Search results

Organizational sociology and organization studies have a long history together, while also sharing a proclivity to self-diagnose crises. Instead of taking these assessments at face value, this paper treats them as an object of study, asking what conditions have fueled them. In the case of organizational sociology, there are indications of a connection between rising levels of discontent and community building: self-identified organizational sociologists have progressively withdrawn from general debates in the discipline and turned their attention to organization studies, which, they suspect, has seen dramatic levels of growth at their expense. Organization studies, on the other hand, are still haunted by “a Faustian bargain”: leaning heavily on the authority of the social sciences, business school faculty were able to facilitate the emergence of a scholarly field of practice dedicated to the study of organizations, which they control. However, in doing so, they also set organization studies on a path of continued dependence on knowledge produced elsewhere: notably, by university disciplines such as sociology.

Although the term interpersonal leadership has been well established within the literature, there remains a dearth of theoretically derived models that specifically address the comprehensive nature of the underlying leader behaviors and activities. The intent of the present article is to attempt to synthesize the existent leadership models, behaviors, and factors to arrive at a coherent conceptual model of interpersonal leadership that can inform efficient and effective leadership education programs. The resulting model included 13 primary factors integrated within a hierarchical framework. Leadership educators are recommended to adopt or adapt the proposed model while developing educational curriculum and interventions.