Establishing causes and effects

There are any number of texts that assert that leadership is critical for organisational performance, whether in the private, public or voluntary public sectors. In the public sector in the UK, there has been a particular emphasis on leadership as one of the means by which improvements in services and/or service transformation is achieved. Leadership was signalled as central to the reform of UK public services, with the Cabinet Office's Performance and Innovation Unit document Strengthening leadership in the public sector (PIU, 2000). There was no escape from the prevalence of leadership in public service reform under the Labour Government from 1997 onwards. Health is no exception to this, and the Darzi report (DH, 2008) pays particular attention to the need to develop leaders, both clinical and non-clinical, in order to improve healthcare.

However, while the impact of leadership on performance is often asserted, the evidence is more fragile, ambiguous or incomplete. There are problems on several fronts in relation to evidence. First, there is more writing about leadership in general descriptive terms than there is detailed research evidence. Some of this is ‘the romance of leadership’ (Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987). So, it is sometimes claimed that particular qualities, behaviours or practices are relevant for ‘effective’ leadership but no data are given. This leaves the field open to broad principles and vague generalisations that are not supported by evidence.