Sonia M. Ospina

The relationship between power and collective leadership (CL) has been theoretically understood and empirically addressed in many different ways. To make sense of this diversity, we investigate and diagram the role of power in CL. First, we identify six representations of power—six ways in which scholars have found that power shapes the emergence and enactment of CL. These representations include: Even in CL, individual power matters; Leaders can devolve power to their subordinates by empowering them; Contextual characteristics related to power can influence the possibility and enactment of CL; CL can create the collective power necessary for people in marginalized positions to challenge embedded power dynamics; Power is intrinsic to the co-construction process; Attributions affect who can enact CL, how they are viewed, and whether they have power. Second, we offer a conceptual framework that provides a comprehensive way to understand the relationship between power and CL. The framework includes two dimensions, one related to power (that runs from episodic to systemic) and the other related to CL (that runs from entitative to emergent). Third, we create a conceptual map by placing the six representations within this framework. Based on our research, we make the case that we cannot understand CL without understanding the ubiquitous, complex, and even contradictory role of power. We also suggest avenues for expanding and elaborating discussions of power in the CL literature.

Despite the complexities involved around the accountability mechanisms of collaborative governance, little is known about how to assess accountability at the network level and disentangle possible accountability deficits. This study first explicates the nature of collaborative governance accountability in contrast to accountability in traditional public administration and market-based governance. The analysis shows how collaborative governance accountability is distinctive: (a) accountability relationships shift from bilateral to multilateral; (b) horizontal as well as vertical accountability relationships are involved; (c) not only formal standards but also informal norms are used; and (d) accountability challenges move from control/audit issues to trust-building and paradox management issues. We then propose a framework for accountability in collaborative governance, drawing its dimensions from the process-based accountability research. Our framework builds on three dimensions of collaborative accountability—information, discussion, and consequences—and elaborates on their components and indicators. Based on the framework, questions to guide future research are provided, focusing on tensions and paradoxes that can arise in each process dimension as primary accountability challenges in collaborative contexts.

In addition to co-editing the Handbook, Ospina is also co-author of the Chapter 3:  Key Influences and Foundations of Participatory Research section introduction. 

In addition to co-editing the Handbook, Ospina is also co-author of the Chapter 26:  Reflections On The Role of Dialogue in Participatory Research and Inquiry section introduction.

In the concluding article, we move from providing a map of the collective leadership (CL) research field that has been conducted to date to providing a travel guide that we hope can inspire both experienced and novice travelers to push out the frontiers of exploration of CL. A Rapid Appraisal analysis of the extant CL research revealed that most of the work to date has focused on shared and distributed leadership; taken an empirical rather than a conceptual focus; and strongly emphasized qualitative versus quantitative research methods. Looking ahead to future CL research, we identify the following three challenges as being the most significant for leadership researchers to confront: the fundamental ambiguity of the space in which CL resides; the definitional problems inherited from leadership studies and exacerbated by its ambiguous nature; and the need to more fully embrace issues of process in CL. In response to these challenges, the following three guidelines are provided: the need to decipher CL configurations and its power-based foundations; the need to establish how leadership is made relevant in a collective setting; and the need for CL researchers to adopt strong process models.

In this introductory article we explain the impetus for creating the Special Issue, along with its goals and the process by which we created it. We present a map of the terrain of collective leadership (CL) that builds on earlier frameworks, recognizing that the terrain is expanding and has become increasingly difficult to traverse. The map is comprised of two axes or dimensions. The first axis, the ‘locus of leadership,’ captures how scholars conceptualize where to look for manifestations of leadership. That is, does the leadership reside in the group or does it reside in the system? The second axis is the view of ‘collectivity’ that plots how scholars conceptualize the collective. Do they see it as an empirical type of leadership or a theoretical lens through which to study leadership? We then plot distinctive CL research into four cells, providing definitions and references to empirical work emblematic for each cell. In introducing and summarizing each of the five articles we have selected for this Special Issue, we show where each of these is located on the CL research map, and distil how each provides a clear connection between theory and method in a way that advances our understanding of CL.

