Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 323

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The importance of self‐ and shared leadership in team based knowledge work: A meso‐level model of leadership dynamics

Bligh, Michelle C., Pearce, Craig L., Kohles, Jeffrey C.·2006·Journal of Managerial Psychology

Abstract

Purpose: To address the increasing need for novel approaches to leadership that deal with the challenges organizations face as they flatten, diversify, and confront increasingly complex problems. Design/methodology/approach: A meso‐level theoretical model is developed that outlines the relationship between self‐ and shared leadership, focusing on the intermediary processes of trust, potency, and commitment that may lead to the development of shared leadership and ultimately more innovative knowledge creation. Findings: Nine propositions are developed, addressing the relationships between self‐ and shared leadership, concluding with some of the theoretical and practical implications of the model and specific recommendations for future empirical work in this area. Research limitations/implications: An important boundary condition of the model is that it assumes team and organizational incentives are in place to encourage team building and the facilitation of team over individual achievements. Practical implications: Conceptualizing leadership in this way leads to numerous unanswered questions regarding how team dynamics influence, and are influenced by, various forms of leadership (including lateral, upward, and downward influence attempts). Greater dialogue between the team dynamics literature and the leadership literature may lead to new insights into how shared leadership is influenced by a variety of team characteristics, including team ability, size, member maturity, familiarity, likeability, cohesion, etc., all of which are potential areas for future research. Originality/value: Important research questions that stem from consideration of these two theories in concert will prove critical in understanding the complex interrelationships among self‐leadership, shared leadership, and the creation of new knowledge in today's complex and dynamic organizations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/02683940610663105

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 323

Metadata

Authors
Bligh, M. C., Pearce, C. L., & Kohles, J. C.
Venue
Journal of Managerial Psychology
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2006-06-01
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
296-318
ISSN
0268-3946 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1484935447
Cited by
323
References
4
FWCI
11.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The importance of self‐ and shared leadership in team based knowledge work: A meso‐level model of leadership dynamics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/02683940610663105
The paper
Bligh, M. C., Pearce, C. L., & Kohles, J. C. (2006). The importance of self‐ and shared leadership in team based knowledge work: A meso‐level model of leadership dynamics. Journal of Managerial Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610663105

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.