Leadership Studies Across Cultures and Nations

2021 ◽  
pp. 11-23
Author(s):  
Yulia Tolstikov-Mast ◽  
Jennifer Aden Murnane-Rainey
Keyword(s):  

This edited book will make an important, timely, and innovative contribution to the now flourishing academic discipline of political leadership studies. We have developed a conceptual framework of leadership capital and a diagnostic tool—the Leadership Capital Index (LCI)—to measure and evaluate the fluctuating nature of leadership capital. Differing amounts of leadership capital, a combination of skills, relations, and reputation, allow leaders to succeed or fail. This book brings together leading international scholars to engage with the concept of “leadership capital” and apply the LCI to a variety of comparative case studies. The LCI offers a comprehensive yet parsimonious and easily applicable ten-point matrix to examine leadership authority over time and in different political contexts. In each case, leaders “spend” and put their “stock” of authority and support at risk. United States president, Lyndon Johnson, arm-twisting Congress to put into effect civil rights legislation, Tony Blair taking the United Kingdom into the invasion of Iraq, Angela Merkel committing Germany to a generous reception of refugees: all ‘spent capital’ to forge public policy they believed in. We are interested in how office-holders acquire, consolidate, risk, and lose such capital. This volume concentrates predominantly on elected ‘chief executives’ at the national level, including majoritarian and consensus systems, multiple and singular cases. We also consider some presidential and sub-national cases. The purpose of the exercise is indeed exploratory: the chapters are a series of plausibility probes, to see how the LCI framework ‘performs’ as a descriptive and analytical tool.


2021 ◽  
pp. 001872672199845
Author(s):  
Guowei Jian

Does empathy merely take place in leaders’ mind? How does it help us better understand and practice leadership? In the past, entitative relational leadership studies have mainly drawn on a mind-based understanding of empathy and focused on the association between individual empathy trait and leader emergence and effectiveness. Such an approach overlooks leadership practice of empathy as a constructive process. By integrating emerging research from diverse disciplines from philosophy to communication, the paper first offers a constructionist view of empathy, based on which empathic leadership practice is conceptualized. The paper explicates how leadership practice of empathy construction is rooted in relational ethics and takes place in both synchronic dyadic interaction through conversation as well as diachronic narrative practice with a collective other. By conceptualizing empathic leadership practice through a social constructionist approach to empathy, the paper makes significant contributions to our understanding of relational leadership.


Leadership ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 174271502098322
Author(s):  
Steve Kempster ◽  
Doris Schedlitzki ◽  
Gareth Edwards

In this short article, we explore and problematise the axiomatic assumption of follower in the field of leadership studies notably the leader–follower axiom as the essential foundation of much leadership theorising. We do so, firstly by drawing on our experiences of exploring followership conceptually, and secondly, by reviewing conversations with executive MBA students. From these sources, we argue that the absence of identifications with followership offers a challenge to leadership assumptions around the socio-materiality of followers and their relations with leaders within organisational contexts. This leads us to questions like: what if follower identifications do not typically exist or are rejected in everyday organisational working contexts – despite discursive labelling of individuals as followers or following practices? Would or should leadership research and its examination of leader–follower dynamics fundamentally change and in what ways? We explore these questions and suggest very different orientations that might appear with regards to notions of the leadership relationship, leading and following dynamics, practice-based attention to leadership and perhaps very different approaches to leadership development. Such a (re)appraisal of the leadership lexicon may move notions of follower identification out of social constructions of organisational leadership and towards social media (Facebook, Twitter and Instagram) – where the phenomenon of being a follower is ever present, but is redefined as a phenomenon of vicarious fantasy associated with interest, curiosity and entertainment.


2021 ◽  
pp. 105960112098729
Author(s):  
Quinetta Roberson ◽  
Narda R. Quigley ◽  
Kamil Vickers ◽  
Isabella Bruck

While scholarship has increased on the topic of neurodiversity in organizations, which refers to individuals with pervasive developmental disorders in the workforce, leadership theory and research has not yet integrated this perspective. Consistent with conventional conceptualizations of disability as an impairment, the few relevant leadership studies tend to approach these differences as special cases, rather than as a population to which theory may be generalized. As a result, management scholars have yet to develop theories and models that are inclusive of neurodiversity. Using the critical disability theory as a lens for reframing assumptions about leadership behavior as described in existing theory and research, we postulate that neurodiversity may serve as a cognitive strength from which leadership derives. We offer a conceptual model that articulates how cognitive characteristics associated with neurodiversity may lead to task-based leadership behavior, and we trace the influence of such behaviors on leader and follower outcomes. The model also includes enabling conditions that may positively influence the emergence and recognition of neurodiverse individuals as leaders. We conclude by proposing directions for future research to better integrate the neurodiversity and leadership literatures and reflecting on the associated practical implications.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Almeida ◽  
Francisca Abreu ◽  
Nelson C. Ramalho

PurposeLeadership is a time-dependent process and a recent leadership research trend posits a central role of time-based variables. The dyadic tenure plays a keystone role in understanding leader–follower dynamics, especially as regards leader ethics. In line with this, from a social learning theory perspective, the authors propose a model that explains how and when ethical leaders' behaviors influence subordinates' moral disengagement.Design/methodology/approachWith a sample of 220 employees, the present study tests the conditional indirect effect of ethical leadership on followers' moral disengagement via instrumental ethical climate (IEC), using dyadic tenure as the moderator variable. The analyses were conducted with Hayes PROCESS macro.FindingsResults suggested that IEC fully mediates the relationship between ethical leadership and moral disengagement. Thus, when followers perceive low levels of ethical leadership, they notice higher levels of IEC, which is positively related to moral disengagement. However, IEC perception only influences moral disengagement when dyadic tenure approaches the third year.Originality/valueThis paper answers calls to include time-based variables in leadership studies. Hence, using dyadic tenure, this study gives support to previous propositions that were still awaiting empirical test.


2021 ◽  
pp. 105256292110413
Author(s):  
Shaista E. Khilji

In recent years, scholars have become critical of mainstream leadership development approaches. In particular, Petriglieri and Petriglieri refer to the dehumanization of leadership, whereby leadership breaks its ties to identity, community, and context. The purpose of this paper is to present an approach for humanizing leadership using the case example of George Washington University’s Organizational Leadership & Learning (OLL) program. Embedded in the critical leadership studies (CLS) approach, the humanizing principles, and the humanistic leadership paradigm, the OLL program’s leadership learning approach focuses on building a learning community and stakeholder engagement. I describe its pedagogical goals and instructional strategies that help promote a psychologically safe space where learners build trusting relationships, integrate diverse perspectives through respectful dialogues, and develop a sense of the “common good” and culture of equity through issue-centered learning. Using classrooms as “identity spaces” and “leadership learning laboratory” allows learners in the program to practice the co-construction of ideas through mutual influence and interactions. This paper makes a valuable contribution to developing future leadership development programs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document