IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v75y1981i02p411-425_17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Context and Leadership Style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn

Author

Listed:
  • Cooper, Joseph
  • Brady, David W.

Abstract

This article deals with the transition in House leadership from Cannon to Rayburn. The transition involved moving from a hierarchical pattern of leadership to a bargaining pattern. In accounting for this transition, we argue that it is the institutional context of the House that determines leadership power and style. Moreover, we argue that there is no straightforward relationship between leadership style and effectiveness; rather, style and effectiveness are contingent or situational. We conclude that the impact of institutional context on leadership behavior is itself primarily determined by party strength. When party strength is high, power is concentrated and leaders are task- or goal-oriented, whereas when party strength is low, power is dispersed and leaders will be oriented to bargaining and maintaining relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Cooper, Joseph & Brady, David W., 1981. "Institutional Context and Leadership Style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 411-425, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:75:y:1981:i:02:p:411-425_17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400172168/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael S. Kang & Joanna M. Shepherd, 2015. "Partisanship in State Supreme Courts: The Empirical Relationship between Party Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decision Making," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 161-185.
    2. Bowen, Renee & Hwang, Ilwoo & Krasa, Stefan, 2022. "Personal power dynamics in bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    3. Krehbiel, Keith & Peskowitz, Zachary, 2012. "Legislative Organization and Ideal-Point Bias," Research Papers 2124, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    4. K. Kanthak, 2004. "Exclusive Committee Assignments and Party Pressure in the U.S. House of Representatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 391-412, February.
    5. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:3:p:95-126 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Fedeli, Silvia & Forte, Francesco & Leonida, Leone, 2014. "The law of survival of the political class: An analysis of the Italian parliament (1946–2013)," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 102-121.
    7. Shuyuan Mary Ho & Merrill Warkentin, 0. "Leader’s dilemma game: An experimental design for cyber insider threat research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    8. Bowen, T. Renee & Krasa, Stefan & Hwang, Ilwoo, 2020. "Agenda-Setter Power Dynamics: Learning in Multi-Issue Bargaining," CEPR Discussion Papers 15406, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. David C. King & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 1999. "Congressional Vote Options," NBER Working Papers 7342, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Keith Krehbiel & Zachary Peskowitz, 2015. "Legislative organization and ideal-point bias," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(4), pages 673-703, October.
    11. John W. Patty, 2008. "Equilibrium Party Government," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 636-655, July.
    12. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:3:p:35-64 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. John E. Owens & Scot Schraufnagel & Quan Li, 2016. "Assessing the Effects of Personal Characteristics and Context on U.S. House Speakers’ Leadership Styles, 1789-2006," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(2), pages 21582440166, April.
    14. Alexandra Kelso, 2016. "Political Leadership in Parliament: The Role of Select Committee Chairs in the UK House of Commons," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(2), pages 115-126.
    15. Shuyuan Mary Ho & Merrill Warkentin, 2017. "Leader’s dilemma game: An experimental design for cyber insider threat research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 377-396, April.
    16. James Lo, 2018. "Dynamic ideal point estimation for the European Parliament, 1980–2009," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 229-246, July.
    17. Jon R. Bond & Richard Fleisher & Michael Northrup, 1988. "Public Opinion and Presidential Support," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 499(1), pages 47-63, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:75:y:1981:i:02:p:411-425_17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.