06:00 Leadership: L

  • Bogdan Lent


The leadership process is presented along the proposed LEAD-approach: Launch, Engage, Act, Deliver. Several leadership models are evaluated: unidirectional, Fiedler situational/contingency, Hersey & Blanchard situational, role emergence, dynamic interrelationship, implicit leadership, Bass transformational and transactional, Hackman & Walton functional, White & Lippet stylistic, Blake & Mouton social style, X,Y and Z McGregor, French & Raven power, House path-goal, and closest to the cybernetic approach presented in this book of holistic theory of Best.

The Launch sub-process develops the big picture and evaluates five base powers of French & Raven. The role of the authenticity and leader-manager differences, including the two-leader approach of Miller & Watkins are further discussed.

The Engage sub-process of Macey and Schneider is projected onto the holistic approach of Best with motivational factors inventory (MFI) of Seiler et al.

The Act sub-process reflects the cybernetic approach of Kinicki and places the egograms of personalities in Blake and Mouton managerial grid. Several other models including the US Army Leadership model are discussed.

The Deliver sub-process considers the decision making drivers in view of uncertainty. Gell-Mann complexity, linear and non-linear systems and Thomas & Mengel Sense Making Intelligence.

Several inventories, Lee and Roberts ACE-Self-Reflection, Kabat-Zinn Mindfulness and Mindfulness based interventions MBI leading to Azonic leadership are the techniques included in this chapter.

Examples of Templates, Checklists and Bibliography close the Chapter.

Quick look at the beginning of the Chapter that gives cornerstone assessment of the process is presented here.