With the growing amount and increasing heterogeneity of research on purpose-oriented networks (PONs) in the public sector, it is imperative to find a way to synthesize this research. Drawing on the varied research perspectives on PONs, we advance the idea of paradigm interplay and meta-synthesis as aspirations for the field and argue this is especially key if we want the study of PONs to inform practice. However, we recognize several challenges in the current state of the PON research that prevent the field from making strides in paradigm interplay and meta-synthesis. We discuss six challenges which we consider the most critical: different labels, differences across research foci, variation in measurement, the nestedness of networks, the dynamism of networks, and variation in the network context. We suggest six good research practices that could contribute to overcoming the challenges now so as to make integration of the research field more of a possibility in the future.

Growing interest in collective leadership challenges the heroic models of the leadership canon. In a post-leadership world, collective leadership would not represent a different form of leadership, but instead a broader lens to look for leadership. Theorizing leadership from the experience of marginalized groups in a post-leadership world demands incorporating critical thinking, if it is to offer insights about the human condition. As new voices shift from the margins to the center, and enter the theorizing space where leadership scholarship is reinvented and created a new, their prior subordination to the perspectives and voices of individuals located in traditional contexts or in positions of privilege eventually disappears. Post-leadership researchers would also be aware of and conversant with alternative methodologies, viewing them as legitimate choices—equal or preferred to the methods in the old canon. In the newly constituted post-leadership field, core principles of alternative standpoint research approaches, like feminist and Indigenous methodologies, would gain currency.

Systematic reviews of research methods in the public administration field have assessed the progress of research practice and offered relevant recommendations to further develop research quality. But most recent reviews examine quantitative studies, and the few assessments of qualitative scholarship tend to focus on specific dimensions. This article calls attention to the overall practice of qualitative research in the field of public administration. The authors analyzed 129 qualitative studies published during a five-year period (2010–14) in the six top public administration journals, combining bibliometric and qualitative analyses. Three findings are drawn from the analysis. First, qualitative work represents a very small percentage of the journal articles published in the field. Second, qualitative research practice uses a small range of methodologies, mainly case studies. Finally, there is inconsistency in reporting methodological decisions. The article discusses the implications of these findings and offers recommendations to ensure methodological rigor while considering the integrity of the logic of inquiry and reporting standards of qualitative research practice.

While liberal-representative democracies tend to conform to a consensus-based post-political paradigm where there is no space for alternatives and dissensus, new forms of democracy in practice are emerging from below. This book explores new socially innovative initiatives that have appeared following the 2011 global uprisings. Initiatives that flourish not only as alternative responses to current social needs but also as new forms of democracy, a democracy that comes from below, by and for the ‘have-nots’.

Combining theories of social innovation and collective leadership, this book analyzes how disadvantaged communities have addressed the effects of economic recession in two global cities: Barcelona and New York. It draws upon several socially innovative initiatives in four neighbourhoods, and offers new knowledge, ideas and tools, both to better understand how social needs could be effectively and democratically satisfied, and to foster social change initiatives at the community level. Civic capacity and democratic leadership practices emerge as crucial factors to make social change happen.

The book advances both theoretical and empirical understandings of social change and will appeal to scholars in urban studies, geography, leadership studies, political science and sociology. It will also be of interest to practitioners, policy makers and leaders in social organizations, as it provides ideas and tools to help foster social change.

To download chapter 4, "Democratic leadership: the work of leadership for social change," please click on the "View/download article" link above.

This article challenges the view that public leadership research should maintain a separate perspective in the study of public leadership. It discusses the benefits of further embedding the public leadership research domain within leadership studies, constructing a cross-fertilization that contributes to advance both. The article maps key concerns in relational leadership theories, contrasting them with current work in the public leadership research domain and offering suggestions to close the gap. It highlights public leadership scholarship's competitive advantage to contribute to theorizing about leadership, given the importance of context for building contemporary theories of relational leadership.

Conservation of large landscapes requires three interconnected types of leadership: collaborative leadership, in which network members share leadership functions at different points in time; distributive leadership, in which network processes provide local opportunities for members to act proactively for the benefit of the network; and architectural leadership, in which the structure of the network is intentionally designed to allow network processes to occur. In network governance, each leadership approach is necessary to achieve sustained, successful outcomes. We discuss each of these approaches to leadership and offer specific practices for leaders of networks, including: shaping the network's identity and vision, attracting members, instilling leadership skills in members, and advancing common interests. These practices are then illustrated in case studies.

This article presents a comparative case study of two nonprofit organizations that do community organizing in the environmental field and asks how do nonprofits school citizens in democracy? Although the literature suggests the importance of social capital, a practice approach surfaces important political dimensions that have not been sufficiently explored. We find that distinct organizational practices create contexts for participants to exercise specific ways of being and doing—called “subject positions”—vis-à-vis the state and their political community. These practices support member participation by serving to construct “citizens”—rather than customers or clients—who develop skills in critical thinking and who exercise agency in the organization and the policy field they seek to influence. These practices represent key mechanisms for schooling citizens in democracy in these nonprofit organizations and link participation in the organization with broader political participation. We discuss implications for theory and practice.

Leaders and followers live in a relational world-a world in which leadership occurs in complex webs of relationships and dynamically changing contexts. Despite this, our theories of leadership are grounded in assumptions of individuality and linear causality. If we are to advance understandings of leadership that have more relevance to the world of practice, we need to embed issues of relationality into leadership studies. This volume addresses this issue by bringing together, for the first time, a set of prominent scholars from different paradigmatic and disciplinary perspectives to engage in dialogue regarding how to meet the challenges of relationality in leadership research and practice. Included are cutting edge thinking, heated debate, and passionate perspectives on the issues at hand. The chapters reveal the varied and nuanced treatments of relationality that come from authors' alternative paradigmatic (entity, constructionist, critical) views. Dialogue scholars-reacting to the chapters-engage in spirited debate regarding the commensurability (or incommensurability) of the paradigmatic approaches. The editors bring the dialogue together with introductory and concluding chapters that offer a framework for comparing and situating the competing assumptions and perspectives spanning the relational leadership landscape. Using paradigm interplay they unpack assumptions, and lay out a roadmap for relational leadership research. A key takeaway is that advancing relational leadership research requires multiple paradigmatic perspectives, and scholars who are conversant in the assumptions brought by these perspectives. The book is aimed at those who feel that much of current leadership thinking is missing the boat in today's complex, relational world. It provides an essential resource for all leadership scholars and practitioners curious about the nature of research on leadership, both those with much research exposure and those new to the field.

Results-based performance measurement and evaluation (PME) systems are part of a global current in public administration. In the Latin American context, this trend is also a reflection of the broader processes of reform of the latter half of the 20th century, including the modernization of public administration, as well as broad processes of decentralization and democratization, both of which are dimensions of development in Latin America, regardless of the political and ideological orientation of specific governments. This chapter documents the development of such evaluative approaches to organizational quality and raises some issues for further discussion.

Network management research documents how network members engage in activities to advance their own goals. However, this literature offers little insight into the nature of work that aims to advance the goals of the network as a “whole.” By examining the behavioral dimension of network governance, this article identifies a specific tension that network leaders address to effectively govern networks: although unity and diversity are essential to network performance, each makes contradictory demands which require attention. Findings from four case studies of immigrant networks in the United States point to three activities representing mechanisms that staff of network administrative organizations use to address this (network level) managerial tension. The study proposes that unity versus diversity represents a distinct challenge to the governance of networks that requires strategic action at the whole-network level and merits further study.

