The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Leadership, Change and Organizational Development

11

The Future of Leadership

David V. Day and John Antonakis

11.1 Introduction

The good news with regard to this (or any) chapter on the future of leadership is that there is one. There was a time when researchers called for a moratorium on new leadership theory and research (e.g. Miner, 1975), citing the uncertain future of the field. Then for a time there was a popular academic perspective that leadership did not really matter when it came to shaping organizational outcomes (Meindl & Ehrlich, 1987; Meindl et al., 1985; Pfeffer, 1977). That perspective was laid to rest by “realists” in the field (Day & Antonakis, 2012a) by means of empirical reinterpretation of the results used to support it (Lieberson & O’Connor, 1972; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1977). Specifically, Day & Lord (1988) showed that when proper methodological concerns were addressed (e.g. controlling for industry- and company-size effects; incorporating appropriate time lags), the impact of top-level leadership was considerable—explaining as much as 45% of the variance in measures of organizational performance. Despite some recent pessimistic sentiments about the “curiously unformed” state of leadership research and theory (Hackman & Wageman, 2007), others have argued that the field has continued to evolve and is potentially on the threshold of some significant breakthroughs (Day & Antonakis, 2012a).

Leadership scholars have been reenergized by new directions in the field, and research efforts have revitalized areas previously ...