Naturalistic Inquiry Theories

evolved beyond the “great man” (leadership by inheritance) and “trait” (leadership by natural abilities) approaches (Bass, 1981; Bass, 1990; Yukl, 1994). Leadership now emphasizes successful leadership practices (Kouzes & Posner, 1987). However, leaders are still viewed as symbolic representations of the community they lead, and hence symbolically responsible for the well being and success of followers. Followers count on their authority figures for leadership and action, disproportionately to their own efforts, and are easily disappointed when their situations do not visibly improve.

Kouzes and Posner (1987) have suggested five universal and “fundamental practices” of successful leadership, (a) challenging the process, (b) inspiring shared

The first axiom involves the nature of reality; the naturalistic inquiry paradigm advances the view that since multiple constructed realities exist, “inquiry into these multiple realities will inevitably diverge” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 37). The second axiom involves the relationship of knower to known; the naturalistic inquiry paradigm accepts that “the inquirer and the ‘object’ of the inquiry interact to influence one another” (p. 37). The third axiom concerns the possibility of generalization; the naturalistic inquiry paradigm forbears generalization in the positivistic sense, and instead proposes, “the aim of inquiry is to develop knowledge in the form of ‘working hypotheses’ that describe the individual case” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 38). The fourth axiom is about the possibility of causal linkages; the naturalistic inquiry paradigm refrains from drawing cause-effect connections, and instead claims, “all entities are in a state of mutual simultaneous shaping so that it is impossible to distinguish causes from effects” (p. 38). The fifth axiom involves the role of values in inquiry; the naturalistic inquiry paradigm accepts that “inquiry is value bound” (p. 38), suggesting the following