METAANALYTIC STUDIES OF LEADERSHIP - ADDED INSIGHTS OR ADDED PARADOXES

This research examines the extent to which meta-analysis of leadership research fulfills its promise to bring order into a body of literature characterized by inconsistent, equivocal findings. Manual and computer searches yielded 14 meta-analyses which clustered around the following leadership topics: (1) theories of leadership (n = 7); (2) leadership in small groups (n = 2); and gender differences in leadership (n = 5). In all three categories, the results of the meta-analyses were as inconsistent as those of primary research. Differences in the types of meta-analystic techniques used, differences in judgment calls including decisions defining the research domain, establishing criteria for inclusion of studies, coding characteristics and selection of potential moderators are, at least in part, responsible for the differences observed. In addition, areas of leadership research which have produced sizable bodies of empirical studies such as the effects of power on leadership outcomes, leader effectiveness as well as the effects of leadership competencies and leadership contexts on leader-follower relations have not been subjected to statistical aggregation and summarization of results across studies. Recommendations for improving the quality of meta-analytic research on leadership are offered.