Search results

The purpose of this paper is to expand attention to responsible leader behavior in the world’s health sectors by explaining how this concept applies to health sectors, considering why health sector leaders should behave responsibly, reviewing how they can do so, and asserting potential impact through an applied example.

This paper is a viewpoint, reflecting conceptualizations rooted in leadership literature which are then specifically applied to health sectors. A definition of responsible leader behavior is affirmed and applied specifically in health sectors. Conceptualizations and viewpoints about practice of responsible leader behavior in health sectors and potential consequences are then discussed and asserted.

Leadership failures and debacles found in health, but more so in other sectors, have led leadership researchers to offer insights, many of them empirical, into the challenges of leadership especially by more clearly delineating responsible leader behavior.

Much of what has been learned in the research about responsible leader behavior offers pathways for health sector leaders to more fully practice responsible leadership.

This paper asserts and provides a supporting example that greater levels of responsible leader behavior in health sectors hold potentially important societal benefits.

This paper is the first to apply emerging conceptualizations and early empirical findings about responsible leader behavior specifically to leaders in health sectors.

The first part of this paper pointed out that theory and research on followership is less extensive and less well known than that on leadership. It then described a three factor model of leadership and suggested it could be applied to and was consistent with other work on followership. The second part of the paper presented empirical evidence supporting the three factor model of leadership and justifying its extension and application to the full range of team roles, including follower and co-worker roles, as well as leader roles. This part of the paper looks specifically at follower roles and followership. Research findings are used to develop and describe a three factor model of follower behaviour. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A mixed group of managers, mainly from the UK public sector, completed a variety of self-assessment questionnaires, had 360 degree assessments completed on them, and provided information on their work role and situation. Research looked at the degree of correlation between variables and its statistical significance. This was used to assess the internal reliability and external validity of three factor measures of leader behaviours and team role behaviours. Information on contextual variables was used to measure leader and follower situations and develop leader-follower scales that were used to identify behaviours used by followers. In total, 360 degree assessments were also used to identify behaviours that are most and least valued when used by followers.

The findings presented in the second part of this paper provided empirical support for the three factor model of leadership and its extension to the full range of team roles. The findings presented in this part of the paper identify behaviours used by individuals in follower roles and behaviours valued when used by individuals in such roles. By combining these two sets of findings, it was possible to produce a three factor model of effective follower behaviour, with each metacategory consisting of five behaviour sets and each set made up of four specific behaviours.

Effective organisations need effective followers and effective leaders. Moreover, the skills of the effective leader develop out of and build on those of the effective follower. Effective leaders and followers use essentially the same skills but use them in different situations, playing different roles. The research was carried out on a diverse sample of managers, drawn mainly from the UK public sector. However, it would be useful to extend the research to other populations.

The findings provide evidence-based descriptions of effective follower behaviours. These have practical implications for leaders and for followers, as well those involved in their training and development. They establish the content of developmental activities for effective followers and indicate how the training and development of followers underpins that of leaders.

The findings challenge the widely held pre-occupation with leadership and the associated view that it is qualitatively different from and superior to leadership. In so doing, the three factor model of followership offers a challenge to the cult of leadership.

This is the first published research to present empirical evidence supporting the three factor model of followership. In the research process, scales were developed to assess leader and follower roles and used to identify behaviours used by followers. They were also used in further research identifying behaviours most and least valued when used by followers. The instruments and the associated research were original.

Drawing on affective events theory (AET), this study aims to investigate how and when leader voice solicitation affects employees’ innovative behavior. Specifically, this study proposes that leader voice solicitation evokes employees’ feelings of pride, which subsequently motivate employees’ innovative behavior. Moreover, collectivism orientation plays a moderating role in this process.

This study collected 251 supervisor–subordinate dyadic data in two phases and employed structural equational modeling (SEM) to test the hypotheses.

The results revealed that employees’ feelings of pride mediate the positive relationship between leader voice solicitation and employees’ innovative behavior. Collectivism orientation intensifies the mediated relationship.

This study extends the potential outcome variables of leader voice solicitation. Moreover, it introduces a novel theoretical perspective to explore the impact of leader voice solicitation on employees. Importantly, this study examines the mediating effect of pride and the moderating effect of collectivism orientation, deepening the understanding of how and when leader voice solicitation affects innovative behavior.

This study investigates the benefits of ethical leadership behaviors for leaders themselves and the underlying mechanisms and boundary conditions of this effect.

Using a multi-time and multi-source survey design, data was collected from both leaders and subordinates across three waves.

Ethical leadership behavior was found to be positively associated with the leader’s moral pride, resulting in the leader’s higher in-role performance and perceived manager effectiveness. The effect of ethical leadership behavior was moderated by core self-evaluation (CSE), such that low-CSE leaders benefit more from these behaviors.

Organizations should encourage ethical leadership behaviors and educate leaders to develop moral pride from conducting these behaviors. Leaders with low CSEs can enhance their in-role performance and overall effectiveness by taking pride in their ethical leadership behaviors.

The field of study on ethical leadership has predominantly focused on the positive outcomes for recipients, yet it is imperative to examine the self-benefits for leaders as well. This study drew upon affective events theory to posit that ethical leadership behaviors generate moral pride in leaders, leading to improved work-related attitudes and performance outcomes.

Previous research has mainly focused on the outcomes of empowering leadership, and empirical evidence on how to encourage leaders to display empowering behaviors has been overlooked, particularly from an interpersonal perspective.

Based on the integrative model of organizational trust, we investigate the relationship between employees' taking charge behaviors and empowering leadership considering the mediating role of leader trust in employees and the moderating role of risk propensity.

The results indicate that taking charge is positively associated with leader trust in employees, which influences the development of empowering leadership. Additionally, leaders' risk propensity moderates these relationships, that is, a higher level of risk propensity can enhance the promoting effect of leader trust on empowering behaviors.

This study explores the antecedents and mechanisms influencing empowering leadership and proposes the moderating effect of risk propensity. The findings not only clarify how and why employees' taking charge behaviors can stimulate empowering leadership but also offer a more comprehensive understanding of the antecedents of empowering leadership.

Using five categories summarized by Bass (1990), this chapter attempts to address three key questions about charismatic leadership:

• (1)

  What are the key behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership?

• (2)

  How does charismatic leadership differ from other forms of leadership?

• (3)

  Who may become followers of charismatic leaders and when do they become followers?

What are the key behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership?

How does charismatic leadership differ from other forms of leadership?

Who may become followers of charismatic leaders and when do they become followers?

By focusing on Weber’s original view of charisma, we suggest that his three dimensions of charismatic leader behaviors underlie most contemporary approaches. By considering these three dimensions in more detail, we demonstrate how this view allows for different views of leadership and is distinguishable from management. Finally, by extending Weber’s view and by identifying two types of charismatic leaders who differ in their power motives, we suggest how the characteristics of followers and the context influence followers’ acceptance of charismatic leaders as legitimate. Some implications for leadership effectiveness are discussed.

This paper reviews and compares six theoretical explanations of the effects of charismatic leaders on their followers. Of the six explanations two are based on psychoanalytic theory, two on attribution theory, one on a sociological theory of symbolic centers, and one on the social psychology of the self-concept. The review exposes differences among the explanations in their motivational assumptions, their predictions regarding leader behaviors and effects on followers, and the mediating mechanisms they posit between leader behaviors and effects on followers. The most critical differences are highlighted and suggested as foci of future research on charismatic leadership.

Leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI), personality, and empowering behavior have been heavily studied in the organizational behavior literature. To date, the majority of research on EI and personality has shown their significant influence on personal outcomes. It has also been suggested that empowerment is a fundamental psychological mechanism underlying follower outcomes. Nevertheless, little attention has been paid to the effect of team leaders’ EI and personality on team outcomes and the potential mediating effect of team leaders’ empowering behavior. In this study, we developed theoretical rationale and empirically tested the effect of team leaders’ EI and personality on team climate and the mediating role that team leaders’ empowering behavior plays in this relationship. The results supported most of our hypothesized relationships, that is, the positive effects of team leaders’ EI and agreeableness on team climate were mediated by team leaders’ empowering behavior, whereas team leaders’ openness to new experience was not related to empowering behavior and team climate. Finally, theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

It has generally been assumed that effective leadership is a key to successful change. But, as some authors have noted, there is a dearth of empirical research regarding the impact of leadership on organization change. In this chapter, we review the empirical evidence from the past 20 years in an attempt to determine the impact of leadership on the conduct and outcomes of organizational change. Our conclusions indicate that the leadership of change is more complex than envisioned, involving multiple forms of leadership engaged in different approaches, behaviors, and activities, only some of which are effective.

The relevance of affective factors in the charismatic leadership process has been widely acknowledged in leadership research. Building on this notion, the present study empirically investigated the role of leaders’ positive mood and emotional intelligence in the development of charismatic leadership behaviors. We developed hypotheses linking these constructs and tested them in a sample of 34 leaders and their 165 direct followers from a multinational corporation. Results showed that both leaders’ positive mood and leaders’ emotional intelligence were positively related to their charismatic leadership behaviors, as rated by followers. Further, we found leaders’ emotional intelligence to moderate the relationship between leaders’ positive mood and their charismatic leadership behaviors. Emotionally intelligent leaders exhibited charismatic leadership behaviors to a high extent, largely irrespective of their degree of positive mood. In contrast, leaders low on emotional intelligence were more likely to exhibit charismatic behaviors when their positive mood was high, while they were less likely to exhibit such behaviors when their positive mood was low. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for leadership theory, research, and practice.