Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distributed leadership in the development of a knowledge sharing system

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Information Systems

Abstract

This paper studies leadership dynamics in the development of a knowledge sharing system. We apply the concept of distributed leadership, examining how leadership roles are distributed across different individuals in the organisation during developing and implementing a knowledge sharing system. The results of a case study demonstrate that the leadership was fulfilled by the interdependent and emergent roles played by several individuals: the spearheading and coordinating roles of a knowledgeable and persistent project leader, the supporting and steering roles carried by a group of perceptive and collaboration-inclined executives, and the knowledge sharing and momentum driving roles performed by knowledge champions. Each of these leadership influences was indispensable. None of the leaders could have accomplished this task individually, without the active involvement of the other types of leaders. This research makes its contribution to the understanding of the emergence and dynamics of distributed leadership in the information system environment, and demonstrates the importance of a full awareness of distributed leadership as tasks are carried out in developing a knowledge sharing system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyris C and Schön DA (1996) Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baroudi J and Orlikowski W (1989) The problem of statistical power in MIS research. MIS Quarterly 13, 87–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat I, Goldstein D and Mead M (1987) The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly 11 (3), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS and Duguid P (1991) Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science 2, 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS and Duguid P (2001a) Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective. Organization Science 12 (2), 198–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS and Duguid P (2001b) Structure and Spontaneity: Knowledge and Organization. In Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer, and Utilization (NONAKA I and TEECE DJ, Eds), pp 45–67, Sage Publications, Thousand Oak, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown ME and Gioia DA (2002) Making things click: distributed leadership in an online division of an offline organization. The Leadership Quarterly 13, 397–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlie PR (2004) Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science 15 (5), 555–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlie PR and Rebentisch ES (2003) Into the black box: the knowledge transformation cycle. Management Science 49 (9), 1180–1195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz K (2000) Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist method. In Handbook of Qualitative Research (DENZIN NK and LINCOLN YS, Eds), Sage, Thousand Oak, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MD and Bacdayan P (1994) Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science 5 (4), 554–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins JC and Porras JI (1994) Built To Last. HarperBusiness, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell JW (1998) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage, Thousand Oak, CA.

  • Crossan MM, Lane HW and White RE (1999) An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review 24 (3), 522–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • CTG (2001) Insider's Guide to Using Information in Government. Center for Technology in Government, Albany, NY.

  • Davenport TH and Prusak L (1998) Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day DV, Gronn P and Salas E (2004) Leadership capacity in teams. The Leadership Quarterly 15, 857–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denison DR, Hooijberg R and Quinn RE (1995) Paradox and performance: toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organizational Science 6 (5), 524–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker PF (1993) Post-Capitalist Society. HarperBusiness, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyson E (1999) Aligning corporate culture to maximize high technology. In Leader to Leader (HESSELBEIN F and COHEN PM, Eds), pp 143–149, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson AC (2002) The local and variegated nature of learning in organizations: a group-level perspective. Organization Science 13 (2), 128–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faerman SR, Mccaffrey DP and Van Slyke DM (2001) Understanding interorganizational cooperation: public-private collaboration in regulating financial market innovation. Organization Science 12 (3), 372–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler FE (1964) A contingency model of leader effectiveness. In Advanced in Experimental Social Psychology (BERKOWITZ L, Ed), Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler FE (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. McGraw Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman EA (1953) Leadership climate, human relations training, and supervisory behavior. Personnel Psychology 6, 205–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman EA (1957) A leader behavior description for industry. In Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement (STOGDILL RM and COONS AE, Eds), Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, Columbus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher JK and Kaüfer K (2003) Shared leadership: Paradox and possibility. In Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership (PEARCE CL and CONGER JA, Eds), pp 21–47, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17 (Winter Special Issue), 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronn P (2000) Distributed properties: a new architecture for leadership. Educational Management & Administration 28 (3), 317–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronn P (2002) Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly 13, 423–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemphill JK and Coons AE (1957) Development of the leader behavior description questionnaire. In Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement (STOGDILL RM and COONS AE, Eds), Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, Columbus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hersey P and Blanchard KH (1977) Management of Organizational Behavior, 3rd edn, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • House RJ (1971) A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 16, 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxham C and Vangen S (2000) Leadership in the shaping and implementation of collaboration agendas: how things happen in a (not quite) joined-up world. Academy of Management Journal 43 (8), 1159–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter R (1996) World-class leaders: The power of partnering. In The Leader of the Future (HESSELBEIN F, GOLDSMITH M and BECKHARD R, Eds), pp 89–98, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B and Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science 3 (3), 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B and Zander U (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science 7 (5), 502–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouzes JM and Posner BZ (1993) Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People Demand It. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave J and Wenger E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee AS (1989) A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Quarterly 13 (1), 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton D (1995) Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt B and March JG (1988) Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology 14, 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln YS and Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mclean ER and Smits SJ (2003) A role model of IS leadership. In Proceedings of the Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems pp 1273–1282, Tampa, FL.

