Acton, B. Putting emergence back in leadership emergence: a dynamic, multilevel, process-oriented framework. Amundsen, S. Empowering leadership: construct clarification, conceptualization, and validation of a new scale.
Linking empowering leadership to job satisfaction, work effort, and creativity: The role of self-leadership and psychological empowerment. Avolio, B. Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory building. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Manual and Sampler Set. Google Scholar. Revisiting the development and validation of the authentic leadership questionnaire: analytical clarifications.
Badura, K. Gender and leadership emergence: a meta-analysis and explanatory model. Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. PubMed Abstract Google Scholar. Hamilton, G. Bower, and N. Frijda Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers , 37— Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Toward a psychology of human agency. Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Bendell, B. A gender-aware study of self-leadership strategies among high-growth entrepreneurs.
Small Bus. Browne, M. Bollen and J. Burns, J. Charlier, S. Emergent leadership in virtual teams: a multilevel investigation of individual communication and team dispersion antecedents. DeRue, D. Drucker, P. Managing oneself. Farahnak, L. The influence of transformational leadership and leader attitudes on subordinate attitudes and implementation success. Fischer, T. Leadership process models: a review and synthesis.
Fornell, C. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Furtner, M. Self—leadership: Basics. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Leading yourself and leading others: linking self-leadership to transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. Work Organ. Geiser, C.
Gong, Y. Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: the mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Groves, K. An empirical study of leader ethical values, transformational and transactional leadership, and follower attitudes toward corporate social responsibility.
Ethics , — Hannah, S. Leader self and means efficacy: a multi-component approach. Hegstrom, J. Dominance, sex, and leader emergence. Sex Roles J. Henseler, J. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Hoobler, J. Bosses' perceptions of family-work conflict and women's promotability: glass ceiling effects.
Houghton, J. The revised self-leadership questionnaire: testing a hierarchical factor structure for self-leadership. Hu, J. Getting ahead, getting along, and getting prosocial: examining extraversion facets, peer reactions, and leadership emergence.
Hu, L. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification.
Methods 3, — Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Jepson, D. Leadership context: the importance of departments. Judge, T. Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Kroesen, M. Do attitudes cause behavior or vice versa? An alternative conceptualization of the attitude-behavior relationship in travel behavior modeling.
Part A Policy Pract. Kwok, N. How leader role identity influences the process of leader emergence: a social network analysis. Lanaj, K. Leadership over-emergence in self-managing teams: the role of gender and countervailing biases. Lilienfeld, S. Psychology's replication crisis and the grant culture: righting the ship.
Liu, Z. Leader development begins at home: overparenting harms adolescent leader emergence. Lovelace, K. Work stress and leadership development: the role of self-leadership, shared leadership, physical fitness and flow in managing demands and increasing job control. Maxwell, S. Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? McClean, E. The social consequences of voice: an examination of voice type and gender on status and subsequent leader emergence. Morgeson, F.
The external leadership of self-managing teams: intervening in the context of novel and disruptive events. Mumford, T. The leadership skills strataplex: leadership skill requirements across organizational levels. Mplus User's Guide. Neck, C. Two decades of self-leadership theory and research.
Nevicka, B. All I need is a stage to shine: narcissists' leader emergence and performance. Northouse, P. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Finally, it asks why certain people become leaders, and identifies the various sources of motivation to take on leadership positions. Before identifying the characteristics of leaders of low-in come urban communities, it is important to examine traditional patterns of leadership selection in rural areas in order to develop a benchmark by which contemporary structures may be evaluated.
In this section, data from both historical accounts of traditional leadership and contemporary patterns in remote rural areas have been drawn upon. Traditional forms of leadership selection vary greatly according to cultural context and to the functions that leaders are expected to fulfil. They may also differ significantly over local areas depending on the particular characteristics of the individual settlement. On the whole, the primary determinant of traditional leadership is ascription, i.
This is particularly the case in many African and Asian countries, where appropriate leadership qualities include age, status and affiliation to the dominant kinship group or lineage.
A leader's functions mainly revolve around representing the community to the outside world, resolving disputes within the village and offering protection to villagers. In many parts of Africa, for example, villages are headed by tribal chiefs or clan elders. Both historically, and in many present-day villages in the rural areas, there is a widespread tradition of the "Big Man" phenomenon, whereby a paternalistic leader of a village offers patronage and protection for his community.
In Asia, respect for age and experience, along with membership of a high-status lineage, is similarly an important criterion in traditional patterns of leadership selection. In South-East Asia, particularly, Confucian ethics, which emphasize a fundamental relationship between wisdom and old age, have led to a system whereby villages were traditionally governed by a small, elderly elite. Traditional respect for age continues to be even more important than gender in terms of status in South-East Asia, meaning that some women have the opportunity to occupy leadership roles within their local communities.
In Latin America, traditional leaders in rural areas conform to a slightly different mould than in other continents, possibly because indigenous forms of organization were wiped out by the Iberian conquest.
In this case, leaders in rural areas are often either self-imposed, authoritarian leaders, generally known as caciques, who derive their support from a combination of force and the exploitation of a "brokerage" role between the community and local government, or they are elected as municipal leaders - a task which is seen as onerous, but nevertheless a duty.
The above-mentioned factors are important in the following discussion of contemporary leadership patterns in urban areas, for the affective or ascriptive dimension in leadership selection may continue to be considerable where identity with, and commitment to, one's tribe or kin group is deemed more important than specific developmental objectives.
However, it is critical not to mistake "traditional" values as the primary basis for local-level organization and leadership with the fact that those values may be a veneer for more "modem", political or instrumental associations. For example, although tribalism per se has been heralded by some as an important political factor in local development in the United Republic of Tanzania, in Kenya, Zimbabwe and elsewhere, it is likely that ethnic symbolism is merely employed as a strategy to mobilize support for movements which are not first and foremost tribally-oriented.
One must also be careful not to equate "modem" values with "Western" conceptions of appropriate forms of community organization. In several respects, the qualities associated with traditional leadership are also found in urban areas, albeit under a slightly different guise. In the following discussion of contemporary leaders in urban communities, examples from "modem" rural settlements which have been the object of national development programmes have also been included.
A critical difference between the analysis of traditional and contemporary leadership structures is that leaders in the latter category are more likely to be exposed to a wider range of influences and also to more bureaucratic decision- making machinery than those living in remote villages.
Therefore, when considering contemporary leaders one must not only be aware of the cultural backcloth against which different types of leaders emerge and the various functions they fulfil, but also the political context in which housing and community-development projects take place. As far as leadership functions are concerned, urban environments provide a wide diversity of opportunities for neighbourhood representation.
Community organization and leadership may spring up around specific issues such as upgrading, 43, 58, or the promotion of different group activities such as social and welfare associations.
For example, in urban African neighborhoods a multiplicity of organizations can be found, such as traditional councils of elders, religious affiliations and landlord associations; or groups may be established for the arbitration of disputes within the settlement and for the protection of the community.
Mbithi and Rasmusson, in their analysis of the harambee self-help movement in Kenya, maintain that different leaders emerge for separate phases of local development projects - initiation, organization and implementation.
For example, in a low-income community in Madras, India, the religious leader was a high-caste elder, while the "political" leaders were younger and tended to have contacts with influential people. Despite the diversity of leadership functions in low-income settlements and the various different challenges posed by membership of urban communities, many types of contemporary leader share common characteristics.
In the following breakdown of the key characteristics of urban leaders it is important to note that many of these factors are interdependent.
For example, gender often determines the type of employment one is likely to obtain, which in turn affects income and social status. Obviously the extent to which these variables overlap depends on the cultural and economic context of different countries. This report does not attempt to demonstrate the likely interrelationships within specific regions, although their possible existence should be borne in mind.
The first three categories of leadership characteristics appear to have more universal significance than the other five, so they have been dealt with in slightly greater depth in order to show the range within each type.
The first significant point about age is that contemporary leaders tend to be younger than their traditional counterparts. For example, in a Copperbelt mining town in what was then Northern Rhodesia now Zambia , the tribal elders who traditionally presided over the local urban administration were gradually replaced by a group of younger, better-educated men whose basis of legitimacy stemmed from their ability to negotiate with so-called "modern" urban institutions.
