Leadership vs Management: Roles, Theories, and Organizational Impact Assignment Sample

Leadership and Management in Marketing: Roles, Theories, and Performance Impact

Are you looking for Expert Assignment Writers in the UK? Native Assignment Help boasts a team of highly qualified writers who are ready to assist you with your academic needs. With our commitment to excellence, you can rest assured that your assignments are in good hands.

Introduction - Management Strategies for Startups: Building Effective Teams Through Leadership

Not every start-up is labelled “fast-growth,” but the ones that often remain in the high-risk, high-reward mode for an extended period of time, and not every established organisation can be deemed to be highly lucrative, are the exception. There is a lot to gain and much more to lose if the situation is handled incorrectly. Businesses often get off to a rapid start and don’t slow down, putting financial strain on the company and draining its owner’s emotional reserves. In order to preserve an edge, they must have the necessary building blocks in place in order to go forward at full speed with the highest possible possibility of success. As a result, leadership is a vital component of the firm. Founders, CEOs, and other top executives are responsible for establishing the required structure, managing finances, and encouraging innovation (Meyer, Li and Schotter, 2020). Everyone, particularly the marketing department, feels the pressure of running a high-growth start-up or running an existing corporate organisation. The marketing department is responsible for acquiring new consumers swiftly and efficiently while also creating brand authority, voice, and impressions.

As I have learned, it is the responsibility of leaders and managers to organise their teams in such a way that the task is distributed correctly. Start-ups have a reputation for needing workers to wear numerous hats—and yours most likely can and do so already—but if you put too much pressure on one or a few individuals, you run the danger of losing them altogether (Sweeney, Clarke and Higgs, 2019). A fast-growing firm may soon become difficult to manage as the number of employees grows and the organisation is forced to deal with an inflow of new customers and implement new procedures.

As a result, I can imply that effective leadership is critical in establishing and sustaining structure so that the work burden does not fall on a small number of employees. People must devise a strategy for dealing with increased complexity that takes into account and accommodates human limitations. This structure becomes even more critical in the marketing environment (Lin et al., 2020). As a broad team of individuals, including those in paid advertising, organic advertising, content and editorial, social media, internal communications, and public relations, there are already many duties that are shared between one another. Structure ensures that work is distributed to the appropriate individuals. Therefore, the following report emphasizes the leadership theories along with emphasizes the differences between managerial and leadership tasks and function in marketing contexts. Also, the report entails discussion on how the application of effective leadership and management principles can enhance the performance of people and teams in the work contexts.

Critically understand the differences between managerial and leadership tasks and function in marketing contexts

In order to provide high-quality services, management and leadership are essential. Despite the fact I think that they are similar in some ways, the perspectives, abilities, and behaviours they entail may be very different in various marketing context. In order to be a successful manager and a successful leader, one must possess both talents. Visionary leaders will convey their goals and devise ways for achieving them to others. They have the ability to inspire others and bargain for the resources and assistance they need to succeed while being involved in a marketing campaign. Managers are responsible for ensuring that all of the available resources are used in the most efficient manner possible to ensure the campaign reach its success (Kalaignanam et al., 2021). As a manager in low- and middle-income nations, one needs also be a leader in order to get the best outcomes. There are managers who do not lead, and leaders who do not have management roles, thus it would be a mistake to assume that all managers are also leaders.

There will always be disagreement about what constitutes leadership and what constitutes management. According to some researchers, management and leadership are not interchangeable (Koeslag-Kreunen et al., 2018). In addition, there is debate on the extent to which the two datasets overlap (Yukl, 1989). Others perceive them as diametrically opposed and believe that a good manager cannot be a good leader and vice versa (Ju et al., 2019). Leaders are sometimes characterized as dreamers. They pave the road for the company's future success. They regularly assess the present state of the company, the future they hope to see, and the means by which they can get there with the help of their team. Managers, on the other hand, work toward their organizations' objectives via the use of procedures like budgeting, organizational structure, and personnel selection. Managers can't see beyond the strategies, plans, and organization of tasks they put in place to achieve the goals established by leaders. But in the context of corporate settings, both positions are critical and need collaborative efforts. Manager often refers to a particular position inside an organization, whereas the phrase "leader" is more generic. A person’s behavior will determine their level of leadership. Inspiring people to give their all is a hallmark of leadership. Neither your job nor your title matters. Managers, on the other hand, have certain duties that go along with their position. (Vieira, Perin and Sampaio, 2018). Leaders, on the other hand, test the present position and promote new functions, so they are searching for long-term objectives while managers keep the concerned campaign running smoothly (Ju et al., 2019). Organizations must have both good management and effective leadership in order to succeed in today’s fast-paced competitive market (Vieira, Perin and Sampaio, 2018).

Both management and leadership have their place in an organisation, but they aren’t the same thing (Dwyer, 2019). Influence, collaboration, and the pursuit of a single objective are all aspects of both leadership and management (Hidayat and Wulandari, 2020). Leadership and management are two distinct areas, though (Rebel, 2020). While management is a one-way authority connection, Katz claims leadership is a multi-way influence interaction (Kouzes and Posner, 2019). Abraham Zaleznik published the first scientific essay on the subject of leadership vs. management in 1977 (Hsiao et al., 2011. Managers and leaders, according to Hsiao et al. (2011), have various contributions to make if the company is to achieve its objectives. There are two types of leaders: those who encourage change and those who promote stability and those who promote stability and those who promote stability and those who seek to comprehend people’s views to acquire their loyalty.

This means that various kinds of individuals are needed for management and leadership (Kashive, Khanna and Bharthi, 2020). According to Watson, managers are responsible for the structure and system, while leaders are responsible for influencing, engaging with people, and working together to reach a shared vision (Graham and Cascio, 2018). Leadership and management, however, are regarded to be two distinct vocations (Lievens and Slaughter, 2016). While management is a one-way authority connection, Katz claims leadership is a two-way influence relation (Kashyap and Verma, 2018).

Meyer, Li and Schotter, (2020), published the first scientific and ground-breaking paper on the distinction between leaders and managers. The researchers said that in order to achieve its objectives, the company need both successful managers and leaders, but he thinks that managers and leaders have distinct contributions (Lin et al., 2020). Managers, on the other hand, strive for consistency, assert their authority, and see projects through to completion while leaders strive for innovation and fresh methods. In order to be effective, management and leadership need a diverse group of individuals. Structure and system are taken care of by managers, while leadership focuses on communication, inspiration, and achieving common objectives (Sweeney, Clarke and Higgs, 2019). As a final point, Watson said that the 7S approach to leadership is more successful than the 5S approach to management, which includes strategy, structure, systems, shared values and skills, and style. The philosophy of goal-setting is a strategy for motivating workers that relies on the establishment of clear, attainable, and verifiable objectives. Both employee performance and engagement may benefit from bringing the goal-setting approach into the workplace. There are five elements of goal formulation that may increase our chances of achievement, according to Locke and Latham

Understand how the application of effective leadership and management principles can enhance the performance of people and teams in the work contexts

In many cases, managers lead and leaders manage, but they are not the same thing. To some extent, leadership actions and management duties are interdependent. But there are managers who do not lead and leaders who do not manage. According to some experts, a great leader is one who inspires, innovates, is adaptable, is fearless, and has a b sense of self-worth. When it comes to managing people, the manager has the ability to be methodical and deliberative while still being authoritative, consultative, analytical, and steadying. In this regard, implication of different leadership theories also comes into play, an analysis of such theories are as follows:

The Great Man theory

The great man hypothesis of leadership holds that good leaders are born, not created. A prominent notion in the 19th century, this theory claims that leadership is an innate talent (Mango, 2018). This sort of leader frequently has the inherent traits of intellect, boldness, confidence, intuition and charisma, among others.

The trait theory

According to the notion of leadership traits, successful leaders have certain inherent characteristics. However, a person's ability to lead does not automatically follow if they possess a certain set of characteristics (Mango, 2018). While some leaders are gifted communicators and listeners, this is not true for everyone.

The behavioural theory

For example, a person's environment, not his or her innate qualities, shapes a person into a leader under the behavioural theory of leadership (Hunt and Fedynich, 2019). Conditioning is a crucial idea in behavioural theory. Environmental reactions to a person's conduct are said to be the cause of their conditioning, according to this theory.

The transactional theory

To study leadership as a reward and punishment system, the transactional theory of leadership is used. It believes that successful leadership must be results-oriented and hierarchical in structure (Hunt and Fedynich, 2019). A transactional leader values order and structure above innovation. The transactional model of executive leadership centers on the idea of a transaction between the leader and the followers. The leader praises those who carry out their duties to the required standard and reprimands those who fall short. This model of leadership and subordination rests on the premise that followers are not intrinsically motivated to do their work and so need direction, guidance, and oversight from above. Workers will do what the transactional leader wants them to do if the leader provides something they value, like pay, the theory posits.

The transformational theory

The “the relationship theory,” another name for the transformational leadership theory, looks at how well a leader can lead when he or she has a good connection with the people on their team. Enthusiasm and passion are powerful motivators in the lives of transformational leaders. As role models for their teams, they hold themselves to the same high standards as they do for their subordinates and employees alike.

As per the context of these theories it is apparent that the leader must be dedicated to ensuring that his followers are moving in the correct path and has a clear sense of vision and objectives. In this regard, the leader must have sufficient efficiency and inherent traits such as intellect, boldness, confidence, intuition and charisma, among others accordingly with the context of Great man theory, while the Trait theory implies the availability of effective communication skills, good listing skills and problem-solving skills etc.

Nevertheless, even if management and leadership have comparable responsibilities, it is critical to distinguish between the two. Leaders and managers have a key responsibility to govern and influence their subordinates. When it comes to achieving objectives, managers and leaders are quite different. Leaders inspire and motivate their followers by their vision and their ability to communicate that vision. Leadership and management have certain similarities, but they are not the same thing (Ju et al., 2019).

In both leadership and management, there is an emphasis on influencing others, working together, and achieving shared objectives (Koeslag-Kreunen et al., 2018). Leadership and management, however, are regarded to be two distinct vocations (Vieira, Perin and Sampaio, 2018). When it comes to management and leadership, Katz claims that they are two different kinds of relationships (Ju et al., 2019). After a decade of research, Abraham Zaleznik published his seminal essay on leadership and management in 1977. A successful company requires both competent managers and effective leaders, but Vieira, Perin and Sampaio (2018) contends that managers and leaders make distinct contributions to the organization’s success.

The 7S approach (Strategy, Structure, System, Common Values, Skills and Style) was also cited by Watson as being more beneficial for leaders than managers. Bryman went on to say in 1985 that strategic motivation is an important part of leadership. “Leaders do the right things; managers do the right things,” say Kashive, Khanna and Bharthi (2020) when describing the contrasts between managers and leaders.

Bennis also said in 1989 that "we will need a new generation of leaders to survive in the twenty-first century." According to Harvard Business School professor John Kotter in 1987 (as cited in Martin and Groen-in-t-Woud, 2011), leadership goes above and beyond ordinary duties to deal with change, whereas management is a regular formal responsibility to cope with routine complexity. In Kotter's view, leadership is creating an organization-wide vision, bringing employees into alignment behind that vision, and inspiring them to take action by meeting their basic needs (Kouzes and Posner, 2019). Kotter argues that "leadership is not management in the sense that most people imagine." The position of a leader is neither mystical or unreal. This has nothing to do with charm or any other over-the-top personality traits. There isn't an exclusive club for this. Leadership is neither a replacement for management nor is it more important than management; rather, the two are distinct and mutually beneficial roles that should be exercised together. To be successful in today's rapidly evolving business environment, you need both (Kashive, Khanna and Bharthi, 2020).

Management, on the other hand, is the practice of coordinating the formal activities of an organization (Meyer, Li and Schotter, 2020). Managing and leading are two sides of the same coin. Managers may be leaders, and leaders can be managers, but there are also managers who don't lead. Experts agree that the qualities that make for a successful leader include the ability to motivate others, creativity, flexibility, courage, and confidence. Managers, however, are not just authoritative, consultative, analytical, and steadying, but also have the capacity to think clearly and rationally and consult with others (Sweeney, Clarke and Higgs, 2019). Management, as defined by Lin et al. (2020), is the process through which leaders address and ultimately achieve their organization's short- and long-term objectives (Kalaignanam et al., 2021). According to Ju et al. (2019), leadership is making sure everyone around you are headed in the right way.

Understand leadership, the dynamics of team leadership and their impact on employer branding

The ability to consistently influence a group of people is at the heart of leadership, and it includes a wide range of characteristics. With leadership, a team's enthusiasm and productivity are constantly monitored, whereas management is more concerned with the general control and supervision of a team's work operations. In order to manage a group of people, multiple leadership styles, attributes, and beliefs are needed. Based on theories of management and the attributes of competent managers, supervisors, or other positional leaders, leadership principles are used as a guide. In addition, notions of conventional management styles and behaviours are driven by leadership conceptions, which generally include attributes like as personal character, ambition, motivation, charisma, and decision-making ability. A collection of people is not yet a team unless they have a shared goal and work together to achieve it. Furthermore, they must have faith that working together will provide better results than doing it alone. There are six criteria which needs to be considered which are given in the figure bwlow:

The dynamics of a team may be defined as the influence of individual members' various responsibilities and behaviours on the organization as a whole. As a result, the dynamics of a team are composed of the collective unconsciousness of its members, which dictates the course of the group's behaviour and output. Members of a team with good group dynamics are more likely to trust each other. As a group, they can make choices together and are held responsible for the results. When a group's dynamics are b, it's more likely to experience better results and show signs of mutual understanding and self-correction. Poor group dynamics, on the other hand, might jeopardise good decision making and job outputs.

When it comes to things like creativity, efficiency, and effectiveness, it's important to consider the dynamics of the group. A better bottom line may be achieved by addressing group dynamics in organisations since group work is essential to the success of the company. Originally coined by Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist, the phrase “group dynamics” is sometimes used interchangeably with the word “team dynamics,” albeit there are notable differences. Great leaders set themselves apart from good ones by having a firm grasp on the nuances of team dynamics and being able to implement strategies that foster a supportive work environment. Trust is a critical component of a healthy group dynamic (more on that later). They hold each other responsible and work together toward a common goal, knowing that they can depend just on support of their teammates. Additionally, healthy team dynamics includes self-correcting behaviour, constructive criticism, and mutual respect. For the same reasons that a b sense of community helps keep people together, a deep sense of teamwork keeps groups working together more efficiently.

Positive team dynamics are influenced by several factors.

Effective Leadership

A successful team is more likely to be led by an effective leader. Remember that good leadership does not need a domineering or controlling boss - rather, great leadership involves understanding your people, trusting them to execute their task properly, and winning their trust. Micro-management, on the other hand, is unproductive and should be avoided at all costs. In the late 1970s, political scientist James MacGregor Burns popularized the idea of transformative leadership. According to Burns, there are two kinds of leadership: transactional and transformational. Transformational leadership involves a leader influencing other by offering something in return, whereas transformational leadership involves a leader connecting with people in such a way as to raise the level of motivation and morality (Siangchokyoo, Klinger and Campion, 2020). Leaders that have the ability to motivate and inspire others have a responsibility to serve the greater good. For example, creating a community centre or increase in air quality might be seen as a socially beneficial endeavour, but it could also be seen as a more personal one.

Communication that is Open and Frequent

Open and regular communication is recommended in high-performing teams. High-performing teams should not only have well-defined procedures and channels of communication, but they must also have the confidence to bring up problems, difficulties, and constructive criticism within the group. A team's opportunity to accomplish high-level objectives is enhanced when members have a sense of belonging and trust that their concerns will be acknowledged. The concept of “communication accommodation” refers to the process through which individuals modify their communication style in response to the needs of others. Divergence and convergence are two methods in which these stylistic modifications are accomplished (Zhang and Giles, 2018). Divergence is a strategy for drawing attention to the different characteristics of the group to which one belongs. Distinction is typically utilized by those who feel bly about their ethnic or racial identity. People who lack authority utilize convergence more frequently to gain social acceptance and concentrate on mimicking the communication patterns of those they are conversing with.

Relationships between the members of the team

A team development model namely the Tuckman’s team development can be implemented for better team forming and collaboration.

Forming- The stage of formation encompasses both the initiation process and the stage of getting to know one another. Since there is now a great deal of unpredictability, all parties concerned are searching for authoritative guidance.

Storming- The storming phase is the most challenging since it is when workers experience the greatest conflict and rivalry.

Norming — At this stage, teams have learned to work together efficiently and effectively. At this time, they are just no longer competing with one another, and they are also beginning to define their long-term objectives. The team's productivity has increased as individuals have learned to work together effectively via open dialogue and constructive feedback.

Performing- Putting It All Together Members of the team have gained trust in one another and are working together to attain a shared objective.

Adjourning - When no more work on the present project or job is required, the team is said to have adjourned. As a result of this project, everyone involved are thinking about ways they may do better in the future.

Members of a team with a b sense of camaraderie and cohesiveness are more likely to achieve success together. When bouncing ideas off one other, these qualities may provide a feeling of security. People are more inclined to engage in open conversation when they feel more comfortable expressing their views.

Defined Responsibilities

A team that lacks clear direction is has a lack of defined roles and duties. There must be clarity and accuracy in this area if accountability and transparency are to be properly implemented. When there is no clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of each member of the team, the result is a chaotic and dispiriting environment. Leaders who want to establish a healthy work environment can begin by clearly identifying the roles and responsibilities of each team member.

Impact of team leadership on Employer Branding

The sustainability of an employer branding programme relies on the leadership's ability to foster a culture of collaboration throughout the firm, which is essential to building a b employer brand. Organizational culture is shaped by the leadership of a company and has a direct influence on how it feels to work there. Employees who are not happy with their jobs are more likely to spread the word than customers who are pleased. The strategic design of an organization's work culture is reflected in its employer branding. A solid job and a long-term connection with the organisation are more important to today's employees. Employees who have a positive view of their workplace are also more inclined to promote it to others and report that it treats them well. To attract the best people, a firm has to have a b brand identity that reflects its values. Trust and dependability are enhanced as a result. Employer branding and corporate culture are both influenced by effective team leadership. For instance, Tesco's employee engagement programs were disseminated through a variety of methods, including the company's HUB intranet portal, physical bulletin boards, television screens, emails, Yammer, and social networking sites.

Attracting and retaining top-tier employees is made simpler with a b employer brand. The effectiveness of an organization's workforce is bly influenced by the power of its brand. Employer branding has also been suggested to be a short-cut for acquiring talent in several circumstances. Rather of conducting in-depth analyses of their own practises, HR departments partner with advertising firms to create a public image that appeals to potential customers even if it is not their own. Rather than focusing on establishing their employer brand, others say companies like Google do so by focusing on how their employees live up to the brand. Managers must realise that the company's basic value is in motivating staff to work hard and be attentive to the needs of the clients they serve. In the end, it is thought that if a firm treats its employees well, they will treat the company well.

Examine the drivers of management behaviour and the limits in which managers operate

A behaviour could be generally defined as the way a person responds to his or her environment, either positively or negatively. The definition of attitude is nonetheless a source of some discussion and debate. When defining drivers of management behaviour, it is helpful to bear two useful conflicts in mind. The first is the existence of ambivalence or differences of attitude towards a given person, object, situation etc. from the same person, sometimes at the same time (Koeslag-Kreunen et al., 2018). This ambivalence indicates that attitude is inherently more complex than a simple sliding scale of positive and negative, and defining these axes in different ways is integral to identifying the essence of attitude. The second conflict to keep in mind is the degree of implicit versus explicit attitude, which is to say subconscious versus conscious. Indeed, people are often completely ignorant of their implicit attitudes, complicating the ability to study and interpret them accurately.

Attitudes regarding many different topics are common among humans, and this is not always a negative thing. The attitude of a company's workers may have a direct effect on the individuals in their immediate vicinity. Positive coworkers may inspire others around them, while negative ones might bring them down (Vieira, Perin and Sampaio, 2018). Though this concept usually operates in a positive direction, it may act in reverse, and attitudes are often nuanced beyond simple positive or negative. The employee's attitude may have an impact on their own job performance as well as the work of their coworkers.

Some attitudes are potentially harmful to the workplace since they may spread to the employee's closest associates and have a negative impact on productivity for everyone. Does the management have an obligation to try to alter the employee's outlook? Does sole accountability rest with the worker? The response is that everyone has some degree of responsibility since attitudes result from the interaction between a person and environmental factors.

Still, if the main reason is related to work circumstances or the work environment, a manager may be able to change an employee's attitude. Long hours, corporate struggles, or problems with a supervisor or coworker are all factors that might negatively affect an employee's outlook on the job (Meyer, Li and Schotter, 2020). Similarly, if workers think they have limited opportunities for promotion or that their efforts are underappreciated, they may become disgruntled with their jobs. Managers should take action to address these issues to the best of their abilities in order to foster a productive work environment.

Nevertheless, there can be many aspects that can cause limits in which the management operates, such aspects include unethical behaviour from management that are driving by internal and external factors (Vieira, Perin and Sampaio, 2018). These drivers are as follows:

• Profit – For financial advantage that goes well beyond their salaries, some managers lead to unethical corporate practises. Alternatively, people participate in this conduct for financial advantage, such as a promotion or a raise.
• Prestige – When a manager’s career depends on it, he or she may participate in unethical business practises to advance in the company or claim credit for work they didn’t perform (Kouzes and Posner, 2019).
• Power – An unethical business practise may be used by a management to satisfy a desire for dominance. When workers think they are being punished or not rewarded “to make a point” by their management, this is a common occurrence.

Conclusion

Nevertheless, the key takeaway of the study implies that both leaders and managers play intricate roles in defining the organisational performance and employee efficacy. Hence, the differentiating roles of the managers and leaders along with their key principles not only influences employee behaviour and performance but can create limitations and drivers as well. Hence, the functionalities of both these prospects are apt and prominent for the organisation.

References

Dwyer, L.P., (2019). Leadership self-efficacy: review and leader development implications. Journal of Management Development.

Graham, B.Z. & Cascio, W.F., (2018). The employer-branding journey: Its relationship with cross-cultural branding, brand reputation, and brand repair. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management.

Hidayat, N. & Wulandari, F., (2020). The impact of leadership behavior on school performance. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 39(3), pp.493-506.

Hsiao, H.C., Chang, J.C., Tu, Y.L. & Chen, S.C., (2011). The impact of self-efficacy on innovative work behavior for teachers. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(1), p.31.

Hsiao, H.C., Tu, Y.L., Chang, J.C. & Chen, S.C., (2011), February. The influence of teachers’ self-efficacy on innovative work behavior. In International Conference on Social Science and Humanity (Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 233-237).

Hunt, T. and Fedynich, L., 2019. Leadership: Past, present, and future: An evolution of an idea. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 8(2), pp.22-26.

Ju, D., Huang, M., Liu, D., Qin, X., Hu, Q. & Chen, C., (2019). Supervisory consequences of abusive supervision: An investigation of sense of power, managerial self-efficacy, and task-oriented leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 154, pp.80-95.

Kalaignanam, K., Tuli, K.R., Kushwaha, T., Lee, L. & Gal, D., (2021). Marketing agility: The concept, antecedents, and a research agenda. Journal of Marketing, 85(1), pp.35-58.

Kashive, N., Khanna, V.T. and Bharthi, M.N., (2020). Employer branding through crowdsourcing: understanding the sentiments of employees. Journal of Indian Business Research.

Kashyap, V. & Verma, N., (2018). Linking dimensions of employer branding and turnover intentions. International Journal of Organizational Analysis.

Koeslag-Kreunen, M., Van den Bossche, P., Hoven, M., Van der Klink, M. & Gijselaers, W., (2018). When leadership powers team learning: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 49(4), pp.475-513.

Kouzes, T.K. & Posner, B.Z., (2019). Influence of managers’ mindset on leadership behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Lievens, F. & Slaughter, J.E., (2016). Employer image and employer branding: What we know and what we need to know. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, pp.407-440.

Lin, W.L., Yip, N., Ho, J.A. & Sambasivan, M., (2020). The adoption of technological innovations in a B2B context and its impact on firm performance: An ethical leadership perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, pp.61-71.

Mango, E., 2018. Rethinking leadership theories. Open Journal of Leadership, 7(01), p.57.

Martin, G. & Groen-in’t-Woud, S.A.S.K.I.A., (2011). Employer branding and corporate reputation management in global companies: A signaling model and case illustration. Global talent management, pp.87-110.

Meyer, K.E., Li, C. & Schotter, A.P., (2020). Managing the MNE subsidiary: Advancing a multi-level and dynamic research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(4), pp.538-576.

Rebel, T., (2020). Team leadership: exploring the effects of work experience and self-efficacy on the effectiveness of empowering and directive leadership behavior.

Siangchokyoo, N., Klinger, R.L. & Campion, E.D., (2020). Follower transformation as the linchpin of transformational leadership theory: A systematic review and future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), p.101341.

Sweeney, A., Clarke, N. & Higgs, M., (2019). Shared leadership in commercial organizations: A systematic review of definitions, theoretical frameworks and organizational outcomes. International Journal of Management Reviews, 21(1), pp.115-136.

Vieira, V.A., Perin, M.G. & Sampaio, C.H., (2018). The moderating effect of managers’ leadership behavior on salespeople’s self-efficacy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, pp.150-162.

Zhang, Y.B. & Giles, H., (2018). Communication accommodation theory. The international encyclopedia of intercultural communication, pp.95-108.