  • Miles MB and Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I and Takeuchi H (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Toyama R and Konno N (2001) SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. In Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer, and Utilization (NONAKA I and TEECE DJ, Eds), pp 13–43, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • OSC (2002a) Comptroller McCall's Municipal Government Partnership, from http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/training/index.htm.

  • OSC (2002b) What are the Comptroller's Responsibilities?, from http://www.osc.state.ny.us/about/response.htm.

  • Pearce CL and Conger JA (Eds) (2003) Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer J and Sutton RI (1999) The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinchot G (1996) Creating organizations with many leaders. In The Leader of the Future (HESSELBEIN F, GOLDSMITH M and BECKHARD R, Eds), pp 27–39, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitcher P and Smith AD (2001) Top management team heterogeneity: personality, power, and proxies. Organizational Science 12 (1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purvis R, Sambamurthy V and Zmud RW (2001) The assimilation of knowledge platforms in organizations: an empirical investigation. Organization Science 12 (2), 117–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roussel C (1999) Decision making beyond the boundaries. In Leading Beyond the Walls: How High-Performing Organizations Collaborate for Shared Success (HESSELBEIN F, GOLDSMITH M and SOMERVILLE I, Eds), pp 49–55, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider M (2002) A stakeholder model of organizational leadership. Organization Science 13 (2), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge P (2000) Classic work: the leader's new work: Building learning organizations. In Knowledge Management: Classics and Contemporary Works (MOREY D, MAYBURY M and THURAISINGHAM B, Eds), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge PM (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Currency and Doubleday, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake RE (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss AL (1987) Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ (2001) Strategies for Managing Knowledge Assets: the Role of Firm Structure and Industrial Context. In Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer, and Utilization (NONAKA I and TEECE DJ, Eds), pp 125–144, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tichy N (1997) The Leadership Engine: How Winning Companies Build Leaders at Every Level. HarperCollins Publishers, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai W (2002) Social structure of “Coopetition” within a multiunit organization: coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science 13 (2), 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaill PB (1989) Managing as a Performing Art: New Ideas for a World of Chaotic Change. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y and Alavi M (2004) Emergent leadership in virtual teams: what do emergent leaders do? Information and Organization 14, 27–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl GA (1999) An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly 10 (2), 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl GA (2002) Leadership in Organizations. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Management, Clark University, Worcester, MA, U.S.A.

    Jing Zhang

  2. Department of Public Administration & Policy, University at Albany, SUNY, Albany, NY, U.S.A.

    Sue R Faerman

Authors
  1. Jing Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sue R Faerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jing Zhang.

Appendix A

Appendix A

See Table A1.

Table a1 Interviewees’ position and affiliation
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, J., Faerman, S. Distributed leadership in the development of a knowledge sharing system. Eur J Inf Syst 16, 479–493 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000694

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000694

Keywords

Search

Navigation