Search results

Serious questions have been raised regarding the necessity to continue focusing our research on what constitutes individual, or what the authors refer to as singular leadership. Although the authors consider these questions to be important to advancing the field of leadership theory, research, and practice, they also suggest that attempts to minimize the relevance of singular leadership may hinder progress in other domains of leadership research. In this chapter, the authors explore how and why singular leaders and their leadership matter, and how they may influence follower, peer, and organizational outcomes. The authors use a paradoxical framework to present a theoretical model and propositions that allow us to clarify the influence of different forms of singular leadership within organizations. In our examination of singular leadership, the authors consider both positive and harmful modes of attributes, cognitions, and behaviors.

This chapter addresses the stage at which entrepreneurs figure out that they have reached their level of incompetence (Peter & Hull, 1969) and how they might overcome it. Recommendations are made to aid entrepreneurs realize when this key moment has arrived, as well as to lay out an action plan to help them either become a professional Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or move aside and let a professional CEO run their company. Based on a state of the art review, this chapter identifies the most valued personality traits and skills, as well as leadership styles, for both entrepreneurs and professional CEOs. Those attributes are summarized as ideal job descriptions to help CEOs detect gaps between their current personality profile and the one that best meets company needs at each stage of the business’ lifecycle.

The upper-echelons model of Hambrick and Mason ((1984). Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206) launched a new area of research and provided the first overall theoretical framework for use in understanding how the experiences, backgrounds, and values of senior executives in organizations can influence the decisions that they make. The model is typically assumed to be what Rousseau ((1985). In: B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cumming (Eds), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 1–37). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press) calls “multi-level,” as it describes how both individuals and top management teams (TMTs) make decisions in line with their preferences, biases, and values; the same model is applicable to both individuals and groups. However, the levels issues in the model have never been subjected to rigorous analysis. This chapter juxtaposes levels concepts and theories on the upper-echelons model, in an effort to highlight its strengths as well as its weaknesses. While the majority of researchers use the model to describe team-level decision making, the analysis presented here reveals that the model is inherently individual-level in focus, and several important limitations must be overcome before the model will provide a full explanation of team-level decision making.

A growing body of research with contributions from different parts of the world documents accounts and analyses of negative behaviors by persons in leadership positions. Researchers today are acknowledging and paying increasing attention to the consequences of leadership that is characterized as being destructive. The chapter outlines organizational outcomes of destructive leadership and aims to emphasize the person–situation interaction in explaining these organizational phenomena. Both the direct outcomes that result from poor decision-making and the indirect effects that emerge as a consequence of the destructive leader's negative impact on the followers are discussed.

This chapter overviews how neuroscience can provide a new lens to understand leadership processes in organizations. We describe how neurological scanning can be applied to leadership research, as well as its potential advantages over more traditional techniques, such as surveys. Research to date is summarized pertaining to how neuroscience can inform such conceptualizations as transformational, complex/adaptive, and ethical forms of leadership. Findings indicate that effective versus not-so-effective leaders can be distinguished neurologically, and such assessment can benefit the prediction of important leadership outcomes. We caution that context needs to be taken into account in that not only can neurological variables associated with leaders affect organizational behavior and outcomes, but it is equally important to understand how the context can affect neurological qualities of individuals. Finally, we describe how it may be possible to use neurofeedback techniques to help develop leadership qualities of people in industry and in education programs, such as those in business schools.

The authors examine the impact of CEO generalist experience on firm performance. Using 522 listed firms in Indonesia for the period 2010–2018, the authors find that the generalist CEO is negatively associated with firm performance. Generalist CEOs tend to experience ambiguity in adjustments in the new environment. In order to decrease the impact of a generalist CEO, our empirical evidence finds that CEO tenure does not significantly moderate the association between the two. This is because generalist CEOs with longer tenure tend to avoid changing strategies, and therefore the negative impact of CEO generalist is not altered. The results of this study provide suggestions for the firm in the developing country to appoint a CEO with generalist experience.