LEADERSHIP

Leadership

Leadership

Introduction

Given the primacy that the visual image has assumed in contemporary society, it is remarkable that organizational studies and leadership studies, in particular, have long suffered from a 'blind spot' when it comes to recognizing the influence that the production and consumption of visual images have on the conduct of organisational life (Guthey & Jackson, 2005; Küpers, 2004). Two recent developments, though, have helped to bring the visual image into contention. First, the aesthetic turn in organization studies has emphasized the need to develop ways of knowing that encompass all of the senses, including the visual (Gagliardi, 1996; Linstead & Hopfl, 1999; Strati, 1992; Strati & De Monteux, 2002; Taylor, 2002; Taylor & Hansen, 2005). Its effects are already being felt in the realm of management education. As Nissley observes, 'we're experiencing an intersectional innovation - the intersection of arts and business and the innovation of arts-based learning'.

The aesthetic turn has also begun to make in-roads into leadership studies (Adler, 2006). Ladkin (2006) has introduced a long overdue aesthetic dimension to cast fresh light upon the processes of interaction between charismatic leaders and their followers. On a more philosophical level, Bathurst (2008) draws on the pioneering aesthetic thinkers Vico, Baumgarten and Kant to argue that leadership practice should become enlivened through aesthetic engagement with employees, customers and other stakeholders.

The second development that has brought at least the possibility of the significance of the visual image to the fore has been the growing acceptance and support by leadership scholars of the socially constructed nature of leadership. Rooted in the notion of the 'romance of leadership' (Chen and Meindl, 1991; Meindl, 1985) this perspective has found its fullest expression in the accumulated works of Keith Grint. Starting with the recognition of the 'constitutive' nature of leadership which emphasizes the leader's role in presenting a sufficiently compelling definition of the current and future situation to followers, Grint (2001) makes a persuasive case that leadership should profitably be considered not as a science, a view that most prominent leadership scholars have ascribed to (Avolio et al., 2009), but as an art. Leadership, though, is not confined to one art but four - the performing arts; the philosophical arts; the martial arts; and the visual arts (Barlow, 1997).

The inter-linkage between personal and positional leadership that is represented in leadership portraits has also been highlighted by Guthey & Jackson (2005) in their study of CEO photographic portraits which appear in a variety of media such as magazines, newspapers and annual reports. They argue that these portraits represent significant sites for the visual construction of not just leadership but corporate identity. In fact, the two work very much hand-in-hand. However, the authors also highlight what they dub as the 'authenticity paradox' that plagues the use of portraits in this manner. Upon first impression, such photographs may appear to convey an impression of the kind of authentic presence that many observers consider to be crucial for establishing a strong corporate ...