Strategic leadership, like many other concepts, does not have a universal definition. The absence of a universal definition of the concept means that not everyone understands the term. For this reason, each author has his/her unique definition of the term (strategic leadership). While some of the individual authors’ definitions of the term may be comparable, others contrast. Each of the definitions, however, draws from leadership and strategy concepts, merging them to present a definition. Strategic leadership has no universal definition according to authors the liberty to each comes with their definition.
Different authors have different definitions of strategic leadership. Singphen et al. (2019) define strategic leadership as “a theory that describes processes of the organization’s direction setting, creating and implementing strategies into practice to achieve the objectives of the organization” (p. 21). For them, strategic leadership is a theory that guides an organization towards attaining organizational goals and objectives. For Simpson (2016) strategic leadership is “that which is exercised at a level of an organization where the individual is truly determining the azimuth for the organization” (p. 75). Simpson (2016) continues in his definition of strategic leadership stating that it involves four tasks that include getting the big ideas right; communicating the ideas across the entire organization; overseeing the implementation of the ideas; and determining the refinement, change, and augmentation of the big ideas. Jaleha and Machuki (2018) define strategic leadership as “the unique abilities to anticipate, envisioning, maintaining flexibility, thinking strategically and empowering employees to create new inventions that lead to organizational transformations or changes and ultimately improvement in performance” (p. 127). For them, strategic leadership hinges on the leaders’ unique abilities to not only form strategy but also influence employees towards improved performance.
Despite the definitions emanating from different authors, there are aspects of the definitions that are similar. Across the three definitions, direction setting connects the authors. Singphen et al. (2019) see strategic leadership as a theory describing a direction-setting process. Similarly, Simpson (2016) sees it as determining the azimuth (direction) of an organization. For Jaleha and Machuki (2018), the unique abilities of a strategic leader enable the leader to empower the employees to create new inventions that lead to organizational transformation. Such abilities essentially help in giving direction to the organization. The connecting thread in the three definitions, therefore, is the leader’s ability to create an environment in which employees feel motivated enough towards achieving organizational objectives. The leader’s main role, in this case, is to provide direction.
Achieving organizational objectives is another similarity across the different definitions. Singphen et al. (2019) view strategic leadership as a process of implementing strategies aimed at achieving organizational objectives. Similarly, Simpson (2016) sees strategic leadership as an exercise whose ultimate objective is giving direction towards the achievement of the big ideas proposed at the beginning. For Jaleha and Machuki (2018), strategic leadership is about using the leader’s unique abilities with the ultimate aim of transforming the organization and improving performance. The baseline for performance improvement is largely hinged on organizational objectives, which the organizational transformation and improvement in performance hope to achieve.
While the direction is the uniting factor, there are differences in the three definitions. Singphen et al. (2019) define strategic leadership as a theory describing a process. On the other hand, Simpson (2016) defines it as an action exercised within an organization. He further goes to provide four different tasks (formulation of the big ideas, communication, supervision, and refinement) associated with strategic leadership, unique to his definition and missing in the other authors’ take of strategic leadership. For Jaleha and Machuki (2018), strategic leadership is a set of unique abilities for organizational transformation. Each of the definitions, therefore, takes a unique approach in describing strategic leadership, even as they all connect at giving direction to the organization. The uniqueness in the definitions is drawn from not only the literature used by the authors but also the subject each author set out to explore.
Each of the three definitions presents unique ideas making it imprudent to choose one as the overarching definition for strategic leadership. It is thus possible to merge some of the unique ideas to come up with a more inclusive and comprehensive definition of strategic leadership. Drawing from the three definitions, strategic leadership thus refers to the use of a leader’s unique abilities to set the direction for an organization through creating, communicating, implementing, and where necessary, refining strategies, towards organizational transformation and improving overall organizational performance. The definition draws from the authors’ elements of a leader’s unique abilities, direction setting (a similarity across all the definitions), and organizational performance/achieving organizational objectives. Bringing together the unique concepts from the three definitions makes for a more comprehensive and fulfilling definition of strategic leadership as it involves the leader, the organizational direction, and all the stakeholders.
The comprehensive definition is applicable in the work setting. Leadership theories have looked at the innate abilities as well as the learned abilities of such leaders (Northhouse, 2016). The definition begins by stating the leader’s ability to set direction. In all work settings, it is the responsibility of the leader to set a vision and direction to be followed by the subordinates (George, 2014; Wang, Chich-Jen, & Mei-Ling, 2010). Vision and direction setting are the traditional roles of a leader in any organization. Moreover, after setting the vision, the leader must create, communicate, and oversee the implementation of strategies aimed at achieving the vision set, making the definition apt for any work setting.