Despite this trend towards relative "youth" of contemporary leaders, most tend to be in their early to late middle-age, and older than the majority of other community residents. For example, in a study of institutional leadership in a housing estate in the United Kingdom, the median age of leaders was 44 years, and in a small group of up-and- coming potential leaders in their late 20s and early 30s, the local influentials tended to be older. The fact that most leaders in third-world communities are slightly older than non-leaders suggests that age is an important criterion in leadership selection.
Comparative seniority furnishes an advantage for leaders in a number of ways. First, their age is likely to command respect from the community. Thirdly, older leaders are likely to be better-off economically which may allow them to devote their free time to community activities rather than to additional income-earning.
Another leadership characteristic relevant to most areas of the world is gender. The great majority of contemporary leaders is male.
First, in several countries there is a long tradition of the management of public affairs by men. Secondly, men are likely to be more successful in negotiation with public bodies because they may have more experience in the "outside world", and because the personnel of bureaucratic institutions, especially in male-dominated societies, might well be male and give greater recognition to men rather than women leaders.
Thirdly, there may be social stigmata attached to women working outside the home or alongside men. However, in certain areas, women seem to have gained a significant foothold in urban leadership positions. For example, in Latin America, where there are comparatively high rates of female migration to cities in comparison with other regions of the world, women often occupy key roles within their communities.
However, there is no clear global pattern of variation in gender and leadership selection. Overall predominance of men in leadership positions corresponds with the fact that most cultures are heavily male-dominated, and that only in certain cases, where the local political context allows or demands it, will women also take on leadership responsibilities.
The majority of contemporary leaders tend to be more educated than the other members of their communities, and to have completed at least a primary school education. For example, in the Mathare Valley, a squatter settlement in Nairobi, leaders tended to be less educated than other residents, with most of them having had no formal education. One may also conclude that higher educational levels often go hand-in-hand with higher status occupations, for although leaders' economic activities vary widely they tend to be of higher status and better-paid than jobs held by other community members.
Many leaders are either artisans or in middle- to lower- level service occupations such as government employment. Relatively higher status occupations tend to make leaders better-off than the majority of residents. Leaders are generally "skilled" in a number of ways, including the capacity to organize, 20 to articulate people's needs, 77 to negotiate with government officials and other institutions 12 and the willingness to listen which may sometimes also be considered an important skill.
Leaders often have control over physical or economic resources within their communities, such as land, which are used either as sources of enrichment or as means of exercising control over residents. For example, leaders often engage in reciprocal relationships with key figures in government or political patrons whereby the leader secures certain promises and benefits in exchange for loyalty and for mobilizing residents on behalf of the patron when required.
High status is an extremely common characteristic of contemporary leaders in Asia and Africa, especially for those leaders who fulfill "social-emotional" roles within their communities, such as local religious figures. Urban residence is also clearly correlated with educational level achieved which, as has been described, is frequently an important feature of leadership.
Certain authors maintain that without charismatic leadership, many development projects are doomed to failure, and although this may, perhaps, be somewhat overstated, "charisma" is obviously an added bonus to other more tangible leadership skills. There are certain characteristics of leadership common to many parts of the world. Leaders are likely to be middle-aged, male, relatively well-educated, and holders of comparatively "high-status" jobs with better than average remuneration.
Wealth is often accompanied by high social status. They will probably have good access to resources and contacts, posses certain skills and experience relevant to the community in question, be long-term residents and have charismatic appeal.
However, in spite of this similarity of their personal qualities, the way in which leaders acquire legitimacy varies markedly. How do leaders derive support from their local community? In an attempt to answer this question it is proposed to identify the principal types of leaders in low-income communities and relate them to their basis of local legitimacy. This will also allow an examination of the degree to which popular participation for community-level improvements will be encouraged under different leadership systems.
There are four main types of leadership categories in low-income settlements which are briefly discussed below see also table 1. It is important to note that these categories are not necessarily distinct from one another. For example, authoritarian leadership may overlap with traditional leadership if there is a history of narrow popular participation in rural areas, such as caciquismo in Latin America or the "Big Man" phenomenon in African villages.
Similarly, political leaders may overlap with authoritarian ones. In low-income settlements in Mexico it is common for local caciques to be affiliated to, and representative of, the dominant political party. For example, traditional councils of elders are common in inner-city areas of Ibadan, Nigeria, although they have gradually acquired new skills and contacts in order to extend their influence in an urban context.
Degree to which leader seeks to mobilize action and support for community level improvements. Sometimes traditional-type leadership may exist alongside other forms of leadership as a result of the function the leader performs. For example, in a Madras housing project, a high-caste, 57 year-old man fulfilled the function of religious leader as well as settling land disputes, whereas other types of leaders in the community played political roles.
Under "traditional" leadership, participation is likely to be low if the leader is paternalistic and handles community affairs alone. Furthermore, since his support does not depend on what he achieves for the community, he may not be disposed to promoting community improvements unless they will benefit him personally.
However, as table I suggests, this is variable. In many traditional communities there is a custom of donating a certain amount of unpaid collective labour each year for the good of the community, such as the tradition of shramadana in Sri Lanka and the faena in Mexico.
Authoritarian leaders, such as the widely-described cacique in Latin America, are self-imposed and gain their leadership through domination and coercion. They also generally derive a certain amount of external support in urban areas through their contacts with patrons.
Such "derivative" support may take the form of powerful patrons visiting the community and publicly congratulating the leader for his efforts. Under caciquismo, rates of community participation in demand-making for services and so on are usually low and strictly controlled, for if it were too successful the cacique would undermine his basis of support.
However, on occasions when the leader needs to demonstrate a turnout of support or voters for his patron in order to secure the promise of a benefit for the community, then, for a while at least, mobilization of the community may be high. Positional leaders are attached to an external institution, be it a political party, a trade union, a religious organization, or faction of any of these, where the aim of that organization is to foster grass-roots support among the urban poor. However, where legitimacy is weighted, as it often is, towards the external institution, then the leader will have to comply with the orthodoxy and ground rules of that organization.
In- this case he will seek to reduce the level of mobilization and the demands that are directed towards the external body. The term "freely-elected" does not mean that the whole community has participated in elections, nor does it imply that the leadership is representative of all groups within the settlement.
However, this category of leadership is probably the only one where the needs of community residents are important criteria for selection. The source of legitimacy is the community itself and not inherited status, force nor political contacts. Therefore they are likely to involve residents in mobilization efforts in order to press the relevant agencies for goods and services.
However, there is a progressive reduction of mass mobilization as services are gradually acquired due to the fact that the leader's role becomes less critical to the community. Leaders may combat this by deliberately dragging their feet in order to extend their usefulness as representatives. Having discussed the characteristics of leaders in low- income settlements and their bases of support, it is time to ask why certain individuals are motivated to take on leadership positions in their communities.
Certainly leaders are often subject to physical, verbal and slanderous abuse, and it is often a thankless task. So why do they become leaders? Certain leaders may feel obliged to become community representatives, either because of their widespread popular support, or because privileged status in certain cultural and ideological contexts carries with it the obligation to provide for, or protect those who are less fortunate.
As an example of the first point, in Sirswadi Village, Maharashtra, India, a woman who was very popular among the residents was made leader, despite her reluctance to take on this responsibility.
Another key motive for adopting leadership positions is to acquire prestige, social status, or a springboard for future political careers. Some leaders genuinely seek to improve the conditions of their communities and adopt leadership positions in order to hasten the arrival of goods and services for their followers.
Gender may be important here. For example, in Guayaquil, Ecuador, men take on leadership functions primarily for economic reasons while women do so mainly for non-pecuniary motives. The motives for taking on leadership positions usually overlap, hut it is important to note that the process of external intervention in low-income communities itself can modify a leader's originally altruistic motive to one more concerned with individual gain.
This is because it is generally the leaders and the better-off residents who benefit most from development programmes. This survey suggests that this is probably an accurate reflection of the motive for most leader involvement. Yet, as is shown in the following chapter, pressure to fill positions of leadership often does not emanate from the community, but from outsiders.
