Destructive leadership
Paper instructions:
Leadership: from ‘mainstream’ to critical perspectives
Leadership is a phenomenon that has received much attention in both academic and practitioner circles. However, there is still little agreement on a single definition of leadership, or how it should be studied.
Traditionally, ‘mainstream’ studies assume that leadership is simply the product of individual leaders, and thus focus on attempting to draw out their various traits, styles, behaviours and skills (e.g. Fulop and
Linstead, 2006; Jackson and Parry, 2008). Furthermore, Grint (1997) notes that from this perspective, leaders are often cast as romanticised heroes who are able to single-handedly lead organisations to
success. In recent years however, scholars located within the Critical Leadership Studies (CLS) paradigm—such as Collinson (2011) and Alvesson and Spicer (2012)—have sought to question the foundations
of how leadership is conceptualised, instead seeing it as a socially constructed process, which is emergent and embedded in context and culture, and decided upon through an ongoing process of meaning
making and reality definition (Smircich and Morgan, 1988; Fairhurst and Grant, 2010). Rather than concentrating their efforts on what leaders do, emphasis is placed on seeking to understand what leadership
actually is. In doing this, theorists have been keen to simultaneously emphasise the ‘dark side’ of mainstream leadership research, and have highlighted the negative and destructive potential of relying on single
individuals (Gemmil and Oakley, 1992; Calás and Smircich, 1991). This brings up a number of interesting questions: Is ‘leadership’ always a positive phenomenon? What are some of the potential problems of
relying on mainstream conceptualisations? In this post-bureaucratic age, is it really best to understand leadership as something that only a select few can perform? Or can it be redefined as a more collective
process? These issues are all areas of debate within contemporary leadership studies, and offer a number of different avenues for a literature review of the topic.
I would like for it to be structured into three separate themes within the field, and the fourth emphasising the summarising the methodology of all information collected. and finally concluding.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more