長榮大學經營管理研究所博士班 經營管理專題研討 學生 : 博一 郭 正 忠 學號： R78062055 101 年 1 月 5 日

1. The Leadership QuarterlyScholarly leadership of the study of leadership:A review of The Leadership Quarterly's second decade, 2000–2009 長榮大學經營管理研究所博士班 經營管理專題研討 學生:博一 郭 正 忠 學號：R78062055 101年1月5日

2. The Leadership Quarterly Scholarly leadership of the study of leadership: A review of The Leadership Quarterly's second decade, 2000–2009 William L. Gardner(1) , Kevin B. Lowe(2) , Todd W. Moss (1) , Kevin T. Mahoney(3) , Claudia C. Cogliser (1) (1) Texas Tech University, United States (2) University of North Carolina-Greensboro, United States (3) Louisiana Tech University, United States Facts & Figures Impact Factor: 2.902  5-Year Impact Factor:4.919  Issues per year: 6 

3. a b s t r a c t • In a reprise of Lowe and Gardner's (2000) review of The Leadership Quarterly's (LQ) first decade as a premier outlet for scholarly leadership research, we review 353 articles published in LQ during its second decade. Multiple methods were employed to prepare this review, including:

4. a b s t r a c t • interviews with the journal's current Senior Editor and Associate Editors; an assessment of LQ‘s impact, reputation, and most cited articles through citation analyses; a content analysis of article type (theory, empirical, and methods), contributors (e.g., discipline, nationality, and institutional affiliation), theoretical foundations, research strategies, sample location/type, data collection methods, and analytical procedures; survey and follow-up focus groups conducted with LQ Editorial Review Board members; and qualitative analyses to assess the prevalent themes, contributions, and trends reflected in LQ during its second decade. Drawing from these sources, we describe anticipated directions for future research.

5. Introduction The purpose of this manuscript is to reviewthe second decade of research published in The Leadership Quarterly (LQ). Inconducting this review we employed multiple methodologies (e.g. content analyses, citation analysis, interviews, andquestionnaires) and considered multiple antecedent variables including editorial staff emphases and reviewer decision processesthat influence what appears in LQ.Thus our broad research questions include: Is there a consensus among leadership scholars that the content of LQ represents the highest level of leadership scholarship? What are the topical characteristics (methods and design) and content (theories and constructs) of the research that appears in LQ?Ourunderstanding of where leadership research might be going?

6. Journal reputation of LQ • LQ's emphasis on rigor and scholarship has led to a natural interest in its quality relative to other management and psychologyjournals. The 2000 LQ content analysis utilized the AnbarIntelligence Service that rated several journals in the strategy contentarea (LQ included) on research and practical implications, readability, and originality. LQ was judged quite favorably on thosedimensions (Lowe & Gardner, 2000). Here, we examine the impact of LQ using multiple impact measures.

7. Journal reputation of LQ The results of our impact analysis are presented in Table 1. • Shows that LQ had an h-index of 37 and a g-index of 50, ranking it 10th on this list of elite journals. • Overall, these statistics show that LQ is comparable with other quality journals in international business and management, many of which appeal to more general audiences. LQ can also be compared favorably with the overall impact factors of other fields:

8. Journal reputation of LQ

9. Most cited articles • To gain further insight into the relative influence of LQ publications from the journal's second decade in comparison to the first, we examined the Top 50 most cited LQ publications. • Table 5 provides a summary of the results by ranking the Top 50 most cited LQ articles in order of cites per year. We also report the total number of cites, the rank in terms of overall cites, and the type of article (theoretical, empirical, and/or special issue).

10. Most cited articles

11. Most cited articles

12. New directions • Fourteen of the leadership theory categories developed through the current content analysis are grouped under the broader New Directions category. These are listed in Table 6 in order of frequency, with Contextual Influences on Leadership being the most common (38/5.6%), followed closely by the Development and Identification of Leaders and Leadership (37/5.4%), Ethical, Servant, Spiritual and Authentic Leadership (36/5.3%), and Leading for Creativity and Innovation (35/5.1%) categories. The emergence of the latter two categories and the Leadership and Emotions and Complexity Theory of Leadership categories were bolstered by the dedication of Yearly Review articles to these topics. The least frequent New Directions categories included Leadership Effects of Task, Technology, Distance and Virtuality (9/1.3%), Ideological and Pragmatic Leadership (8/1.2%), Destructive Leadership (8/1.2%) and Leading Change in Organizations (6/.9%). Nevertheless, the fact that none of these categories were reflected during LQ's first decade suggests that these are ascending theoretical perspectives.

13. New directions

14. Survey results • There is much that leadership scholars can learn about how to improve the likelihood of having their manuscript accepted at LQ. As indicated in Table 12, attention to proper methods, a clear contribution to the leadership literature, and rock-solid use of theory will address the most prevalent failings in recently rejected manuscripts (28%, 25%, and 21%, respectively). Clear writing that has been copyedited to remove unforced errors will also increase the chances of acceptance (11%). The use of data that matches the focal research question, a thorough literature review, and a focus on leadership is also important.

15. Survey results

16. Editorial Policy (Journal內容特色) ◎ The Leadership Quarterly is an international journal of political, social, and behavioral science dedicated to advancing theory, research, and applications concerning leadership. Contributions to thinking about leadership are desired from many disciplinary perspectives, including political science, sociology, economics, anthropology, psychology, and history. Equally desirable are contributions from interdisciplinary fields such as human resource management, international management, administrative science, strategic management, labor studies, and organization theory and behavior. The aim of the journal is to present scholarly research, theory, and developmental application from the diverse fields of inquiry about leadership.

17. Editorial Policy(Journal內容特色) ◎ The journal would like to review studies of leaders from all walks of social life. This includes formal leaders in business and industry, government, labor unions, professional associations, human service organizations, and the military. It also includes people with little or no formal organizational power, such as community elites, consumer opinion leaders, social movement activists, informal leaders in organizations, and others who produce leadership effects without benefit of formal position. Comparative studies of leaders detailing differences and similarities based in nation-state, culture, region, social class, race, gender, and age are welcome.

18. Types of paper 針(對paper提出批判性論點) ◎ LQ encourages the submission of articles by authors working from objectivist, interpretive, critical, or other epistemologies. Given the diversity of perspectives in current research, the journal expects to review a variety of types of articles encompassing the following: • Traditional quantitative and/or qualitative empirical articles are welcome. Their quality will be judged in terms of the importance of the issue, the underlying logic of the argument relevant to theory, the rigor and appropriateness of the methods employed, and the contribution to knowledge resulting from the research.• Integrative research reviews also are welcome. These articles may be traditional narrative reviews or meta-analyses that result in theories, models, or further research agenda. The use of meta-analysis is encouraged whenever appropriate data are available.

19. Types of paper (針對paper提出批判性論點) • Traditional theoretical pieces that suggest new theory are welcome. These articles should advance conventional thought, include testable propositions or hypotheses, correct flawed thinking, redirect current theoretical views, or advance new research paradigms, thus, bridging the gap between theory construction and theory testing.• Well-constructed, well-argued conceptual papers that are significantly thought-provoking and on an important topic also are welcome. These articles, like traditional theoretical pieces, should add new thought to the literature, extend current thought in a new direction, pose new questions/issues, or propose a new paradigm. Their quality, as with traditional theoretical pieces, will be judged in terms of insightfulness, creativity, completeness, and the degree to which they are amenable to empirical investigation.

20. Future research directions未來的研究方向 第一，衡量問卷的改善(如:建構更能直接衡量領導構念的問卷)。 第二，整合跨領域的學者(如:心理學家，社會學家，人類學家，和認知科學家……)及多元的研究方法(如:內容分析，三角測量法……) ，來投入領導研究。 第三，導入跨層次的研究，理解領導是如何制定 ，並在不同層次來同時評估。其目標是了解不同層次的領導者和領導的影響。

21. Future research directions未來的研究方向 第四，運用實驗研究法來更嚴謹審慎的評估研究模式中的因果關係(可利用實驗設計的優勢,來闡述在領導的過程中操作的因果關係)。 第五，引用跨領域的研究方法及理論(如:經濟學博弈理論---使用行為經濟學家開發的實驗方法，以測試博弈論來斷定有關領導決策)。 第七，運用大量數據來驗證不同的研究模式，以更適和或精確的模型擴展現有的領導理論。

22. Journal所得啟示 • 領導一直是一個引人矚目的概念，在漫長的領導研究歷史中，雖然在領導的定義上趨向多元，但它始終牽引著社會科學領域的相關研究。1990 年後，領導領域知識有著明顯的發展議題，近年來隨著全球化環境的快速變遷，對領導的本質與發展有著不同的詮釋與思維。 • 有關領導理論的研究很多，綜合相關學者的觀點，領導理論研究的發展，大致可分為實證與非實證兩個階段，以20世紀為分水嶺，之前為非實證階段，之後為實證階段。 • 藉由領導研究的過去、現在與未來的省思，來探究領導發展的議題，進而提出領導的實踐策略。

23. 後續發展與建議 • 領導發展議題的探究乃一長期且持續性的工作，任何組織欲永續經營與發展便無法跳脫領導發展的框架。有效的教育領導品質便是教育領導成就的展現，面對領導的發展趨勢與挑戰，領導者應有全新的思維與領導取向，藉以做為領導者有效因應領導發展方向，以建構更佳的領導品質。 • 領導發展有其基本要素，即評估、挑戰、支持。領導發展可依據此三要素來設計。 • 針對各種領導理論進行深入研究…藉由理論的支持，強化文章深度…

24. 後續發展

25. 後續發展

26. 感謝聆聽 敬請指教 建立關係、共同互動、雙方獲利 ~THINK FOR YOUR REVIEW~ (敬重他人之智慧財產權) (以學習之心態、造就明日研究之光環)