Power Shared is Power Multiplied: A Case for Distributed Leadership in Today's Organizations

Listen to this article:

Abstract: In today's rapidly evolving business landscape, distributed leadership has emerged as a critical paradigm shift from traditional hierarchical power structures. This article explores how dispersing influence and decision-making authority throughout organizations enables companies to better navigate complexity by leveraging diverse expertise and perspectives. The article makes a compelling case that effective distributed leadership balances autonomy with coordination through clear vision and values, presenting theoretical foundations from shared and collective leadership models alongside empirical research demonstrating enhanced innovation and performance outcomes. Through case studies of Google, Amazon, and Toyota, the article illustrates practical implementations of distributed leadership principles, highlighting how these organizations have successfully empowered employees at all levels while maintaining strategic coherence. The authors conclude by offering best practices for organizations seeking to multiply their capabilities by cultivating leadership across all ranks rather than concentrating power at the top.

Gone are the days when power and leadership were solely held by those at the top of organizational hierarchies. The modern business landscape demands a new way of leading that shares power across all levels.

Today we will make the case that adopting distributed leadership practices allows companies to better navigate today's complex environment by multiplying their power and capabilities.

An Overview of Distributed Leadership

Distributed leadership involves dispersing influence and decision-making authority throughout an organization rather than centralizing it among a select few (Currie & Lockett, 2011). By drawing on the expertise and perspectives of diverse teams, this democratized approach to power generates more innovative solutions and fosters greater agility. However, just sharing titles and responsibilities is not sufficient - strong direction and coordination are still needed from the top. This essay will explore how leadership can balance distributing authority while maintaining oversight through clear vision and values.

To build the research foundation for this argument, theories on distributed and shared leadership will be discussed along with findings from empirical studies. Then, specific examples will illustrate how top companies like Google, Amazon and Toyota have successfully applied distributed leadership principles. The conclusion will summarize key takeaways for organizational leaders looking to strengthen their impact by multiplying rather than hoarding power.

Distributed Leadership: Theoretical Foundations

A wealth of research supports the organizational benefits of distributed leadership models. Broadly defined, distributed leadership involves two or more individuals influencing each other and working collaboratively to achieve positive organizational change (Kampa-Kokesch & Anderson, 2001). At its core, this approach recognizes that leadership skills and expertise reside in many people, not just those at the top of hierarchies (Spillane et al., 2004).

Shared and Collective Leadership

Closely related concepts include shared leadership, where influence is dispersed across team members rather than centralized in a single appointed leader (Carson et al., 2007). Collective leadership also emphasizes team-level interactions and social construction of leadership functions rather than traits of individuals (Fletcher & Käufer, 2003). Across these frameworks, leadership becomes more of collaborative process than a position or role.

Situational and Contingency Approaches

Other models draw on situational and contingency theories. Situational leadership contends that different leadership styles are appropriate depending on subordinates' development levels and task demands (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). Similarly, contingency theories propose that leadership effectiveness depends on matching one's style to organizational characteristics and contextual factors (Fiedler, 1964). These approaches suggest a flexible, adaptable model is needed where power is dispersed strategically based on situations.

Empirical research has found distributed leadership to be positively correlated with school effectiveness, innovation diffusion, and team performance (Leithwood et al., 2007; Mehra et al., 2006; Hoch & Dulebohn, 2017). When influence and decision-making are shared across ranks rather than monopolized from above, organizations can better leverage diverse strengths and harness creativity from all levels.

Implementation in Practice: Google, Amazon, Toyota

Let's now examine specific cases of distributed leadership in action at well-known companies. How have they applied concepts in realistic organizational contexts?

Google: Flat Structure, Skunkworks Approach

Google is renowned for its flat, decentralized structure where teams have autonomy and influence is widely dispersed (Bock, 2015). Small, self-managed groups dubbed "pods" work on projects without rigid hierarchies. Teams also have freedom to experiment through an internal "20% time" policy allowing engineers to innovate on ideas outside core responsibilities. Google's skunkworks or autonomous innovation units like X further champion an entrepreneurial, distributed approach. This has powered innovations from Search to Gmail to self-driving cars by tapping ideas from diverse talent pools.

Amazon: Leadership From Everywhere

Jeff Bezos pioneered the principle that "leadership is not a position or title, it's how you behave" at Amazon to build a culture where anyone, regardless of role, can step up with new ideas (Lashinsky, 2019). Through initiatives like "Workback" where employees propose improvements directly to executives, influence is shared across functions. Autonomous product teams also drive continuous innovation cycles. By distributing ownership and decision rights, Amazon harnesses creativity from all 24,000+ teams to evolve offerings rapidly based on data and customer feedback.

