Globally responsible leadership: The courageous case of Angela Merkel

Abstract

Angela Merkel has stood out as a global leader during her 16-years tenure as Chancellor of Germany. Her chancellorship included navigating dynamics of human rights issues (support for migrants - particularly Syrian refugees), environmental protections, citizens’ wellbeing, and economic development. This paper examines the nature of her complex leadership journey, successes, and challenges through the lens of responsible leadership theory and serves three purposes. Firstly, it is an effort to provide a window into Merkel’s leadership and the lessons it offers for leading in a world amidst crises, polarization, and complexity. Major insights in this regard include acting with courage, navigating crises with persistence, pursing multilateral collaborations, and building a nonconforming leadership profile. Secondly, it critically examines the relevance of responsible leadership theory as a framework for globally responsible leadership, especially outside the realm of business organizations. In doing so, the paper particularly explores the role of ethical grounding, relational competence, and adaptive and systems capability as key dimensions of responsible leadership. Finally, it identifies some gaps in and blind spots of responsible leadership conceptualizations and offers considerations to expand the field.

Keywords

global leadership responsible leadership Angela Merkel leading in crises courageous leadership

“If we now have to start apologizing for showing a friendly face in response to emergency situations, then that’s not my country.” Angela Merkel

In January 2015, I visited the Zaatari Refugee camp in Jordan - the largest Syrian refugee camp in the world. At its peak, the camp was Jordan’s fourth largest city in terms of total population. This experience and my previous engagements with refugee issues, including an assignment in Afghan Refugee camps in Western Pakistan, exposed me to the complexity of humanitarian work assisting refugees. I learned that internally and externally displaced individuals may remain in that state of displacement between 10 and 26 years (Ferris, 2018). Over 108 million individuals are currently displaced worldwide, including over 40 million minors according to The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR.org). At the time of this article’s writing, about 10 million Ukrainians were displaced. About 6.2 million had left for the neighbouring countries and another 5.1 million were internally displaced within Ukraine. Addressing refugee crises involves navigating a labyrinth of political, global governance, immigration, and financial complexities. At the height of the Syrian refugee crises, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany made headlines by taking a difficult and bold stand supporting pro-migrant policies in Germany and Europe.

Ultimately, under her chancellorship, approximately 1.5 million migrants were welcomed into Germany since 2014. Chancellor Merkel’s achievements and challenges go beyond the humanitarian domain. She prioritized environmental protection, citizen’s wellbeing, and economic development in her agenda. While questions have been raised about her leadership approach and some of her decisions, those questions and criticism are to be expected in the complex national and global context that Merkel operated within. For this study, I have chosen to focus on Angela Merkel because her efforts as a global leader offer lessons in responsible leadership that our world urgently needs to address the humanitarian crises, deepening political divides, and hardline nationalist movements that are proliferating globally.

As a student of leadership, I am deeply concerned with its application in the real world and especially its role in serving humanity’s entrenched problems. Advances in leadership studies have produced significant knowledge, including critical perspectives that have emerged in recent years. However, a quick scan of leaders on the global scene reveals extraordinary cases of leadership that may be characterized as irresponsible (e.g., Donald Trump of the United States, Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil) and responsible (e.g., Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand). Leadership is responsibility - this proclamation is attributed to Peter Drucker (Levine, 2021), a widely known author and educator, who emphasized responsibility as an integral idea in leadership and management. I believe responsible leadership is significant from theoretical and applied perspectives and is widely relevant to present societal dynamics. For these reasons, I decided to examine Angela Merkel’s leadership using the responsible leadership lens.

Two additional considerations that drove this research need to be noted here. Firstly, this research was not intended as a victory narrative about Merkel’s achievements. Rather, it is meant as an examination of her leadership as she engaged with some of the thorniest issues of our time. In that sense, it is a humble attempt to respond to the challenge that Tourish (2019) put forward in his article titled, “Making a difference: Leadership research that matters.” He opened that article with the following message, “Most of the leadership research that is currently published...ignores the really important issues that confront our world” (p. 364). Secondly, it is not driven by heroic leader-centred assumptions and recognizes that Merkel’s leadership occurred and unfolded within “layers of nuance, detail, and complexity” (Sutherland et al., 2022: p. 6). At the same time, it acknowledges that responsible leadership cannot be considered without considering individual leaders. Waldman and Balven (2014) observed, “We further conclude… it is impossible to consider responsible leadership without simultaneously considering individual leaders - either as singular leaders or more collectively through a shared leadership model” (p. 232). Similarly, Wilson (2020) observes that from a critical perspective, we must be careful with approaches that largely attribute success to individual leaders and ignore contextual factors and others’ efforts. But at the same time, good and bad leaders have an influence on organizations and societies (Wilson, 2020). As a starting point for this study, I take a position similar to Waldman and Balven (2014) and Wilson (2020).

The paper focuses on Angela Merkel’s leadership on the global stage, and it employs the responsible leadership theory lens to aid this examination. The main aims of the paper are to (a) examine Angela Merkel’s leadership and generate insights and lessons for leadership theory and practice for engaging in complex and contested contexts; (b) study the relevance of responsible leadership theory as a framework for globally responsible leadership, outside and beyond the organizational and business contexts; and (c) provide empirical evidence to enhance our understanding of responsible leadership. The methodological approach for the current study is largely rooted in the qualitative and case study traditions. I start the discussion below with an overview of responsible leadership studies. This is followed by an introduction to the study methodology. I then discuss the case study findings and conclusions.

Responsible leadership

In this section, I provide a short overview of how the field of responsible leadership (RL) studies has unfolded. Given the scope of this article, the review below is not intended to be comprehensive. In addition, it is also important to recognize that the field of RL is subject to some of the critique that the larger field of leadership study and practice has received. A portion of this section therefore includes some critical perspective as well. RL is a relative newcomer in the field of leadership studies. Some of the early studies on RL started appearing around 2005 onwards. Maak and Pless (2006) offered an important foundation in defining and articulating the nature of RL. Their definition described RL as “a relational and ethical phenomenon, which occurs in social processes of interaction with those who affect or are affected by leadership and have a stake in the purpose and vision of the leadership relationship.” (Maak and Pless, 2006: p. 103). Extending the ideas inherent in stakeholder theory, they emphasized the importance of ethical and relational aspects of RL.

More recently, RL has been defined as “an orientation or mind-set taken by people in executive-level positions toward meeting the needs of a firm’s stakeholder(s)” (Waldman et al., 2020: p. 5). Finally, archetypes of RL include visionary, servant, steward, citizen, coach, architect, change agent, storyteller and meaning maker (Maak and Pless, 2006). In the context of the educational sector, Starratt (2005) emphasizes the importance of human, servant, and citizen dimensions of RL. Maak and Pless (2006) distinguished RL as normative in nature compared to traditional leadership theory, which largely focused on descriptive and instrumental perspectives. Widely known and extensively researched theories of transformational leadership (Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985) as well as ethical leadership are clearly normatively anchored. While acknowledging that scholars such as Burns (1978) had envisioned leadership as a process that may elevate leaders and followers to higher levels of motivation and morality, Maak and Pless (2006) asserted that such works did not offer sufficient guidelines in that regard.

Rationalizing the need and emerging place for RL in relation to other contemporary works, Voegtlin et al. (2012) observed, “Though these efforts have undoubtedly made vital contributions to the field, we argue that they are limited due to conceptual constraints, because they do not adequately encompass the causes and implications of present leadership challenges” (p. 2). These authors then go on to describe how “Leading responsibly...means for leaders to open up to a broader target group (the stakeholders) with the goal of securing the legitimacy of the organization in a given society and establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial stakeholder relations.” (p. 4). Voegtlin (2016) clarified and extended the concept of RL in important ways. He advocated that it may be conceptualized as not merely another form of leadership but an essential ingredient of leadership. Specifically, he articulated the following dimensions of RL: (a) it is not practiced in isolation but is an interactional process between leaders and stakeholders, (b) it uses ethical grounding to critically evaluate prevailing societal norms, rules, and conventions; (c) it is forward looking and considers the long-term societal implications of organizations’ actions; and (d) it is not leader-centred and encourages shared problem-solving and responsibility. However, the primary lens (key players, processes, outcomes) for these assertions of responsible leadership was organizational focussed and did not explicitly discuss its potential relevance to the political, societal, or global arenas.

Some recent works on RL have attempted to further refine and integrate RL concepts and their implementation. Tirmizi (2018) outlined three major competence domains in his integrative framework for responsible leadership, including (a) authentic aptitude, (b) relational competence and (c) adaptive capability. Authentic aptitude comprises anchoring of leaders’ work in ethical principles, commitment to common good, and sense of duty towards service. Relational competence entails abilities related to interpersonal, facilitation, and negotiation skills. Adaptive capability encompasses abilities such as strategic thinking, complexity appreciation, systems orientation, and global mindedness. The integrative nature of this framework aims to draw upon existing theory and offers inter-connections across the three domains. For instance, the intersection of authentic aptitude and relational competence, labelled as transformative self, emphasizes that on-going reflection on one’s ethics and values and learning from interpersonal exchanges and relationships may meaningfully inform one’s leadership development. Similarly, in another recent effort to integrate RL studies, Voegtlin et al. (2020) offered a model of leadership anchored in three major RL roles, including expert (focus on organizational tasks and performance), facilitator (concern with employees’ motivation), and citizen (focus on societal wellbeing). Muff et al. (2020) outlined five competency dimensions of RL: stakeholders’ relations, ethics and values, self-awareness, systems thinking, and change and innovation. The three recent works referenced in this paragraph emphasize the ethical-, relational-, systems-, and practice-focused orientation of RL.

A few noteworthy considerations surface as we critically reflect on the conceptualization and nature of RL studies. RL’s language and leader centrality are problematic in the same way as some other traditional theories of leadership. Regarding the leadership language, Learmonth and Morrell (2021) have appropriately emphasized this consideration in their recent commentary where they argued “...the language of ‘leadership’ represents a particularly subtle but powerful opportunity for the pursuit of individual elite interests to be disguised so that it looks as if it is for the benefit of all” (p. 1). In terms of leader centrality, while some of the recent RL theories have emphasized the bridging and collaborative competencies of leaders, such as the facilitator and negotiator roles (Tirmizi, 2018; Voegtlin et al., 2020), they mostly focus on leaders and give limited attention to leadership as a shared process which may co-reside in multiple individuals or emerge and is maintained through collaborative arrangements. As noted above, some works recognize the value of shared processes but have emphasized the leader relevance as well (e.g., Waldman and Balven, 2014).

Most of the work on RL theory development and testing over the last 20 years seems to be led by scholars primarily anchored in the business management discipline (e.g., Miska et al., 2013; Pless, 2007). This corporate focus does not change under the banners of globally responsible leadership inquiry and initiatives. For instance, the Center for Creative Leadership’s white paper on globally responsible leadership opens with the following challenges for leaders: “In the current business environment, the challenge is ‘no more business as usual.’ Increasing pressures of globalization, demanding and diverse stakeholders, the war for talent, scarce resources, and increased risks and opportunities, are causing leaders to ask if there is a better way to cope with complexity” (Quinn and D’Amato, 2008: p. 2). A special of issue of Academy of Management Perspectives (2014) offered important insights about RL research and future directions, but again, the majority of the works focused on the business sector. Additionally, given RL’s emergent nature, Waldman and Balven (2014) appropriately highlighted the importance of attention to measurement issues on both the quantitative and qualitative fronts. The literature and research are largely silent on the relevance of RL at the national and global levels (except some cases where it is mostly mentioned in relation to multi-national corporations’ work).

In summary, while RL conceptions and theory have developed in important ways over the last 20 years, there are a few areas where more work is needed for its refinement and advancement. One major issue with the RL literature is that the majority of the theoretical and empirical works have not sufficiently or creatively examined its relevance across different sectors and levels, especially national and global levels. Given the existing and expanding ‘anomalies’ that humanity and the planet face today, RL studies need to understand its relevance more evenly across different contexts. In other words, existing works on RL have provided a good foundation but it is time to meaningfully expand its conceptualization and application to significant, entrenched issues across national, regional, and global levels. In terms of the current study’s purpose, RL offers an important lens to examine Angela Merkel’s leadership at a global level and it also provides an opportunity to study the relevance of major tenets and issues of RL in a complex societal context.

The study analysis was guided by recent RL works that have attempted to build on and integrate the existing RL research, including Tirmizi (2018), Voegtlin et al. (2020) and Muff et al. (2020). These frameworks offer important overlaps in terms of RL concepts. For instance, Voegtlin et al.’s (2020) citizen role, Tirmizi’s (2018) authentic aptitude, and Muff et al.’s (2020) ethics and values dimensions are all directly concerned with ethical grounding of responsible leadership. Similarly, Muff et al.’s (2020) stakeholder relations, Voegtlin et al.’s (2020) facilitator role, and Tirmizi’s (2018) relational competence emphasize the importance of prioritising and navigating relationship across a broad range of constituencies. Finally, Tirmizi’s adaptive capability, Muff et al.’s (2020) systems thinking, and Voegtlin et al.’s (2020) expert and citizen roles touch upon the adaptive and systems thinking capabilities of RL. Specifically, I relate the study findings with the RL dimensions of ethical grounding, relational competence, and adaptive and systems capability dimensions.

Methodology

The methodological approach is largely rooted in the case study tradition. Yin (2009) defines a case study as ‘an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident’ (Yin, 2009: p. 18). The phenomenon in this case is Merkel’s leadership and the real-life context is spread across the national (German), regional (European Union), and global stages. Another reason to use the case study approach was to further the understanding and potential development of RL theory. Edwards (1998) noted, “In this (case based) type of research, one or more cases of a phenomenon of interest are systematically examined with a view to achieving an understanding and developing or extending a theoretical framework” (p. 36).

Creswell (1998) offered further guidance on employing theory in qualitative research including case study research. He conceptualized the issue along a continuum in terms of using theory before (before investigating and collecting data) or after (after collecting data) the study. Creswell situated case study research in the middle of his continuum and cited works where theory was used before or after on this continuum. In addition, Tsang (2014) noted, “The information provided by case studies can throw light on existing theories or form an empirical foundation for creating new theories (p. 378).” The current case is meant to draw upon the above guidance, therefore I decided to inform this work with an RL theory lens.

I drew upon a variety of data sources that included peer-reviewed outlets, leading journalistic publications, interviews with and news about Angela Merkel in different outlets (e.g., DW, CBC, BBC) and international reports to aid my examination. As can be imagined, making decisions about the type, scope, and timespan of information for a case with a globally engaged protagonist is a complex undertaking. I briefly describe some of those choices and details. The main rationale behind these decisions was an attempt to obtain information which offered reasonable variety in terms of sources, geography, and duration. Regarding duration, the primary focus of information was the period 2005 to 2022 (The year 2005 was chosen as the start date as that’s when Merkel became the Chancellor of Germany). In considering different news platforms from different regions, I attempted to examine reports, stories, and interviews in major media houses such as National Public Radio, CNN, Reuters, BBC, DW, and Al Jazeera to represent voices and analysis from the North America, Europe/Germany, and the Middle East/Asia regions respectively. Similar to selection criteria used by Simpson et al., (2022), another reason for selecting these sources was their generally robust editorial policies and global credibility. This is not to say these outlets are immune to biases, but simply to clarify and emphasize that effort was made to collect information from entities generally considered to be reputable and dependable.

The analytical strategy was based on adaptions of qualitative content analysis (Kohlbacher, 2006) and the steps proposed by Atkinson (2002) for case study methods. It included creating a data repository in the form of a matrix. The matrix comprised multiple columns and rows to facilitate data storage, organization, and analysis. Following Blair (2015), it included template or a priori codes based on the relevant RL dimensions. Blair (2015) notes, “...the codes used are defined by the researcher, which involves using a priori codes drawn from research, reading or theory.” (p. 19). Specifically, in alignment with the key research aims and RL frameworks (e.g., Muff et al., 2020; Tirmizi 2018; Voegtlin et al., 2020), a list of 12 initial a priori codes were employed. Examples of these codes include embracing ethics and values, showing commitment to societal wellbeing, using a systems lens, being analytical, and engaging with diverse stakeholders. The matrix included segments of relevant data that was gathered from the different sources noted above. The process involved examining segments of data from various sources and associating them with one or more of the initial codes. In addition to initial a priori codes, following (Creswell, 2013), emergent codes were also used to consider data points and search for additional themes more fully and appropriately. Elliott (2018) advises that most pragmatic researchers use a hybrid approach which combines these two types of codes. Examples of emergent codes included demonstrating courage, taking risk, dealing with crises, and building consensus. The process was iterative in nature in the sense that as data gathering and processing continued, additional codes were added to the list. The next step was the identification of major categories and themes in relation to the study goals. The analysis resulted in a total of 10 major themes which included, acting with courage, navigating crises with persistence, collaborating through multilateralism, building a non-conforming leadership profile, ethical grounding, relational competence, adaptive and systems capability, obscurity of vision, perceptions of doubtful nature, and engagements with Russia and China. These themes are described in the findings section below in three different segments. The third and fourth steps consisted of relating the themes back to the study purposes and RL concepts as outlined below.

Findings: Merkel as a globally responsible leader

The main aims of this study were to (a) examine the nature of Angela Merkel’s leadership and the insights it may offer for leading in complex global contexts, and (b) demonstrate the relevance of responsible leadership theory as a framework for globally responsible leadership, especially outside the domain of the corporate sector. With that background, I outline below the main findings from this study about Merkel’s leadership approach, relevant achievements, and challenges. The findings are divided in three segments. The first segment includes the major findings related to Merkel’s approach and includes the dimensions of acting with courage, navigating crises with persistence, collaborating through multilateralism, and building a non-conforming leadership profile. The second segment relates Merkel’s approach to the RL conceptual framework described above and includes dimensions of ethical grounding, relational competence, and adaptive and systems capability. And finally, the third segment summarizes themes comprising obscurity of vision, perceptions of doubtful nature, and engagements with Russia and China.

Segment 1: Merkel’s leadership approach

Acting with courage

Merkel’s courage surfaced as a significant theme in this study. Evidence of these courageous actions come from multiple policy decision with significant national, regional, and global implications. Dempsey (2021) noted, “But her two biggest domestic decisions—closing nuclear power stations and throwing open Germany’s doors to over one million refugees—shook her party and showed her real grit” (para. 13). Dettmer (2021) emphasized the importance of the nuclear policy change when Merkel’s government closed Germany’s 17 nuclear power stations. He noted that this policy change was a bold political move in wake of the Japanese Fukushima nuclear disaster, considering the influence of Germany’s powerful energy lobby. Regarding the migrant crises, polls from early 2015 in Germany suggested that majority of Germans were not in favour of liberal asylum policies. Members of her own political party criticized her approach, and her polling numbers and that of her party dropped at that time (Horn, 2016).

Jacob (2018) observed that Merkel’s insistence on opening Germany and Europe’s doors to address the increasing refugee crises was a courageous decision as she faced opposition in Germany and from some European countries. She noted, “With her open-door policy Merkel demonstratively showed the courage to articulate and promote the values she stands up for even at the risk of losing political support both domestically and at the international level (p. 266).” The head of UNHCR recognized Merkel’s contributions in the following words: “By helping more than a million refugees to survive and rebuild, Angela Merkel displayed great moral and political courage.” (Al Jazeera News, 2022). This is a prominent finding of this study and offers important potential to extend and advance RL theory and practice. Specifically, the finding implies that in addition to the emerging RL dimensions such as relational orientation and systems perspectives, ability to act with courage may be an essential ingredient, especially in complex and global environments.

Navigating crises with persistence

Another broad theme was Merkel’s ability to lead effectively in crises. Her 16-years tenure saw a series of national, regional, and global predicaments. Casey (2021) observed, “Merkel has played a key role in shaping the EU’s response to crises such as the 2008 financial collapse, the arrival of more than one million asylum seekers in 2015, and now the coronavirus pandemic” (para. 4). Dempsey (2021), while commenting on Merkel’s legacy, argued that crisis management was one of Merkel’s strengths and noted that her efforts focused on saving the Euro, navigating the global financial meltdown, dealing with the refugee crises, and managing the pandemic. Reflecting on her tenure in a DW News (2021) interview, Merkel named large numbers of refugee arrivals and COVID-19 as her biggest challenges. However, it is important to note how she characterized the refugee challenges in that news interview, saying “I actually don’t like to call a crises, because people are people.” (DW News, 2021). It was her ability to navigate many of these regional and global crises that elevated her from one of many European politicians into the continent’s most prominent crisis handler (Crawford and Czuczka, 2013). In fact, it may be argued that her prominence as a global leader emerged out of her ability to deal with crises. This finding suggests that RL practice must consider crises as an important part of context and include the ability to navigate crises in RL conceptualizations.

Collaborating through multilateralism

Another important theme in Merkel’s outlook was multilateralism, which seems to be an important aspect of responsible leadership at the international and global levels. In her speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos, she noted, “[The Western world] has to act against the fragmentation of the international architecture, and be ready to reform the existing institutions” (Reuters, 2019: para. 4). She further added, “I think we should understand our national interest in a way that we think about the interests of others and from that create win-win situations that are the precondition for multilateralism” (Reuters, 2019: para. 5).

