please use form to type answers in. This week’s assignment will be (Group Theory). Use the example as guide to what it is supposed to look like. This week is different from last week, except the theory changes and we will be doing Group Theory. Look at the example I sent
1
0
This theory matrix is a compilation of all the theories we’ll be covering this semester. It is a document for you to use throughout your graduate program. Add the information you feel is important to remember about each theory. Add images, charts, examples, etc. that will help you you in further understanding and research projects!
Suggested Format:
·
Name of Theory
·
Foundations: What is the vital info of this theory (terms, definitions, etc)
·
Scholars: Who are the major researchers
·
Research: Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory (this might come from our readings or others you find)
·
Notes:
Reflections or Thoughts as desired
Leadership Timeline:
·
1900- Great Man Theory
·
1930- Group Theory
·
1940-
Trait Theory
(Big 5)
·
1950- Behavioral Theory
·
1960- Contingency Theory
·
1970- Situational and Participative Transactional & Transformational
·
1980- Managerial
·
1990- Relationship
·
Today- Situational Leadership
·
Servant Leadership
·
Spiritual Leadership
·
Adaptive Leadership
·
Authentic Leadership
·
Psychological Capital
**Many of the theories overlap each other. The lines are not clear-cut; they can be applied to each other to help understand the phenomenon. Don’t discard one theory for another one.
Table of Contents
Theory/Framework
Page number(s)
Great Man
Trait (Big Five)
Skills Based Approach
Behavioral Approach
Leader Emergence
Bases of Power
Leadership as Influence
Situational Theory
Path Goal Theory
Great Man Theory
Scholars
Founded by Carlyle, 1841
First half of the 20th century
Vital Information
(Foundations, Arguments, Assumptions
)
Argument: Born vs. Made
Asserts that great leaders are born with a set of personal traits or attributes that destine them to be great leaders. Focused on the identification of personal traits (attributes) that characterized individuals who emerged as leaders and those who came to be highly effective leaders.
Research:
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Mouton, 2019
Application
Examples
Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Winston Churchill. The theory would argue leaders such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are great men because they are born with certain traits.
Context
Relates to other theories
Begins to develop trait theory. Does not take into account situational differences, culture, or followers
Notes:
Reflections etc.
Great Man Theory allowed leadership theories to further develop by looking at more character traits of individuals moving into situational factors.
Trait Theory
Scholars
Stogdill (1948)
Kirkpatrick & Locke (1991)
Lord, DeVader, & Alliger (1986)
Mann (1959)
Foundation,
Assumptions, Arguments
Vital Information
BIG FIVE: Used to describe the most salient aspects of personality
1. Neuroticism- the tendency to exhibit poor emotional adjustment and experience negative affects; anxiety, insecurity, and hostility
2. Extraversion- tendency to be sociable, assertive, active and to experience positive affects; energy and seal
3. Openness to Experience- disposition to be imaginative, nonconforming, unconventional and autonomous
4. Agreeableness- trusting, compliant, caring and gentle.
5. Conscientiousness – achievement and dependability
Research and/or examples
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Kirkpatrick & Locke (1991)
Judge, et al., (2002)
Application
Examples
Used to assess effective leadership characteristics. Not all individuals will possess the Big Five qualities. Some qualities may be stronger than others; situational differences affect leadership characteristics.
Context
Relates to other theories
Traits of the leader affect the group and the group affects the traits of the leader
Situational Theory and Trait theory interplay with each other
Notes
Reflections, etc.
Ohio State & University of Michigan Studies
Scholars/Source
“Ohio State” Dimensions of Leadership study
Foundation
Vital Information
1. Consideration: Behavior indicative of friendship mutual trust, respect and warmth.
2. Initiating Structure: Behavior that organizes and defines relationship or roles, and establishes well-defined patterns of organization, channels of communication, and ways of getting jobs done.
3. Production emphasis: Behavior that makes up a manner of motivating the group to greater activity by emphasizing the mission or job to be done.
4. Sensitivity (social awareness): Sensitive of the leader to, and his awareness of, social inter-relationships and pressure inside or outside the group.
Research
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Application
Examples
Close relationship between all managerial characteristics and all peer characteristics. The best predictor for peer support is managerial support: of peer goal emphasis, managerial interaction facilitation; of peer work facilitation, managerial work facilitation and of peer interaction facilitation, managerial interaction facilitation
Context
Relates to other theories
Similar program of research in human relation University of Michigan: 2 sets of group functions
1. Group maintenance functions
2. Goal achievement functions
Mann’s three skills refer to leadership in terms of skills required of supervisors or managers.
1. Human relations
2. Technical Skills
3. Administrative skills
Notes
Reflections, etc.
Attention has started to look at groups less formally structured. Leadership may be provided by anyone in a work group. Helps us understand organizational work team/groups.
Skills Approach
Scholars/Source
Katz (1955) Harvard Business Review
(Bass, 2008, pp. 97-109)
*Mumford et al., (2000)
key world done by Mumford and colleagues
Foundation
Vital Information
Three Skills from Katz (1955)
1. Technical
2. Human skills
3. Conceptual skills
Skills based model by Mumford et al (2000)
*see images
Research
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., (2000)
Mumford, Todd, Higgs, & McIntosh (2017)
Application
Examples
Research in (1990s) goal was to identify leadership factors that create exemplary job performance in orgs.
Skills Based Model- examines relationships between a leader’s knowledge and skills and the leader’s performance. Suggests many people have the potential for leadership
Context
Relates to other theories
Katz (1995) suggests importance of particular leadership skills varies depending on leadership hierarchy
Mumford et al (2000) suggest leadership outcomes are results of leader’s skills in problem solving
Mumford et al (2007) suggest higher levels of skills needed at higher levels of hierarchy
Notes
Reflections, etc.
Provides a way to delineate the skills of a leader; applicable to leaders at all levels in an organization; skills inventory can provide insights into the individual’s leadership competencies
Behavioral Approach
Scholars
Foundation,
Assumptions, Arguments
Vital Information
Research and/or examples
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Application
Examples
Context
Relates to other theories
Notes
Reflections, etc.
Leader Emergence
Power-
Scholars
French and Raven (1959)
Foundation,
Assumptions, Arguments
Vital Information
5 main types of power-
1-
Referent power- Influence based on perceived identity
2-
Expert power- High knowledge in a certain field
3-
Reward power- Power providing the ability to reward
4-
Coercive power- Belief one can punish someone due to noncompliance
5-
Legitimate power- Belief one has the formal right to make demands
(See Image below)
Research and/or examples
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
French and Raven furthered their 5 bases of power in 1965 by adding informational power.
Informational power is mainly down to perception.
Comparing Alternative Measures of the French and Raven Power Bases.
John T. Drea, Gordon C. Briuner II and Paul J. Hensel
Application
Examples
Reward- Can be negative or positive. Giving an employee a pay raise.
Coercive- Difference between reward and coercive is application. Threatening an employee they can be fired if they don’t meet a certain amount of sales.
Legitimate- Is like a caste system in the army. CEO making decisions about companies future plans.
Referent- Others are inspired and want to be like them. Looking up to a famous athlete.
Expert- Superior knowledge, example a project manager.
Informational- A professor having information the class needs to be successful.
Notes
Reflections, etc.
The stronger the basis of the power, the greater the power will be.
Power is what we are perceived to have. We don’t have it if others don’t perceive it.
Influence is what we do.
Leadership as Influence-
Leadership can be defined in many ways. Below is the evolution. They all include influence in some way.
· Leaders can influence in many ways. There is no set formula or perfect way, it needs to be personalized for the person or setting.
·
Some ways include-
1- Providing direction
2- Creating a structure
3- Being a role model
4- Trustworthy and supportive
5- Breaking barriers
6- Facilitating others
· Influence is what you do.
Dr Tim Baker’s 4 Strategies of influence
Strategy-
Meaning/ Application-
Famous Figures-
Collaborator
Share ownership, listen and build trust. Communicate openly.
Mother Teresa
Motivator
Build morale, connect with emotion and use enthusiasm.
Martin Luther King
Calculator
Weigh up all options, logical approach. Use subtle ways to promote their ideas.
Margaret Thatcher
Investigator
Like statistics and facts. Gather evidence and generate ideas. Logic is used for persuasion.
Al Gore
Self Sacrifice
Scholars
De Cremer & Knippenberg (2005)
Foundation,
Assumptions, Arguments
Vital Information
-Leader self sacrifice has a positive effect on cooperation
– Self sacrifice moves people beyond self interest, which promotes group cooperation and citizenship behavior.
– Self sacrifice is related to gaining more trust in a leader and benefits every member of the team.
Research and/or examples
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Knippenberg (2005)
Ruggieri & Abbate (2013)
Application
Examples
Examples of Self Sacrifice-
-Giving up part of your wage so the budget is stronger for the rest of the group.
-Time to new employees.
-Giving up products for those in need.
Notes
Reflections, etc.
Results from this study were as expected through experience and thought.
Measurement of Self Sacrificing Leadership
Situational Theory
· Definition:
A strategy that designates a leadership style (
4 Styles: telling, selling, participating, and delegating) to a given situation based on a number of factors, it is flexible and designed to maximize employee potential. Used heavily in management and organizational training and extremely popular.
· Related Terms:
· Leadership Styles: Telling, Selling, Participating, Delegating
· Readiness, Competence and Commitment, Level of Authority
· Vital Info:
4 Styles
1. Telling: the leader tells people what to do and how to do it
2. Selling: involves leaders and followers in which leaders essentially sell their ideas and messages to get group members to buy into the process
3. Participating: leader offers less direction and allows members of the group to take a more active role for coming up with various ideas and making key decisions
4. Delegating: more of a hands-off approach to leadership in which group members tend to make most of the decisions and take most of the responsibility for what happens
Readiness: evaluating followers, both abilities and willingness, significantly and positively contributes to both performances and satisfaction, positively related to participation
Important aspects:
· Offers flexibility by looking at the situation itself to be the variable that lends itself to what behavior should be used.
· The leader is good at adapting to their followers depending on what needs to be done.
· Readiness: evaluating followers, both abilities and willingness, significantly and positively contributes to both performances and satisfaction, positively related to participation
As Suggested from Indeed situational leaders strive to:
· Direct results by answering the what and the how of a project
· Develop people and appropriate workgroups
· Establish relationships and motivate employees
· Recognize when to adapt leadership styles over time
How Does it Work?
· Diagnose the Situation
· Adapt to appropriate style according to the situation presented
· Scholars and Major Researchers
Paul Hersey
Kenneth Blanchard
· Articles and publications
Situational Leadership Theory: Definition Styles and Maturity Levels, from Indeed Career Guide
Link:
https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/situational-leadership-theory
Empirical and Theoretical Validity of Hersey-Blanchard’s Contingency Model: A Critical Analysis
Meirovich, G., & Gu, J. (2015). Empirical and Theoretical Validity of Hersey-Blanchard’s Contingency Model: A Critical Analysis.
The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship,
20(3), 56-74. doi:10.9774/gleaf.3709.2015.ju.00006
Situational leadership theory: A Test of Three Versions
Thompson, G., & Vecchio, R. P. (2009). Situational leadership theory: A test of three versions.
The Leadership Quarterly,
20(5), 837-848. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.014
Top 15 Reasons Why Situational Leadership Ensures Business Success (A Business Perspective)
https://www.imd.org/imd-reflections/leadership-reflections/situational-leadership/
·
Notes/Figures:
Situational Leadership 2 Model
MODEL
D1: Enthusiastic beginner: a new goal and do not know how to do the challenge, but excited
D2: Disillusioned Learned: learning a skill, but not as excited
D3: Capable but Cautious Performer: capable and have the skill, but uncertain and relies on support
D4: Self Reliant Achiever: Committed and ready to do the job
Path Goal: A Contingency Theory
· Definition:
The leadership theory that is concerned with how leaders motivate followers to accomplish goals.
· Terms:
· Directive leadership: Examples may be- making schedules, giving rules, employee handbook
· Supportive Leadership: Examples may be- schedule flexible times in a meeting to give feedback for upper management, listening to employees for policy integration
· Participative Leadership: Examples may be- Input ideas and concerns for questions, having some sort of voice
· Achievement-Oriented Leadership: Examples may be- promotion, have the goals that are met for the achievement
· Subordinate Characteristics
· Follower Characteristics
· Vital Info:
· Originally developed in 197 by House
· Emphasizes the relationship between: the leader’s style, the characteristics of the followers, the work setting
· Provides a path for the employee to be more successful towards a goal
· Assumptions:
· As a follower we choose what effort based on what we get out of it
· Followers choose the amount of effort to maximize the attainment of valent outcomes
· When our role is ambiguous it will lead to subordinate satisfaction
· The New Theory: adds in work facilitation, group oriented decision process, work-group representation and networking, and value-based leadership behavior
· Path-Goal Theory is a birth and leads to the concept of Charismatic Leadership
· Criticisms include:
· Complexity of the theory
· Demonstrates partial support
· Fails to explain relationship between leadership behavior and worker motivation
· Leader affects the follower only
· No account for gender differences
· Assumes that the leader is advanced in communication
· Scholars and Major Researchers
· Vroom’s expectancy theory (1964)
· Evans (1970)
· House and Mitchell (1974)
· Articles and publications
Path-Goal Theory Examples in Popular Media
Link:
Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy and a Reformulated Theory
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory.
The Leadership Quarterly,
7(3), 323-352. doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(96)90024-7
·
Notes/Figures:
· Major Components
· How it Works
LMX/
Social Identity
Scholars/Source
Graen & Uhl-BIEN and Harris Et.al.
Foundation
Vital Information
LMX – Leaders develop separate exchange relationships with each of their followers
Social Identity –
Research
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
· Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995
· Harris, et al., 2009
Notes
Reflections, etc.
· Vertical dyadic linkage theory – LMX theory
· Limitation of the LMX theory – supports the development of privilege groups in the workplace. Doesn’t follow fairness issues from the follower’s perspectives, basic ideas of the theory are not really developed in regards to building relationships.
Cont. below:
Discussion Leader Resources/Conversation:
Notes:
· In-groups and out-groups – What kind of situations would create these scenarios?
· Familiarity, knowing each others skillset and shortcomings
· As a leader, what does one do to create familiarity in that group?
· Communication and pushing for communication for everyone involved, fun activity.
· What kind of behaviors create outgroups?
· Nepotism or playing favorites
· Power structure or influence tactics that would create outgroups
· Conceptualizes leadership as a process centered around the relationship/communication between leaders and followers.
· There might be difference among the individual contributors to the leaders
· Followers in the out-group are contractual, less dependable, less communicative, lower quality relationships, less involved, not group oriented
· Followers in the in-group are infomed, influence, confidence, opportunities for leadership, trusted, respected
· Works in two ways that it describes and prescribes
· Relationship-based approach to leadership – Graen & Uhl-Bien
· Leadership relationships between dyadic partners between leader and follower
Notes Continued:
· LMX is transactional and transformational
· Empowerment in terms of LMX – Harris, Wheeler, & Kacmar (2009)
· LMX relationship quality will be differentially important depending on how empowered an individual feels – need the quality of relationship to be high for the employee to feel empowered
· Overall finding – results supported the impact of empowerment, LMX quality mattered the most of employees who felt little empowerment
Social Identity
Scholars/Source
Hogg and Reicher et.al.
Foundation
Vital Information
Social Identity – leadership is viewed as a group.
Research
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
· Hogg, 2001
· Reicher, et al., 2018
Notes
Reflections, etc.
SEE BELOW:
SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY OF LEADERSHIP NOTES:
· Changes in leadership skills may be viewed from the perspective of a general theory of learning and expertise
· Starts with having an identity in order to have the skill development progress.
· Source of motivational and directional forces
· Provides access to personal materials
· As the identity becomes more salient than the skills also become more salient
· Individual identities – Uniqueness and differential of the self from others
· Relational identity – define the self in terms of specific roles
· Collective identity – larger group or organizations
· Social identity theory of leadership – Hogg(2001)
· Affirm that our social identity stems from identification without social groups
· Assumptions of social identity thor
· Self-esteem – ex: being part of in group improves self-esteem
· Self-categorization – categorizing people into ingroups vs outgroups, by doing that we depersonalize
· Social attraction
– in-group members are liked more than out-group members
· Processes and structures
· Prototypicality
· Social attraction
· Attribution and information processing
· Central prediction of the theory: if you are a prototypical member then you are more likely to emerge as a leader, depersonalization and the behavior of followers play a critical role
·
SHARED SOCIAL IDENTITY IN LEADERSHIP
· Summary of the other article.
· Groups creates a sense of belonging
Transformational and Charismatic Leadership
Foundational information
Four I’s
· Idealized influence
· Inspirational motivation
· Individualized consideration
· Intellectual stimulation
Experts debate similarities and differences between transformational and charismatic leadership theories; linked by conceptual overlap
Research
Burns
· Leadership is a process designed to create significant change
Bass
· Explore psychological process behind leader motivating and identity creating
Barbuto
Van Knippenberg & Sitkin
Weber (Charismatic Leadership)
Context/Application
Motivating people to take on additional or alternative roles for a group
· Working on a new project
· Volunteering for a charity drive
Presidential candidates – charismatic
Notes
Theory flaws
· How concepts form the theory not specified
· Influence of dimensions on process and outcomes undefined
Servant Leadership
Foundational information
Natural feeling that service comes first, and aspirations to leadership stem from desire to serve
Research
Laub
Barbuto & Wheeler
Wong & Davey
Spears
· 10 characteristics of servant leadership
Context/Application
The leader does the same work as everyone else in the group
Notes
Desired outcomes
· Follower growth and empowerment
· Societal impact
· Team effectiveness
Altruism central component
No consensus on definition; arguably not a leadership style
· Putting others first not always conducive to leadership
Adaptive Leadership
· Definition:
A theory that addresses the process of change in response to crisis. It is a theory that is follower-centered, which encourages everyone to interact and provide a solution.
· Related Terms:
Adaptive challenges
· changes in societies that are forcing organizations to develop new ways of operations and strategies, and clarify values
· Require people to take on new roles, new relationships, new values, new behaviors, and new approaches to work
· It could be technical challenges, adaptive challenges or both.
Holding environment
· The stress level is within the acceptable ranges
· Create an open communication environment for employees to discuss and clarify
· Vital Info:
Principles for leading adaptive challenges
1. Get on the Balcony
· Allow people to step back and determine the patterns of work and identify issues in the larger context
2. Identifying the adaptive challenge
· Leaders are able to identify the adaptive challenges quickly
3. Regulate Distress
· Maintain a productive level of tension by creating a holding environment; being responsible for direction, protection, orientation, managing conflict, and shaping norms; and being presence and poise.
4. Maintain disciplined attention
· Lead employees/followers to maintain focus on the key issues
5. Give the work back to people
· Allow employees/followers to bear the responsibilities
6. Protect voices of leadership from below
· Allow different voices within the organization that may indicate an impending adaptive challenge
· Articles and publications
Heifetz, R., and Laurie, D. (1997). The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 124–134.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A19129101/CWI?u=asuniv&sid=CWI&xid=daf5e5a2
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers (Vol. 465). Harvard University Press.
Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Press.
·
Notes/Figures:
· The figure below demonstrates how adaptive leaders utilize leadership responsibilities differently compared to traditional leaders. This figure allows readers to better understand the difference between adaptive leaders and traditional leaders.
Authentic Leadership & PsyCap
· Definition:
When leaders are true to themselves through self-awareness, self-acceptance, and authentic actions to encompass authentic relations with followers, such as transparency, guidance toward worthy objectives, and emphasis on follower development.
· Researches defined authentic leadership as “a process that draws from both positive psychological capacities and a highly developed organizational context, which results in both greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviors on the part of leaders and associates, fostering positive self-development”
· Related Terms:
Authentic Followership
· Integral component and consequences of authentic leadership development
· Vital Info:
·
· Articles and publications
Authentic Leadership
Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 801–823.
Gardner, W. L., & Schermerhorn Jr., J. R. (2004). Unleashing individual potential: Performance gains through positive organizational behavior and authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 270–281.
Gardner, W., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., May, D., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.003
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership: A positive developmental approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–261). San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.
May, D. R., Chan, A. Y. L., Hodges, T. D., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Developing the moral component of authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 32, 247–260.
· Definition:
– The implications/assumptions created by followers based on the gender of their leader
– The responses/ideations of said followers regarding different leadership styles from leaders of different genders
· Related Terms:
– Transformational Leadership
– Gender bias
– “Gendered” leadership traits
· Vital Info:
– Prevalent research about stereotypes in relation to gender in leadership roles
– “Masculine” behaviors treated as “norms” for ideal leadership styles
– Women with leadership behaviors (authoritative, assertive, etc.) are perceived as less feminine
– This tends to lead non-male leaders to practice a more transformative/adaptive style of leadership
· Articles and publications
Barbuto et al, 2007. “Effects of Gender, Education, and Age upon Leaders’ Use of Influence Tactics and Full Range Leadership Behaviors.”
Eagly et al., 2003. “Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-Faire Leadership Styles: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Women and Men.”
Smith et al., 2004. “A Review of Gender and Full-Range Leadership Research and Suggestions for Future Research.”
· Additional Notes/Thoughts
– Based on the studies listed above, men and women did not differ on objective measures of actual performance; results were more based on stereotyped/biased perspectives
– Importance of the difference between womens’ lack of confidence and mens’ overconfidence in effective leadership.
– As a society we need to change our adjectives when describing women leaders. Nix “bossy” or similar terms that carry a negative connotation for women with leadership qualities.
– Competence, humility, and integrity as building blocks for leadership, rather than blind confidence based on narcissism.
Major Areas of Research – Full-Range Leadership and Gender:
1
image4
image5
image6
image7
image8
image9
image10
image11
image12
image13
image14
image15
image16
image1
image2
image3
Table of
Context
|
Theory |
|
Page Numbers |
||||||
|
Great Man |
3 |
|||||||
|
Trait (Big 5) |
4-6 |
|||||||
|
Skills Based Approach |
||||||||
|
Behavioral Approach |
||||||||
|
Leader Emergence |
||||||||
|
Bases of Power |
||||||||
|
Leadership and Influence |
||||||||
|
Situational Theory |
||||||||
|
Path-Goal Theory |
Great Man Theory
Scholars
Thomas Carlyle,
1
841
Vital Information
Foundations, Arguments, Assumptions
Argument: Born vs Made
· Hero worship
· Godly power to shape the world
Explanation:
History is fundamentally shaped by the actions of extraordinary people. Historical progress is thought to be shaped by and the product of these leaders. The theory emphasizes individual agency over collective or systemic factors, suggesting that the essence of history lies in the influence of powerful/gifted people.
Research:
Reference list of some of the articles and publications related to this model/theory
Mouton, 2019
De Hoogh et al., 2015
Spector, 2015
Marturano, 2024
Bass, 2008
Jango, 1982
Applications
Examples
Napoleon, George Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mohandas Gandhi (considered within Great Man theory as one with the skills to be able to lead masses to revolutionize India).
Relates to other theories
Great Man theory is a foundation for the other theories of leadership. It emphasizes that history is shaped by charismatic leaders. It differs from leadership theories that followed, like trait theory, which measures leadership traits, or behavioral theory, which assumes that leadership is a learned practice.
Notes:
Reflections etc.
· Great Man theory assumes that great men make good plans and bad men make bad plans; thus, great men are those who lead (Mouton, 2019)
· Great Man theory is based on the belief that some people have inherent power that allows them to shape history (Spector, 2015)
· Can take several shapes: prophet, poet, priest, king (Marturano, 2024)
· People were born with certain traits and that only great people possessed the traits to be leaders (Bass 2008 & Jango, 1982, as cited in Northhouse, P.G. 2021.)
Trait Theory
|
Stogdill (1948) Kirkpatrick & Locke (1991) Lord, DeVader, & Alliger (1986) Mann (1959) Table taken from Northhouse, P.G. 2021: |
|
Stogdill found traits that were positively associated with leadership: · Drive for responsibility and task completion · Vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals · Risk-taking and originality in problem-solving · Drive to exercise initiative in social situations · Willingness to accept consequences of decisions and actions · Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress · Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay · Ability to influence other people’s behavior · Capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand Mann found six traits: · Masculinity · Intelligence · Adjustments · Dominance · Extraversion · Conservatism Table taken from Northhouse, P.G. 2021: |
|
Ribeiro et al., 2024 Wyatt & Silvester, 2018 |
|
· Not everyone can have the Big 5 qualities. It is possible for people to display some of the qualities and not others. Some may be stronger than others. · Example: · Musk’s Big Five traits: He’s open to new ideas and takes big risks, like with SpaceX and Tesla. He’s also really disciplined and focused, though sometimes he takes projects that are too big/too many projects at one time. His extraversion is more hidden, like how he uses Twitter to share his ideas and get people behind him, more currently, his political roles and position within Trump’s government. It seems that his agreeableness is not the best. He is described as not easy to get along with. His neuroticism shows in how he handles stress but uses it to stay motivated. Openness seems to be the biggest factor contributing to his success because it leads him to create new ideas and take risks. |
|
· Because trait theory has roots in the idea that some people have leadership traits and some people do, it is linked to Great Man theory. · More research has been dedicated to trait theory than other theories. · Situational · Situational theory is related to trait theory in that both focus on leadership effectiveness, but they emphasize different factors. While trait theory asserts that certain inherent qualities or traits make someone a good leader, situational theory suggests that effective leadership depends on the situation or context, and the leader must adapt their style to the specific circumstances. |
|
· Trait theory posits that leadership is derived from innate and measurable traits that make one a good leader (Riberio et al., 2024) · A leader with specific leadership traits in one situation may not be a leader in another situation (Stogdill, 1948) · Effective leaders are distinct types of people (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991) · Failed to find a solid/definitive list of traits (Northhouse, P.G. 2021) |
1
LEADERSHIP
Ninth Edition
DEDICATION
To Madison, Isla, Sullivan, and Edison
LEADERSHIP
Theory and Practice
Ninth Edition
Peter G. Northouse
Western Michigan University
Los Angeles
London
New Delhi
Singapore
Washington DC
Melbourne
FOR INFORMATION:
SAGE Publications, Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
E-mail: order@sagepub.com
SAGE Publications Ltd.
1 Oliver’s Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP
United Kingdom
SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044
India
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.
18 Cross Street #10-10/11/12
China Square Central
Singapore 048423
Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
All rights reserved. Except as permitted by U.S. copyright law, no
part of this work may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by
any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher.
All third party trademarks referenced or depicted herein are included
solely for the purpose of illustration and are the property of their
respective owners. Reference to these trademarks in no way
indicates any relationship with, or endorsement by, the trademark
owner.
Printed in Canada
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Northouse, Peter Guy, author.
Title: Leadership : theory and practice / Peter G. Northouse, Western Michigan
University.
Description: Ninth Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publishing, 2021. |
Revised edition of the author’s Leadership, [2019] | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020045038 | ISBN 9781544397566 (paperback) | ISBN
9781071836149 | 9781071834466 (epub) | ISBN 9781071834473 (epub) |
ISBN 9781071834480 (pdf)
Subjects: LCSH: Leadership. | Leadership—Case studies.
Classification: LCC HM1261 .N67 2021 | DDC 303.3/4—dc23 LC record
available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020045038
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
21 22 23 24 25 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Acquisitions Editor: Maggie Stanley
Content Development Editor: Lauren Gobell
https://lccn.loc.gov/2020045038
Editorial Assistant: Sarah Wilson
Production Editor: Tracy Buyan
Copy Editor: Melinda Masson
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
Proofreader: Jennifer Grubba
Indexer: Integra
Cover Designer: Gail Buschman
Marketing Manager: Jennifer Jones
BRIEF CONTENTS
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Author
About the Contributors
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Trait Approach
Chapter 3 Skills Approach
Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach
Chapter 5 Situational Approach
Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory
Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership
Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership
Chapter 10 Servant Leadership
Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership
Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership
Chapter 13 Followership
Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership
Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics
Chapter 16 Team Leadership
References
Author Index
Subject Index
DETAILED CONTENTS
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Author
About the Contributors
Chapter 1 Introduction
Leadership Defined
Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership
Definition and Components
Leadership Described
Trait Versus Process Leadership
Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Leadership and Power
Leadership and Coercion
Leadership and Morality
Leadership Is a Neutral Process
Leadership Is a Moral Process
Leadership and Management
Plan of the Book
Case Study
Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . .
Leadership Instrument
Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 2 Trait Approach
Description
Intelligence
Self-Confidence
Determination
Integrity
Sociability
Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership
Strengths and Leadership
Emotional Intelligence
How Does the Trait Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research
Case 2.2 Recruiting for the Bank
Case 2.3 Elon Musk
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)
Summary
Chapter 3 Skills Approach
Description
Three-Skill Approach
Technical Skills
Human Skills
Conceptual Skills
Summary of the Three-Skill Approach
Skills Model
Individual Attributes
Competencies
Influences on Skills Development
Leadership Outcomes
Summary of the Skills Model
How Does the Skills Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team
Case 3.2 Andy’s Recipe
Case 3.3 2019 Global Teacher of the Year: Peter
Tabichi
Leadership Instrument
Skills Inventory
Summary
Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach
Description
Task and Relationship Behaviors
Task Orientation
Relationship Orientation
Historical Background of the Behavioral Approach
The Ohio State Studies
The University of Michigan Studies
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid
Paternalism/Maternalism
Opportunism
Recent Studies
How Does the Behavioral Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First
Case 4.2 We Are Family
Case 4.3 Cheer Coach Monica Aldama
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 5 Situational Approach
Description
Leadership Style
Development Level
How Does SLII® Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels
Case 5.2 Getting the Message Across
Case 5.3 Philosophies of Chinese Leadership
Leadership Instrument
SLII® Questionnaire: Sample Items
Summary
Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory
Description
Leader Behaviors
Directive Leadership
Supportive Leadership
Participative Leadership
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Follower Characteristics
Task Characteristics
How Does Path–Goal Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors
Case 6.2 Playing in the Orchestra
Case 6.3 Row the Boat
Leadership Instrument
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Description
Early Studies
Later Studies
Leadership Development
Emotions and LMX Development
How Does LMX Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments
Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair
Case 7.3 Pixar: Creating Space for Success
Leadership Instrument
LMX-7 Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership
Description
Transformational Leadership Defined
Transformational Leadership and Charisma
A Model of Transformational Leadership
Transformational Leadership Factors
Transactional Leadership Factors
Nonleadership Factor
Transformational Leadership Measurements
Other Transformational Perspectives
Bennis and Nanus
Kouzes and Posner
How Does the Transformational Leadership Approach
Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 8.1 The Vision Failed
Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership
Case 8.3 Grandmothers and Benches
Leadership Instrument
Transformational Leadership Inventory
Summary
Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership
Description
Authentic Leadership Defined
Approaches to Authentic Leadership
Practical Approach
Theoretical Approach
How Does Authentic Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader?
Case 9.2 Kassy’s Story
Case 9.3 The Arena of Authenticity
Leadership Instrument
Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 10 Servant Leadership
Description
Servant Leadership Defined
Historical Basis of Servant Leadership
Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader
Building a Theory About Servant Leadership
Model of Servant Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Servant Leader Behaviors
Outcomes
Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership
How Does Servant Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 10.1 Global Health Care
Case 10.2 Servant Leadership Takes Flight
Case 10.3 Energy to Inspire the World
Leadership Instrument
Servant Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership
Description
Adaptive Leadership Defined
A Model of Adaptive Leadership
Situational Challenges
Technical Challenges
Technical and Adaptive Challenges
Adaptive Challenges
Leader Behaviors
Adaptive Work
How Does Adaptive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness
Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus
Case 11.3 Agonizing Options for Marlboro College
Leadership Instrument
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership
Description
Inclusion Defined
A Model of Inclusive Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Leader Characteristics
Group Diversity Cognitions
Organizational Policies and Practices
Inclusive Leadership Behaviors
Outcomes
How Does Inclusive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Assessment
Challenge
Support
Case Studies
Case 12.1 Difficult Decision
Case 12.2 The Extraversion Advantage
Case 12.3 Inclusive Leadership During a Crisis
Leadership Instrument
Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument
Summary
Chapter 13 Followership
Description
Followership Defined
Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives
Typologies of Followership
The Zaleznik Typology
The Kelley Typology
The Chaleff Typology
The Kellerman Typology
Theoretical Approaches to Followership
Reversing the Lens
The Leadership Co-Created Process
New Perspectives on Followership
Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done
Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest
of the Organization’s Mission
Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders
Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader
Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders
Followership and Destructive Leaders
1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures
2. Our Need for Security and Certainty
3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special
4. Our Need for Membership in the Human
Community
5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social
Death
6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad
Leader
How Does Followership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 13.1 Bluebird Care
Case 13.2 Olympic Rowers
Case 13.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal
Leadership Instrument
Followership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership
Description
The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth
Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth
Understanding the Labyrinth
Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Effectiveness
Navigating the Labyrinth
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 14.1 The “Glass Ceiling”
Case 14.2 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status
Case 14.3 Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New
Zealand
Leadership Instrument
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics
Description
Ethics Defined
Level 1. Preconventional Morality
Level 2. Conventional Morality
Level 3. Postconventional Morality
Ethical Theories
Centrality of Ethics to Leadership
Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
The Dark Side of Leadership
Principles of Ethical Leadership
Ethical Leaders Respect Others
Ethical Leaders Serve Others
Ethical Leaders Are Just
Ethical Leaders Are Honest
Ethical Leaders Build Community
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 15.1 Choosing a Research Assistant
Case 15.2 Reexamining a Proposal
Case 15.3 Ship Shape
Leadership Instrument
Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form)
Summary
Chapter 16 Team Leadership
Description
Team Leadership Model
Team Effectiveness
Leadership Decisions
Leadership Actions
How Does the Team Leadership Model Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates
Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper
Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team
Leadership Instrument
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader
Questionnaire
Summary
References
Author Index
Subject Index
PREFACE
As this ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice goes to
press, the number of confirmed deaths worldwide from the COVID-
19 pandemic is over 1 million. The horrific nature of this pandemic
has challenged societies on a global scale and highlights for all of us
the importance of understanding how leadership works and the value
of leadership in times of crisis. To that end, this edition is written with
the objective of bridging the gap between the often-simplistic popular
approaches to leadership and the more abstract theoretical
approaches. Like the previous editions, this edition reviews and
analyzes a selected number of leadership theories, giving special
attention to how each theoretical approach can be applied in real-
world organizations. In essence, my purpose is to explore how
leadership theory can inform and direct the way leadership is
practiced.
NEW TO THIS EDITION
First and foremost, this edition includes a new chapter on inclusive
leadership, which examines the nature of inclusive leadership, its
underpinnings, and how it functions. Authored by two scholars in the
areas of diversity and inclusion, Donna Chrobot-Mason and Quinetta
Roberson, the chapter presents definitions, a model, and the latest
research and applications of this emerging approach to leadership.
Underscored in the chapter is how inclusion is an integration of two
factors: (1) an individual’s connectedness to others and (2) a
person’s uniqueness. Finally, this new chapter provides case studies
and leadership instruments to explore how to practice inclusive
leadership in a variety of contexts.
In addition to the discussion of inclusive leadership in Chapter 12,
this edition includes an expanded analysis of leadership and morality
—the “Hitler Question.” It discusses the perplexing question of
whether the process of leadership is inherently a moral process that
is concerned with the common good or whether it is a neutral
process that is not dependent on promoting the common good.
Another new feature in this edition is the inclusion of a real-world
case study in each chapter. Because it is important to acknowledge
and see real leaders exhibiting the behaviors and concepts behind
the leadership approaches discussed in the text, the third case study
in each chapter profiles a leader that epitomizes the chapter’s
concepts. These new real-world case studies include profiles from
across the globe including a mental health program utilizing
grandmothers in Africa, an Italian energy company, and New
Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern. In addition, there are profiles
of leaders responding to crisis including closing a college and
battling COVID-19 on a U.S. aircraft carrier.
This edition retains many special features from previous editions but
has been updated to include new research findings, figures and
tables, and everyday applications for many leadership topics
including leader–member exchange theory, transformational and
authentic leadership, team leadership, the labyrinth of women’s
leadership, and historical definitions of leadership. In addition, it
includes an expanded look at the relationship between emotional
intelligence and leadership. The format of this edition parallels the
format used in earlier editions. As with previous editions, the overall
goal of Leadership: Theory and Practice is to advance our
understanding of the many different approaches to leadership and
ways to practice it more effectively.
SPECIAL FEATURES
Although this text presents and analyzes a wide range of leadership
research, every attempt has been made to present the material in a
clear, concise, and interesting manner. Reviewers of the book have
consistently commented that clarity is one of its major strengths. In
addition to the writing style, several other features of the book help
make it user-friendly.
Each chapter follows the same format: It is structured to include
first theory and then practice.
Every chapter contains a discussion of the strengths and
criticisms of the approach under consideration, and assists
readers in determining the relative merits of each approach.
Each chapter includes an application section that discusses the
practical aspects of the approach and how it could be used in
today’s organizational settings.
Three case studies are provided in each chapter to illustrate
common leadership issues and dilemmas. Thought-provoking
questions follow each case study, helping readers to interpret
the case.
A questionnaire is provided in each of the chapters to help
readers apply the approach to their own leadership style or
setting.
Figures and tables illustrate the content of the theory and make
the ideas more meaningful.
Through these special features, every effort has been made to make
this text substantive, understandable, and practical.
AUDIENCE
This book provides both an in-depth presentation of leadership
theory and a discussion of how it applies to real-life situations. Thus,
it is intended for undergraduate and graduate classes in
management, leadership studies, business, educational leadership,
public administration, nursing and allied health, social work, criminal
justice, industrial and organizational psychology, communication,
religion, agricultural education, political and military science, and
training and development. It can also be utilized outside of academia
by small and large companies, as well as federal government
agencies, to aid in developing the learner’s leadership skills. It is
particularly well suited as a supplementary text for core
organizational behavior courses or as an overview text within MBA
curricula. This book would also be useful as a text in student
activities, continuing education, in-service training, and other
leadership-development programs.
TEACHING RESOURCES
This text includes an array of instructor teaching materials designed
to save you time and to help you keep students engaged. To learn
more, visit sagepub.com or contact your SAGE representative at
sagepub.com/findmyrep.
In the electronic edition of the book you have purchased,
there are several icons that reference links (videos, journal
articles) to additional content. Though the electronic edition
links are not live, all content referenced may be accessed at .
This URL is referenced at several points throughout your
electronic edition.
http://sagepub.com/
http://sagepub.com/findmyrep
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many people directly or indirectly contributed to the development of
the ninth edition of Leadership: Theory and Practice. First, I would
like to acknowledge my editor, Maggie Stanley, and her talented
team at SAGE Publications (Lauren Gobell and Sarah Wilson), who
have contributed in so many different ways to the quality and
success of this book. For their very capable work during the
production phase, I would like to thank the copy editor, Melinda
Masson, and the project editor, Tracy Buyan. In her own unique way,
each of these people made valuable contributions to the ninth
edition.
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of this manuscript:
Sidney R. Castle, National University
Jason Headrick, Texas Tech University
Michelle Jefferson, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Gary F. Kohut, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte
R. Jeffery Maxfield, Utah Valley University
Daniel F. Nehring, Morehead State University
Michael Pace, Texas A&M University
Heather I. Scott, Kennesaw State University
Charlotte Silvers, Texas Tech University
Elena Svetieva, University of Colorado Colorado Springs
Mark Vrooman, Utica College
Isaac Wanasika, University of Northern Colorado
Rosie Watwood, Concordia University Texas
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of the eighth-edition manuscript:
Sandra Arumugam-Osburn, St. Louis Community College–
Forest Park
Rob Elkington, University of Ontario Institute of Technology
Abimbola Farinde, Columbia Southern University
Belinda S. Han, Utah Valley University
Deborah A. Johnson-Blake, Liberty University
Benjamin Kutsyuruba, Queen’s University
Chenwei Liao, Michigan State University
Heather J. Mashburn, Appalachian State University
Comfort Okpala, North Carolina A&T State University
Ric Rohm, Southeastern University
Patricia Dillon Sobczak, Virginia Commonwealth University
Victor S. Sohmen, Drexel University
Brigitte Steinheider, University of Oklahoma-Tulsa
Robert Waris, University of Missouri–Kansas City
Sandi Zeljko, Lake-Sumter State College
Mary Zonsius, Rush University
I would like to thank the following reviewers for their valuable
contributions to the development of the seventh-edition manuscript:
Hamid Akbari, Winona State University
Meera Alagaraja, University of Louisville
Mel Albin, Excelsior College
Thomas Batsching, Reutlingen University
Cheryl Beeler, Angelo State University
Julie Bjorkman, Benedictine University
Mark D. Bowman, Methodist University
Dianne Burns, University of Manchester
Eric Buschlen, Central Michigan University
Steven Bryant, Drury University
Daniel Calhoun, Georgia Southern University
David Conrad, Augsburg College
Joyce Cousins, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland
Denise Danna, LSUHSC School of Nursing
S. Todd Deal, Georgia Southern University
Caroline S. Fulmer, University of Alabama
Brad Gatlin, John Brown University
Greig A. Gjerdalen, Capilano University
Andrew Gonzales, University of California, Irvine
Decker B. Hains, Western Michigan University
Amanda Hasty, University of Colorado–Denver
Carl Holschen, Missouri Baptist University
Kiran Ismail, St. John’s University
Irma Jones, University of Texas at Brownsville
Michele D. Kegley, University of Cincinnati, Blue Ash College
Jeanea M. Lambeth, Pittsburg State University
David Lees, University of Derby
David S. McClain, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Carol McMillan, New School University
Richard Milter, Johns Hopkins University
Christopher Neck, Arizona State University–Tempe
Keeok Park, University of La Verne
Richard Parkman, University of Plymouth
Lori M. Pindar, Clemson University
Chaminda S. Prelis, University of Dubuque
Casey Rae, George Fox University
Noel Ronan, Waterford Institute of Technology
Louis Rubino, California State University, Northridge
Shadia Sachedina, Baruch College (School of Public Affairs)
Harriet L. Schwartz, Carlow University
Kelli K. Smith, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
David Swenson, The College of St. Scholastica
Danny L. Talbot, Washington State University
Robert L. Taylor, University of Louisville
Precious Taylor-Clifton, Cambridge College
John Tummons, University of Missouri
Kristi Tyran, Western Washington University
Tamara Von George, Granite State College
Natalie Walker, Seminole State College
William Welch, Bowie State University
David E. Williams, Texas Tech University
Tony Wohlers, Cameron University
Sharon A. Wulf, Worcester Polytechnic Institute School of
Business
Alec Zama, Grand View University
Xia Zhao, California State University, Dominguez Hills
In addition, I would like to thank, for their exceptional work on the
leadership profile tool and the ancillaries, Isolde Anderson (Hope
College), John Baker (Western Kentucky University), and Eric
Buschlen.
A very special acknowledgment goes to Laurel Northouse who has
been my number-one critic and supporter from the inception of the
book in 1990 to the present. In addition, I am especially grateful to
Marie Lee for her exceptional editing and guidance throughout this
project. For her comprehensive literature reviews and chapter
updates, I would like to thank Terri Scandura.
For his review of and comments on the morality and leadership
section, I am indebted to Joseph Curtin (Northeastern University). I
would like to thank Kate McCain (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)
and Jason Headrick (University of Nebraska–Lincoln) for their
contributions to the adaptive leadership chapter, John Baker for his
contributions to the team leadership chapter, Jenny Steiner for her
case study on adaptive leadership, Jeff Brink for sharing his story
about transformational leadership, and Kassandra Gutierrez for her
case study on authentic leadership. In addition, I would like to
acknowledge Barbara Russell (Chemeketa Community College) for
her research and writing of many of the new real-world case studies.
Finally, I would like to thank the many undergraduate and graduate
students whom I have taught through the years. Their ongoing
feedback has helped clarify my thinking about leadership and
encouraged me to make plain the practical implications of leadership
theories.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Peter G. Northouse,
PhD, is Professor Emeritus of Communication in the School of Communication
at Western Michigan University. Leadership: Theory and Practice is the best-
selling academic textbook on leadership in the world and has been translated
into 16 languages. In addition to authoring publications in professional journals,
he is the author of Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (now in its
fifth edition) and co-author of Leadership Case Studies in Education (now in its
third edition) and Health Communication: Strategies for Health Professionals
(now in its third edition). His scholarly and curricular interests include models of
leadership, leadership assessment, ethical leadership, and leadership and
group dynamics. For more than 30 years, he has taught undergraduate and
graduate courses in leadership, interpersonal communication, and
organizational communication on both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Currently, he is a consultant and lecturer on trends in leadership research,
leadership development, and leadership education. He holds a doctorate in
speech communication from the University of Denver, and master’s and
bachelor’s degrees in communication education from Michigan State University.
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Donna Chrobot-Mason,
PhD, is an associate professor and director of the Center for
Organizational Leadership at the University of Cincinnati (UC). She
is director of UC Women Lead, a 10-month executive leadership
program for high-potential women at UC. Her research and
consulting work has spanned two decades and centers on
leadership across differences and strategies for creating
organizations that support diversity, equity, and inclusion and foster
intergroup collaboration. She has published nearly 40 articles and
scholarly works in journals such as the Journal of Management, The
Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Group
and Organization Management. She has served on the editorial
review board for the Journal of Management, Personnel Psychology,
and the Journal of Business and Psychology. Her book (co-authored
with Chris Ernst), Boundary Spanning Leadership: Six Practices for
Solving Problems, Driving Innovation, and Transforming
Organizations, was published by McGraw-Hill Professional in 2010.
Dr. Chrobot-Mason has been invited to address numerous audiences
including the Brookings Institute, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service,
Catholic Health Partners, and the International Leadership
Association. She has consulted with numerous organizations
including Briggs and Stratton, Dayton Public Schools, Boehringer-
Ingelheim, Emory University, Milacron, and Forest City Enterprises.
She holds a PhD and master’s degree in applied psychology from
the University of Georgia.
Crystal L. Hoyt
is a professor and associate dean for academic affairs, and holds the
Thorsness Endowed Chair in Ethical Leadership at the Jepson
School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. Her
research explores the role of belief systems, such as mindsets, self-
efficacy, stereotypes, and political ideologies, in a range of social
issues including stigma and discrimination, ethical failures in
leadership, leadership and educational achievement gaps, public
health, and wealth inequality. Dr. Hoyt’s research appears in journals
such as Psychological Science, Journal of Experimental and Social
Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations, and The Leadership Quarterly.
She has published over 70 journal articles and book chapters and
has co-edited three books. Dr. Hoyt is an associate editor at the
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, is on the editorial
boards at Leadership Quarterly and Sex Roles, and has served as a
reviewer for over 45 journals.
Susan E. Kogler Hill
(PhD, University of Denver, 1974) is Professor Emeritus and former
chair of the School of Communication at Cleveland State University.
Her research and consulting have been in the areas of interpersonal
and organizational communication. She specializes in group
leadership, teamwork, empowerment, and mentoring. She is author
of a text titled Improving Interpersonal Competence. In addition, she
has written book chapters and published articles in many
professional journals.
Quinetta Roberson,
PhD, is the John A. Hannah Distinguished Professor of Management
and Psychology at Michigan State University. Prior to her current
position, she was an Endowed Chair at Villanova University and a
tenured professor at Cornell University. She has been a visiting
scholar at universities on six continents and has more than 20 years
of global experience in teaching courses, facilitating workshops, and
advising organizations on diversity and inclusion, leadership, and
talent management. Dr. Roberson has published over 40 scholarly
journal articles and book chapters and edited a Handbook of
Diversity in the Workplace (2013). Her research and consulting work
focus on developing organizational capability and enhancing
effectiveness through the strategic management of people,
particularly diverse work teams, and is informed by her background
in finance, having worked as a financial analyst and small business
development consultant prior to obtaining her doctorate. She earned
her PhD in organizational behavior from the University of Maryland
and holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in finance.
Stefanie Simon
is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Siena
College. She earned her PhD in social psychology from Tulane
University and was the Robert A. Oden Jr. Postdoctoral Fellow for
Innovation in the Liberal Arts at Carleton College before joining the
faculty at Siena. Her research centers on the psychology of diversity,
with a focus on prejudice, discrimination, and leadership. In her
work, she focuses on the perspective of the target of prejudice and
discrimination, as well as the perspective of the perpetrator of
prejudice and discrimination. She is particularly interested in how
leaders of diverse groups can promote positive intergroup relations
and reduce inequality in society. She has published articles in
various psychology and leadership journals including The
Leadership Quarterly, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,
Social Psychological and Personality Science, and Sex Roles.
1 INTRODUCTION
Leadership is a highly sought-after and highly valued commodity. In the 25 years since the first edition of
this book was published, the public has become increasingly captivated by the idea of leadership.
People continue to ask themselves and others what makes good leaders. As individuals, they seek
more information on how to become effective leaders. As a result, bookstore shelves are filled with
popular books about leaders and how to be a leader. Many people believe that leadership is a way to
improve their personal, social, and professional lives. Corporations seek those with leadership ability
because they believe these individuals bring special assets to their organizations and, ultimately,
improve the bottom line. Academic institutions throughout the country have responded by offering
programs in leadership studies, including at the master’s and doctoral levels.
In addition, leadership has gained the attention of researchers worldwide. Leadership research is
increasing dramatically, and findings underscore that there is a wide variety of different theoretical
approaches to explain the complexities of the leadership process (e.g., Bass, 2008; Bryman, 1992;
Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson, & Uhl-Bien, 2011; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Dinh et al., 2014; J.
Gardner, 1990; W. Gardner et al., 2020; Hickman, 2016; Mumford, 2006; Rost, 1991). Some
researchers conceptualize leadership as a trait or as a behavior, whereas others view leadership from
an information-processing perspective or relational standpoint.
Leadership has been studied using both qualitative and quantitative methods in many contexts,
including small groups, therapeutic groups, and large organizations. In recent years, this research has
included experiments designed to explain how leadership influences follower attitudes and performance
(Podsakoff & Podsakoff, 2019) in hopes of increasing the practical usefulness of leadership research.
Collectively, the research findings on leadership provide a picture of a process that is far more
sophisticated and complex than the often-simplistic view presented in some of the popular books on
leadership.
This book treats leadership as a complex process having multiple dimensions. Based on the research
literature, this text provides an in-depth description and application of many different approaches to
leadership. Our emphasis is on how theory can inform the practice of leadership. In this book, we
describe each theory and then explain how the theory can be used in real situations.
LEADERSHIP DEFINED
There are many ways to finish the sentence “Leadership is . . .” In fact, as Stogdill (1974, p. 7) pointed
out in a review of leadership research, there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as
there are people who have tried to define it. It is much like the words democracy, love, and peace.
Although each of us intuitively knows what we mean by such words, the words can have different
meanings for different people. As Box 1.1 shows, scholars and practitioners have attempted to define
leadership for more than a century without universal consensus.
Box 1.1
The Evolution of Leadership Definitions
While many have a gut-level grasp of what leadership is, putting a definition to the term has
proved to be a challenging endeavor for scholars and practitioners alike. More than a century
has lapsed since leadership became a topic of academic introspection, and definitions have
evolved continuously during that period. These definitions have been influenced by many factors,
from world affairs and politics to the perspectives of the discipline in which the topic is being
studied. In a seminal work, Rost (1991) analyzed materials written from 1900 to 1990, finding
more than 200 different definitions for leadership. His analysis provides a succinct history of how
leadership has been defined through the last century:
1900–1929
Definitions of leadership appearing in the first three decades of the 20th century emphasized
control and centralization of power with a common theme of domination. For example, at a
conference on leadership in 1927, leadership was defined as “the ability to impress the will of the
leader on those led and [to] induce obedience, respect, loyalty, and cooperation” (Moore, 1927,
p. 124).
1930s
In the 1930s, traits became the focus of defining leadership, with an emerging view of leadership
as influence rather than domination. Leadership was also identified as the interaction of an
individual’s specific personality traits with those of a group; it was noted that while the attitudes
and activities of the many may be changed by the one, the many may also influence a leader.
1940s
The group approach came into the forefront in the 1940s with leadership being defined as the
behavior of an individual while involved in directing group activities (Hemphill, 1949). At the same
time, leadership by persuasion was distinguished from “drivership” or leadership by coercion
(Copeland, 1942).
1950s
Three themes dominated leadership definitions during the 1950s:
continuance of group theory, which framed leadership as what leaders do in groups;
leadership as a relationship that develops shared goals, which defined leadership based on
behavior of the leader; and
effectiveness, in which leadership was defined by the ability to influence overall group
effectiveness.
1960s
Although a tumultuous time for world affairs, the 1960s saw harmony among leadership scholars.
The prevailing definition of leadership as behavior that influences people toward shared goals
was underscored by Seeman (1960), who described leadership as “acts by persons which
influence other persons in a shared direction” (p. 53).
1970s
In the 1970s, the group focus gave way to the organizational behavior approach, where
leadership became viewed as “initiating and maintaining groups or organizations to accomplish
group or organizational goals” (Rost, 1991, p. 59). Burns’s (1978) definition, however, was the
most important concept of leadership to emerge: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of
mobilizing by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other
resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or
mutually held by both leaders and followers” (p. 425).
1980s
The 1980s exploded with scholarly and popular works on the nature of leadership, bringing the
topic to the apex of the academic and public consciousness. As a result, the number of
definitions for leadership became a prolific stew with several persevering themes:
Do as the leader wishes. Leadership definitions still predominantly delivered the message
that leadership is getting followers to do what the leader wants done.
Influence. Probably the most often used word in leadership definitions of the 1980s,
influence was examined from every angle. To distinguish leadership from management,
however, scholars insisted that leadership is noncoercive influence.
Traits. Spurred by the national best seller In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman,
1982), the leadership-as-excellence movement brought leader traits back to the spotlight. As
a result, many people’s understanding of leadership is based on a trait orientation.
Transformation. Burns (1978) is credited for initiating a movement defining leadership as a
transformational process, stating that leadership occurs “when one or more persons engage
with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of
motivation and morality” (p. 83).
1990s
While debate continued through the 1990s as to whether leadership and management were
separate processes, research emphasized the process of leadership with the focus shifting to
followers. Several approaches emerged that examine how leaders influence a group of
individuals to achieve a common goal, placing particular attention on the role of followers in the
leadership process. Among these leadership approaches were
servant leadership, which puts the leader in the role of a servant who utilizes “caring
principles” focusing on followers’ needs to help followers become more autonomous,
knowledgeable, and like servants themselves (Graham, 1991);
followership, which puts a spotlight on followers and the role they play in the leadership
process (Hollander, 1992); and
adaptive leadership, in which leaders encourage followers to adapt by confronting and
solving problems, challenges, and changes (Heifetz, 1994).
The 21st Century
The turn of the 21st century brought the emergence of moral approaches to leadership, with
authentic and ethical leadership gaining interest from researchers and executives. These new
approaches also include leader humility and spirituality. Leadership theory and research also
highlighted communication between leaders and followers, and as organizational populations
became increasingly diverse, inclusive leadership was introduced. Among these approaches
were
authentic leadership, in which the authenticity of leaders and their leadership is emphasized
(George, 2003);
ethical leadership, which draws attention to the appropriate conduct of leaders in their
personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to
followers (Brown, Treviño, & Harrison, 2005);
spiritual leadership, which focuses on leadership that utilizes values and sense of calling
and membership to motivate followers (Fry, 2003);
discursive leadership, which posits that leadership is created not so much through leader
traits, skills, and behaviors, but through communication practices that are negotiated
between leader and follower (Aritz, Walker, Cardon, & Zhang, 2017; Fairhurst, 2007);
humble leadership, in which leaders’ humility allows them to show followers how to grow as
a result of work (Owens & Hekman, 2012); and
inclusive leadership, which focuses on diversity and leader behaviors that facilitate followers’
feeling of belongingness to the group while maintaining their individuality (Shore, Cleveland,
& Sanchez, 2018).
After decades of dissonance, leadership scholars agree on one thing: They can’t come up with a
common definition for leadership. Because of such factors as growing global influences and
generational differences, leadership will continue to have different meanings for different people.
The bottom line is that leadership is a complex concept for which a determined definition may
long be in flux.
Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership
In the past 60 years, as many as 65 different classification systems have been developed to define the
dimensions of leadership (Fleishman et al., 1991). One such classification system, directly related to our
discussion, is the scheme proposed by Bass (2008, pp. 11–20). He suggested that some definitions
view leadership as the focus of group processes. From this perspective, the leader is at the center of
group change and activity and embodies the will of the group. Another set of definitions conceptualizes
leadership from a personality perspective, which suggests that leadership is a combination of special
traits or characteristics that some individuals possess. These traits enable those individuals to induce
others to accomplish tasks. Other approaches to leadership define it as an act or a behavior—the things
leaders do to bring about change in a group.
In addition, some define leadership in terms of the power relationship that exists between leaders and
followers. From this viewpoint, leaders have power that they wield to effect change in others. Others
view leadership as a transformational process that moves followers to accomplish more than is usually
expected of them. Finally, some scholars address leadership from a skills perspective. This viewpoint
stresses the capabilities (knowledge and skills) that make effective leadership possible.
Definition and Components
Despite the multitude of ways in which leadership has been conceptualized, the following components
can be identified as central to the phenomenon: (a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves
influence, (c) leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common goals. Based on these
components, the following definition of leadership is used in this text:
Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a
common goal.
Defining leadership as a process means that it is not a trait or characteristic that resides in the leader,
but rather a transactional event that occurs between the leader and the followers. Process implies that a
leader affects and is affected by followers. It emphasizes that leadership is not a linear, one-way event,
but rather an interactive event. When leadership is defined in this manner, it becomes available to
everyone. It is not restricted to the formally designated leader in a group.
Leadership involves influence. It is concerned with how the leader affects followers and the
communication that occurs between leaders and followers (Ruben & Gigliotti, 2017). Influence is the
sine qua non of leadership. Without influence, leadership does not exist.
Leadership occurs in groups. Groups are the context in which leadership takes place. Leadership
involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose. This can be a small task
group, a community group, or a large group encompassing an entire organization. Leadership is about
one individual influencing a group of others to accomplish common goals. Others (a group) are required
for leadership to occur. Leadership training programs that teach people to lead themselves are not
considered a part of leadership within the definition that is set forth in this discussion.
Leadership includes attention to common goals. Leaders direct their energies toward individuals who
are trying to achieve something together. By common, we mean that the leaders and followers have a
mutual purpose. Attention to common goals gives leadership an ethical overtone because it stresses the
need for leaders to work with followers to achieve selected goals. Stressing mutuality lessens the
possibility that leaders might act toward followers in ways that are forced or unethical. It also increases
the possibility that leaders and followers will work together toward a common good (Rost, 1991).
Throughout this text, the people who engage in leadership will be called leaders, and those toward
whom leadership is directed will be called followers. Both leaders and followers are involved together in
the leadership process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders (Burns, 1978; Heller & Van
Til, 1983; Hollander, 1992; Jago, 1982). An extended discussion of followership is provided in Chapter
12. Although leaders and followers are closely linked, it is the leader who often initiates the relationship,
creates the communication linkages, and carries the burden for maintaining the relationship.
In our discussion of leaders and followers, attention will be directed toward follower issues as well as
leader issues. Leaders have an ethical responsibility to attend to the needs and concerns of followers.
As Burns (1978) pointed out, discussions of leadership sometimes are viewed as elitist because of the
implied power and importance often ascribed to leaders in the leader–follower relationship. Leaders are
not above or better than followers. Leaders and followers must be understood in relation to each other
(Hollander, 1992) and collectively (Burns, 1978). They are in the leadership relationship together—and
are two sides of the same coin (Rost, 1991).
LEADERSHIP DESCRIBED
In addition to definitional issues, it is important to discuss several other questions pertaining to the
nature of leadership. In the following section, we will address questions such as how leadership as a
trait differs from leadership as a process; how appointed leadership differs from emergent leadership;
and how the concepts of power, coercion, morality, and management interact with leadership.
Trait Versus Process Leadership
We have all heard statements such as “He is born to be a leader” or “She is a natural leader.” These
statements are commonly expressed by people who take a trait perspective toward leadership. The trait
perspective suggests that certain individuals have special innate or inborn characteristics or qualities
that make them leaders, and that it is these qualities that differentiate them from nonleaders. Some of
the personal qualities used to identify leaders include unique physical factors (e.g., height), personality
features (e.g., extraversion), and other characteristics (e.g., intelligence and fluency; Bryman, 1992). In
Chapter 2, we will discuss a large body of research that has examined these personal qualities.
To describe leadership as a trait is quite different from describing it as a process (Figure 1.1). The trait
viewpoint conceptualizes leadership as a property or set of properties possessed in varying degrees by
different people (Jago, 1982). This suggests that it resides in select people and restricts leadership to
those who are believed to have special, usually inborn, talents.
Description
Figure 1.1 The Different Views of Leadership
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J.
P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.
The process viewpoint suggests that leadership is a phenomenon that resides in the context of the
interactions between leaders and followers and makes leadership available to everyone. As a process,
leadership can be observed in leader behaviors (Jago, 1982) and can be learned. The process definition
of leadership is consistent with the definition of leadership that we have set forth in this chapter.
Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Some people are leaders because of their formal position in an organization, whereas others are
leaders because of the way other group members respond to them. These two common forms of
leadership are called assigned leadership and emergent leadership. Leadership that is based on
occupying a position in an organization is assigned leadership. Team leaders, plant managers,
department heads, directors, and administrators are all examples of assigned leaders.
Yet the person assigned to a leadership position does not always become the real leader in a particular
setting. When others perceive an individual as the most influential member of a group or an
organization, regardless of the individual’s title, the person is exhibiting emergent leadership. The
individual acquires emergent leadership through other people in the organization who support and
accept that individual’s behavior. This type of leadership is not assigned by position; rather, it emerges
over a period through communication. Some of the positive communication behaviors that account for
successful leader emergence include being verbally involved, being informed, seeking others’ opinions,
initiating new ideas, and being firm but not rigid (Ellis & Fisher, 1994).
Researchers have found that, in addition to communication behaviors, personality plays a role in
leadership emergence. For example, Smith and Foti (1998) found that certain personality traits were
related to leadership emergence in a sample of 160 male college students. The individuals who were
more dominant, more intelligent, and more confident about their own performance (general self-efficacy)
were more likely to be identified as leaders by other members of their task group. Although it is
uncertain whether these findings apply to women as well, Smith and Foti suggested that these three
traits could be used to identify individuals perceived to be emergent leaders.
Leadership emergence may also be affected by gender-biased perceptions. In a study of 40 mixed-sex
college groups, Watson and Hoffman (2004) found that women who were urged to persuade their task
groups to adopt high-quality decisions succeeded with the same frequency as men with identical
instructions. Although women were equally influential leaders in their groups, they were rated
significantly lower than comparable men were on leadership. Furthermore, these influential women were
also rated as significantly less likable than comparably influential men were. Another study found that
men who spoke up to promote new ideas in teams were granted higher status compared to women who
did so (McClean, Martin, Emich, & Woodruff, 2018). These results suggest that there continue to be
barriers to women’s emergence as leaders in some settings.
A unique perspective on leadership emergence is provided by social identity theory (Hogg, 2001). From
this perspective, leadership emergence is the degree to which a person fits with the identity of the group
as a whole. As groups develop over time, a group prototype also develops. Individuals emerge as
leaders in the group when they become most like the group prototype. Being similar to the prototype
makes leaders attractive to the group and gives them influence with the group.
The leadership approaches we discuss in the subsequent chapters of this book apply equally to
assigned leadership and emergent leadership. When a person is engaged in leadership, that person is a
leader, whether leadership was assigned or emerged. This book focuses on the leadership process that
occurs when any individual is engaged in influencing other group members in their efforts to reach a
common goal.
Leadership and Power
The concept of power is related to leadership because it is part of the influence process. Power is the
capacity or potential to influence. People have power when they have the ability to affect others’ beliefs,
attitudes, and courses of action. Judges, doctors, coaches, and teachers are all examples of people
who have the potential to influence us. When they do, they are using their power, the resource they
draw on to effect change in us.
Although there are no explicit theories in the research literature about power and leadership, power is a
concept that people often associate with leadership. It is common for people to view leaders (both good
and bad) and people in positions of leadership as individuals who wield power over others, and as a
result, power is often thought of as synonymous with leadership. In addition, people are often intrigued
by how leaders use their power. Understanding how power is used in leadership is instrumental as well
in understanding the dark side of leadership, where leaders use their leadership to achieve their own
personal ends and lead in toxic and destructive ways (Krasikova, Green, & LeBreton, 2013). Studying
how famous leaders, such as Adolf Hitler or Alexander the Great, use power to effect change in others
is titillating to many people because it underscores that power can indeed effectuate change and maybe
if they had power they too could effectuate change.
In her 2012 book The End of Leadership, Kellerman argues there has been a shift in leadership power
during the last 40 years. Power used to be the domain of leaders, but that is diminishing and shifting to
followers. Changes in culture have meant followers demand more from leaders, and leaders have
responded. Access to technology has empowered followers, given them access to huge amounts of
information, and made leaders more transparent. The result is a decline in respect for leaders and
leaders’ legitimate power. In effect, followers have used information power to level the playing field.
Power is no longer synonymous with leadership, and in the social contract between leaders and
followers, leaders wield less power, according to Kellerman. For example, Posner (2015) examined
volunteer leaders, such as those who sit on boards for nonprofit organizations, and found that while
these individuals did not have positional authority in the organization, they were able to influence
leadership. Volunteer leaders engaged more frequently in leadership behaviors than did paid leaders.
In college courses today, the most widely cited research on power is French and Raven’s (1959) work
on the bases of social power. In their work, they conceptualized power from the framework of a dyadic
relationship that included both the person influencing and the person being influenced. French and
Raven identified five common and important bases of power—referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and
coercive—and Raven (1965) identified a sixth, information power (Table 1.1). Each of these bases of
power increases a leader’s capacity to influence the attitudes, values, or behaviors of others.
Table 1.1 Six Bases of Power
Referent
Power
Based on followers’ identification and liking for the leader. A teacher who is adored by
students has referent power.
Expert
Power
Based on followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. A tour guide who is
knowledgeable about a foreign country has expert power.
Legitimate
Power
Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge who administers
sentences in the courtroom exhibits legitimate power.
Reward
Power
Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. A supervisor who
compliments employees who work hard is using reward power.
Coercive
Power
Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coach who sits
players on the bench for being late to practice is using coercive power.
Information
Power
Derived from possessing knowledge that others want or need. A boss who has
information regarding new criteria to decide employee promotion eligibility has
information power.
Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics:
Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper & Row; and “Social Influence and Power,” by B. H. Raven, 1965, in I. D.
Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current Studies in Social Psychology (pp. 371–382), New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
In organizations, there are two major kinds of power: position power and personal power. Position
power, which includes legitimate, reward, coercive, and information power (Table 1.2), is the power a
person derives from a particular office or rank in a formal organizational system. It is the influence
capacity a leader derives from having higher status than the followers have. Position power allows
leaders to attain central roles in organizations; for example, vice presidents and department heads have
more power than staff personnel do because of the positions they hold in the organization. In addition,
leaders’ informal networks bring them greater social power, which separates leaders from nonleaders
(Chiu, Balkundi, & Weinberg, 2017).
Table 1.2 Types and Bases of Power
Position Power Personal Power
Legitimate Referent
Reward Expert
Coercive
Information
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J. P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY:
Free Press.
Personal power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and
knowledgeable. When leaders act in ways that are important to followers, it gives leaders power. For
example, some managers have power because their followers consider them to be good role models.
Others have power because their followers view them as highly competent or considerate. In both
cases, these managers’ power is ascribed to them by others, based on how they are seen in their
relationships with others. Personal power includes referent and expert power (Table 1.2).
In discussions of leadership, it is not unusual for leaders to be described as wielders of power, as
individuals who dominate others. In these instances, power is conceptualized as a tool that leaders use
to achieve their own ends. Contrary to this view of power, Burns (1978) emphasized power from a
relationship standpoint. For Burns, power is not an entity that leaders use over others to achieve their
own ends; instead, power occurs in relationships. It should be used by leaders and followers to promote
their collective goals.
In this text, our discussions of leadership treat power as a relational concern for both leaders and
followers. We pay attention to how leaders work with followers to reach common goals.
Leadership and Coercion
Coercive power is one of the specific kinds of power available to leaders. Coercion involves the use of
force to effect change. To coerce means to influence others to do something against their will and may
include manipulating penalties and rewards in their work environment. Coercion often involves the use
of threats, punishment, and negative reward schedules and is most often seen as a characteristic of the
dark side of leadership. Classic examples of coercive leaders are Adolf Hitler in Germany, the Taliban
leaders in Afghanistan, Jim Jones in Guyana, and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, each of whom
used power and restraint to force followers to engage in extreme behaviors. At an extreme, coercion
combines with other bullying and tyrannical behaviors known as abusive supervision (Tepper, 2007).
It is important to distinguish between coercion and leadership because it allows us to separate out from
our examples of leadership the behaviors of individuals such as Hitler, the Taliban, and Jones. In our
discussions of leadership, coercive people are not used as models of ideal leadership. Our definition
suggests that leadership is reserved for those who influence a group of individuals toward a common
goal. Leaders who use coercion are interested in their own goals and seldom are interested in the wants
and needs of followers. Using coercion runs counter to working with followers to achieve a common
goal.
Leadership and Morality
In considering the relationship of leadership and morality, let’s start with a simple question: Do you
agree or disagree with the following statement:
Hitler’s rule in Germany could be considered a good example of leadership.
Throughout the United States and around the world, in classroom discussions of leadership, the
question about whether or not Adolf Hitler was a “great” leader inevitably comes up. Your response to
this statement is intended to bring out whether your conceptualization of leadership includes a moral
dimension or if you think that leadership is a neutral concept that treats leadership as amoral.
If you answered agree to the statement, you probably come down on the side of thinking the
phenomenon of leadership is neutral, or amoral. You might think it is obvious that Hitler was a leader
because he was very charismatic and persuasive and his actions had a huge impact on Germany and
the world. On the other hand, if you answered disagree, you most likely do not think of Hitler’s
leadership as being in any way positive and that the notion of Hitler as a model of leadership is
repugnant because you reserve the concept of leadership for nondestructive leaders who create change
for the common good. That is, you believe leadership cannot be divorced from values; it is a moral
phenomenon and has a moral component.
For as long as leadership has been studied, the debate of whether or not leadership has a moral
dimension has been a focus of leadership scholars. It is an important debate because it gets at the core
of what we think the phenomenon of leadership actually entails. How we define leadership is central to
how we talk about leadership, how we develop the components of leadership, how we research it, and
how we teach it.
There are two consistent trains of thought regarding the relationship of leadership and morality: Either
leadership is a neutral process that is not guided or dependent on a value system that advances the
common good, or leadership is a moral process that is guided and dependent on values promotive of
the common good.
Leadership Is a Neutral Process
It is common for people to think of leadership as a neutral concept—one that is not tied to morality. From
this perspective, leadership can be used for good ends or bad, and can be employed both by individuals
who have worthy intentions and by those who do not. For example, moral leaders like Mother Teresa,
Nelson Mandela, and Martin Luther King Jr. used leadership for good. On the other hand, Adolf Hitler,
Pol Pot, and Idi Amin used leadership destructively. Common to all of these examples is that these
leaders used leadership to influence followers to move toward and accomplish certain goals. The only
difference is that some leaders used leadership in laudatory ways while others used leadership in highly
destructive ways.
A classic historical example of treating leadership as an amoral concept can be found in Niccolò
Machiavelli’s The Prince (c. 1505; Nederman, 2019). In this book, Machiavelli philosophizes that moral
values need not play a role in decision making; instead, leaders should concentrate on using power to
achieve their goals. Their focus should be on the ends, or consequences, of their leadership and need
not be about the means. Machiavelli endorsed leaders’ use of fear and deception, if necessary, to
accomplish tasks; he was concerned with the pragmatics of what leaders do and not the rightness or
wrongness of a leader’s actions (Nederman, 2019).
There are an abundance of definitions of leadership, and most of these treat the concept of morality in a
neutral fashion (e.g., Rost’s 1991 analysis of 221 definitions of leadership). These definitions do not
require that leadership result in only positive outcomes. To use a specific example, Padilla (2013)
defines leadership as “an organized group process with associated goals resulting in a set of outcomes”
(p. 12), which involves a leader, followers, and contexts. From his perspective, leadership is value-
neutral and can be used for constructive or destructive ends. Padilla argues that Hitler should be
considered a leader even though the outcome of his leadership was horrendously destructive.
Leadership Is a Moral Process
In contrast to describing leadership as a neutral process, some in the field of leadership argue (as we do
in this chapter) that leadership has a value dimension—it is about influencing others to make changes to
achieve a common good. From this perspective, Hitler, who thwarted the common good, cannot be
considered a “great” leader.
One of the first scholars to conceptualize leadership as a moral process was James MacGregor Burns
in his book Leadership (1978). For Burns, leadership is about raising the motivations and moral levels of
followers. He argued it is the responsibility of a leader to help followers assess their own values and
needs in order to raise them to a higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress values such as
liberty, justice, and equality (Ciulla, 2014). Burns (2003) argued that values are central to what leaders
do.
Expanding on Burns, Bass (1985) developed a model of leadership (see Chapter 8, “Transformational
Leadership”) that delineated transforming leadership, a kind of leadership that affects the level of values
of followers. Because it is difficult to use the term transformational leadership when describing a leader
such as Adolf Hitler, the term pseudotransformational leadership was coined by Bass to refer to leaders
who focus on their own personal goals over the common good and are self-consumed, exploitive, and
power-oriented, with warped moral values (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). In contrast
to pseudotransformational leadership, “real” or “ideal” transformational leadership is described as
socialized leadership—leadership that is concerned with the collective good. Socialized leaders
transcend their own interests for the sake of others (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
Additionally, morals have a central role in two established leadership theories, authentic leadership and
servant leadership. Authentic leadership (see Chapter 9) is an extension of transformational leadership,
stressing that leaders do what is “right” and “good” for their followers and society. They understand their
own values, place followers’ needs above their own, and work with followers to align their interests in
order to create a greater common good. Similarly, servant leadership has a strong moral dimension. It
makes altruism the central component of the leadership process and frames leadership around the
principle of caring for others. Within this paradigm, leaders are urged to not dominate, direct, or control
others; they are urged to give up control rather than seek control.
Referring back to the question about whether you agree or disagree that Hitler is an example of
leadership, your answer has to be predicated on what you think leadership is. If you think leadership is a
neutral process that does not have a moral requirement, then Hitler is an example of leadership. On the
other hand, if you think leadership includes ethical considerations such as elevating the morals, values,
and goals of followers to make more principled judgments (Burns, 1978), then Hitler is not an example
of leadership. In this view, he was nothing more than a despotic, Machiavellian autocrat and an evil
dictator responsible for the imprisonment, abuse, and execution of millions of innocent people and the
unprovoked origin of World War II—the deadliest armed conflict in history.
Leadership and Management
Leadership is a process that is similar to management in many ways. Leadership involves influence, as
does management. Leadership entails working with people, which management entails as well.
Leadership is concerned with effective goal accomplishment, and so is management. In general, many
of the functions of management are activities that are consistent with the definition of leadership we set
forth at the beginning of this chapter.
But leadership is also different from management. Whereas the study of leadership can be traced back
to Aristotle, management emerged around the turn of the 20th century with the advent of our
industrialized society. Management was created as a way to reduce chaos in organizations, to make
them run more effectively and efficiently. The primary functions of management, as first identified by
Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling. These functions are still representative
of the field of management today.
In a book that compared the functions of management with the functions of leadership, Kotter (1990)
argued that they are quite dissimilar (Figure 1.2). The overriding function of management is to provide
order and consistency to organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change
and movement. Management is about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive
and constructive change.
As illustrated in Figure 1.2, the major activities of management are played out differently than the
activities of leadership. Although they are different in scope, Kotter (1990, pp. 7–8) contended that both
management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper. For example, if an
organization has strong management without leadership, the outcome can be stifling and bureaucratic.
Conversely, if an organization has strong leadership without management, the outcome can be
meaningless or misdirected change for change’s sake. To be effective, organizations need to nourish
both competent management and skilled leadership.
Figure 1.2 Functions of Management and Leadership
Source: Adapted from A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (pp. 3–8), by J.
P. Kotter, 1990, New York, NY: Free Press.
Many scholars, in addition to Kotter (1990), argue that leadership and management are distinct
constructs. For example, Bennis and Nanus (2007) maintained that there is a significant difference
between the two. To manage means to accomplish activities and master routines, whereas to lead
means to influence others and create visions for change. Bennis and Nanus made the distinction very
clear in their frequently quoted sentence, “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are
people who do the right thing” (p. 221).
Rost (1991) has also been a proponent of distinguishing between leadership and management. He
contended that leadership is a multidirectional influence relationship and management is a unidirectional
authority relationship. Whereas leadership is concerned with the process of developing mutual
purposes, management is directed toward coordinating activities to get a job done. Leaders and
followers work together to create real change, whereas managers and subordinates join forces to sell
goods and services (Rost, 1991, pp. 149–152).
In a recent study, Simonet and Tett (2012) explored how best to conceptualize leadership and
management by having 43 experts identify the overlap and differences between leadership and
management in regard to 63 different competencies. They found a large number of competencies (22)
descriptive of both leadership and management (e.g., productivity, customer focus, professionalism, and
goal setting), but they also found several unique descriptors for each. Specifically, they found leadership
was distinguished by motivating intrinsically, creative thinking, strategic planning, tolerance of ambiguity,
and being able to read people, and management was distinguished by rule orientation, short-term
planning, motivating extrinsically, orderliness, safety concerns, and timeliness.
Approaching the issue from a narrower viewpoint, Zaleznik (1977) went so far as to argue that leaders
and managers themselves are distinct, and that they are basically different types of people. He
contended that managers are reactive and prefer to work with people to solve problems but do so with
low emotional involvement. They act to limit choices. Zaleznik suggested that leaders, on the other
hand, are emotionally active and involved. They seek to shape ideas instead of responding to them and
act to expand the available options to solve long-standing problems. Leaders change the way people
think about what is possible.
Although there are clear differences between management and leadership, the two constructs overlap.
When managers are involved in influencing a group to meet its goals, they are involved in leadership.
When leaders are involved in planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, they are involved in
management. Both processes involve influencing a group of individuals toward goal attainment. For
purposes of our discussion in this book, we focus on the leadership process. In our examples and case
studies, we treat the roles of managers and leaders similarly and do not emphasize the differences
between them.
PLAN OF THE BOOK
This book is user-friendly. It is based on substantive theories but is written to emphasize practice and
application. Each chapter in the book follows the same format. The first section of each chapter briefly
describes the leadership approach and discusses various research studies applicable to the approach.
The second section of each chapter evaluates the approach and how it works, highlighting its strengths
and criticisms. Special attention is given to how the approach contributes or fails to contribute to an
overall understanding of the leadership process. Finally, beginning with Chapter 2, each chapter has an
application section with case studies and a leadership questionnaire that measures the reader’s
leadership style to prompt discussion of how the approach can be applied in ongoing organizations.
Each chapter ends with a summary and references.
Case Study
Case 1.1 is provided to illustrate different dimensions of leadership as well as allow you to examine your
own perspective on what defines a leader and leadership. At the end of the case, you will find questions
that will help in analyzing the case.
Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . .
When asked by a sports editor for the Lanthorn, Grand Valley State University’s student publication,
what three historical figures he would most like to have dinner with, Morris Berger, the newly announced
offensive coordinator for the GVSU Lakers football team, responded Adolf Hitler, John F. Kennedy, and
Christopher Columbus.
“This is probably not going to get a good review,” he said, “but I’m going to say Adolf Hitler. It was
obviously very sad and he had bad motives, but the way he was able to lead was second-to-none. How
he rallied a group and a following, I want to know how he did that. Bad intentions of course, but you
can’t deny he wasn’t a great leader” (Voss, 2020).
When the article ran, it caused a stir. Shortly after, the writer, Kellen Voss, was asked by someone in the
university’s athletics department to alter the online story to remove those comments. The Lanthorn
initially complied, but then changed course and added the full interview back in. Once the Lanthorn
republished the quote, the story went viral. It was covered in the Washington Post, on ESPN, and in
Sports Illustrated and even ended up in the monologue of The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
(Boatner, 2020).
In addition to public dismay, GVSU’s Hillel chapter, a Jewish campus organization, spoke out strongly
against Coach Berger after his comments were made public. “It is unfortunate to see a member of our
Grand Valley community glorify the Holocaust, a period that brought such destruction and travesty to the
world,” the group posted to its Facebook page. “We appreciate the university’s swift response and we
will continue to partner with them to educate our campus community and provide a safe and inclusive
environment for all students” (Colf, 2020).
Seven days after the article appeared, GVSU announced that Coach Berger, who had been suspended
by the university, had resigned. Matt Mitchell, the team’s head coach, gave a statement: “Nothing in our
background and reference checks revealed anything that would have suggested the unfortunate
controversy that has unfolded,” Coach Mitchell said. “This has been a difficult time for everyone. I
accepted Coach Berger’s resignation in an effort for him to move on and for us to focus on the team and
our 2020 season” (Wallner, 2020).
In another statement, Coach Berger said he was disappointed to leave, but added, “I do not want to be
a distraction to these kids, this great university, or Coach Mitchell as they begin preparations for the
upcoming season” (Wallner, 2020).
Coach Berger also issued a more personal apology in a Twitter post:
I failed myself, my parents, and this university—the answer I attempted to give does not align
with the values instilled in me by my parents, nor [does it] represent what I stand for or believe
in—I mishandled the answer, and fell way short of the mark.
For the last 11-years, I worked tirelessly for each and every opportunity and was excited to be
a Laker.
Throughout my life, I have taken great pride in that responsibility—as a teacher, mentor, coach,
role-model, and member of the community.
It is my hope that you will consider accepting my apology.
I recognize that I cannot undo the hurt and the embarrassment I have caused.
But I can control the way I choose to positively learn from my mistake moving forward—as I
work to regain the trust and respect of everyone that I have let down. (Berger, 2020)
A few weeks later, GVSU announced that it would increase its curriculum around the Holocaust and
Native American history. “We will use this moment to work diligently toward institutional systemic change
that creates a healthier campus climate for all,” the university’s president, Philomena Mantella, said
(Colf, 2020).
Questions
1. Who are the leaders in this situation? How would you describe their actions as leaders based on
the definition of leadership in this chapter?
2. Do you think it was wrong for Coach Berger to cite Hitler as a “great leader”?
3. What is your reaction to Coach Berger resigning one week after signing a contract to coach at
GVSU?
4. Based on our discussion of morality and leadership in this chapter, would you say Coach Berger’s
comments are based on leadership as a neutral process or on leadership as a process that has a
moral dimension? Why?
5. What does the university’s response suggest regarding how the university views leadership?
6. If you were the president of the university and you were asked to define leadership, how would you
define it?
7. Bobby Knight was a coach who was known to use questionable leadership tactics. Do you think
Coach Berger would have been safe to ask Coach Knight to dinner? Why?
Leadership Instrument
The meaning of leadership is complex and includes many dimensions. For some people, leadership is a
trait or an ability, for others it is a skill or a behavior, and for still others it is a relationship or a process. In
reality, leadership probably includes components of all of these dimensions. Each dimension explains a
facet of leadership.
Which dimension seems closest to how you think of leadership? How would you define leadership?
Answers to these questions are important because how you think about leadership will strongly
influence how you practice leadership. In this section, the Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire is
provided as an example of a measure that can be used to assess how you define and view leadership.
Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire
Purpose: To identify how you view leadership and to explore your perceptions of different
aspects of leadership
Instructions: Using the scale below, indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the
following statements about leadership.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
1. When I think of leadership, I think of a person with special personality
traits.
1 2 3 4 5
2. Much like playing the piano or tennis, leadership is a learned ability. 1 2 3 4 5
3. Leadership requires knowledge and know-how. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Leadership is about what people do rather than who they are. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Followers can influence the leadership process as much as leaders. 1 2 3 4 5
6. Leadership is about the process of influencing others. 1 2 3 4 5
7. Some people are born to be leaders. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Some people have the natural ability to be leaders. 1 2 3 4 5
9. The key to successful leadership is having the right skills. 1 2 3 4 5
10. Leadership is best described by what leaders do. 1 2 3 4 5
11. Leaders and followers share in the leadership process. 1 2 3 4 5
12. Leadership is a series of actions directed toward positive ends. 1 2 3 4 5
13. A person needs to have certain traits to be an effective leader. 1 2 3 4 5
14. Everyone has the capacity to be a leader. 1 2 3 4 5
15. Effective leaders are competent in their roles. 1 2 3 4 5
16. The essence of leadership is performing tasks and dealing with people. 1 2 3 4 5
17. Leadership is about the common purposes of leaders and followers. 1 2 3 4 5
18. Leadership does not rely on the leader alone but is a process involving
the leader, followers, and the situation.
1 2 3 4 5
19. People become great leaders because of their traits. 1 2 3 4 5
20. People can develop the ability to lead. 1 2 3 4 5
21. Effective leaders have competence and knowledge. 1 2 3 4 5
22. Leadership is about how leaders work with people to accomplish goals. 1 2 3 4 5
23. Effective leadership is best explained by the leader–follower relationship. 1 2 3 4 5
24. Leaders influence and are influenced by followers. 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
1. Sum scores on items 1, 7, 13, and 19 (trait emphasis)
2. Sum scores on items 2, 8, 14, and 20 (ability emphasis)
3. Sum scores on items 3, 9, 15, and 21 (skill emphasis)
4. Sum scores on items 4, 10, 16, and 22 (behavior emphasis)
5. Sum scores on items 5, 11, 17, and 23 (relationship emphasis)
6. Sum scores on items 6, 12, 18, and 24 (process emphasis)
Total Scores
1. Trait emphasis: ____________________
2. Ability emphasis: __________________
3. Skill emphasis: ____________________
4. Behavior emphasis: _______________
5. Relationship emphasis: ____________
6. Process emphasis: _________________
Scoring Interpretation
The scores you received on this questionnaire provide information about how you define and
view leadership. The emphasis you give to the various dimensions of leadership has implications
for how you approach the leadership process. For example, if your highest score is for trait
emphasis, it suggests that you emphasize the role of the leader and the leader’s special gifts in
the leadership process. However, if your highest score is for relationship emphasis, it indicates
that you think leadership is centered on the communication between leaders and followers,
rather than on the unique qualities of the leader. By comparing your scores, you can gain an
understanding of the aspects of leadership that you find most important and least important. The
way you think about leadership will influence how you practice leadership.
Summary
Leadership is a topic with universal appeal; in the popular press and academic research literature, much
has been written about leadership. Despite the abundance of writing on the topic, leadership has
presented a major challenge to practitioners and researchers interested in understanding the nature of
leadership. It is a highly valued phenomenon that is very complex.
Through the years, leadership has been defined and conceptualized in many ways. The component
common to nearly all classifications is that leadership is an influence process that assists groups of
individuals toward goal attainment. Specifically, in this book leadership is defined as a process whereby
an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.
Because both leaders and followers are part of the leadership process, it is important to address issues
that confront followers as well as issues that confront leaders. Leaders and followers should be
understood in relation to each other.
In prior research, many studies have focused on leadership as a trait. The trait perspective suggests
that certain people in our society have special inborn qualities that make them leaders. This view
restricts leadership to those who are believed to have special characteristics. In contrast, the approach
in this text suggests that leadership is a process that can be learned, and that it is available to everyone.
Two common forms of leadership are assigned and emergent. Assigned leadership is based on a formal
title or position in an organization. Emergent leadership results from what one does and how one
acquires support from followers. Leadership, as a process, applies to individuals in both assigned roles
and emergent roles.
Related to leadership is the concept of power, the potential to influence. There are two major kinds of
power: position and personal. Position power, which is much like assigned leadership, is the power an
individual derives from having a title in a formal organizational system. It includes legitimate, reward,
information, and coercive power. Personal power comes from followers and includes referent and expert
power. Followers give it to leaders because followers believe leaders have something of value. Treating
power as a shared resource is important because it de-emphasizes the idea that leaders are power
wielders.
While coercion has been a common power brought to bear by many individuals in charge, it should not
be viewed as ideal leadership. Our definition of leadership stresses using influence to bring individuals
toward a common goal, while coercion involves the use of threats and punishment to induce change in
followers for the sake of the leaders. Coercion runs counter to leadership because it does not treat
leadership as a process that emphasizes working with followers to achieve shared objectives.
There are two trains of thought regarding leadership and morality. Some argue that leadership is a
neutral process that can be used by leaders for good and bad ends and treats Hitler as an example of
strong leadership. Others contend that leadership is a moral process that involves influencing others to
achieve a common good. From this perspective Hitler would not be an example of leadership.
Leadership and management are different concepts that overlap. They are different in that management
traditionally focuses on the activities of planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling, whereas
leadership emphasizes the general influence process. According to some researchers, management is
concerned with creating order and stability, whereas leadership is about adaptation and constructive
change. Other researchers go so far as to argue that managers and leaders are different types of
people, with managers being more reactive and less emotionally involved and leaders being more
proactive and more emotionally involved. The overlap between leadership and management is centered
on how both involve influencing a group of individuals in goal attainment.
In this book, we discuss leadership as a complex process. Based on the research literature, we describe
selected approaches to leadership and assess how they can be used to improve leadership in real
situations.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Trait definition of leadership: Leadership is defined by the traits such as height, intelligence,
extraversion, fluency, and other traits that a leader with followers possesses.
Process definition of leadership: Leadership is defined as the interaction between leader and followers.
2 TRAIT APPROACH
The trait approach has its roots in leadership theory that suggested that certain people were born with
special traits that made them great leaders.
DESCRIPTION
Of interest to scholars throughout the 20th century, the trait approach was one of the first systematic
attempts to study leadership. In the early 20th century, leadership traits were studied to determine what
made certain people great leaders. The theories that were developed were called “great man” theories
because they focused on identifying the innate qualities and characteristics possessed by great social,
political, and military leaders (e.g., Catherine the Great, Mohandas Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Abraham
Lincoln, Joan of Arc, and Napoleon Bonaparte). It was believed that people were born with these traits,
and that only the “great” people possessed them. During this time, research concentrated on
determining the specific traits that clearly differentiated leaders from followers (Bass, 2008; Jago, 1982).
In the mid-20th century, the trait approach was challenged by research that questioned the universality
of leadership traits. In a major review, Stogdill (1948) suggested that no consistent set of traits
differentiated leaders from nonleaders across a variety of situations. An individual with leadership traits
who was a leader in one situation might not be a leader in another situation. Rather than being a quality
that individuals possess, leadership was reconceptualized as a relationship between people in a social
situation. Personal factors related to leadership continued to be important, but researchers contended
that these factors were to be considered as relative to the requirements of the situation.
The trait approach has generated much interest among researchers for its explanation of how traits
influence leadership (Bryman, 1992). For example, Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) went so far as to claim
that effective leaders are actually distinct types of people. Lord, DeVader, and Alliger (1986) found that
traits were strongly associated with individuals’ perceptions of leadership. More recently, Dinh and Lord
(2012) examined the relationship between leadership effectiveness and followers’ perception of
leadership traits.
The trait approach has earned new interest through the current emphasis given by many researchers to
visionary and charismatic leadership (see Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Jacquart & Antonakis,
2015; Nadler & Tushman, 2012; Zaccaro, 2007; Zaleznik, 1977). Charismatic leadership catapulted to
the forefront of public attention with the 2008 election of the United States’ first African American
president, Barack Obama, who is perceived by many to be charismatic, among many other attributes. In
a study to determine what distinguishes charismatic leaders from others, Jung and Sosik (2006) found
that charismatic leaders consistently possess traits of self-monitoring, engagement in impression
management, motivation to attain social power, and motivation to attain self-actualization. In short, the
trait approach is alive and well. It began with an emphasis on identifying the qualities of great persons,
shifted to include the impact of situations on leadership, and, currently, has shifted back to reemphasize
the critical role of traits in effective leadership.
When discussing the trait approach, it is important to define what is meant by traits. Traits refer to a set
of distinctive characteristics, qualities, or attributes that describe a person. They are inherent and
relatively unchanging over time. Taken together, traits are the internal factors that comprise our
personality and make us unique. Because traits are derived from our personality and are fundamentally
fixed, this chapter will not emphasize how people can use this approach to develop or change their
leadership. Instead, the focus of the chapter will be on identifying leaders’ traits and overall role of traits
in leadership.
While research on traits spanned the entire 20th century, a good overview of the approach is found in
two surveys completed by Stogdill (1948, 1974). In his first survey, Stogdill analyzed and synthesized
more than 124 trait studies conducted between 1904 and 1947. In his second study, he analyzed
another 163 studies completed between 1948 and 1970. By taking a closer look at each of these
reviews, we can obtain a clearer picture of how individuals’ traits contribute to the leadership process.
Stogdill’s first survey identified a group of important leadership traits that were related to how individuals
in various groups became leaders. His results showed that an average individual in a leadership role is
different from an average group member with regard to the following eight traits: intelligence, alertness,
insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence, and sociability.
The findings of Stogdill’s first survey also indicated that an individual does not become a leader solely
because that individual possesses certain traits. Rather, the traits that leaders possess must be relevant
to situations in which the leader is functioning. As stated earlier, leaders in one situation may not
necessarily be leaders in another situation. Findings showed that leadership was not a passive state but
resulted from a working relationship between the leader and other group members. This research
marked the beginning of a new approach to leadership research that focused on leadership behaviors
and leadership situations.
Stogdill’s second survey, published in 1974, analyzed 163 new studies and compared the findings of
these studies to the findings he had reported in his first survey. The second survey was more balanced
in its description of the role of traits and leadership. Whereas the first survey implied that leadership is
determined principally by situational factors and not traits, the second survey argued more moderately
that both traits and situational factors were determinants of leadership. In essence, the second survey
validated the original trait idea that a leader’s characteristics are indeed a part of leadership.
Similar to the first survey, Stogdill’s second survey identified traits that were positively associated with
leadership. The list included the following 10 characteristics:
1. Drive for responsibility and task completion
2. Vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals
3. Risk-taking and originality in problem solving
4. Drive to exercise initiative in social situations
5. Self-confidence and sense of personal identity
6. Willingness to accept consequences of decision and action
7. Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress
8. Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay
9. Ability to influence other people’s behavior
10. Capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand
Mann (1959) conducted a similar study that examined more than 1,400 findings regarding traits and
leadership in small groups, but he placed less emphasis on how situational factors influenced
leadership. Although tentative in his conclusions, Mann suggested that certain traits could be used to
distinguish leaders from nonleaders. His results identified leaders as strong in the following six traits:
intelligence, masculinity, adjustment, dominance, extraversion, and conservatism.
Lord et al. (1986) reassessed Mann’s (1959) findings using a more sophisticated procedure called meta-
analysis and found that intelligence, masculinity, and dominance were significantly related to how
individuals perceived leaders. From their findings, the authors argued strongly that traits could be used
to make discriminations consistently across situations between leaders and nonleaders.
Both of these studies were conducted during periods in American history where male leadership was
prevalent in most aspects of business and society. In Chapter 15, we explore more contemporary
research regarding the role of gender in leadership, and we look at whether traits such as masculinity
and dominance still bear out as important factors in distinguishing between leaders and nonleaders.
Yet another review argued for the importance of leadership traits: Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991, p. 59)
contended that “it is unequivocally clear that leaders are not like other people.” From a qualitative
synthesis of earlier research, Kirkpatrick and Locke postulated that leaders differ from nonleaders on six
traits: drive, motivation, integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge. According to these
writers, individuals can be born with these traits, they can learn them, or both. It is these six traits that
make up the “right stuff” for leaders. Kirkpatrick and Locke asserted that leadership traits make some
people different from others, and this difference should be recognized as an important part of the
leadership process.
In the 1990s, researchers began to investigate the leadership traits associated with “social intelligence,”
which is characterized as the ability to understand one’s own and others’ feelings, behaviors, and
thoughts and act appropriately (Marlowe, 1986). Zaccaro (2002) defined social intelligence as having
such capacities as social awareness, social acumen, self-monitoring, and the ability to select and enact
the best response given the contingencies of the situation and social environment. A number of
empirical studies showed these capacities to be a key trait for effective leaders. Zaccaro, Kemp, and
Bader (2017) included such social abilities in the categories of leadership traits they outlined as
important leadership attributes (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics
Stogdill
(1948) Mann (1959) Stogdill (1974)
Lord, DeVader,
and Alliger
(1986)
Kirkpatrick
and Locke
(1991)
Zaccaro, Kemp,
and Bader (2017)
intelligence
alertness
insight
responsibility
initiative
persistence
self-
confidence
sociability
intelligence
masculinity
adjustment
dominance
extraversion
conservatism
achievement
persistence
insight
initiative
self-confidence
responsibility
cooperativeness
tolerance
influence
sociability
intelligence
masculinity
dominance
drive
motivation
integrity
confidence
cognitive
ability
task
knowledge
cognitive ability
extraversion
conscientiousness
emotional stability
openness
agreeableness
motivation
social intelligence
self-monitoring
emotional
intelligence
problem solving
Sources: Adapted from “The Bases of Social Power,” by J. R. P. French Jr. and B. Raven, 1962, in D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group Dynamics:
Research and Theory (pp. 259–269), New York, NY: Harper and Row; Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader (2004).
Table 2.1 provides a summary of the traits and characteristics that were identified by researchers from
the trait approach. It illustrates clearly the breadth of traits related to leadership. Table 2.1 also shows
how difficult it is to select certain traits as definitive leadership traits; some of the traits appear in several
of the survey studies, whereas others appear in only one or two studies. Regardless of the lack of
precision in Table 2.1, however, it represents a general convergence of research regarding which traits
are leadership traits.
Over the past 10 years, interest in leader traits has experienced a renaissance. Zaccaro, Green,
Dubrow, and Kolze (2018) found that basic personality traits and capacities contribute to who emerges
as a leader and one’s effectiveness as a leader.
What, then, can be said about trait research? What has a century of research on the trait approach
given us that is useful? The answer is an extended list of traits that individuals might hope to possess or
wish to cultivate if they want to be perceived by others as leaders. Some of the traits that are central to
this list include intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2 Major Leadership Traits
Intelligence
Self-confidence
Determination
Integrity
Sociability
Intelligence
Intelligence or intellectual ability is positively related to leadership (Sternberg, 2004). Based on their
analysis of a series of recent studies on intelligence and various indices of leadership, Zaccaro et al.
(2017) found support for the finding that leaders tend to have higher intelligence than nonleaders.
Having strong verbal, perceptual, and reasoning abilities appears to make one a better leader (Jacquart
& Antonakis, 2015). Although it is good to be bright, if the leader’s IQ is very different from that of the
followers, it can have a counterproductive impact on leadership. Leaders with higher abilities may have
difficulty communicating with followers because they are preoccupied or because their ideas are too
advanced for their followers to accept.
In a study of the relationship between intelligence and perceived leadership in midlevel leaders from
multinational companies, Antonakis, House, and Simonton (2017) found that the optimal IQ for
perceived leadership appeared to be just over one standard deviation above the mean IQ of the group
membership. Their study found a curvilinear relationship between IQ and perceived leadership—that is,
as IQ increased, so did perceived leadership to a point, and then the IQ had a negative impact on
leadership. Stated another way, it is good for leaders to be intelligent, but if their intelligence scores
become too high, the benefits appear to taper off and can become negative.
An example of a leader for whom intelligence was a key trait was Steve Jobs, founder and CEO of
Apple, who died in 2011. Jobs once said, “I have this really incredible product inside me and I have to
get it out” (Sculley, 2011, p. 27). Those visionary products, first the Apple II and Macintosh computers
and then the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, revolutionized the personal computer and electronic device
industry, changing the way people play and work.
In the next chapter of this text, which addresses leadership from a skills perspective, intelligence is
identified as a trait that significantly contributes to a leader’s acquisition of complex problem-solving
skills and social judgment skills. Intelligence is described as having a positive impact on an individual’s
capacity for effective leadership.
Self-Confidence
Self-confidence is another trait that helps one to be a leader. Self-confidence is the ability to be certain
about one’s competencies and skills. It includes a sense of self-esteem and self-assurance and the
belief that one can make a difference. Leadership involves influencing others, and self-confidence
allows leaders to feel assured that their attempts to influence others are appropriate and right.
Again, Steve Jobs is a good example of a self-confident leader. When Jobs described the devices he
wanted to create, many people said they weren’t possible. But Jobs never doubted his products would
change the world, and despite resistance, he did things the way he thought best. “Jobs was one of
those CEOs who ran the company like he wanted to. He believed he knew more about it than anyone
else, and he probably did,” said a colleague (Stone, 2011, p. 40).
Determination
Many leaders also exhibit determination. Determination is the desire to get the job done and includes
characteristics such as initiative, persistence, dominance, and drive. People with determination are
willing to assert themselves, are proactive, and have the capacity to persevere in the face of obstacles.
Being determined includes showing dominance at times and in situations where followers need to be
directed. Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, and Kelly (2007) expanded the concept of determination and
conducted research on “grit,” which measures the degree of perseverance toward goal attainment.
Leaders with grit recover quickly from setbacks, not letting obstacles impede their success (Duckworth
et al., 2007).
Dr. Paul Farmer has shown determination in his efforts to secure health care and eradicate tuberculosis
for the very poor of Haiti and other third world countries. He began his efforts as a recent college
graduate, traveling and working in Cange, Haiti. While there, he was accepted to Harvard Medical
School. Knowing that his work in Haiti was invaluable to his training, he managed to do both: spending
months traveling back and forth between Haiti and Cambridge, Massachusetts, for school. His first effort
in Cange was to establish a one-room clinic where he treated “all comers” and trained local health care
workers. Farmer found that there was more to providing health care than just dispensing medicine: He
secured donations to build schools, houses, and communal sanitation and water facilities in the region.
He spearheaded vaccinations of all the children in the area, dramatically reducing malnutrition and
infant mortality. To keep working in Haiti, he returned to America and founded Partners In Health, a
charitable foundation that raises money to fund these efforts. Since its founding, PIH not only has
succeeded in improving the health of many communities in Haiti but now has projects in Haiti, Lesotho,
Malawi, Peru, Russia, Rwanda, and the United States, and supports other projects in Mexico and
Guatemala (Kidder, 2004; Partners In Health, 2017; see also Case 10.1, page 272).
Integrity
Integrity, another of the important leadership traits, is the quality of honesty and trustworthiness. People
who adhere to a strong set of principles and take responsibility for their actions are exhibiting integrity.
Leaders with integrity inspire confidence in others because they can be trusted to do what they say they
are going to do. They are loyal, dependable, and not deceptive. Basically, integrity makes a leader
believable and worthy of our trust.
In our society, integrity has received a great deal of attention in recent years. For example, as a result of
two situations—the position taken by President George W. Bush regarding Iraq’s alleged weapons of
mass destruction and the impeachment proceedings during the Bill Clinton presidency—people are
demanding more honesty of their public officials. Similarly, scandals in the corporate world (e.g., Enron
and WorldCom) have led people to become skeptical of leaders who are not highly ethical. In the
educational arena, new K–12 curricula are being developed to teach character, values, and ethical
leadership. (For instance, see the Character Counts! program developed by the Josephson Institute of
Ethics in California at www.charactercounts.org, and the Pillars of Leadership program taught at the J.
W. Fanning Institute for Leadership Development in Georgia at www.fanning.uga.edu.) In short, society
is demanding greater integrity of character in its leaders.
Sociability
A final trait that is important for leaders is sociability. Sociability is a leader’s inclination to seek out
pleasant social relationships. Leaders who show sociability are friendly, outgoing, courteous, tactful, and
diplomatic. They are sensitive to others’ needs and show concern for others’ well-being. Social leaders
have good interpersonal skills and create cooperative relationships with their followers.
An example of a leader with great sociability skills is Michael Hughes, a university president. Hughes
prefers to walk to all his meetings because it gets him out on campus where he greets students, staff,
and faculty. He has lunch in the dorm cafeterias or student union and will often ask a table of strangers if
he can sit with them. Students rate him as very approachable, while faculty say he has an open-door
policy. In addition, he takes time to write personal notes to faculty, staff, and students to congratulate
them on their successes.
Although our discussion of leadership traits has focused on five major traits (i.e., intelligence, self-
confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability), this list is not all-inclusive. While other traits
indicated in Table 2.1 are associated with effective leadership, the five traits we have identified
contribute substantially to one’s capacity to be a leader.
Until recently, most reviews of leadership traits have been qualitative. In addition, they have lacked a
common organizing framework. However, the research described in the following section provides a
quantitative assessment of leadership traits that is conceptually framed around the five-factor model of
personality. It describes how five major personality traits are related to leadership.
Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership
Over the past 25 years, a consensus has emerged among researchers regarding the basic factors that
make up what we call personality (Goldberg, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1987). These factors, commonly
called the Big Five, are neuroticism, extraversion (surgency), openness (intellect), agreeableness, and
conscientiousness (dependability) (Table 2.3).
Table 2.3 Big Five Personality Factors
Neuroticism The tendency to be depressed, anxious, insecure, vulnerable, and hostile
Extraversion The tendency to be sociable and assertive and to have positive energy
Openness The tendency to be informed, creative, insightful, and curious
Agreeableness The tendency to be accepting, conforming, trusting, and nurturing
Conscientiousness The tendency to be thorough, organized, controlled, dependable, and
decisive
Source: Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.
To assess the links between the Big Five and leadership, Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002)
conducted a major meta-analysis of 78 leadership and personality studies published between 1967 and
1998. In general, Judge et al. found a strong relationship between the Big Five traits and leadership. It
appears that having certain personality traits is associated with being an effective leader.
Specifically, in their study, extraversion was the factor most strongly associated with leadership. It is the
most important trait of effective leaders. Extraversion was followed, in order, by conscientiousness,
openness, and low neuroticism. The last factor, agreeableness, was found to be only weakly associated
with leadership. In a more recent study, Sacket and Walmsley (2014) found that conscientiousness had
the highest correlation with overall job performance, task performance, organizational citizenship
behavior, and counterproductive work behavior (negative correlation). It was found to be the most
frequently assessed trait in job interviews for a variety of occupations.
Strengths and Leadership
Very closely related to the traits approach is the more contemporary emphasis on strengths and
leadership. The idea behind strengths leadership is that everyone has talents in which they excel or
thrive and leaders are able to recognize and capitalize on not only their own strengths but those of their
followers as well. A strength is defined as an attribute or quality of an individual that accounts for
successful performance. Strength researchers (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Rath, 2007) suggest that
strengths are the ability to consistently demonstrate exceptional work.
The seminal research in this area has been undertaken by the Gallup organization, which has spent
more than 40 years identifying and assessing individual strengths or “themes of human talent” and
designing and publishing the StrengthsFinder profile, now called CliftonStrengths assessment, an online
assessment of people’s talents and potential strengths. Talents are similar to personality traits—they are
relatively stable, fixed characteristics that are not easily changed. From talents, strengths emerge.
Strengths are derived from having certain talents and then further developing those talents by gaining
additional knowledge, skills, and practice (Rath, 2007).
In the strengths perspective, extraordinary individuals are “distinguished less by their impressive ‘raw
power’ than by their ability to identify their strengths and then exploit them” (Gardner, 1997, p. 15).
MacKie (2016) suggests that our leadership capability is enhanced when we are able to discover our
fully utilized strengths, underutilized strengths, and weaknesses.
Strengths have also been of interest to researchers in the field of positive psychology who look at the
best aspects in people, rather than their weaknesses. Most notably from this area of study, Peterson
and Seligman (2004) developed an inventory of character strengths called the Values In Action
Classification (see Table 2.4).
Table 2.4 VIA Classification of Character Strengths and Virtues
Classification Strengths
WISDOM & KNOWLEDGE
Cognitive Strengths
1. Creativity
2. Curiosity
3. Open-mindedness
4. Love of learning
5. Perspective
Classification Strengths
COURAGE
Emotional Strengths
6. Authenticity
7. Bravery
8. Perseverance
9. Zest
HUMANITY
Interpersonal Strengths
10. Kindness
11. Love
12. Social intelligence
JUSTICE
Civic Strengths
13. Fairness
14. Leadership
15. Teamwork
TEMPERANCE
Strengths Over Excess
16. Forgiveness
17. Modesty
18. Prudence
19. Self-regulation
TRANSCENDENCE
Strengths About Meaning
20. Appreciation of beauty and excellence
21. Gratitude
22. Hope
23. Humor
24. Religiousness
Source: Adapted from A Primer in Positive Psychology, by Christopher Peterson, 2006, pp. 142–146.
Based on this classification, an individual’s strengths can be measured using the VIA Character
Strengths Survey, which includes 24 strengths organized under six basic virtues. This survey identifies
individuals’ top five character strengths as well as a rank order of their scores on all 24 character
strengths. It takes about 30 minutes to complete and is available free at www.viacharacter.org.
In recent years, there has been an increased interest in studying the way character strengths can be
utilized to improve leaders and leadership in organizations. For example, Sosik, Chun, Ete, Arenas, and
Scherer (2019) studied the character strengths of a sample of more than 200 U.S. Air Force officers and
found that character strengths played a pivotal role in fostering leader performance and psychological
http://www.viacharacter.org/
flourishing. When leaders demonstrate high self-control along with high levels of honesty/humility,
empathy, and moral courage, it appears to benefit their ethical leadership, psychological functioning,
and role performance. In another study, Sosik, Gentry, and Chun (2012) assessed data for 191 top-level
U.S. executives of for-profit and nonprofit organizations and found that the character strengths of
integrity, bravery, and social intelligence were positively related to executive leader performance. In
addition, they found integrity contributed the most to explaining the differences in executive
performance. These studies, as well as others, underscore the importance of understanding character
strengths and the role they play in leadership.
Emotional Intelligence
Another way of assessing the impact of traits on leadership is through the concept of emotional
intelligence, which emerged in the 1990s as an important area of study in psychology. It has been widely
studied by researchers and has captured the attention of many practitioners (Caruso & Wolfe, 2004;
Goleman, 1995, 1998; Mayer & Salovey, 1995, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000; Shankman &
Allen, 2015).
As the two words suggest, emotional intelligence has to do with our emotions (affective domain) and
thinking (cognitive domain) and the interplay between the two. Whereas intelligence is concerned with
our ability to learn information and apply it to life tasks, emotional intelligence is concerned with our
ability to understand emotions and apply this understanding to life’s tasks. Specifically, emotional
intelligence can be defined as the ability to perceive and express emotions, to use emotions to facilitate
thinking, to understand and reason with emotions, and to effectively manage emotions within oneself
and in relationships with others (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000).
There are different ways to measure emotional intelligence. One scale is the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso
Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000). The MSCEIT measures
emotional intelligence as a set of mental abilities, including the abilities to perceive, facilitate,
understand, and manage emotion. In general, the MSCEIT appears to have acceptable content validity
and reliability (Boyatzis, 2019); however, a review of research on emotional intelligence found that the
emotional intelligence levels in people assessed using this measure seem to be declining over time.
Some posit that this may be due to initial studies of emotional intelligence overstating the findings (Gong
& Jiao, 2019).
Goleman (1995, 1998) takes a broader approach to emotional intelligence, suggesting that it consists of
a set of personal and social competencies. Personal competence consists of self-awareness,
confidence, self-regulation, conscientiousness, and motivation. Social competence consists of empathy
and social skills such as communication and conflict management.
Shankman and Allen (2015) developed a practice-oriented model of emotionally intelligent leadership,
which suggests that leaders must be conscious of three fundamental facets of leadership: context, self,
and others. In the model, emotionally intelligent leaders are defined by 21 capacities to which a leader
should pay attention, including group savvy, optimism, initiative, and teamwork.
Unlike other traits we’ve discussed in this chapter, there is evidence that emotional intelligence is not a
fixed characteristic; it can be improved through training that focuses on enabling leaders to label their
emotions and then regulate them (Ashkanasy, Dasborough, & Ascough, 2009). One experiment
compared leaders who received training to those who received no training (a control group). Those in
the trained group exhibited improved emotional intelligence competencies and significantly improved
outcomes: lower stress, higher morale, and improved civility (Slaski & Cartwright, 2003). Likewise, a
meta-analysis of 58 studies of emotional intelligence training that included control groups showed a
moderate positive effect for the training (Mattingly & Kraiger, 2019).
Goleman and Boyatzis (2017) articulated four broad aspects of emotional intelligence: Self-awareness,
self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. They suggest that individuals can
improve their emotional intelligence by engaging in a combination of personal reflection and seeking
feedback to the following questions:
What are the differences between how you see yourself and how others see you? This can help
you to understand how your self-perception might differ from your reputation.
What matters to you? The areas of your emotional intelligence that you want to improve on should
reflect the feedback you’ve gotten as well as your personal aspirations.
What changes will you make to achieve these goals? Identify specific actions to take to improve.
Many organizations also see emotional intelligence as a trait that can be changed and have adopted
emotional intelligence training as part of their leadership development. For example, FedEx’s Global
Leadership Institute has an emotional intelligence training program for new managers that challenges
these leaders to focus on the following every day at work:
Know yourself—increase self-awareness of emotions and reactions
Choose yourself—shift from unconscious reactions to intentional responses
Give yourself—align moment-to-moment decisions with a larger sense of purpose
A key principle of the training is that “emotions drive people, [and] people drive performance.” FedEx
has tracked the improvements in managers’ emotional intelligence and reported an 8% to 11% increase
in competencies due to the training—a statistically significant difference (Freedman, 2014).
In addition, the U.S. Army developed a brief internet-based training program for enhancing emotional
intelligence. Because military personnel serve under dangerous and emotionally stressful conditions,
the training was designed to help reduce the development of depression, anxiety, and/or posttraumatic
stress disorder (PTSD). The training helped service members strengthen their emotional flexibility,
adaptability, and coping by improving the ability to understand and control their emotions (Killgore,
2017).
There is a debate in the field regarding how big a role emotional intelligence plays in helping people be
successful in life. Some researchers, such as Goleman (1995), suggested that emotional intelligence
plays a major role in whether people are successful at school, home, and work. Others, such as Mayer,
Salovey, and Caruso (2000) and Antonakis (2009), made softer claims for the significance of emotional
intelligence in meeting life’s challenges. A major review of leadership research identifies “emotions in
leadership” as a general category but does not specifically mention emotional intelligence (Dinh et al.,
2014). It appears that emotional intelligence is not considered mainstream in leadership research. At the
same time, Kotsou, Mikolajczak, Heeren, Grégoire, and Leys (2019) determined that the studies that
have been done on the efficacy of emotional intelligence training have not included follow-up research to
determine the long-term effects of such training.
A review of the literature by Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) summarizes what we can safely conclude:
Emotional intelligence is distinct from, but positively related to, other intelligences (such as IQ). It is an
individual difference; some people have more emotional intelligence than others. Emotional intelligence
develops over a person’s lifetime and can be improved with training. Finally, it involves abilities to
effectively identify and perceive emotion and the skills to understand and manage emotions.
In summary, emotional intelligence appears to play a role in the leadership process. The underlying
premise suggested by the emotional intelligence framework is that people who are more sensitive to
their emotions and the impact of their emotions on others will be leaders who are more effective. As
more research is conducted on emotional intelligence, the intricacies of how emotional intelligence
relates to leadership will be better understood.
HOW DOES THE TRAIT APPROACH WORK?
The trait approach is very different from the other approaches discussed in subsequent chapters
because it focuses exclusively on the leader, not on the followers or the situation. This makes the trait
approach theoretically more straight forward than other approaches. In essence, the trait approach is
concerned with what traits leaders exhibit and who has these traits.
The trait approach does not lay out a set of hypotheses or principles about what kind of leader is
needed in a certain situation or what a leader should do, given a particular set of circumstances.
Instead, this approach emphasizes that having a leader with a certain set of traits is crucial to having
effective leadership. It is the leader and the leader’s traits that are central to the leadership process.
The trait approach suggests that organizations will work better if the people in managerial positions
have designated leadership profiles. To find the right people, it is common for organizations to use trait
assessment instruments. The assumption behind these procedures is that selecting the right people will
increase organizational effectiveness. Organizations can specify the characteristics or traits that are
important to them for particular positions and then use trait assessment measures to determine whether
an individual fits their needs.
The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development. By analyzing their own traits,
managers can gain an idea of their strengths and weaknesses and can get a feel for how others in the
organization see them. A trait assessment can help managers determine whether they have the
qualities to move up or to move to other positions in the company.
A trait assessment gives individuals a clearer picture of who they are as leaders and how they fit into the
organizational hierarchy. In areas where their traits are lacking, leaders can try to make changes in what
they do or where they work to increase their traits’ potential impact.
Near the end of the chapter, a leadership instrument is provided that you can use to assess your
leadership traits. This instrument is typical of the kind of assessments that companies use to evaluate
individuals’ leadership potential. As you will discover by completing this instrument, trait measures are a
good way to assess your own characteristics.
STRENGTHS
The trait approach has several identifiable strengths. First, the trait approach is intuitively appealing. It
fits clearly with our notion that leaders are the individuals who are out front and leading the way in our
society. The image in the popular press and community at large is that leaders are a special kind of
people—people with gifts who can do extraordinary things. The trait approach is consistent with this
perception because it is built on the premise that leaders are different, and their difference resides in the
special traits they possess. People have a need to see their leaders as gifted people, and the trait
approach fulfills this need.
A second strength of the trait approach is that it has a century of research to back it up. No other theory
can boast of the breadth and depth of studies conducted on the trait approach. The strength and
longevity of this line of research give the trait approach a measure of credibility that other approaches
lack. Out of this abundance of research has emerged a body of data that points to the important role of
various traits in the leadership process.
Another strength, more conceptual in nature, results from the way the trait approach highlights the
leader component in the leadership process. Leadership is composed of leaders, followers, and
situations, but the trait approach is devoted to only the first of these—leaders. Although this is also a
potential weakness, by focusing exclusively on the role of the leader in leadership the trait approach has
been able to provide us with a deeper and more intricate understanding of how the leader and the
leader’s traits are related to the leadership process.
The trait approach has given us some benchmarks for what we need to look for if we want to be leaders.
It identifies what traits we should have and whether the traits we do have are the best traits for
leadership. Based on the findings of this approach, trait assessment procedures can be used to offer
invaluable information to supervisors and managers about their strengths and weaknesses and ways to
improve their overall leadership effectiveness.
Last, the trait approach helps organizations identify leaders and select individuals for leadership training
programs. Organizations often use a battery of personality tests when selecting and placing people
within their organizations. For example, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness to experience
are effective traits for sales positions (Frieder, Wang, & Oh, 2018). Personality traits can be used to
screen employees, once hired, who will benefit most from leadership training. For example, one study
found that extraversion, agreeableness, intellectual curiosity, and emotional stability were positively
related to both self-ratings and director ratings of leader development in a training program (Blair,
Palmieri, & Paz-Aparicio, 2018). Thus, traits offer a way to predict who will succeed in certain positions
and who is best suited to leadership development.
CRITICISMS
In addition to its strengths, the trait approach has several weaknesses. First and foremost is the failure
of the trait approach to delimit a definitive list of leadership traits. Although an enormous number of
studies have been conducted over the past 100 years, the findings from these studies have been
ambiguous and uncertain at times. Furthermore, the list of traits that has emerged appears endless.
This is obvious from Table 2.1, which lists a multitude of traits. In fact, these are only a sample of the
many leadership traits that were studied.
Another criticism is that the trait approach has failed to take situations into account. As Stogdill (1948)
pointed out more than 70 years ago, it is difficult to isolate a set of traits that are characteristic of leaders
without also factoring situational effects into the equation. People who possess certain traits that make
them leaders in one situation may not be leaders in another situation. Some people may have the traits
that help them emerge as leaders but not the traits that allow them to maintain their leadership over
time. In other words, the situation influences leadership.
Leader traits also may interact with the situation in that certain traits may predispose a person to
assume leadership roles in organizations. For example, leaders with higher openness to experience
may thrive in the innovative, energetic environment of a high-technology start-up company, but once that
company is established and running on a routine, they may begin to feel stagnant, negatively affecting
their performance. Yet, research on traits has not incorporated the situation (Zaccaro et al., 2018),
including such factors as the leader–member relationship, team characteristics, or organizational culture
that enhance or constrain the influence of traits on performance.
A third criticism, derived from the prior two criticisms, is that this approach has resulted in highly
subjective determinations of the most important leadership traits. Because the findings on traits have
been so extensive and broad, there has been much subjective interpretation of the meaning of the data.
This subjectivity is readily apparent in the many self-help, practice-oriented management books. For
example, one author might identify ambition and creativity as crucial leadership traits; another might
identify empathy and calmness. In both cases, it is the author’s subjective experience and observations
that are the basis for the identified leadership traits. These books may be helpful to readers because
they identify and describe important leadership traits, but the methods used to generate these lists of
traits are weak. To respond to people’s need for a set of definitive traits of leaders, authors have set
forth lists of traits, even if the origins of these lists are not grounded in strong, reliable research.
Research on traits can also be criticized for failing to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes.
This research has emphasized the identification of traits but has not addressed how leadership traits
affect group members and their work. In trying to ascertain universal leadership traits, researchers have
focused on the link between specific traits and leader emergence, but they have not tried to link leader
traits with other outcomes such as productivity or employee satisfaction. For example, trait research
does not provide data on whether leaders who have high intelligence and strong integrity have better
results than leaders without these traits. The trait approach is weak in describing how leaders’ traits
affect the outcomes of groups and teams in organizational settings.
A final criticism of the trait approach is that, other than for emotional intelligence, its usefulness for
leadership training and development is limited. Even if definitive traits could be identified, teaching
leaders to improve these traits is not an easy process because traits are not easily changed. For
example, it is not reasonable to send managers to a training program to raise their IQ or to train them to
become extraverted. While there is some evidence that the trait of emotional intelligence may be
improved with training, it is unclear whether these effects are long lasting. The point is that traits are
largely fixed psychological structures, and this limits the value of teaching and leadership training.
APPLICATION
Despite its shortcomings, the trait approach provides valuable information about leadership. It can be
applied by individuals at all levels and in all types of organizations. Although the trait approach does not
provide a definitive set of traits, it does provide direction regarding which traits are good to have if one
aspires to a leadership position. By taking trait assessments and other similar questionnaires, people
can gain insight into whether they have certain traits deemed important for leadership, and they can
pinpoint their strengths and weaknesses with regard to leadership.
As we discussed previously, managers can use information from the trait approach to assess where
they stand in their organization and what they need to do to strengthen their position. Trait information
can suggest areas in which their personal characteristics are very beneficial to the company and areas
in which they may want to get more training to enhance their overall approach. Using trait information,
managers can develop a deeper understanding of who they are and how they will affect others in the
organization.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
In this section, three case studies (Cases 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3) are provided to illustrate the trait approach
and to help you understand how the trait approach can be used in making decisions in organizational
settings. The settings of the cases are diverse—directing research and development at a large snack
food company, being head of recruitment for a large bank, and a profile of entrepreneur Elon Musk—but
all of the cases deal with trait leadership. At the end of each case, you will find questions that will help in
analyzing the cases.
Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research
Sandra Coke is vice president for research and development at Great Lakes Foods (GLF), a large snack
food company that has approximately 1,000 employees. As a result of a recent reorganization, Sandra
must choose the new director of research. The director will report directly to Sandra and will be
responsible for developing and testing new products. The research division of GLF employs about 200
people. The choice of directors is important because Sandra is receiving pressure from the president
and board of GLF to improve the company’s overall growth and productivity.
Sandra has identified three candidates for the position. Each candidate is at the same managerial level.
She is having difficulty choosing one of them because each has very strong credentials. Alexa Smith is
a longtime employee of GLF who started part-time in the mailroom while in high school. After finishing
school, Alexa worked in as many as 10 different positions throughout the company to become manager
of new product marketing. Performance reviews of Alexa’s work have repeatedly described her as being
very creative and insightful. In her tenure at GLF, Alexa has developed and brought to market four new
product lines. Alexa is also known throughout GLF as being very persistent about her work: When she
starts a project, she stays with it until it is finished. It is probably this quality that accounts for the
success of each of the four new products with which she has been involved.
A second candidate for the new position is Kelsey Metts, who has been with GLF for five years and is
manager of quality control for established products. Kelsey has a reputation for being very bright. Before
joining GLF, she received her MBA at Harvard, graduating at the top of her class. People talk about
Kelsey as the kind of person who will be president of her own company someday. Kelsey is also very
personable. On all her performance reviews, she received extra-high scores on sociability and human
relations. There isn’t a supervisor in the company who doesn’t have positive things to say about how
comfortable it is to work with Kelsey. Since joining GLF, Kelsey has been instrumental in bringing two
new product lines to market.
Thomas Santiago, the third candidate, has been with GLF for 10 years and is often consulted by upper
management regarding strategic planning and corporate direction setting. Thomas has been very
involved in establishing the vision for GLF and is a company person all the way. He believes in the
values of GLF, and actively promotes its mission. The two qualities that stand out above the rest in
Thomas’s performance reviews are his honesty and integrity. Employees who have worked under his
supervision consistently report that they feel they can trust Thomas to be fair and consistent. Thomas is
highly respected at GLF. In his tenure at the company, Thomas has been involved in some capacity with
the development of three new product lines.
The challenge confronting Sandra is to choose the best person for the newly established director’s
position. Because of the pressure she feels from upper management, Sandra knows she must select
the best leader for the new position.
Questions
1. Based on the information provided about the trait approach in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, if you were
Sandra, whom would you select?
2. In what ways is the trait approach helpful in this type of selection?
3. In what ways are the weaknesses of the trait approach highlighted in this case?
Case 2.2 Recruiting for the Bank
Pat is the assistant director of human resources in charge of recruitment for Central Bank, a large, full-
service banking institution. One of Pat’s major responsibilities each spring is to visit as many college
campuses as he can to interview graduating seniors for credit analyst positions in the commercial
lending area at Central Bank. Although the number varies, he usually ends up hiring about 20 new
people, most of whom come from the same schools, year after year.
Pat has been doing recruitment for the bank for more than 10 years, and he enjoys it very much.
However, for the upcoming spring he is feeling increased pressure from management to be particularly
discriminating about whom he recommends hiring. Management is concerned about the retention rate at
the bank because in recent years as many as 25% of the new hires have left. Departures after the first
year have meant lost training dollars and strain on the staff who remain. Although management
understands that some new hires always leave, the executives are not comfortable with the present
rate, and they have begun to question the recruitment and hiring procedures.
The bank wants to hire people who can be groomed for higher-level leadership positions. Although
certain competencies are required of entry-level credit analysts, the bank is equally interested in skills
that will allow individuals to advance to upper management positions as their careers progress.
In the recruitment process, Pat always looks for several characteristics. First, applicants need to have
strong interpersonal skills, they need to be confident, and they need to show poise and initiative. Next,
because banking involves fiduciary responsibilities, applicants need to have proper ethics, including a
strong sense of the importance of confidentiality. In addition, to do the work in the bank, they need to
have strong analytical and technical skills, and experience in working with computers. Last, applicants
need to exhibit a good work ethic, and they need to show commitment and a willingness to do their job
even in difficult circumstances.
Pat is fairly certain that he has been selecting the right people to be leaders at Central Bank, yet upper
management is telling him to reassess his hiring criteria. Although he feels that he has been doing the
right thing, he is starting to question himself and his recruitment practices.
Questions
1. Based on ideas described in the trait approach, do you think Pat is looking for the right
characteristics in the people he hires?
2. Could it be that the retention problem raised by upper management is unrelated to Pat’s recruitment
criteria?
3. If you were Pat, would you change your approach to recruiting?
Case 2.3 Elon Musk
When he was 12, Elon Musk created and sold his first product. That video game, Blastar, was the start
of Musk’s meteoric entrepreneurial career, which has seen him take on everything from electric cars to
space travel to alternative energy.
Musk grew up in South Africa, the son of an engineer and a Canadian model. In grade school Musk was
introverted and often bullied, but at 15 he learned how to defend himself with karate and wrestling. He
moved to Canada at 17 to attend university and three years later left Canada to attend the University of
Pennsylvania where he earned degrees in economics and physics. In 1995, only two days into a PhD
program in energy physics at Stanford, Musk dropped out to launch his first company, Zip2, with his
brother Kimbal. An online city guide, Zip2 provided content for websites of both the New York Times and
the Chicago Tribune. Four years later, Compaq Computer Corporation bought Zip2 for $307 million.
The Musk brothers then founded X.com, an online financial services/payments company, which became
PayPal. Three years later, eBay acquired PayPal for $1.5 billion.
Now a billionaire, Musk started Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, in 2002 with
the intention of building reusable spacecraft for commercial space travel. A year after launching
SpaceX, Musk became the cofounder, CEO, and product architect at Tesla Motors, dedicated to
producing affordable, mass-market electric cars as well as battery products and solar roofs. He also
launched several other side projects, including establishment of The Boring Company devoted to boring
and building underground tunnels to reduce street traffic, becoming cochair of the nonprofit research
organization OpenAI with the mission of advancing digital intelligence to benefit humanity, and
development of the Hyperloop to create a more expedient form of transportation between cities.
But unlike his earlier ventures, both SpaceX and Tesla had considerable challenges. In 2008, Musk was
nearly out of money after SpaceX’s Falcon 1 rocket, of which he was the chief designer, suffered three
failed launches before it finally had a successful one. Meanwhile, Tesla was hitting speed bump after
speed bump in the development of its vehicles, hemorrhaging money, and losing investor confidence as
well as orders from customers who were unhappy with the long wait time to get their vehicles.
Musk faced these challenges the way he did as a bullied school kid: head on. “Leaders are . . . expected
to work harder than those who report to them and always make sure that their needs are taken care of
before yours, thus leading by example,” he said (Jackson, 2017).
At SpaceX, Musk continued to innovate, and the company accomplished a stunning number of
achievements including successfully having rockets land safely back on earth after launches,
transporting supplies to the International Space Station, and developing a rocket that could carry
heavier payloads. By 2019, SpaceX had 6,000-plus contracts, worth $12 billion, with NASA and other
commercial satellite companies. The company, which says its ultimate mission is to foster interplanetary
life, is planning a cargo mission to Mars in 2022 (Space Exploration Technologies Corp., 2020).
Many credit SpaceX’s success to the unified culture at the company created by its fairly flat
organizational structure and the fact that, despite its growth, the company still maintains a start-up
mentality and feel.
“It’s an incredible place to work,” said one engineer. “There’s a great sense of connectedness between
everyone. Everyone’s got the same goal in mind. Everyone’s working super hard to deliver a product
successfully. It’s amazing when it all culminates in launch” (Mind & Machine, 2017).
Dolly Singh, the former head of human resources at SpaceX, said, “The thing that makes Elon Elon is
his ability to make people believe in his vision” (Snow, 2015). Jim Cantrell, SpaceX’s first engineer,
added, “He is the smartest guy I’ve ever met, period. I know that sounds overblown. But I’ve met plenty
of smart people, and I don’t say that lightly. He’s absolutely, frickin’ amazing. I don’t even think he
sleeps” (Feloni, 2014).
But to turn Tesla around, Musk had to roll up his shirtsleeves. The company, which was four years
behind on the production of its Model 3, was under severe public scrutiny from investors and industry
analysts. After missing one deadline after another, Musk restructured the organization in April 2018 and
took over as the head of engineering to personally oversee efforts in that division. In a 2018 Twitter post,
Musk said that to meet production goals, it was time to “divide & conquer, so I’m back to sleeping at
factory.” By the end of June 2018, Tesla had met its goal of producing 5,000 Model 3 cars per week,
while churning out another 2,000 Model S sedans and Model X SUVs (Sage & Rodriguez, 2018).
Musk has been described as an unconventional leader, even by Silicon Valley standards. He is a prolific
tweeter in which he comments on everything from building cyborg dragons, to jokes about bankruptcy,
to mixing Ambien with red wine (Davies, 2018). He has graced magazine covers and goes on talk
shows and appeared on animated television shows The Simpsons and South Park. His peculiar sense
of humor was on dramatic display when he launched his own red Tesla Roadster sports car into space
atop the first SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket. At the same time, some of his behavioral quirks have also
become liabilities.
In a public earnings call with investors and financial analysts, Musk attacked two analysts for asking
what he called “bonehead” and “dry” questions that he refused to answer, resulting in Tesla’s stock value
plunging 10% (Davies, 2018). When his efforts to assist in the rescue of 12 young soccer players and
their coach from a flooded cave in Thailand were criticized as self-aggrandizing rather than serious,
Musk responded with a tweet calling one of the divers involved in the rescue “pedo guy,” insinuating he
was a child molester (Levin, 2018).
In August 2018, Musk wrote on Twitter that he was considering taking Tesla private and that he had the
necessary funding “secured” to do so. As a result, Tesla’s stock price immediately shot up, gaining the
attention of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which investigated and ultimately fined
Musk $20 million. Less than two weeks after that episode, Musk gave an emotional interview with the
New York Times, in which he alternately laughed and cried in a display that left many questioning his
mental state and sent Tesla investors into sell mode with their stock (Crum, 2018).
Not long after that interview, Musk changed his mind and said Tesla would remain a public company. He
followed that decision with an appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast during which he
smoked what was said to be a marijuana-laced cigarette (Davies, 2018).
“The reason Elon seems to attract drama is that he is so transparent, so open, in a way that can come
back to bite him,” his brother and Tesla board member Kimbal Musk told the New York Times. “He
doesn’t know how to do it differently. It’s just who he is” (Gelles, 2018).
After all of the drama in 2018, there were many concerns about where Tesla would go in 2019. The
answer? Tesla ended 2019 on a high note, with a record stock price topping out at more than $400 per
share.
“It’s been quite the turnaround for Musk since his ‘funding secured’ tweet debacle of last year,” one
analyst noted. “Tesla’s stock has been one of the top performers of the second-half of the year and
Musk is proof that you can take on the SEC, smoke weed on podcasts, call people pedo guy and still
run a $70 billion company” (Crum, 2018).
Questions
1. How does Musk exhibit each of the major leadership traits (Table 2.2)? Which of these traits do you
believe he is the strongest in? Is there one where he is weak?
2. Describe how Musk has exhibited each of the Big Five personality factors. Which of these factors
do you think has the most correlation with Musk’s success as a leader?
3. Shankman and Allen (2015) suggest that an emotionally intelligent leader is conscious of context,
self, and others. How would you characterize Musk’s emotional intelligence using these three
facets?
4. If you were asked to design a leadership training program based on the trait approach, how could
you incorporate the story of Elon Musk and his leadership? Around which of his traits would you
structure your training? Are some of his leadership traits more teachable than others? Discuss.
Leadership Instrument
Organizations use a wide variety of questionnaires to measure individuals’ traits. In many organizations,
it is common practice to use standard trait measures such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory or the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. These measures provide valuable information to the
individual and the organization about the individual’s unique attributes for leadership and where the
individual could best serve the organization.
In this section, the Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ) is provided as an example of a measure that
can be used to assess your personal leadership characteristics. The LTQ quantifies the perceptions of
the individual leader and selected observers, such as followers or peers. It measures an individual’s
traits and points respondents to the areas in which they may have special strengths or weaknesses.
By taking the LTQ, you can gain an understanding of how trait measures are used for leadership
assessment. You can also assess your own leadership traits.
Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to measure personal characteristics of leadership
and to gain an understanding of how traits are used in leadership assessment.
Instructions: Using the following scale, indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with
each of the 14 statements when viewing yourself as a leader. After you complete this
questionnaire, it should be completed by five people you know (e.g., roommates, coworkers,
relatives, friends) to show how they view you as a leader.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
1. Articulate: Communicates effectively with others 1 2 3 4 5
2. Perceptive: Is discerning and insightful 1 2 3 4 5
3. Self-confident: Believes in oneself and one’s ability 1 2 3 4 5
4. Self-assured: Is secure with oneself, free of doubts 1 2 3 4 5
5. Persistent: Stays fixed on the goals, despite interference 1 2 3 4 5
6. Determined: Takes a firm stand, acts with certainty 1 2 3 4 5
7. Trustworthy: Is authentic and inspires confidence 1 2 3 4 5
8. Dependable: Is consistent and reliable 1 2 3 4 5
9. Friendly: Shows kindness and warmth 1 2 3 4 5
10. Outgoing: Talks freely, gets along well with others 1 2 3 4 5
11. Conscientious: Is thorough, organized, and controlled 1 2 3 4 5
12. Diligent: Is persistent, hardworking 1 2 3 4 5
13. Sensitive: Shows tolerance, is tactful and sympathetic 1 2 3 4 5
14. Empathic: Understands others, identifies with others 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
1. Enter the responses for Raters 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the appropriate columns as shown in
Example 2.1. The example provides hypothetical ratings to help explain how the
questionnaire can be used.
2. For each of the 14 items, compute the average for the five raters and place that number in
the “average rating” column.
3. Place your own scores in the “self-rating” column.
Example 2.1 Leadership Traits Questionnaire Ratings
Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3 Rater 4 Rater 5 Average rating Self-rating
1. Articulate 4 4 3 2 4 3.4 4
2. Perceptive 2 5 3 4 4 3.6 5
3. Self-confident 4 4 5 5 4 4.4 4
4. Self-assured 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5. Persistent 4 4 3 3 3 3.4 3
6. Determined 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
7. Trustworthy 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
8. Dependable 4 5 4 5 4 4.4 4
9. Friendly 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
10. Outgoing 5 4 5 4 5 4.6 4
11. Conscientious 2 3 2 3 3 2.6 4
12. Diligent 3 3 3 3 3 3 4
13. Sensitive 4 4 5 5 5 4.6 3
14. Empathic 5 5 4 5 4 4.6 3
Scoring Interpretation
The scores you received on the LTQ provide information about how you see yourself as a leader
and how others see you as a leader. There are no “perfect” scores for this questionnaire. The
purpose of the instrument is to provide a way to assess your strengths and weaknesses. This
assessment can help you understand your assets as well as areas in which you may seek to
improve. The chart allows you to see where your perceptions are the same as those of others
and where they differ.
The example ratings show how the leader self-rated higher than the observers did on the
characteristic articulate. On the second characteristic, perceptive, the leader self-rated
substantially higher than others. On the self-confident characteristic, the leader self-rated quite
close to others’ ratings but lower.
A low or moderate self-rating (3 or below) on a trait may indicate that you have had little
opportunity to develop this part of your personality or that your current work or school setting
does not require you to exercise this trait. A high score (4 or above) suggests you are aware of
this trait and use it often. How similar or dissimilar your self-ratings are from others’ ratings may
be affected by whom you chose to evaluate you, how long these people have known you, and
the contexts in which they have observed your behavior.
Summary
The trait approach has its roots in leadership theory that suggested that certain people were born with
special traits that made them great leaders. Because it was believed that leaders and nonleaders could
be differentiated by a universal set of traits, throughout the 20th century researchers were challenged to
identify the definitive traits of leaders.
Around the mid-20th century, several major studies questioned the basic premise that a unique set of
traits defined leadership. As a result, attention shifted to incorporating the impact of situations and of
followers on leadership. Researchers began to study the interactions between leaders and their context
instead of focusing only on leaders’ traits. More recently, there have been signs that trait research has
come full circle, with a renewed interest in focusing directly on the critical traits of leaders.
From the multitude of studies conducted through the years on personal characteristics, it is clear that
many traits contribute to leadership. Some of the important traits that are consistently identified in many
of these studies are intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. In addition,
researchers have found a strong relationship between leadership and the traits described by the five-
factor personality model. Extraversion was the trait most strongly associated with leadership, followed
by conscientiousness, openness, low neuroticism, and agreeableness. Conscientiousness was found to
have the highest correlation with overall job performance, task performance, organizational citizenship
behavior, and counterproductive work behavior (negative correlation) and to be the most frequently
assessed trait in job interviews for a variety of occupations.
Another recent line of research has focused on emotional intelligence and its relationship to leadership.
This research suggests that leaders who are sensitive to their emotions and to the impact of their
emotions on others may be leaders who are more effective.
On a practical level, the trait approach is concerned with which traits leaders exhibit and who has these
traits. Organizations use personality assessment instruments to identify how individuals will fit within
their organizations. The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development because it
allows managers to analyze their strengths and weaknesses to gain a clearer understanding of how
they should try to change to enhance their leadership.
There are several advantages to viewing leadership from the trait approach. First, it is intuitively
appealing because it fits clearly into the popular idea that leaders are special people who are out front,
leading the way in society. Second, a great deal of research validates the basis of this perspective.
Third, by focusing exclusively on the leader, the trait approach provides an in-depth understanding of
the leader component in the leadership process. Last, it has provided some benchmarks against which
individuals can evaluate their own personal leadership attributes.
On the negative side, the trait approach has failed to provide a definitive list of leadership traits. In
analyzing the traits of leaders, the approach has failed to take into account the impact of situations. In
addition, the approach has resulted in subjective lists of the most important leadership traits, which are
not necessarily grounded in strong, reliable research.
Furthermore, the trait approach has not adequately linked the traits of leaders with other outcomes such
as group and team performance, which makes this approach not particularly useful for training and
development for leadership because individuals’ personal attributes are largely stable and fixed, and
their traits are not amenable to change. While there is some evidence that the trait of emotional
intelligence may be improved with training, follow-up studies have not been conducted to determine the
long-term effects of such training.
3 SKILLS APPROACH
The skills approach is a leader-centered perspective that emphasizes the competencies of leaders.
DESCRIPTION
Like the trait approach discussed in Chapter 2, the skills approach takes a leader-centered perspective
on leadership. However, in the skills approach we shift our thinking from focusing exclusively on traits to
an emphasis on skills and abilities that can be learned and developed. Although personality and
behavior certainly play a role in leadership, the skills approach emphasizes the capabilities, knowledge,
and skills that are needed for effective leadership.
Researchers have studied leadership skills directly or indirectly for a number of years (see Bass, 2008,
pp. 97–109). However, the impetus for research on skills was a classic article published by Katz in the
Harvard Business Review in 1955, titled “Skills of an Effective Administrator.” Katz’s article appeared at
a time when researchers were trying to identify a definitive set of leadership traits. Katz’s approach was
an attempt to transcend the trait problem by addressing leadership as a set of developable skills. More
recently, a revitalized interest in the skills approach has emerged. Beginning in the early 1990s, a
multitude of studies have been published that contend that a leader’s effectiveness depends on the
leader’s ability to solve complex organizational problems. This research has resulted in a
comprehensive skill-based model of leadership that was advanced by M. Mumford and his colleagues
(M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000; Yammarino, 2000).
In this chapter, our discussion of the skills approach is divided into two parts. First, we discuss the
general ideas set forth by Katz regarding three basic administrative skills: technical, human, and
conceptual. Second, we discuss the recent work of Mumford and colleagues that has resulted in a skills-
based model of organizational leadership.
Three-Skill Approach
Based on field research in administration and his own firsthand observations of executives in the
workplace, Katz (1955, p. 34) suggested that effective administration (i.e., leadership) depends on three
basic personal skills: technical, human, and conceptual. Katz argued that these skills are quite different
from traits or qualities of leaders. Skills are what leaders can accomplish, whereas traits are who leaders
are (i.e., their innate characteristics). Leadership skills are defined in this chapter as the ability to use
one’s knowledge and competencies to accomplish a set of goals or objectives. This chapter shows that
these leadership skills can be acquired and leaders can be trained to develop them.
Technical Skills
Technical skills are knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work or activity. They include
competencies in a specialized area, analytical ability, and the ability to use appropriate tools and
techniques (Katz, 1955). For example, in a computer software company, technical skills might include
knowing software language and programming, the company’s software products, and how to make
these products function for clients. Similarly, in an accounting firm, technical skills might include
understanding and having the ability to apply generally accepted accounting principles to a client’s audit.
In both of these examples, technical skills involve a hands-on activity with a basic product or process
within an organization. Technical skills play an essential role in producing the actual products a
company is designed to produce.
As illustrated in Figure 3.1, technical skills are most important at lower and middle levels of management
and less important in upper management. For leaders at the highest level, such as CEOs, presidents,
and senior officers, technical competencies are not as essential. Individuals at the top level depend on
skilled followers to handle technical issues of the physical operation.
Human Skills
Human skills are knowledge about and ability to work with people. They are quite different from
technical skills, which have to do with working with things (Katz, 1955). Human skills are “people skills.”
They are the abilities that help a leader to work effectively with followers, peers, and superiors to
accomplish the organization’s goals. Human skills allow a leader to assist group members in working
cooperatively as a group to achieve common goals. For Katz, it means being aware of one’s own
perspective on issues and, at the same time, being aware of the perspective of others. Leaders with
human skills adapt their own ideas to those of others. Furthermore, they create an atmosphere of trust
where followers can feel comfortable and secure and where they can feel encouraged to become
involved in the planning of things that will affect them. Being a leader with human skills means being
sensitive to the needs and motivations of others and considering others’ needs in one’s decision
making. In short, human skills are the capacity to get along with others as you go about your work.
Description
Figure 3.1 Management Skills Necessary at Various Levels of an Organization
Source: Adapted from “Skills of an Effective Administrator,” by R. L. Katz, 1955, Harvard Business
Review, 33(1), pp. 33–42.
Figure 3.1 shows that human skills are important in all three levels of management. Although managers
at lower levels may communicate with a far greater number of followers, human skills are equally
important at middle and upper levels.
Conceptual Skills
Broadly speaking, conceptual skills are the ability to work with ideas and concepts. Whereas technical
skills deal with things and human skills deal with people, conceptual skills involve the ability to work with
ideas. A leader with conceptual skills is comfortable talking about the ideas that shape an organization
and the intricacies involved. They are good at putting the organization’s goals into words and can
understand and express the economic principles that affect the organization. A leader with conceptual
skills works easily with abstractions and hypothetical notions.
Conceptual skills are central to creating a vision and strategic plan for an organization. For example, it
would take conceptual skills for a CEO in a struggling manufacturing company to articulate a vision for a
line of new products that would steer the company into profitability. Similarly, it would take conceptual
skills for the director of a nonprofit health organization to create a strategic plan to compete successfully
with for-profit health organizations in a market with scarce resources. The point of these examples is
that conceptual skills have to do with the mental work of shaping the meaning of organizational or policy
issues—understanding what an organization stands for and where it is or should be going.
As shown in Figure 3.1, conceptual skills are most important at the top management levels. In fact,
when upper-level managers do not have strong conceptual skills, they can jeopardize the whole
organization. Conceptual skills are also important in middle management; as we move down to lower
management levels, conceptual skills become less important.
Summary of the Three-Skill Approach
To summarize, the three-skill approach includes technical, human, and conceptual skills. It is important
for leaders to have all three skills; depending on where they are in the management structure, however,
some skills are more important than others.
