Alternative Approaches for Studying Shared and Distributed Leadership

Abstract

Scholars hold different perspectives about leadership which are not limited to a formally appointed leader. Of the abundance of terms used to describe this phenomenon, shared and distributed are the most prevalent. These terms are often used interchangeably, resulting in confusion in the way that shared and distributed leadership is conceptualized and investigated. This paper provides a historical development of this field, challenges existing conceptions and reveals inconsistencies and contradictions that are seldom acknowledged. Four distinct approaches to the study of shared and distributed leadership are identified in the literature, each embracing different ontological views and leadership epistemologies. Individually, the four approaches offer valuable -yet partial -understanding. Comparing and contrasting the assumptions and insights from the four approaches raises fundamental issues about how we think about leadership in terms of research, practice and development.

Exploring power assumptions in the leadership and management debate

“…Alvesson and Sveningsson, 2003b) and exploring the reluctance to lead (Gleeson and Knights, 2008), is still indicative of this quadrant and is still limited to studying managers 'doing' (or in some examples, as above, 'not doing') leadership. This is important given the growing interest in alternative models of leadership to the formally appointed leader (Fitzsimons et al, 2011) and the subsequent growing literature on 'distributed' or 'dispersed' leadership (see Bolden, 2011 and Thorpe et al, 2011 for reviews). This growth in interest in distributed leadership could illustrate a shift in the literature away from the perspective of researching managers 'doing' leadership.…”

Leadership as an emergent group process: A social network study of personality and leadership

“…A longitudinal network approach statistically tests, in the same analysis, whether individuals scoring higher on specific personality traits are more likely to receive increasing numbers of leadership nominations (i.e., emergent leaders), send increasing numbers of leadership nominations (i.e., emergent followers), and determines the process by which leaders emerge by testing if followers tend to nominate individuals who are similar to themselves (in terms of personality) as a leader. Our approach is structural, in controlling for patterns of leader and follower nominations, and processual, in looking at who sends and receives increasing leader nominations over time (Fitzsimons, James, & Denyer, 2011). Having briefly outlined the social network approach to leadership, we next derive specific predictions about personality and leaderfollower roles in the dynamic leadership network.…”

Competencies Model of a Leader In a Healthcare Organization: International Experience of Distributed Leadership Implementation

“…В работе [Fitzsimons, James, Denyer, 2011] были предложены следующие клю чевые характеристики распределенного ли дерства: 1) лидерство принадлежит не только тем, кому назначены формальные лидерские роли, оно также осуществляется мно жеством индивидов в организации; 2) практика лидерства формируется за счет взаимодействия между лидерами и по следователями, а также в рамках орга низационного контекста; 3) познание «растянуто» поверх участни ков и контекстных аспектов, в которых они находятся; 4) эффективность подразумевает развитие потенциала действий с помощью инстру ментов «совместного действия» (con certive action), «совместной деятельно сти» (coperformance) или «совместной организации» (conjoint agency). Учитывая сложность области исследо ваний распределенного лидерства, а также наличие связанных с ним других форм и моделей лидерства (совместное, распро страненное, демократическое и др.…”