Leadership studies in brazilian events: the walked paths

 

 

Estudos sobre liderança em eventos brasileiros: os caminhos percorridos

 

Luiz Henrique da Silva1, Tatiana Ghedine2,

Christiane Mendes Drozdek Pereira3 e Alessandra Yula Tutida4

 

1 Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil, Doutorando em Administração, e-mail: luizhenrique301@hotmail.com

2 Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Brasil, Doutorado em Administração, e-mail: tghedine@univali.br

3 Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Brasil, Doutoranda em Administração, e-mail: christiane.drozdek@gmail.com

4 Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Brasil, Doutoranda em Administração, e-mail: sachatutida@hotmail.com

 

Recebido em: 29/08/2020 - Revisado em: 20/04/2021 - Aprovado em: 15/08/2021 - Disponível em: 01/10/2021

Abstract

This research aimed to analyze the scientific research on leadership articles published in the EnANPAD and SemeAD annals in the period of 2014 - 2018. It is a bibliometric, quantitative and descriptive study. Publications from academic Personnel Management divisions were used, totaling 61 articles. The following were verified: number of articles, theme`s focus, most referenced articles, production characterization, concepts, methodologies and proposals for future research. The results demonstrate studies that sought to understand leadership as a process of influencing people, aiming to achieve common goals, understand and improve the leaders` role in the development of teams and improvement of organizational results.

Keywords: Leadership; Academic Production, Bibliometric.

 

Resumo

Esta pesquisa teve como objetivo analisar a pesquisa científica sobre liderança publicada nos anais do EnANPAD e SemeAD no período de 2014 - 2018. Trata-se de um estudo bibliométrico, quantitativo e descritivo. Utilizou-se publicações das divisões acadêmicas de Gestão de Pessoas, totalizando 61 artigos. Foram verificados: número de artigos, foco das temáticas, obras mais referenciadas, caracterização da produção, conceitos, metodologias e propostas para pesquisas futuras. Os resultados demonstram estudos que buscaram compreender a liderança como um processo de influência sobre pessoas, objetivando alcançar metas em comum e entender e aperfeiçoar o papel do líder no desenvolvimento de equipes e melhoria dos resultados organizacionais.

Palavras-chave: Liderança; Produção Acadêmica; Bibliométrica.

 

1 Introduction

 

Analyzes of scientific productions on fields or areas of knowledge usually have the literature already produced as their object of research. In this type of investigation, we seek to gather information about the field development, paradigms, agents` performance profile and interaction involved in the production and dissemination of knowledge, among other topics (SANTOS; KOBASHI, 2009; TURANO; CAVAZOTTE, 2016). These studies can be found in the main databases, both electronic and printed. In such investigations, there is a wide use of bibliometric techniques (SILVA; SIENA, 2015). Bibliometric studies are relevant because they allow the produced knowledge to be outline and also guide researches to shape new perspectives to be explored in the future (GEMELLI; FRAGA; PRESTES, 2019).

In recent years, it has been observed that bibliometric studies in the area of Administration have become increasingly recurrent. However, in the Human Resources (HR) area in Brazil, the first published studies were “Academic production in human resources in Brazil: 1991-2000” (TONELLI et al., 2003) and “Academic production in human resources in Brazil: fact or fiction?” (BARBOSA, 2004). After these first two publications, several articles were published, focusing on specific themes, such as “Professional skills: an analysis of Brazilian scientific production from 1999 to 2004” (ROSA; CORTIVO; GODOI, 2006) and “A bibliometric analysis of the literature on strategy and performance evaluation” (LACERDA; ENSSLIN; ENSSLIN, 2012).

However, in a preliminary survey conducted on the SPELL database, it was found that there were few surveys (DELFINO; SILVA; ROHDE, 2010; FONSECA; PORTO; ANDRADE, 2015) presenting a bibliometric study on leadership based on Brazilian surveys and none depicting exclusively the proceedings of the Encontro Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração - EnANPAD and Seminários em Administração - SemeAD, which is the focus of this article. Thus, it is expected that this article contributes not only with a theoretical and bibliometric aspect, but also to the debate on the theme of leadership, proposing to analyze the scientific published research in the annals of EnANPAD and SemeAD from 2014 to 2018.

The choice for scientific events refers to the fact that the presented articles are very current, since publications in scientific periodics require a longer period of time for their publication, a fact that also justifies the choice of analysis from the last five years. As journals recommend using articles from the past five years, this bibliometric analysis seeks to present gaps in recent research and contribute to proposals for future research on leadership.

To carry out this analysis on leadership, this article initially presents the conceptual bases of the research, its main theories and leadership styles. Then, the methodological procedures used for bibliometric analysis. Finally, the analysis, results discussion and the final considerations are presented.

 

2 Theoretical Reference

 

Although discussions on the term leadership have come a long way through history, scientific research on the topic began only in the 20th century. Initial research was primarily focused on the determinants of leadership effectiveness and sought to discover which characteristics, skills, behaviors or situational aspects determined how much a leader is able to influence followers and accomplish task objectives. There was also a growing interest in understanding leadership as a shared process in a team or organization, that is, the reasons why some people emerge as leaders and the determinants of a leader’s actions (YUKL, 2013).

