A field study of a cognitive approach to understanding transformational and transactional leadership

Wofford, J. C.; Goodwin, Vicki L.; Whittington, J. Lee

doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(98)90042-x

Cited by 116 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One notable example of the use of schemas with respect to leadership research is the work of Wofford et al (1998), who proposed a cognitive model to explain the way transformational and transactional leaders view work with followers. In their field study, Wofford et al examined schematic processes (e.g., vision, follower, self) and scripts (behaviors associated with a schema), arguing that transformational and transactional leadership use different schemas to interpret events, which then results in the choice of different leadership behaviors/actions in response to those events.…”

Section: Emerging Cognitive Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions

Avolio

Walumbwa

Weber

2009

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

2,042

1,612

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review examines recent theoretical and empirical developments in the leadership literature, beginning with topics that are currently receiving attention in terms of research, theory, and practice. We begin by examining authentic leadership and its development, followed by work that takes a cognitive science approach. We then examine new-genre leadership theories, complexity leadership, and leadership that is shared, collective, or distributed. We examine the role of relationships through our review of leader member exchange and the emerging work on followership. Finally, we examine work that has been done on substitutes for leadership, servant leadership, spirituality and leadership, cross-cultural leadership, and e-leadership. This structure has the benefit of creating a future focus as well as providing an interesting way to examine the development of the field. Each section ends with an identification of issues to be addressed in the future, in addition to the overall integration of the literature we provide at the end of the article.

show abstract

Section: Emerging Cognitive Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions

Avolio

Walumbwa

Weber

2009

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

2,042

1,612

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, although traditional theories appear to yield greater intervention effects with behavioral outcomes, it is possible that these effects may be due in part to mediating cognitive and affective processes that drive those behaviors (e.g., Lord & Brown, 2004;Wofford, Goodwin & Whittington, 1998). Further, greater attention needs to be paid to how cognition and affect interact in the exercise of leadership.…”

Section: Impact Of Theory Type By Focus Of the Dependent Variablementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pygmalion interventions, and to a lesser extent traditional interventions may be effective over a shorter time frame, while the impact of newer theory interventions require the development of a transformational relationship in which deep and veritable changes in followers emerge over an extended period of time. Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) suggested that what transforming leaders do is to transform and develop followers into leaders over time, and some researchers (e.g., Lord & Brown, 2004;Wofford et al, 1998) have suggested this requires lasting cognitive and schema changes in individuals.…”

Section: Investigating Temporal Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meta-analytic review of leadership impact research: Experimental and quasi-experimental studies

Avolio

Reichard

Hannah

et al. 2009

The Leadership Quarterly

417

394

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c tIn this study we set out to conduct a comprehensive quantitative research analysis of literature reporting results on the causal impact of leadership by focusing on examining what we refer to as 'leadership interventions.' We defined leadership interventions as those studies where the researcher overtly manipulated leadership as the independent variable through training, assignment, scenario or other means. Our focus included both examining experimental and quasi-experimental as well as lab and field studies conducted in public and private organizations. Our goal was to address a simple question: do leadership interventions have the intended impact and if so to what degree? We conducted a comprehensive review of the published and unpublished literature and uncovered 200 lab and field studies that met our criterion as leadership intervention studies. We report here the findings of a series of metaanalyzed effects comparing the relative impact of leadership interventions across intervention types, leadership theories, and several common dependent variables. Overall, leadership interventions produced a 66% probability of achieving a positive outcome versus a 50-50 random effect for treatment participants, but this effect varied significantly when assessing moderators such as type of leadership theory.

show abstract

“…They found that stereotype threat resulted in an increase in negative task-related thoughts (e.g., "this exercise is difficult for me", "I am not good at math"), which led to a decrease in performance. Self-appraisals play an important role in the leadership process and leadership researchers have started to examine the vital role of these appraisals, including leaders' identities and self-schema, on leadership behavior and performance (e.g., Gardner & Avolio, 1998;Lord & Emrich, 2001;Lord & Hall, 2005;Murphy, 2001;Wofford & Goodwin, 1994;Wofford, Goodwin, & Whittington, 1998).…”

Section: Self-appraisals and Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%