Findings reported in the research literature concerned with labeling, status and communication in groups, power, expertise, responsibility, and resistance support the position that leader-follower distinctions in organizations are likely to undermine the very goals they are established to achieve. Rather than being inspired by leaders to do their best, it is likely that followers will either limit themselves to status-appropriate behaviors or resist their low power roles. A case study is presented describing one organization's comprehensive set of internal structures that allows them to successfully fulfill leadership functions without creating leader roles. By drawing comparisons between this organization and another enterprise that has a flat structure, some preliminary suggestions regarding necessary conditions for the success of leaderless organizational structures are made. The implications for behavioral scientists are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ADAMS, S. J.Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 67, 422-436.
2.
ALBANESE, R., & VAN FLEET, D. D.Rational behavior in groups: The free-riding tendency. Academy of Management Review, 1985, 10, 244-255.
3.
ARCHER, D.Power in groups: Self-concept changes of powerful and powerless group members. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1974, 10, 208-220.
4.
BACK, K. W., FESTINGER, L., HYMOVITCH, B., KELLEY, H. H., SCHACTER, S., & THIBAUT, J. W.The methodology of rumor transmission. Human Relations, 1950, 3, 307-312.
5.
BIDDLE, B. J.Role theory: Expectations, identities, and behaviors. New York: Academic Press, 1979.
6.
BJERSTEDT, A.The rotation phenomenon in small groups. Education and Psychological Interactions, 1965, 4, 1-7.
7.
BLAKE, R. R., & MOUTON, J. S.Group dynamics-key to decision making. Houston: Gulf, 1961.
8.
BRAMEL, D., & FRIEND, R.Hawthorne, the myth of the docile worker and class bias in psychology. American Psychologist, 1981, 36, 867-878.
BROWN, M. H., & HOSKING, D. M.Distributed leadership and skilled performance as successful organization in social movements. Human Relations, 1986, 39, 65-79.
11.
BURNS, T., & STALKER, G. M.The management of innovation. London: Tavistock, 1961.
12.
CARRELL, M. R., & DITTRICH, J. E.Equity theory: The recent literature, methodological considerations, and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 1978, 3, 202-210.
13.
COLE, R. E.Work, mobility and participation: A comparative study of American and Japanese industry. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.
14.
CUMMINGS, T. G.Self-regulating work groups: A sociotechnical synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 1978, 3, 625-634.
15.
DAI, B.A socio-psychiatric approach to personality organization. In A. Rose (Ed.), Mental health and mental disorder. New York: Norton, 1955, pp. 314-324.
16.
DOWLING, W. F.Consensus management at Graphic Controls. Organizational Dynamics, Winter 1977, 23-47.
17.
EVAN, W. M.Hierarchy, alienation, commitment, and organization effectiveness. Human Relations, 1973, 30, 77-94.
18.
EVANS, R. R. (Ed.), Readings in collective behavior. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969.
19.
FRENCH, J. R. P., Jr., & RAVEN, B.The bases of social power. In E. D. Cartwright and A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics. Evanston, Illinois: Row, Peterson, 1960.
20.
GERARD, H. B.Some effects of status, role clarity, and group goal clarity upon the individual's relations to group process. Journal of Personality, 1957, 25, 475-488.
21.
GIROUX, H.Theories of reproduction and resistance in the new sociology of education: A critical analysis. Harvard Educational Review, 1983, 53, 257-293.
22.
HARE, A. P.Handbook of small group research (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press, 1976.
23.
HERBST, P. G.Autonomous group functioning. London: Tavistock Publications, 1962.
24.
HOLLANDER, E. P.Leadership dynamics. New York: Free Press, 1978.
25.
INGLE, G. M. Keeping alternative institutions alternative. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Psychology Department, University of Massachusetts, 1980.
26.
JANDA. K. F.Towards the explication of the concept of leadership in terms of the concept of power. Human Relations, 1960, 13, 345-363.
27.
JOREEN (1973). The tyranny of structurelessness. In A. Koedt,E. Levine, and A. Rapone (Eds.), Radical feminism. New York: Quadrangle, 1973.
28.
KATZ, D., & KAHN, R. L.The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley, 1978.
29.
KELLEY, H. H.Communication in experimentally created hierarchies. Human Relations, 1951, 4, 39-56.
30.
KERR, S., & JERMIER, J. M.Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1978, 22, 375-403.
31.
LANGER, E. J., & BENEVENTO, A.Self-induced dependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 886-893.
32.
LAWLER, E. E., III. The new plant revolution. Organizational Dynamics, Winter 1978, 3-12.
33.
LEMBCKE, J.The workplace democracy movement: A success, but for whom?Monthly Review, 1982, 52-58.
34.
MANSBRIDGE, J.Town meeting democracy. Working Papers for a New Society, Summer 1973, 5-15.
35.
MARTIN, S.Managing without managers. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1983.
36.
McCASKEY, M. B.An introduction to organizational design. California Management Review, 1974, 17, 13-20.
37.
MECHANIC, D.Sources of power of lower participations in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1962, 7, 349-364.
38.
MEINDL, J. R., EHRLICH, S. B., & DUKERICH, J. M.The romance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1985, 30, 78-102.
39.
MERTON, R. K.Social theory and social structure (revised ed.). New York: Free Press, 1957.
40.
MILLER, D.The study of social relations: Situation, identity and social interaction. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of science (Vol. 5). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.
41.
MILNE, M. J.The Gorey details. Management Review, 1985, 74, 16-17.
42.
MORGENBESSER, M., NOTKIN, S., McCALL, N., GROSSMAN, B., & NACHREINER COREY, E.The evolution of three alternative social service agencies. Catalyst, 1981, 11, 71-83.
43.
MULDER, M.Power equalization through participation?Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 31-39.
44.
NAGEL, J. H.Participation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1987.
45.
NAPIER, R. W., & GERSHENFELD, M. K.Groups: Theory and experience. (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1985.
46.
OUCHI, W. G.Theory Z: How American business can meet the Japanese challenge. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1981.
47.
PATEMAN, C.Participation and democratic theory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1970.
48.
PFEFFER, J.The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 1977, 2, 104-112.
49.
RAVEN, B. H., & RUBIN, J. Z.Social psychology: People in Groups. New York: Wiley, 1976.
50.
RAYNOR, D. W. L.Gore: Creating a business without bosses. Workplace Democracy, 1985, 12, 6,16.
51.
ROSENTHAL, R., & JACOBSON, L.Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968.
52.
ROTHSCHILD-WHITT, J.The collectivist organization: An alternative to bureaucratic models. American Sociological Review, 1979, 44, 509-527.
SIMMONS, J., & MARES, W.Working together: Employee participation in action. New York: New York University Press, 1985.
55.
STERN, R.The defense of cooperative values in "alternative" organizations. Sociologische Gids, 1983, 30, 237-246.
56.
STODGILL, R. M.Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press, 1974.
57.
STRAUSS, G.Some notes on power equalization. In H. J. Leavitt (Ed.), The social science of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, pp. 39-44.
