"Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement" - Contextual recollections and current observations

Leadership Quarterly

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 95-101

  Jermier, John M ^a   Kerr, Steve ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031521968     PISSN: 10489843     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1048-9843(97)90008-4     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Heckscher C.C., Donnellon A.M. The post-bureaucratic organisation: new perspectives on organizational change. 1994;Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
2. House R.J., Mitchell T.R. Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business. 3:1974;81-98.
3. Howell J.P., Dorfman P.W. Substitutes for leadership: test of a construct. Academy of Management Journal. 24:1981;714-728.
4. Howell J.P., Dorfman P.W., Kerr S. Moderator variables in leadership research. Academy of Management Review. 11:1986;88-102.
5. Jermier J.M. Substitutes for leadership: theory development. 1987, November;. Paper presented at the national meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute, Boston, MA.
6. Jermier J.M., Berkes L. Leader behavior in a police command bureaucracy: a closer look at the quasi-military model. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24:1979;1-23.
7. Manz C.C., Sims H.P. Jr. Self-management as a substitute for leadership: a social learning theory perspective. Academy of Management Review. 5:1980;361-368.
8. McIntosh N.J. Substitutes for leadership: review, critique, and suggestion. 1988;. Paper presented at the national meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.
9. Meindl J.R. Reinventing leadership: a radical, social psychological approach. Murnighan J.K. Social Psychology in Organizations: Advances in Theory and Research. 1993;89-118 Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
10. Pinchot G., Pinchot E. The end of bureaucracy and the rise of the intelligent organization. 1994;Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco.
11. Pitner N. Substitutes for principal leader behavior: an exploratory study. Educational Administration Quarterly. 22:1986;23-42.
12. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Bommer W.H. Meta-analysis of the relationships between Kerr and Jermier's substitutes for leadership and employee job attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 81:1996;380-399.
13. Podsakoff P.M., Niehoff MacKenzie S.B., Williams M.L. Do substitutes for leadership really substitute for leadership? An empirical examination of Kerr and Jermier's situational leadership model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 54:1993;1-44.
14. Ritzer G. The McDonaldization of society: an investigation into the changing character of contemporary social life. 1996;Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.
15. Sheridan J., Vredenburgh D., Abelson M. Contextual model of leadership influence in hospital units. Academy of Management Journal. 27:1984;57-78.
16. Shoultz D.C. Substitutes for leadership in a manufacturing support environment. 1991;University of South Florida. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
17. Staw B.M. Organizational behavior: a review and reformulation of the field's outcome variables. Annual Review of Psychology. 35:1984;627-666.
18. Tosi H. The organization as a context for leadership theory: a multilevel approach. Leadership Quarterly. 2:1991;205-228.