A Critical Review of Leadership Research Development
International Journal of Business and Management
August, 2006
A Critical Review of Leadership Research Development
Jun Liu Business School, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China Xiaoyu Liu School of Labor Relations & Human Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China Abstract Leadership research has gone through several phases of development in the past 80 years or so. The paper identifies the major theories in each phase, and investigates the strengths and weaknesses of the research. Among those theories, transformational/charismatic leadership and leader-member exchange (LMX) are heavily discussed. The paper also discusses the future trend of research in leadership areas. Keywords: Review, Transformational Leadership, LMX Leadership can be defined as a process that an individual influences a group of individuals to implement strategies and achieve the collective goals (Yukl, 2002). Research in the area seeks to find out what types of leaders are likely to be successful and what factors determine leadership effectiveness. Generally, leadership research has gone though four paradigms: trait approach, behavioral approach, situational approach, and the contemporary theories of leadership. The paradigms of leadership theories shift with the progress from static to dynamic view of leadership with the trait and behavioral theories reflecting a personal, the situational theories an interpersonal, and the contemporary theories a relational approach to conceptualizing leadership. That is to say leadership has been examined as intrapersonal competencies, interpersonal processes, and relational dynamics. More specifically, I review those approaches, their strengths and weaknesses as followed: The trait approach The trait theories assumed that leaders were born, not made. In the literature, Stogdill (1948, 1974) completed two comprehensive reviews by synthesizing more than 200 studies of the trait approach. His two surveys identified a group
August, 2006
A Critical Review of Leadership Research Development
Jun Liu Business School, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China Xiaoyu Liu School of Labor Relations & Human Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China Abstract Leadership research has gone through several phases of development in the past 80 years or so. The paper identifies the major theories in each phase, and investigates the strengths and weaknesses of the research. Among those theories, transformational/charismatic leadership and leader-member exchange (LMX) are heavily discussed. The paper also discusses the future trend of research in leadership areas. Keywords: Review, Transformational Leadership, LMX Leadership can be defined as a process that an individual influences a group of individuals to implement strategies and achieve the collective goals (Yukl, 2002). Research in the area seeks to find out what types of leaders are likely to be successful and what factors determine leadership effectiveness. Generally, leadership research has gone though four paradigms: trait approach, behavioral approach, situational approach, and the contemporary theories of leadership. The paradigms of leadership theories shift with the progress from static to dynamic view of leadership with the trait and behavioral theories reflecting a personal, the situational theories an interpersonal, and the contemporary theories a relational approach to conceptualizing leadership. That is to say leadership has been examined as intrapersonal competencies, interpersonal processes, and relational dynamics. More specifically, I review those approaches, their strengths and weaknesses as followed: The trait approach The trait theories assumed that leaders were born, not made. In the literature, Stogdill (1948, 1974) completed two comprehensive reviews by synthesizing more than 200 studies of the trait approach. His two surveys identified a group
References: Bass, B.M. and B. Avolio, (1993), “Transformational leadership: a response to critiques,” In M.M. Chemers and R. Ayman (eds.), Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and Directions (pp. 49-80), New York: Academic Press. Bass, B.M., (1985), Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B.M., (1996), A new paradigm of leadership: An inquiry into transformational leadership. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. Beyer, J.M., (1999), “Taming and promoting charisma to change organizations,” Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 307-330. Blake, R.R. and J.S. Mouton, (1964), The Managerial Grid. Houston: Golf Publishing. Bryman, A., (1992), Charisma and Leadership in Organizations. London: SAGE. Burns, J.M., (1978), Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Ciulla, J.B., (1998), Ethics, the Heart of Leadership. Westport, CT: Greenwood. 