faculty of economics and business...
TRANSCRIPT
GHENT UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS
AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
ACADEMIC YEAR 2013-2014
Dual Executive Leadership & Conflict An investigation into shared leadership and
the factors that influence and resolve conflict
A Master’s capstone presented in the fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Business Economics
Julie De Moyer
Supervisor Prof. Sebastian Desmidt
De Moyer 2
PERMISSION
I, the undersigned, certify that the content of this master thesis can be consulted and/or reproduced if
the source is acknowledged.
Julie De Moyer
De Moyer 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER 5
0.1. Abstract and keywords 5
0.2. Acknowledgements 6
0.3. Introduction 7
0.4. Structure 12
CHAPTER ONE: DUAL LEADERSHIP 12
1.1. Leadership, a unit of analysis 12
1.2. Plural leadership: paradox and possibility 13
1.3. Research approach: dual leadership and conflict 16
CHAPTER TWO: DUAL LEADERSHIP AND CONFLICT 19
2.1. Cognition, strategic leadership and cognitive heterogeneity 19
2.2. Defining and managing conflict 22
2.3. Expanding the field: dual leadership and the amelioration and resolution of conflict 26
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 34
3.1. Leadership research: quantitative versus qualitative approach 34
3.2. The personal construct theory and the Repertory Grid method 35
3.3. The terminology, process & adaptation of the method for the purpose of this research 37
De Moyer 4
CHAPTER FOUR: EMPIRICAL RESEARCH 43
4.1. Case study context: the cultural sector 43
4.2. Data selection 46
4.3. Data analysis 47
4.4. Results & preliminary research conclusion 55
CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS & CONCLUSION 63
5.1. General outcome/ main conclusions 63
5.2. Limitations of the research 66
5.3. Implications for future research 67
REFERENCES 70
6.1. Bibliography 71
6.2. List of figures 81
6.3. Other materials (interview preparation sheet, list of participants, email invitation) 83
APPENDIX 84
7.1. Article by Pawan Bhansing ‘Gemiste kans dat focus te veel ligt op artistieke’ (Dutch) 84
7.2. Repertory Grid: weaknesses & strengths 85
DUTCH SUMMARY 86
ABOUT THE AUTHOR 87
De Moyer 5
ABSTRACT
Traditionally theorists have argued that a single person in the leadership role is the most effective form
of leadership (Weber, 1924/47; Fayol, 1949). However, more recent literature concentrating on
leadership examines structures that include multiple leaders (Pearce & Conger, 2003; Crawfis, 2011;
Denis et. al, 2012; Sergi et al., 2012). This Master thesis reports on research into one particular form of
plural leadership: the Dual Executive Leadership (DEL) model. This study explores the evolution of this
model and its characteristics and focuses on the relationship between the DEL model and the notion of
conflict. Plausible recurrent conflict resolving methods and their overall impact in strategic decision-
making are discussed in the context of recent academic work.
The combination of an in-depth review of current literature and interviews with leaders of leadership
dyads using the Repertory Grid Technique (Fransella et al, 2003/2004) provides insight into the
phenomenon of dual leadership that provides three specific contributions. First of all, the use of Kelly’s
(1955) Personal Construct Theory provides an alternative framework for analysis compared with the
conventional questionnaire formats commonly used in the field of leadership research. Secondly, the
generative, semi-structured form of the Repertory Grid enables the characteristics of the DEL model to
be articulated in a ‘grounded’ manner by the research participants. This leads to the third contribution:
the ability to explore the utility of the emergent and more nuanced characteristics of dual leadership
and their effects on conflict resolution.
The main research questions are: How do leaders within a DEL relation experience conflict when making
strategic decisions? What conflict resolution methods are DEL leaders familiar with? and How can
various resolution methods be mapped and differentiated from each other? The empirical data that
guide the analysis and commentary in this Master thesis were drawn from nonprofit performing arts
organizations. These organizations provide a coherent cadre of leaders who suit the research aims: they
often experience strategic and policy challenges, most notably a dynamic internal tension between the
dual objectives of artistic vision and institutional stability. Research findings offer recommendations for
further study, in particular in the arts context, and highlight their potential to increase the success of
dual leadership structures in general.
KEY WORDS
Dual leadership, strategic decision-making, management theories, personal construct theory,
qualitative analysis, strategic consensus, nonprofit performing arts
De Moyer 6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many individuals have contributed to the writing of this final dissertation. First and foremost, my
heartfelt thanks to my supervisor, Prof. Sebastian Desmidt (University of Ghent) for the tenor of his
work, and for generously sharing his thoughts and ideas with me over the whole writing period.
Furthermore, I would like to thank Prof. Christopher Davis (University of Saint Petersburg) for his
knowledge and help on the Repertory Grid Method, the methodology used in this dissertation. For their
support, discussion, and helpful comments I would like to thank my work colleagues at the Royal Philips
Headquarters in Amsterdam and my academic friends at the University in Ghent. And finally, I would like
to thank my family and my partner João Pedro Cruz for their encouragement, support, tolerance,
patience and good humor throughout.
By writing my final thesis on the critical reflection of the term and meaning of dual leadership and
conflict I hope to gain a better understanding of these notions, and I believe that not only I, but the
reader too, will be able to understand these rather difficult notions in a more practical way.
“We don't get harmony when everybody sings the same note. Only notes that are
different can harmonize. The same is true with people.”
― Steve Goodier
“Ideas stand in the corner and laugh while we fight over them.”
― Marty Rubin
Julie De Moyer, Amsterdam, May 2014
De Moyer 7
INTRODUCTION
Dual executive leadership (DEL): dual versus duel
Traditionally, scholars have argued that single leaders generate a more effective vision for
organizational coherence (Weber, 1924/47; Fayol, 1949; Rost, 1993). Consequently, the dominant unit
of analysis within leadership research has long continued to be the solo or ‘stand-alone’ leader. More
recently, however, management research published in a range of academic and practitioner domains
has begun to explore the validity and added value of multiple leadership structures (Gronn, 2002;
Pearce & Conger, 2003; Crawfis, 2011; Denis et. al, 2012; Sergi et al., 2012). These studies have assessed
the impact of multiple leadership structures on followers, stakeholders and organizations (Heenan &
Bennis 1999, Reid, 2009) and indicated that multiple leadership structures are related with specific
benefits, including how distributed leadership in schools enables democratic involvement (Gronn, 2002);
how job sharing enables more women to participate in leadership roles (Anderson & Court, 2012); how
co-leadership provides support in complex organizational environments (Heenan & Bennis, 1999) and
how shared leadership generates creative group work (Pearce & Sims, 2003).
One specific form of shared leadership expected to benefit organizations, and which has been adopted
by organizations in a range of fields, is dual executive leadership (DEL) structures. The dual executive
leadership structure is generally defined as the situation in which ‘the executive position is divided into
two functionally different positions’ (Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005; Reid and Karambayya, 2009; Bhansing,
2011).1 Typically each leader has his or her own area of expertise (Bhansing, 2013). In most cases, in
both the profit and the nonprofit sector, one director is responsible for the organization’s economic
objectives while another is responsible for the non-economic objectives (Reid, 2009; Galli, 2011).
Dual leadership dyads have been found in commercial organizations including investment banks, design
firms (YSL & Partner), newspapers, film & journalistic organizations, high-tech and family businesses
(Finkelstein et al., 2009). One example is the technology company Research In Motion, that has been led
by two co-chief executives for nearly 20 years (Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005). Research highlights
entrepreneurial new start-ups as a strong locus for plural leadership: 60% overall and 90% in the high-
tech sector (Reid, 2009). Leadership dyads are also found in organizations in the nonprofit field,
particularly those in the performing arts (Reid & Karambayya, 2009; Galli, 2011) .
1 Please note that in this paper, the notions of ‘dual leadership’ and ‘dual executive leadership’ (abbreviated as DEL) are used
interchangeably. However, when talking about scientific research on the topic, the latter notion is most commonly used. One can understand ‘dual’ to be a collective of two and ‘executive’ as being empowered to make independent decisions, i.e. without recourse to higher approval (email conversation Jones Translations, May 2
nd 2014)
De Moyer 8
Previous research in the field of shared leadership has shown that the positive effects include
innovativeness (Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Murray, 1989), increased problem-solving abilities (Nemeth,
1986), and flexibility and adaptability due to the diversity of skills, information sources and perspectives
(for an overview see Finkelstein et al., 2009: 131-136). However, on the flip side, the dual executive
leadership (DEL) model has also been characterized as being innately problematic, causing internal
tension among managers and stagnating the strategic decision-making and planning process (Denis et
al., 2012). The authors argue that when two leaders, with heterogenic cognitive ways of thinking and
acting, try to come to a working collaboration with the aim of formulating successful strategies,
assessing performance, managing change, acquiring resources, and designing and implementing solid
marketing and communication plans, conflict situations are unavoidable (Crawfis, 2011).
Research challenge: dual leadership conflict
Traditionally, conflict is thought to hinder decision making. Arguments in favor of this wisdom are, for
example, the fact that conflict disrupts info exchange among the team of decision makers reducing
decision quality, that it undermines commitment that is needed to get the decision properly
implemented and that conflict reduce satisfaction & affective acceptance among the team members
threatening cohesion and the prospects for future decisions (Schweiger, Sandberg & Ragan, 1986;
Schweiger & Sandberg, 1991)2. However, moments of conflict between both leaders in a dual leadership
structure should not be interpreted as exclusively negative. Previous research on top management team
heterogeneity has shown that positive effects include innovativeness (Bantel & Jackson 1989, Murray,
1989), increased problem solving abilities (Nemeth 1986), and flexibility and adaptability thanks to the
diversity of skills, information sources and perspectives (for overview see Finkelstein, Hambrick &
Cannella 2009: 131-136).
In August 2011, a symposium3 at the Cass Business School (City University of London) contributed to the
emerging body of research into leadership in the plural. Questions that emerged from the symposium
included: ‘Under which conditions will a leadership group be successful in implementing change, and
when (and why) will it fail? How do organizations with plural leadership project a single organizational
voice?’. These questions prompted the articulation of the links between the characteristics underpinning
dual leadership, and their capacity to resolve destructive leadership conflict.
2 Particularly interesting for this paper is that previous research has shown that business executives and executives of not-for-
profit organizations may have very different perceptions of the effects of conflict. Charles Schwenk (1990) concluded that high conflict is associated with high quality for the executives of not-for-profit organizations, but with low quality for executives of for-profit organizations. 3 The symposium Leadership in the plural: Forms, practices and dynamics took place in the Academy of Management
Conference (2011), which, as stated in the introductory text, was ‘designed to showcase this developing area, and to examine the potential across different kinds of professional organizations.’
De Moyer 9
Taking into account the research on the advantages and disadvantages of dual executive leadership
(Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Murray, 1989; Finkelstein et al., 2009; Crawfis, 2011) and the above-mentioned
questions of the London symposium on DEL, this paper illuminates the radical importance of
constructive conflict in strategic decision-making in a dual leadership practice and on the plausible
actions to decrease destructive conflict. The main research questions are:
How do leaders within a DEL relation experience conflict when making strategic decisions?
What conflict resolution methods are DEL leaders familiar with?
How can various resolution methods be mapped and differentiated from each other?
Methodology and data sampling
In an attempt to better understand managerial cognition, in this study theoretical findings regarding
dual leadership and both constructive and destructive conflict are complemented by the use of a
method that allows us to elicit the mental thought-processes that shape attitudes, which in turn
influence the very behaviors we observe in dual leadership constructions and strategic decision-making
processes. To add more meaning to the study of conflict situations in DEL structures, a unique, cognitive
mapping technique is used, originating from clinical psychology: the Repertory Grid method (Kelly,
1955; Fransella et al., 2004). Much of the 'grid work' has taken, and will continue to take place, in the
clinical setting with individuals, as a way to try to increase the psychologist's understanding of how the
person views the world (Kelly, 1955; Ryle, 1975). However, since Kelly’s introduction, the methodology
and theory have also found their home4 in the areas of, among others, artificial intelligence, education,
human learning, politics & policy analysis, forensic work and market research (Fransella et al., 2004).
At the time of writing, little research using Repertory Grid had been conducted in the area of strategic
management and strategic consensus (Fransella et al, 2003/2004; Pidd, 1996; Bryson et al, 2004;
Thomas & Harri-Augstein, 1985). This research aims to fill this gap and to be a starting point in that area.
For the purpose of this study, 14 personal interviews with Belgian and Dutch artistic and business
leaders of nonprofit performing arts organizations using the Repertory Grid method were analyzed with
specialized software to maintain the fidelity of individuals’ mental models as the data were presented
visually.5
4 The Repertory Grid method has also proven successful in various studies independent of the Personal Construct Theory
(Fransella et al., 2004), but in this study the link between theory and method is maintained. 5 Such a combined approach is not entirely new. In previous research, the Repertory Grid technique has been used in
combination with interviews, observations, secondary data analysis, reflexive dialogue, scenario analysis, questionnaires and computerized grid versions - there are a number of software packages available both for eliciting constructs and for analyzing the Repertory Grid data (Stein et al., 2003; Fetherstonhaugh, 1994; Scholes and Freeman, 1994).
De Moyer 10
Contributions to the field
Contribution #1: the setting
The first contribution to the field is to provide research into one particular work setting (nonprofit sector)
and culture (Belgian and Dutch context). Despite the large amount of academic research into the field of
leadership, there is little information on leaders of the many organizations devoted to the arts. For the
purpose of this paper, the data selection focused on Belgian and Dutch artistic and business leaders of
nonprofit performing arts organizations. In this context, in order to survive in the tense economic and
political climate characterized by resource concerns, most operating nonprofit performing arts
organizations have moved from one artistic head to structures in which leadership is share by both an
artistic and a managing director (Crawfis, 2011; Bhansing, 2013). The organizations are managed under a
dual leadership structure, which not only enables them to look at and produce art based on an inner urge,
but also to take into account the business perspective of art and culture in general (Cray et al., 2007; Reid,
2007; Galli, 2011; Bhansing, 2011/2013).
Contribution #2: the cognitive approach
The second contribution of this Master thesis is the cognitive approach towards dual leadership. In his
article Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions (2009), Bruce J. Avolio studies
various recent theoretical and empirical developments in the leadership literature. What makes his
work particularly interesting with regard to this research paper, is that whilst providing an interesting
way to examine the development of the field, Avolio identifies issues to be addressed in the future. One
of these issues is the cognitive approach towards leadership research and forms the starting point for
this analysis. This Master paper advocates a shift towards a cognitive research orientation in the study
of leadership and decision-making processes, enabling us to better understand, explain, and predict
managers’ behavior (Wagner, 1994; Bhansing, 2011/2013). The research design is therefore structured
in favor of such an orientation.
Individual leaders have their own unique education, social background and professional experience,
which guide their perceptions of and interactions with others (Kelly, 1995). This paper testifies that
cognitive research will extend the ‘repertoire’ of constructs pertinent to plural leadership and provide
critical commentary on the utility of the scales and metrics commonly used in empirical studies of
individual executives. Moreover, it is argued that an improved understanding of the perceptions of each
leader in a dyad or pair – particularly their co-evolution during experiences of conflict will provide new
insight into the limitations of the dichotomous view of consensus and conflict common in prior research
(Cray, 2007). This paper validates that – at the cognitive process level – conflict between leaders can be
De Moyer 11
constructive, and that conflict ‘events’ can be differentiated more subtly than merely being the opposite
of consensus.
Contribution #3: the qualitative approach at hand of the Repertory Grid methodology
This dissertation particularly reports on an exploratory and qualitative study of leadership in relation to
motives that influence (constructive/destructive) conflict at hand of the Repertory Grid methodology.
The research breaks away from conventional questionnaire-generated perceptions. At hand of the
Repertory Grid technique is focused on eliciting personal constructs of how real respondents receive
conflict solving actions in relation to the dual leadership structure of which they are part. The method
allows the investigation to go much deeper than past research into the core perceptions that influenced
respondent’s attitudes and subsequent behaviors. Previous literature showed commonality in motives
for strategic consensus in the decision-making process, yet this research builds on these findings adding
not only the theme of conflict bus also new constructs, core perceptual dimensions, opening up new
questions and issues for further research.
RESEARCH STRUCTURE
The first chapter focuses on the origins and different notions of leadership and dual leadership. In the
second chapter the dual executive leadership structure is linked to conflict, both destructive and
constructive. In the third chapter the methodology is clearly explained: the Repertory Grid technique
allows analyzing and understanding of motivations and perceptions of leaders in a dual leadership
structure.
The first three theoretical chapters form the basis for a fourth chapter, in which the data context of this
paper, the cultural setting, is described. Using dyadic data from both the artistic and the managing
directors of various (subsidized) theatre and dance companies with dual leadership structures, the
importance and effects of possible actions that influence conflict, the so-called influencers, are studied.
In the final and fifth chapter, major findings are presented along with the limitations of the research.
Finally, these sections are followed by (1) implications for further theoretical themes, (2) implications for
public policy and (3) implications for managers that are a part of a dual executive leadership structure –
all of which form new and innovative insights not only for the cultural sector itself, but also for a
broader organizational context of dual leadership structures.
De Moyer 12
1. DUAL LEADERSHIP
This chapter offers an introductory understanding of the notion of (dual) leadership based on a
thorough analysis of the academic literature. In this section, [1] a general overview of how leadership
has been defined historically is followed by [2] which types of leadership are recognized and [3] how
dual executive leadership (DEL) is both a past and current practice, and what the advantages and
disadvantages of a DEL structure can be.
1.1. Leadership, a unit of analysis
“Most definitions of leadership reflect the assumption that it involves a social influence
process whereby intentional influence is exerted by one person over other people to
structure the activities and relationships in a group or organization.” (Leadership in
organizations, Yukl, 1994: 3; emphasis added)
The discussion of leadership is often complicated by a plethora of definitions of the term. These
definitions serve equally diverse theories and arguments. First of all, traditionally leadership theorists in
the late 19th and early 20th century
centuries placed an emphasis on command and control in their
definition of leadership (Pearce & Conger, 2003). A second unifying theme in early research into
leadership was the quest for insights on how to create greater efficiency in organizational life (Weber,
1924/1947; Fayol, 1949). Thirdly, traditionally, scholars and theorists have argued that leadership roles
should involve only one person for maximum effectiveness (Weber, 1924/47; Fayol, 1949; Rost, 1993).
Bruce J. Avolio states, for example, that “at the outset of the field of leadership, the primary focus was
on studying an individual leader, who was most likely a male working in some large private sector
organization” (Avolio et al., 2009:422). This very pervasive assumption continues to appear throughout
the leadership literature (Pearce & Conger, 2003). Single leaders are often referred to as being
charismatic, transactional, transformational and/or participatory (Cray et al., 2007), each of which is
suitable in particular circumstances. Yet, an in-depth look into the various meanings of these adjectives
is outside the scope of this research.
In more recent studies, it is generally agreed that the concept of a singular leader is a simplification
(Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005; Avolio, 2009; Denis et al., 2012; Sergi et al., 2012). In contrast to the
traditional belief that the single leadership is the only effective structure, these perspectives argue that
De Moyer 13
the presence of a multiple structure would also contribute to some type of effectiveness (Day et al.,
2004) and that although one leader commonly holds the ultimate authority, one person does not
necessarily lead all the time or in all cases, and we should see distributed leadership as a (temporary)
unit of analysis instead (Gronn, 2002; de Voogt, 2006).
1.2. Plural leadership: paradox and possibility
“So much of the classic literature about management has been about the need for
controlling, which is about designing systems, creating structures and making choices.”
