Four Types of Leadership and Orchestra Quality

• Published date: 01 June 2015
• Date: 01 June 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21132
• Author: Diana E. Krause

431

N M  L, vol. 25, no. 4, Summer 2015 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/nml.21132

Journal sponsored by the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.

Correspondence to: Diana E. Krause, Alpen-Adria University Klagenfurt, Human Resource Management, Leadership

and Organizational Behavior, University Street 65–67, 9020 Klagenfurt Austria. E-mail: DianaEva.Krause@aau.at.

Four Types of Leadership

and Orchestra Quality

Diana E. Krause

Alpen-Adria University Klagenfurt

This study analyzes the effects of a conductor’s power-based leadership on orchestra qual-

ity. The structure of power-based leadership and the hypotheses were tested with a sample

of musicians from German orchestras. Confirmatory factor analyses verify four types of

power-based leadership of the conductor vis-à-vis the musicians: (1) expert/referent power,

(2) informational power, (3) legitimate power through position, and (4) impersonal and

personal reward and coercive power. The relative importance of the four forms of power-

based leadership on artistic quality was tested using structural equation modeling (SEM).

The results supported the hypotheses that expert power and referent power have the strongest

positive impact on artistic quality than all other forms of power-based leadership under

study. Contributions to theories of leadership and power, research methods, and practice

are discussed.

Keywords: leadership, power, power bases, artistic quality, orchestra

Introduction: Previous Investigations

onLeadership in Orchestras

Research on leadership in orchestras has been silent (Boerner and Gebert 2012, 347, Hunt,

Stelluto, and Hooijberg 2004, 148; Koivunen and Wennes 2011, 53). To date, there have

been only a handful studies that investigate the impact of diff erent forms of leadership attrib-

utes (who the leader is) and leadership behaviors (what the leader does) of an orchestra con-

ductor on the musicians and/or the artistic performance of the orchestra (Allmendinger and

Hackman 1994; Atik 1994; Boerner and Krause 2002; Boerner, Krause, and Gebert 2001,

2004; Boerner and von Streit 2007; Koivunen 2003; Koivunen and Wennes 2011; Köping

2007; Ladkin 2008; Rowold and Rohmann 2009).  ese studies use diff erent conceptual-

izations of leadership and diff erent approaches (see Atik 1994) to analyze the phenomenon

of leadership in the orchestra context. For example, the classical study by Allmendinger and

Hackman (1994) has shown (among other things) that the well-being of orchestra musicians

increases if leadership is existent and constructive.  is result is important because research

has documented that the general satisfaction of musicians (Allmendinger and Hackman

1995) as well as their specifi c satisfaction with compensation, growth opportunities, and

Nonprofi t Management & Leadership DOI: 10.1002/nml

432 KRAUSE

work relationships is relatively low (Allmendinger and Hackman 1996), and that many

orchestra musicians suff er from performance anxiety expressed in a lack of confi dence, worry,

emotionality, and physical symptoms (Langendörfer et al. 2006).

Using a qualitative approach (newspaper articles, archival data, and interviews) combined with

aesthetic analysis, Koivunen and Wennes (2011) describe three key leadership dimensions

of a conductor: relational listening, aesthetic judgment, and kinesthetic empathy. Relational

listening is understood as a natural talent of the conductor, which can also be developed and

which requires knowledge, experience, and presence in every single moment and full concentra-

tion by the conductor.  e authors describe aesthetic judgment as an opinion that depends on

sensuous perception of the conductor and that includes the evaluation of the whole sound of

all instrumental groups.  is aesthetic judgment becomes manifest in the conductor’s vision

and interpretation of the music, which needs to be (nonverbally) communicated to the musi-

cians. Kinesthetic empathy refers to the conductor’s nonverbal behaviors to transform his or

her interpretation of the score into shared action by using gestures, body movements, or facial

expressions. Based on case study approach, Ladkin (2008) recommends three fundamentals for

leadership in the music domain: mastery, congruence between form and content, and purpose.

Compared to the aesthetic analysis of leadership in orchestras and in line with the traditional

trait approach of leadership (see Yukl 2012), another body of research focuses on certain

attributes of a conductor that might be crucial for artistic performance. Outstanding conduc-

tors are described as charismatic, visionary, inspirational, competent, enthusiastic, “heroic,”

“grandiose,” demanding, strict, autocratic, despotic, and/or credible (Atik 1994; Hunt et al.

2004; Köping 2007; Marotto, Roos, and Victor 2007; Weick, Gilfi llan, and Keith 1973).

Other studies focus on what the conductor does and analyze the effects of transactional,

transformational, or directive-charismatic leadership behaviors in orchestras.1 For example,

Rowold and Rohmann (2009) investigated the role of transformational and transactional

leadership on subjective performance criteria (musicians’ satisfaction, their extra eff ort, and

their assessment of the conductors’ effectiveness) in nonprofit orchestras that considered

musicians’ positive and negative emotions.  ey found that transformational leadership as

well as transactional leadership behaviors promote performance, and that musicians’ positive

emotions contribute to performance indicators whereas negative emotions do not.

Following the transformational leadership approach in orchestras, Boerner and von Streit

(2007) confirmed an interaction effect of selected facets of transformational leadership

(charisma, inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation) and musicians’ positive

group mood on orchestra performance. According to Boerner and Gebert (2012), the func-

tionality of a conductor’s transformational leadership behaviors on artistic performance can

be explained by two mechanisms: transformational leadership fosters the positive eff ect of

ensemble diversity on idea generation and simultaneously decreases the negative effect of

ensemble diversity on idea integration.

Moreover, it has been empirically documented that the conductor’s directive leadership style

is functional to the orchestra’s success (Boerner et al. 2001) especially if—at the same time—

the musicians perceive the conductor as an indisputable authority (Boerner and Krause

2002). Because of the high interdependency of tasks and the related high demands concern-

ing the coordination of processes (Saavedra, Earle, and Van Dyne 1993), external coordina-

tion through the conductor is central in larger orchestras. This statement is valid for the

interplay within the instrumental groups (for example, fi rst and second violins) as well as for