Building on the success of its annual research days held since 2019, RIPCO will host its next event on May 27, 2025, at ICN in Paris, La Défense. Researchers are invited to submit extended abstracts of their academic work (see presentation guidelines below). Submissions on all topics are welcome, as long as they fall within the scope of organizational behavior, encompassing individual and collective attitudes and behaviors in an organizational setting. We are particularly interested in psychological processes that contribute to the life and performance of teams and organizations.

Contributions can take various forms: narrative, systematic, meta-analytic, or bibliometric literature reviews synthesizing scientific knowledge; conceptual analyses proposing new theoretical frameworks; or empirical studies using experiments, surveys, or qualitative case studies. Social phenomena can be examined independently or in relation to their antecedents and/or consequences. Contributions should be grounded in management sciences, specifically organizational behavior, but can also draw on psychology, ethnology, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, political science, economics, information technology, decision theory, and other related disciplines.

This year, the Research Day will focus on leadership—its antecedents and effects on individuals, groups, and organizations. Leadership dominates discourse in media, business, and academic literature, often presented as the solution to workplace challenges and organizational demands for productivity, innovation, and agility. Since the 1990s, leadership has gained prominence, fueled by management techniques imported from Anglo-Saxon contexts and integrated into European organizations. As performance management and evaluations have become standard, leaders are increasingly expected to guide teams, foster motivation, and inspire trust.

The importance of leadership has been further highlighted during crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, which required individuals and organizations to demonstrate resilience through specific leadership styles. Similarly, technological changes and new ways of working challenge managers to adopt new approaches and develop fresh competencies. Over the past two decades, countless studies have explored various leadership styles, from transactional and transformational leadership to "positive" forms like humble leadership, servant leadership, authentic leadership, and ethical leadership.

While the list of leadership styles seems endless, understanding their precise distinctions and their similar or differing effects remains a complex task for researchers. Leadership remains a central concern in contemporary organizations, but it also reminds us of the crucial role of followers in enabling leaders to function effectively. Given the evidence that leadership attributes correlate with organizational performance—such as studies showing that a leader's influence now explains 20% of organizational outcomes compared to 10% in the 1970s—it is both timely and legitimate to explore the question: "What type of leader is needed for contemporary organizations?"

This theme will be examined from multiple perspectives, addressing the enduring significance of leadership and its diverse forms in shaping organizational outcomes.

The figures related to workplace malaise are alarming. Occupational illnesses are on the rise, and the number of burnout cases, absences, and leave related to these illnesses has become a major concern. Employers must take measures to prevent these health problems and promote employee well-being. However, numerous studies highlight the role of leadership in fostering workplace malaise (Brière, 2021; Hetrick, 2023; Mackey, Parker Ellen, McAllister, & Alexander, 2021; Pfeffer, 2018; Sandel, 2014; Schyns, Wisse, & Sanders, 2019). Toxic leadership appears to play a significant role in creating problematic organizational cultures.
Despite its importance, this specific form of negative leadership, particularly its effects on employees and work groups, remains under-researched. Its definition is not yet well-established, its characteristics are poorly identified, and its direct effects and impacts are insufficiently measured.

Key questions for exploration include:

• Is managerial toxicity limited to isolated and individualized managerial behaviors, or are its roots embedded in organizational missions, culture, management tools, and values?
• How can toxic leadership be measured and diagnosed within organizations?
• What are the links between organizational vision, mission, values, and toxic leadership?
• What variables facilitate the development and spread of toxic management within organizations?
• Can we identify a "trickle-down" or "trickle-up" effect in terms of toxic leadership?
• How do employees react to toxic leadership?
• Is toxic leadership always associated with negative effects, or can it also generate potentially positive individual or collective responses?
• Is toxicity primarily a collective or individual phenomenon?
• What myths, rituals, and discourses establish or dismantle the leader?

A second major question concerns the antecedents of leadership. Is leadership innate, rooted in individual traits that some people possess while others lack? This perspective aligns with Max Weber's concept of charismatic authority (Weber, 1956). Or, alternatively, is leadership a managerial stance that can be acquired like other skills, allowing for a more democratic, distributed, or shared form of leadership within organizations (Coun, Gelderman, & Perez-Arendsen, 2015; Nayani, Nielsen, Daniels, Donaldson-Feilder, & Lewis, 2018; Ospina, 2017)?
This leads us to propose several approaches to explore this theme, including but not limited to:

• What individual traits correspond to various forms of leadership?
• What socio-demographic characteristics define today's leaders (e.g., social origins, educational backgrounds)?
• The image of the leader and the manifestation of their influence and hubris.
• The material representations and portrayals that associate a company with its leader.
• Leadership as individual or collective competence?
• What are the links between individual characteristics and forms of leadership?
• Are there specific spaces for the creation or socialization of today's leaders (e.g., academic institutions, associations, social networks)?
• How should managers be trained in leadership?
• Are leadership training programs for managers or employees effective?
• Is leadership tied to individuals, or can it be conceptualized as a shared and distributed phenomenon?
• Both themes aim to deepen our understanding of leadership in its various forms and contexts, fostering discussions that bridge theoretical perspectives and practical implications.