Qualitative evidence from action networks is used to answer the research question, How do leaders of successful networks manage collaboration challenges to make things happen? This study of two urban immigration coalitions in the United States found that their leaders developed practices as a response to two paradoxical requirements of network collaboration: managing unity and diversity when doing inward work and confrontation and dialogue when doing outward work. By illuminating how leaders responded to these complex demands inherent in action networks, the authors open up the black box of managing whole networks of organizations and underscore the role of leadership in interorganizational collaboration.

Attention to the relational dimensions of leadership represents a new frontier of leadership research and is an expression of the growing scholarly interest in the conditions that foster collective action within and across boundaries. This article explores the antecedents of collaboration from the perspective of social change organizations engaged in processes of collaborative governance. Using a constructionist lens, the study illuminates the question how do social change leaders secure the connectedness needed for collaborative work to advance their organization's mission? The article draws on data from a national, multi-year, multi-modal qualitative study of social change organizations and their leaders. These organizations represent disenfranchised communities which aspire to influence policy makers and other social actors to change the conditions that affect their members' lives. Narrative analysis of transcripts from in-depth interviews in 38 organizations yielded five leadership practices that foster strong relational bonds either within organizations or across boundaries with others. The article describes how these practices nurture interdependence either by forging new connections, strengthening existing ones, or capitalizing on strong ones.

Leadership studies focusing on race–ethnicity provide particularly rich contexts to illuminate the human condition as it pertains to leadership. Yet insights about the leadership experience of people of color from context-rich research within education, communications and black studies remain marginal in the field. Our framework integrates these, categorizing reviewed studies according to the effects of race–ethnicity on perceptions of leadership, the effects of race–ethnicity on leadership enactments, and actors' approach to the social reality of race–ethnicity. The review reveals a gradual convergence of theories of leadership and theories of race–ethnicity as their relational dimensions are increasingly emphasized. A shift in the conceptualization of race–ethnicity in relation to leadership is reported, from a constraint to a personal resource to a simultaneous consideration of its constraining and liberating capacity. Concurrent shifts in the treatment of context, power, agency versus structure and causality are also explored, as are fertile areas for future research.

A traditional view of scholarly quality defines rigor as the application of method and assumes an implicit connection with relevance. But as an applied field, public administration requires explicit attention to both rigor and relevance. Interpretive scholars' notions of rigor demand an explicit inclusion of relevance as an integral aspect of quality. As one form of interpretive research, narrative inquiry illuminates how this can be done. Appreciating this contribution requires a deeper knowledge of the logic of narrative inquiry, an acknowledgement of the diversity of narrative approaches, and attention to the implications for judging its quality. We use our story about community-based leadership research to develop and illustrate this argument.

A traditional view of scholarly quality defines rigor as the application of method and assumes an implicit connection with relevance. But as an applied field, public administration requires explicit attention to both rigor and relevance. Interpretive scholars' notions of rigor demand an explicit inclusion of relevance as an integral aspect of quality. As one form of interpretive research, narrative inquiry illuminates how this can be done. Appreciating this contribution requires a deeper knowledge of the logic of narrative inquiry, an acknowledgement of the diversity of narrative approaches, and attention to the implications for judging its quality. We use our story about community-based leadership research to develop and illustrate this argument.

People are fascinated by the stories of leaders, but not much has been written about the forces that shape them. This set brings together "what truly matters about leadership" to map an emerging discipline that draws from history, philosophy, sociology, anthropology, political science, and psychology. It seeks to answer questions such as what is leadership? What is a great leader? What is a great follower? What are the types of leadership? And how does someone become a leader?

This article proposes a theory of how mandated institutional cooperation transforms into individual cooperative behavior. Using qualitative strategies, we draw insights about cooperation in three public-sector efforts of labor-management cooperation (LMC). We report an association between critical shifts in the roles of stakeholders and the change from adversarial to cooperative labor relations. While managers became team players along with their employees, labor representatives assumed managerial responsibilities. These changes were also associated with a service-oriented perspective, better understanding of the other's experiences, and a view of cooperation as partnership. At the heart of these transformations, we found critical changes in communication patterns associated with incrementally growing levels of trust. We propose a model that depicts the links between collective and individual levels of organizational action related to LMC. We conclude that the positive shifts in mental models regarding work and the value of cooperation justify the promotion of LMC efforts.

