oru.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 53) Show all publications
Andersen, J. A. (2019). On “followers” and the inability to define. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(2), 274-284
Open this publication in new window or tab >>On “followers” and the inability to define
2019 (English)In: Leadership & Organization Development Journal, ISSN 0143-7739, E-ISSN 1472-5347, Vol. 40, no 2, p. 274-284Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: Scholars’ability to do research based on the notions of “follower” and “followership” is questioned when studying formal leadership in organizations. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Design/methodology/approach: Critical comments are presented on the usefulness of the notions of followers and followership.

Findings: There are no evidence that followership exists other than some scholars’ perception of something that they have been unable to define. The conclusion is that the inability to define these notions is tantamount to the inability to research them.

Research limitations/implications: The literature review contains no new empirical data.

Originality/value: The paper stresses that study objects which are not theoretically and empirically defined cannot be investigated

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2019
Keywords
Leadership, Management, Followership, Definitions, Followers
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-71837 (URN)10.1108/LODJ-11-2018-0414 (DOI)000462867400009 ()
Available from: 2019-01-25 Created: 2019-01-25 Last updated: 2019-06-19Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2019). Owners vs executives and decisions vs control. Corporate Governance : The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 19(3), 458-470
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Owners vs executives and decisions vs control
2019 (English)In: Corporate Governance : The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, ISSN 1472-0701, E-ISSN 1758-6054, Vol. 19, no 3, p. 458-470Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose Some scholars have claimed that CEOs make decisions, while boards of directors control these decisions by applying the concepts of decision management and decision control. These concepts were suggested more than 30 years ago and are still applied in corporate governance research. They are now challenged on the basis of scholarship on corporate governance and management. Design/methodology/approach Corporate governance addresses the authority and responsibility that boards of directors and executives have. Management theory addresses planning and control in corporations. Findings The relationship between the owners (the boards of directors) and the top managers is hierarchical. This paper concludes that owners or boards of directors make decisions on main and strategic goals. Decisions cannot be controlled, but the implementation and outcomes of plans can. The latter is managers' responsibility. The terms "decision management" and "decision control" are undefined and do not describe what takes place in organizations. Originality/value Management theory offers clear definitions of decisions, decision-making and control. The concepts of decision management (initiation and implementation) and decision control (ratification and monitoring) neither properly describe who makes major and strategic decisions nor how and who controls the consequences of these decisions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2019
Keywords
Board of directors, Corporate governance, Decision control, Decision management, Owners
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-71833 (URN)10.1108/CG-04-2018-0158 (DOI)000479304900005 ()2-s2.0-85064053862 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2019-01-25 Created: 2019-01-25 Last updated: 2019-11-08Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2018). Managers' Motivation Profiles: Measurement and Application. SAGE Open, 8(2), Article ID 2158244018771732.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Managers' Motivation Profiles: Measurement and Application
2018 (English)In: SAGE Open, ISSN 2158-2440, E-ISSN 2158-2440, Vol. 8, no 2, article id 2158244018771732Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

To promote leadership research on managers' motivation, a measurement (Andersen Motivation Profile Indicator [AMPI]) has been developed and tested that (a) measures achievement, affiliation, and power motivation; (b) measures the relative strengths of these factors; (c) rests explicitly on the definitions of McClelland; and (d) measures managers' work motivation. The questionnaire has been tested for reliability and validity with responses from 580 managers. The application of the instrument in four studies with responses from 565 managers in other organizations supported McClelland's theoretical claims: (a) managers have motivation profiles, (b) there are differences in motivation profiles between managers across organizational types, (c) there are no significant differences in motivation profiles between female and male managers, and (d) managers who are predominantly power motivated enhance organizational effectiveness. Arguably, the application of the instrument may be an indicator of its quality. The instrument facilitates leadership research on the relationship between managers' motivation profiles and organizational specifics, gender, sociocultural factors, and organizational outcomes.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2018
Keywords
achievement motivation, affiliation motivation, power motivation, motivation profile, reliability test, validity test, application
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-67120 (URN)10.1177/2158244018771732 (DOI)000432121800001 ()
Available from: 2018-05-30 Created: 2018-05-30 Last updated: 2018-05-30Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2018). Servant leadership and transformational leadership: from comparisons to farewells. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 39(6), 762-774
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Servant leadership and transformational leadership: from comparisons to farewells
2018 (English)In: Leadership & Organization Development Journal, ISSN 0143-7739, E-ISSN 1472-5347, Vol. 39, no 6, p. 762-774Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to question the usefulness of comparisons between theories on servant leadership and transformational leadership.

Design/methodology/approach: A review of scholarly works on these two theories is presented from the original works of Greenleaf, Burns and Bass to the current research.

Findings: Based on the four categories of construct clarity, two competing alternatives are identifiable in the scholarship of both servant and transformational leadership. There are thus 16 versions of each theory.

Research limitations/implications: The literature review contains no new empirical data. The many versions available today of each theory do not make comparisons meaningful. The prevalence of several versions of theories on servant leadership and transformational leadership implies that they are no longer specific and useful theories.

Originality/value: Critical comments are presented on the usefulness of comparisons between servant leadership and transformational leadership. Thus, the value of these theories is also questioned.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2018
Keywords
Servant leadership, Transformational leadership, Concepts, Scope, Definitions, Organizational outcomes
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-68340 (URN)10.1108/LODJ-01-2018-0053 (DOI)000439576300005 ()2-s2.0-85049510059 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-08-02 Created: 2018-08-02 Last updated: 2018-08-02Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2017). Leadership research and the oldest crime. Dynamic relationships management journal, 6(1), 3-14
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Leadership research and the oldest crime
2017 (English)In: Dynamic relationships management journal, ISSN 2232-5867, E-ISSN 2350-367X, Vol. 6, no 1, p. 3-14Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In management and leadership scholarships, organisations are often regarded as entities established as vehicles for the owners so that the owners can achieve their goals. Arguably, the purpose of managerial leadership research is to provide managers with knowledge which benefits organisations. The purpose of this article is to assess whether current managerial leadership research is relevant and helpful to managers or not. Five studies (March & Sutton, 1997; Collins, 2001; Richard et al., 2009; Hiller et al., 2011; Andersen, 2013), which contain data from a total of 2,479 articles, have revealed that the relationship between formal leadership (management) and organisational effectiveness is seldom studied. When effectiveness is addressed it is rarely defined and almost never measured. It is, indeed, no surprise that six studies (Burack, 1979; Calas & Smircich, 1988; Astley & Zamuto, 1992; House & Aditya, 1997; Ghoshal, 2005; Brownlie et al., 2008) have shown that managers regard leadership research both irrelevant and useless.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Ljubljana: Slovenian Academy of Management, 2017
Keywords
managerial leadership, organisation, relevance, effectiveness, goal-attainment
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-59084 (URN)10.17708/DRMJ.2017.v06n01a01 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-08-14 Created: 2017-08-14 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2017). The concept of managerial discretion in corporate governance - better off without it?. Corporate Governance : The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 17(3), 574-587
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The concept of managerial discretion in corporate governance - better off without it?
2017 (English)In: Corporate Governance : The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, ISSN 1472-0701, E-ISSN 1758-6054, Vol. 17, no 3, p. 574-587Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: This paper aims to assess the concept of managerial discretion with respect to itstheoretical and empirical usefulness for corporate governance research.

Design/methodology/approach: This paper scrutinises applied theoretical claims, definitions andmethods, as well as a number of empirical studies on managerial discretion.

Findings: To date, no empirical definition of the concept has been presented and no measurementhas been developed and tested for reliability and validity that contains all three factors of the managerialdiscretion concept, as proposed by Hambrick and Finkelstein (1987).

Practical implications: Research on managerial discretion does not provide owners and directors ofboards with any advice on granting top managers a high or low degree of discretion.

Originality/value: This paper concludes that corporate governance scholarship will improve if itabandons the concept of managerial discretion.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2017
Keywords
measurement, corporate governance, organizational performance, definitons
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-57789 (URN)10.1108/CG-09-2016-0176 (DOI)000402883800010 ()2-s2.0-85019556405 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2017-05-22 Created: 2017-05-22 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2016). An old man and the 'Sea of Leadership'. Journal of Leadership Studies, 9(4), 70-81
Open this publication in new window or tab >>An old man and the 'Sea of Leadership'
2016 (English)In: Journal of Leadership Studies, ISSN 1935-2611, E-ISSN 1935-262X, Vol. 9, no 4, p. 70-81Article in journal, Meeting abstract (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Leadership has been a scientific discipline for over 100 years. The magnitude of research has increased tremendously. Many different objects of study related to leadership have been investigated with the ambition to solve a variety of problems that appear to be more or less relevant for those in leadership positions. In the current article, the author provides one person's description of eight specific areas of leadership scholarship throughout all these years and how he has reflected upon these theories in light of this fundamental question: what has leadership research really accomplished? These considerations on leadership theories are a product of a lifetime spent on leadership research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley-Blackwell, 2016
Keywords
Leadership
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-49574 (URN)10.1002/jls.21422 (DOI)000377772700009 ()2-s2.0-84961653972 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2016-03-29 Created: 2016-03-29 Last updated: 2018-07-10Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2016). It all starts with the goal. Dynamic relationships management journal, 5(1), 21-34
Open this publication in new window or tab >>It all starts with the goal
2016 (English)In: Dynamic relationships management journal, ISSN 2232-5867, E-ISSN 2350-367X, Vol. 5, no 1, p. 21-34Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this article is to show that three basic concepts in the fields of organization research, corporate governance, management and leadership research come together theoretically. The concepts of goal, activity and goal-attainment constitute a commonality between them. The theoretical bounds are, however, not evident in all writings. The field of organizational research contains as basic concepts owners and goal, while corporate governance deals with the relationship between owners (shareholders), executives and stakeholders. Additionally, the management discipline pertains to an organization to be managed on behalf of the owners. Numerous leadership theories address the behaviors and activities of managers related to goal-attainment. Highlighting these common grounds could help progress in research in one field to be beneficial in the other research areas. They all come together: the fields of organization, corporate governance, management, and theories of leadership. It all starts with the goal of the owners, and it ends with goal-attainment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Ljubljana: Slovenian Academy of Management, 2016
Keywords
organization theory, corporate governance, management theory, leadership theories, owners, goals, behavior, activities, goal-attainment
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-50945 (URN)10.17708/DRMJ.2016.v05n01a02 (DOI)
Available from: 2016-06-20 Created: 2016-06-20 Last updated: 2017-11-28Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2016). Leadership scholarship: all bridges have been burned. Leadership and the humanities, 4(2), 108-125
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Leadership scholarship: all bridges have been burned
2016 (English)In: Leadership and the humanities, ISSN 2050-8727, E-ISSN 2050-8735, Vol. 4, no 2, p. 108-125Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this article is to enhance the understanding of the present state of leadership scholarship by describing similarities between leadership theories and underlining significant differences between them. Based on four criteria, two broad groups of leadership theories are identifiable. These two groups are fundamentally different with respect to the conceptions of both organisations and leadership. While one group of theories concentrates on descriptions and understandings of leadership processes, the other group emphasises causal relationships between leadership and organisational outcomes. A critical result of the divergent emphases is that the theoretical relationships between these two groups of scholarship appear to have ended. Advancements in one area may no longer be beneficial to other areas. This article stresses that it is necessary to come to grips with the consequences of the present fissured state in leadership research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016
Keywords
leadership theory, assumptions on organisations, definitions of leadership, explanation, understanding, method
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-51981 (URN)10.4337/lath.2016.02.03 (DOI)000405380200003 ()
Available from: 2016-09-06 Created: 2016-09-06 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved
Andersen, J. A. (2015). Barking up the wrong tree: on the fallacies of the transformational leadership theory. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(6), 765-777
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Barking up the wrong tree: on the fallacies of the transformational leadership theory
2015 (English)In: Leadership & Organization Development Journal, ISSN 0143-7739, E-ISSN 1472-5347, Vol. 36, no 6, p. 765-777Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that the magnitude of interest in and of enthusiasm for transformational leadership is out of proportion with its weaknesses.

Findings: The theory has some grave problems: there are conceptual limitations; managerial leadership is conflated with political leadership; the theory is presented as a universal as well as a contingency theory; the claim that transformational leaders are more effective is not empirically supported; and the use of the term “followers” rather than “subordinates” creates confusion in the study of formal organizations. Finally, and perhaps most fundamentally, does transformational leadership theory qualify as a managerial leadership theory?

Research limitations/implications: Transformational leadership is a political leadership theory and thus less relevant for managerial leadership.

Originality/value: This paper addresses the theoretical limitations of the transformational leadership theory as well as the lack of empirical support regarding the effectiveness of transformational leaders.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2015
Keywords
Political leadership, Transactional leadership, Transformational leadership, Effectiveness, Managerial leadership
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-45545 (URN)10.1108/LODJ-12-2013-0168 (DOI)000360579500008 ()
Available from: 2015-08-12 Created: 2015-08-12 Last updated: 2017-12-04Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-2156-680X

Search in DiVA

Show all publications