(Mintzberg, 1998: 141; emphasis added)
After World War II, in reaction to the assumption of the superiority of single leader models in the
leadership field and based on observations that organizations can be run by more than a single leader, a
number of theorists have independently begun a study into the nature of multiple leaders (Pearce &
Conger, 2003; Day et al., 2004; Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005; Crawfis, 2011; Denis et. al, 2012; Sergi et al.,
2012). In Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership Craig L. Pearce and Jay A.
Conger (2003) give an overview of the historical bases of research on shared leadership dating, at least,
back to 56 years ago with the research on co leadership of Solomon, Loeffer and Frank (1953):
De Moyer 14
Figure I: Historical Bases of Shared Leadership, summary Pearce & Conger (2003), emphasis added
De Moyer 15
Craig L. Pearce and Jay A. Conger (2003) indicate how early theories of leadership have focused, among
other, on contextual (Follett, 1924) and social systems (Turner, 1933; Mayo, 1933; Barnard, 1938),
co-leadership (1950s, revision in 1980s) and mutual leadership (1960s). Most recently, from the 1990s
onwards, the emphasis has shifted towards more cognitive and connective subjects and research (e.g.
shared cognition and internal/external connectivity). The overview clearly shows how co-leadership has
been defined as ‘the division of the leadership role between two people – primarily examining mentor
and protégé relationships’ (Pearce & Conger, 2003). However, apart from the above-mentioned
historical interpretation of co-leadership, a variety of terms has been implemented and used to describe
multiple leadership situations, including 1) shared, 2) collaborative and (3) — the more recent —
co-leadership (by Hennan & Bennis, 1998).6 The following differentiation of the three terms offers the
reader a glimpse of the nuances within the existing plural leadership terminology.
Shared leadership is rooted in the social psychology literature concerned with teams or groups (Pearce
& Conger, 2003). Social psychology is focused on increased creative outcomes of emergent and informal
leadership within a work group. For example, Craig Pearce and Jay Conger argue that, as opposed to
vertical leadership, within shared leadership situations, work group dynamics will organically generate a
variety of leaders from within the group, and that this process enhances the achievement of the team
(Pearce & Conger, 2003).
Collective or collaborative leadership is recognized in organizational partnerships or joint ventures, and
involves the challenges of ambiguous authority and environmental evolution (Denis et al., 2001;
Huxham et al., 2000). According to Professor Chris Huxham, the capacity to collaborate across
organizational boundaries at the senior leadership level is the key to improve the success of the
strategic organizational partnership (Huxham et al., 2000).
Finally, the notion of co-leaders is, perhaps, the most relevant definition within this research on dual
leadership. In leadership literature, the term co-leadership and the notion of dual leadership are often
used synonymously. Defined by David Heenan and Warrren Bennis (1999) as merely including the
second-in-command as a sometimes prominent leader in the organization, co-leadership/dual
leadership is about two executives (usually a CEO & COO) with a self-recognized sense of synergy;
together they address the increased complexity of contemporary environments. Heenan and Bennis
6 For the purpose of this paper, the notions of shared, collective/collaborative and co-leaders are introduced briefly, but a more
in-depth linguistic interpretation and comparison of these terms is outside the scope of this paper.
De Moyer 16
claim that this results in improved leadership effectiveness (Heenan & Bennis, 1999).
Aside from categorizing literature according to the kind of terminology and field of research, two
different categories can be distinguished in the research focusing on the origins of shared leadership
structures. On the one hand, the shared structure can be mandated. Professor Wendy Read emphasizes
that in this situation, trust and power differences are the main influencers of conflict situations between
all leaders (Reid, 2005). On the other hand, in certain companies the shared leadership developed
organically – there is hierarchy, but formal leaders voluntarily decide to share power with others. In
professional service firms a number of senior professionals typically enjoy high levels of autonomy – but
a crisis or some other need for concerted action demands the emergence of plural of leadership (Denis
et al., 2012).
Plural leadership can be seen as both a paradox and a possibility. In some contexts, plural leadership can
be seen as the ideal solution, whilst in others, it is clear that plural models of leadership can be highly
dysfunctional (de Voogt, 2006; Denis et al., 2012). Plural leadership structures are often problematic,
causing internal tension among managers, and stagnation of the strategic decision-making and planning
process (Denis et al., 2012). However, one of the proponents of plural leadership in the context of
nonprofit organizations is Jaime D. Galli. Galli (2011) argues that it is beneficial in these organizations to
look at alternative models of organizational managements in order to manage internal complexities as
well as the external challenges more effectively (see chapter 4 of this research).
1.3. Research approach: dual leadership and conflict
The dual executive leadership structure is generally defined as the situation in which ‘the executive
position is divided into two functionally different positions’ (Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005; Reid &
Karambayya, 2009; Bhansing, 2011).7 The practice of dual leadership has a long tradition dating back to
ancient classical times. Professor Alex de Voogt contextualizes:
‘A well-known practice of dual leadership is the hereditary dual kingship of the Spartan
society around five hundred BC, which was in place during a number of centuries. Two
hereditary kings would rule the city-state. In practice, both would be part of a council in
which the other council members did not have permanent status and influence. Either
7 Note that within this paper the notions of ‘dual leadership’ and ‘dual executive leadership’ (abbreviated as DEL) are used
interchangeably. However, when talking about scientific research on the topic, the latter notion is most commonly used.
De Moyer 17
king could lead armies into war but only with the approval of certain councils, which
would appoint either king as army leader. In other words, their dual leadership was
entrenched in a more complex system of governance. Still, conflict could and did arise.
But, according to Herodotus, enmity between the two kings from two different royal
houses was part of the traditional fabric of Spartan life.’ (de Voogt, 2006: 2; emphasis
added)
The research approach on dual executive leadership (DEL) structures varies notably. Ranging from
looking at forms, practices and dynamics of DEL (Denis et al., 2011) and the influence of DEL on
performance perception of the producer-director dyad in film companies (Bhansing, 2011), to the
analysis of the dual leadership binominal in investment banks (Walter, 1985) and CEO duality and
organizational performance (Rechner, 1991).
Naturally, each leader is knowledgeable in her or his own area, there is so-called ‘role complementarity’
(Alvarez & Svejenova, 2005; Bhansing, 2011), which is considered one of the main advantages of dual
executive leadership. José Luis Alvarez and Silviya Svejenova (2005) mention how in a high tech
company one CEO is considered responsible for scientific research and production, while the other CEO
acts as the financial responsible (e.g. the face of the company on Wall Street).
A dual arrangement can make the organization highly resilient and, additionally, since two executives
with different backgrounds, education and/or professional experience share the executive position, it is
also likely that the organization becomes more responsive to and allows more coordination with their
external, often complex, environment (Heenan & Bennis, 1999; Bhansing, 2011). However, from a
logical point of view, the leadership couple should also be considered immediately problematic. As
Wendy Reid and Rekha Karambayya explain: ‘the dual structure has the potential danger of conflict
escalation’ (Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Dual leaders may be influenced by their personal idea of what
creates value for the organization in the eyes of a stakeholder (Bhansing, 2011). It is likely that these
attitudes and beliefs affect strategic decision-making (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Accordingly, Dutch
leadership Kees Hommes and Alex de Voogt state that ‘Dual leadership, at first sight, creates an
impending management impasse: dual becomes a duel, a battle for leadership.’ (Hommes & de Voogt,
2006).
This paper emphasizes that moments of conflict between leaders in a DEL structure should not be
interpreted as solely negative. Apart from destructive conflict (so-called emotional or relational conflict),
De Moyer 18
constructive conflict (so-called functional conflict) leads to improved organizational performance by
interrupting the negative effects of group-think (De Dreu & Van De Vliert, 1997), inducing higher-quality
decisions (Amason and Schweiger, 1994) and reducing the likelihood of destructive conflict escalation
(Baron, 1997). The following chapter of this research in particular discusses the radical importance of
constructive conflict in strategic decision-making in a dual leadership practice and the plausible actions
in order to resolve destructive conflict.
De Moyer 19
2. DUAL LEADERSHIP & CONFLICT
In this chapter, a critical analysis of existing literature on this topic in relation to leadership gives the
reader a useful background of the empirical study in chapter 4. This second chapter provides [1] an
introduction to the notions of strategic leadership in relation to cognition and an explanation of how
cognitive heterogeneity affects strategic decision-making and [2] an in-depth analysis of the notion of
conflict. In a final section – the key section of this chapter – [3] dual leadership is linked to conflict in a
critical analysis of literature focusing on these topics.
2.1. Cognition, cognitive heterogeneity and dual leadership conflict
“A dual executive leadership structure aspires to shape an executive constellation where
both executives have different orientations that they use to assess the world around
them, process information to make decisions, and evaluate outcomes” (Bhansing, 2013:
11, emphasis added).
In their article Strategic Leadership Research: Moving On Robert Hooijberg and Kimberly Boal (2001)
explain how leadership research by the mid-1980s moved from the study of “supervisory” leadership
(House & Additya, 1997) towards the study of “strategic leadership”, including a newfound sense of
excitement at the notion of ‘cognition’ (Hooiberg & Boal, 2001). The difference between both
approaches towards leadership are described as follows:
“Whereas supervisory theories of leadership (e.g. path-goal, contingency, LMX) focus on
task and person-oriented behaviors of leaders as they attempt to provide guidance,
support and feedback to subordinates, strategic leadership focuses on the creation of
meaning and purpose for the organization.” (Boal and Hooijberg, 2001: 516; emphasis
added)
Various responsibilities can be associated with strategic leadership, such as creating and communicating
a vision of the future, deciding on and developing key competences and capabilities, organizational
structures, processes and controls, selecting and developing the next generation of leaders, sustaining
an effective organizational structure, and infusing ethical value systems into the organization’s structure
(Boal & Hooijberg, 2001). According to Boal and Hooijberg (2001), in this respect the essence of
successful strategic leadership is the combination of the creation and maintenance of three key
De Moyer 20
elements: absorptive capacity (the ability to learn), managerial wisdom (social/interpersonal
intelligence) and an adaptive capacity (the ability to change). Regarding the latter aspect, they suggest
that the organization’s ability to change requires that leaders have cognitive complexity and flexibility
(Boal & Whitehead, 1992; Hooijberg et al., 1997; Boal & Hooijberg, 2001).
The above-mentioned link between the notion of strategic leadership and the study of cognition has
grown rapidly in recent years. In recent leadership theory a so-called cognitive revolution has been
researched by, among others, Bruce Avolio introducing the emergence of cognition in the leadership
field (Avolio, 2009), Robert Lord & Cynthia Emrich focusing on the cognitive revolution in general (Lord
& Emrich, 2000), and Robert Lord & Rosalie Hall focusing on leaders’ cognitive attributes and abilities
(Lord & Hall, 2005). Particularly interesting within the scope of this research is the article Managerial
and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane (1995) of cognition specialist James
P. Walsh. Walsh explains how the top-down information processing theory – better known as or
cognitive structuring – suggests that individuals create knowledge structures to help them process
information and make decisions. The benefits of employing such knowledge structures are widely noted
by managerial and organizational cognition researchers focusing on strategic decision-making.8
An understanding of the Upper Echelon Theory (1984) – seen as an antecedent of contemporary
research focusing on the cognitive complexity of leaders (Quinn, 1988; Hunt, 1991) – is crucial for a
profound comprehension of the notion of ‘cognition’. Donald Hambrick and Phyllis Mason developed
this theory in the context of top management teams believing that “executive experiences, values, and
personalities greatly influence their [top managers’] interpretations of the situations they face and, in
turn, affect their choices” (Hambrick, 2007 in Bhansing, 2011:14). Hambrick and Mason observe how the
composition, values and dynamics of the group of senior managers of an organization impact on
strategy (Finkelstein et al., 1996; Hambrick & Mason, 1984). In this respect, Sydney Finkelstein and
colleagues define: ‘the term Top Management refers to a small group of the most influential managers
who are at the top of an organization’ (Finkelstein et al., 2009; emphasis added).
This research departs from Hambrick and Masons’ idea (1984) that leaders may be influenced by their
personal idea of what creates value for organizations in the eyes of stakeholders and that, most
importantly, it is likely that these attitudes or beliefs affect strategic decision-making. However, in
contrast to Hambrick and Mason’s reasoning in their Upper Echelon theory, this paper does not focus on
8 For a long list of names of managerial and organizational cognition researchers see Walsh, James P. “Managerial and
Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane.” in: Organization Science, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 280-321.
De Moyer 21
managers’ cognitions in direct relation to organizational outcomes (operationalized as ROE, ROI, ROA,
Sales, etc.), but on cognition in relation to interpersonal processes (influencers of conflict and conflict
resolutions) within organizations, which indirectly aim to enhance the organizations performance.9
One of the general existing assumptions in top management theories, such as the theory that of
Hambrick and Mason, is that more cognitive heterogeneity implies that more issues are attended to in
the strategic decision-making process (Cannella & Holcomb, 2005). Positive effects of heterogeneity are,
for example, innovativeness and potential for high-quality decisions (Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Cosier &
Schwenk, 1990), increased problem solving abilities (Finkelstein et al., 2009) and flexibility and the
ability to adapt due to skill diversity, information sources and perspectives (Finkelstein et al., 2009). A
negative effect of heterogeneity in top management teams is, among the reduction of communication
frequency and reduction of attention and focus10, the increased potential for conflict (Amason, 1996). A
visualization of advantages and disadvantages:
This paper primarily focuses on the ‘increased potential for conflict’. Nevertheless, the other indicated
consequences form interesting alternative points for future analysis (see chapter 5: implications for
future research).
9 Kimberly Boal and Robert Hooijberg coined researches focusing on interpersonal relations ‘new leadership theories’ (Boal &
Hooijberg 2000). Their study provides an interesting contrast to theories focusing on performance outcome and only focuses on analyses around interpersonal relations between leaders and their followers. In the same line, this paper focuses on the particular relationship process between two leaders in a DEL structure. 10
For a broader overview of positive and negative effects of cognitive heterogeneity: see Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams and boards. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 131-36.
Figure II: Personal summary of the advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heterogeneity as mentioned in the
academic literature (Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Cosier & Schwenk, 1990; Finkelstein et al., 2009; Amason, 1996)
De Moyer 22
2.2. Defining and managing conflict
Defining conflict
“Where there is human interaction there is the possibility of one or other type of conflict
[…] whatever type and nature of conflict might be, it is a fact that it can’t be avoided.”
(Ghaffar & Ali Khan, 2012: 332)
A synthesis of literature focusing on how scholars have conceptualized conflict in organizations reveals
that a myriad of definitions have been suggested. For the purpose of this paper, the definition of
organizational psychologists is used and as such conflict is viewed as ‘a process that begins when an
individual or group perceives differences and opposition between himself or herself and another
individual or group about interests, beliefs, or values that matter to him or her’ (De Dreu et al,. 1999; De
Dreu & Beersma, 2005).
Researches have shown that conflicts occur at personal, group and organizational levels. Abdul Ghaffar
& Umar Ali Khan (2012) indicate that the major types of conflicts can be labeled as intrapersonal (within
the individual; for example uncertainty, hesitation, stress, anxiety, depression and insomnia),
interpersonal (between persons), intragroup (in a group), intergroup (between groups) and at
organizational levels (within the total organization across various levels; for example management and
staff disagree about working conditions, goals, authority and decisions). This paper on dual leadership
and conflict focuses on interpersonal conflict:
“Interpersonal conflict represents conflict between two individuals […] a phenomenon
that occurs between interdependent parties as they experience negative emotional
reactions to perceived disagreements and interference with the attainment of their
goals.” (Ghaffar & Ali Khan, 2012: 333)
Traditionally, conflict is thought to hinder decision making. Arguments in favor of this wisdom are, for
example, (Schweiger, Sandberg & Ragan, 1986; Schweiger & Sandberg, 1991)11:
11
Particularly interesting for this paper is that previous research has shown that business executives and executives of not-for-profit organizations may have very different perceptions of the effects of conflict. Charles Schwenk (1990) concluded that high conflict is associated with high quality for the executives of not-for-profit organizations, but with low quality for executives of for-profit organizations.
De Moyer 23
Conflict can:
(1) disrupt info exchange among the team of decision makers, reducing decision quality
(2) undermine commitment that is needed to get the decision properly implemented
(3) reduce satisfaction & affective acceptance among the team members threatening
cohesion and the prospects for future decisions
However, conflict should not always be interpreted as destructive. Researchers have emphasized
conflict to be multidimensional (Amason & Schweiger, 1995; Amason, 1996; De Dreu & Van de Vliert,
1997; Bankovskaya, 2012; Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). A key theme in the research on the
functionality of conflict is addressed in the cognitive versus affective binominal (Amason & Schweiger,
1995; De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997; Bankovskaya, 2012; Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). On the one
hand, when conflict is indeed dysfunctional, it tends to be emotional and focused on personal disputes.
Allen Amason calls this affective conflict (Amason, 1996). On the other hand, Amason also describes how
when conflict is functional, it is generally task-oriented and focused on judgmental differences about
how best to achieve common objectives (Amason, 1996). This type of conflict is called cognitive conflict
(Amason & Schweigner, 1994; De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997; Bankovskaya, 2012; Coleman, Deutch &
Marcus, 2014). A visualization:
AFFECTIVE CONFLICT COGNITIVE CONFLICT
Dysfunctional conflict Functional conflict
Emotional discourse: focused on personal disputes, identity, professional ethics differences
Task-oriented: focused on judgmental differences about how best to achieve common objectives
Examples of relationship conflicts: irritation about personal taste and interpersonal style,
disagreements about political preferences, or opposing values.
Examples of task conflicts: disputes about the distribution and allocation of resources, opposing views with regard to the procedures and policies that should
be used or adhered to, or conflicting judgments and interpretations of facts.
decreases/reduces understanding enhances understanding
poses a threat to productivity, individual well-being, and, under certain conditions, legitimate authority
largely untapped organizational resource that, when properly managed, can increase organizational &
individual performance, as well as prevent harmful effects of unchecked authority or solidarity (e.g. group-
think)
Carsten De Dreu and Evert Van De Vliert (1997) defend the so-called ‘conflict-as-resource camp’ and
explore the conditions under which conflict contributes positively to organizational performance. This
Figure III: Affective versus Cognitive Conflict (Amason, 1996; Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014)
De Moyer 24
paper follows their approach and, furthermore, builds upon a collection of papers within the book Using
Conflict in Organizations (De Dreu & Van De Vliert, 1997). In this collection, several of the contributors
argue that reducing affect in conflict discourse enhances constructive problem solving (De Dreu &
Beersma, 2005) and leads to improved organizational performance by interrupting the negative effects
of group-think (De Dreu & Van De Vliert, 1997), inducing higher-quality decisions (Amason & Schweiger,
1994) and reducing the likelihood of destructive conflict escalation (Baron, 1997).
Conflict Management
“The history of research on organizational conflict could be said to be dominated by two
questions: How can conflict be suppressed by organizations? and How can conflict be
used productively by organizations? These two questions mark different camps within the
study of organizational conflict, because they carry assumptions about the definition and
dynamics of organizational conflict, as well as its value (if any) to organizations.” (De Dreu
& Van De Vliert, 1997: 638)
Various theories and grids have been invented to explain the different ways in dealing with conflict (e.g.
Blake & Mouton’s Conflict Management Grid, 1964; Davis’ Game Theory, 1970; Pruitt & Rubin Dual
Concern Theory, 1986). Although labelling differs across theories, De Dreu and Beersma (2005) state
that, in fact, four different ways of managing conflict can be distinguished — contending (forcing),
conceding (yielding), avoiding (comprising inaction and withdrawing), and collaborating (problem
solving).12
Contention
(force conflict)
Collaboration
(problem solving)
Avoiding
(inaction/withdrawel)
Concession
(yield conflict)
12
De Dreu and Beersma recognize the fact that various researchers use their own specific labels, yet refer to the differentiation in 4 similar areas (De Dreu & Beersma, 2005).
