A hale farewell: The state of leadership research

Understanding indigenous leadership research: Explication and Chinese examples

“…The methodological framework, which integrates both the constructivist (interpretive) and positivist traditions, embodies three steps including constructivist grounded theory, developing and testing hypotheses, and comparative studies. This approach responds to the appeal for methodology diversity in recent leadership studies (Bryman, 2004;Munford, 2011).…”

“…However, as we discussed earlier, both positivism and constructivism have their advantages, which are respectively appropriate for investigating specific research questions. To diversify the leadership research methods (Kempster & Parry, 2011;Munford, 2011) and investigate leadership phenomena that cannot be done by any single tradition, we therefore incorporate them in our indigenous research framework by identifying both the loosely and tightly integrated methodologies.…”

“…This paper addresses this issue and contributes to the leadership literature in three ways: first, it explains the uniqueness of indigenous leadership research and the rationale for conducting such research by pointing out how this type of study differs from studies that simply include situational variables or examine the effect of culture as a moderating variable and the methodological issues involved; second, it proposes a three-step methodological framework for researchers who want to sense of a single event and understand the impact of various factors. However, extant leadership studies, including indigenous studies of US leaders, are mainly positivist and quantitative oriented (Bryman, 2004); the diversity of methods needs further emphasis (Munford, 2011). What is more, the philosophy of research involved in specific research methods also needs to be examined and diversified when exploring various indigenous research questions (e.g.…”

Applying mixed methods to leadership research: A review of current practices

“…J. Thomas Wren, The Leader's Companion, 1995 The nature of leadership involves the exercise of influence (Yukl, 2006) and can be described as a complex, multi-faceted form of performance that does not exist unless something happens (Mumford, 2011). It is the very nature of leadership as a complex, multi-level, and socially constructed process (Gardner, Lowe, Moss, Mahoney, & Cogliser, 2010) that makes it a phenomenon of great interest, but also one that is a challenge to study.…”

Learning from a fool: Searching for the ‘unmanaged’ context for radical learning

“…Wisdom is sought after in leadership research (Mumford, 2011) and perceived as potentially enacted throughout the organization (Rooney et al, 2010). Pasupathi and Staudinger (2001) measure the correlation between wisdom-related performance and moral reasoning performance, Leonard and Swap (2006) promote the transfer of enduring business wisdom and Kaye et al (2011) study the practical application of wisdom in talent management.…”