Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T12:15:26.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Leadership

There Is More Than One Way To Lead

The Charismatic, Ideological, And Pragmatic (CIP) Theory Of Leadership

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2022

Samuel T. Hunter  and
Jeffrey B. Lovelace
Samuel T. Hunter
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Jeffrey B. Lovelace
Affiliation:
University of Virginia

Summary

The charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic (CIP) theory of leadership has emerged as a novel framework for thinking about the varying ways leaders can influence followers. The theory is based on the principle of equifinality, or the notion that there are multiple pathways to the same outcome. Researchers of the CIP theory have proposed that leaders are effective by engaging in one, or a mix of, three leader pathways: the charismatic approach focused on an emotionally evocative vision, an ideological approach focused on core beliefs and values, or a pragmatic approach focused on an appeal of rationality and problem solving. Formation of pathways and unique follower responses are described. The more than 15 years of empirical work investigating the theory are summarized, and the theory is compared and contrasted to other commonly studied and popular frameworks of leadership. Strengths, weaknesses, and avenues for future investigation of the CIP theory are discussed.
Get access

Keywords

LeadershipCharismaticIdeologicalPragmaticCIPPathwaysEquifinality
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Leadership
Online ISBN: 9781108883795
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 14 July 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. B., Lovelace, J. B., Hunter, S. T., & Neely, B. (2020). Foundations of the CIP theory: An overview. In Hunter, S. T. & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.), Multiple pathways to outstanding leadership: Revisiting CIP theory (pp. 22–47). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. J., & Conway, M. A. (1993). Investigating the structure of autobiographical memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(5), 1178.Google Scholar
Antonakis, J., Bastardoz, N., Jacquart, P., & Shamir, B. (2016). Charisma: An ill-defined and ill-measured gift. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 293–319.Google Scholar
Antonakis, J., & Day, D. V. (2018). Leadership: Past, present, and future. In Antonakis, J. & Day, D. V. (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 3–26). California: Sage.Google Scholar
Ashmos, D. P., & Huber, G. P. (1987). The systems paradigm in organization theory: Correcting the record and suggesting the future. Academy of Management Review, 12, 607–621.Google Scholar
Atwater, L. E., Dionne, S. D., Avolio, B., Camobreco, J. E., & Lau, A. W. (1999). A longitudinal study of the leadership development process: Individual differences predicting leader effectiveness. Human Relations, 52(12), 1543–1562.Google Scholar
Baas, M., Roskes, M., Sligte, D., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2013). Personality and creativity: The dual pathway to creativity model and a research agenda. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(10), 732–748.Google Scholar
Babcock-Roberson, M. E., & Strickland, O. J. (2010). The relationship between charismatic leadership, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Journal of Psychology, 144, 313–326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 389–411.Google Scholar
Bales, R. F. (1950). A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review, 15(2), 257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2009).The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Bedell, K., Hunter, S., Angie, A., & Vert, A. (2006). A historiometric examination of Machiavellianism and a new taxonomy of leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(4), 50–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedell-Avers, K., Hunter, S. T., Angie, A. D., Eubanks, D. L., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: An examination of leader–leader interactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 299–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedell-Avers, K. E., Hunter, S. T., & Mumford, M. D. (2008). Conditions of problem-solving and the performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: A comparative experimental study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 89–106.Google Scholar
Bennis, W. G., & Thomas, R. J. (2002). Geeks and geezers: How era, values, and defining moments shape leaders-how tough times shape good leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 305–337.Google Scholar
Bluedorn, A. C., & Jaussi, K. S. (2008). Leaders, followers, and time. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(6), 654–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boal, K. B., & Hooijberg, R. (2000). Strategic leadership research: Moving on. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 515–549.Google Scholar
Bono, J. E., Foldes, H. J., Vinson, G., & Muros, J. P. (2007). Workplace emotions: The role of supervision and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1357–1367.Google Scholar
Bono, J. E., & Ilies, R. (2006). Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(4), 317–334.Google Scholar
Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901–910.Google Scholar
Brescoll, V. L. (2016). Leading with their hearts? How gender stereotypes of emotion lead to biased evaluations of female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 415–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brescoll, V. L., Okimoto, T. G., & Vial, A. C. (2018). You’ve come a long way … maybe: How moral emotions trigger backlash against women leaders. Journal of Social Issues, 74(1), 144–164.Google Scholar