Merkel’s abilities to collaborate and build consensus were important ingredients in her multilateral engagements. Angerer et al. (2021) noted that Merkel demonstrated her ability in consensus building in relation to negotiations around sanctions that Europe and the United States imposed on Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Merkel’s commitment to closely work together with a variety of stakeholders has been acknowledged by numerous observers as an important ingredient of her leadership style. “Merkel never indulges in grandstanding and she is never authoritarian. This is how she creates the space for a cooperative, reason-based, network-oriented style of leadership in Europe” (Ulrich, 2017: para. 6). While most RL theories focus on engagement with a variety of stakeholders, it is the articulation of genuine sharing of leadership processes that is lacking in their conceptualizations. One way to explain the dynamic in Merkel’s approach where she is the initiator of action but her focus remains on the diverse constituents, is through the individual-collective tension that was noted above. I further discuss Merkel’s approach in relation to leader centrality concerns and the individual-collective dynamic under the RL dimension of relational competence below, and the discussion and reflections section.

Building a nonconforming leadership profile

Merkel’s profile and subsequent development as a leader is atypical of what we see in many political and other contexts. She defied prevailing stereotypes on a variety of fronts. Her leadership approach and brand has been characterized by what Bruen (2018) labels as gender transcendence. Bruen asserts, “Her personal brand is not really related to being female. If anything, it rejects such characterizations and their accompanying constraints. She has managed to be less judged against standard stereotypes. Merkel said to the world: see me. Not a woman. Not a historic achievement. A leader to be measured as you would any other” (para. 4). Steckenrider (2013) labelled Merkel as the most powerful woman and further asserted that she was among handful of the most powerful leaders on the world stage, male or female. However, a deeper examination from the gender lens reveals layers of complexity in terms of Merkel’s leadership journey as reported by Ferree (2006), Van Zoonen (2006) and Eagly (2018) - but that discussion is beyond the scope of the current study. Suder (2021) wrote about Merkel’s leadership legacy just before she was finishing her final term, and noted “Many leaders dramatically underestimated her, judging wrongly from her early nickname of “das Mädchen” (the girl) that she might be a political neophyte. She soon proved to be a role model for reliability and responsibility, and the impact of female leadership” (para. 6). I note two important aspects in relation to this finding. Firstly, it widens the leadership engagement and practice space, especially for those who do not fit the dominant implicit theories of what leadership (and leaders) should look like. Secondly, it highlights that with grit and persistence, it is possible to transcend stereotypes and construct one’s own leadership identity.

The next section relates major themes about Merkel’s leadership more directly to the responsible leadership theory. Specifically, I relate the study findings to the RL dimensions of ethical grounding, relational competence, and adaptive and systems capability dimensions. As noted above, these three concepts overlapped across recent integrative RL frameworks (Muff et al., 2020; Tirmizi, 2018; Voegtlin et al., 2020).

Segment II: Merkel’s leadership and the RL theory

Ethical grounding

Ethical grounding is a leader’s ethical anchor and moral compass. An example of her principle-based approach comes from a time early in her career when Helmut Kohl, the first Chancellor of united Germany, lost his election and was the subject of a financial scandal. Merkel climbed up the party hierarchy under Kohl’s sponsorship. However, she surprised the nation when she decided to speak against Chancellor Kohl and asked for his resignation via commentary in a leading national newspaper (Huggler, 2015). This stance must not have been an easy decision given that Kohl considered her a protégé.

The Wall Street Journal (2014) labelled her the “Putin Whisperer” owing to her complicated interactional history with Vladimir Putin, the Russian President. The journal noted that Merkel faced a complicated decision on Russia following its annexation of Crimea. As a member of the G8 at the time, it was a risky move for her to side with voices that advocated Russia’s ouster from the G8 because Germany was hugely dependent on Russian energy imports and Russia was also an important market for German business. Nonetheless, on March 8^th, 2014, she supported the decision to remove Russia from the G8 group (Wall Street Journal, 2014). When asked about her thinking related to engagements with the Russian president just before the 2015 G7 summit, Merkel noted, “The G7 — and earlier, the G8 — were a group of countries that shared the same values with regard to freedom and democracy, and through the annexation of Crimea, Russia made it clear at a certain point that these values of keeping the peace, integrity of the borders of a country were not being respected” (CBC News, 2015a, 2015b). The decision she made in this case and the reasons she gave for this choice suggest that she was taking a moral position rooted in protecting the values of democracy and freedom.

Relational competence

Relational competence has been an integral part of Merkel’s leadership approach. This element was particularly important considering the divided nature of key constituents that Merkel had worked with and led. Fratzscher (2017) credited Merkel’s ability to bridge social and political divides that contributed to Germany’s movement towards an open society. He goes on to argue, “And this, not economic policy, might ultimately become the greatest achievement of her chancellorship. In some ways, Germany has already moved beyond the point of no return on its path toward openness, owing to Merkel’s, 2015 refugee policy” (para. 11). Another example of her relational acumen comes from her insistence on continuing her interactions with Vladimir Putin of Russia, at times under difficult circumstances. The Lisbon treaty negotiations also provide another illustration in this arena. Germany, under Markel’s leadership was clearly the main force behind getting consensus around this treaty. Similarly, eurozone crises also offers interesting insights about Angela Merkel’s ability to use a relational approach in a complex environment. “Decisions taken to contain the (eurozone) crises were…also associated with Chancellor Merkel’s personal conviction and leadership style among the public” (Wendler, 2017: p. 577).

Merkel has made a significant effort to approach Germany’s role within the EU with a collaborative attitude in a variety of negotiations and decisions. Take the example of the Greek debt crisis. In an interview with Margaret Evans of CBC News Canada in June 2015, when asked about Germany’s leadership in G7 to tackle the Greed debt crisis, Merkel observed, “I will be only one of several Europeans represented at the G7 summit in Elmau. The negotiations with Greece are being led, above all, by the IMF, the European Commission and the European Central Bank. So, this is not a German-dominated negotiating forum. It is these three institutions that are talking with Greece (CBC News, 2015a, 2015b).” In terms of relational competence, it is evident from the above quote that she placed importance on the role of multi-way negotiations and ensured that the key stakeholders co-led the engagements with Germany. According to Qvortrup (2021) “...she was not a successful politician because she was uniquely wise or prescient. She got results because she was willing to collaborate and find common ground” (para. 9). This commitment to collective problem-solving is one of the key dimensions of responsible leadership where key stakeholders participate to co-create agendas and directions (Voegtlin, 2016).

It is also important to consider some of the contextual nuances that may have determined the nature of Merkel’s relational engagements. Packer (2014, para 12) observed, “In a country where passionate rhetoric and macho strutting led to ruin, her analytical detachment and lack of apparent ego are political strengths. On a continent where the fear of Germany is hardly dead, Merkel’s air of ordinariness makes a resurgent Germany seem less threatening.”