The importance of leadership is highlighted by the specialized literature in management as a differential factor for better organizational performance (ALVES, 2010). The definition of the concept of leadership is considered arbitrary and subjective, and there is no single correct definition that absorbs its essence (YUKL, 2013). This difficulty in identifying it as a single definition is explained by the fact that the concept of leadership is in a continuous process of transformation (DAY; HARRISON, 2007), varying according to the approach or current adopted, depending on the focus established by the researchers’ line of study (CAMPOS et al., 2013), and by the individual perspectives and aspects of interest (YUKL, 2013).

However, some aspects are common in most definitions of leadership, they are: leadership is related to a group phenomenon and refers to a process of influence exerted by the leader intentionally on his followers to structure, guide and facilitate tasks and relationships (BERGAMINI, 1994; YUKL, 2013). Bianchi, Quisida and Foroni (2017) highlighted that the concepts of leadership underwent changes, as they were first centered on the leader and then they started to consider the group of people involved in the influence process. There was also the alignment of the term with the organizational guidelines, using in the concepts words such as objectives, goals and results.

For a better understanding of the theme, Chart 1 presents the transformation of leadership thinking, showing the level of complexity, its definitions, main theories and the focus of development.

 

Chart 1 - Transformation of leadership thinking

 

Source: adapted from Day and Harrison (2007).

In the first column of Chart 1, the level of complexity changes, progressing from the most basic to the most advanced. The second column provides the evolution of leadership concepts, progressing from a role-based authority (basic), to a process of influence which considers the importance of roles in this process (medium) to a property shared by a social system between individuals, teams and organizations (advanced). The third column points out some theories established by leadership that portray the understanding of what leadership can be (DAY; HARRISON, 2007).

The personality traits theory (basic level of complexity) seeks to identify qualities and personal characteristics that differentiate leaders from non-leaders (BIANCHI; QUISHIDA; FORONI, 2017). This theory assumes that traits are the best way to understand personality and there are some general characteristics that cause individuals to react differently from one another (FLEESON; JAYAWICKREME, 2015). Some main traits include: driving, leadership motivation, honesty and integrity, self-confidence, cognitive ability and business knowledge (KIRKPATICK; LOCKE, 1991).

Behavioral theory, on the other hand, identifies behavioral characteristics that contribute to the differentiation of people from leaders or non-leaders (BIANCHI; QUISHIDA; FORONI, 2017). From a behavioral perspective, it is understood that the set of attributes necessary for leadership can be acquired, modified, adapted or learned, in order to adapt to the different leadership styles, followers` profiles and the different perspectives and paths to reach organizational objectives (VERSIANI et al., 2019).

The leader-member exchange theory (medium level of complexity), also known as LMX, explains the nature of the relationship between leaders and followers and how this relationship affects the leadership process (HORNER, 1997). The theory suggests that relationships that promote high performance are linked to trust, open communication and mutual sharing, on the other hand, the lack of this interaction, generates low return in leadership performance. A relevant aspect in the LMX theory is the fact that it considers that the result is related to the way the leader understands the context, for example the culture and the organizational climate, since the leadership is responsible for disseminating and shaping factors incorporated in the organizational environment (KAUPPILA, 2016).

At the advanced level of complexity, shared leadership is considered a process of interactive and dynamic influence between people in groups, whereby multiple individuals can assume roles of leaders and followers according to the needs of the group in different situations in time (SWEENEY; CLARKE; HIGGS, 2019). Collective leadership involves several people requiring various types of influential relationships that are fluid in the course of team development (CONTRACTOR et al., 2012). Connective leadership is born out of new connections between different individuals and groups, these connections are created by technology, such as the Internet and social media for beginners (LIPMAN-BLUMEN, 2017). Theories of shared collective and connective leadership reinforce the contingency character and show that variables such as processes, culture and organizational aspects are linked to the dependency relationship between the leadership and individuals and organizations (BIANCHI; QUISHIDA; FORONI, 2017).

The last column of Chart 1 presents the focus of leadership development that advances the development of individual skills (basic), later, added to relationship building (medium) and finally, adding empowerment, collaboration and work beyond borders (advanced) (DAY; HARRISON, 2007). The transformation of leadership thinking reflects fundamental changes in the way work is being organized, in the identification of factors associated with its effectiveness and in the recognition of an important catalyst of collective relations and excellence in organizations (BIANCHI; QUISHIDA; FORONI, 2017).

In leadership theories, some leadership styles are addressed in order to investigate the relationship between the leader and his followers. The autocratic style is defined as the use of control and direction behaviors by leaders aimed at centralizing decision-making and the concentration of power (HOOGH; GREER; HARTOG, 2015) that reflects a dominant style with negative implications for many members (HARMS et al., 2018). The liberal style is marked by the absence of leadership and considered the most ineffective, according to the vast majority of research on the subject (NORTHOUSE, 2017; YUKL, 2013). The liberal style attributes total autonomy to the members and the leader intervenes only when he deems it necessary (ESCANDON-BARBOSA; HURTADO-AYALA, 2016).

