Chapter 5
Distributed Approaches to Leadership
This session will cover an opening leadership profile, a new focus of distributed leadership approach, theoretical frameworks of distributed leadership approach, and a scenario.
Opening Leadership Profile: Bridgette Radebe as an Example of “Distributed Leadership”
Bridgette Radebe is the wealthiest African woman, and the founder-CEO of Mmaku Mining. Her company became a contract miner, producing minerals and managing shafts for the big mining houses. Deeply community oriented and socially minded, she offered equity participation to many rural communities where mines were situated, and empowered these rural communities to partner as entrepreneurs. Bridgette is a unique leader, who is a firm believer in the concepts of sharing and empowerment. Rather than keeping power of performing subcontract mining work on her own, she chose to share power with the various local communities where the mines were situated. Bridgette is a superleader who has led by supporting, enabling, and promoting entrepreneurial self-leadership in these communities, and on partnering with them.
Her approach falls within the broad umbrella of what is referred to as “distributed leadership,” so called because the leadership function is more broadly spread than in hierarchical forms of vertical leadership, and where the role of the leader in the whole of the leadership process is the focus. If former approaches have asked “How can formal leaders maximize their roles to enhance effectiveness under a variety of conditions?” distributed leadership approach asks
“Under what conditions can formal leaders minimize their roles to enhance effectiveness?”
Distributed leadership emphasizes the sharing of functions through empowerment mechanisms such as participation and delegation. Many traditional leadership theories have historically failed to fully acknowledge the importance of others in the leadership process: informal leaders, followers, teams, and networks. Distributed leadership theories focus on these important aspects of leadership.
There are seven types of distributed leadership approaches: shared leadership, superleadership, informal leadership, followership, substitutes theory, self-leadership, and a self-managed team theory.
1.
An example of a shared leadership is when the work is sorted by workers most of the time, occasionally done as a collaborative, and occasionally assigned to a point person.
2.
An example of a superleadership is when an executive grooms a likely successor, or delegates a task, only requiring a report if there is a problem.
3.
An example of informal leadership is when a subordinate champions a productivity improvement, even though management is disinclined to adopt it at first.
© Taylor & Francis 2015

4.
An example of followership is when a nearly unanimous vote of no-confidence by the physicians at a hospital causes the replacement of the hospital CEO.
5.
An example of substitutes theory is when a new administrative protocol sets out unwritten policies clearly, reducing the need for leader monitoring and training.
6.
An example of self-leadership is when an employee develops her own plan for selfdevelopment.
7.
An example of self-managed team is when the leader allows his team to refine their purpose, define their mutual accountability, and set their specific work schedule.
Theoretical framework of distributed leadership approach is the following:
1.
Shared leadership theory
Overview:
1.
Shared leadership is based on the normative assumptions that a major role of traditional or vertical leadership is to enhance the capability and motivation to engage in distributed leadership.
2.
Shared leadership is based on the “process use” hypothesis: the more that people engage in the process of deciding, monitoring, and accounting for their own work, the more likely it is that they will find the work meaningful and will be driven to succeed.
3.
Fetterman (2001) identifies ten principles that are relevant for shared leadership: (1) improvement, (2) community ownership, (3) inclusion, (4) democratic participation, (5) social justice, (6) community knowledge, (7) evidence-based strategies, (8) capacity building, (9) organizational learning, and (10) accountability.
Forms of shared leadership:
Germanic/ Nordic
How to develop shared leadership:
Four conditions conducive for the development of shared leadership are:
1.
leaders must be engaged in sense giving, offering a frame of reference to facilitate collective movement of team members
2.
leaders must continuously de-emphasize their positional power
3.
leaders must make shared leadership a contextual norm
© Taylor & Francis 2015

4.
leadership processes must be guided by “law of the situation”
When shared leadership may be more effective:
Four factors determine the success of shared leadership:
1.
capacity of subordinates or member
2.
capacity of leaders
3.
willingness of organization to allow the use of distributed leadership
4.
societal culture
2.
Superleadership theory
Overview:
1.
Shared leadership begins with the active role of the formal leader in preparing, recognizing, and “letting go of” followers.
2.
Superleadership styles are developing, participative and delegative; performance goals include follower development/ satisfaction and production efficiency.
Forms of superleadership:
Based on context: traditional/fast-paced
How to develop superleadership:
Necessary strategies are giving fewer orders, fostering creativity, and creating independence and interdependence among workers where possible.
When superleadership may be more effective:
1.
The letting go involves transfer of the ownership, but the meaning of ownership varies across cultures.
2.
In short-term-oriented cultures, superleadership may be enacted through rapid empowerment in the early stages of a relationship, while in long-term-oriented cultures a prospective superleader may not confront the issue of full empowerment until a much later stage in their relationship.
© Taylor & Francis 2015

3.
In group-oriented cultures, leaders may be willing to exercise true superleadership only in relation to in-group members.
3.
Informal leadership theory
Overview:
1.
Informal leaders are those who lack formal positions or legitimate power, but who nonetheless influence others.
2.
The power associated with influential informal leaders tends to derive from good communication skills, including listening, from expertise and credibility, and from the respect and trust of caring, empathetic colleagues.
3.
Some informal leaders might use their power to enhance self-serving interests rather than those of others.
Forms of informal leadership:
Based on organizational logic/based on societal logic
How to develop informal leadership:
Studies on women in family businesses suggest four conditions conducive for developing informal leadership:
1.
Leaders must emphasize preserving and strengthening organizational unity.
2.
Leaders must emphasize inclusion, broadening and development of leadership.
3.
Leaders must emphasize the principles of workplace democracy.
4.
Leaders must be open to fixing structural barriers that limit the visibility of informal leaders.
When informal leadership may be more effective:
1.
In egalitarian cultures, groups tend to begin with a highly cohesive phase, wherein all members of a group may have space to exercise informal leadership.
2.
In high power distance cultures, formal leaders need to complement formal authority with informal leadership in order to have an influence.
© Taylor & Francis 2015