La profundización de la democracia está directamente relacionada con las capacidades de los gobiernos, de todos los niveles, para dar respuestas a las necesidades y requerimientos de sus ciudadanos. La asignación de responsabilidad a los poderes públicos es otra cara de la misma moneda. Dentro de las múltiples aristas de una agenda para el desarrollo integral, la consolidación de una administración pública que garantice imparcialidad es elemento básico para la existencia del Estado de derecho. Asimismo, una administración pública eficiente y efectiva en la acción gubernamental solo se logra cuando se somete a criterios de capacidad profesional y mérito en su conformación.

This article explores the emerging conceptualization of accountability in nonprofit organizations. This definition broadens traditional concerns with finances, internal controls, and regulatory compliance. The authors explore how the top-level managers of 4 identity-based nonprofit organizations (IBNPs) faced accountability and responsiveness challenges to accomplish their mission. The organization-community link was the core relationship in their accountability environment, helping the IBNP managers achieve what the literature calls "negotiated accountability." The managers favored organizational mechanisms to sustain this relationship in the midst of the accountability demands they experienced daily. Communication with the primary constituency tended to drive the organization's priorities and programs, helped managers find legitimate negotiation tools with other stakeholders, and helped develop a broader notion of accountability. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for other nonprofit organizations and propose questions to further clarify the concepts of broad accountability, negotiated accountability, and the link between accountability and responsiveness in nonprofits.

This collection of original manuscripts-representing a cross-section of the timeliest scholarship in public personnel administration-explores the theme of "problems and prospects" in public personnel administration. The contributions are organized into four broad sections: The Setting, The Techniques, The Issues, and Reform and the Future. Section One focuses primarily on the social, political, economic, and legal trends that have served as catalysts in the transformation of public personnel administration. Section Two is composed of selections that summarize developments in the practice of HRM, with special emphasis on emerging personnel techniques and the ways that traditional approaches to the staffing function are being revised. Section Three discusses and suggests responses to some of the most troublesome or pervasive issues in modern personnel management. The final section assesses the probable trends in the field's future, and analyzes the efficacy of recent reform efforts. For human resource personnel looking to broaden their perspective in the field.

In this paper I explore the managerial challenges posed by diversity in addressing traditional and new requirements for effective performance in public organizations. I survey the core dimensions, concepts and approaches to diversity in reference to organizations dependent of civil
service as their core employment system. In doing so, I expect to show that the mandate to manage diversity in the civil service cannot be based on a one-size-fits-all strategy (Mor Barak, 2000). Designing and implementing this agenda requires a deliberate and methodical managerial strategy that starts with a diagnosis of how diversity affects organizational performance. It
continues with an analysis of the extent to which civil service rules and regulations, its practices and the underlying managerial philosophies about people promote or inhibit public agencies to advance through what scholars call ‘the diversity continuum' (Minors, 1996; Ospina, 1996), from exclusionary to multicultural workplaces (Cox, 1993). Only considering the degree of diversity and the historical, political, cultural and economic contexts of public employment in a given jurisdiction, can a tailored diversity agenda work.
The paper is structured as follows. First, focusing on the conceptual foundations of the diversity agenda, I use organization and management theory to explore what is diversity and why it is an imperative for all organizations. In a transitional section, I then discuss the implications of ‘what' and ‘why', for the agenda of managing diversity. Third, moving into the world of practice, I provide an overview of diversity approaches and strategies, highlighting the benefits of systemic,
proactive strategies to diversity management in contemporary public organizations. I return in the conclusion to the implications of the approaches presented for managing diversity in civil service.

Presents a case study of a managerial training program implemented in a large nonprofit organization. Suggestion that human resources managers can enhance the effectiveness of managerial training programs by providing opportunities for horizontal and vertical integration; Consequences of implementing this approach, including an expanded communications process and bonding between team members.