The Misunderstanding of Outcome Monitoring: A Systematic Literature Review on Instrumental Leadership
Keywords:
Instrumental leadership, output, performance, monitoring, complexity
Abstract
This paper, through a systematic literature review, argues that the scientific study of instrumental leadership has been the object of a misunderstanding of its fourth dimension, that is, outcome monitoring. The general conceptualization of this dimension, which interprets outcome monitoring as an activity consisting of performance supervision and feedback provision, is highly reductive. Outcome monitoring allows instrumental leaders to modify their style and behavior depending on followers’ performance and environmental conditions. After the descriptive analysis, the article presents a content analysis performed using a grounded approach. The study conducts the design of a thematic map that highlights the complex nature of instrumental leadership’s outcome monitoring, linking performance and context in a self-empowering circuit, in which instrumental leaders, through outcome monitoring, modify the contextual conditions and their actions, strategies, and behavior. Finally, recommendations were given for further research.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Metrics
Metrics Loading ...
PlumX Statistics
References
1. Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. S. (2016). Shades of Grey: Guidelines for Working with the Grey Literature in Systematic Reviews for Management and Organizational Studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 432–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12102
2. Agostino, D., Arena, M., & Arnaboldi, M. (2013). Leading change in public organisations: the role of mediators. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(7), 596–615. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-12-2011-0123
3. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2002). An analysis of the full-range leadership theory: The way forward. In Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead (pp. 3–34). JAI Press.
4. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2004, June). On instrumental leadership: beyond transactions and transformations. UNL Gallup Leadership Institute Summit, Omaha, USA.
5. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2013). Addendum: A Re-Analysis of the Full-Range Leadership Theory – The Way Forward. In Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead 10th Anniversary Edition (Monographs in Leadership and Management, Vol. 5) (pp. 35–37). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-357120130000005007
6. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental leadership: Measurement and extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 746–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.005
7. Antonakis, J., House, R. J., & Simonton, D. K. (2017). Can super smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1003–1021. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000221
8. Avolio, B. J. (2011). Full Range Leadership Development. SAGE Publications.
9. Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2002). Developing Potential Across a Full Range of Leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Barker, R. A. (2001). The Nature of Leadership. Human Relations, 54(4), 469–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701544004
11. Beach, D. (2004). The unseen hand in treaty reform negotiations: the role and influence of the Council Secretariat. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 408–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/rjpp13501760410001100279
12. Bryman, A., Stephens, M., & Campo, C. (1996). The importance of context: Qualitative research and the study of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(96)90025-9
13. Benedetti Chammas, C., & Hernandez, J. M. D. C. (2019). Comparing transformational and instrumental leadership. Innovation & Management Review, 16(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1108/inmr-08-2018-0064
14. Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K., Marks, M. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2000). Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(99)00043-0
15. Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a systematic review. In D. A. Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods (pp. 671–689). SAGE Publications.
16. Dourish, P. (2004). What we talk about when we talk about context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-003-0253-8
17. Feng, C., Patel, P. C., & Sivakumar, K. (2020). Chief global officers, geographical sales dispersion, and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 121, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.011
18. Gerlach, F., Hundeling, M., & Rosing, K. (2020). Ambidextrous leadership and innovation performance: a longitudinal study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(3), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-07-2019-0321
19. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
20. Greene, C. N., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1980). Leader-group interactions: A longitudinal field investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.50
21. Gronn, P. (2008). Hybrid Leadership. In K. Leithwood, B. Mascall, & T. Strauss (Eds.), Distributed Leadership According to the Evidence (1st ed., pp. 35–58). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203868539
22. Güntner, A. V., Klonek, F. E., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2020). Follower behavior renders leader behavior endogenous: The simultaneity problem, estimation challenges, and solutions. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(6), 101441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101441
23. Hunt, J. G. (1991). Leadership: A New Synthesis (1st ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
24. Kahn, L. S. (1984). Group Process and Sex Differences. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 8(3), 261–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1984.tb00636.x
25. Kramer, M. W., Day, E. A., Nguyen, C., Hoelscher, C. S., & Cooper, O. D. (2018). Leadership in an interorganizational collaboration: A qualitative study of a statewide interagency taskforce. Human Relations, 72(2), 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718763886
