Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
In the present paper, we propose a cognitive-behavioral understanding of active and passive leadership. Building on core evaluations theory, we offer a model that explains the emergence of leaders’ active and passive behaviors, thereby predicting stable, inter-individual, as well as variable, intra-individual differences in both types of leadership behavior. We explain leaders’ stable behavioral tendencies by their fundamental beliefs about themselves, others, and the world (core evaluations), while their variable, momentary behaviors are explained by the leaders’ momentary appraisals of themselves, others, and the world (specific evaluations). By introducing interactions between the situation the leader enters, the leader’s beliefs, appraisals, and behavior, we propose a comprehensive system of cognitive mechanisms that underlie active and passive leadership behavior.
Highlights
The Full Range of Leadership Model portrays leadership as a pool of behaviors, ranging from highly passive to highly active (Avolio and Bass, 2001, p. 4; Avolio, 2010, p. 66; Sosik and Jung, 2011, p. 9)
We argue that individual differences in the three types of core evaluations account for individual differences in leaders’ inclinations to practice active or passive leadership behaviors (Figure 1, arrow 1)
While the frame of reference for selfevaluations is ‘brains’ at a conference, it may be ‘looks’ in a dating situation. When it comes to leadership, we suggest that there are two central domains in which one needs to feel capable, in order to arrive at positive self-evaluations: (1) handling people and (2) handling tasks
Summary
The Full Range of Leadership Model portrays leadership as a pool of behaviors, ranging from highly passive to highly active (Avolio and Bass, 2001, p. 4; Avolio, 2010, p. 66; Sosik and Jung, 2011, p. 9). By incorporating intra-individual variation in leadership behavior into the scope of investigation, and by identifying the cognitive mechanisms that trigger favorable leadership behaviors, it is possible to offer relevant contributions for practitioners We suggest this for a simple reason: it is easier for leaders to alter the way they think when it interferes with effective behaviors than to change their ‘unhelpful’ dispositions. The basic tenets of the CAPS model have already received support in the context of leadership theory, with Vroom and Jago (2007) suggesting that the stable sequences of cognitive unit activation are responsible for the patterns of variability in the actions, thoughts, and feelings of leaders across different situations. Some of the suggested relationships do not have great novelty value of themselves
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