Katz’s work in the mid-1950s set the stage for conceptualizing leadership in terms of skills, but it was not
until the mid-1990s that an empirically based skills approach received recognition in leadership
research. In the next section, the comprehensive skill-based model of leadership is presented.
Skills Model
Beginning in the early 1990s, a group of researchers, with funding from the U.S. Army and Department
of Defense, set out to test and develop a comprehensive theory of leadership based on problem-solving
skills in organizations. The studies were conducted over a number of years using a sample of more than
1,800 Army officers, representing six grade levels, from second lieutenant to colonel. The project used a
variety of new measures and tools to assess the skills of these officers, their experiences, and the
situations in which they worked.
The researchers’ main goal was to explain the underlying elements of effective performance. They
addressed questions such as these: What accounts for why some leaders are good problem solvers
and others are not? What specific skills do high-performing leaders exhibit? How do leaders’ individual
characteristics, career experiences, and environmental influences affect their job performance? As a
whole, researchers wanted to identify the leadership factors that create exemplary job performance in
an actual organization.
Based on the extensive findings from the project, M. Mumford and colleagues formulated a skill-based
model of leadership (Figure 3.2). The model is characterized as a capability model because it examines
the relationship between a leader’s knowledge and skills (i.e., capabilities) and the leader’s performance
(M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000, p. 12). Leadership capabilities can be developed over time
through education and experience. Unlike the “great man” approach (discussed in Chapter 2 of this
text), which implies that leadership is reserved for only the gifted few, the skills approach suggests that
many people have the potential for leadership. If people are capable of learning from their experiences,
they can acquire leadership skills. The skills approach can also be distinguished from the leadership
approaches, discussed in subsequent chapters, that focus on behavioral patterns of leaders (e.g., the
style approach, leader–member exchange theory, and transformational leadership). Rather than
emphasizing what leaders do, the skills approach frames leadership as the capabilities (knowledge and
skills) that make effective leadership possible (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000, p. 12).
Description
Figure 3.2 Influence of Leader Characteristics on Leader Performance
Source: Adapted from “Leadership Skills for a Changing World: Solving Complex Social Problems,” by
M. D. Mumford, S. J. Zaccaro, F. D. Harding, T. O. Jacobs, and E. A. Fleishman, The Leadership
Quarterly, 11(1), p. 23. Copyright 2000 by Elsevier.
The skill-based model of M. Mumford’s group has five components: competencies, individual attributes,
career experiences, environmental influences, and leadership outcomes (performance and problem
solving) (Figure 3.2).
Individual Attributes
The leftmost box in Figure 3.2 identifies four individual attributes that have an impact on leadership skills
and knowledge: general cognitive ability, crystallized cognitive ability, motivation, and personality. These
attributes play important roles in the skills model. Complex problem solving is a very difficult process
and becomes more difficult as people move up in an organization. These attributes support people as
they apply their leadership competencies.
General Cognitive Ability.
General cognitive ability can be thought of as a person’s intelligence. It includes perceptual processing,
information processing, general reasoning skills, creative and divergent thinking capacities, and memory
skills. General cognitive ability is linked to biology, not to experience.
General cognitive ability is sometimes described as fluid intelligence, a type of intelligence that usually
grows and expands up through early adulthood and then declines with age. In the skills model,
intelligence is described as having a positive impact on the leader’s acquisition of complex problem-
solving skills and the leader’s knowledge.
Crystallized Cognitive Ability.
Crystallized cognitive ability is intellectual ability that is learned or acquired over time. It is the store of
knowledge we acquire through experience. We learn and increase our capacities over a lifetime,
increasing our leadership potential (e.g., problem-solving skills, conceptual ability, and social judgment
skills). In normally functioning adults, this type of cognitive ability grows continuously and typically does
not fall off in adulthood. It includes being able to comprehend complex information and learn new skills
and information, as well as being able to communicate to others in oral and written forms (Connelly et
al., 2000, p. 71). Stated another way, crystallized cognitive ability is acquired intelligence: the ideas and
mental abilities people learn through experience. Because it stays fairly stable over time, this type of
intelligence is not diminished as people get older (Rose & Gordon, 2015).
Motivation.
Motivation is listed as the third attribute in the model. While Kerns (2015) identified three categories of
motivations (self-interest, career considerations, and higher purposes) that propel leaders, the skills
model takes a different approach, instead suggesting there are three aspects of motivation—willingness,
dominance, and social good—that are essential to developing leadership skills (M. Mumford, Zaccaro,
Harding, et al., 2000, p. 22).
First, leaders must be willing to tackle complex organizational problems. This first step is critical. For
leadership to occur, a person must want to lead. Second, leaders must be willing to express dominance
—to exert their influence, as we discussed in Chapter 2. In influencing others, the leader must take on
the responsibility of dominance because the influence component of leadership is inextricably bound to
dominance. Third, leaders must be committed to the social good of the organization. Social good is a
broad term that can refer to a host of outcomes. However, in the skills model it refers to the leader’s
willingness to take on the responsibility of trying to advance the overall human good and value of the
organization. Taken together, these three aspects of motivation (willingness, dominance, and social
good) prepare people to become leaders.
Personality.
Personality is the fourth individual attribute in the skills model. Placed where it is in the model, this
attribute reminds us that our personality has an impact on the development of our leadership skills. For
example, openness, tolerance for ambiguity, and curiosity may affect a leader’s motivation to try to solve
some organizational problems. Or, in conflict situations, traits such as confidence and adaptability may
be beneficial to a leader’s performance. The skills model hypothesizes that any personality
characteristic that helps people to cope with complex organizational situations probably is related to
leader performance (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000).
Competencies
As can be observed in Figure 3.2, problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge are at
the heart of the skills model. These three competencies are the key factors that account for effective
performance (M. Mumford et al., 2012).
Problem-Solving Skills.
What are problem-solving skills? According to M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and colleagues (2000),
problem-solving skills are a leader’s creative ability to solve new and unusual, ill-defined organizational
problems. The skills include being able to define significant problems, gather problem information,
formulate new understandings about the problem, and generate prototype plans for problem solutions.
M. Mumford, Todd, Higgs, and McIntosh (2017, p. 28) identified nine key problem-solving skills leaders
employ to address problems:
1. Problem definition, the ability to define noteworthy issues or significant problems affecting the
organization
2. Cause/goal analysis, the ability to analyze the causes and goals relevant to addressing problems
3. Constraint analysis, the ability to identify the constraints, or limiting factors, influencing any problem
solution
4. Planning, the ability to formulate plans, mental simulations, and actions arising from cause/goal and
constraint analysis
5. Forecasting, the ability to anticipate the implications of executing the plans
6. Creative thinking, the ability to develop alternative approaches and new ideas for addressing
potential pitfalls of a plan identified in forecasting
7. Idea evaluation, the ability to evaluate these alternative approaches’ viability in executing the plan
8. Wisdom, the ability to evaluate the appropriateness of these alternative approaches within the
context, or setting, in which the leader acts
9. Sensemaking/visioning, the ability to articulate a vision that will help followers understand, make
sense of, and act on the problem
Figure 3.3 shows the relationship between these different skills as a developing process, where
employment of one skill can lead to development of the next.
Description
Figure 3.3 Hypothetical Relationships Between Problem-Solving Skills
Source: Reprinted from “Cognitive Skills and Leadership Performance: The Nine Critical Skills,” by M.
D. Mumford, E. M. Todd, C. Higgs, and T. McIntosh, The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), p. 28. Copyright
2017 by Elsevier.
To clarify how these problem-solving skills work in conjunction with one another, consider the following
hypothetical situation. Imagine that you are the director of human resources for a medium-sized
company and you have been informed by the president that you must develop a plan to reduce the
company’s health care costs. In deciding what you will do, you demonstrate problem-solving skills in the
following ways. First, you identify the full ramifications for employees of changing their health insurance
coverage (problem definition; forecasting). What is the impact going to be (cause/goal analysis)?
Second, you gather information about how benefits can be scaled back (constraint analysis). What other
companies have attempted a similar change, and what were their results (forecasting)? Third, you find a
way to teach and inform the employees about the needed change (planning; creative thinking). How can
you frame the change in such a way that it is clearly understood (planning; creative thinking; wisdom)?
Fourth, you create possible scenarios for how the changes will be instituted (forecasting; idea
evaluation). How will the plan be described? Fifth, you look closely at the solution itself (idea
evaluation). How will implementing this change affect the company’s mission and your own career
(sensemaking; visioning)? Last, are there issues in the organization (e.g., union rules) that may affect
the implementation of these changes (constraint analysis; forecasting)?
Problem-solving skills also demand that leaders understand their own leadership capacities as they
apply possible solutions to the unique problems in their organization (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Connelly, &
Marks, 2000).
Being able to construct solutions plays a special role in problem solving. In considering solutions to
organizational problems, skilled leaders need to attend to the time frame for constructing and
implementing a solution, short-term and long-term goals, career goals and organizational goals, and
external issues, all of which could influence the solution (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000, p.
15).
The process of dealing with novel, ill-defined organizational problems is complex and demanding for
leaders. In many ways, it is like a puzzle to be solved. For leaders to solve such puzzles, the skill-based
model suggests that problem-solving skills are essential.
Social Judgment and Social Skills.
In addition to problem-solving skills, effective leadership performance requires social judgment skills
(Figure 3.2). Social judgment skills are the capacity to understand people and social systems (Zaccaro,
Mumford, Connelly, Marks, & Gilbert, 2000, p. 46). They enable leaders to work with others to solve
problems and to marshal support to implement change within an organization. Social judgment skills are
the people skills that are necessary to solve unique organizational problems.
Conceptually, social judgment skills are like Katz’s (1955) early work on the role of human skills in
management. In contrast to Katz’s work, Mumford and colleagues have delineated social judgment skills
into the following: perspective taking, social perceptiveness, behavioral flexibility, and social
performance.
Perspective taking means understanding the attitudes that others have toward a particular problem or
solution. It is empathy applied to problem solving. Perspective taking means being sensitive to other
people’s perspectives and goals—being able to understand their point of view on different issues.
Included in perspective taking is knowing how different constituencies in an organization view a problem
and possible solutions (Gasiorek & Ebesu Hubbard, 2017). According to Zaccaro, Gilbert, Thor, and
Mumford (1991), perspective-taking skills can be likened to social intelligence. These skills are
concerned with knowledge about people, the social fabric of organizations, and the interrelatedness of
each of them.
Social perceptiveness is insight and awareness into how others in the organization function. What is
important to others? What motivates them? What problems do they face, and how do they react to
change? Social perceptiveness means understanding the unique needs, goals, and demands of
different organizational constituencies (Zaccaro et al., 1991). A leader with social perceptiveness has a
keen sense of how followers will respond to any proposed change in the organization. In a sense, you
could say it allows the leader to know the pulse of followers on any issue at any time.
In addition to understanding others accurately, social judgment skills involve reacting to others with
flexibility. Behavioral flexibility is the capacity to change and adapt one’s behavior in light of
understanding others’ perspectives in the organization. Being flexible means one is not locked into a
singular approach to a problem. One is not dogmatic but rather maintains an openness and willingness
to change. As the circumstances of a situation change, a flexible leader changes to meet the new
demands.
Social performance includes a wide range of leadership competencies. Based on an understanding of
followers’ perspectives, leaders need to be able to communicate their own vision to others. Skill in
persuasion and communicating change is essential to do this. When there is resistance to change or
interpersonal conflict about change, leaders need to function as mediators. To this end, skill in conflict
resolution is an important aspect of social performance competency. In addition, social performance
sometimes requires that leaders coach followers, giving them direction and support as they move
toward selected organizational goals. In all, social performance includes many related skills that may
come under the umbrella of communication.
To review, social judgment skills are about being sensitive to how your ideas fit in with others. Can you
understand others’ perspectives and their unique needs and motivations? Are you flexible, and can you
adapt your own ideas to those of others? Can you work with others even when there is resistance and
conflict? Social judgment skills are the people skills needed to advance change in an organization.
Knowledge.
As shown in the model (Figure 3.2), the third aspect of competencies is knowledge. Knowledge is
inextricably related to the application and implementation of problem-solving skills in organizations. It
directly influences a leader’s capacity to define complex organizational problems and to attempt to solve
them (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000). Knowledge is the accumulation of information and
the mental structures used to organize that information. Such a mental structure is called a schema (a
summary, a diagrammatic representation, or an outline). Knowledge results from having developed an
assortment of complex schemata for learning and organizing data.
For example, all of us take various kinds of facts and information into our minds. As we organize that
information into categories or schemata, the information becomes more meaningful. Knowledge
emerges from the facts and the organizational structures we apply to them. People with a lot of
knowledge have more complex organizing structures than those with less knowledge. These
knowledgeable people are called experts.
Consider the following baseball example. A baseball expert knows a lot of facts about the game; the
expert knows the rules, strategies, equipment, players, and much, much more. The expert’s knowledge
about baseball includes the facts, but it also includes the complex mental structures used in organizing
and structuring those facts. This person knows not only the season and lifetime statistics for each
player, but also each player’s quirks and injuries, the personality of the manager, the strengths and
weaknesses of available substitutes, and so on. The expert comprehends the complexities and nuances
of baseball, and thus knows the game. The same is true for leadership in organizations. Leaders with
knowledge know much about the products, the tasks, the people, the organization, and all the different
ways these elements are related to each other. A knowledgeable leader has many mental structures
with which to organize the facts of organizational life.
Knowledge has a positive impact on how leaders engage in problem solving. It is knowledge and
expertise that make it possible for people to think about complex system issues and identify possible
strategies for appropriate change. Furthermore, this capacity allows people to use prior cases and
incidents to plan for needed change. It is knowledge that allows people to use the past to constructively
confront the future.
To summarize, the skills model consists of three competencies: problem-solving skills, social judgment
skills, and knowledge. Collectively, these three components are positively related to effective leadership
performance (Figure 3.2).
Influences on Skills Development
As you can see in Figure 3.2, the skills model identifies two influences that are related to the leader’s
attributes and competencies and leadership outcomes: career experiences and environmental
influences.
Career Experiences.
The skills model suggests that the career experiences (represented in Figure 3.2 as the topmost box)
acquired in the course of leaders’ careers influence their development of knowledge and skills for
solving complex problems. M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and colleagues (2000, p. 24) pointed out that
leaders can be helped through challenging job assignments, mentoring, appropriate training, and hands-
on experience in solving new and unusual problems. In addition, the authors think that career
experiences can positively affect the individual attributes of leaders. For example, certain on-the-job
assignments could enhance a leader’s motivation or intellectual ability.
In the first section of this chapter, we discussed Katz’s (1955) work, which notes that conceptual skills
are essential for upper-level administrators. This is consistent with M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and
colleagues’ (2000) skills model, which contends that leaders develop competencies over time. Career
experiences help leaders to improve their skills and knowledge over time. Leaders learn and develop
higher levels of conceptual capacity if, as they ascend the organizational hierarchy, the kinds of
problems they confront are progressively more complex and longer term (M. Mumford, Zaccaro,
Connelly, et al., 2000). Similarly, upper-level leaders, as opposed to first-line supervisors, develop new
competencies because they are required to address problems that are more novel, are more poorly
defined, and demand more human interaction. As these people move through their careers, higher
levels of problem-solving and social judgment skills become increasingly important (M. Mumford &
Connelly, 1991).
So the skills and knowledge of leaders are shaped by their career experiences as they address
increasingly complex problems in the organization. This notion of developing leadership skills is unique
and quite different from other leadership perspectives. If we say, “Leaders are shaped by their
experiences,” then it means leaders are not born to be leaders (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al.,
2000). Leaders can develop their abilities through experience, according to the skills model.
Environmental Influences.
Another important component of the skills model is environmental influences, which is illustrated at the
bottom of Figure 3.2. Environmental influences represent factors that lie outside the leader’s
competencies, characteristics, and experiences. These environmental influences can be internal and
external.
Internal environmental influences include such factors as technology, facilities, expertise of followers,
and communication. For example, an aging factory lacking in high-speed technology could have a major
impact on the nature of problem-solving activities. Another example might be the skill levels of followers:
If a leader’s followers are highly competent, they will definitely improve the group’s problem solving and
performance. Similarly, if a task is particularly complex or a group’s communication poor, the leader’s
performance will be affected.
External environmental influences, including economic, political, and social issues, as well as natural
disasters, can provide unique challenges to leaders. How U.S. public schools responded to the COVID-
19 pandemic is a good recent example of this. As stay-at-home restrictions were enacted, most public
schools closed months before the school year would have ended. A majority of these schools were
unprepared to switch to online learning. Many districts faced an additional barrier in delivery of online
learning due to access: 17% of U.S. students did not have computers in the home, and 18% of students
lacked access to high-speed internet (Melia, Amy, & Fenn, 2019).
School leaders across the country scrambled to come up with solutions, including working with local
governments and nonprofits to find ways to establish internet hotspots in neighborhoods and to secure
and distribute devices to students so they could access online learning. In addition, because most
teachers had never actually engaged in online teaching, they were untrained and struggled and
underperformed. Others, however, found that having to teach online serendipitously improved their
teaching performance. School leaders nationwide had to respond to the very unique challenges posed
by an external force completely beyond their control and did so with varying degrees of success.
The skills model does not provide an inventory of specific environmental influences. Instead, it
acknowledges the existence of these factors and recognizes that they are indeed influences that can
affect a leader’s performance, but not usually under the control of the leader.
Leadership Outcomes
In the right-hand boxes in Figure 3.2, effective problem solving and performance are the outcomes of
leadership. These outcomes are strongly influenced by the leader’s competencies (i.e., problem-solving
skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge). When leaders exhibit these competencies, they increase
their chances of problem solving and overall performance.
Effective Problem Solving.
As we discussed earlier, the skills model is a capability model, designed to explain why some leaders
are good problem solvers and others are not. Problem solving is the keystone in the skills approach. In
the model (Figure 3.2), problem-solving skills, as competencies, lead to effective problem solving as a
leadership outcome. The criteria for good problem solving are determined by the originality and the
quality of expressed solutions to problems. Good problem solving involves creating solutions that are
logical, effective, and unique, and that go beyond given information (Zaccaro et al., 2000).
Performance.
In the model, performance outcomes reflect how well individual leaders have done their job. To measure
performance, standard external criteria are used. If a leader has done well and been successful, the
leader’s evaluations will be positive. Leaders who are effective receive good annual performance
reviews, get merit raises, and are recognized by superiors and followers as competent leaders. In the
end, performance is the degree to which a leader has successfully performed the assigned duties.
Taken together, effective problem solving and performance are the outcomes used to assess leadership
effectiveness in the skills model. Furthermore, good problem solving and good performance go hand in
hand.
Summary of the Skills Model
In summary, the skills model frames leadership by describing five components of leader performance. At
the heart of the model are three competencies: problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and
knowledge. These three competencies are the central determinants of effective problem solving and
performance, although individual attributes, career experiences, and environmental influences all have
impacts on leader competencies. Through job experience and training, leaders can become better
problem solvers and more effective leaders.
HOW DOES THE SKILLS APPROACH WORK?
The skills approach is primarily descriptive: It describes leadership from a skills perspective. Rather than
providing prescriptions for success in leadership, the skills approach provides a structure for
understanding the nature of effective leadership. In the previous sections, we discussed the skills
perspective based on the work of Katz (1955) and M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and colleagues
(2000). What does each of these bodies of work suggest about the structure and functions of
leadership?
The three-skill approach of Katz suggests that the importance of certain leadership skills varies
depending on where leaders are in a management hierarchy. For leaders operating at lower levels of
management, technical and human skills are most important. When leaders move into middle
management, it becomes important that they have all three skills: technical, human, and conceptual. At
the upper management levels, it is paramount for leaders to exhibit conceptual and human skills.
This approach was reinforced in a 2007 study that examined the skills needed by executives at different
levels of management. The researchers used a four-skill model, similar to Katz’s approach, to assess
cognitive skills, interpersonal skills, business skills, and strategic skills of 1,000 managers at the junior,
middle, and senior levels of an organization. The results showed that interpersonal and cognitive skills
were required more than business and strategic skills for those on the lower levels of management. As
one climbed the career ladder, however, the execution of higher levels of all four of these leadership
skills became necessary (T. Mumford, Campion, & Morgeson, 2007).
In their skills model, M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and colleagues (2000) provided a more complex
picture of how skills relate to the manifestation of effective leadership. Their skills model contends that
leadership outcomes are the direct result of a leader’s competencies in problem-solving skills, social
judgment skills, and knowledge. Each of these competencies includes a large repertoire of abilities, and
each can be learned and developed. In addition, the model illustrates how individual attributes such as
general cognitive ability, crystallized cognitive ability, motivation, and personality influence the leader’s
competencies. And finally, the model describes how career experiences and environmental influences
play a direct or indirect role in leadership performance.
The skills approach works by providing a map for how to reach effective leadership in an organization:
Leaders need to have problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge. Workers can
improve their capabilities in these areas through training and experience. Although individual leaders’
personal attributes affect their skills, it is a leader’s skills themselves that are most important in
addressing organizational problems.
STRENGTHS
In several ways, the skills approach contributes positively to our understanding about leadership. First, it
is a leader-centered model that stresses the importance of developing particular leadership skills. It is
the first approach to conceptualize and create a structure of the process of leadership around skills.
Whereas the early research on skills highlighted the importance of skills and the value of skills across
different management levels, the later work placed learned skills at the center of effective leadership
performance at all management levels. The skills approach also supports succession planning in
organizations by ensuring that there is a pool of potential managers ready to assume leadership at the
next level (Griffith, Baur, & Buckley, 2019).
Second, the skills approach is intuitively appealing. To describe leadership in terms of skills makes
leadership available to everyone. Unlike personality traits, skills are competencies that people can learn
or develop. It is like playing a sport such as tennis or golf. Even without natural ability in these sports,
people can improve their games with practice and instruction. The same is true with leadership. When
leadership is framed as a set of skills, it becomes a process that people can study and practice to
become better at performing their jobs.
An example of how individuals can improve their leadership skills is evident in game-based learning
(GBL), which has been applied to developing leadership skills in recent years. Through GBL, individuals
work toward a goal, choosing actions and experiencing the consequences of those actions in a risk-free
setting. Through experimentation, participants learn and practice the right way to do things. In one study,
a leadership game was found to improve motivation, facilitation, coaching, mindset changing, and
communication (Sousa & Rocha, 2019) in participants. GBL also gives individuals at all levels in an
organization access to training for leadership positions.
Third, the skills approach provides an expansive view of leadership that incorporates a wide variety of
components, including problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, knowledge, individual attributes,
career experiences, and environmental influences. Each of these components can further be subdivided
into several subcomponents. The result is a picture of leadership that encompasses a multitude of
factors. Because it includes so many variables, the skills approach captures many of the intricacies and
complexities of leadership not found in other models.
Last, the skills approach provides a structure that is very consistent with the curricula of most leadership
education programs. Leadership development was estimated to be a $14 billion industry in the United
States (Gurdjian, Halbeisen, & Lane, 2014), and leadership education programs throughout the country
have traditionally taught classes in creative problem solving, conflict resolution, listening, and teamwork,
to name a few. The content of these classes closely mirrors many of the components in the skills model.
Clearly, the skills approach provides a structure that helps to frame the curricula of leadership education
and development programs.
CRITICISMS
Like all other approaches to leadership, the skills approach has certain weaknesses. First, the breadth
of the skills approach seems to extend beyond the boundaries of leadership. For example, by including
motivation, critical thinking, personality, and conflict resolution, the skills approach addresses more than
just leadership. Another example of the model’s breadth is its inclusion of two types of intelligence (i.e.,
general cognitive ability and crystallized cognitive ability). Although both areas are studied widely in the
field of cognitive psychology, they are seldom addressed in leadership research. By including so many
components, the skills model of M. Mumford and others becomes more general and less precise in
explaining leadership performance.
Second, related to the first criticism, the skills model is weak in predictive value. It does not explain
specifically how variations in social judgment skills and problem-solving skills affect performance. The
model suggests that these components are related, but it does not describe with any precision just how
that works. In short, the model can be faulted because it does not explain how skills lead to effective
leadership performance. Despite the billions of dollars spent on leadership training, the overall
effectiveness of these programs has not been clearly substantiated (Kellerman, 2012). In addition, the
ability of leaders to transfer skills training to the job may be limited by the followers, the situation, or the
organizational culture.
The final criticism of the skills approach is that it may not be suitably or appropriately applied to other
contexts of leadership. The skills model was constructed by using a large sample of military personnel
and observing their performance in the armed services. This represents a highly structured, hierarchical
organizational culture where the variance in leader behavior is restricted. This raises an obvious
question: Can the results be generalized to other populations or organizational settings? Although some
research suggests that these military findings can be generalized to other groups (M. Mumford, Zaccaro,
Connelly, et al., 2000), more research is needed to address this criticism.
APPLICATION
Despite its appeal to theorists and academics, the skills approach has not been widely used in applied
leadership settings. For example, there are no training packages designed specifically to teach people
leadership skills from this approach. Although many programs have been designed to teach leadership
skills from a general self-help orientation, few of these programs are based on the conceptual
frameworks set forth in this chapter.
Despite the lack of formal training programs, the skills approach offers valuable information about
leadership. The approach provides a way to delineate the skills of the leader, and leaders at all levels in
an organization can use it. In addition, this approach helps us to identify our strengths and weaknesses
in regard to these technical, human, and conceptual skills. By taking a skills inventory such as the one
provided at the end of this chapter, people can gain further insight into their own leadership
competencies. Their scores allow them to learn about areas in which they may want to seek further
training to enhance their overall contributions to their organization.
From a wider perspective, the skills approach may be used in the future as a template for the design of
extensive leadership development programs. This approach provides the evidence for teaching leaders
the important aspects of listening, creative problem solving, conflict resolution skills, and much more.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following three case studies (Cases 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3) describe leadership situations that can be
analyzed and evaluated from the skills perspective. The first case involves the principal investigator of a
federally funded research grant. In the second case, we learn about how the owner of an Italian
restaurant has created his own recipe for success. The third case profiles Kenyan teacher Peter Tabichi
and his work to improve not only his students’ lives, but their community as well.
As you read each case, try to apply the principles of the skills approach to the leaders and their
situations. At the end of each case are questions that will assist you in analyzing the case.
Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team
Dr. Adam Wood is the principal investigator on a three-year, $1 million federally funded research grant to
study health education programs for older populations, called the Elder Care Project. Unlike previous
projects, in which Dr. Wood worked alone or with one or two other investigators, on this project Dr.
Wood has 11 colleagues. His project team is made up of two co-investigators (with PhDs), four
intervention staff (with MAs), and five general staff members (with BAs). One year into the project, it has
become apparent to Dr. Wood and the team that the project is underbudgeted and has too few
resources. Team members are spending 20%–30% more time on the project than has been budgeted to
pay them. Regardless of the resource strain, all team members are committed to the project; they
believe in its goals and the importance of its outcomes. Dr. Wood is known throughout the country as
the foremost scholar in this area of health education research. He is often asked to serve on national
review and advisory boards. His publication record is second to none. In addition, his colleagues in the
university know Dr. Wood as a very competent researcher. People come to Dr. Wood for advice on
research design and methodology questions. They also come to him for questions about theoretical
formulations. He has a reputation as someone who can see the big picture on research projects.
Despite his research competence, there are problems on Dr. Wood’s research team. Dr. Wood worries
there is a great deal of work to be done but that the members of the team are not devoting sufficient
time to the Elder Care Project. He is frustrated because many of the day-to-day research tasks of the
project are falling into his lap. He enters a research meeting, throws his notebook down on the table,
and says, “I wish I’d never taken this project on. It’s taking way too much of my time. The rest of you
aren’t pulling your fair share.” Team members feel exasperated at Dr. Wood’s comments. Although they
respect his competence, they find his leadership style frustrating. His negative comments at staff
meetings are having a demoralizing effect on the research team. Despite their hard work and devotion
to the project, Dr. Wood seldom compliments or praises their efforts. Team members believe that they
have spent more time than anticipated on the project and have received less pay or credit than
expected. The project is sucking away a lot of staff energy, yet Dr. Wood does not seem to understand
the pressures confronting his staff.
The research staff is starting to feel burned out, but members realize they need to keep trying because
they are under time constraints from the federal government to do the work promised. The team needs
to develop a pamphlet for the participants in the Elder Care Project, but the pamphlet costs are
significantly more than budgeted in the grant. Dr. Wood has been very adept at finding out where they
might find small pockets of money to help cover those costs.
Although team members are pleased that he is able to obtain the money, they are sure he will use this
as just another example of how he was the one doing most of the work on the project.
Questions
1. Based on the skills approach, how would you assess Dr. Wood’s leadership and his relationship to
the members of the Elder Care Project team? Will the project be successful?
2. Does Dr. Wood have the skills necessary to be an effective leader of this research team?
3. The skills model describes three important competencies for leaders: problem-solving skills, social
judgment skills, and knowledge. If you were to coach Dr. Wood using this model, what
competencies would you address with him? What changes would you suggest that he make in his
leadership?
Case 3.2 Andy’s Recipe
Andy Garafallo owns an Italian restaurant that sits in the middle of a cornfield near a large midwestern
city. On the restaurant’s far wall is an elaborate mural of the canals of Venice. A gondola hangs on the
opposite wall, up by the ceiling. Along another wall is a row of real potted lemon trees. “My ancestors
are from Sicily,” says Andy. “In fact, I can remember seeing my grandfather take a bite out of a lemon,
just like the ones hanging on those trees.”
Andy is very confident about his approach to this restaurant, and he should be, because the restaurant
is celebrating its 25th anniversary. “I’m darned sure of what I want to do. I’m not trying different fads to
get people to come here. People come here because they know they will get great food. They also want
to support someone with whom they can connect. This is my approach. Nothing more, nothing less.”
Although other restaurants have folded, Andy seems to have found a recipe for success.
Since opening his restaurant, Andy has had a number of managers. Currently, he has three: Kelly,
Danielle, and Patrick. Kelly is a kitchen (food prep) manager who is known as very honest and
dependable. She loves her work, and is efficient, good with ordering, and good with preparation. Andy
really likes Kelly but is frustrated with her because she has such difficulty getting along with the
salespeople, delivery people, and waitstaff.
Danielle, who works out front in the restaurant, has been with Andy the longest, six years. Danielle likes
working at Garafallo’s—she lives and breathes the place. She fully buys into Andy’s approach of putting
customers first. In fact, Andy says she has a knack for knowing what customers need even before they
ask. Although she is very hospitable, Andy says she is lousy with numbers. She just doesn’t seem to
catch on to that side of the business.
Patrick, who has been with Andy for four years, usually works out front but can work in the kitchen as
well. Although Patrick has a strong work ethic and is great with numbers, he is weak on the people side.
For some reason, Patrick treats customers as if they are faceless, coming across as very unemotional.
In addition, Patrick tends to approach problems with an either–or perspective. This has gotten him into
trouble on more than one occasion. Andy wishes that Patrick would learn to lighten up. “He’s a good
manager, but he needs to recognize that some things just aren’t that important,” says Andy.
Andy’s approach to his managers is that of a teacher and coach. He is always trying to help them
improve. He sees part of his responsibility as teaching them every aspect of the restaurant business.
Andy’s stated goal is that he wants his managers to be “A” players when they leave his business to take
on jobs elsewhere. Helping people to become the best they can be is Andy’s goal for his restaurant
employees.
Although Andy works 12 hours a day, he spends little time analyzing the numbers. He does not think
about ways to improve his profit margin by cutting corners, raising an item price here, or cutting quality
there. Andy says, “It’s like this: The other night I got a call from someone who said they wanted to come
in with a group and wondered if they could bring along a cake. I said ‘yes’ with one stipulation. . . . I get
a piece! Well, the people came and spent a lot of money. Then they told me that they had actually
wanted to go to another restaurant, but the other place would not allow them to bring in their own cake.”
Andy believes very strongly in his approach. “You get business by being what you should be.”
Compared with other restaurants, his restaurant is doing quite well. Although many places are happy to
net 5%–7% profit, Andy’s Italian restaurant nets 30% profit, year in and year out.
Questions
1. What accounts for Andy’s success in the restaurant business?
2. From a skills perspective, how would you describe the three managers, Kelly, Danielle, and Patrick?
What does each of them need to do to improve their skills?
3. How would you describe Andy’s competencies? Does Andy’s leadership suggest that one does not
need all three skills to be effective?
Case 3.3 2019 Global Teacher of the Year: Peter Tabichi
How does one take nearly 500 secondary math and science students at a school in an impoverished,
remote part of Kenya with only one computer, a poor internet connection, and a student–teacher ratio of
58:1 and turn them into motivated, successful students and award-winning scientists?
That’s the question many have been asking Peter Tabichi, a math and science teacher at Keriko Mixed
Day Secondary School in Pwani village, who was named the Varkey Foundation’s 2019 Global Teacher
of the Year after being chosen from more than 10,000 nominations from 179 countries.
For Peter, who is a friar in the Franciscan Brotherhood, teaching starts with understanding his students,
their cultures, and the challenges they face. Keriko is a government-run school in a part of Kenya
frequently stricken with drought and famine, and Peter’s students come from poor families who barely
eke out a living farming the land. A third of the school’s students are orphans or have only one parent
and have lives marked by drug abuse, teenage pregnancies, early school dropout, young marriages,
and suicide.
The fifth of eight children, Peter understands his students’ hardships. Peter’s father was a teacher and
his mother a farmer. “We lived in a mud house, and we ate maize and vegetables grown in the garden,”
he says. His mother died when he was 11, and his youngest sibling just 1. “After that, I had to go to the
school where my father taught, and that was a 7-kilometer walk each way,” he says. “It was hard, but I
knew I was lucky to be getting an education. My father took out loan after loan to put us through school”
(Moorhead, 2019).
Peter went on to university to become a teacher and began his teaching career in a private school, and
while he felt he was making a difference for his students, he wanted to do more. “I felt that the
surrounding communities, they also needed my help. I said, ‘Let me stretch and extend the same love to
the surrounding community’” (Talking Education, 2019).
“I felt increasingly inspired by the life of St. Francis of Assisi. His humility and simplicity appealed to me,”
he says. Peter took his vows to become a Franciscan in 2018. “It’s a challenging life, but I knew it was
the right path for me. There are big commitments to make, but this life brings me much happiness”
(Moorhead, 2019).
Coming to Keriko, Peter began by giving away 80% of his income every year to provide the school’s
students with books and uniforms because many of the students’ families could not afford to do so.
Peter also saw that his students were “not able to concentrate mainly because they are not able to get
enough meals at home” (Talking Education, 2019). To battle this food insecurity, he used his knowledge
of science and farming to teach members of the community sustainable agriculture including ways of
growing vegetables that use a very small portion of land and water. “Teaching the members of the
community new ways of farming is a matter of life and death,” he says (Talking Education, 2019).
Part of his efforts in the community also involved convincing families and community members of the
value of education. He would personally visit families whose children were at risk of dropping out of
school and try to change the minds of those who expected their daughters to get married at an early
age, encouraging the families to instead keep their girls in school (Zaki, 2019).
In the classroom, Peter saw that he needed to do more for his students than impart the basics of math
and science. For many of his students, success in school was about instilling them with confidence. “It is
all about having confidence in the student. Every child has potential, a gift or a talent. I try to engage
students in various activities and mentor them. It is not a matter of telling them ‘do this’ and then walking
away. You need to work with them closely” (Wodon, 2019).
To help build his students’ self-esteem, Peter started a series of school societies, notably the Talent
Nurturing Club. “Everyone had something they were good at, and then they started to believe in
themselves, and they started to do better at everything” (Moorhead, 2019).
Another pivotal group Peter formed was the Peace Club. Because the school’s students are a mix of
genders and come from several different tribes and villages, there was the potential for students to form
groups and for conflict to occur between the groups. Members of the Peace Club engage in activities
like debating, tree planting, and sports where they have to work together. “They see that they can
achieve as a group, not only as individuals. They see themselves as people who are united. This also
helps them do well in the classroom because they are able to work as a team,” Peter explains (Wodon,
2019).
Peter also expanded the school’s Science Club, an effort that has been so successful that 60% of the
club’s research projects qualify for national competitions. At the 2018 Kenya Science and Engineering
Fair, Keriko students showcased a device they invented to help people with vision and hearing
impairments to measure objects. The club’s math and science team qualified to participate at the Intel-
sponsored International Science and Engineering Fair in 2019. Another group of students was
recognized by the Royal Society of Chemistry for their work in harnessing local plant life to generate
electricity.
Despite the school only having one computer, limited internet access, and no library or labs, Peter has
been able to incorporate information technology into 80% of his lessons. He visits internet cafés to
download online content to be used offline in class, which he pays for out of his own pocket. He and his
colleagues also visit struggling students’ homes on the weekends to provide one-on-one tutoring and
meet their families to identify the challenges they face.
In just three years, Peter has dramatically improved his pupils’ achievement and self-esteem. The
school’s enrollment has doubled, girls’ achievement has been boosted, and discipline cases have fallen
from 30 per week to 3. In 2017, only 16 out of Keriko’s 59 graduating students went on to college; in
2018, 26 did (Wodon, 2019).
A colleague describes Peter as dedicated, passionate, and humble. “Bro Tabichi’s belief in his students
has made our poorly equipped school perform well in national science competitions. . . . He became our
role model” (Matara & Njeru, 2019).
“The fact that many students have varying needs, has taught me to be creative in using the best
approaches while teaching them. They want to feel recognized, loved, appreciated and respected. They
have taught me that for them to realize their dreams, you need to work with them closely with a lot of
resilience, patience and dedication” (Koigi, 2019).
Questions
1. Applying the Katz three-skills approach, describe Peter Tabichi’s technical, human, and conceptual
skills. Which of these three skills is most important to Tabichi’s success as a leader?
2. How would you describe Peter’s competencies?
3. Describe how you believe Peter’s career experiences and environmental influences have shaped
his leadership skills.
4. Describe some of the problem-solving skills Peter has exhibited. How have his competencies and
individual attributes contributed to his problem solving?
Leadership Instrument
Many questionnaires assess an individual’s skills for leadership. A quick search of the internet provides
a host of these questionnaires. Almost all of them are designed to be used in training and development
to give people a feel for their leadership abilities. Surveys have been used for years to help people
understand and improve their leadership style, but most questionnaires are not used in research
because they have not been tested for reliability and validity. Nevertheless, they are useful as self-help
instruments because they provide specific information to people about their leadership skills.
In this chapter, we present a comprehensive skills model that is based on many empirical studies of
leaders’ skills. Although the questionnaires used in these studies are highly reliable and are valid
instruments, they are not suitable for our more pragmatic discussion of leadership in this text. In
essence, they are too complex and involved. For example, M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, and
colleagues (2000) used measures that included open-ended responses and very sophisticated scoring
procedures. Though critically important for validating the model, these complicated measures are less
valuable as self-instruction questionnaires.
A skills inventory is provided in the next section to assist you in understanding how leadership skills are
measured and what your own skills might be. Your scores on the inventory will give you a sense of your
own leadership competencies. You may be strong in all three skills, or you may be stronger in some
skills than in others. The questionnaire will give you a sense of your own skills profile. If you are stronger
in one skill and weaker in another, this may help you determine where you want to improve in the future.
Skills Inventory
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to determine your leadership strengths and
weaknesses.
Instructions: Read each item carefully and decide whether the item describes you as a person.
Indicate your response to each item by selecting one of the five options to the right of each item.
Key: 1 = Not true 2 = Seldom true 3 = Occasionally true 4 = Somewhat true 5 = Very true
1. I enjoy getting into the details of how things work. 1 2 3 4 5
2. As a rule, adapting ideas to people’s needs is easy for me. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I enjoy working with abstract ideas. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Technical things fascinate me. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Being able to understand others is the most important part of my work. 1 2 3 4 5
6. Seeing the big picture comes easy for me. 1 2 3 4 5
7. One of my skills is being good at making things work. 1 2 3 4 5
8. My main concern is to have a supportive communication climate. 1 2 3 4 5
9. I am intrigued by complex organizational problems. 1 2 3 4 5
10. Following directions and filling out forms comes easily for me. 1 2 3 4 5
11. Understanding the social fabric of the organization is important to me. 1 2 3 4 5
12. I would enjoy working out strategies for my organization’s growth. 1 2 3 4 5
13. I am good at completing the things I’ve been assigned to do. 1 2 3 4 5
14. Getting all parties to work together is a challenge I enjoy. 1 2 3 4 5
15. Creating a mission statement is rewarding work. 1 2 3 4 5
16. I understand how to do the basic things required of me. 1 2 3 4 5
17. I am concerned with how my decisions affect the lives of others. 1 2 3 4 5
18. Thinking about organizational values and philosophy appeals to me. 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
The skills inventory is designed to measure three broad types of leadership skills: technical,
human, and conceptual. Score the questionnaire by doing the following. First, sum the responses
on items 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16. This is your technical skill score. Second, sum the responses on
items 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, and 17. This is your human skill score. Third, sum the responses on items
3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18. This is your conceptual skill score.
Total scores: Technical skill _____ Human skill _____ Conceptual skill _____
Scoring Interpretation
For each category:
23–30 High Range
14–22 Moderate Range
6–13 Low Range
The scores you received on the skills inventory provide information about your leadership skills in
three areas. By comparing the differences between your scores, you can determine where you
have leadership strengths and where you have leadership weaknesses. Your scores also point
toward the level of management for which you might be most suited.
Summary
The skills approach is a leader-centered perspective that emphasizes the competencies of leaders. It is
best represented in the early work of Katz (1955) on the three-skill approach and the more recent work
of M. Mumford and his colleagues (M. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al., 2000), who initiated the
development of a comprehensive skills model of leadership.
In the three-skill approach, effective leadership depends on three basic personal skills: technical,
human, and conceptual. Although all three skills are important for leaders, the importance of each skill
varies between management levels. At lower management levels, technical and human skills are most
important. For middle managers, the three different skills are equally important. At upper management
levels, conceptual and human skills are most important, and technical skills become less important.
Leaders are more effective when their skills match their management level.
In the 1990s, the skills model was developed to explain the capabilities (knowledge and skills) that make
effective leadership possible. Far more complex than Katz’s paradigm, this model delineated five
components of effective leader performance: competencies, individual attributes, career experiences,
environmental influences, and leadership outcomes. The leader competencies at the heart of the model
are problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge. These competencies are directly
affected by the leader’s individual attributes, which include general cognitive ability, crystallized cognitive
ability, motivation, and personality. Individual leaders’ competencies are also affected by their career
experiences and the environment. The model postulates that effective problem solving and performance
can be explained by a leader’s basic competencies and that these competencies are in turn affected by
the leader’s attributes, experience, and environment.
There are several strengths in conceptualizing leadership from a skills perspective. First, it is a leader-
centered model that stresses the importance of the leader’s abilities, and it places learned skills at the
center of effective leadership performance. Second, the skills approach describes leadership in such a
way that makes it available to everyone. Skills are competencies that we all can learn to develop and
improve. Third, the skills approach provides a sophisticated map that explains how effective leadership
performance can be achieved. Based on the model, researchers can develop complex plans for
studying the leadership process. Last, this approach provides a structure for leadership education and
development programs that include creative problem solving, conflict resolution, listening, and
teamwork.
In addition to the positive features, there are some negative aspects to the skills approach. First, the
breadth of the model seems to extend beyond the boundaries of leadership, including, for example,
conflict management, critical thinking, motivation theory, and personality theory. Second, the skills model
is weak in predictive value. It does not explain how a person’s competencies lead to effective leadership
performance.
Third, the skills model is weak in general application because it was constructed using data only from
military personnel. Until the model has been tested with other populations, such as small and large
organizations and businesses, its basic tenets must still be questioned.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
The skills needed at each level of management are as follows.
Top management: Equal amount of human and conceptual skills, and a lesser amount of technical skills.
Middle management: Equal amount of technical, human, and conceptual skills.
Supervisory management: Equal amount of technical and human skills, and a lesser amount of
conceptual skills.
Back to Figure
Individual attributes are general cognitive ability, crystallized cognitive ability, motivation, and personality.
Competencies are problem-solving skills, social judgement and social skills, and knowledge. Individual
attributes influence competencies, which influence problem solving, which in turn influence performance.
Career experiences influence individual attributes and competencies. Environmental influences affect
individual attributes, competencies, problem-solving, and performance. Leadership outcomes are
problem-solving and performance.
Back to Figure
The steps are as follows:
Problem definition
Cause or goal analysis and constraint analysis
Planning
Forecasting
Creative thinking
Idea evaluation and wisdom, which influence each other
Sensemaking and visioning
4 BEHAVIORAL APPROACH
The behavioral approach suggests that leaders engage in two primary types of behaviors: task
behaviors and relationship behaviors. How leaders combine these two types of behaviors to influence
others is the central focus of the behavioral approach.
DESCRIPTION
The behavioral approach emphasizes the behavior of the leader. This distinguishes it from the trait
approach (Chapter 2), which emphasizes the personality characteristics of the leader, and the skills
approach (Chapter 3), which emphasizes the leader’s capabilities. The behavioral approach focuses
exclusively on what leaders do and how they act. In shifting the study of leadership to leader behaviors,
the behavioral approach expanded the research of leadership to include the actions of leaders toward
followers in various contexts.
Researchers studying the behavioral approach determined that leadership is composed of two general
kinds of behaviors: task behaviors and relationship behaviors. Task behaviors facilitate goal
accomplishment: They help group members to achieve their objectives. Relationship behaviors help
followers feel comfortable with themselves, with each other, and with the situation in which they find
themselves. The central purpose of the behavioral approach is to explain how leaders combine these
two kinds of behaviors to influence followers in their efforts to reach a goal.
Many studies have been conducted to investigate the behavioral approach. Some of the first studies to
be done were conducted at The Ohio State University in the late 1940s, based on the findings of
Stogdill’s (1948) work, which pointed to the importance of considering more than leaders’ traits in
leadership research. At about the same time, another group of researchers at the University of Michigan
was conducting a series of studies that explored how leadership functioned in small groups. A third line
of research was begun by Blake and Mouton in the early 1960s; it explored how managers used task
and relationship behaviors in the organizational setting.
Although many research studies could be categorized under the heading of the behavioral approach,
the Ohio State studies, the Michigan studies, and the studies by Blake and Mouton (1964, 1978, 1985)
are strongly representative of the ideas in this approach. By looking closely at each of these groups of
studies, we can draw a clearer picture of the underpinnings and implications of the behavioral approach.
Task and Relationship Behaviors
The essence of leadership behavior has two dimensions—task behaviors and relationship behaviors.
There are leadership situations and challenges that call for strong task behavior, while others demand
strong relationship behavior, but some degree of each is required in every situation. At the same time,
because of personality and life experiences, leaders bring to every situation their own unique tendencies
to be either more task oriented or more relationship oriented, or some unique blend of the two. On the
surface, this may seem incidental or ho-hum, but in regard to leader effectiveness, the utilization of both
of these behaviors is absolutely pivotal to success or failure.
Task Orientation
Simply put, task-oriented people are doers, and task leadership behaviors facilitate goal
accomplishment. Researchers have labeled these behaviors differently, but they are always about task
accomplishment. Task leadership considers the elements involved in task accomplishment from
organizing work and defining roles to determining policies and procedures to facilitate production.
Relationship Orientation
Relationship-oriented people differ from task-oriented people in that they are not as goal directed in their
leadership behavior; they are more interested in connecting with others. Relationship-oriented
leadership behaviors focus on the well-being of followers, how they relate to each other, and the
atmosphere in which they work. Relationship leadership explores the human aspects of leadership from
building camaraderie, respect, trust, and regard between leaders and followers to valuing followers’
uniqueness and attending to their personal needs.
Task and relationship leadership behaviors are inextricably tied together, and the behavioral approach
looks at how leaders engage in both of these behaviors and the extent to which situational factors affect
these behaviors.
Historical Background of the Behavioral Approach
The Ohio State Studies
A group of researchers at Ohio State believed that the results of studying leadership as a personality
trait seemed fruitless and decided to analyze how individuals acted when they were leading a group or
an organization. This analysis was conducted by having followers complete questionnaires about their
leaders. On the questionnaires, followers had to identify the number of times their leaders engaged in
certain types of behaviors.
The original questionnaire used in these studies was constructed from a list of more than 1,800 items
describing different aspects of leader behavior. From this long list of items, a questionnaire composed of
150 questions was formulated; it was called the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ;
Hemphill & Coons, 1957). The LBDQ was given to hundreds of people in educational, military, and
industrial settings, and the results showed that certain clusters of behaviors were typical of leaders. Six
years later, Stogdill (1963) published a shortened version of the LBDQ. The new form, which was called
the LBDQ-XII, became the most widely used instrument in leadership research. A questionnaire similar
to the LBDQ, which you can use to assess your own leadership behavior, appears later in this chapter.
Researchers found that followers’ responses on the questionnaire clustered around two general types of
leader behaviors: initiating structure and consideration (Stogdill, 1974). Initiating structure behaviors are
essentially task behaviors, including such acts as organizing work, giving structure to the work context,
defining role responsibilities, and scheduling work activities. Consideration behaviors are essentially
relationship behaviors and include building camaraderie, respect, trust, and liking between leaders and
followers.
The two types of behaviors identified by the LBDQ-XII represent the core of the behavioral approach
and are central to what leaders do: Leaders provide structure for followers, and they nurture them. The
Ohio State studies viewed these two behaviors as distinct and independent. They were thought of not
as two points along a single continuum, but as two different continua. For example, a leader can be high
in initiating structure and high or low in task behavior. Similarly, a leader can be low in setting structure
and low or high in consideration behavior. The degree to which leaders exhibit one behavior is not
related to the degree to which they exhibit the other behavior.
Many studies have been done to determine which leadership behavior is most effective in a particular
situation. In some contexts, high consideration has been found to be most effective, but in other
situations, high initiating structure is most effective. Some research has shown that being high in both
behaviors is the best form of leadership. Determining how a leader optimally mixes task and relationship
behaviors has been the central task for researchers from the behavioral approach. The path–goal
approach, which is discussed in Chapter 6, exemplifies a leadership theory that attempts to explain how
leaders should integrate consideration and structure into their behaviors.
The University of Michigan Studies
While researchers at Ohio State were developing the LBDQ, researchers at the University of Michigan
were also exploring leadership behavior, giving special attention to the impact of leaders’ behaviors on
the performance of small groups (Cartwright & Zander, 1970; Katz & Kahn, 1951; Likert, 1961, 1967).
The program of research at Michigan identified two types of leadership behaviors: employee orientation
and production orientation. Employee orientation is the behavior of leaders who approach followers with
a strong human relations emphasis. They take an interest in workers as human beings, value their
individuality, and give special attention to their personal needs (Bowers & Seashore, 1966). Employee
orientation is very similar to the cluster of behaviors identified as consideration in the Ohio State studies.
Production orientation consists of leadership behaviors that stress the technical and production aspects
of a job. From this orientation, workers are viewed as a means for getting work accomplished (Bowers &
Seashore, 1966). Production orientation parallels the initiating structure cluster found in the Ohio State
studies.
Unlike the Ohio State researchers, the Michigan researchers, in their initial studies, conceptualized
employee and production orientations as opposite ends of a single continuum. This suggested that
leaders who were oriented toward production were less oriented toward employees, and those who
were employee oriented were less production oriented. As more studies were completed, however, the
researchers reconceptualized the two constructs, as in the Ohio State studies, as two independent
leadership orientations (Kahn, 1956). When the two behaviors are treated as independent orientations,
leaders are seen as being able to be oriented toward both production and employees at the same time.
In the 1950s and 1960s, a multitude of studies were conducted by researchers from both Ohio State
and the University of Michigan to determine how leaders could best combine their task and relationship
behaviors to maximize the impact of these behaviors on the satisfaction and performance of followers.
In essence, the researchers were looking for a universal theory of leadership that would explain
leadership effectiveness in every situation. The results that emerged from this large body of literature
were contradictory and unclear (Yukl, 2003). Although some of the findings pointed to the value of a
leader being both highly task oriented and highly relationship oriented in all situations (Misumi, 1985),
the preponderance of research in this area was inconclusive.
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid
Perhaps the best-known model of managerial behavior is the Managerial Grid®, which first appeared in
the early 1960s and has been refined and revised several times (Blake & McCanse, 1991; Blake &
Mouton, 1964, 1978, 1985). It is a model that has been used extensively in organizational training and
development. The Managerial Grid, which has been renamed the Leadership Grid®, was designed to
explain how leaders help organizations to reach their purposes through two factors: concern for
production and concern for people. Although these factors are described as leadership orientations in
the model, they closely parallel the task and relationship leadership behaviors we discuss throughout
this chapter.
Concern for production refers to how a leader is concerned with achieving organizational tasks. It
involves a wide range of activities, including attention to policy decisions, new product development,
process issues, workload, and sales volume, to name a few. Not limited to an organization’s
manufactured product or service, concern for production can refer to whatever the organization is
seeking to accomplish (Blake & Mouton, 1964).
Concern for people refers to how a leader attends to the people in the organization who are trying to
achieve its goals. This concern includes building organizational commitment and trust, promoting the
personal worth of followers, providing good working conditions, maintaining a fair salary structure, and
promoting good social relations (Blake & Mouton, 1964).
The Leadership (Managerial) Grid joins concern for production and concern for people in a model that
has two intersecting axes (Figure 4.1). The horizontal axis represents the leader’s concern for results,
and the vertical axis represents the leader’s concern for people. Each of the axes is drawn as a 9-point
scale on which a score of 1 represents minimum concern and 9 represents maximum concern. By
plotting scores from each of the axes, various leadership styles can be illustrated. The Leadership Grid
portrays five major leadership styles: authority–compliance management (9,1), country-club
management (1,9), impoverished management (1,1), middle-of-the-road management (5,5), and team
management (9,9).
Description
Figure 4.1 The Leadership Grid
Source: The Leadership Grid© figure, Paternalism figure, and Opportunism figure from Leadership
Dilemmas—Grid Solutions, by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse. (Formerly the Managerial
Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton.) Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company (Grid figure: p.
29, Paternalism figure: p. 30, Opportunism figure: p. 31). Copyright 1991 by Scientific Methods, Inc.
Reproduced by permission of the owners.
Authority–Compliance Management (9,1).
The 9,1 style of leadership places heavy emphasis on task and job requirements, and less emphasis on
people, except to the extent that people are tools for getting the job done. Communicating with followers
is not emphasized except for the purpose of giving instructions about the task. This style is result driven,
and people are regarded as tools to that end. The 9,1 leader is often seen as controlling, demanding,
hard driving, and overpowering.
Country-Club Management (1,9).
The 1,9 style represents a low concern for task accomplishment coupled with a high concern for
interpersonal relationships. De-emphasizing production, 1,9 leaders stress the attitudes and feelings of
people, making sure the personal and social needs of followers are met. They try to create a positive
climate by being agreeable, eager to help, comforting, and uncontroversial.
Impoverished Management (1,1).
The 1,1 style is representative of a leader who is unconcerned with both the task and interpersonal
relationships. This type of leader goes through the motions of being a leader but acts uninvolved and
withdrawn. The 1,1 leader often has little contact with followers and could be described as indifferent,
noncommittal, resigned, and apathetic.
Middle-of-the-Road Management (5,5).
The 5,5 style describes leaders who are compromisers, who have an intermediate concern for the task
and an intermediate concern for the people who do the task. They find a balance between taking people
into account and still emphasizing the work requirements. Their compromising style gives up some of
the push for production and some of the attention to employee needs. To arrive at an equilibrium, the
5,5 leader avoids conflict and emphasizes moderate levels of production and interpersonal
relationships. This type of leader often is described as one who is expedient, prefers the middle ground,
soft-pedals disagreement, and swallows convictions in the interest of “progress.”
Team Management (9,9).
The 9,9 style places a strong emphasis on both tasks and interpersonal relationships. It promotes a high
degree of participation and teamwork in the organization and satisfies a basic need in employees to be
involved and committed to their work. The following are some of the phrases that could be used to
describe the 9,9 leader: stimulates participation, acts determined, gets issues into the open, makes
priorities clear, follows through, behaves open-mindedly, and enjoys working.
In addition to the five major styles described in the Leadership Grid, Blake and his colleagues have
identified two other behaviors that incorporate multiple aspects of the grid.
Paternalism/Maternalism
Paternalism/maternalism refers to a leader who uses both 1,9 and 9,1 styles but does not integrate the
two (Figure 4.2). This is the “benevolent dictator” who acts graciously but does so for the purpose of
goal accomplishment. In essence, the paternalistic/maternalistic style treats people as if they were
dissociated from the task. Paternalistic/maternalistic leaders are often described as “fatherly” or
“motherly” toward their followers, regard the organization as a “family,” make most of the key decisions,
and reward loyalty and obedience while punishing noncompliance.
Figure 4.2 Paternalism/Maternalism
Source: The Leadership Grid© figure, Paternalism figure, and Opportunism figure from Leadership
Dilemmas—Grid Solutions, by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse. (Formerly the Managerial
Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton.) Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company (Grid figure: p.
29, Paternalism figure: p. 30, Opportunism figure: p. 31). Copyright 1991 by Scientific Methods, Inc.
Reproduced by permission of the owners.
Opportunism
Opportunism refers to a leader who uses any combination of the basic five styles for the purpose of
personal advancement (Figure 4.3). Opportunistic leaders will adapt and shift their leadership behavior
to gain personal advantage, putting self-interest ahead of other priorities. Both the performance and the
effort of the leader are to realize personal gain. Some phrases used to describe this leadership behavior
include ruthless, cunning, and self-motivated, while some could argue that these types of leaders are
adaptable and strategic.
Description
Figure 4.3 Opportunism
Source: The Leadership Grid© figure, Paternalism figure, and Opportunism figure from Leadership
Dilemmas—Grid Solutions, by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse. (Formerly the Managerial
Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton.) Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company (Grid figure: p.
29, Paternalism figure: p. 30, Opportunism figure: p. 31). Copyright 1991 by Scientific Methods, Inc.
Reproduced by permission of the owners.
Blake and Mouton (1985) indicated that people usually have a dominant grid style (which they use in
most situations) and a backup style. The backup style is what the leader reverts to when under
pressure, when the usual way of accomplishing things does not work.
In summary, the Leadership Grid is an example of a practical model of leadership that is based on the
two major leadership behaviors: task and relationship. It closely parallels the ideas and findings that
emerged in the Ohio State and University of Michigan studies. It is used in consulting for organizational
development throughout the world.
Recent Studies
More recently, Behrendt, Matz, and Göritz (2017) have created a leadership behavior model that reflects
the evolving demands of organizational environments. The Integrated Model of Leadership Behavior
(IMoLB; Figure 4.4), which is based on a multitude of studies on leader behavior, builds on the heuristic
taxonomy of leader behavior developed by Yukl (2012). The IMoLB relates task-oriented behavior to
organizational change demands through envisioning change, innovation, and encouraging learning.
Relations-oriented behavior relates to influencing followers to meet the external demands of networking,
monitoring the environment, and mobilizing resources to respond to them.
Description
Figure 4.4 Integrated Model of Leadership Behavior (IMoLB)
Source: Behrendt, P., Matz, S., & Göritz, A. S. (2017). An integrative model of leadership behavior.
The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 229–244.
Still in the early stages of its development, this model has not been measured or tested at the time of
this printing, but still offers a relevant look at the relationship of leadership behaviors in the context of
modern organizational environments.
HOW DOES THE BEHAVIORAL APPROACH WORK?
Unlike many of the other approaches discussed in the book, the behavioral approach is not a refined
theory that provides a neatly organized set of prescriptions for effective leadership behavior. Rather, the
behavioral approach provides a framework for assessing leadership in a broad way, as behavior with a
task and relationship dimension. The behavioral approach works not by telling leaders how to behave,
but by describing the major components of their behavior.
The behavioral approach reminds leaders that their actions toward others occur on a task level and a
relationship level. In some situations leaders need to be more task oriented, whereas in others they
need to be more relationship oriented. Similarly, some followers need leaders who provide a lot of
direction, whereas others need leaders who can show them a great deal of nurturance and support. And
in some cases, a leader must combine both approaches (Casimir & Ng, 2010).
An example may help explain how the behavioral approach works. Imagine two college classrooms on
the first day of class and two professors with entirely different styles. Professor Smith comes to class,
introduces herself, takes attendance, goes over the syllabus, explains the first assignment, and
dismisses the class. Professor Jones comes to class and, after introducing herself and handing out the
syllabus, tries to help the students to get to know one another by having each of the students describe a
little about themselves, their majors, and their favorite nonacademic activities. The leadership behaviors
of Professors Smith and Jones are quite different. The preponderance of what Professor Smith does
could be labeled task behavior, and the majority of what Professor Jones does could be labeled
relationship behavior. The behavioral approach provides a way to inform the professors about the
differences in their behaviors. Depending on the response of the students to their leadership behaviors,
the professors may want to change their behavior to improve their teaching on the first day of class.
Overall, the behavioral approach offers a means of assessing in a general way the behaviors of leaders.
It reminds leaders that their impact on others occurs through the tasks they perform as well as in the
relationships they create.
STRENGTHS
The behavioral approach makes several positive contributions to our understanding of the leadership
process. First, the behavioral approach marked a major shift in the general focus of leadership research.
Before the inception of this approach, researchers treated leadership exclusively as a trait (see Chapter
2). The behavioral approach broadened the scope of leadership research to include the behaviors of
leaders and what they do in various situations. No longer was the focus of leadership on the personal
characteristics of leaders: It was expanded to include what leaders did and how they acted. The early
research examined a broad set of leader behaviors (over 1,800) and distilled these down to two
dimensions—consideration and initiation structure. These two behaviors—caring for others and goal
attainment—are the two fundamental aspects of human behavior in groups, whether they be tribes,
families, or work teams.
Second, a wide range of studies on leadership behavior validates and gives credibility to the basic
tenets of the approach. First formulated and reported by researchers from The Ohio State University
and the University of Michigan, and subsequently reported in the works of Blake and Mouton (1964,
1978, 1985); Blake and McCanse (1991); Judge, Piccolo, and Ilies (2004); and Littrell (2013), the
behavioral approach is substantiated by a multitude of research studies that offer a viable approach to
understanding the leadership process. An extensive meta-analysis of the LBDQ-XII developed by the
Ohio State studies has been carried out by Judge et al. (2004), who found that all the survey
instruments had significant predictive validity for leader success (Littrell, 2013). The Managerial Grid,
which translates the research into categories that can be easily understood, is a popular leadership
approach among managers.
Third, on a conceptual level, researchers of the behavioral approach have ascertained that a leader’s
style consists primarily of two major types of behaviors: task and relationship. The significance of this
idea is not to be understated. Whenever leadership occurs, the leader is acting out both task and
relationship behaviors; the key to being an effective leader often rests on how the leader balances these
two behaviors. Together they form the core of the leadership process. Blake and Mouton defended 9,9
leadership, refuting what they called “situationalism” (see the next chapter), arguing that concerns for
people and production reflect the situational context in organizations (Cai, Fink, & Walker, 2019).
Fourth, the behavioral approach is heuristic. It provides us with a broad conceptual map that is
worthwhile to use in our attempts to understand the complexities of leadership. Leaders can learn a lot
about themselves and how they come across to others by trying to see their behaviors in light of the task
and relationship dimensions. Based on the behavioral approach, leaders can assess their actions and
determine how they may want to change to improve their leadership behaviors. Unlike with most traits,
leaders can learn to lead through leadership training.
CRITICISMS
Along with its strengths, the behavioral approach has several weaknesses. First, the research on the
behavioral approach has not adequately shown how leaders’ behaviors are associated with
performance outcomes (Bryman, 1992; Yukl, 2003). Researchers have not been able to establish a
consistent link between task and relationship behaviors and outcomes such as morale, job satisfaction,
and productivity. According to Yukl (2003, p. 75), the “results from this massive research effort have
been mostly contradictory and inconclusive.” He further pointed out that the only strong finding about
leadership behaviors is that leaders who are considerate have followers who are more satisfied.
In addition, leader behavior questionnaires are typically completed by followers, and their perceptions of
leadership may differ from actual leader behavior (Dinh et al., 2014). Follower perceptions of their
leaders may be biased due to overly positive attributions resulting in overestimation of a leader’s effects
(Behrendt et al., 2017). In other words, if a leader is considerate, then followers may overestimate that
leader’s task behavior because they like the leader.
Another criticism is that this approach has failed to find a universal style of leadership that could be
effective in almost every situation. The overarching goal for researchers studying the behavioral
approach appeared to be the identification of a universal set of leadership behaviors that would
consistently result in effective outcomes. Because of inconsistencies in the research findings, this goal
was never reached. Similar to the trait approach, which was unable to identify the definitive personal
characteristics of leaders, the behavioral approach has been unable to identify the universal behaviors
that are associated with effective leadership.
The difficulty in identifying a universal style may be due to the impact of contextual factors. For example,
research by Martin, Rowlinson, Fellows, and Liu (2012) found that there is a strong situational element
that impacts whether one leadership behavior or another is more effective. In their research on
leadership style and cross-functional teams, they found that different leadership behaviors may be
needed depending on team goals. They noted that managers of projects that span organizational,
national, and ethnic boundaries (cross-functional teams) must “juggle between both task and person-
oriented leadership when involved in managing problem solving teams across boundaries” (p. 19).
Leader effectiveness also may be influenced by characteristics of the leaders, the followers, and the
situation, and the behavioral approach lacks attention to the possible interactions among these
elements. For example, highly skilled followers who have a strong reward system make it easier for a
leader to succeed. These leaders’ effectiveness may be due more to the attributes of their followers who
are rewarded for using their skills at work.
Another criticism of the behavioral approach is that it implies that the most effective leadership style is
the high–high style (i.e., high task and high relationship). Although some researchers (e.g., Blake &
McCanse, 1991; Misumi, 1985) suggested that high–high managers are most effective, that may not be
the case in all situations. In fact, the full range of research findings provides only limited support for a
universal high–high style (Yukl, 2003). In a thought-provoking article on popular leadership styles,
Andersen (2009) argues that in modern business the high-task-leadership orientation is essential to be
successful.
Certain situations may require different leadership styles; some may be complex and require high-task
behavior, and others may be simple and require supportive behavior. At this point in the development of
research on the behavioral approach, it remains unclear whether the high–high style is the best style of
leadership.
A final criticism is that most of the research undertaken on the behavioral approach has come from a
U.S.-centric perspective, reflecting the norms and values of U.S. culture. More recently, a small number
of studies applying behavioral leadership concepts to non-U.S. contexts have been undertaken, and
results show that different cultures prefer different leadership styles than those often espoused or
favored by current U.S. management practice (Begum & Mujtaba, 2016; Engle, Elahee, & Tatoglu, 2013;
Iguisi, 2014; Martin et al., 2012). For example, the paternalistic leadership style of benevolence plus
authority is effective in Turkey, China, and India (Pellegrini & Scandura, 2008).
APPLICATION
The behavioral approach can be applied easily in ongoing leadership settings. At all levels in all types of
organizations, managers are continually engaged in task and relationship behaviors. By assessing their
own behaviors, managers can determine how they are coming across to others and how they could
change their behaviors to be more effective. In essence, the behavioral approach provides a mirror for
managers that is helpful in answering the frequently asked question, “How am I doing as a leader?”
Many leadership training and development programs throughout the country are structured along the
lines of the behavioral approach. Almost all are designed similarly and include giving managers
questionnaires that assess in some way their task and relationship behaviors toward followers.
Participants use these assessments to improve their overall leadership behavior.
An example of a training and development program that deals exclusively with leader behaviors is Blake
and Mouton’s Leadership Grid (formerly Managerial Grid) seminar. Grid seminars are about increasing
productivity, improving morale, and gaining employee commitment. They are offered by Grid
International, an international organization development company (www.gridinternational.com). At grid
seminars, self-assessments, small-group experiences, and candid critiques allow managers to learn
how to define effective leadership, how to manage for optimal results, and how to identify and change
ineffective leadership behaviors. The conceptual framework around which the grid seminars are
structured is the behavioral approach to leadership.
In short, the behavioral approach applies to nearly everything a leader does. It is an approach that is
used as a model by many training and development companies to teach managers how to improve their
effectiveness and organizational productivity.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
In this section, you will find three case studies (Cases 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3) that describe the leadership
behaviors of three different managers, each of whom is working in a different organizational setting. The
first case is about a maintenance director in a large hospital, the second is concerned with the director
of marketing and communications at a college, and the third is about the leadership behind a nationally
recognized cheer team. At the end of each case are questions that will help you to analyze the case
from the perspective of the behavioral approach.
Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First
Mark is the head of the painting department in a large hospital; 20 union employees report to him.
Before coming on board at the hospital, he had worked as an independent contractor. At the hospital, he
took a position that was newly created because the hospital believed change was needed in how
painting services were provided.
Upon beginning his job, Mark did a four-month analysis of the direct and indirect costs of painting
services. His findings supported the perceptions of his administrators that painting services were
inefficient and costly. As a result, Mark completely reorganized the department, designed a new
scheduling procedure, and redefined the expected standards of performance.
Mark says that when he started out in his new job, he was “all task,” like a drill sergeant who didn’t seek
any input from his soldiers. From Mark’s point of view, the hospital environment did not leave much
room for errors, so he needed to be strict about getting painters to do a good job within the constraints
of the hospital environment.
As time went along, Mark relaxed his style and was less demanding. He delegated some responsibilities
to two crew leaders who reported to him, but he always stayed in close touch with each of the
employees. On a weekly basis, Mark was known to take small groups of workers to the local sports bar
for burgers on the house. He loved to banter with the employees and could take it as well as dish it out.
Mark is very proud of his department. He says he always wanted to be a coach, and that’s how he feels
about running his department. He enjoys working with people; in particular, he says he likes to see the
glint in their eyes when they realize that they’ve done a good job and they have done it on their own.
Because of Mark’s leadership, the painting department has improved substantially and is now seen by
workers in other departments as the most productive department in hospital maintenance. Painting
services received a customer rating of 92%, which is the highest of any service in the hospital.
Questions
1. From the behavioral perspective, how would you describe Mark’s leadership?
2. How did his behavior change over time?
3. In general, do you think he is more task oriented or more relationship oriented?
4. What score do you think he would get on Blake and Mouton’s grid?
Case 4.2 We Are Family
Betsy has been hired as the director of marketing and communications for a medium-sized college in
the Midwest. With a long history of success as a marketing and public relations professional, she was
the unanimous choice of the hiring committee. Betsy is excited to be working for Marianne, the vice
president of college advancement, who comes from a similar background to Betsy’s. In a meeting with
Marianne, Betsy is told the college needs an aggressive plan to revamp and energize the school’s
marketing and communications efforts. Betsy and Marianne seem in perfect sync with the direction they
believe is right for the college’s program. Marianne also explains that she has established a
departmental culture of teamwork and empowerment and that she is a strong advocate of being a
mentor to her team members rather than a manager.
Betsy has four direct reports: two writers, Bridget and Suzanne, who are in their 20s; and Carol and
Francine, graphic designers who are in their 50s. In her first month, Betsy puts together a meeting with
her direct reports to develop a new communications plan for the college, presenting the desired goals to
the team and asking for their ideas on initiatives and improvements to meet those goals. Bridget and
Suzanne provide little in the way of suggested changes, with Bridget asking pointedly, “Why do we need
to change anything?”
In her weekly meeting with the vice president, Betsy talks about the resistance to change she
encountered from the team. Marianne nods, saying she heard some of the team members’ concerns
when she went to lunch with them earlier in the week. When Betsy looks surprised, Marianne gives her
a knowing smile. “We are like a family here; we have close relationships outside of work. I go to lunch or
the movies with Suzanne and Bridget at least once a week. But don’t worry; I am only a sounding board
for them, and encourage them to come to you to resolve their issues. They know you are their boss.”
But they don’t come to Betsy. Soon, Bridget stops coming to work at 8 a.m., showing up at 10 a.m. daily.
As a result, she misses the weekly planning meetings. When Betsy approaches her about it, Bridget
tells her, “It’s OK with Marianne; she says as long as I am using the time to exercise and improve my
health she supports it.”
Betsy meets with Suzanne to implement some changes to Suzanne’s pet project, the internal newsletter.
Suzanne gets defensive, accusing Betsy of insulting her work. Later, Betsy watches Suzanne and
Marianne leave the office together for lunch. A few hours later, Marianne comes into Betsy’s office and
tells her, “Go easy on the newsletter changes. Suzanne is an insecure person, and she is feeling
criticized and put down by you right now.”
Betsy’s relationship with the other two staff members is better. Neither seems to have the close contact
with Marianne that the younger team members have. They seem enthusiastic and supportive of the new
direction Betsy wants to take the program in.
As the weeks go by, Marianne begins having regular “Mentor Meetings” with Bridget and Suzanne,
going to lunch with them at least twice a week. After watching the three walk out together one day,
Francine asks Betsy if it troubles her. Betsy replies calmly, “It is part of Marianne’s mentoring program.”
Francine rolls her eyes and says, “Marianne’s not mentoring anyone; she just wants someone to go to
lunch with every day.”
After four months on the job, Betsy goes to Marianne and outlines the challenges that the vice
president’s close relationships with Bridget and Suzanne have presented to the progress of the
marketing and communications program. She asks her directly, “Please stop.”
Marianne gives her the knowing smile again. “I see a lot of potential in Bridget and Suzanne and want to
help foster that,” she explains. “They are still young in their careers, and my relationship with them is
important because I can provide the mentoring and guidance to develop their abilities.”
“But it’s creating problems between them and me,” Betsy points out. “I can’t manage them if they can
circumvent me every time they disagree with me. We aren’t getting any work done. You and I have to be
on the same team.”
Marianne shakes her head. “The problem is that we have very different leadership styles. I like to
empower people, and you like to boss them around.”
Questions
1. Marianne and Betsy do indeed have different leadership styles. What style would you ascribe to
Betsy? To Marianne?
2. Does Betsy need to change her leadership style to improve the situation with Bridget and Suzanne?
Does Marianne need to change her style of leadership?
3. How can Marianne and Betsy work together?
Case 4.3 Cheer Coach Monica Aldama
In January 2020, the world was introduced to the Navarro College cheer team and its coach of 25 years,
Monica Aldama, through the Netflix docuseries Cheer.
The six-hour series followed the 40-member team from the small Texas community college as it
prepared over a period of four months for the penultimate event of its season, the 2019 National
Cheerleaders Association championships in Daytona Beach, Florida. At that meet, Navarro College
would be seeking its 14th title in 19 years.
College-level competitive cheer is an exceedingly difficult and dangerous sport. With stunts including
lifts, tumbling, towering pyramids, and basket tosses where a “flyer” is thrown high in the air, does
several twists and turns, and is caught in the arms of the “bases” below, the risk of catastrophic injury is
second only to football according to the National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research
(NCCSIR; Greenspan, 2020). This risk is apparent in the show as team member after team member is
dropped, falls, or is injured while performing stunts. Concussions, fractured ribs, ankle injuries, and
twisted, swollen limbs are the norm. And this is just at team practices.
For the 40 cheerleaders, it’s all about “making mat”—securing one of the 20 spots on the team to
compete at the national championships. For Coach Aldama, it is about creating and executing a two-
minute, 15-second performance with breathtaking stunts that will result in the highest score possible to
secure the team’s legacy.
Coach Aldama records all the practice sessions on her tablet, watching the videos over and over to
determine if the choreography needs to be altered and to monitor how each of the athletes is
performing. She also consults with her two assistant coaches, Andy Cosferent and Kāpena Kea, about
changes to make to the routine, which athletes to push, and which to cut.
As a leader, Coach Aldama sets high expectations for her team regarding their personal conduct, class
attendance, and the effort and work they put into practice. She clearly articulates that accountability is
her number-one criterion. When students don’t meet expectations, there are consequences. The whole
team will be required to run laps if one student sloughs off class. Team members are often roommates,
and Coach Aldama says that, “whereas before they might just walk out and go to class and let their
roommates stay in bed, now they’re going to make sure that that person is up. And they do get mad if
someone’s not there yet. When class is about to start, they’ll start texting them” (Zakin & Weisberg,
2020).
“That’s just a big thing for me—self accountability. If you have a responsibility, you show up for it. If it’s
class, you show up for it. If it’s practice, you show up for it. If it’s a job, you show up for it. If you made
the commitment to do it, you show up,” she says (Zakin & Weisberg, 2020).
Athlete T. T. Barker gets a painful lesson in this when he arrives at practice with a back injury from
competing with another, noncollegiate team after Coach Aldama advised him not to. Coach Aldama
doesn’t cut T. T. any slack, and he continues to practice, repeatedly hoisting flyers overhead, wincing
and grunting in pain until he finally drops to the mat, crying.
Coach Aldama, who has a bachelor’s degree in finance and an MBA, says she first approached
coaching the team from a business perspective. “I was like, okay, what’s the ultimate goal? To win?” she
says. “I started from there and worked backwards (asking) what I need to do to win. And it was very
black and white. ‘There’s a score sheet. I need to get a score. How am I gonna get this score?’
“I really started there, but then quickly realized, ‘Oh, there’s a whole ’nother part of coaching that has
nothing to do with the score sheet. And it’s these kids that are bickering or they broke up with their
boyfriend or you know, okay, now I have to be a psychologist. I have to be an advisor, I have to be a
counselor, I have to be a mother” (Zakin & Weisberg, 2020).
Many of the team members come from difficult life circumstances, and a place on the team is a ticket
out of trouble and hardship. One of those is Morgan Simianer, who lived with an older brother in a
Wyoming trailer after her biological parents abandoned them both at an early age. Morgan has an
unwavering drive to succeed and to please her coach.
“Not everyone in the world has a strong mother figure in their lives . . . Monica has filled the gap [that
was] created by what I didn’t have. I didn’t have anyone to go prom shopping with or talk about my
boyfriend. I think because of that, I am even more appreciative of her and what we share. I feel like her
kid,” she says. “I really idolize her. Monica has changed my life in so many ways and truly helped me
become a better version of myself” (Bennett, 2020).
That devotion is evident in episode five of the show when Morgan goes to the emergency room between
practices for excruciating rib pain caused by “ribiosis,” what team members call the damage to flyers’
ribs caused by repeatedly falling from great heights into the arms of bases. At the ER, Morgan refuses
treatment because the muscle relaxers she’s prescribed would keep her from participating in that
afternoon’s practice, and—despite a warning that more stress on her ribs could damage her organs or
kill her—she leaves and returns to the gym. “If Monica says full-out, I’m going full-out,” she says
(Whiteley, 2020).
Navarro College is located in Corsicana, a small town in a rural, conservative part of Texas. Several of
the male athletes on the team are gay, and despite her Christian faith, Coach Aldama says she “will fight
tooth and nail to protect my boys.”
“I get upset when I see the world being so harsh and not understanding. I am not a very political person
at all. I would say I’m smack in the middle: I’ve got some of the very conservative, some very liberal . . . I
think everyone needs to be open to learning about different people’s lifestyles and not be so closed-
minded,” she says (Silman, 2020).
Nurturing aside, Coach Aldama ultimately makes the very hard decision of selecting the athletes who
will “make mat” and, even if they are chosen for mat, replacing the athletes if they aren’t cutting it. She
has also kicked key members off the team for rule infractions.
“I try to separate the coaching part and the nurturing part. Sometimes I’ll have to ‘mat-talk’ myself to
separate the feelings of ‘I’m going to break this kid’s heart because I’m not going to put them on mat.’ I
love this kid more than anything and I know what they’ve overcome,” she says. “But you know that they
don’t have the skills that this other person does and that’s where it really pulls at your heartstrings and
that’s where I have to be, like, ‘Come on, Monica, you can do this. It’s fine. Just separate it. Just
separate it. Just separate it.’ And I do. I always try to still circle back around and make sure they know
‘You’re still good, you’re still good enough. It’s just that you know right now it’s not your time’” (Zakin &
Weisberg, 2020).
When one team member didn’t make mat, he was encouraged by his teammates to ask the coach why.
He resisted, saying he thought it would be disrespectful to question her. When he finally did ask, she
told him “he was not putting himself out there.”
“I’m very honest with them. I will let them know, pull them to the side and tell them, ‘I feel like maybe you
don’t want it as badly as someone else or you don’t have that fight in you. Which makes me worried
about are you going to have that fight when it’s go-time.’ I know I’m very honest because how are they
going to know?” (Zakin & Weisberg, 2020).
As a result, the team member put in twice the amount of effort and adjusted his contributions in practice
and ultimately made mat.
Coach Aldama appears patient, calm, and composed, even in crisis. In the national competition, one of
the team members, Austin Bayles, was injured, and a replacement had to be made. The person
replacing Austin had to learn his new role in mere minutes.
“When we were at finals and Austin got hurt, I was proud of myself because I literally went into focus
mode. And although I was terrified, I couldn’t even go there because I was so focused on what we
needed to do to fix it in a very short time span,” she says. “I definitely have always told myself no matter
what I’m feeling inside, I can’t let the team know. Because cheerleading is a very mental game. We can
do all this work preparing mentally, but if they see me looking terrified or scared or losing it, all that work
we’ve done could go down the drain” (Silman, 2020).
“I’m very competitive and I want to be successful, but I also want to be that person that leads by
example. I really set a high standard for myself,” Coach Aldama says (Church, 2020).
Questions
1. How would you describe Coach Aldama’s leadership behavior in terms of initiating structure and
consideration? Is she more task oriented or relationship oriented?
2. Where on the Blake and Mouton Leadership Grid would you place Coach Aldama? Defend your
answer.
3. How would you describe Coach Aldama’s leadership behavior in terms of paternalism/maternalism?
4. Do you think the leadership behavior of opportunism could apply to Coach Aldama? Explain your
answer.
Leadership Instrument
Researchers and practitioners alike have used many different instruments to assess the behaviors of
leaders. The two most commonly used measures have been the LBDQ (Stogdill, 1963) and the
Leadership Grid (Blake & McCanse, 1991). Both of these measures provide information about the
degree to which a leader acts task directed or people directed. The LBDQ was designed primarily for
research and has been used extensively since the 1960s. The Leadership Grid was designed primarily
for training and development; it continues to be used today for training managers and supervisors in the
leadership process.
To assist you in developing a better understanding of how leadership behaviors are measured and what
your own behavior might be, a leadership behavior questionnaire is included in this section. This
questionnaire is made up of 20 items that assess two orientations: task and relationship. By scoring the
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, you can obtain a general profile of your leadership behavior.
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to assess your task and relationship orientations
as a leader.
Instructions: Read each item carefully and think about how often you engage in the described
behavior. Indicate your response to each item by selecting one of the five options to the right of
each item.
Key: 1 = Never 2 = Seldom 3 = Occasionally 4 = Often 5 = Always
1. Tells group members what they are supposed to do. 1 2 3 4 5
2. Acts friendly with members of the group. 1 2 3 4 5
3. Sets standards of performance for group members. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Helps others in the group feel comfortable. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Makes suggestions about how to solve problems. 1 2 3 4 5
6. Responds favorably to suggestions made by others. 1 2 3 4 5
7. Makes their perspective clear to others. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Treats others fairly. 1 2 3 4 5
9. Develops a plan of action for the group. 1 2 3 4 5
10. Behaves in a predictable manner toward group members. 1 2 3 4 5
11. Defines role responsibilities for each group member. 1 2 3 4 5
12. Communicates actively with group members. 1 2 3 4 5
13. Clarifies their own role within the group. 1 2 3 4 5
14. Shows concern for the well-being of others. 1 2 3 4 5
15. Provides a plan for how the work is to be done. 1 2 3 4 5
16. Shows flexibility in making decisions. 1 2 3 4 5
17. Provides criteria for what is expected of the group. 1 2 3 4 5
18. Discloses thoughts and feelings to group members. 1 2 3 4 5
19. Encourages group members to do high-quality work. 1 2 3 4 5
20. Helps group members get along with each other. 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
The Leadership Behavior Questionnaire is designed to measure two major types of leadership
behaviors: task and relationship. Score the questionnaire by doing the following: First, sum the
responses on the odd-numbered items. This is your task score. Second, sum the responses on
the even-numbered items. This is your relationship score.
Total scores: Task ______________________ Relationship _______________________
Scoring Interpretation
For each category:
40–50 High range
30–39 Moderate range
10–29 Low range
The score you receive for task refers to the degree to which you help others by defining their
roles and letting them know what is expected of them. This factor describes your tendencies to
be task directed toward others when you are in a leadership position. The score you receive for
relationship is a measure of the degree to which you try to make followers feel comfortable with
themselves, each other, and the group itself. It represents a measure of how people oriented you
are.
Your results on the Leadership Behavior Questionnaire give you data about your task orientation
and people orientation. What do your scores suggest about your leadership style? Are you more
likely to lead with an emphasis on task or with an emphasis on relationship? As you interpret
your responses to the Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, ask yourself if there are ways you
could change your behavior to shift the emphasis you give to tasks and relationships. To gain
more information about your style, you may want to have four or five of your coworkers or
classmates fill out the questionnaire based on their perceptions of you as a leader. This will give
you additional data to compare and contrast to your own scores about yourself.
Summary
The behavioral approach is strikingly different from the trait and skills approaches to leadership because
the behavioral approach focuses on what leaders do rather than who leaders are. It suggests that
leaders engage in two primary types of behaviors: task behaviors and relationship behaviors. How
leaders combine these two types of behaviors to influence others is the central focus of the behavioral
approach.
The behavioral approach originated from three different lines of research: the Ohio State studies, the
University of Michigan studies, and the work of Blake and Mouton on the Managerial Grid (now known
as the Leadership Grid).
Researchers at Ohio State developed a leadership questionnaire called the Leader Behavior
Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), which identified initiation of structure and consideration as the core
leadership behaviors. The Michigan studies provided similar findings but called the leader behaviors
production orientation and employee orientation.
Using the Ohio State and Michigan studies as a basis, much research has been carried out to find the
best way for leaders to combine task and relationship behaviors. The goal has been to find a universal
set of leadership behaviors capable of explaining leadership effectiveness in every situation. The results
from these efforts have not been conclusive, however. Researchers have had difficulty identifying one
best style of leadership.
Blake and Mouton developed a practical model for training managers that described leadership
behaviors along a grid with two axes: concern for results and concern for people. How leaders combine
these orientations results in five major leadership styles: authority–compliance management (9,1),
country-club management (1,9), impoverished management (1,1), middle-of-the-road management
(5,5), and team management (9,9).
The behavioral approach has several strengths and weaknesses. On the positive side, it has broadened
the scope of leadership research to include the study of the behaviors of leaders rather than only their
personal traits or characteristics. Second, it is a reliable approach because it is supported by a wide
range of studies. Third, the behavioral approach is valuable because it underscores the importance of
the two core dimensions of leadership behavior: task and relationship. Fourth, it has heuristic value in
that it provides us with a broad conceptual map that is useful in gaining an understanding of our own
leadership behaviors. On the negative side, researchers have not been able to associate the behaviors
of leaders (task and relationship) with outcomes such as morale, job satisfaction, and productivity. In
addition, researchers from the behavioral approach have not been able to identify a universal set of
leadership behaviors that would consistently result in effective leadership. Furthermore, the behavioral
approach implies but fails to support fully the idea that the most effective leadership style is a high–high
style (i.e., high task and high relationship). Last, the approach is United States–centric and may not
easily generalize to other cultures.
Overall, the behavioral approach is not a refined theory that provides a neatly organized set of
prescriptions for effective leadership behavior. Rather, the behavioral approach provides a valuable
framework for assessing leadership in a broad way as assessing behavior with task and relationship
dimensions. Finally, the behavioral approach reminds leaders that their impact on others occurs along
both dimensions.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
The horizontal axis is labeled concern for results, the vertical axis is labeled concern for people, and
both the axes range from 1 at low to 9 at high. The different types of leaderships are as follows.
1, 9 at the top-left corner of the grid: Country-club management. Thoughtful attention to the needs of the
people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere, and work
tempo.
9, 9 at the top-right corner of the grid: Team management. Work accomplishment is from committed
people. Interdependence through a common stake in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust
and respect.
5, 5 in the middle of the grid: Middle-of-the-Road management. Adequate organization performance is
possible through balancing the necessity to get work out while maintaining morale of people at a
satisfactory level.
1, 1 at the bottom-left corner of the grid: Impoverished management. Minimum effort is exerted to get
required work done as appropriate to sustain organization membership.
1, 9 at the bottom-left corner of the grid: Authority-compliance management. Efficiency in operations
results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum
degree.
Back to Figure
In the leadership grid, represented as a flat surface, 1, 9 is at the top-left corner, 9, 9 is at the top-right
corner, 5, 5 is in the middle, 1, 1 is at the bottom-left corner, and 1, 9 is at the bottom-right corner.
Arrows from each position on the grid point towards the word opportunism, at the top. An inset image
shows an illustration of a square. Its top-left corner is labeled 1, 9, and its bottom-left corner is labeled 9,
1. The bidirectional arrows from each corner point to the center of the square, which is labeled 9 plus 9.
Back to Figure
A flow diagram shows the following task-oriented behaviors in a block from top to bottom:
Enhancing understanding
Strengthening motivation
Facilitating implementation
The relations-oriented behaviors from left to right in a block positioned to the right of the first block are
as follows:
Activating resources
Promoting cooperation
Fostering coordination
Arrows point from the relations-oriented block to each behavior in the task-oriented block. A bidirectional
vertical arrow to the right of the relations-oriented block is labeled internal at the top and external at the
bottom. A bidirectional horizontal arrow under the task-oriented block is labeled routine on the left and
change on the right.
5 SITUATIONAL APPROACH
The premise of the situational approach is that different situations demand different kinds of leadership.
The SLII® approach provides a model that suggests to leaders how they should behave based on the
demands of a particular situation.
DESCRIPTION
One of the more widely recognized approaches to leadership is the situational approach, which was
developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1969a) based on Reddin’s (1967) 3-D management style theory.
The situational approach has been refined and revised several times since its inception (see Blanchard,
1985; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi, 2013; Hersey & Blanchard,
1977, 1988), and it has been used extensively in organizational leadership training and development.
As its name implies, the situational approach focuses on leadership in situations. The premise of the
theory is that different situations demand different kinds of leadership. From this perspective, effective
leadership requires that people adapt their style to the demands of different situations.
The situational approach is illustrated in the model developed by Blanchard and his colleagues
(Blanchard et al., 1993; Blanchard et al., 2013), called SLII® (Figure 5.1). The SLII® model, which is
Blanchard’s situational approach to effective leadership, is an extension and refinement of the original
model developed by Hersey and Blanchard (1969a). This chapter focuses on the SLII® model.
Blanchard’s model stresses that leadership is composed of both a directive and a supportive dimension,
and that each has to be applied appropriately in a given situation. To determine what is needed in a
particular situation, leaders must evaluate their followers and assess how competent and committed the
followers are to perform a given goal. Based on the assumption that followers’ skills and motivation vary
over time, Blanchard’s SLII® suggests that leaders should change the degree to which they are directive
or supportive to meet the changing needs of followers.
In brief, the essence of Blanchard’s SLII® approach demands that leaders match their style to the
competence and commitment of their followers. Effective leaders are those who can recognize what
followers need and then adapt their style to meet those needs.
The dynamics of this approach are clearly illustrated in the SLII® model, which comprises two major
components: leadership style and development level of followers.
Leadership Style
Leadership style consists of the behavior pattern of a person who attempts to influence others. It
includes both directive behaviors and supportive behaviors. Directive behaviors help individuals and
group members accomplish goals by giving directions, establishing goals and methods of evaluation,
setting timelines, defining roles, and showing how the goals are to be achieved. Directive behaviors
clarify, often with one-way communication, what is to be done, how it is to be done, and who is
responsible for doing it. Supportive behaviors help individuals and group members feel comfortable
about themselves, their coworkers, and the situation. Supportive behaviors involve two-way
communication and responses that show social and emotional support to others. Examples of
supportive behaviors include asking for input, solving problems, praising others, sharing information
about oneself, and listening. Supportive behaviors are mostly job related.
Leadership styles can be classified further into four distinct categories of directive and supportive
behaviors (Figure 5.1). The first style (S1) is a high directive–low supportive style, which is also called a
directing style. In this approach, the leader focuses communication on goal achievement, and spends a
smaller amount of time using supportive behaviors. Using this style, a leader gives instructions about
what and how goals are to be achieved by the followers and then supervises them carefully.
The second style (S2) is called a coaching approach and is a high directive–high supportive style. In this
approach, the leader focuses communication on both achieving goals and meeting followers’
socioemotional needs. The coaching style requires that leaders involve themselves with followers by
giving encouragement and soliciting follower input. However, coaching is an extension of S1 in that it
still requires that the leader make the final decision on the what and how of goal accomplishment.
The third style (S3) is a supporting approach that requires that the leader take a high supportive–low
directive style. In this approach, the leader does not focus exclusively on goals but uses supportive
behaviors that bring out followers’ skills around the goal to be accomplished. The supportive style
includes listening, praising others, asking for input, and giving feedback. A leader using this style gives
followers control of day-to-day decisions but remains available to facilitate problem solving. An S3
leader is quick to give recognition and social support to followers.
Description
Figure 5.1 SLII® Model
Source: From Leadership and the One Minute Manager: Increasing Effectiveness Through Situational
Leadership® II, by K. Blanchard, P. Zigarmi, and D. Zigarmi, 2013, New York, NY: William Morrow.
Used with permission. This model cannot be used without the expressed, written consent of The Ken
Blanchard Companies. To learn more, visit www.kenblanchard.com
Last, the fourth style (S4) is called the low supportive–low directive style, or a delegating approach. In
this approach, the leader offers less goal input and social support, facilitating followers’ confidence and
motivation in reference to the goal. The delegative leader lessens involvement in planning, control of
details, and goal clarification. After the group agrees on what to do, this style lets followers take
responsibility for getting the job done the way they see fit. A leader using S4 gives control to followers
and refrains from intervening with unnecessary social support.
The SLII® model (Figure 5.1) illustrates how directive and supportive leadership behaviors combine for
each of the four different leadership styles. As shown by the arrows on the bottom and left side of the
model, directive behaviors are high in the S1 and S2 quadrants and low in S3 and S4, whereas
supportive behaviors are high in S2 and S3 and low in S1 and S4.
http://www.kenblanchard.com/
Development Level
A second major part of the SLII® model concerns the development level of followers. Development level
is the degree to which followers have the competence and commitment necessary to accomplish a
given goal or activity (Blanchard et al., 2013). Stated another way, it indicates whether a person has
mastered the skills to achieve a specific goal and whether a person has developed a positive attitude
regarding the goal (Blanchard et al., 1993). In earlier versions of the model, this was referred to as the
readiness or maturity of the follower (Bass, 2008; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969a, 1969b, 1977, 1996).
Followers are at a high development level if they are interested and confident in their work and know
how to achieve the goal. Followers are at a developing level if they have little skill for the goal at hand
but believe that they have the motivation or confidence to get the job done.
The levels of development are illustrated in the lower portion of the diagram in Figure 5.1. The levels
describe various combinations of commitment and competence for followers on a given goal. There are
two aspects of commitment: motivation and confidence; and two aspects of competence: transferable
skills and task knowledge. Development levels are intended to be goal specific and are not intended to
be used for the purpose of labeling followers.
On a particular goal, followers can be classified into four categories: D1, D2, D3, and D4, from
developing to developed. Specifically, D1 followers are low in competence and high in commitment.
They are new to a goal and do not know exactly how to do it, but they are excited about the challenge of
it. D2 followers are described as having some competence but low commitment. They have started to
learn a job, but they also have lost some of their initial confidence about the job. D3 represents followers
who have moderate to high competence but may have variable commitment. They have essentially
developed the skills for the job, but they are uncertain as to whether they can accomplish the goal by
themselves. Finally, D4 followers are the highest in development, having both a high degree of
competence and a high degree of commitment to getting the job done. They have the transferable skills
and task knowledge to do the job and the confidence and motivation to get it done.
HOW DOES SLII® WORK?
SLII® is constructed around the idea that followers move forward and backward along the
developmental continuum, which represents the relative competence and commitment of followers. For
leaders to be effective, it is essential that they determine where followers are on the developmental
continuum and adapt their leadership styles to directly match their followers’ development levels.
In a given situation, the first task for leaders is to determine the nature of the situation. Questions such
as the following must be addressed: What goal are followers being asked to achieve? How complex is
the goal? Are the followers sufficiently skilled to accomplish the goal? Do they have the desire to
complete the job once they start it? Answers to these questions will help leaders to identify correctly the
specific development level at which their followers are functioning. For example, new followers who are
very excited but lack understanding of job requirements would be identified as D1-level followers.
Conversely, seasoned followers with proven abilities and great devotion to an organization would be
identified as functioning at the D4 level.
Having identified the correct development level, the second task for leaders is to adapt their style to the
prescribed leadership style represented in the SLII® model. There is a one-to-one relationship between
the development level of followers (D1, D2, etc.) and the leader’s style (S1, S2, etc.). For example, if
followers are at the first level of development, D1, the leader needs to adopt a high directive–low
supportive leadership style (S1, or directing). If followers are more advanced and at the second
development level, D2, the leader needs to adopt a high directive–high supportive leadership style (S2,
or coaching). For each level of development, there is a specific style of leadership that the leader should
adopt.
An example of this would be Rene Martinez, who owns a house painting business. Rene specializes in
restoration of old homes and over 30 years has acquired extensive knowledge of the specialized
abilities required including understanding old construction, painting materials and techniques, plaster
repair, carpentry, and window glazing. Rene has three employees: Ashley, who has worked for him for
seven years and whom he trained from the beginning of her career; Levi, who worked for a commercial
painter for four years before being hired by Rene two years ago; and Anton, who is just starting out.
Because of Ashley’s years of experience and training, Rene would classify her as primarily D3. She is
very competent, but still seeks Rene’s insight on some tasks. She is completely comfortable prepping
surfaces for painting and directing the others but has some reluctance to taking on jobs that involve
carpentry. Depending on the work he assigns Ashley, Rene moves between S3 (supporting) and S4
(delegating) leadership behaviors.
When it comes to painting, Levi is a developed follower needing little direction or support from Rene. But
Levi has to be trained in many other aspects of home restoration, making him a D1 or D2 in those skills.
Levi is a quick learner, and Rene finds he only needs to be shown or told how to do something once
before he is able to complete it easily. In most situations, Rene uses an S2 (coaching) leadership
behavior with Levi. If the goal is more complicated and requires detailed training, Rene moves back into
the S1 (directing) behavior with Levi.
Anton is completely new to this field, developing his skills but at the D1 level. What he lacks in
experience he more than makes up for in energy. He is always willing to jump in and do whatever he’s
asked to do. He is not as careful as he needs to be, however, often neglecting the proper prepping
techniques and cleanup about which Rene is a stickler. Rene finds that not only he, but also Ashley,
uses an S1 (directing) behavior with Anton. Because Levi is also fairly new, he finds it difficult to be
directive with Anton, but likes to give him help when he seems unsure of himself, falling into the S3
(supporting) behavior.
This example illustrates how followers can move back and forth along the development continuum,
requiring leaders to be flexible in their leadership behavior. Followers may move from one development
level to another rather quickly over a short period (e.g., a day or a week), or more slowly on goals that
proceed over much longer periods of time (e.g., a month). Leaders cannot use the same style in all
contexts; rather, they need to adapt their style to followers and their unique situations. Unlike the trait
approach, which emphasizes that leaders have a fixed style, SLII® demands that leaders demonstrate a
high degree of flexibility.
With the growing cross-cultural and technical influences on our society, it appears that the need for
leaders to be flexible in their leadership style is increasingly important. Recent studies have examined
the situational approach to leadership in different cultural and workplace contexts. In a study of the
situational approach and air traffic control employees, Arvidsson, Johansson, Ek, and Akselsson (2007)
assessed leaders in different contexts and found that the leader’s style should change in different group
and individual situations. In addition, they found that the most frequently used leadership style was high
supportive–low directive and the most seldom-used style was high directive–low supportive. In another
study, Larsson and Vinberg (2010), using a case study approach, found that successful leaders use a
relation orientation as a base but include along with it a structure orientation and a change orientation.
STRENGTHS
The SLII® approach to leadership has several strengths, particularly for practitioners. The first strength
is that it has a history of usefulness in the marketplace. SLII® is well known and frequently used for
training leaders within organizations. Hersey and Blanchard (1993) reported that it has been a factor in
training programs of more than 400 of the Fortune 500 companies. It is perceived by corporations as
offering a useful model for training people to become effective leaders.
A second strength of the approach is its practicality. SLII® is easy to understand, intuitively sensible,
and easily applied in a variety of settings. Whereas some leadership approaches provide complex and
sophisticated ways to assess your own leadership behavior (e.g., the decision-making approach in
Vroom & Yetton, 1973), SLII® provides a straightforward approach that is easily used. Because it is
described at a level that is easily grasped, the ideas behind the approach are quickly acquired.
Managers can relate to the description of followers as combinations of competence and commitment. In
addition, the principles suggested by this approach are easy to apply across a variety of settings,
including work, school, and family.
Closely akin to the strength of practicality is a third strength: It has prescriptive value. Whereas many
theories of leadership are descriptive in nature, the SLII® approach is prescriptive. It tells you what you
should and should not do in various contexts. For example, if your followers are very low in competence,
the approach prescribes a directing style for you as the leader. On the other hand, if your followers
appear to be competent but lack confidence, SLII® suggests that you lead with a supporting style.
These prescriptions provide leaders with a valuable set of guidelines that can facilitate and enhance
leadership. For example, in a recent study, Meirovich and Gu (2015) reported that the closer a leader’s
style is to the prescribed style, the better the performance and satisfaction of the employees. A
computer simulation found that when leaders adapted their style to follower readiness over time, the
followers’ performance improved (Bosse, Duell, Memon, Treur, & van der Wal, 2017).
A fourth strength of the situational approach to leadership is that it emphasizes leader flexibility (Graeff,
1983; Yukl, 1989). This approach was one of the first contingency theories of leadership, which stated
that leader effectiveness depends on situational factors. The approach stresses that leaders need to find
out about their followers’ needs and then adapt their leadership style accordingly. Leaders cannot lead
using a single style: They must be willing to change their style to meet the requirements of the situation.
This approach recognizes that followers act differently when working toward different goals, and that
they may act differently during different stages of achieving the same goal. Effective leaders are those
who can change their own style based on the goal requirements and the followers’ needs, even in the
middle of a project. For example, Zigarmi and Roberts (2017) reported that when followers perceive a fit
between the leader’s behavior and their own needs, it is positively related to job affect, trust, and
favorable work intentions. In retrospect, the focus of the theory on followers was many years ahead
since there has been a recent emphasis on “followership” in leadership theory and research.
Finally, the SLII® reminds us to treat each follower differently based on the goal at hand and to seek
opportunities to help followers learn new skills and become more confident in their work (Fernandez &
Vecchio, 1997; Yukl, 1998). Overall, this approach underscores that followers have unique needs and
deserve our help in trying to become better at doing their work. The focus on the commitment and
competence of followers allows leaders to assess follower performance and influence them through
style and behavior (Cote, 2017).
CRITICISMS
Despite its history of use in leadership training and development, SLII® has several limitations. The
following criticisms point out several weaknesses in this approach and help to provide a more balanced
picture of the general utility of this approach in studying and practicing leadership.
The first criticism of this approach is that only a few research studies have been conducted to justify the
assumptions and propositions set forth by the approach. Although many doctoral dissertations address
dimensions of the situational approach to leadership, most of these research studies have not been
published. The lack of a strong body of research on this approach raises questions about the theoretical
basis for it (Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997; Graeff, 1997; Meirovich & Gu, 2015; Vecchio & Boatwright,
2002; Vecchio, Bullis, & Brazil, 2006). Can we be sure it is a valid approach? Is it certain that this
approach does indeed improve performance? Does this approach compare favorably with other
leadership approaches in its impact on followers? It is difficult to give firm answers to these questions
when the testing of this approach has not resulted in a significant amount of published research
findings.
A second criticism of SLII® concerns the ambiguous conceptualization in the model of followers’
development levels. The authors of the model do not make clear how commitment is combined with
competence to form four distinct levels of development (Graeff, 1997; Yukl, 1989). In one of the earliest
versions of the model, Hersey and Blanchard (1969b) defined the four levels of commitment (maturity)
as unwilling and unable (Level 1), willing and unable (Level 2), unwilling and able (Level 3), and willing
and able (Level 4). In a more recent version, represented by the SLII® model, development level is
described as high commitment and low competence in D1, low commitment and some competence in
D2, variable commitment and high competence in D3, and high commitment and high competence in
D4.
The authors of SLII® do not explain the theoretical basis for these changes in the composition of each
of the development levels. Furthermore, they do not explain how competence and commitment are
weighted across different development levels. As pointed out by Blanchard et al. (1993), there is a need
for further research to establish how competence and commitment are conceptualized for each
development level.
Closely related to the general criticism of ambiguity about followers’ development levels is a concern
with how commitment itself is conceptualized in the model. For example, Graeff (1997) suggested the
conceptualization is very unclear. Blanchard et al. (2013) stated that followers’ commitment is composed
of confidence and motivation, but it is not clear how confidence and motivation combine to define
commitment. According to the SLII® model, commitment starts out high in D1, moves down in D2,
becomes variable in D3, and rises again in D4. Intuitively, it appears more logical to describe follower
commitment as existing on a continuum moving from low to moderate to high. Rather than viewing
commitment and competence as having varying levels, the range of scores is cut, and followers are
classified into categories. For example, a follower may be very close to the cutoff for having high
commitment but is placed into the low category.
The argument provided by Blanchard et al. (1993) for how commitment varies in the SLII® model is that
followers usually start out motivated and eager to learn, and then they may become discouraged and
disillusioned. Next, they may begin to lack confidence or motivation, or both, and, last, they become
highly confident and motivated. But why is this so? Why do followers who learn a task become less
committed? Why is there a decrease in commitment at D2 and D3? Without more research to
substantiate the way follower commitment is conceptualized, this dimension of SLII® remains unclear.
Some clarification of the ambiguity surrounding development levels is suggested by Thompson and
Glasø (2015), who found that the predictions of the earlier model of the situational approach to
leadership were more likely to hold true when the leaders’ ratings and followers’ ratings of competence
and commitment are congruent. They stressed the importance of finding mutual agreement between
leaders and followers on these ratings. These findings were replicated and extended by the authors
(Thompson & Glasø, 2018). Again, the research showed that the principles underlying the situational
approach are supported when leaders’ ratings and followers’ ratings of competence and commitment
are in agreement. In comparing the two perspectives, there is no support for using followers’ self-ratings
of competence and commitment to predict performance. However, the leader’s ratings appear to be
more useful for determining the right type of direction to give followers.
A fourth criticism of the SLII® model has to do with how the model matches leader style with follower
development levels—the prescriptions of the model. To determine the validity of the prescriptions
suggested by the Hersey and Blanchard approach, Vecchio (1987) conducted a study of more than 300
high school teachers and their principals. He found that newly hired teachers were more satisfied and
performed better under principals who had highly structured leadership styles, but that the performance
of more experienced and mature teachers was unrelated to the style their principals exhibited.
Vecchio and his colleagues replicated this study twice: first in 1997, using university employees
(Fernandez & Vecchio, 1997), and most recently in 2006, studying more than 800 U.S. Military Academy
cadets (Vecchio et al., 2006). Both studies failed to find strong evidence to support the basic
prescriptions suggested in the situational approach.
To further test the assumptions and validity of the situational approach, Thompson and Vecchio (2009)
analyzed the original and revised versions of the model using data collected from 357 banking
employees and 80 supervisors. They found no clear empirical support for the model in any of its
versions. At best, they found some evidence to support leaders being more directive with newer
employees and being more supportive and less directive as employees become more senior. Also,
Meirovich and Gu (2015) found evidence that followers with more experience indicated a more positive
response to autonomy and participation, a finding supporting the importance of leaders being less
directive with experienced employees. There is also research evidence that shows that the directive
style is being used less frequently, regardless of the readiness levels of followers (Zigarmi & Roberts,
2017). This may be due to a shift in organizational cultures toward empowering followers rather than
“micromanaging” them.
A fifth criticism of SLII® is that it fails to account for how certain demographic characteristics (e.g.,
education, experience, age, and gender) influence the leader–follower prescriptions of the model. For
example, a study conducted by Vecchio and Boatwright (2002) showed that level of education and job
experience were inversely related to directive leadership and were not related to supportive leadership.
In other words, followers with more education and more work experience desired less structure. An
interesting finding is that age was positively related to desire for structure: The older followers desired
more structure than the younger followers did. In addition, their findings indicated that female and male
followers had different preferences for styles of leadership. Female followers expressed a stronger
preference for supportive leadership, whereas male followers had a stronger desire for directive
leadership. These findings indicate that demographic characteristics may affect followers’ preferences
for a particular leadership style. However, these characteristics are not considered in the situational
approach.
SLII® can also be criticized from a practical standpoint because it does not fully address the issue of
one-to-one versus group leadership in an organizational setting. The developers of the theory did not
specify whether the theory operates at the individual, dyadic, or group level of analysis, and the sparse
empirical research does not consider levels (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005). For
example, should leaders with a group of 20 followers lead by matching their style to the overall
development level of the group or to the development level of individual members of the group? Carew,
Parisi-Carew, and Blanchard (1990) suggested that groups go through development stages that are
similar to individuals’, and that therefore leaders should try to match their styles to the group’s
development level. However, if the leaders match their style to the mean development level of a group,
how will this affect the individuals whose development levels are quite different from those of their
colleagues? Existing research on SLII® does not answer this question. More research is needed to
explain how leaders can adapt their styles simultaneously to the development levels of individual group
members and to the group as a whole.
A final criticism of SLII® can be directed at the leadership questionnaires that accompany the model.
Questionnaires on SLII® typically ask respondents to analyze various work situations and select the
best leadership style for each situation. The questionnaires are constructed to force respondents to
describe leadership style in terms of four specific parameters (i.e., directing, coaching, supporting, and
delegating) rather than in terms of other leadership behaviors. Because the best answers available to
respondents have been predetermined, the questionnaires are biased in favor of the situational
approach (Graeff, 1983; Yukl, 1989).
APPLICATION
SLII® is frequently used by trainers and practitioners because it is an approach that is easy to
conceptualize and apply. The straightforward nature of SLII® makes it practical for managers to use.
The principles of this approach can be applied at many different levels in an organization—from how a
CEO of a large corporation works with a board of directors to how a crew chief in an assembly plant
leads a small group of production workers. Middle managers can use SLII® to direct staff meetings, and
heads of departments can use this approach in planning structural changes within an organization.
There is no shortage of opportunities for using SLII®.
SLII® applies during the initial stages of a project, when idea formation is important, and during the
various subsequent phases of a project, when implementation issues are important. The fluid nature of
SLII® makes it ideal for applying to followers as they move forward or go backward (regress) on various
projects. Because SLII® stresses adapting to followers, it is ideal for use with followers whose
commitment and competence change over the course of a project.
Given the breadth of Blanchard’s SLII® model, it is applicable in almost any type of organization, at any
level, for nearly all types of goals. It is an encompassing model with a wide range of applications.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
To see how SLII® can be applied in different organizational settings, you may want to assess Cases 5.1,
5.2, and 5.3. The first case looks at a leader coaching runners at differing levels who hope to complete
the New York City Marathon. The second case is concerned with problems of training new DJs at a
campus radio station. The third explores two Chinese philosophies of leadership—Confucianism and
Daoism—and how these philosophies contrast and affect leadership in the workplace. For each of these
cases, ask yourself what you would do if you found yourself in a similar situation. At the end of each
case, there are questions that will help you analyze the context from the perspective of the situational
approach.
Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels
David Abruzzo is the newly elected president of the Metrocity Striders Track Club (MSTC). One of his
duties is to serve as the coach for runners who hope to complete the New York City Marathon. Because
Abruzzo has run many marathons and ultramarathons successfully, he feels quite comfortable assuming
the role and responsibilities of coach for the marathon runners.
The training period for runners intending to run New York is 16 weeks. During the first couple of weeks
of training, Abruzzo was pleased with the progress of the runners and had little difficulty in his role as
coach. However, when the runners reached Week 8, the halfway mark, some things began to occur that
raised questions in Abruzzo’s mind regarding how best to help his runners. The issues of concern
seemed quite different from those that Abruzzo had expected to hear from runners in a marathon
training program. All in all, the runners and their concerns could be divided into three different groups.
One group of runners, most of whom had never run a marathon, peppered the coach with all kinds of
questions. They were very concerned about how to do the marathon and whether they had the ability to
complete such a challenging event successfully. They asked questions about how far to run in training,
what to eat, how much to drink, and what kind of shoes to wear. One runner wanted to know what to eat
the night before the marathon, and another wanted to know whether it was likely that he would pass out
when he crossed the finish line. For Abruzzo the questions were never-ending and rather basic. He
wanted to treat the runners like informed adults, but they seemed to be acting immature, and rather
childish.
The second group of runners, all of whom had finished the New York City Marathon in the previous year,
seemed most concerned about the effects of training on their running. For example, they wanted to
know precisely how their per-week running mileage related to their possible marathon finishing time.
Would running long practice runs help them through the wall at the 20-mile mark? Would taking a rest
day during training actually help their overall conditioning? Basically, the runners in this group seemed to
want assurances from Abruzzo that they were training in the right way for New York. For Abruzzo,
talking to this group was easy because he enjoyed giving them encouragement and motivational pep
talks.
A third group was made up of seasoned runners, most of whom had run several marathons and many of
whom had finished in the top 10 of their respective age divisions. Sometimes they complained of feeling
flat and acted a bit moody and down about training. Even though they had confidence in their ability to
compete and finish well, they lacked an element of excitement about running in the New York event. The
occasional questions they raised usually concerned such things as whether their overall training
strategy was appropriate or whether their training would help them in other races besides the New York
City Marathon. Because of his running experience, Abruzzo liked to offer running tips to this group.
However, when he did, he felt like the runners ignored and discounted his suggestions. He was
concerned that they might not appreciate him or his coaching.
Questions
1. Based on the principles of the SLII® model (Figure 5.1), how would you describe the runners in
Group 1? What kind of leadership do they want from Abruzzo, and what kind of leadership does he
seem prepared to give them?
2. How would you describe the fit between the runners in Group 2 and Abruzzo’s coaching style?
Discuss.
3. The experienced runners in Group 3 appear to be a challenge to Abruzzo. Using SLII®, explain why
he appears ineffective with this group.
4. If you were helping Abruzzo with his coaching, how would you describe his strengths and
weaknesses? What suggestions would you make to him about how to improve?
Case 5.2 Getting the Message Across
Ann Caldera is the program director of a college campus radio station (WCBA) that is supported by the
university. WCBA has a long history and is viewed favorably by students, faculty, the board of trustees,
and the people in the community.
Caldera does not have a problem getting students to work at WCBA. In fact, it is one of the most sought-
after university-related activities. The few students who are accepted to work at WCBA are always
highly motivated because they value the opportunity to get hands-on media experience. In addition,
those who are accepted tend to be highly confident (sometimes naïvely so) of their own radio ability.
Despite their eagerness, most of them lack a full understanding of the legal responsibilities of being on
the air.
One of the biggest problems that confronts Caldera every semester is how to train new students to
follow the rules and procedures of WCBA when they are doing on-air announcing for news, sports,
music, and other radio programs. It seems as if every semester numerous incidents arise in which an
announcer violates in no small way the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules for
appropriate airtime communication. For example, rumor has it that one year a first-year student disc
jockey on the evening shift announced that a new band was playing in town, the cover was $10, and
everyone should go to hear the group. Making an announcement such as this is a clear violation of FCC
rules: It is illegal.
Caldera is frustrated with her predicament but cannot seem to figure out why it keeps occurring. She
puts a lot of time and effort into helping new DJs, but they just do not seem to get the message that
working at WCBA is a serious job and that obeying the FCC rules is an absolute necessity. Caldera
wonders whether her leadership style is missing the mark.
Each semester, Caldera gives the students a very complete handout on policies and procedures. In
addition, she tries to get to know each of the new students personally. Because she wants everybody to
be happy at WCBA, she tries very hard to build a relational climate at the station. Repeatedly, students
say that Caldera is the nicest adviser on campus. Because she recognizes the quality of her students,
Caldera mostly lets them do what they want at the station.
Questions
1. What’s the problem at WCBA?
2. Using SLII® as a basis, what would you advise Caldera to do differently at the station?
3. Based on SLII®, what creative schemes could Caldera use to reduce FCC infractions at WCBA?
Case 5.3 Philosophies of Chinese Leadership
Before reading this case study, access and listen to the 2019 TED Talk by management consultant Fang
Ruan here:
www.ted.com/talks/fang_ruan_management_lessons_from_chinese_business_and_philosophy#t-
153758. Transcripts are also available on the site.
In China, the business leadership landscape has long been guided by the ancient philosophical
teachings of Confucius, which encourage authority, seniority, and obedience (Confucianism). For a
nation, this is a time-tested formula to ensure order and harmony. For a company, this ensures precise
execution on a large scale. But as business environments constantly change with internet and
technology disrupting traditional industries and millennials becoming a major workforce, new ways of
management are emerging within China.
Management consultant Fang Ruan says she sees many Chinese entrepreneurs leaning toward a more
dynamic leadership style based on the philosophy of another revered, ancient Chinese thought leader,
Lao-tzu (Laozi), known as Daoism. To understand these differences between the two, it’s important to
understand the underlying tenets of each of the philosophies.
Confucianism
Although sometimes referred to as a religion, Confucianism is more a habit of thought, a life philosophy.
China’s dominant social and political value system for over 1,000 years, Confucianism is based on the
concepts of “respect for family, hard work and education” and “emphasizes social order and an active
life” (Min-Huei, 2016).
Confucianism is built on the tenet that proper human relationships are essential to a well-functioning
society. Four traits of Confucian ideology that have remained constant are
socialization within the family unit in such a way as to promote sobriety, education, the acquisition of
skills, and seriousness about tasks, job, family, and obligations;
a tendency to help the group (however it might be identified);
a sense of hierarchy and of its naturalness and rightness; and
a sense of complementarity in relationships, which, combined with the sense of hierarchy,
enhances perceptions of fairness and equity in institutions (Huang, 2000).
The Confucian hierarchical order is considered to lend stability and order; by understanding, honoring,
and maintaining their place in society, followers can achieve harmony.
In the workplace, the hierarchical structure of Confucianism plays a pertinent role in the functioning of
organizations. The characteristics of loyalty, obedience, respect, and service are expected of
subordinates, and wisdom, moral purity, and leadership are expected of superiors (Huang, 2000). The
patriarchal nature of Chinese culture is in direct relationship to Confucius’s teachings, which advocate
an authoritative and patriarchal ruler. This authoritarian culture has developed a superior–subordinate
bureaucracy where the paramount leader is the center of power (Huang, 2000). This perspective lends
itself to elitist and patriarchal organizations where everyone knows their place and does not stray from
the established boundaries.
Chinese communication styles are indirect, and that applies to those in leadership positions, as well.
Wang (2018) notes that “the wise Confucian is expected to listen in silence.” It’s not that Chinese
employees are unwilling to share information; rather, they must be prompted if one wants details. This
becomes particularly complicated when the exchange involves criticism or a discussion of problems. To
prevent a loss of face, or mianzi (MY-ann-ZEE), which is showing respect to others according to their
status and reputation in society, such discussions are often held in private (Wang, 2018).
Yi-Hui Huang (2000) summarizes classic Confucianism dogma this way: “All will be right with the world if
everyone conscientiously performs one’s assigned role” (p. 227).
Daoism
Daoism (also referred to as Taoism) is the less rigid and more simplistic sibling of Confucianism and
arose in the same period, known as the Hundred Schools of Thought.
Daoism originated with Chinese philosopher Laozi (also referred to as Lao-tzu), who was born in 604
BCE in central China. Laozi was the Keeper of Royal Archives for the Zhou dynasty until 516 BCE when
he left the post to travel. He was inspired to write down his teachings in a book, which would become
known as the Dao De Jing (aka the Tao Te Ching) or “The Way.”
Like Confucianism, harmony is the backbone of the Daoist perspective, but with a key difference:
Humans must be in harmony not only with each other but also with the natural flow of life, letting things
take their natural course. Natural ways were considered better than imposed ways by Laozi. Allowing
things to evolve in accordance with natural law is the cornerstone of Daoism. Where Confucianism
focuses on creating social harmony, the goal of the Dao is to achieve balance.
The Dao is more dynamic and fluid, recognizing the need to navigate the duality of life—the Yin and the
Yang—principles of life that are both complementing and opposing, such as dark and light, stillness and
movement, sun and moon.
The metaphor of water is often used in Daoism. Water is seen to be powerful, yet altruistic, as it serves
others. It is modest, flexible, and humble, because by its nature it seeks out the lowest place. Lee, Han,
Byron, and Fan (2008) noted that “we human beings, especially leaders, should learn from water
because water always remains in the lowest position and never competes with other things. Instead,
water is very helpful and beneficial to all things.”
The rivers and seas lead the hundred streams.
Because they are skillful at staying low.
Thus, they are able to lead the hundred streams. (Laozi, Chapter 66) (Lee et al., 2008, p. 91)
Laozi viewed leaders as being servants and followers. “The more one serves, the more one leads.
Leadership, first, means follower-ship or service-ship just like water. Second, leadership means non-
intrusiveness or non-interference” (Lee et al., 2008, p. 91).
Among other tenets, individuals who follow the Dao
exert minimal influence on the lives of followers;
encourage followers to take ownership of tasks;
employ “soft tactics,” such as persuasion, empowerment, modeling, teamwork, collaboration, and
service;
demonstrate creativity and flexibility;
promote harmony with nature and others;
reject the trappings of status and promote equality; and
give to and serve others (Johnson, 1999).
Simplicity of life and respect for its natural flow epitomize a Daoist’s life view.
Questions
1. Where on the SLII® model would you generally classify a leader who strictly leans toward
Confucianism? Where would you classify a follower in an environment that strictly adheres to the
Confucianist philosophy? Explain your reasoning.
2. Where on the SLII® model would you generally classify a leader who models the Daoist
philosophy? Where would you classify a follower in an environment that follows Daoist principles?
Explain your reasoning.
In Fang Ruan’s TED Talk, she discusses companies that have achieved notable success as they
adopted more Daoist leadership philosophies. The following questions relate to those companies:
3. Raun discusses the situation of the founder of Ping An who, desiring to steer innovation, found it
difficult to adopt Daoism-based philosophical changes due to the size and complexity of the
business.
a. From the perspective of the SLII® model, how does an organization’s size and complexity
relate to the effectiveness of each of the leadership styles represented in Figure 5.1?
b. What about the development levels of the followers? How does size and complexity affect the
needed directive behavior of leaders?
4. Which of these two philosophies most reflects your own? How does your own philosophical
perspective affect your expression of the four styles of leadership?
— Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
Although over the years different versions of instruments have been developed to measure SLII®,
nearly all of them are constructed similarly. As a rule, the SLII® provides 20 work-related situations and
asks respondents to select their preferred style for each situation from four alternatives. The situations
and styles are written to directly represent the leadership styles of the four quadrants in the model.
Questionnaire responses are scored to give respondents information about their primary and secondary
leadership styles, their flexibility, and their leadership effectiveness.
The brief questionnaire provided in this section illustrates how the SLII® measures leadership style in
the situational approach. For each situation on the questionnaire, you are asked to identify the
development level of the followers in the situation and then select one of the four response alternatives
that indicate the style of leadership you would use in that situation.
Expanded versions of the brief questionnaire give respondents an overall profile of their leadership
style. By analyzing the alternatives a respondent makes on the questionnaire, one can determine that
respondent’s primary and secondary leadership styles. By analyzing the range of choices a respondent
makes, one can determine that respondent’s leadership flexibility. Leadership effectiveness and
diagnostic ability can be measured by analyzing the number of times the respondent made accurate
assessments of a preferred leadership style.
In addition to these self-scored questionnaires, SLII® uses similar forms to tap the concurrent
perceptions that bosses, associates, and followers have of a person’s leadership style. These
questionnaires give respondents a wide range of feedback on their leadership styles and the opportunity
to compare their own views of leadership with the way others view them in a leadership role.
SLII® Questionnaire: Sample Items
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to explore how different styles of leadership in the
situational approach are used depending on the development level of the followers.
Instructions: Look at the following four leadership situations, from Blanchard, Zigarmi, and
Zigarmi (1992), and indicate which SLII® leadership style is needed in each situation provided in
the answer options beneath each statement.
Situation A B C D
Situation A B C D
1. Because of budget restrictions imposed on your department, it is
necessary to consolidate. You are thinking of asking a highly capable and
experienced member of your department to take charge of the consolidation.
This person has worked in all areas of your department and has the trust and
respect of most of the staff. She is very willing to help with the consolidation.
A. Assign the project to her and let her determine how to accomplish it.
B. Assign the task to her, indicate to her precisely what must be done, and
supervise her work closely.
C. Assign the task to her and provide support and encouragement as
needed.
D. Assign the task to her and indicate to her precisely what must be done but
make sure you incorporate her suggestions.
A B C D
2. You have recently been made a department head of the new regional
office. In getting to know your departmental staff, you have noticed that one of
your inexperienced employees is not following through on assigned tasks. She
is enthusiastic about her new job and wants to get ahead in the organization.
A. Discuss the lack of follow-through with her and explain the alternative
ways this problem can be solved.
B. Specify what she must do to complete the tasks but incorporate any
suggestions she may have.
C. Define the steps necessary for her to complete the assigned tasks and
monitor her performance frequently.
D. Let her know about the lack of follow-through and give her more time to
improve her performance.
A B C D
3. Because of a new and very important unit project, for the past three
months you have made sure that your staff members understood their
responsibilities and expected level of performance, and you have supervised
them closely. Due to some recent project setbacks, your staff members have
become somewhat discouraged. Their morale has dropped, and so has their
performance.
A. Continue to direct and closely supervise their performance.
B. Give the group members more time to overcome the setbacks but
occasionally check their progress.
C. Continue to define group activities but involve the group members more in
decision making and incorporate their ideas.
D. Participate in the group members’ problem-solving activities and
encourage and support their efforts to overcome the project setbacks.
A B C D
Situation A B C D
4. As a director of the sales department, you have asked a member of your
staff to take charge of a new sales campaign. You have worked with this
person on other sales campaigns, and you know he has the job knowledge and
experience to be successful at new assignments. However, he seems a little
unsure about his ability to do the job.
A. Assign the new sales campaign to him and let him function on his own.
B. Set goals and objectives for this new assignment but consider his
suggestions and involve him in decision making.
C. Listen to his concerns but assure him he can do the job and support his
efforts.
D. Tell him exactly what the new campaign involves and what you expect of
him, and supervise his performance closely.
A B C D
Source: Adapted from Game Plan for Leadership and the One Minute Manager (Figure 5.20, Learning Activity, p. 5), by K.
Blanchard, P. Zigarmi, and D. Zigarmi, 1992, Escondido, CA: Blanchard Training and Development (phone 760-489-5005).
Used with permission.
Scoring Interpretation
A short discussion of the correct answers to the brief questionnaire will help to explain the nature
of SLII® questionnaires.
Situation 1 in the brief questionnaire describes a common problem faced by organizations during
downsizing: the need to consolidate. In this particular situation, the leader has identified a person
who appears to be highly competent, experienced, and motivated to direct the downsizing
project. According to the SLII® model, this person is at Development Level 4, which calls for a
delegative approach. Of the four response alternatives, it is the (A) response, “Assign the project
to her and let her determine how to accomplish it,” that best represents delegating (S4): low
supportive–low directive leadership.
Situation 2 describes a problem familiar to leaders at all levels in nearly all organizations: lack of
follow-through by an enthusiastic follower. In the given example, the follower falls in
Development Level 1 because she lacks the experience to do the job even though she is highly
motivated to succeed. The SLII® approach prescribes directing (S1) leadership for this type of
follower. She needs to be told when and how to do her specific job. After she is given directions,
her performance should be supervised closely. The correct response is (C), “Define the steps
necessary to complete the assigned tasks and monitor her performance frequently.”
Situation 3 describes a very different circumstance. In this situation, the followers seem to have
developed some experience and an understanding of what is required of them, but they have lost
some of their motivation to complete the goal. Their performance and commitment have stalled
because of recent setbacks, even though the leader has been directing them closely. According
to SLII®, the correct response for the leader is to shift to a more supportive coaching style (S2)
of leadership. The action response that reflects coaching is (C), “Continue to define group
activities but involve the group members more in decision making and incorporate their ideas.”
Situation 4 describes some of the concerns that arise for a director attempting to identify the
correct person to head a new sales campaign. The person identified for the position obviously
has the skills necessary to do a good job with the new sales campaign, but he appears
apprehensive about his own abilities. In this context, SLII® suggests that the director should use
a supportive style (S3), which is consistent with leading followers who are competent but lacking
a certain degree of confidence. A supportive style is represented by action response (C), “Listen
to his concerns but assure him he can do the job and support his efforts.”
Summary
SLII® is a prescriptive approach to leadership that suggests how leaders can become effective in many
different types of organizational settings involving a wide variety of organizational goals. This approach
provides a model that suggests to leaders how they should behave based on the demands of a
particular situation.
The SLII® model classifies leadership into four styles: S1 is high directive–low supportive, S2 is high
directive–high supportive, S3 is low directive–high supportive, and S4 is low directive–low supportive.
The model describes how each of the four leadership styles applies to followers who work at different
levels of development, from D1 (low in competence and high in commitment), to D2 (low to some
competence and low in commitment), to D3 (moderately competent but lacking commitment), to D4 (a
great deal of competence and a high degree of commitment).
Effective leadership occurs when the leader can accurately diagnose the development level of followers
in a goal situation and then exhibit the prescribed leadership style that matches that situation.
Leadership is measured in this approach with questionnaires that ask respondents to assess a series of
work-related situations. The questionnaires provide information about the leader’s diagnostic ability,
flexibility, and effectiveness. They are useful in helping leaders to learn about how they can change their
leadership style to become more effective across different situations.
There are four major strengths to the situational approach. First, it is recognized by many as a standard
for training leaders. Second, it is a practical approach, which is easily understood and easily applied.
Third, this approach sets forth a clear set of prescriptions for how leaders should act if they want to
enhance their leadership effectiveness. Fourth, the situational approach recognizes and stresses that
there is not one best style of leadership; instead, leaders need to be flexible and adapt their style to the
requirements of the situation.
Criticisms of the situational approach suggest that it also has limitations. Unlike many other leadership
theories, this approach does not have a strong body of research findings to justify and support the
theoretical underpinnings on which it stands. As a result, there is ambiguity regarding how the approach
conceptualizes certain aspects of leadership. It is not clear in explaining how followers move from
developing levels to developed levels, nor is it clear on how commitment changes over time for
followers. Without the basic research findings, the validity of the basic prescriptions for matching
leaders’ styles to followers’ development levels must be questioned. In addition, the model does not
address how demographic characteristics affect followers’ preferences for leadership. Finally, the model
does not provide guidelines for how leaders should adapt their style to groups as opposed to one-to-one
contexts.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
The matrix of leadership styles shows directive behavior along the horizontal axis and supportive
behavior along the vertical axis, both ranging from low to high. The different leadership styles are as
follows.
S1 on the bottom-right side of the matrix: High directive and low supportive behavior.
S2 on the top-right side of the matrix: High directive and high supportive behavior.
S3 on the top-left side of the matrix: High supportive and low directive behavior.
S4 on the bottom-left side of the matrix: Low supportive and low directive behavior.
A bell-shaped curve is labeled delegating in the S4 block, supporting in the S3 block, coaching in the S2
block, and directing in the S1 block.
The four development levels under the matrix, from developing on the right to developed on the left are
as follows.
D1: Low competence, high commitment.
D2: Low to some competence, low commitment.
D3: Moderate to high competence, variable commitment.
D4: High competence and high commitment.
6 PATH–GOAL THEORY
Path–goal theory was developed to explain how leaders motivate followers to be productive and
satisfied with their work.
DESCRIPTION
Path–goal theory discusses how leaders motivate followers to accomplish designated goals. Drawing
heavily from research on what motivates followers, path–goal theory first appeared in the leadership
literature in the early 1970s in the works of Evans (1970), House (1971), House and Dessler (1974), and
House and Mitchell (1974). The stated goal of this theory is to enhance follower performance and
follower satisfaction by focusing on follower motivation and the nature of the work tasks. At its inception,
path–goal theory was incredibly innovative in the sense that it shifted attention to follower needs and
motivations, and away from the predominant focus on tasks and relationships.
In contrast to the situational approach, which suggests that a leader must adapt to the development
level of followers (see Chapter 5), path–goal theory emphasizes the relationship between the leader’s
style and the characteristics of the followers and the organizational setting. For the leader, the
imperative is to use a leadership style that best meets followers’ motivational needs. This is done by
choosing behaviors that complement or supplement what is missing in the work setting. Leaders try to
enhance followers’ goal attainment by providing information or rewards in the work environment (Indvik,
1986); leaders provide followers with the elements they think followers need to reach their goals.
According to House (1996), the heart of path–goal theory suggests that for leaders to be effective they
must “engage in behaviors that complement subordinates’ environments and abilities in a manner that
compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and individual and work unit
performance” (p. 335). Put simply, path–goal theory puts much of the onus on leaders in terms of
designing and facilitating a healthy and productive work environment to propel followers toward
success.
According to House and Mitchell (1974), leadership generates motivation when it increases the number
and kinds of payoffs that followers receive from their work. Leadership also motivates when it makes the
path to the goal clear and easy to travel through coaching and direction, removing obstacles and
roadblocks to attaining the goal, and making the work itself more personally satisfying (Figure 6.1). For
example, even in professions where employees are presumed to be self-motivated such as in technical
industries, leaders can greatly enhance follower motivation, engagement, satisfaction, performance, and
intent to stay (Stumpf, Tymon, Ehr, & vanDam, 2016). Relatedly, research (Asamani, Naab, & Ansah
Ofei, 2016) indicates that follower satisfaction and intent to leave are greatly impacted by a leader’s
communicative style. In other words, employing path–goal theory in terms of leader behavior and the
needs of followers and the tasks they have to do could hold substantial implications for organizations
that seek to enhance follower engagement and motivation while also decreasing turnover.
Figure 6.1 The Basic Idea Behind Path–Goal Theory
In brief, path–goal theory is designed to explain how leaders can help followers along the path to their
goals by selecting specific behaviors that are best suited to followers’ needs and to the situation in
which followers are working. By choosing the appropriate behaviors, leaders increase followers’
expectations for success and satisfaction.
Within path–goal theory, motivation is conceptualized from the perspective of the expectancy theory of
motivation (Vroom, 1964). The underlying assumption of expectancy theory is that followers will be
motivated if they think they are capable of performing their work, if they believe their efforts will result in
a certain outcome, and if they believe that the payoffs for doing their work are worthwhile. Motivation
rests with individuals and the choices they make about how a given behavior matches up with a given
result. The challenge for a leader using ideas from expectancy theory is to understand fully the goals of
each follower and the rewards associated with the goals. Followers want to feel efficacious, like they can
accomplish what they set out to do. But they also want to know that they will be rewarded if they can
accomplish their work. A leader needs to find out what is rewarding to followers about their work and
then make those rewards available to them when they accomplish the requirements of their work.
Expectancy theory is about the goals that followers choose and how leaders help them and reward them
for meeting those goals.
Conceptually, path–goal theory is complex, and it is useful to break it down into smaller units so we can
better understand the complexities of this approach.
Figure 6.2 illustrates the different components of path–goal theory, including leader behaviors, follower
characteristics, task characteristics, and motivation. Path–goal theory suggests that each type of leader
behavior has a different kind of impact on followers’ motivation. Whether a particular leader behavior is
motivating to followers is contingent on the followers’ characteristics and the characteristics of the task.
Figure 6.2 Major Components of Path–Goal Theory
Leader Behaviors
Since its inception, path–goal leadership has undergone numerous iterations and revisions (i.e., House,
1971, 1996; House & Mitchell, 1974) that have increased the number of contingencies associated with
the theory. However, for our purposes, we will discuss only the primary four leadership behaviors
identified as part of path–goal theory—directive, supportive, participative, and achievement oriented
(House & Mitchell, 1974, p. 83). These four leader behaviors are not only foundational to understanding
how path–goal theory works but are still more commonly used by researchers in contemporary studies
of the path–goal leadership approach (e.g., Asamani et al., 2016).
Directive Leadership
Directive leadership is similar to the “initiating structure” concept described in the Ohio State studies
(Halpin & Winer, 1957), discussed in Chapter 4, and the “telling” style described in the situational
leadership approach (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969), the subject of Chapter 5. It characterizes a leader
who gives followers instructions about their task, including what is expected of them, how it is to be
done, and the timeline for when it should be completed. It is thought that by being provided with explicit
expectations and removing ambiguity, followers will have the clarity needed to focus on their jobs. A
directive leader sets clear standards of performance and makes the rules and regulations clear to
followers.
A good example of a directive leader is Professor Smith, discussed in Chapter 4 (page 93), an instructor
who, at the beginning of a term, provides a syllabus to students that outlines what will be studied in the
course, what chapters in a text to read, deadlines for assignments, and when tests will be administered.
Often these syllabi will also outline grading policies so students know what scores are required to earn
certain grades.
Supportive Leadership
Supportive leadership resembles the “consideration” behavior construct identified by the Ohio State
studies (Hemphill & Coons, 1957; Stogdill, 1963). Supportive leadership consists of being friendly and
approachable as a leader and includes attending to the well-being and human needs of followers.
Leaders using supportive behaviors go out of their way to make work pleasant for followers, which, in
turn, provides followers with the confidence necessary to succeed (House, 1971). In addition, supportive
leaders treat followers as equals and give them respect for their status.
To understand the supportive leader role, consider the example of a coordinator of volunteers assigned
to clean up trash and litter after an outdoor music festival. The task itself is not especially pleasant,
especially in the hot sun, but the coordinator makes sure there are cool beverages and snacks for the
volunteers, as well as a meal at the conclusion of their work. To give them extra incentive, he has
developed a game of “trash bingo” in which volunteers have to find an array of items, such as caps to
specific beverage bottles or pieces of trash in different colors, to win prizes. As the volunteers work, he
walks among them, pulling a wagon filled with cold drinks, snacks, extra trash bags, sunscreen, and
other necessities, which he offers them while asking each of them how they are doing and if they need
anything.
Participative Leadership
Participative leadership consists of inviting followers to share in the decision making. A participative
leader consults with followers, obtains their ideas and opinions, and integrates their suggestions into the
decisions about how the group or organization will proceed. This particular leadership style may also
result in increased group performance through member participation and dedication to shared group
goals.
An example of a participative leader is the owner and chef of a fine dining restaurant that became very
popular shortly after its opening. To deal with the “growing pains” of this quick success, she has regular
weekly meetings with her staff to talk about what is working and what’s not and how to improve
processes. She looks to the servers to tell her about menu items that should be changed and has the
kitchen staff discuss how changes to the menu can be implemented. At the same time, they all discuss
plans to scale up the restaurant’s capacity to lower the wait times for customers, without sacrificing
quality.
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Achievement-oriented leadership is characterized by a leader who challenges followers to perform work
at the highest level possible. This leader establishes a high standard of excellence for followers and
seeks continuous improvement. In addition to bringing significant expectations for followers,
achievement-oriented leaders show a high degree of confidence that followers are capable of
establishing and accomplishing challenging goals.
The captain of a firefighting crew that deals with wildfires is an example of an achievement-oriented
leader. The goal for the crew is to contain the fire while saving property and people. The captain
rigorously trains his crew members in the months before wildfire season, running them through
countless drills that practice safety and firefighting methods so that they can perform at their highest
level in the face of danger. For each drill, the captain grades crew members on a scale from 1 to 10.
Those crew members who score the highest on the drills receive a special award at the end of training.
House and Mitchell (1974) suggested that leaders might exhibit any or all of these styles with various
followers and in different situations. Path–goal theory is not a trait approach that locks leaders into only
one kind of leadership. Leaders should adapt their styles to the situation or to the motivational needs of
their followers. For example, if followers need participative leadership at one point in a task and directive
leadership at another, leaders can change their style as needed. Different situations may call for
different types of leadership behavior. Furthermore, there may be instances when it is appropriate for a
leader to use more than one style at the same time.
In addition to leader behaviors, Figure 6.2 illustrates two other major components of path–goal theory:
follower characteristics and task characteristics. Each of these two sets of characteristics influences the
way leaders’ behaviors affect follower motivation. In other words, the impact of leadership is contingent
on the characteristics of both followers and their task.
Follower Characteristics
Follower characteristics determine how a leader’s behavior is interpreted by followers in a given work
context. Researchers have focused on followers’ needs for affiliation, preferences for structure,
desires for control, and self-perceived level of task ability. These characteristics and many others
determine the degree to which followers find the behavior of a leader an immediate source of
satisfaction or instrumental to some future satisfaction. As we discuss these follower characteristics, it is
helpful to relate them to the characteristics exhibited by the athletes and coach of the Navarro College
cheerleading team (Case Study 4.3). College-level competitive cheer is physically demanding and
dangerous, and the coach of this 40-member team knows that each athlete has different follower
characteristics that she must respond to in order to keep the individual athletes motivated to put in the
hard work and practice required for the team to win at the national competition.
Path–goal theory predicts that followers who have strong needs for affiliation prefer supportive
leadership because friendly and concerned leadership is a source of satisfaction. For many of the
Navarro College cheer team’s athletes, having been chosen by Coach Monica Aldama to be part of this
elite squad makes them feel special and talented. The coach continues to foster those feelings in them
by verbally recognizing her team members’ hard work at practices and by attending to them individually
when they need support.
For followers who are dogmatic and authoritarian and have to work in uncertain situations, path–goal
theory suggests directive leadership because task clarity satisfies their preferences for structure.
Directive leadership helps these followers by clarifying the path to the goal, making it less ambiguous.
The authoritarian type of follower feels more comfortable when the leader provides a greater sense of
certainty in the work setting. By establishing a mandatory, consistent team practice schedule and
policies regarding the athletes’ class attendance, practices, and personal conduct, Coach Aldama
provides a very clear structure for her athletes. They know what is expected of them and what the
consequences are if those expectations are not met.
Followers’ desires for control have received special attention in path–goal research through studies of
a personality construct locus of control that can be subdivided into internal and external dimensions.
Followers with an internal locus of control believe that they are in charge of the events that occur in their
life, whereas those with an external locus of control believe that chance, fate, or outside forces
determine life events. Path–goal theory suggests that for followers with an internal locus of control
participative leadership is most satisfying because it allows them to feel in charge of their work and to be
an integral part of decision making. For followers with an external locus of control, path–goal theory
suggests that directive leadership is best because it parallels followers’ feelings that outside forces
control their circumstances. On the Navarro College cheer team, Coach Aldama’s assistant coach
exhibits his internal locus of control in directing practices and also in participating with Coach Aldama
regarding who will make the final cut for the team. On the other hand, for those athletes who have an
external locus of control, Coach Aldama has to be very directive and tell them exactly what she needs
from them.
Another way in which leadership affects follower motivation is the followers’ self-perceived level of
task ability to perform a specific task. As followers’ perceptions of their abilities and competence go up,
the need for directive leadership goes down. In effect, directive leadership becomes redundant and
perhaps excessively controlling when followers feel competent to complete their own work. Through
grueling, two-a-day practices, the cheer team’s athletes become stronger and more competent
performing the stunts, tumbling, and moves of the routine. As they do, their coach is able to pull back
from directing them on their performance, instead focusing on the details that will enhance the team’s
routine. Athletes who do not gain confidence in their own abilities to be able to perform without direction
will not make the cut for the 20-person competition squad.
Task Characteristics
In addition to follower characteristics, task characteristics have a major impact on the way a leader’s
behavior influences followers’ motivation (Figure 6.2). Task characteristics include the design of the
followers’ task, the formal authority system of the organization, and the primary work group of
followers. Collectively, these characteristics in themselves can provide motivation for followers. When a
situation provides a clearly structured task, strong group norms, and an established authority system,
followers will find the paths to desired goals apparent and will not need a leader to clarify goals or coach
them in how to reach these goals. Followers will feel as if they can accomplish their work and that their
work is of value. Leadership in these types of contexts could be seen as unnecessary, un-empathic, and
excessively controlling.
In some situations, however, the design of the task characteristics may call for leadership involvement.
Tasks that are unclear and ambiguous call for leadership input that provides structure. In addition, highly
repetitive tasks call for leadership that gives support to maintain followers’ motivation. In work settings
where the formal authority system is weak, leadership becomes a tool that helps followers by making
the rules and work requirements clear. In contexts where the primary work group norms are weak or
nonsupportive, leadership assists in building cohesiveness and role responsibility.
A special focus of path–goal theory is helping followers overcome obstacles. Obstacles could be just
about anything in the work setting that gets in the way of followers. Specifically, obstacles create
excessive uncertainties, frustrations, or threats for followers. In these settings, path–goal theory
suggests that it is the leader’s responsibility to help followers by removing these obstacles or helping
followers to navigate around them. Helping followers around these obstacles will increase followers’
expectations that they can complete the task and increase their sense of job satisfaction. In coaching
the Navarro cheer team, Coach Aldama sometimes finds elements of the routines that have been
developed for her team to be too challenging for her athletes to accomplish. As a leader she will try to
solve these issues by reworking the routine’s elements and guiding the athletes on skills to help them
master these elements.
As we mentioned earlier in the chapter, path–goal theory has undergone many revisions. In 1996,
House published a reformulated path–goal theory that extends his original work to include eight classes
of leadership behaviors. Besides the four leadership behaviors discussed previously in this chapter—(a)
directive, (b) supportive, (c) participative, and (d) achievement-oriented behavior—the new theory adds
(e) work facilitation, (f) group-oriented decision process, (g) work-group representation and networking,
and (h) value-based leadership behavior. The essence of the new theory is the same as the original: To
be effective, leaders need to help followers by giving them what is missing in their environment and by
helping them compensate for deficiencies in their abilities.
HOW DOES PATH–GOAL THEORY WORK?
Path–goal theory is an approach to leadership that is not only theoretically complex, but also pragmatic.
It provides a set of assumptions about how various leadership styles interact with characteristics of both
followers and the work setting to affect the motivation of followers. In practice, the theory provides
direction about how leaders can help followers to accomplish their work in a satisfactory manner. Table
6.1 illustrates how leadership behaviors are related to follower and task characteristics in path–goal
theory.
