Historical Evolution of Leadership in Relation to Leader-Follower Exchange and Woman Leadership

Abstract

In this study, the leader-follower exchange was investigated within the context of leader-follower exchange, and the women’s role in the process was discussed. First, the statue of leader and follower roles in leadership theories was examined. Then, leadership was looked through the dimension attributed to it, and the follower role in gaining acceptance as a leader was discussed. Herein, Virginia Woolf (1929)’s quote of ‘Women have served all these centuries as looking glasses possessing the magic and delicious power of reflecting the figure of man at twice its natural size’ has been the source of inspiration. Within this framework, woman leadership was also investigated concerning the roles of leader and followers. Woman leadership is defined as ‘women’s realization of themselves, and being able to use their will in their preferences (Jironet, 2011, s. 118). Woman leadership is among the post-modern leadership theories. The present study offers significant implications on women’s woman leadership performances regarding the current theories in leadership literature. (i) The related literature shows that primary leadership theories discriminate women. (ii) Further, it is difficult to mention about woman leadership till the last quarter of the 20th century. (iii) However, it can be said that woman leadership’s importance and the visibility in practice have increased by the post-modern theories in leadership literature. Majority of the post-modern theories may be interpreted as advocates of woman leadership. (iiii) Therefore, it can be inferred that woman leadership will have an upward trend in the future of leadership literature.

Keywords

• Leadership,Leader,Follower,Woman Leadership

Lider Takipçi İlişkisi Bağlamında Liderliğin Tarihsel Evrimi ve Kadın Liderliği

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, lider takipçi ilişkisi liderliğin tarihsel evrimi içerisinde araştırılmakta ve kadınların bu süreçteki rolü tartışılmaktadır. Tarama modelinde tasarlanan çalışmada, belge tarama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Liderlik yazını ve kadın çalışmaları kadın liderliği hedefinde yoğun bir tarama ile harmanlanmıştır. Öncelikle lider ve takipçi rollerinin liderlik kuramlarındaki yeri incelenmiştir. Sonrasında liderlik atfedilen yönü ile ele alınmış, lider olarak kabul görmede takipçi rolü tartışılmıştır. Burada Woolf (1929)’un “bütün bu yüzyıllar boyunca kadınlar, erkeği olduğundan iki kat büyük gösteren bir ayna görevi gördüler, büyülü bir aynaydı bu ve müthiş bir yansıtma gücü vardı” ifadesi esin kaynağı olmuştur. Kadınların kadın liderliği performanslarını liderlik yazınında var olan kuramlar üzerinden yeniden ele alan bu çalışma önemli bulgular sunmaktadır. (i) İlk liderlik kuramları kadınları dışlamaktadır. (ii) Yirminci yüzyılın son çeyreğine kadar kadın liderliğinden söz etmek çok zordur. (iii) Liderlik yazınında var olan postmodern kuramlarla kadın liderliğinin öneminin ve uygulamalardaki görünürlüğünün arttığı söylenebilir. (iiii) Dolayısıyla liderlik yazınının geleceğinde kadın liderliğinin gittikçe yükselen bir trende sahip olacağı söylenebilir.

Keywords

• Liderlik,Lider,Takipçi,Kadın Liderliği

References

1. Adair, C. (2005). Max Weber’s charisma. Journal of Classical Sociology, 5(2), 189–204.
2. Avoli, B. J. & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.
3. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
4. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8 (1), 9–32.
5. Boring, E. G. (1950). Great men and scientific progress. American Philosophical Society, 94(4), 339-351.
6. Brown, C. B. (2011). Barack Obama as the great man: Communicative constructions of racial transcendence in white-male elite discourses. Communication Monographs, 78(4) 535-556.
7. Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadersip. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221-258.
8. Bryman, A. E. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.

9. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership, New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
10. Bülbül, M. Ş. & Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (2010). Chaos and the analogy of education. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research, 5(4), 280-282.
11. Carlyle, T. (1840). On heroes, hero worship and the heroic in history. London, Chapman and Hall Cawton, D. L. (1996). Leadership: The great man theory revisited. Business Horizons, 39(3), 1-4
12. Chief Executive Women. (2009). The business case for women as leaders One woman is not enough. Erişim adresi: http://www.cew.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/The-Business-Case-forWomen-as-Leaders.pdf
13. Conner, C. D. (2012). Halkın bilim tarihi. Ankara: Tübitak Popüler Bilim Kitaplığı.
14. Curtin, L. (2011). Quantum leadership: succeeding in ınteresting times. Elsevier Nurse Leader, 9(1), 35-38.
15. Çelikten, M. (2004). Okul müdürü koltuğundaki kadınlar: Kayseri ili örneği. E. Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2(17), 91-118.
16. Davidson, R. C. (1972). Methods in nonlinear plasma theory. New York and London: Academic Press.
17. Desvaux, G., & Deviliard, S. (2008). Women matter 2: Female leadership, a competitive edge for the future. France: McKinsey & Company.
18. Dow, T. E. (1978). An analysis of weber’s work on charisma. The British Journal of Sociology, 29(1), 83-93.
19. Drucker, P. F. (2011). Büyük değişimler çağında yönetim (Çev. Z. Dicleli). İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları.
20. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C ve Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 569–591.
21. Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (1999). Kuantum liderlik paradigması ile eğitim liderliğinin açımlanması. Cumhuriyet Döneminde Eğitim. Talim ve Terbiye Dairesi Ankara: M.E.B. Yayınları.
22. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., Açıkalın, Ş. N. & Bülbül, M. Ş. (2013). A multi-dimensional approach to leadership in chaotic environments. Banerjee, S. (Ed.) Chaos and complexity theory for management: Nonlinear Dynamics, in (89-104), Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
23. Erçetin, Ş. Ş. & Kamacı, M. C. (2008). Quantum leadership paradigm. World Applied Sciences Journal, 3(6), 865-868.
24. Ernst & Young. (2011). Women in leadership: How smart are you? Retrieved from: http://www. ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/Women_in_leadership._How_smart_are_you/$FILE/Women_ in_leadership_Nov2010.pdf
25. Ertürk, A. (2012). Kaos kuramı: yönetim ve eğitimdeki yansımaları. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 20(3), 849-868.
26. Ferree, M. M. (2006). Angela Merkel: What does it mean to run as a woman? German Politics & Society 24(1), (78), SPECIAL ISSUE, 93-107.
27. Fine, C. (2011). Toplumsal cinsiyet yanılsaması: Zihnimizi toplum ve nörocinsiyetçilik nasıl fark yaratıyor? (Çev. Tanrıyar, Kıvanç.). İstanbul: Sel Yayıncılık.
28. Furtner, M. R., Baldegger, U. & Rauthmann, J. F. (2013) Leading yourself and leading others: Linking self-leadership to transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22:4, 436-449.
29. Gallagher, P. T. (2014). Introduction to plasma physics (PY5012). Retrieved from: http://www.tcd. ie/Physics/people/Peter.Gallagher/lectures/PlasmaPhysics/Lecture3_single_particle.pdf
30. Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R. & Walumba, F. O. (2005). Can you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 343–372.
31. 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, 1120–1145.
32. Grant, J. (1988). Women as managers: What they can offer to organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 16(3), 56-63.
33. Hartog, D. N. D., Koopman, P. L. & Muijen, J. J.V. (1995). Charismatic leadership; a state of the art. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 2(4), 35-49.
34. Özdemir, M., Kütküt, B. (2015). Sosyal adalet liderliği ölçeği’nin (salö) geliştirilmesi: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 16(3), 201-218.
35. Howard, J. (2002). Introduction to plasma physics c17 lecture notes. Plasma Research Laboratory Research School of Pysical Sciences and Engineering. Retrieved from: https://www.fer.unizg. hr/_download/repository/Howard-plasma_physics-chap01%5B1%5D.pdf
36. İbişoğlu, H., Özmen, İ. & Taş, S. (2009). Liderlik davranışı ve toplumsal norm ilişkisi: Ampirik bir çalışma, SDÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(2), 1-23.
37. James, W. (1880). Great men, great thoughts and their environment. Atlantic Monthly, 46, 441-459.
38. Jironet, K. (2011). Female leadership : management, Jungian psychology, spirituality, and the global journey through purgatory. New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
39. Jogulu, U. D., Wood, G. J. (2006) The role of leadership theory in raising the profile of women in management, Equal Opportunities International, 25(4), 236 – 250.
40. Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1967). The social Psychology of organisation. Third Printing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
41. Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 1-26.
42. Lister, R. (2009). A Nordic nirvana? gender, citizenship, and social justice in the nordic welfare states. Retrieved from: http://sp.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/2/242.full.pdf+html
43. Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 11, 585-600.
44. Manz, C. C., Sims, H. P. (1991). Superleadership: Beyond the myth of heroic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19, 18–35.
45. Manz, C. C. & Sims, H. P. (1980).Self-management as a substitute for leadership: a social learning theory perspective. Academy ot Management Review, 5(3), 361-367.
46. Markham, S. E. & Markham, İ. S. (1995). Self managementand self leadershipreexamined: A levels of analysisperspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6(3), 343-359.
47. Neck, C. P.,Nouri, H. & Godwin, J. L. (2003). How self-leadership affects the goal-setting process. Human Resource Management Review, 13, 691–707.
48. Nishikawa, K. & Wakatani, M. (2000). Plasma physics: basic theory with fusion applications. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
49. Northouse, P. G. (2013), Leadership: Theory and Practice, 6xt Edition, London: Sage Publications Ltd. Ray, C. (2005). Individualisation and the third age. Centre for Rural Economy Discussion Paper Series. No:3.
50. Shamir, B. ve Eilam, G. (2005). What’s your story?: A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly. 16, 395–417.
51. Şişman, M. (1996). Postmodernizim tartışmaları ve örgüt kuramındaki yansımaları. Eğitim Yönetimi, 2(3), 451-464.
52. Tan, M. (1996). Eğitim yönetiminde kadın azınlık, TODAİE Dergisi, 29(4), 33-42.
53. UN, (2011). Kadınların güçlenmesi prensipleri: Eşitlik iş demektir. Birleşmiş Milletler Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği ve Kadının Güçlenmesi Birimi ve Birleşmiş Milletler Küresel İlkeler Sözleşmesi Ortaklık İnsiyatifi.
54. Unan, N. (1959). Atatürk’ün söylev ve demeçleri, Cilt. II, Ankara: Türk İnkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü Yayınları.
55. Unterhalter, E. (2007). Gender,schooling and global social justice. NY: Routledge. Visser, M. (2011). The female leadership paradox: power, performance and promotion. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan-Higher-Education.
56. Wagman-Geller, M. (2015). Behind every great man: The forgotten women behind the world’s famous and infamous. Naperville:Sourcebooks.
57. Williams, S. (1997). Personality and self-leadership. Human Resource Management Review, 7(2), 139-155.
58. Woolf, V. (1929). Kendine ait bir oda (Çev. İlknur Özdemir). İstanbul: Kırmızı Kedi Yayınevi.
59. Wright, B. E., Moynihan, D. P. & Pandey, S. K. (2012). Pulling the levers: transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence, Public Administration Review, 72(2), 206–215.
60. Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformatıonal and charismatic leadership theories, Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
61. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations. Seventh Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education