods research, according to our conceptual framework. The overall intent of this article is to highlight the value of purposeful application of mixed methods designs toward advancing leadership theory and/or theoretical thinking about leadership phenomena.     

Romancing leadership: Past, present, and future

This paper presents a review of the romance of leadership and the social construction of leadership theory 25 years after it was originally introduced. We trace the development of this theoretical approach from the original formulation of the romance of leadership (RoL) theory as attributional bias through its emergence as a radical, unconventional approach that views leadership as a sensemaking activity that is primarily ‘in the eye of the beholder.’ We subsequently review research published in management and organizational psychology journals, book chapters and special issues of journals from 1985 to 2010. Three overall themes emerged from this review: 1) biases in (mis)attributions of leadership, including attributions for organizational success and failure; 2) follower-centered approaches, including the role of follower characteristics, perceptions, and motivations in interpreting leadership ratings; and 3) the social construction of leadership, including interfollower and social contagion processes, the role of crisis and uncertainty, and constructions and deconstructions of leadership and CEO celebrity in the media. Within each of these themes, we examine developments and summarize key findings. Our review concludes with recommendations for future theoretical and empirical work in this area.     

Embodying who we are: Leader group prototypicality and leadership effectiveness

Leadership is a process enacted in the context of a shared group membership, and leadership effectiveness is contingent on followers' perceptions of the leader as a group member. Addressing this role of group membership, the social identity theory of leadership puts leader group prototypicality, the extent to which the leader is perceived to embody group identity, center-stage in leadership effectiveness. I review empirical research in leader group prototypicality, concluding there is a robust empirical basis for the key propositions of the social identity theory of leadership. I also identify newer developments that extend and enrich the social identity analysis of leadership, including attention to the roles of uncertainty, leader fairness, leader–follower relationship, leader self-perceived prototypicality, and leadership of creativity and innovation.     

Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review

A growing body of leadership literature focuses on leader and follower identity dynamics, levels, processes of development and outcomes. Despite the importance of the phenomena, there has been surprisingly little effort to systematically review the widely dispersed literature on leader and follower identity. In this review we map existing studies on a multilevel framework that integrates levels-of-the self (individual, relational and collective) with the levels-of-analysis (intrapersonal, interpersonal and group) on which leader or follower identity work takes place. We also synthesize work from multiple research paradigms, such as social psychology experimental studies, narrative accounts of leaders' identity work and field studies on antecedents, outcomes, mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions. Finally, we outline implications for leadership development and call attention to key themes we see ripe for future research.     

State-of-the-science review of leader-follower dyads research

Despite its importance in multilevel research, the dyad level of analysis has been known as the most poorly understood level. Suggestions have been made recently in terms of levels alignment issues and methodologies to enhance the understanding of dyadic phenomena. Given recent remedies for dyads research and that the leader-follower dyad is generally considered the key dyad in organizations, we conducted a comprehensive review of the current state of leader-follower dyads research to assess what we know and how much we know about leader-follower dyads research conducted at the dyad level. Specifically, we summarized empirical studies that focused on leader-follower dyads that used data collected on the same variables from both dyadic partners. This review involved coding studies of these “pure” leader-follower dyads based on several dyadic theories (e.g., vertical dyad linkage, individualized leadership, leader-member exchange, leader-follower congruence) and multiple analytic methods (e.g., multilevel modeling, polynomial regression, WABA) that dealt with leader-follower dyads directly. Based on the results, this review generated a nomological network of constructs for understanding leader-follower dyads and to provide suggestions for future leader-follower dyads research.     

Followership theory: A review and research agenda

While theory and research on leaders and leadership abound, followers and followership theory have been given short shrift. It is accepted wisdom that there is no leadership without followers, yet followers are very often left out of the leadership research equation. Fortunately this problem is being addressed in recent research, with more attention being paid to the role of followership in the leadership process. The purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the followership literature, and from this review, introduce a broad theory of followership into leadership research. Based on our review, we identify two theoretical frameworks for the study of followership, one from a role-based approach (“reversing the lens”) and one from a constructionist approach (“the leadership process”). These frameworks are used to outline directions for future research. We conclude with a discussion of conceptual and methodological issues in the study of followership theory.     

Generations in organizations

Despite a rich tradition of scholarship across many disciplines, organizational research on the topic of generations has been relatively scarce. In this article we develop a framework for studying generations in organizations that draws on multiple conceptualizations across multiple disciplines. Our framework distills two distinct critical elements that give ‘generations’ agency in organizational settings – chronology (the idea that a unique location in time creates a ‘generation’) and genealogy (the idea that generations are linked through the transmission/descent of ideas/values/skills/knowledge). After an historic overview of the evolution of the topic of generations, we review generational research across the fields of political sociology, family sociology, psychology, social anthropology, cultural sociology, demography, and gerontology. Our framework elucidates how linkages between generations, based on chronology and genealogy, can be characterized in organizations and how the nature of intergenerational contact and transfer predicts a wide range of organizational outcomes such as change/innovation, conflict, turnover, and socialization. We outline the implications of this framework for future research on generations in organizations.