Developing a framework for understanding shared leadership: An analysis of antecedents, moderators, mediators and outcomes

Aim of the Paper: This paper seeks to provide an insight into recent conceptions of leadership as a shared, relational process, emerging from the ongoing interactions of multiple actors in a group setting (Beck, 1981;... [ view full abstract ]

Aim of the Paper:
This paper seeks to provide an insight into recent conceptions of leadership as a shared, relational process, emerging from the ongoing interactions of multiple actors in a group setting (Beck, 1981; Vanderslice, 1988; Barker, 1997; Gronn, 1997; Uhl-Bien, 2006). Shared leadership is defined by Conger and Pearce (2003: 1) as ‘a dynamic interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both’. Thus, shared leadership offers a concept of leadership as a group phenomenon (Gibb, 1954) diverging significantly from traditional top-down, individualistic or vertical approaches (Pearce and Sims, 2002; Conger and Pearce, 2003; Pearce and Manz, 2005). A shared approach to leadership is primarily advocated as a way to enable team based organisations to operate effectively in complex business environments and has grown in popularity in this regard (Bolden, 2011; Yukl, 2013; Hoch, 2013). Moreover, it is suggested in the literature that a shared approach, where followers influence and create leadership, might address some of the ethical concerns of modern leadership (Crevani et al., 2007; Pearce and Manz, 2011).

As early as 1978, Burns referred to the ‘crisis of leadership’ which he defined as ‘the mediocrity or irresponsibility of so many of the men and women in power’ (Burns, 1978: 1). Recent high-profile corporate scandals (e.g. Worldcom, Enron, Arthur Anderson, Anglo Irish Bank, Irish Nationwide, FIFA, Volkswagen) have increased societal disillusionment with individual business leaders, and raised questions about the wisdom of centralising power in the hands of a few individuals (Bolden, 2004; Crevani et al., 2007; Pearce and Manz, 2011). Ancona and Backman (2010: 11) agree that ‘the recent past has showcased a leadership stage…filled with leaders who are corrupt, out of touch and unable to act.’ The result of this, according to Crevani et al. (2007: 44) is that ‘we can see a development where leaders in all sectors are met with skepticism and contempt, and where young talents pursue other career forms than the managerial ladder’, adversely affecting the leadership capacity in modern organisations.

From a societal perspective, Crevani et al. (2007) propose that shared leadership might constitute a solution to the leadership crisis, as it could help prevent immoral actions since shared leaders can monitor each other and at least require leaders to discuss the appropriateness of their actions (Lambert-Olsson, 2004). Ancona and Backman (2010) likewise propose that shared leadership could help in addressing these ethical issues, as rebuilding trust will require cooperation, and reliance on each other, rather than on individual leaders. Pearce and Manz (2011: 563) similarly suggest that shared leadership can help ‘establish needed checks and balances capable of reducing corruptive tendencies’, while Fletcher and Kaufer (2003: 23), propose that shared leadership encourages ‘a more explicit focus on the egalitarian, collaborative, mutually enacted, and less hierarchical nature of leader-follower interactions’. Thus, combinations of mistrust in individual, centralised leadership, and the need to develop leadership models more compatible with modern societal values, appear to be key factors underlining the recent prominence of a shared leadership approach.

While overall interest in shared leadership is growing however, our understanding of its dynamics remain quite primitive (Conger and Pearce, 2003; Crevani et al., 2007). The purpose of this paper is to systematically review findings from twenty years of empirical research on shared leadership in commercial organisations to establish what we have learned. The intended contribution here is twofold – firstly the aim is to review the state of shared leadership research in commercial settings to date, with a view to clarifying what we have already learned; and secondly, to suggest a way forward for future research.


Theoretical Base:
The dominant theoretical perspectives adopted by researchers of shared leadership to date are reviewed and discussed in the paper. The authors propose that the prevailing theoretical dispositions in the shared leadership field have neglected to explore the interactions between individuals sharing leadership responsibilities. Given the relational nature of shared leadership, such interactions are key to understanding this concept (Fletcher and Kaufer, 2003; Seibert et al., 2003). To address this gap, a social exchange theory (SET) perspective is proposed to investigate shared leadership interactions between individuals in organisational teams. SET has been described as an approach to analysing the behavioural choices of individuals in social exchanges (Cook et al., 1993) and as such provides a promising framework to enable future research to reveal the underlying dynamics of shared leadership, which has been described as a social process (Schedlitzki and Edwards, 2014).

Importance and Key Contribution:
Shared leadership has potential individual, team, organisational and societal benefits (O’Toole et al., 2002; Rice, 2006; Crevani et al., 2007; Acar, 2010; Bergman et al., 2012; Hoch and Dulebohn, 2013; Houghton et al., 2015). The growing interest in shared leadership has led to a consequent growth in empirical work investigating such approaches, and indeed, such research is timely, perhaps even urgent given the ethical and competitive challenges facing organisations today. However, the blended nature of the emerging empirical literature in the field is problematic for a number of reasons. Firstly, it encompasses many differing conceptualisations of collective forms of leadership, including distributed, shared, relational and emergent leadership, leading to confusion about its definition (Carson et al., 2007; Avolio et al., 2009). Secondly, the limited attention given to the selection of appropriate theoretical frameworks underpinning shared leadership studies to date suggests the need for improved theorization about shared leadership and its basic processes. Added to this is a lack of attention to measurement issues and a general failure to present a rationale for their use (Schriesheim et al., 1999). Finally, the merging of research from different types of organisations, commercial and non-commercial, fails to recognise important contextual differences in these environments. To explore these issues, this paper aims to untangle what we have learned, by carrying out a focused systematic literature review of shared leadership research in commercial organisations. The review comprehensively examines shared leadership definitions, theoretical frameworks and measurement approaches, as well as organisational outcomes in commercial organisations over the past twenty years.

The key contribution is the development of a conceptual framework synthesizing a wide range of empirical findings from shared leadership research, illustrating significant antecedents, as well as important moderators and mediators of the relationship between shared leadership and performance. This framework will provide a blueprint for organisations seeking to facilitate shared leadership in their daily practice.

Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review precedes the conceptualisation of a framework of antecedents, moderators and mediators of shared leadership and team performance. Proposals for future empirical research are also presented.

Paper type: Conceptual paper.

Findings
Research in this area is growing and the majority of findings support the view that shared leadership has a positive effect on team performance, primarily in knowledge-intensive teams where employees have high autonomy (Fausing, 2013). However, this review has identified a number of inconsistencies in approaches to defining and measuring shared leadership, as well as gaps in our understanding of how it unfolds, and how it evolves in different organizational contexts over time. In particular, there is a lack of studies exploring the underlying dynamics of shared leadership and it is notable that little attention has been paid to exploring how shared leadership actually unfolds in the interactions between individuals in the workplace. In order to address these gaps, this paper supports calls for longitudinal, qualitative investigations of shared leadership in a variety of organizational contexts in order to better understand this form of leadership.


Implications
The proposed conceptual framework constitutes a blueprint which organisations can consult to encourage shared approaches to leadership to emerge. For instance, the antecedents outlined have implications for those making decisions about employee selection and team composition, as well those influencing broader matters such as managerial approaches, power sharing structures and organisational culture. The moderators identified suggest that a shared approach to leadership is particularly relevant for knowledge-intensive teams with high employee autonomy, thus leaders in these types of organizational settings could find the framework particularly useful.

shared leadership, teams, antecedents, mediators, moderators [ view full abstract ]

shared leadership, teams, antecedents, mediators, moderators