“Shared Leadership”

Prepared by
Jeliteng Pribadi (JP)
PhD Student in Management
I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
 Background
• Prof. T.K. Peng’s suggestion
Collective dimensions of leadership: The challenges
of connecting theory and method
Submission deadline: 15 June 2018 (submissions will not be considered
before 15 May 2018)

• 3rd Interdisciplinary Perspectives on

Leadership Symposium Theme:
“What leaders actually do”
10-12 May 2018, Crete, Greece
 Background
What Was, What Is, and
What May Be in OP/OB
The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology
and Organizational Behavior, 2014

What May Be
“Three cases in point
for which more attention to the
within-organizational context could
affect the conclusions drawn from
research findings are as follows:
1. Behavior within groups
2. Leadership Lyman W. Porter Benjamin Schneider
(1) Professor Emeritus, Paul Merage School of Business, University
3. The impact of rewards and
of California, Irvine, California 92697; email: lwporter@uci.edu
incentives”
(2) Senior Research Fellow, CEB Valtera, Rolling Meadows, Illinois
60008
 Cont..(Porter & Schneider, 2014, p. 16)
• Acts of leadership can be differentially effective when, as in the context of
organizations, people interact across extended periods of time.
• Thus, for example, how much transformational leadership can members of an
organization tolerate if each new leader, within some limited time frame, imposes
a new visionary direction?
• Or, what if different leaders in different parts of the organization have their own
visionary directions?
• In other words, in organizational settings with many potential (e.g., functional)
leaders, what are the limits, if any, of types of behavior—in this case
transformational leadership—commonly regarded as good?
 Background
• Shared leadership has only recently gained the
attention in academic leadership literature.
There are few studies that have tried to
determine shared leadership (Avolio,
Walumbwa, & Weber 2009).
 Cont..
• There are still some areas of shared leadership
“that have yet to be explored involve certain
boundary conditions, mediators, and
moderators that have been recommended for
future research (Avolio et al. 2009, p. 432).
 Cont..
• Avolio et. al. (2009) argues that there should
be a general definition for shared leadership
that includes the terms transactional or
transformational shared leadership.
 Shared Leadership

• Shared leadership is the fastest growing

organizational groups. It is the idea of a team where
often times no single person is set to be in charge.
• This idea of a team is different from other theories
of leadership because the leader is treated so much
like a peer which opens the door to peer leadership.
• Because of this, leadership is “not determined by
positions of authority but rather by an individual’s
capacity to influence peers by the needs of the
team in any given moment” (Pearce and Conger,
2003, p. xi).
 Shared Leadership Defenition
Shared leadership is a dynamic, interactive
influence processes among individual in groups
for which the objective is to lead one another to
the achievement of group or organizational
goals or both. The key distinction between
shared leadership and traditional model of
leadership is that the influence processes
involves more than just a downward influences
on subordinates by an appointed or elected
leader (Pearce, C.L & Conger, J.A., 2003).
 Cont..Definition
• Each individual brings distinctive knowledge, perspectives,
and capabilities to the team. Shared leadership also
focuses on the big picture; for example, social interactions
are viewed as a group occurrence. The interactions that
are found in shared leadership are often more
multidirectional and less static (Pearce, C.L & Conger, J.A.,
2003, p.23).
 Cont..Shared Leadership
• Directive, transactional, transformational, and
empowering (Pearce et. al., 2001, p. 55).
• Lummis (2001) stresses that in shared
leadership, members work collaboratively in
groups and make decisions by consensus.
 Shared Leadership
(Kinicki and Fugate, 2012)

• Shared leadership
– entails a simultaneous, ongoing, mutual influence
process in which individuals share responsibility
for leading regardless of formal roles and titles.
• Shared leadership refers to a phenomenon
where leadership is distributed throughout
the team rather than relying on a single,
designated leader (Carson & Teslak, 2007).
 Acts of
leadership can
What is come from any
individual in the
Shared organisation, as
Leadership? Leadership is not appropriate, at
restricted to different times
those who hold
A dynamic, designated
There is a
interactive leadership roles
collective shared
influencing
responsibility for
process among
Emphasises success of the
individuals in
teamwork and organisation and
groups
collaboration; its services
objective is to
lead one another (Pearce, C.L & Conger, J.A., 2003)
to achieve group
goals
 Comparison
Classical and Shared Leadership
Nemerowicz and Rosi (1997)

• Classical • Shared
– Displayed by a person’s
position in a group or
hierarchy..
– Leadership evaluated by
whether the leader
solves problems.
– Leaders provide solutions
and answers.
– Identified by the quality of
people’s interactions
rather than their position.
– Leadership evaluated by
how people are working
together.
– All members work to
enhance the process and
to make it more fulfilling.
 Comparison – continued

• Classical • Shared
– Distinct differences – People are inter-
between leaders and dependent; all are active
followers: character, participants in process of
skill, etc… leadership.
– Communication is often
formal. – Communication is crucial
with a stress on
– Can often rely on conversation.
secrecy, deception and – Values democratic
payoffs. processes, honesty and
shared ethics.
 Shared Leadership - Dimensions
• For such leadership to develop we need to pay
special attention to three things. We need to
encourage (Gastil, 1997).

– Ownership. Problems and issues need to become a

responsibility of all with proper chances for people to
share and participate.
– Learning. An emphasis on learning and development is
necessary so that people can share, understand and
contribute to what’s going on.
– Sharing. Open, respectful and informed conversation is
central.
 Measurement
(Carson & Tesluk, 2007)

• Shared leadership was measured following a

social network approach (Mayo, Meindl, & Pastor,
2003) by using density, which is a measure of the
total amount of leadership displayed by team
members as perceived by others within the team
(mean = 3.16, median = 3.15, and range = 2.40 – 3.90).
• Every team member rated each of his/her peers
(using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Not
at all) to 5 (To a very great extent))
 Previous Definitions and Measures of
Shared Leadership (Carson, Tesluk, Marrone, 2007)
Cont..
 Items Assessing Internal Team
Environment for Shared Leadership
(Carson & Tesluk, 2007)
Shared Purpose
• The members of my team…
1. Spent time discussing our team’s purpose, goals, and expectations
for the project.
2. Discuss our team’s main tasks and objectives to ensure that we have
a fair understanding.
3. Devise action plans and time schedules that allow for meeting our
team’s goals.

Social Support
• The members of my team…
1. Talk enthusiastically about our team’s progress.
2. Recognize each other’s accomplishments and hard work.
3. Give encouragement to team members who seem frustrated
 Cont..
• Voice
1. People in this team are encouraged to speak up
to test assumptions about issues under
discussion.
2. As a member of this team, I have a real say in
how this team carries out its work.
3. Everyone on this team has a chance to
participate and provide input.
4. My team supports everyone actively
participating in decision making.
 Points to Consider
• Is there is a team in place?
• Are the team members familiar with the program’s goals and
community issues?
• Do the team members feel responsible to achieve the organization’s
goal?
• Are the team members aware of the needs of the community?
• Are the team members are engaged?
• Do the team members meet regularly to share anything regarding
with the goals achievement?
• What information do members of the Team need to have?
• How do team members want to receive information?
• When do team members need to receive information?
 References
• Avolio, BJ, Bass BM. (1995). Individual conservation viewed at multiple levels of analysis—a
multilevel framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadership
Quarterly. 6: 199-218.
• Avoliom Bruce; Walumbwa, Fred; and Weber, Todd J. (2009). Leadership: Current Theories,
Research, and Future Directions. Annual Review of Psychology 60 , pp. 421-449.
• Carson, Jay B.; Tesluk, Paul A.; Marrone, Jennifer A. (2007). Shared Leadership in Teams: An
Investigation of Antecedent Conditions and Performance. The Academy Of Management
Journal · October 2007.
• Pearce, Craig L. & Wassenaar, Christina L., (2015). Shared Leadership In Practice: When Does
It Work Best?. Academy of Management Perspectives. Vol. 29, No. 3.
• Gastil, John (1989). A Defenition and Illustration of Democratic Leadership. Journal of Human
Relation. Vol. 47 No. 8.
• Kinicki, Angelo and Fugate, Mel (2012). Organizational Behavior; Key Concepts, Skill, & Best
Practices. Mc. Graw Hill/Irwin. Companies. Inc.
• Lummis, B. (2001, January). Guide to Collaborative Culture and Shared Leadership. In Turning
Points Transforming Middle Schools. Retrieved September 4, 2001.
http://www.turningpts.org/pdf/Teams.pdf
• Nemerowicz, Gloria and Rosi, Eugene (1997). Education for Leadership and Social
Responsibility. Psychology Press.
• Pearce, Craig L. and Conger, Jay A. (2003). Shared Leadership; Reframing the Hows and Whys
of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Porter, Lyman W. and Schneider, Benjamin (2014). What Was, What Is, and What May Be in
OP/OB. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior.
• Stumpf, Stephen A., (2010). Shared leadership: From rivals to co-CEOs. Journal of Strategy
and Leadership, March 2010.