Journal Article Analysis: Communications 320
Summary
Kramer’s 2006 study “Sharing Leadership in a Community Theater Group: Filling the Leadership Role” explores the communication methods utilized by individuals in a setting in where shared leadership would seem to be vital for group success. As background for his study, Kramer notes that throughout history, leadership studies have focused almost solely on individual leaders within groups or organizations, hardly ever exploring organizational structures in which leadership is being shared among constituents. Additionally, he points out that the few studies that do broach the topic of shared leadership, still don’t delve into the communication events behind this sharing of power. Kramer, in …show more content…
Through taking numerous notes, and conducting a series of interviews after production of the play had finished, Kramer was able to draw a number of conclusions about the sharing of leadership in groups. Contrasting with the generally assumed modes of leadership, Kramer’s study unintentionally revolved around a passive primary leader who allowed secondary leaders to assume basically full control of the production. In these somewhat rare and different circumstances Kramer concluded that secondary leaders tend to step up and fulfill the roles ignored by the primary leader. Additionally, he concluded that in such a situation, individuals of the group who are not assigned any type of leadership role, will also often step up in times of leadership absence, either directly, or indirectly by utilizing …show more content…
While Kramer emphasizes that Community Theater is an ideal place to conduct such research, due to the many secondary leaders that are necessary to the success of such a play, it seems he downplays the traditionally very hierarchical nature of such a setup. While those he classifies as secondary leaders, indeed have some input into the play production, in a traditional theater structure, the director will have final say over most, if not all topics. Consequently, this would seem to place the realm of theater leadership much closer in line with previous shared leadership studies in which a signal leader eventually emerges to take control, rather than the mutual shared leadership group which Kramer is seeking.
The Methods
By approaching the study from an ethnographic standpoint, Kramer was able to directly observe the communication behaviors occurring within the community theater. Having such intimate contact with the studied group allowed him to both gain a great deal of insight into the participants mindsets, however such proximity certainly contributed to some biases in his overall analysis. Whether consciously or unconsciously his own personal opinions of both the cast members the secondary leaders which he identifies undoubtedly played into his portrayal of their roles within his
Summary
Kramer’s 2006 study “Sharing Leadership in a Community Theater Group: Filling the Leadership Role” explores the communication methods utilized by individuals in a setting in where shared leadership would seem to be vital for group success. As background for his study, Kramer notes that throughout history, leadership studies have focused almost solely on individual leaders within groups or organizations, hardly ever exploring organizational structures in which leadership is being shared among constituents. Additionally, he points out that the few studies that do broach the topic of shared leadership, still don’t delve into the communication events behind this sharing of power. Kramer, in …show more content…
Through taking numerous notes, and conducting a series of interviews after production of the play had finished, Kramer was able to draw a number of conclusions about the sharing of leadership in groups. Contrasting with the generally assumed modes of leadership, Kramer’s study unintentionally revolved around a passive primary leader who allowed secondary leaders to assume basically full control of the production. In these somewhat rare and different circumstances Kramer concluded that secondary leaders tend to step up and fulfill the roles ignored by the primary leader. Additionally, he concluded that in such a situation, individuals of the group who are not assigned any type of leadership role, will also often step up in times of leadership absence, either directly, or indirectly by utilizing …show more content…
While Kramer emphasizes that Community Theater is an ideal place to conduct such research, due to the many secondary leaders that are necessary to the success of such a play, it seems he downplays the traditionally very hierarchical nature of such a setup. While those he classifies as secondary leaders, indeed have some input into the play production, in a traditional theater structure, the director will have final say over most, if not all topics. Consequently, this would seem to place the realm of theater leadership much closer in line with previous shared leadership studies in which a signal leader eventually emerges to take control, rather than the mutual shared leadership group which Kramer is seeking.
The Methods
By approaching the study from an ethnographic standpoint, Kramer was able to directly observe the communication behaviors occurring within the community theater. Having such intimate contact with the studied group allowed him to both gain a great deal of insight into the participants mindsets, however such proximity certainly contributed to some biases in his overall analysis. Whether consciously or unconsciously his own personal opinions of both the cast members the secondary leaders which he identifies undoubtedly played into his portrayal of their roles within his