Search results

1 – 2 of 2
Article
Publication date: 8 April 2021

Jay L. Caulfield, Felissa K. Lee and Bret A. Richards

The aim of this viewpoint paper is to refine the meaning of “leadership as an art” in the context of wicked (complex) social problems and in the realm of contemporary leadership…

1156

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this viewpoint paper is to refine the meaning of “leadership as an art” in the context of wicked (complex) social problems and in the realm of contemporary leadership research and practice.

Design/methodology/approach

In this paper we explore the meaning of “leadership as an art,” a concept often alluded to but rarely defined concretely. The authors examine the concept by comparing artistic and scientific knowledge paradigms, identifying descriptors of the “leadership as art” concept appearing in the literature and illustrating key attributes of the “leadership as art” concept with real-world examples.

Findings

Leadership as an art is conceptualized as empathetically engaging and normatively uniting people in a vision to promote the common good through collectively formulating an understanding of a complex social problem and its resolution that when courageously and creatively pursued has the potential to make an extraordinary contribution to humanity.

Social implications

The magnitude and complexity of social problems impact communities on a daily basis, making them worthy of attention. History has demonstrated that practicing leadership as an art from a normative power base has the potential of uniting diverse collectives in creatively resolving wicked social problems for the benefit of the common good.

Originality/value

Although leadership as an art has been discussed in the literature over several decades, the term has not been positioned explicitly within contemporary leadership in the context of resolving complex social problems within social networks.

Details

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 42 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0143-7739

Keywords

Abstract

Purpose

This study examines chronic illness, disability and social inequality within an exposure-vulnerabilities theoretical framework.

Methodology/Approach

Using the National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), a preeminent source of national behavioral health estimates of chronic medical illness, stress and disability, for selected sample years 2005–2014, we construct and analyze two foundational hypotheses underlying the exposure-vulnerabilities model: (1) greater exposure to stressors (i.e., chronic medical illness) among racial/ethnic minority populations yields higher levels of serious psychological distress, which in turn increases the likelihood of medical disability; (2) greater vulnerability among minority populations to stressors such as chronic medical illness exacerbates the impact of these conditions on mental health as well as the impact of mental health on medical disability.

Findings

Results of our analyses provided mixed support for the vulnerability (moderator) hypothesis, but not for the exposure (mediation) hypothesis. In the exposure models, while Blacks were more likely than Whites to have a long-term disability, the pathway to disability through chronic illness and serious psychological distress did not emerge. Rather, Whites were more likely than Blacks and Latinx to have a chronic illness and to have experienced severe psychological distress (both of which themselves were related to disability). In the vulnerability models, both Blacks and Latinx with chronic medical illness were more likely than Whites to experience serious psychological distress, although Whites with serious psychological distress were more likely than these groups to have a long-term disability.

Research Limitations

Several possibilities for understanding the failure to uncover an exposure dynamic in the model turn on the potential intersectional effects of age and gender, as well as several other covariates that seem to confound the linkages in the model (e.g., issues of stigma, social support, education).

Originality/Value

This study (1) extends the racial/ethnic disparities in exposure-vulnerability framework by including factors measuring chronic medical illness and disability which: (2) explicitly test exposure and vulnerability hypotheses in minority populations; (3) develop and test the causal linkages in the hypothesized processes, based on innovations in general structural equation models, and lastly; (4) use national population estimates of these conditions which are rarely, if ever, investigated in this kind of causal framework.

Details

Social Factors, Health Care Inequities and Vaccination
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83753-795-2

Keywords

1 – 2 of 2