Category: Leadership

Issue in contemporary leadership

Case study and instructions will be attached in the file. First question is highlighted to be answered.
Plan how work should be structured:
*Skills is developed by the time, man gain experience, “believed according to the case”
*THEORETICAL BACKGROUND (explain traits and skills approach and support what you believe)
*DON’T forget about opposite opinion; be critical because question is opened.
-Be very clear about arguing, why he become the leader, right arguments
-This piece of work should convince about point of view

Ernest Shackleton and the epic voyage of the Endurance
Source: This case is an adaptation from Koehn, N. (2010). Leadership in Crisis: Ernest Shackleton and the Epic Voyage of the Endurance. Harvard Business Review.

Introduction
On January 18, 1915, the ship Endurance, carrying Sir Ernest Shackleton and 27 men, froze in the icy waters off the coast of Antarctica. Deep in the southern hemisphere, it was early in the summer, and the Endurance was within sight of land. The ice, however, was unusually thick for the ship’s latitude, and an unexpected southern wind froze it solid around the ship.
More than eight months later, the ice still trapped the ship. The tremendous force of distant currents broke apart the floes (wide plateaus made of thousands of tons of ice) and pressed them back together. For months the wooden timbers of the Endurance, held between three of these floes, creaked and moaned under the pressure of the moving ice.
On October 28, 1915, the ice snapped the hull of the Endurance. Shackleton ordered the crew to abandon ship. That night Shackleton wrote in his diary, “A man must shape himself to a new mark directly the old one goes to ground…. I pray God I can manage to get the whole party to civilization”.

Shackleton’s Early Life
Born in 1874 in County Kildare, Ireland, Shackleton grew up in a middle-class family. In his youth, Shackleton developed a fascination with the sea and English poetry. From adolescence onward, he was fascinated by the idea of man mastering nature. At 16, he convinced his father to allow him to go to sea. The elder Shackleton found his son a position on a merchant vessel at the rank of “boy”, the lowest-ranking member of the crew. Shackleton began his maritime career by scrubbing decks and polishing brass railing. He was attentive and observant, absorbing every bit of information about life at sea.
Despite his hard first experience, Shackleton flourished in the merchant marine. By age 24, he attained the rank of full master. Unlike in school, where his performance was consistently below average, at sea he was considered “more intelligent than the average officer” by a supervisor. In the marine, Shackleton quickly displayed a self-confidence that alienated some men but won over more. After his first voyage, his captain wrote that Shackleton was “the most pig-headed, obstinate boy I have ever come across”. Still, Shackleton’s audacity earned him respect and even promotions. Despite rapid advancement, Shackleton developed a reputation for not flaunting his rank over the regular sailors. One of them later wrote an admiring description, saying he was a “departure from our usual type of young officer . . . he never stood aloof in any way, but was eager to talk—to argue as sailors do . . . he was very human, very sensitive”.
As Shackleton scaled the maritime ladder, he became restless and complained to shipmates that he needed an “opportunity of breaking away from the monotony of method and routine—from an existence that might eventually strangle his individuality”. In 1896, at age 22, he met and fell in love with Emily Dorman, the woman he would marry six years later. He told a fellow sailor that he wanted “to make a name for myself and her.”

The Exploration Industry
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the quest for scientific knowledge drove many explorers and their supporters to mount elaborate polar expeditions. Explorers from a range of countries who succeeded in mapping new territory or reaching previously undiscovered areas were hailed as heroes. Britain was one of many nations engaged in a fierce competition to be the first to reach the South Pole. In this context, the National Antarctic Expedition (NAE) was founded. Major Robert Scott of the Royal Navy was named its commander, and Shackleton was also appointed as a member. Shackleton’s appointment to the NAE linked him to an adventure that many contemporaries considered heroic.

