Shared Leadership in Voluntary Organisations: An Exploratory Survey using Internal Stakeholder Perspective

Management research has predominantly focuses on vertical leadership, which is synonymous with top-down management. Increasingly however, other forms of distributed leadership are observable across organisations. In this research, we explore the involvement of stakeholders in the functions of leadership through the shared leadership paradigm. Using a quantitative approach, the research surveyed 126 respondents in the voluntary sector with a view to assess the level of shared leadership among organisation stakeholders and identify key factors that affect the shared leadership process. Findings suggest relatively high level of shared leadership with stakeholder involvement more prevalent at consultative levels rather than participative levels. Furthermore, stakeholder status within the organisation is identified as a significant factor in determining the level of shared leadership

Shared Leadership: An Exploratory Study taking a Stakeholder Approach in Voluntary Organisations

The aim of this study is to explore the involvement of stakeholders in the functions of leadership within the context of voluntary organisations in the UK. What is intriguing about the study is that business and management research has focused mainly on ‘vertical leadership’ that stems from an appointed or formal leader as opposed to ‘shared leadership’ that is distributed across the organisation. This study therefore, seeks to advance scholarly knowledge on the phenomenon of ‘shared leadership’ focusing on voluntary organisations taking a stakeholder perspective. A review of the current literature focusing on shared leadership indicates that the definition of shared leadership has converged around numerous underlying dimensions. However, the key distinction between shared leadership and other leadership paradigms is that the influence process emanates from different directions rather than the tradition top to down approach. This study attempts to explore the level of shared leadership at the organisational level in the context of voluntary organisations by employing a pragmatic approach to research. The research involved three phases; Phase 1 is qualitative, Phase 2 is quantitative and Phase 3 is qualitative. The research methods have included semi-structured interviews (Phase 1) with 10 participants, a survey (Phase 2) that had 126 respondents and in-depth interviews (Phase 3) involving 30 stakeholders. The findings suggest that the level of shared leadership in voluntary organisations is relatively high. However, the involvement of the stakeholders has been more on a ‘consultative’ level rather than on a ‘participative’ one. Moreover, the status or position of the stakeholder in the organisation is a significant factor in determining the level of shared leadership. It was revealed that some stakeholders are merely involved in low level activities. The findings of this research have implications on the Human Resource Management in terms of stakeholder engagement in the leadership process

Shared leadership: a place-based leadership analysis of voluntary organisations

Positivistic and neo-positivistic approaches to research have dominated the way leadership is studied. It has been argued that leadership is a relational concept (Vallance et al, 2019; Bouden and Liddle, 2018) and the traditional orthodox approaches to research may not capture the mundane activities and processes associated with leadership. This paper aims to explore shared leadership in voluntary organisations in the UK through the theoretical lens of place-based leadership. The research draws on a qualitative study conducted in the context of voluntary organisations. Data collection involved 30 semi-structured interviews with trustees, volunteers and employees. The main challenge faced by voluntary organisations is that although there is a clearly visible leadership presence, leadership is reserved for a few individuals (Buckingham et al, 2014). Leadership is a function of chief executives and those in formal positions (assigned leaders). The voices of the unexpected are absent due to the domination of heroic leadership in this framework. It is against this backdrop, that we seek to gain insight into leadership dynamics within the voluntary organisations by exploring diverse contributions of different actors to the leadership process drawing on the concept of shared leadership. Shared leadership arguably offers an avenue to transcend the traditional leadership – followership dichotomy (Pearce and Conger, 2003; Barnes, 2013; Pearce et al, 2013). However, there is lack of empirically grounded knowledge of understanding the complex processes of shared leadership. Nonetheless, the mode of collective leadership identified within shared leadership could be explained through the place-based leadership lens. As such, the objective of this paper is to investigate the involvement of actors (non-assigned leaders) other than recognised formal leaders in the process of leadership. Leadership could be viewed as a social process based on the interactions of different actors. Place-based leadership perspective could facilitate a deeper insight into shared leadership applied to voluntary organisations. Sotarauta (2016: 46) argues that ‘leadership is a hidden form of agency, shadowed by such visible forms of influences as structures and formal institutions’. Whereas, place-based leadership is achieved through conjoint rather than individual agency (Vallance et al, 2019; Hambleton, 2019). This paper argues that place-based leadership encompasses informal influence that can be important in achieving the intended outcomes of voluntary organisations. Moreover, Collinge and Gibrey (2010: 386) have highlighted the importance of place-based leadership as a conduit for ‘facilitating interdisciplinary working across institutional boundaries and ensuring the comprehensive engagement of local communities’. Traditional leadership paradigms regard leadership as attributed to formal authority and institutional power. However, place-based leadership is reliant on the mobilisation of multiple stakeholders (Vallance et al 2019) and Sotarauta (2016) argues that it is possible for ‘non-assigned leaders’ to exercise influence despite the lack of institutional position. Shared leadership bridges the gap between ‘assigned leaders’ and ‘non assigned’ leaders and this research found that ‘non-assigned’ leaders are willing and able to take leadership positions in wider networks of influence. Therefore, shared leadership and place-based leadership literature provide conceptual and analytical leverage in understanding the complexity of leadership within voluntary organisations

Shared leadership in voluntary sector organisations: exploring practice and theory development

The Co author Dr Demola Obembe is from the Department of Management and Entrepreneurship and Centre for Enterprise and Innovation research group. The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.This article investigates leadership practice in voluntary sector organisations (VSOs). Drawing on stakeholder theory and evidence from a qualitative study involving UK VSOs, it explores the manifestation of shared leadership practices and proposes a framework for more inclusive practices that enhance trust, accountability and collective responsibility. We find that certain stakeholders are more detached from processes of shared leadership than leaders in formal positions. Furthermore, involvement in leadership activity varies with status, with shared practices diminishing from trustees through to employees and volunteers, as trustees and employees are mainly involved in ‘high-level activities’ of the organisation while volunteers are involved in ‘low-level activities’. Our study poses a challenge to unitary and linear leadership models that present shared leadership as equally distributed in organisations

Political uncertainty and stock market liquidity, size, and transaction cost: The role of institutional quality

Using panel data of 42 countries from 2001 to 2019, we examine whether political uncertainty (caused by uncertainty about national elections) explains variations in cross‐country liquidity, market size, and transaction cost. We also investigate whether institutional quality moderates the negative effects of political uncertainty on stock market development. We show that political uncertainty reduces stock market size, liquidity, and increases transaction costs. Our results indicate that institutional quality moderates the negative effects of political uncertainty on stock market development. However, we find no effects in emerging markets arising from the high prevalence of weak institutions. We confirm the robustness of our findings using alternative financial development measures and endogeneity. This study enhances our understanding of the salient role of political uncertainty in the development of the stock market, with important implications for market regulators, corporations, and investors

Uncertainty in phosphorus fluxes and budgets across the US long-term agroecosystem research network

Phosphorus (P) budgets can be useful tools for understanding nutrient cycling and quantifying the effectiveness of nutrient management planning and policies; however, uncertainties in agricultural nutrient budgets are not often quantitatively assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate uncertainty in P fluxes (fertilizer/manure application, atmospheric deposition, irrigation, crop removal, surface runoff, and leachate) and the propagation of these uncertainties to annual P budgets. Data from 56 cropping systems in the P-FLUX database, which spans diverse rotations and landscapes across the United States and Canada, were evaluated. Results showed that across cropping systems, average annual P budget was 22.4 kg P ha−1 (range = −32.7 to 340.6 kg P ha−1), with an average uncertainty of 13.1 kg P ha−1 (range = 1.0–87.1 kg P ha−1). Fertilizer/manure application and crop removal were the largest P fluxes across cropping systems and, as a result, accounted for the largest fraction of uncertainty in annual budgets (61% and 37%, respectively). Remaining fluxes individually accounted for \u3c2% of the budget uncertainty. Uncertainties were large enough that determining whether P was increasing, decreasing, or not changing was inconclusive in 39% of the budgets evaluated. Findings indicate that more careful and/or direct measurements of inputs, outputs, and stocks are needed. Recommendations for minimizing uncertainty in P budgets based on the results of the study were developed. Quantifying, communicating, and constraining uncertainty in budgets among production systems and multiple geographies is critical for engaging stakeholders, developing local and national strategies for P reduction, and informing policy