Thought Leadership: A Multidimensional and Ethical Examination of Intellectual Influence in Organisational, Academic, and Policy Contexts

Paul Andrew Bourne, Nicola Brown and Feliciano Thorpe
Additional contact information
Paul Andrew Bourne: Northern Caribbean University (NCU), Manchester, Jamaica.
Nicola Brown: National Chest Hospital, Kingston, Jamaica.
Feliciano Thorpe: Excelsior Community College, Kingston, Jamaica.

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This study is a conceptual and systematic literature synthesis that examines thought leadership as a multidimensional construct situated at the intersection of knowledge production, intellectual influence, and institutional authority. Using a systematic literature review guided by the PRISMA framework, the study identified and analysed 87 scholarly sources across leadership studies, sociology of knowledge, innovation research, and communication studies. The literature was analysed using thematic synthesis and theoretical integration, thereby enabling the development of a multidimensional framework for thought leadership. The study identifies four primary dimensions of thought leadership: agency (individual vs collective), epistemic orientation (conceptual, empirical, normative), strategic intentionality (organic vs cultivated), and temporal orientation (reactive, adaptive, anticipatory). The paper also critically evaluates thought leadership as a contested construct, examining arguments that it may function as a branding mechanism embedded within neoliberal professional culture rather than a distinct analytical category. The study addresses definitional ambiguity, structural inequalities in intellectual visibility, performative expertise, and ethical responsibilities associated with intellectual influence. The paper's primary contribution is the development of an integrated conceptual framework that explains how different dimensions interact to produce distinct forms of thought leadership across organisational, academic, and policy environments. By clarifying definitions, identifying theoretical mechanisms, and establishing a critical research agenda, the study advances thought leadership from a loosely used professional term to a theoretically grounded analytical construct.

Date: 2026-03-31
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Journal of Global Economics, Management and Business Research, 2026, 18 (2), pp.13-28

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05575820

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().