Bromiley, P., & Rau, D. (2016). Social, behavioral, and cognitive influences on upper echelons during strategy process: A literature review. Journal of Management, 42(1), 174–202.Google Scholar
Brown, A. D., Colville, I., & Pye, A. (2015). Making sense of sensemaking in organization studies. Organization Studies, 36(2), 265–277.Google Scholar
Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, P. (2005). History and social theory. Oxford: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Carlyle, T. (1849). On heroes, hero-worship, and the heroic in history. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30, 749–778.Google Scholar
Carter, S. (2016, January 12). A day in the life of Anne Wojcicki. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-day-in-the-life-of-anne-wojcicki-1452613783.Google Scholar
Chhokar, J. S., Brodbeck, F. C., & House, R. J. (Eds.). (2007). Culture and leadership across the world: The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89–136.Google Scholar
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crayne, M. P., & Hunter, S. T. (2018). Historiometry in organizational science: Renewed attention for an established research method. Organizational Research Methods, 21(1), 6–29.Google Scholar
Crayne, M. P., & Medeiros, K. E. (2020). Making sense of crisis: Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership in response to COVID-19. American Psychologist, 76(3), 462–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm (Vol. 2, pp. 169–187). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Dansereau, F., Cashman, J., & Graen, G. (1973). Instrumentality theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among managers. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10(2), 184–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82.Google Scholar
DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N. E. D., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta‐analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64, 7–52.Google Scholar
Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618–634.Google Scholar
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L. et al. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 36–62.Google Scholar
Ekvall, G., & Arvonen, J. (1991). Change-centered leadership: An extension of the two-dimensional model. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 7(1), 17–26.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella Jr, A. A. (2009). Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fleischman, E. A. (1957). A leader behavior description for industry. In Stogdill, R. M. & Coons, A. E. (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement (pp. 10–119). Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218.Google Scholar
Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53(8), 1027–1055.Google Scholar
Ghiselli, E. E. (1963). Intelligence and managerial success. Psychological Reports, 12(3), 898.Google Scholar
Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gioia, D. A., & Poole, P. P. (1984). Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 449–459.Google Scholar
Goldvarg, E., & Johnson‐Laird, P. N. (2001). Naive causality: A mental model theory of causal meaning and reasoning. Cognitive Science, 25(4), 565–610.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, R. K., Wright, S. L., & Heaphy, E. D. (2020). A critique of the leader-member exchange construct: Back to square one. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(6), 1–17.Google Scholar
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.Google Scholar
Gresov, C., & Drazin, R. (1997). Equifinality: Functional equivalence in organization design. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 403–428.Google Scholar
Griffith, J., Connelly, S., Thiel, C., & Johnson, G. (2015). How outstanding leaders lead with affect: An examination of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 502–517.Google Scholar
Griffith, J. A., Gibson, C., Medeiros, K. et al. (2018). Are you thinking what I’m thinking? The influence of leader style, distance, and leader–follower mental model congruence on creative performance. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 25, 153–170.Google Scholar
Griffith, J. A., & Medeiros, K. E. (2020). Gender (under) representation in the CIP model: Reconsidering outstanding leadership through a gender lens. In Extending the Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic Approach to Leadership (pp. 200–224). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, T., & Bluck, S. (2000). Getting a life: The emergence of the life story in adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 748–769.Google Scholar
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2007). Asking the right questions about leadership: Discussion and conclusions. American Psychologist, 62, 43–47.Google Scholar
Hall, D. T. (2004). Self-awareness, identity, and leader development. In Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., & Halpin, S. M. (Eds.), Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp. 153–176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C. (1989). Guest editor’s introduction: Putting top managers back in the strategy picture. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 5–15.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. (1987). Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 369–406.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.Google Scholar
