Fine Art Metaphors Reveal Leader Archetypes

Lindsey, Jill L.

doi:10.1177/1548051810378013

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Lindsey (2011), in a psychodynamic approach, uncovered five universal Jungian archetypes that were aligned with unconscious knowledge of leadership (mentor-teacher, fatherjudge, warrior-knight, revolutionary-crusader, and visionary-alchemist). Goethals and Allison (2012), in an experimental social psychological approach, found 10 subtypes of hero images reflecting evolutionary-based Jungian archetypes.…”

Section: Mythological Roles In Group Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Sucked into Fairy Tale Roles? Role Archetypes in Imagination and Organization

Moxnes

2016

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research is an attempt to understand and measure mythological roles in attributional processes. Drawing upon Carl Jung's work on the archetype we, first, argue how role archetypes from fantasy dramas and worldwide fairy tales populate organizational life, and further, contend that they have extensive influence on how group members sort their judgments of each other. In the second part of the article, our understanding of role archetypes is aided by quantitative measurements: participants in 31 consecutive leadership development classes are asked which fellow classmates they spontaneously associate with each of seven good and seven bad fairy tale roles (deep roles), if any. Our main question is to evaluate the magnitude of agreement on the assignment of roles. Results give strong support to the assumption that group members quite easily categorize fellow members into stereotypes identified by fairy tale roles. Given the evidence in the present analysis, we posit that the role imagoes most frequently assigned (The Big Five of Fairy Tales) are isomorphic with core family roles, and further, that broad personality traits have their roots in archetypal imaginations. To more effectively secure that mythological mechanisms will not triumph over more rational, complex and balanced ways of judgments, we suggest that organizational research should acknowledge the subtle and hidden world of deep role archetypes. Keywordsarchetype, deep role, fairy tale, Jung, organizational mythology, role attribution 'In the beginning is the image; first imagination then perception; first fantasy then reality … We are indeed such stuff as dreams are made on. ' James Hillman (1975, p. 23)

show abstract

Section: Mythological Roles In Group Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Sucked into Fairy Tale Roles? Role Archetypes in Imagination and Organization

Moxnes

2016

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The generalized archetype that Adam projects is that of Father‐Judge . Lindsey () wrote that Father‐Judge leaders seek order and structure to support an environment where members can live productive and relatively happy lives. A shadow side of the Father‐Judge archetype is a need for control and the use of that control in ways that are detrimental to the growth of their employees and their company.…”

Section: Projection Of Ceo Archetype Impressionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the present Jungian theory grounded paper, the CEO's image among employees is defined as a constellation of positive and negative personality traits and thinking and leadership styles indicative of a CEO's archetype (Palaiou & Furnham, ; Winsborough & Sambath, ). In a study by Lindsey (), CEO leader archetypes have been delineated by means of fine art. These archetypes include such metaphors as Mentor‐Teacher, Father‐Judge, Warrior‐Knight, Revolutionary‐Crusader, and Visionary‐Alchemist (Hatch, Kozminski, & Kostera, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Organizational culture, responsive to CEO positioning and presence, is formed by interpretations of organizational structure, and involves shared meanings about the work environment among members of an organization. The impact of CEO archetype, including personality, leadership style, and leadership image, is linked to development and direction of the organizational culture (Lindsey, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CEO Archetype Identity Drives Organization Culture

Prince¹,

Forr²,

Wardlaw³

et al. 2019

J of Leadership Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current study the relationships between CEO archetypes and organizational climate were examined. Archetypes are historical, mythical, and cultural representations that are shared in our collective unconscious. Data were collected from a CEO and his employees, using a mixed methods research approach which involved the Zaltman Metaphorical Elicitation Technique (ZMET), as well as personality measures and quantitative assessments of organizational climate. The CEO archetype as perceived by employees is that of a benevolent patriarch which mirrors the CEO's self‐concept as caring for the well‐being of employees. Employees ascribed the stress‐free and nurturing organizational climate to the CEO's archetypical leadership style. However, their organizational climate, in principle, leads to excessive employee familistic dependence on the CEO for making important organizational decisions and supplying creative ideation. The present study of a CEO archetype and its bearing on organizational climate is unique, filling an important gap in management knowledge. Implications of the study involve the channeling of its insights about the archetype‐embedded organizational climate, so as to better select administrative managers, improve organizational communication trust and openness, stimulate creative innovation, handle organizational crises, and generally promote employee well‐being.

show abstract

“…Examples of dialogue with philosophy and theology through business ethics include work involving the first author of the focal article (Michaelson, Pratt, Grant, & Dunn, 2014) and myself (Rothausen, in press). The arts also offer rich opportunities for exploring other perspectives on work in organizations (e.g., Adler, 2015; Lindsey, 2011; Taylor & Ladkin, 2009). If we as a field are not in dialogue with these related fields, we risk increasing irrelevance to the big questions of our era.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%