The democratic or participatory style is determined by the communication between leaders and subordinates, involving the use of decision-making procedures that allow the followers to participate and their opinions are considered (ESCANDON-BARBOSA; HURTADO-AYALA, 2016; YUKL, 2013). The democratic leader encourages the active involvement of members in activities (CHEONG et al., 2019) and incorporates participatory leadership behaviors, listening to suggestions, communicating with its members (LI; LIU; LUO, 2018). The sense of involvement and empowerment helps members to overcome resistance to change and support their leader (AHMED et al., 2018).

Leadership styles should be considered as an important variable in the organizational context, as they can influence and direct the individuals’ behavior adaptation or modification (LUNARDI; DESENHARD; ZONATTO, 2019), leading teams to achieve organizational goals and maximize performance (GIUSTINA; GASPARETTO; LUNKES, 2020). The leadership style adopted by the leader influences the way he interacts with his followers, in turn, the adopted style is capable of presenting roles that are related and coexist, and the leader can use several roles at the same time in specific situations. It is up to the leader to seek the best way to act in his team with the purpose of reaching the defined objectives. Leadership roles and styles have also changed as organizations change over the years, and new leadership theories have emerged, demonstrating that the theme of leadership has been constantly changing.

 

3 Methodology

 

This study is classified as quantitative and descriptive, since its objective is to analyze the scientific research on leadership published in the annals of EnANPAD and SemeAD in the period from 2014 to 2018. To perform the data analysis, a bibliometric study was used with a focus in content analysis, which according to Moraes (1999) consists of a research methodology that seeks to describe and interpret the content of all types of documents and texts. Content analysis was performed using the following chronological poles proposed by Bardin (2011): a) pre-analysis; b) exploration of the material; and c) treatment of results.

In the pre-analysis phase, publications were used only from the academic divisions of People Management in the annals of EnANPAD and SemeAD from 2014 to 2018, this division was chosen due to the leadership theme, which is extremely linked to people development studies. In the annals of the events, articles containing the word “leadership” in the title, abstract or keywords, in Portuguese and English, were searched. Only articles that contained any discussion on Leadership were selected for bibliometric analysis and those that only cited the term and did not bring empirical or theoretical discussion on the topic were excluded.

Chart 2 presents the articles found in the annals of the events researched and analyzed in the Endnote software version x.9. Articles without discussion on the theme of Leadership, both theoretical and empirical, and articles that contained only the publication of the expanded abstract were eliminated from the total. Thus, the final total of articles in the EnANPAD annals were 28 and in the SemeAD annals, 33 articles, totaling a sample of 61 articles that presented thematic discussion on Leadership, which were used for analysis of this research.

 

Chart 2 - Pre-analysis results

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

In the exploration phase, some analyzes were selected to be carried out: a) production characterization, in which the number of articles per year, focus of the themes and most referenced works were verified; b) production characterization , presenting the authors who published the most and those who published together; c) leadership concepts and the main leadership theories addressed by the authors; d) types of research; e) methodological paths; f) data collection techniques; g) research environment; and h) mapping proposals for future research. The adherence of the articles was also verified in the exploration phase, the Lotka’s Law, related to the authors’ productivity, and the Zipf’s Law, which measures the frequency of words in certain texts, carried out using the Nvivo software version 12 Plus to determine the 18 most frequent words. Regarding the Bradford Law, with reference to the relevance of journals, it was not possible to carry out this analysis because the articles were published in annals.

 

4 Analysis and Discussion of Results

4.1 Results Analysis

 

Figure 1 shows the evolution of the theme over the analyzed period. Comparing the two events, SemeAD is the one that showed the greatest growth and greatest representation in the number of articles, with 5 articles in 2014, 6 articles in 2015, 3 articles in 2016, 11 articles in 2017 and 8 articles in 2018, with a total of 33 articles, representing 54% of publications. EnANPAD presented 7 articles in 2014, 5 articles in 2015, 3 articles in 2016, 7 articles in 2017 and 6 articles in 2018, with a total of 28 articles, representing 46% of the publications.

Figure 1 - Evolution of the number of articles per year

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

The results presented in Figure 1, indicate an imbalance in the number of publications, oscillating between growth and decrease, with the average EnANPAD publication of 5.6 articles per year and SemeAD of 6.6 articles per year. The period with the highest concentration of published articles was in the year 2017, representing 29.5% of the total articles in the last 5 years, followed by 2018 with 23%, 2014 with 19.5% and 2015 with 18%. The least representative period was 2016 with 10% of the total number of articles.

Regarding the focus of the themes, the articles were classified between those that specifically addressed the theme of leadership as a primary theme and the articles that addressed leadership within other research themes, that is, as a secondary theme. The researched academic scientific production has a greater number of articles with leadership as a primary theme (65.5%). On the other hand, the leadership approach associated with a secondary theme, represented 34.5% of the articles. In individual analysis of the events, in EnANPAD the primary theme represented 82% and the secondary theme 18%. In SemeAD, the primary theme represented 51.5%, almost equaling the secondary theme (48.5%). Thus, it is observed that EnANPAD has a greater number of articles with a primary theme in leadership, corroborating the dissemination of the theme in scientific productions. Some other topics were addressed in conjunction with leadership and can be exemplified as: skills, feminism, organizational culture, learning, quality of life at work, training and development, motivation and career.

