Leadership must be understood as a group process rather than a leader-follower dyad

Evidence

There is a truth here which is so obvious that it is easy to overlook. Leadership is not simply a matter of leaders, or even of leaders and followers. Rather it has to do with the relationship between leaders and followers within a social group (Haslam, 2001; Sherif, 1962, p. 17; van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003b). Indeed, whenever we talk of a leader, there is an implicit (but often absent) reference to an associated group: the nation, the political party, the corporation, the research group, and so on. — Stephen Reicher, S. Alexander Haslam, and Nick Hopkins, Social identity and the dynamics of…, 35

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s framing concern: leaders embodying shared social identity; foundational premise for the whole social identity approach this paper reviews. — connects to: No stable traits distinguish leaders from followers or predict effectiveness — Stephen Reicher, S. Alexander Haslam, and Nick Hopkins, Social identity and the dynamics of…, 27; Leadership acts on followers through collective group norms, not just individual exchange — Stephen Reicher, S. Alexander Haslam, and Nick Hopkins, Social identity and the dynamics of…, 34; Leadership is cognitively framed as a group-level rather than relational process — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2356 (+9 more)

Broader Connections