However, Britain suffered from several disadvantages in the international competition to reach the South Pole. None of the members of the NAE had previous polar experience. Although the commander was a skilled seaman, Scott had never seen pack ice before he arrived in Antarctica with the NAE. Few British explorers were experienced at using dog teams and skis to move over ice. These and other obstacles burdened the 1901–1902 NAE’s voyage. Scott and Shackleton failed to reach the South Pole.
In 1905, Scott published an account of the trip titled Voyage of the Discovery. Scott’s book portrayed Shackleton in a profoundly unflattering light, referring to him as “the invalid” and virtually blaming him for the expedition’s failure to reach the pole. This reinvigorated Shackleton’s Antarctic ambitions and Shortly thereafter, Shackleton began planning an expedition of his own.
By 1907, Shackleton had raised the necessary funds, and the Nimrod set sail. The journey south took two years and made Shackleton a national hero. With three companions, the explorer succeeded in trekking to within 100 miles of the South Pole, beating Scott’s record of farthest south by more than 350 miles. Despite not reaching the pole, the new record for “farthest south” was enough to earn Shackleton a knighthood when he returned to Britain.

Preparing the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition
It would not be long before Shackleton set his sights on another mission for crossing Antarctica. His plan called for a ship to travel into the Weddell Sea and deposit a crew of six men who would then journey overland across the continent to the Ross Sea on the other side. A second ship would sail directly to the Ross Sea and await the overland party’s arrival.
Shackleton’s transcontinental plan involved significant risks. The Weddell Sea, infamous for its large and unpredictable ice floes, posed initial dangers. In addition, crossing Antarctica required a march of 1,500 miles, which Shackleton calculated could be made at a rate of 15 miles a day. Only one mile a day slower than the impressive pace set by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen, the fastest polar explorer of the era. Amundsen’s team relied on skis and sled dogs, but Shackleton was not skilled at either of these forms of ice travel. Furthermore, much of the selected route had never before been explored.

The massive logistical complexity of organising two crews and equipping two polar ships drew criticism from the Royal Geographical Society, which held the scientific credibility and political power to either raise or cripple any proposed expedition. The explorer knew the importance of an endorsement from the respected institution. Although the society’s members complained of the “impossibility of getting any clear answers out of Shackleton” about his plans, they elected to grant him a small donation of £1,000 (about ¥600,000 today).

The Endurance
With Shackleton’s persistence, money came in. By late 1913, he had raised just over £51,500 (about ¥30 million today) through a combination of grants and loans. While continuing his fund-raising efforts, Shackleton turned to the challenge of finding ships for the voyage. Shackleton searched throughout Europe for not one, but two, boats. In a Norwegian shipyard, he found a craft named Polaris. The Polaris was a wooden ship of 300 tons, equipped with extra cabin space and a darkroom. Later, the explorer admitted having reservations about the Polaris, particularly about the large and seemingly overweight stern, but at £11,600 (about ¥6.5 million today) it was a bargain, and he bought it on credit. He renamed the vessel Endurance after his family motto, “By Endurance We Conquer”. This was the ship that would travel through the Weddell Sea. For the other part of the expedition, on the Ross Sea side, he bought the old Aurora, a tried and tested Antarctic vessel. Since the Aurora was already docked in the South Pacific, using it eliminated the expense of moving a ship 12,000 miles from Britain to Australia, the point of departure for many expeditions because of its relative proximity to Antarctica. The Endurance would have to be moved from Norway to England, where crew members and provisions would come aboard. From there, it would proceed to South America, another common point of departure.

The Crew
In December 1913, Shackleton made his first public announcement of the expedition in a published advertisement for volunteers. The notice for crewmen reportedly read: “Men wanted for Hazardous Journey. Small Wages, bitter cold, long months of complete darkness, constant danger, safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in case of success”. According to Shackleton’s friend Hugh Robert Mill, the initial notices elicited responses from 5,000 applicants. Shackleton divided the candidates into the categories “Mad,” “Hopeless,” and “Possible.” He met briefly with those in the “Possible” category and relied largely on his instinct for judging character in evaluating them.
Shackleton looked for qualities he associated with optimism, a personal trait he felt was essential for men undertaking a potentially dangerous and difficult mission. Those who displayed cheerfulness and a sense of humour tended to fare well in interviews with him. When the explorer reviewed the qualifications of veteran Antarctic officers, he placed a premium on demonstrated perseverance. In hiring crew hands, Shackleton gave preference to men who had worked on fishing trawlers in the frigid North Sea between Britain and Norway. The leader knew these sailors were accustomed to spending long hours on frozen, windswept decks and believed they would be able to tolerate the harsh conditions off Antarctica.

The Expedition Begins
On August 8, the Endurance departed for Buenos Aires ahead of Shackleton, who stayed behind to attend to last-minute details. When the leader finally reached Argentina in October by separate vessel, he found that his expedition was far from ready for its voyage south. Frank Worsley, appointed by Shackleton as captain of the Endurance, had proved largely incapable of keeping discipline on board during the journey to South America. In response, Shackleton decided to re-structure the ship’s command in order to reduce the captain’s discretionary authority. Further changes to the composition of the crew were needed when three sailors were dismissed for drunk and disorderly conduct.
Meanwhile, 69 sled dogs arrived from Canada but, because of a contract dispute, the selected dog trainer never appeared. Shackleton finally chose to embark without one. Another significant challenge involved Shackleton’s credit, which was ruined by over-extended loans. The commander decided to proceed to South Georgia Island, the location of Britain’s southernmost whaling village. He suspected that in the remote settlement there, where captains might not know of his poor credit reputation, he had the best chance of obtaining the remaining supplies he needed.
At South Georgia Island, Shackleton confronted new, unexpected obstacles. Noting that the ice floes were the farthest north they had seen, local seamen warned that his ship might get trapped and advised him to postpone his mission until the following year. Shackleton decided to hole up in South Georgia for several weeks, watching for any change in the ice. A month later, with conditions unchanged, the Endurance departed the whaling outpost for Antarctica.

First Weeks on Board
As the ship headed south, Shackleton and his crew started to know each other. Most of the men knew the commander only from the short job interview. Once on board, they were surprised and pleased by how their leader interacted with them, and the crew gave him the good-natured nickname of “Boss.” “When [Shackleton] came across you by yourself,” Dr Macklin remembered, “he would get into conversation and talk to you in an intimate sort of way, asking you little things about yourself—how you were getting on, how you liked it, what particular side of the work you were enjoying most.”
But for all his congeniality with the men, Shackleton ran a tight ship. He demanded unquestioning loyalty and responsiveness to his orders, avoiding direct arguments or negotiations with his men. Frank Wild, Shackleton’s second in command and most trusted mate, became, as Macklin put it, a “sort of foreman.” “When we wanted things,” the doctor recalled, “instead of going to Shackleton we went to Wild.” Whenever one member of the expedition complained to Wild about a problem with another, the lieutenant listened patiently to the complaints. Wild’s approachability and overall geniality helped Shackleton to preserve some distance from the crew and maintain an aura of authority.

Wintering on the Endurance
On December 7, 1914, the men spotted the first pack ice. The expedition members, largely unaware of the warnings the South Georgia whaling captains had given Shackleton, were captivated by the views of the frozen sea. The pace slowed, however, as the boat continued south through thickening ice. On January 27, after nine days in the grip of the pack, Shackleton ordered the boiler fires put out and began to prepare for a long wait. The leader dreaded the effects of inactivity and boredom on a crew with no responsibilities or routine. Consequently, he insisted that every man maintain his ordinary duties as closely as possible on an immobile ship. These included mopping the decks and hulls, organising and rationing supplies, keeping the anchor chains free of rust, and watching for navigable breaks in the ice.
From the beginning, the men had perceived social and professional disparities among themselves. Shackleton did not wish to amplify these distinctions. In a deviation from military and maritime norms, he ordered officers, scientists, and sailors to share the manual labour on ship equally. As April passed, daylight hours became fewer and fewer until, by early May, the men found themselves in the complete darkness. There was little work to be done outside the ship in the dark, so the men passed the time by writing in diaries, reading, listening to music from a hand-crank phonograph, and playing cards and chess. With the Endurance stuck in ice, the mission of the crew had been to wait out the winter and hope to move the following summer. But during those winter months, millions of tons of shifting pack ice had pressed against the Endurance on all sides.

