Management Studies in Development and Evolution

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Publication Ethics

Memorandum of Understanding

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Article Writing Guide

Files

Consultants

Consultants(2023-2024)

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Publons

Methodology for evaluation of scientific publications

This letter of scientific publications

The Executive Regulations of the Law on Pursuing and Dealing with Fraud in the Preparation of Scientific Works

A meta-theory in organizational leadership based on unitary ontology

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate in Business Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba`i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba`i University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba`i University, Tehran, Iran.

4 Professor, Department of Physics Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

5 Professor, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The importance of leadership on the one hand and the plurality of opinions in this field on the other hand increase the need to rethink and conduct research in this regard. The purpose of this exploratory research is to identify gaps in existing leadership theories and to present a new meta-theory to address these gaps. In this library research, we used meta-theory, which is one of the effective research methods for rethinking science. The statistical community is all the articles that investigated leadership theories. Sampling by judgmental method reached the number of 200 articles until theoretical saturation. In this research, we first categorized leadership theories based on the five paradigms of science and then identified theoretical gaps. Based on the research findings, the gaps in the organization's leadership theories go back to the material ontology that governs them, and the solution is to change the perspective towards the unificationist meta-theory and human knowledge in higher dimensions. We have presented our metatheoretical view based on unificationist theories of physics, because unificationist ontology, emphasizing the multiplicity of dimensions and the unity of forces in existence, considers the truth to be something beyond the material world.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. A (2004). “Metatheory: Lessons from social identity research”. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 8(2): pp 98-106. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1207/s15327957pspr0802_2
  2. Antonakis, J. Avoliob, B. J. and Sivasubramaniamc, N. (2003). Context and leadership: an examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14 (3), pp. 261-295. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984303000304
  3. Barker, R.A. (1997). How Can We Train Leaders if We Do Not Know What Leadership Is? Human Relations, Vol. 50, No. 4, 1997, pp. 343-362. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/001872679705000402
  4. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stodgill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications (3rd Ed.). New York: The Free Press
  5. Bell, A., Witte, A. E., Hilb, M., Avery, G. C. (2004). Understanding Leadership: Paradigms and Cases. India: SAGEPublications. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Understanding_Leadership/NLdECzNyUPkC?hl=en&gbpv=0
  6. Bernardo, Cleice & Silva, Rwrsilany & Pedro Filho, Flávio de São & Barbosa, Raul. (2019). PARADIGM OF LEADERSHIP FOR ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION BASED ON THEORY U. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research 7(6):67-89. DOI:31686/ijier.Vol7.Iss6.1779 DOI:10.31686/ijier.Vol7.Iss6.1779
  7. Burrell, G. (1996). ;Normal Science, Paradigms, Metaphors, Discourse and Genealogies of Analysis’. In S. R. Clegg, C.Hardy, and W. R. Nord (eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies, London: Sage.
  8. Cacioppe, R. (2001). Redefining leadership for the 21st century. University of Western Australia: Integral Leadership Centre.
  9. Calida, B.Y., Padilla, J.J., Henrie, M., Sousa-Poza, A., & Bozkurt, I. (2009). Towards a Leadership Theory Based on Philosophical Predispositions. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture, and Change Management: Annual Review, 9, 85-98. DOI:18848/1447-9524/CGP/v09i03/49703
  10. Cawthorn,David.(2002).Philosophical Foundations Leadership, (Clt).(n.d.).(n.p.): Transaction Publishers.
  11. David Lamond (2005). On the value of management history: Absorbing the past to understand the present and inform the future, Management Decision Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 1273-1281.  DOI:1108/00251740510634859
  12. Dubin, R. (1978). Theory Building. New York: Free Press.
  13. Dubrin,Andrew.J (2000). Applying Psychology: Individual and Organizational Effectiveness. Pearson; 6th edition.
  14. Fairholm, M. R. (2002). Defining leadership: a review of past, present, and future ideas. Center for Excellence in Municipal Management: George Washington University.
  15. Fein, E. C., Benea, D., Idzadikhah, Z. and Tziner, A. (2020). The security to lead: A systematic review of leader and follower attachment styles and leader–member exchange. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29, 1: 106–125. DOI:1080/1359432X.2019.1696774
  16. Fiedler, F.E. And Chemer, M.M, (1974), "Leadership And Effective Management, Scott, Foresman and co. p65.
  17. Fiedler, FE (1997/1976). Situational control and a dynamic theory of leadership. In: Grint, K(ed) Leadership: Classical, Contemporary and Critical Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 126-148.
  18. Gadomski, Adam Maria (2001). “Meta-knowledge unified framework: The TOGA (Top-down Object based Goal-oriented Approach) perspective”. Retrieved May 12, 2010, from: http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it/HID-server/Meta-know-1.htm.
  19. Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524–1541. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524
  20. Genza, Gyaviira Musoke(2021). But what is Leadership? A Systematic Review of the Leadership Concept in View of Heightened Educational Leadership in Africa. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.12, No.9, PP. 127-137. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/55761
  21. Greene, Brian.(2015). "The Theory of Relativity, Then and Now". Retrieved 26 September 2015. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/theory-of-relativity-then-and-now-180956622/?no-ist
  22. Greene, B. (2011). The Elegant Universe. United Kingdom: Random House.
  23. Harrison, C. (2017). Leadership Theory and Research: A Critical Approach to New and Existing Paradigms. Germany: Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-68672-1
  24. Hartley, D. (2010). Paradigms: How Far Does Research in Distributed Leadership ‘Stretch’? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(3), 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143209359716
  25. Hersey, P ; Blanchard, H. Kenneth and Dowey, Johnson, (1996), "Management of Organizational Behavior", 6th ed , Englewood Cliffs , Prentice Hall.
  26. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K.H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23(5), 26–34.
  27. Hiller, Janine S. 2013. «The Benefit Corporation and Corporate Social Responsibility». Journal of Business Ethics 118 (2): 287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1580-3
  28. O. R. (1969) content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading: Addison- Wesley.
  29. Karakas, (2009).New Paradigms in Organizational Development in the 21st Century: Positivity, Spirituality, and Complexity. Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27, No. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1743445
  30. Kessler, Eric H (2020). The Philosophical Foundations of Fundamental Leadership Competencies. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2020, No. 1. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.12050abstract
  31. Klenke, K. (2008). Qualitative Research in the Study of Leadership. United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  32. Koontz, H. & Weihrich, H. (1998). Essentials of management (5th Ed.). New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd.
  33. Laszlo, Alexander (2018). Leadership and systemic innovation: socio-technical systems, ecological systems, and evolutionary systems design, International Review of Sociology, 28:3, 380-391. DOI:1080/03906701.2018.1529076
  34. Lawler, E. E.; Mohrman, S. A.; Ledford, G. E.; Cummings, T. G.; and Associates(1999). Doing Research that is Useful for theory and Practice (2nd edn). Lanham. : Lexington Books.
  35. Maxwell, John C (2005). The 360 Degree Leader:Developing Your Influence from Anywhere in the Organization.Us:HarperCollins Leadership.
  36. Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. United Kingdom: Chelsea Green Publishing.
  37. Michio Kaku(2014). The future of the mind : the scientific quest to understand,enhance,and empower the mind. New York: Doubleday.
  38. Miner, J. B. (1984). The validity and usefulness of theories in an emerging organizational science. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.2307/258442
  39. Mowday, R. T. (1997). ‘Presidential Address: Reaffirming Our Scholary Values’. Academy of Management Review, 22: 335-345. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0534
  40. Neufeldt, victoria & Guralnik David B. (1994). Webster’s new world dictionary. New York: prentice hall.
  41. Nigri, Giorgia; Agulini, Armando(2019). Culture and consciousness toward quantum leadership. Cultural Perspectives on Creativity, Innovation and Risk-Taking track, IACCM-IÉSEG 2019 Congress Oct. 31-Nov. 2, 2019 - Paris, France.
  42. Nigri, Giorgia; Mara Del Baldo. (2018). «Sustainability Reporting and Performance Measurement Systems: How Do Small- and Medium-Sized Benefit Corporations Manage Integration?» Sustainability 10 (12): 4499. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124499
  43. Northouse, P. G. (2022). Leadership: Theory and Practice. United States: SAGE.
  44. Overton, W. F. (2007). A coherent metatheory for dynamic systems: Relational organicism-contextualism. Human Development, 50(2-3), 154–159. https://doi.org/10.1159/000100944
  45. Pache, Anne-Claire, e Filipe Santos. 2013. «Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics». Academy of Management Journal 56 (4): 972–1001. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0405
  46. Patterson, J. L. (1993). Leadership for Tomorrow’s Schools. Alexandria, VA: Associaiton for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  47. Polchinski, J., 1998. String theory: Volume 1, an introduction to the bosonic string. Cambridge university press.
  48. Ritzer, G. (1991). Reflections on the Rise of Metatheorizing in Sociology. Sociological Perspectives, 34(3), 237-248. https://doi.org/10.2307/1389509
  49. Ritzer, George. (2004). sociological theory. New York: McGraw hill.
  50. Ritzer, George. (2009). “Meta theory”, retrieved agust 2009, 24, 2009, from: sociologyencyclopedia.com
  51. Robbins, S.R. And Duncan, R.B, (1988), "The Role Of The Ceo And Top Management In The Creation And Implemention Of Strategic Vision", Jai Press, Greenwich, Ct.
  52. Robbins,Stephen.P; Judge,Timothy.A (2016). Organizhtional behavior. Pearson global edition.
  53. Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger.
  54. Sandra B. Rosenthal and Rogene A. Buchholz(1995). Leadership: Toward New Philosophical Foundations. Business & Professional Ethics Journal,Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 25-4. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800977
  55. Sarbo, Janos J.(2017). “Meta-theory for Knowledge Representation”, Radboud University, ICIS, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, Available at: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1100/paper14.pdf
  56. Sharma, M. K. and Jain, S. (2013). Leadership management: principles, models and theories. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies; Vol. 3 (3), pp. 309-318. Available at: https://www.ripublication.com/gjmbs_spl/gjmbsv3n3spl_14.pdf
  57. SHELLEY, BALAS.(2010).THE NEW PARADIGM OF LEADERSHIP: FROM CRUCIBLE TO CREATION. Integrated Studies Project, submitted to George Tombs, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of, Master of Arts – Integrated Studies, Athabasca, Alberta.
  58. Spaak, T. (2009). Meta-Ethics and Legal Theory: The Case of Gustav Radbruch. Law and Philosophy, 28(3), 261–290. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40284672
  59. Spell, Chester. S. (2000). Where do management fashions come from, and how long do they stay? , Journal of Management History, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 334-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552529910288127
  60. Tim Goles and Rudy Hirschheim(2000), The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead…long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan. Omega, Volume 28, Issue 3, P. 249-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(99)00042-0
  61. Torraco, R, J. (2004). “Challenges and choices for theoretical research in human resource development”. Human Resource Development Quartery, 15, p. 171-188. DOI:1002/hrdq.1097
  62. Tsao, Frederick Chavalit; Laszlo,E,Christopher.(2019). Quantum leadership: new consciousness in business. Stanford, California: Stanford Business Books, an imprint of Stanford University Press.
  63. Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (2007). The role of the situation in leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.17
  64. Wallis, Steve. (2010). “Toward a Science of Metatheory”, Integral Review, July 2010, Vol. 6, No. 3. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2322985
  65. Weaver, G. R., & Gioia, D. A. (1994). Paradigms Lost: Incommensurability vs Structurationist Inquiry. Organization Studies, 15(4), 565-589. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069401500404
  66. Weinberg, S. (2010). Dreams Of A Final Theory: The Search for The Fundamental Laws of Nature. United Kingdom: Random House.
  67. Yukl, G. A. (2006). Leadership in Organisations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  68. Zhao, shanyang. (1991). Met theory, Met method, Meta data Analysis: what, why, and how. Sociological perspective Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 377-390. DOI:2307/1389517
  69. Afjeh, Seyyed Ali Akbar (2013). Philosophical foundations and theories of leadership and organizational behavior (ninth edition). Tehran: Samit Publications. [In Persian]
  70. Afjeh, Seyyed Ali Akbar and Hamzepour, Mahdi (1393). A comprehensive approach of quantum leadership theory and its applications in the organization, Strategic Management Thought, 8 (2),p.161-204. https://smt.isu.ac.ir/article_1719.html [In Persian]
  71. Alwani, Seyed Mahdi (2017). public Management. Tehran: Nashrani. [In Persian]
  72. Barzegar, Ibrahim; Taqvi Shawazi, Akbar; Moharram Khani, Fariborz (2013). Metatheoretical analysis of the origins of the theory of legitimacy of Islamic government in the political thought of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi. Journal of Islamic Policy Research, second year, sixth issue, pp. 11-33. https://ipr.isri.ac.ir/article_44939.html [In Persian]
  73. Beharifar, Ali; Danaei Fard, Hassan (2015). The development of theories in social science: the necessity of developing criteria for evaluating the production of theoretical science. Faculty of Humanities Quarterly, Management Special Issue, Spring 2018. https://mri.modares.ac.ir/article_320.html [In Persian]
  74. Bostani, Mehdi; Poladi, Kamal; Tausli Roknabadi, Majid (2017). Metatheory as a tool for understanding. Contemporary Political Essays, Research Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Year 9, Number 4, pp. 21-36. https://politicalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_3531.html [In Persian]
  75. Danaei Fard, Hassan (2015). Digging into the philosophical foundations of complexity theory: Does complexity science have a postmodernist quality? Humanities Lecturer's Quarterly, Special Management Issue, Spring 2016. https://mri.modares.ac.ir/article_323.html [In Persian]
  76. Danaei Fard, Hassan (2018). Theorizing: basics and methodologies. Tehran: Samit Publications. [In Persian]
  77. Danaei Fard, Hassan; Alwani, Seyed Mehdi; Azar, Adel. (2018). Qualitative research methodology in management: a comprehensive approach. Iran: Tehran: Safar Publications.
  78. Dehghani-Firouzabadi, Seyed Jalal (2013). Islamic meta-theory of international relations. Iran, Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University Press[In Persian]
  79. Ebrahim-Gol, Alireza; Attar, Mohammad Saleh. (2018). The position of theory, meta-theory, method and methodology in the study of international law. International Legal Journal, No. 60, pp. 161-184. https://www.cilamag.ir/article_35081.html [In Persian]
  80. Golshani, Mehdi (2015). Causality and prediction in modern cosmology. Philosophical Research Journal, year 10, number 19, pp. 353-378. https://philosophy.tabrizu.ac.ir/article_15855.html?lang=fa [In Persian]
  81. Golshani, Mehdi (2018). Science and religion in the horizon of monotheistic worldview. Tehran: Khwaja Nasiruddin Toosi University of Technology Publications. [In Persian]
  82. Golshani, Mehdi (2019). Quran and natural sciences; Tehran: Research Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies [In Persian]
  83. Heridimos Soukas, and Robert Chia. Philosophy and theory of organization, translated by: Nasser Asgari and Mojtaba Amiri (2018). Tehran: Tehran University Press[In Persian]
  84. Heridimos Soukas, Christian Knudsen. Organization theory (transtheoretical views), 5 volumes. Translation: Kazemi, Seyyed Hossein and Danai Fard, Hassan (2017) Samt Publications. [In Persian]
  85. Masoudi, Hamid; Yousefi, Ali. (1400). Transtheorizing is a necessity for criticizing sociological theories. Critical Research Journal of Humanities Texts and Programs, Research Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Scientific Monthly, 21st year, 7th issue, pp. 341-357. https://criticalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_6637.html [In Persian]
  86. Mohammadpour, Ahmed (2018). Anti-Methodology: Philosophical Backgrounds and Practical Procedures in Qualitative Methodology. Iran: Qom: Logos. [In Persian]
  87. Mohammadpour, Ahmed (2018). Method in method: about the construction of knowledge in humanities. Iran: Qom: Logos. [In Persian]
  88. Sadr al-Din Shirazi, Mohammad bin Ibrahim (Mulasadra). (1364). Al-Shawahid al-Rubabiyyah. Tehran: Academic Center Publishing. [In Persian]
  89. Seyedjavadin, Seyedreza (1388). Theories of management and organization. Tehran: Negah Danesh Publications. [In Persian]
  90. Waris, Seyyed Hamed (2010). Transparadigm approach to public administration. Danesh Management Journal, 14th year, number 55, pp. 81-51. https://jmk.ut.ac.ir/article_17113.html [In Persian]
Management Studies in Development and Evolution
Volume 33, Issue 112
July 2024
Pages 35-74
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 18 January 2024
  • Revise Date: 28 February 2024
  • Accept Date: 05 March 2024
Share
How to cite
Statistics