LEADERSHIP AS A CIRCUIT OF MEANING: A SOCIO-PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31392/cult.alm.2026.2.22Keywords:
leadership, circuit of culture, Stuart Hall, construction of meanings, representation, identity, sociophilosophical analysis, remote interaction, ethics of responsibility, destructive leadershipAbstract
The article provides a socio-philosophical analysis of the leadership phenomenon in contemporary organizational systems through the paradigms of the “Circuit of Culture” model developed by S. Hall and P. du Gay. The relevance of the study is driven by the transformation of traditional hierarchical management structures under conditions of modern social instability and the transition to remote forms of work interaction. It is argued that in the digital era leadership ceases to be a purely administrative function and moves into the realm of symbolic production, where the leader's key task is the construction of shared meanings. The methodological basis of the study is a synthesis of systemic and semiotic approaches, which allows for the interpretation of leadership as a continuous cycle of “encoding” and “decoding” organizational meanings. Within the proposed model, five interrelated processes are analyzed in detail: representation, identity, production, consumption, and regulation. The study substantiates the assumption according to which, through mechanisms of representation, the leader emerges as the “author” of the organizational narrative, constructing a vision to structure the social reality of subordinates. Special attention is paid to the process of collective identity formation in the absence of a shared physical office space, where the “circuit of meanings” becomes the sole tool for maintaining team cohesion. The paradox of leadership meaning consumption is examined, where subordinates act as active subjects of decoding, requiring a high level of authenticity and value synchronization from the leader. A separate emphasis is placed on the ethical dimension of regulation. Drawing on Hans Jonas’s “imperative of responsibility,” the risks of destructive leadership are analyzed as a failure in the system of cultural regulation. It is concluded that effective leadership in the 21st century lies in the leader's ability to act as a guarantor of the “Circuit of Culture” integrity, transforming the organization from a mechanical structure into a living value-based community
References
Вебер М. (1994). Господарство і суспільство. (Класика теорії харизматичного лідерства).
Гльоза О. С. (2025a). Теоретико-методологічні засади лідерства. Освітній дискурс, 52(1–2). DOI: 10.33930/ed.2019.5007.52(1-2)-5.
Гльоза О. С. (2025b). Лідер як медіафігура: трансформація образу влади в епоху невизначеної множинності.
Вища освіта України, 3(98). DOI: 10.32782/NPU-VOU.2025.3(98).06.
Гльоза О. С. (2026). Трансформація лідерства та корпоративної етики в умовах дистанційної робочої взаємодії.
Актуальні проблеми соціальної філософії, 58.
Йонас Г. (2001). Принцип відповідальності. У пошуках етики для технологічної цивілізації. Київ: Дух і Літера.
Bass B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press.
Du Gay P., Hall S., Janes L., Mackay H., Negus K. (1997). Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman. London: Sage.
Isaacson W., (2011). Steve Jobs: A Biography. New York: Simon & Schuster. 656 p. ISBN 978-1451648539.
Hall S., (1997). The work of representation. Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London: Sage.
Manning T., (2017). The Dark Triad of personality and its relationship to leadership, management, teamwork and influencing behaviours. Journal of Intellectual Disability – Diagnosis and Treatment. Vol. 5, Issue 2. https://doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2017.05.02.2.
Thompson K., (1997). Media and Cultural Regulation. London: Sage Publications. 208 p.
Woodward K. (1997). Identity and difference, Identity and Difference, ed. by K. Woodward. London: Sage Publications in association with The Open University. P. 7–62.