Adaptive and systems capability

Adaptive and systems capability represents the analytical domain of a leader’s work from a systems perspective, embracing complexity, strategic thinking, and vision articulation (Tirmizi, 2018). This capability also emphasizes a responsible leader’s ability to use a systems-oriented approach. Eagly (2018) argues “Merkel’s success should be attributed at least in part to her intelligence, both analytic and emotional, and her patent, deliberative decision-making – that are widely acknowledged (p. 187). In a TV interview in 2014, as reported by Orth (2014), Merkel shared that it was important for her to consider different options before making a decision. On the other hand, some questions have been raised about Germany’s long-term strategy at the European level around continental security, cohesion, and foreign policy (Dempsey, 2013). Despite some disagreements, many scholars and observers agree that Merkel had a long list of achievements as a national and global leader. Steckenrider (2013) noted, “Since her against-all-odds rise to be elected chancellor in 2005, Angela Merkel has successfully guided Germany into a thriving economic powerhouse and propelled herself into a leader on the world stage” (p. 226).

Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea, it was ousted from the powerful G8 group as noted above. When asked about her views related to engagements with Russia in 2015, Merkel observed, “So, it is a pity that Russia is not there, but it was, in my view, unavoidable. Nevertheless, we still have a lot of ways of talking with the Russian President. For example, the so-called Normandy Format, where Germany and France together with Russia and Ukraine discuss how to resolve the conflict in Ukraine” (CBC News, 2015a, 2015b). The observations above reveal important ingredients of adaptive leadership in how Merkel was approaching engagements with Russia. On the one hand, she was very clear that what Russia did was not acceptable. But she recognized the importance of continuing a working relationship and ways to engage in dialogue with the Russian leadership to resolve global issues not only in Ukraine but other parts of the world, including Syria. Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine earlier this year, the Chancellor’s engagements with Russia have come under scrutiny again as noted above. Stelzenmüller (2022), while recognizing her as a leader admired globally and in Germany, observed, “She was popular at home and she was admired worldwide as one of Germany’s greatest postwar leaders. Now, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24 has cast a dark backwards shadow over her tenure” (para. 7).

Another insight about Merkel’s holistic perspective representing her adaptive capability surfaced in her following observation: “First, climate is one issue, an important issue, but, of course, the focus will also be on the global economy and foreign policy challenges. We will also be discussing global health and the empowerment of women” (CBC News, 2015a, 2015b). She offered this thought in an interview where she was asked to talk about the climate challenge at the side lines of 2015 G7 summit. It may be inferred here that while Markel was committed to tackling the climate change agendas, she recognized that there were complex security and economic challenges that needed to be addressed simultaneously. Merkel’s ability to consider connections concomitantly and carefully across multifaceted dynamics is what Muff et al. (2020) labelled as systems thinking, one of their five RL competencies.

In addition to the key aspects and themes outlined above, a few additional critical perspectives emerged during the study analysis of Angela’s Merkel’s approach. For ease of flow and clarity, I have outlined these themes below.

Segment III: Some critical perspectives

Obscurity of vision

Despite overwhelming praise for her achievements and leadership style, one criticism of Merkel is that she failed to put forth a clear vision. Yanis Varoufakis, Greece’s former finance minister, criticized Merkel for not having a clear vision for Europe or Germany, and for forcing austerity measures on Greece, not solely but largely on Germany's behalf. Though he acknowledged that she helped save the Eurozone, he argued that the way she saved it was very divisive within Germany and Greece (Adler, 2021). Niall Ferguson, a British historian, contended, “What I think has been lacking has been strategic vision.” However, he also asserted, “Nobody could deny Angela Merkel’s political competence, her political skill, her tactical brilliance.” (Hasel, 2021: para. 7). On the other hand, Johnston and Walker (2021) observed that she demonstrated patience and discernment, possessed vision and strategy, as well as recognized the importance of long-term planning. While these perspectives are understandable, they also raise questions about “traditional” expectations anchored in leadership prototypes of a bygone era. For instance, vision was considered an important component of transformational and charismatic leadership but is not an essential ingredient of effective leadership – especially in approaches that emphasize collaboration and service. I further explore the issue of vision relevance in the next section.

Perceptions of doubtful nature

Some of her criticism also pointed to her perceived doubtful nature. Kornelius and Moncrieff (2014) observe, “For all her outward self-confidence, Merkel has always been prone to doubts” (p. 271). This criticism also shows up in other related ways where she is seen as tentative and too willing to change some of her positions. The German administration had decided to put in strict lockdown measures during the Easter holiday in early 2021. Following opposition and feedback, Merkel quickly changed her position. Having doubt, admitting failure, and apology do not need to be seen as signs of weak leadership, as Merkel demonstrated in her response. In a televised conference she said “The mistake is mine and mine alone. Because in the end, I bear responsibility as chancellor...I regret it deeply, and I ask our citizens for forgiveness” (Moulson, 2021: para. 6). As noted in her response, she in fact is relating owning of mistakes to taking responsibility. Another way of looking at this dynamic is that Merkel refused to be defined by prevailing expectations and pressures of how to exercise her leadership. In that sense, she had invented her own brand of leadership, as also noted in the section above about building a nonconforming leadership profile.

Engagement with Russia and China

The recent Russian invasion of Ukraine has raised questions about Merkel’s legacy in relation to her dealings with Russia. Following an interview with her in June 2022 about her engagements with Russia, most of the major global media houses ran stories with headlines that she has no regrets about her Russian policy and choices. Stelzenmüller (2022: para. 9) asked, “Should she not have seen a connection between the assault on Chechnya, with which Putin began his reign at the turn of the millennium, the war with Georgia in 2008 which resulted in that country’s dismemberment at Russian hands, the annexation of Crimea in 2014, and 8 years of proxy war in Donbas with 14,000 dead?” Merkel has also been criticised for her engagement with China. Specifically, the criticism has focussed on not sufficiently confronting China over its human rights record. Brattberg (2021) observed that the motivation for this non-confrontational approach was linked to German economic interests, which allowed its companies to expand their business footprint and profits in China. At the same time, Brattberg (2021: para. 9) notes, “While still an open critic of China’s human rights record, Merkel has favoured addressing this issue in the context of the regular EU-China human rights dialogue or in private conversations with her Chinese counterparts. She has also made a point of meeting with civil society activists and dissidents during her trips to China.” The issues raised here are important and must be taken into account when considering Merkel’s challenges, achievements, and legacy. As Brockmann (2022: para. 6) noted, “Of course, it's easy to look at a political era in hindsight. There is no doubt that Merkel never took any of her decisions lightly.”

Discussion and reflections

In this final section, I re-visit and comment upon some of the key findings in relation to Angela Merkel’s efforts and role as a globally responsible leader, that appear particularly relevant to our present and foreseeable societal context globally. The commentary assumes that the findings are not automatically generalizable, but they nonetheless offer important considerations and exploration pathways for future RL research and practice. The section also relates some of the key observations and insights to the relevant literature. Finally, this section includes reflections on critical perspectives and gaps in the responsible leadership approach that emerged from this study.