To analyze the frequency of words, relative to Zipf’s Law, which describes the relationship between words in a given text and the order of these words’ series, with the intention to estimate which scientific subject is discussed (ARAÚJO, 2006), the 18 most frequent words in the analyzed articles were verified.

In EnANPAD´s most frequent words were: leadership (3.285), study (842), leader (1.135), organizational (609) and research (603). For SemeAD, the most frequent words were: leadership (1.734), leader (1.111), work (695), people (623) and process (558). Thus, in order to estimate the scientific subject treated, it is observed that in the two academic events the most frequent words are consistent with the theme of leadership, where the word “leadership” was the most used. It is also observed that the words’ frequency corroborates with the findings in focus of the themes, in which other topics addressed were verified, with emphasis on the words “culture”, “career”, “women” and “competences”.

Comparing the word frequencies in the two events (EnANPAD and SemeAD), 61% of words were equal. However, some differences can be pointed out, in EnANPAD, the words “practices”, “performance”, “culture”, “relationship” and “managing”, evidence a connection with a vision of leadership management, with a more theoretical and academic focus. In SemeAD, the words “career”, “development”, “skills”, “women” and “coaching”, refer to the leader, in his career, development, necessary skills and the woman figure as a leader, that is, presenting a more professional focus.

Regarding the quantification of references, a total of 1.358 references were found in EnANPAD and 1.100 references in SemeAD. Each EnANPAD article cited an average of 48 references and for SemeAD an average of 33 references. Chart 3 presents the list of the most referenced works in the analyzed articles. Some articles have more than a year of publication because they deal with original works and translation, or the work has more than one edition.

 

Chart 3 - Most referenced articles

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

Analyzing Chart 3, in EnANPAD the authors Northouse (2004, 2010, 2013) and Avolio and Gardner (2005), appear as the authors of the most referenced works. Northouse’s work bases leadership on several theories and their practices in the organizational environment. Avolio and Gardner detail the characteristics of the authentic leader and make a comparison with the attributes of transformational, charismatic, servant and spiritual leadership.

In SemeAD, the most referenced works are from the authors Bergamini (1994), Avolio, Malumbwa and Weber (2009), Dutra (2010), Robbins (2002, 2005 and 2007) and Sant’anna (2012) respectively. Bergamini provides a historical review of studies and research on leadership emphasizing the importance of effective organizational leaders. Avolio, Malumbwa and Weber review the theoretical and empirical developments in the leadership literature and proposals for future research on the subject. Dutra brings considerations about career and relationships in the organizational environment from the perspective of management, in this same line of thought, Robbins encompasses individuals, groups and organizations. Sant’anna conducted a study with top executives from Brazilian companies investigating the main issues and challenges around the theme of leadership and its development.

Comparing the survey of the events, it is observed that in EnANPAD there is a predominance of international authors in the most referenced works, with only two works being in Portuguese. In contrast, SemeAD has a predominance of works in Portuguese, three of them by Brazilian authors and three originally by international authors. In addition to this fact, some works are present in both events: the chapter translated “Leadership in organizations” by Briton Bryman and “Leadership: management of meaning” by the Brazilian Célia Bergamini.

Referent to the production and characterization, in EnANPAD the author who published the most was Cavazotte with 3 articles, followed by Boas, Davel and Godoi with 2 articles each. In SemeAD the author Cabral appears with 3 articles and the authors Dias, Dutra, Filho, Neto and Veloso with 2 articles. The authors who published articles in both events were Abelha, Dias, Foroni and Oliva with 1 article in each event, and Cavazotte with 3 articles in EnANPAD and 1 article in SemeAD, being considered the author who most published articles in the analyzed events.

Regarding the researchers’ productivity, adherence to Lotka’s Law was verified, in which it establishes that a small number of authors produce a lot in a certain area of knowledge, while a large volume of authors produces little (JUNIOR et al., 2016). Among the 61 articles analyzed, a total of 149 authors were found, with only 13 authors having published more than one article on leadership in EnANPAD and SemeAD. Thus, it is observed that within the scope of the research analyzed, the adherence to Lotka’s Law is not observed. Still regarding the authors, it was verified whether the authors had articles published in partnership.

The analysis showed a small network of scientific collaboration in the analyzed events, since only the authors Abelha and Cavazotte (2016, 2017), Boas and Davel (2015, 2017) and Dias e Filho (2017, 2018) jointly published more than one article.

As for the concept of leadership, its wide scope was verified, bringing together different cognitive and social phenomena, corroborating with the perceptions of Bergamini (1994), Campos et al. (2013), Yukl (2013) and Bianchi, Quisida and Foroni (2017). To better understand the concept of leadership, Chart 4 presents its transformation through some definitions adopted by the analyzed articles.

Chart 4 - Leadership definitions

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

It is observed (Chart 4) that in EnANPAD the concept of leadership emerges as a process of influence for the execution of tasks (STODGILL, 1950) and behavior to direct activities towards a common goal (HEMPHILL; COONS, 1957). It can occur through coordination and direction (FIEDLER, 1967), in the interaction between people (BASS; AVOLIO, 1990) and in the orientation to drive changes (JAMES, 2005). In this way, leadership is perceived in the social interaction and influence of behaviors (MOSCARDINI; KLEIN, 2014).

In SemeAD the concept of leadership emerges as a direction that comes from the personal vision of the leader (LAPIERRE, 1995), associating people to achieve a common purpose (HEIFETZ, 1998). Considering leadership as a quality that can be learned and developed (CARAPETO; FONSECA, 2006) having feedback as a tool for knowledge, learning and adaptation to changes (AVOLIO; WALUMBWA; WEBER, 2009). Finally, leadership is perceived as a reciprocal influence between people (CABRAL; SEMINOTTI, 2009) evidenced in the relationships between members of an organization (DERUE; ASHFORD, 2010).

The different definitions used in the two events reflect the influence of the authors and their lines of thought. In EnANPAD, leadership is seen as a process of influence through social interaction. In SemeAD, leadership is related to the role of the leader and how he mobilizes actions and influences people through a reciprocal process, that is, leaders and followers.

Another point analyzed was related to the leadership theories used by the authors as a basis for their studies. Some articles did not present leadership theories as a basis for conducting their research. In EnANPAD the most used theories were Transformational, with 6 articles, Transactional, with 5 articles, Authentic and Absence of leadership, with 2 articles each. In SemeAD, the most used theories were Spiritual, Transactional, Transformational, LMX and Server with 2 articles each. In general, there is a predominance of some theories already established as Transformational and Transactional in both events. However, the emergence of new theories that has spread in the last decades, such as Servant, Spiritual, E-leadership and Responsible, is noteworthy.

In servant leadership, the leader differs from other leaders who crave power, since the servant leader has the primary characteristic of helping people to be and do the best, their goal is to serve others (GREENLEAF, 2006). Spiritual leadership creates the perception that members of the organization experience a sense of conviction for which their lives make sense and make a difference, in addition to establishing a culture based on values of selfless love (FRY, 2003). In E-leadership, the e-leader has the challenge of acting in an environment mediated by technology, and must communicate effectively through electronic means, build trust and be able to promote motivation at a distance, in addition to managing and guiding virtual teams (DASGUPTA, 2011). Responsible leadership presents a concept that combines social responsibility and leadership. It depends on the leaders’ awareness and consideration for their own actions and consequences for all stakeholders (VOEGTLIN, 2011).

Regarding the types of research used by the articles. According to Chart 5, empirical studies on leadership are predominantly more used in comparison with theoretical research, in general empirical research represented 85% and theoretical research 15%. With regard specifically to events, EnANPAD presented 71% empirical and 29% theoretical, while SemeAD represented 97% empirical and 3% theoretical. The fact that there is a predominance of empirical research can be explained by these studies seeking in practice to study leadership as a way to better understand the social dynamics and collective configurations, involving a process of influence and interaction between leaders and members, in the search for compliance the established objectives and the promotion of social transformations (TURANO; CAVAZOTTE, 2016).

 

Chart 5 - Research type

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

As for the methodological paths used (Chart 6), data collection techniques (Chart 7) and research environments, only 52 empirical articles were analyzed. In Chart 6, it is possible to observe the methodology used and its research nature, approaches and strategies. The results show that according to the nature of the research, there was a greater presence of descriptive research (59.5%), followed by exploratory (29%), exploratory-descriptive (9.5%) and explanatory (2%). Descriptive research seeks to describe facts and phenomena of a given reality, seeking to understand the reality studied, its characteristics and its problems (TRIVIÑOS, 1987).

 

Chart 6 - Methodologies used

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

Regarding the approaches, there was a greater number of quantitative research (50%), followed by qualitative (46%), in addition to a 4% quantitative-qualitative approach. If analyzed specifically by events, it is clear that EnANPAD has a greater number of articles with a quantitative approach, while in SemeAD, there is equality between the number of articles with a qualitative and quantitative approach. Qualitative studies seek to understand in detail the meanings and situational characteristics presented by a social phenomenon, while quantitative studies are focused on objectivity, in which information is analyzed using statistical procedures and hypotheses testing (CRESWELL, 2014).

In the research strategies there was a preference for survey studies (48%), followed by single case studies (29%) and some multiple case studies (23%). The survey is a research strategy characterized by the actions or opinions of the group being studied, in the search to understand “why” or “how” a certain phenomenon occurs (FREITAS et al., 2000).

 

Chart 7 - Data collection techniques

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

It is observed that the total number of data collection techniques is greater than the number of empirical articles, due to the fact that many studies use more than one data collection technique. The most used technique was the questionnaire (47.5%), followed by interviews (38%), document analysis (13 %) and observation (1.5%). According to Rampazzo (2002) the questionnaire is a data collection instrument consisting of an ordered series of questions, in which this technique allows saving time, obtaining a large number of data, simultaneously reaching a large number of people, there is greater freedom in responses and it can be answered at the most favorable moment for the respondent.

The last analysis carried out was in relation to the research environment. The largest number of surveys was conducted in a private environment (44%), followed by the public environment (13.5%), third sector (11.5%), public, private and third sector (8%) and public-private (6%). Some articles did not specify the research environment (17%). The greater amount of research in private companies may be linked to the fact of the growing change in the external environment of organizations and the new challenges faced by leaders in a highly competitive environment, making it essential for people to participate, in order to make the company more agile and competitive. In addition to the development of leadership skills of its employees in order to achieve competitive advantage and better organizational results (YUKL, 2013).

