EMPLOYEES and CHANGE RESISTING

GROUNDED THEORY AND SOCIAL PROCESS : A NEW DIRECTION FOR LEADERSHIP RESEARCH

The purpose of this article is to argue the case for the use of grounded theory as a valid method for researching the process of leadership . The contention is that leadership is a social influence process , and that mainstream leadership research methodologies have been partially unsuccessful in theorizing about the nature of these processes . Grounded theory is a method which , if applied rigorously , will help to overcome the deficiencies in mainstream leadership research methodology . The underlying criterion driving grounded theory

is to generate leadership theory rather than to test theory

Qualitative ethnographic or sociological methodology has not been a representative feature of leadership research and theory-building to date . However , there are a number of points of justification for its use . First , leadership research has concentrated primarily upon the use of the quantitative methodologies associated with psychology . A psychological approach to leadership has dominated research . However this general orientation has not yet led to an enduring and integrative theory of leadership . Second , change is an enduring and integrative theme in the leadership literature . Change incidents are inherently longitudinal , and an appropriate methodology is needed to reflect this Third , leadership can be conceptualized as a social influence process Hence , leadership research needs to investigate the nature of this social influence process . An appropriate methodology must reflect this need . Fourth , leadership research must incorporate the variety of variables that impact upon the social influence process . Hence , a methodology must be used which will utilize a breadth and depth of data such that the variety and range of variables are incorporated . This will necessitate theory generation rather than theory testing . Grounded theory , the main focus of this article , is a particularly relevant methodology with which to achieve this

These points are addressed in more detail in the subsequent discussion which will begin with an examination of the nature of leadership as a social influence process . It will then consider briefly the differences between the contributions that qualitative and quantitative research can make to leadership research . This article will assess the contribution that grounded theory , as a specific though seldom used example of qualitative research , can make to the understanding of leadership

Leadership is closely associated with the notion of change . The major dimension of organizational change relevant to leadership is the use of influence to change the activities and relationships of people within the organization . Because leadership involves a transformation in the views , beliefs , attitudes and motivations of followers , it is about change . Indeed , when investigating leadership in organizations and communities , the anthropologist Lantis (1987 ) found that a leader is a person who "influences in a given direction the attitudes and behavior of not one person or a few people , but a whole group or many people (p . 192 ) Implicit within this anthropological definition is that attitudes and behavior are changed . Leadership induces others to take action (Locke , et al , 1991 , it involves a restructuring of a situation (Bass , 1990 , and it is differentiated from management by its capacity to produce change (Kotter , 1990 . Therefore , it is axiomatic that change is an essential aspect of the process of leadership . Hence , change incidents can be the basis of investigation of the leadership process

Similarly , a crucial aspect of leadership is the ability to influence others . The leadership literature acknowledges this dynamic . For example , a consistent feature of the leadership literature and in definitions of leadership is that it is a process of influence (Bryman 1986 Yukl , 1994 . Yukl (1994 ) reviewed the literature on definitions of leadership and concluded that the definitions had a few aspects in common "Most definitions of leadership reflect the assumption that it involves a social influence process whereby intentional influence is exerted by one person over other people to structure the activities and relationships in a group or organization (Yukl , 1994 ,

. 3 . Similarly based upon an extensive review of the literature , Rost (1993 ) defined leadership as "an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purpose (p . 102

In the same vein , Rost (1993 ) emphasized that leadership is about transformation . It is about transformation in the motivations , values and beliefs of followers , as well as a transformation in the structures of organizations . Rost 's views reflect the findings of a number of studies (Bass , 1985 , 1990 Burns , 1978 . Bass (1990 , in the most extensive literature review on leadership , has provided a general definition of leadership which supports the proposition that leadership is a transformational influence process . Bass defined leadership as "an interaction between two or more members of a group that often involves a structuring or restructuring of the situation and the perceptions and expectations of the members (Bass , 1990 ,

. 19 . The critical transformation in this definition is of the perceptions and expectations of members . Bass emphasizes that leadership , so defined , allows any member of an organization to exhibit leadership

The transformation is about influence relationships based on persuasion not coercion , and it is about people intending real changes to happen Implicit within this persuasive influence is a generation of willingness within followers , as opposed to the sullen compliance which often accompanies the autocratic application of power . The transformation in motivations and actions involves also an insistence that the changes reflect the mutual purposes of the people engaged in the transformation Rost emphasized people , their interactions , and the mutuality of their purpose . Hence , within Rost 's definition is the implication that leadership entails a social influence process

This last point is supported by Hunt (1991 ) and Locke , et al (1991 Yukl (1994 ) suggested that there is a strong view among leadership theorists that leadership is a social influence process that occurs naturally within a social system , and is shared among various members of that social system . This implies that leadership needs to be researched as a process , rather than through the study of leaders alone (Yukl 1993 1994 Bolman , 1993 . In one of the few sociological interpretations of leadership , Selznick (1957 ) concluded that understanding leadership required an appreciation of a broader social context

Although the literature mentions social process frequently , there is not a clear definition of the term . This is a problem for leadership scholars to resolve because a number of authors have used psychological and other quantitative methods to research leadership and claim to have investigated social influence processes (Conger , 1989 House Mitchell 1977 Meindl , Ehrlich Dukerich , 1985 . However , it will be shown that because leadership can be viewed as a social influence process , grounded theory is a particularly useful method of data analysis and theory generation

Given the prominence in the literature of the notion that leadership is a social influence process , it is now necessary to examine the contributions that qualitative and quantitative research contribute to our understanding of leadership . The discussion will in turn lead to an argument that grounded theory can help to alleviate lacunae in the field

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE LEADERSHIP RESEARCH

Historically , leadership research has been dominated by the discipline of psychology which has relied upon the quantitative analysis of data As a result , the quantitative analysis of quantitative data has dominated leadership research method . Persuasive arguments have recently been put against this concentration on quantitative method to research leadership (Alvesson , 1996 . On the other hand , there is an increasing body of leadership research which has used method borrowed from the disciplines of sociology and anthropology (Bryman , et al , 1988 , 1992 Hunt Ropo , 1995 Irurita , 1996 Lantis , 1987 McCaslin , 1993 Meindl 1990 Roberts , 1985 Roberts Bradley , 1988 . This research has utilized more qualitative methods and the findings have been very influential because of their capacity to get at processes in social life

Yet , there is a growing appreciation that both quantitative and qualitative methods are necessary to leadership research . For example Table 1 illustrates some methodological examples relating to combinations of data gathering and their analysis in both the quantitative and qualitative formats

The quantitative analysis of quantitative data is the research methodology traditionally favored by the discipline of psychology . For leadership research , this has been dominated by the use of questionnaires as the data gathering instrument . The quantitative analysis of qualitative data is typical of content analysis which has potential for leadership research , but a drawback is that the richness of qualitative data may be lost . However , studies like Chen and Meindl 's (1991 ) content analysis of the construction of leadership images in the popular press demonstrate its potential . Table 1 also points to the possibility of qualitative analysis of quantitative data . Using discourse analysis , Potter and Wetherell (1994 ) have demonstrated the utility of a qualitative analysis of "quantification rhetoric , that is of arguments based on quantitative data . Gepahart (1988 ) describes this general approach as "ethnostatistics . Alvesson (1996 ) touched on this issue in the context of leadership research

However , of the various methods available to leadership researchers , the qualitative analysis of qualitative data has received far less attention so far . An explanation for this could be a traditional difficulty in generating theory by using this research method . However , this will show that grounded theory research is able to overcome this limitation . Table 1 depicts grounded theory as an example of the qualitative analysis of qualitative data . Grounded theory has been supported as a valid qualitative form of research into organizations (Martin Turner , 1986 Turner , 1983 ) and into the leadership process (Hunt , 1991 Hunt Ropo , 1995

Most qualitative data are descriptive by nature , and this makes theory generation difficult . However , the theory generation of the grounded theory method helps to integrate the descriptive data , as well to begin to explain and interpret those descriptive data . Pettigrew (1990 emphasized the importance for theory generation of secondary data collection via further interviewing and subsequent observation of the phenomenon under investigation . Secondary data collection is an integral element of the grounded theory process of theory generation (Glaser Strauss , 1967 ) and is representative of the inductive nature of the method . A grounded leadership theory will integrate and attempt to explain the descriptive data that are gathered

However , these reflections are not meant to imply that qualitative research and associated approaches like grounded theory should supplant traditional quantitative research . A consistent theme running through much recent research methodology literature is that neither qualitative research nor quantitative research is clearly better than the other rather , they are complementary . Indeed , the combination and triangulation of different methodologies is recommended by a number of (Bryman , 1988 Jick , 1979 Wilson Hutchinson , 1991 Yukl Van Fleet , 1982

An overview of grounded theory now follows , including discussion of how grounded theory is beneficial to the study of leadership as a social influence process . This will include theoretical and epistemological considerations in relation to the extant literature

OVERVIEW OF GROUNDED THEORY AND ITS USEFULNESS FOR LEADERSHIP RESEARCH

As has been shown above , a major theme in the literature is the notion that leadership involves a social influence process , but this process (and its many forms ) has been studied only rarely through the rich data that a qualitative methodology can provide . In recent times , leadership researchers have been calling for more qualitative approaches to leadership research (Avolio , 1995 Bass , 1990 Bryman , 1992 Bryman Bresnen , Beardsworth Keil , 1988 Hunt , 1991 Strong , 1984 Yukl 1994 . For example , Avolio (1995 ) has called for more qualitative methodologies for leadership research , in particular that of Grounded Theory

Let 's see what a grounded theory approach to leadership brings as opposed to the very quantitative and empirical experimental approach . I can 't imagine why either grounded theory or qualitative applications can 't both make a contribution (p . 4

Grounded theory is a research method in which theory emerges from , and is grounded in , the data (Glaser Strauss , 1967 . A grounded theory is inductively derived from the study of the phenomenon it represents , such as the leadership process . Central to grounded theory is the identification of the basic social process , the nature of which is the subject of the derived theory . The grounded theory , is discovered developed , and provisionally verified through systematic data collection and analysis of data pertaining to that phenomenon . Therefore , data collection , analysis , and theory stand in reciprocal relationship with each other . One does not begin with a theory , then prove it . Rather , one begins with an area of study and what is relevant to that area is allowed to emerge (Strauss Corbin , 1990 ,

. 23

The grounded theory approach uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived theory about a phenomenon . Through this methodology , concepts and the relationships between them are generated and provisionally tested . Strauss and Corbin (1990 ) have asserted that if carded out correctly and methodically , grounded theory meets the criteria for "good " scientific research . Those criteria are significance , theoryobservation compatibility , generalizability reproducibility , precision , rigor , and verification

In the course of generating a grounded theory , there is an iterative interplay between data collection , data analysis , and conceptualization /theorizing . This concurrent process is known as the constant comparative method of analysis (Glaser Strauss , 1967 ) and is central to grounded theory . Constant comparison indicates that the researcher is constantly gathering more data , analyzing them , comparing the analyses to past analyses , then gathering and analyzing more data in to clarify an emerging theoretical relationship among variables Silverman (1993 ) asserted that the constant comparison method , or "analytic induction " is a source of validity in research (p . 60

This process means that concepts and preliminary theoretical ideas emerge out of data which prompts further , but more purposeful data collection which in turn results in more theoretical work , and so on During the course of the analysis , working hypotheses are generated . The investigation of these working hypotheses will require the gathering of new data and /or the reinterrogation of existing data . By so doing concepts can be made more clear and abstract , and the relationships between concepts can be confirmed . This process of generating higher levels of theoretical abstraction is called theoretical coding (Glaser 1978 . The result is the identification of a basic social process and the generation of an explanatory theory

How far this interplay between data gathering and analysis works in practice is debatable . In many cases , the term "grounded theory " is used simply to imply that theory was derived from data and therefore the approach as a whole was not implemented . In such cases , the attribution of a grounded theory approach is meant to act as a rationalization for the use of qualitative research . In a sense , then , there are two types (at least ) of grounded theory : a full grounded theory approach of the kind described and recommended by Glaser and Strauss (1967 ) and detailed further by Glaser (1978 ) in which the iterative approach is played out in full , and a "partial " grounded theory approach in which data are collected and then theorized upon . Indeed , some of the rigors associated with qualitative research may account for the presence of the second type . For example , the length of time involved in transcribing large numbers of interviews and in writing up fieldwork notes may make the opportunity for breathing space in which to reflect upon and theorize about one 's data difficult to achieve in practise

Therefore , there are two main shortfalls with the "partial " grounded theory method which reduce its efficacy as sound scientific research The first shortfall is that the analytic process by which concepts are built up to higher levels of abstraction is not explained . The second shortfall is that the determination of the nature of relationships between categories (or concepts ) is not undertaken at least , it is not explained sufficiently in write-ups . Taken together , it could be said that the theoretical coding component of data analysis is not undertaken with sufficient rigor in the "partial " grounded theory method . Hence this partial method fails to meet the "precision " and "rigor " criteria for good scientific research (Strauss and Corbin , 1990 ,

. 7

Additionally , the use of computer software to maintain large data sets assists with the maintenance of precision and rigor in the analysis of data (Richards and Richards , 1992 , 1994 . NUD IST and Ethnograph are two of the most popular software packages used by grounded theorists . This is not to say that the use of such software is methodologically essential to ensure rigor , but there is considerable anecdotal agreement among researchers in the field that its use is mandatory for good scientific grounded theory research . The point about "partial " grounded theory is not to identify two research designs . Rather , it is to highlight the problem that some research is being published as grounded theory , when in reality it is not

Glaser (1992 ) has observed that grounded theory , in particular , is useful to "researchers and practitioners in fields that concern themselves with issues relating to human behavior in organizations groups , and other social configurations (p . 13 ) Because leadership is a process of social influence , this implies clearly that grounded theory can have a significant role in the study of leadership , and some of the studies outlined in this article illustrate its potential

The differences between grounded theory and mainstream approaches to leadership research have been introduced above . Whereas mainstream approaches using quantitative methods tend to generalize across frequencies , grounded theory tends "to generalize in the direction of theoretical ideas , thus emphasizing theory development rather than testing of a theory (Hunt Ropo , 1995 ,

. 381 . Hunt and Ropo have noted that grounded theory identifies the processes or forces that give rise to activity , whereas mainstream organizational research methodology concentrates on abstract elements and their relationship to activity and that "in this sense grounded theory emphasizes dynamism , whereas mainstream analysis emphasizes static structure (Hunt Ropo , 1995 ,

br 381 . Mainstream approaches have a bias toward static , cross-sectional analysis . On the other hand , grounded theory lends itself to processual analysis quite readily (Hunt Ropo , 1995 . This tendency toward processual analysis can enhance one 's understanding of leadership

Hunt and Ropo (1995 ) posit further that there is and should be an increasing emphasis on processual analysis in organizational research including leadership research . Also , Glaser (1992 ) noted that the contribution of grounded theory to well-worked areas of research is not the generation of a new concept or pattern , since these are usually saturated , but a better conceptual grasp of the basic social processes which might be missing . Leadership is a well-worked area of research and grounded theory may give a better conceptual grasp of the basic social influence processes associated with leadership

Central to grounded theory is the identification of a basic social process (Fagerhaugh , 1986 Glaser , 1992 Glaser Strauss , 1967 ) to explain the social phenomenon under investigation . In the case of leadership , a grounded theory approach would entail detailed investigation of the process of social influence . Of course , a number of forms of "basic social process " may be identified as grounded theory investigations of leadership are accumulated . However , grounded theory analysis will progressively integrate the various processes that emerge to a higher level of abstraction such that one overarching social process emerges which can explain variation in all lower level concepts and processes

In conducting a grounded theory analysis of leadership with this orientation , researchers would need to distance themselves from a central , though largely implicit tenet of most leadership research--the idea that the study of leadership is about what formal leaders do Instead , the contention of this article is that the focus should be on social influence process . In so doing , the researcher will need to adopt a research stance that flies in the face of two features of mainstream leadership research . First , the emphasis in mainstream leadership research is on leaders and not on the process of leadership as such Second , when undertaking grounded theory research , leadership will implicitly be sought out in a variety of contexts only some of which may be associated with the behavior of formal leaders . Mainstream research has not always neglected informal leadership (e .g . Fleishman et al 1955 , but by and large formal leaders have been the focus of attention The reason for this tendency is at least in part methodological : It would be very difficult to administer standard questionnaire instruments about leader behavior (such as the LBDQ , LOQ , SBDQ , LPC scale , or MLQ other than to those who are formal leaders or formally designated subordinates . Mainstream research instruments can evaluate informal leaders , but they have been less successful at evaluating informal leadership processes

For example , in a partial grounded theory study of leadership in three specialized transportation organizations (or community transport as it is known in the UK , Bryman et al (1992 ) found that in the most obviously successful of the organizations , a key leadership role was exercised by an individual who was not part of the formal structure but was in fact external to it . Early studies of groups sometimes devoted considerable attention to informal leaders , such as the Bank Wiring Observation Room phase of the Hawthorne Studies and Whyte 's (1943 ) study of street comer gangs , both of which provided Homans (1949 ) with considerable evidence with which to formulate a number of rules of leadership . This preparedness for leadership researchers to investigate leadership from the vantage point of the leadership process rather than the leadership position has dwindled and even many qualitative studies of leadership in organizations exhibit the latter position (e .g . Bryman et al , 1988 , Hunt Ropo , 1995 . The reasons for this change in emphasis over time are unclear . In the case of qualitative research within what is variously called the "transformational leadership " or "new leadership " tradition , there has been a tendency to emphasize not just formal leaders but those at very senior levels (e .g . Bennis Nanus , 1985 . If the implication of a grounded theory approach is taken seriously , leadership will necessarily be examined in a variety of different levels and contexts

Like most qualitative research , grounded theory is implicitly longitudinal . The focus on the unfolding of the social influence process associated with leadership , especially in contexts of rapid organizational change , entails and requires a built-in longitudinal element . This feature chimes well with the current preoccupation with change and change management (e .g . Wilson , 1992 . Conversely , most mainstream methodological approaches to leadership adopt a predominantly static stance and may therefore be less consonant with the preoccupation with change . However , mainstream approaches allow a greater degree of generalizability of findings , whereas grounded theory research findings are applicable only to the substantive setting from which they are derived . Indeed , Alvesson (1996 ) has advocated strongly the use of more substantive settings within which to research leadership , at the expense of attempting to generate generalized theory

Therefore , because grounded theory research projects are confined to substantive settings , and because they are implicitly longitudinal , they have much in common with case study research . The case study has long been a popular method by which to analyse organizational phenomena . A point of similarity between grounded theory analysis and case study research is raised . There are four levels of outputs which can be generated from research into the process of leadership within case studies

1 . Analytical chronology of the case

2 . Diagnosis of the case

3 . Interpretative /theoretical outputs

4 . Meta level analysis across cases (adapted from Pettigrew , 1990

Each level represents a higher level of complexity in interpretation and output . Level 1 represents a very descriptive output . Level 2 outputs assist in the iterative process of inductive pattern generation and theory generation (Petrigrew , 1990 . Level 3 outputs attempt to link theoretical codes and emerging themes into a more complex explanation of phenomena . Grounded theory methodology will generate level 3 outputs Level 4 outputs are generated through the meta-analysis of a number of replicated studies of similar cases . From such a meta-analysis , a formal theory can be generated to explain a more generalizable phenomenon Pettigrew (1990 ) emphasized the importance of the grounded theory processes of Glaser and Strauss (1967 ) and Strauss (1987 ) for moving from level 1 and 2 outputs , to level 3 and 4 outputs . In a sense , it is this emphasis on encouraging the generation of theory that differentiates grounded theory from many other forms of qualitative data analysis , and which makes it such an important complement to mainstream leadership research . Further consideration of the usefulness of grounded theory for leadership research will involve some consideration of the application of the method to research situations

The Application of Grounded Theory : Some Initial Considerations

When giving consideration to the implementation of the grounded theory method , one important point to recognize is the importance of the theoretical sensitivity of the researcher toward the generation of emergent theory . To research leadership , one must observe or interview in depth about processes of social influence . Thus , one must know what it is that one is observing or questioning . Consequently , we need some definition of leadership so that we can be sure that we are observing leadership , and not some other phenomenon . This is a delicate point regarding grounded theory , because its strength lies in theory generation , not theory testing , and researchers must remove their "intellectual baggage " and have no preconceived ideas about what the research might find (Strauss Corbin , 1990 . This is a controversial area within grounded theory because the extent to which a tabula rasa approach is feasible is highly contentious (Henwood Pidgeon , 1995 Pidgeon Henwood , 1996 . Also , since as we have suggested , leadership research should be concerned with leadership processes rather than simply with what formal leaders do , the definition and theorization of "leadership " become of paramount importance

One way to circumvent this potential problem is to interview people in depth about concepts which are subordinate to the overarching concept of leadership , but which have been confirmed in the extant literature as being closely associated with it . For example , rather than asking interviewees about "leaders " or "leadership , they can be asked about people who are going to get them through a particular change process who they look to for a lead , who have the most impact on their attitudes and motivation at work , or who they see as being exceptional or influential . Further in-depth interviewing about the processes by which these outcomes are achieved can shed light on the social influence processes at work in organizational settings

The proposed method will use a combination of theoretical and statistical sampling to select interviewees (Glaser Strauss , 1967 The initial interview subjects should be statistically random in that they came from a range of levels in the hierarchy from a range of functional areas and from different stages of the change process . The use of this sampling strategy is supported by Law (1994 . Bryman (1993 suggested that subjects for the present research should be "everyday people in everyday situations . By randomly selecting people from all levels of the organizational hierarchy in the initial stages of data gathering , this can be achieved

However , the theoretical sensitivity of the researcher must be a part of the grounded theory development process . Glaser and Strauss (1967 believe that theoretical sensitivity has two characteristics . The first is the involvement of the researcher 's personal and temperamental bent The second involves the researcher 's ability to have theoretical insight into the area of research , combined with an ability to make something of the insights . Hence , it is necessary for the researcher to have some understanding of the theoretical area before commencing the grounded theory generation . However , this prior understanding must not be allowed to force the development of some theory that does not emerge from the data

There is not sufficient space within this article to detail the application of grounded theory to leadership research . That would be the subject of a separate . However , some discussion is required about guidelines or considerations for prospective researchers with regard to this important challenge of integrating pre-emergent analytic thinking For example , it is well established in the leadership literature that leadership involves the use of influence to effect real change (Yukl 1994 . Therefore , an initial question of respondents could be "Who has had most effect in creating , driving or stifling these changes followed by "How have they had that effect . Similarly , it is well established that leadership can be interpreted as an attribution of exceptionality by followers (e .g . Conger Kanungo , 1987 Conger , 1989 Therefore , an initial question might be "Do exceptional people stand out as affecting your application , motivation , or your ability to get things done , followed by "How have they had that effect

Third , it is well established that the leadership process results in extra effort from followers (Bass , 1985 . Therefore , an initial question might be "Are there people you would do that bit extra for , followed by "How do they get that bit extra from you . For all three examples intervening and supplementary questions might relate to expanding and giving detail on incidents , processes , and the impact of particular people , as well as specifying the role of people at senior and junior levels in the organization . Hypothetically , it may quickly become apparent to the researcher that there are no exceptional people obvious to respondents in the substantive setting under review . In such a case subsequent interviews must concentrate on other leadership issues such as the clarification of meaning , perceptions about how the manifestation of leadership has been inhibited , and so forth

Therefore , Glaser (1978 ) does acknowledge some pre-emergent analytic thinking is necessary for the "emergent fit " model of grounded theory . A researcher cannot come into a like this completely cold . The researcher must have some predetermined idea of the things about which the subjects will be questioned , without asking explicitly about esoteric s from the existing leadership literature . Thus questioning of subjects should revolve around a range of leadership-related s including those indicated above . Having said this , existing leadership theories must not be considered until after the grounded theory has been generated . Obviously , the emergent theory must be compared with the extant leadership literature . This will avoid the possibility of existing theories or biases being "forced " into the data being gathered . At most , they will provide a mere backcloth to data collection

Conversely , the benefits to grounded theory research of investigating the implicit theories of participants were identified by Millett (1994 The methodological implication of recognizing these contrasting viewpoints about esoteric terminology is that generic terminology should be relied upon as the basis of the interview questions , but that in addition , esoteric terminology should be used as a supplement in to gauge the impact of the implicit theories of participants upon their interpretation of reality . The implicit leadership theories of interviewees help to give an indication of the values that they hold dear (Millett , 1994 . Hence , there is merit in asking supplementary questions of interviewees about their implicit definitions of leadership , and asking for elaboration on the manifestation of such leadership in the organizational setting under investigation . Also subjects could be asked about people who they believe are obvious leaders and people who are not obvious leaders . Subsequent theoretical sampling would ensure that other perspectives are gained on the identified people and also that the identified people are interviewed about their own leadership styles and behaviors . This type of sampling helps to achieve the 360 degree research which is so essential to the understanding of social processes . Dawson (1994 ) has emphasised the importance of this contextualist issue in a processual approach to organizational change research . It is also necessary to ensure that such questioning relates to all levels of the organizational hierarchy to avoid the previously acknowledged problem of concentrating on senior management positions

The notion of leadership as social influence relates mainly to the social and psychological dimensions of organizational change , and to a lesser extent to the structural , technological or other dimensions These various dimensions of change operate concurrently , but leadership relates directly to the social impact on followers , not to the entire range of dimensions of organizational change . Grounded theory research into the leadership process is therefore different from , although related to , organizational change research . However , all is not rosy when advocating the use of the qualitative analysis of qualitative data to research leadership . There are some potential weaknesses of the grounded theory method which warrant consideration

Some Potential Weaknesses of Grounded Theory Analysis of Leadership

Apart from the strengths and weaknesses that grounded theory shares with other qualitative method vis-a-vis quantitative method , there are some other issues that relate to grounded theory specifically

Discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of grounded theory relate mainly to the issues of validity and reliability . It must be noted however , that the criteria by which objectivist , positivist quantitative research is evaluated are not necessarily appropriate for evaluating qualitative research (Guba , 1981 Kirk Miller , 1986 Strauss Corbin , 1990 , although these criteria are often applied to qualitative research . On the other hand , as Kirk and Miller (1986 ) have noted , objectivity is the simultaneous realization of as much validity and reliability as possible

Therefore , if grounded theory research can be shown to be both valid and reliable , then that "subjectivist " research will be seen to be quite "objective . Further , objectivity in subjectivist research like grounded theory is essential , albeit difficult . Strauss and Corbin (1990 suggested that the usual canons of good research should be retained , but modified to fit the realities of grounded theory research . Also Silverman (1993 ) asserted that research becomes scientific by adopting methods appropriate to its subject matter . Discussion of these issues now follows

Validity refers to the best available approximation to the truth of propositions (Chenitz Swanson , 1986 Cook Campbell , 1979 . Kirk and Miller (1986 ) gave a less precise definition of validity as being the extent to which research gives the correct answer , although as Cook and Campbell (1979 ) pointed out , there is no one "correct " answer in the social sciences , hence their insistence on validity being the best "approximation " of the correct answer (p . 37

Historical events that occur before or during data collection can affect the validity of that data collection (Chenitz Swanson , 1986 , if not incorporated into the research or accounted for in some other way Chenitz and Swanson asserted that these problems can be averted by assessing the importance of such events , and by incorporating them into the research . In leadership research , the impact of critical incidents are integral to the data gathering process . Critical incidents , either immediate or from recent history , are the catalyst for examining leadership processes

Moreover , multiple sources of data gathering help to moderate the negative impact of these events on research validity . The use of observation and document analysis to supplement interviewing is a widely accepted method of enhancing validity (Kirk Miller , 1986 . Another way that this can be achieved in grounded theory leadership research is by gathering multiple perspectives on the same critical incident Interviewees are observers of the phenomenon under investigation . This use of multiple observers helps to enhance validity by not relying on the one observer , namely the researcher . Also , the use of field notes and memos helps the researcher to chart the researcher-informant relationship over time to determine if the validity of the findings have been affected in any way . The necessity for the detailed and comprehensive taking and analysis of "memoed " fieldnotes is an axiom of full grounded theory method , and helps to maintain both validity and reliability

A preference for interviewing over participant observation helps to overcome the potential validity problem of researcher reactivity . This problem relates to the impact that the researcher 's presence has on the phenomenon under investigation . Reactivity can be seen as interference or it can be seen as data (Chenitz Swanson , 1986 . However , by utilizing in-depth interviewing over participant observation as the predominant source of data , the direct involvement of the researcher in the phenomenon under investigation is reduced . This will reduce the negative impact of reactivity on research validity . This data gathering strategy is not to imply that interviews should be used to the exclusion of other sources such as participant observation , non-participant observation , document analysis , and the like . Quite the contrary--the dangers of relying overly on the interview have been identified by Alvesson (1996 . Multiple sources of data are essential . However , an interviewing strategy should be the core of the data gathering strategy for grounded theory research into leadership

There is further support for the use of interviewing over observation as the predominant source of data . Most participant observation is of a particular observable setting or of a physical process . This especially is so in the nursing industry , a particularly fertile area for grounded theory research (Boyd , 1993 Chenitz Swanson , 1986 Irurita , 1990 Lundrigan , 1992 Munhall , 1994 , and the education industry (Conrad 1978 Eichelberger , 1989 Guba , 1978 Millett , 1994 . In both nursing and education , social processes are at least as important as technical processes . Hence , grounded theory has correctly been found to be beneficial there . The use of participant observation to gather data for grounded theory analysis is also prevalent in cultural anthropology (eg Henrickson , 1989 Lantis , 1987 Stewart , 1990 , where the situations and processes are easily observable . Indeed , Strong (1984 ) recommended the use of observation to gather data for the study of leadership , but explicit within this recommendation is that the researcher observes managers . The point has been well made that managers can be observed but a process such as leadership cannot be observed easily . Therefore , the social processes of leadership are not easily observable . A social process is being researched , not a physical setting . Therefore unstructured and semi-structured interviewing is suggested as the predominant form of data gathering , with observation as the secondary or supplementary form of data gathering

External validity relates to the generalizability of the research to other populations (Denzin , 1970 . In grounded theory , external validity is assisted by having maximum internal variety in subjects (Glaser 1978 . In the method proposed in this article , internal variety is limited by having a small number of subject organizations , but it is enhanced by having maximum variety within those organizations . The grounded theory activity of theoretical sampling ensures that sufficient internal variety in data sourcing is obtained to saturate the categories which emerge from the analysis . However , it has already been acknowledged that grounded theories are difficult to generalize . Rather they are substantive to the settings from which they are generated

Reliability refers to the accuracy of a measuring instrument over repeated measures (Chenitz Swanson , 1986 . Kirk and Miller (1986 stated that reliability is "the extent to which a measurement procedure yields the same answer however and whenever it is carried out (p . 19 Reliability remains the major challenge for qualitative researchers Chenitz and Swanson (1986 ) and Denzin (1970 ) have claimed that qualitative researchers generally avoid terms like validity and reliability . Instead , the truth and accuracy of the data and their analysis are handled by their evidence and credibility . Be that as it may , one major way of addressing the issue of reliability is by replicating the study (Chenitz Swanson , 1986 . It is very difficult although not impossible , to replicate a grounded theory study because no two situations are alike . Indeed , situations are changing continuously even within the one research project (Glaser Strauss , 1967

The lack of replicability of grounded theory has been a criticism of the method from positivist researchers . As Chenitz and Swanson (1986 pointed out however , the conventional positivist notion of replicability is not relevant to grounded theory . The issue at stake is whether the same questions can be asked of people in different organizational settings , and whether the same observation can be carried out across organizations . By the very nature of semi-structured interviewing , the interview schedule will be different for every research project . In fact , the schedule will be different for every respondent . Therefore complete replication is impossible . On the contrary , it is more appropriate to ask whether or not the grounded theory , if applied to a similar situation , will allow the researcher to interpret , understand and predict phenomena . If used to investigate leadership in the manner outlined in this article , full and detailed grounded theory will do so and therefore can claim reliability . Moreover , the research process outlined in this article can be conducted in different organizational settings , recognizing that pure replication is not feasible for the reasons outlined above . If researchers use the sampling frame , critical incidents , and introductory questions outlined here , they will get as close as can be achieved to a replicative grounded theory study . A final issue relating to reliability is the degree of fit of the theory with the extant literature . If the theory does not support the existing literature , but the variation can be explained by substantive differences in the research situation , then the theory could be said to be reliable

Having discussed the appropriateness of grounded theory as a research method suitable for investigating leadership as a social influence process , it is necessary to consider the few extant examples of leadership research which have used grounded theory . By so doing , gaps in the existing grounded theory-leadership literature may be identified and proposals for future leadership research can be put forward

LEADERSHIP RESEARCH AND GROUNDED THEORY

It would be apposite at this point to elaborate on the processual nature of leadership , for which grounded theory is so relevant . In addition to the discussion earlier about the deductive work of Rost , Bass , Hunt and Yukl regarding leadership being a social process , some further discussion about social process is necessary within the context of what we understand to be leadership . Such elaboration will help to judge the grounded theory research used to date which claims to investigate leadership . Process involves change which occurs over time (Fagerhaugh 1986 Glaser , 1978 ) and the linking of action / interactional sequences (Strauss Corbin , 1990 . Therefore a social process is a process which is concerned with human beings in their relations to each other . Social processes are ubiquitous through an organization , and not concentrated at any particular level or rank

A number of established characteristics of leadership help to confirm its status as a social process . First , as stated earlier leadership involves changes to the beliefs , actions and motivations of followers over time . Second , interactional linkages between a range of variables have been established in leadership research , whether via the disciplines of psychology , sociology , anthropology or political science Indeed , a grounded theory basic social process can be multivariate (Glaser , 1978 , incorporating interactions between variables form psychology (e .g . perceptions , anthropology (e .g . culture , political science (e .g . popular support , organization theory (e .g . power and politics ) and so forth . Third , leadership is clearly involved with human beings in their relations with each other . Specifically , leaders are individual people , as are followers . This assumption provides the justification to conceive of an organizational setting as a society , and the interactions within that society being social interactions Consequently , there is conceptual support for considering leadership as a processual construct , in addition to the scholarly support acknowledged earlier

The extent to which grounded theorists have sought out leadership processes is varied . For example , some researchers have used qualitative methodologies , but have investigated only how managers , or entrepreneurs , or CEOs , engage in leadership behavior (Bennis Nanus 1985 Howell Higgins , 1990 Kotter , 1990 Kouzes Posner , 1987 Levinson Rosenthal , 1984 Peters Austin , 1985 Tichy Devanna 1986 . These works utilize qualitative data and varying amounts of qualitative analysis , but most are largely descriptive of people , and have not theorized on the process of leadership throughout an organization . Irurita (1990 ) and Lundrigan (1992 ) conducted rigorous grounded theory analysis of the leadership processes of senior nursing administrators , but restricted their analysis to senior managers . These examples have neglected the some of the processual issues of leadership by continuing the identified problem of concentrating attention on senior managers

Similarly , Sarros (1992 ) interviewed business executives to generate a grounded theory of leadership in an Australian context . This work was restricted to the investigation of successful senior executives of large organizations . The work of Sarros , Butchatsky and Santora (1996 ) also was restricted to an investigation of successful senior executives of large organizations . Likewise , Tierney (1988 ) undertook a comprehensive grounded theory analysis of leadership in a small Roman Catholic liberal arts college in the USA . However , this was restricted to the leadership processes of the college president , and not to the leadership processes buried within the whole organization . Similarly , Martin (1993 ) used a partial grounded theory methodology , but restricted her investigation to the leadership styles of senior managers . One of the originators of grounded theory insists that "grounded theory research is the study of abstract problems and their processes , not units (Glaser , 1992 ,

. 24 "Units " would include people , or leaders , or managers , or CEOs . Because research needs to investigate the process of leadership , the relevance of grounded theory is manifest . Clearly , the research focus should be firstly on the interactions between people which result in change rather than primarily on the behaviors or characteristics of the people themselves . However , by studying mainly senior managers , like Tierney and Martin will uncover leadership processes but these are likely to be of a specific type and representative only of the higher levels of the organization

Other researchers have theorized about leadership , but they also have restricted their data gathering to senior managers only . Brugger (1992 Card (1992 ) and Kirkland (1990 ) investigated the relationship between leadership succession and culture with a partial grounded theory methodology , but in effect investigated senior management succession not the leadership process . Leadership succession is a structural issue rather than a sociological or psychological one . Theorization about structural issues is not excluded from basic social processes , so long as there is a primary focus on psychological issues (Glaser , 1978

The work of McCaslin (1993 ) utilized grounded theory to investigate the leadership process in rural communities . This work is unique in that it investigated the leadership process throughout the community , and did not concentrate only at the senior management level . Similarly , Harchar and Hyle (1996 ) used grounded theory to investigate the instructional leadership processes of people at various levels of the organizational hierarchy . Based on these precedents , leadership research should investigate the leadership process , not a group of people , not a population , and not a rank in the organization . However , as with McCaslin 's and Harchar 's research , the leadership process will relate only to the substantive setting from which it was generated , and will not be generalizable to other settings . On the other hand , since the aim of grounded theory is the generation of substantive and eventually formal theory , it is the quality of the theorizing that is the key issue rather than the question of generalizability

Scarborough Gavares (1993 ) used grounded theory to investigate aspects of the processual nature of leadership , but concentrated specifically on the issue of empowerment rather than on leadership . Scarborough Gavares also concentrated data gathering on the senior management teams of the organizations in question , rather than throughout the whole of the organizations . Likewise , Robbins (1989 ) generated a grounded theory of leadership , but concentrated only on "vision " as one aspect of leadership . This is a shortfall in her research that she acknowledged (1989 ,p . 229 . Of course , empowerment and vision are important variables associated with leadership . However , the problem is that many other important variables are associated with leadership , and they must not be excluded intentionally from any research method which purports to investigate process

So far the usefulness of grounded theory for leadership research has been examined , and the existing attempts at using it for this purpose have been evaluated . It is necessary now to conclude a little more clearly by proposing a method by which grounded theory could be used by researchers

CONCLUSION AND A PROPOSED METHOD

The purpose of this is to put forward the case for using the grounded theory method to examine the nature of the leadership process within a substantive area of inquiry . This purpose involves questioning the nature of leadership as much as it involves describing the grounded theory method . The suggested context of the proposed research is one of change . Grounded theory is a method used in some qualitative research Although its use has not characterized leadership research to date , it has been argued in this and by others there is a clear justification for its use . Scholars as eminent as Bass , Hunt , Rost , Yukl and Alvesson have been saying for years that leadership is a social process , and Glaser , Strauss and others have emphasised that grounded theory generates theory about social processes . The usefulness of grounded theory is therefore manifest . Moreover , the social processes which evolve from grounded theory analysis help with our understanding of leadership not because they exclude psychological or structural issues , but because they integrate them

However , much of the use of grounded theory has not yet examined the nature of the leadership process throughout organizations . Its use has been concentrated at the higher end of organizational hierarchies . Such research has examined leaders or senior managers , and has neglected the process of leadership throughout the organizational hierarchy . It is assumed that leadership can be exhibited at all levels of an organization . Other published "grounded theory " research has not utilised the full method proposed by Glaser and Strauss , or has not progressed past the descriptive stage of analysis . Still other grounded theory leadership research has concentrated on specific elements of the leadership paradigm , thereby excluding other essential elements from consideration . Finally , some grounded theory research has studied structural elements of leadership while neglecting essential consideration of the social and psychological elements

Consequently , a number of research objectives could be proposed to drive future leadership research . By so doing , the above shortfalls might be remedied , and the chances of generating valid and reliable theory about the social influence processes of leadership may be enhanced . The following research objectives relate to the research problems associated with adequately theorizing about the nature of leadership as a social influence process

Investigate change incidents in organizations . The social influence and leadership processes at work during those change incidents will be the focus of investigations . Resultant changes in the perceptions attributions , beliefs and motivations of followers will be investigated Semi-structured and unstructured in-depth interviewing should be the predominant source of data , supplemented with observation and document analysis . People and incidents from all levels of the organization should be the subject of investigation . Inquiry should be about who did what , when and where . But more importantly , it also should be about why and more importantly how outcomes were achieved

Use an analytical method which is appropriate to the study of social processes in organizations . Grounded theory is the suggested sociological research method , and will involve the qualitative analysis of qualitative data . The full , iterative Glaser and Strauss (1967 methodology must be utilized to initiate rigor into the research Computer software such as NUD IST or Ethnogragh can be used to assist with the recording and analysis of data , and to enhance the rigor of the analysis

Generate an integrarive theory of the social influence processes at work in the substantive organizational setting under investigation . Grounded theory analysis of qualitative data will help to ensure that the theory considers all the relevant variables which impact on leadership within that substantive setting . The purpose of the research will be to generate theory , not to test theory . The resultant theory should then be compared with the extant leadership literature . Replication of the research should be attempted in a range of substantive settings with the aim of moving toward a more formal theory of leadership

With these concluding comments in mind , and in view of the arguments for grounded theory as a relevant method by which to research leadership and to generate leadership theory , it is contended that this method will constitute an important direction for leadership research to take in coming years . It will complement and supplement the enormous progress made in recent years of our understanding of leadership . Specifically grounded theory can integrate the complex range of interrelated variables which make up what we know as leadership

Acknowledgments : The author would like to acknowledge the advice and assistance of Alan Bryman , James Sarros , Bruce Millett , and three anonymous reviewers in particular Alan 's input to the ideas and concepts included within this

Table 1

Methodological Examples of the Relationship Between Qualitative and

Quantitative Data and their Analysis

Analysis Qualitative Quantitative

Quantitative Qualitative analysis of Questionnaire surveys

Data quantification rhetoric Experiments

Ethnostatistics Structured interviews

Structured observation

and their analyses

Qualitative Participant observation Statistical content

analysis

Data Unstructured interviewing

Life history

Grounded theory analysis

REFERENCES

Alvesson , M (1996 . Leadership studies : From procedure and abstraction to reflexivity and situation . Leadership Quarterly , 7 (4 , 455-485

Avolio , B . J (1995 . Transformational leadership . Leadership Review Quarterly , 1 (2 , 4 . Bass , B . M (1985 . Leadership and performance beyond expectations . New York : Free Press

Bass , B . M (1990 . Bass and Stogdill 's handbook of leadership : Theory research and managerial applications . New York : Free Press

Bennis , W . G Nanus , B (1985 . Leaders : Strategies for taking charge . New York : Harper and Row

Bolman , L (1993 . Personal correspondence . University of Missouri-Kansas City , November 26

Boyd , C . O (1993 . Phenomenology : The method . In

. L . Munhall C . O Boyd , Nursing research : A qualitative perspective (pp . 99-132 . New York : National League for Nursing Press

Brugger , G . R (1992 . A study of a community college leadership succession event . Doctoral dissertation . The University of Utah

Bryman , A . E (1986 . Leadership and organizations . London : Routledge Kegan Paul . Bryman , A (1988 . Quantity and quality in social research London : Unwin Hyman

Bryman , A (1992 . Charisma and Leadership in Organizations . London Sage

Bryman , A (1993 . Personal correspondence . Loughborougb University Loughborough , Leicester , UK , September 23

Bryman , A , Bresnen , M , Beardworth , A Keil , T (1988 . Qualitative research and the study of leadership . Human Relations , 41 (1 , 13-30

Bryman , A , Gillingwater , D McGuinness , I (1992 . Decision-making processes in community transport organizations : a comparative case study of service providers (Volume 3 , pp . 7187

Bryman , A Burgess , R . G (Eds (1994 . Analyzing qualitative data London : Routledge . Bums , J . M (1978 . Leadership . New York : Harper Row

Card , M . A (1992 . Creating your job : Leadership , executive succession and strategy formation by state agency directors in Ohio . Doctoral dissertation . Ohio State University

Chen , C . C Meindl , J . R (1991 . The construction of leadership images in the popular press : The case of Donald Burr and People Express Administrative Science Quarterly , 36 , 521-51

Chenitz , W . C Swanson , J . M (1986 . From practice to grounded theory : Qualitative research in nursing . Menlo Park , California Addison-Wesley

Conger , J . A (1989 . The charismatic leader : Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership . San Francisco : Jossey Bass

Conger , J . A Kanungo , R . N (1987 . Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings . Academy of Management Review , 12 (4 , 637--647

Conrad , C . F (1978 . A grounded theory of academic change . Sociology of Education , 51 (2 , 101-112

Cook , T . D Campbell , D . T (1979 . Quasi-experimentation : Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings . Boston : Houghton Mifflin

Dawson ,

(1994 . Organisational Change : A Processual Approach . London Paul Chapman Publishing

Denzin , N . K (1970 . The Research Act . Chicago : Aldine Publishing Eichelberger , R . T (1989 . Disciplined inquiry : Understanding and doing educational research . White Plains , NY : Longman

Fagerhaugh , S . Y (1986 . Analysing data for basic social processes . In W . C . Chenitz J . M . Swanson (Eds , From practice to grounded theory Qualitative research in nursing . Menlo Park , CA : Addison-Wesley

Fleishman , E . A , Harris , E . F Burtt , H . E (1955 . Leadership and supervision in industry . Columbus : Bureau of Educational Research , Ohio State University

Gepahart , R .

(1988 . Ethnostatistics : Qualitative foundations for quantitative research . Newbury Park , CA : Sage

Glaser , B (1978 . Theoretical sensitivity . Mill Valley , CA : Sociology Press

Glaser , B . G (1992 . Emergence vs . forcing : Basics of grounded theory analysis . Mill Valley , CA : Sociology Press

Glaser , B Strauss , A (1967 . The discovery of grounded theory Chicago : Aldine Press

Guba , E .G (1978 . Toward a methodology of naturalistic inquiry in educational evaluation . CSE Monograph Series in Evaluation , No . 8 . Los Angeles : UCLA Graduate School of Education

Guba . E .G (1981 . Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries . ETC , 19 , 7591

Harchar , R . L Hyle , A . E (1996 . Collaborative power : A grounded theory of administrative instructional leadership in the elementary school . Journal of Educational Administration , 34 (3 , 15-29

Henrickson , R . L (1989 . Leadership and culture . Doctoral dissertation San Diego : University of San Diego

Henwood , K Pidgeon , N (1995 . Grounded theory and psychological research . The Psychologist , 8 , 115-18

Homans , G . C (1949 . The strategy of Industrial Sociology . American Journal of Sociology , 54 , 330-339

House , R . J Mitchell , T . R (1977 . Path-Goal Theory of Leadership Journal of Contemporary Business , 3 , 81-97

Howell , J . M Higgins , C . A (1990 . Leadership behaviors , influence tactics , and career experiences of champions of technological innovation . Leadership Quarterly , 1 (4 , 249-264

Hunt , J . G (1991 . Leadership : A new synthesis . Newbury Park , CA : Sage .Hunt , J . G Ropo , A (1995 . Multi-level leadership : Grounded theory and mainstream theory applied to the case of general motors . Leadership Quarterly , 6 (3 , 379-412

Irurita , V . F (1990 . Optimizing as a leadership process : A grounded theory study of nurse leaders in Western Australia . PhD Thesis . Perth The University of Western Australia

Irurita , V . F (1996 . Optimizing : A leadership process for transforming mediocrity into excellence-a study of nursing leadership . In Parry , K W (Ed , Leadership research and practice : Emerging themes and new challenges (pp . 125-138 . Melbourne : Pitman Publishing

Jick , T . D (1979 . Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods Triangulation in action . Administrative Science Quarterly , 24 (4 602-611

Kirk , J Miller , M (1986 . Reliability , validity and qualitative research . Beverly Hills , CA : Sage . Kirkland , T .

(1990 . A grounded theory of community college chief executive officer succession

Doctoral dissertation . Ames , IA : Iowa State University . Kotter , J .P (1990 . A Force for change : How leadership differs from management . New York : Free Press

Kouzes , J . M Posner , B . Z (1987 . The leadership challenge : How to get extraordinary things done in organizations . San Francisco : Jossey Bass

Lantis , M (1987 . Two important roles in organizations and communities Human Organization , 46 (3 , 189-199

Law , J (1994 . Organization , narrative , and strategy . In J . Hassard and M . Parker (Eds , Towards a new theory of organizations (pp . 248-268 London : Routledge

Levinson , H Rosenthal , S (1984 . CEO : Corporate leadership in ac...