The first finding, concerning acting with courage, is perhaps most significant both in terms of responsible leadership theory and practice. In a series of thorny circumstances, Merkel faced choices which involved potential risks. Indeed, these risks, among other considerations, were rooted in what Merkel believed was the right thing to do as evident in her opening quote in this study. These risks, among other considerations, seemed to be linked to Merkel’s values-driven position as noted in some of her statements and decisions outlined above. Given the enormity of urgent issues the world faces today, courageous leadership actions are a necessity (Sen et al., 2013). Studying the nature of courage and risk taking within the realm of responsible leadership appears to be an important venue for future responsible leadership studies.

Another finding of this case study is Merkel’s emphasis on collaboration and consensus building throughout her tenure. The last two decades have seen a significant increase in voices that are polarizing and divisive within and between nation states. These trends endanger large democracies around the globe. The current national and global contexts urgently need leadership that is careful, pragmatic, and inclusive. In that sense, Merkel’s example deserves attention as we look for alternative ways to responsibly tread through polarized contexts. This consensus style of statecraft is aligned with leadership thinking that acknowledges the importance of collaborative work. Voegtlin (2016) emphasized the importance of consensus orientation and collective problem-solving in his conceptualization of RL. He observed, “A collective problem-solving approach in contrast, emphasizes an understanding of responsible leadership that is about encouraging participation among stakeholders and weighing and balancing their legitimate claims” (p. 591).

Another related aspect of our societal dynamics today is their complex, diverse, and changing nature. The refugee crises around the world discussed above, the current global pandemic, and the on-going local international conflicts are good examples of this dynamic and the complexity and uncertainty inherent in them. In this regard, Merkel’s leadership offers important insights. The findings indicate that using adaptive and systems perspectives offer important lessons for leadership in the political, business, and social sector arenas where diverse constituents hold a variety of ideological and other interests. She adhered strongly to some positions and embraced adaptive orientations in other cases. This is not to suggest that one should give up on an ideological position. Rather, the focus should be on search for larger shared values, data informed analysis, and learning. This observation also aligns with the tri-lens responsible leadership framework, which asserts that authentic aptitude and adaptive capability intersect as leaders navigate complex contexts (Tirmizi, 2018).

In introducing this case study, I had noted leader centrality or the individual-collective dynamic as a tension that continues to surface in leadership studies, especially as critical leadership perspectives have drawn increasing attention to it. Concerns around individual leader-centeredness and neglect of collaborative processes and context apply to RL theory as well. From a globally responsible leadership lens, this study also reveals that tension. An important theme in the findings was Merkel’s extensive engagement in relational, collaborative, and multilateral arrangements. At the same time, the findings demonstrate intentionality on her part to initiate or engage in these arrangements. I believe this dynamic, to some extent, is aligned with what Gram-Hanssen (2021) calls the ‘individual-collective simultaneity.’ Based on her study of indigenous leadership in Alaska, she conceptualizes leadership as, “inherently collective and emergent while simultaneously being dependent on individuals “showing up” in everyday situations and contributing with their unique skills and perspectives toward the greater good—a process of ‘individual-collective simultaneity’.” (p. 536). Linking collaborative aspects of Merkel’s approach to the individual-collective simultaneity perspective, offers a potentially important way of conceptualizing and bridging individual-collective debates in the RL theory and practice arenas.

As noted above, while Merkel was able to build her own brand of leadership, gender and other power dynamics nonetheless could not be neglected and she had to defy stereotypes and pressures to conform. This is an intriguing area for future research – especially with a focus on individuals who do not fit the ‘typical’ RL prototypes and must find or create space and identity which is authentic and aligned with their shared values and contexts. This inquiry may also allow addressing the language pitfalls that Learmonth and Morrell (2021) note, especially in relation to RL serving elite interests. In this regard, future research will also benefit from using the gender lens to understand Merkel’s legacy and her challenges more fully. Similar to many dominant leadership theories, responsible leadership research needs to carefully examine its gender blind spots and better understand its intersection with gender dynamics.

While the existing RL theory, with its primary anchoring in the organizational and management literature, has provided a strong conceptual foundation, the findings of this study demonstrate the potential and need to expand this conceptualization in more audacious ways. In fact, it may be argued that this potential refinement and expansion of RL’s conception may enhance its relevance across different sectors including the business and management sector. In particular, the RL dimensions of courageous action, navigating crises with persistence, and multilateral collaborations that emerged in this study are needed to tackle humanity’s most urgent challenges. In that sense, analysis of Angela Merkel’s leadership offers important consideration in extending the RL theoretical domain.

According to some observations in the study findings, questions were raised about Merkel’s ability to offer a long-term perspective or provide a clear vision in some cases. While there are contested perspectives about some of Merkel’s strategies, RL theory does not explicitly deal with the notion of long-term orientation and role of vision in a consistent or explicit fashion, and it would benefit from embracing this lens. As noted above, Voegtlin (2016) was among those few voices that emphasized the importance of forward-looking orientation for responsible leadership. The long-term orientation is especially pertinent given RL’s normative foundation and its potential to address issues and pursue possibilities related to justice, well-being, sustainability, which require persistence over a period time. Rafaty (2015) emphasized the importance of long-termism in the following words, “To be effective, national public policy initiatives on long run issues from financial reform and debt restructuring to climate change mitigation and disarmament all require strategic social and economic planning sustained over decades, surviving the vicissitudes of party competition and the succession of political leadership” (para 4).

As noted above, Merkel has been criticized for not providing a clear vision and for lacking what may be termed as charismatic leadership. This point deserves some critical reflection. Firstly, it invites us to wonder about the elevated place of vision in leadership studies. Perhaps our obsession with inspirational leaders with lofty visions, both in scientific and popular leadership, is misplaced. The findings of this case study suggest that it is indeed possible to be in a position of responsible leadership at the national and global stage without rousing speeches about an envisioned future. Secondly, it is also possible to have a sense of direction without a grand vision. Merkel’s controversial decision to remove use of nuclear power in Germany, following the Fukushima Nuclear Plant disaster in 2011, is a good example of articulating and following a clear and directed approach. Though that decision to move Germany away from nuclear power remains controversial in terms of the country’s energy dependency, especially with the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, it has been hailed as the best approach to transition towards sustainable energy (Verbruggen and Yurchenko, 2017). Finally, these observations raise a question about the prominence that the field of leadership has placed on vision. This case reveals that as long as leaders have a sense of direction, that may be appropriate and sufficient.

While it was appropriate and vital to provide a balanced and critical analysis of Merkel’s leadership, it is important to note that global recognition of her contributions and achievements continues. She was recently awarded the UNHCR’s 2022 Nansen Refugee Award. On that occasion, the UNHCR chief Filippo Grandi recognized Merkel in the following words, “It was true leadership, appealing to our common humanity, standing firm against those who preached fear and discrimination” (UNHCR: para 6).

