An Inconvenient Truth: A Comprehensive Examination of the Added Value (or Lack Thereof) of Leadership Measures

The leadership literature encompasses a bewildering array of leadership styles, with most studies focussing on the nature and consequences of a single leadership style in isolation. This isolationist approach has led researchers to mostly ignore the similarities between supposedly different leadersh...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Journal of management studies Ročník 62; číslo 7; s. 3072 - 3117
Hlavní autori: Eva, Nathan, Howard, Joshua L., Liden, Robert C., Morin, Alexandre J.S., Schwarz, Gary
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: Oxford Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.11.2025
Predmet:
bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling (B‐ESEM)
construct redundancy
Leadership
Leadership style
Leadership styles
Management theory
proliferation
Respondents
Structural equation modeling
Truth
ISSN:0022-2380, 1467-6486
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:The leadership literature encompasses a bewildering array of leadership styles, with most studies focussing on the nature and consequences of a single leadership style in isolation. This isolationist approach has led researchers to mostly ignore the similarities between supposedly different leadership styles, and few studies have examined these overlaps empirically. To understand the extent of this problem, we use bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling to examine whether 12 dominant leadership measures capture shared variance and whether any variance unique to a particular style is related to theoretically and empirically established covariates. Moreover, we explore what the shared variance of these leadership measures may represent. Across seven samples, five countries, multiple organizational contexts, and 4000 respondents, the 12 leadership measures shared significant amounts of variance and did not systematically capture unique leadership‐related variance. Further analyses indicated this shared variance mainly represented the affective quality of the leader–follower relationship. The results reveal an inconvenient truth for leadership researchers who wish to differentiate styles, as the styles have much more in common than differences. Contrasting with previous recommendations to refine styles, we argue that a taxonomic leadership behaviour categories approach to leadership research is the most parsimonious way forward.
Bibliografia:Nathan Eva and Joshua L. Howard contributed equally.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:0022-2380
1467-6486
DOI:10.1111/joms.13156