Table 6.1 Path–Goal Theory: How It Works
Leadership Behavior Follower Characteristics Task Characteristics
Directive Leadership
Provides structure
Dogmatic
Authoritarian
Ambiguous
Unclear rules
Complex
Supportive Leadership
Provides nurturance
Unsatisfied
Need for affiliation
Need for human touch
Repetitive
Unchallenging
Mundane
Participative Leadership
Provides involvement
Autonomous
Need for control
Need for clarity
Ambiguous
Unclear
Unstructured
Leadership Behavior Follower Characteristics Task Characteristics
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Provides challenges
High expectations
Need to excel
Ambiguous
Challenging
Complex
Theoretically, the path–goal approach suggests that leaders need to choose a leadership style that best
fits the needs of followers and the work they are doing. The theory predicts that a directive style of
leadership is best in situations in which followers are dogmatic and authoritarian, the task demands are
ambiguous, the organizational rules are unclear, and the task is complex. In these situations, directive
leadership complements the work by providing guidance and psychological structure for followers
(House & Mitchell, 1974, p. 90).
For tasks that are structured, unsatisfying, or frustrating, path–goal theory suggests that leaders should
use a supportive style. The supportive style provides what is missing by nurturing followers when they
are engaged in tasks that are repetitive and unchallenging. Supportive leadership offers a sense of
human touch for followers engaged in mundane, mechanized activity.
Participative leadership is considered best when a task is ambiguous: Participation gives greater
clarity to how certain paths lead to certain goals, and helps followers learn what leads to what (House &
Mitchell, 1974, p. 92). In addition, participative leadership has a positive impact when followers are
autonomous and have a strong need for control because this kind of follower responds favorably to
being involved in decision making and in the structuring of work.
Furthermore, path–goal theory predicts that achievement-oriented leadership is most effective in
settings in which followers are required to perform ambiguous tasks. In settings such as these, leaders
who challenge and set high standards for followers raise followers’ confidence that they have the ability
to reach their goals. In effect, achievement-oriented leadership helps followers feel that their efforts will
result in effective performance. In settings where the task is more structured and less ambiguous,
however, achievement-oriented leadership appears to be unrelated to followers’ expectations about their
work efforts.
Pragmatically, path–goal theory is straightforward. An effective leader has to attend to the needs of
followers. The leader should help followers to define their goals and the paths they want to take in
reaching those goals. When obstacles arise, the leader needs to help followers confront them. This may
mean helping a follower around the obstacle, or it may mean removing an obstacle. The leader’s job is
to help followers reach their goals by directing, guiding, and coaching them along the way.
STRENGTHS
Path–goal theory has several positive features. First, path–goal theory provides a useful theoretical
framework for understanding how various leadership behaviors affect followers’ satisfaction and work
performance. It was one of the first theories to specify conceptually distinct varieties of leadership (e.g.,
directive, supportive, participative, achievement oriented), expanding the focus of prior research, which
dealt exclusively with task- and relationship-oriented behaviors (Jermier, 1996). The path–goal approach
was also one of the first situational contingency theories of leadership to explain how task and follower
characteristics affect the impact of leadership on follower performance. The framework provided in
path–goal theory informs leaders about how to choose an appropriate leadership style based on the
various demands of the task and the type of followers being asked to do the task. Additionally, later
iterations of the theory offer suggestions for how to motivate work groups for increased collaboration
and enhanced performance.
A second positive feature of path–goal theory is that it attempts to integrate the motivation principles of
expectancy theory into a theory of leadership. This makes path–goal theory unique because no other
leadership approach deals directly with motivation in this way. Path–goal theory forces us continually to
ask questions such as these about follower motivation: How can I motivate followers to feel that they
can do the work? How can I help them feel that if they successfully do their work, they will be rewarded?
What can I do to improve the payoffs that followers expect from their work? Understanding the
processes and dynamics behind motivation is critical in any organization (Kanfer, Frese, & Johnson,
2017), and path–goal theory is designed to keep those questions that address issues of motivation at
the forefront of the leader’s mind.
Path–goal’s third strength, and perhaps its greatest, is that the theory provides a model that in certain
ways is very practical. The representation of the model (Figure 6.1) underscores and highlights the
important ways leaders help followers. It shouts out for leaders to clarify the paths to the goals and
remove or help followers around the obstacles to the goals. In its simplest form, the theory reminds
leaders that the overarching purpose of leadership is to guide and coach followers as they move along
the path to achieve a goal. The theory includes characteristics of both the followers and the situation
and is more comprehensive than prior contingency theories.
CRITICISMS
Although path–goal theory has various strengths, it also has several identifiable weaknesses. First,
path–goal theory is so complex and incorporates so many different aspects of leadership and related
contingencies that interpreting the theory can be confusing. For example, path–goal theory makes
predictions about which of the different leadership styles is appropriate for tasks with different degrees
of structure, for goals with different levels of clarity, for followers at different levels of ability, and for
organizations with different degrees of formal authority. To say the least, it is a daunting task to
incorporate all these factors simultaneously into one’s selection of a preferred leadership style. Because
the scope of path–goal theory is so broad and encompasses so many different interrelated sets of
assumptions, it is difficult to use this theory fully in trying to improve the leadership process in a given
organizational context. The theory also includes follower characteristics that include personality traits.
Due to the complexity of the theory, there has not been a complete empirical test of its propositions.
A second limitation of path–goal theory is that it has received only partial support from the many
empirical research studies that have been conducted to test its validity (House & Mitchell, 1974; Indvik,
1986; C. Schriesheim, Castro, Zhou, & DeChurch, 2006; C. Schriesheim & Kerr, 1977; J. Schriesheim &
Schriesheim, 1980; Stinson & Johnson, 1975; Wofford & Liska, 1993). For example, some research
supports the prediction that leader directiveness is positively related to follower satisfaction when tasks
are ambiguous, but other research has failed to confirm this relationship. Furthermore, not all aspects of
the theory have been given equal attention. A great deal of research has been designed to study
directive and supportive leadership, but fewer studies address the other articulated leadership
behaviors. The claims of path–goal theory remain tentative because the research findings to date do not
provide a full and consistent picture of the basic assumptions and corollaries of path–goal theory
(Evans, 1996; Jermier, 1996; C. Schriesheim & Neider, 1996). There also is some confusion in the
literature due to several iterations of path–goal theory and House’s (1996) version having not been
tested (Turner, Baker, & Kellner, 2018).
A third and more recent criticism is that the theory does not account for gender differences in how
leadership is enacted or perceived (Mendez & Busenbark, 2015). Research has been done on the
impact of gender on directive, supportive, and participative leadership but has not been integrated into
path–goal theory. For example, Eagly and Johnson (1990) conducted a meta-analysis comparing
leadership styles and found that women are more participative, while men are more directive. Other
research has found that directive leadership by women is viewed negatively, regardless of whether
path–goal theory prescribes it. Female leaders who show direction are negatively perceived compared
to male leaders who demonstrate the same behavior (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992), particularly in
“masculine” jobs (Heilman, Wallen, Fuchs, & Tamkins, 2004). Race has also shown to be a factor—
Black women and Asian women are perceived negatively when they show directive behavior (Rosette,
Koval, Ma, & Livingston, 2016).
Another criticism of path–goal theory is that it fails to explain adequately the relationship between
leadership behavior and follower motivation. Path–goal theory is unique in that it incorporates the tenets
of expectancy theory; however, it does not go far enough in explicating how leadership is related to
these tenets. The principles of expectancy theory suggest that followers will be motivated if they feel
competent and trust that their efforts will get results, but path–goal theory does not describe how a
leader could use various styles directly to help followers feel competent or assured of success. For
example, path–goal theory does not explain how directive leadership during ambiguous tasks increases
follower motivation. Similarly, it does not explain how supportive leadership during tedious work relates
to follower motivation. The result is that practitioners are left with an inadequate understanding of how
their leadership will affect followers’ expectations about their work.
In addition, path–goal theory presumes that leaders possess the advanced communication skills
necessary to swiftly jockey between the various leadership behaviors to effectively interact with
followers in all given situations. Without constant feedback from followers, the shifting of leader behavior
among directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented behaviors may be viewed as
inconsistent and confusing by followers.
A final criticism that can be made of path–goal theory concerns a practical outcome of the theory. Path–
goal theory suggests that it is important for leaders to provide coaching, guidance, and direction for
followers; to help followers define and clarify goals; and to help followers around obstacles as they
attempt to reach their goals. Therefore, it is a “leader-centric” approach. As such, others have criticized
the theory for relying on leader behavior as the primary means to motivate followers (Cote, 2017). In
effect, this approach treats leadership as a one-way event: The leader affects the follower. The potential
difficulty in this type of “helping” leadership is that followers may easily become dependent on the leader
to accomplish their work. Path–goal theory places a great deal of responsibility on leaders and much
less on followers. Over time, this kind of leadership could be counterproductive because it promotes
dependency and fails to recognize the full abilities of followers.
APPLICATION
Path–goal theory is not an approach to leadership for which many management training programs have
been developed. You will not find many seminars with titles such as “Improving Your Path–Goal
Leadership” or “Assessing Your Skills in Path–Goal Leadership,” either. Nevertheless, path–goal theory
does offer significant insights that can be applied in ongoing settings to improve one’s leadership.
Path–goal theory provides a set of general recommendations based on the characteristics of followers
and tasks for how leaders should act in various situations if they want to be effective. It informs us about
when to emphasize certain leader behaviors including clarifying goal behavior, lending support, and
enhancing group decision-making processes, among others (House, 1996). For instance, the theory
suggests that leaders should be directive when tasks are complex and that leaders should give support
when tasks are dull. Similarly, it suggests that leaders should be participative when followers need
control and that leaders should be achievement oriented when followers need to excel. In a general way,
path–goal theory offers leaders a road map that gives directions about ways to improve follower
satisfaction and performance.
The principles of path–goal theory can be used by leaders at all levels in the organization and for all
types of tasks. To apply path–goal theory, a leader must carefully assess the followers and their tasks,
and then choose an appropriate leadership style to match those characteristics. If followers are feeling
insecure about doing a task, the leader needs to adopt a style that builds follower confidence. For
example, in a university setting where junior faculty members feel apprehensive about their teaching
and research, a department chair should give supportive leadership. By giving care and support, the
chair helps the junior faculty members gain a sense of confidence about their ability to perform the work
(Bess & Goldman, 2001). If followers are uncertain whether their efforts will result in reaching their
goals, the leader needs to prove to them that their efforts will be rewarded. As discussed earlier in the
chapter, path–goal theory is useful because it continually reminds leaders that their central purpose is to
help followers define their goals and then to help followers reach their goals in the most efficient
manner.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following case studies (Cases 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3) provide descriptions of various situations in which a
leader is attempting to apply path–goal theory. The first case looks at the leadership of three managers
at a manufacturing company. The second case is from the academic perspective of teaching orchestra
students. The final case profiles football coach P. J. Fleck and how his unique leadership rejuvenated
two floundering college teams. As you read the cases, try to apply the principles of path–goal theory to
determine the degree to which you think the leaders in the cases have done a good job based on this
theory.
Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors
Brako is a small manufacturing company that produces parts for the automobile industry. The company
has several patents on parts that fit in the brake assembly of nearly all domestic and foreign cars. Each
year, the company produces 3 million parts that it ships to assembly plants throughout the world. To
produce the parts, Brako runs three shifts with about 40 workers on each shift.
The supervisors for the three shifts (Art, Bob, and Carol) are experienced employees, and each has
been with the company for more than 20 years. The supervisors appear satisfied with their work and
have reported no major difficulty in supervising employees at Brako.
Art supervises the first shift. Employees describe him as being a very hands-on type of leader. He gets
very involved in the day-to-day operations of the facility. Workers joke that Art knows to the milligram the
amount of raw materials the company has on hand at any given time. Art often can be found walking
through the plant and reminding people of the correct procedures to follow in doing their work. Even for
those working on the production line, Art always has some directions and reminders.
Workers on the first shift have few negative comments to make about Art’s leadership. However, they
are negative about many other aspects of their work. Most of the work on this shift is very
straightforward and repetitive; as a result, it is monotonous. The rules for working on the production line
or in the packaging area are all clearly spelled out and require no independent decision making on the
part of workers. Workers simply need to show up and go through the motions. On lunch breaks, workers
often are heard complaining about how bored they are doing the same old thing over and over. Workers
do not criticize Art, but they do not think he really understands their situation.
Bob supervises the second shift. He really enjoys working at Brako and wants all the workers on the
afternoon shift to enjoy their work as well. Bob is a people-oriented supervisor whom workers describe
as very genuine and caring. Hardly a day goes by that Bob does not post a message about someone’s
birthday or someone’s personal accomplishment. Bob works hard at creating camaraderie, including
sponsoring a company softball team, taking people out to lunch, and having people over to his house for
social events.
Despite Bob’s personableness, absenteeism and turnover are highest on the second shift. The second
shift is responsible for setting up the machines and equipment when changes are made from making
one part to making another. In addition, the second shift is responsible for the complex computer
programs that monitor the machines. Workers on the second shift take a lot of heat from others at Brako
for not doing a good job.
Workers on the second shift feel pressure because it is not always easy to figure out how to do their
tasks. Each setup is different and entails different procedures. Although the computer is extremely
helpful when it is calibrated appropriately to the task, it can be extremely problematic when the software
it uses is off the mark. Workers have complained to Bob and upper management many times about the
difficulty of their jobs.
Carol supervises the third shift. Her style is different from that of the others at Brako. Carol routinely has
meetings, which she labels troubleshooting sessions, for the purpose of identifying problems workers
are experiencing. Any time there is a glitch on the production line, Carol wants to know about it so she
can help workers find a solution. If workers cannot do a particular job, she shows them how. For those
who are uncertain of their competencies, Carol gives reassurance. Carol tries to spend time with each
worker and help the workers focus on their personal goals. In addition, she stresses company goals and
the rewards that are available if workers are able to make the grade.
People on the third shift like to work for Carol. They find she is good at helping them do their job. They
say she has a wonderful knack for making everything fall into place. When there are problems, she
addresses them. When workers feel down, she builds them up. Carol was described by one worker as
an interesting mixture of part parent, part coach, and part manufacturing expert. Upper management at
Brako is pleased with Carol’s leadership, but they have experienced problems repeatedly when workers
from Carol’s shift have been rotated to other shifts at Brako.
Questions
1. Based on the principles of path–goal theory, describe why Art and Bob appear to be less effective
than Carol.
2. How does the leadership of each of the three supervisors affect the motivation of their respective
followers?
3. If you were consulting with Brako about leadership, what changes and recommendations would you
make regarding the supervision of Art, Bob, and Carol?
Case 6.2 Playing in the Orchestra
Martina Bates is the newly hired orchestra teacher at Middletown School District in rural Sparta, Kansas.
After graduating from the Juilliard School of Music, Bates had intended to play violin professionally, but
when no jobs became available, she accepted an offer to teach orchestra in her hometown, believing it
would be a good place to hone her skills until a professional position became available.
Being the orchestra instructor at Middletown is challenging because it involves teaching music classes,
directing the high school orchestra, and directing both the middle school and grade school orchestra
programs. When classes started, Bates hit the ground running and found she liked teaching, and was
exhilarated by her work with students. After her first year, however, she is having misgivings about her
decision to teach. Most of all, she is feeling troubled by how different students are in each of the three
programs, and how her leadership does not seem to be effective with all the students.
Running the elementary orchestra program is demanding, but fun. A lot of parents want their children to
play an instrument, so the turnout for orchestra is really strong, and it is the largest of the three
Middletown programs. Many students have never held an instrument before, so teaching them is quite a
challenge. Learning to make the cornet sound like a cornet or moving the bow so a cello sounds like a
cello is a huge undertaking. Whether it is drums, bass viol, clarinet, or saxophone, Bates patiently shows
the kids how to play and consistently compliments them every small step of the way. First and foremost,
she wants all of her learners to feel like they can “do it.” She instructs her students with great detail
about how to hold the instruments, position their tongues, and read notes. They respond well to Bates’s
kindness and forbearance, and the parents are thrilled. The orchestra’s spring concert had many wild
sounds but was also wildly successful, with excited children and happy parents.
The middle school orchestra is somewhat smaller in size and presents different challenges for Bates.
The students in this orchestra are starting to sound good on their instruments and are willing to play
together as a group, but some of them are becoming disinterested and want to quit. Bates uses a
different style of leadership with the middle schoolers, stressing practice and challenging students to
improve their skills. At this level, students are placed in “chairs” for each instrument. The best players sit
in the first chair, the next best are second chair, and so on down to the last chair. Each week, the
students engage in “challenges” for the chairs. If students practice hard and improve, they can advance
to a higher chair; students who don’t practice can slip down to a lower chair. Bates puts up charts to
track students’ practice hours, and when they reach established goals, they can choose a reward from
“the grab bag of goodies,” which has candy, trinkets, and gift cards. Never knowing what their prize will
be motivates the students, especially as they all want to get the gift cards. Although some kids avoid
practice because they find it tedious and boring, many enjoy it because it improves their performance, to
say nothing about the chance to get a prize. The spring concert for this group is Bates’s favorite,
because the sounds are better and the students are interested in playing well.
Middletown’s high school orchestra is actually very small, which is surprising to Bates. Why does she
have nearly a hundred kids in the elementary orchestra and less than half that number in the high
school program? She likes teaching the high school students, but they do not seem excited about
playing. Because she is highly trained herself, Bates likes to show students advanced techniques and
give them challenging music to play. She spends hours listening to each student play, providing
individualized feedback that, unfortunately in many cases, doesn’t seem to have any impact on the
students. For example, Chris Trotter, who plays third-chair trumpet, is considering dropping orchestra to
go out for cross-country. Similarly, Lisa Weiss, who is first-chair flute, seems bored and may quit the
orchestra to get a part-time job. Bates is frustrated and baffled; why would these students want to quit?
They are pretty good musicians, and most of them are willing to practice. The students have such
wonderful potential but don’t seem to want to use it. Students profess to liking Bates, but many of them
just don’t seem to want to be in the orchestra.
Questions
1. Path–goal leadership is about how leaders can help followers reach their goals. Generally, what are
the goals for the students in each of the different orchestras? What obstacles do they face? In what
way does Bates help them address obstacles and reach their goals?
2. Based on the principles of expectancy theory described in the chapter, why is Bates effective with
the elementary and middle school orchestras? Why do both of these groups seem motivated to play
for her? In what ways did she change her leadership style for the middle schoolers?
3. Bates’s competencies as a musician do not seem to help her with the students who are becoming
disinterested in orchestra. Why? Using ideas from expectancy theory, what would you advise her to
do to improve her leadership with the high school orchestra?
4. Achievement-oriented leadership is one of the possible behaviors of path–goal leadership. For
which of the three orchestras do you think this style would be most effective? Discuss.
Case 6.3 Row the Boat
When P. J. Fleck was a wide receivers’ coach for the Rutgers University football team, he told the
team’s then offensive coordinator, Kirk Ciarrocca, that his goal was to become the youngest head
football coach of a college team (Mattingly, 2017a).
Just two years later, at the age of 32, he was named the head coach of the Western Michigan University
(WMU) Broncos, making him the youngest coach of a NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision team.
When Coach Fleck took over the Broncos team, it had a 22–27 record. Four years later, the team was
13–1, became the Mid-American Conference (MAC) champion for the first time in 28 years, and earned
a trip to the 2017 Cotton Bowl.
Coach Fleck then took the top coaching job at the University of Minnesota, a Big Ten school that hadn’t
seen a championship season in 50 years. In just three seasons, he built another floundering team into a
formidable one. In 2019, the Golden Gophers finished the season 10–2. They also tied for the Big Ten
West title, the first time the team had won a share of a division title since the Big Ten began divisional
play. Minnesota defeated No. 9 Auburn in the 2020 Outback Bowl for its 11th win, the team’s most since
1904.
The thing about being a successful football coach is that your success is based on how your players
perform. Coach Fleck could only achieve his goals by setting goals for his players and then leading his
players in achieving those. He boils down the ability to turn around a program into three pieces: the right
people, cultural consistency, and the value of long-term vision over short-term desires (Giambalvo,
2019).
One of Coach Fleck’s first actions as coach at WMU was to rescind all the scholarship offers to
incoming players who had verbally committed to attend the university in Kalamazoo, under the previous
coach. The scholarship withdrawals occurred just weeks before the national signing day and left players
unable to arrange other Division I scholarships as slots were already filled at other schools. Despite the
bad press and the hit to his reputation that resulted, Coach Fleck said his decision to start recruiting
fresh was for the good of the program because recruits “commit to the coaching staff” (Ambrogi, 2013).
“He built Western Michigan by building it with better players,” said Sports Illustrated writer Andy Staples
(Mattingly, 2017b). By the next year, Coach Fleck had one of the highest-ranked recruiting classes in the
MAC conference, and he continued that streak for the next three years.
When he began his tenure at WMU, Coach Fleck was clear that he was creating a culture for the
program that emphasized athletes’ growth in four areas: “academically, athletically, socially and
spiritually.”
He established a team mantra, which also became the team’s rallying cry: Row the Boat. It came from
the tragedy of losing his second son, Colt, to a heart condition just days after he was born in 2011. But it
was more than a mantra; it was a mindset.
Coach Fleck explained the phrase, saying, “It’s very simple when you break it down. There are three
parts to rowing the boat. There is the oar, which is the energy behind rowing the boat. There is the boat,
which is the actual sacrifice, either our team or the administration or the boosters or the audience or
whoever is willing to sacrifice for this program. There is also the compass. Every single person that
comes in contact with our football program, fans or not, they are all going for one common goal and that
is success” (Drew, 2013).
Holding onto that mindset became important after his first season at WMU, when the team went 1–11.
Coach Fleck, along with his rallying cry of Row the Boat, which was emblazoned on billboards, T-shirts,
and posters in bars and restaurants across Kalamazoo, became an object of ridicule among fans, the
media, and rivals, who happily flouted broken oars at away games. But he made it clear to his team that
Row the Boat was for times of adversity.
“It’s very easy to row the boat in times of triumph and success in calm seas, but when you’re in the
middle of the night, and there are really big storms and there are really big waves, and it’s cold, and it’s
dark, and you can’t see, you have to continue to keep your oar in the water. That’s what it’s for. It’s not
for the really amazing times. It’s for when you get really tough times and you’re tested,” he said (Nothaft,
2017).
“And at one point, he was the only one who believed in it,” said WMU running back Jarvion Franklin.
“His voice never wavered. People were screaming at him and he stayed true to himself and his beliefs”
(Markgraff, 2018).
Despite the team’s deplorable record, Coach Fleck’s energy and charisma was enough to help him draw
top-level players to WMU, and the coach preached patience.
“When you take over a program, all 125 players have to adapt to your culture,” he said. “I think it takes
two or three years when you first get into a program,” he said. “There’s a new personality, and it takes
two or three years until everyone begins wearing that personality. Once you start getting into year three
and year four, it’s really just incoming freshmen that are adapting” (Markgraff, 2018).
That culture made his players focus on more than athletics. Coach Fleck stressed that he was preparing
the players for life after college. He wanted them to have the tools to be successful and overcome
adversity in whatever life threw at them.
“Coaching is way different in 2018 than it was in 2008,” he said. “All areas of the student-athletes’ lives
are affected by everything they do in college. I have to teach these four areas more than I ever have
before” (Markgraff, 2018).
In the team’s meeting room, a large sign detailed how to improve “academically, athletically, socially and
spiritually.” Under spirituality, it read, “connect with three new people.”
“Stepping outside your comfort zone in all four areas helps you change the narrative of whatever that
narrative is,” said Coach Fleck. “We are here to change that by our actions every day of doing the right
things. You should never be a better football player than you are a person” (Greder, 2017).
The winning record was one indication Coach Fleck was achieving what he set out to. Another was that
by 2017, the WMU Broncos football team had the highest grade point average in the conference.
Another indication was how the players’ own outlooks had changed.
“It’s not just about football or not just about the program, it’s about life,” WMU defensive lineman Keion
Adams said. “It’s about never giving up. The boat is sacrifice and the oar is the compass and direction
you set for yourself. It’s guided me through my life and made me the person that I am today” (Nichols,
2016).
Coach Fleck’s success at WMU meant bigger football programs would be calling, and within months of
the team’s Cotton Bowl experience, it was announced that he would leave WMU to coach football at the
University of Minnesota. Once in the Twin Cities, Coach Fleck immediately began to instill the same
culture he created at WMU with his new team, building camaraderie, teaching life lessons, and
developing a multilevel leadership committee of players. He was insistent that players assume
leadership roles and consistently model the desired culture of the team, often repeating, “Bad teams,
nobody leads. Average teams, coaches lead. Elite teams, players lead.”
Once again, Coach Fleck knew it would take a couple of years before his culture became ingrained in
his players. But with time, consistency, and a focus on cultural values, he produced “mature players who
are ready to lead” (Markgraff, 2018).
“We define maturity as, ‘When doing what you have to do becomes doing what you want to do,’” he
said. “If our guys don’t know what they have to do because it’s a new program, that takes a couple of
years for this maturity to take place. Once the expectations are laid out for them, they know what they
‘have to do.’ Once they want to do it, they also know every reason why they want to do it. That shows a
very mature football team. That’s when you start seeing players lead elite football teams” (Markgraff,
2018).
“Everything’s connected,” Coach Fleck told ESPN. “How we live our life is going to be how we play. It
sounds like a lot of slogans and all this other stuff. It’s really not. It’s very well connected, it’s very
organized, it’s a very detailed culture, there’s a standard, and that standard can’t be compromised in any
area of your life” (Rittenberg, 2019).
Questions
1. The focus of path–goal theory is for leaders to enhance follower performance by focusing on
follower motivation and the nature of work tasks. Describe how Coach Fleck achieved this through
(a) follower motivation and (b) work tasks.
2. Describe Coach Fleck in terms of the four path–goal leader behaviors—directive, supportive,
participative, and achievement oriented.
3. Regarding the follower characteristics outlined in the chapter, how did Coach Fleck address
followers’ (a) needs for affiliation, (b) preferences for structure, (c) desires for control, and (d) self-
perceived level of task ability?
4. Path–goal leadership and expectancy theory are about how leaders can help followers reach their
goals. Were the goals the players were working toward their own or Coach Fleck’s?
5. Explain Coach Fleck’s leadership in terms of expectancy theory.
Leadership Instrument
Because the path–goal theory was developed as a complex set of theoretical assumptions to direct
researchers in developing new leadership theory, it has used many different instruments to measure the
leadership process. The Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire has been useful in measuring and
learning about important aspects of path–goal leadership (Indvik, 1985, 1988) and is still used in
contemporary research (Asamani et al., 2016). This questionnaire provides information for respondents
on the four leadership behaviors: directive, supportive, participative, and achievement oriented.
Respondents’ scores on each of the different styles provide them with information on their strong and
weak styles and the relative importance they place on each of the styles.
To understand the path–goal questionnaire better, it may be useful to analyze a hypothetical set of
scores. For example, hypothesize that your scores on the questionnaire were 29 for directive, which is
high; 22 for supportive, which is moderate; 21 for participative, which is moderate; and 25 for
achievement oriented, which is moderate. These scores suggest that you are a leader who is typically
more directive than most other leaders, and quite similar to other leaders in the degree to which you are
supportive, participative, and achievement oriented.
According to the principles of path–goal theory, if your scores matched these hypothetical scores, you
would be effective in situations where the tasks and procedures are unclear and your followers have a
need for certainty. You would be less effective in work settings that are structured and unchallenging. In
addition, you would be moderately effective in ambiguous situations with followers who want control.
Last, you would do fairly well in uncertain situations where you could set high standards, challenge
followers to meet these standards, and help them feel confident in their abilities.
In addition to the Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire, leadership researchers have commonly used
multiple instruments to study path–goal theory, including measures of task structure, locus of control,
follower expectancies, and follower satisfaction. Although the primary use of these instruments has
been for theory building, many of the instruments offer valuable information related to practical
leadership issues.
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to identify your path–goal styles of leadership and
examine how your use of each style relates to other styles of leadership.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains questions about different styles of path–goal leadership.
Indicate how often each statement is true of your own behavior.
Key: 1 = Never 2 = Hardly ever 3 = Seldom 4 = Occasionally 5 = Often 6 = Usually 7
= Always
1. I let followers know what is expected of them. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. I maintain a friendly working relationship with followers. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. I consult with followers when facing a problem. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. I listen receptively to followers’ ideas and suggestions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. I inform followers about what needs to be done and how it needs
to be done.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. I let followers know that I expect them to perform at their highest
level.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. I act without consulting my followers. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. I do little things to make it pleasant to be a member of the group. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. I ask followers to follow standard rules and regulations. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. I set goals for followers’ performance that are quite challenging. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. I say things that hurt followers’ personal feelings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. I ask for suggestions from followers concerning how to carry out
assignments.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. I encourage continual improvement in followers’ performance. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. I explain the level of performance that is expected of followers. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. I help followers overcome problems that stop them from carrying
out their tasks.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. I show that I have doubts about followers’ ability to meet most
objectives.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. I ask followers for suggestions on what assignments should be
made.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. I give vague explanations of what is expected of followers on the
job.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. I consistently set challenging goals for followers to attain. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. I behave in a manner that is thoughtful of followers’ personal
needs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scoring
1. Reverse the scores for Items 7, 11, 16, and 18.
2. Directive style: Sum of scores on Items 1, 5, 9, 14, and 18.
3. Supportive style: Sum of scores on Items 2, 8, 11, 15, and 20.
4. Participative style: Sum of scores on Items 3, 4, 7, 12, and 17.
5. Achievement-oriented style: Sum of scores on Items 6, 10, 13, 16, and 19.
Scoring Interpretation
For each style, scores 17 and below are considered low, a moderate score is between 18 and
28, and scores 29 and above are considered high.
The scores you received on the Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire provide information about
which styles of leadership you use most often and which you use less often. In addition, you can
use these scores to assess your use of each style relative to your use of the other styles.
Sources: Adapted from A Path-Goal Theory Investigation of Superior-Subordinate Relationships, by J. Indvik,
unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1985; and from Indvik (1988). Based on the work
of House and Dessler (1974) and House (1977) cited in Fulk and Wendler (1982).
Summary
Path–goal theory was developed to explain how leaders motivate followers to be productive and
satisfied with their work. It is a contingency approach to leadership because effectiveness depends on
the fit between the leader’s behavior and the characteristics of followers and the task.
The basic principles of path–goal theory are derived from expectancy theory, which suggests that
followers will be motivated if they feel competent, if they think their efforts will be rewarded, and if they
find the payoff for their work valuable. A leader can help followers by selecting a style of leadership
(directive, supportive, participative, or achievement oriented) that provides what is missing for followers
in a particular work setting. In simple terms, it is the leader’s responsibility to help followers reach their
goals by directing, guiding, and coaching them along the way.
Path–goal theory offers a large set of predictions for how a leader’s style interacts with followers’ needs
and the nature of the task. Among other things, it predicts that directive leadership is effective with
ambiguous tasks, that supportive leadership is effective for repetitive tasks, that participative leadership
is effective when tasks are unclear and followers are autonomous, and that achievement-oriented
leadership is effective for challenging tasks.
Path–goal theory has three major strengths. First, it provides a theoretical framework that is useful for
understanding how various styles of leadership affect the productivity and satisfaction of followers.
Second, path–goal theory is unique in that it integrates the motivation principles of expectancy theory
into a theory of leadership. Third, it provides a practical model that underscores the important ways in
which leaders help followers.
On the negative side, several criticisms can be leveled at path–goal theory. First, the scope of path–goal
theory encompasses so many interrelated sets of assumptions that it is hard to use this theory in a given
organizational setting. Second, research findings to date do not support a full and consistent picture of
the claims of the theory. Third, path–goal theory does not account for gender differences in how
leadership is enacted or perceived. Fourth, path–goal theory does not show in a clear way how leader
behaviors directly affect follower motivation levels. Also, the theory assumes that leaders have the skills
to allow them to switch between various leadership behaviors needed by differing followers, and it
assumes that leader behavior is the primary means to motivate followers. Last, path–goal theory is
predominantly leader oriented and fails to recognize the interactional nature of leadership. It does not
promote follower involvement in the leadership process.
7 LEADER–MEMBER EXCHANGE THEORY
Leader-member exchange theory addresses leadership as a process centered on the interactions
between leaders and followers. It makes the leader–member relationship the pivotal concept in the
leadership process.
DESCRIPTION
Most of the leadership theories discussed thus far in this book have emphasized leadership from the
point of view of the leader (e.g., trait approach, skills approach, and behavioral approach) or the follower
and the context (e.g., situational approach and path–goal theory). Leader–member exchange (LMX)
theory takes still another approach and conceptualizes leadership as a process that is centered on the
interactions between leaders and followers. As Figure 7.1 illustrates, LMX theory makes the dyadic
relationship between leaders and followers the focal point of the leadership process.
Figure 7.1 Dimensions of Leadership
Source: Reprinted from The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), G. B. Graen & M. Uhl-Bien, “Relationship-
Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of
Leadership Over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-Level, Multi-Domain Perspective,” pp. 219–247, Copyright
(1995), with permission from Elsevier.
Note: LMX theory was first described 28 years ago in the works of Dansereau, Graen, and Haga
(1975), Graen (1976), and Graen and Cashman (1975). Since it first appeared, it has undergone
several revisions, and it continues to be of interest to researchers who study the leadership process.
Before LMX theory, researchers treated leadership as something leaders did toward followers in a
collective way, as a group, using an average leadership style. LMX theory challenged this assumption
and directed researchers’ attention to the differences that might exist between the leader and each of
the leader’s followers.
Early Studies
In the first studies of exchange theory, which was then called vertical dyad linkage (VDL) theory,
researchers focused on the nature of the vertical linkages leaders formed with each of their followers
(Figure 7.2). A leader’s relationship to the work unit as a whole was viewed as a series of vertical dyads
(Figure 7.3).
Figure 7.2 The Vertical Dyad
Note: The leader (L) forms an individualized working relationship with each follower (F). The
exchanges (both content and process) between the leader and the follower define their dyadic
relationship.
Figure 7.3 Vertical Dyads
Note: The leader (L) forms special relationships with all followers (F). Each of these relationships is
special and has unique characteristics.
In assessing the characteristics of these vertical dyads, researchers found two general types of linkages
(or relationships): those that were based on expanded and negotiated role responsibilities (extra-roles),
which were called the in-group, and those that were based on the formal employment contract (defined
roles), which were called the out-group (Figure 7.4).
Description
Figure 7.4 In-Groups and Out-Groups
Note: A leader (L) and followers (F) form unique relationships. Relationships within the in-group are
marked by mutual trust, respect, liking, and reciprocal influence. Relationships within the out-group are
marked by formal communication based on job descriptions. Plus-3 is a high-quality relationship, and
zero is a stranger.
Within an organizational work unit, followers become a part of the in-group or the out-group based on
how well they work with the leader and how well the leader works with them. Personality and other
personal characteristics are related to this process (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975; Maslyn, Schyns,
& Farmer, 2017; Randolph-Seng et al., 2016). In addition, membership in one group or the other is
based on how followers involve themselves in expanding their role responsibilities with the leader
(Graen, 1976). Followers who are interested in negotiating with the leader what they are willing to do for
the group can become a part of the in-group. These negotiations involve exchanges in which followers
do certain activities that go beyond their formal job descriptions, and the leader, in turn, does more for
these followers. If followers are not interested in taking on new and different job responsibilities, they
become a part of the out-group.
Followers in the in-group receive more information, influence, confidence, and concern from their
leaders than do out-group followers (Dansereau et al., 1975). In addition, they are more dependable,
more highly involved, and more communicative than out-group followers (Dansereau et al., 1975).
Whereas in-group members do extra things for the leader and the leader does the same for them,
followers in the out-group are less compatible with the leader and usually just come to work, do their job,
and go home. Not to say that out-group members are poor performers. Poor performers are a third
group that must be managed differently due to the need for performance monitoring and documentation.
Out-group members perform to the specifications of their job description, but they don’t go above and
beyond that to help the leader and the work group.
Later Studies
After the first set of studies, there was a shift in the focus of LMX theory. Whereas the initial studies of
this theory addressed primarily the nature of the differences between in-groups and out-groups, a
subsequent line of research addressed how LMX theory was related to organizational effectiveness.
Specifically, these studies focus on how the quality of leader–member exchanges was related to positive
outcomes for leaders, followers, groups, and the organization in general (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).
Researchers found that high-quality leader–member exchanges produced less employee turnover, more
positive performance evaluations, higher frequency of promotions, greater organizational commitment,
more desirable work assignments, better job attitudes, more attention and support from the leader,
greater participation, and faster career progress over 25 years (Buch, Kuvaas, Dysvik, & Schyns, 2014;
Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Liden, Wayne, & Stilwell, 1993; Malik, Wan, Ahmad, Naseem, & Rehman,
2015).
In a meta-analysis of 164 LMX studies, Gerstner and Day (1997) found that leader–member exchange
was consistently related to member job performance, satisfaction (overall and supervisory),
commitment, role conflict and clarity, and turnover intentions. In addition, they found strong support in
these studies for the psychometric properties of the LMX-7 Questionnaire (included in this chapter). For
purposes of research, they highlighted the importance of measuring leader–member exchange from the
perspective of both the leader and the follower.
Most recently, researchers are investigating the processual nature of leader–member exchange and
how work relationships are co-constructed through communication. N. Hill, Kang, and Seo (2014)
studied the role of electronic communication in employee empowerment and work outcomes and found
that a higher degree of electronic communication between leaders and followers resulted in more
positive leader–member relationships. Omilion-Hodges and Baker (2017) analyzed leader
communication behaviors and developed scales to assess how these behaviors can affect the growth or
stagnation of leader–member relationships.
Based on a review of 130 studies of LMX research conducted since 2002, Anand, Hu, Liden, and
Vidyarthi (2011) found that interest in studying leader–member exchange has not diminished. A large
majority of these studies (70%) examined the antecedents (e.g., Maslyn et al., 2017) and outcomes of
leader–member exchange. The research trends show increased attention to the context surrounding
LMX relationships (e.g., group dynamics), analyzing leader–member exchange from individual and
group levels, and studying leader–member exchange with non-U.S. samples (Malik et al., 2015) or
racially diverse dyads (Randolph-Seng et al., 2016).
For example, using a sample of employees in a variety of jobs in Israeli organizations, Atwater and
Carmeli (2009) examined the connection between employees’ perceptions of leader–member exchange
and their energy and creativity at work. They found that perceived high-quality leader–member
exchange was positively related to feelings of energy in employees, which, in turn, was related to
greater involvement in creative work. LMX theory was not directly associated with creativity, but it served
as a mechanism to nurture people’s feelings, which then enhanced their creativity.
Ilies, Nahrgang, and Morgeson (2007) did a meta-analysis of 51 research studies that examined the
relationship between leader–member exchange and employee citizenship behaviors. Citizenship
behaviors are discretionary employee behaviors that go beyond the prescribed role, job description, or
reward system (Katz, 1964; Organ, 1988). They found a positive relationship between the quality of
leader–member relationships and citizenship behaviors. In other words, followers who had higher-quality
relationships with their leaders were more likely to engage in more discretionary (positive “payback”)
behaviors that benefited the leader and the organization.
Researchers have also studied how LMX theory is related to empowerment (Malik et al., 2015). Harris,
Wheeler, and Kacmar (2009) explored how empowerment moderates the impact of leader–member
exchange on job outcomes such as job satisfaction, turnover, job performance, and organizational
citizenship behaviors. Based on two samples of college alumni, they found that empowerment and
leader–member exchange quality had a slight synergistic effect on job outcomes. The quality of leader–
member exchange mattered most for employees who felt little empowerment. For these employees,
high-quality leader–member exchange appeared to compensate for the drawbacks of not being
empowered. Volmer, Spurk, and Niessen (2012) investigated the role of job autonomy in the relationship
between leader–member exchange and creativity of followers. Their study of a high-technology firm
found that greater autonomy increased the positive relationship between leader–member exchange and
creativity at work.
Finally, a meta-analysis conducted by Martin, Guillaume, Thomas, Lee, and Epitropaki (2016) supported
LMX predictions regarding job performance. There was a positive relationship between LMX and task
performance as well as citizenship performance, while a negative relationship existed between LMX and
counterproductive performance. Of particular importance in this study, it was found that LMX was
positively related to objective task performance (actual performance measurements, not ratings by
supervisors). This study also found that trust, motivation, empowerment, and job satisfaction explain the
effects of LMX on job performance with trust in the leader having the largest effect.
In essence, these findings clearly illustrate that organizations stand to gain much from having leaders
who can create good working relationships. When leaders and followers have good exchanges, they
feel better and accomplish more, and the organization prospers.
Leadership Development
Research into LMX theory has also focused on how exchanges between leaders and followers can be
used for leadership development (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1991). Leadership development emphasizes that
leaders should develop high-quality exchanges with all of their followers rather than just a few. It
attempts to make all followers feel as if they are a part of the in-group and, by so doing, avoids the
inequities and negative implications of being in an out-group. In general, leadership development
promotes partnerships in which the leader tries to build effective dyads with all followers in the work unit
(Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). In addition, LMX theory suggests that leaders can create networks of
partnerships throughout the organization, which will benefit the organization’s goals and the leader’s
own career progress. Herman and Troth’s (2013) findings regarding the emotional experiences
described by followers in high- and low-quality LMX relationships align with the assertion that positive
relationships benefit organizational and personal leader goals.
Graen and Uhl-Bien (1991) suggested that high-quality leader–member relationships develop
progressively over time in three phases: (1) the stranger phase, (2) the acquaintance phase, and (3) the
mature partnership phase (Table 7.1). During Phase 1, the stranger phase, the interactions in the
leader–follower dyad generally are rule bound, relying heavily on contractual relationships. Leaders and
followers relate to each other within prescribed organizational roles. They have lower-quality exchanges,
similar to those of out-group members discussed earlier in the chapter. The follower complies with the
formal leader, who has hierarchical status for the purpose of achieving the economic rewards the leader
controls. The motives of the follower during the stranger phase are directed toward self-interest rather
than toward the good of the group (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).
Table 7.1 Phases in Leadership Development
Phase 1 Stranger Phase 2 Acquaintance Phase 3 Mature Partnership
Roles Scripted Tested Negotiated
Influences One way Mixed Reciprocal
Exchanges Low quality Medium quality High quality
Phase 1 Stranger Phase 2 Acquaintance Phase 3 Mature Partnership
Interests Self Self and other Group
Time
Source: Adapted from “Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of
Leadership Over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-Level, Multi-Domain Perspective,” by G. B. Graen and M. Uhl-Bien, The Leadership
Quarterly, 6(2), pp. 219–247. Copyright 1995 by Elsevier. Reprinted with permission.
While early descriptions of the LMX development process focused on the leader initiating the
development process, followers have been shown to have an influence on how the LMX process
unfolds as well. Xu, Loi, Cai, and Liden (2019) found that follower proactivity positively influenced LMX
development. They found that take-charge followers whose efforts and actions make the leader’s work
more effective and whom the leader recognizes can subsequently develop high-quality LMX
relationships with leaders. This is particularly true for followers who work for leaders with high
achievement goals, so it is prescribed that LMX training include sensitizing leaders to appreciate
followers’ proactive attempts to build the relationship.
Phase 2, the acquaintance phase, begins with an offer by the leader or the follower for improved career-
oriented social exchanges, which involve sharing more resources and personal or work-related
information. It is a testing period for both the leader and the follower to assess whether the follower is
interested in taking on more roles and responsibilities and to assess whether the leader is willing to
provide new challenges for the follower. During this time, dyads shift away from interactions that are
governed strictly by job descriptions and defined roles and move toward new ways of relating. As
measured by LMX theory, it could be said that the quality of their exchanges has improved to medium
quality. Successful dyads in the acquaintance phase begin to develop greater trust and respect for each
other. They also tend to focus less on their own self-interests and more on the purposes and goals of
the group.
Phase 3, mature partnership, is marked by high-quality leader–member exchanges. People who have
progressed to this stage in their relationships experience a high degree of mutual trust, respect, and
obligation toward each other. In addition, during Phase 3, members may depend on each other for
favors and special assistance. For example, leaders may rely on followers to do extra assignments, and
followers may rely on leaders for needed support or encouragement. They have tested their relationship
and found that they can depend on each other. In mature partnerships, there is a high degree of
reciprocity between leaders and followers: Each affects and is affected by the other. For example, in a
study of 75 bank managers and 58 engineering managers, Schriesheim, Castro, Zhou, and Yammarino
(2001) found that good leader–member relations were more egalitarian and that influence and control
were more evenly balanced between the supervisor and the follower.
In a study of leader–member relationship development, Nahrgang, Morgeson, and Ilies (2009) found
that leaders look for followers who exhibit enthusiasm, participation, gregariousness, and extraversion.
In contrast, followers look for leaders who are pleasant, trusting, cooperative, and agreeable. Leader
extraversion did not influence relationship quality for the followers, and follower agreeableness did not
influence relationship quality for the leaders. A key predictor of relationship quality for both leaders and
followers over time was both leader and follower performance. Kelley (2014) investigated the ways
leaders use narrative story lines to determine how leaders identify trustworthy, indeterminate, and
untrustworthy followers. Others have suggested the importance of looking at the social interaction
(Sheer, 2014) or cooperative communication between leaders and followers (Bakar & Sheer, 2013) as a
means to predict and explore relationship quality. It has also been suggested that exploring the use of
traditional relationship-building and maintenance techniques such as conflict management, shared
tasks, and positivity in leader–member relationships can shed light on how leader and follower
behaviors impact the quality of these relationships (Madlock & Booth-Butterfield, 2012; Omilion-Hodges,
Ptacek, & Zerilli, 2015).
The point is that leaders and followers are tied together in productive ways that go well beyond a
traditional hierarchically defined work relationship. They develop extremely effective ways of relating that
produce positive outcomes for themselves and the organization. In effect, partnerships are
transformational in that they assist leaders and followers in moving beyond their own self-interests to
accomplish the greater good of the team and organization (see Chapter 8).
Emotions and LMX Development
Recently, Cropanzano, Dasborough, and Weiss (2017) have suggested that emotions play a critical role
in the development of high-quality leader–member relationships. To explain the role of emotions in LMX,
they constructed a model that complements the original phases suggested by Graen and Uhl-Bien as
described in Table 7.1.
As illustrated in Table 7.2, Cropanzano et al. (2017) suggest that leaders and followers experience
different emotional, or affective, processes as they progress through three stages—role taking, role
making, and role routinization—in LMX development.
Table 7.2 Affective Processes and LMX Development
STAGE I Role Taking STAGE II Role Making STAGE III Role
Routinization
LMX
Development
Leader initiates
possibility of LMX
relationship
Series of dyadic affective
events shapes LMX
quality
Stable relationship disrupted
by LMX differentiation
STAGE I Role Taking STAGE II Role Making STAGE III Role
Routinization
Key
Affective
Process
Leader emotional
expressions are affective
events
Leader and members
share affect (entrainment)
LMX relationship can change
based on LMX differentiation
Level Individual Dyadic Group
Source: Adapted from Cropanzano, R., Dasborough, M. T., & Weiss, H. M. (2017). Affective events and the development of leader–
member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 233–258.
Role Taking.
In the first stage, the leader initiates a relationship, and cues are taken directly from the leader regarding
the development of a higher-quality relationship based on interpersonal liking. In this stage, the leader’s
emotions are pivotal in the initiation and development of the LMX relationship.
Role Making.
As depicted in Figure 7.5, through interactions that occur during the second stage, leaders’ and
members’ emotional states become entrained, or synchronized. Leaders and followers begin sharing
emotional affect at similar times, and leaders’ and members’ emotions become “contagious.”
Description
Figure 7.5 Stage II of LMX Development
Source: Adapted from Cropanzano, R., Dasborough, M. T., & Weiss, H. M. (2017). Affective events
and the development of leader–member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 233–
258.
Role Routinization.
During the third stage, LMX relationships have been formed and maintained, but can change based on
LMX differentiation, or the emotional responses of other organizational members to the distribution of
LMX relationships within the group. For example, the emergence of in-groups and out-groups may
engender emotions of anger and/or contempt.
The benefits for employees who develop high-quality leader–member relationships include preferential
treatment, increased job-related communication, ample access to supervisors, and increased
performance-related feedback (Harris et al., 2009). The disadvantages for those with low-quality leader–
member relationships include limited trust and support from supervisors and few benefits outside the
employment contract (Harris et al., 2009). To evaluate leader–member exchanges, researchers typically
use a brief questionnaire that asks leaders and followers to report on the effectiveness of their working
relationships. The questionnaire assesses the degree to which respondents express respect, trust, and
obligation in their exchanges with others. At the end of this chapter, a version of the LMX questionnaire
is provided for you to take for the purpose of analyzing some of your own leader–member relationships.
HOW DOES LMX THEORY WORK?
LMX theory works in two ways: It describes leadership, and it prescribes leadership. In both instances,
the central concept is the dyadic relationship that leaders form with each of their followers. Descriptively,
LMX theory suggests that it is important to recognize the existence of in-groups and out-groups within a
group or an organization.
The differences in how goals are accomplished by in-groups and out-groups are substantial. Working
with an in-group allows leaders to accomplish more work in a more effective manner than they can
accomplish working without one. In-group members are willing to do more than is required in their job
description and look for innovative ways to advance the group’s goals. In response to their extra effort
and devotion, leaders give them more responsibilities and more opportunities. Leaders also give in-
group members more of their time and support.
Out-group members act quite differently than in-group members. Rather than trying to do extra work,
out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational roles. They do what is required
of them but nothing more. Leaders treat out-group members fairly and according to the formal contract,
but they do not give them special attention. For their efforts, out-group members receive the standard
benefits as defined in the job description.
Prescriptively, LMX theory suggests that leaders should create a special relationship with all followers,
similar to the relationships described as in-group relationships. Leaders should offer each follower the
opportunity to take on new roles and responsibilities. Furthermore, leaders should nurture high-quality
exchanges with their followers. Herman and Troth (2013) found that high-quality exchanges are
described by followers as mentoring, respectful, and based on good communication.
A longitudinal study examining episodes in which leaders and members exchanged resources found
that when more resources were given than taken, the other party, whether leader or follower, felt
obligated to reciprocate (Liao, Liu, Li, & Song, 2019). In other words, if a leader gives more to a follower,
it creates a “contribution surplus,” which results in that member’s subsequent reciprocation. Over time,
these resource contribution surpluses increased work engagement immediately following the exchange
episode and the resource contribution of the member in the next episode. Also, a member’s obligation to
reciprocate is related to the importance a member attaches to the leader–member relationship (Lee,
Thomas, Martin, Guillaume, & Marstand, 2019).
In that regard, rather than focusing on differences between in-group and out-group members, the
leadership development model suggests that leaders should look for ways to build trust and respect with
all of their followers, thus making the entire work unit an in-group. Technology can lend a hand in that
endeavor as N. Hill et al. (2014) found that electronic communication mediates the LMX relationship and
can have a positive impact, thus broadening avenues for developing good communication and positive
relationships across organizations—even those where workers are dispersed and work primarily online.
In addition, leaders should look beyond their own work unit and create high-quality partnerships with
people throughout the organization.
Whether descriptive or prescriptive, LMX theory works by focusing our attention on the unique
relationships that leaders can create with individual followers. When these relationships are of high
quality, the goals of the leader, the followers, and the organization are all advanced.
STRENGTHS
LMX theory makes several positive contributions to our understanding of the leadership process. First, it
is a strong descriptive theory. Intuitively, it makes sense to describe work units in terms of those who
contribute more and those who contribute less (or the bare minimum) to the organization. Anyone who
has ever worked in an organization has felt the presence of in-groups and out-groups. Despite the
potential harm of out-groups, we all know that leaders have special relationships with certain people
who do more and get more. We may not like this because it seems unfair, but it is a reality, and the LMX
theory has accurately described this situation. LMX theory validates our experience of how people within
organizations relate to each other and the leader. Some contribute more and receive more; others
contribute less and get less.
Second, LMX theory is unique in that it is the only leadership approach that makes the concept of the
dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the leadership process. Other approaches emphasize the
characteristics of leaders, followers, contexts, or a combination of these, but none of them addresses
the specific relationships between the leader and each follower. LMX theory underscores that effective
leadership is contingent on effective leader–member exchanges. This is underlined in the work of
Gottfredson and Aguinis (2017), who conducted meta-analytic studies on the centrality of LMX in
understanding the relationship between leader behaviors and job performance. Their results showed
that LMX was a consistent explanation for why leadership behaviors affect follower performance.
Third, LMX theory is noteworthy because it directs our attention to the importance of communication in
leadership. The high-quality exchanges advocated in LMX theory are inextricably bound to effective
communication. Communication is the vehicle through which leaders and followers create, nurture, and
sustain useful exchanges. Effective leadership occurs when the communication of leaders and followers
is characterized by mutual trust, respect, and commitment.
Fourth, LMX theory provides an important alert for leaders. It warns leaders to avoid letting their
conscious or unconscious biases influence who is invited into the in-group (e.g., biases regarding race,
gender, ethnicity, religion, or age; see Randolph-Seng et al., 2016). The principles outlined in LMX
theory serve as a good reminder for leaders to be fair and equal in how they approach each of their
followers.
Fifth, LMX has proven to be a cross-cultural concept and has been studied in many cultures. Rockstuhl,
Dulebohn, Ang, and Shore (2012) examined the role of the national culture of 23 countries as a
moderator of LMX and found that national culture does not affect the relationship of LMX with followers’
task performance, organizational commitment, and transformational leadership. While the study findings
suggested that members’ responses to LMX in Asian contexts may also be influenced by collective
interests and role-based obligations, LMX appears to be universal.
Finally, a large body of research substantiates how the practice of LMX theory is related to positive
organizational outcomes. In a review of this research, Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) pointed out that
leader–member exchange is related to performance, organizational commitment, job climate,
innovation, organizational citizenship behavior, empowerment, procedural and distributive justice, career
progress, and many other important organizational variables. By linking the use of LMX theory to real
outcomes, researchers have been able to validate the theory and increase its practical value.
CRITICISMS
LMX theory also has some limitations. First, leader–member exchange in its initial formulation (VDL
theory) runs counter to the basic human value of fairness. Throughout our lives, beginning when we are
very young, we are taught to try to get along with everyone and to treat everyone equally. We have been
taught that it is wrong to form in-groups or cliques because they are harmful to those who cannot be a
part of them. Because LMX theory divides the work unit into two groups and one group receives special
attention, it gives the appearance of discrimination against the out-group.
Our culture is replete with examples of people of different genders, ages, cultures, and abilities who
have experienced discrimination. Although LMX theory was not designed to do so, it supports the
development of privileged groups in the organizations. In so doing, it appears unfair and discriminatory.
Furthermore, as reported by McClane (1991), the existence of in-groups and out-groups may have
undesirable effects on the group as a whole. The creation of in-groups and out-groups within a work
group can cause members to engage in social comparisons that invoke perceptions of injustice (Matta &
Van Dyne, 2020). This influences emotions that affect how team members interact with one another. For
example, out-group members may engage in less organizational citizenship and helping behaviors for
others on their team if they feel there is injustice.
Whether LMX theory actually creates inequalities is questionable (cf. Harter & Evanecky, 2002;
Scandura, 1999). If a leader does not intentionally keep out-group members “out,” and if they are free to
become members of the in-group, then LMX theory may not create inequalities. However, the theory
does not elaborate on strategies for how one gains access to the in-group if one chooses to do so.
Furthermore, LMX theory does not address other fairness issues, such as followers’ perceptions of the
fairness of pay increases and promotion opportunities (distributive justice), decision-making rules
(procedural justice), or communication of issues within the organization (interactional justice) (Scandura,
1999). There is a need for further research on how these types of fairness issues affect the development
and maintenance of LMX relationships.
A second criticism of LMX theory is that the basic ideas of the theory are not fully developed. For
example, the theory does not fully explain how high-quality leader–member exchanges are created
(Anand et al., 2011). In the early studies, it was implied that they were formed when a leader found
certain followers more compatible in regard to personality, interpersonal skills, or job competencies, but
these studies never described the relative importance of these factors or how this process worked (Yukl,
1994). Research has suggested that leaders should work to create high-quality exchanges with all
followers, but the guidelines for how this is done are not clearly spelled out. Fairhurst and Uhl-Bien
(2012) have done research into the construction of the LMX relationship, but more work needs to be
done to substantiate and clarify guidelines. For example, the model of leadership development
highlights the importance of role making, incremental influence, and type of reciprocity (Table 7.1), but it
does not explain how these concepts function to build mature partnerships. Similarly, the model strongly
promotes building trust, respect, and obligation in leader–follower relationships, but it does not describe
the means by which these factors are developed in relationships.
Some researchers challenge the idea that LMX is an exchange theory. Bernerth, Armenakis, Feild,
Giles, and Walker (2007) state that “the theoretical underpinning of [LMX] is not based on the
conceptualization of social exchange defined by Blau (1964), but rather a role-making model of
negotiation between subordinates and supervisors” (p. 983). Thus, LMX may be grounded better in role
theory than exchange theory, but this needs clarification.
Based on an examination of 147 studies of leader–member exchange, Schriesheim, Castro, and
Cogliser (1999) concluded that improved theorization about leader–member exchange and its basic
processes is needed. Similarly, in a review of the research on relational leadership, Uhl-Bien, Maslyn,
and Ospina (2012) point to the need for further understanding of how high- and low-quality relationships
develop in leader–member exchange. Although many studies have been conducted on leader–member
exchange, these studies have not resulted in a clear, refined set of definitions, concepts, and
propositions about the theory. While LMX researchers publish in the most reputable journals, there is
little agreement on how to define LMX (Gottfredson, Wright, & Heaphy, 2020).
A third criticism of the theory is that researchers have not adequately explained the contextual factors
that may have an impact on LMX relationships (Anand et al., 2011). Since leader–member exchange is
often studied in isolation, researchers have not examined the potential impact of other variables on LMX
dyads. For example, workplace norms and other organizational culture variables are likely to influence
leader–member exchange. There is a need to explore how the surrounding constellations of social
networks influence specific LMX relationships and the individuals in those relationships.
Finally, questions have been raised about the measurement of leader–member exchanges in LMX
theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Schriesheim et al., 1999; Schriesheim et al., 2001). For example, no
empirical studies have used dyadic measures to analyze the LMX process (Schriesheim et al., 2001). In
addition, leader–member exchanges have been measured with different versions of leader–member
exchange scales and with different levels of analysis, so the results are not always directly comparable.
A recent review reported that the most commonly used measure of LMX is the LMX-7 developed by
Graen and his colleagues, which is used in 66% of empirical studies of LMX. The second-most-common
measure is the LMX-MDM (multidimensional measure) developed by Liden and Maslyn (1998), which is
used in 11% of studies (Gottfredson et al., 2020). The remainder is a variety of different measures
presented over the years, and there is not enough data to fully assess those. Even the content validity
and dimensionality of the LMX-7 and LMX-MDM scales have been questioned (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995;
Schriesheim et al., 2001).
APPLICATION
Although LMX theory has not been packaged in a way to be used in standard management training and
development programs, it offers many insights that leaders could use to improve their own leadership
behavior. Foremost, LMX theory directs leaders to assess their leadership from a relationship
perspective. This assessment will sensitize leaders to how in-groups and out-groups develop within their
own organization. In addition, LMX theory suggests ways in which leaders can improve their
organization by building strong leader–member exchanges with all of their followers.
The ideas set forth in LMX theory can be used by leaders at all levels within an organization. A CEO
selects vice presidents and develops dyadic relationships with them. Vice presidents lead their own
units, with their own dyadic relationships with followers. These paired relationships between leader and
follower repeat down each level of an organizational chart.
On a lower level, LMX theory could be used to explain how line managers in a manufacturing plant
develop high-quality relationships with workers to accomplish the production quotas of their work unit.
The ideas presented in LMX theory are applicable throughout organizations, not just at the highest
levels.
In addition, the ideas of LMX theory can be used to explain how individuals create leadership networks
throughout an organization to help them accomplish work more effectively (Graen & Scandura, 1987). A
person with a network of high-quality partnerships can call on many people to help solve problems and
advance the goals of the organization. Sparrowe and Liden (2005) tested the LMX network approach
and found that LMX networks predicted the amount of influence the organization members enjoyed, and
this was a function of how central their leaders were in the network. When leaders are well connected in
organizational networks, sharing ties in the LMX network is beneficial to members.
LMX theory can also be applied in different types of organizations. It applies in volunteer settings as well
as traditional business, education, and government settings. Imagine a community leader who heads a
volunteer program that assists older adults. To run the program effectively, the leader depends on a few
of the volunteers who are more dependable and committed than the rest of the volunteers. This process
of working closely with a small cadre of trusted volunteers is explained by the principles of LMX theory.
Similarly, a manager in a traditional business setting might use certain individuals to achieve a major
change in the company’s policies and procedures. The way the manager goes about this process is
explicated in LMX theory.
In summary, LMX theory tells leaders to be aware of how they relate to their followers. It tells leaders to
be sensitive to whether some followers receive special attention and some followers do not. In addition,
it tells leaders to be fair to all followers and allow each of them to become as involved in the work of the
unit as they want to be. LMX theory tells leaders to be respectful and to build trusting relationships with
all of their followers, recognizing that each follower is unique and wants to relate to leadership in a
special way.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
In the following section, three case studies (Cases 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3) are presented to clarify how LMX
theory can be applied to various group settings. The first case is about the creative director who
oversees several account teams at an advertising agency. The second is about a production manager at
a mortgage company who works hard to be fair with her large team of employees. The third case
profiles leadership behind the creative work at Pixar Animation Studios. After each case, there are
questions that will help you analyze it, using the ideas from LMX theory.
Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments
Carly Peters directs the creative department of the advertising agency of Mills, Smith, & Peters. The
agency has about 100 employees, 20 of whom work for Carly in the creative department. Typically, the
agency maintains 10 major accounts and a number of smaller accounts. It has a reputation for being
one of the best advertising and public relations agencies in the country.
In the creative department, there are four major account teams. Each is led by an associate creative
director, who reports directly to Carly. In addition, each team has a copywriter, an art director, and a
production artist. These four account teams are headed by Jack, Terri, Julie, and Sarah.
Jack and his team get along really well with Carly, and they have done excellent work for their clients at
the agency. Of all the teams, Jack’s team is the most creative and talented and the most willing to go the
extra mile for Carly. As a result, when Carly has to showcase accounts to upper management, she often
uses the work of Jack’s team. Jack and his team members are comfortable confiding in Carly and she in
them. Carly is not afraid to allocate extra resources to Jack’s team or to give them free rein on their
accounts because they always come through for her.
Terri’s team also performs well for the agency, but Terri is unhappy with how Carly treats her team. She
thinks that Carly is not fair because she favors Jack’s team. For example, Terri’s team was counseled
out of pursuing an ad campaign because the campaign was too risky, whereas Jack’s group was
praised for developing a very provocative campaign. Terri believes that Jack’s team is Carly’s pet: His
team gets the best assignments, accounts, and budgets. Terri finds it hard to hold back the animosity
she feels toward Carly.
Like Terri, Julie is concerned that her team is not in the inner circle, close to Carly. She has noticed
repeatedly that Carly favors the other teams. For example, whenever additional people are assigned to
team projects, it is always the other teams who get the best writers and art directors. Julie is mystified as
to why Carly doesn’t notice her team or try to help her team members with their work. She believes
Carly undervalues her team because Julie knows the quality of her team’s work is indisputable.
Although Sarah agrees with some of Terri’s and Julie’s observations about Carly, she does not feel any
antagonism about Carly’s leadership. Sarah has worked for the agency for nearly 10 years, and nothing
seems to bother her. Her account teams have never been earthshaking, but they have never been
problematic either. Sarah views her team members and their work more as a nuts-and-bolts operation in
which the team is given an assignment and carries it out. Being in Carly’s inner circle would entail
putting in extra time in the evening or on weekends and would create more headaches for Sarah.
Therefore, Sarah is happy with her role as it is, and she has little interest in trying to change the way the
department works.
Questions
1. Based on the principles of LMX theory, what observations would you make about Carly’s leadership
at Mills, Smith, & Peters?
2. Are there an in-group and an out-group, and if so, which are they?
3. In what way are Carly’s relationships with the four groups productive or counterproductive to the
overall goals of the agency?
4. Do you think Carly should change her approach toward the associate directors? If so, what should
she do differently?
Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair
City Mortgage is a medium-sized mortgage company that employs about 25 people. Jenny Hernandez,
who has been with the company for 10 years, is the production manager, overseeing its day-to-day
operations.
Reporting to Jenny are loan originators (salespeople), closing officers, mortgage underwriters, and
processing and shipping personnel. Jenny is proud of the company and knows she has contributed
substantially to its steady growth and expansion.
The climate at City Mortgage is very positive. People like to come to work because the office
environment is comfortable. They respect each other at the company and show tolerance for those who
are different from themselves.
Whereas at many mortgage companies it is common for resentments to build between people who earn
different incomes, this is not the case at City Mortgage.
Jenny’s leadership has been instrumental in shaping the success of City Mortgage. Her philosophy
stresses listening to employees and then determining how each employee can best contribute to the
mission of the company. She makes a point of helping individual employees explore their own talents,
and challenges each one to try new things.
At the annual holiday party, Jenny devised an interesting event that symbolizes her leadership style.
She bought a large piece of colorful glass and had it cut into 25 pieces and handed out one piece to
each person. Then she asked the employees to come forward one by one with the piece of glass and
briefly state what they liked about City Mortgage and how they had contributed to the company in the
past year. After the statements were made, the pieces of glass were formed into a cut-glass window that
hangs in the front lobby of the office. The glass is a reminder of how individual employees contribute
their uniqueness to the overall purpose of the company.
Another characteristic of Jenny’s style is her fairness. She does not want to give anyone the impression
that certain people have the inside track, and she goes to great lengths to prevent this from happening.
For example, she avoids social lunches because she thinks they foster the perception of favoritism.
Similarly, even though her best friend is one of the loan originators, she is seldom seen talking with her,
and if she is, it is always about business matters.
Jenny also applies her fairness principle to how information is shared in the office. She does not want
anyone to feel “out of the loop,” so she tries very hard to keep her employees informed on all the
matters that could affect them. Much of this she does through her open-door office policy. Jenny does
not have a special group of employees with whom she confides her concerns; rather, she shares openly
with each of them.
Jenny is very committed to her work at City Mortgage. She works long hours and carries a beeper on
the weekend. At this point in her career, her only concern is that she could be burning out.
Questions
1. Based on the LMX model, how would you describe Jenny’s leadership?
2. How do you think the employees at City Mortgage respond to Jenny?
3. If you were asked to follow in Jenny’s footsteps, do you think you could or would want to manage
City Mortgage with a similar style?
Case 7.3 Pixar: Creating Space for Success
Harvard management professor Linda Hill led a team of researchers on a decade-long study of
exceptional leaders of innovation. The team studied a select group of 16 men and women from a variety
of industries around the world, observing the leaders in action, on-site in their own environments, and
interacting directly with them. What the team discovered may seem counterintuitive to the way many
people perceive that successful innovative organizations operate; in her words, “Leading innovation is
not about creating a vision, and inspiring others to execute it” (L. Hill, 2014).
So how do highly successful companies that innovate again and again do it? Ed Catmull, CEO of Pixar
Animation Studios, exemplifies Professor Hill’s findings. Pixar, known for its highly innovative computer-
generated imagery (CGI) feature films like Toy Story, Ratatouille, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Cars,
and Coco, to name just a few, took 20 years to create its first full-length film, Toy Story, which was
released in 1995. By the end of 2020, the company had generated 23 feature films with an additional 4
more planned.
Noting that it takes approximately 250 people four to five years to make one of these animated films with
story lines that evolve as the making of the movie progresses, Professor Hill (2014) emphasizes that
“innovation is not about solo genius, it’s about collective genius.”
Innovation is the result of trial and error, subject to mistakes and even failures. The “heart of innovation
is a paradox. You have to unleash the talents and passions of many people and you have to harness
them into a work that is actually useful. Innovation is a journey. It’s a type of collaborative problem
solving, usually among people who have different expertise and different points of view” (L. Hill, 2014).
That Pixar employs this philosophy was evident in an article CEO Catmull wrote for Harvard Business
Review. “You get great creative people, you bet big on them, you give them enormous leeway and
support, and you provide them with an environment in which they can get honest feedback from
everyone” (Catmull, 2008).
Providing support without undermining authority is encouraged at all levels of the organization, and
there are essentially two leaders for each production—a director and a producer. The executive
management communicates that operational decisions are left to the film’s leaders without second-
guessing or micromanaging from the top.
Successful leaders at Pixar “must have a unifying vision—one that will give coherence to the thousands
of ideas that go into a movie—and they must be able to turn that vision into clear directives that the staff
can implement. They must set people up for success by giving them all the information they need to do
the job right without telling them how to do it. Each person on a film should be given creative ownership
of even the smallest task” (Catmull, 2008).
For example, an animator drew an arched eyebrow on a character to show the character’s mischievous
side, only to have his animation cut because it was viewed as not representative of the character. Two
weeks later, it was added back by the director. “Because that animator was allowed to share what we
referred to as his slice of genius, he was able to help that director reconceive the character in a subtle
but important way that really improved the story,” said Professor Hill (2014).
Hill’s research team found that innovative organizations have three common capabilities: creative
abrasion, creative agility, and creative resolution.
Creative abrasion centers on the concept that a portfolio of ideas is percolated through a process of
“debate and discourse,” which amplifies differences rather than minimizes them. Unlike brainstorming,
where people suspend their judgment, creative abrasion results in heated but constructive arguments to
develop a set of alternatives. Through this process, people and organizations learn how to inquire, how
to actively listen, and how to advocate for their points of view.
Pixar’s “Creative Brain Trust” is an example of its approach to creative abrasion. The Creative Brain
Trust consists of several accomplished filmmakers, and if a film runs into problems during production,
the director is encouraged to solicit advice from this group. Because the Creative Brain Trust members
can give “unvarnished expert opinions” and the director has the freedom to ask for and consider the
advice, the “problem-solving powers of this group are immense and inspirational to watch” (Catmull,
2008).
Creative agility is the ability to test and refine the portfolio of ideas where participants learn through
experimenting irrespective of the outcome. “Experiments are usually about learning. When you get a
negative outcome, you’re still really learning something that you need to know” (L. Hill, 2014).
Pixar’s use of “dailies”—daily reviews giving feedback in a positive way—exemplifies creative agility.
The team members working on the film review each other’s work in progress, in its incomplete state,
with the opportunity to comment and provide feedback. The intention of these reviews is to circumvent
the natural desire to develop a project to a certain level of perfection before sharing it with the team.
Creative resolution involves injecting integrated decision making into the process to bring together
opposing ideas and “reconfigure them in new combinations to produce a solution that is new and useful”
(L. Hill, 2014).
“Innovative organizations never go along to get along. They don’t compromise. They don’t let one group
or one individual dominate, even if it’s the boss, even if it’s the expert,” Professor Hill explained.
“Instead, they have developed a rather patient and more inclusive decision-making process that allows
for both/and solutions to arise and not simply either/or solutions” (L. Hill, 2014).
At Pixar, everyone must have the freedom to communicate with anyone, and it must be safe for
everyone to offer ideas. This means that managers learn “that they don’t always have to be the first to
know about something going on in their realm” and that “the most efficient way to deal with numerous
problems is to trust people to work out the difficulties directly with each other without having to check for
permission” (Catmull, 2008).
To maximize opportunity for interactions among its employees, Pixar’s building has a large, central
atrium housing the cafeteria, all meeting rooms, bathrooms, and mailboxes. Everyone in the company
has a plethora of reasons to pass through this space several times a day, and “it’s hard to describe just
how valuable the resulting chance encounters are” (L. Hill, 2014).
“They understand that innovation takes a village. The leaders focus on building a sense of community
and building those three capabilities. How do they define leadership? They say leadership is about
creating a world to which people want to belong. What kind of world do people want to belong in at
Pixar? A world where you’re living at the frontier. What do they focus their time on? Not on creating a
vision. Instead they spend their time thinking about, ‘How do we design a studio that has the sensibility
of a public square so that people will interact? Let’s put in a policy that anyone, no matter what their
level or role, is allowed to give notes to the director about how they feel about a particular film. What can
we do to make sure that all the disruptors, all the minority voices in this organization, speak up and are
heard? And, finally, let’s bestow credit in a very generous way’” (L. Hill, 2014).
To emphasize her point, she notes that the credits of a Pixar movie even include the names of babies
born to team members during production.
Questions
1. As noted in the chapter, the early research of LMX focused on the concepts of in-groups and out-
groups.
a. How do you think this applies to Pixar’s approach to leading the large teams required for the
making of its feature films?
b. From what you have gleaned about Pixar, do you feel that team members have a strong sense
of a division between in-groups and out-groups? Why or why not?
c. Do you think that most members of Pixar’s teams feel they are part of the in-group?
d. Do you think the “creative abrasion” discussed in the case is something that is a product of an
in-group mentality? Why or why not?
e. What about those who might perceive themselves in the out-group—would creative abrasion
be possible or productive? Why or why not?
2. Later LMX studies focused on the leader–member exchanges. Given what you know about the
work environment, how would you rank the quality of the leader–member exchange at Pixar? Why?
3. Do you think the individual Pixar team members feel a sense of empowerment?
a. How might the idea of creative agility discussed in the case fit into a feeling of empowerment
by employees?
b. What about the idea of creative resolution?
4. In looking at the phases of leadership development discussed in the text, in what phase do you
think a highly innovative company, like Pixar, would fall? Why?
5. Does Pixar’s culture allow for the stages of affective processes in LMX development—role taking,
role making, and role routinization—to occur? Explain your answer.
—Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
Researchers have used many different questionnaires to study LMX theory. All of them have been
designed to measure the quality of the working relationship between leaders and followers. We have
chosen to include in this chapter the LMX-7, a seven-item questionnaire that provides a reliable and
valid measure of the quality of leader–member exchanges (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).
The LMX-7 is designed to measure three dimensions of leader–member relationships: respect, trust,
and obligation. It assesses the degree to which leaders and followers have mutual respect for each
other’s capabilities, feel a deepening sense of reciprocal trust, and have a strong sense of obligation to
one another. Taken together, these dimensions are the ingredients of strong partnerships.
LMX-7 Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to provide you with a fuller understanding of how
LMX theory works.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains items that ask you to describe your relationship with
either your leader or one of your followers. For each of the items, indicate the degree to which
you think the item is true for you by selecting one of the responses that appear below the item.
Key: 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
1. I know where I stand with my leader (follower) . . . [and] usually know how
satisfied my leader (follower) is with what I do.
1 2 3 4 5
2. My leader (follower) understands my job problems and needs. 1 2 3 4 5
3. My leader (follower) recognizes my potential. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Regardless of how much formal authority my leader (follower) has built
into their position, my leader (follower) will use their power to help me
solve problems in my work.
1 2 3 4 5
5. Again, regardless of the amount of formal authority my leader (follower)
has, they would “bail me out” at their expense.
1 2 3 4 5
6. I have enough confidence in my leader (follower) that I would defend and
justify their decision if they were not present to do so.
1 2 3 4 5
7. I have an extremely effective working relationship with my leader
(follower).
1 2 3 4 5
By completing the LMX-7, you can gain a fuller understanding of how LMX theory works. The
score you obtain on the questionnaire reflects the quality of your leader–member relationships
and indicates the degree to which your relationships are characteristic of partnerships, as
described in the LMX model.
You can complete the questionnaire both as a leader and as a follower. In the leader role, you
would complete the questionnaire multiple times, assessing the quality of the relationships you
have with each of your followers. In the follower role, you would complete the questionnaire
based on the leaders to whom you report.
Scoring Interpretation
Although the LMX-7 is most commonly used by researchers to explore theoretical questions, you
can also use it to analyze your own leadership style. You can interpret your LMX-7 scores using
the following guidelines: high = 25–35, moderate = 20–24, low = 7–19. Scores in the upper
ranges indicate stronger, higher-quality leader–member exchanges (e.g., in-group members),
whereas scores in the lower ranges indicate exchanges of lesser quality (e.g., out-group
members).
Source: Reprinted from The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), G. B. Graen and M. Uhl-Bien,
“Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX)
Theory of Leadership Over 25 Years: Applying a Multi-Level, Multi-Domain Perspective,” pp.
219–247. Copyright (1995) with permission from Elsevier.
Summary
Since it first appeared more than 30 years ago under the title “vertical dyad linkage (VDL) theory,”
leader–member exchange theory has been and continues to be a much-studied approach to leadership.
LMX theory addresses leadership as a process centered on the interactions between leaders and
followers. It makes the leader–member relationship the pivotal concept in the leadership process.
In the early studies of LMX theory, a leader’s relationship to the overall work unit was viewed as a series
of vertical dyads, categorized as being of two different types: Leader–member dyads based on
expanded role relationships were called the leader’s in-group, and those based on formal job
descriptions were called the leader’s out-group. According to LMX theory, followers become in-group
members based on how well they get along with the leader and whether they are willing to expand their
role responsibilities. Followers who maintain only formal hierarchical relationships with their leader are
out-group members. Whereas in-group members receive extra influence, opportunities, and rewards,
out-group members receive standard job benefits.
Subsequent studies of LMX theory were directed toward how leader–member exchanges affect
organizational performance. Researchers found that high-quality exchanges between leaders and
followers produced multiple positive outcomes (e.g., less employee turnover, greater organizational
commitment, and more promotions). In general, researchers determined that good leader–member
exchanges result in followers feeling better, accomplishing more, and helping the organization prosper.
A select body of LMX research focuses on leadership development, which emphasizes that leaders
should try to develop high-quality exchanges with all of their followers. Leadership develops over time
and includes a stranger phase, an acquaintance phase, and a mature partnership phase. By taking on
and fulfilling new role responsibilities, followers move through these three phases to develop mature
partnerships with their leaders. These partnerships, which are marked by a high degree of mutual trust,
respect, and obligation, have positive payoffs for the individuals themselves, and help the organization
run more effectively.
More recently, LMX research has explored the role of emotions, or affective states, in the development
of high-quality relationships between leaders and members. The development of these relationships
progresses through three affective processes—role taking, role making, and role routinization—that
reflect the growing emotional interactions between leaders and members.
There are several positive features to LMX theory. First, LMX theory is a strong descriptive approach
that explains how leaders use some followers (in-group members) more than others (out-group
members) to accomplish organizational goals effectively. Second, LMX theory is unique in that, unlike
other approaches, it makes the leader–member relationship the focal point of the leadership process.
Related to this focus, LMX theory is noteworthy because it directs our attention to the importance of
effective communication in leader–member relationships. In addition, it reminds us to be evenhanded in
how we relate to our followers. Another strength of LMX theory is its universality and that its concepts
are the same across different national cultures. Finally, LMX theory is supported by a multitude of
studies that link high-quality leader–member exchanges to positive organizational outcomes.
There are also negative features in LMX theory. First, the early formulation of LMX theory (VDL theory)
runs counter to our principles of fairness and justice in the workplace by suggesting that some members
of the work unit receive special attention and others do not. The perceived inequalities created by the
use of in-groups can have a devastating impact on the feelings, attitudes, and behavior of out-group
members. Second, LMX theory emphasizes the importance of leader–member exchanges but fails to
explain the intricacies of how one goes about creating high-quality exchanges. Although the model
promotes building trust, respect, and commitment in relationships, it does not fully explicate how this
takes place. While many studies have been conducted on LMX, they have not resulted in a clear,
refined set of definitions, concepts, and propositions about the theory. In addition, there is some debate
about whether LMX is based on social exchange theory or whether it fits better in role theory. Third,
researchers have not adequately explained the contextual factors that influence LMX relationships.
Finally, there are questions about whether the measurement procedures used in LMX research are
adequate to fully capture the complexities of the leader–member exchange process.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
In an in-group, the values on each of the bidirectional arrows, connecting the leader and followers F
subscript A, F subscript B, and F subscript C is plus 3. In an out-group, the values on each of the
bidirectional arrows, connecting the leader and followers F subscript X, F subscript Y, and F subscript Z
is 0.
Back to Figure
A box is labeled, Pattern of shared emotion over time. Two intersecting ellipses are inside the box. One
of the ellipses is labeled leader emotion, the other ellipse is labeled member emotion, and the region of
intersection is labeled mutual emotional entrainment. An arrow from the region of intersection points out
of the box to a box labeled L M X relationship quality.
8 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Transformational leadership is concerned with the process of how certain leaders are able to inspire
followers to accomplish great things. This approach stresses that leaders need to understand and adapt
to the needs and motives of followers.
DESCRIPTION
As one of the current and most popular approaches to leadership, the transformational leadership
approach has been the focus of much research since the 1980s. As its name implies, transformational
leadership is a process that changes and transforms people. It is concerned with emotions, values,
ethics, standards, and long-term goals. It includes assessing followers’ motives, satisfying their needs,
and treating them as full human beings. Transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of
influence that moves followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them. It is a process
that often incorporates charismatic and visionary leadership.
Transformational leadership is part of the “New Leadership” paradigm (Bryman, 1992), which gives
more attention to the charismatic and affective elements of leadership. In a content analysis of articles
published in The Leadership Quarterly, Lowe and Gardner (2001) found that one third of the research
was about transformational or charismatic leadership. That interest has continued into the new
millennium; in a follow-up review of leadership research, Dinh et al. (2014) found that interest in
transformational leadership was sustained from 2000 to 2012. Similarly, Antonakis (2012) found that the
number of papers and citations in the field has grown at an increasing rate, not only in traditional areas
like management and social psychology, but in other disciplines such as nursing, education, and
industrial engineering. Bass and Riggio (2006) suggested that transformational leadership’s popularity
might be due to its emphasis on intrinsic motivation and follower development, which fits the needs of
today’s work groups, who want to be inspired and empowered to succeed in times of uncertainty.
Clearly, many scholars are studying transformational leadership, and it occupies a central place in
leadership research. However, others (i.e., Andersen, 2015; Anderson, Baur, Griffith, & Buckley, 2017)
have suggested that the interest in transformational leadership may be exaggerated and that this
approach to leading may be less significant as millennials continue to flood into the workplace.
An encompassing approach, transformational leadership can be used to describe a wide range of
leadership, from very specific attempts to influence followers on a one-to-one level, to very broad
attempts to influence whole organizations and even entire cultures. Although the transformational leader
plays a pivotal role in precipitating change, followers and leaders are inextricably bound together in the
transformation process. In fact, transformational leadership focuses so heavily on the relationship
between leader and follower that some (Andersen, 2015) have suggested that this bias may limit
explanations for transformational leadership on organizational effectiveness.
Transformational Leadership Defined
The emergence of transformational leadership as an important approach to leadership began with a
classic work by political sociologist James MacGregor Burns titled Leadership (1978). In his work, Burns
attempted to link the roles of leadership and followership. He wrote of leaders as people who tap the
motives of followers in order to better reach the goals of leaders and followers (p. 18). For Burns,
leadership is quite different from power because it is inseparable from followers’ needs.
Transformational Versus Transactional Leadership.
Burns distinguished between two types of leadership: transactional and transformational. Transactional
leadership refers to the bulk of leadership models, which focus on the exchanges that occur between
leaders and their followers. Politicians who win votes by promising “no new taxes” are demonstrating
transactional leadership. Similarly, managers who offer promotions to employees who surpass their
goals are exhibiting transactional leadership. In the classroom, teachers are being transactional when
they give students a grade for work completed. The exchange dimension of transactional leadership is
very common and can be observed at many levels throughout all types of organizations. While
exchanges or transactions between leader and member are a natural component of employment
contracts, research suggests that employees do not necessarily perceive transactional leaders as those
most capable of creating trusting, mutually beneficial leader–member relationships (Notgrass, 2014).
Instead, employees prefer managers to perform transformational leadership behaviors such as
encouraging creativity, recognizing accomplishments, building trust, and inspiring a collective vision
(Notgrass, 2014).
In contrast to transactional leadership, transformational leadership is the process whereby a person
engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the
leader and the follower. This type of leader is attentive to the needs and motives of followers and tries to
help followers reach their fullest potential. Burns points to Mohandas Gandhi as a classic example of
transformational leadership. Gandhi raised the hopes and demands of millions of his people and, in the
process, was changed himself.
Another good example of transformational leadership can be observed in the efforts of Swedish
teenager Greta Thunberg, who raised awareness around the world regarding global climate change.
Thunberg began her activism by sitting outside the Swedish parliament every school day, holding a sign
reading Skolstrejk för klimatet (“School strike for climate”). This inspired an international movement, and
Thunberg spoke in public and to political leaders and assemblies, where she criticized world leaders for
their failure to sufficiently address the climate crisis.
In the organizational world, an example of transformational leadership would be a manager who
attempts to change a company’s corporate values to reflect a more humane standard of fairness and
justice. In the process, both the manager and the followers may emerge with a stronger and higher set
of moral values. In fact, Mason, Griffin, and Parker (2014) demonstrated that through transformational
leadership training, leaders were able to enhance their self-efficacy, positive affect, and ability to
consider multiple perspectives. Their findings suggest that transformational leadership can result in
positive psychological gains for both leader and follower.
Pseudotransformational Leadership.
Because the conceptualization of transformational leadership set forth by Burns (1978) includes raising
the level of morality in others, it is difficult to use this term when describing a leader such as Adolf Hitler,
who was transforming but in a negative way. To deal with this problem, Bass (1998) coined the term
pseudotransformational leadership. This term refers to leaders who are self-consumed, exploitive, and
power oriented, with warped moral values (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Pseudotransformational leadership is
considered personalized leadership, which focuses on the leader’s own interests rather than on the
interests of others (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Authentic transformational leadership is socialized
leadership, which is concerned with the collective good. Socialized transformational leaders transcend
their own interests for the sake of others (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
In a series of four experimental studies, Christie, Barling, and Turner (2011) set forth a preliminary
model of pseudotransformational leadership that reflected four components of transformational
leadership discussed later in this chapter: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation, and individualized consideration. This model helps to clarify the meaning of
pseudotransformational leadership. It suggests that pseudotransformational leadership is inspired
leadership that is self-serving, is unwilling to encourage independent thought in followers, and exhibits
little general caring for others. Pseudotransformational leaders have strong inspirational talent and
appeal but are manipulative and dominant and direct followers toward the leader’s values. This type of
leadership is threatening to the welfare of followers because it ignores the common good.
To sort out the complexities related to the “moral uplifting” component of authentic transformational
leadership, Zhu, Avolio, Riggio, and Sosik (2011) proposed a theoretical model examining how authentic
transformational leadership influences the ethics of individual followers and groups. The authors
hypothesize that authentic transformational leadership positively affects followers’ moral identities and
moral emotions (e.g., empathy and guilt) and this, in turn, leads to moral decision making and moral
action by the followers. Furthermore, the authors theorize that authentic transformational leadership is
positively associated with group ethical climate, decision making, and moral action. In the future,
research is needed to test the validity of the assumptions laid out in this model.
Transformational Leadership and Charisma
At about the same time Burns’s book was published, House (1976) published a theory of charismatic
leadership. Since its publication, charismatic leadership has received a great deal of attention by
researchers (e.g., Conger, 1999; Hunt & Conger, 1999). It is often described in ways that make it similar
to, if not synonymous with, transformational leadership.
The word charisma was first used to describe a special gift that certain individuals possess that gives
them the capacity to do extraordinary things. Weber (1947) provided the most well-known definition of
charisma as a special personality characteristic that gives a person superhuman or exceptional powers
and is reserved for a few, is of divine origin, and results in the person being treated as a leader. Despite
Weber’s emphasis on charisma as a personality characteristic, he also recognized the important role
played by followers in validating charisma in these leaders (Bryman, 1992; House, 1976).
In his theory of charismatic leadership, House suggested that charismatic leaders act in unique ways
that have specific charismatic effects on their followers (Table 8.1). For House, the personality
characteristics of a charismatic leader include being dominant, having a strong desire to influence
others, being self-confident, and having a strong sense of one’s own moral values.
In addition to displaying certain personality characteristics, charismatic leaders demonstrate specific
types of behaviors. First, they are strong role models for the beliefs and values they want their followers
to adopt. For example, Gandhi advocated nonviolence and was an exemplary role model of civil
disobedience. Second, charismatic leaders appear competent to followers. Third, they articulate
ideological goals that have moral overtones. Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech is
an example of this type of charismatic behavior.
Fourth, charismatic leaders communicate high expectations for followers, and they exhibit confidence in
followers’ abilities to meet these expectations. The impact of this behavior is to increase followers’ sense
of competence and self-efficacy (Avolio & Gibbons, 1988), which in turn improves their performance.
Table 8.1 Personality Characteristics, Behaviors, and Effects on Followers of Charismatic Leadership
Personality
Characteristics Behaviors Effects on FollowersPersonality
Characteristics Behaviors Effects on Followers
Dominant Sets strong role model Trust in leader’s ideology
Desire to influence Shows competence Belief similarity between leader and
follower
Self-confident Articulates goals Unquestioning acceptance
Strong moral values Communicates high
expectations
Affection toward leader
Expresses confidence Obedience
Arouses motives Identification with leader
Emotional involvement
Heightened goals
Increased confidence
Fifth, charismatic leaders arouse task-relevant motives in followers that may include affiliation, power, or
esteem. For example, former U.S. president John F. Kennedy appealed to the human values of the
American people when he stated, “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for
your country.” Within the organizational context, charismatic CEOs may motivate members of their
organization by modeling and fostering a transformational leadership climate (Boehm, Dwertmann,
Bruch, & Shamir, 2015), which may result in increases in employee identification with their organization
and in overall organizational performance.
According to House’s charismatic theory, several effects are the direct result of charismatic leadership.
They include follower trust in the leader’s ideology, similarity between the followers’ beliefs and the
leader’s beliefs, unquestioning acceptance of the leader, expression of affection toward the leader,
follower obedience, identification with the leader, emotional involvement in the leader’s goals,
heightened goals for followers, and increased follower confidence in goal achievement. Consistent with
Weber, House contends that these charismatic effects are more likely to occur in contexts in which
followers feel distress because in stressful situations followers look to leaders to deliver them from their
difficulties.
House’s charismatic theory has been extended and revised through the years (see Conger, 1999;
Conger & Kanungo, 1998). One major revision to the theory was made by Shamir, House, and Arthur
(1993). They postulated that charismatic leadership transforms followers’ self-concepts and tries to link
the identity of followers to the collective identity of the organization. Charismatic leaders forge this link
by emphasizing the intrinsic rewards of work and de-emphasizing the extrinsic rewards. The hope is that
followers will view work as an expression of themselves. Throughout the process, leaders express high
expectations for followers and help them gain a sense of confidence and self-efficacy.
In summary, charismatic leadership works because it ties followers and their self-concepts to the
organizational identity.
A Model of Transformational Leadership
In the mid-1980s, Bass (1985) provided a more expanded and refined version of transformational
leadership that was based on, but not fully consistent with, the prior works of Burns (1978) and House
(1976). In his approach, Bass extended Burns’s work by giving more attention to followers’ rather than
leaders’ needs, by suggesting that transformational leadership could apply to situations in which the
outcomes were not positive, and by describing transactional and transformational leadership as a single
continuum (Figure 8.1) rather than mutually independent continua (Yammarino, 1993). Bass gave more
attention to the emotional elements and origins of charisma, suggesting that charisma is a necessary
but not sufficient condition for transformational leadership (Yammarino, 1993).
Figure 8.1 Leadership Continuum From Transformational to Laissez-Faire Leadership
Bass (1985, p. 20) argued that transformational leadership motivates followers to do more than
expected by (a) raising followers’ levels of consciousness about the importance and value of specified
and idealized goals, (b) getting followers to transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the team or
organization, and (c) moving followers to address higher-level needs. An elaboration of the dynamics of
the transformation process is provided in his model of transformational and transactional leadership
(Bass, 1985, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1993, 1994). Additional clarification of the model is provided by
Avolio in his book Full Leadership Development: Building the Vital Forces in Organizations (1999).
As can be seen in Table 8.2, the model of transformational and transactional leadership incorporates
seven different factors. These factors are also illustrated in the Full Range of Leadership model, which is
provided in Figure 8.2 on page 192. A discussion of each of these seven factors will help to clarify
Bass’s model. This discussion will be divided into three parts: transformational factors (4), transactional
factors (2), and the nonleadership, nontransactional factor (1).
Table 8.2 Leadership Factors
Transformational Leadership Transactional Leadership Laissez-Faire Leadership
Transformational Leadership Transactional Leadership Laissez-Faire Leadership
Factor 1
Idealized influence
Charisma
Factor 5
Contingent reward
Constructive transactions
Factor 7
Laissez-faire
Nontransactional
Factor 2
Inspirational motivation
Factor 6
Management by exception
Active and passive
Corrective transactions
Factor 3
Intellectual stimulation
Factor 4
Individualized consideration
Transformational Leadership Factors
Transformational leadership is concerned with improving the performance of followers and developing
followers to their fullest potential (Avolio, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 1990a). People who exhibit
transformational leadership often have a strong set of internal values and ideals, and they are effective
at motivating followers to act in ways that support the greater good rather than their own self-interests
(Kuhnert, 1994). Individuals’ intentions to lead in a transformational manner appear related to effective
transformational leadership behaviors (Gilbert, Horsman, & Kelloway, 2016).
Idealized Influence.
Factor 1 is called charisma or idealized influence. It is the emotional component of leadership
(Antonakis, 2012). Idealized influence describes leaders who act as strong role models for followers;
followers identify with these leaders and want very much to emulate them. These leaders usually have
very high standards of moral and ethical conduct and can be counted on to do the right thing. They are
deeply respected by followers, who usually place a great deal of trust in them. They provide followers
with a vision and a sense of mission.
Description
Figure 8.2 Full Range of Leadership Model
The idealized influence factor is measured on two components: an attributional component that refers to
the attributions of leaders made by followers based on perceptions they have of their leaders, and a
behavioral component that refers to followers’ observations of leader behavior.
In essence, the charisma factor describes people who are special and who make others want to follow
the vision they put forward. A person whose leadership exemplifies the charisma factor is Nelson
Mandela, the first Black president of South Africa. Mandela is viewed as a leader with high moral
standards and a vision for South Africa that resulted in monumental change in how the people of South
Africa would be governed. His charismatic qualities and the people’s response to them transformed an
entire nation.
Inspirational Motivation.
Factor 2 is called inspiration or inspirational motivation. This factor is descriptive of leaders who
communicate high expectations to followers, inspiring them through motivation to become committed to
and a part of the shared vision in the organization. In practice, leaders use symbols and emotional
appeals to focus group members’ efforts to achieve more than they would in their own self-interest.
Team spirit is enhanced by this type of leadership. An example of this factor would be a sales manager
who motivates members of the sales force to excel in their work through encouraging words and pep
talks that clearly communicate the integral role they play in the future growth of the company.
Intellectual Stimulation.
Factor 3 is intellectual stimulation. It includes leadership that stimulates followers to be creative and
innovative and to challenge their own beliefs and values as well as those of the leader and the
organization.
This type of leadership supports followers as they try new approaches and develop innovative ways of
dealing with organizational issues. It encourages followers to think things out on their own and engage
in careful problem solving. An example of this type of leadership is a plant manager who promotes
workers’ individual efforts to develop unique ways to solve problems that have caused slowdowns in
production.
Individualized Consideration.
Factor 4 of transformational leadership is called individualized consideration. This factor is
representative of leaders who provide a supportive climate in which they listen carefully to the individual
needs of followers. Leaders act as coaches and advisers while trying to assist followers in becoming
fully actualized. These leaders may use delegation to help followers grow through personal challenges.
An example of this type of leadership is a manager who spends time treating each employee in a caring
and unique way. To some employees, the leader may give strong affiliation; to others, the leader may
give specific directives with a high degree of structure.
In essence, transformational leadership produces greater effects than transactional leadership (Figure
8.3). Whereas transactional leadership results in expected outcomes, transformational leadership
results in performance that goes well beyond what is expected. In a meta-analysis of 39 studies in the
transformational literature, for example, Lowe, Kroeck, and Sivasubramaniam (1996) found that people
who exhibited transformational leadership were perceived to be more effective leaders with better work
outcomes than those who exhibited only transactional leadership. These findings were true for higher-
and lower-level leaders, and for leaders in both public and private settings.
Description
Figure 8.3 The Additive Effect of Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership has an additive effect; it moves followers to accomplish more than what is
usually expected of them. They become motivated to transcend their own self-interests for the good of
the group or organization (Bass & Avolio, 1990a). In fact, transformational leaders are most likely to
have a positive impact on followers when followers identify with or find meaning in their work
(Mohammed, Fernando, & Caputi, 2013).
In a study of 220 employees at a large public transport company in Germany, Rowold and Heinitz (2007)
found that transformational leadership augmented the impact of transactional leadership on employees’
performance and company profit. In addition, they found that transformational leadership and
charismatic leadership were overlapping but unique constructs, and that both were different from
transactional leadership.
Similarly, Nemanich and Keller (2007) examined the impact of transformational leadership on 447
employees from a large multinational firm who were going through a merger and being integrated into a
new organization. They found that transformational leadership behaviors such as idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation were positively related
to acquisition acceptance, job satisfaction, and performance.
Tims, Bakker, and Xanthopoulou (2011) examined the relationship between transformational leadership
and work engagement in 42 employees and their supervisors in two different organizations in the
Netherlands. Findings revealed that employees became more engaged in their work (i.e., vigor,
dedication, and absorption) when their supervisors were able to boost employees’ optimism through a
transformational leadership style. These findings underscore the important role played by personal
characteristics (i.e., optimism) in the transformational-leadership-performance process. Similarly,
Hamstra, Van Yperen, Wisse, and Sassenberg (2014) found that transformational leaders were more
likely than transactional leaders to promote achievement of followers’ mastery goals. This suggests that
transformational leaders may be especially effective in environments where followers need to focus on
learning, development, and mastering job-related tasks rather than a more competitive or performance-
based work context. Transformational leaders can propel followers to even greater levels of success
when they have a high-quality relationship based on trust, loyalty, and mutual respect (Notgrass, 2014).
Transactional Leadership Factors
Transactional leadership differs from transformational leadership in that the transactional leader does
not individualize the needs of followers or focus on their personal development. Transactional leaders
exchange things of value with followers to advance their own and their followers’ agendas (Kuhnert,
1994). Transactional leaders are influential because it is in the best interest of followers for them to do
what the leader wants (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987).
Contingent Reward.
Factor 5, contingent reward, is the first of two transactional leadership factors (Figure 8.3). It is an
exchange process between leaders and followers in which effort by followers is exchanged for specified
rewards. With this kind of leadership, the leader tries to obtain agreement from followers on what must
be done and what the payoffs will be for the people doing it. An example of this type of constructive
transaction is a parent who negotiates with a child about how much time the child can spend playing
video games after doing homework assignments. Another example often occurs in the academic setting:
A dean negotiates with a college professor about the number and quality of published works the
professor needs to have written in order to receive tenure and promotion. Notgrass (2014) found that
contingent rewards, or the leader’s use of clarifying or supporting achievement behaviors, are most
effective when followers feel that they have a high-quality relationship with their leader.
Management by Exception.
Factor 6 is called management by exception. It is leadership that involves corrective criticism, negative
feedback, and negative reinforcement. Management by exception takes two forms: active and passive.
A leader using the active form of management by exception watches followers closely for mistakes or
rule violations and then takes corrective action. An example of active management by exception can be
illustrated in the leadership of a sales supervisor who daily monitors how employees approach
customers. The supervisor quickly corrects salespeople who are slow to approach customers in the
prescribed manner. A leader using the passive form intervenes only after standards have not been met
or problems have arisen. An example of passive management by exception is illustrated in the
leadership of a supervisor who gives employees poor performance evaluations without ever talking with
them about their prior work performance. In essence, both the active and passive management types
use more negative reinforcement patterns than the positive reinforcement pattern described in Factor 5
under contingent reward.
Nonleadership Factor
In the model, the nonleadership factor diverges farther from transactional leadership and represents
behaviors that are nontransactional.
Laissez-Faire.
Factor 7 describes leadership that falls at the far-right side of the transactional–transformational
leadership continuum (Figure 8.1). This factor represents the absence of leadership. As the French
phrase implies, the laissez-faire leader takes a “hands-off, let-things-ride” (nontransactional) approach.
This leader abdicates responsibility, delays decisions, gives no feedback, and makes little effort to help
followers satisfy their needs. There is no exchange with followers or attempt to help them grow. An
example of a laissez-faire leader is the president of a small manufacturing firm who calls no meetings
with plant supervisors, has no long-range plan for the firm, acts detached, and makes little contact with
employees. While laissez-faire leadership has traditionally been viewed negatively, recent research
(Yang, 2015) argues that laissez-faire leadership may not be the absence of leadership, but instead may
be a strategic behavioral choice by the leader to acknowledge and defer to followers’ abilities, decrease
their dependency, and increase their self-determination, self-competence, and autonomy. In this case,
the leader would be strategically performing laissez-faire leadership by empowering followers to lead.
Interestingly, research does indicate that leaders may be most effective when they combine
transformational leadership behaviors with elements of laissez-faire and transactional leadership
(Antonakis & House, 2014). This reiterates what most of the leadership theories in this book suggest: All
approaches to leadership have strengths and weaknesses, and because leading effectively means
consistently surveying follower, task, and environmental needs and pressures, oftentimes the best
approach is a combination of leadership approaches.
Transformational Leadership Measurements
The popularity of transformational leadership has resulted in researchers developing a number of
assessments to measure its characteristics and efficacy. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ) was one of the earliest and most widely used assessments of transformational leadership. The
MLQ was developed by Bass (1985), based on a series of interviews he and his associates conducted
with 70 senior executives in South Africa. These executives were asked to recall leaders who had raised
their awareness to broader goals, moved them to higher motives, or inspired them to put others’
interests ahead of their own. The executives were then asked to describe how these leaders behaved—
what they did to effect change. From these descriptions and from numerous other interviews with both
junior and senior executives, Bass constructed the questions that make up the MLQ. The questions
measure followers’ perceptions of a leader’s behavior for each of the factors in the Full Range of
Leadership model (Figure 8.2).
Antonakis, Avolio, and Sivasubramaniam (2003) assessed the psychometric properties of the MLQ
using a business sample of more than 3,000 raters and found strong support for the validity of the MLQ.
They found that the MLQ (Form 5X) clearly distinguished nine factors in the Full Range of Leadership
model. Similarly, Hinkin and Schriesheim (2008) examined the empirical properties of the transactional
and the nonleadership factors on the MLQ and identified several ways to use the questionnaire to
generate more reliable and valid results. Since the MLQ was first designed, it has gone through many
revisions, and it continues to be refined to strengthen its reliability and validity.
Based on a summary analysis of a series of studies that used the MLQ to predict how transformational
leadership relates to outcomes such as effectiveness, Bryman (1992) and Bass and Avolio (1994) have
suggested that the charisma and motivation factors on the MLQ are the most likely to be related to
positive effects. Individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, and contingent reward are the next
most important factors. Management by exception in its passive form has been found to be somewhat
related to outcomes, and in its active form it has been found to be negatively related to outcomes.
Generally, laissez-faire leadership has been found to be negatively related to outcomes such as
effectiveness and satisfaction in organizations.
Other Transformational Perspectives
In addition to Bass’s (1985, 1990; Bass & Avolio, 1994) work, two other lines of research have
contributed in unique ways to our understanding of the nature of transformational leadership. They are
the research of Bennis and Nanus (1985, 2007) and the work of Kouzes and Posner (2002, 2017a).
These scholars used similar qualitative research methods. They identified a number of middle- or
senior-level leaders and conducted interviews with them, using open-ended, semi-structured
questionnaires. From this information, they constructed their models of leadership.
Bennis and Nanus
Bennis and Nanus (2007) asked 90 leaders basic questions such as “What are your strengths and
weaknesses?” “What past events most influenced your leadership approach?” and “What were the
critical points in your career?” From the answers leaders provided to these questions, Bennis and Nanus
identified four common strategies used by leaders in transforming organizations.
First, transforming leaders had a clear vision of the future state of their organizations. It was an image of
an attractive, realistic, and believable future (Bennis & Nanus, 2007, p. 89). The vision usually was
simple, understandable, beneficial, and energy creating. The compelling nature of the vision touched the
experiences of followers and pulled them into supporting the organization. When an organization has a
clear vision, it is easier for people within the organization to learn how they fit in with the overall direction
of the organization and even the society in general. It empowers them because they feel they are a
significant dimension of a worthwhile enterprise (pp. 90–91). Bennis and Nanus found that, to be
successful, the vision had to grow out of the needs of the entire organization and to be claimed by those
within it. Although leaders play a large role in articulating the vision, the emergence of the vision
originates from both the leaders and the followers.
Second, transforming leaders were social architects for their organizations. This means they created a
shape or form for the shared meanings people maintained within their organizations. These leaders
communicated a direction that transformed their organization’s values and norms. In many cases, these
leaders were able to mobilize people to accept a new group identity or a new philosophy for their
organizations.
A good example of a transforming leader with a clear vision and who is a social architect for his
organization is college football coach P. J. Fleck, who is highlighted in Case 6.3 on page 149. First as
the coach at Western Michigan University and then at the University of Minnesota, Coach Fleck created
a culture for these programs that emphasized athletes’ growth in four areas: academic, athletic, social,
and spiritual. He was insistent that players assume leadership roles and consistently model the desired
culture of the team. Coach Fleck would often repeat, “Bad teams, nobody leads. Average teams,
coaches lead. Elite teams, players lead.”
The third strategy identified by Bennis and Nanus was that transforming leaders created trust in their
organizations by making their own positions clearly known and then standing by them. Trust has to do
with being predictable or reliable, even in situations that are uncertain. In organizations, leaders built
trust by articulating a direction and then consistently implementing the direction even though the vision
may have involved a high degree of uncertainty. Bennis and Nanus (2007) found that when leaders
established trust in an organization, it gave the organization a sense of integrity analogous to a healthy
identity (p. 48).
Fourth, transforming leaders used creative deployment of self through positive self-regard. Leaders
knew their strengths and weaknesses, and they emphasized their strengths rather than dwelled on their
weaknesses. Based on an awareness of their own competence, effective leaders were able to immerse
themselves in their tasks and the overarching goals of their organizations. They were able to fuse a
sense of self with the work at hand. Bennis and Nanus also found that positive self-regard in leaders
had a reciprocal impact on followers, creating in them feelings of confidence and high expectations. In
addition, leaders in the study were committed to learning and relearning, so in their organizations there
was consistent emphasis on education.
Bennis and Nanus (2007) proposed that transformational leaders “move organizations from current to
future states, create visions of potential opportunities for organizations, instill within employees [a]
commitment to change and instill new cultures and strategies in organizations that mobilize and focus
energy and resources” (p. 19).
Kouzes and Posner
Kouzes and Posner (2002, 2017a) developed their model by interviewing leaders about leadership.
They interviewed more than 1,300 middle- and senior-level managers in private and public sector
organizations and asked them to describe their “personal best” experiences as leaders. Based on a
content analysis of these descriptions, Kouzes and Posner constructed a model of leadership.
The Kouzes and Posner model consists of five fundamental practices that enable leaders to get
extraordinary things accomplished: model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process,
enable others to act, and encourage the heart. For each of the five practices of exemplary leadership,
Kouzes and Posner also have identified two commitments that serve as strategies for practicing
exemplary leadership.
Model the Way.
To model the way, leaders need to be clear about their own values and philosophy. They need to find
their own voice and express it to others. Exemplary leaders set a personal example for others by their
own behaviors. They also follow through on their promises and commitments and affirm the common
values they share with others.
Inspire a Shared Vision.
Effective leaders create compelling visions that can guide people’s behavior. They are able to visualize
positive outcomes in the future and communicate them to others. Leaders also listen to the dreams of
others and show them how their dreams can be realized. Through inspiring visions, leaders challenge
others to transcend the status quo to do something for others.
Challenge the Process.
Challenging the process means being willing to change the status quo and step into the unknown. It
includes being willing to innovate, grow, and improve. Exemplary leaders are like pioneers: They want to
experiment and try new things. They are willing to take risks to make things better. When exemplary
leaders take risks, they do it one step at a time, learning from their mistakes as they go.
Enable Others to Act.
Outstanding leaders are effective at working with people. They build trust with others and promote
collaboration. Teamwork and cooperation are highly valued by these leaders. They listen closely to
diverse points of view and treat others with dignity and respect. They also allow others to make choices,
and they support the decisions that others make. In short, they create environments where people can
feel good about their work and how it contributes to the greater community.
Interestingly, research indicates that women tend to display transformational leadership through more
enabling behaviors whereas men tend to enact more challenging behavior (Brandt & Laiho, 2013).
Encourage the Heart.
Leaders encourage the heart by rewarding others for their accomplishments. It is natural for people to
want support and recognition. Effective leaders are attentive to this need and are willing to give praise to
workers for jobs well done. They use authentic celebrations and rituals to show appreciation and
encouragement to others. The outcome of this kind of support is greater collective identity and
community spirit.
A later study by Caza and Posner (2019) found that the characteristic of “grit,” or perseverance, was
related to some aspects of transformational leadership. High-grit leaders engaged in more frequent role
modeling and innovating behaviors, but less inspiring behavior.
Overall, the Kouzes and Posner model emphasizes behaviors and has a prescriptive quality: It
recommends what people need to do to become effective leaders. Kouzes and Posner (2002, p. 13)
stressed that the five practices of exemplary leadership are available to everyone and are not reserved
for those with “special” ability. The model is not about personality: It is about practice.
For this reason, Kouzes and Posner (2017b) fundamentally disagree with the trait approach to
leadership, described in Chapter 2, that views leadership as preordained or reserved for a special few
leaders who are charismatic.
Leadership is not a gene. Neither is it a trait. There is just no hard evidence to suggest that
leadership is imprinted in the DNA of some people and not others. One of the competencies
you have is the ability to look ahead. The capacity to imagine the future is a fundamental
defining characteristic of human beings, separating Homo sapiens from other species. (p. 30)
To help leaders identify and measure the behaviors described in their model, Kouzes and Posner
developed the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). The LPI is a 360-degree leadership assessment
tool that consists of 30 questions that assess individual leadership competencies. It has been widely
used in leadership training and development. A review of the measurement properties of the LPI, based
on answers from 2.8 million respondents, found the measure had good reliability and consistency
across samples and populations and that the underlying five-factor structure has been sustained across
a variety of studies and settings. Finally, scores from the LPI are positively related to employee
engagement and perceptions of leader effectiveness (Posner, 2016).
HOW DOES THE TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP APPROACH
WORK?
The transformational approach to leadership is a broad-based perspective that encompasses many
facets and dimensions of the leadership process. In general, it describes how leaders can initiate,
develop, and carry out significant changes in organizations. Although not definitive, the steps followed
by transformational leaders usually take the following form.
Transformational leaders set out to empower followers and nurture them in change. They attempt to
raise the consciousness in individuals and to get them to transcend their own self-interests for the sake
of others. For example, Jung, Chow, and Wu (2003) studied upper-level leadership in 32 Taiwanese
companies and found that transformational leadership was directly related to organizational innovation.
Transformational leadership created a culture in which employees felt empowered and encouraged to
freely discuss and try new things.
To create change, transformational leaders become strong role models for their followers. They have a
highly developed set of moral values and a self-determined sense of identity (Avolio & Gibbons, 1988).
They are confident, competent, and articulate, and they express strong ideals.
They listen to followers and are tolerant of opposing viewpoints. A spirit of cooperation often develops
between these leaders and their followers. Followers want to emulate transformational leaders because
they learn to trust them and believe in the ideas for which they stand.
It is common for transformational leaders to create a vision. The vision emerges from the collective
interests of various individuals and units in an organization. The vision is a focal point for
transformational leadership. It gives the leader and the organization a conceptual map for where the
organization is headed; it gives meaning and clarifies the organization’s identity. Furthermore, the vision
gives followers a sense of identity within the organization and also a sense of self-efficacy (Shamir et al.,
1993).
The transformational approach also requires that leaders become social architects. This means that
they make clear the emerging values and norms of the organization. They involve themselves in the
culture of the organization and help shape its meaning. People need to know their roles and understand
how they contribute to the greater purposes of the organization. Transformational leaders are out front in
interpreting and shaping for organizations the shared meanings that exist within them. As Mason et al.
(2014) pointed out, enacting transformational behaviors changes leaders too, not just followers.
Throughout the process, transformational leaders are effective at working with people. They build trust
and foster collaboration with others. Transformational leaders encourage others and celebrate their
accomplishments. In the end, transformational leadership results in people feeling better about
themselves and their contributions to the greater common good.
Many of us have had transformational leaders in our lives. We tend to remember them as very special.
They had an impact on who we are and what we have become. Transformational leaders were the
people who trusted us and allowed us the space to experiment and grow. As described so poignantly in
Box 8.1, transformational leaders are leaders who raise us up to be better people.
Box 8.1
A Letter to Coach Z
The following letter was sent by a former student to his high school coach who was in the final
stages of dying of cancer. While a student, Jeff was the runner-up to the state singles tennis title
and went on to play No. 1 singles at a major university for four years where he was a two-time
Mid-American Conference champion. He gave permission to publish this letter.
Dear Coach Z,
I wanted to write you a letter to express my sincere gratitude for the role you have played in my
personal and professional development. I suspect you are aware of this fact, but my high school
years were very challenging for me socially. My small stature and size brought tremendous
teasing and shaming that profoundly affected my sense of self-esteem and self-worth. I found
myself with very few friends and I experienced a deep loneliness and a strong desire to “escape”
times of social interaction such as the noon hour. There was a strong culture of clique formation
at our high school and I did not belong.
It was at these times that I would retreat to the safety of your office and the comfort of your
friendship. This truly meant the world to me and was critical to my survival. As a 40-year old now,
it blows my mind that you, then in your mid-50s, befriended me and cared for me. Even though
your time was limited, you were so gracious to frequently offer me your undivided attention. I am
convinced that I could not have become the person I am today without your influence in my life.
You have always believed in me and made me feel like I could do something exceptional. You
always encouraged me and pushed me to dig deeper, work harder, and give it my all. You trained
me in the areas of honesty, integrity, teamwork, and commitment. The lessons you’ve taught me
have formed me and stayed with me throughout my life. Your influence has led me to achieve
things in life that few would have thought possible.
It is my hope that this letter will honor you and that God will refresh and prosper you all the
remaining days of your life.
Gratefully Yours,
Jeff
—Courtesy of Jeff Brink
STRENGTHS
In its present stage of development, the transformational approach has several strengths. First,
transformational leadership has been widely researched from many different perspectives, including a
series of qualitative studies of prominent leaders and CEOs in large, well-known organizations. It has
also been the focal point for a large body of leadership research since its introduction in the 1970s. For
example, content analysis of all the articles published in The Leadership Quarterly from 1990 to 2000
showed that 34% of the articles were about transformational or charismatic leadership (Lowe & Gardner,
2001). In an updated review examining the period from 2000 to 2012, 39% of the articles published in
10 top-tier academic journals were about transformational or charismatic leadership (Dinh et al., 2014).
In addition, qualitative research on transformational leadership, which has appeared in highly popular
mass-market leadership books, has provided rich descriptions of the qualities and characteristics of
transformational leaders.
Second, transformational leadership has intuitive appeal. The transformational perspective describes
how the leader is out front advocating change for others; this concept is consistent with society’s popular
notion of what leadership means. People are attracted to transformational leadership because it makes
sense to them. It is appealing that a leader will provide a vision for the future. Transformational leaders
are “movers and shakers” that get an organization moving when change is needed by getting followers
to face the future and achieve results through their influence (Nicholls, 1988).
Third, transformational leadership treats leadership as a process that occurs between followers and
leaders. One of the components of transformational leadership is individualized consideration (Bass,
1985). Because this process incorporates both the followers’ and the leader’s needs, leadership is not
the sole responsibility of a leader but rather emerges from the interplay between leaders and followers.
The needs of others are central to the transformational leader. As a result, followers gain a more
prominent position in the leadership process because their attributions are instrumental in the evolving
transformational process (Bryman, 1992, p. 176).
Fourth, the transformational approach provides a broader view of leadership that augments other
leadership models. Many leadership models focus primarily on how leaders exchange rewards for
achieved goals—the transactional process. The transformational approach provides an expanded
picture of leadership that includes not only the exchange of rewards, but also leaders’ attention to the
needs and growth of followers (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985). Contingent rewards and transformational
behaviors combine to explain employee job satisfaction (Puni, Mohammed, & Asamoah, 2018). In other
words, followers respond to both transactional and transformational behaviors, which are encompassed
in the Full Range of Leadership model (Figure 8.2) that provides a comprehensive view of leadership.
Fifth, transformational leadership places a strong emphasis on followers’ needs, values, and morals.
Burns (1978) suggested that transformational leadership involves attempts by leaders to move people to
higher standards of moral responsibility. It includes motivating followers to transcend their own self-
interests for the good of the team, organization, or community (Howell & Avolio, 1993; Shamir et al.,
1993). Transformational leadership is fundamentally morally uplifting (Avolio, 1999). This emphasis sets
the transformational approach apart from all other approaches to leadership because it suggests that
leadership has a moral dimension. Therefore, the coercive uses of power by people such as Hitler, cult
leader David Koresh, and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte can be disregarded as models of
leadership.
Finally, there is substantial evidence that transformational leadership is an effective form of leadership
(Yukl, 1999). In a critique of transformational and charismatic leadership, Yukl reported that in studies
using the MLQ to appraise leaders, transformational leadership was positively related to follower
satisfaction, motivation, and performance. Furthermore, in studies that used interviews and
observations, transformational leadership was shown to be effective in a variety of different situations. At
the same time, transformational leadership has also been demonstrated to contribute to the leader’s
personal growth (Notgrass, 2014).
CRITICISMS
Transformational leadership has several weaknesses. One criticism is that it lacks conceptual clarity.
Because it covers such a wide range of activities and characteristics—creating a vision, motivating,
being a change agent, building trust, giving nurturance, and acting as a social architect, to name a few
—it is difficult to define exactly the parameters of transformational leadership. Knippenberg and Sitkin
(2013) critically reviewed the transformational leadership research and found the following weaknesses:
lack of a clear conceptual definition, failure to outline a well-defined causal model that accounts for the
unique effects of theoretical dimensions, and the confounding of the conceptualization and
operationalization—a disconnect between the theory and how it is measured. For example, research by
Tracey and Hinkin (1998) has shown substantial overlap between each of the Four Is (idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration), suggesting
that the dimensions are not clearly delimited.
Furthermore, the parameters of transformational leadership often overlap with similar conceptualizations
of leadership. Bryman (1992), for example, pointed out that transformational and charismatic leadership
often are treated synonymously, even though in some models of leadership (e.g., Bass, 1985) charisma
is only one component of transformational leadership. Others have questioned whether the four
dimensions of transformational leadership (i.e., the Four Is) are the reasons for transformational
leadership or if they are simply descriptions of transformational leadership (e.g., Andersen, 2015;
Tourish, 2013). At present, researchers are not sure if these dimensions predict transformational
leadership or just help to explain the presence of transformational leadership.
In addition, Andersen (2015) suggested that transformational leadership was created to be used within
social and political contexts—not in corporations. However, many researchers have been using the
theory to explore managerial rather than political leadership.
Another criticism revolves around how transformational leadership is measured. Researchers typically
have used some version of the MLQ to measure transformational leadership. However, some studies
have challenged the validity of the MLQ. In some versions of the MLQ, the four factors of
transformational leadership (the Four Is) correlate highly with each other, which means they are not
distinct factors (Tejeda, Scandura, & Pillai, 2001). In addition, some of the transformational factors
correlate with the transactional and laissez-faire factors, which means they may not be unique to the
transformational model (Tejeda et al., 2001). It has also been suggested that transformational leadership
could be better measured and understood through a narrative perspective (Andersen, 2015; Tengblad,
2012). Reviews of research on transformational leadership reveal that the factor structure does not
replicate across studies (Knippenberg & Sitkin, 2013).
A third criticism is that transformational leadership treats leadership as a personality trait or personal
predisposition rather than a behavior that people can learn (Bryman, 1992, pp. 100–102). If it is a trait,
training people in this approach becomes more problematic because it is difficult to teach people how to
change their traits. Even though many scholars, including Weber, House, and Bass, emphasized that
transformational leadership is concerned with leader behaviors, such as how leaders involve themselves
with followers, there is an inclination to see this approach from a trait perspective. Perhaps this problem
is exacerbated because the word transformational creates images of one person being the most active
component in the leadership process. For example, even though “creating a vision” involves follower
input, there is a tendency to see transformational leaders as visionaries. There is also a tendency to see
transformational leaders as people who have special qualities that transform others. These images
accentuate a trait characterization of transformational leadership.
Fourth, researchers have not established that transformational leaders are actually able to transform
individuals and organizations (Antonakis, 2012). There is evidence that indicates that transformational
leadership is associated with positive outcomes, such as organizational effectiveness; however, studies
have not yet clearly established a causal link between transformational leaders and changes in followers
or organizations. However, there may be a glimmer of hope in this regard as Arthur and Hardy (2014)
were able to use an experimental design to evaluate the effectiveness of a transformational leadership
intervention in remediating poor performance in an organization. This provides initial evidence that
transformational leadership behaviors may result in some expected positive changes.
A fifth criticism some have made is that transformational leadership is elitist and antidemocratic (Avolio,
1999; Bass & Avolio, 1993). Transformational leaders often play a direct role in creating changes,
establishing a vision, and advocating new directions. This gives the strong impression that the leaders
are acting independently of followers or putting themselves above the followers’ needs. Although this
criticism of elitism has been refuted by Bass and Avolio (1993) and Avolio (1999), who contended that
transformational leaders can be directive and participative as well as democratic and authoritarian, the
substance of the criticism raises valid questions about transformational leadership. The transformational
leadership approach has focused predominantly on leaders at the top echelons of organizations.
However, some research suggests that transformational leadership can occur at all levels of the
organization (Lovelace, Neely, Allen, & Hunter, 2019).
Related to this criticism, some have argued that transformational leadership suffers from a “heroic
leadership” bias (Yukl, 1999). Transformational leadership stresses that it is the leader who moves
followers to do exceptional things. By focusing primarily on the leader, researchers have failed to give
attention to shared leadership or reciprocal influence. Followers can influence leaders just as leaders
can influence followers. More attention should be directed toward how leaders can encourage followers
to challenge the leader’s vision and share in the leadership process.
Another criticism of transformational leadership is that it has the potential to be abused.
Transformational leadership is concerned with changing people’s values and moving them to a new
vision. But who is to determine whether the new directions are good and more affirming? Who decides
that a new vision is a better vision? If the values to which leaders are moving their followers are not
better, and if the set of human values is not more redeeming, then the leadership must be challenged.
However, the dynamics of how followers challenge leaders or respond to their visions are not fully
understood. There is a need to understand how transformational leaders affect followers psychologically
and how leaders respond to followers’ reactions. In fact, Burns (1978) argued that understanding this
area (i.e., charisma and follower worship) is one of the central problems in leadership studies today
(Bailey & Axelrod, 2001). The charismatic nature of transformational leadership presents significant risks
for organizations because it can be used for destructive purposes (Conger, 1999; Howell & Avolio,
1993). A meta-analysis of psychopathic tendencies and transformational leadership showed that
psychopathic people are somewhat more likely to emerge as leaders, but they are viewed as less
effective leaders. Further, this study found that women are penalized for displaying psychopathic
tendencies but that men may be rewarded for similar behaviors (Landay, Harms, & Credé, 2019).
History is full of examples of charismatic individuals who used coercive power to lead people to evil
ends. For this reason, transformational leadership puts a burden on individuals and organizations to be
aware of how they are being influenced and in what directions they are being asked to go. Christie et al.
(2011) warn that astute followers need to be vigilant and pay careful attention to the vision of their
leader, whether the vision is collective or self-focused, whether the leader is tolerant or intolerant of
opposing viewpoints, and whether or not the leader is caring of followers. The potential for abuse of
transformational leadership is mitigated when followers are aware and engaged in how they are being
led.
Another criticism of the transformational leadership approach is that it may not be viewed as effective in
all national cultures. Despite prior claims that transformational leadership is universal (Bass, 1997), this
is not supported by data. A meta-analysis of more than 57,000 employees in 34 countries found that the
value of transformational leadership behaviors may be limited in developed economies such as Western
Europe and North America, while transformational leadership is most effective in Africa, the Middle East,
South America, and parts of Southeast Asia (Credé, Jong, & Harms, 2019).
A final potential weakness of transformational leadership is the fact that it may not be well received by
millennials (Anderson et al., 2017). As millennials continue to replace baby boomers in the workforce,
organizations are recognizing that they are having to modify previous ways of doing things to meet
millennials’ needs. Transformational leadership is one such example. Drawing from the individualistic
orientation of many millennials, Anderson and colleagues predict that transformational leaders may be
less effective because this cohort may be less willing to collaborate with others to achieve common
goals. Relatedly, today’s transformational leaders communicate in a way to encourage followers to
prioritize organizational and task needs and goals over individual interests (Anderson et al., 2017).
However, it is predicted that this will be met with resistance as millennials have expressed a greater
desire for work–life balance and want to “work to live” rather than “live to work” (Ng, Schweitzer, &
Lyons, 2010). Finally, it has been suggested that because millennials expect frequent promotions and
value extrinsic rewards, two of the fundamental components of transformational leadership—idealized
influence and inspirational motivation—may be ineffective (Anderson et al., 2017).
APPLICATION
Rather than being a model that tells leaders what to do, transformational leadership provides a broad
set of generalizations of what is typical of leaders who are transforming or who work in transforming
contexts. Unlike other leadership approaches, such as the situational approach (discussed in Chapter
5), transformational leadership does not provide a clearly defined set of assumptions about how leaders
should act in a particular situation to be successful. Rather, it provides a general way of thinking about
leadership that emphasizes ideals, inspiration, innovations, and individual concerns. Transformational
leadership requires that leaders be aware of how their own behavior relates to the needs of their
followers and the changing dynamics within their organizations.
Bass and Avolio (1990a) suggested that transformational leadership can be taught to people at all levels
in an organization and that it can positively affect a firm’s performance. It can be used in recruitment,
selection and promotion, and training and development. It can also be used in improving team
development, decision-making groups, quality initiatives, and reorganizations (Bass & Avolio, 1994).
Programs designed to develop transformational leadership usually require that leaders or their
associates take the MLQ (Bass & Avolio, 1990b) or a similar questionnaire to determine the leader’s
particular strengths and weaknesses in transformational leadership. These assessments help leaders
pinpoint areas in which they could improve their leadership. For example, leaders might learn that it
would be beneficial if they were more confident in expressing their goals, that they need to spend more
time nurturing followers, or that they need to be more tolerant of opposing viewpoints. Such
transformational leadership measures can be springboards to helping leaders improve a whole series of
their leadership attributes.
One particular aspect of transformational leadership that has been given special emphasis in training
programs is the process of building a vision. For example, it has become quite common for training
programs to have leaders write elaborate statements that describe their own five-year career plans and
their perceptions of the future directions for their organizations. Working with leaders on vision
statements is one way to help them enhance their transformational leadership behavior. Another
important aspect of training is teaching leaders to exhibit greater individual consideration and promote
intellectual stimulation for their followers. Lowe et al. (1996) found that this is particularly valuable for
lower-level leaders in organizations.
The desire to provide effective training in how to be more successful in demonstrating transactional and
transformational leadership resulted in the development of a guide by Sosik and Jung (2010). This
comprehensive, evidence-based approach includes self-assessments, 360-degree feedback, and
leadership development planning. Their work serves as a thorough training guide that explains how,
when, and why the full range of leadership behaviors work.
Overall, transformational leadership provides leaders with information about a full range of their
behaviors, from nontransactional to transactional to transformational. In the next section, we provide
some actual leadership examples to which the principles of transformational leadership can be applied.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
In the following section, three brief case studies (Cases 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3) from very different contexts
are provided. Each case describes a situation in which transformational leadership is present to some
degree. The first case looks at the efforts of a new CEO to transform the traditional culture of aircraft
equipment manufacturing company. The second case comes from the perspective of a college professor
and archaeologist who leads student groups on digs in the Middle East. The final case profiles the
Friendship Bench project that trains grandmothers to help tackle depression in Zimbabwe. The
questions at the end of each case point to some of the unique issues surrounding the use of
transformational leadership in ongoing organizations.
Case 8.1 The Vision Failed
High Tech Engineering (HTE) is a 50-year-old family-owned manufacturing company with 250
employees that produces small parts for the aircraft industry. The president of HTE is Harold Barelli,
who came to the company from a smaller business with strong credentials as a leader in advanced
aircraft technology. Before Barelli, the only other president of HTE was the founder and owner of the
company. The organizational structure at HTE was very traditional, and it was supported by a very rich
organizational culture.
As the new president, Barelli sincerely wanted to transform HTE. He wanted to prove that new
technologies and advanced management techniques could make HTE one of the best manufacturing
companies in the country. To that end, Barelli created a vision statement that was displayed throughout
the company. The two-page statement, which had a strong democratic tone, described the overall
purposes, directions, and values of the company.
During the first three years of Barelli’s tenure as president, several major reorganizations took place at
the company. These were designed by Barelli and a select few of his senior managers. The intention of
each reorganization was to implement advanced organizational structures to bolster the declared HTE
vision.
Yet the major outcome of each of the changes was to dilute the leadership and create a feeling of
instability among the employees. Most of the changes were made from the top down, with little input
from lower or middle management. Some of the changes gave employees more control in
circumstances where they needed less, whereas other changes limited employee input in contexts
where employees should have been given more input. There were some situations in which individual
workers reported to three different bosses, and other situations in which one manager had far too many
workers to oversee. Rather than feeling comfortable in their various roles at HTE, employees began to
feel uncertain about their responsibilities and how they contributed to stated goals of the company. The
overall effect of the reorganizations was a precipitous drop in worker morale and production.
In the midst of all the changes, the vision that Barelli had for the company was lost. The instability that
employees felt made it difficult for them to support the company’s vision. People at HTE complained that
although mission statements were displayed throughout the company, no one understood in which
direction they were going.
To the employees at HTE, Barelli was an enigma. HTE was an American company that produced U.S.
products, but Barelli drove a foreign car. Barelli claimed to be democratic in his style of leadership, but
he was arbitrary in how he treated people. He acted in a nondirective style toward some people, and he
showed arbitrary control toward others. He wanted to be seen as a hands-on manager, but he delegated
operational control of the company to others while he focused on external customer relations and
matters of the board of directors.
At times Barelli appeared to be insensitive to employees’ concerns. He wanted HTE to be an
environment in which everyone could feel empowered, but he often failed to listen closely to what
employees were saying.
He seldom engaged in open, two-way communication. HTE had a long, rich history with many unique
stories, but the employees felt that Barelli either misunderstood or did not care about that history.
Four years after arriving at HTE, Barelli stepped down as president after his operations officer ran the
company into a large debt and cash-flow crisis. His dream of building HTE into a world-class
manufacturing company was never realized.
Questions
1. If you were consulting with the HTE board of directors soon after Barelli started making changes,
what would you advise them regarding Barelli’s leadership from a transformational perspective?
2. Did Barelli have a clear vision for HTE? Was he able to implement it?
3. How effective was Barelli as a change agent and social architect for HTE?
4. What would you advise Barelli to do differently if he had the chance to return as president of HTE?
Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership
Every year, Dr. Cook, a college professor, leads a group of 25 college students to the Middle East on an
archaeological dig that usually lasts about eight weeks. The participants, who come from big and small
colleges throughout the country, usually have little prior knowledge or background in what takes place
during an excavation. Dr. Cook enjoys leading these expeditions because he likes teaching students
about archaeology and because the outcomes of the digs actually advance his own scholarly work.
While planning for his annual summer excavation, Dr. Cook told the following story:
This summer will be interesting because I have 10 people returning from last year. Last year was quite a
dig. During the first couple of weeks everything was very disjointed. Team members seemed
unmotivated and tired. In fact, there was one time early on when it seemed as if nearly half the students
were either physically ill or mentally exhausted. Students seemed lost and uncertain about the meaning
of the entire project.
For example, it is our tradition to get up every morning at 4:30 a.m. to depart for the excavation site at
5:00 a.m. However, during the first weeks of the dig, few people were ever ready on time, even after
several reminders.
Every year it takes some time for people to learn where they fit with each other and with the purposes of
the dig. The students all come from such different backgrounds. Some are from small, private, religious
schools, and others are from large state universities. Each comes with a different agenda, different
skills, and different work habits. One person may be a good photographer, another a good artist, and
another a good surveyor. It is my job to complete the excavation with the resources available to us.
At the end of Week 2, I called a meeting to assess how things were going. We talked about a lot of
things including personal things, how our work was progressing, and what we needed to change. The
students seemed to appreciate the chance to talk at this meeting. Each of them described their special
circumstances and hopes for the summer.
I told the students several stories about past digs; some were humorous, and others highlighted
accomplishments. I shared my particular interests in this project and how I thought we as a group could
accomplish the work that needed to be done at this important historical site. In particular, I stressed two
points: (a) that they shared the responsibility for the successful outcome of the venture, and (b) that they
had independent authority to design, schedule, and carry out the details of their respective assignments,
with the director and other senior staff available at all times as advisers and resource persons. In regard
to the departure time issue, I told the participants that the standard departure time on digs was 5:00
a.m.
Well, shortly after our meeting I observed a real shift in the group attitude and atmosphere. People
seemed to become more involved in the work, there was less sickness, and there was more
camaraderie. All assignments were completed without constant prodding and in a spirit of mutual
support. Each morning at 5:00 a.m. everyone was ready to go.
I find that each year my groups are different. It’s almost as if each of them has a unique personality.
Perhaps that is why I find it so challenging. I try to listen to the students and use their particular
strengths. It really is quite amazing how these students can develop in eight weeks. They really become
good at archaeology, and they accomplish a great deal.
This coming year will again be different because of the 10 returning “veterans.”
Questions
1. How is this an example of transformational leadership?
2. Where are Dr. Cook’s strengths on the Full Range of Leadership model (Figure 8.2)?
3. What is the vision Dr. Cook has for the archaeology excavations?
Case 8.3 Grandmothers and Benches
The invitation of a park bench and the compassion of a grandmother are saving lives in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe, an African nation of more than 16 million people, had only 12 psychiatrists available to meet
the mental health needs of the entire country. Dr. Dixon Chibanda is one of them (Chibanda, 2017c;
Nuwer, 2018).
After losing a young patient he had treated for depression to suicide because she and her mother could
not afford the $15 bus fare to come to his office for treatment, Dr. Chibanda realized that the traditional
delivery of mental health care—offering services in a facility and waiting for patients to come to him—
would not work in his country. After much soul searching and consideration of the effectiveness of his
role as a psychiatrist in Zimbabwe, Dr. Chibanda had an epiphany.
Suicide is not unusual when it comes to mental health concerns. According to the World Health
Organization (WHO), suicide is the leading cause of death of those ages 15 to 29 worldwide. Globally,
more than 300 million people suffer from depression, according to the WHO. Depression is the world’s
leading cause of disability and contributes to 800,000 suicides per year, the majority of which occur in
developing countries (Nuwer, 2018).
Depression, often the result of loneliness, abuse, conflict, and violence, is a treatable mental illness. But
treatment needs to be available and affordable, which are large concerns for a country like Zimbabwe
with extremely limited resources.
In 2006, Dr. Chibanda began leading a team of Zimbabwean researchers in testing new ways of
addressing anxiety and depression disorders and making treatment accessible to those who need it
(Chibanda, 2017a). With no money or facilities available, he accessed the most abundant and reliable
resource he could think of: grandmothers. Thus, the Friendship Bench approach was conceived.
The Friendship Bench involves the engagement and training of laypeople—grandmothers, to be precise
—from local communities, as well as the integration of digital technologies.
Why grandmothers? Grandmothers are often a trusted, cultural cornerstone in Zimbabwean
communities. “It suddenly dawned on me that actually, one of the most reliable resources we have in
Africa are grandmothers. Yes, grandmothers. And I thought, grandmothers are in every community.
There are hundreds of them” (Chibanda, 2017c).
In addition, Dr. Chibanda realized that grandmothers, unlike many younger workers, were more likely to
stay in place and not leave the communities to seek other opportunities. Furthermore, many
grandmothers were already doing community work, and association with this program would reinforce
their role in the community.
“When we started, we didn’t know what the core competencies were . . . Later we discovered that our
lay therapists needed strong listening skills, an ability to convey empathy and an ability to reflect—all
skills the grandmothers had and could develop further” (WHO, 2018, p. 377).
Training these community counselors involved the application of basic cognitive therapy (often referred
to as “talk therapy”) concepts. The grandmothers were taught to adopt a nonjudgmental and practical
approach, allowing the clients to discuss their challenges and talk through possible solutions. Dr.
Chibanda’s strategy was to “empower them [the grandmothers] with the skills to provide behavior
activation, [and] activity scheduling; and support them using digital technology. You know, mobile phone
technology. Pretty much everyone in Africa has a mobile phone today” (Chibanda, 2017c).
The program launched in 2007, and Dr. Chibanda spent the first four years of the program working with
14 grandmothers and his colleague, Petra Mesu, to develop a “culturally appropriate and evidence-
based intervention they could deliver” (WHO, 2018, p. 377). Together, they developed a therapy focused
on problem solving that incorporated the native Shona language and familiar, local cultural concepts.
The first step of the program is screening, which is done at a health facility. Using a locally developed
diagnosis tool called the Shona Symptom Questionnaire, clients are evaluated as to whether they are
suffering from mental illness and what form of mental illness. If it is found that they are, then they are
referred to the Friendship Bench where they meet with one of the trained community counselors (the
grandmothers). The Friendship Bench is a literal wooden park bench, initially located in discreet areas
around the health facility, where patient and grandmother (counselor) can openly discuss a patient’s
concerns in a comfortable setting. Due to the growing acceptance of the program, these benches are
now more publicly visible.
As part of their training, counselors are taught to use language and terms familiar to their clients such as
kuvhura pfungwa (“opening the mind”), kusimudzira (“uplifting”), and kusimbisa (“to strengthen”). Many
of the clients suffer with depression, which is commonly referred to as kufungisisa (“thinking too much”)
in the Shona language.
“They provide six sessions of individual problem-solving therapy to each patient and refer those at risk
of suicide to their immediate supervisors. The first session takes an hour or more, during which the
grandmother listens, establishes a rapport with the client, and takes notes. Their notes are reviewed
regularly by the team, together with the grandmothers, particularly during debrief sessions. The sessions
are recorded for their supervisors to monitor,” said Dr. Chibanda. “Afterwards, the grandmother reflects
on what the client said and decides what needs to be done with the other grandmothers. Subsequent
sessions with the client can be quite short, 20–30 minutes, because the client has an understanding of
what to focus on” (WHO, 2018, p. 377).
Technology plays an important role in the program. To store patient data, the team uses a secure
platform combined with cloud computing. “Each patient receives text messages between sessions to
encourage their problem-solving efforts. When a client does not turn up for a session on the bench, we
call them and if there is no response, the grandmother and a health professional visit the client’s home,”
Dr. Chibanda said (WHO, 2018, p. 377).
Dedicated to the success of the program, Dr. Chibanda ran the initial pilot in Mbare, using his own salary
to pay for supplies and space rental for the training. The program would eventually receive funding from
the National Healthcare Trust, Zimbabwe and other organizations.
Some of the grandmothers are paid, receiving an allowance from their city’s health department. During
the clinical trials, funding was available, but once those trials concluded, that funding dried up and Dr.
Chibanda was concerned the grandmothers might cease working. To his surprise, they did not. When he
and his colleagues looked into why, they found the grandmothers exhibited negative mental health
conditions of their own, and the team hypothesized that perhaps the work the grandmothers were doing
helped them as well, enabling them to expand their own well-being and resilience to adversity.
Dr. Chibanda’s own mother came up with the income-generating model for the grandmothers. “After
finishing sessions on the bench, the grandmothers sit in a circle and share the challenges they face with
their colleagues, while crocheting bags with recycled plastic to sell. Now, after completing therapy, the
grandmothers give their patients further support and show them how to make the bags. So, this is a
forum for problem solving and income generation” (WHO, 2018, p. 377).
The success of the program speaks for itself. In 2017, the program had been scaled into more than 70
communities, with “hundreds of grandmothers” providing mental health services in those communities.
More than 30,000 people have received treatment on the Friendship Bench. “Our results—this was a
clinical trial—in fact, this clinical trial showed that grandmothers were more effective at treating
depression than doctors” (Chibanda, 2017c).
“When we compared the Friendship Bench approach to standard care, plus information, education, and
support on common mental disorders, we found that after nine months the Friendship Bench patients
had a significantly lower risk of symptoms than the standard of care group,” Dr. Chibanda said (WHO,
2018, p. 377).
Not surprisingly, Chibanda sees the potential in expanding the program globally. Even in developed
countries, the availability of mental health professionals is rapidly declining, with waiting times to receive
care increasing to dangerous levels. “In the United Kingdom, thousands of people attempt suicide while
waiting, sometimes for months, on the National Health Service list to see a psychologist. Similarly, long
waiting lists have been reported in the United States” (Chibanda, 2017b).
Dr. Chibanda notes that today there are more than 600 million people worldwide who are above 65, with
this number expected to expand to 1.5 billion people by the year 2050. He envisions “a global network
of grandmothers in every city in the world who are trained in evidence-based talk therapy, supported
through digital platforms, networked. And they will make a difference in communities. They will reduce
the treatment gap for mental, neurological and substance-use disorders” (Chibanda, 2017c).
The realization of this vision has already begun. The program has expanded to rural areas in Zimbabwe
and is developing a component for adolescents. The Friendship Bench approach is being implemented
in Malawi with plans for it to be used in Zanzibar, United Republic of Tanzania. Its use is even being
explored in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (WHO, 2018, p. 377).
Questions
1. Based on the definition of transformational leadership in this chapter:
a. What aspects of the implementation of the Friendship Bench and the effectiveness of the
grandmothers do you see as related to the transformational leadership processes? Explain
why.
b. Are there aspects of this process outlined in this case study that you would classify as
transactional leadership? Why?
2. Charisma and its relationship to transformational leadership was discussed at length and outlined in
Table 8.1. View Dr. Dixon Chibanda’s 2017 TED Talk at
www.ted.com/talks/dixon_chibanda_why_i_train_grandmothers_to_treat_depression and respond
to the following:
a. Do you perceive Dr. Chibanda to be a charismatic leader? Why or why not?
b. What about the grandmothers? What characteristics of charismatic leadership, if any, would
you ascribe to them? Explain your answer.
c. Bass suggested that “charisma is a necessary but not sufficient condition for transformational
leadership.” Based on the elements of this case study, would you agree or disagree? Why?
3. How do each of the leadership factors of idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration relate to this case?
4. Bennis and Nanus expanded on the transformational perspective by identifying four common
strategies for transformational leaders. Discuss how each of these relates to Dr. Chibanda and the
grandmothers:
a. Clear vision
b. Social architect
c. Creation of trust
d. Creative deployment of self
5. Kouzes and Posner identified five fundamental practices of transformational leaders. Discuss how
these apply to this case:
a. Model the way
b. Inspire a shared vision
c. Challenge the process
d. Enable others to act
e. Encourage the heart
6. The chapter lists seven criticisms of the transformational leadership model. Select three of these
and address them with respect to this case.
Leadership Instrument
The Transformational Leadership Inventory developed by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, and Fetter
(1990) provides a measure of transactional and transformational leadership. The purpose of this
questionnaire is to determine which style of leadership you tend to use, transformational or
transactional. If you have held leadership positions in the past, you might have some idea which style
you tend to use. Even if you have no leadership experience, this self-assessment can provide a starting
point for you to determine which style you are more likely to use.
Transformational Leadership Inventory
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to determine which style of leadership you intend
to use, transformational or transactional.
Instructions: To respond to the following questions, consider a time when you have been a leader
of a group. Read each of the following statements and select the response that best describes
your leadership behavior as a member of this group.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
1. I have a clear understanding of where my group is going. 1 2 3 4 5
2. I always give others positive feedback when they perform well. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I paint an interesting picture of the future for our group. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I give special recognition to group members when their work is very good. 1 2 3 4 5
5. I am always seeking new opportunities for the group. 1 2 3 4 5
6. I commend others when they do a better than average job. 1 2 3 4 5
7. I inspire others with my plans for the future. 1 2 3 4 5
8. I frequently acknowledge others’ good performance. 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring and Interpretation
Write the number you selected for each question in the blanks in the following box.
Transformational Leadership Transactional Leadership
1. ______ 2. ______
3. ______ 4. ______
5. ______ 6. ______
7. ______ 8. ______
Total: ______ Total: ______
Transformational Leadership (Identifying and Articulating a Vision): Identifying new
opportunities for a leader’s unit/division/company, and developing, articulating, and inspiring
others with a vision of the future.
Transactional Leadership (Contingent Reward): Promising or delivering rewards to
followers, contingent on their performance.
Your scores for each dimension (transformational or transactional) can range from 4 to 20. In
general, scores from 4 to 12 represent lower levels of your preference for the leadership style,
and scores above 12 indicate higher levels of your preference for the leadership style.
Source: Adapted from Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational
leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors.
The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142.
Summary
One of the most encompassing approaches to leadership—transformational leadership—is concerned
with the process of how certain leaders are able to inspire followers to accomplish great things. This
approach stresses that leaders need to understand and adapt to the needs and motives of followers.
Transformational leaders are recognized as change agents who are good role models, who can create
and articulate a clear vision for an organization, who empower followers to meet higher standards, who
act in ways that make others want to trust them, and who give meaning to organizational life.
Transformational leadership emerged from and is rooted in the writings of Burns (1978) and Bass
(1985). The works of Bennis and Nanus (1985, 2007) and Kouzes and Posner (2002, 2017a) are also
representative of transformational leadership. Qualitative studies provided additional perspectives on
transformational leadership and served as guides for practicing managers.
There are several positive features of the transformational approach, including that it is a popular model
that has received a lot of attention by researchers, it has strong intuitive appeal, it emphasizes the
importance of followers in the leadership process, it goes beyond traditional transactional models and
broadens leadership to include the growth of followers, and it places strong emphasis on morals and
values. Transformational leadership has also proven to be an effective form of leadership that is
positively related to follower satisfaction, motivation, and performance.
