다양한 이론적 관점에 입각한 리더십 연구의 흐름 속에서 Bolman과 Deal은 소위 리더십 프레임(leadership frames)이라는 이론적 모형을 창안하여 제시하였다. Bolman과 Deal이 제시한 ‘리더십 프레임’은 리더가 온갖 사물을 바라보는 사고체계(즉, 인식체계)인 바 모든 리더들은 자신만의 독특한 프레임에 토대하여 리더십 행동을 발휘하게 되는데 Bolman과 Deal은 이 같은 리더십 프레임에 구조적(structural), 인적자원적(human resource), 정치적(political), 상징적(symbolic) 등 네 가지 유형이 있다고 밝히고 있다. 그간의 리더십 관련 연구물들이 매우 다양하고 복잡한 리더십 현상의 어느 한 측면만을 조명하고 밝히고자 주력한데 반해 리더십 프레임 모형은 부분적 범주에 국한되었던 이전의 연구와 관점들을 전체적으로 통합한 모형이라는 점에서 많은 연구자들로부터 그 가치를 인정받았다. 이 통합적 관점(a wholistic perspective)은 다원적 프레임 리더십(multi-frame leadership)이라는 개념을 낳았는데, 이는 리더십의 실재를 좀 더 포괄적이고 심화된(enlarged and enriched) 관점에서 명확히 밝히는데 주요 관심을 두고 있다. 본 연구는 프레임 리더십 모형에 입각하여 국내 ...
다양한 이론적 관점에 입각한 리더십 연구의 흐름 속에서 Bolman과 Deal은 소위 리더십 프레임(leadership frames)이라는 이론적 모형을 창안하여 제시하였다. Bolman과 Deal이 제시한 ‘리더십 프레임’은 리더가 온갖 사물을 바라보는 사고체계(즉, 인식체계)인 바 모든 리더들은 자신만의 독특한 프레임에 토대하여 리더십 행동을 발휘하게 되는데 Bolman과 Deal은 이 같은 리더십 프레임에 구조적(structural), 인적자원적(human resource), 정치적(political), 상징적(symbolic) 등 네 가지 유형이 있다고 밝히고 있다. 그간의 리더십 관련 연구물들이 매우 다양하고 복잡한 리더십 현상의 어느 한 측면만을 조명하고 밝히고자 주력한데 반해 리더십 프레임 모형은 부분적 범주에 국한되었던 이전의 연구와 관점들을 전체적으로 통합한 모형이라는 점에서 많은 연구자들로부터 그 가치를 인정받았다. 이 통합적 관점(a wholistic perspective)은 다원적 프레임 리더십(multi-frame leadership)이라는 개념을 낳았는데, 이는 리더십의 실재를 좀 더 포괄적이고 심화된(enlarged and enriched) 관점에서 명확히 밝히는데 주요 관심을 두고 있다. 본 연구는 프레임 리더십 모형에 입각하여 국내 IT 종사자가 구조적, 인적자원적, 정치적 및 상징적 등 네 가지 리더십 프레임 관점에서 부하의 신뢰와 존경, 부서목표의 효과적 달성, 상사의 승진속도 및 진정한 리더로서의 인식 등 리더십 효과성 차원에 어떤 영향을 미치는지를 실증적으로 밝히는데 주된 목적을 두었다. 연구 결과, IT인력의 경우 네 가지 리더십 프레임이 전반적으로 리더십 효과성에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 즉 구조적, 인적자원적 프레임은 부하의 신뢰/존경과 부서목표의 효과적 달성에, 정치적 프레임은 리더로서의 인식에, 그리고 상징적 프레임은 상사의 승진속도와 리더로서의 인식에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 선행연구들의 논의를 대부분 지지하는 결과로 IT업종의 경우 열악한 과업환경과 이로 인한 상대적인 박탈감, 개인 간/부서 간 갈등수준이 높다는 점에서 본 연구결과는 이러한 현실을 고려한 리더십 발휘가 요구된다는 점을 부각시키고 있으며, 이 점이 본 연구의 의의이다.
