The unstated consensus of leadership approaches

Purpose The purpose of this article is to report on the underlying consensus in the major leadership approaches. This led to an assessment of the comprehensiveness of 11 leadership approaches and the role of place in achieving it. Design/methodology/approach Overall, 11 leadership approaches are analyzed and coded according to their emphasis and purpose and their organizational place (organizational content/context and the follower content/context). Findings A total of eight consensus items are found which range from “leadership is a good thing and more of its is better” to “leadership is a type of holonomic process”. In addition, ten of the 11 leadership approaches lack comprehensiveness, and that this lack is possibly the reason for their popularity. Research limitations/implications This paper does not include all possible leadership approaches. The analysis and coding of those selected leave room for different interpretations and possibly different conclusions. Practical limitations The inability of most leadership approaches to incorporate actual content of the work and the context of the group or organizations limits their usefulness to actually improve leadership. Theorists need to consider and incorporate place in their formulations. Originality/value This paper uses the philosophical concept of place to analyze leadership approaches. This paper also introduces the LAMPE approach to organizational leadership because it points the way to having more comprehensive leadership approach.