The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Authoritarian leadership styles and performance: a systematic literature review and research agenda
Open accessAbstract
Although authoritarian leadership styles are often associated with negative performance, work climate deterioration, increased power distance, and centralized control, contradictory empirical evidence has emerged in the literature. In this paper, we perform a systematic literature review with three aims: (1) understand the effects of authoritarian leadership styles on performance, (2) study the temporal and geographical evolution of the scientific debate, and (3) establish a research agenda for the future. The results show that in the last two decades, the interest for the field has shifted from Western to Eastern countries. Moreover, many authors encourage leaders to increase or decrease their degree of authoritarian leadership depending on the context to more effectively connect leadership with performance. Therefore, leadership should be studied in light of a more complex approach that considers hybrid leadership styles and their effects on performance. Finally, we discuss our study’s limitations and managerial implications.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It is a methodology that is more rigorous than literature reviews, is scientific, transparent, replicable and limits the subjectivity and bias of the researchers (Kuckertz and Block 2021; Pizzolitto et al. 2022; Tranfield et al.2003).”
From Whither compassionate leadership? A systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Pizzolitto et al. 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines
Snyder, H. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039 · Cited by 11,524
Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990) · Qualitative Sociology · doi:10.1007/bf00988593 · Cited by 11,133
The SAGE handbook of organizational research methods
Buchanan, D., & Bryman, A. E. (2009) · Cited by 2,123
Past, present and future of Industry 4.0—A systematic literature review and research agenda proposal
Liao, Y., Deschamps, F., Loures, E. D. F. R., & Ramos, L. F. P. (2017) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1308576 · Cited by 2,036
What we talk about when we talk about context
Dourish, P. (2004) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-003-0253-8 · Cited by 1,529
Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature
Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2011) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1057/ejis.2011.51 · Cited by 1,212
Martins, J. T., Nunes, M. B., Alajamy, M., & Zhou, L. (2013) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2491-7.ch008 · Cited by 1,190
A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts
Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2013) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1322-6 · Cited by 957
Advancing Theory with Review Articles
Post, C. A., Sarala, R. M., Gatrell, C. J., & Prescott, J. E. (2019) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12549 · Cited by 650
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Harrison C, Paul S, Burnard K (2016) Entrepreneurial leadership: a systematic literature review. Int Rev Entrep 14:235–264
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Whither compassionate leadership? A systematic review
Ramachandran, S., Balasubramanian, S., James, W. F., & Al Masaeid, T. (2024) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-023-00340-w · Cited by 116
Knowledge diversity and technological innovation: The moderating role of top management teams
Walrave, B., van de Wal, N., & Gilsing, V. (2024) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2024.102954 · Cited by 49
Koeswayo, P. S., Haryanto, H., & Handoyo, S. (2024) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2023.2296698 · Cited by 49
Maqbool, S., Zafeer, H. M. I., Maqbool, S., Zeng, P., Draissi, Z., & Javed, S. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36438 · Cited by 57
Lü, L., Zhou, K., Wang, Y., & Zhu, S. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.920006 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Pizzolitto, E., Verna, I., & Venditti, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Chieti-Pescara (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Pizzolitto, Elia
- Venue
- Management Review Quarterly
- Published
- 2022-04-04
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 841-871
- ISSN
- 2198-1620 (ISSN-L)
- 2198-1639
- OpenAlex
- W4226053984
- Cited by
- 143
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 45 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 5
- FWCI
- 4.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Management Review Quarterly (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- ARCA (Università Ca' Foscari Venezia) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi G. D'Annunzio Chieti Pescara within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employee Performance and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Leadership and Management in Organizations
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Keywords
- authoritarian leadership, leadership styles, organizational performance, power distance, centralized control, organizational climate, contextual leadership, research agenda
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
