Artikli uurimisaine võib puudutada paljusid, kes puutumuses juhtimisega:

This article examines theory and empirical research about leadership, agonism and sense-making where leaders are working in a context of contest and conflict.

Argumentatsiooni üles ehitades tsiteeritakse ka Chantal Mouffe:

‘Antagonism is struggle between enemies, while agonism is struggle between adversaries. We can therefore reformulate our problem by saying that, envisaged from the perspective of “agonistic plu- ralism”, the aim of democratic politics is to transform antagonism into agonism. This requires providing channels through which collective passions will be given ways to express themselves over issues, which, while allowing enough possibility for identification, will not construct the opponent as an enemy but as an adversary’

Juhtimise aspekte adresseeritakse selgelt ning muuhulgas:

this article takes sense-making beyond organisational leadership, or political leadership in crises (Boin et al., 2012) and considers the leadership processes in situations where there are divergent and competing interests and in a variety of overlapping arenas.

Agonism is a theory which recognises the existence of conflict within liberal democratic regimes (Mouffe, 2000b) and suggests that there are ways in which this conflict can be channelled constructively. This can be seen as a leadership task

Autorid väidavad kokkuvõttes muuhulgas:

This article has delved more deeply into the leadership processes which underpin the interplay of contest and sense-making to produce agonistic consensus, drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Mouffe (2005) and Maitlis (2005).

Hartley, J., & Stansfield, A. (2021). Leading through agonistic conflict: Contested sense-making in national political arenas. Leadership, 17(2), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715020945167