Abandoning Ship
October 27, 1915, the Endurance gave in. Shackleton ordered the crew to abandon ship, and the men spent the night camped on the thick ice nearby. Early the next morning, Shackleton dragged petrol cans from the wreck of the boat and began preparing hot powdered milk for breakfast. “His first thought,” Third Mate Greenstreet explained, “was for the men under him. He didn’t care if he went without a shirt on his back so long as the men, he was leading had sufficient clothing. He was a wonderful man that way; you felt that the party mattered more than anything else”.
Shackleton quickly decided to march the men across the ice in the hopes of reaching Paulet Island, 350 miles northwest, where a storehouse from a 1903 expedition still stood. Shackleton thought, “the right thing to do was to attempt a march. It would be, I considered, so much better for the men to feel that they were progressing—even if the progress was slow—towards land and safety, than simply to sit down and wait for the tardy north-westerly drift to take us from the cruel waste of ice”. The Boss intended the crew to drag two of the three whaleboats salvaged from the Endurance to the edge of the ice and then launch them for an open-boat journey through the remaining nautical distance to the island.
The march proved much more difficult than Shackleton expected. Filled with supplies, each boat weighed nearly a ton, and soft ice made the work of pulling the boats even more arduous. On the third day, Shackleton stopped to confer with Wild, Worsley, and Hurley. Although Hurley was not trained as an officer, he possessed the survival skills of a pioneer and a blustery, independent spirit that made his commander wary. By keeping Hurley close by and informed, Shackleton aimed to keep him in check. The advisory group concurred that there was no choice but to call off the trek and hunker down on the floe.

Life on the Ice
On November 1, 1915, Shackleton ordered to establish a camp approximately four miles from the Endurance. The men named the site “Ocean Camp”. Shackleton divided the crew into five tents, choosing one strong head for each. With energetic leadership in each small group, he hoped to keep morale high and discipline intact. To his own tent he assigned two of the more controversial members of the expedition: James, the physicist, whose clumsiness, academic demeanour, and general unfamiliarity with shipboard life had made him the focus of much teasing, and Hurley, whose tremendous energy and ingenuity sometimes manifested themselves as arrogance.
As always, Shackleton ordered the crew to keep busy. Days began with an early breakfast of seal steak or canned provisions, after which each man set about his chores. In the evenings, the men played cards or talked. Over the next few weeks, the officers and crew retraced their steps across the ice to the wreck of the Endurance to recover valuable food, the third lifeboat, and other supplies. Nearly four weeks after the men had abandoned the ship, the Endurance sank.
A second march was decided between Shackleton, Wild and Hurley. The march proved exhausting and discouraging. Men in harnesses pulled the boats and supply-laden sledges over slushy, uneven ice for hours at a time, but the effort gained them little ground. On the fourth day of the march, Shackleton set out with a small party to scout ahead. When he returned to the group, McNeish declared his refusal to continue with the march. Angry, exhausted, and plagued by foot pain, the carpenter openly challenged Shackleton’s authority, contending that his duty to follow the leader’s orders had officially ended with the sinking of the Endurance. In order to solve this conflict, Shackleton gathered the group together and reviewed the ship’s articles, making one significant change. Although he was not legally obligated to pay the team for their time after the ship was lost, Shackleton declared that every man would be paid in full for each day until they reached safety. This revision to the articles quieted the situation.
Two days later, Shackleton ordered to set a camp which the team named “Patience Camp”. Harsh weather frequently confined the men to their tents. But rest was difficult even there, as the sleeping bags, often wet by day, froze solid in the cold of night. In the evenings, Shackleton divided his time among the tents, reciting poetry or playing cards with the men. Days, then weeks, then months passed in this manner.

Into the Boats
15 months after the Endurance had first lodged in the ice, Shackleton gave the order to launch the lifeboats in search of land. The Boss divided the men into three groups; he would command the James Caird, and he appointed Worsley to lead the Dudley Docker and navigator Hubert Hudson to steer the smallest boat, the Stancomb Wills. The days that followed in the boats were terrifying and painful. After several days and in consultation with Worsley and Wild, Shackleton revised the destination of the three boats. Winds made the closest land at Elephant Island unreachable, so they would aim instead to reach a bay on the Antarctic mainland. For the remainder of that day, the three boats tossed about in choppy waters strewn with chunks of ice. By late evening, winds shifted dramatically again, bringing snow showers. At dawn the next day, Shackleton surveyed his team: “Most of the men were now looking seriously worn and strained. Their lips were cracked, and their eyes and eyelids showed red in their salt-encrusted faces…. Obviously, we must make land quickly, and I decided to run for Elephant Island”. Hoping to make use of the southeast wind, Shackleton announced the fourth change in destination.

Elephant Island
After two days, the three small boats struggled ashore at Elephant Island. But the small spot of land offered no shelter. It was only a matter of hours before the men began to show signs of dejection and hopelessness. The men’s outlook, overall health, and food supply confronted Shackleton with a critical decision. A boat journey in search of relief was necessary. The nearest port was Port Stanley, in the Falkland Islands, 540 miles away. However, the north-westerly wind in a frail and weakened boat made the trip impossible. In instead, South Georgia Island, which was over 800 miles away but lay in the area of west winds which would carry the boat toward the island, was set as a destiny.
Shackleton took great care in deciding who would accompany him. He chose Worsley for his navigational skill, Crean for his tough and hardworking spirit, McNeish for his abilities as a carpenter and sailor, Timothy McCarthy for his commendable performance on the recent boat trip, and John Vincent for his physical strength. An added benefit of taking the sometimes difficult McNeish and Vincent was that they would not be left to spread contentiousness among those remaining on Elephant Island. Knowing that the wait for rescue would be tedious and uneasy, the commander had to consider who had the temperament to withstand the wait and who might be too short-tempered or demoralizing to others. Wild was appointed leader of the 22 remaining men, who would wait on the island for a rescue ship.

Heading towards South Georgia Island
On April 24, 1916, the 22-foot James Caird set out from Elephant Island carrying Shackleton and his five selected crewmen. After five days, physical pain came to the men with every movement: skin was rubbed raw by wet clothes, saltwater boils developed, legs swelled from constant immersion in salt water, and hands burned from frostbite. Shackleton monitored the condition of his crew closely, watching for symptoms that required attention. “Two of the party at least were very close to death,” Worsley recalled. “Indeed, it might be said that [Shackleton] kept a finger on each man’s pulse. Whenever he noticed that a man seemed extra cold and shivered, he would immediately order another hot drink of milk to be prepared and served to all. He never let the man know that [the milk serving] was on his account.
After two weeks, the boat was within 80 miles of the island. The ship’s supply of drinking water had been contaminated by sea salt. Although their ultimate destination was the whaling station, Shackleton determined that, given the conditions, it would be impossible to travel the additional 150 miles. Thus, they sailed into a narrow bay in the uninhabited west coast of the island.

Crossing South Georgia Island
Shackleton had intended to rest briefly at the landing spot and then cross the island towards the whaling station. Shackleton was eager to set out as soon as possible so he could find a ship to retrieve the 22 men stranded on Elephant Island. He decided that Captain Worsley and Second Officer Crean would travel with him, while the less healthy McNeish, Vincent, and McCarthy would remain on the coast in a makeshift shelter created by the overturned James Caird.
Just before dawn on May 20, after 24 hours of trekking with no rest, the three men paused momentarily. Almost immediately, Crean and Worsley fell into a deep sleep. Shackleton did not dare close his eyes. If he did, he knew they would all freeze to death. Instead, he watched his sleeping colleagues for five minutes before rousing them, explaining that they had been asleep for half an hour and it was time to start out again. After a total of 36 hours travelling without sleep or shelter, they reached the edges of the whaling station. Later that day, the station captain dispatched a ship to recover McNeish, Vincent, and McCarthy from the other side of the island.

