Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Organization Studies, 39 (11), 2018, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2017 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Organization Studies page: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/oss on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
Accepted author manuscript, 417 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - No More Heroes
T2 - Critical Perspectives on Leadership Romanticism
AU - Collinson, David Leonard
AU - Smolovic-Jones, Owain
AU - Grint, Keith
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Organization Studies, 39 (11), 2018, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2017 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Organization Studies page: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/oss on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
PY - 2018/11/1
Y1 - 2018/11/1
N2 - This paper revisits Meindl et al’s (1985) ‘romance of leadership’ thesis and extends these ideas in a number of inter-related ways. First, it argues that the thesis has sometimes been neglected and/or misinterpreted in subsequent studies. Second, the paper suggests that romanticism is amuch broader and more historically rich term with wider implications for leadership studies than originally proposed. Arguing that romanticism stretches beyond leader attribution, we connect leadership theory to a more enduring and naturalistic tradition of romantic thought that hassurvived and evolved since the mid-18th century. Third, the paper demonstrates the contemporary relevance of the romanticism critique. It reveals how the study of leadership continues to be characterised by romanticising tendencies in many of its most influential theories, illustrating this argument with reference to spiritual and authentic leadership theories, which only recognise positive engagement with leaders. Equally, the paper suggests that romanticism can shapeconceptions not only of leaders, but also of followers, their agency, and their (potential for) resistance. We conclude by discussing future possible research directions for the romanticism critique that extend well beyond its original focus on leader attribution to inform a broader critical approach to leadership studies.
AB - This paper revisits Meindl et al’s (1985) ‘romance of leadership’ thesis and extends these ideas in a number of inter-related ways. First, it argues that the thesis has sometimes been neglected and/or misinterpreted in subsequent studies. Second, the paper suggests that romanticism is amuch broader and more historically rich term with wider implications for leadership studies than originally proposed. Arguing that romanticism stretches beyond leader attribution, we connect leadership theory to a more enduring and naturalistic tradition of romantic thought that hassurvived and evolved since the mid-18th century. Third, the paper demonstrates the contemporary relevance of the romanticism critique. It reveals how the study of leadership continues to be characterised by romanticising tendencies in many of its most influential theories, illustrating this argument with reference to spiritual and authentic leadership theories, which only recognise positive engagement with leaders. Equally, the paper suggests that romanticism can shapeconceptions not only of leaders, but also of followers, their agency, and their (potential for) resistance. We conclude by discussing future possible research directions for the romanticism critique that extend well beyond its original focus on leader attribution to inform a broader critical approach to leadership studies.
KW - leadership romanticism
KW - leader attribution
KW - natural leaders
KW - expressive collectives
KW - romanticising followership
KW - critical leadership studies
U2 - 10.1177/0170840617727784
DO - 10.1177/0170840617727784
M3 - Journal article
VL - 39
SP - 1625
EP - 1647
JO - Organization Studies
JF - Organization Studies
SN - 0170-8406
IS - 11
ER -