OJL  Vol.4 No.4 , December 2015
From “Cogito Ergo Sum” to “Vivo Ergo Sum”: Current Theoretical Trends and Changing Perspectives in Leadership
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to review recent developments in leadership theories from paradigm perspective and introduce the new frontiers and challenges of leadership theories and practice. Considering that organizational analysis is rooted in different social science paradigms, “scientization” was likely to result in hegemony of a single paradigm in management field—and in specific leadership studies—by suppressing knowledge claims of other paradigms. In conjunction with this, the study attempted to verify whether the leadership field is dominated by modernist-positivist approach by analyzing the trend in last 15 years from this perspective. Findings of the review significantly demonstrated that the recent developments in the field can be described as a transition from a modernist-positivist approach towards more balanced fashion which employs both retrospective and interpretive approach in leadership studies. However, it is also underlined that integrative perspectives that consider how disparate leadership theories—66 different leadership theories in specific-relate or operate simultaneously to influence the emergence of leadership phenomena is crucial.
Cite this paper: Karaaslan, O. (2015) From “Cogito Ergo Sum” to “Vivo Ergo Sum”: Current Theoretical Trends and Changing Perspectives in Leadership. Open Journal of Leadership, 4, 153-163. doi: 10.4236/ojl.2015.44014.

[1]   Bono, J. E., & Ilies, R. (2006). Charisma, Positive Emotions and Mood Contagion. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 317-334.

[2]   Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared Leadership in TEAMS: An investigation of Antecedent Conditions and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1217-1234.

[3]   Clegg, S., & Hardy, C. (1999). Introduction. In S. Clegg, & C. Hardy (Eds.), Studying Organization (pp. 1-22). London: Sage.

[4]   Day, D. V. (2001). Leadership Development: A Review in Context. The Leadership Quarterly, 11, 581-613.

[5]   Denis, J. L., Lamothe, L., & Langley, A. (2001). The Dynamics of Collective Leadership and Strategic Change in Pluralistic Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 809-837.

[6]   Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership Theory and Research in the New Millennium: Current Theoretical Trends and Changing Perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 36-62.

[7]   Eagly, A. H., & Chin, J. L. (2010). Diversity and Leadership in a Changing World. American Psychologist, 65, 216.

[8]   Einarsen, S. L., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive Leadership Behavior: A Definition and Conceptual Model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 207-216.

[9]   Gardner, W. L., Lowe, K. B., Moss, T. W., Mahoney, K. T., & Cogliser, C. C. (2010). Scholarly Leadership of the Study of Leadership: A Review of the Leadership Quarterly’s Second Decade, 2000-2009. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 922-958.

[10]   Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The Impact of Professional Isolation on Teleworker Job Performance and Turnover Intentions: Does Time Spent Teleworking, Interacting Face-to-Face, or Having Access to Communication Enhancing Technology Matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1412-1421.

[11]   Hatch, M. J., Kostera, M., & Kozminski, A. K. (2007). The Three Faces of Leadership. Oxford: Blackwell.

[12]   Hogg, M. A. (2001). A Social Identity Theory of Leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184-200.

[13]   House, R. J., & Aditya, R. N. (1997). The Social Scientific Study of Leadership: Quo Vadis? Journal of Management, 23, 409-473.

[14]   Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. (2005). The Role of Followers in the Charismatic Leadership Process: Relationships and Their Consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30, 96-112.

[15]   Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-Factor Model of Personality and Transformational Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 751-769.

[16]   Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J.-L., Chen, Z. X., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual Power Distance Orientation and Follower Reactions to Transformational Leaders: A Cross-Level, Cross-Cultural Examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 744-764.

[17]   Kozminski, A. K., & Jemielniak, D. (2013). The New Principles of Management. Warsaw: Kozminski University.

[18]   Kozminski, A. K. (2008). Management in Transition. Warsaw: Difin.

[19]   Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant Leadership: Development of a Multidimensional Measure and Multi-Level Assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 161-177.

[20]   Lord, R. G., & Shondrick, S. J. (2011). Leadership and Knowledge: Symbolic, Connectionist, and Embodied Perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 207-222.

[21]   Lord, R. G., Hannah, S. T., & Jennings, P. L. (2005). A Framework for Understanding Leadership and Individual Requisite Complexity. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 104-127.

[22]   Mehra, A., Smith, B. R., Dixon, A. L., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed Leadership in Teams: The Network of Leadership Perceptions and Team Performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 232-245.

[23]   Mumford, M. D., Antes, A. L., Caughron, J. J., & Friedrich, T. L. (2008). Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic Leadership: Multi-Level Influences on Emergence and Performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 144-160.

[24]   Porter, L. W., & McLaughlin, G. B. (2006). Leadership and the Organizational Context: Like the Weather? The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 559-576.

[25]   Ruvio, A., Rosenblatt, Z., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (2010). Entrepreneurial Leadership Vision in Nonprofit vs. For-Profit Organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 144-158.

[26]   Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational Leadership, Conservation, and Creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 703-714.

[27]   Treadway, D. C., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., Ammeter, A. P., et al. (2004). Leader Political Skill and Employee Reactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 493-513.

[28]   Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational Leadership Theory: Exploring the Social Processes of Leadership and Organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654-676.

[29]   Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity Leadership Theory: Shifting Leadership from the Industrial Age to the Knowledge Era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298-318.

[30]   Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic Leadership and Organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review, 29, 222-240.

[31]   Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (2007). The Role of the Situation in Leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 17-24.

[32]   Waldman, D. A., Balthazard, P. A., & Peterson, S. J. (2011). Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1092-1106.

[33]   Yildirim, E. (2002). “Cogito Ergo Sum” dan “Vivo Ergo Sum” a Örgütsel Analiz. Yönetim Arastirmalari Dergisi, 2, 155-185.

[34]   Yukl, G. (2008). How Leaders Influence Organizational Effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 708-722.

[35]   Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-Based Perspectives of Leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 6-22.