Search results

This article verified the construct of servant leadership and validated a measure developed in Western culture. Results from exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (N=285) produced a five-factor model – altruistic calling, emotional healing, persuasive mapping, wisdom, and community stewardship with less items than the original measure. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (N=304) indicated that the 5-factor servant leadership model fits the data best. Correlation analysis of the supervisor-subordinate paired sample (N=209 dyads) showed that servant leadership has more common features with transformational leadership and less with paternalistic leadership; the predictive power of servant leadership was roughly equivalent to that of transformational leadership but higher than that of paternalistic leadership when predicting criterion variables such as overall satisfaction and deviance behavior. Our results totally demonstrated that the revised servant leadership scale in Chinese culture has higher reliability and validity, which could be used for subsequent studies as an effective instrument.

For many of the current leadership theories, models, and approaches, the answer to the question posed in the title, “Is leadership more than ‘I like my boss’?,” is “no,” as there appears to be a hierarchy of leadership concepts with Liking of the leader as the primary dimension or general factor foundation. There are then secondary dimensions or specific sub-factors of liking of Relationship Leadership and Task Leadership; and subsequently, tertiary dimensions or actual sub-sub-factors that comprise the numerous leadership views as well as their operationalizations (e.g., via surveys). There are, however, some leadership views that go beyond simply liking of the leader and liking of relationship leadership and task leadership. For these, which involve explicit levels of analysis formulations, often beyond the leader, or are multi-level in nature, the answer to the title question is “yes.” We clarify and discuss these various “no” and “yes” leadership views and implications of our work for future research and personnel and human resources management practice.

The common notion that leaders should be ethical, good, responsible and trustworthy has been strongly challenged in the fields of business and politics worldwide. Due to the high prevalence of unethical leadership by immediate supervisors and decline in trust in leaders (Cowart, Gilley, Avery, Barber, & Gilley, 2014), scholars started to pay closer attention to the dark sides and destructive aspects of leadership. Many different concepts are suggested to define the dark side of leadership, and each of them captures similar but distinct dimensions. In this vein, Einarsen and colleagues' (2007) constructive and destructive leadership model serves as an umbrella concept for different types of dark sides of leadership, covering concepts which have been studied separately such as abusive supervision, tyrannical leadership, petty tyranny, toxic leadership and leader derailment. The present chapter aims to provide a summary of the definitions of these interrelated constructs to acknowledge some other leadership (e.g., paternalistic leadership, pseudo-transformational leadership) and personality styles (e.g., Machiavellianism, narcissism) that have not been considered in this framework and to provide suggestions for future research.

Transformational, charismatic, and related leadership theories play an important role in understanding how leaders motivate better performance. However, these approaches have paid surprisingly little attention to the management of error in organizations. In fact, current studies in transformational leadership tend to define the management of error as one of the negative features of leadership. Preventing error and learning from error is a high profile leadership role in a wide variety of global industries, and therefore, it is important that leadership theories encompass this critical task. We draw on different streams of research to provide a more integrated and positive approach to leadership and the management error. Studies of error management culture provide insights into the organizational systems that are important for responding and learning from error. We discuss how error learning culture can inform the leadership behaviors that will enhance learning from error. We also draw on regulatory focus theory to show how managing error can be differentiated from other leadership activities. The integration of these ideas with current leadership theory provides a more comprehensive framework for understanding the role of leadership when error management is critical. We present this integrated framework and discuss how cultural factors are likely to shape the role of error management in a variety of global contexts.

This research aimed to determine the mediating effect of entrepreneurial self-efficacy on the relationship between entrepreneurial passion and leadership styles. Two hundred hardware and footwear entrepreneurs from the Las Malvinas Commercial Emporium, Lima, Peru were surveyed. The partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) multivariate statistical technique was applied for data analysis. It was found that there is a complementary mediating effect of entrepreneurial self-efficacy in the relationship between entrepreneurial passion and leadership styles. On the other hand, it was concluded that entrepreneurial passion has a positive influence on entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Likewise, there is a positive influence of entrepreneurial self-efficacy on leadership styles, and there is a positive influence of entrepreneurial passion for leadership styles. This research contributed theoretically to the academic literature and provided empirical evidence of the relationship of the proposed variables; it proved a new predictive and explanatory structural model that can now be used in future research worldwide and generated a model of the studied variables that are useful for both academia and the business world.

In this chapter, the authors will examine turnover in Turkey. In the first section, the authors will briefly describe the legal, institutional, and cultural context with a particular emphasis on their implications for employment conditions and turnover in Turkey. In the second section, the authors will review the academic literature on turnover that originated from Turkey. The authors divide the reviewed studies into two groups: generalizability studies, which are primarily replications of the mainstream literature with no focus on any specific characteristics of Turkey, and contextual studies, which emphasized the role of the economic, legal, or cultural background in formulating or interpreting their research. In the final section, the authors will discuss the findings of the review vis-á-vis the mainstream literature as well as practical implications and conclude with potential future research directions in the Turkish context.

In this contribution, we systematically review the extant global leadership literature to identify important bibliometric and thematic patterns in evidence in this evolving field of scholarship. Conceptualizing the phenomenon to include leaders/managers/supervisors who hold global, expatriate, or international positions, we draw out insights accumulated from a total of 327 published articles in key management and organizational behavior journals listed in Scopus. Our analysis proceeds in two sequential phases. Our bibliometric analysis first identifies the most cited articles, most published first authors, country bases of first authors, and frequently publishing journals in this field. This characterizes both the diversity and innovative nature of scholarship in the field. Our thematic content analysis, generated through Nvivo 11, isolates two dominant overarching themes that represent the wellspring for the body of literature, namely global leader development and global leader effectiveness. These themes of development and effectiveness are further explicated through six distinct lenses namely cultural, cognitive, learning, personality trait, social/relational, and political. These lenses are underpinned by a suite of theoretical perspectives encompassing individual, system, and contextual considerations. In combination, these sets of analyses bring added systematics to the field and serve as a point of departure for future inquiry.

In this chapter, I develop a model concerning effects of paternalistic organizational control on group creativity. I develop the model on the basis of a diverse set of literatures, including research on individual and group creativity, paternalistic leadership, self-systems theory, and its implications for impact of choice on intrinsic motivation. According to this model, (a) paternalistic organizational control enhances work group creativity for groups in the East; (b) the impact of paternalistic organizational control on group creativity is mediated by groups’ intrinsic motivation; and (c) national culture (i.e., East versus West) moderates the relationship between organizational control and group intrinsic motivation (and subsequently, group creativity) in such a way that organizational control would enhance intrinsic motivation (and creativity) for groups in the East, but it would inhibit intrinsic motivation (and creativity) for groups in the West.