Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership: Multi-level influences on emergence and performance

The architecture of managerial leadership: Stimulation and channeling of organizational emergence

“…Some may be dismayed that our integrative attempt does not provide a new typology of leadership styles or leadership behavior. Even though we have not chosen to classify leaders by type, it is readily apparent to leadership scholars that our treatment of patterning of attention and network development would fit nicely into the analysis of pragmatic leadership by Mumford and his colleagues (e.g., Mumford, Antes, Caughron, & Friedrich, 2008). Our analysis of the tagging process to develop an attractive schema is very close to what Mumford and his colleagues (e.g., Mumford et al, 2008) discuss in their treatment of ideological leadership.…”

“…Even though we have not chosen to classify leaders by type, it is readily apparent to leadership scholars that our treatment of patterning of attention and network development would fit nicely into the analysis of pragmatic leadership by Mumford and his colleagues (e.g., Mumford, Antes, Caughron, & Friedrich, 2008). Our analysis of the tagging process to develop an attractive schema is very close to what Mumford and his colleagues (e.g., Mumford et al, 2008) discuss in their treatment of ideological leadership. While we have also refrained from a singular typology of leader behaviors in complex adaptive systems, readers familiar with complexity leadership analysis of Uhl-Bien, Marion, and McKelvey (2007) may see parallels between our discussion of stimulating and challenging emergence and their depiction of emergent dynamics via administrative and enabling leadership.…”

Franchise branding: an organizational identity perspective

“…Entrepreneurial orientation has been suggested to be moderated by both internal and external contingencies, suggesting that contextual considerations such as industry membership may introduce variance in entrepreneurial orientation rhetoric (e.g., Lumpkin and Dess 1996;Rauch et al 2009). Charismatic leadership has also been argued to be context-dependent (Mumford et al 2008). However, research on market orientation has suggested that being marketoriented is a salient goal for all organizations, and therefore it may not vary significantly between industries (Narver and Slater 1990).…”

From “<i>Cogito Ergo Sum</i>” to “<i>Vivo Ergo Sum</i>”: Current Theoretical Trends and Changing Perspectives in Leadership

“…These articles studies transformational and/or charismatic leadership topics, e.g., concepts of charisma, consequences of charismatic leadership. For detailed summary it can be referred to Shin & Zhou (2003) in which authors provide an overview of transformational leadership and its relation with worker outcomes and Mumford et al (2008) for the charismatic leadership. In addition, this thematic category also includes inspirational, Pygmalion effects, visionary, self-sacrificing and ideological/pragmatic, full-range and outstanding leadership theories.…”

“…Articles in this thematic category investigate creative leadership processes from a number of perspectives, encompassing topics like innovation and organizational learning. They also deals with leader's roles in organizational change, or larger social changes in society or government, i.e., developing a vision, implementing changes, and influencing organizational culture (Mumford et al, 2008). These aspects like social change, influencing organizational culture recalls for interpretive insights.…”