The present study focuses on a manager’s understanding of leadership and how this guides – or does not guide practice. The paper reports an empirical in-depth study of a middle manager in an international manufacturing company. We link our discussion to both – the mainstream leadership studies, which assume that managers have a solid type of leadership behavior, and authors with a meaning-oriented, linguistic approach to leadership, in which language, self-awareness, and behavior are linked. The present study suggests that leadership attempts can vary, be divisive, and that a manager’s advocacy efforts are driven by a multitude of different, partly opposing, forces, meaning a decoupling of ideas and behavior in leadership practice. The paper raises the question of whether managers’ meanings of leadership correspond with what they do in practice.
AlvessonM (2011b) Leadership and organizational culture. In: BrymanACollinsonDGrintKet al. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Leadership Studies, London: Sage, pp. 151–164.
Alvesson M and Kärreman D (2016) Intellectual failure and ideological success in organization studies: The case of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Inquiry 25: 139–152.
AlvessonMSpicerA (2012) Critical leadership studies: The case of critical performativity. Human Relations65(3): 367–390.
8.
AlvessonMSveningssonS (2003) The good visions, the bad micro-management and the ugly ambiguity: Contradictions of (non-)leadership in a knowledge-intensive company. Organization Studies24(6): 961–988.
9.
Antonakis J, Cianciolo AT and Sternberg RJ (2004) Leadership: Past, present, future. In: Antonakis J, Cianciolo AT and Sternberg RJ (Eds) The nature of leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp: 3–15.
10.
BarleySRKundaG (2001) Bringing work back in. Organization Science12(1): 76–95.
11.
BresnenMHydePHodgsonDet al. (2015) Leadership talk: From managerialism to leaderism in health care after the crash. Leadership11(4): 451–470.
12.
BoldenRGoslingJHawkinsBet al. (2011) Exploring Leadership, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13.
Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K, et al. (eds) (2011) The SAGE Handbook of Leadership. London: Sage.
14.
BurnsJM (1978) Leadership, New York, NY: Harper Row.
15.
CarrollBLevyL (2008) Defaulting to management: Leadership defined by what it is not. Organization15(1): 75–96.
16.
ChemersM (2003) Leadership effectiveness: Functional, constructivist and empirical perspectives. In: Van KnippenbergDHoggM (eds) Leadership and Power, London: Sage, pp. 5–17.
17.
CrevaniLLindgrenMPackendorffJ (2010) Leadership, not leaders. On the study of leadership as practices and interactions. Scandinavian Journal of Management26: 77–86.
18.
CollinsonDL (2014) Dichotomies, dialectics and dilemmas: New directions for critical leadership studies. Leadership10(1): 36–55.
19.
CunliffeAL (2009) The philosopher leader: On relationalism, ethics and reflexivity – A critical perspective on teaching leadership. Management Learning40(1): 87–101.
20.
CunliffeALEriksenM (2011) Relational leadership. Human Relations64(11): 1425–1449.
Goodman P and associates (1982) Change in organizations : new perspectives on theory, research, and practice, pp. 47–68.
28.
GronnP (2002) Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. Leadership Quarterly13: 423–451.
29.
HolmbergITyrstrupM (2010) Well then – What now? An everyday approach to managerial leadership. Leadership6: 353–372.
30.
HouseRAdityaR (1997) The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis?Journal of Management23(3): 409–473.
31.
HuntJG (2004) What is leadership? In: AntonakisJCiancioloATSternbergRJ (eds) The Nature of Leadership, Thousand Oakes: Sage, pp. 19–47.
32.
HunterSTBedell-AversKEMumfordMD (2007) The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. The Leadership Quarterly18: 435−446.
33.
JacksonBParryKW (2008) A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book About Studying Leadership, London: Sage.
34.
KellyS (2008) Leadership: A categorical mistake?Human Relations61(6): 763–782.
35.
KellyS (2014) Towards a negative ontology of leadership. Human Relations67(8): 905–922.
36.
LarssonMLundholmSE (2010) Leadership as work-embedded influence: A micro-discursive analysis of an everyday interaction in a bank. Leadership6(2): 159–184.
37.
LehtinenEPälliP (2011) Conversational use of genres in managerial meetings. Scandinavian Journal of Management27: 287–296.
38.
LundholmS (2011) Meta-Managing: A Study on How Superiors and Subordinates Manage Their Relationship in Everyday Work. Lund Studies in Economics and Management 123, Lund: Lund Business Press.
39.
Mintzberg H (1975) The manager’s job: Folklore and fact. Harvard Business Review July/August: 49–61.
40.
ParryKBrymanA (2006) Leadership in organizations. In: CleggSRHardyCLawrenceTBet al. (eds) The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies, London: Sage, pp. 447–468.
41.
PondyLR (1978) Leadership is a language game. In: McCallMWLombardoMM (eds) Leadership: Where Else Can We Go?, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 87–99.
42.
PotterJWetherellM (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour, London: Sage.
43.
RaelinJ (2011) From leadership-as-practice to leaderful practice. Human Relations7(2): 195–211.
44.
RortyR (1989) Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
RottmannCSacksRReeveD (2015) Engineering leadership: Grounding leadership theory in engineers’ professional identities. Leadership11(3): 351–373.
46.
Shotter J and Gergen KJ (eds) (1989) Texts of Identity. Sage: London.
47.
SveningssonSLarssonM (2006) Fantasies of leadership: Identity work. Leadership2(2): 203–224.
48.
TengbladS (2006) Is there a “New Managerial Work”? A comparison with Henry Mintzberg’s classic study 30 years later. Journal of Management Studies43(7): 1437–1461.
49.
Yukl G (2011) Contingency theories of effective leadership. In: Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K, et al. (eds) The Sage handbook of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 286–298.
