Abstract: Although leadership is probably the most extensively studied topic in the social,
behavioral, and management sciences, there is still little consensus regarding the
essential features of effective leadership. Part of the problem comes from a lack
of attention to conceptual issues of three kinds. First, the term is rarely defined,
or defined explicitly. This means that the subsequent research uses a wide
variety of ad hoc criteria to define leadership, and the resulting literature is
inconclusive. Thus, as of today, there is virtually no consensus regarding the
characteristics of effective leadership other than to note that it somehow depends
on the “situation.” Second, most discussions never link leadership to a larger
conception of human nature. This was not true earlier on; for example, Argyris,
McGregor, and Herzberg in the 1960s criticized existing management practices
on the basis of their (very similar) ideas about human motivation. They believed
that the most powerful human motive is a need to grow, develop, and expand
one’s talents, that standard management practices infantilize employees, and that
employees react in predictable ways in order to preserve their basic humanity.
And third, academic research rarely links leadership to the performance of larger
organizational units-thus, for most academic theories of leadership, a person
can be a leader even though his or her organization fails.
Publication Year: 2001
Publication Date: 2001-07-01
Language: en
Type: book-chapter
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 47
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot