Erim Hester Duursema[hr].pdf

The three legs of the tripod grew steadily over the last few centuries. Each leg contributed to theory
building and underwent empirical testing. The thought that leadership is equal to the action of
individual is so deeply engrained in the leadership literature that few researchers questioned this
notion7KH³OHDGHU ́OHJRIWKHWULSRGincludes ³*UHDWPDQ ́WKHRULHV(Woods, 1913), trait theories
(Stogdill, 1948; Zaccaro, 2007; Zaccaro et al., 1991) and leader behavior theories (Stogdill & Coons,
1957). Subsequently, vertical dyad linking theory (Dansereau et al., 1975) and Leader-Member
Exchange (LMX) theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) were introduced where the role of followers
became more important. The leadership literature saw an increasing emphasis on ³IRlORZHUVKLS ́their
role and characteristics in the leadership process (Collinson, 2006). Another perspective that brought
followers into the tripod focused on implicit leadership theories, i.e. the influence of follower
expectations and prototypes with respect to leaders (Lord et al., 1984; Lord & Maher, 1993) as well as
the effects RIWKHIROORZHU¶VVHOI-concept on perceived leadership effectiveness (Lord et al., 1999). The
third leg of the tripod, common goals has not received the same amount of theoretical attention as the
other two legs. The only theory which dealt the goals was the path-goal theory (House, 1971), in
which the leader used various resources (rewards and expectations) to guide the followers towards
preset goals. Yet, the focus in this theory was more on the behavior of the leader and its effect on
followers than on the goals themselves. Table 1.1 provides an overview of some of the theories
dealing with one of the three legs of the tripod ontology. The overview is by no means meant to be
exhaustive and serves an illustrative purpose only.

Table 1-1: Theories underlying the three legs of the tripod

Table 1.1 shows the relative unbalance in the tripod ontology, in terms of research efforts. The
observation that WKH³JRDOV ́OHJKDVQRWEHHQVWXGLHGDVH[tensively is especially relevant in the light
of the disconnected (Zaccaro & Klimoski, 2001) nature of the leadership research drawing on