4.
Followership theory
Overview:
1.
Followership tends to emphasize the importance of followers in critically and fairly evaluating formal leadership performance. Followers not only can change leaders by challenging the deeply held assumptions, but also can topple leaders by lack of support, open resistance, and even sabotage.
2.
Proponents of followership emphasize the moral obligation of leaders to respect followers as a separate source of authority, wisdom, and expertise.
3.
Performance goals of followership is to support good leaders and oppose bad ones.
Forms of followership:
Kellerman’s (2007) proposes five types of followers based on their level of engagement: isolates, bystanders, participants, activists, and diehards.
How to develop followership leadership:
1.
Effective followership develops from democratic perspectives of relying on the power of the masses.
2.
Conditions that support the emergence of informal leadership tend to also be conducive to the effective use of followership.
When followership may be more effective:
1.
In authoritarian cultures, leaders are expected to show benevolence and paternalistic support. In such cultures, followership is generally less likely to emerge or succeed.
2.
When power distance combines with in-group collectivism, followership from the proximate members of in-group based on ideologies, seniority, kinship, gender, or class, might reinforce the identity and the power of leaders.
5.
Substitutes-based leadership theory
Overview:
© Taylor & Francis 2015

1.
Kerr and Jermier (1978) articulate a theory of situations in which less leadership is necessary because it is provided by “substitutes” for leadership. Leadership substitutes refer to factors that render leadership less possible and less necessary.
2.
The theory calls for a delegated leadership style and several performance goals, such as production efficiency, freeing up leader’s time, enhancing leader’s ability, etc.
Forms of substitutes-based theory
Neutralizers, enhancers, and supplements
How to develop substitutes-based leadership:
1.
Good leadership sets up systems in which operations have less need for their supervision, so that leaders can focus on other functions such as lateral and external coordination.
2.
When work systems have fewer problems and a predictable workflow, leadership is less needed. When quality management systems and feedback provided by work, they have less need for leaders.
When substitutes-based leadership may be more effective:
1.
In the US, spatial distance is generally not a significant barrier, and virtual teams may be quite effective and seen as enabling work-life flexibility and follower autonomy.
2.
The factors that are perceived as neutralizers, enhancers, or supplements in one culture may be perceived as substitutes in other cultures.
6.
Self-leadership theory
Overview:
1.
Self-leadership is composed of self-control, self-direction, self-support, self-achievement, and self-inspiration.
2.
The central insight of self-leadership theory is that the attitudes, beliefs, self-designed behavioral patterns, and motivational preferences of individuals make a critical difference in both accomplishment and personal satisfaction in work.
3.
Self-leadership theory calls for self-directive, self-supportive, self-achievement, and selfinspirational leadership styles; performance goals include higher personal standards and a greater focus.
© Taylor & Francis 2015

Forms of self-leadership:
Depend on cultural context
How to develop self-leadership:
Three strategies for its development: behavior-focused strategies, natural reward, and constructive thought-pattern:
1.
Behavior-focused strategies are oriented towards identification and utilization of those people and artifacts that enhance productivity.
2.
Natural reward strategies are based on managing the types of work an individual finds more intrinsically satisfying, i.e. offering more natural reward.
3.
“Constructive thought-pattern” strategies deal with the creation or alteration of cognitive thought processes (Houghton, Neck, & Manz 2003, 129).
When self-leadership may be more effective:
1.
Individual self-leadership is effective across cultural contexts in terms of increased employee productivity, reduced absenteeism, and greater self-efficacy, confidence.
2.
Team-level self-leadership is associated with increased creativity, and is particularly effective in situations where teams must coordinate their actions.
7.
Self-managed teams
Overview:
1.
Self-managed teams imply distributing the standard functions of leadership among the group, and allowing the group to assign leadership functions based on member talents and availability.
2.
Self-managed teams call for self-management of team direction, support, participation, achievement, inspiration; performance goals include exceptional production, team independence, mutual development, etc.
Forms of self-managed teams:
Formally managed/self-managed teams
How to develop self-managed teams:
© Taylor & Francis 2015

Katzenbach and Smith (1993) specify four conditions:
1.
a common purpose and approach by the team
2.
a system of accountability
3.
the need for complementary skills
4.
an appropriate number of team members
When self-managed teams may be more effective:
1.
The earliest model of self-managing teams evolved in Japan in the form of quality circles and continuous improvement process teams.
2.
A second form of self-managing teams emerged in the US during the late 1980s, where information technology and knowledge workforce were found as effective substitutes of leadership.
3.
A third form of self-managing teams emerged around the same time, based on the workforce partnership model in Northern European societies.
Scenario: Distributed Leadership
Iqbal prefers to go with the flow rather than make lists. In his line job he was particularly talented at spotting unusual problems that were not immediately apparent by following the standard protocol. In the past, the division never had regular staff meetings. He is planning to call one per month for a couple of hours. During these meetings he would like to propose a slightly more “proactive” approach to problems. He would also like to get suggestions about how to distribute the workflow.
After analyzing the case, answer the questions using distributed leadership approaches’ lenses.
© Taylor & Francis 2015