Leadership takes time: Some implications of (not) taking time seriously in leadership research

By Boas Shamir. 2011

213 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0c675426236db9438a905eb9370788a0565d08fc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

A systematic review of executive coaching outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? (2018, background): “As noted earlier, despite several calls by leadership scholars (Day, 2014; Shamir, 2011; Day & Lord, 1988; in Fischer et al., 2017) the field's conceptual and empirical work has neglected the role of time and needs to study “how effects unfold and last over time” (Fischer et al., 2017, p. 1735).”
Exploring how instructional leadership affects teacher efficacy: A multilevel analysis (2021, background): “In the future, more longitudinal, experimental, or quasi-experimental studies need to be conducted (Hallinger, 2011; Shamir, 2011).”
Destructive Leadership: A Critique of Leader-Centric Perspectives and Toward a More Holistic Definition (2016, background): “While not without limitations (see Ligon et al. 2012, Shamir 2011), historiometry permits tracking of various psychological, behavioral, and environmental factors that shape leadership processes.”
The entanglement of leader character and leader competence and its impact on performance (2017, background): “This perspective deviates from the dominant inputoutput paradigm of leadership and is consistent with the view of leadership as a relationship and as a dynamic process (e.g., Shamir, 2011).”
Leadership and individual differences: At the cusp of a renaissance (2012, background): “How are follower’s time orientations altered by a leaders vision having temporal connotations (see Shamir, 2011)?”
Leader corruption depends on power and testosterone (2015, background): “We introduced a time dimension too because it is possible that the corruptive effect of power might not be immediately evident; that is, an individual may become gradually more corrupt with time (cf. Bluedorn & Jaussi, 2008; Shamir, 2011)—a kind of “slippery slope” effect.”
Linking transformational leadership and work outcomes in temporary organizations: A social identity approach (2017, background): “…of the underlying mechanisms of the transformational leadership process, most of this research is conducted within permanent organizational structures and therefore rests on the assumption that leader-follower constellations are stable and continuous (Antonakis et al., 2003; Shamir, 2011).”
Shared Authentic Leadership and New Venture Performance (2012, background): “If future research takes up this challenge, we likewise note that such investigations should be mindful of the short-term versus long-term consequences of leadership (cf. Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010; Shamir, 2011).”
It’s Not Just What is Said, but When it’s Said: A Temporal Account of Verbal Behaviors and Emergent Leadership in Self-Managed Teams (2019, background): “A growing body of literature encourages researchers to explicitly consider the role of time in leadership theories (e.g., Castillo & Trinh, 2018; Mitchell & James, 2001; Mohammed & Nadkarni, 2011; Shamir, 2011).”
Modeling the Influence of School Leaders on Student Achievement (2012, background): “Although some scholars have recently started to use longitudinal designs to assess the impact of leadership on student outcomes (Hallinger & Heck, 2011; Heck & Hallinger, 2009), more longitudinal studies are needed (Shamir, 2011).”
Debunking the false dichotomy of leadership idealism and pragmatism: Critical evaluation and support of newer genre leadership theories (2014, background): “Further, longitudinal or repeated measures research that assesses the varying levels of effectiveness of multiple leadership styles employed across time and contexts is lacking (Bluedorn & Jaussi, 2008; Shamir, 2011).”
A longitudinal study of the effects of charismatic leadership and organizational culture on objective and perceived corporate performance. (2012, background): “Thus, it seems likely that the effect of culture on performance may take more than two years (Crook, Todd, Combs, Woehr, & Ketchen, 2011; Shamir, 2011).”
Leader Narcissism Predicts Malicious Envy and Supervisor-Targeted Counterproductive Work Behavior: Evidence from Field and Experimental Research (2018, unknown): “Finally, time, as a largely ignored variable in leadership research (Shamir 2011), requires consideration in future studies of leader narcissism and employee counterproductivity.”