Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership brings together the foremost thinkers on the subject and is the first book of its kind to address the conceptual, methodological, and ...practical issues for shared leadership. Its aim is to advance understanding along many dimensions of the shared leadership phenomenon: its dynamics, moderators, appropriate settings, facilitating factors, contingencies, measurement, practice implications, and directions for the future. The volume provides a realistic and practical discussion of the benefits, as well as the risks and problems, associated with shared leadership. It will serve as an indispensable guide for researchers and practicing managers in identifying where and when shared leadership may be appropriate for organizations and teams.
Toward a theory of meta-paradoxical leadership Pearce, Craig L.; Wassenaar, Christina L.; Berson, Yair ...
Organizational behavior and human decision processes,
11/2019, Letnik:
155
Journal Article
Recenzirano
•Meta-paradoxical leadership emerged as the overarching theme os this study.•Sub-themes of formal, shared, situational and parodoxical leadership also emerged.•A synthesized model of meta-paradoxical ...leadership was developed and is presented.•Meta-paradoxical leadership integrates paradixical and situational leadership.•Meta-paradoxical leadership balances short- and long-term demands.
Organizations are rife with paradoxes, yet we know very little about how leaders simultaneously handle multiple paradoxes. To address this question, we conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of 78 formal interviews conducted over a period of 13 months with leaders in a high-growth retail organization. We supplemented this primary data with review of records from meetings, email communications and company documents. We identified four themes involving important aspects of leadership including, formal, shared, situational, and paradoxical leadership. Based on these themes, we recognized an overarching theme concerning a higher-level paradox, or a meta-paradox, whereby leaders consider simultaneously using either formal or shared leadership (situational leadership) and the integration of these styles (paradoxical leadership) over time. We argue that by being situationally conscious, paradoxical leaders become more effective in dealing with an organizational paradox associated with the simultaneous management of short- and long-term goals, and thereby engage in meta-paradoxical leadership. We suggest paradoxical/situational mindsets as antecedents of meta-paradoxical leadership and discuss the implications of our findings.
Drawing from recent theory and research on empowerment and resistance, data on leader behaviors and follower responses were collected from superior–subordinate dyads in 179 public high schools. ...Structural equation modeling revealed that empowering leadership was associated with higher employee performance and satisfaction, as well as reduced dysfunctional resistance. Also, employee dysfunctional resistance partially mediated the relationship of empowering leadership with (a) employee performance and (b) employee satisfaction. These results are interpreted as supportive of a perspective that endorses the utility of empowering leadership at the dyadic level within a hierarchical power structure.
Knowledge work is becoming increasingly team-based. The reason is clear. It is becoming ever more difficult for any one person to be an expert on all aspects of the work that needs to be done, and ...this is true in a wide variety of contexts ranging from the R&D lab to the executive suite. With the shift to team-based knowledge work comes the need to question more traditional models of leadership. Traditionally, leadership has been conceived around the idea that one person is firmly "in charge" while the rest are simply followers--what is termed vertical leadership. However, recent research indicates that leadership can be shared by team leaders and team members--rotating to the person with the key knowledge, skills, and abilities for the particular issues facing the team at any given moment. In fact, research indicates that poor-performing teams tend to be dominated by the team leader, while high-performing teams display more dispersed leadership patterns, i.e., shared leadership. This is not to suggest that leadership from above is unnecessary. On the contrary, the role of the vertical leader is critical to the ongoing success of the shared-leadership approach to knowledge work. Thus, this article addresses the following questions: (1) when is leadership most appropriately shared? (2) how is shared leadership best developed? and (3) how does one effectively utilize both vertical and shared leadership to leverage the capabilities of knowledge workers?
The current study investigated the relative influence of vertical versus shared leadership within new venture top management teams on the performance of startups using two different samples. Vertical ...leadership stems from an appointed or formal leader of a team (e.g., the CEO), whereas shared leadership is a form of distributed leadership stemming from within a team. Transformational, transactional, empowering, and directive dimensions of both vertical and shared leadership were examined. New venture performance was considered in terms of revenue growth and employee growth. The first sample was comprised of 66 top management teams of firms drawn from Inc. Magazine's annual list of America's 500 fastest growing startups. The seconded sample consisted of 154 top management teams of startups randomly drawn from Dun and Bradstreet, which compiles the most extensive database available for identifying relatively young American-based ventures. Both vertical and shared leadership were found to be highly significant predictors of new venture performance. Further, hierarchical regression analysis found the shared leadership variables to account for a significant amount of variance in new venture performance beyond the vertical leadership variables. These results were consistent across both samples, thus providing robust evidence for the value of shared leadership, in addition to the more traditional concept of vertical leadership.
Most discussions of innovation leadership focus on the role of the top leader. Such leaders are advised to be visionary, to control and coordinate the efforts of those below them, and to empower ...subordinates to engage in innovation activities. Most innovation efforts, however, also require teamwork, bringing together diverse individuals to combine divergent talents to develop novel solutions to complex problems. Leadership of such teams, research shows, benefits from shared leadership (e.g., Wassenaar & Pearce. 2018. The Nature of Leadership, 167–88). The rub is that these two sources of leadership are often seen as polar opposites and that the presence of the one negates the use of the other. We contend, however, that to realize the true potential of innovation teams requires the long‐run paradoxical integration and simultaneous deployment of both vertical and shared leadership, along with the short‐run tandem moderation of vertical versus shared leadership, depending on the issues confronting the team, as the innovation process unfolds. We synthesize the literature surrounding this issue and articulate a model of moderated paradoxical leadership to guide future research into this space.
Based on construal level theory and trait activation theory, we examined the effect of consideration of future consequences (CFC) on transformational leadership behavior and leadership effectiveness, ...as well as the potential moderating effects of perceived dynamic work environment in the relationship. The results showed that: (a) CFC is positively related to both transformational leadership and leadership effectiveness; (b) perceived dynamic work environment moderates the relationship between CFC and transformational leadership—specifically, the effect of CFC on transformational leadership is stronger under low perceived dynamic work environment; and (c) the effect of CFC on leader effectiveness is fully mediated by transformational leadership behavior under low versus high perceived dynamic work environment. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.
Leading social innovation is challenging. Creating enduring social innovation requires navigating the tension of simultaneously engaging top-down and shared leadership. We outline the crux of the ...challenge and provide key takeaways and practical advice for the tandem deployment of top-down and shared leadership for social innovation success.
Recent scandals involving executive leadership have significantly contributed to the topic of corporate social responsibility (CSR) becoming one of the most important concerns of the management ...literature in the twenty-first century. The antithesis of CSR is embodied in executive corruption and malfeasance. Unfortunately such things are all too frequent. We view the degree of centrality of leadership, and the primary power motivation of leaders, as key factors that influence the engagement in corruptive leader behavior and consequent corporate social ir-responsibility (CSIR) in organizations. Shared and self-leadership, on the other hand, we introduce as alternatives to traditional top-down centralized views of leadership that can establish needed checks and balances capable of reducing corruptive tendencies. We offer a conceptual model along with several propositions to help guide future research and practice.
Humanized anti–IFN-γ (HuZAF) in the treatment of psoriasis Harden, Jamie L., PhD; Johnson-Huang, Leanne M., PhD; Chamian, Maria Francesca, MD ...
Journal of allergy and clinical immunology,
02/2015, Letnik:
135, Številka:
2
Journal Article
PDF