Return to Elephant Island
Shackleton wasted no time in preparing to rescue the 22 men still on Elephant Island. On May 23, 1916, Shackleton, Worsley, Crean, and a crew of whalers departed on the Southern Sky. The ship got within 60 miles of Elephant Island, but severe pack ice forced a retreat. A stronger boat would be needed.
The news that Shackleton had survived caused great popular excitement in Britain. But World War I raged on, and Britain had no ships available for non-military ventures and the only available option could only be made ready to sail by late September. To Shackleton, there was no question that his crew must be rescued before then as it had been almost six weeks since the James Caird set out. In early June, officials in Uruguay offered a crew and a ship at no cost. Shackleton set out again on June 10 but was forced to retreat within days when the ship sustained damage. In the port of Punta Arenas, Chile, Shackleton found support from the British Club, an association of English citizens living in the area. The Emma set out in mid-July and came within 100 miles of Elephant Island, but severe conditions forced a retreat.
It had now been over three months since the James Caird left Elephant Island. Shackleton approached Chilean officials for assistance. They provided him with the Yelcho, a small steamer. On August 25, he, Crean, and Worsley departed for a fourth attempt at rescuing their stranded comrades. On August 30, 1916, four months after the departure of the Caird, and more than two years after the original departure of the Endurance from London, the Yelcho pulled within view of Elephant Island. As the Yelcho approached, Shackleton stood on deck counting the number of figures on shore until he reached 22. Worsley watched and recalled: “He put his glasses back in their case and turned to me, his face showing more emotion than I had ever known it to show before.” The commander had completed the most important mission of his life: he had led his men “through Hell” and everyone had survived the ordeal. Shackleton later described the moment of rescue: “I called out, ‘Are you all well?’ and [Wild] answered, ‘We are all well, Boss,’ and then I heard three cheers”.

Essay Question
Instructions: Read the above case study and select one essay title from the list below.

You will need to read beyond the lecture materials to construct an effective essay.
1. Discuss the ways in which the case of Shackleton relates to the debate over whether leaders are born or made.
2. Discuss the ways in which Shackleton’s traits were both a positive and negative element of his leadership.
3. Discuss the proposition that the Shackleton’s leadership was both good and bad.
4. Using the Four I’s of transformational leadership discuss the extent to which Shackleton was a transformational leader.
5. Explain how Situational and Contingency leadership can be used to analyse Shackleton’s leadership approach.
6. What was Shackleton’s leadership style? Apply the behavioural approach to justify your answer.
7. Imagine it is not Shackleton the leader in this adventure, but a woman. Now discuss which additional difficulties she could have faced as a female leader of this expedition.
8. The Endurance departed for Argentina ahead of Shackleton, who stayed behind to attend to last-minute details. When Shackleton finally reached Argentina, he found that Frank Worsley, appointed as captain of the Endurance, proved incapable of keeping discipline on board. How can we develop Frank’s leadership competencies to succeed as captain in similar future Antarctic expeditions?
Word Count: 2000 words; not including the bibliography.

Theories to use:
Firstly, the term leadership defined as well as difference between leadership and management. Secondly, ‘Great man theory’ shows the importance of innate qualities and that to some extent it can give an advantage over others, therefore it can serve as a support for further development of leadership qualities. Thirdly, to show the contrast and to emphasise the fact that skills play a decisive role in solving organisational issues, an analysis of abilities that an effective leader should have. Fourthly, the importance of skills in organisational context and modern society. Finally, ‘Skill-Three Approach’ and ‘Skills-based model’ to produce an evidence that skills play a crucial role in terms of finding a solution to controversial organisational questions.

Essay Style Guide and Formatting Instructions
General Instructions
The manuscript should be typed in a 12-point font, Times New Roman on standard size A4 page, double-spaced throughout, and with at least a one-inch (2.5 cm) wide margin at top, bottom, and both sides of each page. All pages (except the cover page) should be numbered consecutively.

Citations in the text
Citations to references should be designated throughout the text by enclosing the authors’ names and year of the reference in parentheses following the Harvard system. If the author’s name is in the text, follow it with the year in parentheses.
Example: Perrow (1986) described…
If the author’s name is not in the text, insert it and the year in parentheses
Example:…institutional theory (Tolbert and Zucker 1996)….
Page numbers, to indicate a passage of special relevance or to give the source of a direct quotation, follow the year and are preceded by a colon.
Example:
Zbaracki (1998: 615) explained….
Tolerance for ambiguity has been defined as “the tendency to perceive ambiguous situations as desirable” (Budner 1962: 29).
Multiple citations are listed either in alphabetical order or by year of publication (never both) and separated by semicolons.
Example: Several studies (eg: Adams 1974; Brown and Hales 1975, 1980; Collins 1976a,b) support this conclusion.
Several empirical studies have addressed this issue (eg: Brown, 2000; Wilson, 2002, Carter, 2003, Heery, 2005).
If the work has two authors, cite both names every time the work is cited in the text. If the work has more than two authors, cite all authors the first time the reference occurs; in subsequent citations of the same work, include only the surname of the first author followed by “et al.” and the year.
Example: Few field studies use random assignment (Franz, Johnson, and Schmidt 1976). [First citation] … even when random assignment is not possible (Franz et al., 1976: 23). [Second citation]

