An Attempt At A Consentience Regarding Formal Leadership

Abstract

Given the importance of leadership in organizations, an attempt to integrate the many disparate concepts and constructs related to this topic is long overdue. With that goal in mind, an integrative framework was created that focuses on three distinct levels of abstraction- big leadership, mid-range leadership, and small leadership. Within this tripartite taxonomy, an attempt was made to reconcile some vexing issues that have been frustrating academics and practitioners alike. Big leadership is viewed as transformational in nature, requiring a charismatic visionary being in the right place at the right time. Both mid-range and small leadership, however, are transactional in nature, but small leadership is so to a fault. Our approach to mid-range leadership theory attempts to identify the important dimensions of transactional leadership, differentiate the normative from the situational ones, and specify the conditions under which the situational leadership factors apply. In our framework, small leadership consists of the myriad of quotidian interactions between the leader and subordinates that are easy to overlook but have an important cumulative effect on the social compact between leader and subordinates that is so essential to gaining subordinate compliance. Lastly, whenever appropriate, contingencies are specified at all three levels, and substitutes for leadership identified. While not a mega-theory, our leadership framework is integrative and, thus, useful to managers who lead organizations, teams, and individuals.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.