Hammond, M., Clapp-Smith, R., & Palanski, M. (2017). Beyond (just) the workplace: A theory of leader development across multiple domains. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 481–498.Google Scholar
Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). “Happy to have been of service”: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s “obedience” experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 55–83.Google Scholar
Helmreich, R. L. (1979). Social psychology on the flight deck. Paper presented at the NASA Workshop on Resource Management Training for Airline Flight Crews, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Hiller, N. J., DeChurch, L. A., Murase, T., & Doty, D. (2011). Searching for outcomes of leadership: A 25-year review. Journal of Management, 37, 1137–1177.Google Scholar
Hooijberg, R., Hunt, J. G., & Dodge, G. E. (1997). Leadership complexity and development of the leaderplex model. Journal of Management, 23(3), 375–408.Google Scholar
House, R. J., & Howell, J. M. (1992). Personality and charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 3(2), 81–108.Google Scholar
Hunter, S. T., Bedell-Avers, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(5), 435–446.Google Scholar
Hunter, S. T., Bedell-Avers, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). Impact of situational framing and complexity on charismatic, ideological and pragmatic leaders: Investigation using a computer simulation. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 383–404.Google Scholar
Hunter, S. T., Cushenbery, L., Thoroughgood, C. N., & Ligon, G. S. (2011). First and ten leadership: A historiometric investigation of the CIP leadership model. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 70–91.Google Scholar
Hunter, S. T., & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.). (2020). Extending the charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic approach to leadership: Multiple pathways to success. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, I. L. (1954). Personality correlates of susceptibility to persuasion. Journal of Personality, 22(4), 504–518.Google Scholar
Janson, A. (2008). Extracting leadership knowledge from formative experiences. Leadership, 4(1), 73–94.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. K. (2008). I second that emotion: Effects of emotional contagion and affect at work on leader and follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 1–19.Google Scholar
Joshi, A., & Knight, A. P. (2015). Who defers to whom and why? Dual pathways linking demographic differences and dyadic deference to team effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 59–84.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36–51.Google Scholar
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kotlyar, I., Karakowsky, L., & Ng, P. (2011). Leader behaviors, conflict and member commitment to team-generated decisions. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 666–679.Google Scholar
Kotter, J. P. (1988). The leadership factor. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Lascano, J. J., Boatman, P., Strange, J. M., & Walters, K. W. (2020). Beyond outstanding to everyday: An applied perspective. In Hunter, S.T. & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.), Extending the charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic approach to leadership: Multiple pathways to success. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ligon, G. S., Harris, D. J., & Hunter, S. T. (2012). Quantifying leader lives: What historiometric approaches can tell us. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 1104–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ligon, G. S., Hunter, S. T., & Mumford, M. D. (2008). Development of outstanding leadership: A life narrative approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 312–334.Google Scholar
Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Lord, R. G., Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., Avolio, B. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2017). Leadership in applied psychology: Three waves of theory and research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 434.Google Scholar
Lovelace, J. B., & Hunter, S. T. (2013). Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders’ influence on subordinate creative performance across the creative process. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 59–74.Google Scholar
Lovelace, J. B., Hunter, S. T., & Neely, B. H. (2020). Advancing the CIP model of leadership: A scale development effort. In Hunter, S. T. & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.), Multiple pathways to outstanding leadership: Revisiting CIP theory (pp. 78–115). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lovelace, J. B., Neely, B. H., Allen, J. B., & Hunter, S. T. (2019). Charismatic, ideological, & pragmatic (CIP) model of leadership: A critical review and agenda for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 96–110.Google Scholar
Lovelace, J. B., Neely, B. H., Jayne, B. S., & Hunter, S. T. (2017). All roads lead to Rome: Navigating the creative process using the CIP model of leadership. In Mumford, M. & Hemlin, S. (Eds.), The handbook of research on leadership and creativity (pp. 316–339). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 385–425.Google Scholar
Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 295–308.Google Scholar
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8, 57–125.Google Scholar
Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. (2007). Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 57–84.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P. (2006). The redemptive self: Stories Americans live by. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. Jr J. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546–562.Google Scholar
