M. Iszatt‐White, Brigid Carroll, Rita A. Gardiner, S. Kempster
{"title":"领导力特刊:我们需要真实的领导力吗?质疑新世界秩序中的真实性","authors":"M. Iszatt‐White, Brigid Carroll, Rita A. Gardiner, S. Kempster","doi":"10.1177/17427150211000153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Authentic Leadership (AL) has been claimed as the ‘root construct’ (Avolio and Gardner, 2005) for other forms of ‘aspirational’ leadership with underpinnings in positive psychology. It has also been explicitly positioned as a response to the ‘ethical corporate meltdown’ (May et al., 2003: 247) said to have resulted from previous forms of leadership. Yet it has struggled to live up to its acknowledged functionalist and instrumentalist aims. At the same time, AL has proved resistant to important philosophical challenges seeking to problematize the nature of the ‘true self’ and draw attention to the complexities of enacting authenticity in the daily practice of leadership. These ambitious claims and unaddressed issues are at the heart of this special issue’s enquiry as to whether AL is fit for purpose as a driver of leadership theory and practice in the current world order, and its call for more critical attention to be paid to the notion of authenticity in leadership. The contributions to this special issue blend traditional, empirical papers with invited ‘Leading Questions’ thought pieces to offer a fundamental interrogation of authenticity at the same time as achieving a balance of perspectives.","PeriodicalId":92094,"journal":{"name":"Leadership (London)","volume":"52 1","pages":"389 - 394"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leadership Special Issue: Do we need Authentic Leadership? Interrogating authenticity in a new world order\",\"authors\":\"M. Iszatt‐White, Brigid Carroll, Rita A. Gardiner, S. Kempster\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17427150211000153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Authentic Leadership (AL) has been claimed as the ‘root construct’ (Avolio and Gardner, 2005) for other forms of ‘aspirational’ leadership with underpinnings in positive psychology. It has also been explicitly positioned as a response to the ‘ethical corporate meltdown’ (May et al., 2003: 247) said to have resulted from previous forms of leadership. Yet it has struggled to live up to its acknowledged functionalist and instrumentalist aims. At the same time, AL has proved resistant to important philosophical challenges seeking to problematize the nature of the ‘true self’ and draw attention to the complexities of enacting authenticity in the daily practice of leadership. These ambitious claims and unaddressed issues are at the heart of this special issue’s enquiry as to whether AL is fit for purpose as a driver of leadership theory and practice in the current world order, and its call for more critical attention to be paid to the notion of authenticity in leadership. The contributions to this special issue blend traditional, empirical papers with invited ‘Leading Questions’ thought pieces to offer a fundamental interrogation of authenticity at the same time as achieving a balance of perspectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leadership (London)\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"389 - 394\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leadership (London)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150211000153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership (London)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150211000153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
摘要
在积极心理学的基础上,真实领导(AL)被认为是其他形式的“抱负”领导的“根结构”(Avolio and Gardner, 2005)。它也被明确定位为对“道德企业崩溃”(May et al., 2003: 247)的回应,据说这是由以前的领导形式造成的。然而,它一直在努力实现其公认的功能主义和工具主义目标。与此同时,人工智能已经被证明能够抵抗重要的哲学挑战,这些挑战试图将“真实自我”的本质问题化,并引起人们对在日常领导实践中制定真实性的复杂性的关注。这些雄心勃勃的主张和未解决的问题是本期特刊探讨的核心,即人工智能是否适合作为当前世界秩序中领导力理论和实践的驱动力,并呼吁对领导力真实性的概念给予更多的批判性关注。本期特刊的贡献融合了传统的实证论文和受邀的“主要问题”思想片段,在实现观点平衡的同时,提供了对真实性的基本质疑。
Leadership Special Issue: Do we need Authentic Leadership? Interrogating authenticity in a new world order
Authentic Leadership (AL) has been claimed as the ‘root construct’ (Avolio and Gardner, 2005) for other forms of ‘aspirational’ leadership with underpinnings in positive psychology. It has also been explicitly positioned as a response to the ‘ethical corporate meltdown’ (May et al., 2003: 247) said to have resulted from previous forms of leadership. Yet it has struggled to live up to its acknowledged functionalist and instrumentalist aims. At the same time, AL has proved resistant to important philosophical challenges seeking to problematize the nature of the ‘true self’ and draw attention to the complexities of enacting authenticity in the daily practice of leadership. These ambitious claims and unaddressed issues are at the heart of this special issue’s enquiry as to whether AL is fit for purpose as a driver of leadership theory and practice in the current world order, and its call for more critical attention to be paid to the notion of authenticity in leadership. The contributions to this special issue blend traditional, empirical papers with invited ‘Leading Questions’ thought pieces to offer a fundamental interrogation of authenticity at the same time as achieving a balance of perspectives.