Business Educators’ Critical Reflection on Leadership

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

It is axiomatic: Leadership is pivotal for positive organisational results. Pervasive literature can guide, yet many organisations suffer unsatisfactory results. It is a question of the gap between intent and execution. Mountains of leadership literature obfuscate versus clarify. This distortion demands scrutiny. Our research question is: “What is leadership?” Our research methodology was reflection (Dewey and others), attempting clarification to improve understanding and guide successful action. Our findings demonstrate that literature inconsistently defines leadership which impacts understanding and practice. Leadership is often studied from the perspective of either (a) the person, specifically their competence, i.e., knowledge, skills, attitude, experience, and behaviour about (i) themselves, (ii) cultivating positive relationships with others, (iii) nurturing effective teams, and (iv) business/technical/job-related content, or (b) function, i.e., attaining organisational results by goal achievement through coordination of organisation-wide activities supported by the free-willed cooperation of all organisational members, or (c) social influence, that is leadership behaviour impacting the functioning of the organisation. Research primarily examines leadership as social influence. These three perspectives are seldom integratively studied, suggesting mutually exclusive domains. However, person, function, and social influence are interconnected. Our findings imply leadership as an interplay between the person, the collective, and contextual conditions impacting organisational results. Therefore, studying leadership from the combined perspectives of person, function, and social influence is more useful. Doing so provides a holistic understanding that ensures attaining positive organisational results. The value of the study includes that reflection, an underused research method examining leadership, can limit proliferation of superfluous literature that often produces confusion. Both academics and practitioners can question their thinking, assumptions, and actions to guide better actions and to approach better results. We recommend further study to hone reflective practice and learning.