Bernadeta Cahya Kumala Putriastuti(1*), Alessandro Stasi(2)

(1) Universitas Gadjah Mada
(2) Mahidol University International College
(*) Corresponding Author


Millennials are currently taking over the global workforce. While practitioners and scholars have recognized their different work values from previous generations, research on this topic is still scarce. Furthermore, the current leadership theories have tended to focus mainly on the characteristics of leaders without adequately examining the leadership styles that work best for the millennials. Using a literature review from the top tier leadership journals, this paper aims to provide a more comprehensive framework to provide new directions for the development of leadership theory by  understanding the millennials’ perspective on leadership. This study thus contributes to the current literatures by using five thematic leadership groups to develop the most optimum leadership style for leading the Millennials. The advantages and disadvantages of using neo-charismatics, leadership and information processing, social exchange/relational leadership, ethical/moral leadership, and e-leadership theories in leading millennials are assessed. Results show that no single leadership theory is adequate for leading the millennials optimally. Hence, mixing the dimensions of different leadership theory groups is suggested. As for the leadership theory aspects, it is recommended to scholars to consider developing more flexible leadership theory models that can accommodate different generational groups.


millennials; neo-charismatic leadership; leadership and information processing; social exchange leadership; ethical leadership; e-leadership.

Full Text:



Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A. & Buckley, M. R., 2017. What works for you may not work for (Gen)Me: Limitations of present leadership theories for the new generation. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), p. 245 –260.

Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. & Baker, B., 2014. E-Leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source and transmission. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), pp. 105-131.

Banks, G. C., McCauley, K. D., Gardner, W. L. & E. Guler, C., 2016. A meta-analytic review of authentic and transformational leadership: A test for redundancy. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 634-652.

Bowen, Glenn A., 2009. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), p. 27 – 40.

Burns, J. M., 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Chen, P.-J. & Choi, Y., 2008. Generational differences in work values: a study of hospitality management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), pp. 595-615.

Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L. & Meuser, J. D., 2014. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), p. 36–62.

Dulin, L., 2008. Leadership preferences of a generation Y cohort: A mixed-methods investigation. Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(1), p. 43–59.

Faller, M. & Gogek, J., 2019. Break from the Past: Survey Suggests Modern Leadership Styles Needed for Millennial Nurses. Nurse Leader, 17(2), pp. 135-140.

Fry, L. W., 2003. Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), pp. 693-727.

Graen, G. B. & Uhl-Bien, M., 1995. Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), pp. 219-247.

Graybill, J. O., 2014. Millennials among the Professional Workforce in Academic Libraries: Their Perspective on Leadership. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(1), p. 10–15.

Gursoy, D., Maier, T. A. & C. G. C., 2008. Generational differences: An examination of work values and generational gaps in the hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), p. 448 – 458.

Judge, T. A. & Piccolo, R. F., 2004. Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), pp. 755-768.

Klimkiewicz, K. & Oltra, V., 2017. Does CSR enhance employer attractiveness? The role of millennial job seekers’ attitudes. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(5), pp. 449-463.

Lloyd, K. J., Boer, D. & Voelpel, S. C., 2015. From listening to leading: Toward an understanding of supervisor listening within the framework of leader-member exchange theory. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(4), pp. 431-451.

Lord, R., Foti, R. & Vader, C. D., 1984. A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34(3), pp. 343-378.

Offermann, L. R. & Coats, M. R., 2018. Implicit theories of leadership: Stability and change over two decades. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(4), pp. 513-522.

Omilion-Hodges, L. M. & Sugg, C. E., 2019. Millennials’ Views and Expectations Regarding the Communicative and Relational Behaviors of Leaders: Exploring Young Adults’ Talk About Work. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 82(1), pp. 74-100.

PR Newswire Association LLC, 2012. Boomers Say Convenience is King, Millennials Focus on Self Identity - What's a Brand to Do?: Continuum of Cool research reveals Millennial/Boomer attitudes towards leading retail brands. New York: PR Newswire.

Rudolpha, C. W., Rauvolaa, R. S. & Zacherb, H., 2018. Leadership and generations at work: A critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), p. 44–57.

Stewart, J. S., Oliver, E. G., Cravens, K. S. & Oishi, S., 2017. Managing millennials: Embracing generational differences. Business Horizons, 60(1), pp. 45-54.

Sy, T., 2010. What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), pp. 73-84.

Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J. & Lance, C. E., 2010. Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic. Journal of Management, 36(5), p. 1117 –1142.

Walumbwa, F. et al., 2008. Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), pp. 89-126.

Weeks, K. P. & Schaffert, C., 2019. Generational differences in definitions of meaningful work: A mixed methods study. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), pp. 1045-1061.

Winograd, M. & Hais, M., 2014. How Millennials Could Upend Wall Street and Corporate America, Washington: Brookings Institution.


Article Metrics

Abstract views : 19429 | views : 13713


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Leadership in Organizations

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Journal of Leadership in Organizations


Editorial Team
Focus and Scope
Peer Review Process
Publication Ethics
Screening for Plagiarism      


Author Guidelines
Submission Guidelines               
Online Submissions
Copyright Notice
Privacy Statement   
Author Fees            





Reviewer Guidelines      



General Search
Author index
Title index                       



Journal of Leadership in Organizations (JLO), with registered number ISSN 2656-8829 (Print) and ISSN 2656-8810 (Online), is published by the Center for Leadership Studies, Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Gadjah Mada. The content of this website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

© 2019 Journal of Leadership in Organizations