ContextIn addition, there are individuals who advocate the premise that effective leadership is relative to the organizational context. The Larsson and Vinberg (2010) study results implied successful leadership behavior to contain both universal and contingency leadership elements. Cangemi, Davis, Sand, and Lott (2011) hypothesize that significant organizational challenges follow a three stage process: Survival Stage, Stability Stage, and the Creative-Competitive Stage, in which each phase requires a different leadership style approach. When a company enters the “Survival Stage”, it requires swift, radical, ethical and decisive leadership to avoid default or bankruptcy. The “Stability Stage” demands a very knowledgeable and capable leader who can elevate core competencies and transform the organization into a more efficient and stable entity. Once stability is achieved management changes its role to a “Creative-Competitive” leadership approach which allows the organization to optimize its competitive skill set onto a global platform by means of an open, opportunistic, and team based system.


There are ample references to the value of a team based approach. Petrie (2011) points out that building a network of collective innovative leadership should be key principles in leadership development. The complex “new” business environment renders it more difficult for anyone to solve challenges individually. Therefore, managers should be taught to focus on collaboration with partners that add problem solving values to his or her specific setting (Petrie, 2011). Promoting input from various stakeholders, such as employees, clients, and vendors allows a director or supervisor to gain multiple perspectives, which in turn is conducive to innovation and problem solving. Moreover, increased stakeholder involvement translates into improved chances for solutions and positive outcomes.

Each of the aforementioned leadership components deserves consideration in the evaluation of an optimal leadership style for managers and executives. Yet, the unique structure and characteristics of each industry does not provide any significant evidence to rank the components in order of priority or importance.