Search results

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.

Articulation of a vision is commonly held to be a critical component of theories of outstanding leadership – both transformational and charismatic leadership. Although there is reason to suspect that vision contributes to leader performance, less is known about the nature and origin of viable visions. In the present chapter, we argue that leaders’ visions can be viewed as a prescriptive mental model reflecting beliefs about the optimal functioning of an organization. To test this proposition, outstanding leaders possessing two contrasting types of prescriptive mental models were identified: ideologues whose models stress the maintenance of extant standards and charismatics whose models stress adaptive change. These two types of prescriptive mental models were associated with distinct patterns of leader behavior in a sample of notable historic leaders. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to current theories of outstanding leadership.

This chapter investigated how pre-existing ideas (i.e., prototypes and antiprototypes) and what the eyes fixate on (i.e., eye fixations) influence followers' identification with leaders from another race. A sample of 55 Southeast Asian female participants assessed their ideal leader in terms of prototypes and antiprototype and then viewed a 27-second video of an engaging Caucasian female leader as their eye fixations were tracked. Participants evaluated the videoed leader using the Identity Leadership Inventory, in terms of four leader identities (i.e., prototypicality, advancement, entrepreneurship, and impresarioship). A series of multiregression models identified participants' age as a negative predictor for all the leader identities. At the same time, the antiprototype of masculinity, the prototypes of sensitivity and dynamism, and the duration of fixations on the right eye predicted at least one leader identity. Such findings build on aspects of intercultural communication relating to the evaluation of global leaders.

This research systematically analyzed the effect of leadership (coaches and owners) on organizational performance in the National Football League (NFL) during the 1970 through 1992 seasons. In addition, it examined the relation of stable individual differences in personality of NFL leaders with performance outcomes for both coaches and owners. Results revealed that leadership added substantially to the prediction of performance in the NFL, even after controlling for non-leadership variables such as quality of competition and year. Furthermore, one facet of Conscientiousness – Deliberateness – showed strong linear relations with all performance measures. The results of both studies also revealed that hierarchical level of leadership was an important moderator, with coaches having greater impact than owners. The desirability of studying leadership in the context of the NFL was recognized and suggestions were provided on the direction that research might take.

In this chapter we examine various human resource management (HRM) implications involved in the leadership of fluid teams. Leadership of fluid teams, which are distinguished by their dynamic composition, requires consideration of issues that may not be as pertinent for stable teams. In particular, we focus on the concept of familiarity. Composing and leading teams with members exhibiting varying degrees of familiarity with one another creates obstacles to effective and efficient functioning and may ultimately lead to poor performance. With this in mind, leaders must pay particular attention to issues of coordination, and composition such that a broad range of generalizable teamwork skills exists within the team. Within this chapter, we explain the concepts of fluid teams, team leadership within fluid teams, and other relevant concepts related to the formation of familiarity. Next, we thoroughly review extant empirical and theoretical research within these areas. We identify areas of correspondence among the various concepts and findings of the reviewed studies and generate an integrated model of fluid team leadership. To conclude, we highlight the distinct HRM implications associated with the use, and leadership, of fluid teams.

Fostered by technological developments and globalization, culturally diverse teams are becoming a mainstay of organizational strategy. As the use of multi-cultural teams continues to increase, it becomes paramount to understand the mechanism(s) by which leaders can promote effectiveness within these teams. Despite this need, there are numerous challenges facing those who seek to understand these phenomena and move science and practice forward. The purpose of this chapter is to present a few of these challenges and approaches which can assist in mitigating these challenges. Finally, we identify what we see as key research needs within this area.

Intuition, along with empirical research, suggests that the generation of creative ideas benefits from divergent thinking among team members. However, the generation of creative ideas represents only one stage of the innovative process; teams also must implement ideas. In this chapter, we propose that effective idea implementation may depend on the opposite of team divergence: team conformity. Specifically, we propose that conformity facilitates various group processes important for effective idea implementation, including team coordination, information exchange, conflict management, and collective efficacy. Next, we discuss the role of leaders in managing the magnitude and processes of conformity. The chapter concludes with a discussion of implications and important next steps for studying conformity in relation to team innovative effectiveness.