This paper returns to the original focus of my earlier 'Leading Questions' article (Collinson, 2017) which questioned Joe Raelin’s (excessive) claims that LAP is a distinct ‘movement’, particularly new and supercedes post-heroic perspectives and is more critical than critical leadership studies. Arguing that Raelin's claims overstate the value of LAP, this rejoinder draws on Giddens’ structuration theory to illustrate my points about structure, practice and resistance in relation to the foregoing responses from Leadership As Practice (LAP) contributors (Raelin et al, 2018).
Collinson M (2017) Leading questions: What's new about Leadership-as Practice? Leadership. Epub ahead of print September 5 2017. DOI: 10.1177/1742715017726879.
2.
GiddensA (1976 [1993]) New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. 2nd ed.
Cambridge:
Polity Press.
3.
GiddensA (1979) Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis.
London:
Macmillan.
4.
Raelin JA (2011) From leadership-as-practice to leaderful practice. Leadership 7(2): 195-211.
5.
RaelinJ (2016) Introduction. In: RaelinJA (ed) Leadership-as-Practice: Theory and Application.
London:
Routledge, pp. 1–17.
6.
RaelinJ (2017)
Leadership-as-practice: Theory and application: An editor’s reflection. Leadership13(2): 215–221.
7.
Raelin JA, Kempster S, Youngs H, Carroll, B and Jackson B (2018) Practicing leadership-as-practice in content and manner. Leadership. Epub ahead of print February 1 2018. DOI: 10.1177/1742715017752422.
