Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Analyzing roles and leadership in organizations from cognitive complexity and meaning-making perspectives
Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, The Jönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, The Jönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare. Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ. IMPROVE (Improvement, innovation, and leadership in health and welfare).ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8952-8773
2018 (English)In: Behavioral Development, ISSN 1942-0722, Vol. 23, no 1, p. 63-80Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Organizations can be seen as social systems with hierarchical structures and roles at different levels of complexity with correspondingly different complexity of tasks. This article applies the perspectives of two theories from the field of adult development, namely, the model of hierarchical complexity (MHC) and ego development theory (EDT) to analyze stratified systems theory (SST). Although the theories are not regarded as strictly comparable and commensurable on account of differences in basic assumptions and methods of the theories, the analysis leads to the conclusion that descriptions of role complexity and individual capabilities in SST, to some extent, correspond to descriptions of developmental levels according to the MHC and EDT. Both comparisons support the notion that task and leadership complexity increases with organizational level, and thereby demonstrates support for the existence of qualitatively different levels of leadership. However, based on the methodological choices of the study, it is beyond the scope of the article to validate the key concepts, constructs in SST, as well as provide support or nonsupport for the proposed value of application in practice. Furthermore, we point out the lack of a more thorough analysis and comparison between the theories built on rich empirical material. Nevertheless, we conclude that the MHC, EDT and SST are fruitful lenses that can further the understanding of organizations as social systems with hierarchical structures.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
American Psychological Association (APA), 2018. Vol. 23, no 1, p. 63-80
Keywords [en]
role complexity, leadership at different levels, the model of hierarchical complexity, ego development theory, stratified systems theory
National Category
Work Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-40407DOI: 10.1037/bdb0000067OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-40407DiVA, id: diva2:1218907
Available from: 2018-06-15 Created: 2018-06-15 Last updated: 2018-06-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Törnblom, OskarKjellström, Sofia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Törnblom, OskarKjellström, Sofia
By organisation
The Jönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and WelfareHHJ. IMPROVE (Improvement, innovation, and leadership in health and welfare)
Work Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf