Advertisement

Analyzing Leadership Attributes in Faith-Based Organizations: Idealism Versus Reality

  • Krystin ZiganEmail author
  • YingFei Heliot
  • Alan Le Grys
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper aims to contribute to the growing discussion about leadership in the contemporary Church of England with a particular interest in the complex interaction between social context and leadership practices. Implicit leadership theory (ILT) is used to explore mutual expectations around distributed models of lay and ordained leadership as well as ‘ordinary’ members’ of congregation. Applying a qualitative research method, we conducted 32 semi-structured interviews in 6 Church of England parishes. Through the systematic analysis of relevant contextual factors at multiple levels, we identify limited congruence between ideal leadership attributes and actual behavior. We contribute to the ILT literature by identifying ethical attributes, such as the ability to help others flourish, as particularly pertinent to the religious setting. We also identify the malleability of some leadership attributes. We further contribute to the literature on organizational studies in faith-based organizations by offering novel insights into the relationship between leadership, followership and contextual factors at local parish level which have significant practical implications for recruiting and training church leaders and followers.

Keywords

Contextual factors Ethical leadership Implicit leadership theory Leadership attributes Faith-based organizations Qualitative 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful for the time and effort taken by the editor and reviewers who provided constructive and insightful suggestions to improve our paper in a substantial way. We also thank Dr. Gloria Appiah for her very helpful comments on drafts of the paper.

