Co-leadership is becoming a more popular and prominent leadership structure across a variety of industries and settings; however, the body of knowledge on this topic is limited. Much of the current research focuses on whether co-leadership is a beneficial or detrimental form of leadership and there exists a gap in our knowledge about how and when co-leadership is or is not successful. The current study aims to fill this gap by surveying a group of 48 U.S. Army co-leader dyads and their direct superiors and subordinates on antecedents and outcomes of this co-leader relationship. Results demonstrate that engaging in effective co-leader processes such as participative decision-making, willingness to learn from each other, and supporting and empowering each other was related to higher quality co-leader relationships. Additionally, participative decision-making and communication quality were related to co-leader effectiveness. Results also revealed that each member of the co-leader dyad may view these antecedents of relationship quality differently. Further, positive co-leader processes and interactions were related to key outcomes such as co-leader effectiveness and team effectiveness. Unexpectedly, co-leader relationship quality was not related to co-leader effectiveness nor team effectiveness and level of dyadic congruence on these antecedent processes was not related to relationship quality. Overall, these findings suggest that co-leadership can work and provide preliminary evidence of antecedents of success and failure.
|Advisor:||Offermann, Lynn R.|
|Commitee:||Ruark, Gregory A., Olsen, Nils|
|School:||The George Washington University|
|School Location:||United States -- District of Columbia|
|Source:||DAI-A 81/7(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Psychology, Occupational psychology, Labor relations, Organizational behavior|
|Keywords:||Co-leadership, Leadership, U.S. Army, Participative decision-making|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be