Methodological rigor in leadership research enhances the reliability and credibility of scholarly findings, yet it may also constrain their practical relevance beyond academic audiences. Achieving a balance between rigorous methodological standards and theoretical richness with practical significance remains a critical challenge in leadership studies. This article examines the increasing publication demands of high-impact journals that prompt scholars to align their research designs with stringent methodological expectations, while not necessarily addressing persistent shortcomings in leadership research. The article offers a critical reflection on current publication practices in leadership studies and encourages continued scholarly discussion on this issue.
{"title":"Between Rigor and Pragmatism: The Dilemmas of Contemporary Leadership Studies","authors":"Joanna Samul","doi":"10.1002/jls.70025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70025","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Methodological rigor in leadership research enhances the reliability and credibility of scholarly findings, yet it may also constrain their practical relevance beyond academic audiences. Achieving a balance between rigorous methodological standards and theoretical richness with practical significance remains a critical challenge in leadership studies. This article examines the increasing publication demands of high-impact journals that prompt scholars to align their research designs with stringent methodological expectations, while not necessarily addressing persistent shortcomings in leadership research. The article offers a critical reflection on current publication practices in leadership studies and encourages continued scholarly discussion on this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145987003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The study examined demographic predictors of the established relationship between Charismatic/Transformational Leadership and a willingness in followers to engage in unethical pro-organizational behavior, finding that certain demographic characteristics in followers mediate this relationship, with implications for organizations to employ mitigation techniques. Six variables were analyzed in the study, including Participant Gender, Participant Age, Participant Job Tenure, Participant Income Level, Participant Job Enjoyment, & Strong Religious Belief. Two of these variables were found to be statistically significant predictors in the relationship between Charismatic/Transformational Leadership and Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior (UPB), namely: (1) Participant Job Tenure and (2) Participant Income Level. The implications of this study are substantial in the ethical leadership discussion and broad across industries. While the tenets of Charismatic/Transformational Leadership include a high measure of ethical conduct, certain demographic predictors are shown to propel followers toward a willingness to act unethically. The results demonstrate that where transformational leadership is practiced, organizations should acknowledge these predictors of UPB and prepare measures to proactively mitigate the risk.
{"title":"Predictors of Unethical Willingness in Followers of Transformational/Charismatic Leaders","authors":"Wayne L. McCoy, Hermanus J. van Niekerk","doi":"10.1002/jls.70022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70022","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The study examined demographic predictors of the established relationship between Charismatic/Transformational Leadership and a willingness in followers to engage in unethical pro-organizational behavior, finding that certain demographic characteristics in followers mediate this relationship, with implications for organizations to employ mitigation techniques. Six variables were analyzed in the study, including Participant Gender, Participant Age, Participant Job Tenure, Participant Income Level, Participant Job Enjoyment, & Strong Religious Belief. Two of these variables were found to be statistically significant predictors in the relationship between Charismatic/Transformational Leadership and Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior (UPB), namely: (1) Participant Job Tenure and (2) Participant Income Level. The implications of this study are substantial in the ethical leadership discussion and broad across industries. While the tenets of Charismatic/Transformational Leadership include a high measure of ethical conduct, certain demographic predictors are shown to propel followers toward a willingness to act unethically. The results demonstrate that where transformational leadership is practiced, organizations should acknowledge these predictors of UPB and prepare measures to proactively mitigate the risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145905185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ellen Weber, Kristof Coussement, Marion Büttgen, Paul Harrigan
Research on CEOs’ social media communication as a leadership instrument remains scarce. The current study addresses this gap by exploring the relationship between CEOs’ leadership-oriented language and user engagement (i.e., sharing behavior). Based on an automated text analysis of 24,719 posts from 172 CEOs of Global Fortune 500 companies on X, one of the largest social media platforms previously known as Twitter, this research examines how CEOs’ leadership-oriented language influences users’ sharing behavior. In particular, it focuses on transformational leadership (TFL), a crucial approach in social media contexts. Utilizing hierarchical linear modeling, the findings revealed that CEOs’ use of linguistic indicators reflecting TFL affects users’ sharing behavior in partially unexpected and contradictory ways. Specifically, using positive emotional language and exclusive words in social media posts can diminish users’ sharing behavior. Conversely, content-rich posts, replies that open a dialogic loop, and posts reflecting psychological closeness all positively influence users’ sharing behavior. These findings underscore the complex nature of leadership-oriented language and provide novel insights into its effectiveness on social media. The current study offers specific guidelines for how CEOs can effectively utilize TFL-oriented language to engage their audiences while minimizing the risk of unintended negative consequences.
