<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com">
<title>Leadership current issue</title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com</link>
<description>Leadership RSS feed -- current issue</description>
<prism:coverDisplayDate>November 2008</prism:coverDisplayDate>
<prism:publicationName>Leadership</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1742-7150</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/363?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/381?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/403?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/419?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/443?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/477?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/481?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://lea.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Leadership</title>
<url>http://lea.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/363?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Leadership as Practice: Challenging the Competency Paradigm]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/363?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Competency frameworks, models, instruments and thinking have long been ingrained and utilized in management and organizational life. Not surprisingly they have been transplanted both swiftly and seemingly easily into the leadership domain. While there certainly have been discomfort and critique from academic and practitioner sources, nothing has emerged strongly enough to date that would provide an alternative mode of framing and translating both leadership and leadership development in the different contexts that seek to make it visible. In this article, consequently, we submit leadership and its development to the `practice turn' to enable a radically different perspective from a competency orientated one. The ontology, epistemology and methodologies of practice are examined and translated to the leadership field. We argue that a focus on praxis, practitioner and practice offers both challenge and transformation to the ways that leadership is bounded and constrained by current organizational and managerial conventions.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carroll, B., Levy, L., Richmond, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095186</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Leadership as Practice: Challenging the Competency Paradigm]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>379</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>363</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/381?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Negotiating Gender Role Expectations: Rhetorical Leadership and Women in the US Senate]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/381?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The historical paucity of US women senators has provided little opportunity to study women at one of the highest and most prestigious leadership levels. Through a content analysis of 12 months of public discourse in a variety of media, we explore the rhetorical leadership of women senators as they carry out their elected roles. Results indicate that women senators use significantly less aggressive and more ambivalent speech when compared to political norms, and are less likely to use terms denoting accomplishment, praise and human interest. Overall, our results suggest that women continue to feel the effects of gender stereotypes and expectations in higher levels of political office, and these effects may have important negative implications for perceptions of their leadership and effectiveness.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bligh, M. C., Kohles, J. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095187</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Negotiating Gender Role Expectations: Rhetorical Leadership and Women in the US Senate]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>402</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>381</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/403?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[What Are We Measuring? Convergence of Leadership with Interpersonal and Non-interpersonal Personality]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/403?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Since leadership styles have been most commonly defined in terms of interpersonal influence, one would assume that they have their main projections on the interpersonal circumplex. In this study, the relations between leadership styles from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire and both interpersonal and HEXACO personality scales are investigated. As expected, charismatic leadership and leader's consideration have strong projections on the interpersonal circumplex, with main projections on the warm-agreeable octant. Transactional leadership, passive leadership, and task-oriented leadership have considerably weaker or no projections on the circumplex. Leader's consideration is most strongly related to interpersonal personality while both transactional and passive leadership are most strongly related to non-interpersonal personality. It is concluded that especially charismatic leadership and leader's consideration are captured almost fully by the HEXACO personality inventory.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[de Vries, R. E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095188</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[What Are We Measuring? Convergence of Leadership with Interpersonal and Non-interpersonal Personality]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>417</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>403</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/419?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Ethical Integrity in Leadership and Organizational Moral Culture]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/419?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Ethical integrity and moral culture are defined, and ethical integrity in leadership, ethical dilemmas and failures, and organizational moral culture are examined. These views are measured against a number of case studies to determine whether there are linkages between organizational moral culture and the ethical or unethical integrity of leadership. A number of conclusions are drawn from the case studies. There appears to be a direct link between ethical leadership and organizational moral culture, although in some cases, considerable time may be needed to change the moral culture of an organization. Shareholders and the public appreciate and reward organizations with high ethical principles and moral culture whereas regulators are increasingly taking legal action against companies which flout share-holders' and the public's trust. The article questions whether codes of conduct, regular performance and audit reviews or other mechanisms to maintain ethics inhibit employees' right to moral autonomy. Finally, it is noted that inconsistencies exist in correlating private standards and behaviour as important predictors or determinants of ethical business conduct.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thoms, J. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095189</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Ethical Integrity in Leadership and Organizational Moral Culture]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>442</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>419</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/443?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Inter-leadership: Why and How Should We Think of Leadership and Followership         Integrally?]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/443?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>                 <I>This article raises questions about and provides meta-paradigmatic perspectives                     on an integral understanding of leadership. In view of the various shortcomings                     of conventional leadership discourse, an integral orientation considers that                     leadership research demands a comprehensive framework and multi-level approach                     suited for investigating the complex, interrelated processes involved.                     Correspondingly, the outlined integral framework of leadership covers the                     interdependent subjective, intersubjective and objective dimensions of leaders                     and leadership. Furthermore, developmental levels and lines &mdash;                     classified in a dynamic cycle &mdash; open up a processual understanding of                     leadership. Finally, theoretical and methodological implications are discussed                     and some avenues for future research and perspectives of integral leadership                     presented.</I>             </p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kupers, W., Weibler, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095190</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Inter-leadership: Why and How Should We Think of Leadership and Followership         Integrally?]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>475</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>443</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/477?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Book Review: Mary Jo Hatch, Monika Kostera and Andrzej K. Kozminski, The Three Faces of Leadership: Manager, Artist, Priest. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 169 pp. ISBN 978--1--40--512259--7 (hbk), 978--1--40--512260--3 (pbk)]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/477?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jepson, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1742715008095468</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Book Review: Mary Jo Hatch, Monika Kostera and Andrzej K. Kozminski, The Three Faces of Leadership: Manager, Artist, Priest. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 169 pp. ISBN 978--1--40--512259--7 (hbk), 978--1--40--512260--3 (pbk)]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>481</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>477</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/481?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Book Review: Graham Haydon, Values for Educational Leadership. London: SAGE, 2007. 116 pp. ISBN 978--1--41293--467--1 (hbk), 978--1--41293--468--8 (pbk)]]></title>
<link>http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/4/481?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Betts, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/17427150080040040602</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Book Review: Graham Haydon, Values for Educational Leadership. London: SAGE, 2007. 116 pp. ISBN 978--1--41293--467--1 (hbk), 978--1--41293--468--8 (pbk)]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>484</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>481</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>