There is no universal definition of strategic leadership. Authors in the discipline each front their definitions of the concept. Despite the differences in the definitions, there exist similarities, particularly in setting a direction for the organization and achievement of organizational objectives. Merging elements of the different definitions creates not only a more comprehensive definition of the concept but also makes the definition applicable in the work setting.
Jaleha, A., A. & Machuki, V., N. (2018). Strategic leadership and organizational performance: A critical review of the literature. European Scientific Journal, 14(35), 124-149. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n35p124.
The paper explores the concept of strategic leadership in relation to organizational performance. In making the connection between the two, it delves into defining some concepts including strategic leadership, the external environment, organizational change, and organizational performance. In relating strategic leadership to organizational performance, the paper argues that leaders’ strategic choice and discretion put them in the best position to influence organizational change and performance through their behavior and strategic choices. Drawn from the renowned Busines Source Complete database and published in the European Scientific Journal, the paper provides sound arguments hinged on theory. The paper also draws from a wide variety of literature, ensuring that has sound grounding from experts in the field.
Simpson, E. (2016). On strategic leadership. Parameters, 45(4), 75-79. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1779966845?accountid=1611.
The ideas on strategic leadership fronted on this paper are from an interview with David H. Petraeus, a retired general of the U.S. Army. The strategic leadership concepts herein, therefore, are drawn from active military service in Afghanistan. The general sees strategic leadership as an exercise carried out by a leader at the helm of an organization with enough power to change the direction of the organization. In the general, the paper proposes four tasks in undertaking strategic leadership that include getting the big ideas right, communicating the idea, overseeing the implementation of the ideas, and determining the need for refinement, changing, and augmentation of the big ideas. The journal is published by the United States Army War College. The journal is peer-reviewed, ensuring that the articles published have undergone stringent scrutiny and that they provide verifiable information. The journal is available on ProQuest, a database that provides resources and tools that enhance research and learning, publishing and dissemination, and the procurement, running, and discovery of library collections.
Singphen, T., Poopayang, P., Siphai, S., & Charoensuk, P. (2019). Strategic leadership factors of school administrators influencing the effectiveness of small-sized schools. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, 11(3), 20-28. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1215445.pdf.
This is a full research paper available from the ERIC database. The purpose of the paper was to study the direct and indirect influence of strategic leadership on school administration, particularly in influencing the effectiveness of small-sized schools. The paper used a research sample of 1,396 administrators of small-sized schools in the North, Northeast, Central, and Southern parts of Thailand. The research discovered that strategic leadership factors including direction setting, strategy formulation, and implementation, and strategic control and evaluation had a great influence on the effectiveness of small-sized schools. The paper draws on empirical research making it appropriate for studying strategic leadership. Additionally, it is published in the International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies and the ERIC database, both of which are high-quality resources. The journal is peer-reviewed ensuring that the information published in it has been verified by experts. On the other hand, ERIC is run by the Institute of Education Sciences, under the U.S. Department of Education. The Institute aims at providing scientific evidence grounding education practice and policy. Through ERIC it hopes to share the information in formats useful and accessible to educators, parents, policymakers, researchers, and the public.
References
George, B. (2014). Jack Ma on Alibaba, entrepreneurs and the role of handstands.” The New York Times. https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/jack-ma-on-alibaba-entrepreneurs-and-the-role-of-handstands/
Jaleha, A., A. & Machuki, V., N. (2018). Strategic leadership and organizational performance: A critical review of the literature. European Scientific Journal, 14(35), 124-149. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n35p124
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ED). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Simpson, E. (2016). On strategic leadership. Parameters, 45(4), 75-79. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1779966845?accountid=1611.
Singphen, T., Poopayang, P., Siphai, S., & Charoensuk, P. (2019). Strategic leadership factors of school administrators influencing the effectiveness of small-sized schools. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, 11(3), 20-28. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1215445.pdf.
Wang, F., Chich-Jen, S., & Mei-Ling, T. (2010). Effect of leadership style on organizational performance as viewed from human resource management strategy. African Journal of Business Management, 4(18), 3924-3936. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1663920369?accountid=1611.