다양한 이론적 관점에 입각한 리더십 연구의 흐름 속에서 Bolman과 Deal은 소위 리더십 프레임(leadership frames)이라는 이론적 모형을 창안하여 제시하였다. Bolman과 Deal이 제시한 ‘리더십 프레임’은 리더가 온갖 사물을 바라보는 사고체계(즉, 인식체계)인 바 모든 리더들은 자신만의 독특한 프레임에 토대하여 리더십 행동을 발휘하게 되는데 Bolman과 Deal은 이 같은 리더십 프레임에 구조적(structural), 인적자원적(human resource), 정치적(political), 상징적(symbolic) 등 네 가지 유형이 있다고 밝히고 있다. 그간의 리더십 관련 연구물들이 매우 다양하고 복잡한 리더십 현상의 어느 한 측면만을 조명하고 밝히고자 주력한데 반해 리더십 프레임 모형은 부분적 범주에 국한되었던 이전의 연구와 관점들을 전체적으로 통합한 모형이라는 점에서 많은 연구자들로부터 그 가치를 인정받았다. 이 통합적 관점(a wholistic perspective)은 다원적 프레임 리더십(multi-frame leadership)이라는 개념을 낳았는데, 이는 리더십의 실재를 좀 더 포괄적이고 심화된(enlarged and enriched) 관점에서 명확히 밝히는데 주요 관심을 두고 있다. 본 연구는 프레임 리더십 모형에 입각하여 국내 IT 종사자가 구조적, 인적자원적, 정치적 및 상징적 등 네 가지 리더십 프레임 관점에서 부하의 신뢰와 존경, 부서목표의 효과적 달성, 상사의 승진속도 및 진정한 리더로서의 인식 등 리더십 효과성 차원에 어떤 영향을 미치는지를 실증적으로 밝히는데 주된 목적을 두었다. 연구 결과, IT인력의 경우 네 가지 리더십 프레임이 전반적으로 리더십 효과성에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 즉 구조적, 인적자원적 프레임은 부하의 신뢰/존경과 부서목표의 효과적 달성에, 정치적 프레임은 리더로서의 인식에, 그리고 상징적 프레임은 상사의 승진속도와 리더로서의 인식에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 선행연구들의 논의를 대부분 지지하는 결과로 IT업종의 경우 열악한 과업환경과 이로 인한 상대적인 박탈감, 개인 간/부서 간 갈등수준이 높다는 점에서 본 연구결과는 이러한 현실을 고려한 리더십 발휘가 요구된다는 점을 부각시키고 있으며, 이 점이 본 연구의 의의이다.
Amongst diverse leadership theory jungle, Bolman and Deal suggested an differentiated leadership model named 'leadership frame'. Many researchers recognized this model so valuable in that it intended to assemble and integrate the partially highlighted aspects of leadership dimension that were approa...
Amongst diverse leadership theory jungle, Bolman and Deal suggested an differentiated leadership model named 'leadership frame'. Many researchers recognized this model so valuable in that it intended to assemble and integrate the partially highlighted aspects of leadership dimension that were approached with a confined perspective to a certain area, into a whole integrated one. This wholistic perspective resulted to create the concept of multi-frame leadership, whose main concern is to see thoroughly the leadership reality with more enlarged and enriched perspectives. In social science, the concept of frames has been mentioned with diverse terms such as schema, schemata, maps, images, frames of reference, representation, paradigm, pictures, or implicit organizing theories. Despite the diversity of these terms, they have a certain assumptions in common in that everybody has his or her own way of seeing the world differently, based on his or her own perspective on this world and reality. This means that the frames of reference invariably have an influence on the interpretation of situation and the determination of behavior, as far as the world of human experiences is so complex and ambiguous. In this respect, frames are windows on the world of leadership and management. According to Bolman and Deal, there are four frames explaining the dimension of leadership like below: (1) The structural frame: It casts managers and leaders in the fundamental roles of clarifying goals, attending to the relationship between structure and environment, and developing a clearly defined structure appropriate to what needs to be done. The main job of a leader is to focus on task, facts, and logic, rather than personality and emotions. The structural frame suggests that most people-problems stem from structural flaws, not personal limitations or liabilities. (2) The human resource frame suggests that people are the center of any organization. If people feel the organization is responsive to their needs and supportive of their personal goals, you can count on commitment and loyalty. The job of a leader is support and empowerment. Support takes a variety of forms: showing concern for people, listening to their aspirations and goals, and communicating personal warmth and openness. The leader empowers through participation and openness and by ensuring that people have the autonomy and resources they need in doing their job. (3) The political frame suggests that managers have to recognize political reality and know how to deal with conflict. Inside and outside any organization, a variety of interest groups, each with its own agenda, compete for scarce resources. There is never enough to give all parties what they want, so there will always be struggle. The job of a leader is to recognize major constituencies, develop ties to their leadership, and manage conflict as productively as possible. Above all, leaders need to build a power base and use power carefully. (4) The symbolic frame suggests that the most important part of a leader's job is inspiration - giving people something they can believe in. People become excited about and committed to a place with a unique identity, a special place where they feel that what they do is really important. The main purpose of this study is to highlight the effects of these four frames model of leadership on the leadership effectiveness such as the acquisition of trusts and respects from subordinates, the effective attainment of organizational unit's goals, the faster promotion speed of unit's leader than his or her rivals, and the recognition as more a leader than a manager by his or her subordinates, focusing on the domestic IT-related firms. The major findings accrued by hypotheses testing are as follows: (1) The frames recognized as bosses’major instrument were shown in the order of human resource, symbolic, political and structural, something else than the hypothesis expecting structural and human resource frames more frequent. (2) The four frames are significantly related with overall leadership effectiveness and success. That is, structural and human resource frames had significant effects on trusts and respects from subordinates and effective attainment of organizational unit's goals respectively. On the other hand, political and symbolic frame had significant effects on recognition as a leader and faster promotion and recognition as a leader respectively. (3) The number of frames exercised by boss was significantly related with every endogenous variable. That is, when it comes down to the effectiveness of leadership frame, the more frames utilized by boss, the more effective was the leadership seen from the perspective of the subordinates. These findings support most of the discussions of previous researches. When considering the incumbents of IT-related firms suffer from the higher degree of feelings of deprivation and the deeply suppressed needs accrued by their inferior task environment, as well as the higher level of interpersonal and interdepartmental conflicts, the results of this study highlight the need to appreciate these conditions when exercising leadership, exercising more flexible frames. This is the very point of this study.