Figure 2 shows the mapping of the proposal for future research, verified in the articles of EnANPAD and SemeAD. This mapping becomes relevant because it serves as a guide for new research, as a justification for those that are in progress and / or in a process of reflection, in addition to enabling a combination of proposals.

Figure 2 - Mapping proposals for future research

 

Source: developed by the authors.

 

These gaps (figure 2) point to directions and trends that can contribute to advancing the theme. There were aspects that remain to be explored in the leadership literature, such as: 1) new characteristics and roles of leaders; 2) new forms of legitimizing the leader; 3) leadership development practices; 4) servant leadership; 5) political leadership; 6) e-leadership; 7) responsible leadership; 8) shared leadership; 9) toxic leadership; and 10) relate it to other themes, such as: organizational learning, commitment and social entrepreneurship.

 

4.2 Research agenda and discussion

 

The main studies on leadership were demonstrated from the the two main management events in Brazil. Research on the theme has been significant in recent years, considering that there were 61 articles published. It was noted the interest portrayed mainly in the year 2017, the largest number of publications, presenting more than double than the previous year. This suggests that because leadership is a topic in constant transformation, it can be studied in the most diverse areas and approaches, due to its dynamic nature.

Regarding the theoretical framework of the studies, it was noticed that the researchers’ concern is mainly centered on the role of the leader, on how he transforms his social environment and influences his followers. The secondary themes associated with leadership, demonstrate that it has followed paths combined with factors that can influence individuals and teams, such as, for example, learning, motivation and career. In addition, the main keywords highlight two approaches to leadership, the management approach and the professional approach. Leadership management addresses the concern in organizing and coordinating tasks, planning work activities and interpersonal relationships. The professional focus of leadership portrays the development of the leader role, the skills necessary for professional performance and the development of skills and confidence of its members.

Regarding the concept of leadership confirming its great conceptual scope, as pointed out in the literature (YUKL, 2013). Two lines of thought were portrayed, leadership as a social interaction and leadership centered on the role of the leader. Leadership as a social interaction refers to it taking place through the influence of the leader to coordinate and direct activities, bringing people together through social interactions so that they commit themselves to perform the tasks established. Leadership centered on the role of the leader comes from the leader’s personal perspective to influence followers to achieve goals, this power of influence can be learned and improved.

In addition, it was possible to observe the main theories of leadership debated in the investigated studies. Although the highlights point to classic and consolidated theories, both in academia and in organizations, some new theories have emerged as propellers of the current contemporary leadership scenarios. The internet has brought organizational boundaries closer together, enabling remote jobs facilitated by the use of technology and communication, which requires leaders to act in virtual environments involving people and teams to achieve specific goals, resulting in E-Leadership or also known as Online Leadership. Another scenario concerns the growing worry with social responsibility practices in organizations, where leaders have a fundamental role in building good relationships with all stakeholders, with an emphasis on Responsible Leadership.

Hence, in view of the results and considerations presented, a research agenda is suggested as a way to deepen the understanding of new approaches to leadership, according to the possibility of academic and managerial contributions: a) focusing on leaders - identifying new characteristics and roles that leaders must have in the face of new organizational scenarios (e-leadership, startups, non-profit organizations, for example), analyze how new leadership styles (spiritual, servant, authentic and transformative) are being incorporated by leaders; b) with a focus on the followers - analyze how the followers perceive their leaders, in the most diverse areas of activity and perspectives; analyze how the followers can contribute to the development of their leaders; and c) with a focus on leadership and other themes: better understand the relationship between leadership and themes such as organizational learning, commitment and social entrepreneurship. In addition to this agenda, the guide for new research presented in Figure 2 can be used.

 

5 Final Considerations

 

This article contributes to the analysis of scientific research on leadership published in the annals of EnANPAD and SemeAD in the period of 2014 to 2018. The research results demonstrate that the paths taken by leadership have a greater focus as a primary study theme, contributing to a greater visibility. It was also observed that the leadership worked in a secondary way, within other themes such as: competences, feminism, organizational culture, learning, quality of life at work, training and development, motivation and career.

The scientific academic production of EnANPAD revealed the predominance of empirical research, descriptive in nature, quantitative approach with a survey strategy. The most used data collection technique was the questionnaire, mostly in private institutions. The most discussed theories were Transformational, Transactional, Authentic and Absence of leadership. The most referenced works demonstrated the predominance of international authors, with emphasis on the works of Northouse (2004, 2010, 2013) and Avolio and Gardner (2005).

SemeAD’s academic production demonstrated the prominence of empirical research, descriptive nature, qualitative and quantitative approach in equality with survey strategies. The most used data collection techniques were the questionnaire and the interview, mostly in private institutions. The most discussed theories were Spiritual, Transactional, Transformational, LMX and Servant. The most referenced works demonstrated the predominance of works in Portuguese, with emphasis on the works of Brazilian authors Bergamini (1994), Dutra (2010) and Sant’anna (2012), and the international authors Avolio, Malumbwa and Weber (2009) and Robbins (2002, 2005 and 2007). In general, there was an imbalance in relation to publications on the theme of leadership in the People Management division, since at sometimes it showed growth and at others, it decreased. Another observation was that SemeAD has a greater number of publications on leadership articles, while EnANPAD has a greater focus on leadership as its main theme.