While I have attempted to collect information and data that are representative in terms of variety of sources, geographies, and time horizon, it is important to note that there were datapoints and perspectives which were not included simply due to the vast amount of material available about Angela Merkel. In addition, while I have included perspectives that both praise and criticize Merkel’s leadership, I recognize that my positionality may have impacted the nature and scope of information employed in this case. As shared in the introductory sections, my exposure to global humanitarian issues, particularly refugee crises around the world, drew my attention to Angela Merkel’s leadership. While I have remained cognizant of my positionality and have attempted to pursue and present a balanced analysis, I believe it is important to recognize my inclinations which motivated me to conduct this case study, which likely impacted my choices. As Blair (2015) observes, “Here I claim validity of method—not by offering a faultless technique but through constant self-scrutiny, reflexivity and the analysis of any conclusions I draw.” (p. 19). Finally, given the uniqueness of case study research, one should be careful about generalizing its findings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while much has been written about Merkel’s leadership in recent months and years, this case provided an analysis of her leadership approach using the responsible leadership lens. The findings suggest that Merkel navigated her role as a globally responsible leader with courage, persistence, collaboration, and care. The study also related Merkel’s approach to the integrated RL theory. In doing so, the case demonstrated that responsible leadership studies have great potential, but they must expand beyond the boundaries of the business world that have dominated these theories for about two decades. The analysis also emphasized some important questions and factors that need to be considered in future work on responsible leadership theory and practice. These factors include the role of courage and risk taking, navigating crises, focus on collaborative and consensus orientation, and building a leadership approach without giving into pressures to conform. In this sense, this case revealed important dimensions that may extend the RL theoretical framework (Edward, 1998). While some of these dimensions have surfaced in selected leadership works, the current study emphasized their persistence and centrality for RL theory and practice. For instance, while leadership across sectors is expected to deal with crises, it was Merkel’s persistent and disciplined navigating of numerous crises that sets her apart from other global leaders and highlights the importance of this RL dimension.

As noted at the outset of this paper, this study was not intended as a victory narrative about Merkel. As the findings of this case study show, Merkel’s leadership approach is not perfect but nonetheless reveals how an ordinary politician with modest roots in former East Germany engaged in extraordinary global leadership for 16 years. The following observation from Tourish (2020) is relevant here: “Our line of work gives us the privilege of writing about the human beings...the endless mistakes that they and we all make, and countless opportunities to discuss how they could be improved...We need to be astonished afresh by the ordinary for the ordinary is not ordinary at all” (p. 108).

Siggelkow (2007) argued that a valuable contribution of cases in relation to conceptual advancement is their use as illustrations. “By seeing a concrete example of every construct that is employed in a conceptual argument, the reader has a much easier time imagining how the conceptual argument might actually be applied to one or more empirical settings” (p. 22). The author goes on to argue, “A paper should allow a reader to see the world, and not just the literature, in a new way” (p. 23). In addition to relating Merkel’s example to the RL conceptualizations, this case has demonstrated what globally responsible leadership may look like in action. In that sense, it has hopefully allowed the reader to see the world of RL in a novel and different way. And finally, this paper will hopefully encourage further theoretical and applied exploration of responsible leadership in ways that are bolder and more curious.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

S Aqeel Tirmizi

Author biography

Aqeel Tirmizi is a Professor of Leadership & Organizational Behavior, at Antioch University’s Graduate School of Leadership and Change. He has over 25 years of international experience in in teaching, research, and consulting in the areas of leadership and management. His research and teaching focus on responsible leadership, cross-cultural leadership, wellbeing, and social innovation. He has developed and published multiple models of leadership. Aqeel has worked with leaders and senior managers from the private, public, and non-profit sectors. He holds a PhD in Management from the State University of New York – Binghamton and Masters in International Administration from the School for International Training.

References

Adler

(2021) Merkel legacy: EU’s queen with a tarnished crown. BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58498231

Al Jazeera News (2022) Ex-German leader Angela Merkel wins UN refugee prize https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/4/ex-german-leader-angela-merkel-wins-un-refugee-prize

Angerer

Eckardt

Elbaum

(2021) Angela Merkel’s departure leaves a void in Germany — and a fight to fill it. NBC News. Available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/angela-merkel-s-departure-leaves-void-germany-fight-fill-it-n1279935

Atkinson

(2002) Four steps to analyse data from a case study method. ACIS 2002 Proceedings 38: 1–11. Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/acis2002/

Bass

(1985) Leadership: good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics 13(3): 26–40.

Blair

(2015) A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences 6(1): 14–29.

Brattberg

(2021) Merkel’s mixed legacy on China. Carnegie endowment for international peace. Available at: https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/30/merkel-s-mixed-legacy-on-china-pub-85471

Brockmann

(2022) Merkel fails to show self-criticism over her Russia policy. DW News. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-merkel-fails-to-show-self-criticism-over-her-russia-policy/a-62068960

Bruen

(2018) Angela Merkal’s legacy and the next generation of women leaders. US News. Available at: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2018-01-24/angela-merkels-legacy-and-the-next-generation-of-women-leaders

10.

Burns

JMG

(1978) Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

11.

Casey

(2021) How might Merkel’s successor manage Germany’s role in the EU? Al Jazeera News. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/13/how-might-merkels-successor-manage-germanys-role-in-the-eu

12.

CBC News (2015a). Angela Merkel Interview: G7 Will Tackle Global Economy, Foreign Policy [Video]. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moABDmNfaPE

13.

CBC News (2015b) Angela Merkel Interview: G7 Summit Will Tackle Global Economy, Foreign Policy. Available at: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/angela-merkel-interview-g7-summit-will-tackle-global-economy-foreign-policy-1.3099931

14.

Crawford

Czuczka

(2013) Angela Merkel: A Chancellorship Forged in Crisis. Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

15.

Creswell

(1998) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

16.

Creswell

(2013) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

17.

Dempsey

(2013) Merkel’s Unfinished Business: Why Germany Needs to Act Strategically. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Available at: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2013/09/05/merkel-s-unfinished-business-why-germany-needs-to-act-strategically-pub-52840

18.

Dempsey

(2021) Will Angela Merkel’s ambiguous legacy last? Carnegie endowment for international peace. Available at: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2021/01/19/will-angela-merkel-s-ambiguous-legacy-last-pub-83681

19.

Dettmer

(2021) What did Merkel achieve. Voice of America. Available at: https://www.voanews.com/a/what-did-merkel-achieve/6225780.html

20.

Eagly

(2018) Some leaders come from nowhere: their success is uneven. Journal of Social Issues 74(1): 184–196.

21.

Edwards

(1998) Types of case study work: a conceptual framework for case-based research. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 38(3): 36–70.

22.

Elliott

(2018) Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Report 23(11): 2850–2861.

23.

Ferree

(2006) Angela Merkel: what does it mean to run as a woman? German Politics and Society, 24(1 (78)), 93–107. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23742714

24.

Ferris

(2018) When refugee displacement drags on, is self-reliance the answer? Brookings. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/when-refugee-displacement-drags-on-is-self-reliance-the-answer/

25.

Fratzscher

(2017) Achievements of Angela Merkal. Euronews. Available at: https://www.euronews.com/2017/11/14/view-merkel-s-greatest-achievement

26.

Gram-Hanssen

(2021) Individual and collective leadership for deliberate transformations: insights from Indigenous leadership. Leadership 17(5): 519–541. DOI: 10.1177/1742715021996486.

27.

Hasel

(2021) Chancellor in crises. DW News. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/angela-merkel-german-chancellor-in-times-of-crisis/a-59197301

28.

