1887
Volume 14, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

There is extensive literature describing the characteristics of a good leader in the area of organisational communication and business management. However, the research tends to be based on secondary, survey or reported data, typically interviews and questionnaires. Moreover, the predominant image of a “good” leader tends to be a charismatic, inspirational, decisive, authoritative, ‘hero’. The Language in the Workplace database provides a large corpus of authentic spoken interaction which allows examination of how effective leaders behave in a wide range of face-to-face interactions at work, and identifies a diverse range of leadership styles. The analysis reveals that effective leaders select from a range of strategies available to challenge, contest or disagree with others, paying careful attention to complex contextual factors, including the type of interaction, the kind of community of practice or workplace culture in which they are operating, and the relative seriousness of the issue involved. The analysis identifies four distinct strategies which leaders use to deal with potential conflict. These strategies lie along a continuum from least to most confrontational: Conflict avoidance; diversion; resolution through negotiation; and resolution by authority. The findings suggest that good leaders “manage” conflict: i.e. they choose strategies which address both their transactional and relational goals in order to achieve a desirable outcome.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.14.4.02hol
2004-01-01
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alvesson, Mats , and Yvonne Due Billing
    (1997) Understanding gender and organizations. Sage: London.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Beck, Dominique M
    (1999) Managing discourse, self and others: Women in senior management positions. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Western Sydney, Nepean.
  3. Brewer, Neil , Patricia Mitchell , and Nathan Weber
    (2002) Gender role, organizational status, and conflict management styles. International journal of conflict management13,1.1: 78-94. doi: 10.1108/eb022868
    https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022868 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, Penelope , and Stephen C. Levinson
    (1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E.N Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.56-289.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clayman, Steven
    (2002) Disagreements and third parties: Dilemmas of neutralism in panel news interviews. Journal of pragmatics34: 1385-1402. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00070‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00070-X [Google Scholar]
  7. Dwyer Judith
    (1993) The business communication handbook. New York: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Eckert, Penelope , and Sally McConnell-Ginet
    (1999) New generalizations and explanation in language and gender research. Language in Society: Special Issue: Communities of Practice in Language and Gender Research28: 185-201. doi: 10.1017/S0047404599002031
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599002031 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fletcher, Joyce
    (1999) Disappearing acts. Gender, power, and relational practice at work. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gardner, John , and Deborah Terry
    (1996) Communication, leadership and organisational change. In K. Parry (ed.), Leadership research and practice. Emerging themes and new challenges. South Melbourne, Vic.: Pitman, pp.153-161.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gross, Michael A , and Laura K. Guerrero
    (2000) Managing conflict appropriately and effectively: An application of the competence model to Rahim’s organizational conflict styles. International journal of conflict management11.3: 200-226. doi: 10.1108/eb022840
    https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022840 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hede, Andrew
    (2001) Integrated leadership: Multiple styles for maximal effectiveness. In K. Parry (ed.), Leadership in the antipodes: Findings, implications and a leader profile. Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies Centre for the Study of Leadership, pp.6-21.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Heifertz, Ronald
    (1998) Values in leadership. In G. Robinson Hickman (ed.), Leading organizations. Perspectives for a new era. London: Sage, pp.343-356.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Helgesen, Sally
    (1990) The female advantage. Women’s way of leadership. New York: Doubleday Currency.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Heritage, John
    (2002) The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of pragmatics34: 1427-1446. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00072‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00072-3 [Google Scholar]
  16. Holmes, Janet
    (2000) Women at work: Analysing women’s talk in New Zealand workplaces. Australian review of applied linguistics (ARAL)22. 2: 1-17.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Holmes, Janet , and Rose Fillary
    (2000) Handling small talk at work: Challenges for workers with intellectual disabilities. International journal of disability, development and education47: 273-291. doi: 10.1080/713671114
    https://doi.org/10.1080/713671114 [Google Scholar]
  18. Holmes, Janet , and Meredith Marra
    (2002a) Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of pragmatics34: 1683-1710. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00032‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00032-2 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2002b) Humour as a discursive boundary marker in social interaction. In A. Duszak (ed.), Us and others: Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp.377-400. doi: 10.1075/pbns.98.23hol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.98.23hol [Google Scholar]
  20. (in press) Relational practice in the workplace: Women’s talk or gendered discourse? (To appear in Language in Society)
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Holmes, Janet , and Miriam Meyerhoff
    (1999) The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. In J. Holmes (ed.), Language in society: special issue: Communities of practice in language and gender research28: 173-183. doi: 10.1017/S004740459900202X
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S004740459900202X [Google Scholar]
  22. Holmes, Janet , and Maria Stubbe
    (2001) Managing conflict at work. Paper presented atAAAL Conference, St Louis, February 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2003a) “Feminine” workplaces: Stereotype and reality. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (eds.), The handbook of language and gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp.573-599.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (2003b) Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Jackson, Brad , and Ken Parry
    (2001) The hero manager: Learning from New Zealand’s top Chief Executives. Auckland: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Jacobs, Scott
    (2002) Maintaining neutrality in third-party dispute mediation. Journal of pragmatics34: 1403-1426. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00071‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00071-1 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kakavá, Christina
    (2002) Opposition in Modern Greek discourse. Journal of pragmatics34: 1537-1568. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00075‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00075-9 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kangasharju, Helena
    (2002) Alignment in disagreement. Journal of pragmatics34: 1447-1472. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00073‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00073-5 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kaufmann, Anita
    (2002) Negation prosody in British English. Journal of pragmatics34: 1473-1494. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00074‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00074-7 [Google Scholar]
  30. Marra, Meredith
    (2003) Decisions in New Zealand business meetings. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
  31. (forthcoming) Leadership and decision-making style: Rubberstamping vs. pass-the-parcel decisions.
  32. Morris, Michael W. , Katherine Y. Williams , Kwok Leung , and Richard Larrick
    (1998) Conflict management style: Accounting for cross-national differences. Journal of international business studies29.4: 729-747. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490050
    https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490050 [Google Scholar]
  33. Parry, Ken
    (ed.) (2001) Leadership in the antipodes: findings, implications and a leader profile. Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies Centre for the Study of Leadership.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Proctor-Thomson, Sarah , and Ken Parry
    (2001) What the best leaders look like. In K. Parry (ed.), Leadership in the antipodes: Findings, implications and a leader profile. Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies Centre for the Study of Leadership, pp.166-191.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rahim, Afzalur , and Thomas V. Bonoma
    (1979) Managing organizational conflict: A model for diagnosis and intervention. Psychological reports44: 1325-1344.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Sinclair, Amanda
    (1998) Doing leadership differently. Gender, power and sexuality in a changing business culture. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Wenger, Etienne
    (1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511803932
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932 [Google Scholar]
  38. Yaegar-Dror, Malcah
    (2002) Introduction. Journal of pragmatics34: 1333-1343. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00068‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00068-1 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.14.4.02hol
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Argument , Disagreement , Discourse analysis , Leadership and Meetings
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error