26. Landeweerd, J. A., & Boumans, N. P. G. (1994). The effect of work dimensions and need for autonomy on nurses’ work satisfaction and health. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1994.tb00563.x
27. Li, M., & Patel, P. C. (2019). Jack of all, master of all? CEO generalist experience and firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.08.006
28. Mannheim, B. F., Rim, Y., & Grinberg, G. (1967). Instrumental Status of Supervisors as Related to Workers’ Perceptions and Expectations. Human Relations, 20(4), 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676702000405
29. McKee, R. A., Lee, Y. T., Atwater, L., & Antonakis, J. (2018). Effects of personality and gender on self-other agreement in ratings of leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 91(2), 285–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12209
30. Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, J. F., & Locander, W. B. (2008). Critical Role of Leadership on Ethical Climate and Salesperson Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9839-4
31. Pizzolitto, E., & Verna, I. (2020). Vocational Identity Development and the Role of Human Resources Management. A Systematic Literature Review. European Scientific Journal ESJ, 16(34). https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2020.v16n34p80
32. Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., & Prescott, J. E. (2020). Advancing Theory with Review Articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(2), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549
33. Rowold, J. (2014). Instrumental Leadership: Extending the Transformational-Transactional Leadership Paradigm. German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift Für Personalforschung, 28(3), 367–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/239700221402800304
34. Schriesheim, C. A., & DeNisi, A. S. (1981). Task dimensions as moderators of the effects of instrumental leadership: A two-sample replicated test of path-goal leadership theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(5), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.5.589
35. Schriesheim, J. F., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1980). A test of the path-goal theory of leadership and some suggested directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 33(2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1980.tb02356.x
36. Smeets, S., & Beach, D. (2019). Political and instrumental leadership in major EU reforms. The role and influence of the EU institutions in setting-up the Fiscal Compact. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1572211
37. Tung, F. C., & Yu, T. W. (2016). Does innovation leadership enhance creativity in high-tech industries? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(5), 579–592. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-09-2014-0170
38. Turk, H. (1961). Instrumental Values and the Popularity of Instrumental Leaders. Social Forces, 39(3), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.2307/2573217
39. van Vugt, M., & de Cremer, D. (1999). Leadership in social dilemmas: The effects of group identification on collective actions to provide public goods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 587–599. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.587
40. Waldersee, R., & Eagleson, G. (2002). Shared leadership in the implementation of re‐orientations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(7), 400–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730210445838
41. Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2013). Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51
2. Agostino, D., Arena, M., & Arnaboldi, M. (2013). Leading change in public organisations: the role of mediators. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(7), 596–615. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-12-2011-0123
3. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2002). An analysis of the full-range leadership theory: The way forward. In Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead (pp. 3–34). JAI Press.
4. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2004, June). On instrumental leadership: beyond transactions and transformations. UNL Gallup Leadership Institute Summit, Omaha, USA.
5. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2013). Addendum: A Re-Analysis of the Full-Range Leadership Theory – The Way Forward. In Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead 10th Anniversary Edition (Monographs in Leadership and Management, Vol. 5) (pp. 35–37). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-357120130000005007
6. Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental leadership: Measurement and extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 746–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.005
7. Antonakis, J., House, R. J., & Simonton, D. K. (2017). Can super smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1003–1021. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000221
8. Avolio, B. J. (2011). Full Range Leadership Development. SAGE Publications.
9. Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2002). Developing Potential Across a Full Range of Leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Barker, R. A. (2001). The Nature of Leadership. Human Relations, 54(4), 469–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701544004
11. Beach, D. (2004). The unseen hand in treaty reform negotiations: the role and influence of the Council Secretariat. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 408–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/rjpp13501760410001100279
12. Bryman, A., Stephens, M., & Campo, C. (1996). The importance of context: Qualitative research and the study of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(96)90025-9
13. Benedetti Chammas, C., & Hernandez, J. M. D. C. (2019). Comparing transformational and instrumental leadership. Innovation & Management Review, 16(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1108/inmr-08-2018-0064
14. Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K., Marks, M. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2000). Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(99)00043-0
15. Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a systematic review. In D. A. Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods (pp. 671–689). SAGE Publications.
16. Dourish, P. (2004). What we talk about when we talk about context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-003-0253-8
17. Feng, C., Patel, P. C., & Sivakumar, K. (2020). Chief global officers, geographical sales dispersion, and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 121, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.011
18. Gerlach, F., Hundeling, M., & Rosing, K. (2020). Ambidextrous leadership and innovation performance: a longitudinal study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(3), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-07-2019-0321
19. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
20. Greene, C. N., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1980). Leader-group interactions: A longitudinal field investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.50
21. Gronn, P. (2008). Hybrid Leadership. In K. Leithwood, B. Mascall, & T. Strauss (Eds.), Distributed Leadership According to the Evidence (1st ed., pp. 35–58). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203868539
22. Güntner, A. V., Klonek, F. E., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2020). Follower behavior renders leader behavior endogenous: The simultaneity problem, estimation challenges, and solutions. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(6), 101441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101441
23. Hunt, J. G. (1991). Leadership: A New Synthesis (1st ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
24. Kahn, L. S. (1984). Group Process and Sex Differences. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 8(3), 261–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1984.tb00636.x
25. Kramer, M. W., Day, E. A., Nguyen, C., Hoelscher, C. S., & Cooper, O. D. (2018). Leadership in an interorganizational collaboration: A qualitative study of a statewide interagency taskforce. Human Relations, 72(2), 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718763886
26. Landeweerd, J. A., & Boumans, N. P. G. (1994). The effect of work dimensions and need for autonomy on nurses’ work satisfaction and health. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1994.tb00563.x
27. Li, M., & Patel, P. C. (2019). Jack of all, master of all? CEO generalist experience and firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.08.006
28. Mannheim, B. F., Rim, Y., & Grinberg, G. (1967). Instrumental Status of Supervisors as Related to Workers’ Perceptions and Expectations. Human Relations, 20(4), 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676702000405
29. McKee, R. A., Lee, Y. T., Atwater, L., & Antonakis, J. (2018). Effects of personality and gender on self-other agreement in ratings of leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 91(2), 285–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12209
30. Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, J. F., & Locander, W. B. (2008). Critical Role of Leadership on Ethical Climate and Salesperson Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9839-4
31. Pizzolitto, E., & Verna, I. (2020). Vocational Identity Development and the Role of Human Resources Management. A Systematic Literature Review. European Scientific Journal ESJ, 16(34). https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2020.v16n34p80
32. Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., & Prescott, J. E. (2020). Advancing Theory with Review Articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(2), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549
33. Rowold, J. (2014). Instrumental Leadership: Extending the Transformational-Transactional Leadership Paradigm. German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift Für Personalforschung, 28(3), 367–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/239700221402800304
34. Schriesheim, C. A., & DeNisi, A. S. (1981). Task dimensions as moderators of the effects of instrumental leadership: A two-sample replicated test of path-goal leadership theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(5), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.5.589
35. Schriesheim, J. F., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1980). A test of the path-goal theory of leadership and some suggested directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 33(2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1980.tb02356.x
36. Smeets, S., & Beach, D. (2019). Political and instrumental leadership in major EU reforms. The role and influence of the EU institutions in setting-up the Fiscal Compact. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1572211
37. Tung, F. C., & Yu, T. W. (2016). Does innovation leadership enhance creativity in high-tech industries? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(5), 579–592. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-09-2014-0170
38. Turk, H. (1961). Instrumental Values and the Popularity of Instrumental Leaders. Social Forces, 39(3), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.2307/2573217
39. van Vugt, M., & de Cremer, D. (1999). Leadership in social dilemmas: The effects of group identification on collective actions to provide public goods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 587–599. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.587
40. Waldersee, R., & Eagleson, G. (2002). Shared leadership in the implementation of re‐orientations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(7), 400–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730210445838
41. Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2013). Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51
Published
2022-09-30
How to Cite
Pizzolitto, E. (2022). The Misunderstanding of Outcome Monitoring: A Systematic Literature Review on Instrumental Leadership. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 18(28), 1. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2022.v18n28p1
Section
ESJ Social Sciences
Copyright (c) 2022 Elia Pizzolitto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
.jpg)