Toyota: Frontline-Centric Continuous Improvement

The Toyota Production System exemplifies distributed leadership through its emphasis on continuous improvement ( kaizen ) led by frontline associates. Team members have authority and responsibility for operational problem-solving using tools like PDCA cycles and andon cords to flag issues for immediate resolution (Liker & Hoseus, 2008). Cross-functional leadership is also cultivated through quality circles and problem-solving workshops. This systematic involvement of all employees maximizes organizational learning and responsiveness to changing market needs.

Best Practices for Organizations

While dispersed authority yields benefits, complete leaderless structures pose coordination challenges. Strong direction is still needed. Organizations should consider the following:

• Clear Vision and Values: Distributed leadership functions best with a coherent vision and set of values to guide dispersed teams pursuing diverse initiatives (Fletcher & Käufer, 2003; Currie & Lockett, 2011). Leaders must establish a unifying direction and boundaries for autonomous units.

• Design Framework for Power Distribution: Rather than ad hoc distribution, leadership diffusion should follow an intentional framework considering situational factors, expertise allocation, succession planning and change management (Denis et al., 2012). Processes hold teams accountable within the shared vision.

• Develop Leadership At All Levels: Empowering distributed leadership demands developing leadership competencies company-wide, not just for C-suite (Pielstick, 2000; Hoch, 2013). Training, coaching and lateral job rotations help nurture a pipeline of diverse leaders comfortable with collaborative influence models.

• Foster Networked Communication: Distributed structures rely on lateral communication networks to coordinate dispersed work and share information for coherence (Yukl, 2009; Currie & Lockett, 2011). Leaders promote participatory decision-making forums, knowledge management systems and communities of practice.

• Balance Autonomy With Direction: Complete autonomy yields incoherence while too much central control stifles innovation (Mehra et al., 2006; Denis et al., 2012). Leaders establish light-touch governance allowing strategic flexibility within clearly defined parameters.

Conclusion

As work grows more complex, no single person possesses all the knowledge or expertise needed to function optimally. The strongest contemporary organizations embrace distributed approaches to amplify their impact by tapping into collective wisdom. By intelligently dispersing authority, vision and influence, companies can better solve challenges, sense emerging opportunities and execute rapidly through self-managed teams. Leaders play a crucial role not in hoarding power but in cultivating an environment where leadership emerges organically from passionate employees at all ranks. By multiplying rather than monopolizing influence, organizations multiply their capacities to innovate, adapt and thrive.

References

1. Bock, L. (2015, August 2). Work rules! Insights from inside Google that will transform how you live and lead. Twelve.

2. Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1217-1234.

3. Currie, G., & Lockett, A. (2011). Distributing leadership in health and social care: Concertive, conjoint or collective?. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 286-300.

4. Denis, J. L., Langley, A., & Sergi, V. (2012). Leadership in the plural. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 211-283.

5. Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Advances in experimental social psychology, 1, 149-190.

6. Fletcher, J. K., & Käufer, K. (2003). Shared leadership: Paradox and possibility. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 21–47). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

7. Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23(5), 26-34.

8. Hoch, J. E. (2013). Shared leadership and innovation: The role of vertical leadership and employee integrity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(2), 159-174.

9. Hoch, J. E., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2017). Shared leadership in enterprise resource planning and human resource management system implementation. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 77-93.

10. Kampa-Kokesch, S., & Anderson, M. Z. (2001). Executive coaching: A comprehensive review of the literature. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(4), 205–228.

11. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system. Leadership and policy in schools, 6(1), 37-67.

12. Lashinsky, A. (2019, January 9). How Amazon's brutal 'coaching' culture works. Fortune.

13. Liker, J. K., & Hoseus, M. (2008). Toyota culture: The heart and soul of the Toyota way. McGraw-Hill Education.

14. Mehra, A., Smith, B. R., Dixon, A. L., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in teams: The network of leadership perceptions and team performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 232-245.

15. Pielstick, C. D. (2000). Formal vs. informal leading: A comparative analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 7(3), 99-114.

16. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of curriculum studies, 36(1), 3-34.

17. Yukl, G. (2009). Leading organizational learning: Reflections on theory and research. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 49-53.

---

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

---

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2025). Power Shared is Power Multiplied: A Case for Distributed Leadership in Today's Organizations. Human Capital Leadership Review, 22(1). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.22.1.2