Horn

(2016) Germany: where leadership is on trial. The Atlantic. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/merkel-germany-refugee-policy/426663/

29.

Huggler

(2015) 10 moments that define Angela Merkel. The Telegraph. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/angela-merkel/11920552/10-moments-that-define-German-chancellor-Angela-Merkel.html

30.

Jacob

(2018) Moral leadership in the XXI century. The case of Angela Merkel and the European refugee crisis. In: Cendrowicz

Chrisidu-Budnik

(eds) Comparative Perspectives for Public Administration and Administrative Law. Wroclaw: University of Wroclaw, 231–235.

31.

Johnston

Walker

(2021) September 24 Angela Merkel’s career shows why we need more scientists in politics. UNSW Newsroom. Available at: https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/angela-merkels-career-shows-why-we-need-more-scientists-politics

32.

Kohlbacher

(2006) The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum: Qualitative social research 7(1): 1–30.

33.

Kornelius

Moncrieff

(2014) Angela Merkel: The Chancellor and Her World. London: Alma Books.

34.

Learmonth

Morrell

(2021) Leadership as a project: neoliberalism and the proliferation of leaders. Organization Theory 2(4): 1–19.

35.

Levine

(2021) Leadership is responsibility. Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartrlevine/2021/03/14/leadership-is-responsibility/

36.

Maak

Pless

(2006) Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society–a relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 66(1): 99–115.

37.

Miska

Stahl

Mendenhall

(2013) Intercultural competencies as antecedents of responsible global leadership. European Journal of International Management 7(5): 550–569.

38.

Moulson

(2021) Merkel Drops Easter Shutdown Plan for Germany, Apologizes. APNews.com. https://apnews.com/article/pandemics-angela-merkel-germany-coronavirus-pandemic-64baf934e39a94e2ef635676b92222cb

39.

Muff

Liechti

Dyllick

(2020) How to apply responsible leadership theory in practice: a competency tool to collaborate on the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27(5): 2254–2274. DOI: 10.1002/csr.1962.

40.

DW News (2021) Merkel talks about her 16 years as Germany’s chancellor. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/merkel-talks-about-her-16-years-as-germanys-chancellor/av-59749223

41.

Orth

(2014) Angela’s assets. Vanity Fair. Available at: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/01/angela-merkel-profile

42.

Packer

(2014) The quiet German: the astonishing rise of Angela Merkel, the most powerful woman in the world. The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/01/quiet-german

43.

Pless

(2007) Understanding responsible leadership: role identity and motivational drivers. Journal of Business Ethics 74(4): 437–456.

44.

Quinn

D’Amato

(2008) Globally Responsible Leadership: A Leading Edge Conversation. Greensboro, North Carolina: Centre for Creative Learning Research White Paper, 1–19.

45.

Qvortrup

(2021) Angela Merkel: gentle persuasion in an age of populism. The conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/angela-merkel-gentle-persuasion-in-an-age-of-populism-167777

46.

Rafaty

(2015) Long-termism. Kings Review. Available at: https://www.kingsreview.co.uk/essays/long-termism

47.

Reuters (2019) Merkel calls for global cooperation to reach ‘win-win outcomes. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-davos-meeting-germany-merkel-idUKKCN1PH1MD

48.

Şen

Kabak

Yangınlar

(2013) Courageous leadership for the twenty-first century. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 75: 91–101.

49.

Siggelkow

(2007) Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal 50(1): 20–24. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2007.24160882.

50.

Simpson

Rego

Berti

, et al. (2022) Theorizing compassionate leadership from the case of Jacinda Ardern: legitimacy, paradox, and resource conservation. Leadership 18(3): 337–358.

51.

Starratt

(2005) Responsible leadership. The Educational Forum 69(2): 124–133. DOI: 10.1080/00131720508984676. Taylor & Francis Group.

52.

Steckenrider

(2013) Angela Merkel: from serendipity to global success. Women as Political Leaders. Milton Park: Routledge, 244–273.

53.

Stelzenmüller

(2022) Merkel’s lack of regrets illustrates the fallacies of Germany’s Russia policy. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2022/06/21/merkels-lack-of-regrets-illustrates-the-fallacies-of-germanys-russia-policy/

54.

Suder

(2021) From ‘Mädchen’ to ‘Mutti’: as Angela Merkel departs, she leaves a great legacy of leadership. The conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/from-madchen-to-mutti-as-angela-merkel-departs-she-leaves-a-great-legacy-of-leadership-168187

55.

Sutherland

Bolden

Edwards

, et al. (2022) Putting leadership in its place: introduction to the special issue. Leadership 18: 3.

56.

Tirmizi

(2018) An integrative framework for responsible leadership practice Enacting Values-Based Change. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 123–136.

57.

Tourish

(2019) Making a difference: doing leadership research that matters. Journal of Management and Organization 25(3): 364–369. DOI: 10.1017/jmo.2019.6.

58.

Tourish

(2020) The triumph of nonsense in management studies. The Academy of Management Learning and Education 19(1): 99–109.

59.

Tsang

(2014) Generalizing from research findings: the merits of case studies. International Journal of Management Reviews 16(4): 369–383.

60.

Ulrich

(2017) How Angela Merkel has redefined leadership. Carnegie Europe. Available at: https://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/73195

61.

UNHCR (2022) Angela Merkel to receive UNHCR Nansen refugee award for protecting refugees at height of Syria crisisAvailable at: https://www.unhcr.org/ie/news/news-releases/angela-merkel-receive-unhcr-nansen-refugee-award-protecting-refugees-height

62.

Van Zoonen

(2006) The personal, the political and the popular: a woman’s guide to celebrity politics. European Journal of Cultural Studies 9(3): 287–301.

63.

Verbruggen

Yurchenko

(2017) Positioning nuclear power in the low-carbon electricity transition. Sustainability 9(1): 163.

64.

Voegtlin

(2016) What does it mean to be responsible? Addressing the missing responsibility dimension in ethical leadership research. Leadership 12(5): 581–608. DOI: 10.1177/1742715015578936.

65.

Voegtlin

Patzer

Scherer

(2012) Responsible leadership in global business: a new approach to leadership and its multi-level outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics 105(1): 1–16.

66.

Voegtlin

Frisch

Walther

, et al. (2020) Theoretical development and empirical examination of a three-roles model of responsible leadership. Journal of Business Ethics 167(3): 411–431.

67.

Waldman

Balven

(2014) Responsible leadership: theoretical issues and research directions. Academy of Management Perspectives 28(3): 224–234. DOI: 10.5465/amp.2014.0016.

68.

Waldman

Siegel

Stahl

(2020) Defining the socially responsible leader: revisiting issues in responsible leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 27(1): 5–20.

69.

Wall Street Journal (2014) Meet the Putin whisperer: Germany’s Angela Merkel [video]. Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frTBy4My9Qc

70.

Wendler

(2017) Recalibrating Germany’s role in Europe: framing leadership as responsibility. German Politics 26: 574–590. DOI: 10.1080/09644008.2017.1364364.

71.

Wilson

(2020) Pandemic leadership: lessons from New Zealand’s approach to COVID-19. Leadership 16(3): 279–293. DOI: 10.1177/1742715020929151.

72.

Yin

(2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.