There are too many leadership concepts... but which ones are redundant?

There are too many leadership concepts… but which ones are redundant?

leadership concepts
image_pdfimage_print

The sheer number of leadership concepts is creating confusion and just trying to keep up with new notions of leadership is a full time job. As a result there is a lot of confusion and overlap between leadership concepts, the variety of different styles, traits, behaviours and other ideas that proliferate in the leadership literature.

 

 

Explosion of leadership concepts

Over the years there has been an explosion in academic research and other writing around leadership to the extent that there is a continual creation of new constructs and notions about leadership that have resulted in considerable confusion and overlap.

As an example of this explosion in research, in 1960 there were 2995 research papers published about leadership. In 2017 (the last complete year) there were 114,422 peer-reviewed papers published about leadership. In 2017 there were 31,339 papers published about leadership styles, up from 499 in 1960.

(This research briefing was sent to members in March 2018)

 

 

99% of everything you are trying to do...

Reinventwheel

...has already been done by someone else, somewhere - and meticulously researched.

Get the latest research briefings, infographics and more from The Oxford Review - Free.

We won't send you spam. Unsubscribe at any time. Powered by ConvertKit

 

 

Redundant leadership concepts

It is not surprising that the sheer number of constructs, frameworks and ideas about leadership have become complex, overlapping and, to some extent, many are likely to be covering the same ground and are, therefore, redundant.

 

 

A new study

A new (2018) study by a team of researchers has conducted an extensive review of research literature to discover the extent of construct redundancy in the literature around leadership behaviours. As can be imagined, both the study and the findings are somewhat complex in nature, but are useful for helping to navigate the plethora of leadership constructs. An example of a potentially redundant construct is the concept of authentic leadership.

 

overlapping constructs

 

Overlapping concepts

A meta-analysis in 2016 found that the concept of authentic leadership overlaps and replicates a significant proportion of the attributes of transformational leadership. The study also found that authentic leadership provided superior outcomes to those measured in practice by leaders following a transformational leadership framework.

Before reviewing the findings of this study, it should be noted that measurements and descriptions of leadership and its outcomes vary considerably between research studies, making it difficult to have a like by like comparison. However, the study found that, over time, many of the leadership constructs tend to coalesce into an agreed understanding with core shared attributes, as well as a number of properties that are idiosyncratic to the various studies.

 

 

Primary leadership concepts

The core leadership styles and constructs that the study examined were:

  1. Transactional
  2. Transformational
  3. Charismatic
  4. Laissez-faire
  5. New charisma
  6. Authentic
  7. Ethical
  8. Servant

 

Of these eight primary leadership constructs the study found that only:

  1. Transformational
  2. Authentic
  3. Servant
  4. Ethical

 

leadership concepts displayed any meaningful and measurable correlations with the outcomes ascribed to them. The other four primary leadership constructs that are found in the literature provided no valid research evidence for either a distinction as a stand-alone category of leadership nor evidence that they contribute to the outcomes attributed to them.

 

 

Laissez-faire leadership

 

 

Laissez-faire leadership

The only exception to this is laissez-faire leadership, which is actually considered to be a “non-leadership” construct, in that laissez-faire leaders abdicate their responsibilities, fail to be present when needed and resist making decisions or expressing views on important matters. So, whilst laissez-faire leadership is well-defined and separate from any other leadership construct, it is in actual fact not a ‘leadership’ style rather a method of abdicating responsibility.

 

 

Leadership outcomes

The main correlations between leader behaviours and their outcomes can be found in the following:

 

  1. Job performance: transformational, ethical and servant leadership styles were found to have very similar outcomes in terms of job performance which were measured in the range of a small to medium impact on job performance. Authentic leadership was found to have no appreciable impact on job performance overall. Laissez-faire leadership methods were found largely to have a negative impact on job performance.
  2. Unit or team performance: servant leadership was found to have a medium to large positive impact on unit or team performance, with transformational, authentic and ethical leadership behaviours displaying a moderate level of outcomes in this area compared to transactional leaders.
  3. Organisational citizenship behaviours: authentic leadership has the biggest positive impact on organisational citizenship behaviours with transformational, servant and ethical leadership types failing to have any distinguishable impact on such behaviours within the organisation.
  4. Turnover intentions: ethical and servant leadership styles have the largest positive impact on reducing turnover intentions and increasing retention rates. There is little or no consistent evidence for the impact of transformational or authentic leadership having any impact on turnover intentions.

 

Apart from these four organisational outcomes, there is no consistent evidence for other leadership constructs having a consistent and reliable effect or impact.

 

Additionally, the study finds that three of the primary leadership constructs; transformational, authentic and ethical overlap enough that they can actually be brought into a broader category called moral leadership.

 

In line with the most recent systematic reviews, servant leadership is the most well-defined leadership construct and has the most consistent outcomes as well.

 

Reference – available to members

Not a member?

Apply to join now and get:

 

  1. Weekly research briefings sent direct to you every week
  2. A copy of the Oxford Review containing between twelve and sixteen additional research briefings every month
  3. Research Infographics
  4. Video research briefings.
  5. The occasional special reports / short literature reviews on topics that appear to be getting a lot of research attention or if there has been a recent shift in the thinking or theory
  6. The ability to request a watch list for new research in keyword areas (as long as it is within the realms of:
    1. Leadership
    2. Management
    3. Human resources (not legal aspects)
    4. Organisational development
    5. Organisational change
    6. Organisational learning
    7. Learning and development,
    8. Coaching
    9. Work Psychology
    10. Decision making
  7. Request specific research / brief literature reviews
  8. Access to the entire archive of previous research briefings, copies of the Oxford Review, infographics, video research briefings and special reports.
  9. Access to Live Reports – continually updated as new research on the topic is released
  10. Members only podcasts – research briefings in audio – coming soon
  11. Live continually updated reports

 

Be the most up-to-date person in the room

Apply to join now

Disclaimer: This is a research review, expert interpretation and briefing. As such it contains other studies, expert comment and practitioner advice. It is not a copy of the original study – which is referenced. The original study should be consulted and referenced in all cases. This research briefing is for informational and educational purposes only. We do not accept any liability for the use to which this review and briefing is put or for it or the research accuracy, reliability or validity. This briefing as an original work in its own right and is copyright © Oxford Review Enterprises Ltd 2016-2019. Any use made of this briefing is entirely at your own risk.

Be impressively well informed

Librarysmileherobg

Get the very latest research intelligence briefings, video research briefings, infographics and more sent direct to you as they are published

Be the most impressively well-informed and up-to-date person around...

Powered by ConvertKit
Like what you see? Help us spread the word

David Wilkinson

David Wilkinson is the Editor-in-Chief of the Oxford Review. He is also acknowledged to be one of the world's leading experts in dealing with ambiguity and uncertainty and developing emotional resilience. David teaches and conducts research at a number of universities including the University of Oxford, Medical Sciences Division, Cardiff University, Oxford Brookes University School of Business and many more. He has worked with many organisations as a consultant and executive coach including Schroders, where he coaches and runs their leadership and management programmes, Royal Mail, Aimia, Hyundai, The RAF, The Pentagon, the governments of the UK, US, Saudi, Oman and the Yemen for example. In 2010 he developed the world's first and only model and programme for developing emotional resilience across entire populations and organisations which has since become known as the Fear to Flow model which is the subject of his next book. In 2012 he drove a 1973 VW across six countries in Southern Africa whilst collecting money for charity and conducting on the ground charity work including developing emotional literature in children and orphans in Africa and a number of other activities. He is the author of The Ambiguity Advanatage: What great leaders are great at, published by Palgrave Macmillian. See more: About: About David Wikipedia: David's Wikipedia Page

Click Here to Leave a Comment Below

Leave a Reply: