Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:566188 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
Leadership in
Bridge leadership: a case study a bridging
of leadership in a bridging organization
organization
715
Ronald S. McMullen and Henry Adobor
Quinnipiac University, Hamden, Connecticut, USA Received March 2010
Revised December 2010
Accepted December 2010
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this research is to examine leadership in an intermediary organization
whose mission is to facilitate collaboration between large corporations and their smaller suppliers, a
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
bridging organization.
Design/methodology/approach A qualitative approach using a single case revelatory method
was adopted. Data were collected from a bridge leader as well as 20 executives of companies involved
in the collaboration.
Findings The analysis revealed that the successful bridge leader tended: to build personal relations
and goodwill as a way of creating personal obligations on the part of the stakeholders he led;
championed the cause of the stakeholders and made their mission his/her own; created opportunities
for individual and collective goal achievement; relied on symbolic behavior and ceremonies to reify the
bridge mission; and engaged in frequent communication with a liberal use of humor and playfulness to
make goals embraceable by the stakeholders in the collaboration.
Research limitations/implications This is a single case study and that limits the generalization
of these findings. However, the findings provide some preliminary evidence to show that a lack of
control of resources need not be a reason for leader non-performance.
Practical implications A bridge leader may substitute other influence strategies to compensate
for the lack of direct positional power.
Originality/value This study is one of the few that explicitly examines leadership in bridging
organizations. The papers understanding of this phenomenon is important because of the importance
of bridging organizations to business and social innovation.
Keywords Bridging organizations, Bridge leaders, Collaboration, Organizations, Leadership
Paper type Case study
Introduction
There is increasing recognition that multiparty collaboration may be critical for the
resolution of all sorts of social and economic problems. One imperative of this
development is the emergence of new and unconventional forms of intermediary
organizations dedicated to fostering multiparty or cross-sector collaboration. One
popular example of this sort of facilitative organization is the bridging organization.
A bridging organization is an independent organization that facilitates multiparty
collaboration (Gray, 1989; Brown, 1993).
Prior research has shown that leadership is important to the success of collaborative Leadership & Organization
initiatives generally, and bridging situations specifically (Gray, 1989; Westley and Development Journal
Vol. 32 No. 7, 2011
Vredenburg, 1991). For example, Faerman et al. (2001) discuss the key role of leaders in pp. 715-735
shaping the vision of a successful collaborative initiative to regulate financial market q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
innovation in the USA. Westley and Vredenburg (1991), on the other hand, DOI 10.1108/01437731111170012
LODJ demonstrate how a lack of leadership contributed to the failure of collaboration
32,7 between groups of stakeholders in Canada. Despite their importance and the emerging
literature on strategic bridging organizations, our understanding of leadership in
bridging organizations may be fairly limited. The very nature of bridging
organizations suggests that individuals who lead such organizations operate in a
complex environment and face serious challenges primarily because the role may place
716 multiple, conflicting and significant pressures on such leaders. Brown (1993) notes that
bridge leaders are vulnerable to failure because they operate in contexts characterized
by high interdependence and turbulence. As a central actor, a bridging agent is highly
visible and vulnerable to institutional and resource dependency pressures from
constituents and other actors with stakes in the problem domain (Brown, 1993).
The exercise of influence in a bridging situation to effect collaboration between
independent stakeholders may require a unique set of skills, yet hardly any studies
exist on behaviors required for leadership in this new organizational form. Given the
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
Research objectives
Current leadership theories seem to identify a set of consistent characteristics,
behaviors and influence tactics for leaders. Bridge leaders may exhibit some, all or
none of those considering the fact that the context of multiparty collaboration is
somewhat different from traditional hierarchical organizations to which most
traditional leadership theory seems to apply. Thus although many traditional
leadership roles and behaviors may apply to bridging organizations, bridging leaders
may have additional challenges. As mentioned earlier, a bridge leader needs to
navigate the conflicting expectations of different stakeholders without the usual
sources of power. To be effective also requires that stakeholders in the system achieve
their individual performance goals as well as their collaborative goals and the
task-related leader behaviors will therefore be keys to their success. The unique Leadership in
aspects of leading in bridging organizations create at least two important questions a bridging
that we address in the research:
(1) First, what influence strategies should prove most useful for a leader in the
organization
bridging situation?
(2) Second, what task-related behaviors are demonstrated by the bridge leader?
717
Leadership theory
Explaining leadership in hierarchical organizations
Research on leadership in hierarchical organizations has identified some key leader
behaviors. Yukl (2006) integrates several earlier taxonomies of leader behavior into
task-oriented and relationship-oriented behaviors. While some leader behaviors are
primarily task-oriented (e.g. planning and organizing, clarifying roles, solving
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
problems, clarifying roles and objectives) others are primarily relationship oriented
(e.g. supporting, motivating; conflict management, developing, and recognizing). The
existing literature has identified at least three leadership styles or behaviors aimed to
influence followers (Bass, 1990).
First are transformational leaders (Burns, 1978) who engage the emotional
involvement of their followers to build higher levels of identification, trust and
commitment to their mission as well as provide intellectual stimulation by raising the
followers confidence (Bass and Avolio, 1984). Second are transactional leaders. In
contrast to transformational leaders, transactional leadership is characterized as an
exchange process between leaders and followers. Transactional leaders identify
expectations of followers and provide contingent rewards for performance (Bass, 1985).
Transactional leaders make no attempt to change the followers values, preferring
instead, to focus on their present needs and desired outcomes. Jung and Avolio (2000)
note that although transactional leaders can be quite effective, they lack commitment
to the personal development of followers. Finally, there is servant leadership; a more
recent and understudied style (Greenleaf, 1977; Harvey, 2001). Servant leadership
shares all the common leader behaviors identified with transformational leadership,
with one notable difference: the leaders primary responsibility is to his or her
commitment to the welfare of their followers. It is possible that the rich theoretical
work on leadership in traditional organizations may prove useful in explaining some
aspects of leadership in bridging organizations.
Bridging organizations
Bridging organizations defined
Bridging organizations are independent organizations that provide a mechanism for
other organizations and individuals to work together. Bridging organizations can
either be neutral third parties whose primary task is to facilitate multi-sector
partnerships or they may be actively involved with the problem domain, when they
become strategic bridging organizations (SBOs). Westley and Vredenburg (1991) first
proposed the concept of strategic bridging in the context of environmentalist-business
collaboration, in their analysis of a failed green alliance between Pollution Probe and a
Canadian grocery retailer, Loblaws. In the case, [Pollution Probe] attempted to act as a
strategic bridge by endorsing a line of green products (Westley and Vredenburg,
1991, p. 65). Another example of a strategic bridging organization is the Swedish
LODJ Ecomuseum Kristianstads Vattenrike (EKV), which coordinated groups to enhance
32,7 ecosystem management in Sweden (Schultz et al., 2007). Brown (1993), p. 812) notes, as
a central actor among diverse constituencies, the bridging organization potentially has
great influence over events. It can be a conduit for ideas and innovations, a source of
information, a broker of resources, a negotiator of deals, a conceptualizer of strategies
and a mediator of conflicts.. Sharma et al. (1994, p. 461) define strategic bridging as
718 being ... characterized by the presence of a third party as a stakeholder, which is
separate and distinct in terms of resources and personnel from the island
organizations it serves to link... Unlike mediators, bridges enter collaborative
negotiations to further their own ends as well as to serve as links among domain
stakeholders.
Bridge leadership
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
more powerful stakeholders each with their own agendas. This means a bridge leader
needs to work with parties who may have different expectations, agendas and visions.
The extent to which a bridge leader is successful may depend on their ability to build
trust between the parties and create opportunities for each party to fulfil both their
individual and collective goals. Unlike leaders in hierarchical organizations, bridging
leaders are not charged with forging a common, unitary vision for one institution.
Instead, their goal is to create the opportunities for the stakeholders to achieve their
individual goals by demonstrating that successful collaboration is the desired vehicle
for the attainment of those individual goals. Success at this task requires such a leader
to be resourceful and tactful, relying on their personal qualities to assure effective
performance in the role.
Second, bridge leaders may typically have very little direct power to influence the
stakeholders they link. Unlike bridge leaders, organizational leaders often have
positional or legal power by virtue of their position in the hierarchy (Pfeffer, 1981).
Organizational leaders also derive power from the fact that they are in control of
critical resources and are able to dispense largesse to internal stakeholders in their
firms. This means that they are in a position to compel internal stakeholders to act in
accordance with organizational goals. To the contrary, the leader in a bridging
organization tends to have little to no positional power or the right to control and
distribute incentives. This implies that a bridging leader needs to rely for their
effectiveness on their own ability to develop novel leadership and influence strategies.
Finally, understanding leadership in a bridging situation may require a more
sociological approach than is the case with evaluating the effectiveness of leaders in
organizations with a formal hierarchy. Leadership research typically defines
effectiveness in terms of the ability of an individual leader to influence goal
attainment within their organizations. To the contrary, sociological approaches to
evaluate bridge leadership effectiveness would focus on the extent to which all actors
in the domain achieve their mutual goals (Balkundi and Kilduff, 2006).
Method
The study applies Yins (2008) single case revelatory study to explore the issues. Yin
suggests that case studies can be helpful in providing details about a phenomenon.
This case study followed Yins protocol for conducting single case studies. The data
LODJ came from the bridge leader and from managers within the two groups that the
32,7 bridging organization serves. The research used a longitudinal, intensive case study of
one individual leader over a period of two and half years. The focus on a single leader
allows us to have a more in-depth study of the phenomenon. This approach is also
consistent with some prior studies that focused on single leaders (e.g. Browning et al.,
1995).
720
Research context
This research was conducted on the Connecticut Minority Supplier Development
Council (CMSDC; hereafter called the Council), a state branch of the National
Minority Supplier Development Council (NMSDC). The NMSDC defines a minority
supplier as a for-profit business enterprise, regardless of size, physically located in the
United States or its trust territories, which is owned, operated and controlled by
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
minority group members. Minority group members are United States citizens who
are Asian, Black, Hispanic and Native American. Ownership by minority individuals
means the business is at least 51 percent owned by such individuals or, in the case of a
publicly-owned business, at least 51 percent of the stock is owned by one or more such
individuals. Further, the management and daily operations are controlled by those
minority group members.
We use the term economic bridging organization to describe the CMSDC because, as
opposed to the traditional role of bridging organizations as vehicles for solving social
problems, the primary aim of the council is to facilitate inter-organizational
partnerships for economic gain between minority supplier business enterprises or
MBEs and large powerful corporations. The CMSDC presents an important context for
studying bridging organizations for at least three reasons. First, the councils are
clearly new institutional arrangements whose primary focus is to facilitate
collaboration between largely small, fragmented businesses and large, economically
very powerful corporations. Second, although social, political and business imperatives
motivate large corporations to do business with minority firms, finding the right
minority supplier can be both costly and challenging, a role the supplier council as a
bridge plays. Finally, the supplier councils are true bridges as they have remained
independent over the years and continue to rely less on other stakeholders for their
survival.
economics as an adjunct professor at a local campus for the state universitys business
school and has also some years of experience as a successful owner and operator of his
own small business. An avid runner, he is also a family man, church member and
engaged in the civic life of his community.
He is affable, occasionally self-effacing, easily approachable and a good listener.
A good conversationalist he has a good sense of humor and seems comfortable with
people of all stripes and stations. Low key, he nonetheless makes a strong and positive
initial impression and he is widely liked and respected. His staff clearly both admires
him, and holds him high in their affection.
Data collection
Data for this study were collected over a two and half year period. Data were collected
by interviews with the President of the Council (hereafter called the bridge leader),
analysis of his writings and correspondence in the form of weekly newsletters, archival
data, some participant observation, and interviews with 20 managers of firms in the
two separate groups of stakeholders that the council bridges. In addition, both
researchers attended several official functions of the council at which the leader
presided. Three in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted over a period of
several months with the president of the CMSDC. Each of our three interviews with the
bridge leader lasted for about 120 minutes. In addition, ten in-depth interviews lasting
about 90 minutes on average were conducted with the presidents of minority supplier
businesses and three CEOs and seven supplier managers of large Fortune 500
companies (20 interviews in all). All interviews were conducted on the respondents
business premises. All interviews were audio taped and transcribed in their entirety.
Mental field notes were made and recorded soon after each interview. In a few cases,
follow-up phone interviews were conducted to seek clarification. We also attended
several functions organized by the council. Some of these events were business
oriented while others were more socially-oriented, but even these provided
opportunities for networking by the stakeholders and information gathering by us.
We used a theoretical sampling approach to collect our data. We spaced out our
interviews with the bridge leader, analyzed the data we collected from each interview
and collected additional data. The sort of data we collected at each stage was
determined in part by the information we got from our data at the earlier stages. This
approach, theoretical sampling, allows for interweaving both data collection and
LODJ analysis (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Two years of a weekly newsletter put out by the
32,7 president of the council was coded following the Miles and Huberman (1984) thematic
content approach. We coded the text and derived key themes.
Our research strategy, approach to coding data, and the use of data from textual
analysis to triangulate our findings allowed us to demonstrate the validity of the data.
Other protocols we followed that demonstrate the validity of the data are as follows:
722 First, we developed initial conceptual categories and some preliminary explanations
from the data. Second, our interviews were spaced out over a period of several months
and this allowed us to review our initial conceptual categories as new information was
collected. Third, we added new categories as new information emerged and dropped
some conceptual categories. This was achieved by comparing new information to prior
data, and explanations we derived from that data. This process of iteration continued
until we believed that we were not getting any new information. In addition, our
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
triangulation of data sources provided us at least two forms of support for the validity
of our data. Finally, we also compared the perspectives of both MBEs and corporations
on the presidents leadership. The perceptions of MBEs and corporations on the
leadership of the president of the bridging organization showed remarkable
consistency as evidenced by our results.
Data analysis
The analysis procedure followed a grounded theory approach formulated by Glaser
and Strauss (1967). Both researchers coded all the interview data following a
three-stage process. First, we closely examined the data and generated some initial
ideas about emerging concepts and then classified the emerging data into categories.
We generated 86 categories at this stage, representing behavior indicators and
characteristics of the bridge leader. We then compared notes and came to agreement on
a common list of 26 categories. Second, we reduced the initial categories through axial
coding by integrating some of the initial categories we identified (Strauss and Corbin,
1998), reducing our initial 26 categories through examination into a core category of 21.
Third, we used selective coding to eliminate some categories by either dropping them
or merging categories we believed related to each other. Finally, we used selective
coding to further merge related categories to fit what we saw as the emerging theory.
All the data were thoroughly examined for evidence of how the data fitted our
categories.
Two years of the weekly newsletters that the president of the council puts out were
coded following the thematic content approach (Miles and Huberman, 1984). Prior
research has demonstrated the suitability of data from textual analysis of speech and
communication (Carley, 1993). Both researchers initially read ten each of samples of the
newsletters and derived a number of key categories separately. We then compared our
categories and mutually agreed on seven categories after dropping some initial ones.
These categories where then used to code the newsletters. Both researchers coded the
newsletters independently. Two graduate students who were trained in content
analysis then separately coded the newsletters with the categories we derived. We
found acceptable agreement and despite the fact that some chance agreement may
have been present, we believed that our results were representative enough.
Results Leadership in
Bridge leader performance a bridging
The tenure of the bridge leader we studied started from 2001 as the President of a state
council to his present position as the head of a regional council. We evaluated the organization
bridge leaders performance by examining secondary data and data from respondent
responses. We also looked at external indicators of his performance including any
recognition he received from external stakeholders for his performance. Both groups of 723
stakeholders expressed great satisfaction with the bridge leader. Respondents
indicated that the leader created opportunities for them to accomplish their objectives.
MBEs, even those who did not get any supplier contracts during his tenure, were still
impressed with the leaders commitment to help them succeed. Respondents noted that
the president energized the council by the several unique programs he introduced, most
notably his weekly e-newsletters that highlighted the activities of the council. Speaking
of the president of the council, one respondent (the CEO of a supplier organization)
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
stated:
I think he does the best he can with what he has to offer in terms of identifying suppliers that
have a good motto and products and services and supporting them and also identifying
corporate members who are doing what the mission is. To bring the two together it takes a lot
of work . . . I have a very good relationship to the council.
The bridge leader is also credited with introducing several innovative programs. These
included workshops for MBE skill development, industry expositions where supplier
activities are showcased, management training programs for MBEs, a dedicated web
site on which the activities of the council are publicized, a well-received weekly news
letter that gives transparency to the agenda of the council and an annual award
ceremony for outstanding corporate and MBE members. The tenure of the bridge
leader also witnessed the increasing ability of the bridge to be independent and
financially self-supporting. Year-to-year tax filings show a steady increase in the
bridges revenues. Perhaps the greatest recognition of the bridge leaders performance
has been the National Council appointing him from the Connecticut Council to head the
New England Regional Council, which now subsumes the Connecticut Council.
seemed a particular sense of urgency in his dealings with the MBEs and corporations.
According to the bridge leader, keeping the issues on a front burner was important to
his ability to inspire and motivate the stakeholders to fulfil both their independent and
common objectives. We found that the bridge leader had the tendency to frame the
issues in larger principles. The bridge leader on several occasions intimated to us that
he always wanted the MBEs to see membership in the council as an opportunity to
develop and grow their businesses. To him, successful MBEs will serve as role models Leadership in
in their communities, thereby making not just an economic, but social impact as well a bridging
and the interview data from both the corporations and MBEs seemed to confirm that.
Second, the data also revealed that the bridge leader played the role of an advocate organization
for the causes of the collaboration, a cheerleader, and one who inspired stakeholders,
particularly the small businesses, who were clearly the weaker party in the
collaboration. Respondents also noted that the leader continuously placed the goals of 725
relationship in focus, and generated enthusiasm for the collective mission of the
collaboration, and assumed ownership of the goals of the stakeholders. The word
cheerleader was used repeatedly by respondents to describe the bridge leader. The
CEO of a supplier company notes Well, my experience with the council under him is
that its been very much for us. He is the council to me. I see him as the idea generator. I
see him as the facilitator; I see him as the cheerleader, always open to what next to do
. . . hes everywhere; I mean if I go to any event, hes there. Hes always representing our
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
served the interests of both the corporations and the supplier group and that meant
bending backward, if necessary, to accommodate all the legitimate requests they
make. He noted that his attitude was that he would try to do everything that is
requested of him by all the stakeholders and to say yes to legitimate requests as much
as possible. The bridge leader seemed to relish the opportunity to interact with
individual managers, thereby building friendship. He also used the many business
gatherings to build social relationships. He indicated that he always tries to know
managers on an individual basis. The bridge leaders frequent interactions with the
stakeholders and his organization and presence at social events such as golf outings all
afforded him the opportunity to build a web of social relations that became the bedrock
of his social capital. Such close relationships with stakeholders resulted in the
development of trust in the bridge leader. In so many ways, our data showed that
beneath the formal ties lay a reservoir of goodwill based on affection, trust and liking
for the bridge leader. All these relational assets seemed to have emerged from his
accumulation of social capital. It was Bauer (1968) who observed, a long time ago, that
leaders who depend on the patience and goodwill of those on whom they depend to get
things done are more effective when they forgo confrontation and instead build
goodwill for the future. The bridge leader we studied seemed to have grasped the
essence of this message quite well by leveraging the political capital and goodwill he
built by being a leader that was committed to helping the stakeholders.
A representative of a large corporation noted, I was prepared to do anything he
asked . . . as a way of making up for all he does for the council.
P2. The bridge leader creates his own sources of influence by creating a sense of
obligation between him and the stakeholders. In turn, this positively impacts
his performance.
the bridge leader says and helps reify the council. A CEO of a supplier firm notes:
I look forward to the newsletter like candy! By ten oclock if not earlier I have read it. And you
know something funny? When we first joined the organization I heard somebody say that and
I thought oh, they must have nothing to do . . . . There are so many different things. There are
events that we can become part of, just other insights that we can get from his (the president)
sharing information. Its very, very useful.
Another puts it this way:
Let me tell you what sets this council apart from other state councils. Its the presidents
newsletter. Hes done it every single week for three years. That is real best practice. When we
get it, we send it out to over 38 regional councils. We also send it to our network of people.
Second, the bridge leader used metaphor liberally to convey his message. Metaphors
can be particularly effective in a bridge situation for some of the reasons discussed
elsewhere in the paper, notably the leaders lack of positional and coercive capacity to
persuade. Metaphors have been shown to be effective means for persuasion (Illes and
Ritchie, 1999). Fox and Hamburger (2001) observe that metaphors are an effective
means for transmitting and creating symbolic realities. To the extent that reality often
has both symbolic and objective meaning, the bridge leaders use of metaphors was an
effective means for advancing his mission in a non-threatening way. He writes in the
closing of one newsletter:
Those of you who have visited my office know that I am a lover of wild animals. There is
literally a pecking order with its own aviarian aristocracy when the food is placed on the
ledge outside my window. Not surprisingly, the biggest birds get first dibs, starting with the
blue jays that just push any of the other birds aside with the squawk of its voice. Any smaller
birds who dont respond to the verbal command are approached with mal-intent. But from my
inexpert perspective it seems that the cardinals, the goldfinches and the common sparrows all
get enough to eat. When there is enough, there is no need to fight. When there is enough, there
is no need to demand the whole pie.
Third, the president also used humor and storytelling as part of his communication
strategy. Prior research has shown that the humorous message generates good feelings
and gains and keeps an audiences attention, releases tension and bridges distances
between managers and employees. As Fox and Hamburger (2001, p. 89) observed,
humor has the power to bridge distances between parties as both sides laugh together
LODJ and identify with one another. Shared feelings may be an effective way of seeing the
32,7 collective picture in any collaboration. Humor has been determined to be particularly
useful for change agents (Kahn, 1989) and bridge leaders are change agents at some
level. The president is fond of telling funny stories, including stories about events in
his own life as a means of communicating his ideas to stakeholders. Story telling has
been determined as an important mode of communication (Boje, 1991). Being able to
728 tell a good story requires good imagination, a skill this leader seemed to have mastered
as our interview data revealed. McKee and Fryer (2003) observe that that all great
stories deal with the conflict between subjective expectations and some uncooperative
reality, a situation that aptly describes the dynamics of cooperation as is exemplified
by the context of this study. That tension between expectations and reality was
captured by the bridge leader in the sort of stories he told in his newsletters to
stakeholders. The use of storytelling and humor was also effective in the bridging
situation because without position power, people do not have to listen to you. Humor
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
and storytelling appeals to peoples emotions and assumes that the message will be
attended to and received. Although leaders in hierarchical organizations can use these
same tools to enhance their position, they do not have to. For the bridge leader on the
other hand, these communication tools may be a necessity.
Finally, the bridge leader engaged in what we term playfulness. Playfulness here is
a combination of self-deprecating humor, and bantering. Both researchers have
witnessed the bridge leader engage in friendly, playful exchanges with stakeholders.
We believe that this playfulness humanized the leader and made his mission and vision
lovable to stakeholders. For example, he uses this playfulness to motivate the
stakeholders.
It might just be the buds appearing on the shrubs outside my window or the warming sun in
the morning, but if January and February are months of hibernation and quietude, March is
definitely the month when life and hopefully business awakens. Personally, I am beginning to
feel like Austin Powers, yea baby, I got my mojo back. And it is time for you to get yours
back as well. It is definitely time to stop singing the blues and time to make some things
happen. So wherever you put your mojo, go get it! And if you dont know where it is, you
better ask somebody.
It appeared as if the bridge leaders playfulness was a mask for a more serious attempt
to constantly keep the mission and the central tasks of the organization at the fore. The
bridge leaders use of humor, metaphor, storytelling and playfulness were effective as
they serve to enhance his likeability, legitimacy, prestige, humanizing him and making
their central task of bridging acceptable in a non-threatening way. All these strategies
may well prove critical for a leader who must appear non-threatening as possible to be
able to maintain both his legitimacy and appeal. The evidence and discussion leads us
to our next proposition:
P3. The bridge leaders use of humor, storytelling and playfulness will positively
impact his/her leadership performance.
and shared purpose. The recognition of outstanding performers serves to identify best
practices that become benchmarks for all stakeholders. Publicizing success and using
ceremonies especially is important in a leadership situation where internal
stakeholders are outside the control and organizational domain of the leader. Prior
research has shown that ceremonies are an effective way to play on the emotional
chords of people (Fox and Hamburger, 2001) and the bridge leader we studied seemed
to have recognized the potency of ceremonies as a tool for advancing his objectives.
Based on the preceding discussion, we propose that:
P4. The celebration of successes of stakeholders in a collaborative system will
reinforce shared values and positively impact the performance of the bridge
leader.
of the collaboration.
Finally, the bridge leader was careful to impress on the stakeholders to realize that it
was important for them to develop shared expectations around the collective goals of
the collaboration. In the bridge leaders own words, there was the need to grow the pie
to be so large that there will be no need to fight over the crumbs. By his leadership on
the key issues of clarifying what his own role is in the collaboration as well as ensuring
that each stakeholder group was fully aware of what it took for them to realize their
individual goals, the bridge leader demonstrated leadership behaviors that proved
valuable in his bridge leadership. We propose that:
P5. Setting clear expectations for the stakeholders will positively impact bridge
leader performance.
stated:
I think he does the best he can with what he has to offer in terms of identifying suppliers that
have a good motto and products and services and supporting them, and also identifying
corporate members who are doing what the mission is. To bring the two together it takes a lot
of work . . . I have a very good relationship to the council.
Another CEO avers:
I see many presidents of supplier councils and this president is really doing his best for both
sides because he is willing to help any supplier in any way he can and he will always say that
I will help you.
This evidence leads us to our third proposition:
P6. The performance of the bridge leader will be positively impacted by his/her
ability to create opportunities for actors to achieve their individual as well as
the collective goals of the collaboration.
Conclusion
Drawing on two research traditions in leadership and multiparty collaboration, this
article makes a number of contributions to the literature on leadership and bridging
organizations. First, the study contributes to our understanding of the dynamics of
leadership in bridging organizations. By examining the influence strategies and
leadership behaviors that were helpful to the leader of a bridging organization we
studied, the study provides some practical ideas for other leaders in similar contexts.
Second, in examining leadership strategies and behaviors in a specific context and
showing how these may differ from our traditional concept of leadership, the study
may allow us to construct new theories about leadership. Finally, where most existing
discussions of bridging have been largely confined to non-governmental, voluntary,
social-change organizations and environmental groups (e.g. Polonsky, 2001), this study
extends the concept of strategic bridging to the private sector.
It is important to mention that some of the leadership behaviors we discussed may
not be unique to bridging situations, and may be applicable to leadership in
hierarchical organizations as well while others may be more appropriate and desirable
particularly for bridging situations. For example, leaders manage the expectations of
LODJ group members (Bass, 1990) use social capital to achieve their goals, just like bridge
32,7 leaders (Balkundi and Kilduff, 2006), sometimes use some of the same modes of
communication such as story telling as bridge leaders to influence their followers
(Conger, 1991) and apply similar relational skills such as the use of social capital to lead
(McCallum and OConnell, 2009). For example, communication is important in
leadership of all sorts of organizations even if the communication strategies of bridge
732 leaders need to be more nuanced to be effective. It is possible that some leadership
behaviors that make for successful leadership in hierarchical organizations may be
equally useful in bridging organizations as well. For example, we have seen the bridge
leader engage in transformational, and to some extent, servant leadership behaviors.
This research has uncovered some important leadership behaviors, skills and
characteristics of a successful bridge leader. The study demonstrated that leaders in
bridging organizations use forms of influence strategies that compensate for their lack
of direct positional power. Although there is some leadership vulnerability in the form
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
of a lack of direct control over resources, the president drew on some of his personal
qualities such as humility, persistence, integrity, reflection and his ability to substitute
personal allegiance for positional authority for influence. Our findings are consistent
with Dulany (1997) who notes that the bridge leaders capacities to elicit trust from the
stakeholders he or she bridges come from competence, integrity, constancy and
empathy. The author goes on to suggest that such bridge leaders must have the ability
to engage different kinds of people; be open to compromise; have credibility with their
constituency and an aptitude for learning to understand the language used by the
stakeholders they bridge.