{"title":"The Social Media Playbook for CEOs: How to Use Transformational Leadership-Oriented Language on Social Media Successfully","authors":"Ellen Weber, Kristof Coussement, Marion Büttgen, Paul Harrigan","doi":"10.1002/jls.70021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70021","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research on CEOs’ social media communication as a leadership instrument remains scarce. The current study addresses this gap by exploring the relationship between CEOs’ leadership-oriented language and user engagement (i.e., sharing behavior). Based on an automated text analysis of 24,719 posts from 172 CEOs of Global <i>Fortune</i> 500 companies on X, one of the largest social media platforms previously known as Twitter, this research examines how CEOs’ leadership-oriented language influences users’ sharing behavior. In particular, it focuses on transformational leadership (TFL), a crucial approach in social media contexts. Utilizing hierarchical linear modeling, the findings revealed that CEOs’ use of linguistic indicators reflecting TFL affects users’ sharing behavior in partially unexpected and contradictory ways. Specifically, using positive emotional language and exclusive words in social media posts can diminish users’ sharing behavior. Conversely, content-rich posts, replies that open a dialogic loop, and posts reflecting psychological closeness all positively influence users’ sharing behavior. These findings underscore the complex nature of leadership-oriented language and provide novel insights into its effectiveness on social media. The current study offers specific guidelines for how CEOs can effectively utilize TFL-oriented language to engage their audiences while minimizing the risk of unintended negative consequences.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145618917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Haskell, C. (2025). Leadership at the Threshold: Meaning, Ethics, and Adaptation in the Age of Generative AI. Journal of Leadership Studies, 19, e70012. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70012
After the publication of the aforementioned article, the following errors were discovered and subsequently corrected as outlined below.
The sentence “This issue of the Leadership & Organization Development Journal does not treat that shift as neutral.” was incorrect. It has been corrected to “The current symposium does not treat that shift as neutral.”
In “Signals of the Current Climate,” the following sentence was incorrect: “We live in a climate that prizes performance over reflection—where power performs expertise, and those who challenge epistemic overreach, from women scholars to high-profile critics like Gary Marcus, are told they're rude, too dark, or depressing, while complexity is waved away as an inconvenience.”.
It has been revised to remove the term “women”: “We live in a climate that prizes performance over reflection—where power performs expertise, and those who challenge epistemic overreach, from scholars to high-profile critics like Gary Marcus, are told they are rude, too dark, or depressing, while complexity is waved away as an inconvenience.”.
The em dash was replaced with parentheses in the following sentences:
Their contributions (frameworks, case studies, and provocations) reclaim leadership as an act of care, critique, and cultural memory.
It identifies the interpretive layers (human, institutional, and algorithmic) that leaders must navigate.
The “Acknowledgments” section was missing and has now been included:
哈斯克尔,C.(2025)。门槛上的领导力:生成式人工智能时代的意义、伦理和适应。《Journal of Leadership Studies》,19,e70012. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70012After在上述文章发表后,发现了以下错误,并随后进行了如下更正。“本期《领导与组织发展杂志》不认为这种转变是中立的”这句话是不正确的。它已被更正为“目前的研讨会不认为这种转变是中性的。”在《当前气候的信号》中,下面这句话是不正确的:“我们生活在一个重视表现而不是反思的环境中——权力表现出专业知识,而那些挑战认知过度的人,从女性学者到加里·马库斯(Gary Marcus)这样的知名评论家,都被告知他们粗鲁、太黑暗或令人沮丧,而复杂性则被视为一种不便而被抛弃。”书中删除了“女性”一词:“我们生活在一个重视表现而不是反思的环境中——权力代表专业知识,那些挑战认知过度的人,从学者到加里·马库斯(Gary Marcus)这样的知名评论家,都被认为粗鲁、太黑暗或令人沮丧,而复杂性则被视为一种不便而被抛弃。”他们的贡献(框架、案例研究和挑衅)将领导力重新定位为一种关怀、批判和文化记忆的行为。它确定了领导者必须驾驭的解释层(人、机构和算法)。“致谢”部分缺失,现在已包括:
{"title":"Correction to “Leadership at the Threshold: MEANING, ETHICS, AND ADAPTATION IN THE AGE OF GENERATIVE AI”","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/jls.70020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70020","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Haskell, C. (2025). Leadership at the Threshold: <i>Meaning, Ethics, and Adaptation in the Age of Generative AI</i>. <i>Journal of Leadership Studies</i>, 19, e70012. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70012</p><p>After the publication of the aforementioned article, the following errors were discovered and subsequently corrected as outlined below.</p><p>The sentence “This issue of the <i>Leadership & Organization Development Journal</i> does not treat that shift as neutral.” was incorrect. It has been corrected to “The current symposium does not treat that shift as neutral.”</p><p>In “Signals of the Current Climate,” the following sentence was incorrect: “We live in a climate that prizes performance over reflection—where power performs expertise, and those who challenge epistemic overreach, from women scholars to high-profile critics like Gary Marcus, are told they're rude, too dark, or depressing, while complexity is waved away as an inconvenience.”.</p><p>It has been revised to remove the term “women”: “We live in a climate that prizes performance over reflection—where power performs expertise, and those who challenge epistemic overreach, from scholars to high-profile critics like Gary Marcus, are told they are rude, too dark, or depressing, while complexity is waved away as an inconvenience.”.</p><p>The em dash was replaced with parentheses in the following sentences:</p><p>Their contributions (frameworks, case studies, and provocations) reclaim leadership as an act of care, critique, and cultural memory.</p><p>It identifies the interpretive layers (human, institutional, and algorithmic) that leaders must navigate.</p><p>The “Acknowledgments” section was missing and has now been included:</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jls.70020","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145101942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Regina Leite, Emília Fernandes, Cláudia Moura, Tânia Moreira