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.Google Scholar
Miller, D., & Toulouse, J. M. (1986). Chief executive personality and corporate strategy and structure in small firms. Management Science, 32(11), 1389–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mischel, W. (1977). The interaction of person and situation. In Magnusson, D. &Endler, N. S. (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 333–352). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Mobley, M. I., Doares, L. M., & Mumford, M. D. (1992). Process analytic models of creative capacities: Evidence for the combination and reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 5(2), 125–155.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D. (2002). Social innovation: Ten cases from Benjamin Franklin. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 253–266.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic Leaders. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Antes, A. L., Caughron, J. J., & Friedrich, T. L. (2008). Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership: Multi-level influences on emergence and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Barrett, J. D., & Hester, K. S. (2012). 16 background data: Use of experiential knowledge in personnel selection. In The Oxford handbook of personnel assessment and selection (pp. 353–382). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Bedell, K. E., Hunter, S. T., Espejo, J., & Boatman, P. R. (2006a). Problem solving-turning crises into opportunities: How charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders solve problems. In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 108–137). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Bedell, K. E., & Scott, G. M. (2006b). Developmental influences – What kind of leader are you destined to be? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 246–267). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, M. S., Helton, W. B., Van Doorn, J. R., & Osburn, H. K. (2002). Alternative approaches for measuring values: Direct and indirect assessments in performance prediction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(2), 348–373.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Espejo, J., Hunter, S. T. et al. (2007). The sources of leader violence: A comparison of ideological and non-ideological leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 217–235.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Gaddis, B., Licuanan, B., Ersland, B., & Siekel, K. (2006c). Communication strategies – Persuasion or logic: How do outstanding leaders connect with their followers? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 167–189). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Licuanan, B., Marcy, R. T., Dailey, L., & Blair, C. (2006d). Political tactics getting ahead: How charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders use influence tactics. In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 190–214). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G., & Hunter, S. T. (2006e). Theory – Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: How do they lead, why do they lead, and who do they lead? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 25–51). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Marcy, R. T., Tutt, M. J., & Espejo, J. (2006f). Development – What early life experiences prepare you for outstanding leadership? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 215–245). Mahwah: Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Standish, C., & Gujar, Y. (2020). The charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership model: Origins, findings, directions, and limitations. In Hunter, S. T. & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.), Multiple pathways to outstanding leadership: Revisiting CIP theory (pp. 1–21). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Strange, J. M., Scott, G. M., & Gaddis, B. (2004). Creative problem-solving in leadership: Directions, actions and reactions. Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 205–223). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, IncGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Strange, J. M., Gaddis, B., Licuanan, B., & Scott, G. (2006g). Performance: Who masters the art of influence? Charismatic, ideological, or pragmatic leaders? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 81–107). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Strange, J. M., Scott, G. M., Dailey, L., & Blair, C. (2006h). Leader-follower interactions – Heroes, leaders, and tyrants: How do they relate? In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership (pp. 138–166). Mahwah: Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., & Van Doorn, J. R. (2001). The leadership of pragmatism: Reconsidering Franklin in the age of charisma. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(3), 279–309.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. K. (2007). Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 243–270.Google Scholar
Neely, B. H Jr., Lovelace, J. B., Cowen, A. P., & Hiller, N. J. (2020). Metacritiques of upper echelons theory: Verdicts and recommendations for future research. Journal of Management, 46(6), 1029–1062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pillemer, D. B. (2001). Momentous events and the life story. Review of General Psychology, 5(2), 123–134.Google Scholar
