Executive Summary

This research critically examines how leadership and management theories apply to Alan Joyce’s tenure as CEO of Qantas and the airline’s broader strategy. It finds that Joyce displayed elements of transformational leadership, driving major initiatives such as global expansion, Jetstar, Project Sunrise etc. that turned Qantas into an “almost invincible, profit powerhouse”. At the same time, his style has been criticized as increasingly autocratic, with an independent review describing Qantas’s culture under Joyce as “top-down” and resistant to internal challenge. In management terms, Qantas has shifted from a classical, hierarchical model to more consultative practices, but performance pressures have led to tensions with contemporary organisational practices such as empowerment and transparency. The research reviews key leadership theories in Australia, such as transformational, transactional, and situational; and management theories in Australian businesses such as classical, human relations, and contingency; applying them to Joyce’s decisions and Qantas’s management strategy. A critical reflection highlights gaps between theory and practice: while leadership models emphasize innovation and inclusion, real-world demands forced trade-offs. In conclusion, the analysis suggests that Alan Joyce’s leadership style and the Qantas management strategy exemplify the complex interplay of vision and pragmatism in modern Australian organizations.

1.0 Introduction

Qantas Airways is not just Australia’s largest airline but a national icon. Famously nicknamed the “flying kangaroo”, it has long embodied Australian pride, with one commentator noting that “everybody in Australia still believes they own Qantas” (Leader, 2023). Leadership at Qantas therefore attracts intense scrutiny. This research analyses how classic leadership theories such as transformational, transactional, situational, authentic, and servant theories, and management theories such as classical, human relations, systems, and contingency theories can explain the real-world case of Qantas under CEO Alan Joyce between 2008-2023. The research first outlines these theories and then assess Joyce’s decisions and Qantas’s corporate strategy in that light. Under Joyce’s 15-year tenure, Qantas underwent radical changes; an aggressive expansion of global routes, like the Project Sunrise flights to New York/London (C‑Suite Insider, 2025), and bold moves like consolidating Jetstar; which many view as visionary. Indeed, some analysts credit Joyce with transforming Qantas from a near‐collapse into “an almost invincible, profit powerhouse” (Leader, 2023). However, the company also faced serious challenges: union disputes over outsourcing, massive route cancellations, especially during the COVID crisis; and accusations of an opaque corporate culture (Bray, Macneil & Spiess, 2021). An independent review recently criticized a “top-down leadership” style at Qantas under Joyce, marked by “insufficient listening and low speak-up” by subordinates (Taylor, 2024).

In this Australian context, understanding Joyce’s approach requires marrying leadership models like a transformational leadership case study of Joyce’s vision and inclusivity with insights from management theory on how organisations are run. The first part, Section 2, summarizes leadership theories and their relevance to modern Australian businesses. Section 3 applies those theories directly to Alan Joyce’s career and decisions. Sections 4 and 5 do the same for management theories and Qantas’s overall management strategy. Section 6 offers a critical reflection on gaps between theory and practice. Finally, the conclusion discusses the implications for leadership development and contemporary organisational practices in Australia.

Top UK Assignment Cities

2.0 Leadership Theories: Conceptual Overview

Leadership theory encompasses numerous models, but most can be grouped into several broad categories. Early theories like the “Great Man” theory focus on the traits or inherent qualities of leaders (Peters, 2023). Later models such as Blake and Mouton’s managerial grid and McGregor’s Theory X/Y emphasize behaviours and the idea that leadership styles can range from autocratic to democratic (Mindapa, 2022; Younis & El‑Farr, 2023). Transactional vs. Transformational leadership is a key dichotomy: Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) distinguished transactional leaders who motivate followers through rewards/punishments for performance from transformational leaders who inspire followers to transcend self-interest and embrace a higher vision (Chukwukelu, 2023). Transformational leaders are associated with charisma, vision, and innovation (Becker et al., 2021). By contrast, situational and contingency theories like Fiedler, Hersey-Blanchard, House’s Path-Goal, and Leader-Member Exchange argue that effective leadership adapts to context; that a task-oriented style may be better in a crisis (Akpa, Asikhia, & Abraham, 2021; Van Wart et al., 2023; Chukwukelu, 2023; Ilevbare, 2021; Alhammi, 2024), whereas a relationship-oriented style suits stable environments (Ali & Siddiqui, 2023). On a similar note, distributed/participative leadership and authentic leadership stress the leader’s role in empowering others and acting with integrity (Kleynhans et al., 2022; Usman et al., 2021). Servant leadership of Robert K. Greenleaf emphasizes prioritizing followers’ needs and building a collaborative culture (Thakadipuram, 2024).

In practice, modern leadership often blends elements of these theories. For example, a CEO might use transformational tactics to articulate a compelling future strategy like inspiring employees to buy in, while also employing transactional methods such as performance bonuses or targets to manage day-to-day operations. Leading Australian businesses increasingly value transformational and ethical leadership (Halvorsen et al., 2022; Ladkin & Bridges Patrick, 2022). Studies of corporate Australia note that visionary leaders who drive innovation and inclusivity are highly prized, reflecting Alan Joyce’s leadership style in promoting LGBTQ+ inclusion and resilience; he was celebrated for being “openly gay” and seen as a beacon of authenticity fostering an inclusive work culture (Leader, 2023). Leadership development literature in Australia also emphasizes emotional intelligence, adaptability, and cultural diversity as part of contemporary practice (Saha et al., 2023).

Top UK Assignment Samples

2.1 Key leadership concepts

• Transformational Leadership: Inspires followers through vision and change, as per Burns and Bass, and also increases morale and innovation. Often linked to charismatic personal qualities (Adigwe, 2024).
• Transactional Leadership: Focuses on clear structures, rewards and penalties. Emphasizes performance management and goal attainment (Dong, 2023).
• Situational/Contingency Leadership: Effectiveness depends on fit between leader’s style and situational factors (Su, 2024). Adaptive leaders shift style to match team maturity or crisis demands.
• Distributed/Team-based Leadership: Authority and responsibility are shared; emphasis on collaboration and empowerment (Liu & Watson, 2023; Nadeem, 2024).
• Authentic/Servant Leadership: Leaders are self-aware, ethical, and prioritize followers’ growth and well-being (Kaushal, 2023).

These theories provide a lens for analysing Alan Joyce’s tenure. As this discussion shall show, Joyce exhibited many transformational traits like setting bold goals for Qantas, but also showed autocratic and transactional tendencies such as stringent cost control, and top-down decision-making. The next section applies these frameworks to his actions and style, supported by evidence from Qantas’s recent history.

3.0 Application of Leadership Theories to Alan Joyce

Alan Joyce became Qantas CEO in late 2008, in the midst of the Global Financial Crisis (McGuire, 2023). From the start, he projected visionary leadership: expanding Qantas’s global reach through projects like Project Sunrise with its non-stop ultra-long flightsm and reinforcing Jetstar as a low-cost brand (C‑Suite Insider, 2025). He set ambitious targets such as profitability, fuel efficiency, and international expansion that energized the organization. In this sense, Joyce embodied a transformational leadership case study; instilling confidence in staff that Qantas could “redefine long-haul travel” (C‑Suite Insider, 2025). Many analysts credit him with pulling Qantas back from near-collapse into a robust competitor: for example, one review notes Joyce’s “strategic foresight in expanding Qantas’ network” kept it competitive globally (C‑Suite Insider, 2025). His leadership style combined vision with decisive action – characteristic of transformational leaders who take charge in crisis.

Joyce also championed social change in the company. Notably, as an openly gay CEO, he signalled that diversity was valued at the top (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2025; Bernardino, 2024). A review of his tenure observes that Joyce “fostered an inclusive workplace culture” in which being authentic was seen as an organizational asset (Leader, 2023). This aligns with authentic leadership theory, where leaders model honesty and acceptance (Almutairi et al., 2024). Indeed, under his tenure Qantas earned praise for diversity initiatives, echoing theories that leaders who value inclusion can boost organizational performance.

However, other aspects of Joyce’s approach reflect different leadership models. His intense focus on cost-cutting and performance metrics has been described as highly transactional. He imposed strict efficiency targets, tying executive bonuses to outcomes, and did not hesitate to resort to layoffs or outsourcing when needed. For instance, during the 2020 pandemic he controversially cancelled thousands of flights and planned to stand down many workers; a transactional response to an extreme external shock (Askola, Forbes-Mewett & Shmihelska, 2021; Stewart, Stanford & Hardy, 2022). This hints at an autocratic style; an independent review recently criticized a “top-down leadership” culture at Qantas under Joyce, marked by “insufficient listening and low speak-up” (Taylor, 2024). In other words, despite his vision, Joyce often managed in a directive way. This authoritarian streak suggests a reliance on leader-driven decision-making rather than democratic or participative approaches.

Joyce’s leadership also shows elements of contingency/situational theory. He faced vastly different challenges such as financial crisis, intense competition, and then the unprecedented COVID-19 disruption (Heiets, & Xie, 2021; Suk & Kim, 2021). His responses shifted accordingly. Early on, he took a bold stance, closing unprofitable international routes and cutting costs (Alaa‑Eldeen, Tawfik & Tag‑Eldeen, 2023) – a task-oriented approach. Later, during the pandemic, he engaged with government and health authorities, and pushed for a domestic recovery strategy; reflecting situational adaptation. Indeed, Qantas’s board acknowledged Joyce’s crisis management skills; it was “appreciative of Mr Joyce’s pandemic performance” (Taylor, 2023) even while later penalizing him for other issues. This mix of praise for resilience in a crisis, and criticism for bringing poor culture underscores the dual nature of his leadership.

Get Assignment Help for Top Subjects

3.1 Balancing Styles

In practice Joyce blended styles. He inspired some employees through personal narrative of surviving cancer and gay rights advocacy (Smith, 2016), which aligns with charismatic leadership traits. At the same time, he was firm on authority: for example, in a dispute over pay last year, the Qantas board slashed his bonus partly due to findings on communication failures (da Silva, 2024). Under his leadership, Qantas went from being highly admired to divisive in the public eye. Analysts summarize his legacy as “a mix of transformation, innovation, and resilience”– crediting both his successes and noting the controversies such as outsourcing, flight cancellations etc. that marked his later years (C‑Suite Insider, 2025). This mix reflects what leadership scholars call a hybrid approach, where even transformational leaders may shift toward transactional, especially under pressure (Su & Wu, 2024).

3.2 Key examples

• Visionary Initiatives: Launch of new international routes and modernizing the fleet (Qantas, 2022). This aligns with transformational change management.
• Employee Relations: Implementation of company-wide diversity programs. This aligns with authentic leadership in action (Leader, 2023).
• Crisis Response: During COVID-19, Joyce secured government support and pivoted to repatriation flights (Freri & Ferguson, 2023). This demonstrates contingency leadership, adapting to unprecedented circumstances.
• Authoritative Decisions: When union disputes arose with regard to pay cuts, Joyce took a strict line, organizing mass firings (about 1700) and legal action (Richie, 2023); a very transactional/autocratic manoeuvre.

3.3 Effect on Qantas

Joyce’s approach yielded mixed results. Under his visionary leadership, Qantas expanded and earned record profits pre-2020. Yet, his “dominant CEO” style has been blamed for fostering a corporate culture where concerns were insufficiently heard (Taylor, 2024). The low speak-up culture arguably contributed to employee dissatisfaction and public backlash. In leadership-theory terms, Joyce shows that a transformational leader who drives change can still become isolated from his followers if he does not also practice the supportive, listening aspects of leadership (Crowley, 2022; Broome, 2024).

Alan Joyce’s tenure, therefore, illustrates how multiple leadership styles can co-exist: he was at once an inspiring change-agent and a tough, business-first manager. Theory suggests such individuals must balance these aspects carefully; an insight reinforced by Joyce’s experience, where ultimate success of Qantas returning to profit came only after stringent measures that alienated some stakeholders.

4.0 Management Theories: Conceptual Overview

Management theory provides frameworks for how organisations operate and make decisions. The classical theories in the early 20^th century include scientific management by Taylor and bureaucratic administration by Weber and Fayol (Taylor, 1911; Weber, 1978[1]; Fayol, 1949[2]). These emphasize efficiency, formal hierarchies, clear division of labour, and top-down control. For example, Weber’s bureaucratic model prescribes a rigid hierarchy and rule-based governance (Weber, 1978), while Fayol’s administrative theory outlines management functions (Fayol, 1949) such as forecasting, planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling (Smith, Babich & Lubrick, 2020). Both underline the idea of a centralized authority and standardized procedures.

In contrast, human relations theory and later behavioural approaches by Mayo, Maslow, and Herzberg stress the importance of worker motivation and informal organization (Adigun & Okunade, 2024). These theories argue that management must address employee needs – democratic problem-solving, participative decision-making, and a focus on team dynamics can boost productivity (Smith, Babich & Lubrick, 2020). For example, the Hawthorne Studies showed that attention to workers’ psychological needs improved morale (Ugoani, 2023). In practice, this translates to management styles that range from autocratic to laissez-faire. A middle ground is consultative/participatory management, which incorporates employee input into planning and recognizes the value of staff well-being (Uribetxebarria, Garmendia & Elorza, 2021).

Modern management theory builds on these. Contingency theory holds that no one style fits all: organisations must tailor their structure and strategy to the external environment (Pacheco‑Cubillos, Boria‑Reverter & Gil‑Lafuente, 2024). A rigid classical model may work in stable conditions, but a rapidly changing market calls for flexible, decentralized approaches (Jeran & Mabrouk, 2023). Similarly, systems theory views an organisation as an interrelated whole (inputs, then process, then outputs with feedback loops), requiring an integrative management style that coordinates across departments (Jiménez, 2025). Strategic management models such as Porter’s Five Forces, and Balanced Scorecard focus on long-term planning and performance metrics (Atoevna, 2025). Today’s managers often combine classical and behavioural elements: they set clear goals or a ‘command function’ but also empower teams or a ‘coordinate function’ (Riggio & Newstead, 2023). The rise of knowledge-based industries has led to networked and learning organization concepts, where innovation and agility are central (Asokan, Arumugam & Selamoglu, 2025). Contemporary management theory, therefore, emphasizes balancing structure with flexibility.

Top Dissertation Topics UK

4.1 Key management concepts

• Classical Management: Emphasizes formal structure, hierarchy, and efficiency like in Taylor’s scientific method and Weber’s bureaucracy (Smith, Babich & Lubrick, 2020). Managers plan and control.
• Human Relations Management: Focuses on employee motivation and social factors like in Mayo’s Hawthorne insights. Managers must address workers’ needs and foster participative environments (Smith, Babich & Lubrick, 2020).
• Contingency & Systems: Effective management depends on context. Organizations seen as systems adapting to environment, requiring appropriate leadership style and structure (Shala, Prebreza & Ramosaj, 2021).
• Strategic/Modern Management: Emphasis on strategy, performance measurement like in MBO by Drucker or Balanced Scorecard (Radtke, 2022), risk management, and learning like continuous improvement and lean practices.

Applying this to businesses, trends of combining bureaucratic oversight with participative culture emerges. Australian companies often claim to use “inclusive” management styles, but many retain hierarchical elements for accountability and compliance (Harrison, Chen & Jiao, 2023). For instance, Qantas publicly stresses its robust corporate governance framework, aligning with ASX principles to ensure “responsible, ethical and sustainable business practices” (Qantas, 2025). Yet at the operational level, Qantas also adopts systematic risk management akin to a modern systems approach, proactively handling fuel price volatility, health regulations, and other uncertainties (Qantas, 2025). This blend reflects a management philosophy that is neither purely classical nor purely ‘humanist’ but ‘eclectic’; consistent with contemporary organisational practices (Knights, 2021).

Management theories, therefore, provide a toolkit: from Taylorist efficiency drives to human-centric culture building. The next section examines how Qantas’s actual management aligns with these ideas; Qantas has elements of both classical (clear corporate hierarchy, cost-control measures) and modern (performance metrics, consultative committees, risk systems) management.

5.0 Application of Management Theories to Qantas Airways

Qantas’s management structure historically has roots in a classical, autocratic model. For decades, as a government-owned airline pre-1995 privatization, it functioned with a rigid hierarchy and clear bureaucratic rules. One study notes that in the post-privatisation era Qantas “shifted from an autocratic management style with hierarchical levels of power and authority… to a more consultative and participative management style” (Liu, 2016). In practice, this meant that executive management kept firm control over strategy and finances, but in recent years began involving senior staff in decisions through committees. This move reflects human relations theory: by soliciting input from different levels, Qantas aimed to improve morale and innovation.

Qantas’s strategic management demonstrates contingency thinking. The airline responds to global market pressures of fuel costs, competition from Gulf carriers, demand shifts etc. by adjusting its portfolio of routes and fleet. Its long-term plans incorporate classic planning functions – forecasting demand, organizing resources, and controlling expenditures; much like Fayol’s framework (Smith, Babich & Lubrick, 2020). For instance, Project Sunrise required extensive forecasting and organizing of resources like new aircraft purchases, pilot training etc. and was managed like a major engineering project. During crises like the pandemic, Qantas management acted like a dynamic system: it quickly reallocated capacity to repatriation flights and restructured operations, illustrating a systems/contingency approach.