Spiritual leadership and happiness have garnered considerable attention among leaders and followers in contemporary organizations. Building upon Fry's theory of spiritual leadership (2003), this study seeks to examine the impact of spiritual leadership on individuals' happiness, with a particular focus on the mediating role of the sense of calling. A quantitative investigation was carried out via a questionnaire administered to 151 Portuguese nutritionists employed at a national pharmaceutical company. Structural equation modeling, facilitated by SPSS AMOS 22, was employed to test the hypotheses. The findings indicate that spiritual leadership exerts a positive influence and can effectively predict individuals' happiness. Furthermore, the study reveals that the sense of calling serves as a mediator in the relationship between spiritual leadership and individuals' happiness. This research presents a novel quantitative analysis of the pivotal role played by the sense of calling in the nexus between spiritual leadership and happiness, thereby contributing to the ongoing debate on the challenges posed by a new organizational paradigm that endeavors to fulfill individual aspirations for holistic well-being through spiritual leadership.
{"title":"The Role of Spiritual Leadership on Individual Happiness: The Mediation Effect of Sense of Calling","authors":"Regina Leite, Emília Fernandes, Cláudia Moura, Tânia Moreira","doi":"10.1002/jls.70019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70019","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Spiritual leadership and happiness have garnered considerable attention among leaders and followers in contemporary organizations. Building upon Fry's theory of spiritual leadership (2003), this study seeks to examine the impact of spiritual leadership on individuals' happiness, with a particular focus on the mediating role of the sense of calling. A quantitative investigation was carried out via a questionnaire administered to 151 Portuguese nutritionists employed at a national pharmaceutical company. Structural equation modeling, facilitated by SPSS AMOS 22, was employed to test the hypotheses. The findings indicate that spiritual leadership exerts a positive influence and can effectively predict individuals' happiness. Furthermore, the study reveals that the sense of calling serves as a mediator in the relationship between spiritual leadership and individuals' happiness. This research presents a novel quantitative analysis of the pivotal role played by the sense of calling in the nexus between spiritual leadership and happiness, thereby contributing to the ongoing debate on the challenges posed by a new organizational paradigm that endeavors to fulfill individual aspirations for holistic well-being through spiritual leadership.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145101943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniel M. Jenkins, Shannon Cleverley-Thompson, Dan Erikson, Anna Blankenbaker, Brooke Brown-Saracino
As generative AI (GenAI) tools rapidly evolve and become more accessible, their application in leadership education and research demands critical reflection and experimentation. The current practitioner-focused study presents two use cases exploring how GenAI tools—including Retrieval-augmented generation platforms like NotebookLM and large language models like ChatGPT and Claude—can support qualitative data analysis in leadership contexts. The first case analyzes open-ended responses from 237 participants about their “best” and “worst” bosses, while the second examines semi-structured interviews from a phenomenological study of leadership educators. These methods were piloted with graduate students through a three-way comparison methodology. Students conducted AI-assisted analysis, compared findings with expert human coding, and examined peer variations in analytical approaches. The comparative analysis reveals key differences across AI tools regarding transparency, analytic depth, usability, and ethical implications, highlighting both affordances and limitations, including variable output quality, learning curves, and the need for methodological rigor. Student outcomes demonstrate that AI tools can effectively support various phases of qualitative methodology while requiring human oversight for interpretive depth, bias detection, and validation of outputs. GenAI can be a helpful analytical partner in leadership research when integrated thoughtfully through pedagogical frameworks emphasizing human–AI collaboration rather than replacement, preparing emerging researchers to leverage technological capabilities while maintaining—and at times enhancing—the interpretive richness essential to qualitative inquiry in leadership studies.
{"title":"Prompting for Meaning: Exploring Generative AI Tools for Qualitative Data Analysis in Leadership Research","authors":"Daniel M. Jenkins, Shannon Cleverley-Thompson, Dan Erikson, Anna Blankenbaker, Brooke Brown-Saracino","doi":"10.1002/jls.70014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70014","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As generative AI (GenAI) tools rapidly evolve and become more accessible, their application in leadership education and research demands critical reflection and experimentation. The current practitioner-focused study presents two use cases exploring how GenAI tools—including Retrieval-augmented generation platforms like NotebookLM and large language models like ChatGPT and Claude—can support qualitative data analysis in leadership contexts. The first case analyzes open-ended responses from 237 participants about their “best” and “worst” bosses, while the second examines semi-structured interviews from a phenomenological study of leadership educators. These methods were piloted with graduate students through a three-way comparison methodology. Students conducted AI-assisted analysis, compared findings with expert human coding, and examined peer variations in analytical approaches. The comparative analysis reveals key differences across AI tools regarding transparency, analytic depth, usability, and ethical implications, highlighting both affordances and limitations, including variable output quality, learning curves, and the need for methodological rigor. Student outcomes demonstrate that AI tools can effectively support various phases of qualitative methodology while requiring human oversight for interpretive depth, bias detection, and validation of outputs. GenAI can be a helpful analytical partner in leadership research when integrated thoughtfully through pedagogical frameworks emphasizing human–AI collaboration rather than replacement, preparing emerging researchers to leverage technological capabilities while maintaining—and at times enhancing—the interpretive richness essential to qualitative inquiry in leadership studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144915205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stories form the foundation of human connection, shaping perception, engagement, and relationships across diverse contexts. Storytelling or narration, as a powerful leadership tool, shapes public perception and behavior, influencing measurable outcomes. The significance of strategic storytelling is evident in high-stakes U.S. presidential debates. For instance, the 2024 Harris-Trump debate, which attracted massive viewership, illustrates how these events captivate audiences and influence public sentiment and electoral outcomes. Data focuses the significant impact of narratives in these debates on performance metrics such as financial campaign contributions and voter turnout. This study introduces bond ambition, a model that integrates narrative-driven leadership with elements of charismatic and transformational leadership—adaptability, relationship building, and initiating positive organizational change. By synthesizing insights from narrative paradigm theory (NPT) with established leadership frameworks, the model offers a robust approach to building trust and enhancing engagement in political as well as educational and commercial settings. Through strategic storytelling and active relational maintenance, bond ambition equips leaders with a dynamic methodology to harness narrative influence effectively.
{"title":"From Words to Wins: Tracing Narrative Impact in Presidential Debates Over Three Decades","authors":"Monika Cooper, Millard McElwee","doi":"10.1002/jls.70015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70015","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Stories form the foundation of human connection, shaping perception, engagement, and relationships across diverse contexts. Storytelling or narration, as a powerful leadership tool, shapes public perception and behavior, influencing measurable outcomes. The significance of strategic storytelling is evident in high-stakes U.S. presidential debates. For instance, the 2024 Harris-Trump debate, which attracted massive viewership, illustrates how these events captivate audiences and influence public sentiment and electoral outcomes. Data focuses the significant impact of narratives in these debates on performance metrics such as financial campaign contributions and voter turnout. This study introduces bond ambition, a model that integrates narrative-driven leadership with elements of charismatic and transformational leadership—adaptability, relationship building, and initiating positive organizational change. By synthesizing insights from narrative paradigm theory (NPT) with established leadership frameworks, the model offers a robust approach to building trust and enhancing engagement in political as well as educational and commercial settings. Through strategic storytelling and active relational maintenance, bond ambition equips leaders with a dynamic methodology to harness narrative influence effectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144888382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>We are living at a threshold moment, not because machines are getting smarter but because we are letting them rewrite the rules of what counts as smart. In under a decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has moved from a niche curiosity to an executive mandate, infiltrating how we draft policy, teach students, monitor performance, and even translate meaning itself. It doesn't just finish our sentences; it finishes our thoughts.</p><p>The deeper shift underway is not just technological. It is epistemological. Leadership today is not just about who sets the direction. It is about who gets to define reality. As generative AI takes up roles once considered deeply human (the explainer, the guide, the sense maker) the very core of leadership is up for grabs. Not by other humans, but by the tools we built and failed to govern.</p><p>We invent protocols that simulate character, but the harder work is to show up ourselves with character. That work cannot be outsourced.</p><p>What is needed now is not just new tools, but wiser stewards, leaders who know how to hold meaning open when machines try to close it. The current symposium authors embody that ethic. Through inquiry, critique, and care, they practice <i>Interpretive Stewardship</i>. Their work is not just timely; it is necessary.</p><p>That stewardship takes many forms, from cautious integration to principled refusal. Refusal is not withdrawal; it is deliberate boundary-setting around what must remain human. Both require the same discipline: resisting unexamined momentum, holding space for meaning, and choosing with care.</p><p>This issue of the <i>Leadership & Organization Development Journal</i> does not treat that shift as neutral. It treats it as contested. The scholars and practitioners in the symposium are not just watching history unfold; they are agents of it. They intervene with clarity and courage, insisting that leadership must be more than momentum, more than polished prompts, more than confidence without coherence. Their contributions—frameworks, case studies, provocations—reclaim leadership as an act of care, critique, and cultural memory.</p><p>What becomes of leadership when generative systems can perform their most human functions? This issue does not flinch. It does not appease. It resists the easy optimism of techno-utopianism with something more grounded: <i>interpretive stewardship</i>. Leadership as discernment under pressure. Leadership as refusal to drift. Leadership that stays human—not out of nostalgia, but out of necessity.</p><p>The essays that follow do not just analyze the problem. They <i>intervene</i> in it. To support such an inquiry, the contributions are organized into two thematic clusters:</p><p>Together, these two essays ask us to reconsider what leadership education is even for. If the goal is no longer mastery of content but discernment of context, we need new scaffolds for teaching students to resist the seduction of syntactic certainty. These authors mode
{"title":"Leadership at the Threshold: Meaning, Ethics, and Adaptation in the Age of Generative AI","authors":"Christine Haskell","doi":"10.1002/jls.70012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70012","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We are living at a threshold moment, not because machines are getting smarter but because we are letting them rewrite the rules of what counts as smart. In under a decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has moved from a niche curiosity to an executive mandate, infiltrating how we draft policy, teach students, monitor performance, and even translate meaning itself. It doesn't just finish our sentences; it finishes our thoughts.</p><p>The deeper shift underway is not just technological. It is epistemological. Leadership today is not just about who sets the direction. It is about who gets to define reality. As generative AI takes up roles once considered deeply human (the explainer, the guide, the sense maker) the very core of leadership is up for grabs. Not by other humans, but by the tools we built and failed to govern.</p><p>We invent protocols that simulate character, but the harder work is to show up ourselves with character. That work cannot be outsourced.</p><p>What is needed now is not just new tools, but wiser stewards, leaders who know how to hold meaning open when machines try to close it. The current symposium authors embody that ethic. Through inquiry, critique, and care, they practice <i>Interpretive Stewardship</i>. Their work is not just timely; it is necessary.</p><p>That stewardship takes many forms, from cautious integration to principled refusal. Refusal is not withdrawal; it is deliberate boundary-setting around what must remain human. Both require the same discipline: resisting unexamined momentum, holding space for meaning, and choosing with care.</p><p>This issue of the <i>Leadership & Organization Development Journal</i> does not treat that shift as neutral. It treats it as contested. The scholars and practitioners in the symposium are not just watching history unfold; they are agents of it. They intervene with clarity and courage, insisting that leadership must be more than momentum, more than polished prompts, more than confidence without coherence. Their contributions—frameworks, case studies, provocations—reclaim leadership as an act of care, critique, and cultural memory.</p><p>What becomes of leadership when generative systems can perform their most human functions? This issue does not flinch. It does not appease. It resists the easy optimism of techno-utopianism with something more grounded: <i>interpretive stewardship</i>. Leadership as discernment under pressure. Leadership as refusal to drift. Leadership that stays human—not out of nostalgia, but out of necessity.</p><p>The essays that follow do not just analyze the problem. They <i>intervene</i> in it. To support such an inquiry, the contributions are organized into two thematic clusters:</p><p>Together, these two essays ask us to reconsider what leadership education is even for. If the goal is no longer mastery of content but discernment of context, we need new scaffolds for teaching students to resist the seduction of syntactic certainty. These authors mode","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jls.70012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144881508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Artificial intelligence (AI) is spreading rapidly in organizational settings, yet limited research examines how culture shapes leaders' readiness to adopt these technologies. The current study addresses that gap by exploring cross-cultural differences in AI acceptance among 434 leaders from Western and Eastern regions, guided by the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). A cross-sectional, quantitative design, supplemented by short, open-ended responses, assessed five UTAUT constructs: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention. Results showed that Western leaders report significantly higher average effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention than Eastern leaders, although both groups find AI beneficial. Multiple regression analyses reveal that Western leaders' intention to adopt AI is primarily related to ease of use, whereas Eastern leaders intention is related to organizational support and peer encouragement. Open-ended responses demonstrate that leaders across regions share ethical and privacy concerns, but Western participants emphasize security and training, while Eastern leaders highlight transparency and real-time insights. These results imply that AI implementation strategies require cultural adaptation, such as prioritizing the quality of user interfaces and training for Western leaders and ensuring organizational endorsements for Eastern contexts. By identifying how leaders evaluate and integrate AI, the current research delivers practical insights for multinational organizations and deepens theoretical dialogues on leadership and technology acceptance. These findings also address current leadership journal calls by spotlighting AI bias, inclusivity, and ethical governance in distinct regional settings.
{"title":"Cross-Cultural Differences in AI Acceptance among Leaders: A UTAUT-Based Study of Western and Eastern Perspectives","authors":"Eric Strandt, Jennifer Murnane-Rainey","doi":"10.1002/jls.70017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70017","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is spreading rapidly in organizational settings, yet limited research examines how culture shapes leaders' readiness to adopt these technologies. The current study addresses that gap by exploring cross-cultural differences in AI acceptance among 434 leaders from Western and Eastern regions, guided by the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). A cross-sectional, quantitative design, supplemented by short, open-ended responses, assessed five UTAUT constructs: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention. Results showed that Western leaders report significantly higher average effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention than Eastern leaders, although both groups find AI beneficial. Multiple regression analyses reveal that Western leaders' intention to adopt AI is primarily related to ease of use, whereas Eastern leaders intention is related to organizational support and peer encouragement. Open-ended responses demonstrate that leaders across regions share ethical and privacy concerns, but Western participants emphasize security and training, while Eastern leaders highlight transparency and real-time insights. These results imply that AI implementation strategies require cultural adaptation, such as prioritizing the quality of user interfaces and training for Western leaders and ensuring organizational endorsements for Eastern contexts. By identifying how leaders evaluate and integrate AI, the current research delivers practical insights for multinational organizations and deepens theoretical dialogues on leadership and technology acceptance. These findings also address current leadership journal calls by spotlighting AI bias, inclusivity, and ethical governance in distinct regional settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144869789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Persistent complex environmental and socioeconomic challenges, political turbulence, and accelerating technological innovation create an intricate and dynamic environment. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential solutions for navigating complexity. However, its deployment introduces its own multifaceted challenges—technological, ethical, and regulatory—all embedded within environmental complexity. Conceptualizing AI implementation as a “nested complexity” recognizes AI as a dynamic phenomenon contributing to the complexity within which organizations operate, thus encouraging organizational leaders to be cognizant of the intricacies, constraints, and evolving nature of AI, and to utilize an adaptive and iterative approach to its implementation.
{"title":"“Nested Complexity” Framework for Human-Centered AI-Augmented Leadership","authors":"Elizabeth Goryunova, Robert M. Yawson","doi":"10.1002/jls.70016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70016","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Persistent complex environmental and socioeconomic challenges, political turbulence, and accelerating technological innovation create an intricate and dynamic environment. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential solutions for navigating complexity. However, its deployment introduces its own multifaceted challenges—technological, ethical, and regulatory—all embedded within environmental complexity. Conceptualizing AI implementation as a “nested complexity” recognizes AI as a dynamic phenomenon contributing to the complexity within which organizations operate, thus encouraging organizational leaders to be cognizant of the intricacies, constraints, and evolving nature of AI, and to utilize an adaptive and iterative approach to its implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":45503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership Studies","volume":"19 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144861909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}