Amongst diverse leadership theory jungle, Bolman and Deal suggested an differentiated leadership model named 'leadership frame'. Many researchers recognized this model so valuable in that it intended to assemble and integrate the partially highlighted aspects of leadership dimension that were approached with a confined perspective to a certain area, into a whole integrated one. This wholistic perspective resulted to create the concept of multi-frame leadership, whose main concern is to see thoroughly the leadership reality with more enlarged and enriched perspectives. In social science, the concept of frames has been mentioned with diverse terms such as schema, schemata, maps, images, frames of reference, representation, paradigm, pictures, or implicit organizing theories. Despite the diversity of these terms, they have a certain assumptions in common in that everybody has his or her own way of seeing the world differently, based on his or her own perspective on this world and reality. This means that the frames of reference invariably have an influence on the interpretation of situation and the determination of behavior, as far as the world of human experiences is so complex and ambiguous. In this respect, frames are windows on the world of leadership and management. According to Bolman and Deal, there are four frames explaining the dimension of leadership like below: (1) The structural frame: It casts managers and leaders in the fundamental roles of clarifying goals, attending to the relationship between structure and environment, and developing a clearly defined structure appropriate to what needs to be done. The main job of a leader is to focus on task, facts, and logic, rather than personality and emotions. The structural frame suggests that most people-problems stem from structural flaws, not personal limitations or liabilities. (2) The human resource frame suggests that people are the center of any organization. If people feel the organization is responsive to their needs and supportive of their personal goals, you can count on commitment and loyalty. The job of a leader is support and empowerment. Support takes a variety of forms: showing concern for people, listening to their aspirations and goals, and communicating personal warmth and openness. The leader empowers through participation and openness and by ensuring that people have the autonomy and resources they need in doing their job. (3) The political frame suggests that managers have to recognize political reality and know how to deal with conflict. Inside and outside any organization, a variety of interest groups, each with its own agenda, compete for scarce resources. There is never enough to give all parties what they want, so there will always be struggle. The job of a leader is to recognize major constituencies, develop ties to their leadership, and manage conflict as productively as possible. Above all, leaders need to build a power base and use power carefully. (4) The symbolic frame suggests that the most important part of a leader's job is inspiration - giving people something they can believe in. People become excited about and committed to a place with a unique identity, a special place where they feel that what they do is really important. The main purpose of this study is to highlight the effects of these four frames model of leadership on the leadership effectiveness such as the acquisition of trusts and respects from subordinates, the effective attainment of organizational unit's goals, the faster promotion speed of unit's leader than his or her rivals, and the recognition as more a leader than a manager by his or her subordinates, focusing on the domestic IT-related firms. The major findings accrued by hypotheses testing are as follows: (1) The frames recognized as bosses’major instrument were shown in the order of human resource, symbolic, political and structural, something else than the hypothesis expecting structural and human resource frames more frequent. (2) The four frames are significantly related with overall leadership effectiveness and success. That is, structural and human resource frames had significant effects on trusts and respects from subordinates and effective attainment of organizational unit's goals respectively. On the other hand, political and symbolic frame had significant effects on recognition as a leader and faster promotion and recognition as a leader respectively. (3) The number of frames exercised by boss was significantly related with every endogenous variable. That is, when it comes down to the effectiveness of leadership frame, the more frames utilized by boss, the more effective was the leadership seen from the perspective of the subordinates. These findings support most of the discussions of previous researches. When considering the incumbents of IT-related firms suffer from the higher degree of feelings of deprivation and the deeply suppressed needs accrued by their inferior task environment, as well as the higher level of interpersonal and interdepartmental conflicts, the results of this study highlight the need to appreciate these conditions when exercising leadership, exercising more flexible frames. This is the very point of this study.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.