Team Member Emotional Intelligence Leadership Style Project Goal Behavioral Engagement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adair J (2007) Leadership and motivation: the fifty-fifty rule and the eight key principles of motivating others. Kogan Page Ltd, London, Reprinted 2007Google Scholar
  2. Adair R (2010) The psychological distance within the dynamics of the leader/follower relationship, leadership review, vol 10. Kravis Leadership Institute, ClaremontGoogle Scholar
  3. Avolio BJ (2004) Why great leadership demands self-awareness, self-regulation – and sometimes, self-sacrifice, interview. In: Brever G, Sanford B (eds) The best of the Gallup management journal 2001–2007. Gallup Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. Avolio BJ, Zhu W, Koh W, Bhatia P (2004) Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. J Organ Behav 25, John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Bass BM, Avolio BJ (2013) Accessed 15 Feb 2013
  6. Bennis W (2009) On becoming a leader. Basic Books, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Best KC (2011/2013) Holistic leadership: a model for leader-member engagement and development. J Value Based Leadersh 4(1), Witner/Spring 2011, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso. Accessed 15 Feb 2013
  8. Blake RR, Mouton JS (1968) The managerial grid; key orientations for achieving production through people. Gulf Publishing Company, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  9. Bock H (2007) Kommunikationsstile, – muster, -strategien, Kapitel 2 (Part 2). Dresden International University Press, DresdenGoogle Scholar
  10. Bousquet A (2009) Scientific way of warfare: order and chaos on the battlefields of modernity. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Buckingham M, Coffman C (1999) First, break all the rules: what the world’s greatest managers do differently. Simon & Shuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Carson JB, Tesluk PE, Marrone JA (2007) Shared leadership in teams: investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Acad Manage J 50(5), The Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Cragan JF, Wright DW, Kasch CR (2009) Communication in small groups: theory, process, skills, 7th edn. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, BostonGoogle Scholar
  14. Cullen M (2013) Mindfulness-based interventions: an emerging phenomenon. Mindfulness J, Springer Science and Business Media. DOI 10.1007/s12671-011-0058-1. Accessed 15 Feb 2013Google Scholar
  15. DeMarco T, Lister T (1999) Peopleware: productive projects and teams, 2nd edn. Dorset House Publishing Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Egan RFC, Sarros JC, Santora JC (1995) Putting transactional & transformational leadership into place. J Leadersh Organ Stud 2(3), SAGE, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  17. Fielder F (2005) Contignency theory of leadership. In: Miner JB (ed) Organizational behavior 1, essential theories of motivation and leaderhsip. M.E. Sharpe, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Flannes WS, Levin G (2005) Essential people skills for project managers. Management Concepts, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  19. French JRP, Raven B (2001) The base of social power. In: Asherman IG, Asherman SV (eds) The negotiation source book, 2nd edn. HRD Press, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  20. Gauguin P (1898) D’où Venons Nous/Que Sommes Nous/Où Allons Nous, oil on canvas, 139.1 × 374.6 cm, Museum of Fine Arts, Tompkins Collection—Arthur Gordon Tompkins Fund, 36.270 Boston, 1897–1898Google Scholar
  21. Gell-Mann M (1994b) The quark and the jaguar: adventures in the simple and the complex. Little Brown, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Goleman D (1997) Emotional intelligence. Bentam Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Grauen GB, Uhl-Bien M (1995) Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of leader-member ex-change (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadersh Q 6(2):219–247, Summer 1995, Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Hackman R, Walton R (1986) Leading groups in organizations. In: Goodman P (ed) Designing effective work groups. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  25. Hersey P, Blanchard KH (1977/1982) Management of organizational behavior: utilizing human resources. 1977 (1 Edition), 1982 (4 Edition). Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  26. Hersey P, Blanchard KH, Johnson DE (2007) Management of organizational behavior: leading human resources. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  27. Hogg MA (2001) A social identity theory of leadership. Personal Soc Psychol Rev 5(3), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  28. House RJ (1996) Path-goal theory of leadership: lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadersh Q 7(3), Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  29. ISO 21500:2012 (2012) Guidance on project management, ICS 03.100.40. ISO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  30. Kabat-Zinn J (1994) Wherever you go, there you are: mindfulness meditation in everyday life. Hyperion, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Kahn WA (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad Manage J 33(4) (Dec 1990), The Academy of Management, Briarcliff ManorGoogle Scholar
  32. Kälin W, Küng R (2008) Arbeit-Stress-Wohlbefinden, Überprüfung der Checkliste von “Stress-Signale, Stress-Ursachen und Folgerungen”, Gesamtbericht der Ergebnisse einer Befragung bei verschiedenen Schweizerischen Unternehmen Januar bis Juni 2007, University of Bern, BernGoogle Scholar
  33. Kaplan S, Norton DP (1996) The balanced scorecard- measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev 70(1), Harvard Business Publishing, BostonGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaufmann S (1955) At home in the universe: the search for law of self-organization and complexity. Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Kinicki AJ, Jacobson KJL, Galvin BM, Prussia GE (2011/2013) A multilevel systems model of leadership. J Leadersh Organ Stud. March 17. Accessed 15 Feb 2013
  36. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ (2008) The leadership challenge, 4th edn. Wiley, San Francisco, p 45 contGoogle Scholar
  37. Kouzner JM, Posner BZ (2013) Leadership practices inventory. Pfeiffer, Zürich. Accessed 15 Feb 2013
  38. Leatherman RW (2008) Quality leadership skills: standards of leadership behavior. HRD Press, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee G, Roberts I (2010) Coaching for authentic leadership. In: Passmore J (ed) Leadership coaching: working with leaders to develop Elite performance. Kogan Page, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Lewin K, Lippitt R, White RK (1939) Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created “social climates”. J Soc Psychol 10:271–299 British Psychological Society, LeicesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Liska G, Ster M, Schulte P (2013) Azonic leadership. A reflective meta-model of leadership. Accessed 15 Feb 2013
  42. Macey W, Schneider B (2008) The meaning of employee engagement. Indus Organ Psychol 1:3–30, Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Miller GA, Watkins MD (2007) The leadership team: complementary strengths or conflicting agendas? Harv Bus Rev 85(4), April 2007, Harvard Business Publishing, BostonGoogle Scholar
  44. Munroe M (1999) Becoming a leader, everyone can do it. Pneuma Life, LanhamGoogle Scholar
  45. Nash S (2004) Vision, leadership in project management 2005, vol 1. Project Management Institute (PMI), PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  46. NATO RTO Technical Report TR-081 (2004) NATO code of best practice for command and control assessment, RTO TECHNICAL REPORT TR-081 SAS-026, RTO Studies, Analysis and Simulation Panel (SAS)Google Scholar
  47. Omoto AM, Snyder M, Hackett JD (2010) Personality and motivational antecedents of activism and civic engagement. Journal of Personality. Vol. 78, Issue 6, December 2010. John Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pauleen DJ (2004) An inductively derived model of leader-initiated relationship building with virtual team members. J Manage Inform Syst 20(3):227–256, Winter 2004, New York University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. Pearce CL, Conger JA (2003) Shared leadership: reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  50. Peterson C, Seligman MEP (2004) Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. APA, Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Radcliff S (2010) Leadership: plain and simple. Pearson Education, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  52. Redcliff S (2009) On becoming a person: a therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Financial Times/Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  53. Seiler S, Lent B, Pinkowska M, Pinazza M (2012) An integrated model of factors influencing project managers’ motivation – findings from a Swiss survey. Int J Project Manage 20(1), Jan 2012Google Scholar
  54. Shondrick SJ, Dinh JE, Lord RG (2010) Developments in implicit leadership theory and cognitive science: applications to improving measurement and understanding alternatives to hierarchical leadership. Leadersh Q 21(6):959–978, Dec 2010, Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  55. Silananda U (2002/2012) The four foundations of mindfulness, Wisdom Publications, SomervilleGoogle Scholar
  56. Silverthorne S (2010) Mindeful leadership: when easts meets west, interview with W.W. George, Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, a first look at faculty research, 7 Sept 2010. Accessed 30 May 2011
  57. Singh H, Singh A (2002) Principles of complexity and chaos theory in project execution: a new approach to management cost engineering. Cost Eng 44(12), MorgantownGoogle Scholar
  58. Thomas J, Mengel T (2008) Preparing project managers to deal with complexity – advanced project management education. Int J Project Manage 26(3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thomas M, Miles G, Fisk P (2006) The complete CEO: the executive’s guide to consistent peak performance. Capstone Publishing Limited (a Wiley Company), ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  60. Verma VK (1996) Human resource skills for the project manager, vol 2. PMI, Newtown SquareGoogle Scholar
  61. Vroom VH, Jago AG (1988) The new leadership: managing participation in organizations. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  62. Walumbwa FO, Wang P, Wang H, Schaubroeck J, Avolio BJ (2010) Psychological processes linking authentic leadership to follower behaviours. Leadersh Q 21(5), Oct 2010, Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Wong Z (2007) Human factors in project management: concepts, tools and techniques for inspiring teamwork and motivation. Wiley, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bogdan Lent
    • 1
  1. 1.Bern University of Applied SciencesBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations