The Romance of Leadership and the Evaluation of Organizational Performance.

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Bad Apples, Bad Barrels, and Broken Followers? An Empirical Examination of Contextual Influences on Follower Perceptions and Reactions to Aversive Leadership

“…This social phenomenon, known as the ''Romance of Leadership,'' stems from a ''biased preference to understand important but causally indeterminate and ambiguous organizational events and occurrences in terms of leadership,'' neglecting the countless number of known, unknown, and indeterminate causal forces interacting with one another to produce and sustain such organizational activity (Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987;Meindl et al, 1985). This romanticized conception of leadership, thus, translates the inherent complexities underlying organizational life into straightforward and simple terms that are easy to understand, live with, and communicate to others (Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987).…”

“…In the ''typical leadership study'' , the leader is viewed as someone of unique, almost superhuman qualities. In fact, research on the ''Romance of Leadership'' suggests observers often erroneously assume that leaders possess a herculean ability to control the fates of their respective organizations (Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987;Meindl et al, 1985). As such, we have tended to place leaders on pedestals in our society, admiring and extolling them for their uncanny capacity to spur positive organizational change.…”

The Aftermath of Organizational Corruption: Employee Attributions and Emotional Reactions

“…Causal Attribution Theory suggests individuals attempt to determine the causes underlying other peoplesÕ behavior, and observers judge an individualÕs intentions and motives based on observations of that individualÕs behavior (Kelley, 1972). When attribution theory is applied to leadership, it has typically been utilized to describe the processes used by leaders to determine the reasons for effective or ineffective behavior of subordinates (Green and Mitchell, 1979) or to understand how followers attribute performance outcomes to leaders (Meindl et al, 1985;Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987;Meindl, 1995). Much of the research on attributions has focused on leadersÕ attributions of followersÕ performance (Green and Mitchell, 1979) and subsequent ratings of follower performance based on the quality of leader-member exchanges (Lord and Maher, 1991).…”

Does Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Leadership Style Matter? An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship among CEO Leadership Style, Job Satisfaction and Profitability in Nepali Financial Institutions

“…No one would deny the assertion that certain individuals have a disproportionate influence upon the course of development of the groups to which they belong; however, the evidence indicates that the influence of a single individual is seldom decisive (Freedman et al, 1956, as cited in Lieberson & O'Conner, 1972). Meindl and Ehrlish (1987) attributed the reason for general expected relationship between leadership and performance of an organization to the concept of romanticization of leadership. They explained that romanticization of leadership states that leadership has assumed a special status; it is no more just another alternative variable that explains organization performance.…”

“…Some other scholars (e.g., Lieberson & O'Conner, 1972;Preffer, 1977) argue that the effects of leadership are of less importance when compared to historical, organizational, and environment forces. In this regard, Meindl and Ehrlish (1987) suggest that attributing organizational outcomes to individual leaders is a romantic oversimplification.…”