Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T20:05:24.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collective Leadership: Thinking About Issues Vis-à-Vis Others

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Michael D. Mumford ,
Tamara L. Friedrich ,
William B. Vessey  and
Gregory A. Ruark
Michael D. Mumford*
Affiliation:
The University of Oklahoma
Tamara L. Friedrich
Affiliation:
Savannah State University
William B. Vessey
Affiliation:
The University of Oklahoma
Gregory A. Ruark
Affiliation:
U.S. Army Research Institute
*
E-mail: mmumford@ou.edu, Address: Department of Psychology, The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 408 - 411
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We would like to thank Stan Halpin, Matthew Schuelke, Jensen Mecca, Vincent Giorgini, and Rahul Chauhan for their contributions to the present effort.

References

Balkundi, P., Kilduff, M., & Harrison, D. A. (2011). Centrality and charisma: Comparing how leader networks and attributions affect team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 1209–1222. Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Google Scholar
Burke, C. S., Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2003). The role of shared cognition in enabling shared leadership and team adaptability. In Pearce, C. L. & Conger, J. A. (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 103–122). London, England: Sage. Google Scholar
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555–590. Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. (Ed.). (2009). Development of professional expertise: Toward measurement of expert performance and design of optimal learning environments. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Fiedler, F. E., & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New approaches to effective leadership: Cognitive resources and organizational performance. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., Schuelke, M. J., Ruark, G. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). A framework for understanding collective leadership: The selective utilization of leader and team expertise within networks. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 933–958. Google Scholar
Hunter, S., Bedell-Avers, K., & Mumford, M. (2007). The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 435–446. Google Scholar
Pearce, C. L., Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. Jr. (2008). The roles of vertical and shared leadership in the enactment of executive corruption: Implications for research and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 353–359. Google Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M., & Marion, R. (2009). Complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing: A meso model. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 631–650. Google Scholar
Vessey, W. B., Friedrich, T. L., Schuelke, M. J., Mumford, M. D., Yammarino, F. J., & Ruark, G. A. (submitted for publication). Collective leadership and George C. Marshall: A historiometric analysis of career events. The Leadership Quarterly.Google Scholar
Yammarino, F. J., Salas, E., Serban, A., Shirreffs, K., & Shuffler, M. L. (2012). Collectivistic leadership approaches: Putting the “we” in leadership science and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 382–402.Google Scholar