Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:01:52.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Putting the “We” in Leadership: Continuing the Dialogue to Advance Our Science and Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Marissa L. Shuffler ,
Eduardo Salas ,
Francis J. Yammarino ,
Andra Serban  and
Kristie Shirreffs
Marissa L. Shuffler
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Eduardo Salas*
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Francis J. Yammarino
Affiliation:
Binghamton University
Andra Serban
Affiliation:
Binghamton University
Kristie Shirreffs
Affiliation:
Binghamton University
*
E-mail: [email protected], Address: Department of Psychology, Institute for Simulation & Training, University of Central Florida, 3100 Technology Parkway, Orlando, FL 32826
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article addresses the insightful and diverse commentaries received regarding our focal article examining collectivistic leadership approaches from both a scientific and practical perspective. In our response, we attend to four emergent themes: the interdisciplinary and historic nature of collectivistic approaches to leadership, the need for studying the nature of collectivistic leadership as a unique phenomenon, the benefits and vulnerabilities associated with this leadership perspective, and the importance of understanding from a holistic perspective what influences collectivistic leadership and how to develop it. For each theme, we integrate feedback from the commentaries and provide our perspective in terms of how to continue the dialogue on collectivistic leadership for scientific and practical advancement.

Type
Response
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 437 - 443
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2012 

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

Avolio, B., Sivasubramaniam, N., Murry, W., Jung, D., & Garger, J. (2003). Assessing shared leadership: Development and preliminary validation of a team multifactor leadership questionnaire. In Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 143–172). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2006). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 419–439. Google Scholar
Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1217–1234. Google Scholar
Carter, D. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2012). Networks: The way forward for collectivistic leadership research. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 412–415. Google Scholar
Cullen, K. L., Palus, C. J., Chrobot-Mason, D., & Appaneal, C. (2012). Getting to “we”: Collective leadership development. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 428–432. Google Scholar
DeChurch, L., Burke, C. S., Shuffler, M. L., Lyons, R., Doty, D., & Salas, E. (2011). A historiometric analysis of leadership in mission critical multiteam environments. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 152–169. Google Scholar
Denis, J. L., Langley, A., & Sergi, V. (2012). Leadership in the plural. Academy of Management Annals, 1–73. Google Scholar
Dust, S. B., & Ziegert, J. C. (2012). When and how are multiple leaders most effective? It's complex. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 421–424. Google Scholar
Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., Schuelke, M. J., Ruark, G. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). A framework for understanding collective leadership: The selective utilization of leader and team expertise within networks. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 933–958. Google Scholar
Gibb, C. A. (1954). Leadership. In Lindzey, G. (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 877–917). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
Gockel, C., & Werth, L. (2010). Measuring and modeling shared leadership. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9, 172–180. Google Scholar
Hiller, N. J., Day, D. V., & Vance, R. J. (2006). Collective enactment of leadership roles and team effectiveness: A field study. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 387–397. Google Scholar
Hunter, S. T., Cushenbery, L., Fairchild, J., & Boatman, J. (2012). Partnerships in leading for innovation: A dyadic model of collective leadership. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 424–428. Google Scholar
Mehra, A., Smith, B. R., Dixon, A. L., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in teams: The network of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 232–245. Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. Journal of Management, 36, 5–39. Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., & Ruark, G. A. (2012). Collective leadership: Thinking about issues vis-à-vis others. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 408–411. Google Scholar
O’Shea, P. G. (2012). Collective leadership and follower resistance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 415–418. Google Scholar
Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (2003). All those years ago: The historical underpinnings of shared leadership. In Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 1–18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
Pearce, C. L., & Sims, H. P. (2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational and empowering leader behaviors. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 172–197. Google Scholar
Sergi, V., Denis, J.-L., & Langley, A. (2012). Opening up perspectives on plural leadership. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 403–407. Google Scholar
Venus, M., Mao, C., Lanaj, K., & Johnson, R. E. (2012). Collectivistic leadership requires a collective identity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 432–436. Google Scholar
Wegge, J., Jeppesen, H.-J., & Weber, W. G. (2012). Broadening our perspective: We leadership is both less romantic and more democratic. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 418–420. Google Scholar
Yammarino, F. J., Salas, E., Serban, A., Shirreffs, K., & Shuffler, M. L. (2012). Collectivistic leadership approaches: Putting the “we” in leadership science and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 382–402. Google Scholar