“Leaders who choose a SuperLeadership approach may appear weak to some[..]that they are shirking their leadership responsibilities[...] SuperLeadership will often produce poorer results at first…” (Houghton et al 2003: 134) There is not necessarily a contradiction between the two approaches, however, one is concerned with the perceived activities of the vertical leader, whereas the other is concerned with the actual activities. Still, it raises the question that, if one takes the position that the vertical leader needs to empower through ‘stepping back’ in some way, how is this done without being criticised or, more crucially, without risking damage to the organisation in the meantime? Conger and Pearce (2003) look at the relationship between vertical and shared leadership and postulate a number of questions worthy of closer study: “Does the absence…of an enlightened vertical leader preclude the possibility of shared leadership from occurring in traditional team and organization settings? Alternatively, might it be possible to develop shared leadership without a vertical leader to initiate the process under certain conditions?” (Conger and Pearce 2003: 286-287) 31
The question of how the vertical leader leads shared leadership would appear to be crucial to its development. Houghton et al highlight the difficulty inherent in doing this: “…a would be SuperLeader might say something like this: ‘Of course I trust you and empower you to handle this situation on your own. So go ahead and work on it[…] And by the way, I would like you to check in with me every couple of hours.’ ” (Houghton et al 2003: 134) Conger and Pearce suggest the need to investigate in what ways vertical leadership might act as a barrier to expressions of shared leadership, as well as the roles vertical leaders might play as catalysts or facilitators of shared leadership. The role of the group members in the instigation of shared leadership is discussed by O’Toole, Galbraith, and Lawler (2003) who list key questions which need to be asked amongst the group at the start of such a process: “What areas in the organization need our direct leadership in order for the corporation to succeed? How are we going to coordinate and communicate with each other so we don’t step on each other’s toes? and How can we make sure we send the same message?” (O’Toole et al 2003: 260)