Leader-in-context and historical leadership research

Abstract

Context remains an undervalued property in leadership studies (LS). After diagnosing some of the reasons for the dominance of leader centrism in LS, the article turns its attention to remedies. In doing so, it outlines a formula for what should be the prime lens in LS: the way in which leader and context interact, and how this is related to outcomes. Arguing that this leader-in-context is key to the understanding of leadership, the article suggests turning to history for modelling. As a discipline, history is well-suited to providing answers as to which part in specific outcomes are attributable to contextual factors, and which part belongs to the leader. The suggested method of leader-context attribution turns around comparative research and hermeneutics, supplemented by a dose of contrarianism. This allows for the determination of leitmotifs, two of which - context dependency and leadership as an organizational process that leverages collective force - are sketched in detail, through the use of case study material. Another fixture of the historical method that can be put to good use in investigating leader-context is kairos - the capacity to recognize, choose and capitalize on the opportune moment, and maintain momentum. The article concludes with a brief outlook on research desiderata; on how to take this new historical perspective in LS to the next level of scientific probity; and on the obstacles that stand in the way of this agenda.