Contemporary organisations face grand challenges such as geopolitics, digital transformation, and climate change that require value-based judgment over technical knowledge (Meynhardt et al., 2024).
Leipzig Leadership Model
The Leipzig Leadership Model (LLM) positions purpose as strategic architecture, defining it as "intention to contribute to the common good, creating public value" (Kirchgeorg et al., 2017).
Empirically validated across 620 participants, the LLM establishes purpose as foundational to four leadership dimensions (Meynhardt et al., 2024):
Identity Alignment
The Visual Identity Leadership Scale (VILS) utilises overlapping circles to assess the degree to which leader behaviours align with team identity (Steffens et al., 2024).
PURPOSE
Value-based decision-making anchored in common good
Legitimacy creation through "why and what for" questions
Language Patterns
Analysis of team communication for collective identity markers such as how often people say "we" versus "I," and whether shared values appear naturally in conversations rather than just formal presentations (van Dick et al., 2018).
ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT:
Purpose-guided innovation and change orientation
Creative uncertainty responses within value framework
Behavioural Consistency
Observation of whether actual decision-making processes reflect stated values, particularly during stress or conflict when true priorities become visible (Steffens et al., 2014).
RESPONSIBILITY
Stakeholder trust through purpose-aligned actions
Authentic role modelling reflecting stated values
EFFECTIVENESS
Task completion serves purposeful outcomes
Strategic implementation converting purpose to results
Emerging Patterns
Pattern 1: Leaders systematically integrate purpose in strategic choices.
Pattern 2: Ongoing "why and what for" reflection, facilitating transformational learning.
Pattern 3: Simultaneous attention to all dimensions (purpose, entrepreneurial spirit, responsibility and effectiveness) rather than sequential development and thinking.
Purpose as strategic architecture is therefore conceptualised as enhancing decision-making, employee and stakeholder engagement, and sustaining performance by directing purpose toward prosperity for all stakeholders
Kirchgeorg, M., et al. (2017). Das Leipziger Führungsmodell. HHL Academic Press. Meynhardt, T. (2004). Wertwissen. Waxmann. Meynhardt, T., et al. (2024). The Leipzig Leadership Model. Current Psychology, 43, 9005-9024.
Cultural Stability
Longitudinal tracking of cultural norms including persistence during transitions, challenges, and growth phases rather than fragmenting under pressure (van Dick et al., 2021).
Measurement Frequency
Studies across multiple countries demonstrate that brief, frequent assessments are more effective than annual comprehensive reviews for maintaining alignment (Matthews et al., 2022). Why? Because identity leadership requires constant calibration between approach and team needs. With this real real-time adjustment organisations are reporting improved leadership development outcomes and more effective succession planning (van Dick et al., 2018, 2021).
Matthews, R. A., et al. (2022). Journal of Business and Psychology, 37, 639-673.
Steffens, N. K., et al. (2014). The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 1001-1024.
Steffens, N. K., et al. (2024). British Journal of Social Psychology, 63, 1658-1680.
van Dick, R., et al. (2018). Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 91(4), 697-728.
van Dick, R., et al. (2021). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 12081.
