that researcher will have little option but to look to the wider leadership studies
literature.
Because of the lack of volume and depth of leadership-related hospitality studies,
it is argued here that hospitality-leadership studies remain in Stage 1 of Reichers
and Schneider's (1990) evolution of concepts framework – the concept
introduction / elaboration stage. Stage 2 has not been reached because, although
there have been some critical evaluations, there has been no empirical work
specifically undertaken to address the criticisms and no subsequent
reconceptualisations.
Further evidence for the Stage 1 position – albeit from the late 1990s - can be
found in Pittaway et al.’s (1998) review of the field. They observed that:
“...the majority of research within the hospitality industry has limited
itself to the identification of the importance of leadership. It has not
contributed significantly to a greater understanding of leadership”
(1998: 412).This observation is entirely consistent with Hunt’s (1999) description of Reichers
and Schneider's (1990) Stage 1,
“Here [in Stage 1], the attempt is to legitimize a new concept or a
newly borrowed concept... Early data are presented to bolster the
argument that the concept represents a real phenomenon”
(Hunt 1999: 131).It is to Pittaway et al.’s (1998) review that this work now turn its attention.
Pittaway et al.’s article is the only previous work to have attempted to make
recommendations for the future direction of leadership studies in the hospitality
field. Because the current research also seeks to make recommendations for the
future development of the field, it is important to review Pittaway et al.’s work for
any relevant findings or insights.
3.11 Pittaway et al.’s (1998) paradigmatic framework
The early evolution stage of hospitality leadership studies has significant
implications for the deductive development of new research questions in the field.