Concern
for self
high
low
Concern for the other low high
Concern for self =
concession making
(low self-concern),
assertiveness (high
self-concern)
Concern for the
other = concern for
the people,
cooperation (high
concern) versus
competition (low
concern
Figure IV: Visualization of the Conflict Management Approach of De Dreu & Beersma (2005)
De Moyer 25
As De Dreu and Beersma (2005) explain: “Contending is trying to impose one’s will onto the other side
— which involves threats and bluffs, persuasive arguments, and positional commitments. Conceding —
oriented towards accepting and incorporating the other’s will — involves unilateral concessions,
unconditional promises, and offering help. Avoiding involves a passive stance, is aimed at reducing and
downplaying the importance of the conflict issues and at suppressing thinking about them.
Collaborating, finally, is oriented towards achieving an agreement that satisfies both one’s own and the
other’s aspirations as much as possible, and involves an exchange of information about priorities and
preferences, showing insights, and making tradeoffs between important and unimportant issues.” (De
Dreu & Beersma, 2005)
As shown in the visualization above (Figure IV), which strategy an individual adopts depends on his or
her low or high concern for self (assertiveness) combined with her or his high or low concern for others
(cooperativeness). Thus, avoidance results from low dual concern, whereas collaboration results from
high dual concern. Contention results from high concern for self and low concern for others, whereas
concession results from low concern for self, combined with high concern for others. Whether and how
particular ways of handling conflict teams influences team effectiveness has been studied extensively in
both laboratory and field research (De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001). Overall, conflict related literature
reviews suggest that when teams manage conflicts through collaboration, effectiveness is enhanced:
“Studies converge on the conclusion that collaborating in conflict situations increases
individual and team effectiveness, as exemplified by greater satisfaction and feelings of
self-efficacy among conflict parties, more mutually beneficial solutions, reduced
likelihood of future conflict, and better goal achievement” (De Dreu & Van Vianen 2001:
314)
However, it is important to distinguish the management of affective and of cognitive conflict (Figure III).
When analyzing conflict management, it is important to understand that task conflict is less threatening
to one’s personal identity, involves less intense, negative emotions, and tends to motivate team
members to search for optimal judgments and decisions (De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001). As such, the
general assumption is that collaboration is seen as the best way to manage conflict.
In a relationship (emotional) conflict, on the other hand, it is difficult to achieve mutual satisfaction, as
tension and frustration are rooted in discrepant professional ethics, political preferences and sense of
humor (De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001). It requires changing issues fundamental to one’s personal
De Moyer 26
identity, acquired in the course of an entire life. As such, the mode of resolution for relationship
conflicts is, according to Druckman and Zechmeister (1973), ‘not joint compromise or concessions, but
altered understanding of the situation by one or both parties.’ Seeking middle-ground and mutually
acceptable solutions through give and take is unlikely to solve the relationship conflict, and may instead
make it seem bigger and intractable. In line with Druckman and Zechmeister (1973), Murnighan and
Conlon (1991) conclude that more successful teams appear to realize which conflicts would be
disruptive and approach these by avoiding or forestalling them. Avoiding responses allow the conflict to
become less prominent. Irritations and annoyances may even go away over time, when team members
have new experiences and get to know one another in new and different ways (Murnighan & Conlin,
1991). As such, various researchers claim that avoiding responses – in case of relationship conflict – may
be functional in that they do not escalate the conflict, but instead teach parties the benefits of patience
(Ury, 1991; Jehn, 1997; De Dreu & Vianen, 2001).13
Having conceptualized both dual executive leadership (chapter 1) and conflict (chapter 2), and taking
into account that affective conflict is negatively associated with team effectiveness and with satisfaction
(De Dreu & Vianen, 2001), in the following section is particularly focused on the identification and
description of recurrent conflict amelioration14 and resolution methods.
2.3. Expanding the field: dual leadership and the amelioration and resolution of conflict
The main research challenge, and opportunity, of this Master thesis is to test and complement the
academic literature whilst expanding the knowledge on how dual leadership members manage conflicts
nowadays within, particularly, nonprofit arts companies (empirical analysis). This study reports upon a
field study of managers in order to explore which of the elements out of the literature analysis apply,
particularly, in the nonprofit performing arts sector. The central area of research is to see how artistic
and business managers within this sector deal with conflict during strategic decision making processes.
13
Note: Ury introduced the metaphor “Going to the balcony” for a mental attitude of detachment in conflict situations (Ury, 1991). 14
Knowing that conflict cannot always be solved in its total, within the Conflict Resolution research field, scholars often speak
of both ‘amelioration and resolution of conflicts’ (Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). Amelioration can be defined as the
progress, betterment, attempt to resolve conflict and is less ‘complete’ than the total resolution of conflict (interview Prof.
Christopher Davis, 2014/05/11, Amsterdam).
De Moyer 27
In The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice Coleman, Deutch and Marcus (2014:xi)
explain how the “the field of conflict resolution continues to develop rapidly […] ”. Furthermore, they
state how:
“as an area of scholarship and professional practice, conflict resolution is relatively
young having emerged as a discipline after World War II. Practice and theory have
been only loosely linked”(Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014:xi-xii).
Like Coleman, Deutch and Marcus (2014), this Master thesis aims to foster a closer connection between
theory and practice by demonstrating the relevance of theoretical ideas (chapter 2) and empirical
research at hand of the Repertory Grid method (chapter 3&4) to practical outcomes and implications for
future researchers and managers in the context of a dual leadership structure (chapter 5).
In the beginning of the 1990s, Kathleen Eisenhardt and Mark Zbaracki (1992) suggested an agenda for
future research in the field of strategic decision-making. Eisenhardt and Zbaracki (1992) proposed the
creation of more realistic views of strategic decision-making by opening up our conceptions of cognition
and conflict to include insight, intuition, emotion and conflict resolution. Eisenhardt and Zbaracki (1992)
explain how:
‘Emerging evidence indicates that strategic decision-makers resolve conflict not
only through political means (the usual approach within traditional strategic
decision-making perspectives), but also by developing cooperative decision styles,
building trust, maintaining equity, and evoking humor” (Eisenhardt & Zbaracki,
1992: 34)
In the above-mentioned quote, Eisenhardt and Zbaracki (1992) sum up five existing conflict resolution
possibilities: 1) resolution by political means, 2) by developing cooperative decision styles, 3 by building
trust, 4) by maintaining power equity, and 5) by evoking humor. Like Eisenhardt and Zbaracki (1992),
most researches in the field of conflict management and leadership discuss commercial enterprises and
scholars have come up with very different influencers of and solutions to conflict. There has been much
research about conflict management and ameliorating factors, yet there is little consensus about the
various factors and their relation to each other.
Three efficient and recurrent conflict resolution methods are summarized below and the main
researchers working in these thematic areas are identified. Coleman, Deutch and Marcus (2014)
describe how each of these methods has been extensively researched from a micro level (such as
De Moyer 28
conflicts within a marriage or between children and parents) and a variety of medium management
fields (such as the banking sector, the health sector, the private sector and the IT sector), to the macro
context of political and governmental conflicts on a national and international level.
In the context of nonprofit organizations, often characterized by dual leadership structures (Crawfis,
2011; Bhansing, 2013), little research has been conducted in the field of conflict resolution management
(Reid & Karambayya, 2009). This study aims at addressing this research gap and differentiates itself from
existent research in the field of conflict resolution management by means of addressing the context of
the’ individual’ managers at hand of personal interviews at based on the personal construct theory and
the repertory grid method (see chapter 3). This personal approach is particularly important in the rather
odd, idiosyncratic, less well ‘known’ world of arts management (interview Christopher Davis,
2014/05/11, Amsterdam).
The following themes provide a useful background for the empirical analysis within the nonprofit sector
(chapter 4)15:
1) Conflict & trust
“The relationship between conflict and trust is an obvious one […] if individuals or
groups trust each other, they can work through conflict relatively easy.” (Coleman,
Deutch & Marcus, 2014:xii)
Focusing on the role of trust, trust development and trust repair, Roy J. Lewicki and Edward C.
Tomlinson (2014) advocate the importance of trust for effective conflict management. Alike Lewicki
and Tomlinson, for the purpose of this Master thesis departed from the definition of trust as "an
individual's belief in, and willingness to act on the basis of, the words, actions, and decisions of another"
(Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014: 106). Lewicki and Tomlinson (2014) review the meaning of trust and its
relevance to effective conflict management. Furthermore, they describe procedures for rebuilding trust
that has been broken and – particularly interesting – for “managing distrust in ways that it can enhance
15
During the literature research within this study, a range of other conflict related topics were touched upon as well: conflict &
power, conflict & language, conflict & competition, conflict & training, conflict & education, etc. (see Deutch & Coleman, 2006).
However, with regards to DEL and the nonprofit context the three most relevant methods, in terms of applicability within the
nonprofit sector, are mentioned.
De Moyer 29
short-term conflict containment while rebuilding trust over the long run” (Lewicki & Tomlinson,
2014:93).
For the purpose of this study, the following two ideas, purposed by Lewicki and Tomlinson (2014) are
relevant to introduce the reader into the world of ‘trust’. Firstly, trust and distrust need to be
understood as fundamentally different from each other (Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014). Trust “implies
belief in the other, a tendency to attribute virtuous intentions to the other, and willingness to act on the
basis of the other’s conduct” (Lewicki & Tomlinson 2014: 110). Distrust, on the contrary implies “fear of
the other, a tendency to attribute sinister intentions to the other, and desire to protect oneself from the
effects of another’s conduct” (Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014:110)
Secondly, Lewicki and Tomlinson (2014:110-111) explain how trust relationships are multifaceted and
developmental. It is by encounters with a person and confirming (new) experiences that relationships
are strengthened. One develops a broader and deeper knowledge of the other by having encounters in a
variety of contexts (not only the work floor, but also in the spare time, etc.). Hereby it is possible that
one may trust the other in some context and distrust them in others. (Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014:111).
With regards to trust and distrust management in conflict situations, Lewicki & Tomlinson (2014)
provide a range of trust-related conflict influencing elements. It is argued that if people act consistently
and reliably, others seem the see them as credible and trustworthy. Furthermore, emotions, happiness
and gratitude can all build trust, whilst anger, in contrary, decreases trust. Hereby apologies in which the
violate takes the responsibility for the violation are more effective than apologies in which the violator
tries to place the blame elsewhere. Apologies are also more effective when conveyed with sincerity and
when conveyed quickly after the violation as occurred, when the parties have had a past relationship
that has been violation-free and when the parties expect a violent-free relationship in the future
(Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014).
With regards to the differentiation between affective and functional conflict (see part 2.2.), it is worth
mentioning how research by Tony L. Simons and Randall S. Peterson (2000) indicate that building and
maintaining trust can moderate the relationship between task conflict and emotional conflict. At hand
of a study with 70 top management teams, they argue that trust is a key to gaining the benefits of task
conflict without suffering the costs of relationship conflict (Simons &Peterson, 2000).
Finally, trust has been coined as a crucial factor for conflict prevention by many other researchers such
De Moyer 30
as Eisenhardt & Zbaracki (1992), Jehn & Mannix (2001), Reid (2005) and Denis et al. (2011). For example,
Wendy Reid (2005:2) emphasizes that “a trusting relationship mitigates the effect of power differences
in conflict. In contrast, distrust can generate destructive conflict because power status differences
between the duo are used to intensify the conflict”.
For the purpose of this Master thesis the following trust related research questions:
What is the importance of trust as perceived by leaders in a DEL structure?
What are the characteristics of trust within a DEL structure?
How does trust relate to other conflict resolution factors?
2) Conflict & communication
“Faulty communication engenders misunderstanding, which may lead to conflict,
and conflict often leads to the breakdown of communication. (Coleman, Deutch &
Marcus, 2014:XXV)
According to Joyce Hocker and William Wilmot "communication is the central element in all
interpersonal conflict" (Hocker & Wilmot, 1985:20). Apart from their belief in the fact that
communication behavior can create and reflect conflict, it can as well be seen as the vehicle for both the
productive and destructive management of conflict (Hocker & Wilmot, 1985). In like manner, according
to Karen L. Fleetwood (1987) conflict – definitions, assumptions, or management of – “cannot be fully
discussed without linking it to communication” (Fleetwood, 1987:9).
More specifically, Jakki Mohr and Robert Spekman (1994) indicate that, particularly, the communication
quality and participation can be seen as, among others, a primary characteristic of successful
partnerships. Additionally, in their article Conflict and Communication ” Robert M. Krauss and Ezequiel
Morsella (2000) emphasize that “good communication cannot guarantee that conflict will be resolved or
even ameliorated, but poor communication greatly increases the likelihood that conflict will be
exacerbated (Krauss & Morsella, 2000: 135). They emphasize, among other, the importance of avoiding
communication channels with low signal-to-noise ratios and the importance of when formulating a
message always to always bear in mind what the listener will or can take ones words to mean (Krauss &
Morsella, 2000).
De Moyer 31
An alternative communication related actions includes the visualization of the main areas of conflict and
possible solutions. A visual sketch (drawing, word groups, mindmap) can lead to a quicker strategic
decision making process and the decrease of possible affective conflict. For example, research of Eben E.
and Patricia Flynn Weitzman indicate some practical communication related conflict resolution
techniques such as the visual creation of checklists or the verbal method or the game of posing What If
questions and writing them down in a ‘scenario of possibilities’ (Weitzman & Weitzman, 2000).
Finally, as Bronstein et al. (2012) state “Negotiation in the twenty-first century is often characterized by
exclusively verbal interactions (via telephone, chat, and e-mails)” (Bronstein et al., 2012:1). Yet, Violetta
Bankovskaya (2012) emphasizes the importance of nonverbal communication – e.g. emotionally-driven
facial expressions, posture, gesture, pace, tone and intensity of voice. According to Bankovskaya (2012)
nonverbal communication “plays big role in conflict resolution, as during conflict process the most
important information is exchanged in a nonverbal way” (Bankovskaya, 2012:30). Bankovskaya hereby
builds upon the research of Segal and Smith (2009) and their belief in the importance of actively
listening to the emotions expressed by the other (i.e. emotional awareness). Segal and Smith indicate
how “the more aware a person of his [or her] own emotions, the easier it will be for him [or her] to
understand what others are feeling. It is important to listen for what is felt as well as said” (Segal &
Smith, 2009:2).
For the purpose of this study is focused on the following communication related research questions:
What is the importance of communication as perceived by leaders in a DEL structure?
What are the characteristics of effective communication within the DEL structure?
How does communication relate to other conflict resolution factors?
3) Conflict & mediation
“How can third parties be used to prevent conflicts from becoming destructive or to
help deadlocked or embittered negotiators move toward constructive management
of their conflicts? This question has been reflected in studies of mediation and in
strategies for deescalating conflict” (Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014: XXXV)
De Moyer 32
Mediation is considered by a variety of researchers as one of the most important conflict resolution
methods, especially within the profit sector (Bercovitch & Rubin, 1992; Bently, 1966; Moore, 2003;
Bankovskaya, 2012; Kressel, 2014). Christopher J. Moore (2003) defines mediation as "the intervention
in a standard negotiation or conflict of an acceptable third party who has limited or no authoritative
decision-making power but who assists the involved parties in voluntarily reaching a mutually
acceptable settlement of issues in dispute” (Moore, 2003:15).
On the positive side, mediation is a popular process to both prevent and resolve conflict. In their article
Mediation and Conflict Prevention (2012) Gerald Eisenkopf and André Bächtiger take upon an
experimental approach that allows for a comprehensive analysis of third-party intervention into
potential conflicts and, furthermore, circumvents key problems linked to the analysis of field data
(Eisenkopf & Bächtiger, 2012). On the other hand, mediation is also a conflict resolution method. In
their article Models of conflict, negotiation and third party intervention: A review and synthesis (1992)
Roy J. Lewicki and Stephen E. Weiss give an extensive literature overview on organizational conflict and
conflict resolution methods identifying 44 major models in the area of conflict, negotiation, and third
party processes. One of the models they describe, mediation, is also know within the context of the
context of dual leadership research (Reid & Karambayya, 2009).
In general, “mediation is proven to be an effective method because it involves a democratic and
structured process that enables disputants to resolve their own conflict, with the assistance of trained
peers” (Ghaffar & Kahn, 2012:334). Mediators can be internal (e.g. company members) or professionally
skilled conflict experts that are hired externally (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2008; Kressel, 2014). Both the
internal and the external mediating third person plays an active role in leading conflict discussions,
deciding on conflict resolution methods and helping all parties to get mutual understanding (e.g. to
reach win-win agreements). Among other, Ellen Giebels and Onne Janssen (2005) concluded that third
party is a successful conflict management strategy to prevent negative outcomes such as conflict stress
– the influencer of wellbeing in terms of emotional exhaustion, absenteeism, and turnover intentions –
of interpersonal conflict in organization (Giebels & Janssen, 2005).
On the negative side, Coleman, Deutch and Marcus (2014:818) indicate: “Among the problems [of
mediation] are the failure (or inability) to randomly assign disputing parties to mediation or control
conditions, the absence of standardized mediation protocols and checks on mediator adherence to such
protocols, the paucity of well-defined outcome measures and the atheoretic, one-shot nature of most
studies.”
De Moyer 33
Linking time and the timing of conflict mediation to dispute duration, Patrick M. Regan & Allan C. Stam
(2000) explain how the effects of mediation vary substantially over the course of a dispute. According to
them, mediation has a curvilinear relationship with time and the ending of disputes (Regan & Stam,
2000). Mediation efforts that occur quickly after the dispute begin; have the best chance of reducing
(expected) future dispute duration. In contrary, often subsequent mediation efforts lead to longer
rather than shorter disputes. Finally, after a long period, mediation again gives rise to shorter disputes
(Regan & Stam, 2000).
Finally, discussing mediation in relation to dual leadership structures within the nonprofit performing art
sector, Reid & Karambayya (2009) explain how both advise-seeking – “attempts to consult other
organizational members and gather information regarding the issues of the conflict” (Reid &
Karambayya, 2009: 1084; emphasis added) – differs from mediation in general – e.g. when either a
Board or staff member is asked as main enabler of the communication between the dual leadership
duo.16
For the purpose of this Master thesis is focused on the following mediation research questions:
What is the importance of mediation as perceived by leaders in a DEL structure?
When is mediation likely to be effective within a DEL structure?
How does mediation relate to other conflict ameliorating factors?
The above mentioned three recurrent key ‘themes’ provide a useful background for the empirical
analysis within the nonprofit sector (see chapter 4). But, first the methodology of this study is explained
in the next chapter. ‘’
16
Within the context of dual executive leadership Reid & Karambayya (2009) discuss two other forms of conflict dissemination,
e.g. ‘alliance-seeking’ and ‘abdication of decision making’. Yet, these two conflict management solutions are no recurrent key
themes in the field of conflict management.
De Moyer 34
3. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
Building upon the first and the second chapter, this chapter explains [1] the terminology and [2] the
methodology of Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory (PCT) and the Repertory Grid method, and discusses
[3] the advantages, applicability and adaptation of the method for the purpose of this research.
3.1. Leadership research: quantitative versus qualitative approach
One of the main methodological difficulties in carrying out research in the field of leadership is the use
of pre-designed behavioral questionnaires. A review of 10 years of publications of The Leadership
Quarterly, Lowe and Gardner (2000) showed that 64% of the studies employed a questionnaire-based
method of collecting data. Other common methods include open interviews and case study analysis
(Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Miles et al., 1994; Yin, 2003) and are argued to be appropriate methods
to develop a contribution to theory (Eisenhard & Graebner, 2007; Reid & Karambayya, 2009), to be able
to include the research context effectively (Bryman et al., 1996) and to examine different levels of
analysis to facilitate an analysis of the whole organization (Rousseau, 1985; Eisenhardt & Graebner,
2007; Reid & Karambayya, 2009). However, despite their advantages, the open interview method has
the disadvantage of engaging little with conventional theory (Bryman et al., 1996) and “plays havoc with
the demands for statistical analysis” (Eden & Jones, 1984:788). The case study method is traditionally
considered to have several major limitations including the problematic construct validity and the often
unsystematic method of interviewing (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). Finally, in both methods the
quality and the comprehensiveness of the methods depends mostly on the experience and knowledge
of the interviewer.
In his work Current and Future Research Methods in Strategic Management, Michael A. Hitt (1998)
insists that strategic management research would likely integrate and contrast multiple theories and
develop more complex models. Hitt’s conclusion is not only applicable in the area of strategic
management, but is also relevant in the specific field of leadership (e.g. the area of this Master thesis).
According to Hitt: ‘Nontraditional research designs will gain popularity, such as combined
qualitative/quantitative data approaches and comparison of outliers.’ (Hitt, 1998). Six years after Hitt’s
publication, Alan Bryman wrote the article Qualitative research on leadership: A critical but appreciative
review (2004). Examining critically, but appreciatively, the ways in which qualitative research on
De Moyer 35
leadership is and is not distinctive, Bryman (2004) argues that while qualitative research has made some
important contributions to certain areas of leadership such as the role of leaders in the change process,
when compared to quantitative research it is sometimes not as distinctive, as might be supposed.
Bryman (2004) subsequently concludes that studies that combine quantitative with qualitative research
are the most adequate solutions.
To date, years after Hitt’s prediction of non-traditional research designs and Bryman’s belief in combined
research designs, researchers use more specialized tools such as panel data analyses (Baltagi, 2012),
applied logistic regression analysis (Scott, 2011), event history analysis (Luke eds., 2012), network
analysis (Bögenhold, 2013), structural equation modeling (Isaac eds., 2010) and the Repertory Grid
methodology (Napier eds., 2007; Wright, 2008). It is the latter methodology that will be used for the
purpose of this study.
3.2. The personal construct theory and the Repertory Grid method
“It is not events themselves, which influence or mound people, torment or
terrify them or make them deliriously happy. It is the meaning with which these
events are invested by the individual which is the potent ingredient.”
(Invitation to Personal Construct Theory, Burr & Butt, 1992: 69)
The Repertory Grid method is a powerful cognitive mapping tool, underpinned by the Personal
Construct Theory (1955) developed by the American17 psychologist George Kelly. Kelly developed his
theory and technique in the context of therapeutic relationships in the field of personal construct
psychology18 (Eden & Jones, 1984). The basic idea of the Personal Construct Theory (PTC) is that the
minds of people are 'construct systems', a construct system being defined as ‘the set of qualities’, or
dimensions, people use in their everyday efforts to make sense of the world (Wright, 2008). In doing so,
they develop a unique system of interrelated personal constructs or ‘networks of meaning’ (Ryle, 1975)
that enables them to anticipate consequences of their actions and interpret actions of others (Eden &
Jones, 1984; Davis & Hufnagel, 2007). These construct systems are highly individual in nature and may
guide people's behavior (Davis & Hufnagel, 2007): people observe, interpret, give meaning to and draw
17
Though Kelly is originally American, Jankovic states “his [Kelly’s] ideas, and particularly his Repertory Grid methodology, have had a substantial influence in Britain.” (Jankowicz, 1987:45) 18
Kelly also uses the notion of constructive alternativism: we are all constructivists constantly and actively revising the way we see and interpret our world. (Wright, 2008: 754)
De Moyer 36
conclusions about patterns19 of cause and effect, and behave according to those conclusions.
Translating the Personal Construct Theory into practice, Kelly developed a cognitive mapping method,
the Repertory Grid method, to elicit people’s perceptions of similarity and difference – revealing
connotations around a certain theme – tapping into their theories of how the world operates (Davis &
Hufnagel, 2007). People can (and do) live with a degree of internal inconsistency within their construct
system (Van de Kerkhof, 2011). The method aims to unfold categorizations by articulating the individual
construct systems of people so they can be changed or maintained which helps to better understand
what meaning people give to a certain problem situation and what kinds of solutions they would prefer.
(Eden & Jones, 1984; Van de Kerkhof, 2011). It provides information from which inferences about
personality can be drawn, but it is not a personality test in the conventional sense.
Advantages of the method, particularly interesting within the scope of this area of research, are its
operational strengths, including the fact that the method allows a deeper investigation than
questionnaires; the tools’ flexibility and its transparent and user-friendly features; the limited number
of interviews needed (input); the ability of a systematic comparison of solutions (output), the enhanced
quality of the argumentative process and the tool reliability and suitability for statistical analysis (for a
more extensive overview of advantages and disadvantages of the tool, see appendix I).
Much of the 'grid work' has taken and is taking place in a clinical setting, with individuals, as a way of
trying to increase the psychologist's understanding of how the person views the world (Kelly, 1955; Ryle,
1975). Yet, since Kelly’s introduction the methodology and theory have also found its home20 in, among
other areas, artificial intelligence, education, human learning (development of children and nursing),
politics and policy analysis, forensic work and market research (Fransella et al., 2004). Within the scope
of this Master thesis, applications within the management field have advanced our understanding of
how organizational members interpret managerial jobs (Smith, 1980), organization culture (Langan-Fox
& Tan, 1997), team performance (Senior, 1996), and managerial effectiveness (Cammock, Nilakant, &
Dakin, 1995).
19
Kelly differentiates 11 corollaries: the construction, experience, individuality, commonality, sociality, dichotomy, choice, range, organization, fragmentation and the modulation corollary (Wright, 2008:754-755; Eden & Jones, 1984: 779). 20
The Repertory Grid method has also proven successful in various studies independent of the Personal Construct Theory (Fransella et.all., 2004), yet in this study the link between theory and method are maintained.
De Moyer 37
At the time of writing, little research using Repertory Grid had been conducted in the area of strategic
decision-making and conflict (Fransella et al, 2003/2004; Pidd, 1996; Bryson et. al, 2004; Thomas &
Harri-Augstein, 1985). This research aims to fill this gap and be a starting point in that area.
3.3. The terminology, process & adaptation of the method for the purpose of this research
Repertory Grid Theory (RGT) = structured interview + grid-based rating technique
As visualized above, in the left figure, the Repertory Grid always consists of three stages (with ratings, 4
stages): the topic, the set of elements and the set of constructs, with or without ratings. In the section
below, the original methodology and Repertory Grid process are described and, most interesting, the
adaptations for the purpose of this research are identified and explained. Finally, an example of a
Repertory Grid, with clear indications of the different process stages, helps the reader to fully
understand how the process works and the data can be visualized.
The topic
First and foremost, a Repertory Grid is always applied to gain knowledge about a specific theme: the
topic. The specific area of this research is, as the subtitle of this dissertation already refers to, the
investigation in shared leadership (DEL) and the factors influencing and resolving conflict. The topic is
the starting point for the preparation of the Repertory Grid interviews. For the purpose of this
dissertation the Repertory Grid interviews have been carefully and intensively prepared with the help of
Professor C. Davis (University of South Florida), who has a deep and profound knowledge of the method
and who offered extensive feedback on the preliminary questions.21 The Repertory Grid procedure of
this research was further characterized as a semi−structured interview (face−to−face or skype
21
Assistance and help on the adaptation of the grid came forth during +5 skype sessions, +10 email conversations and a live meeting in Amsterdam in the period of February – May 2014.
Figure V: Visualization of the Repertory Grid terminology and its applicability within this study
Conflict Resolution in DEL structures
Conflict Resolution Methods
Differences between the various
methods (e.g. costly – not costly)
De Moyer 38
interviews). All interviews started with objective questions on, among others, the leaders’ age, the
foundation and size of the organization, information on the amount of subsidies of the organization, the
implementation date of the DEL structure and the tenure of the participant within the DEL structure of
the organization (see appendix II for the preparation sheet for the interviews).
The set of elements
Secondly, the set of elements are the objects of people's thinking to which they relate their concepts or
values; these are examples or instances of the topic (Eden & Jones, 1984). For example, working as a
clinical psychologist, Kelly was interested in how his clients construed people in the roles they adopted
towards the client and so, originally, terms as 'my father', 'my mother', 'an admired friend' and so forth
were used (Kelly, 1955). Since then, the grid has been used in much wider settings (educational,
occupational and organizational) and so any well-defined set of words, phrases, or even brief behavioral
vignettes can be used as elements.22
The second challenge, particularly of this thesis, was to get to a good and working set of elements
(various conflict influencers). As stated by Eden & Jones (1984) ‘In practice, it becomes unwieldy to try
to produce a grid from more than 20 or less than about seven elements’ (Eden & Jones, 1984:780). For
the purpose of this research, 10 elements were produced. They were both elicited and supplied by
allowing the person to talk about the various strategic decisions and the problem he or she faces by
taking these decisions within the DEL structure they are part of. Furthermore, three of the elements
related closely to the academic literature around conflict resolution methods described in the previous
chapter (e.g. trust, communication and mediation).23
On the one hand, the elicited elements (e.g. the answers the participant gives without help of the
interviewer) ensured that what the respondent sees as relevant based on their own views of the world,
was tapped into. However, this view may not necessarily reflect the full picture of reality (Wright, 2008)
— participants often forgot solutions that they are less familiar with, they found less important, or did
not wish to talk about. On the other hand, supplied elements were additionally mentioned to the
participant in each of the grid interviews. This combined way of working (elicited and supplied elements)
ensures that the situation is not incomplete or messy, but a ‘relatively well-structured problem’ (Eden &
Jones, 1984:780). Having the advantage of being more efficient in terms of time and effort for busy
executives, this also ensured that the respondents focus their construals on specific issues for
22
For example, to see how I construe the purchase of a car, a list of vehicles within my price range could make an excellent set of elements (Eden & Jones, 1984). 23
In the data analysis (part 4.3.) the particular applicability of the Repertory Grid methodology is described more profoundly.
De Moyer 39
investigation. When used as a common denominator, supplied elements allow different grids to be
compared for further analysis, whether between levels in an organization, across firms, industries,
and/or across time frames (Jankowicz, 2004).
In that, the various elements of this research satisfied Kelly’s original Repertory Grid requirements as
noted down by, among others, Robert P. Wright’s (2004):
- Elements must also be representative, in that they must provide a reasonable
coverage of the key aspects of a topic to be investigated
- Elements must be discrete where there must not be a subset of other elements
as this will make construct elicitation problematic.
- Depending on the purpose of administering a Repertory Grid and the degree of
researcher intrusion the study will allow, elements can (similarly with constructs)
either be supplied or elicited from the respondent
- Elements must be homogenous—made up of all people, all objects, all events, or
all situations, but never a combination of different groups.
With regards to the fourth requirement (the homogeneity of the elements), the research design was
further informed by the recent critical Repertory Grid analysis and method specification by Wright
(2008), who comments:
“Previous application of the Repertory Grid technique in the strategy field has been
noteworthy. However, all have been imprisoned by their adherence to strict
element choice based on grid protocol. Elements in past studies have either focused
on all competitor companies, or all strategic decisions, or all decision makers, or all
strategic issues, inter alia, in an effort to learn more about how strategists see,
interpret, and make sense of their strategy experiences. This research note outlines
how current strategy research can be advanced by the use of more heterogeneous
elements for grid applications, hence allowing researchers to go deeper into
eliciting more complex strategic cognitions on how strategy is crafted and recrafted
in a world constructed and reconstructed.” (Wright, 2008: 753)
Wright proposes advancing Repertory Grids to capture heterogeneity in strategizing (Wright, 2008).
Interested in eliciting the strategic cognitions of senior executives about the strategy-making process, he
was repeatedly frustrated in the limitations of the grid’s protocol of element choice, because it did not
allow the inclusion of elements that were not from the same class. As such, he suggests how, when
De Moyer 40
analyzing strategy-making processes, the Repertory Grid method could be further enhanced by a slight
departure from the original protocol of element choice.
Consistent with Kelly (1955) and Thomas and Harri-Augstein (1984), Wright (2008) proposes to
articulate the elements as verb-led phrases or what he calls doing words. He suggests that doing words
better reflect what senior managers actually engage in. Wright conducted numerous pilot test
interviews using homogeneous elements (in their raw form) and encountered very embarrassing
situations with senior executives. He gives the example: ‘One executive stopped the interview and
argued with the interviewer claiming 'You are asking me to compare a piece of paper [referring to the
mission statement] with things I actually do [e.g., overseeing the implementation of strategy]. I can’t
make the connection!’’ (Wright, 2008). Building upon Wrights’ theory and findings, within this research
doing verbs were used during all of the interviews with cultural leaders of the performing arts nonprofit
organizations. The 10 elements were placed vertically on the upper side of the visual grid (see Figure
VII).
The set of constructs
Thirdly, the set of constructs are regarded as personal to the respondent. Colin Eden and Sue Jones
explain: ‘What Kelly calls “constructs” are the building blocks for the acts of making sense’ (Eden &
Jones, 1984:779). Constructs are the discriminations that people make to describe the elements in their
personal, individual world. An essential characteristic of constructs is that they are 'bipolar', e.g.
cold−hot, good−bad (Van Kerkhove, 2011), the two poles are indicated as emergent and the opposite
construct (Wright, 1984).
Like the original Repertory Grid process, once the elements were elicited and supplied, the respondent
was confronted with a triad of elements within this research and is then asked to identify a way in which
two of the elements might be seen as alike, but are distinct from and in contrast to the third. For the
purpose of this research, the challenge was finding the right words to name the constructs that divided
the various elements from each other. For example, in the context of conflict resolutions, the constructs
that differentiate internal mediation from external mediation could be ‘for free’ (emergent pole) versus
‘costs money’. This difficulty can be overcome by encouragement from the interviewer, acting as a so-
called teacher consultant (conversation Prof. Christopher Davis, 12/05/2014, Amsterdam), as Eden &
Jones (1984) state: ‘the person’s evaluation of the problem will not be necessarily easily accessed as a
verbal tag, and so the respondent initially needs encouragement’ (Eden & Jones, 1984: 781). Once the
most suitable verbal tag is agreed upon for that specific triad, the interviewer moves on to the next triad
De Moyer 41
of options. The characteristic that the respondent uses to distinguish between the elements is the
emergent pole and is placed on the left side of the grid, while the opposing pole is indicated on the right
side (see Figure VII). These steps are repeated, further constructs are elicited and the interview would
continue until no further constructs are obtained from the respondent.
The construct ratings
“The most valuable part of the grid […] is the selection of elements and the
construct- elicitation stages; the rating of constructs to elements is a relatively time-
inefficient stage.” (Eden & Jones, 1984: 786)
Since the construct is always bipolar (see above) it can be presented on a scale. The final part, often
interpreted as the fourth part of the Repertory Grid methodology, are the ratings of elements in relation
to constructs. Each rating is usually positioned between the two extremes of the construct, the
emergent and the opposing pole, using a 5 or 7 point rating scale system (Fransella et al., 2004). This can
be done repeatedly for all the constructs that apply and thus its meaning to the client is captured, and
statistical analyses, from simple counting to more complex multivariate analysis of meaning are made
possible. In Kelly’s (1955) original Repertory Grid method, the respondent was asked to rate the
elements on the scale that represents the construct, and to indicate which pole of the construct he or
she prefers. However ‘Many people who wish to use the idea of personal construct theory for problem
construction do not go any further with producing a Repertory Grid than the elicitation of constructs.’
(Eden & Jones, 1984:782). For the purpose of this research, working with ratings was tried in a test
interview, but it became clear and was agreed upon with Professor Davis (University of South Florida;
Davis & Hufnagel, 2007) that within the scope of this dissertation (e.g. dual leadership and conflict
influencers) the ratings are not pivotal. They could, however, be a point of consideration in future dual
leadership research (see chapter 5).
Finally, for the practical purposes in this study, personal interviews using the Repertory Grid method are
combined with a computerized grid program (Webgrid 5) to help analyze and visualize the interview
data.24
24
Such a combined approach is not entirely new. In previous research the Rep Grid method has already been used in combination with interviews, observations, secondary data analysis, reflexive dialogue, scenario analysis, questionnaires and computerized grid version - there are a number of software packages available for both eliciting constructs, and for analyzing the repertory grid data (Stein et al., 2003; Fetherstonhaugh, 1994; Scholes & Freeman, 1994).
De Moyer 42
The following grid is an example of the development of the different parts of the process:
Personal Constructs (emergent pole)
Conflict Prevention/
Resolution Methods
Personal Constructs (opposing pole)
tru
st
emp
ath
y
resp
ect
qu
alit
ativ
e
com
mu
nic
atio
n
med
iati
on
Costs money 1 Costs effort
Formal action 5 Informal action
Short term resolution 1 Long term resolution
Incorrigible action 5 Reversible action
5
3
3
5
5
5
Step 1. Participant identifies methods applied to prevent or resolve conflict Step 2. Participant assesses triads of conflict resolution methods, identifying similarities and differences, yielding a series of personal
construct scales (e.g. Individual/Group decision, Cheap/Expensive, Time efficient/Time consuming, etc.) Step 3. Participant evaluates each conflict resolution method on a five-point scale using own personal construct.
1
2
Ratings 3
Figure VI: Repertory Grid example and indication of the terminology (inspired by David & Hufnagel, 2007)
2
DEL, strategic decision-making and conflict resolution methods
De Moyer 43
4. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
This chapter first [1] describes the context of the research, the performing arts sector, and the features
of DEL structures within this particular context. Subsequently, [2] dyadic data from both artistic and
managing directors of theater and dance companies with a dual leadership structure are selected and
analyzed. During interviews, different strategic decision-making topics are elicited, putting the
participants at ease and paving the way for the Repertory Grid interview focusing on conflict resolution
methods. Finally, [3] the preliminary results and research findings are summarized.
4.1. Case study context: the cultural sector
“A tense economic and political climate, resource concerns, and a rapidly changing
technological environment often complicate the leadership and management
process. Without looking to one or multiple effective approaches to organizational
management and strategic decision-making, performing arts organizations will
continue to struggle to adapt to the challenges facing them.” (Organizational
Management in the Non-Profit Performing Arts: Exploring New Models of Structure,
Management, and Leadership, Jaime D. Galli, 2011:3) 25
Despite the large amount of research into leadership available in academic journals, until recently little
related to leaders of the many organizations devoted to the arts. However, lately, the amount of
conducted research increased. This is mainly26 a consequence of the revision of leadership structures
that took place in various arts organizations (Cray et al., 2007, Bhansing, 2011/2013; Galli, 2011; Crawfis,
2011). In order to be able to survive the tense economic and political climate characterized by resource
concerns, most operating nonprofit performing arts organizations have moved from one artistic head
towards structures in which leadership is given to both an artistic director and a managing director
(Bhansing, 2013). They are now managed under a dual leadership structure which enables them to not
25
Galli emphasizes the problems within an American context, yet the main point she makes applies to the cultural situation in Europe as well (Bhansing, 2011/2013; Galli, 2011). Bhansing (2013:22) also explains the role of the government in the Netherlands in detail and states that it differs from the U.S. high arts setting (Johns, 2006) where box office receipts, private donations and corporate sponsorships make up the larger part of the companies’ income (Zimmer & Toepler, 1999). 26
The changing environment plays a major role in the increased amount of research, yet this increase can also be linked to the increasing amount of available postgraduate studies that focus on performing arts. For example the MAIPR, Master of international Performance Arts (University of Warwick/University of Belgrade/University of Amsterdam), stimulates its scholars to publish their work even before graduating (talk Prof. Milena Sesic, 04/11/2013).
De Moyer 44
only look at and produce art based on an inner urge, but also to take into account the business
perspective of art and culture.
As Reid and Karambayya (2009:1073) state, “The paradoxical co-existence of business and artistic
objectives in creative organizations provides a useful background to explore the conflict dynamics of
dual executive leadership”. Furthermore, focusing on managerial research, David Cray and his
colleagues (2007:295) explain how “although it is acknowledged that arts organizations are undergoing
considerable changes in funding, governance and competition, basic concepts of management have only
recently been applied to problems within the arts sector”. Cray and his colleagues are some of the few
researchers that relate dual leadership to the arts context and decision-making processes. For example,
in their article Managing the Arts: Leadership and Decision Making under Dual Rationalities (2007), they
argue that a close match between organizational goals, environment, and leadership and decision-
making styles is necessary for effective management of arts organizations today (Cray et al., 2007). This
study, following the research of Cray et al. (2007), strengthens the link between arts leaders and
decision-making. Two additional focuses play a major role in the research as well: dual executive
leadership and conflict (resolution).
This study emphasizes the tensions between art and business and follows Jo Caust’s (2010:570) belief
that “the terms ‘leadership’ and ‘management’ can produce powerful and contradictory responses in
the context of arts organizations”. Caust (2010) advocates the importance of arts companies to
understand and take responsibility for leadership and management, to ensure the organization’s
continued survival and success. This paper defends a similar mindset and dives into the cultural leaders’
mind in order to help them understand decision-making processes and the conflicts occurring when
making those decisions.
The performing art sector: setting the stage for conflict
“The dual functions for guiding artistic endeavors [artistic leader] and organizational
administration [business leader], even in the best-run arts groups, foster structural
complexity, competing sets of goals, and multiple stakeholder claims.” (Cray et al.,
2007:297)
De Moyer 45
The setting of this study is limited to one particular subcategory of the arts world: the performing arts
sector. A dual executive leadership structure has become common in such settings, where one executive
– the artistic director – is responsible for the artistic or creative part of the organization (the dance or
theatre performance), and another – the managing director – is responsible for the organization’s
administrative part: selecting administrative personnel, managing budgets and ensuring its overall
financial stability (Bhansing, 2013). Bhansing (2013:1) explains how “The presence of artistic and
economic logics of practice in the same environment can lead to tensions between individuals, between
groups of individuals, and, sometimes, even within individuals themselves“. This study is looks at, more
specifically, the tensions between the DEL leaders.
Various features of, in particular, the performing arts organizational context provide some
understanding of how conflict is naturally embedded in the duo’s relationship (Reid & Karambayya,
2009). According to Reid & Karambayya (2009), the following features do not encourage the mitigation
of conflict27
1. Hiring process & divergent functional responsibilities. Leaders are often
chosen by an external board and balancing the budget is often the only contact
point between the leaders.
2. Divergent values, orientation & training. Whilst the artistic director is more
creative, unpredictable, spontaneous and a social critic; the business director often
is more rational, ordered, planned and working within the social order.
3. Divergent organizational priorities. Initially the priorities are mostly artistic,
yet as the funding environment evolves to include multiple external stakeholders
(partnering with businesses, the government), financial accountability becomes
more important. The organizational strategy is shaped by the funding dependence.
4. No clear criteria for judging the validity of the artistic/organizational strategy.
The ambiguous & subjective valuation sets the stage for personal conflict when
negotiating on resources & strategic decisions.
5. Mutual interdependency within the DEL. One the one hand, the artistic leader
relies on the business leader for financial resources (funding, ticket sales). On the
other hand the business leader relies on the artistic leader to create programs
appealing to audience, (possible) private donors, peers and government juries.
27
Please note that in other domains, such as social psychology literature, other explanations for conflict can be found (Reid & Karambayya, 2009). However, within the scope of this study, the above-mentioned are the most relevant.
Figure VII: Personal summary of the performing arts context according to Reid & Karambayya (2009)
De Moyer 46
Keeping the above-mentioned conflict factors in mind, within this study the data selection is focused on
Belgian and Dutch artistic and business leaders of nonprofit performing arts organizations. Starting point
is the acknowledgement that shared leadership is common in these organizations. In these dual
leadership compositions two managers are working in partnership as executive leaders. Typically within
nonprofit performing arts organizations each leader has his or her own area of expertise (Bhansing,
2011; Reid & Karambayya, 2009). One director is responsible for the organization’s economic objectives
and another responsible for the non-economic objectives (Reid, 2009; Galli, 2011). As Reid and
Karambayya (2009) explain: “The AD [artistic director] is the individual artist searching for artistic
expression through their leadership in an organizational structure and the ED [executive/business
director] is the managerial leader motivated to ensure the sustainability of the organization through
business practice.”(Reid & Karambayya, 2009: 1076).
4.2. Data selection
Using a social psychological theoretical lens, data was gathered from the performing arts industry, a
competitive setting in which dual executive leadership structures are widely used and conflict between
the leaders exists on a regular basis. The data set of this Master thesis was further limited to Belgian and
Dutch performing arts companies28 that are honored with structural subsidies for the period 2013-
201629.
28
The term ‘performing arts’ includes both theatre and dance companies (scope of this Master thesis). Depending on the balance between text and body movement, a company can be categorized as a theatre or a dance organization respectively. 29
This thesis looks only at companies with subsidies, because they have a need to balance art and business as, in order to be able to obtain a grant, the organization needs to have ‘a balanced artistic versus business structure’ (see Handboek
Figure VIII: Key responsibilities of the artistic and business director (Galli, 2011:28)
De Moyer 47
The Dutch (Performing Arts Fund) and the Belgian (Kunstendecreet) association for culture provide
online lists of the national cultural organizations that receive subsidies. For the period of 2013-2016, the
total population of grant-receiving organizations includes 56 Belgian performing arts organizations (13
dance/43 theatre) and 44 Dutch organizations (14 dance/30 theatre). 30 Of this population 23
organizations (25%) were selected with a dual leadership structure that was clearly divided along artistic
and business goals. Particular effort was made to research both established companies – where the
relationship was known to be notably problematic – and a couple of younger organizations that helped
to reflect upon original conflict resolution methods. 31
In spring 2014, these organizations – both the managerial and the artistic directors – were asked to
participate in this study by filling in an introductory survey (quantitative analysis: observable managerial
and organizational characteristics including age, job tenure, academic and professional background) and
participating in an interview (qualitative analysis, in April 2014). 19 leaders (of 13 different
organizations) wanted to participate in this study, with 14 of them providing usable data.32 This sample
size is consistent with the data of various international scholars. For example, Repertory Grid specialist
Robert P. Wright (2008) interviewed 10 participants for his research into the reliability of grid using
heterogeneous elements (see chapter 3), Davis & Hufnagel (2007) conducted Repertory Grid analysis
within the IT sector with 12 interview respondents and cultural researcher Bengt Olsson (1997) had 15
respondents in his work regarding theories of musical knowledge.33
4.3. Data analysis
Interviews were conducted according to the Repertory Grip questioning (see chapter 3). All interviews
started with questions related to the broader area of research (strategic decision-making and DEL) and
moved towards more specific questions on conflict resolution. This way of working was intended to put
the participants at ease and introduce them to the topic without immediately overwhelming them with
questions regarding conflict.
verantwoording meerjarige activiteitensubsidie 2013-2016, Performing Arts Fund NL, Amsterdam 2014 . www.fondspodiumkunsten.nl/toekenningen/meerjarige_activiteitensubsidies_2013-2016/ 30
See appendix 2: overview of the subsidies honored in the different cultural categories (e.g. dance, theatre, music, visual arts) 7 For this Master thesis, an online analysis and direct contacts from previous professional experiences within the cultural sector
helped to refine the target to 23 relevant and easily approachable organizations. 32
This survey response is quite low. We have based our findings on – often limited – existing data on the performing arts. Even so, this methodology yields a more comprehensive picture of the state of the performing arts in Western Europe – particularly Belgium and The Netherlands – than was previously available to date (see also chapter 5: limitations). 33
During the literature research for this study, the quantity of data for studies using the Repertory Grid method varied between the extremes of 2 until 98 participants.
De Moyer 48
Interview phase I: exploration of the topic
In the initial interview phase, participants were asked to list the different strategic decisions of the DEL
structure of which they are a part. Four main clusters of strategic decision-making processes were
identified in the 14 interviews and were labeled by the participants as: artistic decisions, decisions
regarding communication strategy, geographical decisions and organizational & employee related
decisions (see Figure IX).34 The impact of the decisions varies from being critical in the attribution of a
grant, helping the (performance) field forward and reaching the target group, to creating company
recognition. Most of the strategic decisions were perceived by the participants as the overall
responsibility of both leaders within the dual executive leadership (DEL) structure.
Impact of the decision
Responsibility of
business (B)/ artistic
leader (A)
Artistic
Strategic
Decisions
Amount of new performances vs
repertoire pieces Critical for grant attribution A + B
Amount of performances per season Critical for grant attribution A + B
Size of the performance (small/big
theatres) Critical for grant attribution A + B
Experimental vs more commercial
entertainment Impact of helping the field forward A
Whom to partner with Critical for grant attribution A (artistic partners)
B (sponsors)
Communication
Strategy
(Online) communication style & format High impact on target group to reach A + B
Communication frequency & channel High impact on recognition of the
company A + B
Balance of communication of artistic
work (often hermetic)&
commercialization of it (more
accessible)
High impact on recognition of the
company, target group and helping
the field forward
A + B
Geographical
Strategy
Venue to work from
(registration/accommodation) Critical for grant attribution A + B
Decision on the venues in which to
perform (touring) Critical for grant attribution A + B
Organizational
& Employee
Strategy
Power structure of the company
(horizontal vs vertical) Critical for grant attribution A + B
Amount of fixed employees vs
freelancers/outsourcing Critical for grant attribution B
34
Note that not all participants exactly divided the strategic decisions especially with these words. Other words for the strategic
categories included: artistic ideas/artistic vision, language strategy, residence strategy/international scope and the
HR/company strategy
Figure IX: Central strategic decisions according to 14 performing arts DEL leaders in The Low Lands
De Moyer 49
In the scope of the main research topic (e.g. conflict resolution methods), this first interview phase had
the solely aim of getting to know more about the participants and the way in which their organization
works.35 As was hoped for, the questions regarding strategic decision making resulted in respondents
becoming more active, confident and interested in talking about their own decisions. This
introductory question paved the way for the interviewer for the introduction of the, more personal and
sensitive, topic of conflict situations and resolutions.
Interview phase II: element elicitation
“Different top managers can examine identical strategic situations in their current
organizational environments and come to different conclusions about how best to
react.” (Bhansing, 2013:98)
This Master thesis focuses on one particular disadvantage of the DEL leadership model: the ‘increased
potential for conflict' (see chapter 2). In order to gain more knowledge on the various conflict resolution
methods that DEL leaders use and are familiar with, the following questions were asked: When did you
experience conflict in taking strategic decisions within the dual leadership context you are part of? In
what way were you able to solve the conflict? and What other actions can you think of to solve conflict
problems?
In this second interview stage, respondents easily came up with 3-5 conflict resolution methods
(elicitation). Subsequently, the interviewer helped the participants to sum up an even fuller picture of
reality by means of presenting fictional conflict situations and asking how one would react (for
examples: appendix 2 - interview preparation sheet). This helped the respondents to expand their
thoughts and come up with elements they were less familiar with, elements they thought were less
effective and not worth mentioning, and elements they perhaps – at first – personally did not want to
talk about (semi-supplied elements). This combined way of element gathering (elicited & semi-supplied
elements) resulted in a total of 10 different elements. This is the number necessary to have a valid
construct elicitation phase, the next step in the repertory grid construction process. As Colin Eden and
Sue Jones state: “in practice it becomes unwieldy to try to produce a grid from […] less than about seven
elements” (Eden & Jones, 1984:780).
35
One can also investigate the relation between each particular strategic decision-making topics and the most suitable conflict resolution method, but this is out of the scope of this Master thesis and will be mentioned in chapter 5: ideas for future research.
De Moyer 50
14
913
102
98
6
7
8
building &maintaining
trustincreasing
the respectfor each…
ensuringcommunica-tion quality
internalmediation
externalmediation
enhancinginterest &empathy
a clear role &responsibility
division
determina-ting the DEL
visualizingthe root ofthe conflict
taking adecision
break
Main conflict resolution methodswithin the DEL practice
# of the 16 respondents
A visualization of the outcome of this interview phase indicates, on the left, the 10 elements36 and the
number of times each of them was mentioned by the 14 participants (Figure X). Building and
maintaining trust (14 times), ensuring communication quality (13 times) and internal mediation by
means of a team or a board member (10 times) were mentioned most frequently. The use of external
mediations and the determination of the DEL structure were the least mentioned resolution methods.
On the right (Figure X), it becomes visible that the top three elements of the empirical study (trust,
communication and mediation) are equal to the top three most recurring elements in academic
literature (see chapter 2). However, contrary to the general conflict resolution literature (mostly in a
profit context), the nonprofit DEL leaders particularly emphasized the difference between internal and
external mediation. Whereas within the profit sector both forms of mediation are widely accepted and
implemented (Eisenkopf & Bächtiger, 2012), the artistic and business leaders consider involving an
external third party the least preferred conflict resolution method. The artistic leader, particularly, finds
it important not to solve conflicts with external parties as they might not have a profound idea of the
artistic creation process. Two of the participating leaders already experienced such a situation and
36
In the scope of this Master thesis the analysis was limited to the elements that were mentioned by a minimum of 4
participants (25% of the total data set). However, future analysis could also focus on the other elicited elements. These were,
among others: value congruence, team building event for the DEL, political resolution methods and humor.
Figure X: Visualization main conflict resolution methods within the DEL practice in the performing arts sector (BE & NL)
1.building & maintaining trust
2. qualitative communication
(e.g. channel & frequency)
3. internal mediation by a
team or a board member
relating emperical data
(chapter 4) to theory (chapter 2)
Lewicki & Tomlinson, 2014
Reid, 2005,
Simons &Peterson, 2000
Bankovskaya, 2012
Krauss & Morsella, 2000
Fleetwood, 1987
Kressel, 2014
Eisenkopf & Bächtiger, 2012
Moore, 2003
De Moyer 51
explained how “with a third party the conflict only increased” (Anonymous, 2014/04/14). Internal
mediation, however, is the number three mediation element.
Finally, the above-mentioned list of 10 elements – trust, communication & mediation (see chapter 2)
and seven other elements – provided the basic starting point for the next step within the interview: the
Repertory Grid constructs elicitation. As most of the Repertory Grid research elements do not exist in
isolation (Eden & Jones, 1984; Wright, 2008), a next step within the interview is to have the respondent
elicit the similarities and differences between the elements.
Interview phase III: construct elicitation
In the construct elicitation phase, the interviewer helped eliciting the dimensions of analysis
(constructs) the respondent uses in thinking about the various elements. The interviewer proposed
triads of elements and asked the respondent each time to answer the following question: “In what way
are two of these similar and yet different from a third?” (Eden & Jones, 1984:781). This triad elicitation
(Wright, 2008) went on until no new constructs were elicited (Wright, 2008). As mentioned (chapter 3),
constructs are the discriminations that people make to describe the elements in their personal,
individual world. The essential characteristic of constructs is that they are 'bipolar', e.g. cold−hot,
good−bad (van Kerkhove, 2011). Within the Repertory Grid vocabulary, the two poles are indicated as
the emergent and the opposite construct (Wright, 1984).
A main challenge within the construct elicitation phase was that respondents found it difficult to
compare – in their opinion totally different – conflict resolution methods. However, the interviewer
acted as a teacher consultant (C. Davis, interview 2014/05/11) and encouraged the respondent to dig
deeper and to try to find a verbal tag for each of the triads.37 The following 12 bipolar constructs were
elicited:
37
Eden & Jones (1984) explain how when the respondent cannot answer on a triad, the interviewer can just move on to the
next triad. In the interviews for this Master thesis, this happened only twice.
De Moyer 52
Emergent pole of the construct Opposite pole of the construct
1. DEL leaders are both involved/joint choice Individual action/choice of each of the DEL leaders
2. Long term resolution (might take a while) Short term resolution (can have results relatively quick)
3. Costs money Costs motivation encouragement of both DEL leaders
4. Concerns communication between the DEL parties Concerns a (temporary) nonverbal action
5. Preferred & desirable action within a DEL structure Less preferred action within a DEL structure
6. Formal action Informal action
7. Resolution requires a third party Internal resolution (conflict stays within the DEL structure)
8. Impacts the organizational staff/team Resolution method retained within the DEL structure
9. Reversible Often incorrigible action
10. Continuous process/ ongoing action Temporary method/sequential activity
11. Mitigates the effect of status differences of both DEL
leaders (e.g. tenure, professional experience)
Has a minor effect on the status differences of the DEL
leaders
12. Involves willingness to compromise Strong maintenance of one’s own ambition
Labels attached to the conflict resolution have obvious parallels with the advantages and disadvantages
of the methods found in the conflict resolution literature (Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). Yet,
participating leaders go beyond the mere identification of the conflict resolution possibilities, revealing
data and relations that interconnects the various solutions. Davis and Hufnagel (2007) explain the added
value of the construct elicitation phase compared to the existing literature. Their argument – in a study
on IT fingerprint job tasks – can be easily understood within the scope of this Master thesis:
“It [the construct elicitation phase] illustrates the fact that many of the job
characteristics [conflict resolution methods] defined by existing theories tend to
bring the objective and observable features of the task environment [different
resolution methods] into high relief, while masking more important aspects of the
social context that imbue certain tasks [resolution methods] with meaning in the
eyes of those who actually perform them” (Davis & Hufnagel, 2007:691)
Figure XI: Construct visualization: emergent and opposite pole
De Moyer 53
According to the participating nonprofit leaders, whilst building and maintaining trust and increasing
respect for each other are considered long term resolutions, visualizing the root of the conflict and
seeking advice within the company (internal mediation) are relatively short term methods that might
ameliorate a conflict situation relatively quickly. To revise the communication within the DEL structure
(ensuring communication quality by means of adapting communication frequency and channel or by
creating an open culture of communication) both DEL leaders need to agree together upon the path
they want to take. Taking a decision break and enhancing one’s interest and empathy in the other are
(mostly) decisions one leader decides to take when he or she cannot directly come to a consensus with
the other DEL leader. And then there is the difference between solutions that involve a third party
(external and internal mediation) and, for example, the internal decision of both leaders to agree upon a
clear role and responsibility overview.
Interview phase IV: ratings
A common fourth stage within the Repertory Grid method is the rating of the elements in relation to the
elicited constructs (see chapter 3). After the first round of interviews – including the element &
construct elicitation phase – the interviewer creates an empty grid (see chapter 3, Figure VII) in which all
the relevant elements and constructs of all the respondents are mentioned. The interviewer sets up a
second interview with each of the participants and asks them to rate the elements in relation to the
constructs on a 5 or 7 point Likert scale (Eden & Jones, 1984; Wright, 2008).
However, for the purpose of this Master thesis Professor Christopher Davis (University of South Florida;
meeting 2014/05/11, Amsterdam) advised the following:
o in the scope of the research question of this Master thesis (e.g. to research dual
leadership and conflict methods) it is more valid to indicate the negative, neutral
and positive relationship between elements and constructs instead of using a
complete 5 or 7 Likert scale.
o the second round of interviews is often very time-consuming (in the case of this
Master thesis this would mean another 14 extra interviews). Using the negative,
neutral and positive relationship (which can be done by the interviewer using
notes of the first interviews) within this Master thesis this second round does not
add a lot of value and as such is not considered mandatory.
o to be able to use the online Webgrid 5 software the following indication is often
used by scholars for the relationship between elements and construct poles: 1 =
negative relationship, 3= neutral and 5 = positive relationship
De Moyer 54
o the extra interviews and ratings of all elements within the Repertory Grid could be
a point of consideration for a later research paper (see future research
recommendations in chapter 5).
The elements and constructs were submitted for analysis by computer using Webgrid5, a conceptual
representation system that elicits and analyzes personal models of an area of experience that the user
specifies. To be able to analyze the data, the five point Likert scale was, as advised by professor Davis,
used to indicate the negative (1), neutral (3) and positive relation (5) between the elements and the
(emergent) construct pole.
The cluster visualization of the data outcome (Figure XII) is used in the following section as the starting
point for the preliminary research conclusion.
Figure XII: Repertory Grid, realized by the Webgrid 5 software
De Moyer 55
4.4. Preliminary research conclusion
Using Webgrid 5, a digital Repertory Grid software, the 10 elements provided by the respondents
(Figure X; in red) were grouped into four main categories.38 Although existing academic literature
emphasizes the importance of each of the 10 resolution methods, there is little research that provides a
comparable clustered study of resolution methods.39 The following clustered study provides an insight
into how nonprofit leaders within a DEL structure ‘experience’ the various resolution methods and how
they differentiate them. 40
Cluster I: personal ethics as conflict resolution factors
A first category includes the following ethics, intangible actions:
o Enhancing interest & empathy for the DEL partner
o Building & maintaining trust
o Increasing respect for each other
Most remarkable is that almost 94% of the participating artistic and business leaders indicated
maintaining and building trust as the first method to resolve conflict. The interviews revealed the
following trust-related points of discussion and conclusions of its particular importance within a dual
executive leadership (DEL) setting:
Coexistence of trust & distrust: in the nonprofit DEL relationship trust and distrust often coexist
peacefully. For instance, the business leader trusts the artistic leader in the creation of his or
her artistic work, yet distrusts the artistic leader’s capability of managing financial obligations.
For at least seven of the business leaders, the presence of both trust and distrust is experienced
as positive in relation to conflict situations. This relates to the interpretation of ‘conflict as
developmental and multifaceted’, as explained by Lewicki and Tomlinson (2014). Lewicki and
Tomlinson (2014:114) explain how “particularly in business relationships, unquestioning trust,
38
All the different data (e.g. of the 14 interviews) were entered into the Webgrid software in order to get this outcome. 39
Academic researchers focus mostly only on 1 or 2 particular resolution methods and academic editors group resolution methods, but few of them relate the various conflict resolution methods to each other. For instance, Coleman, Deutch & Marcus (2014) assembled papers on various resolution methods, yet they do not focus on the similarities and differences between the various resolution methods. This Master thesis, however, aims to do so. 40
This preliminary research conclusion mainly focuses on the relationship between the most recurring resolution factors within the academic literature (trust, communication and mediation, see chapter 2) and the outcome of the Repertory Grid interviews within a nonprofit DEL leadership context (chapter 4). A deeper analysis of the other seven elicited Repertory Grid elements is out of the scope of this thesis, but provides a starting point for future research.
De Moyer 56
without distrust, is likely to create more problems than solutions” (see academic research and
trust in chapter 2).
Building and maintaining trust: as in the study of Lewicki and Tomlinson (2014), most DEL
leaders within the nonprofit sector see acting consistently and reliably, gratitude, happiness and
emotions as the main builders of trust. Within the nonprofit DEL structure, supplementary to
the existing literature, the notions of ‘care’ and ‘responsibility’ were mentioned in the
interviews by the artistic and business leader respectively. On one side of the leadership dyad,
the artistic leader expressed how, in order to be able to resolve strategic conflict, he needed to
be able to trust ‘that the other will take care of both the artistic and the non-artistic part of the
decision’. ‘Taking care’ refers to the protection of the artistic creation: e.g. ‘taking care/ paying
attention that the economic decisions do not affect the integrity of the artwork’. On the other
side of the dyad, the business director used the word ‘responsibility’ in relation to trust. In order
to solve a problem, trust in the DEL partner’s awareness of responsibilities is of major
importance. The business leader needs to be able to trust that the artistic leader not only knows
his area of expertise (e.g. creation of performances), but also his/her responsibility to finish the
creations in time, to take care of the artistic crew and needs – in busy and in slower periods of
the year.
The trust - empathy relationship: within the DEL practice, trust is closely related to empathy:
“When the business director puts down her financial analysis and managerial duties and drops
in on the rehearsal room to really listen to the ideas for the new performance, and also engages
in and questions the creation process, this stimulates my trust and respect for her. In conflict
situations, I remember these situations and give her a chance to explain her point of view”
(interview Jan Martens, artistic leader of GRIP, 2014/04/12). Moreover, results of the 14
interviews indicate that, on the one hand, the expression of empathy leads to more positive
attitudes when trust is high. On the other hand, empathy tends to have adverse effects when
trust is low (i.e.: extreme empathy after a situation in which one of the DEL leaders violated the
trust of the other has an adverse effect). The interpretations of empathy and the relation
between empathy and trust correspond with the academic studies on empathy and conflict of
Frei (1985), and Nadler and Liviatan (2004) respectively.
The trust - respect relationship: the relation between trust and respect is explained as follows:
“Not only trying to understand your partner in the DEL structure, but also being receptive and
sensitive to his or her ideas and feelings is important within my DEL structure. Respect, trust
De Moyer 57
and empathy go hand in hand: they all inspire to collaborate (…) Respect is, in fact, the basis for
trust.” (artistic director, Warme Winkel, interview 2014/04/28). A comparable correlation
between trust and respect is found in Olsen et al. (2007:201): “Executive teams with high
competence-based trust have respect for, and confidence in, team members (…) mutual respect
and confidence encourage team members to share their diverse views.”
Comparing trust, empathy and respect to the other conflict resolution methods, the respondents
indicated how these three ethics are (see Figure XII and the ratings 1-3-5):
1) resolutions within the DEL structure, in contrast to internal and external mediation that involve a third person.
2) informal (unstructured) resolution methods, in contrast to the specification of roles & responsibilities (more formal,
structured)
3) continuous processes, in contrast to the 2nd
chance meeting which is a temporary/sequential resolution
4) long term resolutions towards conflict
5) methods that not need to be fully communicated in an explicit manner, in contrast to, for instance, the definition of
communication quality, defining the roles and responsibilities
Cluster II: root cause analyses as conflict resolution factors
The second category includes two methods that solve the
conflict by means of finding its cause:
o Visualizing the root of the conflict problems
o Taking a decision break (2nd chance meeting)
These two conflict resolution factors were not discussed in chapter 2 of this Master thesis, as they are
not considered within the top three of recurrent conflict resolution themes. Yet, a short description
indicates the importance and applicability of both methods within the nonprofit dual executive
leadership structures.
Visualization of the conflict root cause: the identification and visualization of the root of the
conflict problems is considered effective by 74% of the participating nonprofit leaders. One of
the root cause methods in the management and academic literature describes how one can
come to the root of a problem [conflict] by repeatedly asking the question ‘why?' (Antony,
2004; Fantin, 2014). This method has been experimented with and applied within mainly
manufacturing businesses such as Toyota (Antony, 2004; Fantin, 2014), yet results of the
interviews reveal that a comparable method exists in the nonprofit sector. The participating
De Moyer 58
DEL leaders argued that the identification and visualization of the reason for conflict, by means
of avoiding assumptions and logic traps and encouraging the DEL partner to ‘drill down’ to the
real root cause (asking Why do you think this? What reason for your way of thinking? What is
your motive to do/act like this?), helps the partner within the DEL structure. One of the
respondents explains how “when trying to find out and tackle the real cause of the conflict,
instead of just its symptoms, often sensitive and touchy subjects are brought forward. Often my
DEL counterpart and I find it difficult to talk about personal interpretations and feelings. Yet,
once we manage to express the reasons why things are not working out, the search for the
resolution of the conflict is less difficult and the trust in the relationship only increases”
(Anonymous, 2014/05/13).41
Taking a conflict break: most of the DEL respondents believe that taking the time to go back to
the root cause of the conflict and afterwards try to come up with an original solution is an
effective conflict resolution method. 73% of the participating artistic leaders believe in taking a
break instead of responding and acting upon the conflict in the heat of its occurrence. Often in
fast-growing companies, there is no time to leave the strategic decision for what it is, in order to
come up with new ideas. These organizations are ‘pulled’ by the market. Arts organizations,
believe in ‘pushing’ the market out of its boundaries: in arts, there are no deadlines for the
clients to deliver a new show, the only big deadline is the application for the grants (4 yearly).
The idea of ‘taking a break’ is familiar in management literature. For example, Wanous and
Youtz (1986) introduced the ‘second chance meeting’ which helps increasing not only the
awareness of the root of the conflict, but has also a positive effect on the solution diversity after
the break. According to Wanous and Youtz (1986), leaving the conflict for what it is for a few
days, to then resume and come to (fresh) solutions, can do wonders. The main advantage of
taking a time-out in a strategic conflict situation is its ability to avoid a downward spiral that
both leaders will only regret later on.
41
Likewise, Fantin (2014) emphasizes that the more Why questions one asks, the closer one can come to the real root cause
which is, most of the times, a certain personal feeling or a process that needs to be improved or even invented.
De Moyer 59
Comparing the visualization of the conflict essence and the idea of the 2nd chance meeting to the other
resolution possibilities, it is argued that these are:
1) reversible methods, as opposed to, for instance, determining the DEL structure
2) internal methods, as opposed to the involvement of a third party
3) costless methods, in contrast to the involvement of an external professional mediator
4) short term methods: a talk on the why’s of the conflict does not need be a continuous process, as resolutions can be
decided upon immediately after the first discussion. Likewise, a communication break does not need to last for weeks
before a next talk on resolutions is possible
Cluster III: communication, internal advice seeking and role clarity as conflict resolution factors
A third category of resolution methods includes methods that have an impact on the other team
members:
o Internal mediation by a team or board member
o Ensuring communication quality
o A clear roles & responsibility vision
No obvious best way of communicating (e.g. what is the best channel, frequency, language?) to avoid or
resolve conflict was concluded upon during Repertory Grid interviews. The following communication
related topics were touched upon:
Face to face communication: in management literature, face-to-face communication is
generally argued as decreasing the potential for misunderstanding and is seen as most effective,
because the immediate response (no delay as with emails) and the interpretation of the
nonverbal communication of the counterparty in the dialogue help immediately considering and
interpreting what the other party says (Kraus & Morsella, 2014). In the case of the DEL
leadership practice in the nonprofit sector, live communication plays, particularly, a role in the
case of the artistic leader. For example, when the artistic director is totally immersed in a new
creation process, it is often more effective to drop in on him in the studio with hand-outs of
budgets or marketing proposals, than to send him an email or call him.
Communication frequency: the business director focused on the high frequency of
communication: “In the dual executive leadership structure it is always like a table tennis
De Moyer 60
match: you start talking about the strategic decision, you share your idea as soon as possible
and you wait for a response from the artistic leader in order to throw some questions back and
forth before coming to the final decision (…) If there is no fixed timeslot each week to discuss
the decisions, you risk not having this effect and missing your deadlines.” (interview Michiel
Nannen, ex-business leader ICKamsterdam, 2014/04/14).
Communicating variety: by choosing his or her words carefully, the business leader is able to
guide the artistic leader in the strategic direction which is (economically) the most valuable. In
other words, the business leader moves along and brings the artistic director to insight by
means of the specific questioning of his/her creation process. In 80% of the interviews with
business leaders, the importance of giving the artistic leaders a variety of choices was
mentioned. As one of the business leaders describes: “As a business leader you are the
gatekeeper of what is possible, it is as if you metaphorically give the artist a color book. It is up
to the artistic party within the dual leadership structure to paint the different figures in the
colors he or she wants, yet it is the business leader’s task to prevent him or her from drawing
outside the lines; and if he does so you try to agree upon staying at least as close as possible to
the lines” (interview Kristin De Coster, executive director at Ultima Vez, 2014/04/10).
A clear roles & responsibility vision: the empirical study demonstrates how in the nonprofit
sector the artistic lead tends to control all the decisions taken by the different members of the
team, including the decisions for which the business leader is responsible. Professor Pawan
Bhansing explains “It seems like the business director works in the service of the artistic
director; whilst artistic and business, in theory, should be equivalent” (Van Gelder, 10/04/2013).
The situation in which the artistic leader ‘overrules’ all decisions, may not only cause double
work (e.g. the artistic and the business leader both work on a same task), but often, may also
result in frustration from the side of the business leader. In this context, redrafting agreements
on roles and responsibilities to meet all underlying needs, creating the win-win situation for
both DEL parties, can be the solution for conflict. The main advantage of a mutually satisfying
scenario in which clear roles and responsibilities are decided upon, is that both parties have
more time to invest in their own expertise. Finally, the empirical finding of a clear role division is
also mentioned in academic literature: “It is constructive in a group’s process to clarify task
structures and responsibilities early (Jehn & Mannix, 2001 in Reid & Karambayya, 2009:1077)
and “true co-leadership can only exist in the presence of […] clear role definition” (Crawfis,
2011:28).
De Moyer 61
Comparing internal mediation by a team or board member, ensuring communication quality and the
clear roles & responsibility vision to the other conflict resolution methods, the respondents indicated
how these three methods are:
1) Internal methods, in contrary to the involvement of a third party
2) Costless methods, in contrast to the involvement of an external professional mediator
3) Involves willingness to compromise (especially role division)
4) Preferred & desirable action within the DEL structure (e.g. the internal mediation is seen as the nr.3 top solution)
Cluster IV: ultimate resolution methods
A last category of resolution methods includes methods that
are least preferred by the DEL leaders:
o Determination of the DEL structure
o External mediation by a professional conflict expert
In this empirical study it appears that determining the DEL structure and external mediation by a
professional conflict person are the least preferred resolution methods of all 10 elements.
External mediation: whilst mediation (both external and internal) in management literature
is considered as one of the most important and effective conflict resolution methods (see
chapter 2; Bankovskaya, 2012; Kressel, 2014), the emperical study reveals that in the
nonprofit sector ‘external mediation’ is the least preferred of all the 10 emerged resolution
methods. For the leaders in the DEL structure, third party resolution is more perceived as a
treat than as helping the conflict resolve. For example, one of the respondents explains how
“the external mediator does often come from a non-artistic background and does not
comprehend that sometimes conflict might take a turn in across the line of economic
benefit and art. Once I had a conflict and an external mediation was asked to help parties to
get to a mutual understanding, yet our team members already got frustrated in explaining
the artistic situation” (Anonomymous, 14/05/2014). Both business and artistic leaders
experience hostility and believe an additional external party only sets the relationship under
pressure.
De Moyer 62
Determination of the DEL structure: one could argue that the determination of the dual
executive leadership structure is not really a conflict resolution method and academic
literature confirms this understanding (Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). However, at least
5 out of the 14 respondents explain that, when conflict escalates so much that the DEL
leader believes the relationship with the other party of the dyad is impossible to repair, it is
sometimes better to leave the company. 2 out of the 14 participants experienced such a
situation and look back at it as this was the best way of resolving the conflict.
Comparing the determination of the DEL structure and external mediation by a professional conflict
expert to the other conflict resolution methods, the respondents indicated how these three methods:
1) Involve a third party
2) Cost money (e.g. the professional conflict expert)
3) irreversible methods impacting the whole team (e.g. changing leadership or with external mediation at least becomes
clear that the conflict is serious)
4) formal methods
5) structured actions to take, in contrast to trust, empathy or respect
Finally, having described the context of the research, the data selection, data analysis and a preliminary
interpretation of the research findings at hand of the Repertory Grid outcome, in the following chapter
final conclusions, limitations and implications of the study are provided.
De Moyer 63
5. RESULTS & CONCLUSION
Firstly, this chapter synthesizes the main research findings of the research. Secondly, this chapter
emphasizes the limitations of this study. The chapter concludes with the implications for future
theoretical research, implications of the findings for public policy and the implications for managers in
the performing arts and organizations in general.
5.1. General outcome/ main conclusions
This Master thesis aimed at achieving several ends. The main objectives were to investigate in how
leaders within a dual executive leadership (DEL) structure experience conflict, which methods they are
familiar with to resolve conflict when making strategic decisions and how they differentiate these
conflict resolutions. This study showed how the nonprofit performance arts sector offers a rich set of
resources to explore the possibilities and the limitations of the study of conflict resolution, a topic which
in the wake of the ‘turn to conflict resolution studies’ since World War II has received increasing
attention (Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014). As such, this Master thesis also sought to make a
contribution to the area of study by giving ‘performance’ an empirical focus.
Chapter 1 and 2 focused mainly on the understanding and the evolution of the notions of leadership,
dual leadership, conflict and conflict resolutions. One the one hand, the first chapter provided an
analysis of academic literature focusing on different types of shared leadership and, in particular, on the
explanation of the features, advantages and disadvantages of one specific form of shared leadership:
the dual executive leadership (DEL) model. On the other hand, the second chapter introduced the
notions of strategic leadership in relation to cognition, gave an explanation of how cognitive
heterogeneity affects strategic decision-making and provided an in-depth analysis of the notion of
conflict. The main conclusions of the first and the second chapter were that, apart from the advantage
of the DEL structure to make an organization highly resilient and more responsive to its external
environment (Heenan & Bennis, 1999; Bhansing, 2011), from a logical point of view, the dual structure
has the potential danger of conflict escalation (Reid & Karambayya, 2009). Subsequently, the
complexity of the notion of conflict was demonstrated, and highlighted that conflict should not be
interpreted as solely negative. The second chapter emphasized the radical importance of constructive
conflict in strategic decision-making in a dual leadership practice. It was concluded that within the
existing literature on the topic of conflict resolution, the three most recurrent and perceived as effective
De Moyer 64
conflict resolution methods are trust, communication and mediation.
Bulding upon the first and the second chapter, the third and the fourth chapter explained the
methodology, the empirical setting and the analysis of the data. First the terminology and the process of
the methodological tool – the Repertory Grid method (Kelly, 1955) – and the applicability and
adaptation of the method within the context of this Master thesis were highlighted. The fourth chapter
described the context of the research, the performing arts sector, and the features of DEL structures
within this particular context. Dyadic data from both artistic and managing directors of theater and
dance companies with a dual leadership structure were selected and analyzed.
A first outcome of the empirical study was that, although each of the leaders within the DEL structure
has his or her own responsibilities, the bigger and important strategic decisions are jointly decided upon
by the leadership dyad. A second finding relates to the ten different conflict resolution methods that
emerged from the Repertory Grid analysis, illuminating the diverse and original web of conflict
resolution methods that the leadership dyads take into account when dealing with tensions while taking
strategic decisions. The resolution methods ranged from the top three recurrent methods as described
in the second chapter – trust, communication and mediation – to the notions of internal and external
mediation, conflict breaks, respect, root cause visibility, redefinition roles & responsibilities, empathy
and interest, and the determination of the DEL structure. The various resolution methods were
perceived according to price, third party involvement, personal involvement, timing and impact on the
rest of the organization, reversibility, effect on the status of the DEL leaders, and the willingness to
compromise. As basis for a better understanding of the role of the ten emerged conflict resolution
methods (elements) and their relation to each other, four categories of methods were identified by
means of the Webgrid5 software. At hand of the summary of the findings related to the four categories
(chapter 4), the follwowing main conclusions were drawn with regards to the three research question
clusters as proposed in chapter 2 (e.g. What is the importance of trust, communication and mediation as
perceived by leaders in a DEL structure? What are the characteristics of these elements within a DEL structure?
How do these elements trust relate to other conflict resolution factors?):
o Trust is, together with empathy and respect, grouped in a first category of ethic solutions. The
empirical data demonstrate that leaders in a DEL structure perceive establishing and
maintaining a culture of trust between the partners in the DEL team, and ultimately within the
organization at large, as enabling the DEL structure to more effectively manage the tension
between the organization’s artistic vitality and its institutional sustainability. Trust, empathy and
De Moyer 65
respect are perceived as internal – the conflict and resolution stays within the DEL structure –
and informal solutions in the form of continuous processes, with a long term effect on conflict.
Maintaining trust, ensuring empathy and respect are perceived as desirable actions within the
nonprofit DEL leadership structure.
o Communication is, together with internal mediation by a team or board member and a clear
roles & responsibility vision, clustered in a second category. Communication is an effective
conflict resolving factor in the DEL context in the sense that clear language, alignment between
the leadership dyad on fixed timeslot per week and a communication variety (choosing words
carefully) all help the dyad to overcome conflict in strategic decision-making. Especially in the
nonprofit sector, face to face communication plays a role as often the artistic leader is in the
rehearsal rooms and is during the creation process often not reachable by phone are email.
Communication, internal mediation and a clear roles and responsibility vision, are perceived as
internal methods, in contrary to the involvement of a third party; costless methods, in contrast
to the involvement of an external professional mediator; and as desirable actions within the DEL
structure.
o The term external mediaton is clustered with the determination of the DEL structure in a third
category. Mediation (both external and internal) is in management literature is considered as
one of the most important, preferred and effective conflict resolution methods (see chapter 2;
Bankovskaya, 2012; Kressel, 2014). Within the non profit DEL context, the differentiation
between external mediation by a professional conflict expert and internal mediation by a team
or board member is of main importance. Whilst internal mediation is perceived as a preferred
action, external mediation is perceived as a less preferred action within the DEL structure. For
the leaders in the DEL structure, third party resolution is more perceived as a treat than as
helping the conflict resolve. Both business and artistic leaders experience hostility and believe
an additional external party only sets the relationship under pressure. External mediation and
leaving the dual leadership strucutre are both costly methods (e.g. external mediation costs
money; determination of the DEL structure might cost you a job and/or a friendship),
irreversible methods impacting the whole team (e.g. changing leadership or with external
mediation at least becomes clear that the conflict is serious) and are more formal an structured
actions to take, in contrast to trust, empathy or respect.
De Moyer 66
Finally, by unsettling the fixed negativly connotated notion of conflict and replacing it with the notions
of constructive conflict and conflict resolutions, the interest of this study has been less in the
organizational alternatives conflict resolutions represent than in the very possibility of alternatives
themselves. The reader is invited to interpret the various conflict resolution methods as ‘emblems of
the possible’. In fact by seeking to reclaim control over the conditions, the interviews with various
leaders in the nonprofit performing arts sector are living examples that ‘there are alternatives’ within
the context of conflict situations. By proposing to read the conflicts of DEL leaders in terms of
constructive moments, their hopeful moving nature is emphasized.
5.2. Limitations of the research
A significant limitation of this Master thesis is that only superficiallly was investigated in the theories
around the resolution factors of trust, communication and mediation. Due to the abundance of theory
available and the limited amount of thesis pages proposed by the university, the second chapter of this
Master thesis only investigated in the main academic findings around each of these notions. A follow-up
article would benefit from focusing on one resolution method only (short research paper) or from
researching more profoundly a variety of resolution factors without going too much in detail on the
explanations of dual leadership and conflict itself (long paper).
A second limitation includes the delay in the repons of the participating leaders and the late interview
scheduling due to fully booked agendas of both respondents and the interviewer. The different
leadership dyas were contacted for the first time by the end of March 2014, which was – due to
professional duties of the interviewer – later than planned. The first interview only took place in the
second week of April 2014. Hence, the time for the data analysis and the writing of the conclusion was
significantly shorter than for the other chapters.
A third limitation is the context of the nonprofit sector in relation to the sensitivity of the topic of
‘conflict’. The nonprofit sector is a turbulent and changing context in which leaders not only have a high
workload, but also do not like to talk about conflict with people outside of the organization without the
agreement of their DEL partner. Two business leaders replied that they would have loved to participate
in a study that emphasizes the needs and features of leaders in the nonprofit sector. But, because their
DEL partner did not wanted to participate, they preferred not to do so. With little exceptions, people
view ‘conflict’ as something negative, as an enemy to effective group functioning and relational
De Moyer 67
performance. This Master thesis, hopefully, helps the reader understand that the notion of conflict
should not only be defined as a problem or in terms of negativity, but that it can also be approached in
terms of resolutions.
5.3. Implications for future research
Implications for future theoretic research
This study is limited to the analysis of the notion of dual leadership within the context of performing arts
organizations in Belgium and the Netherlands. This Master thesis argues that there is a need to continue
the study of the relationship of dual leadership and conflict, in the broader context of both profit and
nonprofit organizations, worldwide. Future research might take into account the comparison of non-
profit versus profit organizations or the geographical comparison of dual leadership structures (are they
as common in other countries as well) in relation to conflict. Both approaches are beneficial for the
research field. Furthermore, this Master thesis provides one of the first applications of the Repertory
Grid methodology in a nonprofit context. Future research in the context of conflict prevention, conflict
detection and conflict management within this sector would also benefit from the usage of a similar
methodology. Finally, this Master thesis investigated in the conflict resolution methods and the relation
between the various resolution methods. During the interviews, however, the respondents also came up
with concrete conflict resolution actions such as weekly moments to reflect upon the feelings and
thought of the DEL partner, making time to share experiences outside of the work floor and trying to be
consistent in managing the expectations of the other. Future research in the area of practical
implications of the various conflict resolution methods would be, in particular, beneficial for (future
generations of) leaders in dual leadership structures.
Managerial implications
Although the cultural industry is a complex and unique environment – different from contexts such as
the banking, private or software sector – this research demonstrates that the study of dual leadership
conflict resolution methods can also be applied within other industries. Balancing economic and non-
economic objectives and conflict situations between parties that are part of a dual executive leadership
(DEL) structure appear in a variety of industries. Profit managers can take a look at the nonprofit sector
in order to come up with innovative and out of the box resolutions for conflict. Managers within the
performing arts sector as well need to take time to understand conflict situations and the possible
De Moyer 68
resolution methods available. This would prove beneficial to the long term health of these organizations
and to the field of the performing arts.
Implications for future policy
This study advocates the idea of developing more cross-discipline professional training programs such as
seminars of workshops to train future artistic leaders. Weitzman & Weitzman (2000) suggested already
that problem solving and decision making techniques should be taught together in conflict resolution
training programs. They argued that training should explain the conditions that encourage adoption of a
problem solving approach, and factors that undermine good decision making. (Eben et al., 2000:193).
Likewise, this Master thesis argues that policymakers should realize that the current top managers of
performing arts organizations in the Lowlands do not have the most ideal strategic orientation for an
environment in which the organization should be mostly focused on the market. This creates tensions
between the artistic and the economic objectives of the organization. A first step for public policy would
be to help leaders to deal with the current situations, increase the cognitive diversity within the DEL
structures and make sure that the artistic leader understands the economic situation and that the
business leader better understand the artistic context.
.
De Moyer 69
REFERENCES & APPENDIX
De Moyer 70
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adizes Ichak, 1991, Mastering Change - The Power of Mutual Trust and Respect in Personal Life, Family
Life, Business & Society, Adizes Institute Publications, Santa Monica.
Amason A.C., 1996, Distinguishing the Effects of Functional and Dysfunctional Conflict on Strategic
Decision Making: Resolving a Paradox for Top Management Teams, Academy of Management Journal,
vol. 39, 123-48.
Amason A.C. and Schweiger D.M., 1994, Resolving the Paradox of Conflict, Strategic Decision Making
and Organizational Performance, International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 5, 239-253.
Anderson K. and Court Marian R, 2012, Women in leadership: contextual dynamics and boundaries.
Gender in Management: an international journal, 27(3), 286-288.
Antony Jiju, 2004, Some pros and cons of six sigma: an academic perspective, The TQM Magazine, vol.
16 (4), 303-306.
Alvarez José Louis and Svejenova Silviya, 2005, Sharing Executive Power, Cambridge University Press,
New York.
Atkinson S. and Butcher D., 2003, Trust in Managerial Relationships, Journal of Managerial Psychology,
vol. 18, 282-288.
Avolio Bruce J., Walumbwa Fred. O. and Weber Todd J., 2009, Leadership: Current Theories, Research,
and Future Directions, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 60, 421- 449.
Baltagi Badi H. and Liu Long, 2012, The Hausman–Taylor panel data model with serial correlation,
Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(7), 1401-1406.
Banathy Bela H., 2000, Guided Evolution of Society: a Systems View, Kluwer Academic/Plenum
Publishers, New York.
Bankovskaya, Violetta, 2012, Development of conflict management strategies to increase the
organizational effectiveness in Nordic companies, Skemman, Reykjavik.
Bantel K.A. and Jackson S.E., 1989, Top Management and Innovations in Banking: Does the Composition
of the Top Team Make a Difference?, Strategic Management Journal (Special Issue: Strategic Leaders
and Leadership), vol. 10 (S1), 107-124.
Baron R. A., 1997, Positive Effects of Conflict: Insights from Social Cognition, in : C. K. W. De Dreu and E.
Van de Vliert (eds.), Using conflict in organizations, Sage, London, 177-191.
Baumol W.J., and Bowen W.G., 1996, Performing Arts: The Economic Dilemma. A Study of Problems
common to Theatre, Opera, Music, and Dance, Twentieth Century Fund, New York.
Bhansing Pawan V., 2013, Business in the performing arts: Dual executive leadership and organizational
performance, unpublished phd dissertation, Amsterdam.
De Moyer 71
Bhansing Pawan V., Leenders A.M. and Wijnberg Nachoem M. , 2012, Performance Effects of Cognitive
Heterogeneity in Dual Leadership Structures in the Arts: The role of selection system orientation,
European Management Journal, vol. 30 (6), 523-534.
Bendixen P., 2000, Skills and roles: Concepts of Modern Arts Management, International Journal of Arts
Management, 59-73.
Boal Kimberley and Hooijberg Robert, 2001, Strategic Leadership Research: moving on, Leadership
Quarterly, 2001 11 (4), 515 - 549.
Bonet Lluís, and Donato Fabio, 2011, The Financial Crisis and its Impact on the Current Models of
Governance and Management of the Cultural Sector in Europe, ENCATC Journal of Cultural
Management and Policy, vol. 1(1), 4-11.
Bourdieu Pierre, 1983, The Field of Cultural Production or: The Economic World Reversed, Poetics, vol.
12, 311-356.
Borman W. C. and Vallon W. R., 1974, A view of what can happen when behavioral expectation scales
are developed in one setting and used in another, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 59, 197-201.
Byrnes W.J., 2003, Management and the Arts, Focal Press, Burlington.
Bronstein Ilan, Nelson Noa, Livnat Zohar and Ben-Ari Rachel, 2012, Rapport in Negotiation: The
Contribution of the Verbal Channel, Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 56, 1089-1115.
Bryman Alan, 2004, Qualitative Research on leadership: A critical but appreciative review, The
Leadership Quarterly, vol. 15, 729–769.
Bryson John M., Ackermann Fran, Eden Colin, Finn and Charles B., 2004, Visible Thinking: Unlocking
Causal Mapping for Practical Business Results, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Burr V. and Butt T., 1992, Invitation to Personal Construct Psychology, Whurr, London.
Burke W. Warner, 2014, Conflict in Organizations, in: The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and
Practice, 3rd Edition, Jossey-Bas, San Francisco, 1-21.
Cammock P., Nilakant V. and Dakin S., 1995, Developing a Lay Model of Managerial Effectiveness: a
social constructivist perspective, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 32(4), 443-474.
Cannella A. and Holcomb T. R., 2005, A multi-level analysis of the upper-echelons model, Research in
MultiLevel Issues, 195-237.
Caust Jo (ed.), 2012, Arts Leadership: International Case Studies, Tilde University Press, Tilde.
Caust Jo, 2010, Does the art end when the management begins? The challenges of making ‘art’ for both
artists and arts managers, Asia Pacific Journal of Arts and Cultural Management, vol. 7 (2) 570-584.
Coffey A. and Atkinson P., 1996, Making sense of qualitative data, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Coleman Peter T, Deutch Morton and Marcus Eric C. (eds.), 2014, The Handbook of Conflict Resolution:
Theory and Practice, 3rd Edition, Jossey-Bas, San Francisco.
De Moyer 72
Conley C., 2007, Peak: How great companies get their mojo from Maslow, John Wiley & Sons: Jossey-
Bass, San Francisco.
Cosier R.A. and Schwenk C.R., 1990, Agreement and thinking alike: Ingredients for poor decisions,
Executive, vol. 4, 69-74.
Crawfis Christine E., 2011, Powerful Partnerships: An Examination of Dual Leadership in Nonprofit
Performing Arts Organizations., unpublished Master thesis.
Cray David, Inglis Loretta and Freeman Susan, 2007, Managing the Arts: Leadership and Decision Making
Under Dual Rationalities, Journal of Arts Management, Law & Society, 36(4), 295-313.
Day David V., Gronn Peter and Salas Eduardo, 2004, Leadership Capacity in Teams, The Leadership
Quarterly, vol. 15, 857-880.
Davis Christopher J. and Hufnagel Ellen M., 2007, Through the Eyes of Experts: A Socio-Cognitive
Perspective on the Automation of Fingerprint Work, MIS Quarterly, vol. 31 (4), 681-703.
Denis Jean-Louis and Langley, Ann, 2001, The Dynamics of Collective Leadership and Strategic Change in
Pluralistic Organizations, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44 (4), 809-837.
Denis Jean-Louis, Langley Ann and Sergi Viviane, 2012, Leadership in the Plural, The Academy of
Management Annuals, vol. (1), 211-283.
De Dreu Carsten K. W. and Van de Vliert Evert (eds.), 1997, Using conflict in organizations, Sage,
Thousand Oaks.
De Dreu Carsten K. W. and Beersma Bianca, 2005, Conflict in Organizations: Beyond Effectiveness and
Performance, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 14 (2), 105-117.
De Dreu Carsten K.W. and Van Vianen Annelies, 2001, Managing relationship conflict and the
effectiveness of organizational teams, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, vol. 22, 309-328.
Druckman D. and Zechmeister K., 1973, Conflict of Interest and Value Dissensus: propositions in the
sociology of conflict, Human Relations, vol. 26, 449-466.
Eden Colin and Jones Sue, 1984, Using Repertory Grids for Problem Construction, The Journal of the
Operational Research Society, vol. 35 (9), 779-790.
Eisenhardt Kathleen M. and Zbaracki M.J., 1992, Strategic decision making, Strategic Management
Journal, vol. 13, 17-37.
Eisenhardt Kathleen M. and Graebner Melissa E., 2007, Theory Building from Cases: opportunities and
challenges, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 50 (1), 25-32.
Eisenkopf Gerald and Bächtiger André, 2013, Mediation and Conflict Prevention, Journal of Conflict
Resolution, vol. 57 (4), 570-597.
Fantin Ivan, 2014, Applied Problem Solving. Method, Applications, Root Causes, Countermeasures, Poka-
Yoke and A3: How to make things happen to solve problems, Createspace, Milan.
De Moyer 73
Fayol H., 1949, General and Industrial Management, Isaac Pitman, London.
Fidler Brian, 2002, Strategic Leadership and Cognition, Springer International Handbooks of Education,
Dordrecht.
Finkelstein Sydney., Hambrick Donald. C. and Cannella Bert, 2009, Strategic leadership: Theory and
research on executives, top management teams, and boards, Oxford University Press, New York.
Fleetwood Karen L., 1987, The Conflict Management Styles and Strategies of Educational Managers,
unpublished master thesis, University of Delaware, Newark
Forsyth, D. R., 2009, Group dynamics, Wadsworth, New York.
Fransella F., Bell R. and Bannister D., 2004, A manual for repertory grid technique, John Wiley & Sons,
London.
Fransella F. (ed.), 2003, International Handbook of Personal Construct Psychology, John Wiley & Sons,
London.
Frei Daniel, 1985, Empathy in Conflict Management, International Journal, vol. 40 (4), 586-598.
Galli Jaime D., 2011, Organizational Management in the Non-Profit Performing Arts: Exploring New
Models of Structure, Management, and Leadership, University of Oregon Press, Oregon.
Ghaffar Abdul and Ali Khan Umar, 2012, Nature of Conflict and Conflict Management Strategies,
International Journal of English and Education, vol. 1 (2), 332-340.
van Gelder Lorianne, ‘Gemiste kans dat focus te veel ligt op artistieke’, Parool, 10/04/2013.
Giebels Ellen and Janssen Onne, 2005, Conflict stress and reduced well-being at work: The buffering
effect of third-party help, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (Special Issue:
Conflict in Organizations: Beyond Effectiveness and Performance), vol. 14 (2), 137-155.
Gronn Peter, 2002, Distributed Leadership as a Unit of Analysis, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 13, 423-
451.
Gronn Peter, 1999, Substituting for Leadership: The Neglected Role of the Leadership Couple, The
Leadership Quarterly, vol. 10, 141-162.
Gronn Peter, 2009, Leadership Configurations, Leadership, vol. 5(3), 381-394.
Hambrick, D. C., 2007, Upper echelons theory: An update, Academy of Management Review, vol. 32,
334-343.
Hambrick, D.C., and Mason P., 1984, Upper Echelons: The Organization as a reflexion of its Top
Managers, Academy of Management Review, vol. 9, 193-206.
Heenan David A. and Bennis Warren, 1999, Co-Leaders: The Power of Great Partnerships, John Wiley &
Sons, New York.
Hitt Michael A., Gimeno Javier and Hoskisson Robert E., 1998, Current and Future Research Methods in
Strategic Management, Organizational Research Methods, vol. 1., 6-44.
De Moyer 74
Hocker J. L. and Wilmot. W. W., 1985, Interpersonal conflict, Wm. C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque.
Hommes K. and de Voogt, A., 2006, Dual or duel leadership?, Journal of Convergence, 7(4), 28-30.
House R.J. and Aditya R., 1997, The Social Scientific Study of Leadership: Quo Vadis?, Journal of
Management, vol. 23, 409-447.
Hunt J.G., 1991, Leadership: a new Synthesis, Sage, Newbury Park.
Inglis Loretta and Cray David, 2011, Leadership in Australian arts organizations: A shared
experience?,Third Sector Review, vol. 17(2), 107-130.
Jaarverslag Belgische Kunstendecreet: analyse meerjarige subsidieronde Kunsten 2013-2016, 2012, URL:
<http://2012.kunstenenerfgoedjaarverslag.be/jaarverslag-2012/de-kijker/analyse-meerjarige-
subsidieronde-kunsten-2013-2016> (04/04/2014).
Jankowicz Devi, 2004, The Easy Guide to Repertory Grids, John Wiley & Sons, San Fransisco.
Janssen Onne. and Veenstra Christian, 1999, How Task and Person Conflict Shape the Role of Positive
Interdependence in Management Teams, Journal of Management, vol. 25, 117-141.
Jehn Karen A., 1994, Enhancing effectiveness: an investigation of advantages and disadvantages of
value-based intragroup conflict, International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 5(3), 223-238.
Jehn Karen A. and Mannix, E., 2001, The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intergroup
conflict and group performance, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, 238-51.
Kelly George. A., 1991, The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Routledge, London. UK (originally
published New York, Norton, 1955).
Kerkhof, Marleen van de, 2011, The Repertory Grid Technique, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam:, URL:
<http://www.ivm.vu.nl/en/Images/PT4_tcm53-161509.pdf> (10/04/2014).
Kerwin Shannon, Doherty Alison and Harman Alanna, 2011, It’s Not Conflict, It’s Differences of Opinion:
An In-Depth Examination of Conflict in Nonprofit Boards, SAGE Small Group Research, vol. 42 (5): 562-
594.
Kinicki Angelo and Kreitner Robert, 2008, Organizational Behavior: Key Concepts, Skills & Best Practices,
The McGraw - Hill Companies, New York.
Kleinbaum David G., Kupper Lawrence L., Muller Keith E. and Nizam Azhar, 2007, Applied Regression
Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods, Duxbury Pr, New York.
Kressel Kenneth, 2014, The Mediation of Conflict: Context, Cognition and Practice, in: Coleman Peter T,
Deutch Morton and Marcus Eric C. (eds.), 2014, The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and
Practice, 3rd Edition, Jossey-Bas, San Francisco, 817- 848.
Lewicki Roy J. and Tomlinson Edward C., 2014, Trust, Trust Development and Trust Repair, in: Coleman
Peter T., Deutch Morton and Marcus Eric C., The Handbook of Conflict Resolution, Theory and
Practice, 3rd edition, Jossey-Bas, San Francisco.
De Moyer 75
Lord Robert G. and Hall, Rosalie J., 2005, Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership
skill, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 16, 591-615.
Lord Robert G. and Emrich, Cynthia G., 2000, Thinking outside the box by looking inside the box:
Extending the cognitive revolution in leadership research, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 11 (4), 551-
579.
Lowe K. B., and Gardner W. L., 2000, Ten years of Leadership Quarterly: Contributions and challenges for
the future, The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 11, 459−514.
Mayer Bernard, 2010, The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide, Wiley & Sons, San
Fransisco.
Menard Scott, 2011, Standards for Standardized Logistic Regression Coefficients, Social Forces, vol. 89
(4), 1409-1428.
Mintzberg H., 1998, Covert leadership: Notes on managing professionals, Harvard Business Review, vol.
76, 140-147.
Mohr Jakki and Spekman Robert, 1994, Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes,
communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 15
(2), 135-152.
Moore Christopher W., 2003, The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, 3rd
edition, Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.
Mulcahy K. V., 2003, Entrepreneurship or social Darwinism? Privatization in American cultural
patronage, Journal of Arts Management, Law and Society 33 (3), 165-84.
Mulhare E.M., 1999, Mindful of the future: Strategic planning ideology and the culture of non-profit
management, Human Organization, 59 (3), 323-30.
Murray A.I., 1989, Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance, Strategic Management
Journal, vol. 10, 125-141.
Nadler Arie and Liviatan Ivo, 2006, Intergroup Reconciliation: Effects of Adversary's Expressions of
Empathy, Responsibility, and Recipients, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 32 (4), 459-
470.
Napier Nannette P., Keil Mark and Tan Felix B., 2007, IT project managers’ construction of successful
project management practice: a repertory grid investigation, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Information
Systems Journal, vol. 19, 255-282.
Nederlandse toekenningen meerjarige activiteitensubsidies 2013-2016, 2012, URL:
<http://www.fondspodiumkunsten.nl/nl/toekenningen/meerjarige_activiteitensubsidies_2013-
2016/#2> (01/04/2014).
De Moyer 76
Neimeyer G.J. and Hagans C.L., 2002, More madness in our method? The effects of repertory grid
variations on construct differentiation, Journal of Constructivist Psychology, vol. 15, 139-160.
Olsson Bengt, 1997, Is Musical Knowledge Aesthetic or Social? A Pilot Study of Knowledge Formation in
MusicAuthor(s), Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, vol. 133, 110-114.
Olson Bradley J., Parayitam Satyanarayana and Bao Yongjian, 2007, Strategic Decision Making: The
Effects of Cognitive Diversity, Conflict, and Trust on Decision Outcomes, Journal of Management, vol.
33, 196-222.
Pearce Craig L. and Conger Jay A., 2003, Shared Leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership,
Sage, Thousand Oaks CA.
Pearce Craig .L., 2004,The Future of Leadership: Combining Vertical and Shared Leadership to Transform
Knowledge Work, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 18, 47-57.
Pidd Michael, 1996, Tools for Thinking: Modelling in Management Science, John Wiley & Sons, San
Fransisco.
Pinkley R.L., 1990, Dimension of conflict frame: Disputant interpretations of conflict, Journal of Applied
Psychology, vol. 75, 117-126.
Pinkley Robin L. and Northcraft Gregory B., 1994, Conflict frames of reference: implications for dispute
processes and outcome, Academy of Management Journal, 1994, vol.1, 193-205.
Rahim M.A., 1983, Measurement of organizational conflict, Journal of General Psychology, vol. 109, 189-
199.
Rechner, Paula L. and Dalton Dan R., 1991, CEO duality and organizational performance: A longitudinal
analysis, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 12 (2), 155-160.
Regan Patrick M. and Stam Allan C., 2000, In the Nick of Time: Conflict Management, Mediation: Timing,
and the Duration of Interstate Disputes, International Studies Quarterly, vol. 44 (2), 239-260.
Reid Wendy, 2003a, Artists and Managers as Executive Leaders of Arts Organizations, in: Henze,
Raphaela (ed.), Kultur und Management – Eine Annäherung, Wiesbaden, VS Springer, 227-237.
Reid Wendy, 2013b, Dual Executive Leadership in the Arts: Rémi Brousseau, Pierre Rousseau and Le
Théâtre Denise-Pelletier, in: Caust Jo (ed.), Arts Leadership International Case Studies, Palgrave
MacMillan, Melbourne, 96-110.
Reid Wendy and Karambayya Rekha, 2009, Impact of dual executive leadership dynamics in creative
organizations, Human relations, vol. 62 (7), 1073-1112.
Reid Wend, 2003, Leadership Conflict Resulting from Combined Leadership Styles and Cognitive Values
of Dual CEO’s in Nonprofit Arts Companies, Conference Proceedings, Milan.
De Moyer 77
Reid Wendy, 2005, Instituionalized, Mandated Dual Leadership in Nonprofit Arts Organizations: One
Conceptualization of the Phenomenon and its Implications for Organizational Effectiveness, 9th
International Congress on Arts and Cultural Management (AIMAC), Valenica
Rost Joseph C., 1993, Leadership for the 21st Century, Praeger, New York.
Ryle, Anthony, 1975, Frames and cages: The repertory grid approach to human understanding,
International Universities Press, London.
Schwenk Charles R, 1990, Conflict in organizational decision making: an exporatory study of its effects in
the for-profit and not-for-profit organizations, Management Science, vol. 36, 436-448.
Segal Jeanne and Smith Melinda, 2009, Conflict Resolution Skills, URL:
<http://www.edcc.edu/counseling/documents/conflict.pdf> (01/05/2014).
Senior B., 1996, Team performance: using repertory grid technique to gain a view from the inside,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 11(3), 26-32.
Sergi Viviane, Denis Jean-Louis and Langley Ann, 2012, Opening Up Perspectives on Plural Leadership,
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol.5 (4), 403-407.
Simons Tony L. and Peterson Randall S., 2000, Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management
teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85(1), 102-111.
Smith H.J., 2000, The reliability and validity of structural measures derived from repertory grids, Journal
of Constructivist Psychology, vol. 13, 221-230.
Smith M., 1980, An analysis of three managerial jobs using repertory grids, Journal of Management
Studies, vol. 17(2), 205-213.
Spector Paul E., 1994, Using Self-Report Questionnaires in OB Research: A comment on the Use of a
Controversial Method, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 15 (5), 385-392.
Stodgill, R.M. Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of
Psychology, 1948, 25, 35-71.
Srivastava Abhishek, Bartol Kathryn M. And Locke Edwin A., 2006, Empowering Leadership in
Management Teams: effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy and performance, Academy of
Management Journal, vol. 49 (6), 1239-1251.
Tan Felix B. and Hunter M. Gordon, 2002, The Repertory Grid Technique: A Method for the Study of
Cognition in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, vol. 26 (1), 39-57.
Thomas L. and Harri-Augstein E., 1997 Self-Directed Learning: Toward a Comprehensive Model, Adult
Education Quarterly Fall, vol. 48, 18-33.
Ury W, 1991, Getting Past No: Negotiating with Difficult People, Bantam Books, Boston.
Varbanova, Lidia, 2013, Strategic Management in the Arts, Routledge, New York.
De Moyer 78
de Voogt, A., 2006, Dual Leadership as a Problem-solving Tool in Arts Organizations, International
Journal of Arts Management, vol. 9(1), 17-23.
Wall V.D. and Nolan L.L., 1987, Small group conflict: A look at equity, satisfaction, and styles of conflict
management, Small group behavior, vol. 18, 188-211.
Walsh James P., 1995, Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane.
Organization Science, vol. 6 (3), 280-321.
Walter Carl E., 1985, Dual Leadership and the 1956 Credit Reforms of the People's Bank of China, The
China Quarterly, vol. 102, 277-290.
Wanous J.P. and Youtz M.A., 1986, Solution diversity and the quality of group decisions. Academy of
Management Journal, vol. 29, 149-159.
Weber M., 1924/1947, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, Free Press, New York
Weitzman Eben A. and Weitzman Patricia Flynn, 2000, Problem Solving and Decision Making in Conflict
Resolution, in: Deutsch Morton, Peter T. Coleman and Marcus (eds.), The Handbook of Conflict
Resolution: Theory and Practice, San Francisco, Jossey-Bas Publishers, 185-209.
Wright Robert P., 2008, Constructed and Reconstructed Eliciting Cognitions of Strategizing Using
Advanced Repertory Grids in a World, Organizational Research Methods, vol. 11 (4) 753-769.
Wright Robert P., 2004, Mapping Cognitions to Better Understand Attitudinal and Behavioral Responses
in Appraisal Research, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 25 (3), 339-374.
Yukl Gary, 1994, Leadership in organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
De Moyer 79
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I: Historical Bases of Shared Leadership, summary Pearce & Conger (2003), emphasis added.
Figure II: Personal summary of the advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heterogeneity as
mentioned in the academic literature (Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Cosier & Schwenk, 1990; Finkelstein et
al., 2009; Amason, 1996)
Figure III: Affective versus Cognitive Conflict (Amason, 1996; Coleman, Deutch & Marcus, 2014)
Figure IV: Visualization of the Conflict Management Approach of De Dreu & Beersma (2005)
Figure V: Visualization of the Repertory Grid terminology and its applicability within this study
Figure VI: Repertory Grid example and indication of the terminology (inspired by David & Hufnagel,
2007)
Figure VII: Personal summary of the performing arts context according to Reid & Karambayya (2009)
Figure VIII: Key responsibilities artistic and business director (Galli, 2011:44)
Figure IX: Central strategic decisions according to 14 performing arts DEL leaders in The Low Lands
Figure X: Visualization main conflict resolution methods within the DEL practice in the performing arts
sector (BE & NL)
Figure XI: Construct visualization: emergent and opposite pole
Figure XII: Repertory Grid, realized by the Webgrid 5 software
De Moyer 80
OTHER MATERIALS
1. Copy of the interview preparation sheet
De Moyer 81
De Moyer 82
2. Summary of participating leaders
Company and function country Subisidies per year in EUR (2013-20116)
ICKamsterdam: ex- business leaders (left in 2013) NL 752.000
Dansmakers Amsterdam: ex-business leader (left in 2010) NL 399.570
Jan Martens/GRIP: artistic leader BE n.a.
ConnyJanssenDanst: business leader NL 468.000
Nederlands Danstheater: business leader NL 1.935.381
De Warme Winkel: artistic leader NL 334.500
Nationaal Ballet: ex-business leader (left in 2014) NL 4.282.360
Ultima Vez: business leader BE 1.040.000
Toneelgroep Oostpool: business leader NL 2.654.942
Ward/Ward: business leader BE/NL 288.000
Jan Martens/GRIP: business leader BE n.a., mix of various subsidies
Dood Paard: business leader NL 345.000
Het kip: artistic leader BE 360.000
NB Projects: artistic leader NL 279.000
3. Copy of an email invitation for the leaders
De Moyer 83
APPENDIX
1. Article by Pawan Bhansing ‘Gemiste kans dat focus te veel ligt op artistieke’ (Dutch)
De Moyer 84
2. Repertory Grid: strengths (up) & weaknesses (below)
This document was created in January ’14 in order to explore the method and its applicability for this Master thesis
- - Transparent and user-friendly:
many variations exist for different aspects of the procedure such as the elicitation procedure, the sorting technique, and the rating direction. The tool is fairly user−friendly: most articles report that the method is well understood by the respondents in face−to−face interviews (for phone interviews this advantage applies less).Eliciting the constructs is not difficult. The questions to ask respondents are simple.
- - Tool Reliability: researchers argue
that Rep Grid is not about producing the same results, but to see to what extent it shows change (in preferences, meanings, etc.), and what that change is signifying.
- Enhanced quality of the argumentive process. When it is used in a participatory assessment, the method has the capacity to enhance the quality of the argumentative process by facilitating the exploration of conflicting arguments and (underlying) claims on a specific topic (Van de Kerkhof, 2004)
Flexible tool: applicable in many variations in a variety of issue areas (Fransella & Bannister, 1977). Able to develop the intersection between objective and subjective methods of assessment: it targets the articulation of deeply personal meanings and enables the comparison or compilation of these meanings vis−a−vis the meaning of others (Bannister, 1985, referred to in Neimeyer, 2002). RGT gives insight into the ways in which respondents view a specific problem or topic. Limited number of interviews necessary: the tool is able to measure the true range of constructs in a particular context and at a particular moment by means of 20-25 interviews. This means that after 20 to 25 interviews, no new constructs will come up anymore (saturation). Some test re−test studies show rather stable patterns of construct relationships, whereas other studies report a lower degree of about one hour each to have a sound overview of the most relevant constructs in a particular context. (Van der Sluijs et al., 2001) Only one interviewer: with regard to the manpower the interviews (elicitation) and the analysis of the constructs can be done by one and the same person. If a computerized version of the method is used, this person will also be the facilitator
Deeper investigation is possible: Wright (2004), for instance, argues that the method allows the investigation to go much deeper than conventional questionnaires as it aims to reveal the core perceptions that influenced respondents' attitudes and subsequent behavior. The grid might encourage people to say what they think. Limited input & output: the only input that may be needed concerns the selection of elements, but this can also be done with the help of the respondents. The output of the tool consists of a list of constructs that respondents use to give meaning to a specific topic, as well as rankings (i.e. respondents' preferences) of elements according to the elicited constructs. No steering interviewer. the interviewer, due to his/her minimal role, does not steer the respondent through questioning (Van der Sluijs et al., 2001). The role of the interviewer will become even smaller if the respondents choose the elements in the analysis and not the respondent (Van de Kerkhof, 2004).
-
Method requires statistical
methods: analyzing the constructs is
more difficult and, if done
quantitatively, requires statistical
methods. The transparency of the
outcomes to some extent depends on
the type of analysis that is conducted.
Only present situation as
reference: it is hard to say what the
time is before the results become
outdated. People's constructs can
change as the result of new
knowledge, new developments, etc.
This is also one of the aims of the
method. With regard to the time scale
it needs to be stressed that the
present situation is the reference.
-
- Outcomes can be seen as less relevant:
the method's variations with regard to e.g.
elicitation method, sorting technique, rating
direction (Neimeyer, 2002; Neimeyer &
Hagans, 2002) or variations with regard to
the examples that are used to introduce and
explain the method (Reeve et al., 2002)
affect its outcomes. ariations in the use of
the method may elicit different sets of
constructs (this concerns the validity of the
method). As a result, researchers might
consider the grid outcomes insufficiently
reliable and, therefore, less relevant.
-
- Respondent constraints: Respondents can
be suspicious towards the rather open
questions and, as a result, feel constraint to
think up constructs with an open mind (Van
de Kerkhof, 2004).
- Need to be able to attach verbal
labels: the method only elicits the
constructs to which a person can
attach verbal labels (Fransella et al.,
2004). Some respondents might feel
the use of a verbal, and moderately
numerate, technique would be
counterproductive. It seems that the
nature of their ideas depends on the
inexplicit and ineffable. Yet, as one
interviewed artist in the research of
A.D. Jankowicz (1987) puts it
“Putting things into words? That is
positively dangerous.” (Jankowicz
1987:44).
-
-
De Moyer 85
DUTCH SUMMARY (NEDERLANDSE SAMENVATTING)
In het verleden deelden de meeste theoretici de mening dat één enkele persoon in de leidende rol de
meest effectieve vorm van leiderschap is (Weber, 1924/47 is; Fayol, 1949). Echter, meer recente
academische literatuur concentreert zich op structuren waarin meerdere personen de leiding over een
organisatie hebben (Pearce & Conger, 2003; Crawfis, 2011; Denis et. al., 2012; Sergi et al., 2012). Deze
Masterproef brengt verslag uit van een empirisch onderzoek dat focust op één bepaalde vorm van
gedeeld leiderschap: het duale leiderschapsmodel (dual executive leadership/DEL model).
Deze Masterproef bestudeert de evolutie en de kenmerken van het duale leiderschapsmodel (hoofstuk
1) en richt zich vervolgens op de relatie tussen het duale leiderschapsmodel en de notie van conflict.
Terugkerende en effectief bewezen vormen van conflictoplossingswijzen in de academische literatuur
worden onder de loep genomen (hoofdstuk 2) en er wordt bekeken hoe deze literatuur terugkomt in
het empirische onderzoek (hoofstuk 4). In tegenstelling tot conventionele vragenlijsten – zoals vaak
gebruikt wordt voor onderzoek naar leiderschapsstructuren – vindt het emperisch onderzoek voor deze
Masterproef plaats aan de hand van de Repertory Grid methodologie van psycholoog George Kelly
(hoofdstuk 3) en wordt zo een vernieuwend inzicht gegeven in het vakgebied van duaal leiderschap.
De onderzoeksvragen zijn: Hoe ervaring leiders de relatie tussen conflict en strategische beslissingen?
Met welke conflict resolutie methodes zijn leiders in een DEL structuur vertrouwd? en Hoe onderscheiden
leiders de verschillende conflictoplossingsmethoden van elkaar? Voor deze Masterproef werden
empirische gegevens verzameld van leiders uit Nederlandse en Belgische podiumkunstenorganisaties.
Deze organisaties bieden een gepast onderzoekskader, vermits in de duale leiderschapsstructuur in
deze context – bestaande uit de artistieke en de zakelijke leider – interne spanning inherent aanwezig is.
Dit komt door de dubbele doelstellingen van beide leiders: de artistieke leiding leidt het artistieke
creatieproces en de zakelijke leider bewaakt de institutionele stabiliteit van de organisatie.
Ten slotte, toont deze Masterproef aan dat – ondanks het feit dat de culturele sector gezien wordt als
een complex en unieke omgeving, verschillend van bijvoorbeeld het bankwezen of de IT industrie –
conflict resolutie en het balanceren van economische en niet-economische doelen binnen een duale
leiderschapstructuur ook voorkomt in andere industrieën. Sterker nog, zoals Pawan Bhansing
(2013:154) omschrijft, “in vele opzichten neemt de culturele industrie het voortouw op het gebied van
innovatie en creativiteit”.
De Moyer 86
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Julie De Moyer
Selected and awarded with a full cover grant by the EACEA department of the European Commission,
Julie completed in 2012 an International Research Master of Arts (cum laude) at the University of
Belgrade (RS) and Amsterdam (NL) after which she worked for two years as a marketing and
communication manager in the cultural sector. Julie is specialized in marketing analysis, strategic
consensus and international communication (both within an arts & business context) and combines her
academic career with a marketing research position at the Royal Philips Amsterdam Headquarters in its
Consumer Lifestyle Department. Her main goal is to build on what she has discovered from her studies
and work in Ghent, Bologna, Belgrade and Amsterdam, utilizing this knowledge as a ground for her
future work in a broader international perspective.