2013
DOI: 10.1177/0170840612473552
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Distributed Leadership in Policy Formulation: A Sociomaterial Perspective

Abstract: Leadership in public policy making is challenging. There is tension in gaining commitment from competing stakeholder groups, in sustaining public engagement in technically complex areas and securing broad-based support. Our paper illuminates these challenges through a case study of health policy development in the UK. We go beyond individual roles and leader-follower exchange relationships to develop the concept of distributed leadership using a sociomaterial approach to reveal how and why leadership is distri… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
56
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
(107 reference statements)
2
56
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However the use of the interview has the tendency to draw the analytic eye to attitudes and perceptions towards tools, technologies and various forms of matter. So, the analysis tends towards participant interpretations as opposed to specific moments of organizational action, with emphasis given to themes such as the disappropriation of the histories of place (de Vaujany and Vaast, 2014) and legitimacy and trust in leadership (Oborn et al 2013). …”
Section: The Problem Of Relevance For Studies Of Sociomaterialitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However the use of the interview has the tendency to draw the analytic eye to attitudes and perceptions towards tools, technologies and various forms of matter. So, the analysis tends towards participant interpretations as opposed to specific moments of organizational action, with emphasis given to themes such as the disappropriation of the histories of place (de Vaujany and Vaast, 2014) and legitimacy and trust in leadership (Oborn et al 2013). …”
Section: The Problem Of Relevance For Studies Of Sociomaterialitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our approach follows an emerging stream of research in leadership studies on the role of people and objects/artefacts in distributed leadership (Spillane et al 2004;Bryson et al 2009;Oborn et al 2013;Mailhot et al 2016). Some scholars analyse how human agents employ objects (i.e., concepts, committees or technologies) to achieve outcomes through their leadership practice (Mailhot et al 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Bryson et al (2009: 200) identify artefacts or objects including strategy maps "that changed the minds of their producers and guided subsequent action across time and space" as influential actants in inter-organisational collaboration. In the context of public policy making, Oborn et al (2013) highlight that socio-material configurations of human agents and objects (such as data and communication technologies) can resolve conflicts and legitimise re-thinking of leadership outcomes. They too emphasise that "these materials are not passive mediators or neutral channels for leadership but are consequential".…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…using of two or more leaders and; coordinated versus fragmented [14] but the common theme between these is that DL emphasizes inclusivity; collectiveness and collaboration [15]. DL structures which align with the transformational perspective of leadership are common nowadays; and are even institutionalized in some cases.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%