The research presented a theoretical contribution on the understanding of leadership, its main approached theories, as well as, the transformation of leadership concepts (Chart 4). Another contribution is related to the analysis of scientific academic production in recent years, which demonstrated the presence of studies that seek to understand leadership as a process of influencing people with the objective of reaching common goals, in addition to understanding and perfecting the role of the leader to collaborate in team development and improvement of organizational results. This study also contributes to the verification of trends in leadership studies, pointing out a mapping of proposals and an agenda with suggestions for future research.

Finally, as a suggestion for future work, it is recommended that a bibliometric analysis be developed on leadership in other academic divisions of EnANPAD and SemeAD; in other academic scientific events of Administration and the Brazilian Spell database; or even, in congresses and database of international scientific journals (Scielo, Scopus and Web of Science), to understand the differences between research and themes on leadership carried out in Brazil and abroad, as well as, to verify the tendencies of debated theories.

References

 

AHMED, F. et al. Roles of leadership styles and relationship-based employee governance in open service innovation: evidence from malaysian service sector. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, v. 39, n. 3, p. 353-374, 2018.

ALVES, S. Liderança organizacional: discussão sobre um conceito-chave à administração. Revista Pensam. Contemp. em Adm., v. 4, n. 1, p. 43-53, 2010.

ARAÚJO, C. A. Bibliometria: evolução histórica e questões atuais. Em Questão, v. 12, n. 1, p. 11-32, 2006.

AVOLIO, B; WALUMBWA, F; WEBER, T. Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, v. 60, p. 421-449, 2009.

BARBOSA, A. A produção acadêmica em recursos humanos no brasil: fato ou ficção? Revista de Administração Eletrônica, v. 3, n. 2, p. 1-8, 2004.

BARDIN, L. Análise de conteúdo. São Paulo: Edições 70, 2011.

BASS, B; AVOLIO, B. Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1990.

BERGAMINI, C. Liderança: a administração do sentido. RAE, v. 34, n. 3, p. 102-114, 1994.

BIANCHI, E; QUISHIDA, A; FORONI, P. (2017). Atuação do líder na gestão estratégica de pessoas: reflexões, lacunas e oportunidades. RAC, v. 21, n. 1, p. 41-61, 2017.

CABRAL, P; SEMINOTTI, N. A dimensão coletiva da liderança. Cadernos IHU Ideias, v. 7, n. 120, p. 3-37, 2009.

CAMPOS, H. et al. Estilos de liderança e interferência no nível de confiança organizacional: um estudo de caso. Revista Gestão & Planejamento, v. 14, n. 3, p. 389-409, 2013.

CARAPETO, C; FONSECA, T. Administração pública, modernização, qualidade e inovação. Lisboa: Edições Sílabo, 2006.

CHEONG, M. et al. A review of the effectivenes of empowering leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, v. 30, n. 1, p. 34-58, 2019.

CONTRACTOR, N. et al. The topology of collective leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, v. 23, p. 994-1011, 2012.

CRESWELL, J. W. Investigação qualitativa e projeto de pesquisa: escolhendo entre cinco abordagens. 3. ed. Porto Alegre, 2014.

DASGUPTA, P. Literature review: e-leadership - emerging leadership journeys. Emerging Leadership Journeys, v. 4, n. 1, p. 1-36, 2011.

DAY, D; HARRISON, M. A multilevel, identity-based approach to leadership development. Human Resource Management Review, v. 17, n. 4, p. 360-373, 2007.

DELFINO, I; SILVA, A; ROHDE, L. A produção acadêmica sobre liderança no Brasil: uma análise bibliométrica dos artigos publicados em eventos e periódicos entre 1995 e 2009. In: XLI EnANPAD, 2010. Rio de Janeiro: Anais Eletrônicos, 2010.

DERUE, D; ASHFORD, S. Who will lead and who will follow? a social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. The Acad. Man. Review, v. 35, n. 4, p. 627-647, 2010.

ESCANDON-BARBOSA, D; HURTADO-AYALA, A. Influencia de los estilos de liderazgo en el desempeño de las empresas exportadoras colombianas. Estudios Gerenciales, v. 32, n. 139, p. 137-145, 2016.

FIEDLER, F. A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

FLEESON, W; JAYAWICKREME, E. Whole trait theory. Journal of Research in Personality, v. 56, p. 82-92, 2015.

FONSECA, A; PORTO, J; ANDRADE, J. Liderança: um retrato da produção científica brasileira. RAC, v. 19, n. 3, p. 290-310, 2015.

FREITAS, H. et al. O método de pesquisa survey. Rev. de Adm., v. 35, n. 3, 105-112, 2000.

FRY, L. Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Lead. Quart., v. 14, p. 693-727, 2003.

GEMELLI, C. E; FRAGA, A. M; PRESTES, V. A. (2019). Produção científica em relações de trabalho e gestão de pessoas (2000/2017). Contextus, v. 17, n. 2, p. 222-248, 2019.

GIUSTINA, K. A. D; GASPARETTO, V; LUNKES, R. J. Efeito dos estilos de liderança nos sistemas de controle gerencial e no desempenho organizacional. Revista Capital Científico, v. 18, n. 1, p. 64-81, 2020.

