Relational leadership

Abstract

This article aims to extend contemporary work on relational leadership theory by conceptualizing leadership as embedded in the everyday relationally-responsive dialogical practices of leaders. Relational leadership requires a way of engaging with the world in which the leader holds herself/himself as always in relation with, and therefore morally accountable to others; recognizes the inherently polyphonic and heteroglossic nature of life; and engages in relational dialogue. This way of theorizing leadership also has practical implications in helping sensitize leaders to the importance of their relationships and to features of conversations and everyday mundane occurrences that can reveal new possibilities for morally-responsible leadership. We develop and illustrate the notion of relational leadership by drawing on the work of Bakhtin and Ricoeur, and on an empirical study of Federal Security Directors.

Diversity as Polyphony: Reconceptualizing Diversity Management from a Communication-Centered Perspective

“…Pless (1998) argues that corporate management initiatives aiming to solve ecological crises oftentimes fail because firms do not engage actively with dissensual and marginal voices of internal and external stakeholders in a polyphonic way. In order to overcome this dilemma, she stresses five guiding principles for conducting polyphonic dialogues between corporations and their internal and external stakeholders (Pless, 1998, pp. 315-325; for similar remarks, see Cunliffe and Eriksen, 2011): First, one important requisite for a polyphonic dialogue is the mutual recognition of all participants of the dialogue.…”

Performing Leadership: Observations from the World of Music

“…Rather, it represents how artful engagement can impact profoundly on organizational life, especially team processes [74], by moving groups beyond a leader-follower duality to embrace and explore the complex array of interactions [75]. These interactions, however, are often simple, small gestures that affirm other members of the team, which Cunliffe and Eriksen [20] referred to as "mundane", and provide a supportive basis from which to work together. A smile, a nod, and even an affirmative "yes, I understand you" are all invitational prompts that trigger further interactions that engage the whole group.…”

“…Leadership as a plural process, then, eschews hierarchy in preference to the more difficult and perhaps more time-consuming work of maintaining "relational integrity" ( [20], p. 1438), avoiding both the passive compliance of groupthink [21] and the potential for offence by overly confrontational and combative argument [22]. As Cunliffe and Eriksen [20] state "relational leaders understand the polyphonic, unfinalizable and creative nature of dialogue and the always emerging nature of leadership" (p. 1438) and that this kind of leadership rests on the ability of group members to resist indulging their ego and embracing an "ethics of reciprocity-of living well with others" ( [23], p. 1439, emphasis in the original).…”

“…As Cunliffe and Eriksen [20] state "relational leaders understand the polyphonic, unfinalizable and creative nature of dialogue and the always emerging nature of leadership" (p. 1438) and that this kind of leadership rests on the ability of group members to resist indulging their ego and embracing an "ethics of reciprocity-of living well with others" ( [23], p. 1439, emphasis in the original). Therefore, we define plural leadership within groups as a social construction that relies on a reflexive attitude and where individuals continually reassess their relational dynamics in order to act in ways that improve the group's ongoing welfare and its social contribution.…”

“…This requires a shift in emphasis away from a leader-centric ideology to a more dialogic approach where group members participate equally in the production of ideas and strategies. Cunliffe and Eriksen [20] discuss this phenomenon under the rubric of "relational leadership" and explore how day-to-day, "mundane small details, actions and conversations" (p. 1428) impact positively on group processes.…”