The context deficit in leadership research

Complementary evidence from narrative literature reviews and meta-analyses leads to the conclusion that much research suffers from a lack of attention to the context in which leadership occurs. Several possible reasons for this context deficit are refuted, including notions that context is unimportant for leaders, contextualized research is less scientific than decontextualized research, and useful contextual descriptors are lacking. Rather, it is argued that the context deficit is a negative manifestation of the romance of leadership. Advantages of enhanced attention to context include reduction of omitted variable bias, improved understanding of anomalous research results, differentiation and integration of research findings, and enhanced teaching and practice of leadership. Improved contextual appreciation can be facilitated by consulting contextual success stories, embracing an interdisciplinary perspective, focusing on events, behavior, and change, employing experience sampling, conducting more qualitative research, using a configural approach, studying how leaders construe and process contextual cues, adopting context-specific leadership measures, and improving writing, editing, and review practices concerning context.