Balancing against the positive features of transformational leadership are several weaknesses. These
include that the approach lacks conceptual clarity and a well-defined causal model; it is based on the
MLQ, which has been challenged by some research; it creates a framework that implies that
transformational leadership has a trait-like quality; it is sometimes seen as elitist and undemocratic; it
suffers from a “heroic leadership” bias; and it has the potential to be used counterproductively in
negative ways by leaders. Finally, transformational leadership may not be viewed as an effective
leadership approach in all national cultures and among millennials. Despite the weaknesses,
transformational leadership appears to be a valuable and widely used approach.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
LEGEND
Nonleadership
LF Laissez-Faire
Transactional
MBE-P Management by Exception, Passive
MBE-A Management by Exception, Active
CR Contingent Reward
Transformational Four I’s
Idealized Influence
Inspirational Motivation
Intellectual Stimulation
Individualized Consideration
Back to Figure
Transformational leadership equals idealized influence plus inspirational motivation plus intellectual
stimulation plus individualized consideration. Transactional leadership equals contingent reward plus
management by exception. Transformational leadership and expected outcomes from transactional
leadership lead to performance beyond expectations.
9 AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP
Authentic leadership describes leadership that is transparent, morally grounded, and responsive to
people’s needs and values.
DESCRIPTION
Authentic leadership represents one of the newer areas of leadership research. It focuses on whether
leadership is genuine and “real.” As the title of this approach implies, authentic leadership is about the
authenticity of leaders and their leadership. Unlike many of the theories that we have discussed in this
book, authentic leadership is still in the formative phase of development. As a result, authentic
leadership needs to be considered more tentatively: It is likely to change as new research about the
theory is published.
In recent times, upheavals in society have energized a tremendous demand for authentic leadership.
The destruction on 9/11, corporate scandals at companies like WorldCom and Enron, deliberate
misinformation and claims of “fake news,” and civil unrest resulting from incidents of racial injustice have
all created anxiety and uncertainty. People feel apprehensive and insecure about what is going on
around them, and as a result, they long for bona fide leadership they can trust and for leaders who are
honest and good. People’s demands for trustworthy leadership make the study of authentic leadership
timely and worthwhile.
In addition to the public’s interest, authentic leadership has been intriguing to researchers: It was
identified earlier in transformational leadership research but never fully articulated (Bass, 1990; Bass &
Steidlmeier, 1999; Burns, 1978; Howell & Avolio, 1993). Furthermore, practitioners had developed
approaches to authentic leadership that were not evidence based and so needed further clarification
and testing. In attempts to more fully explore authentic leadership, researchers set out to identify the
parameters of authentic leadership and more clearly conceptualize it, efforts that continue today.
Authentic Leadership Defined
On the surface, authentic leadership appears easy to define. In actuality, it is a complex process that is
difficult to characterize. Among leadership scholars, there is no single accepted definition of authentic
leadership. Instead, there are multiple definitions, each written from a different viewpoint and with a
different emphasis (Chan, 2005).
One of those viewpoints is the intrapersonal perspective, which focuses closely on the leader and what
goes on within the leader. It incorporates the leader’s self-knowledge, self-regulation, and self-concept.
In their description of the intrapersonal approach, Shamir and Eilam (2005) suggest that authentic
leaders exhibit genuine leadership, lead from conviction, and are originals. This perspective emphasizes
the life experiences of a leader and the meaning one attaches to those experiences as being critical to
the development of the authentic leader.
A second way of defining authentic leadership is as an interpersonal process. This perspective outlines
authentic leadership as relational, created by leaders and followers together (Eagly, 2005). It results not
from the leader’s efforts alone, but also from the response of followers. Authenticity emerges from the
interactions between leaders and followers. It is a reciprocal process because leaders affect followers
and followers affect leaders.
Finally, authentic leadership can be defined from a developmental perspective, which is exemplified in
the work of Avolio and his associates (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Gardner, Avolio, & Walumbwa, 2005b;
Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, & Peterson, 2008). This perspective, which underpins the
approaches to authentic leadership discussed in the following section, views authentic leadership as
something that can be nurtured in a leader, rather than as a fixed trait. Authentic leadership develops in
people over a lifetime and can be triggered by critical life events, such as a severe illness or a new
career.
Taking a developmental approach, Walumbwa et al. (2008) conceptualized authentic leadership as a
pattern of leader behavior that develops from, and is grounded in, the leader’s positive psychological
qualities and strong ethics. They suggest that authentic leadership is composed of four distinct but
related components: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and
relational transparency (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009). Over a lifetime, authentic leaders learn and
develop each of these four types of behavior.
Approaches to Authentic Leadership
Formulations about authentic leadership can be differentiated into two areas: (1) the practical approach,
which evolved from real-life examples as well as the training and development literature; and (2) the
theoretical approach, which is based on findings from social science research. Both approaches offer
interesting insights about the complex process of authentic leadership.
Practical Approach
Books and programs about authentic leadership are popular today; people are interested in the basics
of this type of leadership. Specifically, they want to know the “how to” steps to become an authentic
leader. In this section, we discuss Bill George’s (2003) authentic leadership approach.
Bill George’s Authentic Leadership Approach.
The authentic leadership approach developed by George (2003; George & Sims, 2007) focuses on the
characteristics of authentic leaders. George describes, in a practical way, the essential qualities of
authentic leadership and how individuals can develop these qualities if they want to become authentic
leaders.
Based on his experience as a corporate executive and through interviews with a diverse sample of 125
successful leaders, George found that authentic leaders have a genuine desire to serve others, they
know themselves, and they feel free to lead from their core values. Specifically, authentic leaders
demonstrate five basic characteristics: (1) They have a strong sense of purpose, (2) they have strong
values about the right thing to do, (3) they establish trusting relationships with others, (4) they
demonstrate self-discipline and act on their values, and (5) they are sensitive and empathetic to the
plight of others (George, 2003).
Figure 9.1 illustrates five dimensions of authentic leadership identified by George: purpose, values,
relationships, self-discipline, and heart. The figure also illustrates each of the related characteristics—
passion, behavior, connectedness, consistency, and compassion—that individuals need to develop to
become authentic leaders.
In his interviews, George found that authentic leaders have a real sense of purpose. They know what
they are about and where they are going. In addition to knowing their purpose, authentic leaders are
inspired and intrinsically motivated about their goals. They are passionate individuals who have a deep-
seated interest in what they are doing and truly care about their work.
A good example of an authentic leader who exhibited passion about his goals was Terry Fox, a cancer
survivor, whose right leg was amputated above the knee after a malignant tumor was discovered. Using
a customized leg prosthesis, Terry attempted to run across Canada, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, to
raise awareness and money for cancer research. Although he died before he finished his run, his
courage and passion affected the lives of millions of people. He also accomplished his goals to increase
cancer awareness and to raise money for cancer research. Today, the Terry Fox Foundation is going
strong and has raised more than $800 million (Canadian) for cancer research (www.terryfox.org). Of the
dimensions and characteristics in Figure 9.1, Terry Fox clearly demonstrated purpose and passion in his
leadership.
Figure 9.1 Authentic Leadership Characteristics
Source: From Authentic Leadership: Rediscovering the Secrets to Creating Lasting Value by Bill
George, copyright © 2003. Reproduced with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Authentic leaders understand their own values and behave toward others based on these values. Stated
another way, George suggests that authentic leaders know their “True North.” They have a clear idea of
who they are, where they are going, and what the right thing is to do. When tested in difficult situations,
authentic leaders do not compromise their values, but rather use those situations to strengthen their
values.
An example of a leader with a strong set of values is Nobel Peace Prize laureate Nelson Mandela.
Mandela was a deeply moral man with a strong conscience. While fighting to abolish apartheid in South
Africa, he was unyielding in his pursuit of justice and equality for all. When he was in prison and was
offered early release in exchange for denouncing his viewpoint, he chose to remain incarcerated rather
than compromise his position. Nelson Mandela knew who he was at his core. He knew his values, and
his leadership reflected those values.
A third characteristic of authentic leadership in the George approach is strong relationships. Authentic
leaders have the capacity to open themselves up and establish a connection with others. They are
willing to share their own story with others and listen to others’ stories. Through mutual disclosure,
leaders and followers develop a sense of trust and closeness.
George argued that people today want to have access to their leaders and want their leaders to be open
with them. In a sense, people are asking leaders to soften the boundary around their leadership role and
to be more transparent. People want to have a trusting relationship with their leaders. In exchange,
people are willing to give leaders greater loyalty and commitment.
As we discussed in Chapter 7 (leader–member exchange theory), effective leader–follower relationships
are marked by high-quality communication in which leaders and followers demonstrate a high degree of
mutual trust, respect, and obligation toward each other. Leaders and followers are tied together in
productive ways that go beyond the stereotypical leader–follower relationship. This results in strong
leader–member relationships, greater understanding, and higher productivity.
Self-discipline is another dimension of authentic leadership and is the quality that helps leaders to reach
their goals. Self-discipline gives leaders focus and determination. When leaders establish objectives and
standards of excellence, self-discipline helps them to reach these goals and to keep everyone
accountable. Furthermore, self-discipline gives authentic leaders the energy to carry out their work in
accordance with their values.
Like long-distance runners, authentic leaders with self-discipline are able to stay focused on their goals.
They are able to listen to their inner compass and can discipline themselves to move forward, even in
challenging circumstances. In stressful times, self-discipline allows authentic leaders to remain cool,
calm, and consistent. Because disciplined leaders are predictable in their behavior, other people know
what to expect and find it easier to communicate with them. When the leader is self-directed and “on
course,” it gives other people a sense of security.
Last, the George approach identifies compassion and heart as important aspects of authentic
leadership. Compassion refers to being sensitive to the plight of others, opening one’s self to others,
and being willing to help them. George (2003, p. 40) argued that as leaders develop compassion, they
learn to be authentic. Leaders can develop compassion by getting to know others’ life stories, doing
community service projects, being involved with other racial or ethnic groups, or traveling to developing
countries (George, 2003). These activities increase the leader’s sensitivity to other cultures,
backgrounds, and living situations.
In summary, George’s authentic leadership approach highlights five important features of authentic
leaders. Collectively, these features provide a practical picture of what people need to do to become
authentic in their leadership. Authentic leadership is a lifelong developmental process, which is formed
and informed by each individual’s life story.
Theoretical Approach
Although still in its initial stages of development, a theory of authentic leadership is emerging in social
science literature (see Kumar, 2014; Leroy, Anseel, Gardner, & Sels, 2015; Peus, Wescher, Streicher,
Braun, & Frey, 2012). In this section, we identify the basic components of authentic leadership and
describe how these components are related to one another.
Background to the Theoretical Approach.
Although people’s interest in “authenticity” is probably timeless, research on authentic leadership is
rather recent. Luthans and Avolio (2003) published one of the first articles on the topic, focusing on
authentic leadership development and positive organizational scholarship. Initial writing on authentic
leadership gave rise to a leadership summit at the University of Nebraska. This summit was sponsored
by the Gallup Leadership Institute and focused on the nature of authentic leadership and its
development. From the summit, two sets of publications emerged: (1) a special issue of The Leadership
Quarterly in the summer of 2005, and (2) Monographs in Leadership and Management, titled “Authentic
Leadership Theory and Process: Origins, Effects and Development,” also published in 2005.
Interest in authentic leadership increased following 9/11, a time in which there was a great deal of
societal upheaval and instability in the United States. The attacks of 9/11, widespread corporate
corruption, and a troubled economy all created a sense of uncertainty and anxiety in people about
leadership. Widespread unethical and ineffective leadership necessitated the need for more humane,
constructive leadership that served the common good (Fry & Whittington, 2005; Luthans & Avolio,
2003).
In addition, researchers felt the need to extend the work of Bass (1990) and Bass and Steidlmeier
(1999) regarding the meaning of authentic transformational leadership. There was a need to
operationalize the meaning of authentic leadership and create a theoretical framework to explain it. To
develop a theory of authentic leadership, researchers drew from the fields of leadership, positive
organizational scholarship, and ethics (Cooper, Scandura, & Schriesheim, 2005; Gardner et al., 2005b).
A major challenge confronting researchers in developing a theory was to define the construct and
identify its characteristics. As we discussed earlier in the chapter, authentic leadership has been defined
in multiple ways, with each definition emphasizing a different aspect of the process. For this chapter, we
have selected the definition set forth by Walumbwa et al. (2008), who defined authentic leadership as
a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological
capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral
perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of
leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development. (p. 94)
Although complex, this definition captures the current thinking of scholars regarding the phenomenon of
authentic leadership and how it works.
Different models have been developed to illustrate the process of authentic leadership. Gardner et al.
(2005b) created a model that frames authentic leadership around the developmental processes of
leader and follower self-awareness and self-regulation. Ilies, Morgeson, and Nahrgang (2005)
constructed a multicomponent model that discusses the impact of authenticity on leaders’ and followers’
happiness and well-being. In contrast, Luthans and Avolio (2003) formulated a model that explains
authentic leadership as a developmental process. In this chapter, we will present a basic model of
authentic leadership derived from the research literature that focuses on the core components of
authentic leadership. Our discussion will examine authentic leadership as a process.
Components of Authentic Leadership.
In an effort to further our understanding of authentic leadership, Walumbwa and associates (2008)
conducted a comprehensive review of the literature and interviewed groups of content experts in the
field to determine what components constituted authentic leadership and to develop a valid measure of
this construct. Their research identified four components: self-awareness, internalized moral
perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency (Figure 9.2). Together, these four
components form the foundation for a theory of authentic leadership.
Self-awareness refers to the personal insights of the leader. It is not an end in itself but a process in
which individuals understand themselves, including their strengths and weaknesses, and the impact
they have on others. Self-awareness includes reflecting on your core values, identity, emotions, motives,
and goals, and coming to grips with who you really are at the deepest level. In addition, it includes being
aware of and trusting your own feelings (Kernis, 2003). A meta-analysis including 11 studies and more
than 3,500 respondents found that emotional intelligence is significantly and positively related to
authentic leadership (Miao, Humphrey, & Qian, 2018). Leaders with high emotional intelligence are more
self-aware and able to benefit from reflection on their past experiences to improve their authenticity.
When leaders know themselves and have a clear sense of who they are and what they stand for, they
have a strong anchor for their decisions and actions (Gardner et al., 2005b). Other people see leaders
who have greater self-awareness as more authentic. More recently, research has shown that self-
knowledge and self-consistency also have a positive impact on followers’ satisfaction with leaders,
organizational commitment, and perceived team effectiveness (Leroy et al., 2015; Peus et al., 2012).
Internalized moral perspective refers to a self-regulatory process whereby individuals use their internal
moral standards and values to guide their behavior rather than allow outside pressures to control them
(e.g., group or societal pressure). It is a self-regulatory process because people have control over the
extent to which they allow others to influence them. Others see leaders with an internalized moral
perspective as authentic because their actions are consistent with their expressed beliefs and morals.
Description
Figure 9.2 Authentic Leadership
Sources: Adapted from “Authentic Leadership Development,” by F. Luthans and B. J. Avolio, in K. S.
Cameron, J. E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive Organizational Scholarship (pp. 241–258),
2003, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler; and “‘Can You See the Real Me?’ A Self-Based Model of
Authentic Leader and Follower Development,” by W. L. Gardner, B. J. Avolio, F. Luthans, D. R. May,
and F. O. Walumbwa, 2005, The Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 343–372.
Balanced processing is also a self-regulatory behavior. Although not completely clear from its title, it
refers to an individual’s ability to analyze information objectively and explore other people’s opinions
before making a decision. It also means avoiding favoritism about certain issues and remaining
unbiased. Balanced processing includes soliciting viewpoints from those who disagree with you and fully
considering their positions before taking your own action. Leaders with balanced processing are seen as
authentic because they are open about their own perspectives but are also objective in considering
others’ perspectives.
Relational transparency refers to being open and honest in presenting one’s true self to others. It is self-
regulating because individuals can control their transparency with others. Relational transparency
occurs when individuals share their core feelings, motives, and inclinations with others in an appropriate
manner (Kernis, 2003). It includes the individuals showing both positive and negative aspects of
themselves to others. In short, relational transparency is about communicating openly and being real in
relationships with others.
Factors That Influence Authentic Leadership.
There are other factors such as positive psychological capacities, moral reasoning, and critical life
events that influence authentic leadership (Figure 9.2). Individuals perceive the critical events that occur
in their lives according to their capacities for confidence, hope, optimism, and resilience and for moral
reasoning, which is related to how they cultivate the qualities needed to be authentic leaders.
The four key positive psychological capacities that have an impact on authentic leadership—confidence,
hope, optimism, and resilience—have been drawn from the fields of positive psychology and positive
organizational behavior (Table 9.1; Luthans & Avolio, 2003). Positive attributes predispose or enhance a
leader’s capacity to develop the components of authentic leadership discussed in the previous section.
Each of these attributes has a trait-like and a state-like quality. They are believed to be malleable and
can be enhanced with training.
Table 9.1 Related Positive Psychological Capacities
Confidence Optimism
Hope Resilience
Source: Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.),
Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–258). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Confidence refers to having self-efficacy—the belief that one has the ability to successfully accomplish a
specified task. Leaders who have confidence are more likely to be motivated to succeed, to be
persistent when obstacles arise, and to welcome a challenge (Bandura, 1997; Luthans & Avolio, 2003).
Hope is a positive motivational state based on willpower and goal planning (Luthans & Avolio, 2003).
Authentic leaders with hope have goals they know can be accomplished; their hope inspires followers to
trust them and believe in their goals. Optimism refers to the cognitive process of viewing situations from
a positive light and having favorable expectations about the future. Leaders with optimism are positive
about their capabilities and the outcomes they can achieve. They approach life with a sense of
abundance rather than scarcity (Covey, 1990). Resilience is the capacity to recover from and adjust to
adverse situations. It includes the ability to positively adapt to hardships and suffering. During difficult
times, resilient people are able to bounce back from challenging situations and feel strengthened and
more resourceful as a result of them (Sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003).
Moral reasoning is another factor that can influence authentic leadership (Figure 9.2). It is the capacity
to make ethical decisions about issues of right or wrong and good or bad. Developing the capacity for
moral reasoning is a lifelong process. Higher levels of moral reasoning make it possible for the authentic
leader to make decisions that transcend individual differences and align individuals toward a common
goal. They enable leaders to be selfless and make judgments that serve the greater good of the group,
organization, or community. Moral reasoning capacity also enables authentic leaders to use this ability
to promote justice and achieve what is right for a community. An extended discussion of how moral
reasoning develops is provided in Chapter 13.
Critical life events are major events that shape people’s lives, and therefore also shape individuals’
development as authentic leaders (Figure 9.2). The events can be positive, like receiving an unexpected
promotion, having a child, or reading an important book; or they can be negative, like being diagnosed
with cancer, getting a negative year-end employment evaluation, or experiencing the death of a loved
one. Critical life events act as catalysts for change. Shamir and Eilam (2005) argued that authentic
leadership rests heavily on the insights people attach to their life experiences. Authentic leaders often
express their genuine emotions and values through telling stories about their pasts—particularly stories
that are sensitive, negative, and even embarrassing (Lemoine, Hartnell, & Leroy, 2019). When leaders
tell their life stories, they gain greater self-knowledge, more clarity about who they are, and a better
understanding of their role. By understanding their own life experiences, leaders become more
authentic.
Critical life events also stimulate growth in individuals and help them become stronger leaders (Luthans
& Avolio, 2003). For example, Howard Schultz (founder and chairman emeritus of Starbucks) tells a
story about when he was little: His father, who was a delivery driver, fell and was hurt on the job but did
not have health insurance or workers’ compensation. Seeing the problems that resulted from his father’s
difficulties, when Schultz built Starbucks he provided comprehensive health insurance for employees
who worked as few as 20 hours a week. Schultz’s style of leadership was triggered by his childhood
experience (“Howard Schultz,” 2008).
Authentic leadership is a unique approach to understanding leadership due to its focus on leaders’ self-
concept and their corresponding self-expression (Lemoine et al., 2019). As such, authentic leadership is
consistent with the movement of positive organizational behavior with its emphasis on an individual’s
personal experiences, traits, and development to enhance organizational performance (Yavuz, 2020).
As the theory of authentic leadership develops further, other antecedent factors that influence the
process may be identified. To date, however, it is positive psychological capacities, moral reasoning, and
critical life events that have been identified as factors that are influential in a person’s ability to become
an authentic leader.
HOW DOES AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP WORK?
In this chapter, we have discussed authentic leadership from a practical and theoretical perspective.
Both perspectives describe authentic leadership as a process that develops in leaders over time;
however, each perspective provides a different description for how authentic leadership works.
The practical approach provides prescriptions for how to be authentic and how to develop authentic
leadership. For example, the George approach focuses on five characteristics leaders should develop to
become authentic leaders. More specifically, George (2003) advocates that leaders become more
purposeful, value centered, relational, self-disciplined, and compassionate. The essence of authentic
leadership is being a leader who strongly demonstrates these five qualities.
Rather than simple prescriptions, the theoretical approach describes what authentic leadership is and
what accounts for it. From this perspective, authentic leadership works because leaders demonstrate
self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency.
Leaders develop these attributes through a lifelong process that is often influenced by critical life events.
In addition, the literature suggests that positive psychological capacities and moral reasoning have a
significant impact on authentic leaders.
Authentic leadership is a complex process that emphasizes the development of qualities that help
leaders to be perceived as trustworthy and believable by their followers. The job of authentic leaders is
to learn to develop these qualities and apply them to the common good as they serve others.
Throughout this chapter, we have focused on the development of authentic leadership in the leader.
Recent research has focused on the effects of authentic leadership on followers, and the impact of
followers on authentic leadership development. Xu, Zhao, Li, and Lin (2017) and Semedo, Coelho, and
Ribeiro (2016) not only found that authentic leadership correlates directly to followers who thrive at work,
but also found a positive relationship between employee creativity and authentic leadership. Rego,
Sousa, Marques, and Pina e Cunha (2014) found similar results regarding creativity, and also found
positive relationships between authentic leadership and employees’ hope. Stander, Beer, and Stander
(2015) found that authentic leadership led significantly to optimism and trust, and that those qualities led
directly to stronger work engagement. Finally, research has shown that the four key positive
psychological attributes that have an impact on authentic leadership—confidence, hope, optimism, and
resilience—explain why authentic leaders may have followers who are more proactive. Authentic
leadership is related to the psychological state of followers and indirectly influences them to invest in
their work, maintain passion for what they do, and solve problems proactively (Hu et al., 2018).
Furthermore, Wang, Sui, Luthans, Wang, and Wu (2014) directly investigated, and positively correlated,
the impact of authentic leadership on follower performance. Azanza, Moriano, Molero, and Lévy Mangin
(2015) extended the findings of positive relationships between authentic leadership and work
engagement to also include employee satisfaction and intent to stay while Kumar (2014) studied the
effects of authentic leadership on followers’ psychological ownership of their organizations. Wei, Li,
Zhang, and Liu (2018) report that authentic leadership increases followers’ task performance and
organizational citizenship behavior. This effect is enhanced by followers’ views of the leader’s
competence and their own work engagement.
Finally, Lyubovnikova, Legood, Turner, and Mamakouka (2017) found that authentic leadership was
effective in directing teams. Because authentic leaders encourage team members to reflect on team
goals and strategies and openly communicate about them, these followers often exhibit more flexibility
and higher performance.
STRENGTHS
Authentic leadership has several strengths. First, it fulfills an expressed need for trustworthy leadership
in society. During the past 20 years, failures in public and private leadership have created distrust in
people. Authentic leadership helps to fill a void and provides an answer to people who are searching for
good and sound leadership in an uncertain world. When a leader is authentic, it gives followers a clear
picture of who the leader is and how the leader will act. It informs their understanding of the leader and
whether or not they can depend on this person’s leadership.
Second, authentic leadership provides broad guidelines for individuals who want to become authentic
leaders. Both the practical and theoretical approaches clearly point to what leaders should do to
become authentic leaders. Social science literature emphasizes that to be authentic it is important for
leaders to have self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational
transparency. Taken together, these approaches provide a map for becoming an authentic leader.
Third, similar to transformational, inclusive, and servant leadership, authentic leadership has an explicit
moral dimension. Underlying both the practical and theoretical approaches is the idea that authenticity
requires leaders to do what is “right” and “good” for their followers and society. Authentic leaders
understand their own values, place followers’ needs above their own, and work with followers to align
their interests to create a greater common good. Steffens, Mols, Haslam, and Okimoto (2016) found that
when a leader champions the collective good, followers are more inspired, and the leader’s authenticity
is enhanced.
Authentic leadership emphasizes that authentic values and behaviors can be developed in leaders over
time. Authentic leadership is not an attribute that only some people exhibit: Everyone can develop
authenticity and learn to be more authentic. For example, leaders can learn to become more aware and
transparent, or they can learn to be more relational and other-directed. Leaders can also develop moral
reasoning capacities. Furthermore, Luthans and Avolio (2003) contended that leaders can learn to
develop positive psychological capacities such as confidence, hope, optimism, and resilience, and can
use these to create a positive organizational climate. There are many ways that leaders can learn to
become authentic leaders over a lifetime.
Finally, authentic leadership can be measured using the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ). The
ALQ is a validated, theory-based instrument comprising 16 items that measure four factors of authentic
leadership (Avolio et al., 2009; Walumbwa et al., 2008). Nearly a decade after its development, Avolio,
Wernsing, and Gardner (2018) reexamined the ALQ and concluded that the four-factor structure of the
measure (self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational
transparency) is supported using recently developed statistical techniques. As research moves forward
in refining authentic leadership theory, it is valuable to have an established instrument of this construct
that is based in theory and can be used to measure authentic leadership in future research.
CRITICISMS
Despite increased research on authentic leadership, a number of questions still need to be addressed
about the theory. First, the concepts and ideas presented in George’s practical approach are not fully
substantiated. While the practical approach is interesting and offers insight on authentic leadership, it is
not built on a broad empirical base, nor has it been tested for validity. Because of its reliance on a
leader’s personal experiences, the authentic leadership approach can make it difficult to predict the
course of action an authentic leader will take. Without research support, the ideas set forth in the
practical approach should be treated cautiously as explanations of the authentic leadership process.
Second, the moral component of authentic leadership is not fully explained. Whereas authentic
leadership implies that leaders are motivated by higher-order end values such as justice and community,
the way that these values function to influence authentic leadership is not clear. Authentic leaders judge
what is moral based on personal experience and not societal norms. This raises a number of questions.
For example, how are a leader’s values related to a leader’s self-awareness? Or, what is the path or
underlying process through which moral values affect other components of authentic leadership? In its
present form, authentic leadership does not offer thorough answers to these questions.
Third, researchers have questioned whether positive psychological capacities should be included as
components of authentic leadership. Although there is an interest in the social sciences to study positive
human potential and the best of the human condition (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003), the rationale
for including positive psychological capacities as an inherent part of authentic leadership has not been
clearly explained by researchers. In addition, some have argued that the inclusion of positive leader
capacities in authentic leadership broadens the construct of authentic leadership too much and makes it
difficult to measure (Cooper et al., 2005). In a review of the authentic leadership theory and research,
Alvesson and Einola (2019) concluded that the foundations of the theory are too shaky for the theory to
have inspired the popularity it has among scholars and that the promise offered by consultants and
inspirational talks are not well grounded in research evidence. It is fair to say that at this point in the
development of research on authentic leadership, the role of positive psychological capacities in
authentic leadership theory needs further clarification.
In addition, new research is required to determine if the millennial generation can be effectively led by
authentic leaders. This generation’s individualism, commitment to work–life balance, and subsequent
preference for extrinsic rewards have been identified by Anderson, Baur, Griffith, and Buckley (2017) as
potential stumbling points for effectively leading millennials as followers using the model of authentic
leadership.
Finally, it is not clear how authentic leadership results in positive organizational outcomes. Given that it
is a relatively new area of research, it is not unexpected that there are few data on outcomes. Research
has begun to come out on organizational outcomes (see Azanza et al., 2015; Gatling, Kang, & Kim,
2016; Rego, Sousa, Marques, & Pina e Cunha, 2012; Semedo et al., 2016; Xu et al., 2017), but more
data are necessary to substantiate the value of the theory. In addition, Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn, and
Wu (2018) questioned the degree to which authentic leadership contributes to explaining differences in
follower performance and work attitudes. They conducted a meta-analysis and found that authentic
leadership failed to explain significant incremental variance in these outcomes over and above
transformational leadership, leaving the authors to conclude that the authentic leadership approach’s
utility is low. Although authentic leadership is intuitively appealing on the surface, questions remain
about whether this approach is effective, in what contexts it is effective, and whether authentic
leadership results in productive outcomes. In some contexts, authenticity may be counterproductive. For
example, in some organizations, expressing what one really thinks might be risky and lead to being fired
or marginalized by one’s boss and/or coworkers (Alvesson & Einola, 2019).
Relatedly, it is also not clear in the research whether authentic leadership is sufficient to achieve
organizational goals. For example, can an authentic leader who is disorganized and lacking in technical
competence be an effective leader? Authenticity is important and valuable to good leadership, but how
authenticity relates to effective leadership is unknown. Sidani and Rowe (2018) reconceptualized
authentic leadership as a process of followers legitimizing a leader’s authenticity based on moral
judgments. They provide the example of former U.S. president Donald Trump, whose followers view him
as having self-awareness and relational transparency (Mintz, 2015). These followers share Trump’s
value system and believe that he is genuine, and while those with a different value system may
disagree, his influence lies in the followers who make his behavior legitimate. Clearly, future research
should be conducted to explore how follower perceptions of authentic leadership translate into the
attainment of organizational outcomes.
APPLICATION
Because authentic leadership is still in the early phase of its development, there has been little research
on strategies that people can use to develop or enhance authentic leadership behaviors. While there are
prescriptions set forth in the practical approach, there is little evidence-based research on whether these
prescriptions or how-to strategies actually increase authentic leadership behavior.
In spite of the lack of intervention research, there are common themes from the authentic leadership
literature that may be applicable to organizational or practice settings. One theme common to all of the
formulations of authentic leadership is that people have the capacity to learn to be authentic leaders. In
their original work on authentic leadership, Luthans and Avolio (2003) constructed a model of authentic
leadership development. Conceptualizing it as a lifelong learning process, they argued that authentic
leadership is a process that can be developed over time. This suggests that human resource
departments may be able to foster authentic leadership behaviors in employees who move into
leadership positions.
Another theme that can be applied to organizations is the overriding goal of authentic leaders to try to
do the “right” thing, to be honest with themselves and others, and to work for the common good.
Authentic leadership can have a positive impact in organizations. For example, Cianci, Hannah,
Roberts, and Tsakumis (2014) investigated the impact of authentic leadership on followers’ morality.
Based on the responses of 118 MBA students, they found that authentic leaders significantly inhibited
followers from making unethical choices in the face of temptation. Authentic leadership appears to be a
critical contextual factor that morally strengthens followers. Cianci et al. suggest that the four
components of authentic leadership (i.e., self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced
processing, and relational transparency) should be developed in organizational leadership to increase
ethical organizational behavior.
Last, authentic leadership is shaped and reformed by critical life events that act as triggers to growth
and greater authenticity. Being sensitive to these events and using them as springboards to growth may
be relevant to many people who are interested in becoming leaders who are more authentic. Avolio and
Wernsing (2008) describe the importance of trigger events as a way to enhance self-awareness. Self-
awareness means asking questions: When am I showing my best? When am I being my true self? How
can I improve? Such questions are asked as part of training programs in authentic leadership that
increase self-awareness. Reflecting on trigger events encourages leaders to consider the meaning and
implications of the event for their leadership style.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following section provides three case studies (Cases 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3) of individuals who
demonstrate authentic leadership. The first case is about Sally Helgesen, author of The Female
Advantage: Women’s Ways of Leadership (1990). The second case is about Kassandra Gutierrez, a
preschool teacher whose life story is inextricably connected to her teaching. The final case profiles Dr.
Brené Brown, a best-selling author and speaker who has a large following around her study of difficult
topics including shame, vulnerability, courage, and empathy. At the end of each case study, questions
are provided to help you analyze the case using ideas from authentic leadership.
Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader?
Sally Helgesen was born in the small Midwest town of Saint Cloud, Minnesota. Her mother was a
housewife who later taught English, and her father taught speech as a college professor. After attending
a local state college, where she majored in English and comparative religion, Helgesen spread her
wings and moved to New York, inspired by the classic film Breakfast at Tiffany’s.
Helgesen found work as a writer, first in advertising and then as an assistant to a columnist at the then-
influential Village Voice. She contributed freelance articles to magazines such as Harper’s, Glamour,
Vogue, Fortune, and Inside Sports. She also returned to school, completing a degree in classics at
Hunter College and taking language courses at the city graduate center in preparation for a PhD in
comparative religion. She envisioned herself as a college professor, but also enjoyed freelancing. She
felt a strong dichotomy within her, part quiet scholar and part footloose dreamer. The conflict bothered
her, and she wondered how she would resolve it. Choosing to be a writer—actually declaring herself to
be one—seemed scary, grandiose, and fraudulent.
Then one day, while walking on a New York side street in the rain, Helgesen saw an adventuresome
black cat running beside her. It reminded her of Holly Golightly’s cat in Breakfast at Tiffany’s, an emblem
in the movie for Holly’s dreamy temperament and rootlessness. It made her realize how much the
freedom and independence offered by her “temporary” career as a writer suited her temperament.
Helgesen told the cat she was a writer—she’d never been able to say the words before—and decided
she was going to commit to full-time writing, at least for a time. When she saw the opportunity to cover a
prominent murder trial in Fort Worth, Texas, she took it.
While covering the trial, Helgesen became intrigued with the culture of Texas, and decided she wanted
to write a book on the role of independent oil producers in shaping the region. Doing so required a huge
expenditure of time and money, and for almost a year Helgesen lived out of the trunk of her car, staying
with friends in remote regions all over Texas. It was lonely and hard and exhilarating, but Helgesen was
determined to see the project through. When the book, Wildcatters (1981), was published, it achieved
little recognition, but Helgesen felt an enormous increase in confidence and commitment as a result of
having finished the book. It strengthened her conviction that, for better or worse, she was a writer.
Helgesen moved back to New York and continued to write articles and search around for another book.
She also began writing speeches for the CEO at a Fortune 500 company. She loved the work, and
particularly enjoyed being an observer of office politics, even though she did not perceive herself to be a
part of them. Helgesen viewed her role as being an “outsider looking in,” an observer of the culture. She
sometimes felt like an actor in a play about an office, but this detachment made her feel professional
rather than fraudulent.
As a speechwriter, Helgesen spent a lot of time interviewing people in the companies she worked for.
Doing so made her realize that men and women often approach their work in fundamentally different
ways. She also became convinced that many of the skills and attitudes women brought to their work
were increasingly appropriate for the ways in which organizations were changing, and that women had
certain advantages as a result. She also noticed that the unique perspectives of women were seldom
valued by CEOs or other organizational leaders, who could have benefited if they had better understood
and been more attentive to what women had to offer.
These observations inspired Helgesen to write another book. In 1988, she signed a contract with a
major publisher to write a book on what women had to contribute to organizations. Until then, almost
everything written about women at work focused on how they needed to change and adapt. Helgesen
felt strongly that if women were encouraged to emphasize the negative, they would miss a historic
opportunity to help lead organizations in a time of change. The time was right for this message, and The
Female Advantage: Women’s Ways of Leadership (1990) became very successful, topping a number of
best-seller charts and remaining steadily in print for nearly 20 years. The book’s prominence resulted in
numerous speaking and consulting opportunities, and Helgesen began traveling the world delivering
seminars and working with a variety of clients.
This acclaim and visibility was somewhat daunting to Helgesen. While she recognized the value of her
book, she also knew that she was not a social scientist with a body of theoretical data on women’s
issues. She saw herself as an author rather than an expert, and the old questions about fraudulence
that she had dealt with in her early years in New York began to reassert themselves in a different form.
Was she really being authentic? Could she take on the mantle of leadership and all it entailed? In short,
she wondered if she could be the leader that people seemed to expect.
The path Helgesen took to answer these questions was simply to present herself for who she was. She
was Sally Helgesen, an outsider looking in, a skilled and imaginative observer of current issues. For
Helgesen, the path to leadership did not manifest itself in a step-by-step process. Helgesen’s leadership
began with her own journey of finding herself and accepting her personal authenticity. Through this self-
awareness, she grew to trust her own expertise as a writer with a keen eye for current trends in
organizational life.
Helgesen continues to be an internationally recognized consultant and speaker on contemporary issues
and has published five books. She remains uncertain about whether she will finish her degree in
comparative religion and become a college professor, but always keeps in mind the career of I. F. Stone,
an influential political writer in the 1950s and 1960s who went back to school and got an advanced
degree in classics at the age of 75.
Questions
1. Learning about one’s self is an essential step in becoming an authentic leader. What role did self-
awareness play in Sally Helgesen’s story of leadership?
2. How would you describe the authenticity of Sally Helgesen’s leadership?
3. At the end of the case, Sally Helgesen is described as taking on the “mantle of leadership.” Was
this important for her leadership? How is taking on the mantle of leadership related to a leader’s
authenticity? Do all leaders reach a point in their careers where embracing the leadership role is
essential?
Case 9.2 Kassy’s Story
Kassandra Gutierrez is a preschool teacher at Living Stones Academy, a private faith-based (Christian)
school in Michigan serving a diverse student population in preschool through sixth grade. Forty-four
percent are students of color, while nearly 60 percent come from lower socioeconomic status
households. Gutierrez recently shared her story about being yourself with the school community:
As a child, it was a challenge for me to find a sense of community. I felt a lack of belonging growing up
with my peers because of the difference in my ethnic background, socioeconomic status, and family
dynamics.
I am Mexican-American; my dad was born in Oaxaca, Mexico, one of nine children. He came to the
United States at 16 to find work to support his family after his father passed away.
My mom, who is white, was raised in Mentone, California, with a mom and step-dad, dad and step-mom,
sister, and two half-brothers; you could say I understand “complicated” when it comes to family
dynamics.
Growing up as a biracial child, I felt empowered by the fact that I was able to embrace two different
cultures. Unfortunately, I felt others around me did not embrace this aspect of me. I often felt
overwhelmed and torn between my two identities.
My father’s family members would call me “gringa” and “weda” because I had a white mom who didn’t
cook mole or menudo, I didn’t speak Spanish to my parents, and there was a perception that I had
money because I went to a private Christian school.
There were many days I would walk onto that school’s campus and feel utterly alone among my peers. I
was appreciative of having the opportunity to go to a private school, but something didn’t feel right.
There was a lack of diversity and cultural awareness around me. I didn’t see myself represented in the
textbooks or within the school’s staff and student body. From kindergarten to 8th grade, I didn’t have a
single teacher that was a person of color. There were two other Mexican-Americans in my classes; but
even then, I felt different from them because of my lower socioeconomic status.
My dad started his own landscaping business and early in the morning he would pull up to school in his
work truck to drop me off. I felt embarrassed because my classmates would always tease me about his
business. All they saw was a Mexican man working a stereotypical job. But I saw a hardworking man
who came to the U.S. for a better life, learned English, and started his own business. When my mom
would pick me up from school, my classmates made comments and asked questions about her being
white and me having dark skin. Sometimes we received curious stares as to why we looked so different.
It was exhausting having to explain my family dynamics so many times.
I was bullied quite often. I was called a lot of racial slurs on the playground and was excluded from
playing games because of my ethnic background. At home, when I would tell my mom about these
experiences or ask questions, she didn’t provide support and encouragement in embracing my two
cultures or help as I tried to understand why I felt so different from others.
Sadly, those same racial slurs I heard on the playground were being used by my mom towards my dad.
My parents had a toxic marriage and they would fight with each other daily. During these arguments, my
mom would use hateful and racially derogatory language towards my dad. That kind of hate was not
easy to listen to or watch as a child. Why my mother would express that hatred towards a part of who I
am was very confusing to me. Also, my father’s family would express their dislike about my mom being
white. These conflicts between my parents and their families, along with hearing racial slurs towards
myself, led me to question my own identity and have thoughts of how easy it would be if I were just
white.
So, I grew up as the little Mexican girl who doubted herself everywhere she went. At school, she felt like
an outcast because she didn’t have white skin or light eyes like many of her teachers and classmates.
At home, she doubted herself among her family members who looked like her but had their own
stereotypes for her.
Where did I belong? I felt voiceless against those who would tell me who I was or what I should be
based on stereotypes they held.
Providing Space for Others
When I look back on my experiences—as a child that was searching for belonging, it is essential for me
now as an educator to create an environment that is welcoming, safe, and a place to feel embraced. My
classroom is a space where families, children, and I can be vulnerable and transparent to build
relationships. There have been children in my class who have experienced hard challenges and trauma,
whether it’s separation from their parents, conflicts in their households, and insecurities within
themselves.
Because of the challenges in my childhood, I can relate to and have conversations with my students.
There have been moments where I’ve embraced a child who was in tears because of the trauma they
experienced. It reminds me that there’s a reason for the challenges we may face and how God will use
them to strengthen us and the relationships we have with one another.
I had a student who was dealing with trauma at home. She was asked questions from other curious 5-
year-olds about why her skin was so dark. I could tell she felt insecure about the differences in her
appearance from the other children. To ensure a safe community in the classroom, I did not ignore the
situation but made it a priority to address it. Through the help of my colleagues, books about diversity,
and honest conversations, I made sure to remind her of how God created his daughter in His image. It
was a time I could remind all my children the beauty of how God created us to look, speak, and think
differently, but all in his image.
Being Authentic and Promoting Authenticity
Belonging is not only essential to my class but in every classroom, preschool through 6th grade at
school where I teach. The environment our staff has created is radically inclusive. There is a deep
commitment to teaching students to embrace all cultural, economic, and racial diversities.
We welcome children will all kinds of needs, circumstances, and learning abilities. We are intentional
with giving every child, from preschool to 6th grade, a time to use their voice. Time from the academic
curriculum is set aside to provide a space for these children to share while teaching the importance of
listening. We practice proactive circles to check in on our students and talk about the praises in their
lives with their peers and teachers. We also encourage working through hardships they may have with
one another through the practice of restorative circles. Proactive and restorative circles have become a
part of the daily routine to teach social skills and problem-solving while building a positive classroom
community.
Our staff is also intentional about building trustworthy relationships with their students and their
colleagues. One day, a student came to school with her hair down naturally after having her hair in
braids the week before. She was feeling insecure because her peers had noticed a difference and were
asking questions. This student talked to her teacher about her feelings towards her hair and how others
were responding. Her teacher encouraged her through her feelings but took it one step further to ensure
that this student felt empowered. After talking with her student, she asked a colleague, who is a person
of color, to have a one-on-one conversation with the student because she knew her colleague could
relate.
Once the student was able to connect with the teacher, the student’s confidence increased—not only
was she able to connect with someone who looked like her, but she felt supported by not just one
teacher, but two.
As a teacher here at this school, I no longer question my own belonging. I bring a feeling of belonging to
work with me every day and use it to help my students and colleagues feel the same.
—Reprinted with permission of Kassandra Gutierrez.
Questions
1. In the chapter, Bill George’s approach to authentic leadership suggests that truly authentic leaders
exhibit passion, strong values, connectedness, consistency, and compassion. In what way has
Gutierrez shown these qualities? Which characteristics are most representative of Gutierrez?
Discuss.
2. The Model of Authentic Leadership (Figure 9.2) posits that critical life events shape an individual’s
development as an authentic leader. In what way do you think this has been true for Gutierrez?
3. When leaders tell their life stories, they gain greater self-knowledge and a clearer picture of who
they are and their role. Do you think telling her story has been helpful to Gutierrez and the school
community? If you were Gutierrez, would you have shared your story so openly? What are the
implications for a leader when sharing personal stories with the public? Discuss.
4. As illustrated in Figure 9.2, authentic leaders use their internal moral perspective to guide their
behavior and are motivated by higher-order values such as justice and community. Describe
Gutierrez’s moral perspective and the impact it has on her behavior as a leader. How does her
moral perspective impact how she is viewed by others?
Case 9.3 The Arena of Authenticity
Note: This case study provides insights into Dr. Brené Brown’s personal history, her strengths, and the
trajectory of her career. You might find it informative to also view her Netflix special, The Call to
Courage, or her videos on TED.com, which can provide additional insight into her leadership behavior.
It is not the critic who counts. It is not the man who sits and points out how the doer of deeds
could have done things better and how he falls and stumbles. The credit belongs to the man
who is actually in the arena whose face is marred with dust and sweat and blood. . . . But when
he’s in the arena, at best, he wins, and at worst, he loses, but when he fails, when he loses, he
does so daring greatly.
This passage, inspired by a speech by former U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt (Dalton, 2002) is one
that Dr. Brené Brown teaches, preaches, and lives by.
The author of five number-one New York Times best-selling books who has become a world-renowned
thought leader and sought-after speaker, Brown is more likely to bill herself as simply a “research
professor.” She is, in fact, a professor at the University of Houston with a $2 million endowed chair
funded by the Huffington Foundation, but also an entrepreneur, CEO, mother, and wife who has built a
very large following around the study of such difficult topics as shame, vulnerability, courage, and
empathy.
Brown is a high-energy Harry Potter fan who prefers “shit kickers” (cowboy boots) or clogs and jeans to
just about any form of business attire and doesn’t hesitate to wear these even for her most visible
engagements. She would be the first to say that authenticity and courage do not happen without
vulnerability. In her words, “vulnerability is not a weakness . . . it is our most accurate measurement of
courage—to be vulnerable, to let ourselves be seen, to be honest” (Brown, 2012).
Brown’s research data, as well as her personal life experiences, clearly support what she says. The
“man in the arena” quote, a rallying cry in many of her books, came to her at a particularly low point. She
had recently delivered a TEDxHouston talk on the subject of vulnerability. Rather than deliver a
comfortable academic talk complete with academic terminology and data, she opted instead to share a
very personal story of her own challenges with vulnerability and an emotional breakdown she
experienced when faced with the truth of her own data. That truth—that vulnerability, a topic she
despised and personally avoided—and the courage to be imperfect were necessary ingredients to living
what she coined as a “whole-hearted life.” They could not be separated.
She had chosen research as her livelihood because, in her words, “the definition of research is . . . to
study phenomena for the explicit reason to control and predict.” But her research results challenged this
premise. What she found was the way to live is with vulnerability and to stop controlling and predicting
(Brown, 2010).
While the talk was well received, it left Brown feeling exposed and regretting sharing such a deeply
personal and revealing story. She found some solace in convincing herself that the talk would likely only
be watched by perhaps 500 or so local people. Instead, it went viral. The Power of Vulnerability has
become one of the most accessed TED Talks with nearly 50 million views (TED, n.d.).
Instantly propelled into the public spotlight, her mortification was heightened by the anonymous ugly
comments made about her on social media, which led her to seek comfort in a jar of peanut butter,
binge-watching Downton Abbey, and not leaving her house for three days (Winfrey, 2013). Curious
about the time period depicted in the show, Brown did a little research and happened upon Teddy
Roosevelt’s famous words. It became a turning point for her.
“The fear of shame, the fear of criticism, was so great in my life up until that point—I mean, just
paralyzing—that I engineered smallness in my life. I did not take chances. I did not put myself out there.
I mean, I just didn’t. It wasn’t worth it to me to step into my power and play big, because I didn’t know if I
could literally, physically withstand the criticism” (Efros, Findlay, Mussman, & Restrepo, 2019).
Interestingly, Brown wasn’t a stranger to withstanding criticism and marching to the beat of her own
drum. Her career was shaped by choices to remain true to her own path.
A fifth-generation Texan, Cassandra Brené Brown was a plucky, curious young girl who grew to be
tenacious and outspoken with a quick and infectious wit. However, she spent most of her young adult
life feeling like an outsider. This sense of not belonging followed her throughout her school years. In
high school, she was not selected for the school’s drill team (the Bearkadettes) despite her years of
dance lessons, knowing the try-out routine by heart, and weighing six pounds under the required weight.
She would later learn that, though she was considered a solid dancer, she just wasn’t thought to be
“Bearkadette material,” leaving her heart broken and ashamed (Brown, 2017).
But these formative years shaped her later success. “I owed my career to not belonging. First as a child,
then as a teenager. I found my primary coping mechanism for not belonging in studying people. I was a
seeker of pattern and connection. I knew if I could recognize patterns in people’s behaviors and connect
those patterns to what people were feeling and doing, I could find my way,” she said. “I used my pattern
recognition skills to anticipate what people wanted, what they thought, or what they were doing. I
learned how to say the right thing or show up the right way. I became an expert fitter-in, a chameleon”
(Brown, 2017, p. 16).
After high school, Brown had unsettled years of rebellion, hitchhiking across Europe and working as a
bartender and waitress, gaining a variety of life experiences. She returned to college and, at 29,
graduated at the top of her class with a bachelor’s degree in social work and went on to graduate
school. Through her studies, Brown found a passion for social work and qualitative research. She
became interested in and trained in a methodology known as grounded theory, which starts with a topic
rather than a theory and, through the process of collecting and analyzing data based on discussions
with the study participants, reveals patterns and theories. The grounded theory model fit Brown’s gift for
storytelling and her ability to connect patterns in her subjects through the listening and observation skills
she developed as coping mechanisms in her teens.
“I fell in love with the richness and depth of qualitative research,” she said. “Storytelling is my DNA, and I
couldn’t resist the idea of research as story-catching. Stories are data with a soul and no methodology
honors that more than grounded theory” (Brown, 2019b).
Unfortunately, the grounded theory model is a departure from traditional academic research, which
tends to place higher value on the cleaner, more measurable outcomes of quantitative research. Despite
being discouraged by other academics and counseled to not use the methodology for her doctoral
dissertation, Brown pushed forward. And like the research method she espouses, Brown allowed the
stories emerging from the data to shape her explorations, and she began to study the emotion of
shame.
“I didn’t sign on to study shame—one of the most (if not the most) complex and multifaceted emotions
that we experience. A topic that not only took me six years to understand, but an emotion that is so
powerful that the mere mention of the word shame triggers discomfort and avoidance in people. I
innocently started with an interest in learning more about the anatomy of connection,” she says.
“Because the research participants had the courage to share their stories, experiences, and wisdom, I
forged a path that defined my career and my life” (Brown, 2019b).
Those research participants, who often asked Brown to share her findings, inspired her to once again
deviate from a traditional academic trajectory by publishing her work in more mainstream publications
and journals rather than as peer-reviewed articles in academic journals. Soon her work became
available for the masses and later became best-selling books.
Brown brings herself totally to every speaking engagement, despite efforts to temper the subject matter
of her talks or her way of delivering them. She has been asked by some not to talk about uncomfortable
things like shame and vulnerability, even though those are her areas of expertise. Religious groups have
requested she not cuss, and business groups have asked she not use the word God in her talks. She
has been asked to dress differently. But Brown says the only way she can be effective is by being
completely herself, knowing that you can’t impress on others the importance of vulnerability, and how it
relates to courage, if you don’t have the courage to be authentically yourself.
Being able to maintain this authenticity isn’t an innate skill, Brown says, but requires using “shared
language, skills, tools, and daily practices that can support us through the rumble.” She defines “the
rumble” as a discussion, conversation, or meeting defined by a commitment to such things as being
vulnerable, sticking with the messiness of problem identification and problem solving, being fearless in
“owning our parts,” and “listening with the same passion with which we want to be heard” (Brown,
2019c).
“More than anything else, when someone says, ‘Let’s rumble,’ it cues me to show up with an open heart
and mind so we can serve the work and each other, not our egos” (Brown, 2019c).
The fearlessness of owning who you are and risking vulnerability to find the courage to bring yourself
authentically into your work, your family, and your community is what Brown is all about. In living by the
ideals she espouses to millions of followers, she has unwittingly achieved the true belonging that had
eluded her. She encapsulates her philosophy with a simple observation: “True belonging doesn’t require
us to change who we are. It requires us to be who we are” (Brown, 2017, p. 40).
Questions
1. Do you find Brené Brown to be an authentic leader? Why or why not?
2. This chapter discusses three different perspectives—intrapersonal, interpersonal, and
developmental—used to define authentic leadership. Discuss how these perspectives do or do not
fit Brené Brown.
3. Discuss how each of the five dimensions of authentic leadership identified by George apply to
Brené Brown:
a. Purpose
b. Values
c. Relationships
d. Self-discipline
e. Heart
4. Discuss how each of the components of the theoretical approach apply to Brené Brown:
a. Self-awareness
b. Internalized moral perspective
c. Balanced processing
d. Relational transparency
5. This approach describes four key positive psychological attributes that impact authentic leadership.
Discuss each in relationship to Brené Brown.
a. Confidence
b. Hope
c. Optimism
d. Resilience
6. Critical life events are a key component in the authentic leadership model (see Figure 9.2). What do
you think are the critical events that shaped Brené Brown and who she has become?
—Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
The Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) was created by Walumbwa and associates (2008) to
explore and validate the assumptions of authentic leadership. It is a 16-item instrument that measures
four factors of authentic leadership: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced
processing, and relational transparency. Based on samples in China, Kenya, and the United States,
Walumbwa and associates validated the dimensions of the instrument and found it positively related to
outcomes such as organizational citizenship, organizational commitment, and satisfaction with
supervisor and performance. To obtain this instrument, contact Mind Garden Inc., in Menlo Park,
California, or visit www.mindgarden.com.
In this section, we provide an authentic leadership self-assessment to help you determine your own
level of authentic leadership. This questionnaire will help you understand how authentic leadership is
measured and provide you with your own scores on items that characterize authentic leadership. The
questionnaire includes 16 questions that assess the four major components of authentic leadership
discussed earlier in this chapter: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing,
and relational transparency. Your results on this self-assessment questionnaire will give you information
about your level of authentic leadership on these underlying dimensions of authentic leadership. This
questionnaire is intended for practical applications to help you understand the complexities of authentic
leadership. It is not designed for research purposes.
Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to assess facets of your authentic leadership.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains items about different dimensions of authentic
leadership. There are no right or wrong responses, so please answer honestly. Use the following
scale when responding to each statement by writing the number from the scale that you feel
most accurately characterizes your response to the statement.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
http://www.mindgarden.com/
1. I can list my three greatest weaknesses. 1 2 3 4 5
2. My actions reflect my core values. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I seek others’ opinions before making up my own mind. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I openly share my feelings with others. 1 2 3 4 5
5. I can list my three greatest strengths. 1 2 3 4 5
6. I do not allow group pressure to control me. 1 2 3 4 5
7. I listen closely to the ideas of those who disagree with me. 1 2 3 4 5
8. I let others know who I truly am as a person. 1 2 3 4 5
9. I seek feedback as a way of understanding who I really am as a person. 1 2 3 4 5
10. Other people know where I stand on controversial issues. 1 2 3 4 5
11. I do not emphasize my own point of view at the expense of others. 1 2 3 4 5
12. I rarely present a “false” front to others. 1 2 3 4 5
13. I accept the feelings I have about myself. 1 2 3 4 5
14. My morals guide what I do as a leader. 1 2 3 4 5
15. I listen very carefully to the ideas of others before making decisions. 1 2 3 4 5
16. I admit my mistakes to others. 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
1. Sum the responses on items 1, 5, 9, and 13 (self-awareness).
2. Sum the responses on items 2, 6, 10, and 14 (internalized moral perspective).
3. Sum the responses on items 3, 7, 11, and 15 (balanced processing).
4. Sum the responses on items 4, 8, 12, and 16 (relational transparency).
Total Scores
Self-Awareness: ______
Internalized Moral Perspective: ______
Balanced Processing: ______
Relational Transparency: ______
Scoring Interpretation
This self-assessment questionnaire is designed to measure your authentic leadership by
assessing four components of the process: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective,
balanced processing, and relational transparency. By comparing your scores on each of these
components, you can determine which are your stronger and which are your weaker components
in each category. You can interpret your authentic leadership scores using the following
guideline: high = 16–20 and low = 15 and below. Scores in the upper range indicate stronger
authentic leadership, whereas scores in the lower range indicate weaker authentic leadership.
Summary
As a result of leadership failures in the public and private sectors, authentic leadership is emerging in
response to societal demands for genuine, trustworthy, and good leadership. Authentic leadership
describes leadership that is transparent, morally grounded, and responsive to people’s needs and
values. Even though research on authentic leadership is still in the early stages of development, the
study of authentic leadership is timely and worthwhile, offering hope to people who long for true
leadership.
Although there is no single accepted definition of authentic leadership, it can be conceptualized
intrapersonally, interpersonally, and developmentally. The intrapersonal perspective focuses on the
leader and the leader’s knowledge, self-regulation, and self-concept. The interpersonal perspective
claims that authentic leadership is a collective process, created by leaders and followers together. The
developmental perspective emphasizes major components of authentic leadership that develop over a
lifetime and are triggered by major life events.
The practical approach to authentic leadership provides basic “how to” steps to become an authentic
leader. George’s (2003) approach identifies five basic dimensions of authentic leadership and the
corresponding behavioral characteristics individuals need to develop to become authentic leaders.
In the social science literature, a theoretical approach to authentic leadership is emerging. Drawing from
the fields of leadership, positive organizational scholarship, and ethics, researchers have identified four
major components of authentic leadership: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced
processing, and relational transparency.
In addition, researchers have found that authentic leadership is influenced by a leader’s positive
psychological capacities, moral reasoning, and critical life events.
Authentic leadership has several positive features. First, it provides an answer to people who are
searching for good and sound leadership in an uncertain world. Second, authentic leadership provides
broad guidelines about how leaders can learn to become authentic. Third, it has an explicit moral
dimension that asserts that leaders need to do what is “right” and “good” for their followers and society.
Fourth, it is framed as a process that is developed by leaders over time rather than as a fixed trait. Last,
authentic leadership can be measured with a theory-based instrument.
There are also negative features to authentic leadership. First, the ideas set forth in the practical
approach need to be treated cautiously because they have not been fully substantiated by research.
Second, the moral component of authentic leadership is not fully explained. For example, it does not
describe how values such as justice and community are related to authentic leadership. Third, the
rationale for including positive psychological capacities as an inherent part of a model of authentic
leadership has not been fully explicated and remains as a shaky foundation for use of the theory by
consultants and inspirational speakers. Fourth, there is evidence emerging that authentic leadership
may be ineffective with the millennial generation. Finally, there is a lack of evidence regarding the
effectiveness of authentic leadership and how it is related to positive organizational outcomes.
In summary, authentic leadership is a new and exciting area of research that holds a great deal of
promise. As more research is conducted on authentic leadership, a clearer picture will emerge about the
true nature of the process and the assumptions and principles that it encompasses.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Positive psychological capacities and moral reasoning, along with critical life events, lead to self-
awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency, which are
the attributes of authentic leadership.
10 SERVANT LEADERSHIP
Servant leadership emphasizes that leaders should be attentive to the needs of followers, empower
them, and help them develop their full human capacities.
DESCRIPTION
Servant leadership is a paradox—an approach to leadership that runs counter to common sense. Our
everyday images of leadership do not coincide with leaders being servants. Leaders influence, and
servants follow. How can leadership be both service and influence? How can a person be a leader and
a servant at the same time? Although servant leadership seems contradictory and challenges our
traditional beliefs about leadership, it is an approach that offers a unique perspective.
Servant leadership, which originated in the writings of Greenleaf (1970, 1972, 1977), has been of
interest to leadership scholars for more than 40 years. Until recently, little empirical research on servant
leadership has appeared in established peer-reviewed journals. Most of the academic and nonacademic
writing on the topic has been prescriptive, focusing on how servant leadership should ideally be, rather
than descriptive, focusing on what servant leadership actually is in practice (van Dierendonck, 2011).
However, in the past 10 years, multiple publications have helped to clarify servant leadership and
substantiate its basic assumptions.
Similar to earlier leadership theories discussed in this book (e.g., skills approach and behavioral
approach), servant leadership is an approach focusing on leadership from the point of view of leaders
and their behaviors. Servant leadership emphasizes that leaders be attentive to the concerns of their
followers, empathize with them, and nurture them. Servant leaders put followers first, empower them,
and help them develop their full personal capacities.
In addition, like the authentic leadership approach, which is discussed in Chapter 9, and ethical
leadership, which is explored in Chapter 15, servant leadership is viewed as a “moral” form of
leadership. Servant leaders are ethical and lead in ways that serve the greater good of the organization,
community, and society at large. What sets servant leadership apart from other moral leadership
approaches is its focus on serving these multiple stakeholders (Lemoine, Hartnell, & Leroy, 2019).
Servant Leadership Defined
What is servant leadership? Scholars have addressed this approach from many different perspectives
resulting in a variety of definitions of servant leadership. Greenleaf (1970) provides the most frequently
referenced definition:
[Servant leadership] begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then
conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. . . . The difference manifests itself in the care
taken by the servant—first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being
served. The best test . . . is: do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served,
become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?
And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, will they
not be further deprived? (p. 15)
Although complex, this definition sets forth the basic ideas of servant leadership that have been
highlighted by current scholars. Servant leaders place the good of followers over their own self-interests
and emphasize follower development (Hale & Fields, 2007). They demonstrate strong moral behavior
toward followers (Graham, 1991; Walumbwa, Hartnell, & Oke, 2010), the organization, and other
stakeholders (Ehrhart, 2004). Practicing servant leadership comes more naturally for some than for
others, but everyone can learn to be a servant leader (Spears, 2010). Although servant leadership is
sometimes treated by others as a trait, in our discussion servant leadership is viewed as a set of
behaviors.
Historical Basis of Servant Leadership
Robert K. Greenleaf coined the term servant leadership and is the author of the seminal works on the
subject. Greenleaf’s persona and writings have significantly influenced how servant leadership has
developed on the practical and theoretical level. He founded the Center for Applied Ethics in 1964, now
the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, which provides a clearinghouse and focal point for
research and writing on servant leadership.
Greenleaf worked for 40 years at AT&T and, after retiring, began exploring how institutions function and
how they could better serve society. He was intrigued by issues of power and authority and how
individuals in organizations could creatively support each other. Decidedly against coercive leadership,
Greenleaf advocated using communication to build consensus in groups.
Greenleaf credits his formulation of servant leadership to Hermann Hesse’s (1956) novel The Journey to
the East. It tells the story of a group of travelers on a mythical journey who are accompanied by a
servant who does menial chores for the travelers but also sustains them with his spirits and song. The
servant’s presence has an extraordinary impact on the group. When the servant becomes lost and
disappears from the group, the travelers fall into disarray and abandon the journey. Without the servant,
they are unable to carry on. It was the servant who was ultimately leading the group, emerging as a
leader through his selfless care of the travelers.
In addition to serving, Greenleaf states that a servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned
about those who are marginalized and those less privileged. If inequalities and social injustices exist, a
servant leader tries to remove them (Graham, 1991). In becoming a servant leader, a leader uses less
institutional power and control while shifting authority to those who are being led. Servant leadership
values community because it provides a face-to-face opportunity for individuals to experience
interdependence, respect, trust, and individual growth (Greenleaf, 1970).
Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader
In an attempt to clarify servant leadership for practitioners, Spears (2002) identified 10 characteristics in
Greenleaf’s writings that are central to the development of servant leadership. Together, these
characteristics comprise the first model or conceptualization of servant leadership.
1. Listening. Communication between leaders and followers is an interactive process that includes
sending and receiving messages (i.e., talking and listening). Servant leaders communicate by
listening first. They recognize that listening is a learned discipline that involves hearing and being
receptive to what others have to say. Through listening, servant leaders acknowledge the viewpoint
of followers and validate these perspectives.
2. Empathy. Empathy is “standing in the shoes” of another person and attempting to see the world
from that person’s point of view. Empathetic servant leaders demonstrate that they truly understand
what followers are thinking and feeling. When a servant leader shows empathy, it is confirming and
validating for the follower. It makes the follower feel unique.
3. Healing. To heal means to make whole. Servant leaders care about the personal well-being of their
followers. They support followers by helping them overcome personal problems. Greenleaf argues
that the process of healing is a two-way street—in helping followers become whole, servant leaders
themselves are healed.
4. Awareness. For Greenleaf, awareness is a quality within servant leaders that makes them acutely
attuned and receptive to their physical, social, and political environments. It includes understanding
oneself and the impact one has on others. With awareness, servant leaders are able to step aside
and view themselves and their own perspectives in the greater context of the situation.
5. Persuasion. Persuasion is clear and persistent communication that convinces others to change. As
opposed to coercion, which utilizes positional authority to force compliance, persuasion creates
change through the use of gentle nonjudgmental argument. According to Spears (2002),
Greenleaf’s emphasis on persuasion over coercion is perhaps related to his denominational
affiliation with the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers).
6. Conceptualization. Conceptualization refers to an individual’s ability to be a visionary for an
organization, providing a clear sense of its goals and direction. This characteristic goes beyond
day-to-day operational thinking to focus on the “big picture.” Conceptualization also equips servant
leaders to respond to complex organizational problems in creative ways, enabling them to deal with
the intricacies of the organization in relationship to its long-term goals.
7. Foresight. Foresight encompasses a servant leader’s ability to know the future. It is an ability to
predict what is coming based on what is occurring in the present and what has happened in the
past. For Greenleaf, foresight has an ethical dimension because he believes leaders should be held
accountable for any failures to anticipate what reasonably could be foreseen and to act on that
understanding.
8. Stewardship. Stewardship is about taking responsibility for the leadership role entrusted to the
leader. Servant leaders accept the responsibility to carefully manage the people and organization
they have been given to lead. In addition, they hold the organization in trust for the greater good of
society.
9. Commitment to the growth of people. Greenleaf’s conceptualization of servant leadership places
a premium on treating each follower as a unique person with intrinsic value that goes beyond the
individual’s tangible contributions to the organization. Servant leaders are committed to helping
each person in the organization grow personally and professionally. Commitment can take many
forms, including providing followers with opportunities for career development, helping them
develop new work skills, taking a personal interest in their ideas, and involving them in decision
making (Spears, 2002).
10. Building community. Servant leadership fosters the development of community. A community is a
collection of individuals who have shared interests and pursuits and feel a sense of unity and
relatedness. Community allows followers to identify with something greater than themselves that
they value. Servant leaders build community to provide a place where people can feel safe and
connected with others, but are still allowed to express their own individuality.
These 10 characteristics of servant leadership represent Greenleaf’s seminal work on the servant as
leader. They provide a creative lens from which to view the complexities of servant leadership.
Building a Theory About Servant Leadership
For more than three decades after Greenleaf’s original writings, servant leadership remained a set of
loosely defined characteristics and normative principles. In this form it was widely accepted as a
leadership approach, rather than a theory, that has strong heuristic and practical value. Praise for
servant leadership came from a wide range of well-known leadership writers, including Bennis (2002),
Blanchard and Hodges (2003), Covey (2002), DePree (2002), Senge (2002), and Wheatley (2002). At
the same time, servant leadership was adopted as a guiding philosophy in many well-known
organizations such as The Toro Company, Herman Miller, Synovus Financial Corporation,
ServiceMaster, Men’s Wearhouse, The Container Store, Southwest Airlines, and TDIndustries (Spears,
2002). Although novel and paradoxical, the basic ideas and prescriptions of servant leadership
resonated with many as an ideal way to run an organization.
More recently, researchers have begun to examine the conceptual underpinnings of servant leadership
in an effort to build a theory about it. This has resulted in a wide array of models that describe servant
leadership that incorporate a multitude of variables. For example, Russell and Stone (2002) developed a
practical model of servant leadership that contained 20 attributes, 9 functional characteristics (distinctive
behaviors observed in the workplace), and 11 accompanying characteristics that augment these
behaviors. Similarly, Patterson (2003) created a value-based model of servant leadership that
distinguished 7 constructs that characterize the virtues and shape the behaviors of servant leaders.
Other conceptualizations of servant leadership have emerged from researchers’ efforts to develop and
validate instruments to measure the core dimensions of the servant leadership process. Table 10.1
provides a summary of some of these studies, illustrating clearly the extensiveness of characteristics
related to servant leadership. This table demonstrates how servant leadership is treated as a trait
phenomenon (e.g., courage, humility) in some studies while other researchers regard it as a behavioral
process (e.g., serving and developing others).
Table 10.1 also exhibits the lack of agreement among researchers on what specific characteristics
define servant leadership. While some of the studies include common characteristics, such as humility
or empowerment, none of the studies conceptualize servant leadership in exactly the same way. Most
recently, Coetzer, Bussin, and Geldenhuys (2017) analyzed the existing literature and created a
framework that summarizes the functions of servant leadership to make it more practical in
organizations. They highlight 8 servant leadership characteristics (authenticity, humility, integrity,
listening, compassion, accountability, courage, and altruism) and 4 competencies, 10 measures, and 3
outcomes of servant leadership. Although scholars are not in agreement regarding the primary attributes
of servant leadership, all these studies provide the groundwork necessary for the development of a
refined model of servant leadership.
Table 10.1 Key Characteristics of Servant Leadership
Laub (1999) Wong & Davey
(2007)
Barbuto &
Wheeler (2006)
Dennis &
Bocarnea (2005)
Sendjaya, Sarros,
& Santora (2008)
van
& NuLaub (1999) Wong & Davey
(2007)
Barbuto &
Wheeler (2006)
Dennis &
Bocarnea (2005)
Sendjaya, Sarros,
& Santora (2008)
van
& Nu
Developing
people
Sharing
leadership
Displaying
authenticity
Valuing
people
Providing
leadership
Building
community
Serving and
developing
others
Consulting
and
involving
others
Humility
and
selflessness
Modeling
integrity and
authenticity
Inspiring
and
influencing
others
Altruistic
calling
Emotional
healing
Persuasive
mapping
Organizational
stewardship
Wisdom
Empowerment
Trust
Humility
Agapao love
Vision
Transforming
influence
Voluntary
subordination
Authentic self
Transcendental
spirituality
Covenantal
relationship
Responsible
morality
Source: Adapted from “Servant Leadership: A Review and Synthesis,” by D. van Dierendonck, 2011, Journal of Management, 37(4), pp.
1228–1261.
MODEL OF SERVANT LEADERSHIP
This chapter presents a servant leadership model based on Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008)
and Liden, Panaccio, Hu, and Meuser (2014) that has three main components: antecedent conditions,
servant leader behaviors, and outcomes (Figure 10.1). The model is intended to clarify the phenomenon
of servant leadership and provide a framework for understanding its complexities.
Description
Figure 10.1 Model of Servant Leadership
Sources: Adapted from Liden, R. C., Panaccio, A., Hu, J., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership:
Antecedents, consequences, and contextual moderators. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of
leadership and organizations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; and van Dierendonck, D. (2011).
Servant leadership: A review and syntheses. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261.
Antecedent Conditions
As shown on the left side of Figure 10.1, three antecedent, or existing, conditions have an impact on
servant leadership: context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity. These conditions are
not inclusive of all the conditions that affect servant leadership, but do represent some factors likely to
influence the leadership process.
Context and Culture.
Servant leadership does not occur in a vacuum but occurs within a given organizational context and a
particular culture. The nature of each of these affects the way servant leadership is carried out. For
example, in health care and nonprofit settings, the norm of caring is more prevalent, while for Wall
Street corporations it is more common to have competition as an operative norm. Because the norms
differ, the ways servant leadership is performed may vary.
Dimensions of culture (see Chapter 16, “Culture and Leadership”) will also influence servant leadership.
For example, in cultures where power distance is low (e.g., Nordic Europe) and power is shared equally
among people at all levels of society, servant leadership may be more common. In cultures with low
humane orientation (e.g., Germanic Europe), servant leadership may present more of a challenge. The
point is that cultures influence the way servant leadership is able to be achieved.
Leader Attributes.
As in any leadership situation, the qualities and disposition of the leader influence the servant leadership
process. Individuals bring their own traits and ideas about leading to leadership situations. Some may
feel a deep desire to serve or are strongly motivated to lead. Others may be driven by a sense of higher
calling (Sendjaya, Sarros, & Santora, 2008). These dispositions shape how individuals demonstrate
servant leadership. In addition, people differ in areas such as moral development, emotional
intelligence, and self-determinedness, and these traits interact with their ability to engage in servant
leadership.
Recent research has attempted to determine if specific leader traits are important to servant leadership.
Emotional intelligence, or the leader’s ability to monitor the feelings, beliefs, and internal states of the
self and followers, has been identified as an important attribute for a leader implementing a servant
leader ideology (Barbuto, Gottfredson, & Searle, 2014; Beck, 2014; Chiniara & Bentein, 2016). An
empirical study by Hunter and colleagues (2013) concluded that “leaders scoring high in agreeableness
and low in extraversion were more likely to be perceived as servant leaders by their followers” (p. 327).
In addition, a study by Sousa and van Dierendonck (2017) determined that having humility can make
servant leaders more impactful regardless of their hierarchical position in an organization.
Follower Receptivity.
The receptivity of followers is a factor that appears to influence the impact of servant leadership on
outcomes such as personal and organizational job performance. Follower receptivity concerns the
question “Do all followers show a desire for servant leadership?” Research suggests the answer may be
no. Some followers do not want to work with servant leaders. They equate servant leadership with
micromanagement, and report that they do not want their leader to get to know them or try to help,
develop, or guide them (Liden et al., 2008). Similarly, empirical studies have shown that when servant
leadership was matched with followers who desired it, this type of leadership had a positive impact on
performance and organizational citizenship behavior (Meuser, Liden, Wayne, & Henderson, 2011;
Otero-Neira, Varela-Neira, & Bande, 2016; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015). The opposite was seen when there
was no match between servant leadership and the desire of followers for it. It appears that, for some
followers, servant leadership has a positive impact and, for others, servant leadership is not effective. A
recent experiment found that servant leadership benefits followers who have higher levels of self-
interest. Followers who are inclined to care only about themselves were more likely to improve their
helping behaviors after exposure to a manager who supports helping behaviors (Wu, Liden, Liao, &
Wayne, 2020).
Servant Leader Behaviors
The middle component of Figure 10.1 identifies seven servant leader behaviors that are the core of the
servant leadership process. These behaviors emerged from Liden et al.’s (2008) vigorous efforts to
develop and validate a measure of servant leadership. The findings from their research provide
evidence for the soundness of viewing servant leadership as a multidimensional process. Collectively,
these behaviors are the central focus of servant leadership. Individually, each behavior makes a unique
contribution.
Conceptualizing.
Conceptualizing refers to the servant leader’s thorough understanding of the organization—its purposes,
complexities, and mission. This capacity allows servant leaders to think through multifaceted problems,
to know if something is going wrong, and to address problems creatively in accordance with the overall
goals of the organization.
For example, Kate Simpson, a senior nursing supervisor in the emergency room of a large hospital,
uses conceptualizing to lead her department. She fully understands the mission of the hospital and, at
the same time, knows how to effectively manage staff on a day-to-day basis. Her staff members say
Simpson has a sixth sense about what is best for people. She is known for her wisdom in dealing with
difficult patients and helping staff diagnose complex medical problems. Her abilities, competency, and
value as a servant leader earned her the hospital’s Caregiver of the Year Award.
Emotional Healing.
Emotional healing involves being sensitive to the personal concerns and well-being of others. It includes
recognizing others’ problems and being willing to take the time to address them. Servant leaders who
exhibit emotional healing make themselves available to others, stand by them, and provide them with
support.
Emotional healing is apparent in the work of Father John, a much sought-after hospice priest on
Chicago’s South Side. Father John has a unique approach to hospice patients: He doesn’t encourage,
give advice, or read Scripture. Instead he simply listens to them. “When you face death, the only
important thing in life is relationships,” he said. “I practice the art of standing by. I think it is more
important to come just to be there than to do anything else.”
Putting Followers First.
Putting others first is the sine qua non of servant leadership—the defining characteristic. It means using
actions and words that clearly demonstrate to followers that their concerns are a priority, including
placing followers’ interests and success ahead of those of the leader. It may mean leaders break from
their own tasks to assist followers with theirs.
Dr. Autumn Klein, a widely published health education professor at a major research university, is
responsible for several ongoing large interdisciplinary public health studies. Although she is the principal
investigator on these studies, when multiauthored articles are submitted for publication, Dr. Klein puts
the names of other researchers before her own. She chooses to let others be recognized because she
knows it will benefit them in their annual performance reviews. She puts the success of her colleagues
ahead of her own interests.
Helping Followers Grow and Succeed.
This behavior refers to knowing followers’ professional or personal goals and helping them to
accomplish those aspirations. Servant leaders make followers’ career development a priority, including
mentoring followers and providing them with support. At its core, helping followers grow and succeed is
about aiding these individuals to become self-actualized, reaching their fullest human potential.
An example of how a leader helps others grow and succeed is Mr. Yon Kim, a high school orchestra
teacher who consistently receives praise from parents for his outstanding work with students. Mr. Kim is
a skilled violinist with high musical standards, but he does not let that get in the way of helping each
student, from the most highly accomplished to the least capable. Students like Mr. Kim because he
listens to them and treats them as adults. He gives feedback without being judgmental. Many of his
former students have gone on to become music majors. They often visit Mr. Kim to let him know how
important he was to them. Yon Kim is a servant leader who helps students grow through his teaching
and guidance.
Behaving Ethically.
Behaving ethically is doing the right thing in the right way. It is holding to strong ethical standards,
including being open, honest, and fair with followers. Servant leaders do not compromise their ethical
principles in order to achieve success.
An example of ethical behavior is how CEO Elizabeth Angliss responded when one of her employees
brought her a copy of a leaked document from their company’s chief competitor, outlining its plans to go
after some of Angliss’s largest customers. Although she knew the document undoubtedly had valuable
information, she shredded it instead of reading it. She then called the rival CEO and told him she had
received the document and wanted him to be aware that he might have a security issue within his
company. “I didn’t know if what I received was real or not,” she explains. “But it didn’t matter. If it was the
real thing, someone on his end did something wrong, and my company wasn’t going to capitalize on
that.”
Empowering.
Empowering refers to allowing followers the freedom to be independent, make decisions on their own,
and be self-sufficient. It is a way for leaders to share power with followers by allowing them to have
control. Empowerment builds followers’ confidence in their own capacities to think and act on their own
because they are given the freedom to handle difficult situations in the way they feel is best.
For example, a college professor teaching a large lecture class empowers two teaching assistants
assigned to him by letting them set their own office hours, independently grade student papers, and
practice teaching by giving one of the weekly class lectures. They become confident in their teaching
abilities and bring new ideas to the professor to try in the classroom.
Creating Value for the Community.
Servant leaders create value for the community by consciously and intentionally giving back to the
community. They are involved in local activities and encourage followers to also volunteer for community
service. Creating value for the community is one way for leaders to link the purposes and goals of an
organization with the broader purposes of the community.
An example of creating value for the community can be seen in the leadership of Mercedes Urbanez,
principal of Alger High School. Alger is an alternative high school in a midsize community with three
other high schools. Urbanez’s care and concern for students at Alger is remarkable. Ten percent of
Alger’s students have children, so the school provides on-site day care. Fifteen percent of the students
are on probation, and Alger is often their last stop before dropping out and becoming further entangled
with the criminal justice system. While the other schools in town foster competition and push Advanced
Placement courses, Alger focuses on removing the barriers that keep its students from excelling and
offers courses that provide what its students need, including multimedia skills, reading remediation, and
parenting.
Under Urbanez, Alger High School is a model alternative school appreciated at every level in the
community. Students, who have failed in other schools, find they have a safe place to go where they are
accepted and adults try to help them solve their problems. Law enforcement supports the school’s
efforts to help these students get back into the mainstream of society and away from crime. The other
high schools in the community know that Alger provides services they find difficult to provide. Urbanez
serves those who are marginalized in the community, and the whole community reaps the benefits.
Different researchers have used the servant leadership behaviors as identified by Liden et al.’s (2008)
work as well as the work of Page and Wong (2000), Sendjaya and Sarros (2002), Dennis and Bocarnea
(2005), and Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) as the foundation to understand servant leadership and how it
is established in an organization. For example, Winston and Fields (2015) developed and validated a
scale that identifies 10 leader behaviors that are essential to developing servant leadership in an
organization.
Outcomes
Although servant leadership focuses primarily on leader behaviors, it is also important to examine the
potential outcomes of servant leadership. The outcomes of servant leadership are follower performance
and growth, organizational performance, and societal impact (see Figure 10.1). As Greenleaf
highlighted in his original work (1970), the central goal of servant leadership is to create healthy
organizations that nurture individual growth, strengthen organizational performance, and, in the end,
produce a positive impact on society.
Follower Performance and Growth.
In the model of servant leadership, most of the servant leader behaviors focus directly on recognizing
followers’ contributions and helping them realize their human potential. The expected outcome for
followers is greater self-actualization. That is, followers will realize their full capabilities when leaders
nurture them, help them with their personal goals, and give them control.
Another outcome of servant leadership, suggested by Meuser et al. (2011), is that it will have a
favorable impact on followers’ in-role performance—the way followers do their assigned work. When
servant leaders were matched with followers who were open to this type of leadership, the results were
positive. Followers became more effective at accomplishing their jobs and fulfilling their job descriptions.
For example, Bauer, Perrot, Liden, and Erdogan (2019) found that when servant leaders helped new
employees “learn the ropes” in a new job, those employees’ proactivity increased.
Another example is a study of servant leadership in a sales setting in Spain that found sales managers’
servant leadership was directly related to salespeople’s performance within the organization and
indirectly related to salespeople’s identification with the organization. In addition, it enhanced the
salespeople’s adaptability and proactivity by positively affecting their self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation
(Bande, Fernández-Ferrín, Varela-Neira, & Otero-Neira, 2016; Otero-Neira et al., 2016). Hunter et al.
(2013) found that servant leadership fosters a positive service climate, induces followers to help
coworkers and sell products, and reduces turnover and disengagement behaviors. In addition, Chiniara
and Bentein (2016) found that when servant leaders attended to followers’ needs for autonomy,
competence, and relatedness, it had a positive impact on followers’ task performance and
organizational citizenship behavior.
Finally, another expected result of servant leadership is that followers themselves may become servant
leaders. Greenleaf’s conceptualization of servant leadership hypothesizes that when followers receive
care and empowerment from ethical leaders, they, in turn, will likely begin treating others in this way.
Servant leadership would produce a ripple effect in which servant leaders create more servant leaders.
For example, Hunter et al. (2013) report that employees who perceived their leaders as having servant
qualities were more likely to help their coworkers with task and interpersonal matters, as well as less
likely to disengage.
Organizational Performance.
Initial research has shown that, in addition to positively affecting followers and their performance,
servant leadership has an influence on organizational performance. Several studies have found a
positive relationship between servant leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors, which are
follower behaviors that go beyond the basic requirements of the follower’s duties and help the overall
functioning of the organization (Ehrhart, 2004; Liden et al., 2008; Neubert, Kacmar, Carlson, Chonko, &
Roberts, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2010).
Servant leadership also affects the way organizational teams function. Hu and Liden (2011) found that
servant leadership enhanced team effectiveness by increasing the shared confidence among team
members that they could be effective as a work group. Furthermore, their results showed that servant
leadership contributed positively to team potency by enhancing group process and clarity. However,
when servant leadership was absent, team potency decreased, despite clearer goals. In essence, it
frustrates people to know exactly what the goal is, but not get the support needed to accomplish the
goal.
While research on the organizational outcomes of servant leadership is in its initial stages, more and
more studies are being undertaken to substantiate the direct and indirect ways that servant leadership is
related to organizational performance.
Societal Impact.
Another outcome expected of servant leadership is that it is likely to have a positive impact on society.
Although societal impact is not commonly measured in studies of servant leadership, several examples
of servant leadership’s impact are highly visible. One example we are all familiar with is the work of
Mother Teresa, whose years of service for those who are hungry, homeless, and rejected resulted in the
creation of a new religious order, the Missionaries of Charity. This order now has more than 1 million
workers in over 40 countries that operate hospitals, schools, and hospices for people living in poverty.
Mother Teresa’s servant leadership has had an extraordinary impact on society throughout the world.
In the business world, an example of the societal impact of servant leadership can be observed at
Southwest Airlines (see Case 10.2). Leaders at Southwest instituted an “others first” organizational
philosophy in the management of the company, which starts with how it treats its employees. This
philosophy is adhered to by those employees who themselves become servant leaders in regards to the
airline’s customers. Because the company thrives, it impacts society by providing jobs in the
communities it serves and, to a lesser extent, by providing the customers who rely on it with
transportation.
In his conceptualization of servant leadership, Greenleaf did not frame the process as one that was
intended to directly change society. Rather, he visualized leaders who become servants first and listen
to others and help them grow. As a result, their organizations are healthier, ultimately benefiting society.
In this way, the long-term outcomes of putting others first include positive social change and helping
society flourish.
Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership
In summary, the model of servant leadership consists of three components: antecedent conditions,
servant leader behaviors, and outcomes. The central focus of the model is the seven behaviors of
leaders that foster servant leadership: conceptualizing, emotional healing, putting followers first, helping
followers grow and succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the community.
These behaviors are influenced by context and culture, the leader’s attributes, and the followers’
receptivity to this kind of leadership. When individuals engage in servant leadership, it is likely to
improve outcomes at the individual, organizational, and societal levels.
HOW DOES SERVANT LEADERSHIP WORK?
The servant leadership approach works differently than many of the prior theories we have discussed in
this book. For example, it is unlike the trait approach (Chapter 2), which emphasizes that leaders should
have certain specific traits. It is also unlike path–goal theory (Chapter 6), which lays out principles
regarding what style of leadership is needed in various situations. Instead, servant leadership focuses
on the behaviors leaders should exhibit to put followers first and to support followers’ personal
development. It is concerned with how leaders treat followers and the outcomes that are likely to
emerge.
So what is the mechanism that explains how servant leadership works? It begins when leaders commit
themselves to putting their followers first, being honest with them, and treating them fairly. Servant
leaders make it a priority to listen to their followers and develop strong long-term relationships with
them. This allows leaders to understand the abilities, needs, and goals of followers, which, in turn,
allows these followers to achieve their full potential. When many leaders in an organization adopt a
servant leadership orientation, a culture of serving others within and outside the organization is created
(Liden et al., 2008).
Servant leadership works best when leaders are altruistic and have a strong motivation and deep-
seated interest in helping others. In addition, for successful servant leadership to occur, it is important
that followers are open and receptive to servant leaders who want to empower them and help them
grow.
It should be noted that in much of the writing on servant leadership there is an underlying philosophical
position, originally set forth by Greenleaf (1970), that leaders should be altruistic and humanistic. Rather
than using their power to dominate others, leaders should make every attempt to share their power and
enable others to grow and become autonomous. Leadership framed from this perspective downplays
competition in the organization and promotes egalitarianism.
Finally, in an ideal world, servant leadership results in community and societal change. Individuals within
an organization who care for each other become committed to developing an organization that cares for
the community. Organizations that adopt a servant leadership culture are committed to helping those in
need who operate outside of the organization. Servant leadership extends to serving those who are
marginalized in society (Graham, 1991). Case 10.1 in this chapter provides a striking example of how
one servant leader’s work led to positive outcomes for many throughout the world.
STRENGTHS
In its current stage of development, research on servant leadership has made several positive
contributions to the field of leadership. First, while there are other leadership approaches such as
transformational and authentic leadership that include an ethical dimension, servant leadership is
unique in the way it makes altruism the central component of the leadership process. Servant leadership
argues unabashedly that leaders should put followers first, share control with followers, and embrace
their growth. It is the only leadership approach that frames the leadership process around the principle
of caring for others.
In comparing servant leadership to transformational leadership, a meta-analysis found servant
leadership was better at predicting employee performance and attitudes, showing promise as a stand-
alone theory that can help leadership researchers and practitioners better explain employee
performance and attitudes than other recent approaches (Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn, & Wu, 2018).
Servant leadership is recognized as a viable approach that makes a unique contribution to our
understanding of the leadership process.
Third, servant leadership provides a counterintuitive and provocative approach to the use of influence,
or power, in leadership. Nearly all other theories of leadership treat influence as a positive factor in the
leadership process, but servant leadership does just the opposite. It argues that leaders should not
dominate, direct, or control; rather, leaders should share control and influence. To give up control rather
than seek control is the goal of servant leadership. Servant leadership is an influence process that does
not incorporate influence in a traditional way. This difference has resulted in servant leadership being
conceptually and empirically distinct from other leadership approaches, which are leader-centric rather
than follower-centric.
Another key distinction in servant leadership research is the consideration of multiple stakeholders,
including followers, organizations, customers, communities, and societies, and the outcomes that result.
Most notably, followers are recognized as being served by the actions and decisions of leaders.
Outcomes such as work–family balance have been linked to servant leadership (Wang, Kwan, & Zhou,
2017). Also, servant leaders create more awareness of spirituality at work (Williams, Randolph-Seng,
Hayek, Haden, & Atinc, 2017). Studies have included customer service behaviors, such as putting the
customer first, and customer-helping behaviors as outcome variables as well (Chen, Zhu, & Zhou,
2015). Stakeholders also extend beyond the organization’s followers and customers to the broader
community (Lemoine et al., 2019).
Fifth, rather than imply that servant leadership is a panacea, research on servant leadership has shown
there are conditions under which servant leadership is not a preferred kind of leadership. Findings
indicate that servant leadership may not be effective in contexts where followers are not open to being
guided, supported, and empowered. Followers’ readiness to receive servant leadership moderates the
potential usefulness of leading from this approach (Liden et al., 2008). In addition, Sousa and van
Dierendonck (2017) found that servant leadership may be more effective for those at higher ranks in the
organization. When expressed by executive- and board-level leaders, the combination of humility and
action predicts engagement. However, for managers at lower ranks, a focus on the actions relating to
operations results in more engagement.
Finally, there are multiple ways to assess servant leadership. A review of servant leadership research
identified 16 different measures of servant leadership (Eva, Robin, Sendjaya, van Dierendonck, & Liden,
2019). The measure we have selected to highlight at the end of this chapter—the Servant Leadership
Questionnaire (SLQ)—was developed and validated by Liden et al. (2008). It is comprised of 28 items
that identify 7 distinct dimensions of servant leadership. Studies show that the SLQ is unique and
measures aspects of leadership that are different from those measured by the transformational and
leader–member exchange theories (Liden et al., 2008; Schaubroeck, Lam, & Peng, 2011). While the
SLQ has proved to be a suitable instrument for use in research on servant leadership, Liden and his
colleagues have also validated a short 7-item measure of servant leadership (Liden et al., 2015).
CRITICISMS
In addition to the positive features of servant leadership, this approach has several limitations. First, the
paradoxical nature of the title “servant leadership” creates semantic noise that diminishes the potential
value of the approach. Because the name appears contradictory, servant leadership is prone to be
perceived as fanciful or whimsical. In addition, being a servant leader implies following, and following is
viewed as the opposite of leading. Although servant leadership incorporates influence, the mechanism
of how influence functions as a part of servant leadership is not fully explicated in the approach.
Second, it is not clear how servant leadership leads to organizational change. For example, Newman,
Schwarz, Cooper, and Sendjaya (2017) found that servant leadership was positively related to
psychological empowerment, but it did not result in followers engaging in extra-role performance
(organizational citizenship) above and beyond that accounted for by leader–member exchange (LMX).
Similar findings were found for work engagement; LMX explained the influence of servant leadership
(Bao, Li, & Zhao, 2018). Therefore, an explanatory mechanism for the relationship between servant
leadership and outcomes may be the quality of the working relationship between leaders and followers.
Followers view their servant leaders positively and respond with higher performance if they have a good
relationship with those leaders.
Third, there is debate among servant leadership scholars regarding the core dimensions of the process.
As illustrated in Table 10.1, servant leadership is hypothesized to include a multitude of abilities, traits,
and behaviors. To date, researchers have been unable to reach consensus on a common definition or
theoretical framework for servant leadership (van Dierendonck, 2011). Some conceptualizations of
servant leadership included outcomes such as organizational citizenship behavior and even
antecedents such as personality traits. Some authors defined servant leadership in terms of examples
such as self-sacrifice. This resulted in definitions that were confusing to both scholars and leaders (Eva
et al., 2019). Despite 20 years of research on servant leadership, questions remain regarding the
robustness of its theoretical formulations.
Fourth, a large segment of the writing on servant leadership has a prescriptive overtone that implies that
good leaders “put others first.” While advocating an altruistic approach to leadership is commendable, it
has a utopian ring because it conflicts with individual autonomy and other principles of leadership such
as directing, concern for production, goal setting, and creating a vision (Gergen, 2006). Furthermore,
along with the “value-push” prescriptive quality, there is a moralistic nature that surrounds servant
leadership. For example, some literature characterizes servant leaders as courageous heroes who work
for the common good (Gandolfi & Stone, 2018). This premise, that leadership is about serving a higher
purpose, is not always seen by researchers as one of the central features of servant leadership.
Finally, it is unclear why “conceptualizing” is included as one of the servant leadership behaviors in the
model of servant leadership (see Figure 10.1). Is conceptualizing actually a behavior, or is it a cognitive
ability? Is it a skill? Furthermore, what is the rationale for identifying conceptualizing as a determinant of
servant leadership? Being able to conceptualize is undoubtedly an important cognitive capacity in all
kinds of leadership, but why is it a defining characteristic of servant leadership? In the revised 7-item
SLQ developed by Liden et al. (2015), only one item to measure conceptual skills was retained. The
authors note that the item for conceptualization was changed by adding the word work-related to more
closely relate it to conceptual skills rather than an emotional or personal item. But no explanation was
offered for why this apparent skill is included in the servant leadership concept. A clearer explanation for
its central role in servant leadership needs to be addressed in future research.
APPLICATION
Servant leadership can be applied at all levels of management and in all types of organizations. Within a
philosophical framework of caring for others, servant leadership sets forth a list of behaviors that
individuals can engage in if they want to be servant leaders. Most of the prescribed behaviors of servant
leadership are not esoteric; they are easily understood and generally applicable to a variety of
leadership situations.
Unlike leader–member exchange theory (Chapter 7) or authentic leadership (Chapter 9), which are not
widely used in training and development, servant leadership has been used extensively in a variety of
organizations for more than 30 years. Many organizations in the Fortune 500 (e.g., Starbucks, AT&T,
Southwest Airlines, and Vanguard Group) employ ideas from servant leadership. Training in servant
leadership typically involves self-assessment exercises, educational sessions, and goal setting. The
content of servant leadership is straightforward and accessible to followers at every level within the
organization.
Liden et al. (2008) suggest that organizations that want to build a culture of servant leadership should
be careful to select people who are interested in and capable of building long-term relationships with
followers. Furthermore, because “behaving ethically” is positively related to job performance,
organizations should focus on selecting people who have high integrity and strong ethics. In addition,
organizations should develop training programs that spend time helping leaders develop their emotional
intelligence, ethical decision making, and skills for empowering others. Behaviors such as these will help
leaders nurture followers to their full potential.
Servant leadership is taught at many colleges and universities around the world and is the focus of
numerous independent coaches, trainers, and consultants. In the United States, Gonzaga University
and Regent University are recognized as prominent leaders in this area because of the academic
attention they have given to servant leadership. Overall, the most recognized and comprehensive center
for training in servant leadership is the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership (www.greenleaf.org).
In summary, servant leadership provides a philosophy and set of behaviors that individuals in the
organizational setting can learn and develop. The following section features cases illustrating how
servant leadership has been manifested in different ways.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
This section provides three case studies (Cases 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3) that illustrate different facets of
servant leadership. The first case is about Dr. Paul Farmer and his efforts to stop disease in Haiti and
other parts of the world. The second case is about the leaders of Southwest Airlines who created a
servant leadership culture that permeates the company. The third case discusses the culture and
leadership of Italian energy corporation Snam. At the end of each case, several questions are provided
to help analyze the case from the perspective of servant leadership.
Case 10.1 Global Health Care
“Education wasn’t what he wanted to perform on the world. . . . He was after transformation.”
—Kidder (2003, p. 44)
When Paul Farmer graduated from Duke University at 22, he was unsure whether he wanted to be an
anthropologist or a doctor. So he went to Haiti. As a student, Paul had become obsessed with the island
nation after meeting many Haitians at local migrant camps. Paul was used to the grittier side of life; he
had grown up in a family of eight that lived in a converted school bus and later on a houseboat moored
in a bayou. But what he observed at the migrant camps and learned from his discussions with Haitian
immigrants made his childhood seem idyllic.
In Haiti, he volunteered for a small charity called Eye Care Haiti, which conducted outreach clinics in
rural areas. He was drawn in by the lives of the Haitian people and the deplorable conditions so many of
them endured and determined to use his time there to learn everything he could about illness and
disease afflicting people living in poverty. Before long, Paul realized that he had found his life’s purpose:
He’d be a doctor to people living in poverty, and he’d start in Haiti.
Paul entered Harvard University in 1984 and, for the first two years, traveled back and forth to Haiti
where he conducted a health census in the village of Cange. During that time he conceived of a plan to
fight disease in Haiti by developing a public health system that included vaccination programs and clean
water and sanitation. The heart of this program, however, would be a cadre of people from the villages
who were trained to administer medicines, teach health classes, treat minor ailments, and recognize the
symptoms of grave illnesses such as HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria.
His vision became reality in 1987, thanks to a wealthy donor who gave $1 million to help Paul create
Partners In Health (PIH). At first it wasn’t much of an organization—no staff, a small advisory board, and
three committed volunteers. But its work was impressive: PIH began building schools and clinics in and
around Cange. Soon PIH established a training program for health outreach workers and organized a
mobile unit to screen residents of area villages for preventable diseases.
In 1990, Paul finished his medical studies and became a fellow in infectious diseases at Brigham and
Women’s Hospital in Boston. He was able to remain in Haiti for most of each year, returning to Boston to
work at Brigham for a few months at a time, sleeping in the basement of PIH headquarters.
It wasn’t long before PIH’s successes started gaining attention outside of Haiti. Because of its success
treating the disease in Haiti, the World Health Organization appointed Paul and PIH staffer Jim Yong
Kim to spearhead pilot treatment programs for multiple-drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Paul’s
attention was now diverted to the slums of Peru and Russia where cases of MDR-TB were on the rise.
In Peru, Paul and PIH encountered barriers in treating MDR-TB that had nothing to do with the disease.
They ran headlong into governmental resistance and had to battle to obtain expensive medications.
Paul learned to gently navigate governmental obstacles, while the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
stepped in with a $44.7 million grant to help fund the program.
In 2005, PIH turned its attention to another part of the world: Africa, the epicenter of the global AIDS
pandemic. Beginning its efforts in Rwanda, where few people had been tested or were receiving
treatment, PIH tested 30,000 people in eight months and enrolled nearly 700 in drug therapy to treat the
disease. Soon, the organization expanded its efforts to the African nations of Lesotho and Malawi
(Partners In Health, 2011).
But Paul’s efforts weren’t just in far-flung reaches of the world. From his work with patients at Brigham,
Paul observed the needs of low-income communities in Boston. The Prevention and Access to Care
and Treatment (PACT) project was created to offer drug therapy for HIV and diabetes for residents living
in poverty of the Roxbury and Dorchester neighborhoods. PIH has since sent PACT project teams
across the United States to provide support to other community health programs.
By 2020, PIH had grown to 18,000 employees working in health centers and hospitals in throughout the
world, including the Dominican Republic, Peru, Mexico, Rwanda, Lesotho, Malawi, the Navajo Nation
(U.S.), and Russia. Each year the organization increases the number of facilities and personnel that
provide health care to those most in need around the world. Paul continues to travel around the world,
monitoring programs and raising funds for PIH in addition to leading the Department of Global Health
and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School.
Questions
1. Would you characterize Paul Farmer as a servant leader? Explain your answer.
2. Putting others first is the essence of servant leadership. In what way does Paul Farmer put others
first?
3. Another characteristic of a servant leader is getting followers to serve. Who are Paul Farmer’s
followers, and how did they become servants to his vision?
4. What role do you think Paul Farmer’s childhood had in his development as a servant leader?
Case 10.2 Servant Leadership Takes Flight
A young mother traveling with a toddler on a long cross-country flight approached the flight attendant
looking rather frantic. Because of weather and an hour-and-a-half wait on the runway to take off, the
plane would arrive at its destination several hours late. The plane had made an intermediate stop in
Denver to pick up passengers but not long enough for travelers to disembark. The mother told the
attendant that with the delays and the long flight, her child had already eaten all the food she brought
and if she didn’t feed him soon he was bound to have a total meltdown. “Can I get off for five minutes
just to run and get something for him to eat?” she pleaded.
“I have to recommend strongly that you stay on the plane,” the attendant said, sternly. But then, with a
smile, she added, “But I can get off. The plane won’t leave without me. What can I get your son to eat?”
Turns out that flight attendant not only got the little boy a meal, but brought four other children on board
meals as well. Anyone who has traveled in a plane with screaming children knows that this flight
attendant not only took care of some hungry children and frantic parents, but also indirectly saw to the
comfort of a planeload of other passengers.
This story doesn’t surprise anyone familiar with Southwest Airlines. The airline’s mission statement is
posted every 3 feet at all Southwest locations: Follow the Golden Rule—treat people the way you want
to be treated.
It’s a philosophy that the company takes to heart, beginning with how it treats employees. Colleen
Barrett, the president emeritus of Southwest Airlines, said the company’s cofounder and her mentor,
Herb Kelleher, was adamant that “a happy and motivated workforce will essentially extend that goodwill
to Southwest’s customers” (Knowledge@Wharton, 2008). If the airline took care of its employees, the
employees would take care of the customers, and the shareholders would win, too.
From the first days of Southwest Airlines, Herb resisted establishing traditional hierarchies within the
company. He focused on finding employees with substance, willing to say what they thought and
committed to doing things differently. Described as “an egalitarian spirit,” he employed a collaborative
approach to management that involved his associates at every step.
Colleen, who went from working as Herb’s legal secretary to being the president of the airline, is living
proof of his philosophy. A woman with little money from rural Vermont who got the opportunity of a
lifetime to work for Herb when he was still just a lawyer, she rose from his aide to become vice president
of administration, then executive vice president of customers, and then president and chief operating
officer in 2001 (which she stepped down from in 2008). She had no formal training in aviation, but that
didn’t matter. Herb “always treated me as a complete equal to him,” she said.
It was Colleen who instituted the Golden Rule as the company motto and developed a model that
focuses on employee satisfaction and issues first, followed by the needs of the passengers. The
company hired employees for their touchy-feely attitudes and trained them for skill. Southwest Airlines
developed a culture that celebrated and encouraged humor. The example of being themselves on the
job started at the top with Herb and Colleen.
This attitude has paid off. Southwest Airlines posted a profit for 35 consecutive years and continues to
make money while other airlines’ profits are crashing. Colleen said the most important numbers on the
balance sheet, however, are those that indicate how many millions of people have become frequent
flyers of the airline, a number that grows every year.
Questions
1. What type of servant leader behaviors did Herb Kelleher exhibit in starting the airline? What about
Colleen Barrett?
2. How do the leaders of Southwest Airlines serve others? What others are they serving?
3. Southwest Airlines emphasizes the Golden Rule. What role does the Golden Rule play in servant
leadership? Is it always a part of servant leadership? Discuss.
4. Based on Figure 10.1, describe the outcomes of servant leadership at Southwest Airlines, and how
follower receptivity may have influenced those outcomes.
Case 10.3 Energy to Inspire the World
Marco Alverà has found the secret ingredient in making a business be best. Fairness.
Marco is the CEO of Snam, an independent energy company based in Italy whose largest shareholder
is a holding company controlled by the Italian state. Historically, Italy had been dependent on its
neighbors to the north to supply the country with natural gas. Snam’s mission has been to reverse the
flow of natural gas, and it has succeeded. By “reducing bottlenecks” and “harmonizing prices in the
European market,” Snam has made Italy a natural gas hub in Europe and is now Europe’s second-
largest network operator in terms of extension of pipeline, providing gas to countries like Russia, Algeria,
Libya, Norway, Holland, Austria, France, and the United Kingdom (Elliott, 2018).
Marco came to the energy industry from big banking—Goldman Sachs, to be specific—where
competition created by big bonuses and large salaries was used to motivate people and cull the high
performers from the low. He quickly realized that this motivational tool kit was effectively useless at
Snam, which offered fixed salaries and lifelong jobs. How, then, to inspire 3,000 employees to strive for
excellence and motivate them to bring their best to work every day?
To Marco’s surprise, he found areas of unmitigated excellence in the company. Snam was beating its
competition in tough and highly competitive business sectors like trading, project management, and
exploration. “Our exploration team was finding more oil and gas than any other company in the world. It
was a phenomenon,” he said (Alverà, 2017). At first, Marco attributed this to luck, but when it continued
to happen, he dug a little deeper to figure out why. The secret? Fairness.
Marco notes that unfairness is the “root cause of polarization” and “makes people defensive and
disengaged” at work. Unfairness causes us pain. Fairness, on the other hand, brings us satisfaction.
Behavioral research has shown that people sense fairness (or unfairness) even before they begin to
analyze a situation and reach logical conclusions (Ronen, 2018).
Marco said Snam employees worked for a company where they didn’t have to worry about short-term
results or about being penalized for making mistakes. They knew they would be rewarded for their
overall performance and not on individual success. “They knew they were valued for what they were
trying to do, not the outcome. They were valued as human beings. They were part of a community.
Whatever happened, the company would stand by them . . . These guys could be true to their purpose,
which was finding oil and gas. They didn’t have to worry about company politics or greed or fear. They
could be good risk-takers . . . and they were excellent team workers. They could trust their colleagues.
They didn’t need to look behind their backs” (Alverà, 2017).
For example, Marco shared the story of his friend and employee who drilled seven dry wells at the cost
of $1 billion to the company. Marco was worried for him, but his friend didn’t seem to be concerned, and
on the eighth drill he successfully found gas.
Giving employees the latitude to do what they did best was key. Having freedom to do what they feel is
right is a motivator “in a way that no bonus can buy” that works at every level of the company, he said.
For example, an employee asked Marco for the budget to build a cheese factory next to Snam’s plant in
a village in Ecuador.
“It didn’t make any sense: no one ever built a cheese factory. But this is what the village wanted,
because the milk they had would spoil before they could sell it, so that’s what they needed. And so we
built it” (Alverà, 2017).
This kind of culture comes from what Marco calls a “company psychoanalysis,” a top-down analysis of
every aspect of the company. “We went back to something that Aristotle said: ‘A human being with a
purpose is much more motivated’ and that purpose is in the intersection of what someone is really good
at doing, what his talents are and what the world needs. So we went through a long journey, a lot of
introspective work, and we really came up with what our strengths were and what we think the world
needs” (Alverà, 2017).
Marco and his team took a hard look at how decisions were made and how company resources were
allocated. They scrutinized the existing processes, systems, and rules. From those analyses they
removed anything that wasn’t clear, wasn’t rational, or limited the flow of information within the company.
Company culture and how people were motivated were given the same type of evaluation.
To allow this to happen, Marco said he had to take himself “out of the equation” and “that means being
aware of my own biases . . . to actively promote a culture of diversity of opinions and diversity of
character” (UniBocconi, 2019).
Marco, who has degrees in philosophy and economics from the London School of Economics, found his
philosophy background particularly useful. “It teaches you about having different opinions of the same
topic . . . And I find that very helpful in negotiating and managing people to be able to look at different
perspectives” (Alverà, 2017).
This process resulted in the company defining its purpose as “Energy to Inspire the World.” “The
purpose is on top, the purpose said, ‘What you are for, why you exist,’” he said. “But it’s not enough just
to have a purpose. Then you need to have the mission, the vision, the strategy, the values, the
competencies, so that it’s an entire framework” (Alverà, 2017).
Marco said the definition of ideal fairness is “when you can fold down your antenna in your search for
unfairness.” He admits the last element of fairness is the hardest, because it is not something that is
easily analyzed and requires something altogether different from the norm in the business world. “It’s
about what people’s emotions are, what their needs are, what’s going on in their private lives, what
society needs” (Alverà, 2017).
This requires judgment and risk, he said.
“And if we turn on our hearts, that’s the key to getting the real best out of people, because they can
smell it if you care, and only when you really care will they leave their fears behind and bring their true
selves to work” (Alverà, 2017).
Questions
1. The text suggests that for servant leadership to be effective, three antecedent (or existing)
conditions must exist—context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity. Discuss how
each of these antecedents plays a role at Snam.
2. The servant leadership model identifies seven leader behaviors core to the servant leadership
process. How do each of these relate to Marco Alverà and Snam? Which of these behaviors are
most relevant to Marco’s leadership success?
3. Servant leadership is unique in that it considers multiple stakeholders. Who are the stakeholders in
this case? How do Marco Alverà and Snam exhibit consideration to these stakeholders?
4. The text identifies the potential outcomes of servant leadership as follower performance and
growth, organizational performance, and societal impact. How is each of these outcomes evident in
the approach Marco Alverà and Snam take toward leadership? Provide examples from the case to
support your answers.
5. According to Greenleaf, the servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned about those
who are marginalized and those less privileged. If inequalities and social injustices exist, a servant
leader tries to remove them.
a. How would you apply this statement to Marco Alverà and his role as a servant leader?
b. Do you view Marco Alverà as a servant leader? Why or why not?
—Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
Many questionnaires have been used to measure servant leadership (see Table 10.1). Because of its
relevance to the content, the Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ) by Liden et al. (2008) was
chosen for inclusion in this chapter. It is a 28-item scale that measures 7 major dimensions of servant
leadership: conceptualizing, emotional healing, putting followers first, helping followers grow and
succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the community. Using exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis, Liden et al. established the multiple dimensions of this scale and described
how it is uniquely different from other leadership measures. In addition, Liden et al. (2015) have
developed and validated a 7-item scale that measures global servant leadership, which correlates
strongly with the 28-item measure used in this section.
By completing the SLQ you will gain an understanding of how servant leadership is measured and
explore where you stand on the different dimensions of servant leadership. Servant leadership is a
complex process, and taking the SLQ is one way to discover the dynamics of how it works.
Servant Leadership Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to examine the servant leadership behaviors you
exhibit.
Instructions: Have a friend, colleague, or classmate read each item carefully and use the
following 7-point scale to indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree with the following
statements as they pertain to your leadership. In these statements, “the leader” is referring to you
in a leadership capacity.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Disagree somewhat 4 = Undecided 5 =
Agree somewhat 6 = Agree 7 = Strongly agree
1. Others would seek help from the leader if they had a personal
problem.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. The leader emphasizes the importance of giving back to the
community.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. The leader can tell if something work-related is going wrong. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. The leader gives others the responsibility to make important
decisions about their own jobs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. The leader makes others’ career development a priority. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. The leader cares more about others’ success than their own. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. The leader holds high ethical standards. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. The leader cares about others’ personal well-being. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. The leader is always interested in helping people in the
community.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. The leader is able to think through complex problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. The leader encourages others to handle important work decisions
on their own.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. The leader is interested in making sure others reach their career
goals.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. The leader puts others’ best interests above their own. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. The leader is always honest. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. The leader takes time to talk to others on a personal level. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. The leader is involved in community activities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. The leader has a thorough understanding of the organization and
its goals.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. The leader gives others the freedom to handle difficult situations in
the way they feel(s) is best.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. The leader provides others with work experiences that enable
them to develop new skills.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. The leader sacrifices their own interests to meet others’ needs. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. The leader would not compromise ethical principles in order to
meet success.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. The leader can recognize when others are feeling down without
asking them.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. The leader encourages others to volunteer in the community. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. The leader can solve work problems with new or creative ideas. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. If others need to make important decisions at work, they do not
need to consult the leader.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. The leader wants to know about others’ career goals. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. The leader does what they can to make others’ jobs easier. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
28. The leader values honesty more than profits. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Source: Adapted from The Leadership Quarterly, 19, by R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, H. Zhao, and D. Henderson, “Servant
Leadership: Development of a Multidimensional Measure and Multi-Level Assessment,” pp. 161–177, Copyright (2008).
Scoring
1. Add up the scores for 1, 8, 15, and 22. This is your score for emotional healing.
2. Add up the scores for 2, 9, 16, and 23. This is your score for creating value for the
community.
3. Add up the scores for 3, 10, 17, and 24. This is your score for conceptual skills.
4. Add up the scores for 4, 11, 18, and 25. This is your score for empowering.
5. Add up the scores for 5, 12, 19, and 26. This is your score for helping followers grow and
succeed.
6. Add up the scores for 6, 13, 20, and 27. This is your score for putting followers first.
7. Add up the scores for 7, 14, 21, and 28. This is your score for behaving ethically.
Scoring Interpretation
The scores you received on the SLQ indicate the degree to which you exhibit the seven
behaviors characteristic of a servant leader. You can use the results to assess areas in which
you have strong servant leadership behaviors and areas in which you may strive to improve.
Based on the responses of the person who filled out this questionnaire on your leadership, the
following scores for each category can be broken down as follows:
High range: A score between 23 and 28 means others believe you strongly exhibit this
servant leadership behavior.
Moderate range: A score between 14 and 22 means others believe you tend to exhibit this
behavior in an average way.
Low range: A score between 4 and 13 means others believe you exhibit this leadership
behavior below the average or expected degree.
Summary
Originating in the seminal work of Greenleaf (1970), servant leadership is a paradoxical approach to
leadership that challenges our traditional beliefs about leadership and influence. Servant leadership
emphasizes that leaders should be attentive to the needs of followers, empower them, and help them
develop their full human capacities.
Servant leaders make a conscious choice to serve first—to place the good of followers over the leaders’
self-interests. They build strong relationships with others, are empathic and ethical, and lead in ways
that serve the greater good of followers, the organization, the community, and society at large.
Based on an idea from Hermann Hesse’s (1956) novel The Journey to the East, Greenleaf argued that
the selfless servant in a group has an extraordinary impact on the other members. Servant leaders
attend fully to the needs of followers, are concerned with those with less privilege, and aim to remove
inequalities and social injustices. Because servant leaders shift authority to those who are being led,
they exercise less institutional power and control.
Scholars have conceptualized servant leadership in multiple ways. According to Spears (2002), there
are 10 major characteristics of servant leadership: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion,
conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community.
Additional efforts by social science researchers to develop and validate measures of servant leadership
have resulted in an extensive list of other servant leadership attributes (Coetzer et al., 2017; Winston &
Fields, 2015).
Liden et al. (2014) created a promising model of servant leadership that has three main components:
antecedent conditions, servant leader behaviors, and outcomes. Antecedent conditions that are likely to
impact servant leaders include context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity. Central to
the servant leader process are the seven servant leader behaviors: conceptualizing, emotional healing,
putting followers first, helping followers grow and succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating
value for the community. The outcomes of servant leadership are follower performance and growth,
organizational performance, and societal impact.
Research on servant leadership has several strengths. First, it is unique because it makes altruism the
main component of the leadership process. Second, it can be used to explain employee performance.
Third, servant leadership provides a counterintuitive and provocative approach to the use of influence
wherein leaders give up control rather than seek control. Fourth, rather than a panacea, research has
shown that there are conditions under which servant leadership is not a preferred kind of leadership.
Last, recent research has resulted in a sound measure of servant leadership (Servant Leadership
Questionnaire) that identifies seven distinct dimensions of the process.
The servant leadership approach also has limitations. First, the paradoxical nature of the title “servant
leadership” creates semantic noise that diminishes the potential value of the approach. Second, no
consensus exists on a common theoretical framework for servant leadership. Third, servant leadership
has a utopian ring that conflicts with traditional approaches to leadership. Last, it is not clear why
“conceptualizing” is a defining characteristic of servant leadership.
Despite the limitations, servant leadership continues to be an engaging approach to leadership that
holds much promise. As more research is done to test the substance and assumptions of servant
leadership, a better understanding of the complexities of the process will emerge.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Antecedent conditions:
Context and culture
Leader attributes
Follower receptivity
Servant leader behaviors:
Conceptualizing
Emotional Healing
Putting Followers First
Helping Followers Grow and Succeed
Behaving Ethically
Empowering
Creating Value for the Community
Outcomes:
Follower Performance and Growth
Organization Performance
Societal Impact
Antecedent behaviors affect servant leader behaviors, which influence outcomes.
11 ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP
Adaptive leadership is about helping people change and adjust to new situations.
DESCRIPTION
As the name of the approach implies, adaptive leadership is about how leaders encourage people to
adapt—to face and deal with problems, challenges, and changes. Adaptive leadership focuses on the
adaptations required of people in response to changing environments. Simply stated, adaptive leaders
prepare and encourage people to deal with change. Unlike the trait approach (Chapter 2) and authentic
leadership (Chapter 9), which focus predominantly on the characteristics of the leader, adaptive
leadership stresses the behaviors of the leader in relation to the work of followers in the situations in
which they find themselves.
Since Heifetz first published Leadership Without Easy Answers (1994), the seminal book on adaptive
leadership, this approach has occupied a unique place in the leadership literature. Adaptive leadership
has been used effectively to explain how leaders encourage productive change across multiple levels,
including self, organizational, community, and societal. However, most of the writing about adaptive
leadership has been prescriptive and based on anecdotal and observational data rather than data
derived from rigorous scientific inquiry. Scholars and practitioners have recognized the merits of the
approach, but the theoretical underpinnings of adaptive leadership remain in the formative stages.
Development of the adaptive leadership framework emerged largely from the work of Heifetz and his
associates (Heifetz, 1994; Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky, 2009; Heifetz & Laurie, 1997; Heifetz & Linsky,
2002; Heifetz, Sinder, Jones, Hodge, & Rowley, 1991). From the beginning, they set out to create a
different approach to leadership. Rather than seeing the leader as a savior who solves problems for
people, they conceptualized the leader as one who plays the role of assisting people who need to
confront tough problems (e.g., sexism in the workplace or pandemic-induced restrictions and social
distancing requirements). An adaptive leader challenges others to face difficult situations, providing
them with the space or opportunity they need to learn new ways of dealing with the inevitable changes
in beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors that they are likely to encounter in addressing real
problems.
Adaptive Leadership Defined
Although people often think of adaptive leadership as being leader centered, it is actually more follower
centered. It focuses primarily on how leaders help others do the work they need to do, to adapt to the
challenges they face. Generally, adaptive leadership is concerned with how people change and adjust to
new circumstances. In this chapter, we emphasize the process leaders use to encourage others to
grapple with difficult problems.
In the leadership literature, Heifetz and his colleagues suggest that “adaptive leadership is the practice
of mobilizing people to tackle tough challenges and thrive” (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 14). In contrast to
emphasizing the position or characteristics of the leader, this definition suggests that leadership is
concerned with the behaviors of leaders. Adaptive leaders engage in activities that mobilize, motivate,
organize, orient, and focus the attention of others (Heifetz, 1994). In addition, adaptive leadership is
about helping others to explore and change their values. The goal of adaptive leadership is to
encourage people to change and to learn new behaviors so that they may effectively meet their
challenges and grow in the process. In short, adaptive leadership is the behavior of and the actions
undertaken by leaders to encourage others to address and resolve changes that are central in their
lives. To better understand how adaptive leadership works, Table 11.1 provides some examples of
situations in which adaptive leadership would be an ideal form of leadership.
Conceptually, the process of adaptive leadership incorporates four different biases: systems, biological,
service orientation, and psychotherapeutic (Heifetz, 1994). Taken together, these biases help explain
and characterize the nature of adaptive leadership:
Systems Bias.
The adaptive leadership approach assumes that many problems people face are actually embedded in
complicated interactive systems (see Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007). Problems are viewed as
complex and multifaceted, dynamic in that they can evolve and change, and connected to others in a
web of relationships.
Biological Bias.
Adaptive leadership recognizes that people develop and evolve as a result of having to adapt to both
their internal cues/state and external environments. The ability to adapt allows people to thrive in new
circumstances.
Service Orientation Bias.
Similar to physicians, adaptive leaders use their expertise or authority to serve people by diagnosing
their problems and helping them find solutions.
Psychotherapeutic Bias.
The way clients address issues in psychotherapy is similar to how people accomplish adaptive work.
Adaptive leaders understand that people need a supportive environment and adapt more successfully
when they face difficult problems directly, learn to distinguish between fantasy and reality, resolve
internal conflicts, and learn new attitudes and behaviors.
Table 11.1 Adaptive Leadership in Practice
Adaptive leaders mobilize, motivate, organize, orient, and focus the attention of others to address
and resolve changes that are central in their lives. These are some examples of cases where
adaptive leadership would be beneficial:
Student Organization
You are the president of Women in Business, a student organization at a large public university
whose mission is to prepare women for successful careers in business. Some members have
expressed that issues affecting transwomen should be discussed and explored; other group
members are not interested in adding this to the focus of the group. As the president, you must
guide the group to reach a resolution.
Company Merger
A midsize, family-owned paper company merges with another similar paper company. The merger
creates tensions between the employees regarding job titles and duties, different wage schedules,
overtime, and vacation pay. The new owners must bring these two groups of employees together to
have the company function successfully.
Merit Pay
In an established engineering company, a small group of young, high-achieving engineers wants to
change the way merit pay is given by removing seniority and years of service as part of the criteria.
Long-time employees are resisting the change. The management must find a way to address this
issue without alienating either group.
Health and Safety
You are mayor of a moderate-sized city that is home to a large prison where over 600 inmates have
tested positive for COVID-19. The number of new cases in the city is rising sharply. Sheltering in
place and wearing masks has been found to be the only way to curtail and control the virus’s
spread, but a large majority of city residents think the problem is the prison’s and refuse to obey
your recent orders to close all businesses in the city.
Source: Reprinted (adapted version) from The Leadership Quarterly, 19, R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, H. Zhao, and D. Henderson,
“Servant Leadership: Development of a Multidimensional Measure and Multi-Level Assessment,” pp. 161–177, Copyright (2008), with
permission from Elsevier.
In addition to the way Heifetz and his colleagues defined adaptive leadership, it has been
conceptualized as an element or subset of complexity leadership theory, a framework designed to
explain leadership for organizations of the 21st century that concentrate on knowledge or information as
a core commodity, rather than the production of goods as was prevalent in the industrial era (Uhl-Bien et
al., 2007). Complexity leadership theory (which includes administrative, adaptive, and enabling
leadership) focuses on strategies and behaviors that encourage learning, creativity, and adaptation in
complex organizational systems. Within this framework, adaptive leadership is described as a complex
process that emerges to produce adaptive change in a social system. It originates in struggles or
tensions among people over conflicting needs, ideas, and preferences. It is not conceptualized as a
person or a specific act, but rather is defined as leadership that seeks to emerge from a system, or a
“generative dynamic” (see Uhl-Bien et al., 2007, p. 299). Similarly, DeRue (2011) addresses adaptive
leadership as a process where individuals engage in repeated leading–following interactions that evolve
as group needs change, enabling groups to adapt and remain viable in dynamic contexts.
Adaptive leadership is a unique kind of leadership that focuses on the dynamics of mobilizing people to
address change. In the next section, we describe the various components of adaptive leadership and
discuss how each component contributes to the overall process of adaptive leadership.
A MODEL OF ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP
Figure 11.1 offers a visual representation of the major components of adaptive leadership and how they
fit together, including situational challenges, leader behaviors, and adaptive work. Heuristically, this
model provides a basis for clarifying the process of adaptive leadership as well as generating empirical
research to validate and refine the concepts and principles described by the model.
Situational Challenges
As illustrated on the left side of Figure 11.1, this practice of leadership requires that leaders address
three kinds of situational challenges: those that are primarily technical in nature, those that have both a
technical and adaptive dimension, and those that are primarily adaptive in nature. While addressing
technical challenges is important, adaptive leadership is concerned with helping people address
adaptive challenges.
Technical Challenges
Technical challenges are problems in the workplace, community, or self that are clearly defined, with
known solutions that can be implemented through existing organizational procedures. They are
problems that can be solved by experts or by those who have what Heifetz calls a “repertoire” of skills or
procedures based on current know-how. For technical challenges, people look to the leader for a
solution, and they accept the leader’s authority to resolve the problem. For example, if employees at a
tax accounting firm are frustrated about a newly adopted tax software program, the manager at the firm
can assess the software issues, identify the weaknesses and problems with the software, contact the
company that provided the software, and have the programs modified in accordance with the
accountants’ needs at the tax firm. In this example, the problem is identifiable, it has an achievable
solution, and the manager at the tax firm has the authority to address the problem through the accepted
structures and procedures of the organization. The employees accept that authority and look to the
manager to solve the technical problem.
Description
Figure 11.1 Model of Adaptive Leadership
Technical and Adaptive Challenges
Some challenges have both a technical and adaptive dimension. In this case, the challenges are clearly
defined but do not have distinct straightforward solutions within the existing organizational system. The
responsibility of tackling this type of challenge is shared between the leader and the people. The leader
may act as a resource for others and provide support, but the people need to do the work—they need to
learn to change and adapt. For example, if an urban hospital with a traditional approach to care (i.e.,
providers are the experts, and patients are the visitors) wanted to establish a patient-centered culture,
the goal could be clearly laid out. To reach the goal, the hospital leadership, through its hierarchical
authority, could provide in-service training on how to involve patients in their own care. New rules could
be designed to preserve patients’ personal routines, give them access to their own records, and give
them more control of their own treatment. However, the staff, doctors, patients, and family members
would need to accept the proposed change and learn how to implement it. Making the hospital a model
of patient-centered care would require a lot of work and adaptation on the part of many different people.
Adaptive Challenges
Central to the process of adaptive leadership are adaptive challenges, or problems that are not clear-cut
or easy to identify. They cannot be solved solely by the leader’s authority or expertise, or through the
normal ways of doing things in the organization. Adaptive challenges require that leaders encourage
others to define challenging situations and implement solutions. Not easy to tackle and often resisted,
adaptive challenges are difficult because they usually require changes in people’s priorities, beliefs,
roles, and values. An example of adaptive challenges involves the problems and concerns a family
confronts when placing a parent in hospice care. In a hospice, there is a great deal of uncertainty for
patients and families about how and when the patient will die, and how to best comfort the patient during
this time. While hospice workers can give support and informal feedback about the dying process, the
patient and families have to come to grips with how they want to approach the patient’s final days. What
does the impending loss mean? How can they prepare for it? How will they cope with the loss going
forward? In this context, those in the health care system act as leaders and mobilize the patient and
family members to address the many questions and concerns that surround the death of the family
member. How these hospice nurses, social workers, and staff communicate, demonstrate empathy, offer
support, and so on is important in this process of helping families to confront the complexities and
concerns of the impending loss.
Leader Behaviors
As shown in the middle of Figure 11.1, six leader behaviors, or activities, play a pivotal role in the
process of adaptive leadership. Based on the work of Heifetz and his colleagues (Heifetz, 1994; Heifetz
& Laurie, 1997), these behaviors are general prescriptions for leaders when helping others confront
difficult challenges and the inevitable changes that accompany them. Although there is a general order
as to which leader behavior comes first in the adaptive leadership process, many of these behaviors
overlap with each other and should be demonstrated by leaders at the same time. Taken together, these
leader behaviors suggest a kind of recipe for being an adaptive leader.
1. Get on the Balcony.
A prerequisite for the other adaptive leader behaviors, “getting on the balcony” is a metaphor for
stepping out of the fray and finding perspective in the midst of a challenging situation. It is an allusion to
a dance floor and that one needs to be above the dancing to understand what’s going on below. Being
on the balcony enables the leader to see the big picture—what is really happening. On the balcony, the
leader is momentarily away from the noise, activity, and chaos of a situation, and able to gain a clearer
view of reality. This behavior allows the leader to identify value and power conflicts among people, ways
they may be avoiding work, and other dysfunctional reactions to change (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997).
Getting on the balcony can include such things as taking some quiet time, forming a group of unofficial
advisers for alternative discussions about organizational issues, or simply attending meetings as an
observer. In this model, the adaptive leader is urged to step away from the conflict in order to see it fully,
but never to dissociate entirely from the conflict. Effective leaders are able to move back and forth as
participants and observers between the struggles of their people and the intentions of the organization
or community.
To understand what it means to stand on the balcony, imagine yourself as the principal of an elementary
school. From the balcony, you see all the pieces that go into educating your students: federal and state
requirements, teachers and staff, budgets, teacher evaluations, parents, and discipline, not to mention
the children themselves. From above, you can see how these issues relate to and affect one another,
and who is dancing with which partners, all while working toward the common goal of educating
children.
As another example, imagine you are a chief union negotiator who, in the midst of difficult labor talks,
steps away from the table for a moment to separate yourself from the emotion and intensity of the talks
and reflect on their goals. Once you feel you again have a grasp of the issues at hand, you can dive
directly back into negotiations.
In both of these examples, the leader takes time to see the big picture as an observer but also stays
engaged as a participant with the challenges people are confronting.
2. Identify the Adaptive Challenge.
In addition to getting on the balcony and observing the dynamics of the complex situations people face,
leaders must analyze and diagnose these challenges. Central to this process is differentiating between
technical and adaptive challenges. Failures in leadership often occur because leaders fail to diagnose
challenges correctly. The adaptive leadership process suggests that leaders are most effective using
adaptive leadership behaviors for adaptive challenges and technical leadership behaviors for technical
challenges. Approaching challenges with the wrong style of leadership is maladaptive.
If challenges are technical in nature, leaders can fix the problem with their own expertise. For example,
in a manufacturing environment, problems that arise in scheduling, product sales quotas, facility
expansion, or raising the minimum wage are all problems that leaders can use their authority to resolve.
However, it is essential that leaders also know when their authority is not sufficient or appropriate to
address a particular challenge.
When people’s beliefs, attitudes, and values are affected by a problem, leaders need to take an
adaptive approach. Determining if the challenge is an adaptive one requires the leader to determine
whether or not the challenge strikes at the core feelings and thoughts of others. Adaptive challenges are
usually value laden and stir up people’s emotions. Furthermore, if challenges are adaptive, they require
that people learn new ways of coping. Take the manufacturing environment discussed earlier: If another
company buys that manufacturing facility and the new owners implement production procedures and
standards that the facility’s workers are unfamiliar with, these changes will create adaptive challenges
for the workers. Identifying adaptive challenges means leaders need to focus their attention on problems
they cannot solve themselves and that demand collaboration between the leader and followers. For
adaptive challenges, leaders make themselves available to support others as they do the work they
need to do.
To more easily identify complex adaptive challenges and also distinguish them from technical
challenges, there are four archetypes or basic patterns in need of adaptive change to consider (Heifetz
et al., 2009).
Archetype 1: Gap Between Espoused Values and Behavior. This archetype is present when an
organization espouses, or claims to adhere to, values that aren’t in reality supported by its actions. For
example, a company that promotes itself as a family-friendly place to work but does not have a flexible
work policy, an extended maternity leave policy, or in-house childcare doesn’t have behaviors that match
the family-friendly image it promotes itself as having.
Archetype 2: Competing Commitments. When an organization has numerous commitments and
some come into conflict with each other, this archetype is in play. For example, a health and fitness
center wants to grow and expand its services but at the same time sees the best way to reduce costs is
by trimming the number of trainers and staff it employs.
Archetype 3: Speaking the Unspeakable. The phrases “sacred cow” and “elephant in the room” are
examples of this archetype; it occurs when there are radical ideas, unpopular issues, or conflicting
perspectives that people don’t dare address because of their sensitive or controversial nature. Speaking
out about these is seen as “risky.” Consider an organization with a well-liked, established owner who is
perceived by the employees as “over the hill” and not in touch with the current business climate, but no
one is willing to discuss the matter. It is easier to suffer the consequences of dated leadership than
confront and risk angering the owner.
Archetype 4: Work Avoidance. This archetype represents a situation where people avoid addressing
difficult issues by staying within their “comfort zone” or by using diversionary methods. For example,
coworkers at a company refuse to confront or discuss a very skilled employee who is not participating in
organizational planning because of serious concerns about institutional racism within the company. It is
easier to continue to do the same things and avoid the concerns of the disgruntled employee. Another
example is an ad agency that has a graphic designer who is not able to produce the quality of creative
work needed, so, rather than address the problem directly, the agency assigns that designer menial jobs
that are essentially busywork. It then hires a second graphic designer to do the more creative work
despite the cost and the fact that the agency doesn’t have enough work to justify two designers.
These four archetypes are representative of some of the common challenges that require adaptive
change. Although they do not describe every possible type of adaptive change, they are useful as
frames of reference when trying to identify adaptive challenges in a particular organizational setting.
3. Regulate Distress.
A third behavior, or activity, important for adaptive leaders is to regulate distress. Psychologically, we all
have a need for consistency—to keep our beliefs, attitudes, and values the same. In fact, it is quite
natural for individuals to be more comfortable when things are predictable and their way of doing things
stays the same. But adaptive challenges create the need to change, and the process of change creates
uncertainty and distress for people. Feeling a certain level of distress during change is inevitable and
even useful for most, but feeling too much distress is counterproductive and can be debilitating. The
challenge for a leader is to help others recognize the need for change but not become overwhelmed by
the need for the change itself. The adaptive leader needs to monitor the stress people are experiencing
and keep it within a productive range, or regulate it. The model suggests three ways that leaders can
maintain productive levels of stress.
Create a Holding Environment. This refers to establishing an atmosphere in which people can feel
safe tackling difficult problems, but not so safe that they can avoid the problem. The idea of a holding
environment has its roots in the field of psychotherapy where the counselor creates a therapeutic setting
and uses effective communication and empathy to provide a sense of safety and protection for the client
(Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; Modell, 1976; Winnicott, 1965). You can think of a holding environment in terms
of children learning to swim—the instructor is within a watchful distance, but allows the children to do the
hard work of overcoming their fears and learning to kick, breathe, and stroke in sync. A holding
environment is a structural, procedural, or virtual space formed by cohesive relationships between
people. It can be physical space, a shared language, common history, a deep trust in an institution and
its authority, or a clear set of rules and processes that allow groups to function with safety. As illustrated
in Figure 11.1, the holding environment represents the space where the work of adaptive leadership
gets played out. Within the holding environment, adaptive leaders use their leverage to help people
attend to the issues, to act as a reality test regarding information, to orchestrate conflicting perspectives,
and to facilitate decision making (Heifetz, 1994, p. 113).
Creating a holding environment also allows a leader to regulate the pressures people face when
confronting adaptive challenges. Heifetz often describes it as analogous to a pressure cooker, because
initially a leader turns up the heat on the issues. This gets dialogue started and also allows some of the
pressures from the issues to escape. If too much tension concerning issues is expressed, the holding
environment can become too intense and ineffective for addressing problems. However, without the
leader’s initial catalyst, little dialogue will transpire.
Similar to labor negotiations in organizations, the holding environment is the place where all parties
gather to begin talking to each other, define issues, and clarify competing interests and needs. If this
discussion is too heated, negotiations reach a quick impasse. However, as negotiation develops, newer
issues can be addressed. Over time, the holding environment provides the place where new contractual
relationships can be agreed upon and enacted.
Provide Direction, Protection, Orientation, Conflict Management, and Productive Norms. This
refers to specific ways leaders can help people manage the uncertainty and distress that accompany
adaptive work. They are prescribed behaviors for adaptive leaders.
Providing direction involves identifying the adaptive challenges that others face and then framing
these so they can be addressed. In difficult situations, it is not uncommon for people to be unclear
or confused about their goals. Sometimes the goal is unknown, sometimes it is obscure, and at
other times it is entangled with competing goals. By providing direction, the leader helps people feel
a sense of clarity, order, and certainty, reducing the stress people feel in uncertain situations.
Protection refers to a leader’s responsibility to manage the rate of adaptive change for people. It
includes monitoring whether the change is too much or too fast for people. Furthermore, it requires
monitoring external pressures people are experiencing and keeping these within a range they can
tolerate.
Orientation is the responsibility a leader has to orient people to new roles and responsibilities that
may accompany adaptive change. When a change requires adopting new values and acting in
accordance with those values, people may need to adopt entirely new roles within the organization.
Orientation is the process of helping people to find their identity within a changing system.
Conflict management refers to the leader’s responsibility to handle conflict effectively. Conflict is
inevitable in groups and organizations during adaptive challenges and presents an opportunity for
people to learn and grow. Although conflict can be uncomfortable, it is not necessarily unhealthy,
nor is it necessarily bad. The question is not “How can people avoid conflict and eliminate change?”
but rather “How can people manage conflict and produce positive change?”
Establishing productive norms is a responsibility of the adaptive leader. Norms are the rules of
behavior that are established and shared by group members but are not easily changed. When
norms are constructive, they have a positive influence on the progress of the group. However, when
norms are unproductive and debilitating, they can impede the group. A leader should pay close
attention to norms and challenge those that need to be changed and reinforce those that maximize
the group’s effectiveness and ability to adapt to change.
Collectively, these five prescribed behaviors provide a general blueprint for how adaptive leaders can
mitigate the frustrations people feel during adaptive change. While not inclusive, they highlight some of
the many important ways leaders can help people during the change process.
Regulating Personal Distress. This is another way leaders can maintain a productive level of stress
during adaptive change. As we discussed previously, change and growth within an organization do not
occur without uncertainty and stress. Because stress is inherent in change, adaptive leaders need to
withstand the pressures from those who want to avoid change and keep things the same. While
moderate amounts of tension are normal and necessary during change, too much or too little tension is
unproductive. Leaders need to keep people focused on the hard work they need to do and the tension
that accompanies that, while at the same time being sensitive to the very real frustrations and pain that
people feel when doing adaptive work.
To help others through the adaptive process, adaptive leaders need to make sure their own ideas,
opinions, and processes are well thought out. They must be strong and steady because people look to
them and depend on them for support in situations that can be very trying and painful. Adaptive leaders
need to be role models and exhibit confidence and the emotional capacity to handle conflict. This is not
a stress-free role. Adaptive leaders need to be willing to experience the frustrations and pain that people
feel during change but not to the extent that they lose their own sense of who they are as leaders.
An example of the demands of regulating personal distress can be seen in the leadership of a therapist
who runs a support group for high school students with substance use disorders. In her role as a group
facilitator, the therapist faces many challenges. She has to listen to students’ stories and the challenges
they face as they try to stay clean. She also has to push people to be honest about their successes and
failures regarding drug use. She cannot push so hard, however, that group members feel threatened,
stop communicating, or stop attending the group sessions. In the holding environment, she has to be
able to show nurturance and support, but not enable destructive behavior. The pain and frustration
people in treatment for addiction feel is tremendous, and the therapist has to be in touch with this pain
without losing her role as a therapist. Hearing stories of recovery and failed recovery can be
heartbreaking, while hearing success stories can be uplifting. Throughout all of this, the therapist needs
to monitor herself closely and control her own anxieties regarding recovery. Group members look to the
therapist for direction and support. They want the therapist to be strong, confident, and empathic.
Regulating her own stress is essential in order to make herself fully available to students who are
recovering from substance abuse disorders.
4. Maintain Disciplined Attention.
The fourth leader behavior prescribed by the adaptive leadership process is to maintain disciplined
attention. This means that the leader needs to encourage people to focus on the tough work they need
to do. This does not come easily; people naturally do not want to confront change, particularly when it is
related to changing their beliefs, values, or behaviors. It is common for all of us to resist change and
strive for a sense of balance and equilibrium in our day-to-day experiences. People do not like things
“out of sync,” so when their sense of balance is disrupted by the need to change, it is natural for them to
engage in avoidance behavior. This leader behavior is about helping people address change and not
avoid it.
Avoidance behaviors can take many forms. People can ignore the problem, blame the problem on the
authority, blame coworkers for the problem, attack those who want to address the problem, pretend the
problem does not exist, or work hard in areas unrelated to the problem. No matter the form of
avoidance, the leader’s task is to mobilize and encourage people to drop their defenses and openly
confront their problems. Adaptive leaders help people focus on issues. If some topics are deemed too
“hot” in the organization, the leader should support people in getting these topics on the agenda for
discussion. If some issues create deep divisions between people, the leader should provide a vessel of
safety where competing sides can address the issues without feeling as if the organization will explode.
If there is an “elephant in the room”—an issue that no one wants to address but is pivotal in making
change—the leader needs to nudge people to talk about it. Whatever the situation, the adaptive leader
gets people to focus, and to show disciplined attention to the work at hand.
An example of disciplined attention can be seen in how the director of a nursing home responds to the
members of a family who are struggling with their decision to move their 80-year-old mother into nursing
care. The mother has early signs of dementia, but has successfully lived alone since her husband died
10 years earlier. She prides herself on being able to cook, drive, and live independently. But her
forgetfulness and physical problems are worrisome to her two adult children who are very concerned
about their mother’s health and safety. The children know their mother could benefit from nursing care,
but they just cannot bring themselves to force their mother to move from her home to the care facility.
They say things like “Mom just doesn’t need it yet. We’ll just take her car keys away. She is so much
better than those people at the care facility. She won’t survive in a new environment. She just won’t be
herself if she’s not at their own home. We have the resources; we just don’t need to put her in there yet.”
The director of the nursing home frequently hears the arguments expressed by the children, and his
challenge is help them make the decision—a decision they are afraid of making and avoiding. He
consistently gives a listening ear and sets up multiple appointments for the children to visit the care
facility as well as meetings for the children to talk to staff members and other families who have parents
at the facility. Throughout all of these sessions, the director emphasizes the importance of the children
communicating their concerns. He lets them know that it is normal to not want to take a parent out of
their own home, and to want to think of a parent as independent and whole. He lets them know that
everyone has trouble accepting the failing health of a parent, and as difficult as this decision is, going
into the nursing care facility is a good and reasonable decision because the parent will be safer, receive
good care, and learn to thrive in her new home. In this example, the director is sensitive to the adaptive
challenges the children face, and he makes a point of “standing by” and giving guidance and support.
The director helps the children stay focused on the changes they need to make and mobilizes them to
confront the decisions they need to make.
5. Give the Work Back to the People.
People want leaders to provide some direction and structure to their work and want to feel secure in
what they are doing; they also want to actively participate in problem solving. Too much leadership and
authority can be debilitating to an organization, decrease people’s confidence to solve problems on their
own, and suppress their creative capacities. Overly directive leadership can result in people being
dependent on their leaders and inhibit them from doing adaptive work. Even though it makes people feel
comfortable and secure to have leaders tell them what to do, leaders need to learn ways to curtail their
influence and shift problem solving back to the people involved.
Leaders need to be aware of and monitor the impact they have on others. Giving work back to the
people requires leaders to be attentive to when they should drop back and let the people do the work
that they need to do. This can be a fine line; leaders have to provide direction, but they also have to say,
“This is your work—how do you think you want to handle it?” For adaptive leaders, giving work back to
the people means empowering people to decide what to do in circumstances where they feel uncertain,
expressing belief in their ability to solve their own problems, and encouraging them to think for
themselves rather than doing that thinking for them.
Summerhill, the famous boarding school on the east coast of England, provides a good example of
giving the work back to the people taking center stage. Summerhill is a self-governing, democratic
school where adults and students have equal status. Summerhill’s philosophy stresses that students
have the freedom to take their own path in life and develop their own interests so long as it does not
harm others. Classes are optional for students who have the freedom to choose what they do with their
time. The schedules and rules of the school are established in weekly group meetings at which all
participants have an equal vote. Summerhill’s leaders give the work of learning back to the students.
Instead of the teachers telling students what to study and learn, the students themselves make those
decisions within a supportive environment. It is an unusual model of education and not without its
problems, but it clearly demonstrates recognition of the need for students, and not their teachers, to
identify and define their goals and take responsibility for meeting those goals.
6. Protect Leadership Voices From Below.
This final leader behavior means that adaptive leaders have to be careful to listen and be open to the
ideas of people who may be at the fringe, marginalized, or even deviant within the group or
organization. This is a challenge because when the leader gives voice to an out-group member, it is
upsetting to the social equilibrium of the group. To be open to the ideas of low-status individuals, who
often may express themselves ineffectively, is also challenging because it is disruptive to the “normal”
way of doing things. Too often, leaders find it convenient to ignore the dissident, nonconforming voices
in an effort to maintain things as they are and keep things moving. Adaptive leaders should try to resist
the tendency to minimize or shut down minority voices for the sake of the majority. To give voice to
others requires that a leader relinquish some control, giving other individual members more control. This
is why it is a challenging process.
Protecting voices from below puts low-status individuals on equal footing with other members of the
group. It means the leader and the other people of the group give credence to the out-group members’
ideas and actions. When out-group members have a voice, they know their interests are being
recognized and that they can have an impact on the leader and the group. Giving them a voice allows
low-status members to be more involved, independent, and responsible for their actions. It allows them
to become more fully engaged in the adaptive work of the group, and they can feel like full members in
the planning and decision making of the group.
Consider a college social work class in which students are required to do a service-learning project. For
this project, one group chose to build a wheelchair ramp for an older woman in the community. In the
initial stages of the project, morale in the group was down because one group member (Alissa) chose
not to participate. Alissa said she was not comfortable using hand tools, and she chose not to do
manual labor. The other team members, who had been doing a lot of planning for the project, wanted to
proceed without her help. As a result, Alissa felt rejected and began to criticize the purpose of the
project and the personalities of the other team members. At that point, one of the group’s leaders
decided to start listening to Alissa’s concerns and learned that while Alissa could not work with her
hands, she had two other talents: She was good with music, and she made wonderful lunches.
Once the leader found this out, things started to change. Alissa started to participate. During the
construction of the ramp, Alissa kept up morale by playing each group member’s and the older woman’s
favorite music while they worked on the ramp. In addition, Alissa made sandwiches and provided drinks
that accommodated each of the group members’ unique dietary interests. By the last day, Alissa felt so
included by the group, and was praised for providing great food, that she joined in the manual labor and
began raking up trash around the ramp site. Although Alissa’s talents didn’t tie in directly with
constructing a ramp, she still contributed to building a successful team. Everybody was included and
useful in a community-building project that could have turned sour if the leader had not given voice to
Alissa’s concerns and talents.
Adaptive Work
As represented on the right side of the model of adaptive leadership (Figure 11.1), adaptive work is the
process toward which adaptive leaders direct their work. It is the focus and intended goal of adaptive
leadership. Adaptive work develops from the communication processes that occur between the leader
and followers but is primarily the work of followers. Ideally, it occurs within a holding environment where
people can feel safe as they confront possible changes in their roles, priorities, and values.
The model illustrates that the holding environment is the place where adaptive work is conducted. It is a
real or virtual space where people can address the adaptive challenges that confront them. Because the
holding environment plays a critical role in the adaptive process, leaders direct considerable energy
toward establishing and maintaining it.
While the term followers is used to depict individuals who are not the leader, it is important to note that
throughout most of the writing on adaptive leadership, the term is avoided, due to its implication of a
submissive role in relationship to the leader. In adaptive leadership, leaders do not use their authority to
control others; rather, leaders interact with people to help them do adaptive work. Followers is used in
the model simply to distinguish the specific individuals who are doing adaptive work.
An example of adaptive work can be seen at a fitness center where a fitness instructor is running a class
for a group of individuals who have had heart problems and struggle with being overweight. The goal of
the instructor is to provide a safe place where people can challenge themselves to do mundane training
exercises that will help them to lose weight and reduce their risk for health problems. Because the
people must change their lifestyles to live more healthfully, they must engage in adaptive work with the
support of the fitness instructor. Another example where adaptive work can be observed is in a public
elementary school where the principal is asking the teachers to adopt new Common Core standards but
the teachers, who have a proven record of success using their own student-centered curriculum, are
resisting. To help the teachers with the intended change, the principal sets up a series of 10 open faculty
meetings where teachers are invited to freely discuss their concerns about the new policies. The
meetings provide a holding environment where the teachers can confront their deeply held positions
regarding the usefulness and efficacy of standardized testing and what it will mean for them to have to
shift to Common Core standards. The principal’s role is to communicate in ways that support the
teachers in their adaptive work, and help shift values, beliefs, and perceptions to allow them to work
effectively under the new system.
HOW DOES ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP WORK?
Adaptive leadership is a complex process comprising multiple dimensions, including situational
challenges, leader behaviors, and adaptive work. The overriding focus of the process is to engage
individuals in doing adaptive work. This unique emphasis on mobilizing individuals (followers) to confront
adaptive challenges makes adaptive leadership very different from other traditional leadership
approaches that focus on leader traits (Chapter 2), skills (Chapter 3), behaviors (Chapter 4), and
authenticity (Chapter 9). Adaptive leadership centers on the adaptations required of people in response
to changing environments, and how leaders can support them during these changes.
As illustrated in Figure 11.2, the process of adaptive leadership works like this: First, the leader takes
time to step back from a challenging situation to understand the complexities of the situation and obtain
a fuller picture of the interpersonal dynamics occurring among the participants. Second, in any situation
or context where people are experiencing change, the leader makes an initial assessment to determine
if the change creates challenges that are technical or adaptive in nature. If the challenges are technical,
the leader addresses the problems with authority and expertise or through the rules and procedures of
the organization. If the challenges are adaptive, the leader engages in several specific leader behaviors
to move the adaptive process forward.
Description
Figure 11.2 The Adaptive Leadership Process
While the recipe for adaptive leadership comprises many leader behaviors and activities, there is no
particular order to the prescribed behaviors. Adaptive leadership incorporates many of these behaviors
simultaneously, and interdependently, with some of them being more important at the beginning of a
particular process and others at the end. Some important adaptive leader behaviors are regulating
distress, creating a holding environment, providing direction, keeping people focused on important
issues, empowering people, and giving voice to those who feel unrecognized or marginalized.
An example illustrating how the adaptive leadership process works can be seen in one university’s
handling of issues of freedom of speech on campus. Within the course of two years, the university had
three separate incidents related to freedom of speech: college football players kneeling in protest to
police violence toward people of color; an English Department lecturer harassing an undergraduate
member of Turning Point USA, an organization that is considered to be politically conservative and far
right; and an undergraduate student displaying White nationalist behavior.
The university’s leaders approached these freedom of speech issues as adaptive challenges. First, they
took the time to step back from each challenging situation to understand the complexities and obtain a
fuller picture of the interpersonal dynamics occurring among the students and stakeholders involved
(i.e., faculty, students, regents, parents, and political figures).
Second, the leaders made an initial assessment to determine if the challenges were technical or
adaptive in nature. “Freedom of speech controversies are considered adaptive challenges because they
tend to be unclear, require people to consider their values and beliefs, and [require people to] face
resistance” (Sunderman, Headrick, & McCain, in press).
To confront each issue, the administration incorporated adaptive behaviors. The university’s
administration demonstrated the behavior of getting on the balcony by hosting forums with faculty and
students to discuss their thoughts and feelings regarding freedom of speech issues. The forums allowed
university leaders to regulate distress by creating a space for people on campus to process their
emotions and fears.
Following the forums, the university conducted a system-wide survey regarding free speech and
campus climate with the Gallup organization to gain perspective and better understand the challenges.
After identifying the root issues, administrators decided to pursue a national search for a vice chancellor
of diversity and inclusion.
These efforts to give the work back to the people allowed university leaders to empower and educate
students, staff, and faculty to lead conversations and change. As universities make decisions in hopes
of promoting civil discourse and positive campus culture, it becomes important to consider students’
perspectives, which are often left out of conversations about free speech (Shapiro, 2018).
Complex campus issues that create disagreement and tension will undoubtedly continue to occur within
colleges and universities and their surrounding communities. Adaptive leaders can aid institutions of
higher education in doing the difficult and important work of taking perspective, empowering others on
their campuses to bring change, and protecting campus voices (Sunderman et al., in press).
Finally, another example of adaptive leadership in action is in the work of Ramalingam, Wild, and Ferrari
(2020), who describe the role of adaptive leadership in response to the coronavirus pandemic of 2019–
2020. The outbreak created a worldwide need for adaptive leadership. Leaders at the federal, state, and
local levels had to respond quickly to circumstances that changed every day. Decisions had to be made
based on available data, which weren’t always consistent, and information from many different spheres,
including health care, natural resource management, military planning, international development, and
humanitarian efforts. The collective ability to identify which interventions—or combination of
interventions—might work best and why, as well as to understand the impacts of these interventions,
was a major leadership challenge.
Overall, it is safe to say that adaptive leadership works because leaders are willing to engage in all of
these behaviors with the intention of helping followers do adaptive work.
STRENGTHS
In its present stage of development, adaptive leadership has multiple strengths. First, in contrast to
many other leadership theories, adaptive leadership takes a process approach to the study of
leadership. Consistent with the process definition of leadership discussed in Chapter 1, adaptive
leadership underscores that leadership is not a trait or characteristic of the leader, but rather a complex
transactional event that occurs between leaders and followers in different situations. The process
perspective highlights that leaders and followers mutually affect each other, making leadership an
interactive activity that is not restricted to only a formally designated leader. This approach emphasizes
that the phenomenon of leadership is a complex interactive process comprising multiple dimensions and
activities. An adaptive leader addresses problems by engaging followers who are close to the problem
in a system. These followers know the system because they exist within it every day and know what
may or may not work. Follower participation is an important component of adaptive leadership as the
approach recognizes that the leader does not have all the answers. The leader’s role is one of
facilitation rather than direction, and followers put processes in place to implement solutions (Nelson &
Squires, 2017).
Second, adaptive leadership stands out because it is follower centered. Adaptive leaders mobilize
people to engage in adaptive work. The adaptive approach to leadership is other directed, stressing
follower involvement and follower growth. A primary obligation of adaptive leaders is to provide
interventions to enable progress and regulate stress, and to create holding environments where others
can learn, grow, and work on the changes that are needed. This approach encapsulates leadership as
those behaviors and actions leaders need to engage in to give followers the greatest opportunity to do
adaptive work.
Third, adaptive leadership is unique in how it directs authority to help followers deal with conflicting
values that emerge in changing organizational environments and social contexts. Change and learning
are inherent in organizational life, and adaptive leadership focuses specifically on helping followers to
confront change and examine the emergence of new values that may accompany change. No other
leadership approach holds as a central purpose to help followers confront their personal values and
adjust these as needed in order for change and adaptation to occur.
From the perspective of Uhl-Bien and Arena (2018) and their work on complexity theory, the
requirement for adaptive leadership often emerges from the tension between an organization’s need to
innovate and its need to produce. Innovative leaders propose new ideas that challenge the status quo
and strain the current operating system. Resistance to change often occurs when followers realize that
implementing these new ideas diverges from the current mission of the organization. It is this
organizational resistance that adaptive leadership can address.
Another strength of adaptive leadership is that it provides a prescriptive approach to leadership that is
useful and practical. In their writings, Heifetz and his colleagues identify many things leaders can do to
facilitate adaptive leadership. The leader behaviors in Figure 11.1 are prescriptions for what an adaptive
leader should do. For example, “get on the balcony,” “regulate distress,” and “give the work back to the
people” are all prescriptive behaviors leaders can use to mobilize followers to do the work they need to
do to adapt or change. In a general sense, even the model is prescriptive. It suggests that followers
should learn to adapt and leaders should set up a context where this is most likely to occur. In short,
adaptive leadership provides a recipe for what leaders and followers should do to facilitate adaptive
change. It describes the kind of work (i.e., technical or adaptive) that followers should address and then
the behaviors leaders should employ to help them accomplish this work.
Adaptive leadership’s prescriptive nature is of value as organizations are faced with increasing levels of
disruptive change that challenge organizational structures, and they must develop an adaptive response
to address these challenges. Because adaptive leadership is not a “top-down” approach, new order
emerges when networks of people, technology, information, and resources combine to solve problems
(Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2017). With its emphasis on collaboration, adaptive leadership is especially
applicable to complex organizational problems (Nelson & Squires, 2017).
Finally, adaptive leadership makes a unique contribution to the field of leadership studies by identifying
the concept of a holding environment as an integral part of the leadership process. Few leadership
theories discuss how leaders are responsible for creating a safe environment for followers to address
difficult issues. The holding environment can be physical, virtual, or relational, but most important, it is
an atmosphere where people feel safe tackling difficult issues. It is a place where leaders get a dialogue
started, but do not let it become too heated or explosive. Although abstract, the concept of a holding
environment can be easily visualized and is useful for anyone wanting to demonstrate adaptive
leadership.
CRITICISMS
In addition to its strengths, adaptive leadership has several weaknesses. First, very little empirical
research has been conducted to test the claims of adaptive leadership theory even though the
conceptual framework for this approach was set forth more than 20 years ago in Heifetz’s Leadership
Without Easy Answers (1994). Originally intended as a practical framework for theory building, adaptive
leadership is based on ideas and assumptions, but not on established research. Without evidence-
based support for the tenets of the model, the ideas and principles set forth on adaptive leadership
should be viewed cautiously. Recently, however, preliminary research that aims to provide an
evidentiary basis for the basic assumptions and theoretical tenets of the model has begun to emerge
(see Adams, Bailey, Anderson, & Galanos, 2013; Benzie, Pryce, & Smith, 2017; Corazzini et al., 2014;
Gilbert, 2013; Hlalele, Manicom, Preece, & Tsotetsi, 2015; Klau & Hufnagel, 2016; Mugisha & Berg,
2017; Preece, 2016). Regarding measurement of adaptive leadership, some preliminary work on
adaptive performance has been done that addresses solving problems creatively; dealing with uncertain
or unpredictable work situations; learning new tasks, technologies, and procedures; and handling work
stress (Marques-Quinteiro, Ramos-Villagrasa, Passos, & Curral, 2015).
Second, conceptualization of the process of adaptive leadership needs further refinement. Adaptive
leadership was designed intentionally as a practical approach to leadership and is composed of a series
of prescriptions for leaders to help people engage in adaptive work. However, the major factors in the
adaptive process and the way these factors relate to one another to facilitate adaptive work are not
clearly delineated. Figure 11.1 provides a “first attempt” at modeling the phenomenon of adaptive
leadership, but much more needs to be done to clarify the essential factors in the model, the empirical
relationships among these factors, and the process through which these factors lead to adaptive change
within groups and organizations.
Third, adaptive leadership can be criticized for being too wide-ranging and abstract. For example, the
approach suggests that leaders should “identify your loyalties,” “mobilize the system,” “name the
default,” “hold steady,” “act politically,” “anchor yourself,” and many more behaviors that were not
discussed in this chapter. Interpreting these prescriptions and their relationship to being an adaptive
leader can be overwhelming because of the breadth and wide-ranging nature of these prescriptions. In
addition, the recommended leader behaviors such as “give the work back to the people” often lack
specificity and conceptual clarity. Without clear conceptualizations of recommended behaviors, it is
difficult to know how to analyze these in research or implement them in practice. As a result, leaders
may infer their own conceptualizations of these prescriptions, which may vary widely from what Heifetz
and his colleagues intended.
Fourth, adaptive leadership can be uncomfortable for followers since it encourages conflict. Although
the concept of a “holding environment” is central in the theory where it is safe to voice concerns and
explore solutions, it is not clear how to keep the environment safe. Those who question the leadership
may be penalized for their views. The theory needs to address how to guard against manipulation by an
autocratic leader (Nelson & Squires, 2017).
Finally, from a theoretical perspective, the adaptive leadership framework hints at but does not directly
explain how adaptive leadership incorporates a moral dimension. Adaptive leadership focuses on how
people evolve and grow through change. It implies that the evolution of one’s values leads to a greater
common good, but the way the evolution of values leads to a greater common good is not fully
explicated. It advocates mobilizing people to do adaptive work but does not elaborate or explain how
doing adaptive work leads to socially useful outcomes. The model acknowledges the importance of
promoting values such as equality, justice, and community, but the link between adaptive work and
achieving those social values is not clear.
APPLICATION
How can adaptive leadership be applied to real-life situations? There are several ways. On an individual
level, adaptive leadership provides a conceptual framework made up of a unique set of constructs that
help us determine what type of challenges we face (e.g., technical versus adaptive) and strategies for
managing them (e.g., establishing a holding environment). Individuals can easily integrate these
constructs into their own practice of leadership. Furthermore, it is an approach to leadership that people
can apply in a wide variety of settings, including family, school, work, community, and society.
Figure 11.3 Adaptive Leadership Framework Developed by Heifetz and Linsky
Sources: Adapted from “Finding Your Way Through EOL Challenges in the ICU Using Adaptive
Leadership Behaviours: A Qualitative Descriptive Case Study,” by J. A. Adams, D. E. Bailey Jr., R. A.
Anderson, and M. Thygeson, 2013, Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 29, pp. 329–336; and
“Adaptive Leadership and the Practice of Medicine: A Complexity-Based Approach to Reframing the
Doctor-Patient Relationship,” by M. Thygeson, L. Morrissey, and V. Ulstad, 2010, Journal of Evaluation
in Clinical Practice, 16, pp. 1009–1015.
On the organizational level, adaptive leadership can be used as a model to explain and address a
variety of challenges that are ever present during change and growth. Consultants have applied
adaptive leadership at all levels in many different kinds of organizations. In particular, it has been an
approach to leadership of special interest to people in nonprofits, faith-based organizations, and health
care.
At this point in the development of adaptive leadership, the context in which most of the research has
been conducted is health care. For example, one group of researchers suggests that adaptive
leadership can improve the practice of medicine (Thygeson, Morrissey, & Ulstad, 2010). They contend
that health professionals who practice from an adaptive leadership perspective would view patients as
complex adaptive systems who face both technical and adaptive challenges (Figure 11.3). Overall, they
claim the adaptive leadership approach has promise to make health care more efficient, patient-
centered, and sustainable.
Eubank, Geffken, Orzano, and Ricci (2012) used adaptive leadership as the overarching framework to
guide the curriculum they developed for a family medicine residency program. They argue that if
physicians practice the behaviors promoted in adaptive leadership (e.g., get on the balcony, identify
adaptive challenges, or regulate distress), they can acquire the process skills that are necessary to
implement and sustain true patient-centered care and healing relationships. Furthermore, to assist
patients who are suffering, they contend that physicians need more than technical problem-solving
competencies. Physicians also need adaptive skills that will enable them to help patients process and
learn to live with the challenges resulting from changes in their health and well-being.
In two separate case studies, researchers found adaptive leadership could be used to help patients and
family members confront health care challenges. Using the adaptive leadership framework, Adams,
Bailey, Anderson, and Thygeson (2013) identified nurse and physician behaviors that can facilitate the
transition from curative to palliative care by helping family members do the adaptive work of letting go.
Similarly, Adams, Bailey, Anderson, and Galanos (2013) found adaptive leadership principles were
useful in helping family members of patients in hospital intensive care units come to terms with loss and
change, and make decisions consistent with the patient’s goals.
In summary, there are many applications for adaptive leadership, on both the personal and
organizational level, as well as in the research environment. While further research needs to be done to
support the tenets of adaptive leadership, it is clearly a leadership approach that can be utilized in many
settings.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
This section provides three case studies (Cases 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3) from very different contexts where
adaptive leadership is present to a degree. The first case describes the challenges faced by two editors
of a high school newspaper who wanted to write about lessening the stigma of mental illness. The
second case is about how two co-captains tried to change the culture of their college Ultimate Frisbee
team. The third case describes how the leadership of a financially struggling small college dealt with the
possibility of having to close. At the end of each case, questions are provided to help you explore
dimensions of adaptive leadership and how it can be utilized.
Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness
Madeline Halpert and Eva Rosenfeld had three things in common: They were on the high school
newspaper staff, they both suffered from depression, and until they shared their experiences with each
other, both felt the isolation of the stigma that comes with suffering from mental illness.
The two student editors knew they were far from the only ones in their high school who experienced
these challenges and, in a concerted effort to support others and lessen the stigma of mental illness,
decided to write an in-depth feature on the topic for their student newspaper. Recent cases of school
shootings had brought mental illness in teens to the forefront, and evidence shows that depression is a
major cause of suicide in young people. Yet, the strong stigma that surrounds depression and mental
illness often isolates those who suffer from it. The purpose of Eva and Madeline’s feature was to open
the dialogue and end the stigma. They interviewed a number of teens from schools in the surrounding
area who agreed to use their real names and share their personal stories about mental illness, including
depression, eating disorders, and homelessness. The student editors even obtained waivers from the
subjects’ parents giving them permission to use the stories. However, their stories never made it to print.
While they were putting the story together, their school’s principal called them into her office and told
them about a former college football player from the area who struggled with depression and would be
willing to be interviewed. The editors declined, not wanting to replace the deeply personal articles about
their peers with one from someone removed from the students. The principal then told them she
wouldn’t support printing the stories. She objected to the use of students’ real names, saying she feared
potential personal repercussions such as bullying or further mental health problems that publishing such
an article could have for those students. District officials stood by the principal’s decision to halt printing
of the piece, saying it was the right one to protect the students featured in the article.
This move surprised the two student editors because they felt that their school had a very tolerant
atmosphere, which included offering a depression awareness group. “We were surprised that the
administration and the adults who advocated for mental health awareness were the ones standing in the
way of it,” they wrote. “By telling us that students could not talk openly about their struggles, they
reinforced the very stigma we were trying to eliminate.”
Instead, the two editors penned an op-ed piece, “Depressed, but Not Ashamed,” which was published in
the New York Times. The article discussed their dismay with having the articles halted by school
administrators, an act that they believe further stigmatized those with mental illnesses.
“By interviewing these teenagers for our newspaper, we tried—and failed—to start small in the fight
against stigma. Unfortunately, we’ve learned this won’t be easy. It seems that those who are charged
with advocating for our well-being aren’t ready yet to let us have an open and honest dialogue about
depression,” they wrote.
The op-ed piece generated a response—and, interestingly, a dialogue—about the topic.
The two student editors were subsequently interviewed on the National Public Radio show Weekend
Edition (2014). In that interview, the editors acknowledged that they had experienced mostly positive
reactions to their piece, with more than 200 comments after the initial publication. Many of those
comments said the article resonated with readers and gave them the courage to talk to someone about
their struggles with mental illness in a way they hadn’t before.
“And I think, most importantly, it’s opening a dialogue,” said one of the editors in the interview. “There
were negative comments. There were positive comments. But the most important thing is that it’s so
amazing to see people discussing this and finally opening up about it.”
Questions
1. How do you define the problem the editors were trying to address? Was this a technical or an
adaptive challenge?
2. What is your reaction to what the principal did in this situation? How do you think what she did fits in
with providing direction, protection, orientation, conflict management, and productive norms?
3. Describe the holding environment in this case. Was the holding environment sufficient to meet the
adaptive challenges in this situation? How would you improve it?
4. Based on Figure 11.1, discuss who were the adaptive leaders in this case. Which of the leader
behaviors (get on the balcony, identify adaptive challenges, regulate distress, etc.) did these
leaders exhibit?
Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus
Dominic Santana is a serious Ultimate player. He became involved in the sport—which is a bit like
soccer, only with a flying disc—in middle school and played competitively in high school. When he went
to college at a small liberal arts school in the Pacific Northwest, he was excited to find the school had an
Ultimate team. His excitement quickly turned to dismay when he found the team members were more
interested in partying than playing.
Dominic remembers this about his first year on the team: “The team really had this sort of fraternity
culture in that there was light hazing, drinking was a priority, and tournaments were about parties, not
competition. The team threw a lot of parties and had this reputation for exclusivity.” Even the team’s
name, Bacchus (the Roman god of wine and drunkenness), reflected this culture.
Dominic found a like-minded soul in his teammate Harrison, and together they sought to turn the team
into a program that operated on a more competitive level. The two were chosen as co-captains and
began to share their deeper knowledge of the sport with the team. They also communicated their
aspirations for success. This flew in the face of some team members who were there for the parties. As
one player put it, “Either you were down with it or you decided it was too intense and you left the club.”
The two captains knew that the team’s culture wasn’t going to change just because they wanted it to.
They also knew that they couldn’t be captains, coach the team, and be players at the same time. They
began taking a number of steps to help the team change its own culture.
First, they brought in Mario O’Brien, a well-known Ultimate coach, to help guide the team and teach the
players skills and strategy. The team had had other coaches in the past, but none of those had the
knowledge, experience, or reputation that O’Brien did.
“That really took some forethought,” says a player, “to be able to step back and say, ‘What does this
team really need to become a strong program?’ And then making a move to bring in someone of
O’Brien’s stature.”
After a few weeks of practice with O’Brien, the captains and coach organized a team dinner. Before the
dinner they asked each player to anonymously submit in writing what he thought of the team and what
he wanted to see the team be. “There were no rules—just say what you need to say,” says a player.
Each submission was read aloud and discussed by team members.
“No one was put in the position of having to publicly speak out and be embarrassed in front of the
others,” says a player. “We came out of that meeting more together, more bonded as a team. We
hashed out a lot of issues, and came to the realization that we were looking for the same goals. The
process helped filter out those that weren’t as committed to those goals, but not in a confrontational
way.”
The goals agreed to at that dinner meeting were for the team to do well enough at the sectional
competition to obtain a berth at the national collegiate competition. But the team had a number of
inexperienced players, which sometimes caused stress, frustration, and friction. The captains continued
to have multiple meetings to talk about concerns, discussed the team’s goals before and after each
practice, and organized social events (with a minimum of drinking) where team members engaged in
activities together other than playing Ultimate. More experienced players began mentoring the newer
players to help improve their skills. Even Harrison, who was an exceptional offensive player, put himself
on the defensive line to help improve those players’ skills. While it wasn’t optimum for his own
enjoyment and playing abilities, he felt it was needed to help improve the team.
Bacchus reached its goals two years later; it came in second at sectionals and earned a spot in the
national competition. After the team completed its last game at nationals, Dominic and Harrison
gathered the team members together in a circle. “We accomplished something more than being here
today,” Dominic said. “We’ve become a family with goals, and with respect for one another and for our
game. And that’s a better victory than any other.”
Questions
1. What changes were Dominic and Harrison trying to make? How did these changes affect the
beliefs, attitudes, or values of the players?
2. Were the challenges the team faced technical, technical and adaptive, or adaptive? What examples
can you give to explain your answer?
3. Citing examples, explain how the captains engaged in each of these adaptive leader behaviors: (1)
get on the balcony, (2) identify adaptive challenges, (3) regulate distress, (4) maintain disciplined
attention, (5) give the work back to the people, and (6) protect leadership voices from below.
4. Describe the holding environment that the co-captains created for the team. Do you think it was
successful? Why or why not?
Case 11.3 Agonizing Options for Marlboro College
To close or not to close? This is the question confronting many small colleges in the United States.
A number of factors have created these dire circumstances. First, student enrollment in higher education
across the United States has declined due to a strong economy (Nadworny & Larkin, 2019). Second,
states are no longer funding higher education to help subsidize costs, so institutions are more reliant on
the tuition dollars of enrolled students. As a result, tuition at private colleges increased by more than
29% from 2008 to 2018 (Hess, 2019). Third, the coronavirus pandemic in 2019–2020 resulted in
increased online education offerings, making students second-guess the need for a residential, small-
college experience. Finally, the number of high school graduates has plateaued, making the landscape
for interested college applicants highly competitive.
These factors have resulted in sizeable drops in enrollment at many schools. Low enrollment means
less revenue, and that decline has forced colleges to make difficult decisions, like choosing to cut staff
and faculty to make up for budget deficits (Harlow, 2019) or simply making the choice to close their
doors (Jaschik, 2019).
Marlboro College, a small liberal arts college in rural Vermont, recently faced the decision of whether or
not it should continue to operate as an institution of higher education. Marlboro served a specific type of
student—those who wanted to create their own academic plan, to graduate having written the
equivalent of a master’s thesis, and to have intentional interaction with faculty (ratio 7:1) (Zahneis,
2019). Was Marlboro’s philosophy academic utopia or sadly doomed to fail? To the students who found
Marlboro, it was an academic dream, but with the myriad of factors impacting its enrollment, staying
open was becoming a harder reality.
Marlboro president Kevin F. F. Quigley wanted to explore options rather than simply closing. He cared
deeply about Marlboro and did not want it to fail. To that end, he initiated a Strategic Options Task
Force, comprised of the board chair, the president, four trustees, two faculty members, and one student,
to review the options for Marlboro (Marlboro College, 2019). Among the questions the team investigated
included these: Could the campus still operate, but as a branch campus of another institution? Would
there be a way to ensure current students didn’t have a break in their academic journey? How would a
campus closure impact the small town (also called Marlboro) in which the college resides? What would
happen to the history and values of the school? How would students, faculty, and alumni handle a
change that would most certainly impact the identification they had with the school?
As the school entered the 2019–2020 academic year, it became clear that Marlboro, at best, could only
remain open for a few more years (Audette, 2019b). In collaboration with the task force, President
Quigley put out a call to other institutions to see if they wanted to partner with the college, ultimately
talking to 10 (Audette, 2019a).
The task force narrowed the options, landing on the University of Bridgeport, the only partnership that
would allow Marlboro to maintain its rural campus. Marlboro signed a letter of intent with Bridgeport, a
vocationally oriented institution that focuses on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and
enrolls 5,000 students annually, in late July. But it was not to be. Negotiations between Marlboro and
Bridgeport broke off in September 2019 (Zahneis, 2019).
Surprisingly, in November 2019, a new deal was reached. Marlboro and Emerson College in Boston
announced that there would be a partnership between the two institutions (Zahneis, 2019). The
agreement would wind down operations at Marlboro College at the end of the 2020 school year, with the
opportunity for all remaining students to transfer to Emerson College in Boston to finish their studies with
their current tuition packages. Emerson agreed to hire all Marlboro’s tenure and tenure-track faculty and
accept any current Marlboro student, honoring Marlboro’s current tuition rate if the students did not
change majors. All other positions at Marlboro would cease to exist at the end of the academic year. In
this process, Emerson received a transfer of assets from Marlboro, including a $30 million endowment
and $10 million in buildings. Emerson College indicated that the Marlboro campus would close, and that
it had no interest in having a campus in Marlboro (Audette, 2019a).
Many were surprised by the announcement. President Quigley said negotiations with Emerson had
been intentionally kept under wraps. “Since the collapse of the talks with Bridgeport in the middle of
September, my community has really been on pins and needles, waiting for the shoe to drop,” he said.
“We changed how we talked about it on campus and who was involved in the process, so we had a
tighter circle of people involved. There were really no updates to the community” (Zahneis, 2019).
The move created a mix of feelings among Marlboro’s students and alumni. A previous Marlboro faculty
member felt the situation was mishandled, saying, “All of this has taken place through secret
negotiations. Nobody knew what was happening” (Zahneis, 2019). This sentiment was also expressed
by the residents of the town of Marlboro, many of whom were employed by the college.
As soon as word became more public, one alumnus attempted to buy the institution with plans to have it
run by alumni sharing (Zahneis, 2019). Through Facebook, a large following of alumni pledged to quit
their jobs, take pay cuts, and help to rebuild their alma mater. They felt as though campus leadership did
not think about all the alternatives to the campus closure. But, the agreement with Emerson was
binding, and the university needed to move forward with the plan.
Many faculty and alumni were disheartened by the course of action, and to help ease fears, Marlboro
students and faculty made a number of visits to Emerson (Marlboro College Board of Trustees, 2019) to
ensure that the Emerson experience would fit with the Marlboro philosophy. Current students have
expressed a sense of unity over the situation. One shared, “I’m pretty optimistic about the merger. We
recognize that it’s the best of a bad situation” (Zahneis, 2019).
At the same time, however, there was considerable concern by residents as to what would happen to
the college’s campus located in a prominent part of the town. To address that, Marlboro College
established the Marlboro Campus Working Group, comprised of Marlboro alumni, trustees, staff, faculty,
students, and a representative from the town of Marlboro, to seek proposals “for endeavors that would
benefit the community and make productive use of the Marlboro campus” (Audette, 2020).
Questions
1. What were the competing commitments Marlboro’s president was trying to navigate?
2. Would you describe the work of Marlboro’s president as adaptive leadership? Why or why not?
3. Which of the following leader behaviors did the president utilize: (1) get on the balcony, (2) identify
adaptive challenges, (3) regulate distress, (4) maintain disciplined attention, (5) give the work back
to the people, (6) protect leadership voices from below? Provide an example of each.
4. Do you think there is a different course of action the college should take to resolve this challenge?
Why or why not?
5. If you were the president of Marlboro College, how could you have created a holding environment
for the students, faculty, and townspeople of Marlboro?
6. Adaptive leadership is about helping followers address value struggles. Who in the case is
struggling, and what is their struggle?
—Jenny Steiner, PhD, University of Minnesota
Leadership Instrument
To assist you in understanding the process of adaptive leadership and what your own style might be, the
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire is included in this section. This questionnaire provides 360-degree,
or multirater, feedback about your leadership. The Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire comprises 30
items that assess the six dimensions of adaptive leadership discussed earlier in this chapter: get on the
balcony, identify the adaptive challenge, regulate distress, maintain disciplined attention, give the work
back to the people, and protect leadership voices from below. The results you obtain on this
questionnaire will provide you information on how others view you and how you view yourself on these
six dimensions of adaptive leadership.
Adaptive leadership is a complex process, and taking this questionnaire will help you understand the
theory of adaptive leadership as well as your own style of adaptive leadership.
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to identify your adaptive leadership strengths and
weaknesses.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains items that assess different dimensions of adaptive
leadership and will be completed by someone who knows you (coworkers, friends, members of a
group you belong to).
1. Have 1 individual fill out the assessment regarding your leadership
2. Have the individual indicate the degree to which they agree with each of the 30 statements
below regarding your leadership by selecting the number from the scale that they believe
most accurately characterizes their response to the statement. There are no right or wrong
responses.
Key: 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
1. When difficulties emerge in our organization, this leader is good at
stepping back and assessing the dynamics of the people involved.
1 2 3 4 5
2. When events trigger strong emotional responses among employees, this
leader uses their authority as a leader to resolve the problem.
1 2 3 4 5
3. When people feel uncertain about organizational change, they trust that
this leader will help them work through the difficulties.
1 2 3 4 5
4. In complex situations, this leader gets people to focus on the issues they
are trying to avoid.
1 2 3 4 5
5. When employees are struggling with a decision, this leader tells them
what they think they should do.
1 2 3 4 5
6. During times of difficult change, this leader welcomes the thoughts of
group members with low status.
1 2 3 4 5
7. In difficult situations, this leader sometimes loses sight of the “big
picture.”
1 2 3 4 5
8. When people are struggling with value questions, this leader reminds
them to follow the organization’s policies.
1 2 3 4 5
9. When people begin to be disturbed by unresolved conflicts, this leader
encourages them to address the issues.
1 2 3 4 5
10. During organizational change, this leader challenges people to
concentrate on the “hot” topics.
1 2 3 4 5
11. When employees look to this leader for answers, they encourage them
to think for themselves.
1 2 3 4 5
12. Listening to group members with radical ideas is valuable to this leader. 1 2 3 4 5
13. When this leader disagrees with someone, they have difficulty listening
to what the person is really saying.
1 2 3 4 5
14. When others are struggling with intense conflicts, this leader steps in to
resolve the differences.
1 2 3 4 5
15. This leader has the emotional capacity to comfort others as they work
through intense issues.
1 2 3 4 5
16. When people try to avoid controversial organizational issues, this leader
brings these conflicts into the open.
1 2 3 4 5
17. This leader encourages their employees to take initiative in defining and
solving problems.
1 2 3 4 5
18. This leader is open to people who bring up unusual ideas that seem to
hinder the progress of the group.
1 2 3 4 5
19. In challenging situations, this leader likes to observe the parties involved
and assess what’s really going on.
1 2 3 4 5
20. This leader encourages people to discuss the “elephant in the room.” 1 2 3 4 5
21. People recognize that this leader has confidence to tackle challenging
problems.
1 2 3 4 5
22. This leader thinks it is reasonable to let people avoid confronting difficult
issues.
1 2 3 4 5
23. When people look to this leader to solve problems, they enjoy providing
solutions.
1 2 3 4 5
24. This leader has an open ear for people who don’t seem to fit in with the
rest of the group.
1 2 3 4 5
25. In a difficult situation, this leader will step out of the dispute to gain
perspective on it.
1 2 3 4 5
26. This leader thrives on helping people find new ways of coping with
organizational problems.
1 2 3 4 5
27. People see this leader as someone who holds steady in the storm. 1 2 3 4 5
28. In an effort to keep things moving forward, this leader lets people avoid
issues that are troublesome.
1 2 3 4 5
29. When people are uncertain about what to do, this leader empowers
them to decide for themselves.
1 2 3 4 5
30. To restore equilibrium in the organization, this leader tries to neutralize
comments of out-group members.
1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
Get on the Balcony—This score represents the degree to which you are able to step back and
see the complexities and interrelated dimensions of a situation.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 1, 19, and 25 and the reversed (R) score values for 7 and 13 (i.e., change 1 to 5,
2 to 4, 4 to 2, and 5 to 1, with 3 remaining unchanged).
____ 1 ____ 7(R) ____ 13(R) ____ 19 ____ 25 ____ Total (Get on the Balcony)
Identify the Adaptive Challenge—This score represents the degree to which you recognize
adaptive challenges and do not respond to these challenges with technical leadership.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 20 and 26 and the reversed (R) score values for 2, 8, and 14 (i.e., change 1 to 5,
2 to 4, 4 to 2, and 5 to 1, with 3 remaining unchanged).
____ 2(R) ____ 8(R) ____ 14(R) ____ 20 ____ 26 ____ Total (Identify the Adaptive
Challenge)
Regulate Distress—This score represents the degree to which you provide a safe environment
in which others can tackle difficult problems and to which you are seen as confident and calm in
conflict situations.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 3, 9, 15, 21, and 27.
____ 3 ____ 9 ____ 15 ____ 21 ____ 27 ____ Total (Regulate Distress)
Maintain Disciplined Attention—This score represents the degree to which you get others to
face challenging issues and not let them avoid difficult problems.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 4, 10, and 26 and the reversed (R) score values for 22 and 28 (i.e., change 1 to
5, 2 to 4, 4 to 2, and 5 to 1, with 3 remaining unchanged).
____ 4 ____ 10 ____ 16 ____ 22(R) ____ 28(R) ____ Total (Maintain Disciplined Attention)
Give the Work Back to the People—This score is the degree to which you empower others to
think for themselves and solve their own problems.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 11, 17, and 29 and the reversed (R) score values for 5 and 23 (i.e., change 1 to
5, 2 to 4, 4 to 2, and 5 to 1, with 3 remaining unchanged).
____ 5(R) ____ 11 ____ 17 ____ 23(R) ____ 29 ____ Total (Give the Work Back to the
People)
Protect Leadership Voices From Below—This score represents the degree to which you are
open and accepting of unusual or radical contributions from low-status group members.
To arrive at this score:
Sum items 6, 12, 18, and 24 and the reversed (R) score value for 30 (i.e., change 1 to 5, 2
to 4, 4 to 2, and 5 to 1, with 3 remaining unchanged).
____ 6 ____ 12 ____ 18 ____ 24 ____ 30(R) ____ Total (Protect Leadership Voices From
Below)
Scoring Interpretation
High range: A score between 21 and 25 means others find you are strongly inclined to
exhibit this adaptive leadership behavior.
Moderately high range: A score between 16 and 20 means others find you moderately
exhibit this adaptive leadership behavior.
Moderate low range: A score between 11 and 15 means others find you at times exhibit this
adaptive leadership behavior.
Low range: A score between 5 and 10 means others find you are seldom inclined to exhibit
this adaptive leadership behavior.
This questionnaire measures adaptive leadership assessing six components of the process: get
on the balcony, identify the adaptive challenge, regulate distress, maintain disciplined attention,
give the work back to the people, and protect leadership voices from below. By completing the
questionnaire yourself and comparing your scores on each of these components, you can
determine which are your stronger and which are your weaker components in each category.
There are no “perfect” scores for this questionnaire. While it is confirming when others see you in
the same way as you see yourself, it is also beneficial to know when they see you differently.
This assessment can help you understand those dimensions of your adaptive leadership that are
strong and dimensions of your adaptive leadership you may seek to improve.
Summary
Adaptive leadership is about helping people change and adjust to new situations. Originally formulated
by Heifetz (1994), adaptive leadership conceptualizes the leader not as one who solves problems for
people, but rather as one who encourages others to do the problem solving. Adaptive leadership
occupies a unique place in the leadership literature. While the merits of the approach are well
recognized, the theoretical conceptualizations of adaptive leadership remain in the formative stages.
While the name of this approach, adaptive leadership, makes one think it is concerned with how leaders
adapt, it is actually more about the adaptations of followers. Adaptive leadership is defined as “the
practice of mobilizing people to tackle tough challenges and thrive” (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 14).
Consistent with complexity theory, adaptive leadership is about leader behaviors that encourage
learning, creativity, and adaptation by followers in complex situations.
This chapter offers a model of the major components of adaptive leadership and how they fit together,
including situational challenges, leader behaviors, and adaptive work (Figure 11.1). Leaders confront
three kinds of situational challenges (technical, technical and adaptive, and adaptive); adaptive
leadership is concerned with helping people address adaptive challenges. The six leader behaviors that
play a major role in the process are (1) get on the balcony, (2) identify adaptive challenges, (3) regulate
distress, (4) maintain disciplined attention, (5) give the work back to the people, and (6) protect
leadership voices from below. These six behaviors form a kind of recipe for being an adaptive leader.
Adaptive work is the focus and goal of adaptive leadership. Central to adaptive work is awareness of the
need for creating a holding environment, and skill in creating holding environments when needed. A
holding environment is a space created and maintained by adaptive leaders where people can feel
secure as they confront and resolve difficult life challenges.
Adaptive leadership has several strengths. First, adaptive leadership takes a unique approach that
emphasizes that leadership is a complex interactive process comprising multiple dimensions and
activities. Second, unlike most other leadership theories, adaptive leadership clearly describes
leadership as actions the leaders undertake to afford followers the best opportunity to do adaptive work.
Third, adaptive leadership is unique in describing how leaders can help people confront and adjust their
values in order to adapt and thrive. Fourth, adaptive leadership provides a useful and practical set of
prescriptions for leaders and followers to facilitate adaptive change. Last, adaptive leadership highlights
the important role a holding environment plays in the leadership process.
The adaptive leadership process also has certain weaknesses. Foremost, there is very little empirical
research to support the claims and tenets of adaptive leadership. Second, the conceptualizations of the
process of adaptive leadership need further refinement. The major factors and how they fit together are
not clearly delineated. Third, interpreting the prescriptions of adaptive leadership can become
overwhelming because of the breadth and wide-ranging nature of these prescriptions. In addition, the
abstract nature of the recommended leadership behaviors makes these behaviors difficult to analyze in
research or implement in practice. Fourth, adaptive leadership does not explain how leaders can
guarantee safe holding environments for followers who have to deal with the conflict inherent in the
adaptive process. Finally, on a theoretical level, adaptive leadership acknowledges the moral dimension
of leadership and the importance of change for the common good, but does not show how doing
adaptive work leads to such socially useful outcomes.
Overall, adaptive leadership offers a unique prescriptive approach to leadership that is applicable in
many situations. Going forward, more research is needed to clarify the conceptualizations of adaptive
leadership and validate the assumptions and propositions regarding how it works.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Situational challenges:
Technical challenges
Technical and adaptive challenges
Adaptive challenges
Technical and adaptive challenges and adaptive challenges are highlighted.
Leader behaviors:
Get on the Balcony.
Identify the Adaptive Challenge.
Regulate Distress.
Maintain Disciplined Attention.
Give the Work Back to the People.
Protect Leadership Voices From Below.
Adaptive Work:
Holding environment
Leader-follower interaction
Situational challenges affect leader behaviors, which influence adaptive work.
Back to Figure
The six steps in the adaptive leadership process for a challenging situation or context are as follows:
Leader steps back from challenging situation to understand complexities.
Leader assesses if challenge is technical or adaptive in nature.
If technical, the leader addresses the challenge with authority.
If adaptive, the leader engages in specific behaviors to move the process forward.
Leader uses adaptive behaviors to help followers address the challenge.
Followers engage in a safe environment to work on changing behaviors and managing solutions to
the challenge.
12 INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP
Donna Chrobot-Mason
Quinetta Roberson
The concept of inclusion has emerged as a key psychological construct for realizing the benefits that
diversity can bring to the workplace. In today’s multifaceted and multicultural business environment,
leaders must be able to identify or create opportunities for growth and competitiveness.
DESCRIPTION
Although the term inclusive leadership is relatively new, scholars have been advising leaders for quite
some time to be prepared to address the challenges of a more diverse workforce (Roberson, Ryan, &
Ragins, 2017). A now famous report from 1987 titled Workforce 2000 predicted that for organizations to
remain competitive in the future, they must find ways to integrate and support women and people of
color in the workplace (Johnston & Packer, 1987). Cox and Blake (1991) further reinforced the value of
diversity in organizations, arguing that diversity can create a competitive advantage if managed
effectively such that all employees are contributing to the best of their abilities and at their highest
potential.
In the years following the Workforce 2000 report, numerous scholarly and practitioner publications
touted the need for effective diversity management (see Dass & Parker, 1999; Ivancevich & Gilbert,
2000; Kalev, Kelly, & Dobbin, 2006; Yang & Konrad, 2011). Diversity management incorporates
programs and practices designed to “(a) improve interaction among diverse people; and (b) make this
diversity a source of innovation and increased effectiveness rather than miscommunication, conflict, or
obstacles to employees’ performance, satisfaction, and advancement” (Hays-Thomas, 2017, p. 5). The
concept and practice of diversity management has quickly evolved, and today researchers and
practitioners emphasize inclusion and inclusive leadership as central elements of successful diversity
management.
Initially, approaches to diversity management within research and practice included formalized human
resource practices focused on improving opportunities for historically marginalized groups or
organizational initiatives to promote and value all types of differences among employees (Linnehan &
Konrad, 1999). While many organizations primarily approached diversity in terms of increasing the
number of members of underrepresented groups within their workforces and maintaining legal
compliance consistent with equal employment opportunity legislation (Thomas & Ely, 1996), more
systemic approaches focused on leveraging the benefits of diverse knowledge, perspectives, and skills
to facilitate organizational learning and growth were developed (Ely & Thomas, 2001). Such approaches
were shown to require environments in which all employees feel valued, able to fully utilize their
perspectives and talents, and that they have an opportunity to commit and contribute to organizational
objectives (Davidson & Ferdman, 2002; Ely & Thomas, 2001). As such, they highlighted inclusion as
critical to valuing and leveraging diversity in organizations (Mor Barak & Cherin, 1998).
Since the beginning of the millennium, the concept of inclusion has emerged as a key psychological
construct for realizing the benefits that diversity can bring to the workplace. Ferdman (2014) contends
that a focus on inclusion not only promotes the reduction of negative and problematic processes
grounded in discrimination and oppression, but also fosters a positive vision of what might replace these
undesired behaviors, policies, and systems. Despite this shift toward clarifying a vision of what the
workplace should be like in order to fully engage a diverse workforce, scholarly contributions to the
inclusion literature have largely progressed without a clear theoretical foundation and have primarily
focused on construct definition. Additionally, strategies for creating more inclusive organizations,
including the importance and role of leaders, have been largely missing from the literature.
What has become clearer over time is that the demand and need for inclusive leadership has come at a
moment when leaders’ plates are already full. Today’s leaders are finding themselves responsible for
guiding others in an increasingly global and complex marketplace, fulfilling the role of boundary spanner,
linking and creating direction, alignment, and commitment across individuals, teams, and networks
(Ernst & Chrobot-Mason, 2010). In addition, leaders are tasked with driving the transfer of knowledge
and resources across organizations to enhance collaboration and support innovation (Corsaro, Ramos,
Henneberg, & Naudé, 2012). As technological advances have made work less bound by geography and
time and characterized by more diverse customers, suppliers, and employees, leaders play a critical role
in facilitating coordination and learning across groups, organizations, and cultures (Arnett & Wittmann,
2014; Carter et al., 2020; Miles, Snow, Fjeldstad, Miles, & Lettl, 2010). Given the complexities and
challenges that global markets, geographic dispersion, rapid advances in technology, the influence of
social media, the rapid pace of change, and diversity bring, more is expected of leaders than ever
before.
In today’s multifaceted and multicultural organizational environment, leaders must be able to identify or
create opportunities for growth and competitiveness. As such, they must be able to create environments
in which differences are valued and can be incorporated into the main work of an organization to
enhance strategies, processes, and overall effectiveness (Ernst & Chrobot-Mason, 2010; Ferdman,
2014; Thomas & Ely, 1996). While organizational policies and human resource practices may help
create an infrastructure to foster this type of environment, leaders are the primary drivers of
organizational culture. Accordingly, leaders who can create a sense of inclusion among followers and
leverage the benefits of diversity are needed in organizations.
This chapter explores the nature of inclusive leadership, beginning by defining inclusion by drawing on
both the diversity and the leadership literature. It will then examine an inclusive leadership model that
describes the antecedent conditions, behaviors, and outcomes of inclusive leadership, followed by a
discussion of how inclusive leadership works, its strengths and criticisms, and how it can be developed.
Finally, case studies and a leadership instrument will provide an opportunity to evaluate inclusive
leadership practices in a variety of contexts.
Inclusion Defined
To understand the role inclusion plays in diversity management, it makes sense to first explore what is
meant by inclusion. More than a half-century ago, Schutz (1958) posited that inclusion (along with
control and affection) is a basic human need that people experience in their interpersonal relationships.
Schutz argued that people express their need to be included by how they communicate with others. He
contends that people experience less anxiety if their need to be “in the group” matches the degree to
which they want others to “include them.” This suggests that it is beneficial for leaders to open their
arms to include all followers, but not to the extent that the individual differences of others get smothered
or lost in the process.
In the leadership literature, some researchers view inclusive leadership as a particular form of relational
leadership, which focuses on the relationship between a leader and follower as the unit of analysis.
From this perspective, inclusiveness is enacted and socially constructed through leader–follower
interactions (Uhl-Bien, 2006). In effect, inclusive leadership is driven by the two-way influence process
between leader and follower (Hollander, 2009). Rather than leaders directing followers, inclusive
approaches establish norms of active consultation and participation, which drive shared decision making
within a team or organization.
Despite its participative qualities, however, inclusive leadership differs from participative leadership
(defined in Chapter 6, “Path–Goal Theory”) in that it is applicable to situations in which members’
statuses vary according to the degree to which they are considered insiders and incorporate behaviors
to include those whose perspectives and opinions might otherwise be ignored. By inviting and
appreciating the contributions of all individuals, an inclusive leadership approach helps people feel they
are genuinely valued members of a team or organization (Tyler & Lind, 1992). Accordingly, inclusive
leadership is fundamental to relational leadership, as it focuses on interpersonal relationships and drives
followers’ perceptions that leaders are fair, accountable, and attentive to their needs.
Given research that shows that individuals from a variety of social and cultural groups are often
excluded from networks of information and opportunity in organizations (Ibarra, 1993; Pettigrew &
Martin, 1989), inclusion has also been used to describe worker participation and empowerment. For
example, Mor Barak and Cherin (1998) define inclusion as the extent to which individuals can access
information and resources, are involved in groups, and have the ability to influence decision-making
processes. Rather than emphasizing difference as an organizational commodity, inclusion is focused on
the degree to which individuals feel they are a part of critical organizational processes (Roberson,
2006). While it encapsulates diversity in its various forms, including characteristics that are both
observable and unobservable within a social system, and recognizes such diversity as a means for
achieving collective goals, inclusion requires that all individuals feel able to fully and meaningfully
contribute to shared goals regardless of group memberships and to do so without assimilating to
established norms or relinquishing any part of their identity (Ferdman, 2014).
Brewer (1991) links inclusion to optimal distinctiveness theory. According to this theory, individuals strive
to balance their basic human need to be part of larger social groups with their need to maintain a
distinctive self-concept. People want to belong, feel accepted, and be connected to others, but not to the
extent that they lose their sense of self as unique individuals. Inclusion means feeling like you are a full
member of the group, but at the same time maintaining your own sense of self.
Following the theoretical tenets of optimal distinctiveness theory (Brewer, 1991), Shore and colleagues
(2011) define inclusion as “the degree to which an employee perceives that he or she is an esteemed
member of the work group through experiencing treatment that satisfies his or her needs for
belongingness and uniqueness” (p. 1265). Further, they put forth an inclusion framework proposing that
groups that allow members to feel like insiders while retaining their sense of uniqueness generate
feelings of inclusion while providing opportunities for improved group outcomes. This framework,
depicted in Table 12.1, illustrates how varying levels of belongingness (i.e., the desire to be included)
interact with uniqueness (i.e., the desire to maintain one’s own identity) and result in four outcomes:
exclusion, differentiation, assimilation, and inclusion.
Table 12.1 Inclusion: Combination of Uniqueness and Belongingness
Low Belongingness High Belongingness
Low
Uniqueness
Exclusion
Individuals are not treated as organizational
insiders with unique value in the group, but
there are other members or groups who are
insiders.
Assimilation
Individuals are treated as insiders in
the group when they conform to
organizational/dominant culture
norms and downplay uniqueness.
High
Uniqueness
Differentiation
Individuals are not treated as organizational
insiders in the group, but their unique
characteristics are seen as valuable and
required for group/organization success.
Inclusion
Individuals are treated as insiders
and allowed/encouraged to retain
uniqueness within the group.
Source: Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhard, K., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in
work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1266.
The upper left quadrant of Table 12.1 is Exclusion, which is characterized by low levels of both
belongingness and uniqueness. Individuals in this quadrant feel excluded in their group or organization;
they do not feel a part of the environment, and they do not feel valued. Exclusion occurs when
organizations fail to see and value the unique qualities of individual members and fail to accept them as
organizational insiders. An example might be a young female vice president of a bank whose ideas are
discounted by her male counterparts and who is seldom invited to corporate planning meetings. In
effect, exclusion represents a complete failure to deal with matters of diversity.
The Differentiation quadrant (lower left), characterized by low belongingness but high uniqueness levels,
describes individuals who feel unique and respected but who also feel left out and not a part of the in-
group. Differentiation occurs when organizations accept and value the unique qualities of members who
are different but do not treat these individuals as full members of the organization. For example, this
might occur when a customer service center hires several Spanish-speaking representatives because
the center is working with more Spanish-speaking customers. Yet, those representatives are not asked
for their input on organizational issues, such as the scripting they use for complaint calls or process
improvements. In terms of diversity, differentiation goes halfway—it recognizes differences among
individuals, but does not fully accept them.
The Assimilation quadrant (upper right), characterized by high belongingness but low uniqueness levels,
represents people who feel they are insiders and in the organizational in-group but whose unique
characteristics are not really valued by the organization. An example of assimilation could be a Jewish
college student who is accepted and involved in various student groups but is criticized for missing
meetings scheduled on Jewish religious holidays. In effect, this student’s religious background is not
acknowledged by the other students, who expect the Jewish student to ignore that background and
adopt dominant group norms. In terms of diversity, assimilation represents an attempt by organizations
to open their arms and bring everyone in; however, the same organizations can be faulted for failing to
acknowledge the uniqueness of their members—they accept different individuals, but do not fully value
the unique perspectives and experiences they bring.
Finally, the Inclusion quadrant (lower right), characterized by high levels of both belongingness and
uniqueness, describes individuals who feel they belong and are valued for their unique beliefs, attitudes,
values, and background. This quadrant represents the optimal way to address diversity. It means, in
short, accepting others and at the same time valuing them for who they are without requiring them to
give up valued identities or cultural features (Ferdman, 1992). For example, inclusion occurs when a
professor is informed that because a student who is hearing-impaired will be taking an online course
next semester, the closed captioning and automatic transcript features on the teaching platform must be
enabled. The professor makes these accommodations but also changes the syllabus to require all
students to offer their comments and questions using the chat features. In doing so, the professor
recognizes the student’s disability and incorporates such differences into the norms for class
participation so that all students can fully engage and interact in course discussions.
Conceptualizing inclusion as seen in Table 12.1 is useful for understanding ways to address inclusion
because it illustrates an integration of two factors: (1) an individual’s connectedness (i.e., belonging) to
others and (2) a person’s individuality (i.e., uniqueness). These factors combine to create a dynamic
system that is prescribed by the values, policies, and practices of an organization and enacted by
people at all levels, including supervisors and coworkers (Ferdman & Davidson, 2002). Still, because a
leader’s values, processes, and decisions influence member experiences within groups and
organizations, research shows that leaders are essential to facilitating inclusion (Ferdman, 2014). As
such, inclusive leaders are critical for creating and maintaining environments in which employees feel
valued and are capable of fully utilizing their perspectives and talents to contribute to organizational
objectives (Davidson & Ferdman, 2002; Ely & Thomas, 2001).
Despite being a relatively new construct in leadership studies, the literature provides strong rationale to
suggest that inclusive leadership has three goals: (1) to create a shared identity among group or
organizational members such that everyone feels a sense of belonging, (2) to reduce status differences
and ensure that each individual is treated with respect and concern, and (3) to facilitate the participation
and involvement of all so that everyone has equal voice and input in making important decisions.
A MODEL OF INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP
In contrast to many of the leadership approaches covered in this book (e.g., leader–member exchange
theory, transformational leadership, or servant leadership), inclusive leadership has not been extensively
researched, nor has the research on inclusive leadership been clearly organized around a common
theme or framework. This section presents a “working” theoretical model of inclusive leadership,
outlining the factors that influence inclusive leader behaviors and the outcomes of such behaviors.
As illustrated in Figure 12.1, the process of inclusive leadership consists of three major components:
antecedent conditions, behaviors, and outcomes. Each component has multiple subcomponents, which
collectively capture and explain inclusive leadership.
Description
Figure 12.1 Model of Inclusive Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
The first component in the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1) is antecedent conditions, which
are preceding factors that affect the development of and use of inclusive behaviors by leaders. As
suggested by prior research, such factors may be characteristics of the leader, group cognitions, or
organizational policies and practices.
Leader Characteristics
Randel et al. (2018) propose that a leader’s pro-diversity beliefs—the degree to which a leader sees
diversity in groups as beneficial and is able to recognize each person’s differences as strengths—are
influential to the leader’s propensity to engage in inclusive leadership. For example, a CEO for a
nonprofit that coordinates after-school programs for marginalized youth not only sees the value in
having representatives of those marginalized communities on the organization’s board of directors, but
also recruits members with business, health care, and educational backgrounds to serve on the board
but who aren’t from the marginalized communities. The CEO believes differing perspectives can inform
all members of the board and the organization, allowing for better decision making in regard to effective
programming for youth.
Randel et al. (2018) also suggest that a leader’s cognitive complexity, or the capability for seeing and
analyzing situations in different ways, enhances a leader’s ability to recognize member differences as
strengths as well as ways to incorporate them into work processes. For example, some leaders may see
only one specific way to complete a task and perceive other approaches to be “wrong.” In contrast, a
leader with greater cognitive complexity is capable of seeing multiple “right” ways of approaching a task
and encourages diverse approaches and ways of thinking.
Finally, leader personality factors, such as agreeableness and openness to experience, have also been
shown to influence individuals’ diversity orientation and, subsequently, their contextual performance as
leaders (see Strauss & Connerley, 2003). While there are many individual differences that may influence
a leader’s style and behavior, those related to a leader’s capacity for valuing individual identities and
contributions within a group while simultaneously emphasizing the group’s identity and goals will
increase the likelihood that a leader will engage in inclusive leadership.
Group Diversity Cognitions
Research also suggests that diversity cognitions within the group may influence inclusive leadership.
Individuals’ beliefs in the value of diversity as well as their multicultural beliefs can positively influence
their propensity to make use of diversity within groups and to enhance engagement of underrepresented
groups (see van Knippenberg, Homan, & van Ginkel, 2013). For example, groups with positive diversity
cognitions hold a collective view that differences in perspectives, experiences, values, and ways of
working can enhance the overall performance of their group.
At the same time, psychological climates, or the perceptions of an organization’s values and human
resource policies and practices such as its climate for diversity (Kossek & Zonia, 1993) or climate for
inclusion (Nishii, 2013), may also drive inclusive leadership. For instance, although an organization may
have an explicit statement on its website stating that diversity is a corporate value, organizational
members may perceive the climate quite differently such that there is a mismatch between stated and
enacted values. However, when the organization not only has a policy against harassment but also
enforces a zero-tolerance approach to harassment and terminates violators of such a policy, members
perceive a strong positive diversity climate. Studies highlight the effects of such perceptions on
behavioral intentions concerning diversity as well as behaviors to enhance the success of organizational
diversity initiatives (see van Knippenberg et al., 2013). Although there may be other diversity-related
beliefs and attitudes that influence leader behavior, those that support a leader’s ability to recognize and
incorporate diversity into a group or organization’s work will enhance the leader’s propensity for
inclusive leadership.
Organizational Policies and Practices
A third antecedent condition, an organization’s policies and practices, may also motivate inclusive
leadership. Specifically, research suggests that certain groups of practices may facilitate the
participation of all employees and leverage the effects of diversity in organizations. Roberson (2006)
found diversity among all stakeholder groups, fair treatment initiatives, collaborative work arrangements,
and conflict resolution processes to be supportive of inclusive organizational environments. Similarly,
Nishii (2013) highlights the importance of fairly implemented employment practices and diversity-specific
practices to eliminate bias as critical to establishing positive climates for diversity and inclusion. One
example of this is ensuring that job applicants are interviewed by multiple interviewers and all applicants
are asked the same set of questions that pertain directly to job duties. Standardizing task-based
questions asked during an interview and using multiple interviewers are two hiring practices that help to
eliminate bias during the interview process (Levashina, Hartwell, Morgeson, & Campion, 2014). While
other policies and practices may capture the extent to which diversity is considered to be an important
resource that should be utilized to enhance an organization’s functioning, those that facilitate leaders’
capacity for valuing and integrating diverse perspectives and approaches into organizations will be more
likely to facilitate inclusive leadership.
Inclusive Leadership Behaviors
A second component of the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1) addresses specific behaviors
by leaders that can facilitate inclusive leadership. Foundational research on inclusive leadership
behaviors was developed by Edmondson (1996, 2003) and based on qualitative insights taken from the
study of health care teams. Using data from operating room and intensive care unit teams, researchers
explored leader approaches to creating psychologically safe environments, or cultures with a shared
belief that members are safe to engage in interpersonal risk-taking and will not be subjected to negative
repercussions, such as embarrassment or rejection, for speaking up within those teams (Edmondson,
1999). The findings showed that nurse managers and surgeon team leaders who acknowledged and
proactively invited others’ input, regardless of those individuals’ professional roles or status
relationships, helped team members to feel greater psychological safety (Edmondson, 1996, 2003).
Based on this evidence, Nembhard and Edmondson (2006) put forth the concept of leader
inclusiveness, which represents behaviors engaged in by leaders to include opinions and contributions
of those who might be otherwise excluded from certain deliberations and decisions. While considered to
be related to participative decision making and effective facilitation of group processes, inclusive
leadership is particularly relevant in situations characterized by status or power differences, which
constrain the ability of some group members to express themselves and feel their contributions are
valued. Therefore, inclusive leaders are characterized by behaviors that encourage divergent viewpoints
and genuinely appreciate the views and contributions of all followers regardless of status or power.
Edmonson (2004) proposed additional inclusive leader behaviors for encouraging individuals to be
themselves in their organizational environments and feel comfortable raising divergent viewpoints. First,
she speculated that leaders who are available and accessible both physically and psychologically to
followers may help to create a climate of approachability, which reduces barriers to voice and input.
Second, she reasoned that because leaders model appropriate behavior within teams, inviting input
from others and sharing decision-making responsibilities may help to create a climate of trust and
learning.
Diversity researchers view inclusive leadership as behaviors that create the psychological experience of
feeling included within a team or organization. Randel et al. (2018) describe a set of behaviors that
facilitate individuals’ perceptions of belonging to a group and of being valued for their uniqueness that
can result in positive group outcomes. For example, inclusive leadership behaviors to ensure the fair
treatment of all group members, make everyone feel comfortable and supported, and share decision
making are considered to facilitate perceptions of belongingness. At the same time, leader behaviors to
solicit different perspectives and approaches and fully incorporate members’ knowledge, skills, and
abilities into the group’s work help to facilitate feelings of uniqueness.
Outcomes
As depicted in the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1), there are a number of positive
organizational outcomes that result from the facilitation and implementation of inclusive leadership.
Research suggests that leader inclusiveness makes others—particularly low-status individuals—feel
supported and valued as members of a team (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006). As such, psychological
safety and work engagement tend to be higher in teams with inclusive leaders (Choi, Tran, & Park,
2015; Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006). Inclusive leadership is also positively related to employee well-
being, including positive emotional states and quality relationships with others (Choi, Tran, & Kang,
2017).
Inclusive leadership has also been shown to have direct effects on follower creativity and innovative
work behavior (Choi et al., 2017; Choi et al., 2015; Javed, Naqvi, Khan, Arjoon, & Tayyeb, 2017; Qi, Liu,
Wei, & Hu, 2019). Leader openness to, and respect for, new ideas and feedback facilitates a supportive
climate in which followers feel comfortable to offer alternative perspectives and to experiment.
Subsequently, followers are more strongly motivated to engage in innovative activities. Similarly, leader
inclusiveness has been shown to interact with psychological diversity climates, or individual perceptions
of the degree to which an organization promotes and maintains a diversity-friendly environment, to
positively influence followers’ behavior (Randel, Dean, Ehrhart, Chung, & Shore, 2016). Leader
inclusiveness within the context of a positive diversity climate was found to be related to follower helping
behaviors directed at both the leader and other group members.
Feelings of psychological safety resulting from leader inclusiveness have been linked to followers
learning from errors and failures (Hirak, Peng, Carmeli, & Schaubroeck, 2012; Ye, Wang, & Li, 2018).
Inclusive behaviors help to create a safe work environment in which followers feel comfortable
experimenting, examining the results of their actions, and developing improved work processes and
approaches (Ye et al., 2018). Consequently, inclusive leadership has also been shown to positively
impact unit performance (Hirak et al., 2012; Mitchell et al., 2015).
Overall, the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1) highlights factors that influence relevant
behaviors and the resultant outcomes of such behavior. Based on extant research, it identifies leader,
group, and organizational characteristics that may influence specific inclusive leadership behaviors. It
also depicts the effects of these behaviors on a variety of follower outcomes, including positive
emotional states, behaviors that enhance group functioning, and both individual and team performance.
HOW DOES INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP WORK?
Although inclusive leadership theory and research derive from the leadership and diversity literatures, a
few common elements have emerged from these literature streams that together illustrate how this
approach to leadership works.
First, inclusive leadership incorporates a sense of shared identity among group members. According to
leadership research, information regarding an individual’s value to the group is communicated by the
leader (Tyler & Lind, 1992), who is seen as a representative or prototype group member that establishes
behaviors that group members should adopt. Accordingly, leader behaviors that invite and appreciate
others’ contributions help all members feel like they are part of the in-group, thereby facilitating a
common identity within the group. Similarly, the diversity literature highlights the importance of satisfying
individuals’ belongingness needs in order for them to feel treated like insiders within groups and for
leaders to act in an inclusive manner.
Inclusive leadership within the leadership and diversity literatures also incorporates behaviors to reduce
status differences within groups. From a leadership perspective, inclusiveness involves behaviors to
solicit and integrate viewpoints and opinions from those whose input into decision-making processes
may not typically be valued. Further, it involves being approachable and reachable to all members of the
group, which helps to reduce potential barriers to interaction and information exchange, particularly
among those who might typically be considered outsiders. As such, inclusive leaders attempt to
eradicate cliques and other status boundaries within the team. This reduction of status distinction is also
an important component of inclusive leadership from a diversity management perspective. Inclusiveness
encompasses actions to ensure equity and justice within the group, which reduces the likelihood of bias
or differences in treatment based on a member’s value to the team.
Existing theory and research also underscore the importance of follower participation and involvement in
decision processes. Leadership researchers posit leader inclusiveness to be a relational approach that
operates according to norms of input and shared decision making, even when members’ contributions
may be divergent from those of the leader or others on the team. Likewise, diversity researchers
emphasize the importance of group members each having a sense of uniqueness, such that their
distinct characteristics and contributions are considered to be valuable to the group’s success. Yet,
rather than simply acknowledging members’ individuality, leader inclusiveness takes action to ensure
that decision-making power is distributed across group members and members have a say in how the
group’s work is done.
STRENGTHS
In this chapter, we have outlined a working model of inclusive leadership drawing from literature in the
areas of diversity, diversity management, inclusion, and inclusive leadership. The literature summarized
in the present chapter has three strengths.
First, inclusive leadership emphasizes the involvement and engagement of everyone in the group. While
certain group members may be more likely to perceive and experience exclusion (e.g., members of
historically marginalized groups), the aim of inclusive leadership is to create an organizational
environment in which everyone feels a sense of belonging while also feeling valued for their unique
attributes.
Second, inclusive leadership is consistent with and enhances other relational leadership theories such
as leader–member exchange and transformational leadership. Each of these theories places value on
developing positive relationships with followers, recognizing each follower’s unique strengths and
interests, and fostering a positive and affirming organizational environment. Although the specific
behaviors and expected outcomes of these relational leadership theories are different, valuing and
developing relationships with followers are fundamentally at the core of all three.
Finally, inclusive leadership is a shared responsibility of everyone in the group. This is a strength for two
reasons. First, it is consistent with emerging paradigms that define leadership as a socially constructed
and shared phenomena. Second, it means that no single person is solely responsible for creating an
inclusive environment; all organizational members play an important role in doing so. In other words,
everyone both creates and benefits from inclusive leadership.
CRITICISMS
Despite an existing body of literature that provides insight into the core elements of inclusive leadership,
there are several limitations to such insight. First, while researchers have attempted to conceptualize
inclusive leadership, it has to some degree been used as an all-encompassing construct for any
approach to leadership that incorporates behaviors to form quality-based interpersonal relationships
with followers and to show appreciation and support for their efforts (Javed et al., 2017). As a result,
findings regarding antecedents and outcomes of transformational, charismatic, participative, servant,
ethical, and other forms of leadership have been confounded with those of inclusive leadership.
Similarly, given its conceptual focus on high-quality relationships between leader and follower, inclusive
leadership has also been used interchangeably with leader–member exchange (Nishii & Mayer, 2009).
Second, there are also challenges associated with the measurement of inclusive leadership. For
example, some researchers have used measures for assessing leader inclusiveness that ask
employees to provide such ratings for their direct manager, supervisor, or other organizational authority
responsible for directing others’ efforts (see Carmeli, Reiter-Palmon, & Ziv, 2010; Nembhard &
Edmondson, 2006). The problem with this approach to measuring inclusive leadership is that it may not
adequately capture variability in member experiences of inclusiveness or differences in the quality of
relationships between the leader and individual members of the team. In other words, using this
approach, leaders may be considered inclusive yet only rate highly on inclusive leadership measures for
some members of their group. Thus, it is important to develop more nuanced and multifaceted ways to
measure inclusive leadership than currently exist to capture the experiences and perceptions of
everyone in the group.
Lastly, although prior research has identified core components of inclusive leadership, few studies to
date have attempted to reconcile these components across the leadership and diversity literatures. We
have attempted to do so in providing the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1), yet more research
is needed to empirically examine the relationships between the antecedent conditions, leadership
behaviors, and outcomes outlined in the model. Perhaps the greatest need is to determine the relative
importance of key leadership behaviors in creating an inclusive environment. For example, some
researchers emphasize the extent to which a leader invites and appreciates others as contributing
members to the work product (see Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006) while others focus on a leader’s
invitation and openness, availability, and accessibility (see Carmeli et al., 2010). Still others emphasize
actions to create a sense of belonging and uniqueness (see Randel et al., 2018). Though all of these
leadership behaviors may play an important role in fostering inclusion, additional research is needed to
link specific behaviors to outcomes.
APPLICATION
Because inclusive leadership is defined as a set of behaviors, it follows that inclusive leadership can be
both learned and developed. However, there is limited insight into the specific skills and competencies
that must be learned as well as the most effective strategies for developing into an inclusive leader.
Booysen (2014) provides a helpful comparison of the differences between more traditional approaches
to leadership and an inclusive approach to leadership. Her work highlights the fact that developing
inclusive leaders requires a shift in the use of power deriving from position and control to a more
distributed approach characterized by high levels of empowerment of followers. Rather than a
conventional “direct, tell, and sell” approach to decision making, inclusive leaders elicit and facilitate
dialogue. They view themselves as part of the collective and focus on fostering perceptions of “we and
all” rather than a more traditional view of leadership as a formal position that considers “me, us, and
them” and strives to achieve uniformity. Further, inclusive leaders strive to both pursue and value
differences of followers, including capabilities, viewpoints, and opinions (Booysen, 2014). Learning to be
a more inclusive leader requires a change in mindset, a shift in values, and the adoption of a new style
of interacting with others.
The process of inclusive leadership development can be illustrated using the assessment-challenge-
support (ACS) model (Van Velsor, McCauley, & Ruderman, 2010) developed by scholars at the Center
for Creative Leadership based on decades of data collection to determine how leaders grow and
develop leadership skills. The ACS model describes the three critical elements of leadership
development—assessment, challenge, and support. Although the ACS model is based on research
conducted on leader development experiences (Van Velsor et al., 2010), to our knowledge it has not yet
been applied specifically to inclusive leadership. Thus, in the sections that follow, we consider each
element of the ACS model in relation to inclusive leadership development and provide examples of
each.
Assessment
The first step in leadership development work, assessment, involves an evaluation of strengths and
opportunities for development as it relates to creating an inclusive organizational environment. This
should involve understanding and reflection on one’s identity, ethnocentrism, biases, stereotypes,
prejudice, and privilege (Chrobot-Mason, Ruderman, & Nishii, 2013; Northouse, 2018, pp. 201–205;
Wasserman, 2014). For instance, leaders should consider their memberships in dominant or majority
groups as well as the nondominant, minority, or stigmatized groups to which they belong, as such
reflection may provide insight into experiences of exclusion. Similarly, the identification of sources of
advantage or circumstances in which leaders have benefited from their identity or group memberships
may provide perspective on entitlement and privilege that exists in their organizations, and what needs
to be done to create more inclusive environments in which all followers have access to key resources
and opportunities for involvement and success.
One example of this type of identity work is illustrated by Ferdman and Morgan Roberts (2014). They
present an activity in which participants list their multiple social identities (ethnicity, education, life
experiences, birth order, nationality, professional affiliation, etc.). Participants then reflect on the impact
of these identities by addressing questions such as “How/why are these identities important to you?”
and “How do they or can they make a difference for you and others at your organization?”
Another useful activity for assessment is to complete a privilege worksheet. One such worksheet, the
White Privilege Checklist, based on work by Peggy McIntosh (1988; available at
https://teacherworksheets.co.uk/sheets/privilege), focuses on white privilege and asks respondents to
agree or disagree with a series of statements. For example, statements on the worksheet include “I can
arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time” and “I am never asked to speak for
all of the people of my racial group.”
Some scholars and practitioners suggest that it is only by acknowledging and recognizing the biases,
stereotypes, and privilege they have as a result of their upbringing, past experiences, media influence,
societal values, and any number of other sources that people can mitigate the impact of such mindsets
and enhance their interactions with others (Nkomo & Ariss, 2014; Offermann et al., 2014). Accordingly,
many organizations offer diversity training sessions, workshops, and seminars to help leaders uncover
their implicit biases and understand how such biases influence decision making (Church, Rotolo, Shull,
& Tuller, 2014).
Other strategies for assessing leaders’ mindsets related to diversity and inclusion are tools that measure
personal attitudes and beliefs, such as the popular Implicit Association Test
(https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), or
organizational support for diversity and practices that integrate diverse followers into the organizational
environment (see Mor Barak, Cherin, & Berkman, 1998). Regardless of the tool, uncovering one’s
thoughts and assumptions about others and the value of their contributions to work processes and
output can help leaders to better understand how and why they make decisions and take actions to do
so more inclusively.
https://teacherworksheets.co.uk/sheets/privilege
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html
Challenge
While self-awareness of one’s diversity-related attitudes and beliefs is important to becoming an
inclusive leader, it is equally as important to understand one’s level of behavioral skill. Thus, the next
step in developing an inclusive leadership style and skill set is to identify one’s gaps and developmental
needs across various diversity and inclusion competency areas and then formulate an action plan to
facilitate skill building. Consistent with the ACS model (Van Velsor et al., 2010), this behavioral feedback
process illuminates challenges for leaders to overcome and enhances motivation to develop and
strengthen skills needed to create inclusive organizational environments.
For example, as inclusive leadership involves strong communication skills, a leader should develop the
capacity for listening to diverse viewpoints, diagnosing the core issues of a problem between individuals
and groups, and serving as a boundary spanner or liaison to facilitate cross-group interactions.
Accordingly, a leader may attempt to practice these skills during team meetings, such as seeking
followers’ opinions or inviting debate on a specific topic. Alternatively, if after determining that all team
members’ voices are not being heard in brainstorming sessions, a leader may try a nominal group
technique, which encourages contributions from everyone and prioritizes ideas with input from the entire
group (https://asq.org/quality-resources/nominal-group-technique).
In general, breaking with conventional leadership strategies will help leaders adapt their current
approaches to create more diverse organizational environments and develop new capacities for
inclusiveness. Seeking out such challenges often forces leaders outside their comfort zone; yet this is
exactly what must happen for them to become more confident and capable of fostering inclusion.
https://asq.org/quality-resources/nominal-group-technique
Support
Because challenges push leaders to go beyond what they have been comfortable with in the past and
try new approaches, they need support to successfully deal with such challenges. For inclusive leaders,
this means having an infrastructure and relationships that help to reinforce behaviors learned, as
suggested by the ACS model (Van Velsor et al., 2010). For example, colleagues, mentors, and
significant others often serve as sounding boards for leaders, offering affirmations and feedback as
leaders struggle through the challenges of being more inclusive and adopting new behaviors to lead
inclusively. The organization itself may also play a significant role in offering support to leaders
attempting to create a more inclusive environment by providing accountability structures, diversity
councils or advisory boards, a diversity and inclusion mission statement and strategies, and zero-
tolerance policies toward discrimination, which can all positively impact the climate for diversity
(Roberson, King, & Hebl, 2020). Support may also come in the form of coaching and mentoring, which
are often included as components of many leadership development programs to help leaders develop
personal accountability for creating and promoting diverse and inclusive workplaces.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following case studies (Cases 12.1, 12.2, and 12.3) offer an opportunity to apply inclusive
leadership concepts introduced in the chapter as well as inclusive behaviors identified in the Inclusive
Leadership Reflection Instrument on page 346. The first case involves a situation where group members
stereotype another member based on race, whereas the second case examines group members who
seem to hold back from participating in group discussions. The final case is derived from an interview
with the vice president for equity, inclusion, and community impact at the University of Cincinnati, Dr.
Bleuzette Marshall, who found inclusive leadership critical in helping the institution to navigate a very
difficult and traumatic time.
In addition to answering the discussion questions listed at the end of each case, determine the key
issue presented in each case, the underlying causes of that issue, and possible solutions. Using this
analysis, consider how you would address the identified issue as an inclusive leader and the actions you
might take to create a more inclusive environment going forward.
Case 12.1 Difficult Decision
Sondra is the leader of a nonprofit organization with about 40 full- and part-time employees. She is
proud of her organization and its very dedicated staff. Sondra has been with the organization for 10
years, having worked her way up through the ranks into the director role, a position she finds equally
challenging and rewarding. She describes her leadership style as highly collaborative and empowering.
Furthermore, Sondra views herself as a leader who values diversity and does all that she can to create
an environment in which everyone feels comfortable and supported.
Antonio is a Hispanic male employee who has been with the organization just eight months but shows
promise as a highly dedicated employee and future leader. However, he has missed the last three days
of work, which seems to have caused some speculation among his coworkers about why he has been
absent. While walking past a cubicle in the office building, Sondra overhears two of her direct reports
(both white) talking about Antonio. One employee, Terry, says, “I heard that Antonio was undocumented,
which wouldn’t surprise me.” The second employee, Pat, responds, saying, “Maybe he’s been deported.
Or maybe he just left town for fear that he would be deported.” Surprised by what she overhears,
Sondra decides to just keep walking by, as it seems no one noticed her.
However, when she returns to her desk, she lets out a sigh and looks out her window. She feels
conflicted about what she should do. On the one hand, she considers doing nothing because Terry and
Pat were only speaking to one another. On the other hand, she is concerned that other colleagues may
be speculating about Antonio’s absence as well and jumping to false conclusions since Sondra knows
that Antonio has not been deported but instead is battling an illness. She decides to take a walk to try
and clear her head so that she can decide what to do, if anything.
Questions
1. Why do you think Sondra is conflicted in this situation?
2. Do you believe Sondra has a responsibility, as an inclusive leader, to do something? Why or why
not?
3. What inclusive leadership behaviors from the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1) could
Sondra use to deal with this situation?
4. Why do you think Terry and Pat jumped to the conclusion that Antonio had been deported? What is
your opinion about them discussing this with one another?
5. What do you think Sondra should do, if anything?
Case 12.2 The Extraversion Advantage
Quinn is a midlevel manager who does his best to create an inclusive team environment. He leads a
group of seven employees who are diverse along a variety of dimensions. Quinn feels that he does his
best to create opportunities for everyone to speak up during their weekly team meetings. He frequently
asks for input on issues and decisions and takes the first 5–10 minutes each week to ask his team
members to share updates about their personal lives to build trust and comfort among his team
members.
Recently, however, Quinn has started to become concerned that two team members are not sharing
much during meetings. These team members, Brett and Alex, both come prepared and offer input
whenever they are asked directly. In addition, Brett has been leading a project and has been sharing
updates on project goals each week very effectively. Still, Quinn has noticed that Brett and Alex are
often quiet during the times when the rest of the team engages in a discussion in which team members
have very different opinions. Indeed, sometimes these discussions can get a bit heated when people
feel passionate about something. Truth be told, Quinn is proud of this and feels like this is an indication
that the team is deeply engaged in their work. The conversations are never disrespectful in Quinn’s
opinion, just naturally healthy task-related conflict that keeps the team energized.
Quinn decides to ask another team member, Shawn, who seems to have no trouble jumping into the
conversations for thoughts on what could be done to better engage Brett and Alex in these debates.
Shawn tells Quinn that some members of the team are just “quiet by nature” and could benefit from
learning how to be more assertive during meetings. To help them do so, Shawn recommends enrolling
Brett and Alex in a public-speaking or other type of communication skills training course.
Questions
1. What do you think is the underlying issue within this team?
2. Based on the leader behaviors identified in the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1), what
should Quinn do to make team meetings more inclusive for everyone?
3. Since inclusion is the responsibility of everyone, not just the leader’s, what can other team
members do to help create a more inclusive team environment?
4. This particular case involves only male coworkers. In what ways might your answers change if
Quinn were Lynn (a woman) or if Brett and Alex were women reporting to a male supervisor?
Case 12.3 Inclusive Leadership During a Crisis
On July 19, 2015, in Cincinnati, Ohio, Samuel DuBose, an unarmed Black man, was fatally shot by Ray
Tensing, a University of Cincinnati police officer, during a traffic stop for a missing front license plate and
a suspended driver’s license. In response to the shooting, protestors took to the streets to demonstrate
their anger, frustration, and pain. Protests were held both on campus and off campus and included
students, faculty, staff, and community members. A student-led movement emerged called the Irate 8,
which derived its name from the fact that only 8% of the University of Cincinnati student body was
composed of Black students.
In a short period of time, support grew across the university and the broader community for the student-
led activist movement. The students demanded to meet with university senior leaders and gave them a
list of 10 demands. As vice president for equity, inclusion, and community impact at the University of
Cincinnati, Dr. Bleuzette Marshall found herself at the center of this very difficult and traumatic time in
the university’s history.
Dr. Marshall describes her role during this time as one of healer and reconciler. “I worked with people so
that they could express themselves about how they were thinking and feeling about the institution. It
wasn’t just about this particular incident. People were inflamed by the shooting, but other past
experiences and practices fueled the anger they were feeling. And I took it,” she said. “I did my best to
respond to questions about what the university was doing or not doing, I stood outside among the
demonstrators and listened, I worked with our president and vice presidents to consider what changes
we could and could not make. I responded to the demands our students made to the university and
communicated with them about our progress. It required a lot of time, patience, and listening to both
what was said and not said—being able to read others’ emotions was equally important” (Dr. Bleuzette
Marshall, personal communication, July 1, 2020).
Multiple groups presented demands to Dr. Marshall’s office, and one of the things she stressed was the
need to be real and authentic in communicating with these various constituents. She met with leaders
across the university including colleagues from the provost’s, finance, human resources, investments,
and admissions offices, as well as the campus police department. She met with various groups about
the demands made by student and community activists to determine what the university’s current
practices were and what kinds of change were possible. She explained that it was important to not just
take the list of demands and disappear, but to offer to involve those making the demands in the change
process. She describes how the university practiced inclusive leadership by inviting others to engage in
finding solutions.
To address the list of demands from the Irate 8 and practice inclusion, Dr. Marshall invited University of
Cincinnati students to develop and offer recommendations for change to the university’s administration.
“We created committees of students to have them involved in working on the responses to these
demands. For example, to recruit more Black students to the university, our students came up with the
idea to partner with Cincinnati Public Schools to create an ambassador program. The goal was to have
high school students serve as ambassadors in partnership with university students to educate
neighboring high school students about the University of Cincinnati’s application and admissions
process and to get them excited about college from fellow students. I’ll always remember their
excitement going through the process of meeting with members of our admissions team, putting a
proposal together, submitting the proposal to university administration, and then securing funding to run
the program” (Dr. Bleuzette Marshall, personal communication, July 1, 2020).
In talking about lessons learned as a result of her experiences following the DuBose shooting, Dr.
Marshall noted how important it is for leaders to be humble and always be open to learning. “I learned
that when assuming a leadership role there is always going to be some type of challenge that I call the
‘welcome to leadership moment,’ because it comes unexpectedly and it is not at all clear what you
should do. It’s nothing that you could have ever planned for. The right answer is not written in any
manual that you can simply look up to figure out how to navigate this challenge. Instead, you have to
rely on your own sensibilities, your own strategic and creative thinking, and evolving skill set to be able
to navigate” (Dr. Bleuzette Marshall, personal communication, July 1, 2020).
She shared another “welcome to leadership” moment involving a student group that staged a
demonstration outside her office protesting the university’s handling of sexual assault on campus. The
group informed local media who were also present to film the group marching to the administration
building with their mouths taped. Group members then proceeded to sit on the floor in a circle outside of
Dr. Marshall’s office.
“The first thing I did was take a deep breath when I heard the students were outside. I came out of my
office and told them that I was ready to talk to them whenever they were ready to speak with me. They
texted me to say they would be ready in 15 minutes. So I set my watch for 15 minutes, walked out, and
immediately sat down in their circle to listen to their concerns and personal stories. Some concerns I
could address right then and there, but some I could not, so I encouraged the students to schedule
some time with me to deal with the lingering issues, which they did, and we worked together to
implement changes” (Dr. Bleuzette Marshall, personal communication, July 1, 2020).
In her role as the vice president of equity, inclusion, and community impact at a large urban university
with nearly 50,000 students and over 15,000 employees, Dr. Marshall says she continues to learn and
grow her inclusive leadership skill set. She describes her leadership style as participatory, because she
invites people who are important to the process and encourages them to stay involved. She is also
boundary spanning in the sense that she works across campus to infuse inclusive practices in any and
all areas of the university. Another example of how Dr. Marshall practices inclusive leadership is that she
begins a meeting by asking everyone in the meeting to share something with the group such as a movie
or book they recently enjoyed, or a favorite quote. The topic is not important; what is important is
allowing everyone in the room to speak and share because the goal is to create a foundation in which
everyone in the room has exercised their voice. She finds this simple practice can make a big difference
as it tends to open up subsequent conversation and makes it easier for people to feel comfortable
speaking up later in the meeting.
For aspiring inclusive leaders, Dr. Marshall recommends they first and foremost become good at self-
reflection. She says it is important to spend time understanding who you are as a person, what you
appreciate about other people, what your shortcomings are, what you are doing to try to be a better
person, how you do or do not connect with others, and what your hot buttons are and how to manage
them. She also suggests that inclusive leaders must make a concerted effort to expand their circle of
friends so they can be exposed to different ideas, opinions, and perspectives. Surrounding yourself with
people who hold different opinions than you enhances your cognitive complexity and allows the
opportunity to know yourself better by understanding how your upbringing and experiences differ from
others. Finally, she encourages those attempting to be more inclusive to remember not to fight fire with
fire, but instead fight fire with water. She has learned that during heated and difficult situations she
continually reminds herself that in some way, shape, or form, those expressing their anger are frustrated
and hurting, and they are coming to her and the university for relief.
“The only way I can really help is to know the full extent of what’s going on—so if it means you need to
fuss, then fuss; if it means you need to cuss, then cuss to get it out so that we can fully dissect what’s
going on. Only then can we determine what changes can be made” (Dr. Bleuzette Marshall, personal
communication, July 1, 2020).
Questions
1. What inclusive leadership behaviors as identified in the Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1)
does Dr. Marshall exhibit in her role?
2. In what ways do you practice these inclusive leadership behaviors in your interactions with others?
In what ways could you practice these behaviors in the future?
3. Active listening is an important theme in this case. Dr. Marshall mentions the importance of listening
and learning from others multiple times. Why is it often difficult for us to really listen and understand
others?
4. What one thing can you do moving forward to enhance your active listening skills?
Leadership Instrument
To measure inclusive leadership, researchers have primarily utilized the Inclusive Leadership Scale
developed by Carmeli et al. (2010). This 9-item scale assesses leaders on the dimensions of availability,
accessibility, and openness. More recently, Chung and colleagues (2020) developed a 10-item scale,
structured around the dimensions of belonging and uniqueness, to assess perceptions of individuals’
experiences within their immediate work environment that help them to feel included.
This section includes a self-assessment instrument to help you reflect on your own inclusive leadership.
It is based on the most recent research as well as best practices from organizations engaged in diversity
and inclusion efforts. The instrument provides a list of inclusive leadership behaviors in which you may
(or may not) be engaging. Because inclusiveness may feel different in different situations, the instrument
also highlights inclusive leadership behaviors in a variety of settings, including one-on-one meetings,
team meetings, and mentoring sessions. Based on this assessment, leaders can learn more about
inclusive behaviors that can be incorporated into their daily activities and interactions as well as
recognize areas for future development.
Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to reflect on your inclusive behaviors and
challenge yourself to exhibit inclusive behaviors in your daily interactions.
Instructions: The following instrument is a checklist designed to encourage you to reflect on the
inclusive behaviors you exhibit in a variety of settings: meeting one-on-one with individuals,
facilitating a team meeting, participating in a team meeting, and mentoring someone less
experienced. In each case, you are encouraged to place a check mark in the Yes column or No
column.
Types of
Interactions Inclusive Leadership Behaviors Yes No
One-on-One I begin our interaction by showing interest in the other person
(e.g., asking questions, sharing something personal, and inviting
the other person to share as well).
I make eye contact with the person.
I face the individual I am speaking with.
Types of
Interactions Inclusive Leadership Behaviors Yes No
I put away all distractions such as my cell phone.
I eliminate physical or technological barriers between us, such as
sitting behind my desk and/or keeping my camera off.
I ask open-ended questions to learn about the other person.
I regularly designate time for people to come and talk to me.
I treat each and every person with respect and dignity.
I recognize and reward employees/people according to their
individual motivations.
Teams (as
leader)
I identify unique skill sets of team members.
I use the full range of talents on my team to achieve work
objectives.
I ask everyone on the team for input and through different means
(in person, via email, pulse checks, etc.).
I ask everyone on the team what and how they want to
contribute.
I configure project teams to include people who do not regularly
interact with one another.
I provide different members of the team with leadership
opportunities.
I seek feedback from others and make changes based on that
feedback.
Teams (as
facilitator)
I prepare an agenda and send it out ahead of a meeting so that
people can prepare and better participate.
Types of
Interactions Inclusive Leadership Behaviors Yes No
I utilize a process in which everyone gives feedback and input at
times (e.g., nominal group technique, round-robin discussion,
online real-time data collection tools).
When possible, I ask team members to provide updates rather
than being the only one to speak.
I adapt physical arrangements such as seating and/or technology
that allows people to interact with one another.
When someone new joins the team or when a team is forming, I
ask for everyone’s preferred names, pronunciations, and
pronouns.
I encourage conflicting views and/or dissension within team
discussions.
I create “airtime” limits so that outspoken people do not dominate
the conversation.
Teams (as
participant)
We rotate roles in team meetings each time (time keeper, note-
taker, action item capturer, etc.).
If a colleague is interrupted by someone, I will say that I would
like to hear the colleague finish the thought, prompting the group
to go back to let that person finish speaking.
I come prepared to share my thoughts and ideas.
If a colleague has been silent during the meeting, I will
encourage the colleague to share by saying something like “I
would love to hear what you are thinking about this issue.”
Mentor/Protégé I ask my protégé about preferred work style and communication
cadence.
Types of
Interactions Inclusive Leadership Behaviors Yes No
I discuss and develop a list of expectations with my protégé such
that we are both able to clarify expectations of one another early
in the relationship.
Rather than assume I know what is best, I start meetings with my
protégé by asking how our time together can be most useful for
the protégé.
Scoring
1. There are 30 items contained in the Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument. First, count
up the total number of check marks you placed in the No column.
Total Score ______________
2. Next, count up the number of check marks you placed in the No column for the various
types of interactions:
One-on-one = 9 total ______________
Teams (as leader) = 7 total ______________
Teams (as facilitator) = 7 total ______________
Teams (as participant) = 4 total ______________
Mentor/Protégé = 3 total ______________
Scoring Interpretation
Upon completion of this instrument, you will have identified inclusive leader behaviors you should
continue to display as well as those you will want to consider using and developing in the future.
To interpret your scores, we suggest you consider the following:
1. Examine the total number of check marks you placed in the No column.
A score of 0–9 indicates that you exemplify many behaviors of inclusive leaders. You
may be able to thus serve as a role model to others and foster inclusive leadership in
members of your team and in your colleagues at work.
A score of 10–19 suggests that you are working to become an inclusive leader. You are
likely motivated to foster an inclusive organizational environment but have a somewhat
limited number of tactics and strategies that you have utilized in the past. You may need
to try out some additional inclusive leader behaviors and seek feedback from others to
determine if what you are doing equates to others feeling more included in the
organization.
A score of 20–30 indicates that you either previously were not aware of the value of
inclusive leadership or were not motivated to adapt a more inclusive approach to
leadership. Hopefully, after reading this chapter, you better understand how and why
inclusive leadership may create benefits for your team and the organization as a whole.
Additionally, we hope that you are now motivated to try out various inclusive leadership
behaviors described in the checklist and seek feedback from others to determine if what
you are doing equates to others feeling more included in the organization.
2. Examine the number of check marks you placed in the No column for the various types of
interactions. Circle the types of interactions with the most No check marks as follows. That is
a good place to identify where and how you can make changes and challenge yourself to
step outside of your comfort zone to become a more inclusive leader.
One-on-one
Teams (as leader)
Teams (as facilitator)
Teams (as participant)
Mentor/Protégé
Summary
The concept of inclusion has emerged as a key psychological construct for realizing the benefits that
diversity can bring to the workplace. In today’s multifaceted and multicultural business environment,
leaders must be able to identify or create opportunities for growth and competitiveness. As such, they
must be able to create environments in which differences are valued and can be incorporated into the
main work of an organization to enhance strategies, processes, and overall effectiveness.
Inclusion requires the consideration of belongingness (i.e., the desire to be included) and the extent to
which it interacts with uniqueness (i.e., the desire to maintain one’s own identity). An inclusive
organization is one in which members’ perceptions of both belongingness and uniqueness are high. In
this type of organization, individuals feel they belong and are valued for their unique beliefs, attitudes,
values, and background. Inclusive leaders play a key role in creating such an organization as a result of
their behavior toward others.
The Model of Inclusive Leadership (Figure 12.1) offered in this chapter highlights factors that influence
relevant inclusive leader behaviors and the resultant outcomes of such behavior. It clarifies the
importance of the leader, group, and organizational characteristics that influence the degree to which
inclusive leadership behaviors are encouraged and practiced in the organization. It also depicts the
effects of inclusive leadership behaviors on a variety of follower outcomes, including positive emotional
states, behaviors that enhance group functioning, and both individual and team performance.
Based on inclusive leadership theory and research derived from the leadership and diversity literatures,
common elements have emerged to illustrate how this approach to leadership works. First, inclusive
leadership incorporates a sense of shared identity among group members. Second, inclusive leadership
incorporates behaviors to reduce status differences within groups. Third, inclusive leaders foster
employee participation and involvement in decision processes.
Existing research on inclusive leadership has several strengths. The first is that inclusive leadership
emphasizes the involvement and engagement of everyone in the group. A second strength is inclusive
leadership’s focus on the relational aspects of leadership such as identifying the strengths and interests
of each follower and fostering positive relationships with each follower. A third strength of inclusive
leadership is that it frames inclusivity as a shared responsibility between leaders and followers and one
that does not fall solely on the shoulders of an individual leader.
One criticism of inclusive leadership is that research on inclusive leadership has been confounded with
other leadership theories and sets of behaviors. Another criticism is that current methods of measuring
inclusive leadership do so in an aggregate fashion such that individual differences in perceptions of
inclusion may be lost. Thus, more nuanced and complex measurement strategies are needed in future
research. Finally, existing research has not been able to clearly determine links between specific
inclusive behaviors and outcomes. In other words, future research is needed to test the Model of
Inclusive Leadership presented in Figure 12.1.
Because inclusive leadership is defined as a set of behaviors, it follows that inclusive leadership can be
both learned and developed. Learning to be a more inclusive leader requires a change in mindset, a
shift in values, and the adoption of a new style of interacting with others. Leaders who wish to develop a
more inclusive style of leading should identify strengths and weaknesses through feedback and
assessment tools, identify new and challenging experiences to strengthen their inclusive leadership
skills, and seek support from others to stay motivated and positive in the face of change.
As the workforce is projected to become increasingly diverse and organizations continue to operate in
fiercely competitive environments, inclusive leadership may be viewed as a strategy to ensure that the
potential benefits of a diverse workforce are realized. That is, inclusive leaders play a critical role in
creating environments in which different ideas, perspectives, experiences, and values are leveraged to
foster greater creativity and innovation as well as more effective problem solving. A key takeaway from
this chapter is that practicing inclusive leadership requires both a mindset and everyday behaviors to
foster inclusion. An inclusive mindset means constantly being vigilant to recognize bias, discrimination,
stereotyping, and exclusion in the words and actions of both oneself and others. Practicing inclusive
behaviors means engaging in both proactive and reactive tactics to ensure that everyone feels like they
are part of the group, that all members are treated with respect and fairness, and that everyone feels
that they can participate fully.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Antecedent conditions:
Leader characteristics:
pro-diversity beliefs
cognitive complexity
personality
Group diversity cognitions:
multiculturalism
climate for inclusion
Organizational policies and practices
Behaviors:
Encourages divergent viewpoints
Appreciates all views and contributions
Is available and accessible
Invites input from others and shares decision making
Ensures justice and equity
Shows support
Incorporates members’ knowledge, skills, and abilities
Outcomes:
Psychological safety
Work engagement
Well-being
Creativity and innovation
Helping behavior
Learning from errors/failures
Work unit performance
Antecedent conditions influence behaviors, which affect outcomes.
13 FOLLOWERSHIP
Leadership requires followership, and without understanding what the act of following entails, it is
difficult to fully understand leaders and leadership. Therefore, the focus in this chapter is on followership
and the central role followers play in the leadership process.
DESCRIPTION
You cannot have leaders without followers. In the previous chapter, “Inclusive Leadership” (Chapter 12),
we focused on inclusive leadership and how leaders can ensure that followers feel a part of the group.
In this chapter, we shift the focus to followers and the central role followers play in the leadership
process. The process of leading requires the process of following. Leaders and followers together
create the leadership relationship, and without an understanding of the process of following, our
understanding of leadership is incomplete (Shamir, 2007; Uhl-Bien, Riggio, Lowe, & Carsten, 2014).
For many people, being a follower and the process of followership have negative connotations. One
reason is that people do not find followership as compelling as leadership. Leaders, rather than
followers, have always taken center stage. For example, in school, children are taught early that it is
better to be a leader than a follower. In athletics and sports, the praise for performance consistently
goes to the leaders, not the team players. When people apply for jobs, they are asked to describe their
leadership abilities, not their followership activities. Clearly, it is leadership skills that are applauded by
society, not followership skills. It is just simply more intriguing to talk about how leaders use power than
to talk about how followers respond to power.
While the interest in examining the active role of followers was first approached in the 1930s by Follett
(1949), groundwork on follower research wasn’t established until several decades later through the
initial works of scholars such as Zaleznik (1965), Kelley (1988), Meindl (1990), and Chaleff (1995). Still,
until recently, only a minimal number of studies have been published on followership. Traditionally,
leadership research has focused on leaders’ traits, roles, and behaviors because leaders are viewed as
the causal agents for organizational change. At the same time, the impact of followers on organizational
outcomes has not been generally addressed. Researchers often conceptualize leadership as a leader-
centric process, emphasizing the role of the leader rather than the role of the follower. Furthermore, little
research has conceptualized leadership as a shared process involving the interdependence between
leaders and followers in a shared relationship. Even though followers share in the overall leadership
process, the nature of their role has not been scrutinized. In effect, followership has rarely been studied
as a central variable in the leadership process.
There are indications that this is beginning to change. In a 2017 New York Times article, Susan Cain
(author of Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking [2012]) decries the
glorification of leadership skills in college admissions and curricula and argues that the world needs
more followers. It needs team players, people called to service, and individuals committed to something
outside of themselves. Followership is also receiving more attention now because of three major works
devoted exclusively to the process of following: The Art of Followership: How Great Followers Create
Great Leaders and Organizations by Riggio, Chaleff, and Lipman-Blumen (2008), Followership: How
Followers Are Creating Change and Changing Leaders by Kellerman (2008); and Followership: What Is
It and Why Do People Follow? by Lapierre and Carsten (2014). Collectively, these books have put the
spotlight on followership and helped to establish it as a legitimate and significant area of study.
In this chapter, we examine followership and how it is related to the leadership process. First, we define
followers and followership and discuss the implications of these definitions. Second, we discuss
selected typologies of followership that illustrate different styles used by followers. Next, we explore a
formal theory of followership that has been set forth by Uhl-Bien et al. (2014) and new perspectives on
followership suggested by Carsten, Harms, and Uhl-Bien (2014). Last, we explore types of ineffective
followership that contribute to destructive leadership.
Followership Defined
It is challenging to define followership because the term conjures up different meanings for people, and
the idea of being a follower is positive for some and negative for others. For example, followership is
seen as valuable in military situations when soldiers follow orders from a platoon leader to complete a
mission, or when passengers boarding a plane follow the boarding agent’s instructions. In contrast,
however, followership is thought of negatively in such situations as when people follow a cult leader
such as David Koresh of the Branch Davidians, or when members of a college fraternity take it upon
themselves to conduct life-threatening hazing rituals with new members. Clearly, followership can be
positive or negative, and it plays out differently in different settings.
What is followership? Followership is a process whereby an individual or individuals accept the influence
of others to accomplish a common goal. Followership involves a power differential between the follower
and the leader. Typically, followers comply with the directions and wishes of leaders—they defer to
leaders’ power.
Followership also has an ethical dimension. Like leadership, followership is not amoral; that is, it is not a
process that is morally neutral. Followership carries with it a responsibility to consider the morality of
one’s actions and the rightness or wrongness of the outcomes of what one does as a follower. Followers
and leaders work together to achieve common goals, and both share a moral obligation regarding those
goals. There are ethical consequences to followership and to what followers do because the character
and behavior of followers has an impact on leaders and on organizational outcomes.
Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives
Followership can be divided into two broad categories: role-based and relational-based (Uhl-Bien et al.,
2014).
The role-based perspective focuses on followers in regard to the typical roles or behaviors they exhibit
while occupying a formal or informal position within a hierarchical system. For example, in a staff
planning meeting, some people are very helpful to the group because they bring energy and offer
insightful suggestions regarding how the group might proceed. Their role as engaged followers, in this
case, has a positive impact on the meeting and its outcomes. Emphasis in the role-based approach is
on the roles and styles of followers and how their behaviors affect the leader and organizational
outcomes.
The relational-based approach to followership is quite different from the role-based approach. To
understand the relational-based approach it is helpful to understand social constructivism. Social
constructivism is a sociological theory that argues that people create meaning about their reality as they
interact with each other. For example, a fitness instructor and an individual in an exercise class
negotiate with each other about the kind of influence the instructor will have and the amount of influence
the individual will accept. From a social constructivist perspective, followership is co-created by the
leader and follower in a given situation. The meaning of followership emerges from the communication
between leaders and followers and stresses the interplay between following and leading. Rather than
focusing on roles, it focuses on the interpersonal process and one person’s attempt to influence and the
other person’s response to these influence attempts. Leadership occurs within the interpersonal context
of people exerting influence and responding to those influence attempts. In the relational-based
approach, followership is tied to interpersonal behaviors rather than to specific roles (Carsten, Uhl-Bien,
West, Patera, & McGregor, 2010; DeRue & Ashford, 2010; Fairhurst & Uhl-Bien, 2012; Uhl-Bien et al.,
2014).
Table 13.1 Typologies of Followership
Zaleznik (1965) Kelley (1992) Chaleff (1995) Kellerman (2008)
Withdrawn Alienated Resource Isolate
Masochistic Passive Individualist Bystander
Compulsive Conformist Implementer Participant
Zaleznik (1965) Kelley (1992) Chaleff (1995) Kellerman (2008)
Impulsive Pragmatist Partner Activist
Exemplary
Diehard
Source: Adapted from “Conceptualizing followership: A review of the literature,” by B. Crossman and J. Crossman, 2011, Leadership,
7(4), 481–497.
Typologies of Followership
How can we describe followers’ roles? Trying to do just that has been the primary focus of much of the
existing followership research. As there are many types of leaders, so, too, are there many types of
followers (Table 13.1). Grouping followers’ roles into distinguishable categories to create an accurate
classification system, or typology, of follower behaviors has been undertaken by several researchers. A
typology enhances our understanding of the broader area of followership by breaking it down into
smaller pieces. In this case, these pieces are different types of follower roles observed in various
settings.
The Zaleznik Typology
The first typology of followers was provided by Zaleznik (1965) and was intended to help leaders
understand followers and also to help followers understand and become leaders. In an article published
in the Harvard Business Review, Zaleznik created a matrix that displayed followers’ behaviors along two
axes: dominance–submission and activity–passivity (Figure 13.1). The vertical axis represents a range
of followers from those who want to control their leaders (i.e., be dominant) to those who want to be
controlled by their leaders (i.e., be submissive). The horizontal axis represents a range of followers from
those who want to initiate and be involved to those who sit back and withdraw. Based on the two axes,
the model identifies four types of followers: withdrawn (submissive/passive), masochistic
(submissive/active), compulsive (highly dominant/passive), and impulsive (highly dominant/active).
Because Zaleznik was trained in psychoanalytic theory, these follower types are based on psychological
concepts. Zaleznik was interested in explaining the communication breakdowns between authority
figures and subordinates, in particular the dynamics of subordinacy conflicts. The follower types
illustrated in Figure 13.1 exist as a result of followers’ responses to inner tensions regarding authority.
These tensions may be unconscious but can often come to the surface and influence the
communication in leader–follower relationships.
Description
Figure 13.1 Zaleznik Follower Typology
Source: Zaleznik, A. (1965). The dynamics of subordinacy, Harvard Business Review, May-Jun.
The Kelley Typology
Kelley’s (1992) typology (Figure 13.2) is currently the most recognized followership typology. Kelley
believes followers are enormously valuable to organizations and that the power of followers often goes
unrecognized. He stresses the importance of studying followers in the leadership process and gave
impetus to the development of the field of followership. While Zaleznik (1965) focused on the personal
aspects of followers, Kelley emphasizes the motivations of followers and follower behaviors. In his
efforts to give followership equal billing to leadership, Kelley examined those aspects of followers that
account for exemplary followership.
Kelley sorted followers’ styles on two axes: independent critical thinking–dependent uncritical thinking
and active–passive. These dimensions resulted in five follower role types:
passive followers (sometimes pejoratively called “sheep”), who look to the leader for direction and
motivation,
conformist followers, who are “yes people”—always on the leader’s side but still looking to the
leader for direction and guidance,
alienated followers, who think for themselves and exhibit a lot of negative energy,
pragmatist followers, who are “fence-sitters” who support the status quo but do not get on board
until others do, and
exemplary followers (sometimes called “star” followers), who are active and positive and offer
independent constructive criticism.
Description
Figure 13.2 Kelley Follower Typology
Source: Based on excerpts from Kelley, Robert. E. (1992). The Power of Followership: How to Create
Leaders People Want to Follow and Followers Who Lead Themselves. New York: Doubleday.
Based on his observations, Kelley (1988, 2008) asserts that effective followers share the same
indispensible qualities: (1) They self-manage and think for themselves, exercise control and
independence, and work without supervision; (2) they show strong commitment to organizational goals
(i.e., something outside themselves) as well as their own personal goals; (3) they build their competence
and master job skills; and (4) they are credible, ethical, and courageous. Rather than framing
followership in a negative light, Kelley underscores the positive dimensions of following.
The Chaleff Typology
Chaleff (1995, 2008, 2009) developed a typology to amplify the significance of the role of followers in the
leadership process (Table 13.1). He developed his typology as a result of a defining moment in his
formative years when he became aware of the horrors of the World War II Holocaust that killed more
than 6 million European Jews. Chaleff felt a moral imperative to seek answers as to why people followed
German leader Adolf Hitler, a purveyor of hate and death. What could be done to prevent this from
happening again? How could followers be emboldened to help leaders use their power appropriately
and act to keep leaders from abusing their power?
Figure 13.3 Leader–Follower Interaction
Source: Adapted from “Creating new ways of following” by I. Chaleff, in R. E. Riggio, I. Chaleff, and J.
Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The Art of Followership: How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and
Organizations (p. 71), 2008. Permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Republished with permission of John Wiley & Sons.
Rather than serving leaders, Chaleff argues that followers serve a common purpose along with leaders
(Figure 13.3) and that both leaders and followers work to achieve common outcomes. Chaleff states that
followers need to take a more proactive role that brings it into parity with the leader’s role. He sought to
make followers more responsible, to change their own internal estimates of their abilities to influence
others, and to help followers feel a greater sense of agency.
To achieve equal influence with leaders, Chaleff emphasizes that followers need to be courageous. His
approach is a prescriptive one; that is, it advocates how followers ought to behave. According to Chaleff,
followers need the courage to
a. assume responsibility for the common purpose,
b. support the leader and the organization,
c. constructively challenge the leader if the common purpose or integrity of the group is being
threatened,
d. champion the need for change when necessary, and
e. take a moral stand that is different from the leader’s to prevent ethical abuses.
In short, Chaleff proposes that followers should be morally strong and work to do the right thing when
facing the multiplicity of challenges that leaders place upon them.
Chaleff created a follower typology (Figure 13.4), which is constructed using two characteristics of
courageous followership: the courage to support the leader (vertical axis) and the courage to challenge
the leader’s behavior and policies (horizontal axis). This typology differentiates four styles of
followership:
Description
Figure 13.4 Chaleff Follower Typology
Source: Adapted from “Creating new ways of following” by I. Chaleff, in R. E. Riggio, I. Chaleff, and J.
Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The Art of Followership: How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and
Organizations (p. 71), 2008; permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Republished with permission of John Wiley & Sons.
1. Resource (lower left quadrant), which exhibits low support and low challenge. This describes those
followers who do just enough to get by.
2. Individualist (lower right quadrant), which demonstrates low support and high challenge. Often
marginalized by others, individualists speak up and let the leader know where they stand.
3. Implementer (upper left quadrant), which acts with high support and low challenge. Often valued by
the leader, implementers are supportive and get the work done but, on the downside, fail to
challenge the leader’s goals and values.
4. Partner (upper right quadrant), which shows high support and high challenge. Followers who exhibit
this style take responsibility for themselves and for the leader and fully support the leader but are
always willing to challenge the leader when necessary.
The Kellerman Typology
Kellerman’s (2008) typology of followers was developed from her experience as a political scientist and
her observations about followers in different historical contexts. Kellerman argues that the importance of
leaders tends to be overestimated because they generally have more power, authority, and influence,
while the importance of followers is underestimated. From her perspective, followers are subordinates
who are “unleaders,” by which she means they have little power, no position of authority, and no special
influence.
Figure 13.5 Kellerman Follower Typology
Source: From Followership: How Followers Are Creating Change and Changing Leaders, by Barbara
Kellerman, 2008, Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Kellerman designed a typology that differentiates followers in regard to a single attribute: level of
engagement. She suggests a continuum (Figure 13.5), which describes followers on one end as being
detached and doing nothing for the leader or the group’s goals and followers on the opposite end as
being very dedicated and deeply involved with the leader and the group’s goals. As shown in the figure,
Kellerman’s typology identifies five levels of follower engagement and behaviors:
1. Isolates are completely unengaged. They are detached and do not care about their leaders.
Isolates who do nothing actually strengthen the influence potential of a leader. For example, when
an individual feels alienated from the political system and never votes, elected officials end up
having more power and freedom to exert their will.
2. Bystanders are observers who do not participate. They are aware of the leader’s intentions and
actions but deliberately choose to not become involved. In a group situation, a bystander is one
who listens to the discussion but, when it is time to make a decision, disengages and declares
neutrality.
3. Participants are partially engaged individuals who are willing to take a stand on issues, either
supporting or opposing the leader. For example, participants would be the employees who
challenge or support their leader regarding the fairness of their company’s new overtime policy.
4. Activists feel strongly about the leader and the leader’s policies and are determined to act on their
own beliefs. They are change agents. For example, in 2020 after the death of George Floyd, an
African American man, at the hands of a white Minneapolis, Minnesota, police officer, antiracism
activists took to the streets in protest to demand change in police practices. Their protests inspired
similar protests across the United States and abroad.
5. Diehards are engaged to the extreme. They are deeply committed to supporting the leader or
opposing the leader. Diehards are totally dedicated to their cause, even willing to risk their lives for
it. In a small-group setting, diehards are followers who are all-consumed with their own position
within the group to the point of forcing the group members to do what they want them to do or
forcing the group process to implode. For example, there have been U.S. representatives willing to
force the government into economic calamity by refusing to vote to raise the country’s debt ceiling
in order to force their will on a particular issue, such as increased defense spending or funding for a
roads project in their district.
What do these four typologies (i.e., Zaleznik, Kelley, Chaleff, and Kellerman) tell us about followers?
What insights or conclusions are suggested by the typologies?
First, these typologies provide a starting point for research. The first step in building theory is to define
the phenomenon under observation, and these typologies are that first step to identifying key
followership variables. Second, these typologies highlight the multitude of different ways followers have
been characterized, from alienated or masochistic to activist or individualist. Third, while the typologies
do not differentiate a definitive list of follower types, there are some commonalities among them.
Generally, the major followership types are active–engaged, independent–assertive, submissive–
compliant, and supportive–conforming—or, as suggested by Carsten et al. (2014), passive followers,
antiauthoritarian followers, and proactive followers.
Fourth, the typologies are important because they label individuals engaged in the leadership process.
This labeling brings followers to the forefront and gives them more credence for their role in the
leadership process. These descriptions can also assist leaders in effectively communicating with
followers. By knowing that a follower adheres to a certain type of behavior, the leaders can adapt their
style to optimally relate to the role the follower is playing.
Collectively, the typologies of followership provide a beginning point for theory building about
followership. Building on these typologies, the next section discusses some of the first attempts to
create a theory of followership.
THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO FOLLOWERSHIP
What is the phenomenon of followership? Is there a theory that explains it? Uhl-Bien and her colleagues
(2014) set out to answer those questions by systematically analyzing the existing followership literature
and introducing a broad theory of followership. They state that followership comprises “characteristics,
behaviors and processes of individuals acting in relation to leaders” (p. 96). In addition, they describe
followership as a relationally based process that includes how followers and leaders interact to construct
leadership and its outcomes (Uhl-Bien et al., 2014, p. 99).
Based on these definitions, Uhl-Bien et al. proposed a formal theory of followership. They first identified
four constructs (i.e., components or attributes) and variables that comprise the process of followership
as shown in Table 13.2.
Table 13.2 Theoretical Constructs and Variables of Followership
Followership
Characteristics
Leadership
Characteristics
Followership
and Leadership
Behaviors
Followership
Outcomes
Follower Traits Leader Power Followership
Behaviors
Individual Follower
Outcomes
Follower Motivation Perceptions and
Constructions
Leadership
Behaviors
Individual Leader
Outcomes
Follower Perceptions and
Constructions
Leader Affect
Relationship
Outcomes
Leadership Process
Outcomes
Source: From “Followership Theory: A Review and Research Agenda,” by M. Uhl-Bien, R. R. Riggio, R. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten,
The Leadership Quarterly, 25, p. 98. Copyright 2014 by Elsevier. Reprinted with permission.
Followership characteristics refer to the attributes of followers, such as the follower’s traits (e.g.,
confidence), motivations, and the way an individual perceives what it means to be a follower.
Leadership characteristics refer to the attributes of the leader, such as the leader’s power and/or
willingness to empower others, the leader’s perceptions of followers, and the leader’s affect (i.e., the
leader’s positive or negative feelings toward followers). Followership behaviors are the behaviors of
individuals who are in the follower role—that is, the extent to which they obey, defer, or resist the leader.
Leadership behaviors are the behaviors of the individuals in the leadership role, such as how the leader
influences followers to respond. Finally, followership outcomes are the results that occur based on the
followership process. The outcomes can influence the individual follower, the leader, the relationship
between the leader and the follower, and the leadership process. For example, how a leader reacts to a
follower, whether a follower receives positive or negative reinforcement from a leader, and whether a
follower advances the organizational goals all contribute to followership outcomes.
To explain the possible relationships between the variables and constructs identified in Table 13.2, the
authors proposed two theoretical frameworks: reversing the lens (Figure 13.6) and the leadership co-
created process (Figure 13.7).
Reversing the Lens
Reversing the lens is an approach to followership that addresses followers in a manner opposite of the
way they have been studied in most prior leadership research. Rather than focusing on how followers
are affected by leaders, it focuses on how followers affect leaders and organizational outcomes.
Reversing the lens emphasizes that followers can be change agents. As illustrated in Figure 13.6, this
approach addresses (1) the impact of followers’ characteristics on followers’ behavior, (2) the impact of
followers’ behavior on leaders’ perceptions and behavior and the impact of the leaders’ perceptions and
behavior on followers’ behaviors, and (3) the impact of both followers’ behavior and leaders’ perceptions
and behavior on followership outcomes.
Figure 13.6 Reversing the Lens
Source: From “Followership Theory: A Review and Research Agenda,” by M. Uhl-Bien, R. R. Riggio,
R. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten, The Leadership Quarterly, 25, p. 98. Copyright 2014 by Elsevier.
Reprinted with permission.
A hypothetical example of how reversing the lens might work is the research a team is doing on
employees and followership in a small, nonprofit organization. In this situation, researchers might be
interested in how followers’ personality traits (e.g., introversion–extraversion, dogmatism) relate to how
they act at work—that is, their style and work behavior. Researchers might also examine how
employees’ behavior affects their supervisors’ leadership behavior or how the follower–leader
relationship affects organizational outcomes. These are just a sample of the research questions that
could be addressed. However, notice that the overriding purpose and theme of the study is the impact of
followers on the followership process.
The Leadership Co-Created Process
A second theoretical approach, the leadership co-created process, is shown in Figure 13.7. The name
of this approach is almost a misnomer because it implies that it is about leadership rather than
followership. However, that is not the case. The leadership co-created process conceptualizes
followership as a give-and-take process where one individual’s following behaviors interact with another
individual’s leading behaviors to create leadership and its resulting outcomes. This approach does not
frame followership as role-based or as a lower rung on a hierarchical ladder; rather, it highlights how
leadership is co-created through the combined act of leading and following.
Figure 13.7 The Leadership Co-Created Process
Source: Based on The Allure of Toxic Leaders by J. Lipman-Blumen, 2005, p. 29; permission
conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. Republished with permission of Oxford University
Press.
Leading behaviors are influence attempts—that is, using power to have an impact on another. Following
behaviors, on the other hand, involve granting power to another, complying, or challenging. Figure 13.7
illustrates that (1) followers and leaders have a mutual influence on each other; (2) leadership occurs as
a result of their interaction (i.e., their leading and following); and (3) this resulting process affects
outcomes.
The following example illustrates what followership would entail using the leadership co-created process
framework in Figure 13.7. Terry Smith is a seasoned high school football coach who paints houses in
the summer to supplement his income. One summer, Coach Smith invited one of his players, Jason
Long, to work with him as a painter. Coach Smith and Jason worked well together, sharing painting
responsibilities, and often finding innovative ways to accomplish their painting jobs more efficiently.
When the summer was over and football practice resumed, however, Coach Smith and Jason ran into
problems. At practice, Jason called Coach Smith by his first name, joking with him about their painting
jobs, and behaving as a peer rather than a team member. Although Coach Smith liked being on a first-
name basis with Jason in the summer, he was concerned that other team members would also start
calling him by his first name and he would lose their respect of him as the coach. Jason, on the other
hand, felt good about his relationship with Coach Smith and the influence he had with him. He did not
want to lose this, which would happen if he was forced to resume calling him Coach Smith, like the rest
of the players.
To resolve their issues, Coach Smith and Jason discussed how they would address one another in a
series of interactions and decided it was best for Jason to call Smith “Coach Smith” during the academic
year to facilitate a positive working relationship between the coach and all of the team members.
In this example, the leadership co-created process can be seen in the different leading and following
moves Smith and Jason made. For example, when Coach Smith asked Jason to join him to paint, he
was asserting friendly influence which Jason accepted by agreeing to work with Smith. When Jason
suggested more efficient methods of painting, Smith accepted the influence attempt and deferred to
Jason’s ideas. By calling each other by their first names while working together, both Jason and Smith
assumed that leadership was being shared.
But, when football practice started in the fall and Jason continued to call Smith by his first name instead
of “Coach Smith,” it was apparent that for Coach Smith to retain his influence with the other players,
Jason and Smith needed to reach an agreeable decision on “who was in charge” and “who was to
follow.” Together they decided what leadership (i.e., coaching) and followership meant in the different
contexts. The result was better football practices because all players received what they perceived as
equal treatment. In this situation, researchers studying followership would focus on the way Smith’s and
Jason’s leading and following behaviors resulted in leadership that in turn resulted in effective or
ineffective outcomes.
Because followership research is in the initial stages of development, the two frameworks—reversing
the lens and the leadership co-created process—set forth by Uhl-Bien and her colleagues (2014) are
initial attempts to create a theory of followership. The frameworks provide a way to conceptualize
followership that is useful to researchers in generating further studies to explore the intricacies of
followership such as the work we discuss in the next section.
New Perspectives on Followership
The research on followership is continuing to evolve and has resulted in a growing interest in the role
followers have in organizations. Work by Carsten et al. (2014) not only helps organizations understand
followers but also presents positive aspects of being a follower and suggests several practical
perspectives on followership.
Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done
In the past, there has been what Meindl (1995) called a “romance of leadership,” which emphasized the
importance of leaders and leadership to the functioning of groups and organizations. There has been
less recognition of the importance of followers to getting the job done. When viewed from a less leader-
centric perspective, leadership can be seen as something that occurs among followers as a result of
how they interpret leadership. This places less emphasis on the personality of the leader and more on
followers’ reactions to the leader. It shifts attention away from leaders as the causal agents of
organizational change and focuses on how the behavior of followers affects organizational outcomes.
Clearly, followers carry out the mission of the group and the organization; in short, they do the work.
They are central to the life of the organization. Going forward, more attention needs to be given to the
personalities, cognitive abilities, interpersonal skills, and problem-solving abilities of followers (Carsten
et al., 2014).
Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest of the Organization’s Mission
Although not true of all followers, proactive followers are committed to achieving the goals of the group
or organization to which they belong. Rather than being passive and blindly obedient to the wishes of
the leader, these followers report asserting themselves in ways that are in alignment with the goals of
the organization. They put the organization’s goals ahead of the leader’s goals. The advantage of
proactive followers is that they guard against leaders who act in self-serving or unethical ways. For
example, if the president of the United States asked a cabinet member to do something that would
personally benefit only the president, the cabinet member might refuse, arguing that what they were
asked to do was not in the best interests of the country, which they ultimately serve. Followers act as a
check and balance on a leader’s power, protecting the organization against abuse of this power.
Proactive followers keep the organization front and center.
Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders
As illustrated in the typologies outlined earlier in the chapter, being engaged, active, and challenging are
identifying characteristics of effective followers. But followers who challenge the leader can also help to
make an organization run more effectively and successfully. When followers have knowledge about a
process or procedure of which the leader is unaware, the followers become a strong asset both to the
leader and to the organization. They become extra “eyes” to make sure the leader sees the organization
from another angle. In addition, followers who are proactive and challenge the leader can keep the
leader in sync with the overall mission of the organization.
In his work on a conceptual framework of “authentic followership,” de Zilwa (2014) focuses on the
relational interactions between leaders and followers and how authentic followership impacts leadership
processes. De Zilwa argues that followership is proactive—followers make a conscious decision to
follow a leader. This challenges the conventional view that a leader’s influence is a one-way process. In
being authentic, followers are assertive and offer independent, critical thought. Rather than blindly
following a leader, authentic followers develop capacities for cooperation as they focus on organizational
effectiveness. They are self-aware and know when to place the needs of others above their own,
making the leader more effective.
To illustrate this point, consider what happened between Amy Malley, an upper-level college student,
and her professor, Dr. Orville. After Dr. Orville posted the final grades for a capstone course that he
taught, Amy came to see him in his office.
“I saw my posted grade, and I want you to know it is wrong,” she said. “I know for certain I did very well
on the exam and my grade for the course should be an A, but your posting indicates I got a B.
Something is wrong with your calculations or the key for the exam.”
Dr. Orville, who had taught for 25 years and never made an error in a student’s grade, began to shrug
off Amy’s assertions and tell her she was wrong. She persisted and challenged Dr. Orville because she
was confident that her exam grade was incorrect. After much discussion, Dr. Orville offered to let Amy
see her exam and the scoring key. To his surprise, her answers were correct, but he had marked them
wrong. Upon looking further into the matter, Dr. Orville became aware that he had wrongly scored all the
students’ exams because he had used the incorrect scoring key. Recognizing his error, Dr. Orville
immediately changed Amy’s grade and recalculated the grades for the rest of the class. In this example,
Amy’s challenging of Dr. Orville’s leadership resulted in positive outcomes for all the students and also
for the leader.
Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader
In addition to challenging a leader, it is equally important for followers to support the leader. To advance
an organization’s mission, it is valuable for leaders when followers validate and affirm the leaders’
intentions. Consider what happens in a small-group setting when an individual member attempts to
make a point or advance an idea. If someone in the group supports the individual, the group member’s
idea is heard and gains traction in the group, as does the group member. However, if individual
members do not receive support from other group members, they tend to feel disconfirmed and question
their role in the group.
For a leader, having a follower who supports you is like having a lieutenant. The lieutenant affirms the
leader’s ideas to others and in so doing gives the leader’s ideas validity. This support strengthens a
leader’s position in the group and helps advance the leader’s goals (Yelsma, 1999). We all need
lieutenants, but leaders especially need lieutenants. Support from others is essential to advancing ideas
with others. An example of how not having this support can affect outcomes can be seen in the
leadership of Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer during the COVID-19 crisis, when she gave a
mandate to close down businesses in the entire state to slow the spread of the virus but could not
muster enough support from the state legislature to keep the measure solidly in place. In this case, not
having the support of others in a group was detrimental to the leader.
Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders
A serendipitous outcome of being a follower is that in the process of following you learn about leading.
Followership gives individuals the opportunity to view leadership from a position unencumbered from the
burdens and responsibilities of being the leader. Followers get to observe what does or does not work
for a leader; they can learn which leadership approaches or methods are effective or ineffective and
apply this learning if they become leaders.
Consider the training that individuals undergo to become teachers. In most education programs,
becoming certified as a teacher requires students to do “student teaching” or “supervised teaching,”
spending a semester working with a certified teacher in a classroom where actual teaching and learning
are taking place. The student gets a chance to observe what teachers do and what teaching requires
without the full responsibility of being in charge of the students and the educational outcomes. These
student teachers have the opportunity to explore their own competencies and hone their teaching skills.
From a followership perspective, the student is playing the follower role but in the process learns the
leader role.
Followership and Destructive Leaders
Thus far in this chapter, we have focused on effective rather than ineffective followership. For example,
we have discussed how followers provide valuable confirmation to leaders and help them accomplish
organizational goals. But there is another side to followership in which followers can play unproductive,
and even harmful, roles.
Some research suggests there is actually a “dark side” to followership. Schyns, Wisse, and Sanders
(2019) found that followers who exhibit the “dark triad” of traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and
psychopathy—are likely to have negative effects on fellow organization members and the organization
as a whole. The authors identified “red flag” behaviors of dark triad followers such as taking credit for
others’ work, self-promotion, becoming aggressive after feedback, controlling others, manipulation, and
bullying. When both leaders and followers have dark triad traits, the outcomes for the other group
members and the organization may be even more negative.
Another way followers can have a debilitating impact is through their facilitation of toxic leadership. For
example, when followers are passive or submissive, their inaction can contribute to unfettered
leadership and unintentionally support toxic leaders. Furthermore, followers can create contexts that are
unhealthy and make it possible for leaders who are not interested in the common good to thrive. When
followers act in ways that contribute to the power of destructive leaders and their goals, it can have a
debilitating impact on not just the group or organization they serve, but the followers as well.
In The Allure of Toxic Leaders (2005), Jean Lipman-Blumen explored toxic leadership from the
perspective of followership. Toxic, or harmful, leaders are leaders who have dysfunctional personal
characteristics and engage in numerous destructive behaviors. Yet, people follow them. There are many
examples of such leaders in world history, among them Adolf Hitler, whose leadership led to the
extermination of 6 million Jews in Europe; former Serbian and Yugoslavian president Slobodan
Milošević, who ordered the genocide of thousands of Albanians and forced deportation of nearly a
million, and Enron’s Jeffrey Skilling and Kenneth Lay, whose conspiracy and fraud cost nearly 20,000
people their jobs and future retirement earnings.
Lipman-Blumen seeks to answer this question: Why do people follow bad leaders? She identifies a
series of psychological factors on the part of followers that contribute to harmful leadership and explains
why followers can be compliant even with highly destructive leaders. She also examines how some
followers become “henchmen” for toxic leaders, helping and supporting the toxic leader in enacting a
destructive agenda.
Her thesis is that unhealthy followership occurs as a result of people’s needs to find safety, feel unique,
and be included in community, and her work is useful for developing an understanding of why some
followership is negative and has counterproductive outcomes.
Among the psychological factors of followers that can foster destructive leadership identified by Lipman-
Blumen are our need for reassuring authority figures; our need for security and certainty; our need to
feel chosen or special; our need for membership in the human community; our fear of ostracism,
isolation, and social death; and our fear of powerlessness to challenge a bad leader (Table 13.3).
1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures
As far back as psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud’s research in the early 1900s, much has been written
about how people deal with authority. When we are very young, we depend on our parents to guide and
protect us; but as we mature, we learn to be our own compass/authority/person and make decisions
without being dependent on others. However, even as adults, some people still have a high need for
authority figures. They want their leaders to provide guidance and protection like their parents used to.
This need can open the door for leaders who use followers for their own ends. When followers’ needs
for a reassuring authority figure are extremely strong, it makes them vulnerable to following abusive and
destructive leaders. For example, a middle school student who plays an instrument may practice
considerably more than is necessary just to obtain assurance from the teacher that they are good and
worthwhile. In this example, the teacher could take advantage of this student’s need for validation by
having the student do more than is commonly required.
2. Our Need for Security and Certainty
The freedom many people experience when achieving adulthood can bring uncertainty and disruption to
their lives. Psychologists who study people’s belief systems have found that people have a need for
consistency—to keep their beliefs and attitudes balanced. Our drive for certainty means we struggle in
contexts where things are disrupted and we do not feel “in charge” of events. This uncertainty and
insecurity creates stress from which we seek to find relief. It is in contexts like these that followers are
susceptible to the lure of unethical leaders who have power. For example, think about migrant workers
who come from Mexico to the United States to work on a large produce farm. The farmer they work for
has promised good wages and a place to live. But upon arriving at the farm, the workers find they are
required to work in the fields for up to 15 hours a day, seven days a week, and the housing provided is
substandard. In addition, the farmer charges the workers a high rent for the housing, plus additional fees
for providing drinking water in the fields. The workers, who are undocumented immigrants, put up with
these conditions because they need the meager income they make and they know that if they complain,
the farmer will report them to immigration authorities and they will be deported. The fragile security of
working for the farmer outweighs the uncertainty of living in poverty in Mexico.
3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special
To explain the need to feel “chosen,” Lipman-Blumen points to historic religious leaders, such as Moses
and John Calvin, who emphasized to their people that there were “chosen ones” among them who were
special and singled out by a higher authority. Being a part of “the chosen” means one has “truth” on
one’s side and those who are the “others” do not. Being chosen means protecting one’s uniqueness and
distinguishing oneself from others. While being chosen provides some comfort and even a feeling of
immortality, it can motivate some to do battle with others. Being part of the chosen and feeling that they
are “right” gives a sense of security to followers, but it does so at the expense of appreciating the
humanity of “the others.”
Consider, for example, those who adhere to a white supremacist ideology based on the belief that white
people are “chosen” and superior to all other races and should have control over people of those other
races. White supremacists oppose people of color and those members of non-Christian religions who
they believe threaten the “purity” of the white race. Followers of white supremacy’s belief in being
somehow special reinforces their behaviors, which often involve treating others inhumanely.
4. Our Need for Membership in the Human Community
Psychologist William Schutz (1958) argued that one of humans’ strongest interpersonal needs is to
know whether they belong to the group. Are we “in” or “out”? Are we included with others and
acknowledged as a member of the community or not?
When groups and organizations function positively, it is healthy for all group members, not detrimental.
Group members feel accepted, comfortable, valued, and inspirited. But people’s need to be members of
the group can be exploited by destructive leaders who take advantage of individuals who are highly
dependent on the group for their own personal meaning and purpose. Highly dependent followers may
be willing to give up their individuality, beliefs, and integrity just to make sure they can retain their social
belonging (Lipman-Blumen, 2005).
Consider the number of disturbing hazing incidents at fraternities or other groups on college campuses
that have resulted in the injuries and deaths of new members (pledges) who are willing to endure
dangerous rituals because of their high need to belong to the group. Followers can become vulnerable
to bad leadership when they are unable to moderate their own personal need for belonging.
5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social Death
When an individual becomes a part of and acquires full membership to a group, the individual typically
learns and begins to practice the norms of the group. Surrounded by the group, followers become
comfortable with the group’s values, mission, and beliefs. In addition, followers begin to like being a
group member and doing what group members do and find the inclusion and community of the group
comforting.
But being a part of the group also has a downside. This inclusion and community makes it difficult for
individuals to break out of the group or dissent if the group’s mission or values run counter to their own.
Pressure to conform to the group makes it challenging for individuals to disagree with the group or try to
get the group to change. When followers act against group norms or bring attention to the negative
aspects of what the group is doing (e.g., whistle-blowers), they run a high risk of becoming ostracized
and isolated from the group.
For example, imagine being in a group of friends, and several members of your group have started to
make fun of a young man in your class who is on the autism spectrum and often acts awkwardly in
social situations. You dislike how they treat this young man and consider their behavior to be bullying.
Do you speak up and tell them to stop, knowing that you might be ostracized by the rest of the group?
Or do you “keep quiet” and maintain your relationships with your friends? Being an ethical follower
carries with it the burden of acting out your individual values even when it can mean social death.
6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad Leader
Finally, followers may unintentionally enable destructive leaders because they feel helpless to change
them. Once a part of a group, followers often feel pressure to conform to the norms of the group. They
find that it is not easy to challenge the leader or go against the leader’s plans for the group. Even when
a leader acts inappropriately or treats others in harmful ways, it is hard for followers to muster the
courage to address the leader’s behavior. Groups provide security for followers, and the threat of losing
this security can make it scary to challenge authority figures. To speak truth to power is a brave act, and
followers often feel powerless to express themselves in the face of authority. Although being an
accepted follower in a group carries with it many benefits, it does not always promote personal agency.
After all, who would support you if you challenged the leader? For example, imagine what it would be
like to be a gay employee in an organization whose leadership is openly prejudiced against individuals
who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Would you be likely to express disapproval of the
leadership and its policies?
Table 13.3 Psychological Factors and Dysfunctional Leadership
1. Our need for reassuring authority figures
2. Our need for security and certainty
3. Our need to feel chosen or special
4. Our need for membership in the human community
5. Our fear of ostracism, isolation, and social death
6. Our fear of powerlessness to challenge a bad leader
Source: From “Followership Theory: A Review and Research Agenda,” by M. Uhl-Bien, R. R. Riggio, R. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten,
The Leadership Quarterly, 25, p. 98. Copyright 2014 by Elsevier. Reprinted with permission.
The six psychological needs of followers outlined by Lipman-Blumen are essential to understanding the
role of followers in fostering destructive leadership. When followers attempt to fulfill these needs, it can
create contexts where unethical and destructive leaders are allowed to thrive.
HOW DOES FOLLOWERSHIP WORK?
Unlike established leadership theories such as leader–member exchange theory (Chapter 7) or
transformational leadership (Chapter 8) for which there are formulated models, assumptions, and
theorems, followership is an area of study still in its infancy. However, it does provide several
“takeaways” that have valuable implications for practicing followership.
First, simply discussing followership forces us to elevate its importance and the value of followers. For
many years, the role of leaders in the leadership process has been esteemed far above that of
followers, as evidenced by the thousands of research studies that exist on leaders and leadership
approaches and the very few that have been done on followership. Leadership has been idealized as a
central component of organizational behavior. But by focusing on followership, we are forced to engage
in a new way of thinking about those who do the work of leadership and to explore the merits of the
people who do the work of followership. Leadership does not exist in a vacuum; it needs followers to be
operationalized. Followership research highlights the essential role that followers fulfill in every aspect of
organizational accomplishments. Why should we focus on followership? Because it is just as important
as leadership.
Second, followership is about how individuals accept the influence of others to reach a common goal. It
describes the characteristics and actions of people who have less power than the leader yet are critical
components in the leadership process. The typologies of follower behaviors discussed in this chapter
provide a criterion of what followers typically do in different situations when they are being influenced by
a leader. Do they help the leader, or do they fight the leader? Do they make the organization run better
or worse? Categorizations of followers are beneficial because they help us understand the way people
act when occupying a follower role. To know that a person is a follower is useful, but to know if that
follower is dependent-passive or proactive-antiauthoritarian is far more valuable. These categories
provide information about how followers act and how a leader can respond accordingly. It also helps
leaders know followers’ attitudes toward work and the organization and how to best communicate with
these followers.
Third, followership research provides a means of understanding why harmful leadership occurs and
sometimes goes unrestrained. Followers are interdependent with leaders in the leadership process—
each affects and is affected by the other. When leaders are abusive or unethical, it affects followers. But
followers often feel restrained to respond. While they may want to respond to destructive leaders,
followers will often become passive and inactive instead. This occurs because they fear losing the
security provided by their membership in the group. By understanding their own feelings of
powerlessness and need for security and community, followers can more easily identify and confront
destructive leaders.
STRENGTHS
In this chapter, we trace the development of followership and how it has been conceptualized by
researchers over the past 50 years. This research has several strengths.
First, it gives recognition to followership as an integral part of the leadership equation. While some
earlier theories of leadership (e.g., implicit leadership theory [Lord & Maher, 1991] and social identity
theory [Tajfel & Turner, 1986]) recognize followers as an element in the leadership process, the most
recent literature suggests an approach to followership that elevates it considerably and gives it equal
footing with leadership. Further underscoring the complexity and importance of followership, Popper
(2014) suggests that followers’ attraction to leaders emerges from one of three perspectives: (a)
psychoanalytic, where the leader is seen as a protective figure; (b) cognitive-psychological, where the
leader is seen as a suitable and psychologically convenient explanation for a complex reality; or (c)
social-psychological, in which the leader is a kind of narrative imparting meaning to followers’ social
identity and sense of self-worth. This emphasis broadens our purview of leadership and suggests that
followership will—and should—receive far more attention by researchers and practitioners in the future.
Second, a focus on followership forces a whole new way for people to think about leadership. While
there are textbooks on leadership, such as Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy’s Leadership: Enhancing the
Lessons of Experience (2014), that give special attention to followership, current followership research
and literature go further and challenge us to take leadership off its pedestal and replace it with
followership. It forces us to focus on followers rather than leaders. It looks to answer questions like
these: What makes effective followership? How do followers affect group processes and influence goal
accomplishment? How do followers influence leaders? For example, recent research by Carsten, Uhl-
Bien, and Huang (2018) found that followers influence their leaders through less voice and upward
delegation (for example, passing problems to a manager rather than solving the problem themselves).
Leaders were less motivated, and less likely to contribute to goal attainment, when followers were
passive and engaged in upward delegation. It makes sense that organizations should pay more
attention to training followers, rather than just leaders, in how to work effectively together.
In addition, new followership literature invites us to view leadership as a co-constructed process in which
followers and leaders share equally. Rather than focusing on the individuals with the power, our thinking
needs to shift to embracing the individuals without the power and the relationship these people make
with the leader. The study of followership reminds us that leadership is incomplete and cannot be
understood without focusing on and understanding the role and dimensions of followers. For example,
Pietraszewski (2019) describes how leadership and followership can solve the problem of coordination
and cooperation toward goal attainment. He points out that no one follower has all the information
needed to solve complex problems alone. Therefore, leaders and followers create a “social
marketplace” where leaders propose alternatives, and leaders and followers choose their responses
from among them. This marketplace operates on social information processing where leaders and
followers propose and evaluate options.
Third, although in its infancy, followership research provides a set of basic prescriptions for what a
follower should or should not do to be effective. These prescriptions provide a general blueprint of the
types of behaviors that create effective followership. For example, effective followers balance their need
for community with their need for self. They act in the best interests of the organization and challenge
the leader when the leader’s agenda is self-serving or unethical. Effective followers do not act
antiauthoritarian, but collaborate to get the job done. Furthermore, they recognize powerlessness in
themselves but do not let this keep them from challenging the leader when necessary. While the
followership research has not yet produced elegant theories that explain the intricacies of how
followership works, it does provide a set of ideas that have strong practical applications.
Furthermore, research on implicit followership theory suggests that leaders look for both attributes
related to performance and attributes such as loyalty and being able to cooperate with others in their
view of an “ideal” follower (Carsten et al., 2010). Sy (2010) found six factors constitute the ideal follower:
industry, enthusiasm, good citizenship, conformity, insubordination, and incompetence. The first three
were valued positively (i.e. followership prototype), and the latter three had negative values (i.e.,
followership antiprototype). This research also found that when followers fit the leader’s implicit
prototype for being a good follower, they reported that they liked the leader more and had higher
relationship quality and trust. Alipour, Mohammed, and Martinez (2017) propose that timing plays an
important role in understanding the effects of followership prototypes. Meeting a leader’s expectations
on deadlines, time perspective, preference for multitasking, and pacing style all could depend on
whether the follower matches the leader’s implicit follower prototype. A follower who is aware of and
able to engage in behaviors that are consistent with a leader’s ideal follower prototype may be more
likely to meet the leader’s time-related expectations, reducing coordination problems. Followers who
perceive an alignment between their followership prototype and their actual behavior are more likely to
view followership as part of their self-concept, claim to be a follower rather than a leader, and be more
open to their leader’s attempts to shape their social identity as a good follower (Epitropaki, Kark,
Mainemelis, & Lord, 2017).
CRITICISMS
In addition to its strengths, the study of followership has certain limitations. First, the methodical
research that has been conducted on the process of followership is in the nascent stage. The absence
of advanced research makes it difficult to concretely conceptualize the nature of followership including
what defines followers and how followers contribute to the leadership process. Without precise theories
and models of followership, there can be no clear set of principles or practices about how followership
works and the role it plays in groups, organizations, and the community.
Second, the current followership literature is primarily personal observations and anecdotal. For
example, the typologies of followership styles discussed earlier in the chapter (i.e., Zaleznik, Kelley,
Chaleff, and Kellerman) are useful category systems to differentiate between followers’ styles, but the
derivation of the typologies is simply the conjectures and hypotheses of a single author. While such
descriptive research, including designing different typologies, is a traditional process in the initial phase
of theory development, the value and power of our thinking on followership will not advance until
followership is fully conceptualized and tested.
Third, the leader-centric orientation that exists in the world may be too ingrained for followership to
blossom. For followership to succeed, it will need both leaders and followers to be strong in their roles;
followers must serve the purpose of teaching the leader as well as learning from the leader (Chaleff,
1995). And in a leader-centric world, where followership’s primary purpose is seen as important only to
make leaders leaders (you can’t be a leader if no one is following), this evolution may take a very long
time to come about. There is a need for research that considers both leader and follower prototypes and
how these expectations influence the leadership process and outcomes (Foti, Hansbrough, Epitropaki,
& Coyle, 2017). Until we have more research that is dyadic, we will only understand parts of the
dynamics that explain effective followership.
Fourth, research on followers has not fully addressed the question “Why follow?” Bastardoz and Van
Vugt (2019) critiqued the followership literature from an evolutionary psychology perspective. They
assert that followership is puzzling because there has been no explanation for why followers give up
autonomy and put their own goals aside to follow leaders. From an evolutionary perspective,
followership evolved to address problems in groups such as hunting, gathering, and peacekeeping.
Those who do not have the ability to lead are more likely to become followers. Also, followership occurs
because of the rewards followers receive from a leader, goal alignment, the challenges faced by the
group, and the leader’s style. The authors argue that evolutionary psychology offers a more robust
explanation for followership than current theoretical approaches offered in the literature.
Fifth, there has been little research on when and/or how patterns of followership are beneficial or
detrimental. Followership is not without risks. Qualitative research conducted by Benson, Hardy, and
Eys (2016) found that leaders viewed followership as important because they rely on followers to offer
alternative insights on and solutions to problems. However, they also expect followers to support leader
directives. In some instances, follower attempts to influence their leaders were “at the wrong time and
place” and viewed as disruptive by the leader. This research raises an important caveat for followers:
While proactivity is important, followers must be aware and calibrate their influence attempts by taking
the situational factors into account.
APPLICATION
“Follow the leader” is an expression familiar to many. Whether it was a way for teachers to avoid
confusion and keep peace with their charges or a game played on the playground, “follow the leader”
means people need to get in line behind the designated leader and do what the leader tells them to do.
Following the leader is about the process of accepting the leader’s authority and influence. More
importantly, it is about deciding how to respond to what the leader says.
Followership research is about just that: understanding how and why followers respond to leaders.
There are several applications of followership research.
First and foremost, the research underscores the importance of followership—it is as important as
leadership. This chapter helps us understand the critical and complex role followers play in regard to
leaders. It differentiates common roles followers play, from very active and positive to very inactive and
negative. When applied to real-life leadership situations, knowledge about followers and their roles and
behaviors expands our understanding of the major components that contribute to group and
organizational success.
In addition, the study of followership has implications for organizational training and development.
Although followership is not currently recognized as a top topic in the training and development field, it is
not difficult to see how workshops and training in followership could become very important to
organizations in the near future. Learning about followership could help followers understand
themselves, how they function, and how they can best contribute to the goals of the group or
organization of which they are members. Clearly, there is demonstrable value in training programs on
such topics as “Being an Effective Follower,” “Dealing With Destructive Bosses,” or “Accepting the
Challenges of Followership.” With the increased attention being given to followership research, it is
expected that an increase in training programs on followership will result as well.
Furthermore, the information described in this chapter can help leaders to understand followers and how
to most effectively work with them. So much of the current leadership literature is about the leader and
the leader’s behavior; however, this chapter shifts the attention to the follower and why followers act the
way they do. Leaders can use this followership information to adjust their style to the needs of followers.
For example, if the leader finds that followers are aggressive and disruptive, the information in this
chapter suggests that they may have authority issues and are acting out because of their own needs for
security. Or, some followers may be quiet and compliant, suggesting they need leadership that assures
them that they are a part of the group and encourages them to participate more in the group process.
Leaders have tried for years to treat followers as individuals with unique needs, but this chapter goes
further and provides leaders with cues for action that are derived directly from the followership literature.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following three case studies (Cases 13.1, 13.2, and 13.3) present followership in three different
contexts. The first case describes a home health care agency and the unique ways followers contribute
to the work of the agency. The second case discusses a renowned rowing team and the way the
followers worked together to create cohesiveness and a magical outcome. The last case examines the
role of followership in the circumstances that brought down a well-regarded collegiate football program
and the university’s leadership. At the end of each case, there are questions that will help you to analyze
the case utilizing the principles of followership discussed in the chapter.
Case 13.1 Bluebird Care
Robin Martin started Bluebird Care, an in-home health care agency, 20 years ago with a staff of 2 and 5
clients. The agency has grown to a staff of 25 serving 50 clients.
Robin started in elder care as an aide at a reputable assisted living facility. She liked caring for patients
and was good at it. When she began running Bluebird Care, Robin knew all her staff members and their
clients. But as the demand for in-home health care has increased, Bluebird Care has grown as well—
hiring more staff and expanding its service area. For Robin, this means less time with the company’s
clients and more time managing her growing agency. She admits she feels as if she is losing her
connections with her clients and staff.
When asked to describe a time when the agency was really running smoothly, Robin talks about when
Bluebird Care had just 10 employees. “This was a good time for us. Everyone did what they were
assigned and did not complain. No one called in sick; they were very dependable. But, it was different
then because we all lived in the same area and I would see each of our employees every week. On
Tuesdays they had to hand in their time sheets, and every other Thursday they stopped to pick up their
paycheck. I enjoyed this.”
Because the agency’s service area is much larger now, encompassing many of the city’s suburbs, Robin
seldom sees her employees. Time sheets are emailed in by employees, and paychecks are sent
through the mail or directly deposited into employees’ bank accounts. Robin says, “Because they never
see us, the staff feels like they can do what they want, and management has nothing to say about it. It’s
not the same as when we were smaller.”
There is a core of agency staff that Robin does interact with nearly every day. Terry, a staff member who
has been with Robin since the beginning, is Robin’s go-to person. “I trust her,” Robin says. “When she
says, ‘Robin—we need to do it this way,’ I do what she says. She is always right.” Terry is very positive
and promotive of the agency and complimentary of Robin. When other staff members challenge the
rules or procedures of the agency, Terry is the person to whom Robin goes to for advice. But, Terry also
challenges Robin to make Bluebird Care the best agency it can be.
Terry is a direct contrast to Belinda, another employee. A five-year staff member, Belinda is dogmatic
and doesn’t like change, yet frequently challenges Robin and the rules of the agency. Robin describes
Belinda as “a bully” and not a team player. For example, Belinda and Robin had a conflict about a rule in
the agency’s procedural manual that requires staff to work every other weekend. Belinda argued that it
was unfair to force staff members to work every other weekend and that other similar agencies don’t
have such policies. To prove her point, Belinda obtained a competing agency’s manual that supported
her position and showed it to Robin.
Robin, who does not like confrontation, was frustrated by Belinda’s aggressive conflict style. Robin
brought up the issue about weekends with Terry, and Terry supported her and the way the policy was
written. In the end, Belinda did not get the policy changed, but both Belinda and Robin are sure there
will be more conflicts to come.
Two other key staff members are Robin’s son, Caleb, who hires and trains most of the employees, and
her son-in-law, James, who answers the phone and does scheduling. Robin says as a manager James
does his work in a quiet, respectful manner and seldom causes problems. In addition to handling all the
hiring and training, Robin relies on Caleb to troubleshoot issues regarding client services. For both
James and Caleb, the job can become stressful because it is their phones that ring when a staff
member doesn’t show up to a client’s for work and they have to find someone to fill in.
Caleb also says he is working hard to instill a sense of cohesiveness among the agency’s far-flung staff
and to reduce turnover with their millennial-age staff members. Caleb says while the agency’s growth is
seen as positive, he worries that the caring philosophy his mother started the agency with is becoming
lost.
Questions
1. Who are the followers at Bluebird Care?
2. In what way is followership related to the mission of the agency? Do Robin and her managers
recognize the importance of followership? Explain.
3. Using the roles identified in Chaleff’s follower typology (Figure 13.4), what roles do Terry, Belinda,
Caleb, and James play at the agency?
4. Using the “reversing the lens” framework (Figure 13.6), explain how Caleb and James’s
characteristics contribute to the followership outcomes at Bluebird Care.
5. Terry and Robin have a unique relationship in that they both engage in leading and following. How
do you think each of them views leadership and followership? Discuss.
6. If you were an organizational consultant, what would you suggest to Robin that could strengthen
Bluebird Care? If you were a followership coach, how would you advise Robin?
Case 13.2 Olympic Rowers
In the 1930s, rowing was the most popular sport in the country. The sport not only was physically brutal,
but required inexhaustible teamwork. In an eight-man rowing shell, each member of the team has a role
to fulfill based on where he sits in the boat. The movements of each rower are precisely synchronized
with the movements of the others in the boat. Every rower in the shell must perform flawlessly with each
and every pull of the oar; if one member of the crew is off, the whole team is off. Any one rower’s
mistake can throw off the tempo for the boat’s thrust and jeopardize the balance and success of the
boat.
In the early 1930s, rowing was a sport dominated by elite East Coast universities like Cornell, Harvard,
and Princeton. However, two West Coast teams, the University of California, Berkeley, and the
University of Washington, had an intense rivalry not only with the crews from the East Coast but with
one another as well. Al Ulbrickson, the varsity crew coach at the University of Washington, had watched
jealously as the California team ascended to national prominence, representing the United States in the
1932 Olympics, and was determined that his University of Washington team would be the one to
represent the United States at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, Germany.
Ulbrickson’s program had a number of talented rowers, including those who had rowed to win the
national freshman championships in 1934. Unlike teams from the East Coast whose members’ lives
were often marked by privilege and wealth, many of the boys in the University of Washington program
came from poor, working-class backgrounds. They were the sons of loggers, farmers, and fishermen,
and gaining a spot on the rowing team would help pay for their college education. Over the summer
break these same boys would work, often in dangerous and physically taxing jobs, so they could afford
to return to college in the fall.
Finding the ideal makeup of members for a successful rowing team is a complex process. A great crew
is a carefully balanced mix of rowers with different physical abilities and personalities. According to
Brown (2013), “Good crews are blends of personalities: someone to lead the charge, someone to hold
something in reserve, someone to pick a fight, someone to make peace, someone to think through,
someone to charge ahead without thinking. . . . Even after the right mixture is found, each oarsman
must recognize their place in the fabric of the crew and accept the others as they are” (pp. 179–180).
To find that magic mix, Ulbrickson experimented with different combinations of rowers, putting individual
rowers on different teams to see how they performed together. But it was more than just putting the right
abilities together; it was finding the right chemistry. He finally did with a team of boys who “had been
winnowed down by punishing competition, and in the winnowing a kind of common character had issued
forth: they were all skilled, they were all tough, they were all fiercely determined, but they were also all
good-hearted. Every one of them had come from humble origins or been humbled by the hard times in
which they had grown up. . . . The challenges they had faced together had taught them humility—the
need to subsume their individual egos for the sake of the boat as a whole—and humility was the
common gateway through which they were able now to come together” (Brown, 2013, p. 241). One of
those team members said when he stepped into the shell with his new teammates, he finally felt at
home.
This Washington varsity team decimated the competition on the East and West Coasts, earning a spot
on the U.S. Olympic team. At the Berlin Olympics, the team faced a number of challenges. One of their
key oarsmen had fallen seriously ill on the transatlantic voyage to Germany and remained sick
throughout the competition. There were distractions everywhere. But every time the American boys saw
tension or nervousness in one another, they drew closer together as a group and talked earnestly and
seriously to each other. They draped arms over one another’s shoulders and talked through their race
plan. “Each of them knew a defining moment in his life was nearly at hand and no one wanted to waste
it. And none wanted to waste it for the others” (Brown, 2013, p. 326).
The team defeated England in its preliminary heat, and made it to the finals. But the odds were stacked
against them: They were in the worst lane in the final race, which put them at a two-length
disadvantage; they experienced a delayed start because their coxswain missed the signal that the race
had begun; and their sick oarsman was barely conscious. But they came from behind and triumphed,
winning Olympic gold.
As Brown (2013) points out, “No other sport demands and rewards the complete abandonment of the
self the way that rowing does. Great crews may have men or women of exceptional talent or strength;
they may have outstanding skills . . . but they have no stars. The team effort—the perfectly synchronized
flow of muscle, oars, boat, and water . . . the single, whole, unified, and beautiful symphony that a crew
in motion becomes—is all that matters. Not the individual, not the self” (pp. 177–178).
Questions
1. In what way is this case about followership? Who were the followers? Who were the leaders?
2. The coxswain is the crew member who sits in the stern facing the bow, steers the boat, and
coordinates the power and rhythm of the rowers. In this case, is the coxswain’s role more or less
important than the roles of other crew members? Explain your answer.
3. Reversing the lens emphasizes that followers can be change agents—what was the impact of
followers’ characteristics on followers’ behaviors in this case? What impact do you think
Ulbrickson’s perception and behaviors had on the rowers in his program?
4. How would you describe the impact of both followers and leaders on followership outcome?
5. In this case, the boys in the boat created a highly cohesive unit. Do you think highly effective
followership always results in cohesiveness? Defend your answer.
Case 13.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal
In the 46 years that Joe Paterno was head football coach of the Penn State Nittany Lions, he racked up
409 victories and was the most victorious football coach in the history of the National Collegiate Athletic
Association. Paterno called his brand of coaching “The Grand Experiment” because he aimed to prove
that football excellence and academic integrity could coexist. Imbuing his program with the motto
“Success With Honor,” Paterno was as interested in the moral character of his players as in their
physical abilities, a fact borne out by the program’s unusually high graduation rates (Mahler, 2011). Over
four decades, a positive mythology enveloped the program, the university, and Paterno, instilling a
fervent Penn State pride in students, faculty, staff, athletes, and fans across the globe, contributing to
Penn State’s reputation as one of the most highly regarded public universities in the United States.
But in 2011, a child sexual abuse scandal involving a former Penn State assistant football coach caused
“The Grand Experiment” to tumble from its high perch, bringing down with it not only Coach Paterno, the
university’s athletic director Tim Curley, and the storied Penn State football program, but also the
university’s president, Graham B. Spanier.
The seeds of the scandal began in 1977 when Penn State’s then defensive line coach Jerry Sandusky
established a nonprofit organization called The Second Mile that was described as a “group foster home
devoted to helping troubled boys.” Sandusky’s position and association with Penn State gave the charity
credibility, but The Second Mile ultimately proved to be a cover and conduit for Sandusky’s sexual
abuse of boys. It is alleged that through The Second Mile, Sandusky was able to identify and meet
many of the young men who ultimately became his victims.
Fast-forward to more than 30 years later when, in 2008, the mother of a high school freshman reported
to officials that her son was sexually abused by Sandusky. Sandusky had been retired from Penn State
since 1999, but continued to coach as a volunteer, working with kids through his Second Mile charity. As
a result of the call, the state’s attorney general launched an investigation of Sandusky, and evidence
was uncovered that this wasn’t the first time Sandusky had been alleged of committing sexual abuse.
Allegations of his abuse had been cropping up since the late 1990s.
In 1998, the mother of an 11-year-old boy called Penn State University police after she learned her son
had showered naked with Sandusky in the campus’s athletic locker room and that Sandusky touched
the child inappropriately. At the time, Paterno, Curley, and Spanier, as well as Gary C. Schultz, senior
vice president for finance and business, were all informed of the incident, and an investigation was
conducted. Even though police talked with another boy who reported similar treatment, they opted to
close the case. During an interview with university police and a representative from the Pennsylvania
Department of Public Welfare (now known as Human Services), Sandusky said he would not shower
with children again.
Two years later, in the fall of 2000, a janitor in Penn State’s Lasch football building told a coworker and
supervisor that he saw Sandusky engaged in sexual activity with a boy in the assistant coach’s shower.
Fearing for their jobs, neither the janitor nor his coworker filed a report; their supervisor did not file a
report, either.
“They knew who Sandusky was,” Special Investigative Counsel Louis J. Freeh later said after he
completed an eight-month investigation of the scandal in 2012. “They said the university would circle
around it. It was like going against the president of the United States. If that’s the culture on the bottom,
God help the culture at the top” (Wolverton, 2012).
In 2001, Penn State graduate assistant Mike McQueary witnessed Sandusky sexually assaulting a boy
in the showers at the Lasch football building. McQueary visited Coach Paterno’s home the next morning
to tell the coach what he had witnessed. Paterno, in turn, reported the incident to Athletic Director
Curley. It wasn’t until 10 days later, however, that McQueary finally met with Curley and Schultz to
describe what he saw.
Initially Curley, Schultz, and Spanier decided to report the incident to the Department of Public Welfare.
However, two days later, Curley informed Schultz and Spanier that he had changed his mind after
“talking it over with Joe” Paterno. They decided instead to offer Sandusky “professional help” and tell
him to stop bringing guests to the locker room (Wolverton, 2012). No report was made to the police or
the child protection agency. It was later found that in an email, Spanier told Curley he approved of the
athletic director’s decision not to report the incident, calling it a “humane and reasonable way to
proceed” (Wolverton, 2012).
McQueary, meanwhile, continued to work at Penn State, being promoted to an assistant football coach’s
position. And over the next seven years, Sandusky reportedly kept meeting and sexually assaulting
young boys.
When Sandusky was finally arrested and charged with 40 counts of sexual abuse in 2011, it was at the
end of a three-year investigation launched by that mother’s 2008 phone call. The investigation not only
uncovered that Sandusky sexually abused eight boys over a 15-year period, but determined that
university leaders, including Spanier and Schultz, knew about the coach’s behavior and did not act.
During testimony they gave during the attorney general’s investigation, these same leaders denied
knowing about the 1998 and 2001 incidents; but the investigation proved through emails and other
documents that university leaders did not truthfully admit what they knew about these incidents and
when they knew it. As a result, Curley and Schultz were charged with perjury and failure to report what
they knew of the allegations.
While Spanier called Sandusky’s behavior “troubling,” he pledged his unconditional support for both
Curley and Schultz, predicting they would be exonerated (Keller, 2012). Two days later, however,
Paterno and Spanier were fired by the university’s Board of Trustees, and the board hired Freeh to
conduct an independent investigation of the scandal.
Eight months later, Freeh released a scathing 267-page report that detailed how and when university
leaders knew about Sandusky’s behavior and stated that they failed to report repeated allegations of
child sexual abuse by Sandusky. The report stated that Spanier and Paterno displayed “a total disregard
for the safety and welfare of children” and hid critical facts from authorities on the alleged abuses
(Wolverton, 2012).
The investigation by Freeh found emails and other documents suggesting that Spanier, Paterno,
Schultz, and Curley all knew for years about the sexual nature of the accusations against Sandusky and
kept these allegations under wraps. The report stated that Paterno, especially, “was an integral part of
the act to conceal” (Keller, 2012). Athletic Director Curley was described in the report as “someone who
followed instruction regardless of the consequences and was ‘loyal to a fault.’” One senior official called
Curley Paterno’s “errand boy.” And finally, the investigation concluded that Spanier “failed in his duties
as president” for “not promptly and fully advising the Board of Trustees about the 1998 and 2001 child-
sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky and the subsequent grand jury investigation of him” (Keller,
2012).
But it wasn’t just the university administrators who took fire. The report also cited the university’s Board
of Trustees for failing “to exercise its oversight,” stating “the Board did not create a ‘tone at the top’
environment wherein Sandusky and other senior university officials believed they were accountable to
it.” Ultimately, Freeh’s report concluded that the reputations of the university and its exalted football
program were “more important to its leaders than the safety and welfare of young children” (Keller,
2012).
Joe Paterno died in January 2012. Six months later, Sandusky, the assistant coach he protected, was
convicted of 45 counts of child sexual abuse and sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison. Former Penn
State officials Curley, Schultz, and Spanier were all sentenced to jail time for failing to alert authorities of
the allegations against Sandusky, allowing him to continue molesting boys for years.
A month after Sandusky’s conviction and 10 days after Freeh’s report was released, a much-beloved 7-
foot, 900-pound bronze statue of Paterno was removed from its pedestal outside Penn State’s Beaver
Stadium, providing symbolic evidence of the failure of Paterno’s “Success With Honor” motto and the
public’s faith in Penn State’s program.
Questions
1. How would you describe the followership at Penn State? Whom would you identify as the followers?
Who are the leaders?
2. Using Kelley’s typology, how would you describe the follower styles for Schultz and Curley? What
about McQueary?
3. How did followers in this case act in ways that contribute to the power of destructive leaders and
their goals? What was the debilitating impact their actions had on the organization?
4. Based on Lipman-Blumen’s psychological factors that contribute to harmful leadership (Table 13.3),
explain why those who could have reported Sandusky’s behaviors chose not to.
5. Based on the outcome, where did Paterno’s intentions go wrong? In what ways could followers
have changed the moral climate at Penn State?
6. In the end, who carries the burden of responsibility regarding the failure of Paterno’s program—the
leaders or the followers? Defend your answer.
Leadership Instrument
As discussed earlier in this chapter, Kelley (1992) developed a typology that categorized followers into
one of five styles (exemplary, alienated, conformist, passive, and pragmatist) based on two axes
(independent thinking and active engagement). These different dimensions of followership became the
basis for Kelley’s Followership Questionnaire, a survey that allows followership style to be determined
through an empirical approach, rather than through observation.
Followership Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to learn about your style as a follower.
Instructions: Think of a specific leader–follower situation where you were in the role of follower.
For each statement, please use the following scale to indicate the extent to which the statement
describes you and your behavior in this situation.
Key: 0 = Rarely 1 = Almost rarely 2 = Seldom 3 = Occasionally 4 = More often than
not 5 = Often 6 = Almost always
1. Does your work help you fulfill some societal goal or personal
dream that is important to you?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
2. Are your personal work goals aligned with the organization’s
priority goals?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
3. Are you highly committed to and energized by your work and
organization, giving them your best ideas and performance?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
4. Does your enthusiasm also spread to and energize your
coworkers?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
5. Instead of waiting for or merely accepting what the leader tells
you, do you personally identify which organizational activities are
most critical for achieving the organization’s priority goals?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Do you actively develop a distinctive competence in those critical
activities so that you become more valuable to the leader and the
organization?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. When starting a new job or assignment, do you promptly build a
record of successes in tasks that are important to the leader?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
8. Can the leader give you a difficult assignment without the benefit
of much supervision, knowing that you will meet your deadline with
highest-quality work and that you will “fill in the cracks” if need be?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
9. Do you take the initiative to seek out and successfully complete
assignments that go above and beyond your job?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10. When you are not the leader of a group project, do you still
contribute at a high level, often doing more than your share?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
11. Do you independently think up and champion new ideas that will
contribute significantly to the leader’s or the organization’s goals?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
12. Do you try to solve the tough problems (technical or
organizational), rather than look to the leader to do it for you?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
13. Do you help out other coworkers, making them look good, even
when you don’t get any credit?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
14. Do you help the leader or group see both the upside potential and
downside risks of ideas or plans, playing the devil’s advocate if
need be?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
15. Do you understand the leader’s needs, goals, and constraints, and
work hard to help meet them?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
16. Do you actively and honestly own up to your strengths and
weaknesses rather than put off evaluation?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
17. Do you make a habit of internally questioning the wisdom of the
leader’s decision rather than just doing what you are told?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
18. When the leader asks you to do something that runs contrary to
your professional or personal preferences, do you say “no” rather
than “yes”?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
19. Do you act on your own ethical standards rather than the leader’s
or the group’s standards?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
20. Do you assert your views on important issues, even though it
might mean conflict with your group or reprisals from the leader?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Source: Excerpts from Kelley, Robert E. (1992). The Power of Followership: How to Create Leaders People Want to Follow
and Followers Who Lead Themselves. New York: Doubleday.
Scoring
The Followership Questionnaire measures your style as a follower based on two dimensions of
followership: independent thinking and active engagement. Your responses indicate the degree
to which you are an independent thinker and actively engaged in your follower role. Score the
questionnaire by doing the following. Your scores will classify you as being primarily one of the
five styles: exemplary, alienated, conformist, pragmatist, or passive.
1. Independent Thinking Score: Sum of questions 1, 5, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20
2. Active Engagement Score: Sum of questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, and 15
Exemplary Followership Style: If you scored high (above 40) on both independent
thinking and active engagement, your followership style is categorized as exemplary.
Alienated Followership Style: If you scored high (above 40) on independent thinking and
low (below 20) on active engagement, your followership style is categorized as
alienated.
Conformist Followership Style: If you scored low (below 20) on independent thinking
and high (above 40) on active engagement, your followership style is categorized as
conformist.
Pragmatist Followership Style: If you scored in the middle range (from 20 to 40) on both
independent thinking and active engagement, your followership style is categorized as
pragmatist.
Passive Followership Style: If you scored low (below 20) on both independent thinking
and active engagement, your followership style is categorized as passive.
Followership Style Independent Thinking Score Active Engagement Score
EXEMPLARY High High
ALIENATED High Low
CONFORMIST Low High
Followership Style Independent Thinking Score Active Engagement Score
PRAGMATIST Middling Middling
PASSIVE Low Low
Source: Adapted from Kelley, Robert E. (1992). The Power of Followership: How to Create Leaders People Want to Follow
and Followers Who Lead Themselves. New York: Doubleday.
Scoring Interpretation
What do the different styles mean? How should you interpret your style? The followership styles
characterize how you carry out the followership role, not who you are as a person. At any point in
time, or under different circumstances, you may use one followership pattern rather than another.
Exemplary Follower
Exemplary followers score high in both independent thinking and active engagement. They
exhibit independent, critical thinking, separate from the group or leader. They are actively
engaged, using their talents for the benefit of the organization, even when confronted with
bureaucracy or other noncontributing members. Up to 35% of people are categorized as
exemplary followers.
Alienated Follower
Alienated followers score high in independent thinking but low in active engagement. This means
that they think independently and critically, but are not active in carrying out the role of a follower.
They might disengage from the group at times and may view themselves as victims who have
received unfair treatment. Approximately 15%–25% of people are categorized as alienated
followers.
Conformist Follower
Conformist followers often say “yes” when they really want to say “no.” Low in independent
thinking and high in active engagement, they willingly take orders and are eager to please
others. They believe that the leader’s position of power entitles the leader to followers’
obedience. They do not question the social order and find comfort in structure. Approximately
20%–30% of people are categorized as conformist followers.
Pragmatist Follower
With independent thinking and active engagement styles that fall between high and low,
pragmatic followers are most comfortable in the middle of the road and tend to adhere to a motto
of “better safe than sorry.” They will question a leader’s decisions, but not too often or too openly.
They perform required tasks, but seldom do more than is asked or expected. Approximately
25%–35% of people are categorized as pragmatist followers.
Passive Follower
With low independent thinking and low active engagement behaviors, passive followers are the
opposite of exemplary followers, looking to the leader to do their thinking for them. They do not
carry out their assignments with enthusiasm and lack initiative and a sense of responsibility.
Approximately 5%–10% of people are categorized as passive followers.
Source: Excerpts from Kelley, Robert E. (1992). The Power of Followership: How to Create Leaders People Want to
Follow and Followers Who Lead Themselves. New York: Doubleday.
Summary
Leadership requires followership, and without understanding what the act of following entails, it is
difficult to fully understand leaders and leadership. Therefore, the focus in this chapter is on followership
and the central role followers play in the leadership process.
In recent years, followership has received increased attention as a legitimate and significant area of
leadership study. Followership is defined as a process whereby an individual or individuals accept the
influence of others to accomplish a common goal. It involves a power differential between the follower
and the leader. From a social constructivist perspective, followership emerges from communication
between leaders and followers and involves the relational process of people exerting influence and
others responding to that influence.
Early research on followership resulted in a series of typologies that differentiate the roles followers can
play. The primary types of follower roles identified are active–engaged, independent–assertive,
submissive–compliant, and supportive–conforming.
The development of these typologies provides a starting point for building theory on followership. Based
on a systematic analysis of the research literature, Uhl-Bien and her colleagues (2014) introduced a
broad theory of followership comprising the characteristics, behaviors, and outcomes of followers and
leaders acting in relation to each other. Furthermore, these researchers proposed two ways of theorizing
about followership: (1) reversing the lens, which addresses followers in the opposite way they have
been studied in most prior leadership research, and (2) the leadership co-created process, which
conceptualizes followership as a give-and-take process in which individuals’ following behaviors and
leading behaviors interact with each other to create leadership and its resulting outcomes.
Work by Carsten and colleagues (2014) also advanced several positive facets of followership—followers
get the job done, work in the best interest of the organization’s mission, challenge leaders, support the
leader, and learn from leaders.
In addition to having a positive impact, there is another, darker side to followership. Followers can play
ineffective, and even harmful, roles. Lipman-Blumen (2005) identified a series of psychological factors of
followers that contribute to harmful, dysfunctional leadership. These factors include people’s need for
reassuring authority figures; need for security and certainty; need to feel chosen or special; need for
membership in the human community; fear of ostracism, isolation, and social death; and fear of
powerlessness to challenge a bad leader. The emergence of these factors occurs as a result of people’s
needs to find safety to feel unique and to be included in community.
The existing followership literature has several strengths and certain limitations. On the positive side, the
most recent literature gives recognition to followership as an integral part of the leadership equation and
elevates it considerably, giving it equal footing with leadership. Second, it forces us to take leadership off
its pedestal and replace it with followership. Third, it provides a useful set of basic prescriptions for what
a follower should or should not do in order to be an effective follower.
On the negative side, very little methodical research has been conducted on the process of followership,
which makes it difficult to theorize about followership’s role in groups, organizations, and the community.
Furthermore, the descriptive research that has been conducted on followership is primarily anecdotal
and observational. Third, the world’s pervasive emphasis on and glorification of leadership may be so
ingrained that the study of followership will remain constrained and never flourish. Fourth, followership
research has not fully addressed the question “Why follow?” Finally, there has been little research on
when and/or how patterns of followership are beneficial or detrimental.
In summary, the demand in society for effective, principled followers is growing and along with it a strong
need for research-based theories of the process of followership. Until more research is done on the
intricacies of followership, our understanding of leadership will be incomplete.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
The horizontal axis lists passivity on the left and activity on the right, and the vertical axis lists
dominance or controlling at the top and submission or being controlled at the bottom. The four types of
followers are as follows.
Compulsive: Passivity and Dominance.
Impulsive: Activity and Dominance.
Withdraw: Passivity and Submission.
Masochistic: Activity and Submission.
Back to Figure
The horizontal axis lists passive on the left and active on the right, and the vertical axis lists
independent, critical thinking at the top and dependent, uncritical thinking at the bottom. The five types
of followers are as follows.
Alienated followers: Passive and Independent, Critical Thinking.
Exemplary followers: Active and Independent, Critical Thinking.
Passive followers: Passive and Dependent Uncritical Thinking.
Conformist followers: Active and Dependent Uncritical Thinking.
Pragmatist followers: Center of the axes.
Back to Figure
The horizontal axis lists low challenge on the left and high challenge on the right, and the vertical axis
lists low support at the top and high support at the bottom. The four types of followers are as follows.
Implementer: Low Challenge and High Support.
Partner: High Challenge and High Support.
Resource: Low Challenge and Low Support.
Individualist: High Challenge and Low Support.
14 GENDER AND LEADERSHIP
Stefanie Simon
Crystal L. Hoyt
Women are significantly underrepresented in major leadership positions. The barriers women encounter
on their leadership journey have been dubbed the leadership labyrinth. Removing these barriers will
help ensure equal opportunity, access to the greatest talent pool, and diversity, which have been linked
to organizational success.
DESCRIPTION
While academic researchers ignored issues related to gender and leadership until the 1970s (Chemers,
1997), the increasing numbers of women in leadership positions and women in academia brought about
by dramatic changes in American society have fueled the now robust scholarly interest in the study of
leadership and gender.
Scholars started out asking, “Can women lead?”—a question that is now moot. In addition to the
increasing presence of women in corporate and political leadership roles, we can point to highly
effective leaders who are women, including former prime minister Benazir Bhutto (Pakistan), former
president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf (Liberia), and former prime minster Indira Gandhi (India), and current
world leaders such as Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, Prime Minister Sanna Marin of Finland,
and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand (featured in Case Study 14.3). Beyond politics, there
are many examples of highly effective female leaders including YouTube’s CEO Susan Wojcicki,
Anthem’s CEO Gail Boudreaux, General Motors Company’s CEO Mary Barra, retired four-star general
Ann E. Dunwoody, and U.S. Supreme Court justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ruth Bader
Ginsburg.
The primary research questions now—“Do men and women lead differently?” and “Are men more
effective leaders than women?”—are often subsumed under a larger question: “Why are women
underrepresented in elite leadership roles?” This chapter explores empirical evidence related to these
issues of gender and leadership by discussing the gender gap in leadership and prominent explanations
for it, and by addressing approaches to promoting women in leadership.
The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth
Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth
Although the gender gap in leadership has improved significantly in recent decades, there is still a long
way to go. Women now earn 57% of the bachelor’s degrees, 60% of the master’s degrees, and 53% of
the doctoral degrees acquired each year in the United States (National Center for Education Statistics,
2018), and as of December 2019 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), women made up more than half of
the U.S. labor force (50.03%; Kelly, 2020). However, women are still underrepresented in the upper
echelons of America’s corporations and political system. Women represent only 5.8% of S&P 500 CEOs
and hold only 21.2% of S&P 500 board seats (Catalyst, 2020). On the political front, 2018 was a
noteworthy year for women in U.S. politics, particularly for women of color in the House of
Representatives (Warner, Ellmann, & Boesch, 2018). In addition, Senator Kamala Harris, a daughter of
Indian and Jamaican immigrants, became the first woman of color selected as a U.S. vice presidential
candidate on the Democratic Party ticket. However, women currently occupy just 127 of the 535 seats in
the U.S. Congress (26% in the Senate and 23.2% in the House); women of color occupy 48 seats
(Center for American Women and Politics, 2020a, 2020b). As of June 2020, the United States ranked 83
out of 193 countries in women’s representation in national legislatures or parliaments (Inter-
Parliamentary Union, 2020).
The invisible barrier preventing women from ascending into elite leadership positions was initially
dubbed the glass ceiling, a term introduced into the American vernacular by two Wall Street Journal
reporters in 1986 (Hymowitz & Schellhardt, 1986). Even in female-dominated occupations, women face
the glass ceiling, whereas white men appear to ride a glass escalator to the top leadership positions
(Maume, 1999; C. Williams, 1992, 1995). Eagly and Carli (2007) identified limitations with the glass
ceiling metaphor, including that it implies that everyone has equal access to lower positions until all
women hit this single, invisible, and impassable barrier. They put forward an alternative image: a
leadership labyrinth, conveying the impression of a journey riddled with challenges all along the way—
not just near the top—that can be and has been successfully navigated by women. Related, Facebook
CEO Sheryl Sandberg proffered the metaphor of a jungle gym in her book Lean In (2013).
Understanding the Labyrinth
The gender gap in leadership is a global phenomenon whereby women are disproportionately
concentrated in lower-level and lower-authority leadership positions compared to men (Powell & Graves,
2003). Discussions of women’s underrepresentation in high-level leadership positions generally revolve
around three types of explanations (Figure 14.1). The first set of explanations highlights differences in
women’s and men’s investments in human capital. The next category of explanations considers gender
differences between women and men. The final type of explanation focuses on prejudice and
discrimination against female leaders.
Human Capital Differences.
One prominent set of explanations for the labyrinth is that women have less human capital investment in
education, training, and work experience than men (Eagly & Carli, 2004, 2007). This supposed lack of
human capital is said to result in a dearth of qualified women, sometimes called a “pipeline problem.”
However, a closer look at the numbers reveals that women are indeed in the pipeline, but that the
pipeline is leaking. As already discussed, women are obtaining undergraduate degrees at a far higher
rate than men, and women are earning professional and doctoral degrees at a rate greater or nearly
equal to that of men, but women are still vastly underrepresented in top leadership positions. In the
domain of law, women earn 50% of all law degrees and make up 46% of associates, but they make up
only 22.7% of partners (American Bar Association, 2019). And even though women represent about
40% of those graduating with MBAs (Hess, 2019), their representation in the upper echelons of
American business pales in comparison.
Description
Figure 14.1 Understanding the Leadership Labyrinth
Women do have somewhat less work experience and employment continuity than men, driven largely
by the disproportionate responsibility women assume for child rearing and domestic duties (Bowles &
McGinn, 2005; Eagly & Carli, 2007). Although men’s participation in domestic labor has increased in
recent years (Galinsky, Aumann, & Bond, 2008), women continue to do the majority of the child care
responsibilities and household chores (Belkin, 2008; Craig, 2006; Pailhe & Solaz, 2006). Furthermore, it
appears that in times of crisis, working mothers are hit the hardest. During the COVID-19 pandemic,
women were more likely to lose a job and take on extra domestic labor as schools and day cares closed
around the nation (Cohen & Hsu, 2020). Economists have noted that this disruption to women’s careers
could set women back significantly as women who drop out of the workforce to take care of children
have trouble reentering and making up for lost time (Cohen & Hsu, 2020).
In normal times, women must respond to work–home conflicts and do so in a variety of ways (Bowles &
McGinn, 2005). Some women choose not to marry or have children, others choose to become
“superwomen” and attempt to excel in every role, and others take leaves of absence, take sick days, or
choose part-time employment to juggle these work–home conflicts (Hewlett, 2002; Nieva & Gutek,
1981). Antiquated workplace norms make it difficult for women to rise in the leadership ranks: Those
who take advantage of workplace leave and flexibility programs are often marginalized, and those who
take time off from their careers often find reentry difficult, returning at a lower level than the level they
left (J. Williams, 2010). A related explanation for the leadership gap is that this culturally prescribed
division of labor leads women to self-select to take themselves out of leadership tracks by choosing
“mommy track” positions that do not funnel into leadership positions (Belkin, 2003); however, research
does not support this argument (Eagly & Carli, 2004; J. Williams, 2010).
Despite their presence in the workforce, women have fewer developmental opportunities at work than
do men. Many of these gender differences in developmental opportunities may be driven in part by the
prejudice women experience in the domain of leadership. In addition to having fewer responsibilities in
the same jobs as men, women are less likely to receive encouragement, be included in key networks,
and receive formal job training than their male counterparts (Knoke & Ishio, 1998; Morrison & Von
Glinow, 1990; Ohlott, Ruderman, & McCauley, 1994; Powell & Graves, 2003). One important
developmental experience that affects career success is effective mentor relationships (Ensher &
Murphy, 2005), and women confront greater barriers to establishing informal mentor relationships than
men do (Powell & Graves, 2003). Additionally, women are disproportionately represented in business
positions that are less visible, have less responsibility, and do not lead to top leadership positions
(Bowles & McGinn, 2005).
Relatedly, when women are promoted to leadership positions, they may be more likely than men to be
placed on a “glass cliff”—in other words, appointed to precarious leadership situations associated with
greater risk and criticism (Mulcahy & Linehan, 2014; Ryan, Haslam, Hersby, & Bongiorno, 2011; for a
recent meta-analysis, see Morgenroth, Kirby, Ryan, & Sudkämper, 2020). Ryan and Haslam (2005) first
coined the term glass cliff based on a pattern of women being appointed to corporate boards of
companies in the United Kingdom only after those companies were experiencing poor performance.
Setting women up for failure by placing them in these precarious leadership positions can reaffirm
preconceived notions that women are not effective leaders. However, women may be placed on a glass
cliff at times because they are seen as being more fit to handle a crisis situation (Ryan et al., 2011;
Ryan, Haslam, & Postmes, 2007).
Recent research has put this proposition to the test by comparing outcomes in U.S. states led by male
versus female governors during the COVID-19 pandemic, a grave societal crisis. Using publicly
available data on COVID-19 deaths in the United States, Sergent and Stajkovic (2020) found that states
with female governors had fewer COVID-19 deaths compared to states with male governors, and female
governors expressed more empathy and confidence in their briefings. While there are many reasons for
differences in COVID-related deaths across the United States, these data suggest that female
governors may have handled this particular crisis more effectively than male governors. A similar pattern
of women’s leadership effectiveness during COVID-19 seems to be appearing more globally. For
example, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand has been credited for leading her country
effectively and quickly through the COVID-19 crisis (Cave, 2020).
In sum, there is scant support for the notions that women receive less education than men, that they quit
their jobs more often than men, or that they opt out of the leadership track for the mommy track. There is
support for the notion that women have less work experience and more career interruptions than men,
largely because women assume significantly more domestic responsibility. Women receive less formal
training and have fewer developmental opportunities at work than men, both of which likely are related
to prejudice against female leaders. While women at times may be set up for leadership failure on a
glass cliff, they may also be quite effective as leaders in crisis situations.
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN LEADERSHIP STYLES AND
EFFECTIVENESS
Other arguments attempting to explain the leadership gap revolve around the notion that women are just
different from men. This line of reasoning reflects more general views about a stark dichotomy between
men and women in American society. While the term gender refers to the social meaning ascribed to
biological sex categories (male and female), the perceived differences between men and women are
often assumed to be natural consequences of innate differences (Eagly & Wood, 2013). One argument
in this vein is that women’s underrepresentation in elite leadership positions is a result of differences in
leadership style and effectiveness.
Increasingly, writers in the mainstream press are asserting that there are indeed gender differences in
leadership styles, and that women’s leadership is more effective in contemporary society (Book, 2000;
Helgesen, 1990; Rosener, 1995). Rather than explaining the leadership gap, these assertions make the
gap that much more perplexing. However, academic researchers have a greater diversity in their views;
indeed, many argue that gender has little or no relationship to leadership style and effectiveness
(Dobbins & Platz, 1986; Kaiser & Wallace, 2016; Powell, 1990; van Engen, van der Leeden, &
Willemsen, 2001).
Meta-analyses of research examining style differences between women and men found that, contrary to
stereotypic expectations, women were not found to lead in a more interpersonally oriented and less
task-oriented manner than men in organizational studies. One robust gender difference found across
settings is that women led in a more democratic, or participative, manner than men (Eagly & Johnson,
1990; van Engen & Willemsen, 2004). It is important to consider these results in conjunction with
findings from a large-scale meta-analysis of the literature on evaluations of female and male leaders
showing that women were devalued compared to men when they led in a masculine manner, when they
occupied a typically masculine leadership role, and when the evaluators were men (Eagly, Makhijani, &
Klonsky, 1992). These findings indicate that women’s greater use of democratic style appears to be
adaptive in that they are using the style that produces the most favorable evaluations.
More recent research has examined gender differences in transformational leadership (Bass, 1985;
Burns, 1978; see Chapter 8). A meta-analysis by Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, and van Engen (2003)
found small but robust differences between female and male leaders on these styles such that women’s
styles tend to be more transformational than men’s, and that women tend to engage in more contingent
reward behaviors than men. Although these styles predict effectiveness, recent findings suggest that the
devaluation of female leaders by male subordinates has been shown to extend to female
transformational leaders (Ayman, Korabik, & Morris, 2009).
Recent research also points to potential gender differences in leaders’ values that may impact the way
men and women lead (Eagly, 2013). For example, women tend to emphasize social values that promote
others’ welfare to a greater extent than men (S. Schwartz & Rubel, 2005), a difference that has been
shown among CEOs and board members (Adams & Funk, 2012). This difference in emphasis on social
values may influence leadership behaviors, such as company philanthropy (R. Williams, 2003) and
corporate responsibility (Boulouta, 2012).
In addition to leadership style and leadership values, the relative effectiveness of male and female
leaders has been assessed in a number of studies (Jacobson & Effertz, 1974; Tsui & Gutek, 1984). In a
meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of female and male leaders, men and women were equally
effective leaders, overall, but there were gender differences such that women and men were more
effective in leadership roles that were congruent with their gender (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995).
Thus, women were less effective to the extent that the leader role was masculinized. For example,
women were less effective than men in military positions, but they were somewhat more effective than
men in education, government, and social service organizations and substantially more effective than
men in middle management positions where communal interpersonal skills are highly valued. In
addition, women were less effective than men when they supervised a higher proportion of male
subordinates or when a greater proportion of male raters assessed the leaders’ performance.
In recent years, new research on leadership effectiveness that has come from analyzing 360
evaluations made by peers, bosses, and direct reports that rate a leader’s overall effectiveness has
shown that women are viewed as better leaders (Zenger & Folkman, 2012, 2019). These 360
evaluations judge competencies on 16 traits most important to leadership effectiveness, such as how
good the leader is at taking initiative, developing others, and motivating others. At every level of
leadership, women were rated by peers, bosses, direct reports, and other associates as better overall
leaders than men, and this gap in effectiveness grew wider at higher leadership levels (Zenger &
Folkman, 2012). In a recent replication of these findings, Zenger and Folkman’s results (2019) again
demonstrated a leadership competence advantage for women in leadership roles.
Beyond what a leader’s peers think of women in leadership roles, social advocates often make a
“business case” for increasing the representation of women on corporate boards of directors by claiming
that it would positively affect financial outcomes for those organizations (Eagly, 2016). This research
would suggest boards with women are more effective than boards that are made up of men only. While
a bottom-line argument would provide a potentially convincing reason to increase gender diversity of
board memberships, research has demonstrated that the effect of gender diversity of boards on an
organization’s financial outcomes is often nonexistent or very small (Eagly, 2016).
Boards that are comprised of more women, however, can have other positive consequences for
organizations. An analysis of the S&P 500 companies from 2009 to 2013 demonstrates that gender pay
disparities among top executives decreased when women served as the chair of the organization’s
compensation committee but did not decrease when women were added to boards in general (Cook,
Ingersoll, & Glass, 2019). Fortune 500 companies with gender-diverse boards also tend to have
stronger business and equity practices (Glass & Cook, 2018), offer more LGBT-friendly policies (Cook &
Glass, 2016), and appoint women as CEOs (Cook & Glass, 2015). Thus, when looking beyond the
effectiveness of a single leader to the effectiveness of a leading body, a gender-diverse board can at
times result in more positive outcomes for an organization but not necessarily impact the bottom line.
Another oft-cited barrier to women’s advancement is the presumed gender difference in commitment to
employment and motivation to lead. However, research indicates that women show the same level of
identification with and commitment to paid employment roles as men do, and both women and men view
their roles as workers to be secondary to their roles as parents and partners (Bielby & Bielby, 1988;
Thoits, 1992). Empirical research does indicate that women are less likely than men to promote
themselves for leadership positions (Bowles & McGinn, 2005). For example, women are more likely to
take on informal, as opposed to official, leadership roles, and use terms such as facilitator or organizer
instead of leader (Andrews, 1992; Fletcher, 2001). A meta-analytic review of the research literature on
leader emergence revealed that although women were less likely than men to emerge as group leaders,
they were more likely to serve as social facilitators than men (Eagly & Karau, 1991).
Why are women less likely to emerge as leaders? Recent research suggests that it may be because
women do not expect to have much influence in groups where the majority of the members are male. In
a series of studies, Goodwin, Dodson, Chen, and Diekmann (2020) demonstrated that women expected
to have a lower sense of power when applying for a majority-male leadership committee compared to a
committee that is gender-balanced. This lower sense of power explained why women expressed a lower
desire to lead and lower intentions to apply for a committee position compared to men.
Furthermore, men are more likely than women to ask for what they want (Babcock & Laschever, 2003).
Reaching elite leadership positions is not done in a vacuum; people must negotiate with others to
access the right positions, experiences, opportunities, resources, and assistance in both the
professional and domestic spheres. Not only are women less likely to negotiate than men (Small,
Gelfand, Babcock, & Gettman, 2007), but the negotiations needed to ascend the leadership hierarchy
often are unstructured, ambiguous, and rife with gender triggers (factors that prompt gender-related
behavioral responses)—exactly the type of situation that particularly disadvantages women (Bowles &
McGinn, 2005).
This research must be interpreted in light of the social costs, or backlash, women experience when they
promote themselves or are competent in positions of authority (Rudman & Glick, 2001). Women face
significant gender biases and social disincentives when they self-promote and negotiate. Unlike men, for
example, self-promoting women are seen as less socially attractive and less hirable (Rudman, 1998),
and women face greater social costs for negotiating than men do (Amanatullah & Tinsley, 2013a, 2013b;
Bowles, Babcock, & Lai, 2007).
In sum, empirical research supports small differences in leadership style and effectiveness between
men and women. Women experience slight effectiveness disadvantages in masculine leader roles,
whereas roles that are more feminine offer them some advantages. Additionally, women exceed men in
the use of democratic or participatory styles, and they are more likely to use transformational leadership
behaviors and contingent rewards, which are styles associated with contemporary notions of effective
leadership. Women are no less effective at leading than men, and women are no less committed to their
jobs or motivated for leadership roles than men. In fact, the research on leadership competencies
seems to indicate a slight leadership competence advantage for women. However, women are less
likely to self-promote and negotiate than men, and women may avoid leadership positions where the
group membership is majority male. Furthermore, research shows a small gender difference such that
women are more likely to focus on the welfare of others and ethical behavior.
Prejudice.
One prominent explanation for the leadership gap revolves around gender biases stemming from
stereotyped expectations that women take care and men take charge (Hoyt & Chemers, 2008).
Stereotypes are cognitive shortcuts that influence the way people process information regarding groups
and group members. People assign characteristics to groups, or individual members of groups,
regardless of the actual variation in characteristics between the members (Hamilton, Stroessner, &
Driscoll, 1994). Gender stereotypes are pervasive, well documented, and highly resistant to change
(Dodge, Gilroy, & Fenzel, 1995; Heilman, 2001). Gender stereotypes both describe stereotypic beliefs
about the attributes of women and men and prescribe how men and women ought to be (Burgess &
Borgida, 1999; Glick & Fiske, 1999). Men are stereotyped with agentic characteristics such as
confidence, assertiveness, independence, rationality, and decisiveness, whereas women are
stereotyped with communal characteristics such as concern for others, sensitivity, warmth, helpfulness,
and nurturance (Deaux & Kite, 1993; Heilman, 2001).
Gender stereotypes are easily and automatically activated, and they often lead to biased judgments
(Fiske, 1998; Kunda & Spencer, 2003). In addition to facing gender-based prejudice, women of color
often confront racial or ethnic prejudice (Bell & Nkomo, 2001). A vivid illustration of gender-based
prejudice can be seen in the evaluation of men and women auditioning for symphony orchestras. In the
1970s and 1980s, male-dominated symphony orchestras made one simple change: All applicants were
asked to audition while hidden behind a screen. This small change greatly increased the proportion of
women in symphony orchestras (Goldin & Rouse, 2000). Merely seeing the applicant’s gender evoked
stereotype-based expectations in the judges’ minds that resulted in a significant bias toward selecting
men.
In leadership roles, gender stereotypes are particularly damaging for women because agentic, as
opposed to communal, tendencies often are indispensable (Chemers & Murphy, 1995). According to
role congruity theory, the agentic qualities thought necessary in the leadership role are incompatible with
the predominantly communal qualities stereotypically associated with women, thus resulting in prejudice
against female leaders (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Although the masculine construal of leadership has
decreased somewhat over time, it remains pervasive and robust (Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari,
2011). Thus, in the leadership role, women are confronted with cross-pressures: As leaders, they should
be masculine and tough, but as women, they should not be “too manly.” These opposing expectations
for women often result in the perception that women are less qualified for elite leadership positions than
men, and in harsh evaluations of effective female leaders for not being “female enough.”
This prejudice against female leaders helps explain the numerous findings indicating less favorable
attitudes toward female compared to male leaders, greater difficulty for women to attain top leadership
roles, and greater difficulty for women to be viewed as effective in these roles (Eagly & Karau, 2002).
The penalties for violating one’s gender stereotypes are clearly illustrated in the classic 1989 Supreme
Court case Price Waterhouse v. Ann Hopkins. Price Waterhouse told Hopkins that she would not make
partner because she was too masculine, going as far as advising her to go to charm school, wear
jewelry and makeup, and be less aggressive. In the end, the Supreme Court ruled that Price
Waterhouse was discriminating based on gender stereotypes (Fiske, Bersoff, Borgida, Deaux, &
Heilman, 1991). Gender bias was also evident in the media coverage of the 2008 U.S. presidential
primaries involving Hillary Clinton. As Katie Couric noted after Clinton bowed out of contention, “One of
the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life,
particularly the media . . . if Senator Obama had to confront the racist equivalent of an ‘Iron My Shirt’
poster at campaign rallies or a Hillary nutcracker sold at airports . . . the outrage would not be a
footnote, it would be front page news” (Couric, 2008).
Gender biases can be particularly detrimental in the decision-making processes for selecting elite
leaders, given that the generally unstructured nature of those decisions allows biased decisions without
accountability (Powell & Graves, 2003). Not only are the decision makers influenced by the stereotypes
that disadvantage women in the leadership role, but also they may succumb to homosocial
reproduction, a tendency for a group to reproduce itself in its own image (Kanter, 1977). People prefer
similar others and report the most positive decisions about and evaluations of people who are most like
them, biases that can clearly disadvantage women when male leaders are looking for replacements.
This seems to be particularly true for people who prefer group hierarchies in society (i.e., who are high
in social dominance orientation) in that they show an even stronger preference for leaders who are
white and male (Hoyt & Simon, 2016).
These stereotypic expectations not only affect others’ perceptions and evaluations of female leaders,
but also can directly affect the women themselves. Women who make up a very small minority of a
male-dominated group are seen as tokens representing all women; they experience significant pressure
as their highly visible performance is scrutinized, and they are perceived through gender-stereotyped
lenses (Kanter, 1977). Women often are very aware of their gender and the accompanying stereotypes
(Sekaquaptewa & Thompson, 2003). Research shows that women respond in one of two ways to the
gender-based leadership stereotype: Either they demonstrate vulnerability by assimilating to the
stereotype, or they react against it by engaging in stereotype-countering behaviors (Hoyt, 2010; Simon
& Hoyt, 2013). Whether the threat of the gender–leader stereotype is met with vulnerability or reactance
responses depends on factors such as the leader’s self-efficacy, the explicitness of the stereotype, the
type of task, the group sex-composition, and the power that the leader holds (Bergeron, Block, &
Echtenkamp, 2006; Davies, Spencer, & Steele, 2005; Hoyt & Blascovich, 2007, 2010; Kray, Reb,
Galinsky, & Thompson, 2004; Kray, Thompson, & Galinsky, 2001). Furthermore, although female
leaders may demonstrate reactance to certain solitary gender stereotype threats, when such threats are
combined, women are likely to demonstrate deleterious vulnerability responses (Hoyt, Johnson, Murphy,
& Skinnell, 2010). In sum, substantial empirical evidence reveals that gender stereotypes can
significantly alter the perception and evaluation of female leaders and directly affect women in or
aspiring to leadership roles.
While most past research has focused on perceptions of white men and white women in leadership
positions, recent research has begun to take an intersectional approach (Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach,
2008; Rosette, Koval, Ma, & Livingston, 2016) by investigating the experiences of people with multiple
subordinate-group identities, such as women of color in leadership positions. Research in this area is
limited, but suggests that Black women may experience bias in leadership positions differently than
white women or Black men—sometimes gaining an advantage (e.g., Livingston, Rosette, & Washington,
2012) and sometimes experiencing a disadvantage (e.g., Rosette & Livingston, 2012). This remains an
important area of research as women of color are entering new levels of leadership in society, such as
Kamala Harris as the vice presidential running mate of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden in
the 2020 election. Their experiences in elite leadership positions remain to be seen.
Navigating the Labyrinth
The number of women who successfully navigate the labyrinth is on the rise (Eagly & Carli, 2007). A
confluence of factors contributes to this increase in effective female leaders (Figure 14.2). Changes in
organizations are beginning to make it easier for women to reach top positions. The culture of many
organizations is changing; gendered work assumptions such as the male model of work, the notion of
uninterrupted full-time careers, and the separation of work and family are being challenged (Cooper &
Lewis, 1999; J. Williams, 2010). Moreover, many organizations are valuing flexible workers and diversity
in their top echelons. These organizations can augment women’s career development by involving them
in career development programs and formal networks and offering work–life support. In addition,
assigning more women to high-visibility positions and developing effective and supportive mentoring
relationships for women are key strategies for reducing the leadership gap (Bell & Nkomo, 2001; Ensher
& Murphy, 2005; Ragins, Townsend, & Mattis, 1998).
As Gloria Steinem famously noted, “We’ve begun to raise daughters more like sons . . . but few have the
courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.” Increasing parity in the involvement of women and
men in child care and housework will go a long way in reducing the leadership gap (Eagly & Carli,
2007). In balancing work and home life, an appealing approach for women is structural role redefinition
(Hall, 1972). This approach involves negotiating with both family and colleagues to renegotiate role
expectations both at work and at home. For example, at home women can negotiate workload between
spouses, team up with friends and family members, and, if able, hire help when necessary (Bowles &
McGinn, 2005). At work women can work for family-friendly reforms such as job-protected maternity
leaves.
Description
Figure 14.2 Leadership Effectiveness
Beyond work–home issues, negotiations for valued positions, experiences, and resources are important
social interactions on the road to top leadership positions. Thus, another approach to reducing the
leadership gap is to enhance women’s negotiation power and restructure negotiations to their advantage
(Bowles & McGinn, 2005). For example, research has shown that the term negotiation is laden with
gendered connotations, so one approach would be to reframe negotiation situations in nongendered
terms such as “asking” situations.
Women who are aware of the labyrinth may circumvent barriers by starting their own ventures (Wirth,
2001). Women-owned businesses account for 39% of all privately owned firms, contribute 8% of
employment, and make up 4.2% of revenues (National Association of Women Business Owners, 2020).
Women’s successful foray into entrepreneurship is working to change the face of business, and by
extension leadership, as we know it.
Many of the impediments women face in the leadership domain stem from the incongruity between the
female gender role and the leadership role. Women face a double standard in the leadership role; they
must come across as extremely competent but also as appropriately “feminine,” a set of standards men
are not held to (Eagly & Carli, 2003). One way that women can increase their perceived warmth and
their influence is by combining communal qualities such as warmth and friendliness with agentic
qualities such as exceptional competence and assertiveness (Carli, 2001; Rudman & Glick, 2001).
Additionally, the transformational leadership style discussed in Chapter 8 is particularly beneficial for
women because it is not a markedly masculine style. This style encompasses traditionally feminine
behaviors, such as being considerate and supportive, and is strongly associated with leadership
effectiveness. Recent research suggests that blending individualized consideration with inspirational
motivation is prudent for women seeking leadership advancement (Vinkenburg, van Engen, Eagly, &
Johannesen-Schmidt, 2011). The incongruity between the leadership role and the female gender role
does appear to be decreasing (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Recent research indicates that women have
become significantly more masculine—for example, becoming more assertive and valuing leadership
and power more as job attributes, without losing their femininity (Konrad, Ritchie, Lieb, & Corrigall, 2000;
Twenge, 2001). In addition, evidence suggests that the leadership role is starting to be seen as less
masculine and more androgynous (Koenig et al., 2011; Schein, 2001). Relatedly, people perceive
heroes, a specific type of leader, as more androgynous than a typical leader (Hoyt, Allison, Barnowski, &
Sultan, 2020), which may provide a different pathway for people to start identifying women as heroic
leaders.
In sum, we likely will see more women in elite leadership roles with (1) changes in workplace norms and
developmental opportunities for women; (2) greater gender equity in domestic responsibilities; (3)
greater negotiation power of women, especially regarding the work–home balance; (4) effectiveness and
predominance of women-owned businesses; and (5) changes in the incongruity between women and
leadership.
STRENGTHS
Understanding the research into gender and leadership can help us promote more women into the
upper echelons of leadership. Doing so will fulfill the promise of equal opportunity by allowing everyone
the possibility of taking on leadership roles, from the boardroom to the Senate floor. This larger and
more demographically diverse pool of candidates not only makes it easier to find talented people, but
also facilitates greater levels of organizational success. Furthermore, promoting a richly diverse group of
women into leadership roles will not only help make societal institutions, businesses, and governments
more representative, but can also contribute to more ethical, productive, innovative, and financially
successful organizations that demonstrate higher levels of collective intelligence and are less rife with
conflict (Bernardi, Bosco, & Columb, 2009; Catalyst, 2004; Forsyth, 2010; Miller & Del Carmen Triana,
2009; Nielsen & Huse, 2010; Woolley, Chabris, Pentland, Hashmi, & Malone, 2010).
A consideration of the effects of gender on leadership has important implications for a comprehensive
understanding of leadership. Contemporary approaches to gender and leadership involve questions that
directly affect leadership success, such as style and effectiveness differences between men and
women, and the varied barriers confronting women. Gender is integral to contemporary notions of
effective leadership styles that have morphed from a traditional masculine, autocratic style to the more
feminine or androgynous styles of democratic and transformational leadership. Developing a more
androgynous conception of leadership will enhance leadership effectiveness by giving people the
opportunity to engage in the best leadership practices, and not by restricting people to those behaviors
that are most appropriate for their gender.
Research on gender and leadership is productive in both dispelling myths about the gender gap and
shining a light on aspects of the gender barriers that are difficult to see and therefore are often
overlooked. For example, gender biases generally are no longer overt but more often take the form of
subtle and implicit preconceptions and institutionalized discrimination, making them particularly potent
and pernicious. These biases have a detrimental impact on the perception and evaluation of women,
and they limit the range of leadership behavior deemed appropriate for women. In addition, the mere
awareness of these gender biases can be detrimental to women performing in leadership roles. The
changes needed to overcome these problems within organizations and society can occur only when we
are aware of these often subtle and disguised prejudices.
Understanding the many components of the labyrinth will give us the tools necessary to combat this
inequality from many perspectives, including individual, interpersonal, organizational, and societal
approaches. In addition, this research addresses larger, more significant considerations about gender
and social systems. For example, it acknowledges the profound power division between men and
women, and it opens up dialogue on structural questions such as the gendered division of work in
society. By acknowledging and attempting to understand issues of gender and leadership, rather than
ignoring them, we can help ensure that women have equal opportunity in attaining influential leadership
positions, that organizations and constituents have access to the greatest talent pool when selecting
leaders, and that there is greater gender diversity in the ranks of leadership, which has been linked to
organizational success.
CRITICISMS
Issues of gender and leadership can be subsumed under a more general topic of leadership and
diversity. This perspective involves an understanding of the impact of various demographic
characteristics on leadership, including—but not limited to—gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual
orientation (Chemers & Murphy, 1995; Hoyt & Chemers, 2008). However, unlike the research examining
gender and leadership, research into racial-ethnic minority leaders is scant (Hoyt & Chemers, 2008).
Although some of the issues surrounding people of color in leadership may bear similarities to those
surrounding women (e.g., people of color also face negative stereotypes and resulting difficulties
ascending the leadership hierarchy), the underlying dynamics and mechanisms are no doubt distinct
(Gurin, 1985; Stangor, Lynch, Duan, & Glass, 1992). Leadership researchers should put a greater
emphasis on understanding the role of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other types of diversity, as
well as important interactive effects between, for example, race and gender (Smith & Stewart, 1983), in
leadership processes.
Much of the research examining gender in leadership has taken place in Western contexts; research on
gender and leadership in other contexts is sparse. Because most of the findings regarding female
leaders stem from the culturally defined role of women in society, many of the findings discussed in this
chapter will not generalize well across cultures in which the roles of women and men differ. Therefore,
we must realize the limited generalizability of the extant literature on gender and leadership, and
researchers should expand their purview to address gender and leadership from a cross-cultural
perspective. A final criticism concerns the dearth of essential, complementary research agendas on the
domestic sphere. Research on gender and leadership focuses on decreasing the gender gap in
leadership positions, thereby lessening gender segregation at work; however, the leadership gap will not
be closed without a concurrent focus on closing the gender gap at home.
APPLICATION
Although the gender gap in influential leadership positions remains clearly visible, there is evidence that
it is starting to close. Understanding the obstacles that make up the labyrinth and tactics to eradicate the
inequality will make it easier for women to reach top positions. The labyrinth has many barriers, and the
necessary changes occur at many levels, ranging from individual and interpersonal levels to
organizational and societal levels. Prejudice plays an important role in the interpersonal and individual
levels; the first step in dealing with these biases is to become aware of them in others and in ourselves.
Women are faced with the problem of needing to bolster their leadership competence with appropriate
“femaleness”: Adopting behaviors such as individualized consideration and inspirational motivation is a
promising approach to overcome these biased expectations. In addition, women’s use of effective
negotiation techniques can aid them in procuring the resources they need at work and at home to
augment their leadership advancement.
Changes are also taking place at more macro-organizational and societal levels that will contribute to
greater gender equality in leadership. For example, changes in organizational culture, women’s career
development, mentoring opportunities for women, and increased numbers of women in strategic
positions will increase the presence of women in prominent leadership roles. At the societal level,
structural changes regarding a more equitable distribution of child rearing and domestic duties are also
contributing to the influx of women into elite positions.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
In the following section, three case studies (Cases 14.1, 14.2, and 14.3) are presented to provide
practice in diagnosing and making recommendations on situations confronting female leaders in
organizations. The first case is about a market analyst in a Wall Street firm, the second case is about a
senior managing director at a manufacturing company, and the third case is about New Zealand prime
minister Jacinda Ardern. After each case, questions are provided to assist your analysis of the case.
Case 14.1 The “Glass Ceiling”
Lisa Weber never doubted that she would be a partner in her Wall Street firm. A graduate of a
prestigious business school with a doctorate in economics, she had taught briefly at a major university.
She was the first woman hired as a market analyst in her well-regarded firm. Within two years, she
became one of four senior portfolio managers reporting directly to a senior partner. Her clients give her
the highest commendations for her outstanding performance; over the past two years, she has brought
in the largest number of new accounts to the firm.
Despite the admiration of her colleagues and their seeming acceptance of her, there is a disturbing, if
flattering, aspect to her job. Most of her peers and some of the partners visit her office during the day to
discuss in private her opinions on market performance and financial projections. She enjoys these
private sessions but is dismayed that at the weekly staff meetings the CEO, Michael Breyer, usually
says something like, “Okay, let’s get started and bring Lisa up to date on some of the trouble spots.”
None of her peers or the partners mention that Lisa knows as much as they do about what’s going on in
the firm. She never protests this slight to her competence and knowledge of firm business, nor does she
mention the almost-daily private meetings where her advice is sought. As the only woman on the
executive level, she prefers to be considered a team player and one of the boys.
In the past year, one of her peers has been promoted to partner, although Lisa’s performance clearly
surpassed his, as measured by the success of her accounts and the amount of new business she
brought to the firm. Having heard no mention of partnership for herself, she approached her boss, one
of the partners, and asked about the path to a partnership. He replied, “You’re doing great, Lisa, but
professors do not partners make. What happens if you are a partner and you make a huge mistake?
How would you take it? And what about our clients? There’s never been a female partner in the 103
years of our firm.”
Shortly thereafter, another woman, Pamela Tobias, was hired as a marketing analyst. Once, when the
CEO saw Lisa and Pamela together, he called out to the men, “Hey, guys, two women in one room.
That’s scary.”
During the next six months, Lisa meets several times with the CEO to make her case for a partnership
on the basis of her performance. She finally realizes that there is no possibility of change in the
foreseeable future and decides to leave and form her own investment firm.
—Adapted from Blank, R., & Slipp, S. (1994). Voices of diversity. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Questions
1. What advancement barriers did Lisa encounter?
2. What should the firm’s top executives, including Michael, have done differently to retain Lisa?
3. What type of organizational policies and opportunities might have benefited Lisa and Pamela?
4. What could the organization do to raise the gender consciousness of Michael and Lisa’s male
colleagues?
Case 14.2 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status
Marina Soslow is a senior managing director at a manufacturing company. She has worked at the
company for 10 years, gradually working her way up to a responsible position. She would like to win
promotion to a top executive position and has recently finished an MBA, which supplements her
master’s degree in chemical engineering.
Several months ago, she found out she was pregnant. She is reluctant to tell her boss, Roy Bond, the
division head, because she knows several other women who were eased out of their positions before
they gave birth or shortly thereafter.
After a meeting with Roy about a new product, Marina mentions her pregnancy and says that she plans
to take a three-month leave of absence after her delivery. She begins describing the plans she has
carefully worked out for distributing her work. Roy cuts her short and says, “I knew this was going to
happen sooner or later; it always does.” He said this as if a disaster were about to occur. “There’s no
point in talking about this now. We’ll think about it later.”
Marina can tell that he’s very annoyed about what he thinks is going to happen. She can see his wheels
spinning and worries about the implications for her. She thinks, “Doesn’t Roy know about the Family and
Medical Leave Act of 1993? Legally, this company has to guarantee my job, but I know he can make it
very rough for me.”
—Adapted from Blank, R., & Slipp, S. (1994). Voices of diversity. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Questions
1. What advancement barriers is Marina encountering?
2. What should Roy have said when Marina told him she was pregnant?
3. What could Roy do to ensure that Marina’s work will be covered during her absence and that taking
this time off will not hurt her advancement?
4. What type of organizational changes could be made to benefit Marina and other pregnant women in
this organization?
Case 14.3 Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand
On March 15, 2019, a shooter opened fire during Friday prayers at two Muslim mosques in
Christchurch, New Zealand. More than 50 people were killed (including several children), a number that
rivaled the island country’s total murders for a year, and dozens more were wounded. Prior to the attack,
the shooter penned a chilling 74-page manifesto, which was sent to the prime minister’s office. He then
livestreamed himself on Facebook as he stormed the Al Noor Mosque. The hate-based attacks left New
Zealand, a country known for its low crime rates and reputation for welcoming immigrants, in a state of
shock and grief.
The response by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand’s 39-year-old leader, was swift and
unflinching. Avoiding divisive language, she instead united and galvanized a country in crisis. Speaking
at a press conference, she reminded people of the importance of the diversity of their culture:
For many, New Zealand was their choice . . . The place they actively came to, and committed
themselves to . . . where they were part of communities who they loved and who loved them. A
place where they were free to practice their culture and their religion.
For those of you who are watching at home tonight, and questioning how this could have
happened here, we—New Zealand—we were not a target because we are a safe harbor for
those who hate. We were not chosen for this act of violence because we condone racism. We
were chosen for the very fact that we are none of these things. Because we represent diversity,
kindness, compassion, a home for those who share our values, refuge for those who need it. . .
.
We are a proud nation of more than 200 ethnicities, 160 languages. And amongst that diversity
we share common values. And the one that we place the currency on right now—and tonight—
is our compassion and support for the community of those directly affected by this tragedy.
(Chandler, 2020)
In an address to Parliament a few days later, she stood firm, refusing to give the shooter the one thing
she felt he desired: notoriety. After opening her address with the Arabic greeting As-salamu alaykum
(“Peace be upon you”), she expounded, “He is a terrorist, he is a criminal, he is an extremist, but he will,
when I speak, be nameless, and to others I implore you: Speak the names of those who were lost rather
than the name of the man who took them. He may have sought notoriety but we in New Zealand will
give him nothing—not even his name” (Hjelmgaard, 2019).
Focusing her efforts on honoring those who lost their lives and standing up to right-wing terrorism,
Ardern vowed to cover funeral costs and provide financial assistance to grief-stricken families.
Recognizing that gun control was a weak link in New Zealand, a land where gun ownership is
widespread, she also pledged to take swift action on gun control. A month later, under her leadership,
New Zealand’s Parliament approved a ban on semiautomatic and military-style weapons, a feat that
much larger countries struggling with long histories of mass shootings had yet to accomplish.
While Prime Minister Ardern was well supported in her efforts, her detractors were not quiet. The speed
of the process was criticized, to which she countered, “You either believe that in New Zealand these
weapons have a place or you do not. And if you believe, like us, that they do not, you should be able to
agree that we can move swiftly. My view is that an argument about process is an argument to do
nothing” (M. Schwartz, 2019).
Her resolute and expedient actions were only one element of Ardern’s approach to leading her country
through uncertainty, tragedy, and grief. She reached out directly to the communities most affected,
visiting Christchurch the day after the shooting and taking with her the leaders of all New Zealand’s
political parties. She visited the mosques to mourn directly with the families, and personally met with,
listened to, hugged, and consoled family and friends of those lost and injured in the shooting. In a show
of respect and empathy, she donned a black hijab, a traditional headscarf of the Muslim faith.
“The Prime Minister, when she came wearing her scarf, that was big for us,” shared Dalia Mohamed,
one of the many mourners who attended (Hjelmgaard, 2019).
Who Is Jacinda Ardern?
At 37, Jacinda Kate Laurell Ardern became the youngest prime minister (PM) of New Zealand since
1856 and only the third woman to hold the position. Her rise in New Zealand politics was termed the
“most meteoric rise to power of any New Zealand PM” (Atkinson, 2018).
Ardern was born in 1980 in Hamilton, located in New Zealand’s politically conservative Waikato Region.
She was the second of two daughters and raised in the Mormon religion, a conservative faith that
advocates for the traditional role of women within the family. She ultimately broke from the church over
its prohibitive view on homosexuality and same-sex marriage (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
Ardern spent her early years in Murupara, a small, isolated town known as the center of Maori gang
activity. Maori are the indigenous Polynesian people of New Zealand and comprise almost 15% of the
country’s population (New Zealand History, n.d.). Seeing “children without shoes on their feet or
anything to eat for lunch” inspired her to enter politics (Jones, 2017).
At the age of 17, she deviated from her conservative roots and joined New Zealand’s more liberal
Labour Party. With the help of an aunt, she joined the reelection campaign of Harry Duynhoven, a
Labour member of Parliament (MP). After receiving a bachelor’s degree in communication studies from
the University of Waikato in 2001, Ardern became a researcher for Labour MP Phil Goff, which led to a
position on the staff of then prime minister Helen Clark. The second woman to hold New Zealand’s
highest office, Clark was Ardern’s political hero and mentor (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
In 2005, Ardern left this position for an “overseas experience,” a traditional rite of passage for New
Zealand’s middle- and upper-class youth involving an extended—usually working—trip to Britain. While
many young New Zealanders often use this as a time to work menial jobs and tour the continent, Ardern
instead secured a position in the cabinet office of British prime minister Tony Blair. As the associate
director for Better Regulation Executive, she spent two and a half years working to improve the
interactions between local authorities and small businesses. Her subsequent election as president of the
International Union of Socialist Youth in 2007 further expanded her horizons, taking her to Algeria,
China, India, Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
Back in New Zealand, Ardern was selected for a Parliament seat as a list candidate and, at the age of
28, took her place as New Zealand’s youngest member of the House of Representatives. Unafraid to
speak her mind, in her first address to the House “she called for the introduction of compulsory
instruction in the Maori language in New Zealand schools and she castigated the government for its
‘shameful’ response to climate change” (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
Because she was a rising political star, Ardern’s age and physical attractiveness did not go unnoticed. In
2011, in what was dubbed by the press as the “Battle of the Babes,” she ran for the seat representing
Auckland Central that was held by another of New Zealand’s young political women, Nikki Kaye of the
National Party, who was five months older than Ardern. Ardern bristled at the media attention on her
physical attractiveness, characterizing herself as an “acceptable nerd” with a “relentlessly positive”
approach to life. Narrowly losing to Kaye by 717 votes, Ardern returned to Parliament again as a list
candidate (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
Ardern spent the next few years fostering key relationships and beneficial assignments, being named
the Labour Party’s spokesperson for social development and for arts, culture and heritage, children,
justice, and small business. In 2017, after a landslide win for a vacant parliamentary seat, she was
unanimously elected as the Labour Party’s deputy leader. But just weeks before the 2017 September
general parliamentary election, the party’s leader stepped down. Before he did, he convinced Ardern to
take his place (reportedly, she refused seven times before agreeing). On August 1, Ardern found herself
unanimously elected the Labour Party leader and the party’s new candidate for prime minister.
Ardern’s “charismatic optimism, strength, and down-to-earth charm quickly energized voters—especially
women and the young” (Wallenfeldt, 2020). She campaigned for free university education, reductions in
immigration, decriminalization of abortion, and the creation of new programs to alleviate poverty among
children. More broadly, her platform included a “fairer deal” for the marginalized (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
Dubbed “Jacindamania,” Ardern’s public support rapidly escalated, and political experts began
characterizing her as a “rock star” politician likening her to Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau and
former U.S. president Barack Obama.
If elected, she would be only the third female prime minister of New Zealand, a fact she did not shy
away from in her campaign. When an interviewer asked her whether she planned to have children, she
initially had no problem answering such a personal question. However, when another interviewer took
the issue further by implying that employers had a right to know whether prospective female employees
planned on taking time off from work to have children, she quickly clarified her previous response and
the acceptability of such questions. “I decided to talk about it, it was my choice . . . but . . . it is totally
unacceptable in 2017 to say that women should have to answer that question in the workplace. It is the
woman’s decision about when they choose to have children. It should not predetermine whether or not
they are given a job or have job opportunities” (Wallenfeldt, 2020).
The election was held, but no party had enough votes to gain a majority. After weeks of negotiation and
the subsequent tally of special votes (overseas votes), Ardern found out at the same time as the rest of
her country that she would become its 40th prime minister. She was sworn in on October 26, 2017.
When she took office as the world’s youngest world leader, she was 37, unmarried, and pregnant. She
and her partner, Clarke Gayford, welcomed their first child in June 2018, making her only the second
elected head of state in modern history to give birth while serving, as well as the first elected leader
known to ever take maternity leave (Hjelmgaard, 2019).
She continued to make history when she brought her three-month-old daughter to a United Nations
General Assembly meeting. In an interview with The New Yorker, Ardern and Gayford shared their
perspectives on juggling family and professional responsibilities, with Gayford saying, “It was a no-
brainer to say, ‘Right, I’ll take care of her, you take care of the country’” (Hollander, 2018).
“I don’t want to ever give the impression that I’m some kind of Wonder Woman,” Ardern added. “Or that
women should be expected to do everything because I am. I’m not doing everything” (Hjelmgaard,
2019).
Less than a week after the Christchurch shootings, Ardern was extolled not only by the citizens of her
own country but also by the international community for her decisive and compassionate response to
her nation’s shock and grief. Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer, described Ardern as a
“political prodigy” who was “changing the game” for women around the globe (Hjelmgaard, 2019). Later
that year, Ardern was named by Time magazine as one of the world’s 100 most influential people.
In the words of her mentor, former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark, Ardern is a natural and
empathetic communicator who doesn’t preach at people, but instead signals that she’s “standing with
them.”
“They may even think: ‘Well, I don’t quite understand why the government did that, but I know she’s got
our back.’ There’s a high level of trust and confidence in her because of that empathy” (Friedman,
2020).
Questions
1. In a USA Today article shortly after the mosque attacks in New Zealand, writer Neill Borowski
(2019) profiled Ardern’s accomplishments during the crisis, listing these four things to know about
Ardern:
She’s New Zealand’s youngest leader in decades.
She refuses to the give the shooter notoriety.
She promised tougher gun laws.
She’s a mom.
a. What do you see as the relevance of the last bullet point?
b. Do you think if Ardern had been male and a father, this author would have found it equally
as important to include that he was a father? Why or why not?
2. Human capital is the first element of the leadership labyrinth discussed in this chapter. Discuss how
each of the four aspects of the human capital element relates to Ardern. How has she addressed
the challenges of each?
3. The chapter describes the existence of “perceived” differences between men and women in how
they lead, which, in the past, have been considered to be natural consequences of innate
differences.
a. Do you agree or disagree that these are innate to each gender? Why?
b. What are some ways that Ardern leads that might be different from a male leader?
c. What are some ways that Ardern leads that might be the same as a male leader?
4. This textbook has discussed several different leadership approaches (authentic, situational, leader–
member exchange, transformational, etc.). Which of these approaches apply to Ardern’s
leadership? Explain why.
5. It is suggested in this chapter that women are more likely to serve as “social facilitators” than men.
Do you feel this true of Ardern? If so, how has this served or not served her and her constituents?
6. Prejudice is one of the leading contributors to the leadership gap between men and women.
Discuss how the four aspects of prejudice outlined in the leadership labyrinth may have influenced
Ardern and her political career. What types of barriers and obstacles did they each present?
7. The book notes that “women face a double standard in the leadership role; they must come across
as extremely competent but also as appropriately ‘feminine,’ a set of standards men are not held to”
(Eagly & Carli, 2003). The burden to balance agentic qualities and communal qualities is greater for
women than for men. How did Ardern experience this double standard?
—Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
The Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire was developed to measure implicit gender biases by examining
the value people place on communal leadership characteristics and agentic leadership characteristics.
Gender stereotypes of women as communal and men as agentic have been damaging to women in
leadership due to the lower value placed on communal behaviors. This questionnaire will examine the
gender-stereotypical associations that contribute to the bias against women as leaders. The items in this
questionnaire were taken from the gender implicit association test (IAT) developed by Dasgupta and
Asgari (2004) that examines the gender-stereotypical associations that contribute to the bias against
women as leaders (Eagly & Karau, 2002).
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to learn about gender biases and how to become
aware of them in order to break harmful stereotypes.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains characteristics associated with communal and agentic
behaviors. Indicate the degree to which you feel each characteristic is important for leadership
using a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (very important).
Key: 1 = Not Important 2 = Somewhat Important 3 = Neutral 4 = Important 5 = Very
Important
1. Supporter 1 2 3 4 5
2. Leader 1 2 3 4 5
3. Ambitious 1 2 3 4 5
4. Determined 1 2 3 4 5
5. Helpful 1 2 3 4 5
6. Dynamic 1 2 3 4 5
7. Understanding 1 2 3 4 5
8. Compassionate 1 2 3 4 5
9. Assertive 1 2 3 4 5
10. Sympathetic 1 2 3 4 5
11. Warm 1 2 3 4 5
12. Kind 1 2 3 4 5
13. Controlling 1 2 3 4 5
14. Caring 1 2 3 4 5
15. Independent 1 2 3 4 5
16. Dominant 1 2 3 4 5
Scoring
The logic behind the questionnaire is that people tend to view communal characteristics, which
are a stereotypically associated with women, as less important to leadership while they view
agentic characteristics, which are stereotypically associated with men, as more important to
leadership.
The sum of questions 1, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 14 makes up your communal characteristics
score.
The sum of questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 15, and 16 makes up your agentic characteristics score.
Communal scores between 8 and 24 indicate a weak value of communal characteristics in
leadership; scores between 25 and 32 indicate a neutral association; scores between 33 and 40
indicate a strong value of communal characteristics in leadership.
Agentic scores between 8 and 24 indicate a weak value of agentic characteristics in leadership;
scores between 25 and 32 indicate a neutral association; scores between 33 and 40 indicate a
strong value of agentic characteristics in leadership.
Scoring Interpretation
Many people are surprised to find out that they have a biased association favoring traditional
leadership/agentic behaviors, especially when it is incompatible with their stated egalitarian
values. This test is designed to show people that they might hold associations that they are
unaware of and to make people aware of the broad reach of these stereotypes.
Summary
Women are significantly underrepresented in major leadership positions. The barriers women encounter
on their leadership journey have been dubbed the leadership labyrinth. Removing these barriers will
help ensure equal opportunity, access to the greatest talent pool, and diversity, which have been linked
to organizational success. There are a number of explanations for the leadership gender gap. One set
of explanations focuses on women’s lack of human capital investment in education, training, and work
experience. There is no empirical support for the argument that women are less educated than men are
or that they are more likely to quit their jobs or choose the mommy track. There is evidence that women
assume significantly more domestic responsibility, which contributes to less work experience and more
career interruptions. Additionally, women receive less formal training and have fewer developmental
opportunities at work than men.
Another set of explanations for the gender gap focuses on differences between women and men.
Women are no less effective at leadership, committed to their work, or motivated to attain leadership
roles than men. However, women are less likely to self-promote than men are, and they are less likely to
initiate negotiation, an important tool all leaders need in order to access the right opportunities and
resources in both the professional and domestic spheres. Investigations into leadership style have
revealed that women are somewhat more likely to use democratic and transformational styles than men
are. Research looking at leadership effectiveness indicates a greater use by women of effective
transformational and contingent reward behaviors.
The prejudice explanation for the leadership gap is strongly supported. Gender stereotypes of women
as communal and men as agentic are particularly damaging to women in leadership. The incongruity
between the female gender role and the leadership role leads to prejudice against female leaders, who
are evaluated and perceived more negatively than their male counterparts. These biases are particularly
detrimental during unstructured decision-making processes that often occur when elite leaders are
selected. Gender-based leader stereotypes can threaten women eliciting either a vulnerability or a
reactance response. There is evidence that this discrepancy is on the decline as the leader role
becomes more androgynous and women become more agentic.
Finally, there are a number of approaches to navigating the labyrinth. Significant organizational reform
will make it easier for women to reach top positions—including changes in workplace norms, changes in
organizational culture, increases in career development for women, increases in effective mentoring
opportunities, and women taking more strategic positions leading to higher leadership roles. Effective
negotiations will help decrease the gender gap, especially negotiations regarding role expectations at
work and at home. Additionally, the combination of warmth with agentic qualities and in particular the
melding of individualized consideration with inspirational motivation can be effective for developing
female leaders.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Human capital:
Education
Work Experience
Developmental Opportunities
Work–Home Conflict
Gender differences:
Style and Effectiveness
Commitment and Motivation
Self-Promotion
Negotiation Traits
Prejudice:
Gender Stereotypes
Biased Perception and Evaluations
Vulnerability and Reactance
Cross-Pressures
Back to Figure
The four levels are as follows:
Individual level: Promoting effective negotiations and use of effective leadership styles.
Interpersonal level: Decreasing gender stereotypes.
Organizational level: Diversifying leadership equity in maternity and paternity leave.
Societal level: Gender equity in domestic responsibilities.
15 LEADERSHIP ETHICS
Although there has been an interest in ethics for thousands of years, very little theoretical research
exists on the nature of leadership ethics. This chapter presents an overview of ethical theories as they
apply to the leadership process.
DESCRIPTION
This chapter is different from many of the other chapters in this book. Most of the other chapters focus
on one unified leadership theory or approach (e.g., trait approach, path–goal theory, or transformational
leadership), whereas this chapter is multifaceted and presents a broad set of ethical viewpoints. The
chapter is intended not as an “ethical leadership theory,” but rather as a guide to some of the ethical
issues that arise in leadership situations.
Probably since our cave-dwelling days, human beings have been concerned with the ethics of our
leaders. Our history books are replete with descriptions of good kings and bad kings, great empires and
evil empires, and strong presidents and weak presidents. But despite a wealth of biographical accounts
of great leaders and their morals, very little research has been published on the theoretical foundations
of leadership ethics. There have been many studies on business ethics in general since the early 1970s,
but these studies have been only tangentially related to leadership ethics. Even in the literature of
management, written primarily for practitioners, there are very few books on leadership ethics. This
suggests that theoretical formulations in this area are still in their infancy.
One of the earliest writings that specifically focused on leadership ethics appeared as recently as 1996.
It was a set of working papers generated from a small group of leadership scholars, brought together by
the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. These scholars examined how leadership theory and practice could be
used to build a more caring and just society. The ideas of the Kellogg group are now published in a
volume titled Ethics, the Heart of Leadership (Ciulla, 1998).
Interest in the nature of ethical leadership has continued to grow, particularly because of the many
recent scandals in corporate America and the political realm. On the academic front, there has also
been a strong interest in exploring the nature of ethical leadership (see Aronson, 2001; Brown &
Treviño, 2006; Ciulla, 2001, 2003, 2014; Johnson, 2011, 2018; Kanungo, 2001; Lawton & Páez, 2015;
McManus, Ward, & Perry, 2018; Price, 2008; Treviño, Brown, & Hartman, 2003).
Ethics Defined
From the perspective of Western tradition, the development of ethical theory dates back to Plato (427–
347 B.C.E.) and Aristotle (384–322 B.C.E.). The word ethics has its roots in the Greek word ethos,
which translates to “customs,” “conduct,” or “character.” Ethics is concerned with the kinds of values and
morals an individual or a society finds desirable or appropriate. Furthermore, ethics is concerned with
the virtuousness of individuals and their motives. Ethical theory provides a system of rules or principles
that guide us in making decisions about what is right or wrong and good or bad in a particular situation.
It provides a basis for understanding what it means to be a morally decent human being.
In regard to leadership, ethics is concerned with what leaders do and who leaders are. It has to do with
the nature of leaders’ behavior, and with their virtuousness. In any decision-making situation, ethical
issues are either implicitly or explicitly involved. The choices leaders make and how they respond in a
given circumstance are informed and directed by their ethics.
A leader’s choices are also influenced by their moral development. For example, in a study of 24
exemplary leaders in journalism, Plaisance (2014) found “an overarching emphasis on notions of care
and respect for others, professional duty, concern for harm, and proactive social engagement—all of
which characterize higher stages of moral development” (p. 308). The most widely recognized theory
advanced to explain how people think about moral issues is Kohlberg’s stages of moral development.
Kohlberg (1984) presented a series of dilemmas (the most famous of which is “the Heinz dilemma”) to
groups of young children whom he then interviewed about the reasoning behind their choices regarding
the dilemmas. From these data he created a classification system of moral reasoning that was divided
into six stages: Stage 1—Obedience and Punishment, Stage 2—Individualism and Exchange, Stage 3
—Interpersonal Accord and Conformity, Stage 4—Maintaining the Social Order, Stage 5—Social
Contract and Individual Rights, and Stage 6—Universal Principles (Table 15.1). Kohlberg further
classified the first two stages as preconventional morality, the second two as conventional morality, and
the last two as postconventional morality.
Level 1. Preconventional Morality
When an individual is at the preconventional morality level, they tend to judge the morality of an action
by its direct consequences. There are two stages that fall within preconventional morality:
Table 15.1 Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development
LEVEL 1: PRECONVENTIONAL MORALITY
Reasoning based on self-interest, avoiding punishment, and rewards
STAGE 1
Obedience and Punishment
“I follow the rules so I don’t get hurt”
STAGE 2
Individualism and Exchange
“I will do a favor for you, if you do one for me”
LEVEL 2: CONVENTIONAL MORALITY
Reasoning based on society’s views and expectations
STAGE 3
Interpersonal Accord and Conformity
“I try to be good and do what others expect
of me”
STAGE 4
Maintaining the Social Order
“I follow the rules and support the laws of society”
LEVEL 3: POSTCONVENTIONAL MORALITY
Reasoning based on conscience and creating a just society
STAGE 5
Social Contract and Individual Rights
“I work with others to do what is best for all
of us”
STAGE 6
Universal Principles
“I act out of my internalized and universal principle of
justice”
Stage 1—Obedience and Punishment. At this stage, the individual is egocentric and sees morality
as external to self. Rules are fixed and handed down by authority. Obeying rules is important
because it means avoiding punishment. For example, a child reasons it is bad to steal because the
consequence will be to go to jail.
Stage 2—Individualism and Exchange. At this stage, the individual makes moral decisions based
on self-interest. An action is right if it serves the individual. Everything is relative, so each person is
free to do their own thing. People do not identify with the values of the community (Crain, 1985) but
are willing to exchange favors. For example, an individual might say, “I’ll do a favor for you, if you do
a favor for me.”
Level 2. Conventional Morality
Those who are at this level judge the morality of actions by comparing them to society’s views and
expectations. Authority is internalized but not questioned, and reasoning is based on the norms of the
group to which the person belongs. Kohlberg identified two stages at the conventional morality level:
Stage 3—Interpersonal Accord and Conformity. At this stage, the individual makes moral choices
based on conforming to the expectations of others and trying to behave like a “good” person. It is
important to be “nice” and live up to the community standard of niceness. For example, a student
says, “I am not going to cheat because that is not what a good student does.”
Stage 4—Maintaining the Social Order. At this stage, the individual makes moral decisions in ways
that show concern for society as a whole. In order for society to function, it is important that people
obey the laws, respect authority, and support the rules of the community. For example, a person
does not run a red light in the middle of the night when no other cars are around because it is
important to maintain and support the traffic laws of the community.
Level 3. Postconventional Morality
At this level of morality, also known as the principled level, individuals have developed their own
personal set of ethics and morals that guide their behavior. Postconventional moralists live by their own
ethical principles—principles that typically include such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice.
There are two stages that Kohlberg identified as part of the postconventional morality level:
Stage 5—Social Contract and Individual Rights. At this stage, the individual makes moral decisions
based on a social contract and their views on what a good society should be like. A good society
supports values such as liberty and life, and fair procedures for changing laws (Crain, 1985), but
recognizes that groups have different opinions and values. Societal laws are important, but people
need to agree on them. For example, if a boy is dying of cancer and his parents do not have money
to pay for his treatment, the state should step in and pay for it.
Stage 6—Universal Principles. At this stage, the individual’s moral reasoning is based on
internalized universal principles of justice that apply to everyone. Decisions that are made need to
respect the viewpoints of all parties involved. People follow their internal rules of fairness, even if
they conflict with laws. An example of this stage would be a civil rights activist who believes a
commitment to justice requires a willingness to disobey unjust laws.
Kohlberg’s model of moral development has been criticized for focusing exclusively on justice values, for
being sex-biased since it is derived from an all-male sample, for being culturally biased since it is based
on a sample from an individualist culture, and for advocating a postconventional morality where people
place their own principles above those of the law or society (Crain, 1985). Regardless of these
criticisms, this model is seminal to developing an understanding of what forms the basis for individuals’
ethical leadership.
Ethical Theories
For the purposes of studying ethics and leadership, ethical theories can be thought of as falling within
two broad domains: theories about leaders’ conduct and theories about leaders’ character (Table 15.2).
Stated another way, ethical theories when applied to leadership are about both the actions of leaders
and who they are as people. Throughout the chapter, our discussions about ethics and leadership will
always fall within one of these two domains: conduct or character. Ethical theories that deal with the
conduct of leaders are in turn divided into two kinds: theories that stress the consequences of leaders’
actions and those that emphasize the duty or rules governing leaders’ actions (see Table 15.2).
Teleological theories, from the Greek word telos, meaning “ends” or “purposes,” try to answer questions
about right and wrong by focusing on whether a person’s conduct will produce desirable consequences.
From the teleological perspective, the question “What is right?” is answered by looking at results or
outcomes. In effect, the consequences of an individual’s actions determine the goodness or badness of
a particular behavior.
Table 15.2 Domains of Ethical Theories
Conduct Character
Consequences (teleological theories)
• Ethical egoism
• Utilitarianism
Virtue-based theories
Duty (deontological theories)
In assessing consequences, there are three different approaches to making decisions regarding moral
conduct (Figure 15.1): ethical egoism, utilitarianism, and altruism. Ethical egoism states that a person
should act so as to create the greatest good for themselves. A leader with this orientation would take a
job or career that they selfishly enjoy (Avolio & Locke, 2002). Self-interest is an ethical stance closely
related to transactional leadership theories (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Ethical egoism is common in
some business contexts in which a company and its employees make decisions to achieve its goal of
maximizing profits. For example, a midlevel, upward-aspiring manager who wants their team to be the
best in the company could be described as acting out of ethical egoism.
Description
Figure 15.1 Ethical Theories Based on Self-Interest Versus Interest for Others
A second teleological approach, utilitarianism, states that we should behave so as to create the greatest
good for the greatest number. From this viewpoint, the morally correct action is the action that
maximizes social benefits while minimizing social costs (Schumann, 2001). When the U.S. government
allocates a large part of the federal budget for preventive health care rather than for catastrophic
illnesses, it is acting from a utilitarian perspective, putting money where it will have the best result for the
largest number of citizens.
Closely related to utilitarianism, and opposite of ethical egoism, is a third teleological approach, altruism.
Altruism is an approach that suggests that actions are moral if their primary purpose is to promote the
best interests of others. From this perspective, a leader may be called on to act in the interests of
others, even when it runs contrary to their own self-interests (Bowie, 1991). Authentic transformational
leadership (Chapter 8) is based on altruistic principles (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Kanungo &
Mendonca, 1996), and altruism is pivotal to exhibiting servant leadership (Chapter 10). The strongest
example of altruistic ethics can be found in the work of Mother Teresa, who devoted her life to helping
those living in poverty. Quite different from looking at which actions will produce which outcomes,
deontological theory is derived from the Greek word deos, which means “duty.” Whether a given action
is ethical rests not only with its consequences (teleological), but also with whether the action itself is
good. Telling the truth, keeping promises, being fair, and respecting others are all examples of actions
that are inherently good, independent of the consequences. The deontological perspective focuses on
the actions of the leader and their moral obligations and responsibilities to do the right thing. A leader’s
actions are moral if the leader has a moral right to do them, if the actions do not infringe on others’
rights, and if the actions further the moral rights of others (Schumann, 2001).
In the late 1990s, the president of the United States, Bill Clinton, was brought before Congress for
misrepresenting under oath an affair he had maintained with a White House intern. For his actions, he
was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, but then was acquitted by the U.S. Senate. At
one point during the long ordeal, the president appeared on national television and, in what is now a
famous speech, declared his innocence. Because subsequent hearings provided information that
suggested that he may have lied during this television speech, many Americans felt President Clinton
had violated his duty and responsibility (as a person, leader, and president) to tell the truth. From a
deontological perspective, it could be said that he failed his ethical responsibility to do the right thing—to
tell the truth.
Whereas teleological and deontological theories approach ethics by looking at the behavior or conduct
of a leader, a second set of theories approaches ethics from the viewpoint of a leader’s character (Table
15.2). These theories are called virtue-based theories; they focus on who leaders are as people. In this
perspective, virtues are rooted in the heart of the individual and in the individual’s disposition (Pojman,
1995). Furthermore, it is believed that virtues and moral abilities are not innate but can be acquired and
learned through practice. People can be taught by their families and communities to be morally
appropriate human beings.
With their origin traced back in the Western tradition to the ancient Greeks and the works of Plato and
Aristotle, virtue theories are experiencing a resurgence in popularity. The Greek term associated with
these theories is aretaic, which means “excellence” or “virtue.” Consistent with Aristotle, current
advocates of virtue-based theory stress that more attention should be given to the development and
training of moral values (Velasquez, 1992). Rather than telling people what to do, attention should be
directed toward telling people what to be, or helping them to become more virtuous.
What, then, are the virtues of an ethical person? There are many, all of which seem to be important.
Based on the writings of Aristotle, a moral person demonstrates the virtues of courage, temperance,
generosity, self-control, honesty, sociability, modesty, fairness, and justice (Velasquez, 1992). For
Aristotle, virtues allowed people to live well in communities. Applying ethics to leadership and
management, Velasquez has suggested that managers should develop virtues such as perseverance,
public-spiritedness, integrity, truthfulness, fidelity, benevolence, and humility.
In essence, virtue-based ethics is about being and becoming a good, worthy human being. Although
people can learn and develop good values, this theory maintains that virtues are present in one’s
disposition. When practiced over time, from youth to adulthood, good values become habitual, and part
of the people themselves. By telling the truth, people become truthful; by giving to those living in poverty,
people become benevolent; by being fair to others, people become just. Our virtues are derived from
our actions, and our actions manifest our virtues (Frankena, 1973; Pojman, 1995).
Centrality of Ethics to Leadership
As discussed in Chapter 1, leadership is a process whereby the leader influences others to reach a
common goal. The influence dimension of leadership requires the leader to have an impact on the lives
of those being led. To make a change in other people carries with it an enormous ethical burden and
responsibility. Because leaders usually have more power and control than followers, they also have
more responsibility to be sensitive to how their leadership affects followers’ lives.
Whether in group work, organizational pursuits, or community projects, leaders engage followers and
utilize them in their efforts to reach common goals. In all these situations, leaders have the ethical
responsibility to treat followers with dignity and respect—as human beings with unique identities. This
“respect for people” demands that leaders be sensitive to followers’ own interests, needs, and
conscientious concerns (Beauchamp & Bowie, 1988). In a qualitative study of 17, mostly Swiss,
executive ethical leaders, Frisch and Huppenbauer (2014) reported that these ethical leaders cared
about other stakeholders, such as customers, suppliers, owners of companies, the natural environment,
and society. Although all of us have an ethical responsibility to treat other people as unique human
beings, leaders have a special responsibility, because the nature of their leadership puts them in a
special position in which they have a greater opportunity to influence others in significant ways.
Ethics is central to leadership, and leaders help to establish and reinforce organizational values. Every
leader has a distinct philosophy and point of view. “All leaders have an agenda, a series of beliefs,
proposals, values, ideas, and issues that they wish to ‘put on the table’” (Gini, 1998, p. 36). The values
promoted by the leader have a significant impact on the values exhibited by the organization (see
Carlson & Perrewe, 1995; Demirtas, 2015; Eisenbeiss, van Knippenberg, & Fahrbach, 2015; Schminke,
Ambrose, & Noel, 1997; Treviño, 1986; Xu, Loi, & Ngo, 2016; Yang, 2014). Because of their influence,
leaders play a major role in establishing the ethical climate of their organizations. For example, in a
meta-analytic review of 147 articles on ethical leadership, Bedi, Alpaslan, and Green (2016) found that
ethical leadership was positively related to followers’ perceptions of the leader’s fairness and the
followers’ ethical behavior.
In short, ethics is central to leadership because of the nature of the process of influence, the need to
engage followers in accomplishing mutual goals, and the impact leaders have on the organization’s
values.
The following section provides a discussion of some of the work of prominent leadership scholars who
have addressed issues related to ethics and leadership. Although many additional viewpoints exist,
those presented are representative of the predominant thinking in the area of ethics and leadership
today.
Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
Based on his work as a psychiatrist and his observations and analysis of many world leaders (e.g.,
President Lyndon Johnson, Mohandas Gandhi, and Margaret Sanger), Ronald Heifetz (1994) has
formulated a unique approach to ethical leadership. His approach emphasizes how leaders help
followers to confront conflict and to address conflict by effecting changes. Heifetz’s perspective is
related to ethical leadership because it deals with values: the values of workers and the values of the
organizations and communities in which they work. According to Heifetz, leadership involves the use of
authority to help followers deal with the conflicting values that emerge in rapidly changing work
environments and social cultures. It is an ethical perspective because it addresses the values of
workers.
For Heifetz (1994), leaders must use authority to mobilize people to face tough issues. As discussed in
the chapter on adaptive leadership (Chapter 11), it is up to the leader to provide a “holding environment”
in which there is trust, nurturance, and empathy. In a supportive context, followers can feel safe to
confront hard problems. Specifically, leaders use authority to get people to pay attention to the issues, to
act as a reality test regarding information, to manage and frame issues, to orchestrate conflicting
perspectives, and to facilitate decision making (Heifetz, 1994, p. 113). The leader’s duties are to assist
the follower in struggling with change and personal growth.
Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
As discussed in Chapter 8, Burns’s theory of transformational leadership places a strong emphasis on
followers’ needs, values, and morals. Transformational leadership involves attempts by leaders to move
followers to higher standards of moral responsibility. This emphasis sets transformational leadership
apart from most other approaches to leadership because it clearly states that leadership has a moral
dimension (see Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).
Similar to that of Heifetz, Burns’s (1978) perspective argues that it is important for leaders to engage
themselves with followers and help them in their personal struggles regarding conflicting values. The
resulting connection raises the level of morality in both the leader and the follower.
The origins of Burns’s position on leadership ethics are rooted in the works of such writers as Abraham
Maslow, Milton Rokeach, and Lawrence Kohlberg (Ciulla, 1998). The influence of these writers can be
seen in how Burns emphasizes the leader’s role in attending to the personal motivations and moral
development of the follower. For Burns, it is the responsibility of the leader to help followers assess their
own values and needs in order to raise them to a higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress
values such as liberty, justice, and equality (Ciulla, 1998).
Burns’s position on leadership as a morally uplifting process has not been without its critics. It has raised
many questions: How do you choose what a better set of moral values is? Who is to say that some
decisions represent higher moral ground than others? If leadership, by definition, entails raising
individual moral functioning, does this mean that the leadership of corrupt leaders is not actually
leadership? Notwithstanding these very legitimate questions, Burns’s perspective is unique in that it
makes ethics the central characteristic of the leadership process. His writing has placed ethics at the
forefront of scholarly discussions of what leadership means and how leadership should be carried out.
The Dark Side of Leadership
Although Burns (1978) placed ethics at the core of leadership, there still exists a dark side of leadership
that exemplifies leadership that is unethical and destructive. It is what we defined in Chapter 8
(“Transformational Leadership”) as pseudotransformational leadership and discussed in Chapter 13
(“Followership”) in regard to destructive leadership. The dark side of leadership is the destructive and
toxic side of leadership in that a leader uses leadership for personal ends. Lipman-Blumen (2005)
suggests that toxic leaders are characterized by destructive behaviors such as leaving their followers
worse off than they found them, violating the basic human rights of others, and playing to followers’
basest fears. Furthermore, Lipman-Blumen identifies many dysfunctional personal characteristics
destructive leaders demonstrate including lack of integrity, insatiable ambition, arrogance, and reckless
disregard for their actions. In addition, using two different toxic leadership questionnaires, Singh,
Sengupta, and Dev (2017) identified eight factors of perceived toxicity in leaders in Indian organizations.
The toxicity factors included managerial incompetency, dark traits, derisive supervision, impervious
despotic leadership, dearth of ethics, erratic behavior, narcissism, and self-promoting. The same
characteristics and behaviors that distinguish leaders as special can also be used by leaders to produce
disastrous outcomes (Conger, 1990). Because researchers have been focused on the positive attributes
and outcomes of effective leadership, until recently, there has been little attention paid to the dark side
of leadership. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that it exists.
In a meta-analysis of 57 studies of destructive leadership and its outcomes, Schyns and Schilling (2013)
found a strong relationship between destructive leadership and negative attitudes in followers toward
the leader. Destructive leadership is also negatively related to followers’ attitudes toward their jobs and
toward their organization as a whole. Furthermore, Schyns and Schilling found it closely related to
negative affectivity and to the experience of occupational stress.
In an attempt to more clearly define destructive leadership, Padilla, Hogan, and Kaiser (2007)
developed the concept of a toxic triangle that focuses on the influences of destructive leaders,
susceptible followers, and conducive environments (Figure 15.2). As shown in the model, destructive
leaders are characterized by having charisma and a need to use power and coercion for personal gains.
They are also narcissistic and often attention-getting and self-absorbed. Destructive leaders often have
negative life stories that can be traced to traumatic childhood events. Perhaps from self-hatred, they
often express an ideology of hate in their rhetoric and worldview.
Description
Figure 15.2 The Toxic Triangle
Source: Reprinted from The Leadership Quarterly, 18, A. Padilla, R. Hogan & R. B. Kaiser, “The Toxic
Triangle: Destructive Leaders, Susceptible Followers, and Conducive Environments,” pp. 180,
Copyright (2007).
As illustrated in Figure 15.2, destructive leadership also incorporates susceptible followers who have
been characterized as conformers and colluders. Conformers go along with destructive leaders to
satisfy unmet needs such as emptiness, alienation, or need for community. These followers have low
self-esteem and identify with charismatic leaders in an attempt to become more desirable. Because they
are psychologically immature, conformers more easily go along with authority and engage in destructive
activity. On the other hand, colluders may respond to destructive leaders because they are ambitious,
desire status, or see an opportunity to profit. Colluders may also go along because they identify with the
leader’s beliefs and values, which may be unsocialized such as greed and selfishness.
Finally, the toxic triangle illustrates that destructive leadership includes a conducive environment. When
the environment is unstable, the leader is often granted more authority to assert radical change. When
there is a perceived threat, followers often accept assertive leadership. People are attracted to leaders
who will stand up to the threats they feel in the environment. Destructive leaders who express
compatible cultural values with followers are more likely to succeed. For example, cultures high on
collectiveness would prefer a leader who promotes community and group identity. Destructive
leadership will also thrive when the checks and balances of the organization are weak and the rules of
the institution are ineffective.
Although research on the dark side of leadership has been limited, it is an area critical to our
understanding of leadership that is unethical. Clearly, there is a need for the development of models,
theories, and assessment instruments about the process of destructive leadership.
Principles of Ethical Leadership
In this section, we turn to a discussion of five principles of ethical leadership, the origins of which can be
traced back to Aristotle. The importance of these principles has been discussed in a variety of
disciplines, including biomedical ethics (Beauchamp & Childress, 1994), business ethics (Beauchamp &
Bowie, 1988), counseling psychology (Kitchener, 1984), and leadership education (Komives, Lucas, &
McMahon, 1998), to name a few. Although not inclusive, these principles provide a foundation for the
development of sound ethical leadership: respect, service, justice, honesty, and community (Figure
15.3).
Figure 15.3 Principles of Ethical Leadership
Ethical Leaders Respect Others
Philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that it is our duty to treat others with respect. To do so
means always to treat others as ends in themselves and never as means to ends. As Beauchamp and
Bowie (1988, p. 37) pointed out, “Persons must be treated as having their own autonomously
established goals and must never be treated purely as the means to another’s personal goals.” These
writers then suggested that treating others as ends rather than as means requires that we treat other
people’s decisions and values with respect: Failing to do so would signify that we were treating them as
a means to our own ends.
Leaders who respect others also allow them to be themselves, with creative wants and desires. They
approach other people with a sense of their unconditional worth and valuable individual differences
(Kitchener, 1984). Respect includes giving credence to others’ ideas and confirming them as human
beings. At times, it may require that leaders defer to others. As Burns (1978) suggested, leaders should
nurture followers in becoming aware of their own needs, values, and purposes, and assist followers in
integrating these with the leader’s needs, values, and purposes.
Respect for others is a complex ethic that is similar to but goes deeper than the kind of respect that
parents teach little children. Respect means that a leader listens closely to followers, is empathic, and is
tolerant of opposing points of view. It means treating followers in ways that confirm their beliefs,
attitudes, and values. When a leader exhibits respect to followers, followers can feel competent about
their work. In short, leaders who show respect treat others as worthy human beings.
Ethical Leaders Serve Others
Earlier in this chapter, we contrasted two ethical theories, one based on a concern for self (ethical
egoism) and another based on the interests of others (ethical altruism). The service principle clearly is
an example of altruism. Leaders who serve are altruistic: They place their followers’ welfare foremost in
their plans. In the workplace, altruistic service behavior can be observed in activities such as mentoring,
empowerment behaviors, team building, and citizenship behaviors, to name a few (Kanungo &
Mendonca, 1996).
The leader’s ethical responsibility to serve others is very similar to the ethical principle in health care of
beneficence. Beneficence is derived from the Hippocratic tradition, which holds that health professionals
ought to make choices that benefit patients. In a general way, beneficence asserts that providers have a
duty to help others pursue their own legitimate interests and goals (Beauchamp & Childress, 1994). Like
health professionals, ethical leaders have a responsibility to attend to others, be of service to them, and
make decisions pertaining to them that are beneficial and not harmful to their welfare.
In the past, the service principle has received a great deal of emphasis in the leadership literature. It is
clearly evident in the writings of Block (1993), Covey (1990), De Pree (1989), Gilligan (1982), and
Kouzes and Posner (1995), all of whom maintained that attending to others is the primary building block
of moral leadership. Further emphasis on service can be observed in the work of Senge (1990) in his
well-recognized writing on learning organizations. Senge contended that one of the important tasks of
leaders in learning organizations is to be the steward (servant) of the vision within the organization.
Being a steward means clarifying and nurturing a vision that is greater than oneself. This means not
being self-centered, but rather integrating one’s self or vision with that of others in the organization.
Effective leaders see their own personal vision as an important part of something larger than themselves
—a part of the organization and the community at large.
The idea of leaders serving others was more deeply explored by Robert Greenleaf (1970, 1977), who
developed the servant leadership approach. Servant leadership, which is explored in depth in Chapter
10, has strong altruistic ethical overtones in how it emphasizes that leaders should be attentive to the
concerns of their followers and should take care of them and nurture them. In addition, Greenleaf
argues that the servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned with the “have-nots” and
should strive to remove inequalities and social injustices. Greenleaf places a great deal of emphasis on
listening, empathy, and unconditional acceptance of others.
In short, whether it is Greenleaf’s notion of waiting on the “have-nots” or Senge’s notion of giving oneself
to a larger purpose, the idea behind service is contributing to the greater good of others. Recently, the
idea of serving the “greater good” has found an unusual following in the business world. In 2009, 20% of
the graduating class of the Harvard Business School, considered to be one of the premier schools
producing today’s business leaders, took an oath pledging that they will act responsibly and ethically,
and refrain from advancing their own ambitions at the expense of others. Similarly, Columbia Business
School requires all students to pledge to an honor code requiring they adhere to truth, integrity, and
respect (Wayne, 2009). In practicing the principle of service, these and other ethical leaders must be
willing to be follower centered, must place others’ interests foremost in their work, and must act in ways
that will benefit others.
Ethical Leaders Are Just
Ethical leaders are concerned about issues of fairness and justice. They make it a top priority to treat all
of their followers in an equal manner. Justice demands that leaders place issues of fairness at the
center of their decision making. As a rule, no one should receive special treatment or special
consideration except when their particular situation demands it. When individuals are treated differently,
the grounds for different treatment must be clear and reasonable, and must be based on moral values.
For example, many of us can remember being involved with some type of athletic team when we were
growing up. The coaches we liked were those we thought were fair with us. No matter what, we did not
want the coach to treat anyone differently from the rest. When someone came late to practice with a
poor excuse, we wanted that person disciplined just as we would have been disciplined. If a player had
a personal problem and needed a break, we wanted the coach to give it, just as we would have been
given a break. Without question, the good coaches were those who never had favorites and who made
a point of playing everyone on the team. In essence, what we wanted was that our coach be fair and
just.
When resources and rewards or punishments are distributed to employees, the leader plays a major
role. The rules that are used and how they are applied say a great deal about whether the leader is
concerned about justice and how they approach issues of fairness. Rawls (1971) stated that a concern
with issues of fairness is necessary for all people who are cooperating together to promote their
common interests. It is similar to the ethic of reciprocity, otherwise known as the Golden Rule—“Do unto
others as you would have them do unto you”—variations of which have appeared in many different
cultures throughout the ages. If we expect fairness from others in how they treat us, then we should
treat others fairly in our dealings with them. Issues of fairness become problematic because there is
always a limit on goods and resources, and there is often competition for the limited things available.
Because of the real or perceived scarcity of resources, conflicts often occur between individuals about
fair methods of distribution. It is important for leaders to clearly establish the rules for distributing
rewards. The nature of these rules says a lot about the ethical underpinnings of the leader and the
organization.
Beauchamp and Bowie (1988) outlined several of the common principles that serve as guides for
leaders in distributing the benefits and burdens fairly in an organization (Table 15.3). Although not
inclusive, these principles point to the reasoning behind why leaders choose to distribute things as they
do in organizations. In a given situation, a leader may use a single principle or a combination of several
principles in treating followers.
To illustrate the principles described in Table 15.3, consider the following hypothetical example: You are
the owner of a small trucking company that employs 50 drivers. You have just opened a new route, and
it promises to be one that pays well and has an ideal schedule. Only one driver can be assigned to the
route, but seven drivers have applied for it. Each driver wants an equal opportunity to get the route. One
of the drivers recently lost his wife to breast cancer and is struggling to care for three young children
(individual need). Two of the drivers are people of color, and one of them feels strongly that he has a
right to the job. One of the drivers has logged more driving hours for three consecutive years, and she
feels her effort makes her the logical candidate for the new route. One of the drivers serves on the
National Transportation Safety Board and has a 20-year accident-free driving record (societal
contribution). Two drivers have been with the company since its inception, and their performance has
been meritorious year after year.
Table 15.3 Principles of Distributive Justice
These principles are applied in different situations.
To each person
These principles are applied in different situations.
To each person
• An equal share or opportunity
• According to individual need
• According to that person’s rights
• According to individual effort
• According to societal contribution
• According to merit or performance
As the owner of the company, your challenge is to assign the new route in a fair way. Although many
other factors could influence your decision (e.g., seniority, wage rate, or employee health), the principles
described in Table 15.3 provide guidelines for deciding who is to get the new route.
Ethical Leaders Are Honest
When we were children, grown-ups often told us we must “never tell a lie.” To be good meant we must
be truthful. For leaders the lesson is the same: To be a good leader, one must be honest.
The importance of being honest can be understood more clearly when we consider the opposite of
honesty: dishonesty (see Jaksa & Pritchard, 1988). Dishonesty is a form of lying, a way of
misrepresenting reality. Dishonesty may bring with it many objectionable outcomes; foremost among
those outcomes is the distrust it creates. When leaders are not honest, others come to see them as
undependable and unreliable. People lose faith in what leaders say and stand for, and their respect for
leaders is diminished. As a result, the leader’s impact is compromised because others no longer trust
and believe in the leader.
When we relate to others, dishonesty also has a negative impact. It puts a strain on how people are
connected to each other. When we lie to others, we are in essence saying that we are willing to
manipulate the relationship on our own terms. We are saying that we do not trust the other person in the
relationship to be able to deal with information we have. In reality, we are putting ourselves ahead of the
relationship by saying that we know what is best for the relationship. The long-term effect of this type of
behavior is that it weakens relationships. Even when used with good intentions, dishonesty contributes
to the breakdown of relationships.
But being honest is not just about telling the truth. It has to do with being open with others and
representing reality as fully and completely as possible. This is not an easy task, however, because
there are times when telling the complete truth can be destructive or counterproductive. The challenge
for leaders is to strike a balance between being open and candid while monitoring what is appropriate to
disclose in a particular situation. Many times, there are organizational constraints that prevent leaders
from disclosing information to followers. It is important for leaders to be authentic, but it is also essential
that they be sensitive to the attitudes and feelings of others. Honest leadership involves a wide set of
behaviors.
Dalla Costa (1998) made the point clearly in his book, The Ethical Imperative, that being honest means
more than not deceiving. For leaders in organizations, being honest means, “Do not promise what you
can’t deliver, do not misrepresent, do not hide behind spin-doctored evasions, do not suppress
obligations, do not evade accountability, do not accept that the ‘survival of the fittest’ pressures of
business release any of us from the responsibility to respect another’s dignity and humanity” (p. 164). In
addition, Dalla Costa suggested that it is imperative that organizations recognize and acknowledge the
necessity of honesty and reward honest behavior within the organization.
Ethical Leaders Build Community
In Chapter 1, we defined leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of
individuals to achieve a common goal. This definition has a clear ethical dimension because it refers to
a common goal. A common goal requires that the leader and followers agree on the direction to be
taken by the group. Leaders need to take into account their own and followers’ purposes while working
toward goals that are suitable for both of them. This factor, concern for others, is the distinctive feature
that delineates authentic transformational leaders from pseudotransformational leaders (Bass &
Steidlmeier, 1999) (for more on pseudotransformational leadership see page 187 in Chapter 8).
Concern for the common good means that leaders cannot impose their will on others. They need to
search for goals that are compatible with everyone.
Burns (1978) placed this idea at the center of his theory on transformational leadership. A
transformational leader tries to move the group toward a common good that is beneficial for both the
leaders and the followers. In moving toward mutual goals, both the leader and the followers are
changed. It is this feature that makes Burns’s theory unique. For Burns, leadership has to be grounded
in the leader–follower relationship. It cannot be controlled by the leader, such as Hitler’s influence in
Germany. Hitler coerced people to meet his own agenda and followed goals that did not advance the
goodness of humankind.
An ethical leader takes into account the purposes of everyone involved in the group and is attentive to
the interests of the community and the culture. Such a leader demonstrates an ethic of caring toward
others (Gilligan, 1982) and does not force others or ignore the intentions of others (Bass & Steidlmeier,
1999).
Rost (1991) went a step further and suggested that ethical leadership demands attention to a civic
virtue. By this, he meant that leaders and followers need to attend to more than their own mutually
determined goals. They need to attend to the community’s goals and purpose. As Burns (1978, p. 429)
wrote, transformational leaders and followers begin to reach out to wider social collectivities and seek to
establish higher and broader moral purposes. Similarly, Greenleaf (1970) argued that building
community was a main characteristic of servant leadership. All of our individual and group goals are
bound up in the common good and public interest. We need to pay attention to how the changes
proposed by a leader and followers will affect the larger organization, the community, and society. An
ethical leader is concerned with the common good, in the broadest sense. This is underscored by
Wilson and McCalman (2017), who argued that leadership for the greater good is the ultimate end
toward which ethical leadership ought to be directed.
It is important to note that building community, as well as the other principles of ethical leadership
discussed previously (Figure 15.3), vary across cultures. Cultures vary widely in what they view as
positive leadership attributes and in what they define as ethical behavior of leaders. As the world
becomes more connected and cross-cultural, an understanding of these different cultural perspectives
on ethical leadership will be important.
Resick Hanges, Dickson, and Mitchelson, (2006) found that ethical leadership dimensions of
character/integrity, altruism, collective motivation, and encouragement were endorsed across all cultures
but that the importance of each dimension varied by culture. They also examined the meaning of ethical
leadership in six countries and results indicated that cultures agree on the importance of character and
integrity. Respondents from the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, and Germany regarded
consideration, respect for others, and collective orientation as crucial to ethical leadership; Ireland, the
United States, and Taiwan rated these attributes as less important. The authors concluded that while
some country differences exist, there is a general consensus regarding the meaning of ethical
leadership (Resick et al., 2011).
STRENGTHS
This chapter discusses a broad set of ideas regarding ethics and leadership. This general field of study
has several strengths. First, it provides a body of timely research on ethical issues. There is a high
demand for moral leadership in our society today. Beginning with the Richard Nixon administration in the
1970s and continuing through Donald Trump’s administration, people have been insisting on higher
levels of moral responsibility from their leaders. At a time when there seems to be a vacuum in ethical
leadership, this research offers us some direction on how to think about and practice ethical leadership.
Second, this body of research suggests that ethics ought to be considered as an integral part of the
broader domain of leadership. Except for servant, transformational, inclusive, and authentic leadership,
none of the other leadership theories discussed in this book focuses on the role of ethics in the
leadership process. This chapter suggests that leadership is not an amoral phenomenon. Leadership is
a process of influencing others; it has a moral dimension that distinguishes it from other types of
influence, such as coercion or despotic control. Leadership involves values, including showing respect
for followers, being fair to others, and building community. It is not a process that we can demonstrate
without showing our values. When we influence, we have an effect on others, which means we need to
pay attention to our values and our ethics.
Third, research on ethical leadership clearly demonstrates benefits to the organization. When
employees perceive that their leaders are ethical role models, there is less deviance and more
cooperation, resulting in higher performance and organizational citizenship (Den Hartog, 2015). Kuenzi,
Mayer, and Greenbaum (2019) found that ethical leadership predicts the ethical climate of the
organization. The study also found that the ethical climate of an organization explains the relationship
between ethical leadership and unethical behavior within work groups. When ethical leaders create
ethical climates in organizations, it reinforces the role modeling of ethical behaviors for followers.
In addition, research has demonstrated that followers exhibit ethical norms, positive job attitudes, and
constructive ethical behaviors because their leaders serve as role models when they behave ethically
(Mayer, Kuenzi, Greenbaum, Bardes, & Salvador, 2009). There appears to be a cascading effect. When
leaders are ethical at higher organizational levels, followers emulate their behavior. The cascading effect
has been explained by middle-level supervisors’ ethical efficacy expectations (the belief in their ability to
be ethical) and their expectations of punishments for being unethical (Wang, Xu, & Liu, 2018). However,
Thiel, Hardy, Peterson, Welsh, and Bonner (2018) found that the efficacy of ethical leadership is related
to the leader’s number of followers; leaders with a wider span of control had fewer high-quality
relationships and therefore had less influence on the ethical behavior of followers.
Fourth, ethical leadership has been linked to attitudinal, motivational, well-being, and performance-
related outcomes; ethical norms and decisions; and ethical behaviors by followers. Ng and Feldman
(2015) conducted a meta-analysis of 101 samples published over 15 years (29,620 respondents) and
found that ethical leadership showed positive relationships to followers’ job attitudes, job performance,
and evaluations of their leaders. Further, followers’ trust in the leader explained the relationships of
ethical leadership with job attitudes and performance. A review of ethical leadership research concluded
that it relates positively to satisfaction with the leader, perceived leader effectiveness, followers’ job
dedication, willingness to report problems to management, well-being, LMX, organizational commitment,
and trust and it is negatively related to cynicism (Den Hartog, 2015).
Finally, the measurement of ethical leadership has improved. For example, Brown, Treviño, and
Harrison (2005) developed and validated a 10-item measure of ethical leadership (the Ethical
Leadership Scale, ELS) that has been employed in subsequent research, and is the most widely used
measure (Ng & Feldman, 2015) of ethical leadership.
CRITICISMS
Although the area of ethics and leadership has many strengths, it also has some weaknesses. First, it
remains an area of research in an early stage of development, and therefore lacks a strong body of
traditional research findings to substantiate it. There is conceptual confusion regarding the nature and
definition of ethical leadership (Yukl, Mahsud, Hassan, & Prussia, 2013). Den Hartog (2015) points out
that some definitions are based on leader intentions (e.g., “do no harm”), while others describe leader
behaviors based on follower perceptions (e.g., “asking what’s the right thing to do”). In addition,
followers’ perceptions of their leaders may be biased. Although many studies have been published on
business ethics, these studies have not been directly related to ethical leadership. One exception is the
work of Yukl and colleagues (2013), who identified key components of ethical leadership as a result of
their efforts to validate an ethical leadership questionnaire, which they developed based on existing
measurement instruments that all had limitations. In this work, they suggest the construct domain of
ethical leadership includes integrity, honesty, fairness, communication of ethical values, consistency of
behavior with espoused values, ethical guidance, and altruism. In general, the dearth of research on
leadership ethics makes speculation about the nature of ethical leadership difficult. Until more research
studies have been conducted that deal directly with the ethical dimensions of leadership, theoretical
formulations about the process will remain tentative.
Another criticism is that, in the past, leadership ethics relied on the writings of just a few people who
have penned essays and texts that were strongly influenced by their personal opinions about the nature
of leadership ethics and their view of the world. Although these writings, such as Heifetz’s and Burns’s,
have stood the test of time, they have not been tested using traditional quantitative or qualitative
research methods. They are primarily descriptive and anecdotal. In recent years, leadership ethics
researchers have begun to develop the traditional kind of empirical support that usually accompanies
accepted theories of human behavior.
Third, most of the research on ethical leadership has focused primarily on the Western world and Anglo-
American countries (Eisenbeiss, 2012; Wilson & McCalman, 2017). There is a need to widen the scope
of research on ethical leadership to include European and Asian perspectives because cultures vary
widely in how they approach ethical leadership. As the world becomes more connected and cross-
cultural, an understanding of these different cultural perspectives on ethical leadership will be important.
Fourth, there are also generational differences in ethical perspectives. From an analysis of the literature,
Anderson, Baur, Griffith, and Buckley (2017) suggest that today’s generation of workers, millennials,
presents unique challenges regarding ethical leadership. First, because millennials are more
individualistic than older employees, they are less likely to view the intensity of moral decisions in the
same way and less likely to look to their leaders for guidance on making ethical decisions. Second,
because millennials see their work as less central to their lives, they are less likely to view ethical
dilemmas at work as particularly problematic. Third, because millennials value highly extrinsic rewards,
they are less likely to respond to ethical appeals to do the right thing for the organization. In fact,
research suggests that these employees may be even more likely to succumb to temptations to be
unethical if such behavior is likely to lead to pay-offs (Ethics Resource Center, 2011).
Because ethical perspectives can change quickly, empirical ethical leadership research will struggle to
be up-to-date and relevant.
APPLICATION
Although issues of morality and leadership are discussed more often in society today, these discussions
have not resulted in a large number of programs in training and development designed to teach ethical
leadership. Many new programs are oriented toward helping managers become more effective at work
and in life in general, but these programs do not directly target the area of ethics and leadership.
Yet the ethics and leadership research in this chapter can be applied to people at all levels of
organizations and in all walks of life. At a very minimum, it is crucial to state that leadership involves
values, and one cannot be a leader without being aware of and concerned about one’s own values.
Because leadership has a moral dimension, being a leader demands awareness on our part of the way
our ethics defines our leadership.
For example, Moore et al. (2018) combined experiments and field research to demonstrate that ethical
leadership reduces followers’ tendencies to morally disengage and then engage in deviant behavior.
Moral disengagement is thinking that it is acceptable to take credit for someone else’s work. The authors
cite Pope Francis as an example of how ethical leadership may reduce followers’ moral disengagement.
During his first year as Pope, instead of kneeling for a symbolic touch of the feet of 12 priests on Holy
Thursday, he washed and kissed the feet of 12 imprisoned juveniles. By treating marginalized people in
this way, the Pope created a disconnect for followers who talk badly about those who are
disenfranchised. He also became a role model for humility for his followers by moving from the Apostolic
Palace to a small apartment and replacing the papal Mercedes with a Ford Focus.
Managers and leaders can use the information in research on ethical leadership to better understand
themselves and strengthen their own leadership. Ethical theories can remind leaders to ask themselves,
“What is the right and fair thing to do?” or “What would a good person do?” Leaders can use the ethical
principles described in this research as benchmarks for their own behavior. Do I show respect to others?
Do I act with a generous spirit? Do I show honesty and faithfulness to others? Do I serve the
community? Finally, we can learn from the overriding theme in this research that the leader–follower
relationship is central to ethical leadership. To be an ethical leader, we must be sensitive to the needs of
others, treat others in ways that are just, and care for others.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
The following section contains three case studies (Cases 15.1, 15.2, and 15.3) in which ethical
leadership is needed. Case 15.1 describes a department chair who must choose which student will get
a special assignment. Case 15.2 deals with the ethical issues surrounding how a human resource
service company established the pricing for its services. Case 15.3 explores the events surrounding
U.S. Navy Captain Brett Crozier’s firing for sounding the alarm about COVID-19 aboard the aircraft
carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt. At the end of each case, there are questions that point to the
intricacies and complexities of practicing ethical leadership.
Case 15.1 Choosing a Research Assistant
Dr. Angi Dirks is the chair of the state university’s organizational psychology department, which has four
teaching assistants (TAs). Angi has just found out that she has received a grant for research work over
the summer and that it includes money to fund one of the TAs as her research assistant. In Angi’s mind,
the top two candidates are Roberto and Michelle, who are both available to work over the summer.
Roberto, a foreign student from Venezuela, has gotten very high teaching evaluations and is well liked
by the faculty. Roberto needs a summer job to help pay for school since it is too expensive for him to
return home for the summer to work. Michelle is also an exceptional graduate student; she is married
and doesn’t necessarily need the extra income, but she is going to pursue a PhD, so the extra
experience would be beneficial to her future endeavors.
A third teaching assistant, Carson, commutes to school from a town an hour away, where he is helping
to take care of his grandparents. Carson manages to juggle school, teaching, and his home
responsibilities well, carrying a 4.0 GPA in his classwork. Angi knows Carson could use the money, but
she is afraid that he has too many other responsibilities to take on the research project over the
summer.
As Angi weighs which TA to offer the position, a faculty member approaches her about considering the
fourth TA, Analisa. It’s been a tough year with Analisa as a TA. She has complained numerous times to
her faculty mentor and to Angi that the other TAs treat her differently, and she thinks it’s racial
discrimination. The student newspaper printed a column she wrote about “being a speck of brown in a
campus of white,” in which she expressed her frustration with the predominantly white faculty’s inability
to understand the unique perspectives and experiences of minority students. After the column came out,
the faculty in the department became wary of working with Analisa, fearing becoming part of the
controversy. Their lack of interaction with her made Analisa feel further alienated.
Angi knows that Analisa is a very good researcher and writer, and her skills would be an asset to the
project. Analisa’s faculty mentor says that giving the position to her would go a long way to “smooth
things over” between faculty and Analisa and make Analisa feel included in the department. Analisa
knows about the open position and has expressed interest in it to her faculty mentor, but hasn’t directly
talked to Angi. Angi is afraid that by not giving it to Analisa, she may stir up more accusations of ill
treatment while at the same time facing accusations from others that she is giving Analisa preferential
treatment.
Questions
1. Of the four options available to Angi, which is the most ethical?
2. Using the principles of distributive justice, who would Angi choose to become the research
assistant?
3. From Heifetz’s perspective, can Angi use this decision to help her department and faculty face a
difficult situation? Should she?
4. Do you agree with Burns’s perspective that it is Angi’s responsibility to help followers assess their
own values and needs in order to raise them to a higher level that will stress values such as liberty,
justice, and equality? If so, how can Angi do that through this situation?
Case 15.2 Reexamining a Proposal
After working 10 years as the only manager of color in a large printing company, David Jones decided
he wanted to set out on his own. Because of his experience and prior connections, David was confident
he could survive in the printing business, but he wondered whether he should buy an existing business
or start a new one. As part of his planning, David contacted a professional employer organization (PEO),
which had a sterling reputation, to obtain an estimate for human resource services for a startup
company. The estimate was to include costs for payroll, benefits, worker’s compensation, and other
traditional human resource services. Because David had not yet started his business, the PEO
generated a generic quote applicable to a small company in the printing industry. In addition, because
the PEO had nothing tangible to quote, it gave David a quote for human resource services that was
unusually high.
In the meantime, David found an existing small company that he liked, and he bought it. Then he
contacted the PEO to sign a contract for human resource services at the previously quoted price. David
was ready to take ownership and begin his new venture. He signed the original contract as presented.
After David signed the contract, the PEO reviewed the earlier proposal in light of the actual figures of the
company he had purchased. This review raised many concerns for management. Although the goals of
the PEO were to provide high-quality service, be competitive in the marketplace, and make a
reasonable profit, the quote it had provided David appeared to be much too high. It was not comparable
in any way with the other service contracts the PEO had with other companies of similar size and
function.
During the review, it became apparent that several concerns had to be addressed. First, the original
estimate made the PEO appear as if it was gouging the client. Although the client had signed the
original contract, was it fair to charge such a high price for the proposed services? Would charging such
high fees mean that the PEO would lose this client or similar clients in the future? Another concern was
related to the PEO’s support of businesses owned by people of color. For years, the PEO had prided
itself on having strong values about affirmative action and fairness in the workplace, but this contract
appeared to actually hurt and to be somewhat unfair to a Black client. Finally, the PEO was concerned
with the implications of the contract for the salesperson who drew up the proposal for David. Changing
the estimated costs in the proposal would have a significant impact on the salesperson’s commission,
which would negatively affect the morale of others in the PEO’s sales area.
After a reexamination of the original proposal, a new contract was drawn up for David’s company with
lower estimated costs. Though lower than the original proposal, the new contract remained much higher
than the average contract in the printing industry. David willingly signed the new contract.
Questions
1. What role should ethics play in the writing of a proposal such as this? Did the PEO do the ethical
thing for David? How much money should the PEO have tried to make? What would you have done
if you were part of management at the PEO?
2. From a deontological (duty) perspective and a teleological (consequences) perspective, how would
you describe the ethics of the PEO?
3. Based on what the PEO did for David, how would you evaluate the PEO on the ethical principles of
respect, service, justice, honesty, and community?
4. How would you assess the ethics of the PEO if you were David? If you were among the PEO
management? If you were the salesperson? If you were a member of the printing community?
Case 15.3 Ship Shape
The Cast
Commanding Officer of the USS Theodore Roosevelt Captain Brett Crozier
Commander of Carrier Strike Group (oversees 7 ships
including the USS Theodore Roosevelt)
Rear Admiral Stuart Baker
Acting U.S. Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly
U.S. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper
The Crew Sailors and airmen aboard USS
Theodore Roosevelt
Act 1—The Virus
It was believed to have begun on March 5, 2020, with the Vietnamese port call of the U.S. naval aircraft
carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt. The port call in Da Nang, only the second visit by an American aircraft
carrier to the country since the Vietnam War, was ordered partly as a show of military strength in a
region threatened by perceived growing territorialism by China in the South China Sea.
At the time the Roosevelt arrived there, Vietnam had 16 reported cases of the highly contagious
coronavirus (COVID-19), but they were all in the country’s northern region, far from the ship’s port of
call. Because the Roosevelt, commanded by Captain Brett Crozier, a Naval Academy graduate with
more than 30 years of service, was too large for the city’s docks, the ship anchored offshore and relied
on small boats to ferry its sailors to Da Nang, where they spent several days within the city, frequenting
its restaurants, shops, and hotels and engaging in community service projects. On the fourth day,
several crew members were ordered back to the ship when it was feared they may have been exposed
to COVID-19 at a hotel where two British nationals who had tested positive for the virus had also been
staying.
The Roosevelt then left port and headed out to sea, returning to normal operations with aircraft flying to
and from the ship bringing supplies from Japan and the Philippines. Meanwhile, the ship’s medical team
watched the crew closely for signs of the virus, knowing that symptoms generally appear within the first
14 days after exposure.
On March 24, an announcement came over the ship’s loudspeakers: “Set River City 1.” This alerted the
sailors that the ship had entered into a period of restricted communications, meaning no internet or
phone calls for most everyone onboard. The reason why, the crew soon discovered, was that three
sailors aboard the Roosevelt had tested positive for COVID-19. Within 24 hours, the number of cases on
the ship doubled and each subsequent day rendered new cases (Simkins, 2020).
The Roosevelt, a massive 1,000-foot nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, is essentially a small city. It
housed almost 5,000 crew members, all living and working in extremely tight quarters. Crew members
shared common cafeterias, bathroom facilities, other social areas, and narrow hallways. They worked in
close proximity to one another day and night. Even their sleeping quarters were close with bunks often
stacked three high.
The sailors who tested positive were all members of the reactor crew, the group responsible for running
the core of the ship. They were flown to a Navy hospital in Guam, with the ship following a few days
later, docking there to begin testing of the entire crew and engage in professional cleaning of the ship.
Just a few months earlier, the Diamond Princess, a cruise ship of 2,600 passengers housed in individual
cabins, had eight of its passengers die of the virus while aboard with more than 700 others infected.
Captain Crozier knew the Roosevelt, with its tight quarters and significantly larger crew, had the
potential to be much worse than the Diamond Princess; the Roosevelt’s doctors were estimating that
more than 50 crew members could potentially die from the virus (Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, Cooper, &
Ismay, 2020).
Act 2—The Letter
As the cases aboard the Roosevelt rapidly increased, several options were considered with Captain
Crozier arguing strongly for evacuating nearly all the sailors from the ship, leaving a skeleton crew of
around 500 to perform essential duties and protect the vessel’s reactors, bombs, missiles, and war
planes. The rest of the crew would be quarantined and tested while the ship was cleaned.
Captain Crozier’s commanding officer, Rear Admiral Stuart Baker, disagreed, feeling that less drastic
action would still protect the crew and leave the ship in operation. Ultimately, 1,000 of the ship’s crew
were evacuated to a gymnasium on base where they slept on cots, which quickly resulted in several
more confirmed cases.
After continued denials from his superiors and watching the situation escalate each day, on March 30,
Captain Crozier laid out his concerns and arguments in a four-page letter titled, Request for Assistance
in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic. The letter was sent via unclassified email and addressed to
Crozier’s commanding officer, Rear Admiral Stuart Baker, U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral John
Aquilino, and Naval Air Forces Commander Vice Admiral DeWolfe Miller as well as copied to seven
other Navy captains (Simpkins, 2020).
According to the New York Times, prior to sending the letter, Captain Crozier shared the email with
several of the Roosevelt’s most senior officers. When they expressed their desire to add their signatures
to the letter, Captain Crozier refused, fearing for their careers, knowing the letter might well end his
(Cooper, Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, & Cochrane, 2020).
Pleading for assistance and consideration, Captain Crozier wrote, “This will require a political solution,
but it is the right thing to do . . . We are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we
are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset — our sailors” (Gafni & Garofoli, 2020). Noting
that only a small group of infected crewmen had been removed from the ship and quarantined, and that
“the spread of the disease is ongoing and accelerating,” Crozier requested “compliant quarantine
rooms” be provided on shore in Guam for his entire crew “as soon as possible” (Gafni & Garofoli, 2020).
The letter was leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle and the plight of the crewmen on the USS
Theodore Roosevelt soon became public knowledge in the midst of a worldwide pandemic.
Act 3—Retribution
Infuriated that the letter had been sent to what he considered a wide distribution (though the recipients
were all Navy personnel) and consequently became public due to being leaked to the press, acting U.S.
secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly fired Captain Crozier on April 2.
Modly, himself a Naval Academy graduate and former Navy helicopter pilot, was the acting secretary
positioned to become the permanent Secretary of the Navy. He had replaced Richard Spencer, who had
been fired by U.S. president Donald Trump for opposing Trump’s support of a Navy Seal who had been
charged with war crimes. According to the New York Times, Modly, concerned that Captain Crozier’s
letter would anger Trump, sought the advice of colleagues, including the chief of naval operations and
the chair of the joint chiefs of staff, who counseled Modly to first order an investigation (Gibbons-Neff,
Schmitt, Cooper, & Ismay, 2020). He did not.
Although Modly acknowledged that there was “no evidence that Captain Crozier leaked the message” to
the media (Cooper, Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, & Cochrane, 2020) he quickly relieved the captain of his
duties without a formal investigation and, according to Modly’s aides, without pressure from his
superiors, U.S. defense secretary Mark Esper or U.S. president Donald Trump. NavyTimes would later
report that Modly ignored the counsel of his colleagues, “due to the belief that President Donald Trump
wanted Crozier fired” (Simkins, 2020).
Modly’s immediate superior, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, had previously cautioned his commanders
not to make decisions that might contradict Trump’s intended messaging on the growing COVID-19
pandemic. Modly tried to frame the firing of Captain Crozier as a “loss of confidence” rather than
retribution by claiming the letter had “raised alarm bells unnecessarily” and that “in sending it out
broadly, he [Crozier] did not take care to assure it couldn’t be leaked” (Cooper, Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, &
Cochrane, 2020).
As Captain Crozier left his ship, hundreds of sailors and airmen gathered to form a “corridor” for him to
openly express their support for the popular and highly respected commander. Videos of this went viral.
In response, Modly chartered a Gulf Stream business jet and flew immediately to Guam at a cost of
$243,000 where he delivered a scathing, profanity-laced 15-minute reprimand to the Roosevelt’s crew
over the ship’s public address system (Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, & Ismay, 2020). Modly berated the crew
for cheering the captain, calling Crozier “too stupid” and “too naïve” to command a ship and adding that
blame for the virus belonged to China. Thirty minutes later, he abruptly left, fielding no questions.
Within 30 minutes of his departure from the Roosevelt, social media was widely broadcasting audio
recordings of his tirade.
Act 4—R&R: Resignation and Reinstatement?
When Acting Secretary Modly landed back in Washington, D.C., he was immediately directed by
Defense Secretary Esper to apologize. Lawmakers and former military officials were calling for Modly’s
resignation.
The next day, Modly, in quarantine because of his potential exposure to the virus while onboard the
Roosevelt, tendered his resignation.
Captain Crozier subsequently ended up in quarantine at the naval base in Guam, battling the virus.
More than 4,000 of the ship’s crew members were also quarantined with more than 800 testing positive
for the virus and one crew member dying from it.
But Captain Crozier’s plight and that of the USS Theodore Roosevelt’s crew had caught the attention of
senior military officials and raised awareness and concern for other warships and missions. General
John Hyten, chair of the joint chiefs of staff shared, “From my perspective, it’s not a good idea to think
that the Teddy Roosevelt is a one-of-a-kind issue. To think that it will never happen again is not a good
way to plan” (Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, & Ismay, 2020).
The Navy subsequently instituted new health and safety procedures for ships at sea and for those
preparing to head out on deployment to prevent future outbreaks, including requiring crew members to
wear masks and observe social distancing guidelines. In addition, in preparation for deployment, a
ship’s crew must be quarantined for 14 days before boarding the ship.
More than 345,000 people signed an online petition to reinstate Captain Crozier. Legislators urged the
Pentagon to reconsider. The chair of the House Armed Services Committee and other top subcommittee
leaders condemned Crozier’s dismissal, stating that “Dismissing a commanding officer for speaking out
on issues critical to the safety of those under their command discourages others from raising similar
concerns” (Cooper, Gibbons-Neff, Schmitt, & Cochrane, 2020).
Amidst pressure from the public and lawmakers, and after a preliminary inquiry, the Navy’s top
leadership took the unprecedented step to recommend reinstatement of Captain Crozier as commander
of the USS Theodore Roosevelt. The final decision on whether Captain Crozier would be reinstated as
captain of the USS Roosevelt was delayed by acting Navy secretary James E. McPherson (who
replaced Thomas Modly) who has called for a broader investigation into the matter (Martinez, 2020). At
the time this was written, Crozier remained in the Navy, maintaining his rank, but had been given a
temporary duty assignment in San Diego (Ziesulewicz, 2020).
Questions
1. The chapter states that “a leader’s choices are also influenced by their moral development.”
Applying Kohlberg’s stages of moral development to this case:
a. At what stage would you classify Captain Crozier’s level of moral reasoning? Why?
b. At what stage would you classify Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly’s level of moral
reasoning? Why?
c. What about Rear Admiral Stuart Baker? Why?
d. What level would you classify Defense Secretary Mark Esper? Why?
2. The chapter outlines three different approaches to assessing consequences—ethical egoism,
utilitarianism, and altruism.
a. Which of these approaches do you feel most accurately summarizes Captain Brett Crozier’s
approach? Why?
b. Which of these do you feel most accurately summarizes Acting Secretary Thomas Modly’s
approach? Why?
c. Which approach applies to Rear Admiral Stuart Baker?
3. What elements described in the Toxic Leadership Triangle, were evident in this case? Do you think
there are examples of destructive leadership in this case? Explain your answer.
4. The chapter outlines five Principles of Ethical Leadership. Which of these principles applied to
Captain Brett Crozier’s leadership? Which principles applied to Thomas Modly’s leadership?
—Barbara Russell, MBA, BSCS, BBA, Chemeketa Community College
Leadership Instrument
It is human to want others to see you as an ethical leader, because being viewed as an unethical leader
can carry with it very strong negative connotations. But the social desirability of being judged by others
as an ethical leader makes measuring ethical leadership challenging. Self-reported scores of ethical
leadership are often biased and skewed in a positive direction.
The Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (ELSQ) presented in this chapter is a self-reporting
measure of ethical leadership that does not measure whether one is or is not ethical, but rather
assesses the leader’s style of ethical leadership. The ELSQ is a 45-question instrument that measures
how a leader approaches ethical dilemmas. The six ethical styles assessed by the dilemmas are (a)
duty ethics (I would do what is right), (b) utilitarianism ethics (I would do what benefits the most people),
(c) virtue ethics (I would do what a good person would do), (d) caring ethics (I would do what shows that
I care about my close personal relationships), (e) egoism ethics (I would do what benefits me the most),
and (f) justice ethics (I would do what is fair). Based on the individual’s responses, the ELSQ identifies a
leader’s primary and secondary ethical leadership styles.
Although the ELSQ is in its initial stages of development, data from two studies (Baehrend, 2016;
Chikeleze, 2014) confirmed that when leaders face ethical dilemmas, they have a preference for a
particular style of ethical leadership. The ELSQ can be used by leaders as a self-assessment tool to
understand their decision-making preferences when confronting ethical dilemmas. Organizations will
find it a useful training tool to educate leaders on decision making (Chikeleze & Baehrend, 2017).
Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form)
Purpose: To develop an understanding of your ethical leadership style and understand how your
preferred ethical leadership style relates to other ethical leadership styles.
Instructions: Please read the following 10 hypothetical situations in which a leader is confronted
with an ethical dilemma. Place yourself in the role of the leader or manager in the situation and
indicate with an “X” your most preferred response. Your most preferred response is the response
that best describes why you would do what you would do in that particular situation. Choose only
one response. There are no right or wrong answers.
Response alternatives explained:
I would do what is right: This option includes following the rules, meeting my responsibilities,
fulfilling my obligations, and adhering to organization policy. Rules in this context may be
explicit or implicit.
I would do what benefits the most people: This option includes doing what helps the most
people overall and what creates the greatest total happiness. It also includes doing the
greatest good for the greatest number.
I would do what a good person would do: This option includes exhibiting excellence of
character, acting with integrity, and being faithful to one’s principles. This option includes
employing virtues such as courage, honesty, and loyalty.
I would do what shows that I care about my close relationships: This option includes building
and maintaining caring relationships, nurturing relationships, and being responsive to the
needs of others. It gives special consideration to those with whom I share a personal bond
or commitment.
I would do what benefits me the most: This option includes achieving my goals, being
successful in my assigned task, and advancing my career. It also includes doing things that
are in my self-interest.
I would do what is fair: This option includes acting with justice, being equitable to others, and
treating others fairly. It also includes distributing benefits and burdens to everyone equally.
Situations
1. You are the leader of a manufacturing team and learn that your employees are falsifying
product quality results to sell more products. If you report the matter, most of them will lose
their jobs, you may lose yours, and your company will take a significant hit to its reputation.
What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
2. You have an employee who has been having performance problems, which is making it hard
for your group to meet its work quota. This person was recommended to you as a solid
performer. You now believe the person’s former manager had problems with the employee
and just wanted to get rid of the person. If you give the underperforming employee a good
recommendation, leaving out the performance problems, you will have an opportunity to
pass the employee off to another group. What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
3. Your team is hard-pressed to complete a critical project. You hear about a job opening that
would be much better for one of your key employees’ career. If this individual leaves the
team, it would put the project in danger. What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
4. An employee of yours has a child with a serious illness and is having trouble fulfilling
obligations at work. You learn from your administrative assistant that this employee claimed
40 hours on a time sheet for a week when the employee actually only worked 30 hours.
What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
5. You are a manager, and some of your employees can finish their quotas in much less than
the allotted time to do so. If upper management becomes aware of this, they will want you to
increase the quotas. Some of your employees are unable to meet their current quotas. What
would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
6. You are an organization’s chief financial officer, and you are aware that the chief executive
officer and other members of the senior leadership team want to provide exaggerated
financial information to keep the company’s stock price high. The entire senior management
team holds significant stock positions. What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
7. Two new employees have joined your accounting team right out of school. They are
regularly found surfing the Internet or texting on their phones. Your accounting work
regularly requires overtime at the end of the month to get the financial reports completed.
These employees refuse to do any overtime, which shifts work to other team members. The
other team members are getting resentful and upset. What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
8. You are the director of a neighborhood food cooperative. A member—a single parent with
four children—is caught shoplifting $30 in groceries from the co-op. You suspect this person
has been stealing for years. You consider pressing charges. What would you do in this
situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
9. You have been accused of discriminating against a particular gender in your hiring practices.
A new position opens up, and you could hire a candidate of the gender you’ve been accused
of discriminating against over a candidate of another gender, even though the latter
candidate has slightly better qualifications. Hiring the former candidate would let you
address this accusation and improve your reputation in the company. What would you do in
this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
10. You are a professor. One of your best students buys an essay online and turns it in for a
grade. Later in the term, the student begins to feel guilty and confesses to you that the paper
was purchased. It is the norm at the university to fail a student guilty of plagiarism. You must
decide if you will flunk the student. What would you do in this situation?
□ A. I would do what is right.
□ B. I would do what benefits the most people.
□ C. I would do what a good person would do.
□ D. I would do what shows that I care about my relationships.
□ E. I would do what benefits me the most.
□ F. I would do what is fair.
Scoring
To score the questionnaire, sum the number of times you selected item A, B, C, D, E, or F. The
sum of A responses represents your preference for Duty Ethics, the sum of B responses
represents your preference for Utilitarian Ethics, the sum of C responses represents your
preference for Virtue Ethics, the sum of D responses represents your preference for Caring
Ethics, the sum of E responses represents your preference for Egoism Ethics, and the sum of F
responses represents your preference for Justice Ethics. Place these sums in the Total Scores
section that follows.
A. Duty Ethics: __________
B. Utilitarian Ethics: __________
C. Virtue Ethics: __________
D. Caring Ethics: __________
E. Egoism Ethics: __________
F. Justice Ethics: __________
Scoring Interpretation
The scores you received on this questionnaire provide information about your ethical leadership
style; they represent your preferred way of addressing ethical dilemmas. Given a situation with
an ethical dilemma, this questionnaire points to what ethical perspective is behind the choices
you would make to resolve the dilemma. As you look at your total scores, your highest score
represents your primary or dominant ethical leadership style, your second-highest score is the
next most important, and so on. If you scored 0 for a category, it means that you put lower
priority on that particular ethical approach to guide your decision making when facing ethical
dilemmas.
If you scored higher on Duty Ethics, it means you follow the rules and do what you think you
are supposed to do when facing ethical dilemmas. You focus on fulfilling your responsibilities
and doing what you think is the right thing to do.
If you scored higher on Utilitarian Ethics, it means you try to do what is best for the most
people overall when facing ethical dilemmas. You focus on what will create happiness for the
largest number of individuals.
If you scored higher on Virtue Ethics, it means that you pull from who you are (your
character) when facing ethical dilemmas. You act out of integrity, and you are faithful to your
own principles of goodness.
If you scored higher on Caring Ethics, it means that you give attention to your relationships
when facing ethical dilemmas. You may give special consideration to those with whom you
share a personal bond or commitment.
If you scored higher on Egoism Ethics, it means that you do what is best for yourself when
facing ethical dilemmas. You are not afraid to assert your own interests and goals when
resolving problems.
If you scored higher on Justice Ethics, it means that you focus on treating others fairly when
facing ethical dilemmas. You try to make sure the benefits and burdens of decisions are
shared equitably between everyone concerned.
Comparing your scores regarding each of these ethical perspectives can give you a sense of
what is important to you when addressing an ethical concern. A low score in any of the
categories suggests that you give less priority to that ethical perspective. All of the ethical
perspectives have merit, so there is no “best” perspective to maintain.
This questionnaire is intended as a self-assessment exercise. Although each ethical approach is
presented as a discrete category, it is possible that one category may overlap with another
category. It is also possible that you may have an ethical leadership style that is not fully
captured in this questionnaire. Since this questionnaire is an abridged version of an expanded
questionnaire, you may wish to take the full questionnaire to gain a more accurate reflection of
your ethical approach. It can be taken at www.leaderdecisionmakingsurvey.com.
—Abridged and adapted from the Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire,
www.leaderdecisionmakingsurvey.com
http://www.leaderdecisionmakingsurvey.com/
http://www.leaderdecisionmakingsurvey.com/
Summary
Although there has been an interest in ethics for thousands of years, very little theoretical research
exists on the nature of leadership ethics. This chapter has presented an overview of ethical theories as
they apply to the leadership process.
Ethical theory provides a set of principles that guide leaders in making decisions about how to act and
how to be morally decent. In the Western tradition, ethical theories typically are divided into two kinds:
theories about conduct and theories about character. Theories about conduct emphasize the
consequences of leader behavior (teleological approach) or the rules that govern their behavior
(deontological approach). Virtue-based theories focus on the character of leaders, and they stress
qualities such as courage, honesty, fairness, and fidelity.
Ethics plays a central role in the leadership process. Because leadership involves influence and leaders
often have more power than followers, they have an enormous ethical responsibility for how they affect
other people. Leaders need to engage followers to accomplish mutual goals; therefore, it is imperative
that they treat followers and their ideas with respect and dignity. Leaders also play a major role in
establishing the ethical climate in their organization; that role requires leaders to be particularly sensitive
to the values and ideals they promote.
Several prominent leadership scholars, including Heifetz, Burns, and Greenleaf, have made unique
contributions to our understanding of ethical leadership. The theme common to these authors is an ethic
of caring, which pays attention to followers’ needs and the importance of leader–follower relationships.
This chapter suggests that sound ethical leadership is rooted in respect, service, justice, honesty, and
community. It is the duty of leaders to treat others with respect—to listen to them closely and be tolerant
of opposing points of view. Ethical leaders serve others by being altruistic, placing others’ welfare ahead
of their own in an effort to contribute to the common good. Justice requires that leaders place fairness at
the center of their decision making, including the challenging task of being fair to the individual while
simultaneously being fair to the common interests of the community. Good leaders are honest. They do
not lie, nor do they present truth to others in ways that are destructive or counterproductive. Finally,
ethical leaders are committed to building community, which includes searching for goals that are
compatible with the goals of followers and with society as a whole.
Research on ethics and leadership has several strengths. At a time when the public is demanding
higher levels of moral responsibility from its leaders, this research provides some direction in how to
think about ethical leadership and how to practice it. In addition, this research reminds us that
leadership is a moral process. Scholars should include ethics as an integral part of leadership studies
and research. Furthermore, ethical leadership has been shown to provide advantages for organizations
as well as followers. Last, from a research perspective, this area of research is benefiting from improved
measures of ethical leadership.
On the negative side, this research area of ethical leadership is still in an early stage of development.
Few studies have been done that directly address the nature of ethical leadership. As a result, the
theoretical formulations about the process remain tentative. Second, this area of research relies on the
writings of a few individuals whose work has been primarily descriptive and anecdotal. As a result, the
development of theory on leadership ethics lacks the traditional empirical support that usually
accompanies theories of human behavior. In addition, more research is needed to explain the impact of
culture and generational differences in regard to ethical leadership. Despite these weaknesses, the field
of ethical leadership is wide open for future research. There remains a strong need for research that can
advance our understanding of the role of ethics in the leadership process.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
The data from the illustration are tabulated below.
Concern for self-interest Concern for the interest of others Ethical theory
High Low Ethical egoism
Medium Medium Utilitarianism
Low High Altruism
Back to Figure
Destructive leaders:
Charisma
Personalized power
Narcissism
Negative life themes
Ideology of hate
Susceptible followers:
Conformers
Unmet needs
Low core self-evaluations
Low maturity
Colluders
Ambition
Similar worldview
Bad values
Conducive environments:
Instability
Perceived threat
Cultural values
Lack of checks and balances and ineffective institutions
16 TEAM LEADERSHIP
Susan E. Kogler Hill
The team leadership model provides a framework in which to study the systematic factors that
contribute to a team’s outcomes or general effectiveness. Within this approach, the critical function of
leadership is to help the team accomplish its goals by monitoring and diagnosing the team and taking
the requisite action.
DESCRIPTION
Work teams are very prevalent in today’s organizations. The reliance on teams is due partially to
increasingly complex tasks, more globalization, and the flattening of organizational structures. A team is
a type of organizational group that is composed of members who are interdependent, who share
common goals, and who must coordinate their activities to accomplish these goals. Team members
must work collectively to achieve their goals. Examples of organizational teams include senior executive
teams, project management teams, task forces, work units, standing committees, quality teams, and
improvement teams. Teams can be located in the same place meeting face-to-face, or they can be
geographically dispersed “virtual” teams meeting across time and distance via various forms of
communication technology. Teams can also be hybrids of face-to-face and virtual teams with some
members being co-located and some being dispersed. Exactly what defines an organizational group as
a team or not is constantly evolving as organizations confront the many new forms of contemporary
collaboration (Wageman, Gardner, & Mortensen, 2012).
The study of organizational teams has focused on strategies for maintaining a competitive advantage.
Team-based organizations have faster response capability because of their flatter organizational
structures, which rely on teams and new technology to enable communication across time and space
(Porter & Beyerlein, 2000). These newer organizational structures have been referred to as “team-based
and technology-enabled” (Mankin, Cohen, & Bikson, 1996).
Before the COVID-19 pandemic spread globally and people were forced to work remotely from their
homes, relying on videoconferencing for meetings and engagement, a majority of multinational
companies were already depending on virtual teams, or teams that are geographically dispersed and
rely on technology to interact and collaborate (Muethel, Gehrlein, & Hoegl, 2012). Such teams allow
companies to (1) use the best talent across the globe, (2) facilitate collaboration across time and space,
and (3) reduce travel costs (Paul, Drake, & Liang, 2016) and, as experienced during the pandemic,
allow organizational work to continue when physical locations are shut down or unavailable. The
development of social media, video communication technologies, and software applications for meeting
management has given virtual teams richer and more realistic communication environments where
collaboration is facilitated (Schmidt, 2014; Schouten, van den Hooff, & Feldberg, 2016; Scott, 2013).
Despite this, virtual teams face more difficulty with members separated by time, distance, and culture. In
virtual teams, face-to-face communication is rare, with decisions and scheduling taking more time. In
addition, they often have less trust, more conflict, and more subgroup formation. Breuer, Hüffmeier, and
Hertel (2016) found that trust is an important factor when leading virtual teams because trust has been
shown to be more important to virtual teams compared to face-to-face teams.
The Center for Creative Leadership worked with 141 virtual teams around the world and found that three
key factors influence the effectiveness of virtual teams (Leslie & Hoole, 2018):
1. Technology. Effective team leadership uses technology to create connections among team
members and make team members feel like they are working face-to-face. The use of
videoconferencing (e.g., Zoom) became critical during the COVID-19 pandemic to allow for team
success.
2. Managing distance. In many cases, virtual teams work across different time zones, and
accommodating differing schedules is important. Virtual team leadership must share the burden of
early-morning and late-night meetings among team members so that certain members are not
always the ones to accommodate the time zone differences. Physical distance is a challenge to the
engagement of team members, and team leaders must work to ensure members’ commitment to
team goals.
3. Team structure. Virtual team leadership must carefully consider the members of the team and
ensure that those on the team are committed. While this is true for all teams, it is even more critical
in a virtual team, since it is easier for team members to “check out.” Often, as seen during the
COVID-19 pandemic, some people were members of many different virtual teams, which resulted in
less effort toward any one team and harmed the overall effectiveness.
Whether traditional or virtual, the organizational team-based structure is an important way for
organizations to remain competitive by responding quickly and adapting to constant, rapid changes.
Studies of both face-to-face and virtual teams have increasingly become focused on team processes
and team outcomes (Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt, 2005; Thomas, Martin, & Riggio, 2013). Also,
researchers focused on the problems work teams confront as well as how to make these work teams
more effective (Ilgen, Major, Hollenbeck, & Sego, 1993). Effective organizational teams lead to many
desirable outcomes, such as
greater productivity,
more effective use of resources,
better decisions and problem solving,
better-quality products and services, and
greater innovation and creativity (Parker, 1990).
However, for teams to be successful, the organizational culture needs to support member involvement.
The traditional authority structure of many organizations does not support decision making at lower
levels, and this can lead to the failure of many teams. Teamwork is an example of lateral decision
making as opposed to the traditional vertical decision making that occurs in the organizational hierarchy
based on rank or position in the organization. The dynamic and fluid power shifting in teams has been
referred to as heterarchy (Aime, Humphrey, DeRue, & Paul, 2014). Such power shifting within teams
can lead to positive outcomes as long as team members see these shifting sources of power as
legitimate. Teams will have great difficulty in organizational cultures that are not supportive of such
collaborative work and decision making. Changing an organizational culture to one that is more
supportive of teams is possible, but it takes time and effort (Levi, 2011).
Leadership of teams has also become an important area of study. The ideas of “team leadership” are
quite different from leadership within the organizational vertical structure. Many theories of leadership,
such as situational (discussed in Chapter 5) and transformational (discussed in Chapter 8), can be
applied in the team setting. However, team leadership is a unique setting for leadership, and it is very
process oriented. How do teams develop their “critical capabilities”? How do team leaders shift their
actions over time to deal with contingencies as they arise? How do leader actions promote task and
interpersonal development (Kozlowski, Watola, Jensen, Kim, & Botero, 2009)? Effective team leadership
facilitates team success and helps teams to avoid team failure (Stagl, Salas, & Burke, 2007; Stewart &
Manz, 1995). Effective leadership processes are the most critical factor in team success (Zaccaro,
Rittman, & Marks, 2001, p. 452).
Shared or Distributed Leadership.
The complexities of team processes demand the attention and focus of all members of the team. Some
teams are autonomous and self-directed with no formal leader. But even those with a formal leader will
benefit from shared leadership among team members. Team leadership functions can be performed by
the formal team leader and/or shared by team members. Shared team leadership occurs when
members of the team take on leadership behaviors to influence the team and to maximize team
effectiveness (Bergman, Rentsch, Small, Davenport, & Bergman, 2012). Shared leadership has been
referred to as team leadership capacity, encompassing the leadership repertoire of the entire team (Day,
Gronn, & Salas, 2004). Such distributed leadership involves the sharing of influence by team members.
Team members step forward when situations warrant, providing the leadership necessary, and then step
back to allow others to lead. Such shared leadership has become more and more important in today’s
organizations to allow faster responses to more complex issues (Morgeson, DeRue, & Karam, 2010;
Pearce, Manz, & Sims, 2009; Solansky, 2008).
Shared leadership, while very important, does involve risk and takes some courage for the member who
steps forward to provide leadership outside the formal role of team leader (Amos & Klimoski, 2014).
Risks aside, teams with shared leadership have less conflict, more consensus, more trust, and more
cohesion than teams that do not have shared leadership (Bergman et al., 2012). Shared leadership is
even more important for virtual teams. Empowering leadership that shares power with virtual team
members promotes both effective collaboration and performance (Drescher & Garbers, 2016; Hill &
Bartol, 2016). Virtual teams are simply more effective when there is shared team leadership (Hoch &
Kozlowski, 2014; Muethel et al., 2012; Wang, Waldman, & Zhang, 2014). How leaders and members
can share the leadership of teams so that these teams can truly become effective and achieve
excellence is discussed in this chapter. It introduces a model that provides a mental road map to help
the leader or any team member providing leadership diagnose team problems and take appropriate
action to correct those problems.
Team Leadership Model
The Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) is based on the functional leadership claim that the
leader’s job is to monitor the team and then take whatever action is necessary to ensure team
effectiveness. The model provides a tool for understanding the very complex phenomenon of team
leadership, starting at the top with its initial leadership decisions, moving to leader actions, and finally
focusing on the indicators of team effectiveness. In addition, the model suggests specific actions that
leaders can perform to improve team effectiveness. Effective team leaders need a wide repertoire of
communication skills to monitor and take appropriate action. The model is designed to simplify and
clarify the complex nature of team leadership and to provide an easy tool to aid leadership decision
making for team leaders and members alike.
Effective team performance begins with how the leader sees the situation that the team is experiencing
(the leader’s mental model). This mental model reflects not only the components of the problem
confronting the team, but also the environmental and organizational contingencies that define the larger
context of team action. The leader develops a mental conception of what the team problem is and what
solutions are possible in this context, given the environmental and organizational constraints and
resources (Zaccaro et al., 2001).
To respond appropriately to the problem envisioned in the mental model, a good team leader needs to
be behaviorally flexible and have a wide repertoire of actions or skills to meet the team’s diverse needs
(Barge, 1996). When the leader’s behavior matches the complexity of the situation, the leader is
behaving with “requisite variety,” or the set of behaviors necessary to meet the team’s needs (Drecksel,
1991). Effective team leaders are able to construct accurate mental models of the team’s problems by
observing team functioning, and can take requisite action to solve these problems. Effective team
leaders can diagnose correctly and choose the right action.
The leader has special responsibility for functioning in a manner that will help the team achieve
effectiveness. Within this perspective, leadership behavior is seen as team-based problem solving, in
which the leader attempts to achieve team goals by analyzing the internal and external situation and
then selecting and implementing the appropriate behaviors to ensure team effectiveness (Fleishman et
al., 1991). Leaders must use discretion about which problems need intervention, and make choices
about which solutions are the most appropriate (Zaccaro et al., 2001). The appropriate solution varies
by circumstance and focuses on what should be done to make the team more effective. Effective
leaders have the ability to determine what leadership interventions are needed, if any, to solve team
problems. When leadership is shared throughout the team, various members are diagnosing problems
and intervening with appropriate behaviors. The monitoring and selection of behaviors is shared
throughout the team membership. Given the complexity of team functioning, such shared leadership can
—and, in fact, does—lead to greater team effectiveness.
Team Effectiveness
At the bottom of the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) is “Team Effectiveness,” which
focuses on team excellence or the desired outcomes of teamwork. Two critical functions of team
effectiveness are performance (task accomplishment) and development (team maintenance).
Performance refers to the quality of the outcomes of the team’s work. Did the team accomplish its goals
and objectives in a quality manner? Development refers to the cohesiveness of the team and the ability
of team members to satisfy their own needs while working effectively with other team members (Nadler,
1998). Excellent teams accomplish both of these objectives: getting the job done and maintaining a
cohesive team.
Description
Figure 16.1 The Hill Model for Team Leadership
Scholars have systematically studied organizational work teams and developed standards of
effectiveness or criteria of excellence that can be used to assess a team’s health (Hackman, 1990,
2002, 2012; Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993; Katzenbach & Smith, 2008; LaFasto & Larson, 2001;
Larson & LaFasto, 1989; Lencioni, 2005; Zaccaro et al., 2001). Hackman (2012) has posited six
enabling conditions that lead to effective team functioning: (1) Is it a real team? (2) Does it have a
compelling purpose? (3) Does it have the right people? (4) Are the norms of conduct clear? (5) Is there
support from the organizational context? (6) Is there team-focused coaching? Larson and LaFasto
(1989) studied successful teams and found that, regardless of the type of team, eight characteristics
were consistently associated with team excellence. Table 16.1 demonstrates the similarity of these
excellence characteristics to the enabling conditions suggested by Hackman (2012).
Table 16.1 Comparison of Theory and Research Criteria of Team Effectiveness
Enabling Conditions of Group Effectiveness
(Hackman, 2012)
Characteristics of Team Excellence
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989)
Enabling Conditions of Group Effectiveness
(Hackman, 2012)
Characteristics of Team Excellence
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989)
Compelling purpose Clear, elevating goal
Results-driven structure
Right people Competent team members
Real team Unified commitment
Collaborative climate
Clear norms of conduct Standards of excellence
Supportive organizational context External support and recognition
Team-focused coaching Principled leadership
It is helpful if team leaders understand the conditions that contribute to or enable team excellence. Such
understanding will allow the leaders to benchmark or compare their own or their team’s performance to
these standards and to determine possible areas of team weakness or ineffectiveness. Assessing how
well the team compares to these established indicators of team success provides a valuable source of
information to guide the leader to take appropriate actions to improve team success.
1. Clear, Elevating Goal.
“A compelling purpose energizes team members, orients them toward their collective objective, and fully
engages their talents” (Hackman, 2012, p. 437). Team goals must be very clear so that one can tell
whether the performance objective has been realized. Teams sometimes fail because they are given a
vague task and then asked to work out the details (Hackman, 1990). In addition, the team goal must be
involving or motivating so that the members believe it to be worthwhile and important. Teams often fail
because they let something else replace their goal, such as personal agendas or power issues (Larson
& LaFasto, 1989). Research data from numerous teams show that effective leaders keep the team
focused on the goal (LaFasto & Larson, 2001).
Focusing the team on its goal has been identified as one of the primary responsibilities of good team
leaders (Salas, Dinh, & Reyes, 2019). Based on an analysis of a wide range of literature of team
leadership and how it is practiced, Salas et al. (2019) argue that at the onset of a team’s formation, team
leaders have a key opportunity to define team goals and the task interdependence of team members,
and this effort can strongly influence the trajectory of the team. Team leaders can do so in several ways,
including conducting prebriefings to instill shared affect, cognition, and behavior in team members;
emphasizing a common and compelling mission; and engaging team members to work collectively.
2. Results-Driven Structure.
Teams need to find the best structure for accomplishing their goals. Structural features that lead to
effective teamwork include task design, team composition, and core norms of conduct (Wageman,
Fisher, & Hackman, 2009). Top management teams typically deal with power and influence, task forces
deal with ideas and plans, customer service teams deal with clients, and production teams deal with
technology (Hackman, 1990). Problem resolution teams such as task forces need a structure that
emphasizes trust so that all will be willing and able to contribute. Creative teams such as advertising
teams need to emphasize autonomy so that all can take risks and be free from undue censorship.
Tactical teams such as emergency room teams need to emphasize clarity so that everyone knows what
to do and when. In addition, all teams need clear roles for team members, a good communication
system, methods of assessing individual performance, and an emphasis on fact-based judgments
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989). Appropriate structures enable teams to meet their needs while still
accomplishing team goals.
In their effort to answer the question of “what makes a good team leader,” Salas et al. (2019) identified
initiating an enabling structure as a first evidence-based priority. Effective structures are established by
team leaders who do five things: (1) compose the group with members having a combination of
knowledge, traits, and skills; (2) establish productive norms; (3) identify who is responsible and
accountable for what outcomes; (4) designate the team’s functions and authority; and (5) instill a sense
of ownership among the members.
3. Competent Team Members.
Teams should be composed of the right number and mix of members to accomplish all the tasks of the
team. In addition, members need sufficient information, education, and training to become or remain
competent team members (Hackman & Walton, 1986). As a whole, the individual team members need
to possess the requisite technical competence to accomplish the team’s goals. Members also need to
be personally competent in interpersonal and teamwork skills. A common mistake in forming teams is to
assume that people who have all the technical skills necessary to solve a problem also have the
interpersonal skills necessary to collaborate effectively (Hackman, 1990). Just because someone is a
good engineer or doctor does not mean one has the interpersonal skills to function on a team. Team
members need certain core competencies that include the ability to do the job and the ability to solve
problems. In addition, members need certain teamwork factors such as openness, supportiveness,
action orientation, and a positive personal style (LaFasto & Larson, 2001).
4. Unified Commitment.
A common mistake is to call a work group a team but treat it as a collection of individuals (Hackman,
1990). Teams do not just happen: They are carefully designed and developed. Excellent teams are
those that have developed a sense of unity or identification. Such team spirit often can be developed by
involving members in all aspects of the process (Larson & LaFasto, 1989).
5. Collaborative Climate.
The ability of a team to collaborate or work well together is essential to team effectiveness. A
collaborative climate is one in which members can stay problem focused, listen to and understand one
another, feel free to take risks, and be willing to compensate for one another. To build an atmosphere
that fosters collaboration, we need to develop trusting relationships based on honesty, openness,
consistency, and respect (Larson & LaFasto, 1989). Integration of individual actions is one of the
fundamental characteristics of effective teams. Team members each have their own unique roles that
they typically perform to contribute to the team’s success. Team failure may result from the members’
“collective failure to coordinate and synchronize their individual contributions” (Zaccaro et al., 2001, p.
451). Effective team leaders can facilitate a collaborative climate by managing their own needs to
control, by making communication safe, by demanding and rewarding collaborative behavior, and by
guiding the team’s problem-solving efforts (LaFasto & Larson, 2001).
Similar to building a collaborative climate, Salas et al. (2019) underscore the importance of team leaders
fostering a climate where team members experience psychological safety. A climate of safety emerges
when team leaders admit their own faults, solicit input and ideas from others, and provide
developmental debriefing sessions. In safe environments, team members feel comfortable to be open
and express themselves more often because the team leader is supportive and nondefensive when they
do. This environment allows team members to also feel more competent about expressing themselves.
6. Standards of Excellence.
Clear norms of conduct (how we should behave) are important for team functioning (Hackman, 2012).
Team members’ performance should be regulated so that actions can be coordinated and tasks
completed (Hackman & Walton, 1986). It is especially important that the organizational context or the
team itself set up standards of excellence so that members will feel pressure to perform at their highest
levels. The standards must be clear and concrete, and all team members must be required to perform to
standard (Larson & LaFasto, 1989). A team leader can facilitate this process by requiring results—
making expectations clear; reviewing results—providing feedback to resolve performance issues; and
rewarding results—acknowledging superior performance (LaFasto & Larson, 2001). With such
standards in place and monitored, members will be encouraged to perform at their highest levels.
Consistent with establishing standards of excellence, Salas et al.’s (2019) insights on what makes a
good team leader suggest that team leaders have to reinforce teamwork with feedback and rewards.
Team leaders need to establish clear indicators for individual and group performance and objectively
monitor their performance. In addition to rewarding individuals for jobs well done, rewards for excellent
performance must be provided at the team level.
7. External Support and Recognition.
A supportive organizational context includes material resources, rewards for excellent performance, an
educational system to develop necessary team skills, and an information system to provide data needed
to accomplish the task (Wageman et al., 2009). A common mistake is to give organizational teams
challenging assignments but fail to give them organizational support to accomplish these assignments
(Hackman, 1990). The leader must identify which type of support is needed and intervene as needed to
secure this support (Hackman, 2002). The best goals, team members, and commitment will not mean
much if there is no money, equipment, or supplies for accomplishing the goals. Also, organizations often
ask employees to work on a difficult team assignment and then do not reward them with raises or
bonuses for that performance. Hyatt and Ruddy (1997) found that having systems in place to support
teams (clear direction, information, data, resources, rewards, and training) enables the team to become
more effective and achieve performance goals. Teams can achieve excellence if they are given the
resources needed to do their jobs, are recognized for team accomplishments, and are rewarded for
team performance rather than for individual performances (Larson & LaFasto, 1989).
An important, but often overlooked, aspect of reward and recognition is when a team leader supports
the growth of team members by providing mentoring and development opportunities. Salas et al. (2019)
found that good team leaders support the growth of team members by acting as coaches and helping
facilitate their work. Included in this support are debriefings at the outset, at midterm, and in the final
stages of the group task efforts. Debriefings provide a chance for team members to dialogue about what
they have learned, and this information can improve their performance when facing new challenges. In
addition, a good team leader finds and provides team members with opportunities for learning and new
skills development.
8. Principled Leadership.
Effective team leadership has been found to consistently relate to team effectiveness (Zaccaro, Heinen,
& Shuffler, 2009). Leadership has been described as the central driver of team effectiveness, influencing
the team through four sets of processes: cognitive, motivational, affective, and coordinate (Zaccaro et
al., 2001). Cognitively, the leader helps the team understand the problems confronting the team.
Motivationally, the leader helps the team become cohesive and capable by setting high performance
standards and helping the team to achieve them. Affectively, the leader helps the team handle stressful
circumstances by providing clear goals, assignments, and strategies. Coordinately, the leader helps
integrate the team’s activities by matching members’ skills to roles, providing clear performance
strategies, monitoring feedback, and adapting to environmental changes.
Effective team leaders are committed to the team’s goals and give members autonomy to unleash their
talents when possible. Leaders can reduce the effectiveness of their team by being unwilling to confront
inadequate performance, diluting the team’s ability to perform by having too many priorities, and
overestimating the positive aspects of team performance. Leaders can enhance the effectiveness of
their team by keeping the team focused on its goals, maintaining a collaborative climate, building
confidence among members, demonstrating technical competence, setting priorities, and managing
performance (Larson & LaFasto, 1989). It is essential that the leadership of the team be assessed along
with the other criteria of team excellence. Such feedback is essential to the health and effectiveness of
the team.
The leadership of the team can use these eight characteristics of team excellence (Table 16.1) in a
normative fashion to assess the health of the team and to take appropriate action to address any
weaknesses. If team leaders assess that one or more of the eight characteristics of team success are
not being achieved, then they need to address these weaknesses. Continually assessing the standards
of team effectiveness can also provide feedback, enabling leaders to determine whether past actions
and interventions had the desired results. To assess team effectiveness, team leaders need to use
whatever tools are at their disposal, such as direct observation, surveys, feedback, and performance
indicators. The information gained from the analysis of team effectiveness can provide feedback to the
leader and guide future leadership decisions. The line on the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure
16.1) that connects the “Team Effectiveness” box at the bottom to the “Leadership Decisions” box at the
top reflects the ongoing learning process of data gathering, analysis, and decision making. Such
feedback loops demonstrate the dynamic and evolving nature of teams (Ilgen et al., 2005). Past
leadership decisions and actions are reflected in the team’s performance and relational outcomes. In
turn, these indicators of team effectiveness shape the future analysis and decisions of the team
leadership.
Leadership Decisions
At the top of the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) are “Leadership Decisions,” which include
the major decisions the team’s leadership needs to make when determining whether and how to
intervene to improve team functioning. The first of these decisions is whether it is most appropriate to
continue to observe and monitor the team or to intervene in the team’s activities and take action. The
second decision is to choose whether a task or a relational intervention is needed (i.e., does the team
need help in accomplishing its tasks, or does it need help in maintaining relationships?). The final
decision is whether to intervene at the internal level (within the team itself) or at the external level (in the
team’s environment).
Leadership Decision 1:
Should I monitor the team or take action? The first decision confronting the team’s leadership is whether
to keep observing the team or to take action to help the team. McGrath (as cited in Hackman & Walton,
1986) outlined the critical leadership functions of group effectiveness, taking into account the analysis of
the situation both internally and externally and whether this analysis indicates that the leader should
take an immediate action. Figure 16.2, “McGrath’s Critical Leadership Functions,” demonstrates these
two dimensions of leadership behavior: monitoring versus taking action and internal group issues versus
external group issues. As leaders, we can diagnose, analyze, or forecast problems (monitoring), or we
can take immediate action to solve a problem. We can also focus on the problems within the group
(internal) or the problems outside the group (external). These two dimensions result in the four types of
team leadership functions shown in Figure 16.2.
Description
Figure 16.2 McGrath’s Critical Leadership Functions
Source: Based on McGrath’s critical leadership functions as cited in “Leading Groups in
Organizations,” by J. R. Hackman and R. E. Walton, 1986, in P. S. Goodman & Associates (Eds.),
Designing Effective Work Groups (p. 76). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Quadrants 1 and 2 in Figure 16.2 focus on the internal operations of the team. In Quadrant 1, the leader
is diagnosing group deficiencies, and in Quadrant 2, the leader is acting to repair or remedy the
observed problems. Quadrants 3 and 4 focus on the external operations of the team. In the third
quadrant, the leader is scanning the environment to determine and forecast any external changes that
will affect the group. In the fourth quadrant, the leader acts to prevent any negative changes in the
environment from hurting the team.
Therefore, the first decision confronting the team’s leadership is “Should I continue monitoring these
factors, or should I take action based on the information I have already gathered and structured?” To
develop an accurate mental model of team functioning, leaders need to monitor both the internal and
external environments to gather information, reduce equivocality, provide structure, and overcome
barriers. Fleishman et al. (1991) described two phases in this initial process: information search and
structuring. First a leader must seek out information to understand the current state of the team’s
functioning (information search), and then this information must be analyzed, organized, and interpreted
so the leader can decide how to act (information structuring). Leaders can also help their information
search process by obtaining feedback from team members, networking with others outside the team,
conducting team assessment surveys, and evaluating team outcomes. Once information on the team is
gathered, the leader needs to structure or interpret this information in order to make action plans. Virtual
teams operate under the same group dynamics principles and also need to monitor and intervene as
appropriate (Berry, 2011).
All members of the team can engage in monitoring (information search and structuring) and collectively
provide distributed or shared leadership to help the team adapt to changing conditions. In fast-paced,
rapidly changing situations, the team leader and members might have to work in concert to assess the
situation accurately. The official leader of the team might be too busy processing information from the
environment to process information internal to the team. The team members can help the leader by
staying on top of internal problems. Together, they can form an accurate picture of the team’s
effectiveness.
In addition to gathering and interpreting information, team leaders must take the right action based on
this information. Determining the right action to take is at the very heart of team leadership. It involves
selecting from among competing courses of action to facilitate the team’s work (Barge, 1996). Leaders
differ in their tendencies to take action; they either do so quickly (hasty to act) or delay taking action by
analyzing the situation at length (slow to act). While “hasty to act” leaders might prevent problems from
getting out of control, they might not make the right intervention if they do not have all the information,
and such fast action might undermine the development of shared leadership. “Slow to act” leaders might
encourage other team members to emerge as leaders (shared leadership), but the action-taking delay
might cause the team’s problem to become unmanageable.
The exact timing of a leadership intervention is as important as the specific type of intervention
(Wageman et al., 2009). It has been proposed that groups go through developmental stages of forming,
storming, norming, performing, and adjourning (Tuckman & Jensen, 2010). Certain behaviors are
common and even expected at each of these stages. If, for example, conflict was occurring during the
storming stage of team life, the leadership might not intervene at that time but just continue monitoring.
Or, the leadership might choose an intervention that advances the team to the next phase of norming.
Others have described three phases of group life and the leadership needed during each: (1)
motivational coaching (at start), (2) consultative coaching (at midpoint), and (3) educational coaching (at
end). The important aspect of timing is that the leader should understand where the team is in its life
cycle and provide the type of leadership needed at that time (Hackman, 2012).
Leadership Decision 2:
Should I intervene to meet task or relational needs? Returning to the top box in Figure 16.1 (“Leadership
Decisions”), the second decision confronting the leader is whether the team needs help in dealing with
relational issues or task issues. Since the early study of small groups, the focus has been on two critical
leadership functions: task and maintenance. Task leadership functions include getting the job done,
making decisions, solving problems, adapting to changes, making plans, and achieving goals.
Maintenance functions include developing a positive climate, solving interpersonal problems, satisfying
members’ needs, and developing cohesion. These two functions have also been referred to in terms of
performance and development (i.e., how well the team has accomplished its task and how well the team
has developed effective relationships).
Superior team leadership focuses constantly on both task and maintenance functions (Kinlaw, 1998);
both types of leadership behaviors (task-focused and person-focused) have been found to be related to
perceived team effectiveness (Burke et al., 2006). Task functions are closely intertwined with relational
functions. If the team is well maintained and has good interpersonal relationships, then the members will
be able to work together effectively and get their job done. If not, they will spend all of their time
infighting, sniping, and working at cross-purposes. Similarly, if the team is productive and successful in
accomplishing its task, it will be easier to maintain a positive climate and good relations. Conversely,
failing teams often take their lack of performance out on each other, and fighting teams often accomplish
little.
In virtual teams connected across time and space by electronic media, it is important to focus on both
task and relational issues (Han & Beyerlein, 2016). The focus on building team relationships is even
more critical for virtual teams than for traditional co-located teams. Virtual team leaders must be able to
“read” all the personal and contextual nuances in a world of electronic communications. They must be
able to understand the possible causes of silence, misunderstanding, and slights without any of the
usual signs to guide them. Leaders must be sensitive to the team process and must pay attention to
even small matters that could interfere with the team’s success (Pauleen, 2004). Virtual teams place
even greater demands on team leaders—50% more time investment—than the more traditional co-
located team (Dyer, Dyer, & Dyer, 2007).
Research suggests that leaders of virtual teams should begin the team with face-to-face meetings, if
possible, to facilitate trust, comfort, and rapport. In addition, virtual team leaders need to focus on
project management and regular, organized team meetings. However, virtual team leaders need to be
careful not to be too task focused, and work to develop social relationships among the team. Virtual
team leaders also need to keep literate in all new communication technologies and know when to use
them for optimal teamwork (Humbley, O’Neill, & Kline, 2009). As the prevalence of virtual teams
expands, specific leadership issues and interventions related to these virtual teams are increasingly
becoming the focus of study (Berry, 2011; Cordery, Soo, Kirkman, Rosen, & Mathieu, 2009; Zaccaro,
Ardison, & Orvis, 2004).
Leadership Decision 3:
Should I intervene internally or externally? If a decision was made to take action or intervene, the leader
must make the third strategic leadership decision in Figure 16.1 and determine what level of the team
process needs leadership attention: internal leadership actions or external leadership actions. Does the
leader need to intervene inside of the team, or is the problem external to the team? Effective team
leaders analyze and balance the internal and external demands of the team and react appropriately
(Barge, 1996).
Is there internal conflict between members of the team? Then perhaps taking an internal relational
action to maintain the team and improve interpersonal relationships will be most appropriate. Are the
team goals unclear? Then perhaps an internal task intervention is needed to focus on goals. Is the
organizational environment not providing proper support to the team to do its job? Then perhaps an
external environmental intervention focusing on obtaining external support for the team is the most
appropriate intervention.
The current focus of research is on real-life organizational work teams that exist within a larger
organizational environment. In addition to balancing the internal task and relational needs of the team,
the leader has to help the team adapt to and function effectively in its environment. Most teams focus on
the internal problems of the team. But it is increasingly important for teams to also be externally oriented
to “reach across boundaries to forge dense networks of connection, both inside and outside the
organization,” so that they can deal effectively with the fast-changing environment (Ancona, Bresman, &
Caldwell, 2009).
Leadership Actions
The middle section of the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) lists a number of specific
leadership actions that can be performed internally (“Task” and “Relational”) or externally
(“Environmental”). These lists are not exhaustive but are compiled from research on team excellence
and team performance discussed earlier in this chapter. For example, teams that have clear goals, clear
standards, effective structure, and effective decision making will have higher task performance. Teams
that can manage conflict, collaborate well together, and build commitment will have good relationships.
Teams that are well connected to and protected from their environment will also be more productive.
It is up to the leader to assess what action, if any, is needed and then intervene with the specific
leadership function to meet the demands of the situation. The leader needs the ability to perform these
skills and to make a strategic choice as to the most appropriate function or skill for the intervention. For
example, if team members were arguing, the leader might decide to initiate conflict management. To be
an effective leader, one needs to respond with the action that is required of the situation. Thus, it is the
job of the leader to analyze and mediate the situation to make the best decisions for the good of the
team. A detailed knowledge of group dynamics and interpersonal processes is key to effective team
leadership.
A team leader also needs to recognize and interpret what is getting in the way of the team’s goal
accomplishment and then make a strategic choice and respond with the appropriate action (Gouran &
Hirokawa, 1996). If a problem is diagnosed as a team performance problem, then the leader needs to
determine the appropriate action to solve this task problem (e.g., goal focusing, standard setting, or
training). If a problem is diagnosed as a team development problem, then the leader needs to determine
the appropriate action to solve this relational problem (e.g., managing conflict or building commitment). If
a problem is diagnosed as an environmental problem, then the leader needs to determine the
appropriate action to solve this context problem (e.g., networking, advocating, or sharing information).
Internal Task Leadership Actions.
The “Task” box in the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) lists the set of skills or actions that
the leader might perform to improve task performance. After monitoring the team’s performance, the
leader might choose to intervene in one of the following task areas:
Goal focusing (clarifying, gaining agreement)
For example, if team members seem to be going off in different directions, the leader might
intervene to clarify the team’s goals or work with members to obtain agreement on goals.
Structuring for results (planning, visioning, organizing, clarifying roles, delegating)
For example, if the team is stuck in day-to-day affairs and not looking to or building for the future,
then the leader might intervene by helping the team vision and plan for the future.
Facilitating decision making (informing, controlling, coordinating, mediating, synthesizing, focusing
on issues)
For example, if team members are not adequately sharing information with each other, the leader
might ask questions to seek out the information that is not being shared.
Training team members in task skills (educating, developing)
For example, if the team members do not have the skills necessary to make well-reasoned
decisions, the leader might provide a training seminar in decision making.
Maintaining standards of excellence (assessing team and individual performance, confronting
inadequate performance)
For example, if some team members are coming late to meetings or not attending meetings, the
leader might take direct action and confront them to address their inadequate performance.
Internal Relational Leadership Actions.
The second set of internal leadership actions in Figure 16.1 reflects those that the leader needs to
implement to improve team relationships. After monitoring the team’s performance, the leader might
choose to intervene in one of the following relational areas:
Coaching team members in interpersonal skills
For example, if team members do not seem to be listening to one another, then the leader might
intervene by leading them in a listening exercise.
Collaborating (including, involving)
For example, if some team members are not taking others’ opinions into account, then the leader
might intervene to encourage compromise.
Managing conflict and power issues (fighting or avoiding confrontation, questioning ideas, avoiding
groupthink)
For example, if the members are not questioning ideas and are just agreeing with each other in
order to move quickly to a decision, then the leader might intervene by providing a discussion on
the negative aspects of groupthink (Neck & Manz, 1994).
Building commitment and esprit de corps (being optimistic, innovating, envisioning, socializing,
rewarding, recognizing)
For example, if the team seems to have low morale, the leader could intervene to build commitment
and unity by recognizing past team successes.
Satisfying individual member needs (trusting, supporting, advocating)
For example, if a team member seems stressed due to disrespect from other members, the leader
might provide support to the upset member and advocate to the team on this individual’s behalf.
Modeling ethical and principled practices (fair, consistent, normative)
For example, if the team is inconsistent vis-à-vis the in-group members sometimes being treated
differently than the out-group members, then the leader might intervene and model a change in
behavior to be fair and consistent to all members.
External Environmental Leadership Actions.
The “External Leadership Actions” (Figure 16.1) reflect those actions the leader might implement to
improve the environmental interface with the team. Real-life teams do not exist in a laboratory—they are
subsystems of the larger organizational and societal context. To stay viable, the team needs to monitor
this environment closely and determine what actions should be taken to enhance team effectiveness
(Barge, 1996; Hyatt & Ruddy, 1997; Zaccaro et al., 2001). If environmental monitoring suggests a
leadership intervention, then the leader needs to select from the following functions:
Networking and forming alliances in the environment (gathering information, increasing influence)
For example, if the team’s members are not well known or are not well connected throughout the
organization, then the leader might intervene by interacting and forming relationships with powerful
and respected individuals in the organization.
Advocating and representing the team to the environment
For example, if organizational superiors are unaware of the team’s successes, the leader might
initiate an FYI policy, sending information about all successes upward as they happen. The leader
could also initiate a team newsletter that chronicles team efforts to accomplish the same function
but to a broader context.
Negotiating upward to secure necessary resources, support, and recognition for the team
For example, a leader might determine that the team does not have enough clerical support to
accomplish its goals. The leader could then negotiate with upper management to provide the
needed support or, if failing in this, to persuade upper management to alter the team’s goals
accordingly.
Buffering team members from environmental distractions
For example, if the team is overloaded with tasks, then the leader might intervene by keeping
unnecessary demands and distractions away from the team members so that they can concentrate
on their goals.
Assessing environmental indicators of the team’s effectiveness (surveys, evaluations, performance
indicators)
For example, if the leader observes that the members of the team have no way of knowing how well
they are doing, the leader can provide data from the environment as to how their performance
stacks up with other teams.
Sharing relevant environmental information with the team
For example, if the team leader reviews the environment and finds that the organization’s business
is going in a new direction, the leader can share this information with the team to keep members in
line with these new directions.
Team leadership is complex; there are no simple recipes for team success. Team leaders must learn to
be open and objective in understanding and diagnosing team problems and skillful in selecting the most
appropriate actions (or inactions) to help achieve the team’s goals. It is important to reemphasize that
these critical functions need not be carried out only by the leader. Experienced members in a mature
team might share these leadership behaviors. As long as the team’s critical needs have been met, the
leadership behavior, whether enacted by the leader or by team members, has been effective. The key
assertion of the functional perspective is that the leader is to do whatever is necessary to take care of
unmet needs of the team. If the team members are taking care of most of the needs, then the leader
has to do very little.
HOW DOES THE TEAM LEADERSHIP MODEL WORK?
Team leaders and team members can use the model to help them make decisions about the current
state of their team and the specific actions they need to take, if any, to improve the team’s functioning.
The model portrays leadership as a team oversight function in which the leader’s role is to do whatever
is necessary to help the team achieve effectiveness. The model provides the leader with a cognitive
map for identifying team needs, and offers suggestions about how to take appropriate corrective actions.
The model helps the leader make sense of the complexity of teams and offers practical suggestions
based on theory and research.
In using the model, the team leadership engages in the leader mediation process by deciding which
option is most appropriate for the team: monitoring or taking action. If the monitoring reveals that all
aspects of the team’s functioning are satisfactory, then the leadership should not take any direct actions
but continue to monitor the internal and external environments in terms of team performance and
development. If monitoring reveals that action is needed, then the leadership decides whether to take an
internal-level action or an external-level action or both. Finally, the leadership decides which action is
appropriate to meet the needs of the team.
Determining the exact intervention is not as easy as it sounds, however, and it clearly reflects the skills
necessary for team leadership. For example, a leader monitoring the internal functioning of the team
notices there is infighting for control and power. The leader may see this as an internal relationship
problem because of the authoritarian and autocratic behavior of one team member. Or perhaps the
leader sees it as an internal task problem because the structure of the team is not appropriate and the
roles and responsibilities of some members are unclear. The leader may also see the problem as an
external environmental problem because the team is not given sufficient autonomy from the
organization; consequently, the members are fighting over what little power and control exist. Or
perhaps the leader sees the conflict as temporary given the stage of group development (e.g.,
storming).
In any case, the leader can decide to keep monitoring the situation and not take any immediate action
because of the group’s phase of development. Or the leader can decide at which level to intervene and
then decide to enact the most appropriate leadership function at that level. The leader can even decide
to intervene at all three levels, addressing the authoritarian individual (internal, relational), clarifying
team roles (internal, task), and negotiating more team autonomy with those higher up in the organization
(external).
The team leadership model aids in team analysis and improvement, much like that of sports teams. In
sports, the coach does not stop working just because the team is winning. The coach keeps working to
build commitment, develop young players, share expertise, create new methods and strategies, and
generally improve team functioning. The effective coach never rests on past successes, but works to
improve the team’s functioning for the future. After a win or a loss, a football coach will have the team
review videos of the game to determine areas of success and failure. Organizational team leaders could
learn a great deal from sports team coaches. By comparing their own teams with established standards
or criteria of team excellence, leaders can determine the areas of greatest weakness that might need
critical intervention.
The Hill Model for Team Leadership has clear implications for the effectiveness of team leadership. The
study of team leadership has a number of strengths and weaknesses, which will be reviewed next.
STRENGTHS
One of the strengths of team leadership is that it is designed to focus on the real-life organizational work
group and the leadership needed therein. The model places the ongoing work group or team in an
environmental context within the organization, industry, or society. In addition, the real-life focus on
performance and team effectiveness enables leaders and members to diagnose and correct team
problems. A team leader can present the model to the team as a teaching tool. By learning what
constitutes excellent teams and applying these criteria to team performance, leaders and members can
learn how to better lead teams to the highest levels of excellence. Team leadership focuses on internal
and external environments, which encompasses the scope of leadership in teams. Leaders must
address dynamics within the team while monitoring the organizational and external environment to
assess impacts on the team. Given the inclusion of external leadership, the model can encompass the
shift to multi-team systems (MTSs) in organizations. MTSs are needed to solve complex problems that
one team cannot address. External team leadership is needed to coordinate overarching goals within
MTSs (Shuffler & Carter, 2018).
A second strength of team leadership is that it provides guidelines that help leaders to design and
maintain effective teams, especially when performance is below standards. Such an approach is
consistent with the emerging theoretical notions of the leader as a medium whose job it is to process the
complex information inherent in teamwork (Fisher, 1985). Any model or theory that tries to simplify such
a complex process would be inappropriate and inadequate. The team leadership model is not simplistic,
and it integrates in a manageable and practical form many complex factors that can help a leader be a
good medium or processor of information.
Another strength of the model is that it takes into account the changing role of leaders and followers in
organizations (shared leadership). This is consistent with a paradigm shift from top-down, hierarchical
leadership toward more horizontal, team processes that has been occurring for the past 20 years
(Friedrich, Griffith, & Mumford, 2016). The model does not focus on the position of power of a leader, but
instead focuses on the critical functions of leadership as diagnosis and action taking. Any team member
can perform the critical leadership functions to assess the current effectiveness of the team and then
take appropriate action. This approach is consistent with the current movement in organizations to
rethink leadership responsibilities in work teams. The responsibilities or functions of team leadership—
such as setting goals, coaching, and rewarding—historically have rested with the team’s formal leader,
but now, with organizational restructuring, these duties and responsibilities often are distributed across
the team. A meta-analysis found that shared leadership in teams is significantly and positively related to
team performance (D’Innocenzo, Mathieu, & Kukenberger, 2016).
In addition, this approach to team leadership can help in selection of team leaders and team members.
If a leader must be chosen for the team, it might be best to select one who is perceptive, open,
objective, analytical, and a good listener who has good diagnostic skills. In addition, it would be wise to
select a leader who has a wide repertoire of action-taking skills and is comfortable intervening in the
team’s processes in many ways, such as with negotiation, conflict resolution, problem solving, goal
focusing, and influencing upward. Good leaders not only can diagnose the team’s problems, but also
can reach into their bag of tricks and pull out the appropriate action or actions. For example, if a leader
determines that two members of a team are in conflict with one another, the leader needs to be able to
determine the root cause of that conflict and select the most appropriate action (or select nonaction).
CRITICISMS
The Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1) is a conceptual framework to assist team-based
leadership in its decision making. As such, it lists only some of the many skills that leadership might
need to employ in making such decisions. Depending on the type of team or situation, additional skills
might be needed that focus more on the environment (Cobb, 2012), coaching and training (Zaccaro et
al., 2009), or preplanning and timing (Wageman et al., 2009). A team might need to modify the model to
include skills that are particularly relevant to its effectiveness. The model does not include factors that
may influence team effectiveness such as individual differences of team leaders and members and
aspects of the organizational context such as organizational culture or team size.
Even though the model does not include all possible leadership skills, it is still quite complex. Team
leaders need to spend time adjusting to the framework so that it comes naturally to them when decisions
are needed. This framework also does not provide on-the-spot answers to specific problems facing the
team leader, such as “When is the best time to intervene?” “What do you say to a member who is upset
and crying?” or “What specific action do you take to deal with an organizational culture that is not
supporting teamwork?” The model only points the leader in the right direction and suggests skills
needed to solve these complex problems. The model is not specific on what team leadership skills work
best in particular situations. It is more descriptive than prescriptive. The model assumes that the leader
is skilled in group process, decision making, interpersonal communication, conflict resolution, and other
abilities.
To make matters worse, many teams have shared leadership necessitating that everyone who provides
team leadership has a wide range of team-oriented skills. In addition, the roles of leaders and followers
can change over time, making it very important for the team leader and team members to possess the
requisite leadership skills. In immature teams leaders might need to take on more of the leadership
roles, whereas in a mature team the leader might be able to sit back and let the team lead itself.
Increasingly, scholars are providing instruction in diagnosing weaknesses in team leadership skills and
offering methods for development and improvement (Cobb, 2012; Levi, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2010;
Salas, Burke, & Stagl, 2004). Instruction in teamwork and team leadership needs to focus on team
diagnosing and action taking so that team leadership skills can be developed throughout the team and
be more easily implemented.
Methods for testing and measuring outcomes of team leadership models are not fully refined. Most of
the research is based on follower perceptions of team leader behavior, and while these studies provide
some guidance, subjective perceptions of team leadership may be biased. Rather than rely on team
member ratings, team training should rely on the observation of the team leadership’s behaviors as
factors in determining team success (Cook, Zill, & Meyer, 2020).
APPLICATION
The primary function of team leadership is to guide the team in accomplishing its goals by monitoring
and diagnosing the team and taking the requisite action. There are many ways to apply the team
leadership model to increase the effectiveness of organizational teams. The model is useful in helping
the leader make decisions: Should I act? If so, how should I do so? For example, if the team is not
performing effectively (team effectiveness), then the leader can make the first strategic choice by
monitoring the situation or acting to improve team functioning. If an action seems warranted, then the
leader needs to decide whether the action should be directed inward toward team functioning, outward
toward the environment, or both. Once the context for the action is determined, leaders need to choose
the most appropriate skill for the situation from their behavioral repertoire. It is important to continue
monitoring the results of the intervention and adapting accordingly, depending on these results.
The leader might choose to use an assessment tool such as the Team Excellence and Collaborative
Team Leader Questionnaire included in this chapter to help conduct the team’s diagnosis and set the
steps needed for taking action. Team members are asked to fill out the questionnaire, as is the team
leader. The results are fed back to the team members and team leader, allowing them to see the areas
of greatest strength and weakness. It is particularly important that both the team leader and team
members fill out the questionnaire. Research suggests that team leaders overestimate their
effectiveness on these dimensions and often score themselves much higher than do team members
(LaFasto & Larson, 2001). By comparing the scores by leaders and by members, the leader along with
team members can determine which dimensions of team or leadership effectiveness need improvement.
The team and leader can then prepare action plans to correct the highest-priority problems. Such a
team assessment approach is very helpful in monitoring and diagnosing team problems. It aids in
determining the complex factors affecting team excellence to build a committed team involved in action
planning.
Finally, presenting a view from a practical standpoint, Salas, Dinh, and Reyes (2019) reviewed existing
research on team leadership and developed key insights that can guide the practice of team leadership.
These insights follow the life span of a team from its creation to its sustainment—and reflect many of the
components outlined in the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1). These team leadership
behaviors reflect the internal functions of task and relational leadership. For example, team leaders
create structure and define tasks (task leadership). They also create psychological safety (relational
leadership). The external functions discussed in Hill’s model are reflected in ensuring that the
organization provides rewards to team members as well as the training needed for growth and
development of team members.
CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
To improve your understanding of the team leadership model, refer to Cases 16.1, 16.2, and 16.3. For
each case, you will be asked to put yourself in the role of team leader and apply the team leadership
model in analyzing and offering solutions to the team problems.
Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates
Axis Global is a giant oil and gas company that owns nine refineries worldwide and is headquartered in
Paris, France. Axis Global’s refineries convert crude oil into gasoline, jet fuel, and other products, and
each refinery has an information technology (IT) team located “within the refinery gates” that reports to
the refinery’s management team. Each IT team is responsible for the operation and maintenance of
computers and applications that are critical to the safe and efficient operation of its refinery.
In addition to refineries, Axis Global owns and operates oil wells, pipelines, chemical plants, and gas
stations across the globe. As a result, some IT operations are standardized across the company, and a
centralized team located in Paris makes those decisions for all the IT teams in the company. Recently,
the centralized IT organization concluded that IT services company-wide should be outsourced to a third
party. Outsourcing means most of the company’s IT personnel are no longer employed by Axis Global,
and the third party will decide which, if any, of Axis Global’s IT employees it will retain, replace, or
terminate.
Axis Global has recently notified the Tappan Refinery in Pennsylvania of the global decision to
outsource all IT teams. Top executives at the Tappan Refinery are unhappy with the decision because
they were not consulted before the decision was made and few details were provided to Tappan’s
executives on how the outsourcing would be implemented. In addition, these executives are worried that
the decision will negatively affect essential tasks performed by Tappan’s IT team and result in increased
costs. The management at Tappan Refinery is opposed to changing its current IT operations.
Russ Saffold manages IT at the Tappan Refinery and has three members on his team: Alejandro Salis,
Samantha Umbia, and Todd Greengold. The IT team is well respected by everyone in the refinery, and
their interpersonal relationships are solid. All four team members are officially employees of Axis Global
and physically work within the refinery gates at Tappan. Because refineries are frequently bought and
sold among oil companies, the refineries prefer to operate as self-contained organizations (i.e., “within
the gates”). They have a bunker mentality vis-à-vis the larger organization and often see that
relationship between a refinery and the parent organization as “us versus them.” Employee loyalty is to
the refinery, not to Axis Global.
The outsourcing news creates a crisis within Russ Saffold’s IT team. Although Russ will remain an
employee of Axis, the other three team members will not. The three team members are now unsure of
their futures and find it difficult to focus on their work tasks. Alejandro Salis (age 43) is fairly confident
that he will be hired by the outsourcing company as he is the “star” on the team. Samantha Umbia (age
31) fears she will be terminated as she is unable to relocate to the outsourcing company’s location. Todd
Greengold (age 62) is worried that he will lose his stock options and pension if he is terminated or
transferred to the outsourcing company. And the entire team worries about how they will be treated by
their new employer. Morale of the team members sinks, and with the likelihood of fewer positions,
competition among them begins to emerge. Russ finds himself in the middle of implementing a decision
that is unclear, is opposed by his bosses at Tappan Refinery, and is creating personal issues with his
staff. He wonders how he will establish a working relationship with the outsourcing company.
Questions
1. Should Russ Saffold intervene to help his team handle this crisis? If so, what type of leadership
action should he take? Internal task? Internal relational? External environmental?
2. What leadership actions, if any, should team members take?
3. What should Russ Saffold do (if anything) to mitigate the two opposing positions regarding
outsourcing of IT (Axis Global versus Tappan Refinery)?
4. What characteristics of team excellence are currently lacking in this team?
Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper
A faculty member, Kim Green from the Management Department, was asked to chair a major university
committee to plan the mission of the university for the next 20 years. Three other senior faculty and
seven administrators from across the campus were also asked to serve on this committee. The
president of the university, Dr. Sulgrave, gave the committee its charge: What should Northcoast
University be like in the year 2020? Dr. Sulgrave told the committee that the work of this task force was
of utmost importance to the future of the university, and the charge of this committee should take
precedence over all other matters. The task force was allowed to meet in the president’s conference
room and use the president’s assistant. The report of the committee was due in two months.
The task force members felt very good about being selected for such an important team. The team met
on a weekly basis for about two hours each time. At first, the members were very interested in the task
and participated enthusiastically. They were required to do a great deal of outside research. They came
back to the meetings proud to share their research and knowledge. However, after a while the meetings
did not go well. The members could not seem to agree on what the charge to the team meant. They
argued about what they were supposed to accomplish and resented the time the committee was taking
from their regular jobs. Week after week the team met but accomplished nothing. Attendance became a
problem, with people skipping several meetings, showing up late, or leaving early. Team members
stopped working on their committee assignments. Green didn’t want to admit to the university president
that the team didn’t know what it was doing; instead, she just got more and more frustrated. Meetings
became sporadic and eventually stopped altogether. The president was involved in a crisis at the
university and seemed to lose interest in the committee. The president never called for the report from
the committee, and the report was never completed.
Questions
1. Which characteristics of excellence were lacking in this task force?
2. Which characteristics of excellence were evident in this task force?
3. How would you assess Green as a leader?
4. What actions would you take (internally or externally) if you were the leader of this task force?
Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team
The 1980 U.S. ice hockey team pulled off one of the greatest upsets in Olympic history, defeating the
Soviet Union’s team 4–3 before defeating Finland 4–2 to win the gold medal. It was only the second
Olympic gold medal for the United States in ice hockey since the sport was introduced to the games in
1920.
Winning the Olympic medal was sweet, but what made this such an upset was the U.S. victory over the
Soviet team. The Soviet Union had long dominated Olympic ice hockey, having won seven gold medals
since 1956 and not losing an Olympic hockey game since 1968.
There were stark differences between the two teams. Nicknamed the “Red Machine,” the Soviet team
was made up of professional athletes who had played together for years as the Soviet national team.
Despite this being common knowledge, team members had been bogusly designated as students,
engineers, or soldiers to maintain the amateur status then required of Olympic athletes. The Soviets
were coached by Viktor Tikhonov, a former KGB officer who used a Soviet military style of coaching and
leadership that demanded strict obedience and total commitment from all of his players (Shevchenko,
2018). All of the Soviet players lived together for 11 months in a training camp and were not allowed to
leave for any reason. The team’s total commitment to ice hockey and upholding the Soviet ice hockey
tradition was evident in its success, and many saw it as a testimony to the effectiveness of communist
leadership and Tikhonov’s ability to create effective teams (Lapin, 2015).
Coached by Herb Brooks, the U.S. team was made up of college and amateur hockey players with an
average age of 21. Before being tapped to coach the 1980 Olympic team, Brooks was the coach at the
University of Minnesota, where he had taken a last-place team and transformed it, amassing one of the
most impressive winning records in Division I hockey (175–100–20), including three NCAA
championships in 1974, 1976, and 1979. Brooks was no stranger to Olympic hockey, either. Although he
had been cut from the 1960 Olympic team days before the games started, Brooks went on to play on
eight U.S. national and Olympic teams, including the 1964 and 1968 Olympic teams (Bernstein, 2006).
But Brooks wasn’t an automatic choice for the Olympic coaching job; he applied to be the coach in
1978, and after the committee’s first choice declined, they met with Brooks. He came prepared with
binders outlining his plan for player selection, staffing, conditioning, pre-Olympic scheduling, and his
proposed style of play. The last was the most surprising: Brooks wanted to abandon the traditional
dump-and-chase, reactive style of North American hockey that had been so successful for his
Minnesota teams, and retrain the athletes to play a hybrid style that imitated the Soviets’ physical game,
phenomenal conditioning, and stickhandling prowess. He got the job (Coffey, 2005).
From the outset, Brooks was determined to find the right players for the team. “My recruiting key—I
looked for PEOPLE first, athletes second,” he said. “I wanted people with a sound value system as you
cannot buy values. You’re only as good as your values. I learned early on that you do not put greatness
into people . . . but somehow try to pull it out” (Herb Brooks Foundation, n.d.).
Brooks looked for players at the National Sports Festival in Colorado Springs in June 1979. He didn’t
look for the most talented players, opting for those who could skate hard and fast, who exhibited a work
ethic and willingness to embrace his new hybrid style of hockey, and who would fit together as a whole.
He punished 68 hopefuls with continuous drills on ice and a 300-question survey to assess their
psychological makeup.
Most of the prospects ultimately selected for the team were from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and
New England—and long-standing regional rivalries often resulted in on-ice brawls during the drills. In
order to unify them, Brooks set out to make himself the enemy. “A shared disdain for his ceaselessly
demanding and Machiavellian ways would be the rallying cry, the reason guys would want to go out on
the ice and bust their tails, just to show him . . . he kept nearly everyone anxious about their prospects
for making the team, almost to the end” (Coffey, 2005, p. 9). As a result, the players commiserated with
one another, creating bonds that erased their regional borders.
Brooks knew, however, that the distance and wall he put up between himself and the team would need
to be countered by someone with a softer touch. For that he chose Craig Patrick as the team’s assistant
coach, telling him “I’m going to be tough on them, and you are going to have to be the one who keeps
everyone together” (Coffey, 2005, p. 11). Patrick fulfilled his role as a sounding board, advocate, and
nurturer for the team’s players.
Brooks was relentless, and one of his favorite expressions to use was “prepare to grow through pain”
(Brown, 2014; Timetoast, n.d.). As a run-up to the Olympics, the team began a series of exhibition
games. After the U.S. team tied in a game against Norway, a team Brooks thought the United States
should have easily trounced, he kept his team on the ice making them skate wind sprints the lengths of
the rink (infamously called “Herbies”). He kept them at it even after the custodians had shut off lights to
the rink and the team physician urged him to stop.
It wasn’t just physical stamina that Brooks drilled into his athletes. As Brooks got to know his players, he
learned what buttons to push and when to push them for every one of them. He would pick at them,
provoke them, verbally berate them, or not talk to them at all.
“Traumatic is the best way to describe playing for him,” Goalie Steve Janaszak said, noting that he once
went three months without hearing so much as a hello from Brooks (Coffey, 2005, p. 102).
Brooks engaged in mind games with his players, fostering fear into them that they could be cut from the
team at any time. Brooks believed that uncertainty made the players more motivated and pushed them
to work harder. During the seven months the team played in exhibition games, Brooks would often bring
in outside players to audition for spots on the team, making it clear to the current roster of players that
they were expendable. In most cases, these mind games triggered renewed determination and skill from
his current players. In one case, however, the team fought back.
Mike Eruzione was the team captain, and a unifying force on the team. But during the exhibition games,
the usual high scorer was experiencing a scoring slump. Brooks, seeking to cut Eruzione, brought in two
outside players to skate with the team as a tryout, which infuriated the team. “They’d been through
Brooks’s boot camp grind for six months. Eruzione had become a widely admired captain, an emotional
lynchpin” (Coffey, 2005, p. 230). With less than three weeks before the Olympics, the team confronted
Brooks and told him to stop his revolving door of new players to audition. It was unfair not only to those
who were auditioning, but also to those who had been working and sacrificing for months. The players
told Brooks that they were a family and the final roster for the Olympic team needed to come from that
family. Brooks backed off.
That unity was something Brooks respected and protected. During the Olympics, he angered not only
the international press, but Olympic Games organizers, when he refused to make his players available
for press interviews after games. While some saw that as Brooks wanting all the attention for himself,
the truth was that Brooks had spent months building the spirit and substance of the team and didn’t
want the players’ bonds injured by one or two of the players getting all the media attention (Coffey,
2005, p. 100). He maintained his no-press stance even after the United States’ searing Olympic victory
over the USSR, when the world’s media was clamoring for interviews. But when the team clinched the
gold medal against Finland, 3–2, the arena erupted in bedlam with celebration, and the players were
swamped by fans, family, and journalists. Brooks was not there, however, to bask in the limelight; right
after the final buzzer, he went directly to the team’s locker room.
“They were really mentally tough and goal-oriented,” said Brooks of his squad. “They came from all
different walks of life, many having competed against one another, but they came together and grew to
be a real close team. I pushed this team really hard, I mean I really pushed them! But they had the
ability to answer the bell . . . The players took to it like ducks to water, and they really had a lot of fun
playing it. We were a fast, creative team that played extremely disciplined without the puck. Throughout
the Olympics, they had a great resiliency about them. I mean they came from behind six or seven times
to win. They just kept on moving and working and digging” (Herb Brooks Foundation, n.d.).
Four months after the Olympic Games, Brooks wrote every player on the team a personal, eight-
paragraph letter:
Under separate cover, you will be receiving a laminated team picture from Craig [Patrick] and
myself. This reflects our complete respect we have for you as an athlete and as a person.
I feel respect is the greatest reward in the world of sport. You have earned that from the coaching
staff.
Personally, this year was not only my most enjoyable year in coaching, but also my toughest.
Toughest because it involved making so many difficult decisions regarding the makeup of our final
team.
Because of that, and because I wanted to be as objective as possible, I stayed away from close
personal contacts with you. I did not want the U.S. Hockey Community to say that regionalism
and/or favoritism entered into my final selections.
This year was a challenge for all of us.
A challenge to:
Live and work as a unit.
Play a positive game—a creative way.
Make the most out of our dreams.
You met those challenges and conquered them. If there was any team I ever wanted to identify with
on a personal basis, this was the team. Hopefully that day will come.
Respectfully,
Herb Brooks
—Coach Herb Brooks (1980 US Olympic Hockey team); [Coffey, 2005, p. 263]; Coffey, W. (2005). The
boys of winter: The untold story of a coach, a dream and the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team. New
York, NY: Crown.
Herb Brooks died in a car accident in 2003, at the age of 66. Twenty-four years after he brought them
together the first time, members of the 1980 U.S. Olympic team came together again at the funeral for
their former coach.
In his eulogy, Mike Eruzione likened Brooks “to a father you love deeply but don’t always like because
he pushed you so hard. ‘I firmly believe he loved our hockey team, but we didn’t know it,’ he said”
(Coffey, 2005, p. 3).
Questions
1. What is your reaction to Herb Brooks as a team leader? Do the ends in this case justify the means?
2. Describe how each of the eight characteristics of team excellence applied to Brooks’s coaching of
the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team.
3. The Hill Model for Team Leadership advocates that the leader’s job is to monitor the team and take
whatever action is necessary to ensure team effectiveness. Describe the actions Brooks took in
relation to the internal leadership aspects of the model:
a. Task (goal focusing, structuring for results, facilitating decisions, training, maintaining
standards)
b. Relational (coaching, collaborating, managing conflict, building commitment, satisfying needs,
modeling principles)
4. Hill states that “the leader has special responsibility for functioning in a manner that will help the
team achieve effectiveness” While the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team was highly successful, do
you think it was because of Herb Brooks’s leadership? Explain your answer.
Leadership Instrument
Larson and LaFasto developed an assessment tool to gauge team effectiveness (a team’s health)
based on their study of many different types of excellent organizational teams (see Larson & LaFasto,
1989). Their research demonstrated the eight criteria or factors that are consistently associated with
team excellence and high performance that were discussed earlier in the chapter. The complete Team
Excellence Survey contains more than 40 questions across the eight factors that are used to determine
a team’s performance level and suggest areas that might need corrective action. The eighth factor on
this instrument is principled leadership. Subsequent research by LaFasto and Larson led to the
development of a 42-item questionnaire focusing on this criterion of leadership. The full Collaborative
Team Leader Instrument and a discussion of its reliability and validity can be found in their latest text
(LaFasto & Larson, 2001). The questionnaire included here provides a sample of questions from these
two surveys so that the reader can see how team and team leadership effectiveness can be evaluated.
(Readers who want to assess their own organizational teams are advised to use the complete versions
of both surveys.)
The team members are given the questionnaire, and their scores are combined and averaged to obtain
a team view; the leader fills out the same questionnaire. The responses from the team leader are then
compared with the team members’ responses to determine the areas of greatest weakness, if any.
Based on these comparisons, the team and its leader can plan the action steps needed to correct and
improve the weak areas of team functioning. The action planning is done collaboratively with the leader
and team members working together.
The Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader assessments are designed as diagnostic tools to
help teams sort through any problems and to pinpoint areas for action taking. The Team Excellence and
Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire provided in this chapter combines sample questions from the
two instruments developed by LaFasto and Larson. The first seven questions are taken from the Team
Excellence Survey, developed by LaFasto and Larson in 1987 (cited in Larson & LaFasto, 1989) to
measure a team’s health in terms of the criteria of team excellence (goal, structure, team members,
commitment, climate, standards, and external support). Leadership is measured by the next six
questions, taken from the Collaborative Team Leader Instrument developed by LaFasto and Larson in
1996 (LaFasto & Larson, 2001, pp. 151–154). These six questions assess the effectiveness of the
leader in goal focusing, ensuring a collaborative climate, building confidence, demonstrating know-how,
setting priorities, and managing performance. All of these team and leadership factors have been found
to relate to team effectiveness.
As you fill out the sample questionnaire, think about a team to which you belong or have belonged as a
member or as the leader. The items that you score as 1 or 2 (False or More false than true) are the
areas of team weakness from your perspective. To obtain a team assessment, you would compare your
scores on this instrument with the scores of the other team members. For example, if almost everyone
on the team responds with a 1 or 2 to Item 3 (“Team members possess the essential skills and abilities
to accomplish the team’s objectives”), then the team leader may need to provide training to increase the
competence of team members. Such an instrument that assesses team effectiveness is particularly
helpful to the team leader in identifying areas of team or leadership weakness and suggesting solutions
for improving team effectiveness.
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire
Purpose: The purpose of this questionnaire is to assess your team’s strengths and weaknesses
to help your team leader improve you overall effectiveness.
Instructions: This questionnaire contains questions about your team and the leadership within
this team. Indicate whether you feel each statement is true or not true of your team. Use the
following scale:
Key: 1 = False 2 = More false than true 3 = More true than false 4 = True
1. There is a clearly defined need—a goal to be achieved or a purpose to be
served—that justifies the existence of our team. (team: clear, elevating
goal)
1 2 3 4
2. We have an established method for monitoring individual performance and
providing feedback. (team: results-driven structure)
1 2 3 4
3. Team members possess the essential skills and abilities to accomplish the
team’s objectives. (team: competent team members)
1 2 3 4
4. Achieving our team goal is a higher priority than any individual objective.
(team: unified commitment)
1 2 3 4
5. We trust each other sufficiently to accurately share information,
perceptions, and feedback. (team: collaborative climate)
1 2 3 4
6. Our team exerts pressure on itself to improve performance. (team:
standards of excellence)
1 2 3 4
7. Our team is given the resources it needs to get the job done. (team:
external support and recognition)
1 2 3 4
8. If it’s necessary to adjust the team’s goal, our team leader makes sure we
understand why. (leadership: focus on the goal)
1 2 3 4
9. Our team leader creates a safe climate for team members to openly and
supportively discuss any issue related to the team’s success. (leadership:
ensure collaborative climate)
1 2 3 4
10. Our team leader looks for and acknowledges contributions by team
members. (leadership: build confidence)
1 2 3 4
11. Our team leader understands the technical issues we must face in
achieving our goal. (leadership: demonstrate sufficient technical know-how)
1 2 3 4
12. Our team leader does not dilute our team’s effort with too many priorities.
(leadership: set priorities)
1 2 3 4
13. Our team leader is willing to confront and resolve issues associated with
inadequate performance by team members. (leadership: manage
performance)
1 2 3 4
Sources: Questions 1–7: Adapted from the Team Excellence Survey (copyright 1987 LaFasto and Larson; portions reprinted
with permission of Profact). Questions 8–13: Adapted from the Collaborative Team Leader Instrument (copyright 1996 LaFasto
and Larson; portions reprinted with permission).
Scoring Interpretation
In addition to such targeted questions on each of the criteria of excellence, the complete surveys
ask open-ended questions to allow team members to comment on issues that might not be
specifically covered in the directed questions, such as strengths and weaknesses of the team
and its leadership, necessary changes, problematic norms, or issues that need to be addressed.
The complete version of the survey is given to team members and the team leader, and all are
involved in the diagnosis and the resulting action planning. Such a method is clearly consistent
with the empowerment movement in organizational teams and helps address the enormous
complexity involved in making teams effective.
Summary
The increased importance of organizational teams and the leadership needed for them has produced a
growing interest in team leadership theory. The team leadership model provides a framework in which to
study the systematic factors that contribute to a team’s outcomes or general effectiveness. Within this
approach, the critical function of leadership is to help the team accomplish its goals by monitoring and
diagnosing the team and taking the requisite action.
A strategic decision model has been developed to reveal the various decisions team leaders must make
to improve their team’s effectiveness. The model describes these decisions: What type of intervention
should be used (monitoring or action taking)? At what level should the intervention be targeted (internal
or external)? What leadership function should be implemented to improve team functioning?
Questionnaires filled out by team members and the team leader can aid in diagnosing specific areas of
team problems and suggest action steps to be taken by the team.
The strength of this approach is its practical focus on real-life organizational teams and their
effectiveness. The model also emphasizes the functions of leadership that can be shared and
distributed within the work team. The model offers guidance in selecting leaders and team members
with the appropriate diagnostic and action-taking skills. Furthermore, the model is appropriately
complex, providing a cognitive model for understanding and improving organizational teams.
On the negative side, this approach is limited in that it does not include all the factors and skills related
to team effectiveness. Furthermore, the model does not provide on-the-spot answers to specific
problems facing team leaders nor does it address how team leadership skills can be shared throughout
the team. Last, methods for testing and measuring the outcomes and effectiveness of team leadership
models are not fully refined.
Descriptions of Images and Figures
Back to Figure
Leadership decisions influences internal leadership actions such as task and relational, and external
leadership actions such as environmental. The actions affect team effectiveness, which influence
leadership decisions.
Leadership decisions:
Monitor or Take Action
Task or Relational
Internal or External
Task:
Goal Focusing
Structuring for Results
Facilitating Decision Making
Training
Maintaining Standards
Relational:
Coaching
Collaborating
Managing Conflict
Building Commitment
Satisfying Needs
Modeling Principles
Environmental:
Networking
Advocating
Negotiating Support
Buffering
Assessing
Sharing Information
Team Effectiveness:
Performance
Development
Back to Figure
The functions are as follows.
Diagnosing Group Deficiencies: Internal and Monitor.
Taking Remedial Action: Internal and Executive Action.
Forecasting Environmental Changes: External and Monitor.
Preventing Deleterious Changes: External and Executive Action.
REFERENCES
CHAPTER 1
Aritz, J., Walker, R., Cardon, P., & Zhang, L. (2017). Discourse of
leadership: The power of questions in organizational decision
making. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(2),
161–181. doi:10.1177/2329488416687054
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond
expectations. New York, NY: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A
survey of theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership
(2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and
authentic transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
10, 181–217.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for
taking charge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Berger, M. [@Coach_Berger]. (2020, January 30). An open letter
[Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/coach_berger?lang=en
Boatner, C. (2020, January 31). College paper goes viral after
unpublishing then republishing coach’s quote complimenting
Hitler. Student Press Law Center. https://splc.org/2020/01/college-
paper-goes-viral-after-unpublishing-then-republishing-coachs-
quote-complimenting-hitler/
https://twitter.com/coach_berger?lang=en
College paper goes viral after unpublishing then republishing coach’s quote complimenting Hitler
Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical
leadership: A social learning perspective for construct
development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations.
London, UK: SAGE.
Bryman, A., Collinson, D., Grint, K., Jackson, G., & Uhl-Bien, M.
(Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of leadership. London, UK:
SAGE.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership. New York, NY: Grove
Press.
Chiu, C. Y. C., Balkundi, P., & Weinberg, F. J. (2017). When
managers become leaders: The role of manager network
centralities, social power, and followers’ perception of leadership.
The Leadership Quarterly, 28(2), 334–348.
Ciulla, J. B. (2014). The ethics of leadership (3rd ed.). Santa
Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Colf, C. (2020, February 14). GVSU to focus on Holocaust education
after football coach’s Hitler comment. The Jewish News.
https://thejewishnews.com/2020/02/14/gvsu-to-focus-on-
holocaust-education-after-football-coachs-hitler-comment/
https://thejewishnews.com/2020/02/14/gvsu-to-focus-on-holocaust-education-after-football-coachs-hitler-comment/
Copeland, N. (1942). Psychology and the soldier. Harrisburg, PA:
Military Service.
Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (Eds.). (2012). The nature of leadership
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C.,
& Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new
millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives.
The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62.
Ellis, D. G., & Fisher, B. A. (1994). Small group decision making:
Communication and the group process (4th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Fairhurst, G. T. (2007). Discursive leadership: In conversation with
leadership psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Fayol, H. (1916). General and industrial management. London, UK:
Pitman.
Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y.,
Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B. (1991). Taxonomic efforts in the
description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional
interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(4), 245–287.
French, J. R., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power.
In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 259–269). Ann
Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The
Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693–727.
Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York, NY: Free Press.
Gardner, W. L., Lowe, K. B., Meuser, J. D., Noghani, F., Gullifor, D.
P., & Cogliser, C. C. (2020). The leadership trilogy: A review of the
third decade of the leadership quarterly. The Leadership Quarterly.
Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101379
George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets
to creating lasting value. Warren Bennis signature series. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant-leadership in organizations:
Inspirational and moral. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 105–119.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Heller, T., & Van Til, J. (1983). Leadership and followership: Some
summary propositions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18,
405–414.
Hemphill, J. K. (1949). Situational factors in leadership. Columbus:
The Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.
Hickman, G. R. (Ed.). (2016). Leading organizations: Perspectives
for a new era (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101379
Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184–200.
Hollander, E. P. (1992). Leadership, followership, self, and others.
The Leadership Quarterly, 3(1), 43–54.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). The ethics of charismatic
leadership: Submission of liberation? Academy of Management
Executive, 6(2), 43–54.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research.
Management Science, 28(3), 315–336.
Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from
management. New York, NY: Free Press.
Krasikova, D. V., Green, S. G., & LeBreton, J. M. (2013). Destructive
leadership: A theoretical review, integration, and future research
agenda. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1308–1338.
McClean, E. J., Martin, S. R., Emich, K. J., & Woodruff, C. T. (2018).
The social consequences of voice: An examination of voice type
and gender on status and subsequent leader emergence.
Academy of Management Journal, 61(5), 1869–1891.
Moore, B. V. (1927). The May conference on leadership. Personnel
Journal, 6, 124–128.
Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A
comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic
leaders. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nederman, C. (2019, Summer). Niccolò Machiavelli. In Edward N.
Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/machiavelli/
Owens, B. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2012). Modeling how to grow: An
inductive examination of humble leader behaviors, contingencies,
and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 787–818.
Padilla, A. (2013). Leadership: Leaders, followers, environments.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence:
Lessons from America’s best-run companies. New York, NY:
Warner Books.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2019). Experimental designs in
management and leadership research: Strengths, limitations, and
recommendations for improving publishability. The Leadership
Quarterly, 30(1), 11–33.
Posner, B. Z. (2015). An investigation into the leadership practices of
volunteer leaders. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 36(7), 885–898.
Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. In I. D. Steiner &
M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychology (pp. 371–
382). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/machiavelli/
Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York,
NY: Praeger.
Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2017). Communication: Sine qua non
of organizational leadership theory and practice. International
Journal of Business Communication, 54(1), 12–30.
Seeman, M. (1960). Social status and leadership. Columbus: The
Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.
Shore, L. M., Cleveland, J. N., & Sanchez, D. (2018). Inclusive
workplaces: A review and model. Human Resource Management
Review, 28(2), 176–189.
Simonet, D. V., & Tett, R. P. (2012). Five perspectives on the
leadership-management relationship: A competency-based
evaluation and integration. Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 20(2), 199–213.
Smith, J. A., & Foti, R. J. (1998). A pattern approach to the study of
leader emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(2), 147–160.
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory
and research. New York, NY: Free Press.
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations:
Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management,
33(3), 261–289.
Voss, K. (2020, January 23). Inside the mind of GVSU’s newest
offensive coordinator. Grand Valley Lanthorn.
https://lanthorn.com/73049/sports/inside-the-mind-of-gvsus-
newest-offensive-coordinator
Wallner, P. J. (2020, January 30). Grand Valley State coach resigns
following his Hitler remarks. MLive.com.
https://www.mlive.com/sports/grand-rapids/2020/01/grand-valley-
state-coach-resigns-for-hitler-remarks.html
Watson, C., & Hoffman, L. R. (2004). The role of task-related
behavior in the emergence of leaders. Group & Organization
Management, 29(6), 659–685.
Zaleznik, A. (1977, May–June). Managers and leaders: Are they
different? Harvard Business Review, 55, 67–78.
https://www.mlive.com/sports/grand-rapids/2020/01/grand-valley-state-coach-resigns-for-hitler-remarks.html
CHAPTER 2
Antonakis, J. (2009). “Emotional intelligence”: What does it measure
and does it matter for leadership? In G. B. Graen (Ed.), LMX
leadership—game-changing designs: Research-based tools (Vol.
11, pp. 163–192). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Antonakis, J., House, R. J., & Simonton, D. K. (2017). Can super
smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The
curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1003–1021.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Dasborough, M. T., & Ascough, K. W. (2009).
Developing leaders: Teaching about emotional intelligence and
training in emotional skills. In S. J. Armstrong & C. V. Fukami
(Eds.), The Sage handbook of management learning, education
and development (pp. 161–183). London, UK: SAGE.
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2002). Emotion in the workplace:
The new challenge for managers. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 16(1), 76–86.
Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A
survey of theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free
Press.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for
taking charge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Blair, C. A., Palmieri, R. E., & Paz-Aparicio, C. (2018). Do Big 5
personality characteristics and narcissism predict engagement in
leader development? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1817.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2019). Emotional intelligence and its measurement.
In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.
DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.159
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations.
London, UK: SAGE.
Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. (2001). Now, discover your strengths.
New York, NY: Free Press.
Caruso, D. R., & Wolfe, C. J. (2004). Emotional intelligence and
leadership development. In D. V. Day, S. J. Zaccaro, & S. M.
Halpin (Eds.), Leader development for transforming organizations:
Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp. 237–266). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Crum, R. (2018, August 17). Worry over Musk’s “stability”: Tesla
stock nosedives after CEO’s emotional interview. Mercury News.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/17/elon-musk-cries-
laughs-and-calls-past-year-excruciating
Davies, A. (2018, May 3). Elon Musk’s attack on Tesla investors
could make him a liability. Wired.
https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-tesla-model-3-earnings-
call/
Dinh, J., Lord, R., Gardner, W., Meuser, J., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J.
(2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium:
Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The
Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62.
Worry over Musk’s ‘stability’: Tesla stock nosedives after CEO’s emotional interview
https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-tesla-model-3-earnings-call/
Dinh, J. E., & Lord, R. G. (2012). Implications of dispositional and
process views of traits for individual difference research in
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 651–667.
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R.
(2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101.
Feloni, R. (2014, October 23). Former SpaceX exec explains how
Elon Musk taught himself rocket science. Business Insider.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-elon-musk-learned-rocket-
science-for-spacex-2014-10?r=US&IR=T
Freedman, J. (2014). Case study: Emotional intelligence for people-
first leadership at FedEx Express. Six Seconds.
http://www.6seconds.org/2014/01/14/case-study-emotional-
intelligence-people-first-leadership-fedex-express/
French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1962). The bases of social power.
In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (pp.
259–269). New York, NY: Harper and Row.
Frieder, R., Wang, G., & Oh, I. S. (2018). Linking job-relevant
personality traits, transformational leadership, and job
performance via perceived meaningfulness at work: A moderated
mediation model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(3), 324–333.
Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds: Portraits of exceptional
individuals and an examination of our extraordinariness. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-elon-musk-learned-rocket-science-for-spacex-2014-10?r=US&IR=T
Case Study: Emotional Intelligence for People-First Leadership at FedEx Express
Gelles, D. (2018, August 28). In Elon Musk’s world, brakes are for
cars, not C.E.O.s. New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/business/elon-musk-
tesla.html
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”:
The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York,
NY: Bantam.
Goleman, D., & Boyatzis, R. (2017). Emotional intelligence has 12
elements. Which do you need to work on? Harvard Business
Review, 84(2), 1–5.
Goleman, D., & Nevarez, M. (2018). Boost your emotional
intelligence with these three questions. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2018/08/boost-your-emotional-intelligence-with-
these-3-questions
Gong, Z., & Jiao, X. (2019). Are effect sizes in emotional intelligence
field declining? A meta-meta analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 10,
Article 1655.
Jackson, A. E. (2017, June 20). The art (& science) of leadership:
Inside the mind of Elon Musk. Glassdoor.
https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/elon-musk
https://hbr.org/2018/08/boost-your-emotional-intelligence-with-these-3-questions
https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/elon-musk
Jacquart, P., & Antonakis, J. (2015). When does charisma matter for
top-level leaders? Effect of attributional ambiguity. Academy of
Management Journal, 58(4), 1051–1074.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research.
Management Science, 28(3), 315–336.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002).
Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780.
Jung, D., & Sosik, J. J. (2006). Who are the spellbinders? Identifying
personal attributes of charismatic leaders. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 12, 12–27.
Kidder, T. (2004). Mountains beyond mountains: The quest of Dr.
Paul Farmer, a man who would cure the world. New York, NY:
Random House.
Killgore, W. D. (2017). Refinement and validation of a military
emotional intelligence training program. Tucson: University of
Arizona. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1050120
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits
matter? The Executive, 5, 48–60.
Kotsou, I., Mikolajczak, M., Heeren, A., Grégoire, J., & Leys, C.
(2019). Improving emotional intelligence: A systematic review of
existing work and future challenges. Emotion Review, 11(2), 151–
165.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1050120
Levin, S. (2018, July 16). Elon Musk calls British diver in Thai cave
rescue “pedo” in baseless attack. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk-
british-diver-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-twitter
Lord, R. G., DeVader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis
of the relation between personality traits and leadership
perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 402–410.
MacKie, D. (2016). Strength-based leadership coaching in
organizations: An evidence-based guide to positive leadership
development. London, UK: Kogan Page.
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality
and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241–
270.
Marlowe, H. A. (1986). Social intelligence: Evidence for
multidimensionality and construct independence. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 78, 52–58.
Mattingly, V., & Kraiger, K. (2019). Can emotional intelligence be
trained? A meta-analytical investigation. Human Resource
Management Review, 29(2), 140–155.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Selecting a
measure of emotional intelligence: The case for ability scales. In
R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional
intelligence (pp. 320–342). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk-british-diver-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-twitter
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the
construction and regulation of feelings. Applied & Preventive
Psychology, 4, 197–208.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In
P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and
emotional intelligence: Implications for educators (pp. 3–31). New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of
emotional intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of
intelligence (pp. 396–420). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor
model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90.
Mind & Machine. (2017, August 13). Working at SpaceX, building the
future of space exploration on MIND & MACHINE [Video file].
Musk, E. (@ElonMusk). (2018, April 2). About a year ago, I asked
Doug to manage both engineering & production. He agreed that
Tesla needed eng & prod better aligned, so we don’t design cars
that are crazy hard to build. Right now, tho, better to divide &
conquer, so I’m back to sleeping at factory. Car biz is hell . . .
[Tweet].
About a year ago, I asked Doug to manage both engineering & production. He agreed that Tesla needed eng & prod better aligned, so we don’t design cars that are crazy hard to build. Right now, tho, better to divide & conquer, so I’m back to sleeping at factory. Car biz is hell …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 2, 2018
lang=en
About a year ago, I asked Doug to manage both engineering & production. He agreed that Tesla needed eng & prod better aligned, so we don’t design cars that are crazy hard to build. Right now, tho, better to divide & conquer, so I’m back to sleeping at factory. Car biz is hell …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 2, 2018
Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2012). What makes for magic
leadership? In W. E. Rosenbach & R. L. Taylor (Eds.),
Contemporary issues in leadership (7th ed., pp. 135–139).
Boulder, CO: Westview.
Partners In Health. (2017). Our work. https://www.pih.org/programs
Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and
virtues: A handbook and classification. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press; Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Rath, T. (2007). StrengthsFinder 2.0. New York, NY: Gallup Press.
Sacket, P. R., & Walmsley, P. T. (2014). Which personality attributes
are most important in the workplace? Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 9(5), 538–551.
Sage, A., & Rodriguez, S. (2018, July 1). Exclusive: Tesla hits Model
3 manufacturing milestone, hours after deadline—factory sources.
Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-model3-
exclusive/exclusive-tesla-hits-model-3-manufacturing-milestone-
hours-after-deadline-factory-sources-idUSKBN1JR1WX
Sculley, J. (2011, October 10). No bozos. Ever. Bloomberg
Businessweek, 4249, 27.
https://www.pih.org/programs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-model3-exclusive/exclusive-tesla-hits-model-3-manufacturing-milestone-hours-after-deadline-factory-sources-idUSKBN1JR1WX
Shankman, M. L., & Allen, S. J. (2015). Emotionally intelligent
leadership: A guide for college students (2nd ed.). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Slaski, M., & Cartwright, S. (2003). Emotional intelligence training
and its implications for stress, health and performance. Stress &
Health, 19(4), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.979
Snow, S. (2015, June 4). Steve Jobs’s and Elon Musk’s
counterintuitive leadership traits. Fast Company.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3046916/elon-musks-leadership-
traits
Sosik, J. J., Chun, J. U., Ete, Z., Arenas, F. J., & Scherer, J. A.
(2019). Self-control puts character in action: Examining how leader
character strengths and ethical leadership relate to leader
outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 160(3), 765–781.
Sosik, J. J., Gentry, W. A., & Chun, J. U. (2012). The value of virtue
in the upper echelons: A multisource examination of executive
character strengths and performance. The Leadership Quarterly,
23(3), 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.08.010
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (2020). About SpaceX.
SpaceX.com/about
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2004). International handbook of intelligence.
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A
survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.979
https://www.fastcompany.com/3046916/elon-musks-leadership-traits
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.08.010
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory
and research. New York, NY: Free Press.
Stone, B. (2011, October 10). The return. Bloomberg Businessweek,
4249, 40.
Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). Organizational leadership and social
intelligence. In R. Riggio (Ed.), Multiple intelligence and leadership
(pp. 29–54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership.
American Psychologist, 62, 6–16.
Zaccaro, S. J., Green, J. P., Dubrow, S., & Kolze, M. (2018). Leader
individual differences, situational parameters, and leadership
outcomes: A comprehensive review and integration. The
Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 2–43.
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and
attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg
(Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 101–124). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2017). Leader traits and
attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg
(Eds.), The nature of leadership (3rd ed., pp. 29–55). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Zaleznik, A. (1977, May–June). Managers and leaders: Are they
different? Harvard Business Review, 55, 67–78.
CHAPTER 3
Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A
survey of theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free
Press.
Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K. V., Marks,
M. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2000). Exploring the relationship of
leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance. The
Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 65–86.
Gasiorek, J., & Ebesu Hubbard, A. (2017). Perspectives on
perspective-taking in communication research. Review of
Communication, 17(2), 87–105.
Griffith, J. A., Baur, J. E., & Buckley, M. R. (2019). Creating
comprehensive leadership pipelines: Applying the real options
approach to organizational leadership development. Human
Resource Management Review, 29(3), 305–315.
Gurdjian, P., Halbeisen, T., & Lane, K. (2014). Why leadership-
development programs fail. McKinsey Quarterly, 1(1), 121–126.
Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard
Business Review, 33(1), 33–42.
Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
Kerns, C. D. (2015). Motivations to lead: A core leadership
dimension. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 9–23.
Koigi, B. (2019, August 16). Peter Tabichi—the world’s best teacher
about the role of science in ending poverty. FairPlanet.
https://www.fairplanet.org/story/peter-tabichi-the-
world%E2%80%99s-best-teacher-about-the-role-of-science-in-
ending-poverty/
Matara, E., & Njeru, L. (2019, March 31). A teacher who goes above
the call of duty. The Citizen.
https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/magazine/soundliving/1843780-
5049978-y7i6dm/index.html
Melia, M., Amy, J., & Fenn, L. (2019, June 10). 3 million US students
don’t have home internet. Associated Press News.
https://apnews.com/7f263b8f7d3a43d6be014f860d5e4132
Moorhead, J. (2019, May 29). The secret to unlocking children’s
potential, by the Kenyan friar named the “world’s best teacher.”
The Telegraph.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/schooling/secrets-kenyan-friar-
became-worlds-best-teacher/
Mumford, M. D., & Connelly, M. S. (1991). Leaders as creators:
Leader performance and problem solving in ill-defined domains.
The Leadership Quarterly, 2, 289–315.
Mumford, M. D., Hester, K. S., Robledo, I. C., Peterson, D. R., Day,
E. A., Hougen, D. F., & Barrett, J. D. (2012). Mental models and
creative problem-solving: The relationship of objective and
subjective model attributes. Creativity Research Journal, 24(4),
311–330.
https://www.fairplanet.org/story/peter-tabichi-the-world%E2%80%99s-best-teacher-about-the-role-of-science-in-ending-poverty/
https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/magazine/soundliving/1843780-5049978-y7i6dm/index.html
https://apnews.com/7f263b8f7d3a43d6be014f860d5e4132
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/schooling/secrets-kenyan-friar-became-worlds-best-teacher/
Mumford, M. D., Todd, E. M., Higgs, C., & McIntosh, T. (2017).
Cognitive skills and leadership performance: The nine critical
skills. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 24–39.
Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, M. S., & Marks, M. A.
(2000). Leadership skills: Conclusions and future directions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 155–170.
Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T. O., &
Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world:
Solving complex social problems. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1),
11–35.
Mumford, T. V., Campion, M. A., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). The
leadership skills strataplex: Leadership skill requirements across
organizational levels. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 154–166.
Rose, D. M., & Gordon, R. (2015). Age-related cognitive changes
and distributed leadership. The Journal of Management
Development, 34(3), 330–339.
Sousa, M. J., & Rocha, Á. (2019). Leadership styles and skills
developed through game-based learning. Journal of Business
Research, 94, 360–366.
Talking Education. (2019, February 20). The Kenyan teacher who
gives his salary to the poor [Video file]. YouTube.
Westfall, C. (2019). Leadership development: Why most programs
don’t work. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswestfall/2019/06/20/leadership-
development-why-most-programs-dont-work/#3e1d233a61de
Wodon, Q. (2019, September 17). An interview with Peter Tabichi,
winner of the 2019 Global Teacher Prize. World Bank.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/brief/an-interview-
with-peter-tabichi-winner-of-the-2019-global-teacher-prize
World Bank Live. (2019, September 6). The power of teachers in
tackling the global learning crisis [Video file]. YouTube.
Yammarino, F. J. (2000). Leadership skills: Introduction and
overview. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 5–9.
Zaccaro, S. J., Gilbert, J., Thor, K. K., & Mumford, M. D. (1991).
Leadership and social intelligence: Linking social perceptiveness
and behavioral flexibility to leader effectiveness. The Leadership
Quarterly, 2, 317–331.
Zaccaro, S. J., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, M. S., Marks, M. A., &
Gilbert, J. A. (2000). Assessment of leader problem-solving
capabilities. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 37–64.
Zaki, Y. (2019, March 25). Peter Tabichi: 10 things to know about
Kenyan monk-teacher who won $1 million. Gulf News.
https://gulfnews.com/uae/education/peter-tabichi-10-things-to-
know-about-kenyan-monk-teacher-who-won-1-million-
1.1553504923391
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswestfall/2019/06/20/leadership-development-why-most-programs-dont-work/#3e1d233a61de
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/brief/an-interview-with-peter-tabichi-winner-of-the-2019-global-teacher-prize
https://gulfnews.com/uae/education/peter-tabichi-10-things-to-know-about-kenyan-monk-teacher-who-won-1-million-1.1553504923391
CHAPTER 4
Andersen, J. A. (2009). Your favourite manager is an organisational
disaster. European Business Review, 21(1), 5–16.
Begum, R., & Mujtaba, B. G. (2016). Task and relationship
orientation of Pakistani managers and working professionals: The
interaction effect of demographics in a collective culture. Public
Organization Review, 16(2), 199–215.
Behrendt, P., Matz, S., & Göritz, A. S. (2017). An integrative model of
leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 229–244.
Bennett, W. (2020, January 30). Cheer’s Morgan Simianer sleeps in
her makeup, idolizes Coach Monica—and is back at Navarro.
Vogue. https://www.vogue.com/article/morgan-simianer-interview-
cheer-netflix
Blake, R. R., & McCanse, A. A. (1991). Leadership dilemmas: Grid
solutions. Houston, TX: Gulf.
Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The Managerial Grid. Houston,
TX: Gulf.
Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1978). The new Managerial Grid.
Houston, TX: Gulf.
Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1985). The Managerial Grid III.
Houston, TX: Gulf.
https://www.vogue.com/article/morgan-simianer-interview-cheer-netflix
Bowers, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational
effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 11, 238–263.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations.
London, UK: SAGE.
Cai, D. A., Fink, E. L., & Walker, C. B. (2019). Robert R. Blake, with
recognition of Jane S. Mouton. Negotiation and Conflict
Management Research. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12151
Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. (1970). Group dynamics research and
theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Tavistock.
Casimir, G., & Ng, Y. N. (2010). Combinative aspects of leadership
style and the interaction between leadership behaviors.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(6), 501–517.
Church, B. (2020, March 6). The “Queen” of Cheer reveals how
Netflix mega-hit changed her life. CNN.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/06/sport/cheer-monica-aldama-
netflix-cheerleading-spt-intl/index.html
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C.,
& Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new
millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives.
The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62
Engle, R. L., Elahee, M. N., & Tatoglu, E. (2013). Antecedents of
problem-solving cross-cultural negotiation style: Some preliminary
https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12151
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/06/sport/cheer-monica-aldama-netflix-cheerleading-spt-intl/index.html
evidence. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship,
18(2), 83–102.
Greenspan, R. (2020, March 10). Cheer shows competitive
cheerleading is almost as dangerous as football. So why isn’t it
officially considered a sport? Time. Retrieved from
https://time.com/5782136/cheer-netflix-cheerleading-dangers/
Hemphill, J. K., & Coons, A. E. (1957). Development of the Leader
Behavior Description Questionnaire. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E.
Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement
(Research Monograph No. 88). Columbus: The Ohio State
University, Bureau of Business Research.
Iguisi, O. (2014). Indigenous knowledge systems and leadership
styles in Nigerian work organisations. International Journal of
Research in Business and Social Science, 3(4), 1–13.
Judge, T., Piccolo, R., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The
validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership
research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36–51.
Kahn, R. L. (1956). The prediction of productivity. Journal of Social
Issues, 12, 41–49.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1951). Human organization and worker
motivation. In L. R. Tripp (Ed.), Industrial productivity (pp. 146–
171). Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.
Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
https://time.com/5782136/cheer-netflix-cheerleading-dangers/
Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and
value. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Littrell, R. F. (2013). Explicit leader behaviour. The Journal of
Management Development, 32(6), 567–605.
Martin, M. T., Rowlinson, S., Fellows, R., & Liu, A. M. M. (2012).
Empowering the project team: Impact of leadership style and team
context. Team Performance Management, 18(3), 149–175.
Misumi, J. (1985). The behavioral science of leadership: An
interdisciplinary Japanese research program. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A
review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management,
34(3), 566–593.
Silman, A. (2020, January 21). How Cheer’s superstar coach Monica
gets it done. The Cut. Retrieved from
https://www.thecut.com/2020/01/how-cheers-coach-monica-
aldama-gets-it-done.html
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A
survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.
Stogdill, R. M. (1963). Manual for the Leader Behavior Description
Questionnaire form XII. Columbus: The Ohio State University,
Bureau of Business Research.
https://www.thecut.com/2020/01/how-cheers-coach-monica-aldama-gets-it-done.html
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory
and research. New York, NY: Free Press.
Whiteley, G. (2020, January 8). Cheer [TV series]. Boardwalk
Pictures, Caviar and One Potato Productions.
Yukl, G. (2003). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and
what questions need more attention. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 26(4), 66–85.
Zakin, C., & Weisberg, D. (Producers). (2020, February 4). Skimm’d
from the Couch: Coach Monica Aldama [Audio podcast].
https://www.theskimm.com/money/skimmd-from-the-couch-coach-
monica-aldama-3rKxVUjfCIDEm6p3NGo9SH
https://www.theskimm.com/money/skimmd-from-the-couch-coach-monica-aldama-3rKxVUjfCIDEm6p3NGo9SH
CHAPTER 5
Arvidsson, M., Johansson, C. R., Ek, Å., & Akselsson, R. (2007).
Situational leadership in air traffic control. Journal of Air
Transportation, 12(1), 67–86.
Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory,
research, and managerial applications (4th ed.). New York, NY:
Free Press.
Blanchard, K. H. (1985). SLII®: A situational approach to managing
people. Escondido, CA: Blanchard Training and Development.
Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, D., & Nelson, R. (1993). Situational
Leadership® after 25 years: A retrospective. Journal of Leadership
Studies, 1(1), 22–36.
Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (1992). Game plan for
leadership and the One Minute Manager. Escondido, CA:
Blanchard Training and Development.
Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (2013). Leadership and the
One Minute Manager: Increasing effectiveness through Situational
Leadership® II. New York, NY: William Morrow.
Blank, W., Green, S. G., & Weitzel, J. R. (1990). A test of the
situational leadership theory. Personnel Psychology, 43(3), 579–
597.
Bosse, T., Duell, R., Memon, Z. A., Treur, J., & van der Wal, C. N.
(2017). Computational model-based design of leadership support
based on situational leadership theory. Simulation, 93(7), 605–
617.
Carew, P., Parisi-Carew, E., & Blanchard, K. H. (1990). Group
development and Situational Leadership II®. Escondido, CA:
Blanchard Training and Development.
Cote, R. (2017). A comparison of leadership theories in an
organizational environment. International Journal of Business
Administration, 8(5), 28–35.
Fernandez, C. F., & Vecchio, R. P. (1997). Situational Leadership
theory revisited: A test of an across-jobs perspective. The
Leadership Quarterly, 8(1), 67–84.
Graeff, C. L. (1983). The Situational Leadership theory: A critical
view. Academy of Management Review, 8, 285–291.
Graeff, C. L. (1997). Evolution of Situational Leadership theory: A
critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 153–170.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969a). Life-cycle theory of
leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23, 26–34.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969b). Management of
organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of organizational
behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1988). Management of organizational
behavior: Utilizing human resources (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1993). Management of organizational
behavior: Utilizing human resources (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1996). Great ideas revisited:
Revisiting the life-cycle theory of leadership. Training &
Development Journal, 50(1), 42.
Huang, Y. H. (2000). The Personal Influence Model and Gao Guanxi
in Taiwan Chinese public relations. Public Relations Review, 26(2),
219–236.
Johnson, C. E. (1999). Emerging perspectives in leadership ethics.
www.academy.umd.edu/ila/Publications/Proceedings/1999/cjohns
on
Larsson, J., & Vinberg, S. (2010). Leadership behavior in successful
organizations: Universal or situation-dependent? Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 21(3), 317–334.
Lee, Y., Han, A., Byron, T., & Fan, H. (2008). Daoist leadership:
Theory and application. In C. Chen & Y. Lee (Eds.), Leadership
and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices
(pp. 83–107). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511753763.005
http://www.academy.umd.edu/ila/Publications/Proceedings/1999/cjohnson
Meirovich, G., & Gu, J. (2015). Empirical and theoretical validity of
Hersey-Blanchard’s contingency model: A critical analysis. Journal
of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 20(3), 56–74.
http://dx.doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.3709.2015.ju.00006
Min-Huei, C. (2016). How Chinese philosophy applies in today’s
business world. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 5(3),
102–110.
https://www.ijac.org.uk/images/frontImages/gallery/Vol._5_No._3/1
2._102-110
Reddin, W. J. (1967, April). The 3-D management style theory.
Training and Development Journal, pp. 8–17.
Thompson, G., & Glasø, L. (2015). Situational leadership theory: A
test from three perspectives. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 36(5), 527–544.
Thompson, G., & Glasø, L. (2018). Situational leadership theory: A
test from a leader-follower congruence approach. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 9(5), 574–591.
Thompson, G., & Vecchio, R. P. (2009). Situational leadership
theory: A test of three versions. The Leadership Quarterly, 20,
837–848.
Vecchio, R. P. (1987). Situational leadership theory: An examination
of a prescriptive theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3),
444–451.
http://dx.doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.3709.2015.ju.00006
https://www.ijac.org.uk/images/frontImages/gallery/Vol._5_No._3/12._102-110
Vecchio, R. P., & Boatwright, K. J. (2002). Preferences for idealized
style of supervision. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 327–342.
Vecchio, R. P., Bullis, R. C., & Brazil, D. M. (2006). The utility of
situational leadership theory: A replication in a military setting.
Small Group Leadership, 37, 407–424.
Vroom, V. H., & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision-
making. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Wang, B. (2018, January 1). Chinese leadership: 5 critical
differences with the West. IEDP Developing Leaders.
https://www.iedp.com/articles/chinese-leadership-5-critical-
differences-with-the-west/
Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Chun, J. U., & Dansereau, F.
(2005). Leadership and levels of analysis: A state-of-the-science
review. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(6), 879–919.
Yukl, G. A. (1989). Leadership in organizations (2nd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. A. (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zigarmi, D., & Roberts, T. P. (2017). A test of three basic
assumptions of Situational Leadership® II model and their
implications for HRD practitioners. European Journal of Training
and Development, 41(3), 241–260.
https://www.iedp.com/articles/chinese-leadership-5-critical-differences-with-the-west/
CHAPTER 6
Ambrogi, M. (2013, April 28). New coach, no scholarship: “I’m sorry,
we don’t want you,” is first thing Indy-area recruit told. Indianapolis
Star, p. C1.
Asamani, J. A., Naab, F., & Ansah Ofei, A. M. (2016). Leadership
styles in nursing management: Implications for staff outcomes.
Journal of Health Sciences, 6(1), 23–36.
Bess, J. L., & Goldman, P. (2001). Leadership ambiguity in
universities and K–12 schools and the limits of contemporary
leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 419–450.
Cote, R. (2017). A comparison of leadership theories in an
organizational environment. International Journal of Business
Administration, 8(28), 1923–4007.
http://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v8n5p28
Drew, D. (2013, May 15). WMU football coach P. J. Fleck explains
his “Row the Boat” mantra and hopes it will define the program
and his tenure. MLive.com.
https://www.mlive.com/broncos/2013/05/wmu_football_coach_pj_fl
eck_ex.html
Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style:
A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and
the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,
111, 3–22.
http://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v8n5p28
https://www.mlive.com/broncos/2013/05/wmu_football_coach_pj_fleck_ex.html
Evans, M. G. (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the
path-goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 5, 277–298.
Evans, M. G. (1996). R. J. House’s “A path-goal theory of leader
effectiveness.” The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 305–309.
Fulk, J., & Wendler, E. R. (1982). Dimensionality of leader-
subordinate interactions: A path-goal investigation. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 241–264.
Giambalvo, E. (2019, November 5). Skeptical of P.J. Fleck and his
slogans? So were others, but 8–0 Minnesota believes.
Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/11/05/skeptical-pj-
fleck-his-slogans-so-were-others-minnesota-believes/
Greder, A. (2017, November 17). What is the “spiritual” part of P.J.
Fleck’s Gophers football makeover? St. Paul Pioneer Press.
https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4361595-what-spiritual-
part-pj-flecks-gophers-football-makeover
Halpin, A. W., & Winer, B. J. (1957). A factorial study of the leader
behavior descriptions. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.),
Leader behavior: Its description and measurement (pp. 39–51).
Columbus: The Ohio State University, Bureau of Business
Research, Monograph No. 88.
Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004).
Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male
gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/11/05/skeptical-pj-fleck-his-slogans-so-were-others-minnesota-believes/
https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4361595-what-spiritual-part-pj-flecks-gophers-football-makeover
Hemphill, J. K., & Coons, A. E. (1957). Development of the Leader
Behavior Description Questionnaire. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E.
Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement
(pp. 6–38). Columbus: The Ohio State University, Bureau of
Business Research, Monograph No. 88.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of
leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23(5), 26–34.
House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 321–328.
House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J.
G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge (pp.
189–207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy,
and a reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–
352.
House, R. J., & Dessler, G. (1974). The path-goal theory of
leadership: Some post hoc and a priori tests. In J. Hunt & L.
Larson (Eds.), Contingency approaches in leadership (pp. 29–55).
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
House, R. J., & Mitchell, R. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of
leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business, 3, 81–97.
Indvik, J. (1985). A path-goal theory investigation of superior-
subordinate relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Indvik, J. (1986). Path-goal theory of leadership: A meta-analysis. In
Proceedings of the Academy of Management Meeting (pp. 189–
192). Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management.
Indvik, J. (1988). A more complete testing of path-goal theory. Paper
presented at the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.
Jermier, J. M. (1996). The path-goal theory of leadership: A
subtextual analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 311–316.
Kanfer, R., Frese, M., & Johnson, R. E. (2017). Motivation related to
work: A century of progress. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
102(3), 338–355.
Markgraff, P. (2018). PJ Fleck on coaching your culture. AFCA
Insider. https://insider.afca.com/pj-fleck-coaching-culture/
Mattingly, B. (2017a). Into the fire [Television series episode]. In
Sports Talk with Bo Mattingly and JM Associates (Executive
Producers), Being P.J. Fleck. Bristol, CT: ESPN.
Mattingly, B. (2017b). Sleeping giant [Television series episode]. In
Sports Talk with Bo Mattingly and JM Associates (Executive
Producers), Being P.J. Fleck. Bristol, Connecticut: ESPN.
Mendez, M. J., & Busenbark, J. R. (2015). Shared leadership and
gender: All members are equal . . . but some more than others.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(1), 17–34.
https://insider.afca.com/pj-fleck-coaching-culture/
Nichols, B. (2016, December 31). Whether with dances or costumes,
P.J. Fleck always found ways to motivate Western Michigan all the
way to Cotton Bowl. Dallas News.
Nothaft, P. (2017, October 12). Former WMU coach P.J. Fleck using
past success, failures in Minnesota rebuild. MLive.com.
https://www.mlive.com/sports/2017/10/former_wmu_coach_pj_flec
k_usin.html
Rittenberg, A. (2019, November 8). How P.J. Fleck rebuilt Minnesota
football using batting doughnuts, “The Dig” and the Nekton
mentality. ESPN. https://www.espn.com/college-
football/story/_/id/28028337/how-pj-fleck-rebuilt-minnesota-
football-using-batting-doughnuts-dig-nekton-mentality
Rosette, A. S., Koval, C. Z., Ma, A., & Livingston, R. (2016). Race
matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic
deficiencies and penalties. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 429–
445.
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., Zhou, X., & DeChurch, L. A.
(2006). An investigation of path-goal and transformational
leadership theory predictions at the individual level of analysis.
The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 21–38.
Schriesheim, C. A., & Kerr, S. (1977). Theories and measures of
leadership: A critical appraisal. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.),
Leadership: The cutting edge (pp. 9–45). Carbondale: Southern
Illinois University Press.
Schriesheim, C. A., & Neider, L. L. (1996). Path-goal leadership
theory: The long and winding road. The Leadership Quarterly,
https://www.mlive.com/sports/2017/10/former_wmu_coach_pj_fleck_usin.html
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/28028337/how-pj-fleck-rebuilt-minnesota-football-using-batting-doughnuts-dig-nekton-mentality
7(3), 317–321.
Schriesheim, J. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1980). A test of the path-
goal theory of leadership and some suggested directions for future
research. Personnel Psychology, 33, 349–370.
Stinson, J. E., & Johnson, R. W. (1975). The path-goal theory of
leadership: A partial test and suggested refinement. Academy of
Management Journal, 18, 242–252.
Stogdill, R. M. (1963). Manual for the Leader Behavior Description
Questionnaire form XII. Columbus: The Ohio State University,
Bureau of Business Research.
Stumpf, S. A., Tymon, W. G., Ehr, R. J., & vanDam, N. H. M. (2016).
Leading to intrinsically reward professionals for sustained
engagement. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
37(4), 467–486.
Turner, J. R., Baker, R., & Kellner, F. (2018). Theoretical literature
review: Tracing the life cycle of a theory and its verified and
falsified statements. Human Resource Development Review,
17(1), 34–61.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.
Wofford, J. C., & Liska, L. Z. (1993). Path-goal theories of
leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 19(4), 857–
876.
CHAPTER 7
Anand, S., Hu, J., Liden, R. C., & Vidyarthi, P. R. (2011). Leader–
member exchange: Recent research findings and prospects for
the future. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, G. Jackson, & B.
Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 311–325).
London, UK: Sage.
Atwater, L., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Leader–member exchange,
feelings of energy, and involvement in creative work. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20, 264–275.
Bakar, H. A., & Sheer, V. C. (2013). The mediating role of perceived
cooperative communication in the relationship between
interpersonal exchange relationships and perceived group
cohesion. Management Communication Quarterly, 27, 443–465.
Bernerth, J. B., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Walker,
H. J. (2007). Leader–member social exchange (LMSX):
Development and validation of a scale. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 28, 979–1003.
Buch, R., Kuvaas, B., Dysvik, A., & Schyns, B. (2014). If and when
social and economic leader–member exchange relationships
predict follower work effort. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 35(8), 725–739.
Catmull, E. (2008, September). How Pixar fosters collective
creativity. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2008/09/how-
pixar-fosters-collective-creativity
https://hbr.org/2008/09/how-pixar-fosters-collective-creativity
Cropanzano, R., Dasborough, M. T., & Weiss, H. M. (2017). Affective
events and the development of leader–member exchange.
Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 233–258.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G. B., & Haga, W. (1975). A vertical dyad
linkage approach to leadership in formal organizations.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46–78.
Fairhurst, G., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2012). Organizational discourse
analysis (ODA): Examining leadership as a relational process. The
Leadership Quarterly, 23(6), 1043–1062.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader–
member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827–844.
Gottfredson, R. K., & Aguinis, H. (2017). Leadership behaviors and
follower performance: Deductive and inductive examination of
theoretical rationales and underlying mechanisms. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 38(4), 558–591.
Gottfredson, R. K., Wright, S. L., & Heaphy, E. D. (2020). A critique
of the Leader–Member Exchange construct: Back to square one.
The Leadership Quarterly. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101385
Graen, G. B. (1976). Role-making processes within complex
organizations. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology (pp. 1202–1245). Chicago, IL: Rand
McNally.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101385
Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of
leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In
J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–
166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of
dyadic organizing. In B. Staw & L. L. Cumming (Eds.), Research in
organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 175–208). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1991). The transformation of
professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing
contributions: Toward a theory of leadership making. Journal of
Management Systems, 3(3), 33–48.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to
leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX)
theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level, multi-
domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.
Harris, K. J., Wheeler, A. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2009). Leader–
member exchange and empowerment: Direct and interactive
effects on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and performance.
The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 371–382.
Harter, N., & Evanecky, D. (2002). Fairness in leader–member
exchange theory: Do we all belong on the inside? Leadership
Review, 2(2), 1–7.
Herman, H. M. Tse, & Troth, A. C. (2013). Perceptions and emotional
experiences in differential supervisor-subordinate relationships.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(3), 271–283.
Hill, L. (2014, September). How to manage for collective creativity
[Video file]. TEDxCambridge.
https://www.ted.com/talks/linda_hill_how_to_manage_for_collectiv
e_creativity
Hill, N. S., Kang, J. H., & Seo, M. (2014). The interactive effect of
leader–member exchange and electronic communication on
employee psychological empowerment and work outcomes. The
Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 772–783.
Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader–member
exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92(1), 269–277.
Katz, D. (1964). Motivational basis of organizational behavior.
Behavioral Science, 9, 131–146.
Kelley, K. M. (2014). Leaders’ narrative sensemaking during LMX
role negotiations: Explaining how leaders make sense of who to
trust and when. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(3), 433–448.
Lee, A., Thomas, G., Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., & Marstand, A. F.
(2019). Beyond relationship quality: The role of leader–member
exchange importance in leader–follower dyads. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(4), 736–763.
Liao, Z., Liu, W., Li, X., & Song, Z. (2019). Give and take: An
episodic perspective on leader–member exchange. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 104(1), 34–51.
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–
member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale
development. Journal of Management, 24, 43–72.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study
on the early development of leader–member exchange. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 78, 662–674.
Madlock, P. E., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2012). The influence of
relational maintenance strategies among coworkers. Journal of
Business Communication, 49, 21–47.
Malik, M., Wan, D., Ahmad, M. I., Naseem, M. A., & Rehman, R. ur.
(2015). The role of LMX in employees’ job motivation, satisfaction,
empowerment, stress and turnover: Cross country analysis.
Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 31(5), 1897–2000.
Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O.
(2016). Leader–member exchange (LMX) and performance: A
meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67–121.
Maslyn, J. M., Schyns, B., & Farmer, S. M. (2017). Attachment style
and leader–member exchange. Leadership and Organization
Development Journal, 38(3), 450–462.
Matta, F. K., & Van Dyne, L. (2020). Understanding the disparate
behavioral consequences of LMX differentiation: The role of social
comparison emotions. Academy of Management Review, 45(1),
154–180.
McClane, W. E. (1991). Implications of member role differentiation:
Analysis of a key concept in the LMX model of leadership. Group
& Organization Studies, 16(1), 102–113.
Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, R. P., & Ilies, R. (2009). The
development of leader–member exchanges: Exploring how
personality and performance influence leader and member
relationships over time. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 108, 256–266.
Omilion-Hodges, L. M., & Baker, C. R. (2017). Communicating
leader–member relationship quality: The development of leader
communication exchange scales to measure relationship building
and maintenance through the exchange of communication-based
goods. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(2),
115–145.
Omilion-Hodges, L. M., Ptacek, J. K., & Zerilli, D. H. (2015). A
comprehensive review and communication research agenda of the
contextualized workgroup: The evolution and future of leader–
member exchange, coworker exchange, and team-member
exchange. In E. L. Cohen (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol.
40, pp. 343–377). New York, NY: Routledge.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good
soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Randolph-Seng, B., Cogliser, C. C., Randolph, A. F., Scandura, T.
A., Miller, C. D., & Smith-Genthôs, R. (2016). Diversity in
leadership: Race in leader–member exchanges. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 37(6), 750–773.
Rockstuhl, T., Dulebohn, J. H., Ang, S., & Shore, L. M. (2012).
Leader–member exchange (LMX) and culture: A meta-analysis of
correlates of LMX across 23 countries. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 97(6), 1097.
Scandura, T. A. (1999). Rethinking leader–member exchange: An
organizational justice perspective. The Leadership Quarterly,
10(1), 25–40.
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999). Leader–
member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of
theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices. The Leadership
Quarterly, 10, 63–113.
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., Zhou, X., & Yammarino, F. J.
(2001). The folly of theorizing “A” but testing “B”: A selective level-
of-analysis review of the field and a detailed leader–member
exchange illustration. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 515–551.
Sheer, V. C. (2014). “Exchange lost” in leader–member exchange
theory and research: A critique and a reconceptualization.
Leadership, 11, 1–17.
Sparrowe, R. T., & Liden, R. C. (2005). Two routes to influence:
Integrating leader–member exchange and social network
perspectives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4), 505–535.
Uhl-Bien, M., Maslyn, J., & Ospina, S. (2012). The nature of
relational leadership: A multitheoretical lens on leadership
relationships and processes. In D. V. Day & J. Antonakis (Eds.),
The nature of leadership (2nd ed., pp. 289–330). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Volmer, J., Spurk, D., & Niessen, C. (2012). Leader–member
exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement.
The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 456–465.
Xu, A. J., Loi, R., Cai, Z., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Reversing the lens:
How followers influence leader–member exchange quality. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(3), 475–497.
Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations (3rd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
CHAPTER 8
Andersen, J. A. (2015). Barking up the wrong tree: On the fallacies
of the transformational leadership theory. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 36(6), 765–777.
Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (2017).
What works for you may not work for (Gen)me: Limitations of
present leadership theories for the new generation. The
Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 245–260.
Antonakis, J. (2012). Transformational and charismatic leadership. In
D. V. Day & J. Antonakis (Eds.), The nature of leadership (2nd ed.,
pp. 256–288). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context
and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range
leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.
The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261–295.
Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental leadership:
Measurement and extension of transformational transactional
leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 746–771.
Arthur, C. A., & Hardy, L. (2014). Transformational leadership: A
quasi-experimental study. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 35(1), 38–53.
Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital
forces in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Avolio, B. J., & Gibbons, T. C. (1988). Developing transformational
leaders: A life span approach. In J. A. Conger, R. N. Kanungo, &
Associates (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in
organizational effectiveness (pp. 276–308). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Bailey, J., & Axelrod, R. H. (2001). Leadership lessons from Mount
Rushmore: An interview with James MacGregor Burns. The
Leadership Quarterly, 12, 113–127.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond
expectations. New York, NY: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational
leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics,
18, 19–31.
Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional–transformational
leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national
boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130–139.
Bass, B. M. (1998). The ethics of transformational leadership. In J.
Ciulla (Ed.), Ethics: The heart of leadership (pp. 169–192).
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990a). The implications of transactional
and transformational leadership for individual, team, and
organizational development. Research in Organizational Change
and Development, 4, 231–272.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990b). Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership: A
response to critiques. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.),
Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions (pp.
49–80). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational
effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire for research. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership
(2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and
authentic transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
10, 181–217.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for
taking charge. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for
taking charge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Boehm, S. A., Dwertmann, D. J. G., Bruch, H., & Shamir, B. (2015).
The missing link? Investigating organizational identity strength and
transformational leadership climate as mechanisms that connect
CEO charisma with firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly,
26(2), 156–171.
Brandt, T., & Laiho, M. (2013). Gender and personality in
transformational leadership context. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 34(1), 44–66.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations.
London, UK: SAGE.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Caza, A., & Posner, B. Z. (2019). How and when does grit influence
leaders’ behavior? Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 40(1), 124–134.
Chibanda, D. (2017a, June 15). How a community-based approach
to mental health is making strides in Zimbabwe. The Conversation.
https://theconversation.com/how-a-community-based-approach-to-
mental-health-is-making-strides-in-zimbabwe-79312
Chibanda, D. (2017b, May 16). The grandmothers who save lives.
Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/world/global-
development/la-fg-global-dixon-chibanda-oped-20170516-
story.html
Chibanda, D. (2017c). Why I train grandmothers to treat depression
[Video file]. TEDWomen2017.
https://www.ted.com/talks/dixon_chibanda_why_i_train_grandmoth
ers_to_treat_depression
https://theconversation.com/how-a-community-based-approach-to-mental-health-is-making-strides-in-zimbabwe-79312
https://www.latimes.com/world/global-development/la-fg-global-dixon-chibanda-oped-20170516-story.html
Christie, A., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2011). Pseudo-transformational
leadership: Model specification and outcomes. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 44(12), 2943–2984.
Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in
organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing
streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145–179.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1998). Charismatic leadership in
organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Credé, M., Jong, J., & Harms, P. (2019). The generalizability of
transformational leadership across cultures: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(3), 139–155.
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C.,
& Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new
millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives.
The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62.
Dong, Y., Bartol, K. M., Zhang, Z.-X., & Li, C. (2017). Enhancing
employee creativity via individual skill development and team
knowledge sharing: Influences of dual-focused transformational
leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 439–458.
Gilbert, S., Horsman, P., & Kelloway, E. K. (2016). The motivation for
transformational leadership scale. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 37(2), 158–180.
Hamstra, M. R., Van Yperen, N. W., Wisse, B., & Sassenberg, K.
(2014). Transformational and transactional leadership and
followers’ achievement goals. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 29(3), 413–425.
Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2008). A theoretical and
empirical examination of the transactional and non-leadership
dimensions of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ).
The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 501–513.
House, R. J. (1976). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J.
G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge (pp.
189–207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). The ethics of charismatic
leadership: Submission or liberation? Academy of Management
Executive, 6(2), 43–54.
Hunt, J. G., & Conger, J. A. (1999). From where we sit: An
assessment of transformational and charismatic leadership
research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(3), 335–343.
Jung, D. I., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational
leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses
and some preliminary findings. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(4–5),
525–544.
Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J., Chen, Z. X., & Lowe, K. B. (2009).
Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to
transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination.
Academy of Management Journal, 52, 744–764.
Knippenberg, D. van, & Sitkin, S. B. (2013). A critical assessment of
charismatic–transformational leadership research: Back to the
drawing board? The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 1–60.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017a). The leadership challenge:
How to get extraordinary things done in organizations (6th ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2017b). Who you are isn’t who you will be.
Leader to Leader, 83, 30–34.
Kuhnert, K. W. (1994). Transforming leadership: Developing people
through delegation. In B. M. Bass & B. J. Avolio (Eds.), Improving
organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership
(pp. 10–25). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kuhnert, K. W., & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and
transformational leadership: A constructive/developmental
analysis. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 648–657.
Landay, K., Harms, P. D., & Credé, M. (2019). Shall we serve the
dark lords? A meta-analytic review of psychopathy and leadership.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(1), 183–196.
Lovelace, J. B., Neely, B. H., Allen, J. B., & Hunter, S. T. (2019).
Charismatic, ideological, & pragmatic (CIP) model of leadership: A
critical review and agenda for future research. The Leadership
Quarterly, 30(1), 96–110.
Lowe, K. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2001). Ten years of The Leadership
Quarterly: Contributions and challenges for the future. The
Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 459–514.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996).
Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional
leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature. The
Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 385–425.
Mason, C., Griffin, M., & Parker, S. (2014). Transformational
leadership development: Connecting psychological and behavioral
change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(3),
174–194.
Mohammed, Y. G., Fernando, M., & Caputi, P. (2013).
Transformational leadership and work engagement. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 34(6), 532–550.
Nemanich, L. A., & Keller, R. T. (2007). Transformational leadership
in an acquisition: A field study of employees. The Leadership
Quarterly, 18, 49–68.
Ng, E. S., Schweitzer, L., & Lyons, S. T. (2010). New generation,
great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 281–292.
Nicholls, J. (1988). Transforming leadership in organisations:
Bringing meta “visioning” into the macro leadership role. European
Management Journal, 6(3), 269–276.
Notgrass, D. (2014). The relationship between followers’ perceived
quality of relationship and preferred leadership style. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 35(7), 605–621.
Nuwer, R. (2018, October 16). How a bench and a team of
grandmothers can tackle depression. BBC.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181015-how-one-bench-and-
a-team-of-grandmothers-can-beat-depression
Posner, B. Z. (2016). Investigating the reliability and validity of the
Leadership Practices Inventory®. Administrative Sciences, 6(4),
17. doi:10.3390/admsci6040017
Puni, A., Mohammed, I., & Asamoah, E. (2018). Transformational
leadership and job satisfaction: The moderating effect of
contingent reward. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 39(4), 522–537.
Rowold, J., & Heinitz, K. (2007). Transformational and charismatic
leadership: Assessing the convergent, divergent and criterion
validity of the MLQ and the CKS. The Leadership Quarterly, 18,
121–133.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational
effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory.
Organization Science, 4(4), 577–594.
Sosik, J. J., & Jung, D. I. (2010). Full range leadership development:
Pathways for people, profit, and planet. New York, NY: Psychology
Press.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181015-how-one-bench-and-a-team-of-grandmothers-can-beat-depression
Tejeda, M. J., Scandura, T. A., & Pillai, R. (2001). The MLQ revisited:
Psychometric properties and recommendations. The Leadership
Quarterly, 12, 31–52.
Tengblad, S. (2012). The work of managers: Towards a practice
theory of management. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2011). Do
transformational leaders enhance their followers’ daily work
engagement? The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 121–131.
Tourish, D. (2013). The dark side of transformational leadership: A
critical perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.
Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. R. (1998). Transformational leadership or
effective managerial practices? Group & Organization
Management, 23(3), 220–236.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations
(T. Parsons, trans.). New York, NY: Free Press.
World Health Organization. (2018). Dixon Chibanda: Grandmothers
help to scale up mental health care. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, 96(6), 376–377.
Yammarino, F. J. (1993). Transforming leadership studies: Bernard
Bass’ leadership and performance beyond expectations. The
Leadership Quarterly, 4(3), 379–382.
Yang, I. (2015). Positive effects of laissez-faire leadership:
Conceptual exploration. The Journal of Management
Development, 34(10), 1246–1261.
Yukl, G. A. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in
transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The
Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
Zhu, W., Avolio, B. J., Riggio, R. E., & Sosik, J. J. (2011). The effect
of authentic transformational leadership on follower and group
ethics. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 801–817.
CHAPTER 9
Alvesson, M., & Einola, K. (2019). Warning for excessive positivity:
Authentic leadership and other traps in leadership studies. The
Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 383–395.
Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (2017).
What works for you may not work for (Gen)me: Limitations of
present leadership theories for the new generation. The
Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 245–260.
Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership
development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership.
The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315–338.
Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership:
Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review
of Psychology, 60, 421–449.
Avolio, B. J., & Wernsing, T. S. (2008). Practicing authentic
leadership. Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people, 4,
147–165.
Avolio, B. J., Wernsing, T., & Gardner, W. L. (2018). Revisiting the
development and validation of the authentic leadership
questionnaire: Analytical clarifications. Journal of Management,
44(2), 399–411.
Azanza, G., Moriano, J. A., Molero, F., & Lévy Mangin, J. (2015).
The effects of authentic leadership on turnover intention.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(8), 955–971.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York,
NY: Freeman.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Handbook of leadership. New York, NY: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and
authentic transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
10, 181–217.
Brown, B. (2010). The power of vulnerability [Video file]. TED.
https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_the_power_of_vulnerabilit
y
Brown, B. (2012). Listening to shame [Video file]. TED.
Brown, B. (2017). Braving the wilderness: The quest for true
belonging and the courage to stand alone. New York, NY: Random
House.
Brown, B. (2019a). Official bio. Brené Brown.
https://Brenebrown.com/media-kit/
Brown, B. (2019b). Research. Brené Brown.
https://Brenebrown.com/the-research/
Brown, B. (2019c, May 1). Let’s rumble [Blog post]. Brené Brown.
https://Brenebrown.com/blog/2019/05/01/lets-rumble/
https://brenebrown.com/media-kit/
https://brenebrown.com/the-research/
https://brenebrown.com/blog/2019/05/01/lets-rumble/
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003). Foundations of
positive organizational scholarship. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton,
& R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 3–
13). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Chan, A. (2005). Authentic leadership measurement and
development: Challenges and suggestions. In W. L. Gardner, B. J.
Avolio, & F. O. Walumbwa (Eds.), Authentic leadership theory and
practice: Origins, effects, and development (pp. 227–251). Oxford,
UK: Elsevier Science.
Cianci, A. M., Hannah, S. T., Roberts, R. P., & Tsakumis, G. T.
(2014). The effects of authentic leadership on followers’ ethical
decision-making in the face of temptation: An experimental study.
The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 581–594.
Cooper, C., Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2005). Looking
forward but learning from our past: Potential challenges to
developing authentic leadership theory and authentic leaders. The
Leadership Quarterly, 116, 474–495.
Covey, S. R. (1990). Principle-centered leadership. New York, NY:
Fireside.
Dalton, K. (2002). Theodore Roosevelt: A strenuous life. New York,
NY: Knopf.
Eagly, A. H. (2005). Achieving relational authenticity in leadership:
Does gender matter? The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 459–474.
Efros, D., Findlay, D., & Mussman, J. (Producers), & Restrepo, S.
(Director). (2019). Brené Brown: The call to courage [Video file].
Netflix. https://www.netflix.com/title/81010166
Fry, L. W., & Whittington, J. L. (2005). In search of authenticity:
Spiritual leadership theory as a source for future theory, research,
and practice on authentic leadership. In W. Gardner, B. J. Avolio,
& F. O. Walumbwa (Eds.), Authentic leadership theory and
practice: Origins, effects, and development (pp. 183–202). Oxford,
UK: Elsevier Science.
Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumbwa,
F. O. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A self-based model of
authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership
Quarterly, 16, 343–372.
Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2005a). Authentic
leadership theory and practice: Origins, effects and development
(Monographs in leadership and management, vol. 3). Bingley, UK:
Emerald Group.
Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2005b). Authentic
leadership development: Emergent trends and future directions. In
W. L. Gardner, B. J. Avolio, & F. O. Walumbwa (Eds.), Authentic
leadership theory and practice: Origins, effects, and development
(pp. 387–406). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Gatling, A., Kang, H. J. A., & Kim, J. S. (2016). The effects of
authentic leadership and organizational commitment on turnover
intention. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(2),
181–199.
https://www.netflix.com/title/81010166
George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets
to creating lasting value. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
George, B., & Sims, P. (2007). True north: Discover your authentic
leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gill, C., & Caza, A. (2018). An investigation of authentic leadership’s
individual and group influences on follower responses. Journal of
Management, 44(2), 530–554.
Helgesen, S. (1981). Wildcatters: A story of Texans, oil, and money.
New York, NY: Doubleday.
Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of
leadership. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Hirst, G., Walumbwa, F., Aryee, S., Butarbutar, I., & Chen, C. J. H.
(2016). A multi-level investigation of authentic leadership as an
antecedent of helping behavior. Journal of Business Ethics,
139(3), 485–499.
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do
ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above
and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal
of Management, 44(2), 501–529.
Howard Schultz: Starbucks’ first mate. (2008, October 10).
Entrepreneur. Retrieved from
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197692
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197692
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). The ethics of charismatic
leadership: Submission or liberation? Academy of Management
Executive, 6(2), 43–54.
Hu, Y., Wu, X., Zong, Z., Xiao, Y., Maguire, P., Qu, F., Wei, J., &
Wang, D. (2018). Authentic leadership and proactive behavior:
The role of psychological capital and compassion at work.
Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2470.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02470
Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic
leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader-
follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 373–394.
Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-
esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 1–26.
Kumar, A. (2014). Authentic leadership and psychological
ownership: Investigation of interrelations. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 35(4), 266–285.
Lemoine, G. J., Hartnell, C. A., & Leroy, H. (2019). Taking stock of
moral approaches to leadership: An integrative review of ethical,
authentic, and servant leadership. Academy of Management
Annals, 13(1), 148–187.
Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Gardner, W., & Sels, L. (2015). Authentic
leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and
work role performance: A cross-level study. Journal of
Management, 41(6), 1677–1697.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02470
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership
development. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn
(Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–258). San
Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Lyubovnikova, J., Legood, A., Turner, N., & Mamakouka, A. (2017).
How authentic leadership influences team performance: The
mediating role of team reflexivity. Journal of Business Ethics,
141(1), 59–70.
Miao, C., Humphrey, R., & Qian, S. (2018). Emotional intelligence
and authentic leadership: A meta-analysis. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 39(5), 679–690.
Mintz, S. (2015, September 9). Is Donald Trump an authentic
leader? Ethics Sage. http://www.ethicssage.com/2015/09/is-
donald-trump-an-authentic-leader-.html
Peus, C., Wescher, J. S., Streicher, B., Braun, S., & Frey, S. (2012).
Authentic leadership: An empirical test of its antecedents,
consequences, and mediating mechanisms. Journal of Business
Ethics, 107(3), 331–348.
Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., & Pina e Cunha, M. (2012).
Authentic leadership promoting employees’ psychological capital
and creativity. Journal of Business Research, 65(3), 429–437.
Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., & Pina e Cunha, M. (2014). Hope
and positive affect mediating the authentic leadership and
creativity relationship. Journal of Business Research, 67(2), 200–
210.
http://www.ethicssage.com/2015/09/is-donald-trump-an-authentic-leader-.html
Semedo, A. S. D., Coelho, A. F. M., & Ribeiro, N. M. P. (2016).
Effects of authentic leadership, affective commitment and job
resourcefulness on employees’ creativity and individual
performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
37(8), 1038–1055.
Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). “What’s your story?” A life-stories
approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership
Quarterly, 16, 395–417.
Sidani, Y. M., & Rowe, W. G. (2018). A reconceptualization of
authentic leadership: Leader legitimation via follower-centered
assessment of the moral dimension. The Leadership Quarterly,
29(6), 623–636.
Stander, F. W., Beer, L. T. de, & Stander, M. W. (2015). Authentic
leadership as a source of optimism, trust in the organisation and
work engagement in the public health care sector. SA Journal of
Human Resource Management, 13(1), 1–12.
Steffens, N. K., Mols, F., Haslam, S. A., & Okimoto, T. G. (2016).
True to what we stand for: Championing collective interests as a
path to authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(5),
726–744.
Sutcliffe, K. M., & Vogus, T. J. (2003). Organizing for resilience. In K.
S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive
organizational scholarship (pp. 94–110). San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler.
TED. (n.d.). The most popular talks of all time [Video file].
https://www.ted.com/playlists/171/the_most_popular_talks_of_all
https://www.ted.com/playlists/171/the_most_popular_talks_of_all
Terry Fox Foundation. (2017). http://www.terryfox.org/
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., &
Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and
validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management,
34(1), 89–126.
Wang, H., Sui, Y., Luthans, F., Wang, D., & Wu, Y. (2014). Impact of
authentic leadership on performance: Role of followers’ positive
psychological capital and relational processes. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 35, 5–21.
Wei, F., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., & Liu, S. (2018). The interactive effect of
authentic leadership and leader competency on followers’ job
performance: The mediating role of work engagement. Journal of
Business Ethics, 153(3), 763–773.
Winfrey, O. (2013, March 17). Dr. Brené Brown’s vulnerability
breakdown [Television series episode]. In O. Winfrey (Producer),
SuperSoul Sunday. West Hollywood, CA: Oprah Winfrey Network
(OWN).
Xu, B., Zhao, S., Li, C., & Lin, C. (2017). Authentic leadership and
employee creativity: Testing the multilevel mediation model.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(3), 482–498.
Yavuz, M. (2020). Transformational leadership and authentic
leadership as practical implications of positive organizational
psychology. In E. Baykal (Ed.), Handbook of research on positive
organizational behavior for improved workplace performance (pp.
122–139). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
CHAPTER 10
Alverà, M. (2017). The surprising ingredient that makes businesses
work better [Video file]. TED@BCG Milan.
https://www.ted.com/talks/marco_Alvera_the_surprising_ingredient
_that_makes_businesses_work_better
Bande, B., Fernández-Ferrín, P., Varela-Neira, C., & Otero-Neira, C.
(2016). Exploring the relationship among servant leadership,
intrinsic motivation and performance in an industrial sales setting.
The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(2), 219–231.
Bao, Y., Li, C., & Zhao, H. (2018). Servant leadership and
engagement: A dual mediation model. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 33(6), 406–417.
Barbuto, J. E., Jr., Gottfredson, R. K., & Searle, T. P. (2014). An
examination of emotional intelligence as an antecedent of servant
leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(3),
315.
Barbuto, J. E., Jr., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and
construct clarification of servant leadership. Group and
Organizational Management, 31, 300–326.
Bauer, T. N., Perrot, S., Liden, R. C., & Erdogan, B. (2019).
Understanding the consequences of newcomer proactive
behaviors: The moderating contextual role of servant leadership.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 356–368.
Beck, C. D. (2014). Antecedents of servant leadership: A mixed
methods study. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
21(3), 299.
Bennis, W. (2002). Become a tomorrow leader. In L. C. Spears & M.
Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership for the
twenty-first century (pp. 101–110). New York, NY: Wiley.
Blanchard, K., & Hodges, P. (2003). The servant leader:
Transforming your hearts, heads, hands, and habits. Nashville,
TN: Thomas Nelson.
Chen, Z., Zhu, J., & Zhou, M. (2015). How does a servant leader fuel
the service fire? A multilevel model of servant leadership,
individual self identity, group competition climate, and customer
service performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 511–
521.
Chiniara, M., & Bentein, K. (2016). Linking servant leadership to
individual performance: Differentiating the mediating role of
autonomy, competence and relatedness need satisfaction. The
Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 124.
Coetzer, M. F., Bussin, M., & Geldenhuys, M. (2017). The functions
of a servant leader. Administrative Sciences, 7(1), 5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci7010005
Covey, S. R. (2002). Foreword. In R. K. Greenleaf (Ed.), Servant
leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness (pp. 1–14). New York, NY: Paulist Press.
Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the servant
leadership assessment instrument. Leadership & Organization
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci7010005
Development Journal, 26, 600–615.
DePree, M. (2002). Servant-leadership: Three things necessary. In
L. C. Spears & M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership: Servant-
leadership for the twenty-first century (pp. 27–34). New York, NY:
Wiley.
Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as
antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior.
Personnel Psychology, 57, 61–94.
Elliott, S. (2018, June 7). View from the top: An interview with Marco
Alverà, Snam CEO [Video file]. S&P Global Platts.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?
q=marco+Alverà&&view=detail&mid=A610E9158A05C05711AAA6
10E9158A05C05711AA&&FORM=VDRVRV
Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R.
C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for
future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111–132.
Gandolfi, F., & Stone, S. (2018). Leadership, leadership styles, and
servant leadership. Journal of Management Research, 18(4), 261–
269.
Gergen, D. (2006, June 11). Bad news for bullies. U.S. News and
World Report, 140, 54.
Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant leadership in organizations:
Inspirational and moral. The Leadership Quarterly, 2, 105–119.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Westfield, IN:
Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1972). The institution as servant. Westfield, IN:
Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the
nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York, NY: Paulist
Press.
Hale, J. R., & Fields, D. L. (2007). Exploring servant leadership
across cultures: A study of followers in Ghana and the USA.
Leadership, 3, 397–417.
Hesse, H. (1956). The journey to the East. London, UK: P. Owen.
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do
ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above
and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal
of Management, 44(2), 501–529.
Hu, J., & Liden, R. C. (2011). Antecedents of team potency and team
effectiveness: An examination of goal and process clarity and
servant leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 851–
862.
Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., &
Weinberger, E. (2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers:
Antecedent and outcomes for employees and the organization.
The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316–331.
Kidder, T. (2003). Mountains beyond mountains: The quest of Dr.
Paul Farmer, a man who would cure the world. New York, NY:
Random House.
Knowledge@Wharton. (2008, July 9). Southwest Airlines’ Colleen
Barrett flies high on fuel hedging and “servant leadership.”
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2006
Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development
of the servant organizational leadership assessment (SOLA)
instrument. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(2), 308. (UMI
No. 9921922)
Lemoine, G. J., Hartnell, C. A., & Leroy, H. (2019). Taking stock of
moral approaches to leadership: An integrative review of ethical,
authentic, and servant leadership. Academy of Management
Annals, 13(1), 148–187.
Liden, R. C., Panaccio, A., Hu, J., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant
leadership: Antecedents, consequences, and contextual
moderators. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of
leadership and organizations (pp. 357–379). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Meuser, J. D., Hu, J., Wu, J., & Liao, C.
(2015). Servant leadership: Validation of a short form of the SL-28.
The Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 254–269.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008).
Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure
and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 161–
177.
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2006
Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Henderson, D. J. (2011,
August). Is servant leadership always a good thing? The
moderating influence of servant leadership prototype. Paper
presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, San
Antonio, TX.
Neubert, M. J., Kacmar, K. M., Carlson, D. S., Chonko, L. B., &
Roberts, J. A. (2008). Regulatory focus as a mediator of the
influence of initiating structure and servant leadership on
employee behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1220–
1233.
Newman, A., Schwarz, G., Cooper, B., & Sendjaya, S. (2017). How
servant leadership influences organizational citizenship behavior:
The roles of LMX, empowerment, and proactive personality.
Journal of Business Ethics, 145(1), 49–62.
Otero-Neira, C., Varela-Neira, C., & Bande, B. (2016). Supervisory
servant leadership and employee’s work role performance.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(7), 860–881.
Ozyilmaz, A., & Cicek, S. S. (2015). How does servant leadership
affect employee attitudes, behaviors, and psychological climates in
a for-profit organizational context? Journal of Management and
Organization, 27(3), 263–290.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2014.80
Page, D., & Wong, P. (2000). A conceptual framework for measuring
servant-leadership. In S. Adjibolosoo (Ed.), The human factor in
shaping the course of history and development (pp. 69–110).
Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2014.80
Partners In Health. (2011). History.
http://www.pih.org/pages/partners-in-health-history.html
Partners In Health. (2013). 2013 annual report.
http://www.pih.org/pages/2013-annual-report
Patterson, K. A. (2003). Servant leadership: A theoretical model
(Doctoral dissertation, Regent University, ATT 30882719).
Ronen, Z. (2018, May 9). On the power of fairness in generating
employee motivation. Ze’ev Ronen-Business Excellence.
https://business-excellence.co.il/en/my-blog/634-fairness-
motivation
Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant-leadership
attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 23, 145–157.
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S. K., & Peng, A. C. (2011). Cognition-
based and affect-based trust as mediators of leader behavior
influences on team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,
96(4), 863–871.
Sendjaya, S., & Sarros, J. C. (2002). Servant leadership: Its origin,
development, and application in organizations. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(2), 57–64.
Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining and
measuring servant leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal
of Management Studies, 45(2), 402–424.
http://www.pih.org/pages/partners-in-health-history.html
http://www.pih.org/pages/2013-annual-report
https://business-excellence.co.il/en/my-blog/634-fairness-motivation
Senge, P. M. (2002). Afterword. In R. K. Greenleaf (Ed.), Servant
leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness (pp. 343–360). New York, NY: Paulist Press.
Sousa, M., & van Dierendonck, D. (2017). Servant leadership and
the effect of the interaction between humility, action, and
hierarchical power on follower engagement. Journal of Business
Ethics, 141(1), 13–25.
Spears, L. C. (2002). Tracing the past, present, and future of
servant-leadership. In L. C. Spears & M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus
on leadership: Servant-leadership for the 21st century (pp. 1–16).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Spears, L. C. (2010). Servant leadership and Robert K. Greenleaf’s
legacy. In D. van Dierendonck & K. Patterson (Eds.), Servant
leadership: Developments in theory and research (pp. 11–24).
New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
UniBocconi. (2019, September 20). Executive chat with Marco
Alverà, CEO of Snam [Video file].
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?
q=marco+Alverà&&view=detail&mid=438956C3E9633D33657743
8956C3E9633D336577&&FORM=VDRVRV
van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and
synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261.
van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The servant leadership
survey: Development and validation of a multidimensional
measure. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 249–267.
Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant
leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee
attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level
investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 517–529.
Wang, M. M., Kwan, H. K., & Zhou, A. Q. (2017). Effects of servant
leadership on work-family balance in China. Asia Pacific Journal of
Human Resources, 55(4): 387–407.
Wheatley, M. (2002). The work of the servant leader. In L. C. Spears
& M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership
for the twenty-first century (pp. 349–362). New York, NY: Wiley.
Whittington, J. L. (2017). Creating a positive organization through
servant leadership. In C. J. Davis (Ed.), Servant leadership and
followership (pp. 51–79). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan,
Cham.
Williams, W. A., Randolph-Seng, B., Hayek, M., Haden, S. P., &
Atinc, G. (2017). Servant leadership and followership creativity:
The influence of workplace spirituality and political skill.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(2), 178–193.
Winston, B., & Fields, D. (2015). Seeking and measuring the
essential behaviors of servant leadership. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 36(4), 413–434.