Porac, J. F., & Thomas, H. (2002). Managing cognition and strategy: Issues, trends and future directions. In Pettigrew, A. M., Thomas, H., and Whittington, R. (Eds.), Handbook of strategy and management (pp. 165–181). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Quigley, T. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2015). Has the “CEO effect” increased in recent decades? A new explanation for the great rise in America’s attention to corporate leaders. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 821–830.Google Scholar
Ryan, K. D. (2019, March). 23andMe’s Anne Wojcicki says doing these 2 things as a leader built her company’s culture of honesty. Inc. Magazine. https://www.inc.com/magazine/201904/kevin-j-ryan/23andme-anne-wojcicki-best-business-advice.html.Google Scholar
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999). Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 63–113.Google Scholar
Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33–53.Google Scholar
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.Google Scholar
Stokes, G. S., Mumford, M. D., & Owens, W. A. (1994). Biodata handbook: Theory, research, and use of biographical information in selection and performance prediction. Palo Alto: CPP Books.Google Scholar
Strange, J. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). The origins of vision: Charismatic versus ideological leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 343–377.Google Scholar
Strange, J. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2005). The origins of vision: Effects of reflection, models, and analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(1), 121–148.Google Scholar
Streufert, S., Streufert, S. C., & Castore, C. H. (1968). Leadership in negotiations and the complexity of conceptual structure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52(3), 218–223.Google Scholar
Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). Collective action: Towards a dual-pathway model. European Review of Social Psychology, 15(1), 59–99.Google Scholar
Suedfelt, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (2014). Integrative complexity at forty: Steps toward resolving the scoring dilemma. Political Psychology, 35(5), 597–601.Google Scholar
Thoroughgood, C. N., & Sawyer, K. B. (2017). Who wants to follow the leader? Using personality and work value profiles to predict preferences for charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic styles of leading. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33, 181–202.Google Scholar
Thoroughgood, C. N., Sawyer, K. B., &Baldock, Z. C. (2020). What About the Followers?: A Preliminary Exploration into the Role of Followers in the Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic Model of Leadership. In Extending the Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic Approach to Leadership (pp. 225–253). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tsai, K. C. (2017). Development of the teacher leadership style scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 45(3), 477–490.Google Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104.Google Scholar
Van Knippenberg, D., & Sitkin, S. B. (2013). A critical assessment of charismatic – transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board? The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 1–60.Google Scholar
Vecchio, R. P., Justin, J. E., & Pearce, C. L. (2008). The utility of transactional and transformational leadership for predicting performance and satisfaction within a path‐goal theory framework. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(1), 71–82.Google Scholar
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science, 111, 23–29.Google Scholar
Watts, L. L., Ness, A. M., Steele, L. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2018). Learning from stories of leadership: How reading about personalized and socialized politicians impacts performance on an ethical decision-making simulation. The Leadership Quarterly, 29, 276–294.Google Scholar
Watts, L. L., Rothstein, E. G., & Patel, K. R. (2020). Multiple pathways to studying outstanding leadership: It is time to expand the methodological toolbox. In Hunter, S. T. & Lovelace, J. B. (Eds.), Multiple pathways to outstanding leadership: Revisiting CIP theory (pp, 48–77). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1924). The theory of social and economic organizations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations. Translated by T. Parsons. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Wowak, A. J., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Steinbach, A. L. (2017). Inducements and motives at the top: A holistic perspective on the drivers of executive behavior. Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 669–702.Google Scholar
Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (2020). The evolution of management thought. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.Google Scholar
Yukl, G., & Gardner, W. L. (2020). Leadership in organizations (9th ed.).Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(1), 15–32.Google Scholar
Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6–16.Google Scholar
Zaccaro, S. J., Green, J. P., Dubrow, S., & Kolze, M. (2018). Leader individual differences, situational parameters, and leadership outcomes: A comprehensive review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 2–43.Google Scholar
Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2003). Awakening employee creativity: The role of leader emotional intelligence. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(4–5), 545–568.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

There Is More Than One Way To Lead
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

There Is More Than One Way To Lead
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

There Is More Than One Way To Lead
Available formats
×