Why do leaders emerge and how do they relate to society at large? Although the motive for taking on the role of community leader varies considerably, this fact, by itself, fails to explain why leadership adopts particular forms both between societies and within societies.
Why, for example, do different systems of caciquismo exist in Latin America and why do caciques become prominent at different periods? Similarly, in the Republic of Korea, why should parallel structures of leadership exist within the New Community Movement'? Perhaps the most important feature of leadership is its role as intermediary between local residents and supra-local institutions, he they governmental, political or private. This chapter specifically identifies the nature of the link between these two levels as mediated by leaders, and analyses the relative importance of the community and external bodies in shaping leadership structures.
There are several reasons why this is regarded as a key issue. First, the review of the literature demonstrates that one cannot divorce analyses of leadership from the historical and cultural settings in which they emerge 76 nor, more specifically, from the particular political and economic context of a society at any given moment in time.
As Bartra 7 argues, leadership forms part of the power structure of a whole region. One needs to understand, therefore, how leadership both affects and is affected by the local political economy. Leadership cannot be analysed in a social or political vacuum.
It is necessary to discover why and how leadership structures operate and this can only be achieved by examining the nature of engagement between leaders and society.
Secondly, and arising from the first point, all leaders act as mediators between external institutions and the grassroots, but this mediation operates in a variety of ways with varying degrees of autonomy. Sometimes neither leaders nor institutions are what they seem: both have covert as well as overt rationales which affect their behaviour.
Thirdly, leadership is a dynamic phenomenon. Thus, local leadership structures change as perceived "needs" shift, as socio-political structures alter, and as competitors emerge. It is important to recognize the dynamics of leadership and to seek to identify the variables which are most likely to lead to change.
Finally, leadership overlaps spatially and functionally so that both the causes of, and likely outcomes associated with, factions and their formation need to be understood. The nature of leaders' links upwards to external institutions and down towards those whom they represent. All societies have some sort of formal or informal structure through which information, demands, resources and so on may be channelled both upwards and downwards.
The extent to which these channels successfully represent the interests of the originating group and the degree to which the traffic is one-way varies considerably. In such cases, leadership may operate simultaneously on a variety of fronts religious, emotional, petitioning, arbitrating but without having to constitute itself formally as a representational structure. The formal establishment of a community association is usually a result of initiatives from outside rather than an expression of the local population's needs.
For example, in addition to those cases already cited, the Alliance for Progress during the s required the creation of community participation organizations throughout Latin America; 92 British colonial governments did likewise in Africa, 53 as did Community Action Program in the United States of America during the s. There are four inroad types of relationship between leaders and their followers and external institutions. In most cases this relationship is unequal with control over leaders being exercised by the State in a variety of ways see table 2.
The identifying characteristics of a patron-client link are that it: a is informal and not legally binding; b comprises personal. The classic example is where a politician or government bureaucrat promises public utilities in exchange for votes or political support. In actual fact, leaders are rarely either patrons or clients but intermediaries or brokers. The relationship of the broker to his superior is a crucial one, but it is also two-way.
If the leader fails to conform to what the patron expects of him e. By the same token, the patron must deliver some of the rewards desired by the leader's followers or they may seek an altemative patron. Table 2. Methods of control exercised by different forms of community-State relationship. Cooption occurs where a leader affiliates with a supra-local organization thereby becoming subject to its orthodoxy, procedures and rules.
Thus affiliation to an influential political party may be perceived usually mistakenly as a prerequisite for successful demand-making. Usually cooption and incorporation lead to a reduction in influence that the leader and local group are able to wield in their negotiations with external institutions. Cooption is also widely practiced by party political and State institutions. In Guayaquil, local communities allow themselves to be coopted by political parties in the hope that they would receive services, 58 while in Mexico, many groups joined the governing party the Institutional Revolutionary Party PRI with the same expectations.
Cooption seems most likely when there is a dominant political or power group which, despite its influence, actively seeks to widen its control still further. This is a form of integration achieved by government agencies when leaders are recognized and accommodated by the institution in order for this to allow it to fulfil its goals efficiently.
Where leaders prove intransigent or uncooperative, agency staff may seek to undermine their power base either by negotiating with competing factions, or by using other mechanisms to drive a wedge between leaders and their followers. But how do leaders effectively exercise this influence? French and Raven provide us with a useful typology that identifies the sources and types of power that may be at the disposal of leaders:. Different types of power elicit different forms of compliance: Leaders who rely on coercive power often alienate followers who resist their influence attempts.
Leaders who rely on reward power develop followers who are very measured in their responses to [what? Leaders who use referent and expert power commonly experience a favorable response in terms of follower satisfaction and performance.
Research suggests that rationality is the most effective influence tactic in terms of its impact on follower commitment, motivation, performance, satisfaction, and group effectiveness. Sometimes these powers lead to follower performance and satisfaction, yet they also sometimes fail. Coercive power can result in favorable performance, yet follower and resistance dissatisfaction are not uncommon. Good leaders, whether formal or informal, develop many sources of power. Leaders who rely solely on their legitimate power and authority seldom generate the influence necessary to help their organization and its members succeed.
In the process of building their power base, effective leaders have discovered that the use of coercive power tends to dilute the effectiveness of other powers, while the development and use of referent power tends to magnify the effectiveness of other forms of power. In sum, one key to effective leadership, especially as it pertains to the exercise of social and interpersonal influence, relates to the type of power employed by the leader.
Overall leader effectiveness will be higher when people follow because they want to follow. Leadership is also about having a vision and communicating that vision to others in such a way that it provides meaning for the follower. These tools help the leader influence the attitudes, motivation, and behavior of their followers. Many writers and researchers have explored how leaders can use power to address the needs of various situations.
One view holds that in traditional organizations members expect to be told what to do and are willing to follow highly structured directions. Individuals attracted to high-involvement organizations, however, want to make their own decisions, expect their leaders to allow them to do so, and are willing to accept and act on this responsibility. This suggests that a leader may use and employ power in a variety of ways.
In the s, Tannenbaum and Schmidt created a continuum see Figure along which leadership styles range from authoritarian to extremely high levels of worker freedom. Theory X and Y thinking gives rise to two different styles of leadership. The Theory X leader assumes that the average individual dislikes work and is incapable of exercising adequate self-direction and self-control.
As a consequence, they exert a highly controlling leadership style. In contrast, Theory Y leaders believe that people have creative capacities, as well as both the ability and desire to exercise self-direction and self-control. They typically allow organizational members significant amounts of discretion in their jobs and encourage them to participate in departmental and organizational decision-making.
Theory Y leaders are much more likely to adopt involvement-oriented approaches to leadership and organically designed organizations for their leadership group.
Theory X and Theory Y thinking and leadership are not strictly an American phenomenon. Evidence suggests that managers from different parts of the global community commonly hold the same view. A study of 3, managers from 14 countries reveals that most of them held assumptions about human nature that could best be classified as Theory X.
Contemplating the central role of problem-solving in management and leadership, Jan P. Muczyk and Bernard C. Reimann of Cleveland State University offer an interesting perspective on four different leadership styles see Figure that revolve around decision-making and implementation processes. This style of leadership is seen as appropriate when circumstances require quick decisions and organizational members are new, inexperienced, or underqualified.
A doctor in charge of a hastily constructed shelter for victims of a tornado may use this style to command nonmedical volunteers. The permissive autocrat mixes his or her use of power by retaining decision-making power but permitting organizational members to exercise discretion when executing those decisions. This leader behavior is recommended when decision-making time is limited, when tasks are routine, or when organizational members have sufficient expertise to determine appropriate role behaviors.
Also sharing power is the directive democrat, who encourages participative decision-making but retains the power to direct team members in the execution of their roles. This style is appropriate when followers have valuable opinions and ideas, but one person needs to coordinate the execution of the ideas. By doing these things, you are on your way to becoming a leader worth following. The Molly Fletcher Company inspires leaders, teams and organizations to kick-start growth.
A keynote speaker and author, Molly draws on her decades of experiences working as a sports agent.
0コメント