References
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
Adler, P. and Kwon, S. (2002), Social capital: prospects for a new concept, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 27, pp. 18-40.
Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC) (2003), Asian Pacific American Legal Center
(APALC) Crossing Boundaries: An Exploration of Effective Leadership Development in
Communities, APALC, Los Angeles, CA.
Balkundi, P. and Kilduff, M. (2006), The ties that bind: a social network approach to leadership,
The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 419-49.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1990), From transaction to transformational leadership: learning to share the
vision, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 19-31.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1984), Improving Organizational Effectiveness through
Transformational Leadership, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Bauer, R. (1968), The study of policy formation: an introduction, in Bauer, R. and Gergen, K.
(Eds), The Study of Policy Formation, Free Press, New York, NY.
Boje, D.M. (1991), The storytelling organization: a study of story performance in an
office-supply firm, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36, pp. 106-26.
Brown, D.L. (1993), Development bridging organizations and strategic management for social
change, in Shrivastava, P., Huff, A. and Dutton, J. (Eds), Advances in Strategic
Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Browning, L.D., Breyer, J.M. and Shetler, J.C. (1995), Building cooperation in a competitive
industry: SEMATECH and the semiconductor industry, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 113-51.
Burgelman, R.A. (1983), A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major
firm, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28, pp. 223-44.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Carley, K. (1993), Coding choices for textual analysis: a comparison of content analysis and map
analysis, Sociological Methods, Vol. 23, pp. 75-126.
Conger, J.A. (1991), Inspiring others: the language of leadership, Executive, Vol. 5 No. 1,
pp. 31-45.
Crosby, B. and Kiedrowski, J. (2008), Integrative leadership: observations from a University of
Minnesota seminar series, Integral Leadership Review, Vol. 8 No. 3.
Daft, R. (2008), Organization Theory and Design, Southwestern, Mason, OH.
LODJ Dulany, P. (1997), Toward a New Paradigm for Civil Society Leadership: The Art of Bridging
Gaps, The Synergos Institute, New York, NY.
32,7
Faerman, S.R., McCaffrey, D.P. and Van Slyke, D.M. (2001), Understanding interorganizational
cooperation: public-private collaboration in regulating financial market innovation,
Organization Science, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 372-88.
Fletcher, J.K. and Kaufer, K. (2003), Shared leadership: paradox and possibility, in Pearce, C.L.
734 and Conger, J.A. (Eds), Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 21-47.
Fox, S. and Hamburger, Y. (2001), The power of emotional appeals in promoting organizational
change programs, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 84-94.
Galaskiewicz, J. and Shastin, D. (1981), Leadership and networking among neighborhood
human service organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 26, pp. 434-48.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)
Yukl, G. (2006), Leadership in Organizations, 6th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Further reading
Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (1990), Grounded theory research: procedures, canons and evaluative
criteria, Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 13, pp. 3-21.
French, J.R.P. and Raven, B.H. (1959), The bases of social power, in Cartwright, D. (Ed.), Studies
in Social Power, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 150-67.
Roberts, N.C. (1985), Transforming leadership: a process of collective action, Human Relations,
Vol. 38, pp. 1023-46.
Westley, F. and Mintzberg, H. (1989), Visionary leadership and strategic management,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 17-32.
Corresponding author
Dr Ronald S. McMullen can be contacted at: Ronald.McMullen@quinnipiac.edu
1. Aarti Gupta, Till Pistorius, Marjanneke J. Vijge. 2015. Managing fragmentation in global environmental
governance: the REDD+ Partnership as bridge organization. International Environmental Agreements:
Politics, Law and Economics . [CrossRef]
2. B. Yan, W. R. Maladzhi, O. D. MakindeCreating innovation culture through visionary leadership in small
medium enterprises 1170-1174. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 21:21 12 February 2016 (PT)