Search results

Machine learning (ML) has recently gained momentum as a method for measurement in strategy research. Yet, little guidance exists regarding how to appropriately apply the method for this purpose in our discipline. We address this by offering a guide to the application of ML in strategy research, with a particular emphasis on data handling practices that should improve our ability to accurately measure our constructs of interest using ML techniques. We offer a brief overview of ML methodologies that can be used for measurement before describing key challenges that exist when applying those methods for this purpose in strategy research (i.e., sample sizes, data noise, and construct complexity). We then outline a theory-driven approach to help scholars overcome these challenges and improve data handling and the subsequent application of ML techniques in strategy research. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach by applying it to create a linguistic measure of CEOs' motivational needs in a sample of S&P 500 firms. We conclude by describing steps scholars can take after creating ML-based measures to continue to improve the application of ML in strategy research.

In this chapter, we briefly trace the history of the neo-charismatic movement and review Bass and Avolio’s full-range leadership theory (FRLT). We present the FRLT as the flame bearer of the movement, and argue that it should be used as a platform to integrate similar leadership theories. We identify conditions that may moderate the factor structure of the FRLT, and review the validity of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire – the instrument underlying the FRLT. Furthermore, we identify theoretical deficiencies in the FRLT and propose the addition of a broad class of behaviors labeled instrumental leadership, which, we argue, is distinct from transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. Finally, we discuss the utility of dispositional variables in predicting the emergence of leadership.

Organizations are investing their resources to identify effective leaders; however, the most commonly utilized assessments of leadership potential do not cover the social cognitions of individuals. Trait assessments, which are explicit in nature, also have other problems, including faking and socially desirable responding. In this chapter, we highlight the importance of leaders' implicit reasoning processes, with a particular focus on cognitive biases, in an attempt to understand how destructive leaders frame the world, situations and people and how they justify their choice of behaviours and decisions. Empirical evidence in the literature supports the valid use of implicit reasoning measurements in organizational contexts. Thus, we first summarize and list the cognitive biases of destructive leaders as identified in the literature. We then turn our focus on Machiavellian leaders as they have been associated with destructive leadership. We present the most common six cognitive biases and justification mechanisms of Machiavellian leaders based on our qualitative analysis of interview responses from 72 employees. We aim to encourage researchers and practitioners to make use of the literature on implicit reasoning and to further contribute to developing measures assessing such implicit reasoning processes.

In recent years, business companies are challenged with various difficulties in connection to human resources (HR), for example, adapting to one’s sentiments, managing debates, developing collaboration, affecting leadership, addressing motives, interpersonal susceptibility, dealing with capabilities and also individual emotional intelligence (EI) or inward characteristics (e.g. moral qualities). Expanding on and reaching out earlier and ongoing work, the scope of this research is to experimentally look at the connection between the components of EI and ethics in contemporary organizations and their resulting impact on employees’ motives and performance. A quantitative method was utilized, and an entirety of 386 questionnaires was collected from three diverse high-tech new businesses based in Greece and analyzed with SPSS programing. For triangulation reasons, auxiliary information from the organizations’ sites were gathered and a meeting with each organization’s executive of the HR division was held. The outcomes propose that ethical values add to motives and thus employee motives add to employee performance. Helpful administrative ramifications resulted from this research.

Positivist deductive research on transformational leadership brings along with it 25 years of researcher presuppositions. Such research not only suggests that a transformational leader’s influence is unidirectional but also that transformational leadership theory is a universal theory. In this chapter, I inductively seek to examine board-executive director interactions, free from the shackles of existing theory.

The current chapter uses an inductive research approach to the collection and analysis of the empirical material. By being open to surprises in the empirical material, I am able to explore behaviors and relationships, while analyzing a specific context – the nonprofit board-executive director relationship.

The current study finds evidence that individualized consideration in a governance model frequently occurs in the opposite direction. Despite organizational documents promoting a hierarchical structure, evidence of top-down, collegiality, and bottom-up individualized consideration suggests hierarchical boundaries are commonly crossed in the decision making process.

Results of this exploratory study suggest that in a governance context, hierarchical actors do not fit neatly into the boxes defined by 30 years of research on transformational leadership theory, suggesting that the leadership process is more complex than portrayed by current dichotomizations. The findings provide support for recent criticisms of transformational leadership theory.

The findings of this chapter provide evidence of the benefits of eliciting input from organizational actors at multiple hierarchical levels. The empirical evidence provides practitioners with a fresh perspective on board roles and relationship, diverging from the traditional structural prescriptions.

In this paper, we explore a new leadership theory termed “Issue Leadership,” where a leader is considered to be a person who looks for critical issues in the ordinary, involves the audience (i.e. those who are directly or indirectly related to a particular issue) in an effective way, and achieves outstanding performances and desired changes through efficient implementation of a proposed issue. Specifically, an issue leader is required to exhibit three distinctive behaviors: issue-creating, audience-involving, and issue-implementing. Antecedents and moderators of issue leadership behavior are identified, and their interrelationships are proposed in a comprehensive issue leadership model. After a detailed explanation of the issue leadership theory, we researched, and tried to answer the question, “How do we apply the theory to global business settings?”