This theme explores the definition of leadership styles, the distinctions between them, and their potentially similar or differing impacts. Articles that examine leadership typologies and their consequences are particularly welcome, as are empirical studies investigating the human and organizational outcomes of various leadership styles. Contributions addressing collective, shared, or distributed leadership styles, which are gaining traction in the literature, are also encouraged. Methodological issues, especially strategies for measuring leadership styles through qualitative or quantitative approaches, are an important avenue for exploration. Recent critiques highlight methodological challenges, such as the blending of subjective perception items and objective behavioral items in quantitative scales, which can lead to interpretive dead ends (Fischer, Dietz, & Antonakis, 2025).

Key questions include:

• What typologies of leadership styles exist?
• What are the conceptual and theoretical challenges in differentiating leadership styles?
• How do definitional differences in leadership styles influence theoretical approaches?
• What distinguishes leadership styles based on individual attributes from those focusing on acquired competencies?
  How can leadership and its various forms and styles be practically measured?
• What are the possibilities and limitations of collective, distributed, or shared leadership forms, and what are their effects and consequences?
• How is the leader portrayed (e.g., through image and discourse)? Is the leader seen as majestic or collective?

Are leadership styles universal, or do they depend on the organizational, sectoral, or professional environments in which they develop? Leadership styles are often evaluated based on their intrinsic merits, but an alternative perspective considers that different organizations may require tailored leadership styles. For example, the compatibility of leadership styles with specific sectors (private, public, or semi-public) is a legitimate avenue of inquiry.
The cultural particularities of organizations, and their connection to leadership styles, remain underexplored. Do unique organizational cultures necessitate specific leadership styles? Similarly, crises—whether economic, health-related, or organizational—present opportunities to examine leadership styles and their evolution. The recent wave of technological changes, new ways of working, and structural innovations (e.g., holacracy, agile organizations, liberated companies) challenges traditional leadership approaches and raises questions about their long-term viability. Lastly, professional identities play a significant role in leadership; managing employees from diverse professional backgrounds using uniform leadership techniques is unlikely to yield the same results.

Key questions include:

• What leadership styles are suited to specific types of organizations?
• What forms of leadership are appropriate for private, public, and semi-public organizations?
• How do leadership styles create organizational cultures that foster cohesion and efficiency?
• How should leadership styles adapt to periods of economic, social, health, or technological crises?
• Do newer generations demand new forms of leadership?
• How do holacracy and agile organizations seek distributed or shared leadership?
• Should leadership styles be standardized or differentiated to manage diverse professional identities within organizations?
• How do employees perceive leadership approaches, and what are the consequences of these often-divergent perceptions?
• What image does a leader aim to project, and how does this align with their evolution and the organization's culture?
• Both themes aim to deepen our understanding of leadership in its diverse styles and contingent contexts, encouraging a nuanced examination of its impact on organizations and their members.

• Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic Leadership Development: Getting to the Root of Positive Forms of Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.
• Bartsch, S., Weber, E., Buttgen, M., & Huber, A. (2021). Leadership matters in crisis-induced digital transformation: how to lead service employees effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Service Management, 32(1), 71-85.
• Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.
• Brière, T. (2021). Toxic management. La manipulation en entreprise. Paris: Editions Robert Laffont.
• Caillier, J. G. (2016). Do Transformational Leaders Affect Turnover Intentions and Extra-Role Behaviors Through Mission Valence? The American Review of Public Administration, 46(2), 226-242.
• Coun, M. J. H., Gelderman, C. J., & Perez-Arendsen, J. (2015). Shared leadership and proactivity in the New Ways of Working. Gedrag & Organisatie, 28(4), 356-379.
• Eichenauer, C. J., Ryan, A. M., & Alanis, J. M. (2022). Leadership During Crisis: An Examination of Supervisory Leadership Behavior and Gender During COVID-19. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 29(2), 190-207.
• Emery, Y., & Giauque, D. (2023). Leadership. In N. Soguel, P. Bundi, T. Mettler, & S. Weerts (Eds.), Comprendre et concevoir l'administration publique. Le modèle IDHEAP (pp. 133-142). Lausanne: EPFL Press.
• Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., Van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111-132.
• Fischer, T., Dietz, J., & Antonakis, J. (2025). A fatal flaw: Positive leadership style research creates causal illusions. The Leadership Quarterly, 101771.
• Genoud, C. (2023). Leadership, agilité, bonheur au travail. Bullshit! En finir avec les idées à la mode et revaloriser (enfin) l'art du management. Paris: Vuibert.
• Gerards, R., Van Wetten, S., & Van Sambeek, C. (2021). New ways of working and intrapreneurial behaviour: the mediating role of transformational leadership and social interaction. Review of Managerial Science, 15(7), 2075-2110.
• Hannah, S. T., Perez, A. L. U., Lester, P. B., & Quick, J. C. (2020). Bolstering Workplace Psychological Well-Being Through Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(3), 222-240.
• Hetrick, S. (2023). Toxic Organizational Cultures and Leadership. How to Build and Sustain a Healthy Workplace. New York: Routledge.
• Kelemen, T. K., Matthews, S. H., Matthews, M. J., & Henry, S. E. (2022). Humble leadership: A review and synthesis of leader expressed humility. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 44(2), 202-224.
• Kim, J., Lee, H. W., & Chung, G. H. (2025). Organizational resilience: leadership, operational and individual responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 37(1), 92-115.
• Krishnan, V. R. (2005). Leader-Member Exchange, Transformational Leadership, and Value System. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 10(1), 14-21.
• Lauritzen, H. H., Grøn, C. H., & Kjeldsen, A. M. (2021). Leadership Matters, But So Do Co-Workers: A Study of the Relative Importance of Transformational Leadership and Team Relations for Employee Outcomes and User Satisfaction. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(4), 614-640.
• Mackey, J. D., Parker Ellen, B., McAllister, C. P., & Alexander, K. C. (2021). The dark side of leadership: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of destructive leadership research. Journal of Business Research, 132, 705-718.
• Metselaar, S. A., Klijn, E. H., Den Dulk, L., & Vermeeren, B. (2023). Did Leadership Become More Important During COVID-19? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Servant Leadership on Performance and Work-Life Balance Satisfaction in a Public Organization. Review of Public Personnel Administration.
• Nayani, R. J., Nielsen, K., Daniels, K., Donaldson-Feilder, E. J., & Lewis, R. C. (2018). Out of sight and out of mind? A literature review of occupational safety and health leadership and management of distributed workers. Work and Stress, 32(2), 124-146.
• Ospina, S. M. (2017). Collective Leadership and Context in Public Administration: Bridging Public Leadership Research and Leadership Studies. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 275-286.
• Peng, A. C., Wang, B., Schaubroeck, J. M., & Gao, R. (2020). Can Humble Leaders Get Results? The Indirect and Contextual Influences of Skip-Level Leaders. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1548051820952402.
• Pfeffer, J. (2018). Dying for a Paycheck. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
• Quigley, T. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2015). Has the "CEO effect" increased in recent decades? A new explanation for the great rise in America's attention to corporate leaders. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 821-830.
  Sandel, M. J. (2014). Ce que l'argent ne saurait acheter. Paris: Editions du Seuil.
• Schyns, B., Wisse, B., & Sanders, S. (2019). Shady strategic behavior: Recognizing strategic followership of Dark Triad followers. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(2), 234-249.
• Vogel, R., Vogel, D., & Reuber, A. (2022). Finding a mission in bureaucracies: How authentic leadership and red tape interact. Public Administration, n/a(n/a).
• Vuong, B. N. (2022). The influence of servant leadership on job performance through innovative work behavior: does public service motivation matter? Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 1-21.
• Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-Member Exchange as a Mediator of the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Followers' Performance and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 420-432.
• Weber, M. (1956). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr.
  Wright, B. E., Hassan, S., & Park, J. (2016). Does a Public Service Ethic Encourage Ethical Behaviour? Public Service Motivation, Ethical Leadership and the Willingness to Report Ethical Problems. Public Administration, 94(3), 647-663.

Extended abstracts must be written in either French or English and should be between 2,000 and 4,000 words in length, single-spaced, using Times New Roman, 12 pt font. The abstract must include the following information: title, theme, authors' names, their affiliations and contact details, the study context, research question, methodological framework (if applicable), key findings, main conclusions, limitations, and references formatted according to APA standards. Submissions must be original and unpublished in any journal at the time of submission.

Authors will also be asked to provide a short biography along with their contact details to facilitate networking opportunities.

Submissions should be sent exclusively via email to the following address: soumission_jr2025@ripco-online.com

The research day will take place on MAY 27, 2025. It will be held in person this year to promote scientific interactions and exchanges.

• Deadline for submission of the extended abstract: March 17, 2025
• Feedback from the RIPCO scientific committee: April 27, 2025

The best papers addressing the Focus of the Day themes will be shortlisted for inclusion in a special issue of RIPCO. The pre-selection of a paper does not constitute a final acceptance for publication in the special issue.  The authors of these papers will have three months after the research day to submit full papers on the journal website: ripco.manuscriptmanager.net/ripco. Manuscripts must follow the guidelines for manuscript preparation and submission: ripco-online.com/EN/submission.asp. They will follow the usual double-blind editorial process.

Papers on a different theme may be invited to be submitted for publication in regular issues of the journal.