GREENLEAF, R. K. Liderança servidora. 1. ed. São Paulo: CBEL, 2006.

HARMS, P. et al. Autocratic leaders and authoritarian followers revisited: a review and agenda for the future. The Leadership Quarterly, v. 29, n. 1, p. 105-122, 2018.

HEIFETZ, R. A. Leadership without easy answers. Oxford: President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1998.

HEMPHILL, J; COONS, A. Development of the leader behavior description questionnaire. In: STOGDILL, R; COONS, A. Leader behavior: its description and measurement. Columbus: The Ohio State University: Bureau of Business Research, 1957.

HOOGH, A; GREER, L; HARTOG, D. Diabolical dictators or capable commanders? an investigation of the differential effects of autocratic leadership on
team performance. The Leadership Quarterly, v. 26, n. 5, p. 687-701, 2015.

HORNER, M. Leadership theory: past, present and future. Team Performance Management, v. 3, n. 4, p. 270-287, 1997.

JAMES, W. The impact of corporatisation and national competition policy: an exploratory study of organisational change and leadership style. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, v. 26, n. 4, p. 289-309, 2005.

JUNIOR, C. M. et al. As leis da bibliometria em diferentes bases de dados científicos. Revista de Ciências da Administração, v. 18, n. 44, p. 111-123, 2016.

KAUPPILA, O. When and how does LMX differentiation influence followers’ work outcomes? the interactive roles of one’s own LMX status and organizational context. Personnel Psychology, v. 69, p. 357-393, 2016.

KIRKPATICK, S; LOCKE, E. Leadership: do traits matter?. Academy of Management Perspectives, v. 5, n. 2, p. 48-60, 1991.

LACERDA, R; ENSSLIN, L; ENSSLIN, S. Uma análise bibliométrica da literatura sobre estratégia e avaliação de desempenho. Gestão & Produção, v. 19, n. 1, p. 59-78, 2012.

LAPIERRE, L. Imaginário e liderança. São Paulo: Atlas, 1995.

LI, G; LIU, H; LUO, Y. Directive versus participative leadership: dispositional antecedents and team consequences. Jour. of Occup. and Org. Psychology, v. 91, n. 3, p. 645-664, 2018.

LIPMAN-BLUMEN, J. Connective leadership in an interdependent and diverse world. Roeper Review, v. 39, n. 3, p. 170-173, 2017.

LUNARDI, M; DEGENHART, L; ZONATTO, V. C. S. Estilo de liderança, assimetria de informação e uso avaliativo do orçamento constituem-se antecedentes a participação orçamentária?. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade, v. 16, n. 38, p. 3-34, 2019.

MOASCARDINI, T; KLEIN, A. Educação corporativa e desenvolvimento de liderança em empresas multisite. In: XXXVII EnANPAD, 2014, Rio de Janeiro: Anais Eletrônicos, 2014.

MORAES, R. Análise de conteúdo. Revista Educação, v. 22, n. 37, p. 7-32, 1999.

NORTHOUSE, P. G. Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice. 4 ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2017.

RAMPAZZO, L. Metodologia científica. 3 ed. São Paulo: Edições Loyola, 2002.

ROSA, A. P; CORTIVO, L. D; GODOI, C. K. Competências profissionais: uma análise da produção cientifica brasileira de 1999 a 2004. Rev. de Negócios, v. 11, n. 1, p. 77-88, 2006.

SANTOS, R. N. M; KOBASHI, N. Y. Bibliometria, cientometria, infometria: conceitos e aplicações. Rev. Tend. da Pesq. Brasil. em Ciência da Infor., v. 2, n. 1, p. 155-172, 2009.

SILVA, R. S; SIENA, O. Produção científica brasileira sobre competências organizacionais: estruturas, configurações e características do campo. In: XXXIV EnANPAD, 2003. Belo Horizonte: Anais Eletrônicos, 2003.

STOGDILL, R. M. Leadership, membership and organization. Psychological Bulletin, v. 47, n. 1, p. 1-14, 1950.

SWEENEY, A; CLARKE, N; HIGGS, M. Shared leadership in commercial organisations: a systematic review of definitions, theoretical frameworks and organisational outcomes. International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 21, n. 1, p. 115-136, 2019.

TONELLI, M. et al. Produção acadêmica em recursos humanos no Brasil: 1991-2000. Revista de Administração Eletrônica, v. 43, n. 1, p. 105-122, 2003.

TRIVIÑOS, A. Introdução à pesquisa em ciências sociais: a pesquisa qualitativa em educação. São Paulo: Atlas, 1987.

TURANO, L; CAVAZOTTE, F. Conhecimento científico sobre liderança: uma análise bibliométrica do acervo do the leadership quarterly. RAC, v. 20, n. 4, p. 434-457, 2016.

VERSIANI, F. et al. Características de liderança das mulheres empreendedoras: um estudo de caso no setor de serviços. Revista de Adm. da UNIMEP, v. 17, n. 1, p. 188-213, 2019.

VOEGTLIN, C. Development of a scale measuring discursive responsible leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, v. 98, n. 1, p. 57-73, 2011.

YUKL, G. Leadership in organizations. 8 ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2013.