Funding

Funding for this research has been received from the University of Kent and the University of Surrey.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they are aware of no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures were carried out in accordance with the Ethical Standards of the Institutional Research Committee.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Alexander, L., & Higton, M. (Eds.). (2016). Faithful improvisation: Theological reflections on church leadership. London: Church House Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Alipour, K., Mohammed, S., & Martinez, P. (2017). Incorporating temporality into implicit leadership and followership theories: Exploring inconsistencies between time-based expectations and actual behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly,28(2), 300–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,16(3), 315–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barsalou, L. W. (1985). Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,11, 629–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bedi, A., Alpaslan, C., & Green, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. Journal of Business Ethics,139, 517–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyatzis, R., Brizz, T., & Godwin, L. (2011). The effect of religious leaders’ emotional and social competencies on improving parish vibrancy. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies,18(2), 192–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, D., & Lord, R. (2001). Leadership and perceiver cognition: Moving beyond first order constructs. In M. London (Ed.), How people evaluate others in organizations (pp. 181–202). Mahwah, NJ: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly,17, 595–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,97, 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, A., & Woodhead, L. (2016). That was the church that was: How the Church of England lost the English people. London: Bloomsbury Continuum.Google Scholar
  12. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  13. Chaves, M. (1998). Denominations as dual structures: An organizational analysis. In N. J. Demerath III, P. Hall, P. Schmitt, & R. Williams (Eds.), Sacred companies. Organizational aspects of religion and religious aspects of organizations (pp. 175–194). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Church of England. (2007). Common worship ordination services. Retrieved January 29, 2019, from https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-and-worship/worship-texts-and-resources/common-worship/ministry/common-worship-ordination-services.
  15. Church Times. (2019). A middle-class culture dominates the Church. Retrieved July, 5, 2019, from https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2019/1-march/comment/opinion/a-middle-class-culture-dominates-the-church.
  16. Coyle, P. T., & Foti, R. (2015). If you’re not with me you’re…? Examining prototypes and cooperation in leader–follower relationships. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies,22, 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Effects of categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology,72, 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. das Neves, J. C., & Melé, D. (2013). Managing ethically cultural diversity: Learning from Thomas Aquinas. Journal of Business Ethics,116(4), 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davie, G. (2008). The sociology of religion. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Davie, G. (2015). Religion in Britain: A persistent paradox (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Day, D. V., Fleenor, J., Atwater, L., Sturm, R., & McKee, R. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly,25(1), 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Demerath, N. J., III, Hall, P., Schmitt, P., & Williams, R. (1998). Sacred companies. Organizational aspects of religion and religious aspects of organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Demerath, N. J., III, & Schmitt, T. (1998). Transcending sacred and secular: Mutual benefits in analyzing religious and non-religious organizations. In N. J. Demerath III, P. Hall, P. Schmitt, & R. Williams (Eds.), Sacred companies. Organizational aspects of religion and religious aspects of organizations (pp. 381–400). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Derler, A., & Weibler, J. (2014). The ideal employee: Context and leaders’ implicit follower theories. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,35(5), 386–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dipboye, R. L., Fromkin, H. L., & Wiback, K. (1975). Relative importance of applicant sex, attractiveness, and scholastic standing in evaluation of job applicant résumés. Journal of Applied Psychology,60, 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Engle, E. M., & Lord, R. G. (1997). Implicit theories, self schemas, and leader–member exchange. Academy of Management Journal,40, 988–1010.Google Scholar
  27. Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. (2017). Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly,28, 104–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology,89(2), 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of implicit leadership theories on leader–member exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology,90(4), 659–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Epitropaki, O., Sy, T., Martin, R., Tram-Quon, S., & Topakas, A. (2013). Implicit Leadership and Followership Theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings. The Leadership Quarterly,24(6), 858–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Foti, R. J., Bray, B. C., Thompson, N. J., & Allgood, S. F. (2012). Know thy self, know thy leader: Contributions of a pattern-oriented approach to examining leader perceptions. The Leadership Quarterly,23(4), 702–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fry, L. W., Hannah, S. T., Noel, M., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2011). Retracted: Impact of spiritual leadership on unit performance. The Leadership Quarterly,22(2), 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly,22(6), 1120–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparisons of leadership prototypes. The Leadership Quarterly,2, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  36. Grandy, G. (2013). An exploratory study of strategic leadership in churches. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,34(7), 616–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grandy, G., & Sliwa, M. (2017). Contemplative leadership: The possibilities for the ethics of leadership theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics,143, 423–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Greenleaf, R. (1977). Servant Leadership. A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.Google Scholar
  39. Hansson, P. (2012). The clerical ethos: The Church of Sweden authorities and clerical ethical standards. In K. Niemelä (Ed.), Church work and management in change (pp. 76–100). Tampere: Church Research Institute.Google Scholar
  40. Harris, M. (1998a). A special case of voluntary associations? Towards a theory of congregational organization. British Journal of Sociology,49(4), 602–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Harris, M. (1998b). Religious congregations as nonprofit organizations: Four English Case Studies. In N. J. Demerath III, P. Hall, P. Schmitt, & R. Williams (Eds.), Sacred companies. Organizational aspects of religion and religious aspects of organizations (pp. 307–322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Hodges, J., & Howieson, B. (2017). The challenges of leadership in the third sector. European Management Journal,35, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hovorun, C. (2017). Scaffolds of the Church: Towards post-structural ecclesiology. Oregon: Cascade.Google Scholar
  44. Humanist. (2019). Religion and belief: Some surveys and statistics. Retrieved June 19, 2019, from https://humanism.org.uk/campaigns/religion-and-belief-some-surveys-and-statistics/.
  45. Iszatt-White, M., Kelly, S., & Rouncefield, M. F. (2006). Ethnography and leadership. In Ethnography conference. University of Liverpool.Google Scholar
