Research literature on leadership of knowledge workers: where are we, and where should we be heading?
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0240 |
| Date | 06 August 2020 |
| Published date | 06 August 2020 |
| Pages | 122-148 |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Knowledge management,HR & organizational behaviour,Organizational structure/dynamics,Accounting & finance,Accounting/accountancy,Behavioural accounting |
| Author | Abdallah Wumpini Issahaka,Rune Lines |
Research literature on leadership
of knowledge workers: where are
we, and where should we
be heading?
Abdallah Wumpini Issahaka and Rune Lines
Department of Strategy and Management, Norwegian School of Economics,
Bergen, Norway
Abstract
Purpose –With the transition into a knowledge economy, the concept of leading knowledge workers (KWs)
has gained an increasing amount of attention in organisational studies and among practitioners. The emerging
literature on the leadership of KW addresses an important phenomenon, but theoretical underpinnings and
empirical inquiry into leadership effectiveness in a KW context do not agree on a common conceptualisation of
KWs. Thus, a concerted research effort seems warranted.
Design/methodology/approach –The purpose of this study is to take stock of the existing literature on the
leadership of KW. Based on a critical literature review, this paper provides a timely synthesis of the diffuse
literature and identifies research gaps facing the leadership of KW field.
Findings –This paper suggests that the literature to date is deficient in terms of theory and evidence for how
KWs are different from other classes of workers and argues that this deficiency stands in the way of developing
ideas about how KWs could be effectively led.
Research limitations/implications –This paper extends a discussion on establishing “KW”as a clear,
independent construct and how the nomological network in which KW is situated (i.e. leadership antecedents,
and workplace outcomes) may be elucidated, extended and researched.
Originality/value –This paper extends beyond the identified research gaps and findings to present an
agenda for future research. Specifically, we propose that insights from research in educational psychology
should be used as a platform for theorising about how to lead in a KW context.
Keywords Knowledge workers, Leadership, Systematic review
Paper type Literature review
Introduction
The notion that knowledge workers (KWs) are assets to be valued, stimulated and managed
in organisations (Amar and Hlupic, 2016;Kaur et al., 2019;Donate and de Pablo, 2015;
Shujahat et al., 2019) has received increasing attention from management scholars and
practitioners. With the rapid global economic restructuring towards a knowledge-based
economy with a vibrant innovation landscape (Schot and Steinmueller, 2016;Singh et al.,
2019b;Nguyen et al., 2019;Millar et al., 2017), greater reliance on intellectual capabilities has
become the basis for maintaining a competitive advantage (Andrews and Criscuolo, 2013;
Durrani and Forbes, 2017). As such, the management of KW individuals producing and
distributing novel ideas prompts scholarship to explore new pathways to lead them
effectively.
However, despite the proliferation of investigations into leadership in organisational
studies, little explicit attention has been paid to the KW setting in leadership research (Paton,
2013;Uhl-Bien et al., 2007;Millar et al., 2017). The scholarly discourse on managing or leading
KWs has largely consisted of normative and fragmentary propositions, despite the
acknowledgement among scholars that KWs require different leadership structures
(Kelloway and Barling, 2000;Sveningsson and Alvesson, 2003;Walumbwa et al., 2011;
Chuang et al., 2016;Donate and de Pablo, 2015;Millar et al., 2017;Wu and Lee, 2017).
JIC
22,1
122
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1469-1930.htm
Received 18 October 2019
Revised 1 April 2020
11 June 2020
Accepted 29 June 2020
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 22 No. 1, 2021
pp. 122-148
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0240
There is a question of how KWs should be managed effectively if it has at all become a
significant and inevitable concern for both research and practice, but so far, suggestions have
not been based on an explicit theory of how KWs are different. This concern is epitomised by
Peter Drucker’s assertion that leading KWs will be the 21st century’s greatest management
challenge (1959).
The purpose of this review is threefold. First, we provide a timely literature synthesis on
the leadership of KWs and shed light on research gaps in the field to achieve a deeper
understanding of the leading KWs’nomological framework beyond the simple relationship
with KW outcomes to understand the leadership antecedents, mediating mechanisms and
boundary conditions. Second, we explore the theories utilised in the leadership of KW
research. Specifically, the focus is on understanding and defining KWs, learning the existing
theoretical lenses for how KWs are differentiated from other workers and examining the
theoretical bases for investigating KW preferences for and responses to proposed leadership
structures. Third, we propose an agenda for future research, particularly a theoretical
perspective for how KWs are different from other workers and a basis to predict their
preferences for and responses to leadership, which can be developed from research in
educational psychology. Overall, our efforts will afford the management field a firmer
background to better understand and respond to KWs.
The KW literature has been broadly categorised into two waves of research (cf. Darr and
Warhurst, 2008). The first wave (late 1950s to the mid-1990s) primarily features sociological
literature expounding the rise of a “new working class”and the transition towards a
knowledge-intensive society (Bell, 1979;Brint, 1984;Ehrenreich and Ehrenreich, 1979).
Sociologists assert that with expanded education, a new middle class emerged in the latter
half of the 20th century that is composed of professional and technical workers (Darr and
Warhurst, 2008). The second wave (mid-1990s onwards) is primarily composed of business
literature with a focus on managing KWs (Reich, 1993;Drucker, 1999;Uhl-Bien et al., 2007;
Horwitz et al., 2003;Davenport, 2005). With this managerial turn, the research focus on KWs
is growing alongside the rhetoric of “leadership”,“knowledge management”,“human
resource management”and “organisational structures”. However, scholars lacked consensus
on how KWs should be effectively led. The root cause of this divergence among scholars
remains a question and this prompts a timely review and synthesis of relevant existing
studies in the core and allied disciplines.
Research on the management of KWs can be categorised into at least three strands:
(1) the conceptual developments of the term KW and who qualifies as a KW; (2) the
relationships between proposed management structures, including leadership, and KW
outcomes; and (3) a model development phase beyond simple relationships with outcomes
to understand the antecedents, mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions of
leadingKWs.WiththeproliferationofresearchonleadershipofKW,aliterature
review synthesising and consolidating the growing body of knowledge is needed. It is,
thus, timely to conduct a systematic literature review of the nomological network of
leadership of KW.
Research on leadership of KWs needs a comprehensive and integrated review because of
the following. First, since the pioneering work by Drucker (1959) that laid the foundation for
the concept of KW, research has demonstrated the empirical and theoretical differentiation of
KWs from other forms of workers (e.g. Kelloway and Barling, 2000;Davenport, 2005). Second,
despite the increasing academic interest in the leadership of KW, there is still a lack of
coherence and clarity in the field. Advances in research have appeared in management
journals and across allied disciplines, including education (e.g. Hempsall, 2014,Lyndon et al.,
2020;Robert and You, 2018), but research remains fragmentary. Third, there are currently
many proposed leadership structures for effectively influencing KW outcomes, but most of
which are yet to be reviewed.
Literature on
leadership of
knowledge
workers
123
To continue reading
Request your trial