9 International Journal of Business and Management August, 2006 Conger, J.A., (1999), “Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing streams on research,” Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145-179. Conger, J.A., and R.N. Kanungo, (1998), Charismatic Leadership in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Day, D.V., (2000), “Leadership development: A review in context,” Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. Dunegan, K.J., D. Duchon, and M. Uhl-Bien, (1992), “Examining the link between leader-member exchange and subordinate performance: The role of task analyzability and variety as moderators,” Journal of Management, 18(1), 59-79. Fiedler, F.E., (1967), A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Fu, P.P., R.J. House, J. Liu, et al., (2002), “Study of Chinese business Executives: A value-based approach,” Paper presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Denver, Colorado, August 9-14, 2002. Graen, G., R.C. Liden, and W. Hoel, (1982), “The role of leadership in the employee withdrawal process,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(6), 868–872. Graen, G.B. and M. Ulh-Bien, (1991), “The transformation of professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing contributions: Toward a theory of leader-making,” Journal of Management Systems, 3(3), 33-48. Graen, G.B., and M. Ulh-Bien, (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,” Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247. Graham, J.W., (1991), “Servant-leadership in organizations: Inspirational and moral,” Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 105-119. Green, S.G., S.E. Anderson, and S.L. Shivers, (1996), “Demographic and organizational influences on leader-member exchange and related work attitudes,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66(2), 203-214. Hersey, P., and K. Blanchard, (1982), Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. House, R.J., and B. Shamir, (1993), “Toward the integration of transformational, charismatic and visionary theories of leadership,” In M.C.R. Ayman (eds.) Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and directions. New York: Academic Press. House, R.J., and R.R. Mitchell, (1974), “Path-goal theory of leadership,” Journal of Contemporary Business, 3, 81-97. Hughes, R.L., R.C. Ginnett, and G.J. Curphy, (1996), Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience. Chicago: Irwin. Jermier, J.M., and S. Kerr, (1997), “Substitutes for leadership: their meaning and measurement contextual recollections and current observations,” Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 95-101. Kark, R., B. Shamir, and G. Chen, (2003), “The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependence,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 246-255. 10 International Journal of Business and Management August, 2006 Kerr, S., and J.M. Jermier, (1978), “Substitutes for leadership: The meaning and measurement,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22(3), 375–403. Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R.K. White, (1939), “Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates,” Journal of Social Psychology, 10(3), 271-301. MacKenzie, S.B., P.M. Podsakoff, and G.A. Rich, (2001), “Transformational and transactional leadership and salesperson performance,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(2), 115-134. 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. Miller, K.I., and P.R. Monge, (1986), “Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-analytic review,” Academy of Management Journal, 29(4), 727-753. Misumi, J., (1985), The Behavioral Science of Leadership: An interdisciplinary Japanese Research Program. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Podsakoff, P.M., S.B. MacKenzie, R.H. Moorman, and R. Fetter, (1990), “Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers ' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors,” Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142. Scandura, T.A., (1999), “Rethinking leader-member exchange: An organizational justice perspective,” Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 25-40. Scandura, T.A., and C.A. Schriesheim, (1994), “Leader-member exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complementary constructs in leadership research,” Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1588–1602. Schriesheim, C.A., and C.J. Murphy, (1976), “Relationships between leader behavior and subordinates satisfaction and performance: A test of some situational moderators,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(5), 634-641. Schriesheim, C.A., S.L. Castro, X.T. Zhou, and F.J. Yammarino, (2002), “The folly of theorizing ‘A’ but testing ‘B’: A selective level-of-analysis review of the field and a detailed Leader–Member Exchange illustration,” Leadership Quarterly, 12(4), 515-551. Shamir, B., E. Zakay, E. Breinin, and M. Popper, (1998), “Correlates of charismatic leader behavior in military units: Subordinates’ attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors’ appraisals of leader performance,” Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 387–409. Shamir, B., R.J. House, and M.B. Arthur, (1993), “The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory,” Organization Science, 4(1), 1–17. Stogdill, R.M., (1948), “Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature,” Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35-71. Trice, H.M., and J.M. Beyer, (1986), “Charisma and its routinization in two social movement organizations.” Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 113–164. Vroom, V.H., and A.G. Jago, (1995), “Situation effects and levels of analysis in the study of leader participation,” Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 169–181. 11