Leadership OS pp 111-124 | Cite as


  • Nik Kinley
  • Shlomo Ben-Hur


In this chapter, the authors introduce the second element of their Leadership OS model, clarity. They describe the four components of clarity: direction, purpose, accountability and values. Using both their own and previous research, they describe the social and neural underpinnings of clarity and the functions it plays in a leaders’ Operating System—how it affects people’s performance. And they introduce a case study that highlights the role and importance of clarity in leadership (Zhang Xin at SOHO China).


  1. 1.
    R. Stagner, “Corporate decision making: An empirical study,” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 53, no. 1, pt. 1, pp. 1–13, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Hannah, M. Uhl-Bien, B. Avolio and F. Cavarretta, “A framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts,” University of Nebraska Management Department Faculty Publications. Paper 39, 2009.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Reuveni and D. Vashdi, “Innovation in multidisciplinary teams: The moderating role of transformational leadership in the relationship between professional heterogeneity and shared mental models,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 678–692, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Camerer and M. Weber, “Recent developments in modeling preferences—Uncertainty and ambiguity,” Journal of Risk Uncertainty, vol. 5, pp. 325–370, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Constine, “Shorter is better, but avoid url shorteners,” AdWeek, 6 April 2011.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Epstein and M. Schneider, “Ambiguity, information quality, and asset pricing,” The Journal of Finance, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 197–228, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Hsu, M. Bhatt, R. Adolphs, D. Tranel and C. Camerer, “Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making,” Science, vol. 310, no. 5754, pp. 1680–1683, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Weick, The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.), London: McGraw-Hill, 1979.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Dale and M. L. Fox, “Leadership style and organizational commitment: Mediating effect of role stress,” Journal of Managerial Issues, pp. 109–130, 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Waller, N. Gupta and R. Giambatista, “Effects of adaptive behaviors and shared mental models on control crew performance,” Management Science, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 1463–1613, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Stout, J. Cannon-Bowers, E. Salas and D. Milanovich, “Planning, shared mental models, and coordinated performance: An empirical link is established,” Human Factors, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 61–71, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Marks, S. Zaccaro and J. Mathieu, “Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments,” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 971–986, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Amabile and M. Pratt, “The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning,” Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 36, pp. 157–183, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Parnell, “Strategic clarity, business strategy and performance,” Journal of Strategy and Management, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 303–324, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. Buytendijk, “The five keys to building a high performance organization,” Business Performance Management Magazine, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 24–47, 2006.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    L. Hrebiniak and C. Snow, “Top-management agreement and organizational performance,” Human Relations, vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 1139–1157, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    I. Kennis, “Effects of budgetary goal characteristics on attitudes and performance,” The Accounting Review, vol. 54, no. 4, p. 707, 1979.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Hu and R. Liden, “Antecedents of team potency and team effectiveness: An examination of goal and process clarity and servant leadership,” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 851–862, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    “The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance,” Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 141–163, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. Peralta, P. Lopes, L. Glison, P. Lourenço and L. Pais, “Innovation processes and team effectiveness: The role of goal clarity and commitment, and team affective tone,” Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 80–107, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Arvey, H. Dewhirst and J. Boling, “Relationships between goal clarity, participation in goal setting, and personality characteristics on job satisfaction in a scientific organization,” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 103–105, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nik Kinley
    • 1
  • Shlomo Ben-Hur
    • 2
  1. 1.WokingUK
  2. 2.LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations