The Ohio State Leadership Studies have contributed in general to the fields of management and organizational behavior, and specifically to the field of leadership. These contributions can be summarized in several categories. Process contributions include the use of an interdisciplinary approach to the study of leadership phenomena as well as a consistent emphasis on performing high-quality research. Conceptually, the Ohio State studies helped to shift the focus of the field from a universal trait approach to a more situational, behavioral-based view. Methodologically, the Ohio State studies contributed a model of programmatic construct validation and investigation, and provided future researchers with useful research instruments. In sum, these contributions are substantial and are worthy of continued recognition.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association. Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, D.C.: 1974.
2.
Carter, L. F., & Nixon, M.An investigation of the relationship between four criteria of leadership ability for three different tasks. Journal of Psychology, 1949, 23, 245-261.
3.
Cureton, E. E.Validity, reliability, and baloney. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1950, 10, 94-86.
4.
Fleishman, E. A.The description of supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1953, 37, 1-6.
5.
Fleishman, E. A.Manual for the leadership opinion questionnaire, 1969 revision. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1969.
6.
Fleishman, E. A.Twenty years of consideration and structure. In E. A. Fleishman & J. C. Hunt (Eds.), Current developments in the study of leadership. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1973.
7.
Greene, C. N.A longitudinal analysis of relationships among leader behavior and subordinate satisfaction. In T. B. Green & D. R. Ray (Eds.), Academy of Management Proceedings. Boston: 1973, 433-440.
8.
Greene, C. N., & Schriesheim, C. A.Leader-group interactions: A longitudinal field investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, in press.
9.
Hemphill, J. K.Relations between the size of the group and the behavior of superior leaders. Journal of Social Psychology, 1950, 32, 11-22.
10.
House, R. J.A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 321-338.
11.
House, R. J., & Dessler, G.The path-goal theory of leadership: Some post hoc and a priori tests. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Contingency approaches to leadership. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1974.
12.
Jacobs, T. O.Leadership and exchange in formal organizations. Alexandria, Va.: Human Resources Research Organization, 1970.
13.
Kerr, S., & Schriesheim, C.Consideration, initiating structure, and organizational criteria—An update of Korman's 1966 review. Personnel Psychology, 1974, 27, 555-568.
14.
Kerr, S., Schriesheim, C. A., Murphy, C. J., & Stogdill, R. M.Toward a contingency theory of leadership based upon the consideration and initiating structure literature. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1974, 12, 62-82.
15.
Morris, R. T., & Seeman, M.The problem of leadership: An interdisciplinary approach. American Journal of Sociology, 1950, 56, 149-155.
16.
Nunnally, J. C.Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.
17.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. E.Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1970, 15, 150-163.
18.
Schriesheim, C. A., & DeNisi, A. S.Effects of format variation on the convergent and discriminant validity of two leadership description questionnaires. In C. N. Greene & P. H. Birnbaum (Eds.), Proceedings of the Midwest Academy of Management Conference. Bloomington, Indiana: Academy of Management, Midwest Division, 1978, 219-225.
19.
Schriesheim, C. A., & Kerr, S.Theories and measures of leadership: A critical appraisal of current and future directions. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1977.
20.
Schriesheim, C. A., & Von Glinow, M. A.The path-goal theory of leadership: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 1977, 20, 398-405.
21.
Scott, E. L.Leadership and perceptions of organization. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1956 (Research Monograph 82).
22.
Shartle, C. L.Introduction. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1957 (Research Monograph 88).
23.
Shaw, M. E., & Costanzo, P. R.Theories of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
24.
Stogdill, R. M.Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 1948, 25, 35-72.
25.
Stogdill, R. M.Leadership and structures of personal interaction. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1957 (Research Monograph 84).
26.
Stogdill, R. M.Individual behavior and group achievement. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959.
27.
Stogdill, R. M.Basic concepts for a theory of organization. Management Science, 1967, 13, B-666-B-676.
28.
Stogdill, R. M., & Coons, A. E. (Eds.). Leader behavior: Its description and measurement. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1957 (Research Monograph 84).
29.
Stogdill, R. M., & Shartle, C. L.Methods in the study of administrative leadership. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1955 (Research Monograph 80).
30.
Stogdill, R. M., & Shartle, C. L.Patterns of administrative performance. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1956 (Research Monograph 81).
31.
Stogdill, R. M., Shartle, C. L., Scott, E. L., Coons, A. E., & Jaynes, W. E.A predictive study of administrative work patterns. Columbus: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1956 (Research Monograph 85).
32.
Yukl, G.Toward a behavioral theory of leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1971, 6, 414-440.