  46. Jung, C. (1921). Psychological types. London: Routledge Classics.Google Scholar
  47. Junker, N., & van Dick, R. (2014). Implicit theories in organizational settings: A systematic review and research agenda of implicit leadership and followership theories. The Leadership Quarterly,25(6), 1154–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Keck, N., Giessner, S., van Quaquebeke, N., & Kruijiff, E. (2018). When do followers perceive their leaders as ethical? A relational models perspective of normatively appropriate conduct. Journal of Business Ethics.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4055-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Keller, T. (1999). Images of the familiar: Individual differences and implicit leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly,10, 589–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kenney, R., Schwartz-Kenney, B., & lascovich, J. (1996). Implicit leadership theories. Defining leaders described as worthy of influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,22(11), 1128–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity: Theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,38, 283–357.Google Scholar
  52. Keyes, C., & Haidt, J. (Eds.). (2002). Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  53. Ko, C., Ma, J., Bartnik, R., Haney, M., & Kang, M. (2018). Ethical leadership: An integrative review and future research agenda. Ethics and Behavior,28(2), 104–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lemoine, J., Hartnell, C., & Leroy, H. (2019). Taking stock of moral approaches to leadership: An integrative review of ethical, authentic, and servant leadership. Academy of Management Annals,13(1), 148–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Liden, R. C., & Antonakis, J. (2009). Considering context in psychological leadership research. Human Relations,62(11), 1587–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., Harvey, J. L., & Hall, R. J. (2001). Contextual constraints on prototype generation and their multilevel consequences for leadership perceptions. The Leadership Quarterly,12(3), 311–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & de Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,34, 343–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lord Green Steering Group. (2014). Talent management for future leaders and leadership development for bishops and deans: A new approach. Retrieved September 8, 2018, from www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/uploads/TalentManagement.pdf.
  59. Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  60. Low, J., & Ayoko, O. (2018). The emergence of spiritual leader and leadership in religion-based organizations. Journal of Business Ethics.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3954-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (1998). At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups. Academy of Management Journal,41(4), 441–452.Google Scholar
  62. Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: A social constructionist approach. The Leadership Quarterly,6, 329–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Melé, D., & Fontodrona, J. (2017). Christian ethics and spirituality in leading business organizations: Editorial introduction. Journal of Business Ethics,145, 671–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. O’Keeffe, J. (2000). Leadership in the Parish. The Furrow,51(10), 557–562.Google Scholar
  66. Offermann, L. R., Kennedy, J. K., & Wirtz, P. W. (1994). Implicit leadership theories: Content, structure, and generalizability. The Leadership Quarterly,5(1), 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Owen, J. (1834). Spiritual mindedness. Louisville: GLH Publishing.Google Scholar
  68. Peel, D. (1991). The Ministry of the Laity: Sharing the leadership, sharing the task. Toronto: Anglican Book Center.Google Scholar
  69. Percy, M. (1998). Power and the Church. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  70. Peyton, N., & Gattrell, C. (2013). Managing clergy lives—Obedience, sacrifice, intimacy. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  71. Ritter, B. A., & Lord, R. G. (2007). The impact of previous leaders on the evaluation of new leaders: An alternative to prototype matching. Journal of Applied Psychology,92, 1683–1695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Roberts, R. H. (2002). Religion, theology, and the human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Rush, M. C., & Russell, J. E. A. (1988). Leader prototypes and prototype contingent consensus in leader behavior descriptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,24, 88–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schein, V. (1975). Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers. Journal of Applied Psychology,60, 340–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Shondrick, S. J., & Lord, R. G. (2010). Implicit leadership and followership theories: Dynamic structures for leadership perceptions, memory, and leader–follower processes. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology,25(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
  76. Shotter, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2014). In search of phronesis: Leadership and the art of judgment. Academy of Management Learning and Education,13(2), 224–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  78. Simpson, P. (2012). Complexity and change management: Analyzing church leaders’ narratives. Journal of Organizational Change Management,25(2), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stinchcombe, A. (1990). Information and organizations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  80. Styhre, A. (2014). In the service of God and the parish: Professional ideologies and managerial control in the Church of Sweden. Culture and Organization,20(4), 307–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. The Archbishop’s Council. (2015). Senior church leadership—A resource for reflection. The Faith and Order Commission of the Church of England. London: Church of England.Google Scholar
  82. Tidball, D. (2008). Ministry by the book: New Testament patterns for pastoral leadership. Nottingham: Apollos.Google Scholar
  83. Torry, M. (2014). Managing religion: The management of Christian religious and faith-based organizations. Internal relationships (Vol. 1). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  84. Treviño, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations,56(1), 5–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R., Lowe, K., & Carsten, M. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly,25(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Van Brackle, L. G. (2011). Dynamism in action. In K. Agard (Ed.), Leadership in nonprofit organizations. A reference handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 303–310). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Van Dierendonck, D., Stam, D., de Boersma, P., Windt, N., & Alkema, J. (2014). Same difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly,25, 544–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Van Gils, S., van Quaquebeke, N., & van Knippenberg, D. (2010). The X-factor: On the relevance of implicit leadership and followership theories for leader–member exchange agreement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,19(3), 333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Van Quaquebeke, N., Graf, M., & Eckloff, T. (2014). What do leaders have to live up to? Contrasting the effects of central tendency versus ideal-based leader prototypes in leader categorization processes. Leadership,10(2), 191–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Verlage, H., Rowold, J., & Schilling, J. (2012). Through different perspectives on leadership: Comparing the full range leadership theory to implicit leadership theories. Journal of Organizational Learning and Leadership,10(2), 68–95.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kent Business SchoolUniversity of KentChatham MaritimeUK
  2. 2.Surrey Business SchoolUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK
  3. 3.University of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations