A framework for understanding leadership and individual requisite complexity

By R. Lord, S. Hannah, P. L. Jennings. 2011

100 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This paper examines the relation of individual perceptual, conscious, and self-regulatory processes to the generation of requisite complexity in formal and informal leaders. Requisite complexity is a complex adaptive systems concept that pertains to the ability of a system to adjust to the requirements of a changing environment by achieving equivalent levels of complexity. We maintain that requisite complexity has both static and dynamic aspects that involve four domains (general, social, self, and affective complexity), with each being more or less important for leaders depending upon the task requirements they face. Dynamic complexity draws on these static components and also creates new aspects of complexity through the interaction of mental processes. The implications of these issues for understanding leader adaptation and development are also discussed.

Subfields: Computational Theory and Mathematics, Management Science and Operations Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2cec2a586e2b432a1d9a191d74380fce6c43d2bf

How researchers see this paper

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

In Computational Theory and Mathematics

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review ☆ (2017, background): “Chang and Johnson (2010) used the Levels of Self-Concept Scale (LSCS; Selenta & Lord, 2005) to measure leaders' relational identity and Karelaia and Guillén (2014) focused specifically on gender and operationalized woman/leader identity conflict using a 6-item measure adapted from Settles (2004).”
Beyond motivation: job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. (2014, background): “Work design likely also facilitates a form of identity development argued to be important for effective leadership, which is a shift in focus from an individual identity (me) to a relational identity (you and me) or a collective identity (all of us) (Lord et al. 2011).”
Leader Self and Means Efficacy: A multi-component approach (2012, background): “, 2008), and recognizes that leaders’ beliefs in their capabilities represents a complex scaffolding or assemblage (Hannah, Woolfolk, et al., 2009; Lord et al., 2011; Wood, 2007).”
Moral Maturation and Moral Conation: A Capacity Approach to Explaining Moral Thought and Action (2011, background): “This portion - the working self-concept - includes aspects of identity and associated cognitive, affective, and motivational components that are activated in a specific situation and that drive thoughts and behaviors in that situation (Lord et al., 2011).”