Good leadership is essential to the success of any initiative or business. A great leader has a clear vision, is fearless, has integrity, honesty, humility, and a clear focus. It’s not uncommon for a great leader to assist others achieve their goals, even if it means hiring someone who may be better than them. When it comes to leadership, Raelin sees it as an activity rather than a quality or behavior that is unique to one person (Raelin, 2017). Participant-driven practice is a coordinated effort by a group of people to attain a specific goal. For many people, it also includes a community’s routines and tacit problem-solving or coping techniques. Leadership as practice is therefore less about what one person believes or does and more about what others may accomplish together. When it comes to a leadership constellation, the social and material factors that influence it are not outside of it, but rather a part of it at all times. However, this paper will compare and contrast an entity-based view of leadership theory and practice with a socially constructed view of leadership as practice as well as explain how these divergent perspectives lead to divergent research questions and epistemological approaches to conducting leadership research using the Joseph Raelin’s book; Leadership as practice theory and application.
Differences of entity-based view of leadership theory and practice with a socially constructed view of leadership as practice
When it comes to leadership, Raelin demonstrates that a socially constructed perspective of leadership is founded on a variety of closely linked traditions that call for a different line of inquiry than focusing on traits, actions, talents, or competencies. The entity-based approach to leadership theory and practice is the most comprehensive, as it aims to free leadership from the constraints of a role-based, entitative influence relationship (Raelin, 2017).
Identifying someone as a leader is a socially created perspective on leadership practice that may have repercussions in specific circumstances since it may be overemphasized, compromising the reporting of current leadership practice. An entity-based perspective is driven by a desire to comprehend and explain leadership behavior in all of its manifestations (Raelin, 2017). In the entity-based approach to mobilization theory, a movement’s attention is attracted to specific areas of social mobilization. A systemic approach to leadership theory and practice permits the formation of a collective identity with a normative orientation for the goal of rethinking the traditional definition of leadership.
Entity-based views of leadership theory and practice differ from socially constructed views in that the people who have an impact on leadership at any given time do not reside outside of leadership, but rather are intricately intertwined in it. Anyone who works in the company’s leadership team is able and willing to take on any extra responsibilities that may develop at any time. As a civilization, a leader is uncontrollable and has the power to oppress the weakest members of the community.
Also advantageous to entities is that it depicts collective action as occurring in real time and over time as a result of interconnected interactions between participants. This is a further advantage of entity-based techniques. Since it does not rely on individuals’ attributes and does not require a focus on the dyadic relationship between leaders and followers, which has traditionally been the starting point for any discussion of leadership, it challenges our traditional views of leadership (socially constructed perspective) (Raelin, 2017).
Entity-based approaches place a great priority on the individual creative contributions of those who participate rather than being based on the decision of people in selecting a leader, as in the socially constructed perspective on leadership. People and groups are studied, as are factors that encourage innovation. Creativity may thrive in an environment that encourages both positive and forceful leadership. The ambition to succeed and the ability to change with the times motivate those who are innovative to succeed (Raelin, 2017). It is easier for people to collaborate when they can freely exchange ideas. Innovative thought is stimulated by adaptive norms, conflict, and stress. A person’s ability to feel secure and open to new ideas has a significant impact on their ability to generate new ideas. As a creative person, this is very relevant. When it comes to issue solving, finding new ways to connect ideas, or when the utility of concepts complements one another, for example, concepts interact and reinteract with one another and with lower-level concepts as well as higher-level concepts in a complex networked ecosystem.
Explain how these differing perspectives would result in research questions that lead to different epistemological approaches to the appropriate methodologies in conducting leadership research.
The dilemma of how to select a leader who embraces participants’ communal, shared, and exploratory discourses has surfaced as a source of concern. Critical evaluation is particularly challenging in participatory settings, where power dynamics can stifle voices and gag those who are not part of the mainstream discourse. If researchers focus on the group as a whole, rather than on individuals, members of the group may be more effective in combating oppression and other inequitable social systems. Having a strong leadership personality style portrays the individual leader as a beacon of morals and prosperity (Raelin, 2017).
People’s decisions can be tough to manage when determining who should preside over a trial. When establishing a process ontology for leadership development, it may be necessary to conduct a retrospective analysis to see how interlocking techniques have worked (Raelin, 2017). Consistently unfolding provides a place from which a variety of various paths can be taken, despite the fact that there is no consensus. To better understand leadership, it may be necessary to re-examine some of the previously established components of leadership practice, with a particular focus on how the design of material aspects contributes to leadership.
In addition to the utilization of equipment and goods, materials are also critical to a company’s creative process, which is why they are so crucial in production. So it follows that people want to express themselves logically and uniquely even when their work is typically fluid, fragile, and filled with inconsistencies and fragmentation (as is often the case). When conducting study on leadership as a process rather than a phenomena, it is preferable to focus on cultural, historical and political components of the leadership relationship rather than focusing on leadership itself (Raelin, 2017).
A process-oriented approach would be characterized by a strong emphasis on power dynamics and human connections, but also applauding the evolution and ambiguity of control and reason. When it comes to leadership styles, which are often individualistic and commanding, process-oriented dynamics are unlikely to close the deal (Raelin, 2017). This Slowing down the pace of action would be necessary to study distinct behaviors and interactions amongst people in a continuous flow of leadership.
When examining leadership as a talent, it’s important to keep in mind the shared beliefs and co-constructions that may lead to future individual or collective action and decision-making from time to time. Doing so is, in fact, a good idea. It is possible, and in some cases required, for academics to conduct leadership research at numerous interrelated levels, as has been discussed previously. It is possible to do research on leadership in practice using qualitative methods such as narrative and conversational analysis, content analysis, critical events research, ethnographies and autoethnographies, and activity theory (Raelin, 2017). Because they are holistic and diverse, these techniques can more easily be triangulated and illuminated in terms of theoretical concepts. It is their preference to go into considerable detail in order to depict both the conversation and practice at the same time.
An in-depth investigation of social practices and relationships between people, objects, and organizations would be necessary for the practice of leadership as a practice in a culture where practice has replaced theory as the accepted standard. Real-world experiences and a specific historical, cultural, and geographic context must be taken into account when it comes to learning. It is possible to use “action modalities” or interventions, as they are known, in order to apply development techniques that meet people in their current situation as they work together to solve their own problems (Raelin, 2017). When employed in this way, they can help people develop and even produce new information while simultaneously enhancing their practice
Reference
Raelin J. (2017). Leadership-as-Practice: Theory and Application An Editor’s Reflection. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316261389_Leadership-as-Practice_Theory_and_Application_An_Editor’s_Reflection
Leave a Reply