This study sets out to test the assumption that concepts of leadership differ as a function of cultural differences in Europe and to identify dimensions which describe differences in leadership concepts across European countries. Middle‐level managers (N = 6052) from 22 European countries rated 112 questionnaire items containing descriptions of leadership traits and behaviours. For each attribute respondents rated how well it fits their concept of an outstanding business leader. The findings support the assumption that leadership concepts are culturally endorsed. Specifically, clusters of European countries which share similar cultural values according to prior cross‐cultural research (Ronen & Shenkar, 1985), also share similar leadership concepts. The leadership prototypicality dimensions found are highly correlated with cultural dimensions reported in a comprehensive cross‐cultural study of contemporary Europe (Smith, Dugan, & Trompenaars, 1996). The ordering of countries on the leadership dimensions is considered a useful tool with which to model differences between leadership concepts of different cultural origin in Europe. Practical implications for cross‐cultural management, both in European and non‐European settings, are discussed.

SummaryIn the management literature, heuristics are often conceived of as a source of systematic error, whereas logic and statistics are regarded as the sine qua non of good decision making. Yet, this view can be incorrect for decisions made under uncertainty, as opposed to risk. Research on fast and frugal heuristics shows that simple heuristics can be successful in complex, uncertain environments and also when and why this is the case. This article describes the conceptual framework of heuristics as adaptive decision strategies and connects it with the managerial literature. We review five classes of heuristics, analyze their common building blocks, and show how these are applied in managerial decision making. We conclude by highlighting some prominent opportunities for future research in the field. In the uncertain world of management, simple heuristics can lead to better and faster decisions than complex statistical procedures.

Given the increasingly acknowledged insight that people do not act as self-contained individuals but in relation to others and embedded in context, relational social constructionist leadership (RSCL) has recently gained exciting momentum. Unfortunately, this development has not been accompanied by sufficient efforts at clarification. This systematic concept-centric review, which consists of 47 empirical RSCL studies, contributes to a better understanding of RSCL as part of the relationality movement in leadership. The results help to clear up some misunderstandings on relational leadership and suggest a more analytical and critical treatment of RSCL approaches to advance the development of RSCL. As a major contribution for dealing appropriately with RSCL, the authors propose a three-component RSCL model, composed of: (1) social construction (i.e. processes of intersubjectively creating social realities through ongoing interpretation and interaction), representing the leadership mechanism, (2) high-quality relating and communicating (i.e. all the visible and invisible threads that connect people) representing the leadership content; and (3) influence (emerging at the interpersonal interaction level or the collective level), representing the leadership manifestation. This model permits: first, clearer boundaries to be drawn between RSCL and other relational leadership forms and general relationship forms; second, power and influence in RSCL to be addressed adequately; and third, potential 'dark sides of RSCL' to be considered in full. The authors believe that this model may help to reduce the risk of diluting the distinctiveness of RSCL, and to balance potential tendencies towards developing overly idealistic or implicit ideological leadership approaches within the promising field of RSCL.

No abstract

This study represents a multi-method, multi-source, and longitudinal evaluation of a leadership development program in Germany. For the development of transformational leadership, the methods of leadership feedback, training, and coaching were combined into a program. The effects of this program were evaluated at three, six, nine, and twelve months after training. Altogether, 25 leaders participated in the program. The results revealed that transformational leadership (subordinate assessment) improved six months after training and later on. Also, leaders' performance (leaders' supervisor ratings) and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (subordinate assessment) improved over time.