Wong, P. T. P., & Davey, D. (2007). Best practices in servant
leadership. Paper presented at the Servant Leadership Research
Roundtable, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.
Wu, J., Liden, R. C., Liao, C., & Wayne, S. J. (2020, April 9). Does
manager servant leadership lead to follower serving behaviors? It
depends on follower self-interest. Journal of Applied Psychology.
Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000500
CHAPTER 11
Adams, J. A., Bailey, D. E., Jr., Anderson, R. A., & Galanos, A. N.
(2013). Adaptive leadership: A novel approach for family decision
making. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 16(3), 326–329.
Adams, J. A., Bailey, D. E., Jr., Anderson, R. A., & Thygeson, M.
(2013). Finding your way through EOL challenges in the ICU using
adaptive leadership behaviours: A qualitative descriptive case
study. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 29, 329–336.
Audette, B. (2019a, November 11). Town struggles with Marlboro
closure plan. Battleboro Reformer.
https://www.reformer.com/stories/town-struggles-with-marlboro-
college-closure-plan,589942
Audette, B. (2019b, December 16). Marlboro board chairman
defends decision. Bennington Banner.
https://www.benningtonbanner.com/stories/marlboro-board-
chairman-defends-merger-decision,592654
Audette, B. (2020, January 17). Marlboro College alum, former
administrator laments “missed opportunity.” Berkshire Eagle.
https://www.berkshireeagle.com/stories/marlboro-college-alum-
former-administrator-laments-missed-opportunity,595009?
Benzie, H. J., Pryce, A., & Smith, K. (2017). The wicked problem of
embedding academic literacies: Exploring rhizomatic ways of
working through an adaptive leadership approach. Higher
Education Research & Development, 36(2), 227–240.
https://www.reformer.com/stories/town-struggles-with-marlboro-college-closure-plan
https://www.benningtonbanner.com/stories/marlboro-board-chairman-defends-merger-decision
https://www.berkshireeagle.com/stories/marlboro-college-alum-former-administrator-laments-missed-opportunity,595009?
Corazzini, K., Twersky, J., White, H. K., Buhr, G. T., McConnell, E.
S., Weiner, M., & Colón-Emeric, C. S. (2014). Implementing
culture change in nursing homes: An adaptive leadership
framework. The Gerontologist, 55(4), 616–627.
DeRue, D. S. (2011). Adaptive leadership theory: Leading and
following as a complex adaptive process. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 31, 125–150.
Eubank, D., Geffken, D., Orzano, J., & Ricci, R. (2012, September).
Teaching adaptive leadership to family medicine residents: What?
Why? How? Families, Systems & Health, 30(3), 241–252.
Gilbert, N. L. (2013). The challenges of starting and leading a charter
school: Examining the risks, the resistance, and the role of
adaptive leadership—An autoethnography (Dissertation, University
of Pennsylvania, AAI3562369).
Halpert, M., & Rosenfeld, E. (2014, May 21). Depressed, but not
ashamed. New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/22/opinion/depressed-but-not-
ashamed.html
Harlow, T. (2019, December 12). Declining enrollment prompts staff,
budget cuts at Bethel University. Star Tribune.
http://www.startribune.com/declining-enrollment-prompts-staff-
budget-cuts-at-bethel-university/566126311
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press.
http://www.startribune.com/declining-enrollment-prompts-staff-budget-cuts-at-bethel-university/566126311
Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of
adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your
organization and the world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press.
Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (1997). The work of leadership.
Harvard Business Review, 7(1), 124–134.
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line: Staying
alive through the dangers of leading. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Heifetz, R. A., Sinder, R., Jones, A., Hodge, L., & Rowley, K. (1991).
Teaching and assessing leadership courses: Part one. Phi Kappa
Phi Journal (Winter), 21–25.
Hess, A. (2019, December 13). The cost of college increased by
more than 25% in the last 10 years—here’s why. CNBC.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/13/cost-of-college-increased-by-
more-than-25percent-in-the-last-10-years.html
Hlalele, D., Manicom, D., Preece, J., & Tsotetsi, C. T. (2015).
Strategies and outcomes of involving university students in
community engagement: An adaptive leadership perspective.
JHEA/RESA, 13(1&2), 169–193.
Jaschik, S. (2019, January 24). Another small college will close.
Inside HigherEd.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/24/green-
mountain-latest-small-college-close.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/13/cost-of-college-increased-by-more-than-25percent-in-the-last-10-years.html
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/24/green-mountain-latest-small-college-close
Klau, M., & Hufnagel, J. (2016). Strengthening communities through
adaptive leadership: A case study of the Kansas Leadership
Center and the Bangladesh Youth Leadership Center. In Creative
social change: Leadership for a healthy world (pp. 279–294).
Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
Lapierre, L. M., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership: What is it and
why do people follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
Marlboro College. (2019). What’s next for Marlboro: Work continues
on options for Marlboro’s future. Marlboro College News.
https://www.marlboro.edu/community/news/what-is-next-for-
marlboro/updates/?id=14
Marlboro College Board of Trustees. (2019). What’s next for
Marlboro: Open letter from Marlboro College Board of Trustees.
Marlboro College News.
https://www.marlboro.edu/community/news/what-is-next-for-
marlboro/updates/?id=42&fbclid=IwAR2-
mlBBVo0BOmPoGGXLdgdi5SyZkNPzi24gZUY9ue7-
ulqGyVZsZ1pukq4
Marques-Quinteiro, P., Ramos-Villagrasa, P., Passos, A. M., &
Curral, L. (2015). Measuring adaptive performance in individuals
and teams. Team Performance Management, 21(7–8), 339–360.
Modell, A. H. (1976). The “holding environment” and the therapeutic
action of psychoanalysis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic
Association, 24(2), 285–307.
Mugisha, S., & Berg, S. V. (2017). Adaptive leadership in water utility
operations: The case of Uganda. Sustainable Water Resources
https://www.marlboro.edu/community/news/what-is-next-for-marlboro/updates/?id=14
https://www.marlboro.edu/community/news/what-is-next-for-marlboro/updates/?id=42&fbclid=IwAR2-mlBBVo0BOmPoGGXLdgdi5SyZkNPzi24gZUY9ue7-ulqGyVZsZ1pukq4
Management, 1–9.
Nadworny, E., & Larkin, M. (2019, December 16). Fewer students
are going to college. Here’s why that matters. Morning Edition.
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/16/787909495/fewer-students-are-
going-to-college-heres-why-that-matters
National Public Radio. (2014, May 24). Students struggle with
depression—and with telling the story (S. Simon, interviewer).
Weekend Edition Saturday.
http://www.npr.org/2014/05/24/315445104/students-struggle-with-
depression-and-with-telling-the-story
Nelson, T., & Squires, V. (2017). Addressing complex challenges
through adaptive leadership: A promising approach to
collaborative problem solving. Journal of Leadership Education,
16(4), 111–123.
Preece, J. (2016). Negotiating service learning through community
engagement: Adaptive leadership, knowledge, dialogue and
power. Education as Change, 20(1), 104–125.
Ramalingam, B., Wild, L., & Ferrari, M. (2020). Adaptive leadership
in the coronavirus response. Coronavirus Briefing Note.
https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/resource-
documents/032020_pogo_coronavirus_adaptation
Rosenhead, J., Franco, L. A., Grint, K., & Friedland, B. (2019).
Complexity theory and leadership practice: A review, a critique,
and some recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(5),
101–304.
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/16/787909495/fewer-students-are-going-to-college-heres-why-that-matters
http://www.npr.org/2014/05/24/315445104/students-struggle-with-depression-and-with-telling-the-story
https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/resource-documents/032020_pogo_coronavirus_adaptation
Shapiro, S. (2018, June 18). A Middlebury professor surveys student
attitudes about free speech (opinion). Inside Higher Ed.
https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/06/18/middlebury-
professor-surveys-student-attitudes-about-free-speech-opinion
Sunderman, H. M., Headrick, J., & McCain, K. D. (in press).
Addressing complex issues and crises in higher education with an
adaptive leadership framework. Change: The Magazine of Higher
Learning.
Thygeson, M., Morrissey, L., & Ulstad, V. (2010). Adaptive
leadership and the practice of medicine: A complexity-based
approach to reframing the doctor-patient relationship. Journal of
Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 16, 1009–1015.
Tourish, D. (2019). Is complexity leadership theory complex enough?
A critical appraisal, some modifications and suggestions for further
research. Organization Studies, 40(2), 219–238.
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2017). Complexity leadership.
Organizational Dynamics, 1(46), 9–20.
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2018). Leadership for organizational
adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework.
The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 89–104.
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity
leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the
knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298–318.
https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/06/18/middlebury-professor-surveys-student-attitudes-about-free-speech-opinion
Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational processes and the
facilitating environment: studies in the theory of emotional
development. London, UK: Hogarth Press.
Zahneis, M. (2019, November 18). A college prepares to close its
doors as students and alumni mourn—and scheme. The Chronicle
of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/A-College-
Prepares-to-Close/247567
https://www.chronicle.com/article/A-College-Prepares-to-Close/247567
CHAPTER 12
Arnett, D. B., & Wittmann, C. M. (2014). Improving marketing
success: The role of tacit knowledge exchange between sales and
marketing. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 324–331.
Booysen, L. (2014). The development of inclusive leadership
practice and processes. In B. M. Ferdman & B. Deane (Eds.),
Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion (pp. 296–329). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and
different at the same time. Personality & Social Psychology
Bulletin, 17, 475–482.
Carmeli, A., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Ziv, E. (2010). Inclusive leadership
and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The
mediating role of psychological safety. Creativity Research
Journal, 22, 250–260.
Carter, D. R., Cullen-Lester, K. L., Jones, J. M., Gerbasi, A.,
Chrobot-Mason, D., & Nae, E. Y. (2020, February). Functional
leadership in interteam contexts: Understanding “what” in the
context of why? where? when? and who? The Leadership
Quarterly, 31(1), 101378.
Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., & Kang, S.-W. (2017). Inclusive
leadership and employee well-being: The mediating role of
person-job fit. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18, 1877–1901.
Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., & Park, B. I. (2015). Inclusive leadership
and work engagement: Mediating roles of affective organizational
commitment and creativity. Social Behavior and Personality, 43,
931–944.
Chrobot-Mason, D., Ruderman, M., & Nishii, L. (2013). Leadership in
a diverse workplace. In Q. Roberson’s (Ed.), Oxford handbook of
diversity (pp. 315–340). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Chung, B. G., Ehrhart, K. H., Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Dean, M.
A., & Kedharnath, U. (2020). Work group inclusion: Test a scale
and model. Group and Organization Management, 45(1), 75–102.
Church, A. H., Rotolo, C. T., Shull, A. C., & Tuller, M. D. (2014).
Inclusive organizational development. In B. M. Ferdman & B.
Deane (Eds.), Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion (pp.
287–288). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Corsaro, D., Ramos, C., Henneberg, S. C., & Naudé, P. (2012). The
impact of network configurations on value constellations in
business markets: The case of an innovation network. Industrial
Marketing Management, 41(1), 54–67.
Cox, T. H., Jr., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity:
Implications for organizational competitiveness. The Executive,
5(3), 45.
Dass, P., & Parker, B. (1999). Strategies for managing human
resource diversity. Academy of Management Executive, 13, 68–
80.
Davidson, M. N., & Ferdman, B. M. (2002, April). Inclusion: What can
I and my organization do about it? The Industrial-Organizational
Psychologist, 39, 80–85.
Edmondson, A. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than
done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and
correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,
32, 5–32.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior
in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.
Edmondson, A. (2003). Speaking up in the operating room: How
team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams.
Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1419–1452.
Edmondson, A. (2004). Psychological safety, trust, and learning in
organizations: A group-level lens. In R. M. Kramer & K. S. Cook
(Eds.), Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and
approaches (pp. 239–272). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The
effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and
outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 229–273.
Ernst, C., & Chrobot-Mason, D. (2010). Boundary spanning
leadership: Six practices for solving problems, driving innovation,
and transforming organizations. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Professional.
Ferdman, B. M. (1992). The dynamics of ethnic diversity in
organizations: Toward integrative models. In K. Kelley (Ed.),
Advances in psychology: Issues, theory, and research in
industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 339–384). Amsterdam,
Netherlands: North-Holland.
Ferdman, B. M. (2014). The practice of inclusion in diverse
organizations: Toward a systemic and inclusive framework. In B.
M. Ferdman & B. Deane (Eds.), Diversity at work: The practice of
inclusion (pp. 3–54). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ferdman, B. M., & Davidson, M. N. (2002). A matter of differences—
Inclusion: What can I and my organization do about it? The
Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 39, 80–85.
Ferdman, B. M., & Morgan Roberts, L. (2014). Creating inclusion for
oneself: Knowing, accepting, and expressing one’s whole self at
work. In B. M. Ferdman & B. Deane (Eds.), Diversity at work: The
practice of inclusion (pp. 93–127). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998).
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit
Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74, 1464–1480.
Hays-Thomas, R. (2017). Managing workplace diversity and
inclusion: A psychological perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hirak, R., Peng, A. C., Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. M. (2012).
Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: The
importance of psychological safety and learning from failures. The
Leadership Quarterly, 23, 107–117.
Hollander, E. P. (2009). Inclusive leadership: The essential leader-
follower relationship. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in
management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management
Review, 18, 56–87.
Ivancevich, J. M., & Gilbert, J. A. (2000). Diversity management:
Time for a new approach. Public Personnel Management, 29, 75–
92.
Javed, B., Naqvi, S. M. M. R., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., & Tayyeb, H.
H. (2017). Impact of inclusive leadership on innovative work
behavior: The role of psychological safety. Journal of Management
and Organization, 25, 117–136.
Johnston, W. B., & Packer, A. H. (1987). Workforce 2000: Work and
workers for the 21st century. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute.
Kalev, A., Kelly, E., & Dobbin, F. (2006). Best practices or best
guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action
and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71, 589–
617.
Kossek, E. E., & Zonia, S. C. (1993). Assessing diversity climate: A
field study of reactions to employer efforts to promote diversity.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 61–81.
Levashina, J., Hartwell, C. J., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A.
(2014). The structured employment interview: Narrative and
quantitative review of the research literature. Personnel
Psychology, 67(1), 241–293.
Linnehan, F., & Konrad, A. M. (1999). Diluting diversity: Implications
for intergroup inequality in organizations. Journal of Management
Inquiry, 8(4), 399–414. doi:10.1177/105649269984009
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal
account of coming to see correspondence through work in
women’s studies. Working Paper No. 189. Wellesley, MA:
Wellesley Centers for Women.
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Fjeldstad, O. D., Miles, G., & Lettl, C.
(2010). Designing organizations to meet 21st-century opportunities
and challenges. Organizational Dynamics, 39, 93–103.
Mitchell, R., Boyle, B., Parker, V., Giles, M., Chiang, V., & Joyce, P.
(2015). Managing inclusiveness and diversity in teams: How
leader inclusiveness affects performance through status and team
identity. Human Resource Management, 54, 217–239.
Mor Barak, M. E., & Cherin, D. A. (1998). A tool to expand
organizational understanding of workforce diversity: Exploring a
measure of inclusion-exclusion. Administration in Social Work, 22,
47–64.
Mor Barak, M. E., Cherin, D. A., & Berkman, S. (1998).
Organizational and personal dimensions of diversity climate:
Ethnic and gender differences in employee perceptions. Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 34, 82–104.
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The
effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on
psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care
teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 942–966.
Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-
diverse groups. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1754–
1774.
Nishii, L. H., & Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to
reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader-
member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 94, 1412–1426.
Nkomo, S. M., & Ariss, A. A. (2014). The historical origins of ethnic
(white) privilege in US organizations. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 29(4), 389–404.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and
practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Offermann, L. R., Basford, T. E., Graebner, R., Jaffer, S., De Graaf,
S. B., & Kaminsky, S. E. (2014). See no evil: Color blindness and
perceptions of subtle racial discrimination in the workplace.
Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(4), 499–507.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Martin, J. (1989). Organizational inclusion of
minority groups: A social psychological analysis. In J. P. Van
Oudenhoven & T. M. Willemsen (Eds.), Ethnic minorities: Social
psychological perspectives (pp. 169–200). Berwyn, PA: Swets
North America.
Qi, L., Liu, B., Wei, X., & Hu, Y. (2019). Impact of inclusive
leadership on innovative behavior: Perceived innovative support
as a mediator. PLoS ONE, 14, 1–14.
Randel, A. E., Dean, M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B., & Shore, L.
(2016). Leader inclusiveness, psychological diversity climate, and
helping behaviors. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31, 216–
234.
Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B.
G., Dean, M. A., & Kedharnath, U. (2018). Inclusive leadership:
Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being
valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review,
28, 190–203.
Roberson, Q. M. (2006). Disentangling the meanings of diversity and
inclusion in organizations. Group & Organization Management, 31,
212–236.
Roberson, Q. M., King, E. B., & Hebl, M. (2020). Designing more
effective practices to address workplace inequality. Behavioral
Science and Policy, 6(1), 39–49.
Roberson, Q. M., Ryan, A. M., & Ragins, B. R. (2017). The evolution
and future of diversity at work. Journal of Applied Psychology,
102(3), 483–499.
Schutz, W. (1958). FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of
interpersonal behavior. New York, NY: Rinehart.
Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K.
H., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A
review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37,
1262–1289.
Strauss, J. P., & Connerley, M. L. (2003). Demographics, personality,
contact, and university-diverse orientation: An exploratory
examination. Human Resource Management, 42(2), 159–174.
Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996, September–October). Making
differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity.
Harvard Business Review, pp. 79–90.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in
groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). New York, NY: Academic
Press.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relationship leadership theory: Exploring the
social processes of leadership and organizing. Leadership
Quarterly, 17, 654–676.
van Knippenberg, D., Homan, A. C., & van Ginkel, W. P. (2013).
Diversity cognition and climates. In Q. Roberson’s (Ed)., Oxford
Handbook of Diversity (pp. 220–238). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Van Velsor, E., McCauley, C. D., & Ruderman, M. N. (2010). The
Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership
development (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wasserman, I. C. (2014). Strengthening interpersonal awareness
and fostering relational eloquence. In B. M. Ferdman & B. Deane
(Eds.), Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion (pp. 128–154).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Yang, Y., & Konrad, A. M. (2011). Understanding diversity
management practices: Implications of institutional theory and
resource-based theory. Group and Organization Management, 36,
6–38.
Ye, Q., Wang, D., & Li, X. (2018). Promoting employees’ learning
from errors by inclusive leadership: Do mood and gender matter?
Baltic Journal of Management, 13, 125–142.
CHAPTER 13
Alipour, K. K., Mohammed, S., & Martinez, P. N. (2017).
Incorporating temporality into implicit leadership and followership
theories: Exploring inconsistencies between time-based
expectations and actual behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly,
28(2), 300–316.
Bastardoz, N., & Van Vugt, M. (2019). The nature of followership:
Evolutionary analysis and review. The Leadership Quarterly,
30(1), 81–95.
Benson, A. J., Hardy, J., & Eys, M. (2016). Contextualizing leaders’
interpretations of proactive followership. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 37(7), 949–966.
Braun, S., Kark, R., & Wisse, B. (2018). Fifty shades of grey:
Exploring the dark sides of leadership and followership. Frontiers
in Psychology, 9, 1877.
Brown, D. J. (2013). The boys in the boat: Nine Americans and their
epic quest for gold at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. New York, NY:
Penguin.
Cain, S. (2012). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can’t
stop talking. New York, NY: Crown.
Cain, S. (2017, March 24). Not leadership material? Good. The world
needs followers. The glorification of leadership skills, especially in
college admissions, has emptied leadership of its meaning. New
York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/opinion/sunday/not-
leadership-material-good-the-world-needs-followers.html
Carsten, M. K., Harms, P., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2014). Exploring historical
perspectives of followership: The need for an expanded view of
followers and the follower role. In L. M Lapierre & R. K. Carsten
(Eds.), Followership: What is it and why do people follow? (pp. 3–
26). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., & Huang, L. (2018). Leader
perceptions and motivation as outcomes of followership role
orientation and behavior. Leadership, 14(6), 731–756.
Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., West, B. J., Patera, J. L., & McGregor,
R. (2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A
qualitative study. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 543–562.
Chaleff, I. (1995). The courageous follower: Standing up to and for
our leaders. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Chaleff, I. (2008). Creating new ways of following. In R. E. Riggio, I.
Chaleff, & J. Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The art of followership: How
great followers create great leaders and organizations (pp. 67–87).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chaleff, I. (2009). The courageous follower: Standing up to and for
our leaders (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Crossman, B., & Crossman, J. (2011). Conceptualising followership:
A review of the literature. Leadership, 7(4), 481–497.
DeRue, S., & Ashford, S. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow?
A social process of leadership identity construction in
organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627–647.
de Zilwa, D. (2014) A new conceptual framework for authentic
followership. In L. Lapierre & M. Carsten (Eds.), Followership:
What is it, and why do people follow? (pp. 47–72). Bingley, UK:
Emerald Group.
Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. G. (2017).
Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel
review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 104–129.
Fairhurst, G. T., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2012). Organizational discourse
analysis (ODA): Examining leadership as a relational process. The
Leadership Quarterly, 23(6), 1043–1062.
Follett, M. P. (1949). The essentials of leadership. London, UK:
Management Publications Trust.
Foti, R. J., Hansbrough, T. K., Epitropaki, O., & Coyle, P. T. (2017).
Dynamic viewpoints on implicit leadership and followership
theories: Approaches, findings, and future directions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 28(2), 261–267.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2014). Leadership:
Enhancing the lessons of experience (8th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Keller, J. (2012, July 12). How the Penn State report implicates top
officials. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
http://www.chronicle.com/article/How-the-Penn-State-
Report/132837
Kellerman, B. (2008). Followership: How followers are creating
change and changing leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
Press.
Kelley, R. E. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business
Review, 66(6), 141–148.
Kelley, R. E. (1992). The power of followership. New York, NY:
Doubleday Business.
Kelley, R. E. (2008). Rethinking followership. In R. E. Riggio, I.
Chaleff, & J. Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The art of followership: How
great followers create great leaders and organizations (pp. 5–16).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lapierre, L. M., & Carsten, R. K. (Eds.). (2014). Followership: What
is it and why do people follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow
destructive bosses and corrupt politicians—and how we can
survive them. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Lord, R., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information
processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston, MA:
Unwin-Everyman.
http://www.chronicle.com/article/How-the-Penn-State-Report/132837
Mahler, J. (2011, November 8). Grand experiment meets an
inglorious end. New York Times, B12.
Meindl, J. R. (1990). On leadership: An alternative to the
conventional wisdom. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.),
Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 159–203).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a follower-centric
theory: A social constructionist approach. The Leadership
Quarterly, 6(3), 329–341.
Pietraszewski, D. (2019). The evolution of leadership: Leadership
and followership as a solution to the problem of creating and
executing successful coordination and cooperation enterprises.
The Leadership Quarterly. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.05.006.
Popper, M. (2014). Why do people follow? In L. M. Lapierre & R. K.
Carsten (Eds.), Followership: What is it and why do people follow?
(pp. 109–120). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
Riggio, R. E., Chaleff, I., & Lipman-Blumen, J. (Eds.). (2008). The art
of followership: How great followers create great leaders and
organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO: A three dimensional theory of
interpersonal behavior. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Schyns, B., Wisse, B., & Sanders, S. (2019). Shady strategic
behavior: Recognizing strategic followership of Dark Triad
followers. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(2), 234–249.
Shamir, B. (2007). From passive recipients to active co-producers:
Followers’ roles in the leadership process. In B. Shamir, R. Pillai,
M. Bligh, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), Follower-centered perspectives on
leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl (pp. ix–
xxxix). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the
content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership
theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 113, 73–84.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of
intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.),
Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-
Hall.
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014).
Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The
Leadership Quarterly, 25, 83–104.
Wolverton, B. (2012, July 12). Penn State’s culture of reverence led
to “total disregard” for children’s safety. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Penn-States-Culture-
of/132853
Yelsma, P. (1999). Small group problem solving as academic
service-learning. In D. Droge & B. O. Murphy (Eds.), Voices of
democracy, concepts and models for service-learning in
communication studies, American Association for Higher
Education/NCA Press, pp. 87–96.
http://www.chronicle.com/article/Penn-States-Culture-of/132853
Zaleznik, A. (1965, May/June). The dynamics of subordinacy.
Harvard Business Review.
CHAPTER 14
Adams, R. B., & Funk, P. (2012). Beyond the glass ceiling: Does
gender matter? Management Science, 58, 219–235.
Amanatullah, E. T., & Tinsley, C. H. (2013a). Ask and ye shall
receive? How gender and status moderate negotiation success.
Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 6, 253–272.
Amanatullah, E. T., & Tinsley, C. H. (2013b). Punishing female
negotiators for asserting too much . . . or not enough: Exploring
why advocacy moderates backlash against assertive female
negotiators. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 120, 110–122.
American Bar Association. (2019, April). Commission on women in
the profession: A current glance at women in the law.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/wom
en/current_glance_2019
Andrews, P. H. (1992). Sex and gender differences in group
communication: Impact on the facilitation process. Small Group
Research, 23, 74–94.
Atkinson, N. (2018, July 10). Jacinda Ardern: Biography. New
Zealand History. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/jacinda-ardern
Ayman, R., Korabik, K., & Morris, S. (2009). Is transformational
leadership always perceived as effective? Male subordinates’
devaluation of female transformational leaders. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 39, 852–879.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/women/current_glance_2019
https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/jacinda-ardern
Babcock, L., & Laschever, S. (2003). Women don’t ask: Negotiation
and the gender divide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational
Dynamics, 13, 26–40.
Belkin, L. (2003, October 26). The opt-out revolution. The New York
Times, p. 42.
Belkin, L. (2008, June 15). When mom and dad share it all. The New
York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/magazine/15parenting-t.html?
ref=jobs&pagewanted=all
Bell, E., & Nkomo, S. (2001). Our separate ways: Black and white
women and the struggle for professional identity. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Bergeron, D. M., Block, C. J., & Echtenkamp, B. A. (2006). Disabling
the able: Stereotype threat and women’s work performance.
Human Performance, 19, 133–158.
Bernardi, R. A., Bosco, S. M., & Columb, V. L. (2009). Does female
representation on boards of directors associate with the “Most
Ethical Companies” list? Corporate Reputation Review, 12, 270–
280.
Bielby, D. D., & Bielby, W. T. (1988). She works hard for the money:
Household responsibilities and the allocation of work effort.
American Journal of Sociology, 93, 1031–1059.
Blank, R., & Slipp, S. (1994). Voices of diversity. New York, NY:
AMACOM.
Book, E. W. (2000). Why the best man for the job is a woman. New
York, NY: HarperCollins.
Borowski, N. (2019, March 21). 4 things to know about Jacinda
Ardern, New Zealand’s prime minister. USA Today.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/03/21/new-
zealand-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-leads-after-mosque-killings-
christchurch/3231942002/
Boulouta, I. (2012). Hidden connections: The link between board
gender diversity and corporate social performance. Journal of
Business Ethics, 113, 185–197.
Bowles, H. R., Babcock, L., & Lai, L. (2007). Social incentives for
gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations:
Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 103, 84–103.
Bowles, H. R., & McGinn, K. L. (2005). Claiming authority:
Negotiating challenges for women leaders. In D. M. Messick & R.
M. Kramer (Eds.), The psychology of leadership: New
perspectives and research (pp. 191–208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are, who women
should be: Descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex
discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 5, 665–692.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Plenum.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/03/21/new-zealand-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-leads-after-mosque-killings-christchurch/3231942002/
Carli, L. L. (2001). Gender and social influence. Journal of Social
Issues, 57, 725–741.
Catalyst. (2004). The bottom line: Connecting corporate performance
and gender diversity. New York, NY: Author.
Catalyst. (2020, January 15). Pyramid: Women in S&P 500
companies. https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-sp-500-
companies/
Cave, D. (2020, May 23). Jacinda Ardern sold a drastic lockdown
with straight talk and mom jokes. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/23/world/asia/jacinda-ardern-
coronavirus-new-zealand.html
Center for American Women and Politics. (2020a). Women in
elective office 2020. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/women-elective-
office-2020
Center for American Women and Politics. (2020b). Women of color
in elective office 2020. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/women-color-
elective-office-2020
Chandler, A. (2020). 10 things we can learn from the way Jacinda
Ardern communicates. Business Chicks.
https://businesschicks.com/jacinda-ardern/
Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-sp-500-companies/
https://cawp.rutgers.edu/women-elective-office-2020
https://cawp.rutgers.edu/women-color-elective-office-2020
https://businesschicks.com/jacinda-ardern/
Chemers, M. M., & Murphy, S. E. (1995). Leadership and diversity in
groups and organizations. In M. M. Chemers, S. Oskamp, & M. A.
Constanzo (Eds.), Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for
a changing workplace (pp. 157–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cohen, P., & Hsu, T. (2020, June 3). Pandemic could scar a
generation of working mothers. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/business/economy/coronavir
us-working-women.html
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2015). Diversity begets diversity? The effects
of board composition on the appointment and success of women
CEOs. Social Science Research, 53, 137–147.
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2016). Do women advance equity? The effect
of gender leadership composition on LGBT-friendly policies in
American firms. Human Relations, 69(7), 1431–1456.
Cook, A., Ingersoll, A. R., & Glass, C. (2019). Gender gaps at the
top: Does board composition affect executive compensation?
Human Relations, 72, 1292–1314.
Cooper, C. L., & Lewis, S. (1999). Gender and the changing nature
of work. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp.
37–46). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Couric, K. (2008, June 11). Katie Couric’s notebook: Sexism and
politics. CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/katie-courics-
notebook-sexism-and-politics/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/katie-courics-notebook-sexism-and-politics/
Craig, L. (2006). Does father care mean fathers share? A
comparison of how mothers and fathers in intact families spend
time with children. Gender and Society, 20, 259–281.
Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to
counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on automatic
gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
40, 642–658.
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., & Steele, C. M. (2005). Clearing the
air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on
women’s leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 88, 276–287.
Deaux, K., & Kite, M. (1993). Gender stereotypes. In F. L. Denmark
& M. Paludi (Eds.), Psychology of women: A handbook of theory
and issues (pp. 107–139). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Dobbins, G. H., & Platz, S. J. (1986). Sex differences in leadership:
How real are they? Academy of Management Review, 11, 118–
127.
Dodge, K. A., Gilroy, F. D., & Fenzel, L. M. (1995). Requisite
management characteristics revisited: Two decades later. Journal
of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 253–264.
Eagly, A. H. (2013). Women as leaders: Leadership style versus
leaders’ values and attitudes. In Gender and work: Challenging
conventional wisdom. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/conferences/2013-w50-research-
symposium/Documents/eagly
http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/conferences/2013-w50-research-symposium/Documents/eagly
Eagly, A. H. (2016). When passionate advocates meet research on
diversity, does the honest broker stand a chance? Journal of
Social Issues, 72, 199–222.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). The female leadership advantage:
An evaluation of the evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 807–
834.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2004). Women and men as leaders. In J.
Antonakis, R. J. Sternberg, & A. T. Cianciolo (Eds.), The nature of
leadership (pp. 279–301). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth
about how women become leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. (2003).
Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles:
A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological
Bulletin, 129, 569–591.
Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style:
A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of
leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60, 685–710.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of
prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–
598.
Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the
effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,
117, 125–145.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M., & Klonsky, B. (1992). Gender and the
evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111,
3–22.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2013). The nature–nurture debates: 25
years of challenges in understanding the psychology of gender.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340–357.
Ensher, E. A., & Murphy, S. E. (2005). Power mentoring: How
successful mentors and protégés get the most out of their
relationships. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fiske, S. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T.
Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social
psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 982–1026). Boston, MA: McGraw-
Hill.
Fiske, S., Bersoff, D. N., Borgida, E., Deaux, K., & Heilman, M. E.
(1991). Social science research on trial: Use of sex stereotyping
research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. American Psychologist,
46, 1049–1060.
Fletcher, J. K. (2001). Disappearing acts: Gender, power, and
relational practice at work. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Forsyth, D. R. (2010). Group dynamics (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Friedman, U. (2020, April 19). New Zealand’s prime minister may be
the most effective leader on the planet. The Atlantic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/jacinda-
ardern-new-zealand-leadership-coronavirus/610237/
Galinsky, E., Aumann, K., & Bond, J. (2008). Times are changing:
Gender and generation at work and at home.
http://familiesandwork.org/site/research/reports/Times_Are_Chang
ing
Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2018). Do women leaders promote positive
change? Analyzing the effect of gender on business practices and
diversity initiatives. Human Resource Management, 57, 823–837.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Sexism and other “isms”:
Independence, status, and the ambivalent content of stereotypes.
In W. B. Swann Jr. & J. H. Langlois (Eds.), Sexism and
stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor
Spence (pp. 193–221). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The
impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. American
Economic Review, 90, 715–741.
Goodwin, R. D., Dodson, S. J., Chen, J. M., & Diekmann, K. A.
(2020). Gender, sense of power, and desire to lead: Why women
don’t “lean in” to apply to leadership groups that are majority-male.
Psychology of Women Quarterly. Advance online publication.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998).
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/jacinda-ardern-new-zealand-leadership-coronavirus/610237/
http://familiesandwork.org/site/research/reports/Times_Are_Changing
association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
1464–1480.
Gurin, P. (1985). Women’s gender consciousness. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 49, 143–163.
Hall, D. T. (1972). A model of coping with role conflict: The role
behavior of college-educated women. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 17, 471–486.
Hamilton, D. L., Stroessner, S. J., & Driscoll, D. M. (1994). Social
cognition and the study of stereotyping. In P. G. Devine, D. L.
Hamilton, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Social cognition: Impact on social
psychology (pp. 291–321). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender
stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder.
Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.
Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of
leadership. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Hess, A. (2019, November, 11). Applications to business schools are
down—but women are making modest gains. CNBC.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/11/business-school-applications-
are-down-but-women-are-making-gains.html
Hewlett, S. A. (2002). Creating a life: Professional women and the
quest for children. New York, NY: Talk Miramax.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/11/business-school-applications-are-down-but-women-are-making-gains.html
Hjelmgaard, K. (2019, March 19). Jacinda Ardern leads New
Zealand in aftermath of killings police say could have been worse.
USA Today.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/03/19/new-
zealand-jacinda-ardern-wins-praise-handling-mosque-shootings-
prime-minister/3209576002/
Hollander, S. (2018, October 1). Jacinda Ardern’s juggling act. The
New Yorker.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/08/jacinda-arderns-
juggling-act
Hoyt, C. L. (2010). Women, men, and leadership: Exploring the
gender gap at the top. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 4, 484–498.
Hoyt, C. L., Allison, S. T., Barnowski, A., & Sultan, A. (2020). Lay
theories of heroism and leadership: The role of gender,
communion, and agency. Social Psychology. Advance online
publication.
Hoyt, C., & Blascovich, J. (2007). Leadership efficacy and women
leaders’ responses to stereotype activation. Group Processes and
Intergroup Relations, 10, 595–616.
Hoyt, C., & Blascovich, J. (2010). The role of self-efficacy and
stereotype activation on cardiovascular, behavioral and self-report
responses in the leadership domain. The Leadership Quarterly,
21, 89–103.
Hoyt, C. L., & Chemers, M. M. (2008). Social stigma and leadership:
A long climb up a slippery ladder. In C. L. Hoyt, G. R. Goethals, &
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/03/19/new-zealand-jacinda-ardern-wins-praise-handling-mosque-shootings-prime-minister/3209576002/
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/08/jacinda-arderns-juggling-act
D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Leadership at the crossroads: Leadership
and psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 165–180). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Hoyt, C., Johnson, S., Murphy, S., & Skinnell, K. (2010). The impact
of blatant stereotype activation and group sex-composition on
female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 716–732.
Hoyt, C. L., & Simon, S. (2016). The role of social dominance
orientation and patriotism in the evaluation of racial minority and
female leaders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46, 518–
528.
Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986, March 24). The glass
ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that
blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street Journal, pp. D1 ,
D4–D5.
Inter-Parliamentary Union. (2020). Monthly ranking of women in
national parliaments. https://data.ipu.org/women-ranking?
month=6&year=2020
Jacobson, M. B., & Effertz, J. (1974). Sex roles and leadership
perceptions of the leaders and the led. Organizational Behavior
and Human Performance, 12, 383–396.
Jones, A. (2017, October 19). Jacinda Ardern: “Stardust” ousts
experience in New Zealand. BBC News.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41226232
Kaiser, R. B., & Wallace, W. T. (2016). Gender bias and substantive
differences in ratings of leadership behavior: Toward a new
https://data.ipu.org/women-ranking?month=6&year=2020
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41226232
narrative. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
68, 72–98.
Kanter, R. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York,
NY: Basic Books.
Kelly, J. (2020, January, 13). Women now hold more jobs than men
in the U.S. workforce. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/01/13/women-now-
hold-more-jobs-than-men/#17a487528f8a
Knoke, D., & Ishio, Y. (1998). The gender gap in company job
training. Work and Occupations, 25, 141–167.
Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011). Are
leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research
paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 616–642.
Konrad, A. M., Ritchie, J. E., Jr., Lieb, P., & Corrigall, E. (2000). Sex
differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 593–641.
Kray, L., Reb, J., Galinsky, A., & Thompson, L. (2004). Stereotype
reactance at the bargaining table: The effect of stereotype
activation and power on claiming and creating value. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 399–411.
Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes:
Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations.
Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 80, 942–958.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/01/13/women-now-hold-more-jobs-than-men/#17a487528f8a
Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to
mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theory of
stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin, 129,
522–544.
Livingston, R. W., Rosette, A. S., & Washington, E. F. (2012). Can an
agentic Black woman get ahead? The impact of race and
interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders.
Psychological Science, 23, 354–358.
Maume, D. J., Jr. (1999). Glass ceilings and glass escalators. Work
& Occupations, 26, 483.
Miller, T., & Del Carmen Triana, M. (2009). Demographic diversity in
the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity-firm performance
relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 755–786.
Morgenroth, T., Kirby, T. A., Ryan, M. K., & Sudkämper, A. (2020).
The who, when, and why of the glass cliff phenomenon: A meta-
analysis of appointments to precarious leadership positions.
Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication.
Morrison, A., & Von Glinow, M. A. (1990). Women and minorities in
management. American Psychologist, 45, 200–208.
Mulcahy, M., & Linehan, C. (2014). Females and precarious board
positions: Further evidence of the glass cliff. British Journal of
Management, 25, 425–438.
National Association of Women Business Owners. (2020). Women
business owner statistics.
https://www.nawbo.org/resources/women-business-owner-
statistics
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Table 318.30.
Bachelor’s, master’s, and doctor’s degrees conferred by degree-
granting institutions, by sex of student and discipline division:
2017–18. In Digest of education statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_318.30.asp
New Zealand History. (n.d.). Jacinda Ardern biography.
https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/jacinda-ardern
Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). The contribution of women on
boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate
Governance—An International Review, 18, 136–148.
Nieva, V. E., & Gutek, B. A. (1981). Women and work: A
psychological perspective. New York, NY: Praeger.
Ohlott, P. J., Ruderman, M. N., & McCauley, C. D. (1994). Gender
differences in managers’ developmental job experiences.
Academy of Management Journal, 37, 46–67.
Pailhe, A., & Solaz, A. (2006). Time with children: Do fathers and
mothers replace each other when one parent is unemployed?
European Journal of Population, 24, 211–236.
Powell, G. N. (1990). One more time: Do female and male managers
differ? Academy of Management Executive, 4, 68–75.
https://www.nawbo.org/resources/women-business-owner-statistics
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_318.30.asp
https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/jacinda-ardern
Powell, G. N., & Graves, L. M. (2003). Women and men in
management (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility:
The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple
subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 377–391.
Ragins, B. R., Townsend, B., & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the
executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking
the glass ceiling. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 28–42.
Rosener, J. (1995). America’s competitive secret: Utilizing women as
a management strategy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Rosette, A. S., Koval, C. Z., Ma, A., & Livingston, R. (2016). Race
matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic
deficiencies and penalties. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 429–
445.
Rosette, A. S., & Livingston, R. W. (2012). Failure is not an option for
Black women: Effects of organizational performance on leaders
with single versus dual-subordinate identities. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1162–1167.
Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women:
The costs and benefits of counter-stereotypical impression
management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
629–645.
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes
and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57,
743–762.
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that
women are over-represented in precarious leadership positions.
British Journal of Management, 16, 81–90.
Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., Hersby, M. D., & Bongiorno, R. (2011).
Think crisis–think female: The glass cliff and contextual variation in
the think manager–think male stereotype. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 96, 470–484.
Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., & Postmes, T. (2007). Reactions to the
glass cliff: Gender differences in the explanations for the
precariousness of women’s leadership positions. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 20, 182–197.
Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work, and the will to lead.
New York, NY: Knopf.
Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to
women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57,
675–688.
Schwartz, M. (2019, April 10). New Zealand passes law banning
most semi-automatic weapons. NPR.
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/10/711820023/new-zealand-passes-
law-banning-most-semi-automatic-weapons
Schwartz, S. H., & Rubel, T. (2005). Sex differences in value
priorities: Cross-cultural and multimethod studies. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 1010–1028.
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/10/711820023/new-zealand-passes-law-banning-most-semi-automatic-weapons
Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2003). Solo status, stereotype
threat, and performance expectancies: Their effects on women’s
performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 68–
74.
Sergent, K., & Stajkovic, A. D. (2020). Women’s leadership is
associated with fewer deaths during the COVID-19 crisis:
Quantitative and qualitative analyses of United States governors.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 105, 771–783.
Simon, S., & Hoyt, C. L. (2013). Exploring the effect of media images
on women’s leadership self-perceptions and aspirations. Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 232–245.
Small, D. A., Gelfand, M., Babcock, L., & Gettman, H. (2007). Who
goes to the bargaining table? The influence of gender and framing
on the initiation of negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 93, 600–613.
Smith, A., & Stewart, A. J. (1983). Approaches to studying racism
and sexism in Black women’s lives. Journal of Social Issues, 39,
1–15.
Stangor, C., Lynch, L., Duan, C., & Glass, B. (1992). Categorization
of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 207–218.
Thoits, P. A. (1992). Identity structures and psychological well-being:
Gender and marital status comparisons. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 55, 236–256.
Tsui, A. S., & Gutek, B. A. (1984). A role set analysis of gender
differences in performance, affective relationship, and career
success of industrial middle managers. Academy of Management
Journal, 27, 619–635.
Twenge, J. M. (2001). Change in women’s assertiveness in
response to status and roles: A cross-temporal meta-analysis,
1931–1993. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81,
133–145.
van Engen, M. L., van der Leeden, R., & Willemsen, T. M. (2001).
Gender, context and leadership styles: A field study. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 581–598.
van Engen, M. L., & Willemsen, T. M. (2004). Sex and leadership
styles: A meta-analysis of research published in the 1990s.
Psychological Reports, 94, 3–18.
Vinkenburg, C. J., van Engen, M. L., Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-
Schmidt, M. C. (2011). An exploration of stereotypical beliefs
about leadership styles: Is transformational leadership a route to
women’s promotion? The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 10–21.
Wallenfeldt, J. (2020). Jacinda Adern. Brittanica.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jacinda-Ardern/
Warner, J., Ellman, N., & Boesch, D. (2018, November, 20). The
women’s leadership gap. Center for American Progress.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2018/11/
20/461273/womens-leadership-gap-2/
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jacinda-Ardern/
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2018/11/20/461273/womens-leadership-gap-2/
Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for
men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39, 253–267.
Williams, C. L. (1995). Still a man’s world: Men who do “women’s
work.” Berkeley: University of California Press.
Williams, J. (2010). Reshaping the work-family debate: Why men
and class matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Williams, R. J. (2003). Women on corporate boards of directors and
their influence on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business
Ethics, 42, 1–10.
Wirth, L. (2001). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Women in
management. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office.
Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone,
T. M. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the
performance of human groups. Science, 330, 686–688.
Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2012, March 15). Are women better
leaders than men? Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2012/03/a-study-in-leadership-women-do
Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2019, June 25). Research: Women score
higher than men in most leadership skills. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2019/06/research-women-score-higher-
than-men-in-most-leadership-skills
https://hbr.org/2012/03/a-study-in-leadership-women-do
https://hbr.org/2019/06/research-women-score-higher-than-men-in-most-leadership-skills
CHAPTER 15
Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (2017).
What works for you may not work for (Gen)me: Limitations of
present leadership theories for the new generation. The
Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 245–260.
Aronson, E. (2001). Integrating leadership styles and ethical
perspectives. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4),
244–256.
Avolio, B. J., & Locke, E. E. (2002). Contrasting different
philosophies of leader motivation: Altruism versus egoism. The
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 169–191.
Baehrend, W. R., Jr. (2016). Refinement of the Ethical Leadership
Style Questionnaire. Lisle, IL: Benedictine University. (Pro Quest
Number 10255065)
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and
authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership
Quarterly, 10(2), 181–217.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Bowie, N. E. (1988). Ethical theory and
business (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1994). Principles of biomedical
ethics (4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bedi, A., Alpaslan, C. M., & Green, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review
of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. Journal of
Business Ethics, 139(3), 517–536.
Block, P. (1993). Stewardship: Choosing service over self-interest.
San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Bowie, N. E. (1991). Challenging the egoistic paradigm. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 1(1), 1–21.
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review
and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616.
Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical
leadership: A social learning perspective for construct
development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Carlson, D. S., & Perrewe, P. L. (1995). Institutionalization of
organizational ethics through transformational leadership. Journal
of Business Ethics, 14(10), 829–838.
Chikeleze, M. C. (2014). Validation of the Ethical Leadership Style
Questionnaire (ELSQ) (Doctoral dissertation). Lisle, IL:
Benedictine University. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses database. (Order No. 3584797)
Chikeleze, M. C., & Baehrend, W. R. (2017). Ethical leadership style
and its impact on decision-making. Journal of Leadership Studies,
11(2), 45–47. doi:10.1002/jls.21523
Ciulla, J. B. (1998). Ethics, the heart of leadership. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Ciulla, J. B. (2001). Carving leaders from the warped wood of
humanity. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4),
313–319.
Ciulla, J. B. (2003). The ethics of leadership. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Ciulla, J. B. (2014). Ethics, the heart of leadership (3rd ed.). Santa
Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Conger, J. (1990). The dark side of leadership. Organizational
Dynamics, 19, 44–55.
Cooper, H., Gibbons-Neff, T., Schmitt, E., & Cochrane, E. (2020,
April 2). Navy Removes Captain of Aircraft Carrier Stricken by
Coronavirus. New York Times (Online).
Covey, S. R. (1990). Principle-centered leadership. New York, NY:
Fireside.
Crain, W. C. (1985). Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. In W.
C. Crain (Ed.), Theories of development: Concepts and
applications (pp. 118–136). New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
Dalla Costa, J. (1998). The ethical imperative: Why moral leadership
is good business. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Demirtas, O. (2015). Ethical leadership influence at organizations:
Evidence from the field. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(2), 273–
284.
Den Hartog, D. N. (2015). Ethical leadership. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1),
409-434.
De Pree, M. (1989). Leadership is an art. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Eisenbeiss, S. A. (2012). Re-thinking ethical leadership: An
interdisciplinary integrative approach. The Leadership Quarterly,
23(5), 791–808.
Eisenbeiss, S. A., van Knippenberg, D., & Fahrbach, C. M. (2015).
Doing well by doing good? Analyzing the relationship between
CEO ethical leadership and firm performance. Journal of Business
Ethics, 128(3), 635–651.
Ethics Resource Center. (2011). Generational differences in
workplace ethics: A supplemental report of the 2011 National
Business Ethics Survey. Retrieved from
http://www.ethics.org/research/eci-research/nbes
Frankena, W. (1973). Ethics (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Frisch, C., & Huppenbauer, M. (2014). New insights into ethical
leadership: A qualitative investigation of the experiences of
executive ethical leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1), 23–
43.
http://www.ethics.org/research/eci-research/nbes
Gafni, M. & Garofoli, J. (2020, March 31). Exclusive: Captain of
aircraft carrier with growing coronavirus outbreak pleads for help
from Navy. San Francisco Chronicle.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Exclusive-Captain-of-
aircraft-carrier-with-15167883.php
Gibbons-Neff, T., Schmitt, E., Cooper, H., & Ismay, J. (2020, April
12). There will be losses: How a captain’s plea exposed a rift in
the military. New York Times (Online).
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and
women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gini, A. (1998). Moral leadership and business ethics. In J. B. Ciulla
(Ed.), Ethics, the heart of leadership (pp. 27–46). Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Newton Centre, MA:
Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the
nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York, NY: Paulist.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do
ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above
and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal
of Management, 44(2), 501–529.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Exclusive-Captain-of-aircraft-carrier-with-15167883.php
Jaksa, J. A., & Pritchard, M. S. (1988). Communication ethics:
Methods of analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Johnson, C. R. (2011). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Johnson, C. R. (2018). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership
(6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and
transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences, 18(4), 257–265.
Kanungo, R. N., & Mendonca, M. (1996). Ethical dimensions of
leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kitchener, K. S. (1984). Intuition, critical evaluation, and ethical
principles: The foundation for ethical decisions in counseling
psychology. Counseling Psychologist, 12(3), 43–55.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development, Vol. 2: The
psychology of moral development. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (1998). Exploring
leadership: For college students who want to make a difference.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge:
How to keep getting extraordinary things done in organizations
(2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuenzi, M., Mayer, D. M., & Greenbaum, R. L. (2019). Creating an
ethical organizational environment: The relationship between
ethical leadership, ethical organizational climate, and unethical
behavior. Personnel Psychology, 73(1), 43–71.
Lawton, A. & Páez, I. (2015). Developing a framework for ethical
leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), 639–649.
Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Martinez, L. (2020, April 29). Navy delays Crozier decision, launches
broader investigation into carrier COVID-19 outbreak. ABC News.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/navy-delays-crozier-decision-
launches-broader-investigation-carrier/story?id=70404055
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R. L., Bardes, M., &
Salvador, R. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of
a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision
Processes, 108, 1–13.
McManus, R. M., Ward, S. J., & Perry, A. K. (2018). Ethical
leadership: A primer. Northampton, MA: Elgar.
Moore, C., Mayer, D. M., Chiang, F. F. T., Crossley, C., Karlesky, M.
J., & Birtch, T. A. (2019). Leaders matter morally: The role of
ethical leadership in shaping employee moral cognition and
misconduct. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(1), 123–145.
Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2015). Ethical leadership: Meta-analytic
evidence of criterion-related and incremental validity. Journal of
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/navy-delays-crozier-decision-launches-broader-investigation-carrier/story?id=70404055
Applied Psychology, 100(3), 948–965.
Padilla, A., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2007). The toxic triangle:
Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive
environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 176–194.
Plaisance, P. L. (2014). Virtue in media: The moral psychology of
U.S. exemplars in news and public relationships. Journalism and
Mass Media Quarterly, 91(2), 308–325.
Pojman, L. P. (1995). Ethical theory: Classical and contemporary
readings (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Price, T. (2008). Leadership ethics: An introduction. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Boston, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Resick, C. J., Hanges, P. J., Dickson, M. W., & Mitchelson, J. K.
(2006). A cross-cultural examination of the endorsement of ethical
leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 345–359.
Resick C. J., Martin, G. S., Keating, M. A., Dickson, M. W., Kwan, H.
K., & Peng, C. (2011). What ethical leadership means to me:
Asian, American, and European perspectives. Journal of Business
Ethics, 101(3), 435–457.
Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York,
NY: Praeger.
Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Noel, T. W. (1997). The effect of
ethical frameworks on perceptions of organizational justice.
Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1190–1207.
Schumann, P. L. (2001). A moral principles framework for human
resource management ethics. Human Resource Management
Review, 11, 93–111.
Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad
leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its
outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 138–158.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the
learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Simkins, J. D. (2020, April 16). “Regardless of the impact to my
career”—Crozier’s email revealed, Navy won’t rule out
reinstatement. NavyTimes. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-
navy/2020/04/16/regardless-of-the-impact-to-my-career-croziers-
email-revealed-navy-wont-rule-out-reinstatement/
Singh, N., Sengupta, S., & Dev, S. (2017). Toxicity in leadership:
Exploring its dimensions in the Indian context. International
Journal of Management Practice, 10(2), 109.
Thiel, C. E., Hardy, J. H., Peterson, D. R., Welsh, D., & Bonner, J. M.
(2018). Too many sheep in the flock? Span of control attenuates
the influence of ethical leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
103(12), 1324–1334.
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/04/16/regardless-of-the-impact-to-my-career-croziers-email-revealed-navy-wont-rule-out-reinstatement/
Treviño, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A
person–situation interactionist model. Academy of Management
Review, 11(3), 601–617.
Treviño, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative
investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership:
Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human
Relations, 56(1), 5–37.
Velasquez, M. G. (1992). Business ethics: Concepts and cases (3rd
ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wang, Z., Xu, H., & Liu, Y. (2018). How does ethical leadership
trickle down? Test of an integrative dual-process model. Journal of
Business Ethics, 153(3), 691–705.
Wayne, L. (2009, May 29). A promise to be ethical in an era of
immorality. The New York Times. Retrieved from
Wilson, S., & McCalman, J. (2017). Re-imagining ethical leadership
as leadership for the greater good. European Management
Journal, 35(2), 151–154.
Xu, A. J., Loi, R., & Ngo, H. (2016). Ethical leadership behavior and
employee justice perceptions: The mediating role of trust in
organization. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 493–504.
Yang, C. (2014). Does ethical leadership lead to happy workers? A
study on the impact of ethical leadership, subjective well-being,
and life happiness in the Chinese culture. Journal of Business
Ethics, 123(3), 513–525.
Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An
improved measure of ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 20(1), 38.
Ziesulewicz, G. (2020, May 5). Fired Theodore Roosevelt
commander Brett Crozier reassigned to San Diego. NavyTimes.
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/05/05/fired-tr-
commander-reassigned-to-san-diego/
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/05/05/fired-tr-commander-reassigned-to-san-diego/
CHAPTER 16
Aime, F., Humphrey, S., DeRue, D. S., & Paul, J. B. (2014). The
riddle of heterarchy: Power transitions in cross-functional teams.
Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 327–352.
Amos, B., & Klimoski, R. J. (2014). Courage: Making teamwork work
well. Group & Organizational Management, 39(1), 110–128.
Ancona, D., Bresman, H., & Caldwell, D. (2009). The X-factor: Six
steps to leading high-performing X-teams. Organizational
Dynamics, 38(3), 217–224.
Barge, J. K. (1996). Leadership skills and the dialectics of leadership
in group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.),
Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 301–
342). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Bergman, J. Z., Rentsch, J. R., Small, E. E., Davenport, S. W., &
Bergman, S. M. (2012). The shared leadership process in
decision-making teams. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(1),
17–42.
Bernstein, R. (2006). America’s coach: Life lessons and wisdom for
gold medal success: A biographical journey of the late hockey icon
Herb Brooks. New Brighton, MN: Bernstein Books.
Berry, G. R. (2011). Enhancing effectiveness on virtual teams:
Understanding why traditional team skills are insufficient. Journal
of Business Communication, 48(2), 186–206.
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more
in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness
considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151–1177.
Brown, J. (2014). “Miracle” players recall Herb Brooks as gruff, great.
NHL. https://www.nhl.com/news/miracle-players-recall-herb-
brooks-as-gruff-great/c-704235
Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., &
Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are
functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership Quarterly,
17, 288–307.
Cobb, A. T. (2012). Leading project teams: The basics of project
management and team leadership (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Coffey, W. (2005). The boys of winter: The untold story of a coach, a
dream and the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team. New York, NY:
Crown.
Cook, A. S., Zill, A., & Meyer, B. (2020, April). Observing leadership
as behavior in teams and herds—An ethological approach to
shared leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(2),
101296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.05.003
Cordery, J., Soo, C., Kirkman, B., Rosen, B., & Mathieu, J. (2009).
Leading parallel global virtual teams: Lessons from Alcoa.
Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 204–216.
https://www.nhl.com/news/miracle-players-recall-herb-brooks-as-gruff-great/c-704235
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.05.003
Day, D. V., Gronn, P., & Salas, E. (2004). Leadership capacity in
teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 857–880.
D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J. E., & Kukenberger, M. R. (2016). A
meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership–team
performance relations. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1964–1991.
Drecksel, G. L. (1991). Leadership research: Some issues.
Communication Yearbook, 14, 535–546.
Drescher, G., & Garbers, Y. (2016). Shared leadership and
commonality: A policy-capturing study. The Leadership Quarterly,
27, 200–217.
Dyer, W. G., Dyer, W. G., Jr., & Dyer, J. H. (2007). Team building:
Proven strategies for improving team performance (4th ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fisher, B. A. (1985, May). Leadership as medium: Treating
complexity in group communication research. Small Group
Behavior, 16(2), 167–196.
Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y.,
Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B. (1991). Taxonomic efforts in the
description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional
interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(4), 245–287.
Friedrich, T. L., Griffith, J. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2016). Collective
leadership behaviors: Evaluating the leader, team network, and
problem situation characteristics that influence their use. The
Leadership Quarterly, 27(2), 312–333.
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1996). Functional theory and
communication in decision-making and problem-solving groups:
An expanded view. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. D. Poole (Eds.),
Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 55–80).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Work teams in organizations: An orienting
framework. In J. R. Hackman (Ed.), Groups that work (and those
that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork (pp. 1–14).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great
performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hackman, J. R. (2012). From causes to conditions in group
research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 428–444.
Hackman, J. R., & Walton, R. E. (1986). Leading groups in
organizations. In P. S. Goodman & Associates (Eds.), Designing
effective work groups (pp. 72–119). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Han, S. J., & Beyerlein, M. (2016). Framing the effects of
multinational cultural diversity on virtual team processes. Small
Group Research, 47(4), 351–383.
Herb Brooks Foundation. (n.d.). About Coach Brooks.
https://www.herbbrooksfoundation.com/coachbrooks
Hill, N. S., & Bartol, K. M. (2016). Empowering leadership and
effective collaboration in geographically dispersed teams.
https://www.herbbrooksfoundation.com/coachbrooks
Personnel Psychology, 69, 159–198.
Hoch, J. E., & Kozlowski, W. J. (2014). Leading virtual teams:
Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team
leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(3), 390–403.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (1993). Leadership:
Enhancing the lessons of experience. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Humbley, L. A., O’Neill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2009). Virtual team
leadership: Perspectives for the field. In N. Kock (Ed.), Virtual
team leadership and collaborative engineering advancements:
Contemporary issues and implications (pp. 84–104). Hershey, NY:
Information Science Reference.
Hyatt, D. E., & Ruddy, T. M. (1997). An examination of the
relationship between work group characteristics and performance:
Once more into the breach. Personnel Psychology, 50, 553–585.
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005).
Teams in organizations: From input–process–output models to
IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543.
Ilgen, D. R., Major, D. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Sego, D. J. (1993).
Team research in the 1990s. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman
(Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and
directions (pp. 245–270). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2008). The discipline of teams.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Kinlaw, D. C. (1998). Superior teams: What they are and how to
develop them. Hampshire, UK: Grove.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., Watola, D. J., Jensen, J. M., Kim, B. H., &
Botero, I. C. (2009). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of
dynamic team leadership. In E. Salas, G. F. Goodwin, & C. S.
Burke (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-
disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 113–155). New
York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
LaFasto, F. M. J., & Larson, C. E. (1987). Team Excellence Survey.
Denver, CO: Author.
LaFasto, F. M. J., & Larson, C. E. (1996). Collaborative Team Leader
Instrument. Denver, CO: Author.
LaFasto, F. M. J., & Larson, C. E. (2001). When teams work best:
6,000 team members and leaders tell what it takes to succeed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lapin, A. (2015, January 22). The tale of the hockey players for
whom 1980 was no miracle on ice. NPR.
https://www.npr.org/2015/01/22/378609166/the-tale-of-the-hockey-
players-for-whom-1980-was-no-miracle-on-ice
Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go
right/what can go wrong. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Lencioni, P. (2005). Overcoming the five dysfunctions of a team: A
field guide for leaders, managers, and facilitators. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
https://www.npr.org/2015/01/22/378609166/the-tale-of-the-hockey-players-for-whom-1980-was-no-miracle-on-ice
Leslie, J., & Hoole, E. (2018). Leading virtual teams. Center for
Creative Leadership. https://www.ccl.org/articles/white-
papers/how-to-lead-virtual-teams/
Levi, D. (2011). Group dynamics for teams. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Mankin, D., Cohen, S. G., & Bikson, T. K. (1996). Teams and
technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in
teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership
structures and processes. Journal of Management, 36(1), 5–39.
Muethel, M., Gehrlein, S., & Hoegl, M. (2012). Socio-demographic
factors and shared leadership behaviors in dispersed teams:
Implications for human resource management. Human Resource
Management, 51(4), 525–548.
Nadler, D. A. (1998). Executive team effectiveness: Teamwork at the
top. In D. A. Nadler & J. L. Spencer (Eds.), Executive teams (pp.
21–39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Neck, C. P., & Manz, C. C. (1994). From groupthink to teamthink:
Toward the creation of constructive thought patterns in self-
managing work teams. Human Relations, 47(8), 929–952.
Parker, G. M. (1990). Team players and teamwork. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
https://www.ccl.org/articles/white-papers/how-to-lead-virtual-teams/
Paul, R., Drake, J. R., & Liang, H. (2016). Global virtual team
performance: The effect of coordination effectiveness, trust, and
team cohesion. IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication, 59(3), 186–202.
Pauleen, D. J. (2004). An inductively derived model of leader-
initiated relationship building with virtual team members. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 20(3), 227–256.
Pearce, C. L., Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. (2009). Where do we go
from here? Is shared leadership the key to team success?
Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 234–238.
Porter, G., & Beyerlein, M. (2000). Historic roots of team theory and
practice. In M. M. Beyerlein (Ed.), Work teams: Past, present and
future (pp. 3–24). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Salas, E., Burke, C. S., & Stagl, D. C. (2004). Developing teams and
team leaders: Strategies and principles. In D. V. Day, S. J.
Zaccaro, & S. M. Halpin (Eds.), Leader development for
transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp.
325–355). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Salas, E., Dinh, J., & Reyes, D. (2019). What makes a good team
leader? The Journal of Character & Leadership Development,
6(1), 88–100.
Schmidt, G. B. (2014). Virtual leadership: An important leadership
context. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(2), 182–187.
Schouten, A. P., van den Hooff, B., & Feldberg, F. (2016). Virtual
teamwork. Communication Research, 43(2), 180–210.
Scott, M. E. (2013). “Communicate through the roof”: A case study
analysis of the communicative rules and resources of an effective
global virtual team. Communication Quarterly, 61(3), 301–318.
Shevchenko, N. (2018, May 2). The fearsome Red Machine: The
meteoric rise and dramatic decline of Soviet hockey. Russia
Beyond. https://www.rbth.com/history/328171-rise-and-fall-soviet-
hockey
Shuffler, M. L., & Carter, D. R. (2018). Teamwork situated in
multiteam systems: Key lessons learned and future opportunities.
American Psychologist, 73(4), 390–406.
Solansky, S. T. (2008). Leadership style and team processes in self-
managed teams. Journal of Leadership and Organizational
Studies, 14(4), 332–341.
Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., & Burke, C. S. (2007). Best practices in team
leadership: What team leaders do to facilitate team effectiveness.
In J. A. Conger & R. E. Riggio (Eds.), The practice of leadership:
Developing the next generation of leaders (pp. 172–197). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Stewart, G. L., & Manz, C. C. (1995). Leadership for self-managing
work teams: A typology and integrative model. Human Relations,
48(7), 747–770.
https://www.rbth.com/history/328171-rise-and-fall-soviet-hockey
Thomas, G., Martin, R., & Riggio, R. E. (2013). Leading groups:
Leadership as a group process. Group Processes and Intergroup
Relations, 16(1), 3–16.
Timetoast. (n.d.). 1980 USA hockey team wins gold.
https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/1980-usa-olympic-hockey-
team-wins-gold
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (2010). Stages of small-group
development revisited. Group Facilitation: A Research and
Applications Journal, 10, 43–48.
Wageman, R., Fisher, C. M., & Hackman, J. R. (2009). Leading
teams when the time is right: Finding the best moments to act.
Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 192–203.
Wageman, R., Gardner, H., & Mortensen, M. (2012). The changing
ecology of teams: New directions for teams research. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 33, 301–315.
Wang, D., Waldman, D. A., & Zhang, Z. (2014). A meta-analysis of
shared leadership and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 99(2), 181–198.
Zaccaro, S. J., Ardison, S. D., & Orvis, K. L. (2004). Leadership in
virtual teams. In D. V. Day, S. J. Zaccaro, & S. M. Halpin (Eds.),
Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing
leaders for tomorrow (pp. 267–292). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zaccaro, S. J., Heinen, B., & Shuffler, M. (2009). Team leadership
and team effectiveness. In E. Salas, G. F. Goodwin, & C. S. Burke
https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/1980-usa-olympic-hockey-team-wins-gold
(Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-
disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 83–111). New York,
NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
Zaccaro, S. J., Rittman, A. L., & Marks, M. A. (2001). Team
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 451–483.
AUTHOR INDEX
Adams, J. A., 304, 307
Adams, R. B., 399
Aguinis, H., 168
Ahmad, M. I., 160
Aime, F., 463
Akselsson, R., 114
Alipour, K. K., 376
Allen, J. B., 207
Allen, S. J., 38, 39, 50
Alliger, G. M., 27, 31
Allison, S. T., 406
Alpaslan, C. M., 429
Alverà, M., 276, 277, 278
Alvesson, M., 234, 235
Amanatullah, E. T., 401
Ambrogi, M., 149
Ambrose, M. L., 429
Amos, B., 464
Amy, J., 68
Anand, S., 160, 170–171
Ancona, D., 475
Andersen, J. A., 95, 185, 186, 205, 206
Anderson, H. J., 185, 208, 234, 442
Anderson, R. A., 304, 307
Andrews, P. H., 401
Ang, S., 168
Ansah Ofei, A. M., 133
Anseel, F., 226
Antonakis, J., 1, 28, 32, 40, 185, 192, 196, 197, 206
Ardison, S. D., 475
Arena, M., 303, 304
Arenas, F. J., 37
Ariss, A. A., 337
Aritz, J., 5
Arjoon, S., 332
Armenakis, A. A., 170
Arnett, D. B., 323
Aronson, E., 422
Arthur, C. A., 206
Arthur, M. B., 190
Arvidsson, M., 114
Asamani, J. A., 133, 134, 153
Asamoah, E., 204
Ascough, K. W., 39
Asgari, S., 418
Ashford, S., 354
Ashkanasy, N. M., 39, 40
Atinc, G., 268
Atkinson, N., 414
Atwater, L., 161
Audette, B., 312, 313, 314
Aumann, K., 396
Avolio, B. J., 15, 187, 188, 189, 191, 194, 197, 202, 204, 205,
207, 209, 221, 222, 226, 227, 229, 230, 233, 236, 426
Axelrod, R. H., 207
Ayman, R., 399
Azanza, G., 232, 235
Babcock, L., 401
Bader, P., 30, 31
Baehrend, W. R., Jr., 452
Bailey, D. E., Jr., 304, 307
Bailey, J., 207
Bakar, H, A., 164
Baker, C. R., 160
Baker, R., 142
Bakker, A. B., 195
Balkundi, P., 12
Bande, B., 261, 264
Bandura, A., 229
Bao, Y., 269
Barbuto, J. E., Jr., 258, 260, 264
Bardes, M., 440
Barge, J. K., 465, 473, 475, 478
Barling, J., 187
Barnowski, A., 406
Bartol, K. M., 464
Bass, B. M., 1, 6, 15, 27, 28, 56, 112, 185, 187, 190, 191, 194,
197, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 220, 221, 226, 399, 426,
427, 430, 438, 439
Bastardoz, N., 377
Bauer, T. N., 264
Baur, J. E., 70, 185, 234, 442
Beauchamp, T. L., 429, 433, 434, 436
Beck, C. D., 260
Bedi, A., 429
Beer, L. T. de, 232
Begum, R., 96
Behrendt, P., 91, 94
Belkin, L., 396, 397
Bell, E., 402, 404
Bennett, W., 101
Bennis, W. G., 17, 28, 198, 199, 217, 220, 257
Benson, A. J., 377
Bentein, K., 260, 265
Benzie, H. J., 304
Berg, S. V., 304
Berger, M., 19, 20
Bergeron, D. M., 404
Bergman, J. Z., 464
Bergman, S. M., 464
Berkman, S., 337
Bernardi, R. A., 407
Bernerth, J. B., 170
Bernstein, R., 487
Berry, G. R., 473, 475
Bersoff, D. N., 403
Bess, J. L., 144
Beyerlein, M., 461, 474
Bielby, D. D., 401
Bielby, W. T., 401
Bikson, T. K., 461
Blair, C. A., 42
Blake, R. R., 84, 87, 88, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 103, 104,
107
Blake, S., 322
Blanchard, K. H., 109, 112, 114, 116, 117, 118, 128, 135, 257
Blascovich, J., 404
Block, C. J., 404
Block, P., 435
Boatner, C., 19
Boatwright, K. J., 116, 118
Bocarnea, M., 258, 264
Boehm, S. A., 189
Boesch, D., 395
Bommer, W. H., 235, 268
Bond, J., 396
Bongiorno, R., 397
Bonner, J. M., 440
Bono, J. E., 35
Book, E. W., 398
Booth-Butterfield, M., 164
Booysen, L., 335, 336
Borgida, E., 402, 403
Borowski, N., 416
Bosco, S. M., 407
Bosse, T., 115
Botero, I. C., 463
Boulouta, I., 399
Bowers, D. G., 87
Bowie, N. E., 427, 429, 433, 434, 436
Bowles, H. R., 396, 397, 401, 405
Boyatzis, R. E., 38, 39
Brandt, T., 200
Braun, S., 226
Brazil, D. M., 116
Bresman, H., 475
Breuer, C., 462
Brewer, M. B., 325
Brown, B., 237, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247
Brown, D. J., 381, 382
Brown, J., 488
Brown, M. E., 5, 422, 441
Bruch, H., 189
Bryman, A., 1, 8, 27, 94, 185, 188, 197, 204, 205, 206
Buch, R., 160
Buckingham, M., 36
Buckley, M. R., 70, 185, 234, 442
Bullis, R. C., 116
Burgess, D., 402
Burke, C. S., 463, 474, 482
Burns, J. M., 3, 4, 7, 8, 13, 15, 16, 186, 187, 188, 190, 204, 207,
220, 221, 399, 430–431, 434, 438, 439, 441, 445, 459
Busenbark, J. R., 142
Bussin, M., 257
Byron, T., 125
Cai, D. A., 94
Cai, Z., 162
Cain, S., 353
Caldwell, D., 475
Cameron, K. S., 234
Campion, M. A., 70, 330
Caputi, P., 194
Cardon, P., 5
Carew, P., 118
Carli, L. L., 395, 396, 397, 404, 405, 406, 417
Carlson, D. S., 265, 429
Carmeli, A., 161, 332, 335, 345
Carsten, M. K., 352, 353, 354, 361, 366, 375, 392
Carsten, R. K., 352
Carter, D. R., 323, 480
Cartwright, D., 86
Cartwright, S., 39
Caruso, D. R., 38, 40
Cashman, J., 157
Casimir, G., 93
Castro, S. L., 142, 164, 170
Catmull, E., 176, 177, 178
Cave, D., 398
Caza, A., 200
Chabris, C. F., 407
Chaleff, I., 352, 353, 355, 357–359, 361, 376, 380
Chan, A., 222
Chandler, A., 413
Chemers, M. M., 394, 402, 408
Chen, J. M., 401
Chen, Z., 268
Cherin, D. A., 323, 325, 337
Chibanda, D., 213, 214, 215, 216, 217
Chikeleze, M. C., 452
Childress, J. F., 433, 434
Chiniara, M., 260, 265
Chiu, C. Y. C., 12
Choi, S. B., 332
Chonko, L. B., 265
Chow, C., 201
Christie, A., 187, 208
Chrobot-Mason, D., 323, 324, 336
Chun, J. U., 37, 38, 118
Chung, B., 332
Chung, B. G., 345
Church, A. H., 337
Church, B., 103
Cianci, A. M., 236
Cicek, S. S., 261
Ciulla, J. B., 15, 422, 430, 431
Cleveland, J. N., 5
Clifton, D., 36
Cobb, A. T., 481, 482
Cochrane, E., 449, 450, 451
Coelho, A. F. M., 232
Coetzer, M. F., 257, 283
Coffey, W., 487, 488, 489, 490
Cogliser, C. C., 170
Cohen, P., 397
Cohen, S. G., 461
Colf, C., 19, 20
Collinson, D., 1
Columb, V. L., 407
Conger, J. A., 188, 190, 207, 431
Connelly, M. S., 61, 64, 67, 72
Connerley, M. L., 329
Cook, A., 400
Cook, A. S., 482
Coons, A. E., 86, 135
Cooper, B., 269
Cooper, C., 226, 234
Cooper, C. L., 404
Cooper, H., 448, 449, 450, 451
Copeland, N., 3
Corazzini, K., 304
Cordery, J., 475
Corrigall, E., 406
Corsaro, D., 323
Costa, P. T., 35
Cote, R., 116, 143
Couric, K., 403
Covey, S. R., 229, 257, 435
Cox, T. H., Jr., 322
Coyle, P. T., 377
Craig, L., 396
Crain, W. C., 424, 425
Credé, M., 207, 208
Cropanzano, R., 164
Crum, R., 50
Curphy, G. J., 374, 466
Curral, L., 305
Dalla Costa, J., 438
Dalton, K., 243
Dansereau, F., 118, 157, 159
Dasborough, M. T., 39, 164
Dasgupta, N., 418
Dass, P., 322
Daus, C. S., 40
Davenport, S. W., 464
Davey, D., 258
Davidson, M. N., 323, 327
Davies, A., 49, 50
Davies, P. G., 404
Day, D. V., 1, 160, 464
Dean, M., 332
Deaux, K., 402, 403
DeChurch, L. A., 142
Del Carmen Triana, M., 407
Demirtas, O., 429
Den Hartog, D. N., 440, 441
Dennis, R. S., 258, 264
DePree, M., 257, 435
DeRue, D. S., 288, 463, 464
DeRue, S., 354
Dessler, G., 132
Dev, S., 431
DeVader, C. L., 27, 31
de Zilwa, D., 367
Dickson, M. W., 439
Diekmann, K. A., 401
Dinh, J., 467, 468, 469, 470, 483
Dinh, J. E., 1, 27, 40, 94, 185, 204
D’Innocenzo, L., 481
Dionne, S. D., 118
Dobbin, F., 322
Dobbins, G. H., 399
Dodge, K. A., 402
Dodson, S. J., 401
Drake, J. R., 461–462
Drecksel, G. L., 465
Drescher, G., 464
Drew, D., 150
Driscoll, D. M., 402
Duan, C., 408
Dubrow, S., 30
Duckworth, A. L., 33
Duell, R., 115
Dulebohn, J. H., 168, 235, 268
Dutton, J. E., 234
Dwertmann, D. J. G., 189
Dyer, J. H., 474
Dyer, W. G., 474
Dyer, W. G., Jr., 474
Dysvik, A., 160
Eagly, A. H., 142, 222, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402,
403, 404, 405, 406, 417, 418
Ebesu Hubbard, A., 65
Echtenkamp, B. A., 404
Edmondson, A. C., 331, 332, 335
Effertz, J., 399
Efros, D., 244
Ehr, R. J., 133
Ehrhart, K. H., 332
Ehrhart, M. G., 254, 265
Eibach, R. P., 404
Eilam, G., 222, 230
Einola, K., 234, 235
Eisenbeiss, S. A., 429, 442
Ek, Å., 114
Elahee, M. N., 96
Elliott, S., 276
Ellis, D. G., 9
Ellman, N., 395
Ely, R. J., 323, 324, 327
Emich, K. J., 10
Engle, R. L., 96
Ensher, E. A., 397, 404
Epitropaki, O., 161, 376, 377
Erdogan, B., 264
Ernst, C., 323, 324
Ete, Z., 37
Eubank, D., 307
Eva, N., 268, 269
Evanecky, D., 169
Evans, M. G., 132, 142
Eys, M., 377
Fahrbach, C. M., 429
Fairhurst, G. T., 5, 170, 354
Fan, H., 125
Farmer, S. M., 159
Fayol, H., 16
Feild, H. S., 170
Feldberg, F., 462
Feldman, D. C., 440, 441
Fellows, R., 95
Feloni, R., 49
Fenn, L., 68
Fenzel, L. M., 402
Ferdman, B. M., 323, 324, 325, 327, 336
Fernandez, C. F., 115, 116, 117
Fernández-Ferrín, P., 264
Fernando, M., 194
Ferrari, M., 302
Fields, D. L., 254, 264, 283
Findlay, D., 244
Fink, E. L., 94
Fisher, B. A., 9, 481
Fisher, C. M., 468
Fiske, S. T., 402, 403
Fjeldstad, O. D., 323
Fleishman, E. A., 6, 56, 466, 472
Fletcher, J. K., 401
Folkman, J., 400
Follett, M. P., 352
Forsyth, D. R., 407
Foti, R. J., 9, 377
Frankena, W., 429
Freedman, J., 40
French, J. R., Jr., 12
Frese, M., 141
Frey, S., 226
Frieder, R., 42
Friedman, U., 416
Friedrich, T. L., 481
Frisch, C., 429
Fry, L. W., 5, 226
Fuchs, D., 143
Funk, P., 399
Gafni, M., 449
Galanos, A. N., 304, 307
Galinsky, A., 404
Galinsky, E., 396
Gandolfi, F., 270
Garbers, Y., 464
Gardner, H., 36, 461
Gardner, J. W., 1
Gardner, W. L., 1, 185, 204, 222, 226, 227, 228, 233
Garofoli, J., 449
Gasiorek, J., 65
Gatling, A., 235
Geffken, D., 307
Gehrlein, S., 461
Geldenhuys, M., 257
Gelfand, M., 401
Gelles, D., 50
Gentry, W. A., 38
George, B., 5, 223–226, 231, 234, 242, 247, 251
Gergen, D., 270
Gerhardt, M. W., 35
Gerstner, C. R., 160
Gettman, H., 401
Giambalvo, E., 149
Gibbons, T. C., 189, 202
Gibbons-Neff, T., 448, 449, 450, 451
Gigliotti, R. A., 7
Gilbert, J. A., 64, 65, 322
Gilbert, N. L., 304
Gilbert, S., 191
Giles, W. F., 170
Gilligan, C., 435, 439
Gilroy, F. D., 402
Gini, A., 429
Ginnett, R. C., 374, 466
Glasø, L., 117
Glass, B., 408
Glass, C., 400
Glick, P., 401, 402, 406
Goldberg, L. R., 35
Goldin, C., 402
Goldman, P., 144
Goleman, D., 38, 39, 40
Gong, Z., 38
Goodwin, R. D., 401
Gordon, R., 61
Göritz, A. S., 91
Gottfredson, R. K., 168, 170, 171, 260
Gouran, D. S., 476
Graeff, C. L., 115, 116, 117, 119
Graen, G. B., 157, 159, 160, 162, 164, 169, 171, 172, 180
Graham, J. W., 4, 254, 255, 267
Grashow, A., 285
Graves, L. M., 395, 397, 403
Greder, A., 151
Green, J. P., 30
Green, S., 429
Green, S. G., 10
Greenbaum, R. L., 440
Greenleaf, R. K., 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 264, 265, 266, 267,
278, 283, 435, 439, 459
Greenspan, R., 100
Greenwald, A. G., 337
Grégoire, J., 40
Griffin, M., 187
Griffith, J. A., 70, 185, 234, 442, 481
Grint, K., 1
Gronn, P., 464
Gu, J., 115, 116, 118
Guillaume, Y., 161, 167
Gurdjian, P., 71
Gurin, P., 408
Gutek, B. A., 397, 399
Hackman, J. R., 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 473
Haden, S. P., 268
Haga, W., 157, 159
Halbeisen, T., 71
Hale, J. R., 254
Hall, D. T., 405
Halpert, M., 308
Halpin, A. W., 135
Hamilton, D. L., 402
Hamstra, M. R., 195
Han, A., 125
Han, S. J., 474
Hanges, P. J., 439
Hannah, S. T., 236
Hansbrough, T. K., 377
Harding, F. D., 56, 60, 61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 69, 70, 79, 82
Hardy, J., 377
Hardy, J. H., 440
Hardy, L., 206
Harlow, T., 312
Harms, P. D., 207, 208, 353
Harris, K. J., 161, 165
Harrison, D. A., 5, 441
Harter, N., 169
Hartman, L. P., 422
Hartnell, C. A., 230, 253, 254
Hartwell, C. J., 330
Hashmi, N., 407
Haslam, S. A., 233, 397, 398
Hassan, S., 441
Hayek, M., 268
Hays-Thomas, R., 322
Headrick, J., 301
Heaphy, E. D., 170
Hebl, M., 338
Heeren, A., 40
Heifetz, R. A., 5, 285, 286, 287, 288, 290, 292, 293, 303, 304,
305, 306, 320, 430, 441, 445, 459
Heilman, M. E., 143, 402, 403
Heinen, B., 470
Heinitz, K., 194
Hekman, D. R., 5
Helgesen, S., 237–239, 398
Heller, T., 7
Hemphill, J. K., 3, 86, 135
Henderson, D. J., 259, 261
Henneberg, S. C., 323
Herman, H. M. Tse, 162, 167
Hersby, M. D., 397
Hersey, P., 109, 112, 114, 116, 117, 135
Hertel, G., 462
Hess, A., 312, 396
Hesse, H., 254, 283
Hewlett, S. A., 397
Hickman, G. R., 1
Higgs, C., 62
Hill, L., 176, 177, 178
Hill, N. S., 160, 167, 464
Hinkin, T. R., 197, 205
Hirak, R., 332
Hirokawa, R. Y., 476
Hjelmgaard, K., 413, 414, 416
Hlalele, D., 304
Hoch, J. E., 235, 268, 464
Hodge, L., 285
Hodges, P., 257
Hoegl, M., 461
Hoffman, L. R., 9
Hogan, R., 432
Hogg, M. A., 10
Hollander, E. P., 5, 7, 324
Hollander, S., 416
Hollenbeck, J. R., 462, 463
Homan, A. C., 330
Hoole, E., 462
Horsman, P., 191
House, R. J., 32, 132, 134, 135, 136, 139, 140, 142, 144, 188,
190, 196, 206
Howell, J. M., 15, 187, 205, 207, 221
Hoyt, C. L., 402, 403, 404, 406, 408
Hsu, T., 397
Hu, J., 160, 259, 265
Hu, Y., 232, 332
Huang, L., 375
Huang, Y. H., 123, 124
Hüffmeier, J., 462
Hufnagel, J., 304
Hughes, R. L., 374, 466
Humbley, L. A., 474
Humphrey, R., 228
Humphrey, S., 463
Hunt, J. G., 188
Hunter, E. M., 260, 264, 265
Hunter, S. T., 207
Huppenbauer, M., 429
Huse, M., 407
Hyatt, D. E., 470, 478
Hymowitz, C., 395
Ibarra, H., 325
Iguisi, O., 96
Ilgen, D. R., 462, 463, 471
Ilies, R., 35, 93, 161, 164, 227
Indvik, J., 132, 142, 153
Ingersoll, A. R., 400
Ishio, Y., 397
Ismay, J., 448, 449, 450
Ivancevich, J. M., 322
Jackson, A. E., 48
Jackson, G., 1
Jacobs, T. O., 56
Jacobson, M. B., 399
Jacquart, P., 28, 32
Jago, A. G., 7, 8, 27
Jaksa, J. A., 437
Jaschik, S., 312
Javed, B., 332, 334
Jensen, J. M., 463
Jensen, M. A. C., 473
Jermier, J. M., 141, 142
Jiao, X., 38
Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., 399, 406
Johansson, C. R., 114
Johnson, B. T., 142, 399
Johnson, C. E., 125
Johnson, C. R., 422
Johnson, M., 462
Johnson, R. E., 141
Johnson, R. W., 142
Johnson, S., 404
Johnston, W. B., 322
Jones, A., 285, 414
Jong, J., 208
Judge, T. A., 35, 93, 94
Jundt, D., 462
Jung, D., 28
Jung, D. I., 201, 209
Kacmar, K. M., 161, 265
Kahn, R. L., 86, 87
Kaiser, R. B., 399, 432
Kalev, A., 322
Kanfer, R., 141
Kang, H. J. A., 235
Kang, J. H., 160
Kang, S.-W., 332
Kanter, R., 403
Kanungo, R. N., 190, 422, 427, 434
Karam, E. P., 464
Karau, S. J., 399, 401, 402, 403, 418
Kark, R., 376
Katz, D., 86, 161
Katz, R. L., 56, 57, 65, 67, 69, 82
Katzenbach, J. R., 466
Keller, J., 385, 386
Keller, R. T., 194
Kellerman, B., 11, 72, 353, 355, 360, 361, 376
Kelley, K. M., 164
Kelley, R. E., 352, 355, 356–357, 361, 376, 386, 387
Kellner, F., 142
Kelloway, E. K., 191
Kelly, D. R., 33
Kelly, E., 322
Kelly, J., 395
Kemp, C., 30, 31
Kernis, M. H., 227, 229
Kerns, C. D., 61
Kerr, S., 142
Khan, A. K., 332
Kidder, T., 34, 272
Killgore, W. D., 40
Kim, B. H., 463
Kim, J. S., 235
King, E. B., 338
Kinlaw, D. C., 474
Kirby, T. A., 397
Kirkman, B., 475
Kirkpatrick, S. A., 27, 30, 31
Kitchener, K. S., 433, 434
Kite, M., 402
Klau, M., 304
Klimoski, R. J., 464
Kline, T. J. B., 474
Klonsky, B. G., 142, 399
Knippenberg, D. van, 205, 206, 330, 429
Knoke, D., 397
Koenig, A. M., 402, 406
Kohlberg, L., 423, 424, 425, 430, 451
Koigi, B., 78
Kolze, M., 30
Komives, S. R., 433
Konrad, A. M., 322, 406
Korabik, K., 399
Kossek, E. E., 330
Kotsou, I., 40
Kotter, J. P., 16, 17
Kouzes, J. M., 198, 199–201, 217, 220, 435
Koval, C. Z., 143, 404
Kozlowski, S. W. J., 463
Kozlowski, W. J., 464
Kraiger, K., 39
Krasikova, D. V., 10
Kray, L. J., 404
Kroeck, K. G., 194
Kuenzi, M., 540
Kuhnert, K. W., 191, 195
Kukenberger, M. R., 481
Kumar, A., 226, 232
Kunda, Z., 402
Kuvaas, B., 160
Kwan, H. K., 268
LaFasto, F. M. J., 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 483, 491
Lai, L., 401
Laiho, M., 200
Lam, S. S. K., 269
Landay, K., 207
Lane, K., 71
Lapierre, L. M., 353
Lapin, A., 487
Larkin, M., 312
Larson, C. E., 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 483, 491
Larsson, J., 114
Laschever, S., 401
Laub, J. A., 258
Laurie, D. L., 285, 290
Lawton, A., 422
LeBreton, J. M., 10
Lee, A., 161, 167
Lee, Y., 125
Legood, A., 232
Lemoine, G. J., 230, 231, 253, 268
Lencioni, P., 466
Leroy, H., 226, 228, 230, 253
Leslie, J., 462
Lettl, C., 323
Levashina, J., 330
Levi, D., 463, 482
Levin, S., 49
Lévy Mangin, J., 232
Lewis, P., 195
Lewis, S., 404
Leys, C., 40
Li, C., 232, 269
Li, X., 167
Li, Y., 232
Liang, H., 461–462
Liao, C., 261
Liao, Z., 167
Liden, R. C., 160, 162, 171, 172, 259, 261, 264, 265, 267, 268,
269, 270, 279, 283
Lieb, P., 406
Likert, R., 86
Lin, C., 232
Lind, E. A., 325, 333
Linehan, C., 397
Linnehan, F., 322
Linsky, M., 285, 293, 306
Lipman-Blumen, J., 353, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 386, 392, 431
Liska, L. Z., 142
Littrell, R. F., 93, 94
Liu, A. M. M., 95
Liu, B., 332
Liu, S., 232
Liu, W., 167
Liu, Y., 440
Livingston, R. W., 143, 404
Locke, E. A., 27, 30, 31
Locke, E. E., 426
Loi, R., 162, 429
Lord, R. G., 27, 29, 31, 374, 376
Lovelace, J. B., 207
Lowe, K. B., 185, 194, 204, 209, 352
Lucas, N., 433
Luthans, F., 226, 227, 229, 230, 232, 233, 236
Lynch, L., 408
Lyons, S. T., 208
Lyubovnikova, J., 232
Ma, A., 143, 404
MacKie, D., 36
Madlock, P. E., 164
Maher, K. J., 374
Mahler, J., 383
Mahsud, R., 441
Mainemelis, C., 376
Major, D. A., 463
Makhijani, M. G., 142, 399
Malik, M., 160, 161
Malone, T. M., 407
Mamakouka, A., 232
Manicom, D., 304
Mankin, D., 461
Mann, R. D., 29, 31
Manz, C. C., 463, 464, 477
Marion, R., 286
Markgraff, P., 150, 151, 152
Marks, M. A., 64, 463
Marlowe, H. A., 30
Marques, C., 232, 235
Marques-Quinteiro, P., 305
Marstand, A. F., 167
Martin, G. S., 439
Martin, J., 325
Martin, M. T., 95
Martin, R., 161, 167, 462
Martin, S. R., 10
Martinez, L., 451
Martinez, P. N., 376
Maslyn, J. M., 159, 161, 170, 171
Mason, C., 187, 202
Matara, E., 78
Mathieu, J. E., 475, 481
Matta, F. K., 169
Matthews, M. D., 33
Mattingly, B., 149, 150
Mattingly, V., 39
Mattis, M., 404
Matz, S., 91
Maume, D. J., Jr., 395
Mayer, D. M., 334, 440
Mayer, J. D., 38, 40
McCain, K. D., 301
McCalman, J., 439, 442
McCanse, A. A., 87, 93, 95, 104
McCauley, C. D., 336, 397
McClane, W. E., 169
McClean, E. J., 10
McCrae, R. R., 35
McGhee, D. E., 337
McGinn, K. L., 396, 397, 401, 405
McGregor, R., 354
McIntosh, P., 337
McIntosh, T., 62
McKelvey, B., 286
McMahon, T. R., 433
McManus, R. M., 422
Meindl, J. R., 352, 366
Meirovich, G., 115, 116, 118
Melia, M., 68
Memon, Z. A., 115
Mendez, M. J., 142
Mendonca, M., 427, 434
Meuser, J. D., 259, 261, 264
Meyer, B., 482
Miao, C., 228
Mikolajczak, M., 40
Miles, G., 323
Miles, R. E., 232
Miller, T., 407
Min-Huei, C., 123
Mintz, S., 235
Misumi, J., 87, 95
Mitchell, A. A., 402
Mitchell, R., 332
Mitchell, R. R., 132, 134, 136, 139, 140, 142
Mitchelson, J. K., 439
Modell, A. H., 293
Mohammed, I., 204
Mohammed, S., 376
Mohammed, Y. G., 194
Molero, F., 232
Mols, F., 233
Moore, B. V., 2
Moore, C., 442
Moorhead, J., 76, 77
Mor Barak, M. E., 323, 325, 337
Morgan Roberts, L., 336
Morgenroth, T., 397
Morgeson, F. P., 70, 161, 227, 330, 464, 482
Morgeson, R. P., 164
Moriano, J. A., 232
Morris, S., 399
Morrison, A., 397
Morrissey, L., 306
Mortensen, M., 461
Mouton, J. S., 84, 87–90, 91, 93, 94, 96, 98, 103, 107
Muethel, M., 461, 464
Mugisha, S., 304
Mujtaba, B. G., 96
Mulcahy, M., 397
Mumford, M. D., 1, 56, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72,
79, 82, 481
Mumford, T. V., 70
Murphy, S. E., 397, 402, 404, 408
Musk, E., 45, 47–50
Mussman, J., 244
Naab, F., 133
Nadler, D. A., 28, 466
Nadworny, E., 312
Nahrgang, J. D., 161, 164, 227
Nanus, B., 17, 28, 198–199, 217, 220
Naqvi, S. M. M. R., 332
Naseem, M. A., 160
Naudé, P., 323
Neck, C. P., 477
Nederman, C., 14
Neely, B. H., 207
Neider, L. L., 142
Nelson, R., 109
Nelson, T., 303, 304, 305
Nemanich, L. A., 194
Nembhard, I. M., 331, 332, 335
Neubert, M. J., 265
Newman, A., 269
Ng, E. S., 208
Ng, T. W., 440, 441
Ng, Y. N., 93
Ngo, H., 429
Nicholls, J., 204
Nichols, B., 151
Nielsen, S., 407
Niessen, C., 161
Nieva, V. E., 397
Nishii, L. H., 330, 334, 336
Njeru, L., 78
Nkomo, S. M., 337, 402, 404
Noel, T. W., 429
Northouse, P. G., 336
Notgrass, D., 186, 195, 205
Nothaft, P., 150
Nuijten, I., 258
Nuwer, R., 213
Offermann, L. R., 337
Oh, I. S., 42
Ohlott, P. J., 397
Oke, A., 254
Okimoto, T. G., 233
Omilion-Hodges, L. M., 160, 164
O’Neill, T. A., 474
Organ, D. W., 161
Orvis, K. L., 475
Orzano, J., 307
Ospina, S., 170
Otero-Neira, C., 261, 264
Owens, B. P., 5
Ozyilmaz, A., 261
Packer, A. H., 322
Padilla, A., 15, 432
Páez, I., 422
Page, D., 264
Pailhe, A., 396
Palmieri, R. E., 42
Panaccio, A., 259
Parisi-Carew, E., 118
Park, B. I., 332
Parker, B., 322
Parker, G. M., 463
Parker, S., 187
Passos, A. M., 305
Patera, J. L., 354
Patterson, K. A., 257
Paul, J. B., 463
Paul, R., 461–462
Pauleen, D. J., 474
Paz-Aparicio, C., 42
Pearce, C. L., 464
Pellegrini, E. K., 96
Peng, A. C., 269, 332
Pentland, A., 407
Perrewe, P. L., 429
Perrot, S., 264
Perry, A. K., 422
Peters, T. J., 4
Peterson, C., 33, 36
Peterson, D. R., 440
Peterson, S. J., 222
Pettigrew, T. F., 325
Peus, C., 226, 228
Piccolo, R., 93
Pietraszewski, D., 375
Pillai, R., 206
Pina e Cunha, M., 232, 235
Plaisance, P. L., 423
Platz, S. J., 399
Podsakoff, N. P., 1
Podsakoff, P. M., 1
Pojman, L. P., 428, 429
Popper, M., 374
Porter, G., 461
Posner, B. Z., 11, 198, 199–201, 217, 220, 435
Postmes, T., 398
Powell, G. N., 395, 397, 399, 403
Preece, J., 304
Price, T., 422
Pritchard, M. S., 437
Prussia, G. E., 441
Pryce, A., 304
Ptacek, J. K., 164
Puni, A., 204
Purdie-Vaughns, V., 404
Qi, L., 332
Qian, S., 228
Quinn, R. E., 234
Ragins, B. R., 322, 404
Ramalingam, B., 302
Ramos, C., 323
Ramos-Villagrasa, P., 305
Randel, A. E., 328, 329, 331, 332, 335
Randolph-Seng, B., 159, 161, 168, 268
Rath, T., 36
Raven, B. H., 12
Rawls, J., 436
Reb, J., 404
Reddin, W. J., 109
Rego, A., 232, 235
Rehman, R. ur, 160
Reiter-Palmon, R., 335
Rentsch, J. R., 464
Resick, C. J., 439
Restrepo, S., 244
Reyes, D., 467, 468, 469, 470, 483
Ribeiro, N. M. P., 232
Ricci, R., 307
Riggio, R. E., 15, 185, 187, 188, 352, 353, 462
Ristikari, T., 402
Ritchie, J. E., Jr., 406
Rittenberg, A., 152
Rittman, A. L., 463
Roberson, Q. M., 322, 325, 330, 338
Roberts, J. A., 265
Roberts, R. P., 236
Roberts, T. P., 115, 118
Robin, M., 268
Rocha, Á., 71
Rockstuhl, T., 168
Rodriguez, S., 49
Ronen, Z., 276
Rose, D. M., 61
Rosen, B., 475
Rosener, J., 398
Rosenfeld, E., 308
Rosette, A. S., 143, 404
Rost, J. C., 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 15, 17, 439
Rotolo, C. T., 337
Rouse, C., 402
Rowe, W. G., 235
Rowley, K., 285
Rowlinson, S., 95
Rowold, J., 194
Rubel, T., 399
Ruben, B. D., 7
Ruddy, T. M., 470, 478
Ruderman, M. N., 336, 397
Rudman, L. A., 401, 406
Russell, R. F., 257
Ryan, A. M., 322
Ryan, M. K., 397, 398
Sacket, P. R., 36
Sage, A., 49
Salas, E., 463, 464, 467, 468, 469, 470, 482, 483
Salovey, P., 38, 40
Salvador, R., 440
Sanchez, D., 5
Sandberg, S., 395, 416
Sanders, S., 369
Santora, J. C., 258, 260
Sarros, J. C., 258, 260, 264
Sassenberg, K., 195
Scandura, T. A., 96, 169, 170, 172, 206, 226
Schaubroeck, J. M., 269, 332
Schein, V. E., 406
Schellhardt, T. D., 395
Scherer, J. A., 37
Schilling, J., 431
Schmidt, G. B., 462
Schminke, M., 429
Schmitt, E., 448, 449, 450, 451
Schouten, A. P., 462
Schriesheim, C. A., 142, 164, 170, 171, 197, 226
Schriesheim, J. R., 142
Schumann, P. L., 427
Schutz, W. C., 324, 371
Schwartz, J. L. K., 337
Schwartz, M., 413
Schwartz, S. H., 399
Schwarz, G., 269
Schweitzer, L., 208
Schyns, B., 159, 160, 369, 431
Scott, M. E., 462
Sculley, J., 32
Searle, T. P., 260
Seashore, S. E., 87
Seeman, M., 3
Sego, D. J., 463
Sekaquaptewa, D., 403
Seligman, M. E. P., 36
Sels, L., 226
Semedo, A. S. D., 232, 235
Sendjaya, S., 258, 260, 264, 268, 269
Senge, P. M., 257, 435
Sengupta, S., 431
Seo, M., 160
Sergent, K., 398
Shamir, B., 189, 190, 202, 205, 222, 230, 352
Shankman, M. L., 38, 39, 50
Shapiro, S., 302
Sheer, V. C., 164
Shevchenko, N., 487
Shore, L. M., 5, 168, 325, 332
Shuffler, M. L., 470, 480
Shull, A. C., 337
Sidani, Y. M., 235
Silman, A., 102, 103
Simkins, J. D., 448, 449
Simon, S., 403, 404
Simonet, D. V., 18
Simonton, D. K., 32
Sims, H. P., 464
Sims, P., 223
Sinder, R., 285
Singh, N., 431
Sitkin, S. B., 205, 206
Sivasubramaniam, N., 194, 197
Skinnell, K., 404
Slaski, M., 39
Small, D. A., 401
Small, E. E., 464
Smith, A., 408
Smith, D. K., 466
Smith, J. A., 9
Smith, K., 304
Snow, C. C., 323
Snow, S., 49
Solansky, S. T., 464
Solaz, A., 396
Song, Z., 167
Soo, C., 475
Sosik, J. J., 28, 37, 38, 188, 209
Sousa, F., 232, 235
Sousa, M., 260, 268
Sousa, M. J., 71
Sparrowe, R. T., 172
Spears, L. C., 254, 255, 256, 257, 283
Spencer, S. J., 402, 404
Spurk, D., 161
Squires, V., 303, 304, 305
Stagl, D. C., 482
Stagl, K. C., 463
Stajkovic, A. D., 398
Stander, F. W., 232
Stander, M. W., 232
Stangor, C., 408
Steele, C. M., 404
Steffens, N. K., 233
Steidlmeier, P., 15, 187, 221, 226, 426, 427, 430, 438, 439
Sternberg, R. J., 32
Stewart, A. J., 408
Stewart, G. L., 463
Stilwell, D., 160
Stinson, J. E., 142
Stogdill, R. M., 2, 27, 28, 29, 31, 43, 84, 86, 104, 135
Stone, A. G., 257
Stone, B., 33
Stone, S., 270
Strauss, J. P., 329
Streicher, B., 226
Stroessner, S. J., 402
Stumpf, S. A., 133
Sudkämper, A., 397
Sui, Y., 232
Sultan, A., 406
Sunderman, H. M., 301, 302
Sutcliffe, K. M., 230
Sy, T., 375
Tajfel, H., 374
Tamkins, M. M., 143
Tatoglu, E., 96
Tayyeb, H. H., 332
Tejeda, M. J., 206
Tengblad, S., 206
Tepper, B. J., 13
Tett, R. P., 18
Thiel, C. E., 440
Thoits, P. A., 401
Thomas, D. A., 323, 324, 327
Thomas, G., 161, 167, 462
Thompson, G., 117, 118
Thompson, L., 404
Thompson, M., 403
Thor, K. K., 65
Thygeson, M., 306, 307
Tims, M., 195
Tinsley, C. H., 401
Todd, E. M., 62
Tourish, D., 205
Townsend, B., 404
Tracey, J. B., 205
Tran, T. B. H., 332
Treur, J., 115
Treviño, L. K., 5, 422, 429, 441
Troth, A. C., 162, 167
Tsakumis, G. T., 236
Tsotetsi, C. T., 304
Tsui, A. S., 399
Tuckman, B. W., 473
Tuller, M. D., 337
Turner, J. C., 374
Turner, J. R., 142
Turner, N., 187, 232
Tushman, M. L., 28
Twenge, J. M., 406
Tyler, T. R., 325, 333
Tymon, W. G., 133
Uhl-Bien, M., 1, 160, 162, 164, 169, 170, 171, 180, 286, 287,
288, 303, 304, 324, 352, 353, 354, 362, 366, 375, 392
Ulstad, V., 306
vanDam, N. H. M., 133
van den Hooff, B., 462
van der Leeden, R., 399
van der Wal, C. N., 115
van Dierendonck, D., 253, 258, 260, 268, 269
Van Dyne, L., 169
van Engen, M. L., 399, 406
van Ginkel, W. P., 330
van Knippenberg, D., 205, 206, 330, 429
Van Til, J., 7
Van Velsor, E., 336, 337, 338
Van Vugt, M., 377
Van Yperen, N. W., 195
Varela-Neira, C., 261, 264
Vecchio, R. P., 115, 116, 117, 118
Velasquez, M. G., 428
Vidyarthi, P. R., 160
Vinberg, S., 114
Vinkenburg, C. J., 406
Vogus, T. J., 230
Volmer, J., 161
Von Glinow, M. A., 397
Voss, K., 19
Vroom, V. H., 115, 133
Wageman, R., 461, 468, 470, 473, 481
Waldman, D. A., 464
Walker, C. B., 94
Walker, H. J., 170
Walker, R., 5
Wallace, W. T., 399
Wallen, A. S., 143
Wallenfeldt, J., 414, 415
Wallner, P. J., 20
Walmsley, P. T., 36
Walton, R. E., 468, 469, 471
Walumbwa, F. O., 222, 227, 233, 248, 254, 265
Wan, D., 160
Wang, B., 124
Wang, D., 232, 332, 464
Wang, G., 42
Wang, H., 232
Wang, M. M., 268
Wang, Z., 440
Ward, S. J., 422
Warner, J., 395
Washington, E. F., 404
Wasserman, I. C., 336
Waterman, R. H., 4
Watola, D. J., 463
Watson, C., 9
Wayne, L., 435
Wayne, S. J., 160, 259, 261
Weber, M., 188
Weber, T. J., 222
Wei, F., 232
Wei, X., 332
Weinberg, F. J., 12
Weisberg, D., 101, 102
Weiss, H. M., 164
Welsh, D., 440
Wernsing, T. S., 222, 233, 236
Wescher, J. S., 226
West, B. J., 354
Wheatley, M., 257
Wheeler, A. R., 161
Wheeler, D. W., 258, 264
Whiteley, G., 102
Whittington, J. L., 226
Wild, L., 302
Willemsen, T. M., 399
Williams, C. L., 395
Williams, J., 397, 404
Williams, R. J., 399
Williams, W. A., 268
Wilson, S., 439, 442
Winer, B. J., 135
Winfrey, O., 244
Winnicott, D. W., 293
Winston, B., 264, 283
Wirth, L., 405
Wisse, B., 195, 369
Wittmann, C. M., 323
Wodon, Q., 77, 78
Wofford, J. C., 142
Wolfe, C. J., 38
Wolverton, B., 384, 385
Wong, P. T. P., 258, 264
Wood, W., 398
Woodruff, C. T., 10
Woolley, A. W., 407
Wright, S. L., 170
Wu, A., 201
Wu, D., 235, 268
Wu, J., 261
Wu, Y., 232
Xanthopoulou, D., 195
Xu, A. J., 162, 429
Xu, B., 232, 235
Xu, H., 440
Yammarino, F. J., 56, 118, 164, 190
Yang, C., 429
Yang, I., 196
Yang, Y., 322
Yavuz, M., 231
Ye, Q., 332
Yelsma, P., 368
Yetton, P. W., 115
Yukl, G. A., 87, 91, 94, 95, 115, 116, 119, 170, 205, 207, 441
Zaccaro, S. J., 28, 30, 31, 32, 43, 56, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67,
69, 70, 72, 79, 82, 463, 465, 466, 469, 470, 475, 478, 481
Zahneis, M., 312, 313
Zaki, Y., 77
Zakin, C., 101, 102
Zaleznik, A., 18, 28, 352, 355, 356, 361, 376
Zander, A., 86
Zenger, J., 400
Zerilli, D. H., 164
Zhang, L., 5
Zhang, Y., 232
Zhang, Z., 464
Zhao, H., 259, 269
Zhao, S., 232
Zhou, A. Q., 268
Zhou, M., 268
Zhou, X., 142, 164
Zhu, J., 268
Zhu, W., 188
Ziesulewicz, G., 451
Zigarmi, D., 109, 115, 118, 128
Zigarmi, P., 109, 128
Zill, A., 482
Ziv, E., 335
Zonia, S. C., 330
SUBJECT INDEX
Abruzzo, D., 120–121
Abusive supervision, 13
Achievement-oriented leadership, 136–137, 140, 140 (table)
Acquired intelligence, 61
ACS model. See Assessment-challenge-support (ACS) model
Active management by exception, 196
Activist follower, 361
Adaptive leadership, 5 (box)
adaptive challenges, 289–293
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire, 315–319
adaptive work, 299–300
advantages, 302–304
application, 306–307
assessment, 315–319
biases, 286
biological bias, 286
case studies, 308–314
complexity leadership theory, 287–288
definition, 286–288
disadvantages, 304–305
disciplined attention, 296–297
distress regulation, 293–296
follower centered approach, 303
framework, 306 (figure)
“getting on the balcony” behavior, 290–291
giving work back to people, 297–298
holding environment, 293–294, 299, 304, 430
leader behaviors, 290–299
model, 288–300, 289 (figure)
overview, 285
practice in, 287 (table)
prescriptive approach, 303–304
process, 301 (figure)
psychotherapeutic bias, 286
service orientation bias, 286
situational challenges, 288–290
systems bias, 286
technical and adaptive challenges, 289
technical challenges, 288–289
working of, 300–302
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire, 315–319
Adaptive work, 299–300
Agreeableness, 35 (table)
Aldama, M., 100–103
Alexander the Great, 10
Alienated followers, 356
Allure of Toxic Leaders, The (Lipman-Blumen), 369
ALQ. See Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ)
Altruism, 427, 434
Alverà, M., 276–278
Amin, I., 14
Angliss, E., 262–263
Antecedent conditions
inclusive leadership, 328–330
servant leadership, 259–261
Ardern, J., 394, 398, 412–417
Aristotle, 423, 428
Assessment
ACS model, 336–338
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire, 315–319
ALQ, 233, 248–250
CliftonStrengths, 36
ELSQ, 452–458
Followership Questionnaire, 387–391
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire, 418–420
Inclusive Leadership Scale, 345–349
LBDQ, 86, 104
LBDQ-XII, 86, 94
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, 104–106
leadership conceptualization, 23–24
Leadership Grid, 87–90, 89 (figure), 96, 104
LMX-7 Questionnaire, 181–182
LPI, 201
LTQ, 51–53
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, 51
MLQ, 197, 206
MSCEIT, 38
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, 51
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire, 153–155
skills inventory, 79–81
SLII® model, 128–130
SLQ, 268–269, 279–282
StrengthsFinder, 36
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader
Questionnaire, 483, 491–494
Transformational Leadership Inventory, 218–219
Assessment-challenge-support (ACS) model, 336
assessment, 336–337
challenge, 337–338
support, 338
Assigned leadership, 8–10
Assimilation, 327
Authentic followership, 367
Authentic leadership
advantages, 232–233
ALQ, 233, 248–250
application, 235–236
approaches, 222–231
assessment, 248–250
balanced processing, 229
behavior, 224
case studies, 237–247
characteristics, 224 (figure)
compassion, 225
components of, 227–229, 228 (figure)
confidence, 229
connectedness, 225
consistency, 225
critical life events, 230–231
definition, 5 (box), 15, 221–222, 227
developmental perspective, 222
disadvantages, 234–235
George approach, 223–226
heart, 225
hope, 229
influencing factors, 229–231
internalized moral perspective, 228
interpersonal perspective, 222
intrapersonal perspective, 222
moral reasoning, 230
optimism, 229
overview, 221
passion, 223
positive psychological capacities, 229, 230 (table)
practical approach, 222–226
purpose, 223
relational transparency, 229
relationships, 225
resilience, 229–230
self-awareness, 227–228
self-discipline, 225
theoretical approach, 222, 226–231
values, 224
working of, 231–232
Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ), 233, 248–250
Authentic transformational leadership, 187–188, 427
Authority–compliance management, 88, 89 (figure)
Awareness attribute, 255
Axis Global, 484–485
Balanced processing, 229
Barelli, H., 210–211
Barra, M., 394
Barrett, C., 274–275
Bates, M., 147–149
Behavioral flexibility, 65
Behavior/behavioral approach
adaptive leadership, 290–299
advantages, 93–94
application, 96
assessment, 104–106
authentic leadership, 224
benevolent dictator, 90
case studies, 97–103
consideration, 86, 135
directive behaviors, 110
disadvantages, 94–96
employee orientation, 87
followership, 363
historical background, 85–92
IMoLB, 91–92, 92 (figure)
inclusive leadership, 331–332
initiating structure, 86, 135
LBDQ, 86
LBDQ-XII, 86, 94
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, 104–106
Leadership Grid, 87–90, 89 (figure), 96, 104
Managerial Grid, 6, 87–90, 94
Ohio State studies, 85–86
opportunism, 90–91, 91 (figure)
overview, 84–85
paternalism/maternalism, 90, 90 (figure)
path–goal theory, 134–137, 139, 140 (table)
production orientation, 87
purpose of, 84
relationship, 84–85
servant leadership, 261–264
situationalism, 94
supportive behaviors, 110
task, 84–85
University of Michigan studies, 86–87
U.S.-centric perspective, 95–96
working of, 92–93
Beneficence, 434
Benevolent dictator, 90
Berger, M., 19–20
Bhutto, B., 394
Biden, J., 404
Big Five personality model, 35–36, 35 (table)
Bluebird Care, 379–381
Bond, R., 411–412
Boudreaux, G., 394
Brako, 145–147
Brooks, H., 487–490
Brown, B., 243–247
Bush, G. W., 34
Bystanders, 360
Cain, S., 353
Caldera, A., 121–122
Capability model, 60, 68
Career experiences, 67
Case studies
adaptive leadership, 308–314
authentic leadership, 237–247
behavioral approach, 97–103
ethical leadership, 444–451
followership, 379–386
gender and leadership, 410–417
inclusive leadership, 339–344
LMX theory, 173–179
path–goal theory, 145–152
servant leadership, 272–278
skills approach, 73–78
SLII® model, 120–126
team leadership, 484–490
trait approach, 45–50
transformational leadership, 210–217
Cause/goal analysis, 62
Chaleff follower typology, 357–359, 359 (figure)
Character strengths, 36–38, 37 (table)
Charismatic leadership, 28, 185, 188–190
Chibanda, D., 213–217
China, 122–126
City Mortgage, 174–175
Civic strengths, 37 (table)
CliftonStrengths, 36
Clinton, B., 34, 428
Coaching (leadership style), 110
Co-created process, leadership, 364–366, 364 (figure)
Coercion, 13, 256
Coercive power, 11 (table), 13
Cognitive ability, 61
Cognitive complexity, 329
Cognitive strengths, 37 (table)
Coke, S., 45–46
Colluders, 433
Columbus, C., 19
Commitment of followers, 112, 116–117
Community development
ethical leadership, 438–439
servant leadership, 256, 263–264
Compassion, 225
Competencies, 62
followers, 112, 116–117
knowledge, 66
problem-solving skills, 62–64, 63 (figure)
social judgment and social skills, 64–66
Complexity leadership theory, 287–288
Conceptualization, 6, 23–24, 256, 261
Conceptual skills, 58–59
Concern for production, 88
Conducive environment, 433
Confidence, 229
Conflict management, 294
Conformist followers, 356
Confucianism, 123–124
Connectedness, 225
Conscientiousness, 35 (table)
Consideration behaviors, 86, 135
Constraint analysis, 62
Constructive transaction, 195
Contingent reward, 195–196
Conventional morality, 424–425, 424 (table)
Costa, D., 438
Country-club management, 88, 89 (figure)
Courageous followership, 358–359
Creative abrasion, 177
Creative agility, 177
Creative Brain Trust, 177
Creative resolution, 177
Creative thinking, 63
Critical life events, 230–231
Crystallized cognitive ability, 61
Curley, T., 383–386
Dao De Jing (Laozi), 124
Daoism, 124–125
Delegating (leadership style), 111
Destructive leadership, 369–373, 431–433
Determination trait, 33–34
Developmental authentic leadership, 222
Development level, 112, 116
Diehard follower, 361
Differentiation, 326
Directive leadership, 110, 135, 139, 140 (table)
Dirks, A., 444–445
Discursive leadership, 5 (box)
Distributed leadership, 463–464
Distributive justice, 436–437, 437 (table)
Diversity management, 322
Dominance, 61–62
DuBose, S., 341
Dunwoody, A. E., 394
Duterte, R., 13, 205
Dyadic relationship, 157, 158 (figure)
Elder Care Project, 73–74
ELSQ. See Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (ELSQ)
Emergence, leadership, 10
Emergent leadership, 8–10
Emerson College, 313
Emotional intelligence, 38–40, 260
Emotional strengths, 37 (table)
Empathy attribute, 255
Employee orientation behavior, 87
End of Leadership, The (Kellerman), 11
Environmental influences, 67–68
Ethical egoism, 426
Ethical Imperative, The (Costa), 438
Ethical leadership, 5 (box)
advantages, 439–441
altruism, 427, 434
application, 442–443
assessment, 452–458
Burns’s perspective on, 430–431
case studies, 444–451
centrality of, 429–430
common goal, 438
community principle, 438–439
conventional morality level, 424–425
cultural perspectives, 439
deontological perspective, 427–428
destructive leadership, 431–433
disadvantages, 441–442
distributive justice principle, 436–437, 437 (table)
ELSQ, 452–458
ethical egoism, 426
ethical theories, 426–429
ethic of reciprocity, 436
ethics, definition, 423
fairness principle, 435–436
generational differences, 442
Golden Rule, 436
Heifetz’s perspective on, 430
honest principle, 437–438
justice principle, 435–437
Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, 423–425
moral conduct, 426–427
overview, 422
postconventional morality level, 425
preconventional morality level, 423–424
principles of, 433–439, 433 (figure)
respect principle, 434
service principle, 434–435
teleological theories, 426–428
toxic leadership, 431–432
utilitarianism, 426–427
virtue-based theories, 428
Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (ELSQ), 452–458
Ethical theory, 423
Ethics, the Heart of Leadership (Ciulla), 422
Excess, strengths over, 37 (table)
Exclusion, 325–326
Exemplary followership, 356–357
Exemplary leaders, 200
Expectancy theory, 133–134, 141, 143
Expert power, 11 (table)
Experts, 66
External environmental influences, 68
Extraversion, 35 (table), 340–341
Farmer, P., 33–34, 272–274
FedEx, 39–40
Female Advantage, The (Helgesen), 238
Fleck, P. J., 149–152
Fluid intelligence, 61
Followers/followership, 5 (box)
activists, 361
advantages, 374–376
alienated, 356
application, 377–378
assessment, 387–391
authentic, 367
behaviors, 363
bystanders, 360
case studies, 379–386
Chaleff typology, 357–359, 359 (figure)
characteristics, 137–138, 362
cognitive-psychological perspective, 374
colluders, 433
commitment of, 112, 116–117
competence of, 112, 116–117
conformers, 432–433
conformist, 356
courageous, 358–359
dark triad, 369
definition, 7, 11, 353–354
desires for control, 137–138
destructive leaders and, 369–373
development level, 112, 114
diehards, 361
disadvantages, 376–377
engagement, level of, 360–361
ethical dimension, 354
evolutionary perspective and, 377
exemplary, 356–357
Followership Questionnaire, 387–391
ideal, 375–376
isolate, 360
Kellerman typology, 360–361, 360 (figure)
Kelley typology, 356–357, 357 (figure)
leader-follower interaction, 358 (figure)
leadership behaviors, 363
leadership characteristics, 362–363
leadership co-created process, 364–366, 364 (figure)
locus of control, 137–138
motivation, 143
needs for affiliation, 137
outcomes, 363
overview, 352–353
participants, 360–361
passive, 356
perspectives on, 366–368
pragmatist, 357
preference for structure, 137
prescriptions for effective, 375
psychoanalytic perspective, 374
psychological factors and dysfunctional leadership, 370–
373, 370 (table)
receptivity, 260–261
relational-based, 354
reversing the lens approach, 363–364, 363 (figure)
role-based perspective, 354
self-perceived level of task ability, 138
social marketplace, 375
social-psychological perspective, 374
styles, 356–357, 359
susceptible, 432
task characteristics, 138–139
theoretical approaches, 362–373
toxic leadership and, 369
types, 361
typologies, 354–361, 355 (table)
working of, 373–374
Zaleznik typology, 355, 356 (figure)
Followership Questionnaire, 387–391
Forecasting, 62
Foresight attribute, 256
Fox, T., 223
Freud, S., 370
Friendship Bench, 213–217
Full Range of Leadership model, 191, 192 (figure), 197
Game-based learning (GBL), 71
Gandhi, I., 394
Gandhi, M., 186, 188, 430
Garafallo, A., 74–76
Gender and leadership
advantages, 406–407
application, 408–409
assessment, 418–420
boards of directors in organization, 400
case studies, 410–417
commitment, 400–401
disadvantages, 408
gender-biased perceptions, 9–10
gender gap, 395
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire, 418–420
glass ceiling, 394–398
glass cliff, 397–398
glass escalator, 395
human capital differences, 395–398
leadership labyrinth, 394–398, 404–406
leadership styles and effectiveness, 398–406
overview, 394
path–goal theory, 142–143
pipeline problem, 396
prejudice, 402–404
self-promoting, 401
social values, 399
stereotypes, 402
transformational leadership, 399
work–home conflicts, 397
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire, 418–420
General cognitive ability, 61
George, Bill, 223–226
Ginsburg, R. B., 394
Glass ceiling, 394–398
Glass cliff, 397–398
Glass escalator, 395
Global Leadership Institute, 39
Great Lakes Foods (GLF), 45–46
“Great man” theories, 27, 60
Green, K., 485–486
Greengold, T., 485
Greenleaf, R. K., 254
Grid International, 96
Grit, 33
Groups, 6–7
Gutierrez, K., 239–243
GVSU Lakers football team, 19–21
Halpert, M., 308–309
Harris, K., 395, 404
Heifetz, R., 430
Heinz dilemma, 423
Helgesen, S., 237–239
Hernandez, J., 174–175
Heterarchy, team, 463
High directive–high supportive leadership style, 110
High directive–low supportive leadership style, 110
High supportive–low directive leadership style, 110
High Tech Engineering (HTE), 210–211
Hitler, A., 10, 13–16, 19, 187, 205, 358, 369
Holding environment, 293–294, 299, 304, 430
Hope, 229
Hughes, M., 34
Human skills, 57–58
Humble leadership, 5 (box)
Idea evaluation, 63
Idealized influence factor, 192–193
Ideal leadership, 13
IMoLB. See Integrated Model of Leadership Behavior (IMoLB)
Implicit association test (IAT), 337, 418
Impoverished management, 88, 89 (figure)
Inclusion, 323
definition, 324–328
optimal distinctiveness theory, 325
uniqueness and belongingness, 325–327, 326 (table)
Inclusive leadership, 5 (box)
ACS model, 336–338
advantages, 334
antecedent conditions, 328–330
application, 335–338
assessment, 345–349
behaviors, 331–332
case studies, 339–344
characteristics, 328–329
cognitive complexity, 329
disadvantages, 334–335
goals, 328
group diversity cognitions, 329–330
Inclusive Leadership Scale, 345–349
leader inclusiveness, 331–333
leader personality factors, 329
model, 328–333, 329 (figure)
organizational policies and practices, 330
outcomes, 332–333
overview, 322–324
participative leadership vs., 324
pro-diversity beliefs, 328
psychological climates, 330
relational leadership, 324
working of, 333
Inclusive Leadership Scale, 345–349
Individual attributes, 61–62
Individualized consideration, 193–195, 204
Influential leadership, 4 (box), 7, 429
Information power, 11 (table), 12
In-group, 159
Initiating structure behaviors, 86, 135
In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman), 4 (box)
Inspirational motivation, 193
Integrated Model of Leadership Behavior (IMoLB), 91–92, 92
(figure)
Integrity trait, 34, 38
Intellectual stimulation, 193
Intelligence, 32–33
acquired, 61
emotional, 38–40, 260
fluid, 61
social intelligence, 30, 65
Internal environmental influences, 67–68
Internalized moral perspective, 228
Interpersonal authentic leadership, 222
Interpersonal strengths, 37 (table)
Intrapersonal authentic leadership, 222
Isolate follower, 360
Jobs, S., 32–33
Johnson, L., 430
Jones, D., 445–446
Jones, J., 13
Journey to the East, The (Hesse), 254
Kagan, E., 394
Kant, I., 434
Kelleher, H., 274–275
Kellerman follower typology, 360–361, 360 (figure)
Kelley follower typology, 356–357, 357 (figure)
Kennedy, J. F., 19, 189
Kim, Y., 262
King, M. L., Jr., 14, 188
Klein, A., 262
Knowledge, 66
Kohlberg, L., 430
Koresh, D., 205, 353
Labyrinth, leadership, 394–398, 404–406
Laissez-faire leadership, 190 (figure), 196–197
Laozi, 124–125
Lay, K., 369
LBDQ. See Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ)
LBDQ-XII, 86, 94
Leader and leadership, 1–2
achievement-oriented, 136–137, 140, 140 (table)
adaptive, 5 (box), 285–321
assessment, 22–24
assigned vs. emergent, 8–10
authentic, 5 (box), 15, 221–252
behavioral approach, 84–108, 134–137, 139
charismatic, 28, 185, 188–190
co-created process, 364–366, 364 (figure)
coercion and, 13
common goals, 7
communication behaviors, 9
components of, 6–8
conceptualization, 6, 23–24
definition, 2–8, 15
dimensions of, 157 (figure)
directive, 110, 135, 139, 140 (table)
discursive, 5 (box)
emergence, 10
ethical, 5 (box), 422–460
evolution of definitions, 2–5 (box)
functions of, 17 (figure)
gender and, 394–421
gender-biased perceptions, 9–10
group processes, as, 6–7
humble, 5 (box)
inclusive, 5 (box), 322–351
influential, 4 (box), 7, 429
laissez-faire, 190 (figure), 196–197
management and, 16–18
morality and, 13–16
moral process, 15–16
neutral process, 14–15
outcomes, 68–69
participative, 135–136, 140, 140 (table)
path–goal theory, 132–156
personality perspective, 6, 9
power, 6, 10–13, 11 (table), 12 (table)
process, 6–8, 9 (figure)
pseudotransformational, 15, 187–188, 431
romance of, 366
servant, 4 (box), 15–16, 253–284, 435
situational approach, 109–131
skills approach, 6, 56–83
socialized, 15, 187
spiritual, 5 (box)
strengths, 36–38
supportive, 110, 135, 139–140, 140 (table)
team, 461–495
traits, 4 (box), 8, 9 (figure), 27–55, 31 (table), 32 (table)
transformational, 6, 15, 185–220
volunteer leaders, 11
Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), 86
Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory, 269
acquaintance phase, 163
advantages, 168–169
affective processes, 164–165
application, 171–172
assessment, 180–182
case studies, 173–179
development process, 162–166, 163 (table)
disadvantages, 169–171
emotions and LMX development, 164–166
LMX-7, 171, 180
LMX-7 Questionnaire, 181–182
LMX-MDM, 171
mature partnership phase, 163–164
overview, 157–158
quality of, 160–162
stranger phase, 162–163
VDL theory, 158–160, 169
working of, 166–167
Leadership (Burns), 15, 186
Leadership (Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy), 374
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, 104–106
Leadership Grid, 87–90, 89 (figure), 96, 104
Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI), 201
Leadership styles
authority–compliance management, 88
coaching, 110
country-club management, 88
delegating, 111
development level of followers and, 113
high directive–high supportive, 110
high directive–low supportive, 110
high–high style, 95
high supportive–low directive, 110
impoverished management, 88
low supportive–low directive, 111
middle-of-the-road management, 89
supporting, 110
team management, 90
Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ), 51–53
Leadership Without Easy Answers (Heifetz), 285, 304
Legitimate power, 11 (table)
Listening attribute, 255
LMX-7, 171, 180–182
LMX theory. See Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory
Long, J., 365
Low supportive–low directive leadership style, 111
LPI. See Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI)
LTQ. See Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)
Machiavelli, N., 14
Management
authority–compliance, 88
country-club, 88
exception, by, 196
functions of, 17 (figure)
impoverished, 88
leadership and, 16–18
middle-of-the-road, 89
skills, 58 (figure)
team, 90
Managerial Grid, 87–90, 94, 96
Mandela, N., 14, 193, 224
Marin, S., 394
Marlboro College, 312–314
Marshall, B., 341–344
Martin, R., 379–381
Martinez, R., 113–114
Maslow, A., 430
Maternalism, 90, 90 (figure)
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT),
38
McQueary, M., 384–385
Meaning, strengths about, 37 (table)
Measurement. See Assessment
Merkel, A., 394
Metrocity Striders Track Club (MSTC), 120
Metts, K., 45–46
Middle-of-the-road management, 89, 89 (figure)
Milošević, S., 369
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, 51
MLQ. See Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)
Moral conduct, 426
Moral development, stages of, 423, 424 (table)
conventional morality, 424–425
postconventional morality, 425
preconventional morality, 423–424
Morality, leadership and, 13–16
Moral process, leadership as, 15–16
Moral reasoning, 230
Mother Teresa, 14, 265–266, 427
Motivation, 61–62, 132–133
expectancy theory of, 133–134, 141, 143
inspirational, 193
MSCEIT. See Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence
Test (MSCEIT)
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), 197, 206
Multi-team systems (MTSs), 480
Musk, E., 47–50
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, 51
Nelson, P., 46–47
Neuroticism, 35 (table)
Neutral process, leadership as, 14–15
“New Leadership” paradigm, 185
Nixon, R., 439
Noncoercive influence, 4 (box)
Norms, 295
Obama, B., 28
O’Brien, M., 310
Ohio State behavior study, 85–86
Openness, 35 (table)
Opportunism, 90–91, 91 (figure)
Optimal distinctiveness theory, 325
Optimism, 229
Out-group, 159–160
Participative leadership, 135–136, 140, 140 (table)
Partners In Health (PIH), 33–34, 273
Passion, 223
Passive followers, 356
Passive management by exception, 196
Paternalism, 90, 90 (figure)
Paterno, J., 383–386
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire, 153–155
Path–goal theory, 133 (figure), 140 (table)
achievement-oriented leadership, 136–137, 140, 140 (table)
advantages, 141
application, 143–144
assessment, 153–155
case studies, 145–152
components of, 134, 134 (figure)
directive leadership, 135, 139, 140 (table)
disadvantages, 142–143
expectancy theory, 133–134, 141, 143
follower characteristics, 137–138
gender differences and, 142–143
leader behaviors, 134–137, 139
leader-centric approach, 143
overview, 132–134
participative leadership, 135–136, 140, 140 (table)
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire, 153–155
purpose of, 132
supportive leadership, 135, 139–140, 140 (table)
task characteristics, 138–139
working of, 139–141
People, concern for, 88
People skills, 57, 64
Perceived leadership, 32
Personal competence, 38
Personality, 6, 9, 62
Big Five, 35–36, 35 (table)
inclusive leadership, 329
transformational leadership and, 206
Personalized leadership, 187
Personal power, 12
Personal skills, 57
Perspective-taking skills, 65
Persuasion, 256
Peters, C., 173–174
Pixar, 176–179
Planning skill, 62
Plato, 423, 428
Pol Pot, 14
Pope Francis, 443
Position power, 12
Positive psychological capacities, 229, 230 (table)
Postconventional morality, 425
Power, 6, 10–13, 11 (table), 12 (table)
Pragmatist followers, 357
Preconventional morality, 423–424, 424 (table)
Price Waterhouse v. Ann Hopkins, 403
Prince, The (Machiavelli), 14
Principled leadership, 470–471, 491
Privilege worksheet, 336–337
Problem definition, 62
Problem-solving skills, 62–64, 63 (figure), 67–68
Process leadership, 6–7, 9 (figure)
trait vs., 8
Pro-diversity beliefs, 328
Production, concern for, 88
Production orientation behavior, 87
Pseudotransformational leadership, 15, 187–188, 431
Questionnaire. See Assessment
Quiet (Cain), 353
Quigley, K. F. F., 312–313
Receptivity, follower, 260–261
Referent power, 11 (table)
Relational-based followership, 354
Relational transparency, 229
Relationship behaviors, 84–85
authentic leadership, 225
Resilience, 229–230
Reversing the lens approach, 363–364, 363 (figure)
Reward power, 11 (table)
Rokeach, M., 430
Role-based followership, 354
Role congruity theory, 402
Romance of leadership, 366
Roosevelt, T., 447–451
Rosenfeld, E., 308–309
Rowing, 381–383
Saffold, R., 484–485
Salis, A., 485
Sandberg, S., 395
Sandusky, J., 383–386
Sanger, M., 430
Santana, D., 310–311
Santiago, T., 46
Schema, 66
Schultz, G. C., 384–386
Schultz, H., 230–231
Self-awareness, 227–228
Self-confidence, 33
Self-discipline, 225
Sensemaking, 63
Servant leadership, 4 (box), 15–16, 435
advantages, 267–269
antecedent conditions, 259–261
application, 270–271
assessment, 279–282
awareness attribute, 255
behaviors, 261–264
case studies, 272–278
characteristics of, 255–257, 258 (table), 260
commitment attribute, 256
community development, 256
conceptualization attribute, 256, 261
context and culture, 260
creating value for community, 263–264
definition, 254
disadvantages, 269–270
emotional healing attribute, 261–262
empathy attribute, 255
empowerment, 263
ethical behavior, 262–263
follower performance and growth outcome, 264–265
follower receptivity, 260–261
foresight attribute, 256
healing attribute, 255
helping followers grow and succeed attribute, 262
historical research, 254–255
listening attribute, 255
model, 259–266, 259 (figure)
organizational performance impact, 265
outcomes, 264–266
overview, 253
persuasion attribute, 256
putting followers first attribute, 262
SLQ, 268–269, 279–282
societal impact, 265–266
stewardship attribute, 256
theoretical development, 257, 259
working of, 266–267
Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ), 268–269, 279–282
Shared leadership, 463–464
Simpson, K., 261
Sirleaf, E. J., 394
Situational approach. See SLII® model
Situationalism, 94
Skilling, J., 369
Skills of an Effective Administrator (Katz), 56
Skills/skills approach
acquired intelligence, 61
advantages, 70–71
application, 72
assessment, 79–81
behavioral flexibility, 65
capability model, 60, 68
career experiences, 67
case studies, 73–78
cause/goal analysis, 62
competencies, 62–66
conceptual skills, 58–59
constraint analysis, 62
creative thinking, 63
crystallized cognitive ability, 61
definition, 57
disadvantages, 71–72
dominance, 61–62
environmental influences, 67–68
fluid intelligence, 61
forecasting, 62
general cognitive ability, 61
human skills, 57–58
idea evaluation, 63
individual attributes, 61–62
influences on, 67–68
knowledge, 66
leadership outcomes, 68–69
management skills, 58 (figure)
motivation, 61–62
overview, 56
performance outcomes, 69
personality, 62
personal skills, 57
perspective taking, 65
planning, 62
problem definition, 62
problem-solving, 62–64, 63 (figure), 68–69
sensemaking, 63
skills inventory, 79–81
skills model, 59–69, 60 (figure)
social good, 61–62
social judgment, 64–66
social perceptiveness, 65
social performance, 65
social skills, 64–66
technical skills, 57
three-skill approach, 56–59
visioning, 63
willingness, 61
wisdom, 63
working of, 69–70
SLII® model, 109–110, 111 (figure)
advantages, 114–115
application, 119
assessment, 127–130
case studies, 120–126
commitment of followers, 112, 116–117
competence of followers, 112, 116–117
development level of followers, 112, 116
directive behaviors, 110
disadvantages, 116–119
flexibility, 115
leadership style, 110–112
practicality of, 115
questionnaire, 128–130
supportive behaviors, 110
usefulness of, 114
validity of, 118
working of, 112–114
SLQ. See Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ)
Smith, A., 45
Smith, T., 365
Snam, 276
Sociability, 34–35
Social architects, 198
Social competence, 38
Social constructivism, 354
Social good, 61–62
Social identity theory, 10
Social intelligence, 30, 65
Socialized leadership, 15, 187
Social judgment skills, 64–66
Social perceptiveness, 65
Social performance, 65
Social power, 12
Social skills, 64–66
Soslow, M., 411–412
Sotomayor, S., 394
Southwest Airlines, 274–275
Spanier, G. B., 383–384
Spiritual leadership, 5 (box)
Stewardship, 256
StrengthsFinder, 36
Strengths leadership, 36–38
Supportive leadership, 110, 135, 139–140, 140 (table)
Susceptible followers, 432
Tabichi, P., 76–78
Taoism, 124–125
Tappan Refinery, 484–485
Task behaviors, 84–85
Task characteristics, 138–139
Team-based organizations, 461–463
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire,
483, 491–494
Team leadership
advantages, 480–481
application, 482–483
assessment, 491–494
capacity, 464
case studies, 484–490
characteristics, 466–471
collaboration, 468
commitment, 468
critical leadership functions, 472, 472 (figure), 481
development, 466
disadvantages, 481–482
distributed leadership, 463–464
external environmental leadership actions, 477–479
goal clarity, 467
heterarchy, 463
Hill Model for Team Leadership, 464–479, 465 (figure), 480
internal/external intervention, 475
internal relational leadership actions, 477
internal task leadership actions, 476–477
leadership actions, 475–479
leadership decisions, 471–475
maintenance functions, 474
mental model, 464–465
model, 464–479, 465 (figure), 480
monitoring, team, 471–473, 479
MTSs, 480
overview, 461–464
performance, 466
physical distance and, 462
principled leadership, 470–471, 491
psychological safety, 469
results-driven structure, 467–468
shared leadership, 463–464
standards of excellence, 469
support and recognition, 470
task functions, 474
task/relational intervention, 474–475
team-based organizations, 461–463
team effectiveness, 466–471
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader
Questionnaire, 483, 491–494
team members competency, 468
team structure, 462
technology and, 462
virtual teams, 462, 474–475
working of, 479–480
Team management, 89 (figure), 90
Technical skills, 57
Technology-enabled organizations, 461
Teleological theories, 426–428
3-D management style theory, 109
Three-skill approach, 56–59
Thunberg, G., 187
Tobias, P., 411
Toxic leadership, 369, 431–432
Traits/trait approach, 4 (box), 8, 9 (figure), 31 (table), 32 (table)
advantages, 41–42
application, 44
assessment, 41, 51–53
Big Five personality model, 35–36, 35 (table)
case studies, 45–50
definition, 27
determination, 33–34
disadvantages, 42–44
emotional intelligence, 38–40
“great man” theories, 27
integrity, 34, 38
intelligence, 32–33
Kirkpatrick and Locke on, 30
LTQ, 51–53
Mann on, 29
overview, 27–32
personality, 6, 9, 35–36
self-confidence, 33
sociability, 34–35
Stogdill on, 28–29
strengths, 36–38
working of, 40–41
Transactional leadership, 186–187
contingent reward, 195–196
factors, 191 (table), 195–196
management by exception, 196
transformational vs., 186–187, 194
Transformational leadership, 6, 15, 430
additive effect of, 194, 194 (figure)
advantages, 203–205
application, 208–209
assessments, 197, 218–219
authentic, 187–188, 427
Bennis and Nanus on, 198–199
case studies, 210–217
charisma and, 188–190
common goal, 438
components of, 187
defined, 186–188
disadvantages, 205–208
factors, 191–195, 191 (table)
Full Range of Leadership model, 190, 192 (figure), 197
gender differences, 399
idealized influence, 192–193
individualized consideration, 193–195, 204
inspirational motivation, 193
intellectual stimulation, 193
Kouzes and Posner on, 199–201
leadership continuum, 190 (figure)
LPI, 201
measurements, 197
MLQ, 197, 206
model of, 190–197
nonleadership factor, 196–197
overview, 185–186
pseudotransformational, 15, 187–188, 431
trait perspective, 206
transactional vs., 186–187, 194
Transformational Leadership Inventory, 218–219
working of, 201–203
Transformational Leadership Inventory, 218–219
Trump, D., 235, 440
Ulbrickson, A., 381–382
Umbia, S., 485
University of Michigan behavior study, 86–87
Urbanez, M., 263–264
U.S. ice hockey team, 486–490
Utilitarianism, 426–427
Values In Action Classification, 36, 37 (table)
Vertical dyad linkage (VDL) theory, 158–160, 169
VIA Character Strengths Survey, 36
Virtual teams, 462, 474–475
Virtue-based theories, 428
Visioning, 63
Volunteer leaders, 11
WCBA, 121–122
Weber, L., 410–411
White Privilege Checklist, 336–337
Whitmer, G., 368
Willingness, 61
Wisdom, 63
Wojcicki, S., 394
Wood, A., 73–74
Zaleznik follower typology, 355, 356 (figure)
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the Author
About the Contributors
Chapter 1 Introduction
Leadership Defined
Ways of Conceptualizing Leadership
Definition and Components
Leadership Described
Trait Versus Process Leadership
Assigned Versus Emergent Leadership
Leadership and Power
Leadership and Coercion
Leadership and Morality
Leadership Is a Neutral Process
Leadership Is a Moral Process
Leadership and Management
Plan of the Book
Case Study
Case 1.1 Open Mouth . . .
Leadership Instrument
Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 2 Trait Approach
Description
Intelligence
Self-Confidence
Determination
Integrity
Sociability
Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership
Strengths and Leadership
Emotional Intelligence
How Does the Trait Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 2.1 Choosing a New Director of Research
Case 2.2 Recruiting for the Bank
Case 2.3 Elon Musk
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ)
Summary
Chapter 3 Skills Approach
Description
Three-Skill Approach
Technical Skills
Human Skills
Conceptual Skills
Summary of the Three-Skill Approach
Skills Model
Individual Attributes
Competencies
Influences on Skills Development
Leadership Outcomes
Summary of the Skills Model
How Does the Skills Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 3.1 A Strained Research Team
Case 3.2 Andy’s Recipe
Case 3.3 2019 Global Teacher of the Year: Peter Tabichi
Leadership Instrument
Skills Inventory
Summary
Chapter 4 Behavioral Approach
Description
Task and Relationship Behaviors
Task Orientation
Relationship Orientation
Historical Background of the Behavioral Approach
The Ohio State Studies
The University of Michigan Studies
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid
Paternalism/Maternalism
Opportunism
Recent Studies
How Does the Behavioral Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 4.1 A Drill Sergeant at First
Case 4.2 We Are Family
Case 4.3 Cheer Coach Monica Aldama
Leadership Instrument
Leadership Behavior Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 5 Situational Approach
Description
Leadership Style
Development Level
How Does SLII® Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 5.1 Marathon Runners at Different Levels
Case 5.2 Getting the Message Across
Case 5.3 Philosophies of Chinese Leadership
Leadership Instrument
SLII® Questionnaire: Sample Items
Summary
Chapter 6 Path–Goal Theory
Description
Leader Behaviors
Directive Leadership
Supportive Leadership
Participative Leadership
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
Follower Characteristics
Task Characteristics
How Does Path–Goal Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 6.1 Three Shifts, Three Supervisors
Case 6.2 Playing in the Orchestra
Case 6.3 Row the Boat
Leadership Instrument
Path–Goal Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 7 Leader–Member Exchange Theory
Description
Early Studies
Later Studies
Leadership Development
Emotions and LMX Development
How Does LMX Theory Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 7.1 His Team Gets the Best Assignments
Case 7.2 Working Hard at Being Fair
Case 7.3 Pixar: Creating Space for Success
Leadership Instrument
LMX-7 Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 8 Transformational Leadership
Description
Transformational Leadership Defined
Transformational Leadership and Charisma
A Model of Transformational Leadership
Transformational Leadership Factors
Transactional Leadership Factors
Nonleadership Factor
Transformational Leadership Measurements
Other Transformational Perspectives
Bennis and Nanus
Kouzes and Posner
How Does the Transformational Leadership Approach Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 8.1 The Vision Failed
Case 8.2 An Exploration in Leadership
Case 8.3 Grandmothers and Benches
Leadership Instrument
Transformational Leadership Inventory
Summary
Chapter 9 Authentic Leadership
Description
Authentic Leadership Defined
Approaches to Authentic Leadership
Practical Approach
Theoretical Approach
How Does Authentic Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 9.1 Am I Really a Leader?
Case 9.2 Kassy’s Story
Case 9.3 The Arena of Authenticity
Leadership Instrument
Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 10 Servant Leadership
Description
Servant Leadership Defined
Historical Basis of Servant Leadership
Ten Characteristics of a Servant Leader
Building a Theory About Servant Leadership
Model of Servant Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Servant Leader Behaviors
Outcomes
Summary of the Model of Servant Leadership
How Does Servant Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 10.1 Global Health Care
Case 10.2 Servant Leadership Takes Flight
Case 10.3 Energy to Inspire the World
Leadership Instrument
Servant Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 11 Adaptive Leadership
Description
Adaptive Leadership Defined
A Model of Adaptive Leadership
Situational Challenges
Technical Challenges
Technical and Adaptive Challenges
Adaptive Challenges
Leader Behaviors
Adaptive Work
How Does Adaptive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 11.1 Silence, Stigma, and Mental Illness
Case 11.2 Taming Bacchus
Case 11.3 Agonizing Options for Marlboro College
Leadership Instrument
Adaptive Leadership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 12 Inclusive Leadership
Description
Inclusion Defined
A Model of Inclusive Leadership
Antecedent Conditions
Leader Characteristics
Group Diversity Cognitions
Organizational Policies and Practices
Inclusive Leadership Behaviors
Outcomes
How Does Inclusive Leadership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Assessment
Challenge
Support
Case Studies
Case 12.1 Difficult Decision
Case 12.2 The Extraversion Advantage
Case 12.3 Inclusive Leadership During a Crisis
Leadership Instrument
Inclusive Leadership Reflection Instrument
Summary
Chapter 13 Followership
Description
Followership Defined
Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives
Typologies of Followership
The Zaleznik Typology
The Kelley Typology
The Chaleff Typology
The Kellerman Typology
Theoretical Approaches to Followership
Reversing the Lens
The Leadership Co-Created Process
New Perspectives on Followership
Perspective 1: Followers Get the Job Done
Perspective 2: Followers Work in the Best Interest of the Organization’s Mission
Perspective 3: Followers Challenge Leaders
Perspective 4: Followers Support the Leader
Perspective 5: Followers Learn From Leaders
Followership and Destructive Leaders
1. Our Need for Reassuring Authority Figures
2. Our Need for Security and Certainty
3. Our Need to Feel Chosen or Special
4. Our Need for Membership in the Human Community
5. Our Fear of Ostracism, Isolation, and Social Death
6. Our Fear of Powerlessness to Challenge a Bad Leader
How Does Followership Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 13.1 Bluebird Care
Case 13.2 Olympic Rowers
Case 13.3 Penn State Sexual Abuse Scandal
Leadership Instrument
Followership Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 14 Gender and Leadership
Description
The Glass Ceiling Turned Labyrinth
Evidence of the Leadership Labyrinth
Understanding the Labyrinth
Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Effectiveness
Navigating the Labyrinth
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 14.1 The “Glass Ceiling”
Case 14.2 Pregnancy as a Barrier to Job Status
Case 14.3 Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand
Leadership Instrument
Gender-Leader Bias Questionnaire
Summary
Chapter 15 Leadership Ethics
Description
Ethics Defined
Level 1. Preconventional Morality
Level 2. Conventional Morality
Level 3. Postconventional Morality
Ethical Theories
Centrality of Ethics to Leadership
Heifetz’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
Burns’s Perspective on Ethical Leadership
The Dark Side of Leadership
Principles of Ethical Leadership
Ethical Leaders Respect Others
Ethical Leaders Serve Others
Ethical Leaders Are Just
Ethical Leaders Are Honest
Ethical Leaders Build Community
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 15.1 Choosing a Research Assistant
Case 15.2 Reexamining a Proposal
Case 15.3 Ship Shape
Leadership Instrument
Ethical Leadership Style Questionnaire (Short Form)
Summary
Chapter 16 Team Leadership
Description
Team Leadership Model
Team Effectiveness
Leadership Decisions
Leadership Actions
How Does the Team Leadership Model Work?
Strengths
Criticisms
Application
Case Studies
Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates
Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper
Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team
Leadership Instrument
Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire
Summary
References
Author Index
Subject Index
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Achiever Papers is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Dissertation Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, if anything is unclear, you may always chat with us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download