References
References should begin on a new page, with the word “REFERENCES” in bold at the top of the page. References should be double-spaced and left-justified. They should not be numbered. Please cross-check your text with the reference list to make sure that every reference you cite in one appears in the other and that each reference is complete; double-check the spelling of authors’ names. List references in alphabetical order by the last name of the author (first author if more than one) or the editor, or by the corporate author (e.g., U.S. Census Bureau), or periodical name (e.g., Wall Street Journal) if there is no indication of individual authors or editors.
For two or more references by the same author(s), list them in order of the year of publication. For two or more references by the same author(s) from the same year, list them in alphabetical order by title, distinguishing each reference by adding letters (a, b, c, etc.) to the year or to “Forthcoming” (e.g., “1992a” or “Forthcoming a”).
Authors’ names are repeated for each entry. Include full names of all authors — use first-name initials only if the author used initials in the original publication. For multiple authorship, only the name of the first author is inverted (e.g., “Jones, Arthur B., Colin D. Smith, and Barrie Thorne”).
World Wide Web sources must be acknowledged following the basic rules for conventional sources. A reference to a Web page should include the author(s)/editor(s) name (if known), the last update or copyright date, the document (Web page) title, the site title, the full URL, and the access date.
Examples:
Books
Geertz, C. (1973) The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Journal articles
Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998) ‘Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage’, Academy of Management Review 23/2: 242–66.
Pettigrew, A. M. (1979) ‘On studying organizational cultures’, Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 570–81.
Chapters in books
Weick, K. E. (1977) ‘Enactment processes in organizations’ in B. M. Staw and G. Salancik (eds.) New directions in organizational behavior, pp267–300. Chicago: St Clair.

Dissertations and theses
Charles, M. (1990) ‘Occupational sex segregation: a log-linear analysis of patterns in 25 industrial countries.’ Ph.D. thesis, Department of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Magazine articles
Economist (1998) ‘Driven by Fiat’ April 25, pp. 95–6.

World Wide Web sources
Department of Education (Victoria, Australia) (1996) ‘Using the internet for research’. Learning with the internet. http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/loti/page1.htm (accessed: 14 February, 2017).

Please note that in your list of references you need to include all the references in a single alphabetically ordered list. Do not separate references into the lists of books, journal articles, etc. In the above examples, the references from various types of sources are listed separately only for ease of exposition of the different requirements.

Recommended textbooks

• Yukl, G. (2010) Leadership in Organisations, 7th ed., London, Prentice Hall
• Dennis Tourish (2103) The Dark Side of Leadership: A critical perspective, Routledge, UK
• Lemmergaard J. and Muhr S. L. eds (2013) Critical Perspectives on Leadership: Emotion, Toxicity, and Dysfunction. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing
• Adair, J. (2007) Leadership for Innovation, 2nd ed., London: Kogan Page.
• Storey, P. (2006) Leadership in Organisations: Current Issues and Key Trends, Oxford: Routledge.
• Northouse, P. (2007) Leadership Theory and Practice, 4th ed., London: Sage.
• Yukl, G. (2010) Leadership in Organisations, 7th ed., London, Prentice Hall.
• Davila, T. Epstein, M. and R. Shelton (2005) Making Innovation Work: How to Manage It, Measure It and Profit from It, London: Pearson.

Readings
Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. (2013) “Does leadership create stupidity?”. In Critical Perspectives on Leadership: Emotion, Toxicity, and Dysfunction. Edited by Jeanette Lemmergaard and Sara Louise Muhr , Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1989). Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Bennis, W. (2003) On Becoming Leader. Kent: Hutchinson Business Books

Boyatzis, R. E. (2011). Managerial and leadership competencies: A behavioral approach to emotional, social and cognitive intelligence. Vision, 15(2), 91–100.

Blunt, P. and Jones, M. (1997) Exploring the limits of western leadership in East Asia and Africa. Personnel Review, 26 (1/2) 6–23.

Brown, A.D. (2003). The Six Dimensions of Leadership. London: Random House.

Collinson, D. (2011) Critical leadership, In: Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K, Jackson B and Uhl-Bien M (eds) The Sage Handbook of Leadership, London: Sage: 179-192.

Collinson, D. & Tourish, D. (2015) Teaching Leadership Critically: New Directions for Leadership Pedagogy, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(4); 576–594

Darling, J. (1999). Organizational excellence and leadership strategies: Principles followed by top multinational executives. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 20(6) 309–321.

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82.

Farley, R. (2005). ‘By endurance we conquer’ Ernest Shackleton and performances of white male hegemony. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 8(2), 231-254.

Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2016). Leading at the top: Understanding women’s challenges above the glass ceiling. Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 51–63.

Groysberg, B., McLean, A N., Nohria, N (2006) Are leaders portable? Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84,5, pp.92 -100

House, R. J. (1995). Leadership in the 21st century: A speculative enquiry. In: Howard, A. (ed.), The changing nature of work, San Francisco: Jossey Bass, pp. 411-450

Hoyt, C. L., & Murphy, S. E. (2016). Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, Women, And leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 387–399.

Kellerman, B. (2004). Leadership – Warts and all. Harvard Business Review, 1–6.

Kotter, J.P. (1990) “What Leaders Really Do”, Harvard Business Review, May—June, pp.103 –11.
Knights, D., & O’Leary, M. (2006). Leadership, ethics and responsibility to the other. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(2), 125–137.

Leung, S. and Bozionelos, N. (2004) Five-factor model traits and the prototypical image of the effective leader in the Confucian culture, Employee Relations 26(1) 62-71.

Littrell, R. (2002) Desirable leadership behaviours in multi-cultural managers in China. Journal of Management Development, 21(1) 5–74.

Mellahi, K. (2000). The teaching of leadership on UK MBA programmes; A critical analysis from an international perspective. Journal of Management Development, 19, pp.297-308

Miska, C., Hilbe, C., & Mayer, S. (2014). Reconciling different views on responsible leadership: A rationality-based approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(2), 349–360.

Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (2011). Responsible leadership: Pathways to the future. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 3–13.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 63–77.

Powell, G. N. (2011). The gender and leadership wars. Organizational Dynamics, 40(1), 1–9.

Prince, L. (2005). Eating the menu rather than the dinner: Tao and leadership. Leadership, 1, pp. (105–126).

Redding, S. G. (1994). ‘Comparative management theory: jungle, zoo, or fossil bed?’ Organization Studies 15/3: 323-359.

Robinson, S. & Kerr, R. (2009). The symbolic violence of leadership: a critical hermeneutic study of leadership and succession in a British organization in the post-Soviet context’ Human Relations, 62, pp. 875-903.

Schumpeter -The trouble with superheroes; The Economist. London: Oct 1, 2011. Vol. 401, Iss. 8753; pg. 74

Spreitzer, G. M., Perttula, K. H., & Xin, K. (2005). Traditionality matters: An examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, pp. 205-227.

Sutherland N, Land C and Böhm S (2014) Anti-leaders(hip) in Social Movement
Organizations: The case of autonomous grassroots groups. Organization 21(6): 759-781.

Tichy, N.M. and Cohen, E. (2002) The Leadership Engine: How winning companies build leaders at every level. New York: Harper Collins.

Tichy, N.M. and Charan, R.(1989). Speed, simplicity and self-confidence: An interview with Jack Welch, Harvard Business Review. September-October: 112-120.

Vecchio, R. P. (2002). Leadership and gender advantage. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 643–671.

Vial, A. C., Napier, J. L., & Brescoll, V. L. (2016). A bed of thorns: Female leaders and the self-reinforcing cycle of illegitimacy. Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 400–414.

Witt, M. A., & Stahl, G. K. (2016). Foundations of Responsible Leadership: Asian Versus Western Executive Responsibility Orientations Toward Key Stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(3), 623–638.

Zaleznik, A. (2004). Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, 82 (1)74-81.

Zhang, H., Cone M.H., Everett, M.E, Elkin, G. (2013) Contextualizing Transformational Leadership Theories in China:A Confucian Perspective, Frontiers of Business Research in China. 7, 2, p. 189–218.

We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!