On the human side, Qantas claims to value employee engagement. The Board’s People & Remuneration Committee, listed publicly, signals a formal structure for HR oversight (Qantas, 2025). The Qantas Group Business Practices emphasize “beliefs, values, and business practices” and encourage a risk-aware culture (Qantas, 2025). Yet the independent review of late 2023 suggested a gap: employees did not feel empowered to challenge management, indicating a shortfall in human relations management. This tension captures theory vs practice: while Qantas espouses inclusive values, the reality, as per reports, was that ordinary staff had limited voice. That suggests an organization still leaning on its older autocratic habits.

Corporate governance at Qantas provides a window into its modern management style. The Board oversees a detailed governance framework aligned with ASX principles (Qantas, 2025). There are dedicated committees for audit, safety and risk, and remuneration, showing a bureaucratic emphasis on checks and controls (Qantas, 2025). Simultaneously, Qantas has invested in enterprise risk management: it “adopts a proactive approach” to identify risks such as fuel prices, pandemics, regulatory changes etc. and builds resilience through integrated systems (Qantas, 2025). This systematic risk management approach is very much in line with contingency/systems theory; treating the organization as an open system that must constantly adapt to external shocks.

In terms of day-to-day style, Qantas management under Joyce often combined strong central control with incentive programs. It instituted rigorous performance measurement by financial targets, punctuality metrics etc. reflecting a scientific management mindset. At the same time, it offered training and development programs for staff, recognizing the human aspect of performance. For example, Qantas’s on-line governance and values documents indicate efforts to engage employees in safety and customer service processes, consistent with the human relations idea that attention to culture improves performance (Qantas, 2025).

5.1 Summary of alignment

• Classical Aspects: Qantas maintains a clear hierarchy and defined roles of Board, CEO, & executive teams, with formal charters and rules (Qantas, 2025). Decision-making tends to be centralized, especially on strategic issues.
• Human Relations Aspects: In recent years, Qantas has created consultative forums and emphasized “values” like ethics and respect in its business practice documents (Qantas, 2025). Employee engagement surveys and partnerships with unions also reflect a nod to people-focused management.
• Contingency/Systems: The airline’s robust risk management systems and agile operational adjustments during COVID show it adapts structure to circumstances (Qantas, 2025).
• Strategic Management: Use of long-term planning like the domestic vs. international focus shifts, and balanced scorecards (though not public, but implied by metrics) align with strategic theory.

Despite these theoretically “best practice” initiatives, the 2023 review suggests Qantas’s actual culture still exhibits the limitations of its classical past: employees report that authority and accountability remain top-down. In effect, management theories in Australian businesses like Qantas have produced a hybrid. The formal governance (classical) and risk protocols (systems/strategic) coexist with newer consultative efforts (human relations). How well this mix works is judged by outcomes: on one hand, Qantas avoided collapse in 2020; on the other, internal reviews say it missed opportunities to harness frontline creativity. The next section reflects on these theory-practice tensions.

6.0 Critical Reflection: Theory vs Practice

The case of Alan Joyce and Qantas illustrates the persistent gap between theoretical ideals of leadership/management and organizational realities. Leadership theory often extols the virtues of empowerment, open communication, and ethical charisma. Management theory emphasizes staff involvement and adaptability. Yet in practice, Qantas under Joyce shows that such ideals can be hard to fully realize. For example, transformational leadership theory suggests that an inspiring leader should energize all employees. Joyce indeed set a bold vision, but critics argue he did not always translate that into collective engagement – the independent report’s finding of “low speak-up” at Qantas (Taylor, 2024) speaks to this disconnect. In other words, even leaders who are visionaries may still operate in a command-and-control manner.

Similarly, human relations management theory would predict that greater employee participation yields better outcomes. Qantas’s mixed approach – strong central decisions with occasional consultation; reflects a compromise. Theory suggests employees would benefit from a more participatory style, yet Qantas’s results (pre-2020 profitability) also show the effectiveness of decisive leadership. The tension here is clear: management frameworks advocate empowerment, but high-stakes environments like airlines often compel executives to revert to hierarchical control for efficiency and safety. In this sense, Alan Joyce’s leadership style and Qantas’s operations demonstrate that leaders must frequently adapt theory to context, rather than applying one model rigidly.

The co-existence of styles at Qantas also underscores the idea from contingency theory that leadership and management must fit the situation. Joyce shifted between transformational moves like expanding routes and promoting inclusion, and transactional measures like mass standdowns and contract negotiations as circumstances demanded. This reflects a pragmatic use of different theories. Yet it also creates cognitive dissonance: employees may find it difficult to reconcile an inspirational mission statement with the reality of forced pay cuts or job losses. Qantas’s experience suggests that theory can guide leaders, but cannot eliminate the harsh choices required by business imperatives.

In terms of organisational culture, theory would have Qantas evolve into a learning organisation where dissent can prevent mistakes. However, the actual culture under Joyce showed limitations. The board’s own critique implies that Qantas’s structure and past legacy still exert a classical influence; contrary to the more participative model predicted by modern theory (Taylor, 2024). This calls into question whether large, complex organisations like Qantas can ever fully enact “contemporary organisational practices” when legacy systems remain in place. In practice, Qantas seems to have ended up with a hybrid model: it leveraged the strengths of multiple theories such as visionary change and efficiency drive, but also felt their contradictions.

6.1 Key insight

Theoretical models are rarely realized in pure form. Alan Joyce’s tenure shows that an effective leader may combine visionary inspiration (transformational) with firm control (transactional). Likewise, Qantas’s management blends bureaucratic structure with elements of strategic risk-taking and employee consultation. The critical reflection is that theory provides useful frameworks but must be balanced against context.

7.0 Conclusion

This discussion has demonstrated that neither leadership nor management theories can explain everything about the tenure of Alan Joyce and the strategy of Qantas, and no single theory can explain everything. Joyce had numerous transformational qualities; a daring vision, personal integrity, particularly in relation to diversity; and the ability to persevere through challenges. Meanwhile, his approach was sometimes transactional and autocratic, as was appropriate in classical management. In the same way, the management of Qantas is a combination of structured governance and performance-based controls with a degree of consultations. The critical distance between theory and practice can be seen: in the market, ideal models can come into conflict with reality. The case of Qantas indicates that contemporary organisations need a leader with a flexible, hybrid style; the style that is capable of inspiring change, but also able to produce results. Finally, this research underscores that understanding leadership and management in context – in this case, an Australian corporate setting, is crucial. It is only by applying multiple theories and acknowledging practical constraints that one can fully grasp the complexity of leading and managing a contemporary organisation like Qantas.

References

Adigun, U. O., & Okunade, I. O. (2024). Human relations in management: A critical analysis of neo‑classical theory. Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Государственное и муниципальное управление, 11(4), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8313-2024-11-4-495-505

Adigwe, C. S. (2024). Transformational leadership: A comparative exploration of the leadership prowess of Jeff Bezos and Steve Jobs. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 24(3), 68–89. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEBA/2024/v24i31242

Agnihotri, A., & Bhattacharya, S. (2025). Qantas Airways: Assessing leadership recruitment and the selection of a woman CEO during an organizational reputation crisis. SAGE Business Cases Originals. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071984529

Akpa, V., Asikhia, O., & Abraham, A. A. (2021). Leadership: A review of definitions and theories (Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 273–291). International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM). Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://ijaem.net/issue_dcp/Leadership%20A%20Review%20of%20Definitions%20and%20Theories.pdf

Alaa‑Eldeen, M., Tawfik, A., & Tag‑Eldeen, A. (2023). Crisis of competition: A conceptual review of hospitality and tourism industries. Athens Journal of Tourism, 10(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajt.10-1-3

Alhamami, M. A. (2024). Leading for innovation: How different leadership styles shape employee innovation in Saudi higher education (Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University). Victoria University Research Repository. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://vuir.vu.edu.au/48838/

Ali, A., & Siddiqui, D. A. (2023, April 28). How relation‑oriented, task‑oriented and objective‑oriented leadership affect employee performance during the pandemic: The mediatory role of individual job autonomy, and work tension, as well as team cohesiveness, teamwork tension, complemented by digital maturity [Preprint]. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4432166

Almutairi, M., Timmins, F., Yoder Wise, P., Stokes, D., & Alharbi, T. A. F. (2024). Authentic leadership—A concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 81(4), 1775–1793. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16496

Asikhia, O., Akpa, V., & Abraham, A. A. (2021). Leadership: A review of definitions and theories. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM), 3(1), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.35629/5252-0301273291

Askola, H., Forbes-Mewett, H., & Shmihelska, O. (2021). Migrant precariousness in the time of COVID-19: Migrant workers, risks and rights. Monash University. https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2489233/Migration-and-COVID-19-final-report.pdf

Asokan, N., Arumugam, S. R., & Selamoglu, Z. (2025). Talent management, knowledge-based view, and learning organizations. In M. W. Bari & F. Di Virgilio (Eds.), Handbook of talent management and learning organizations: A post‑pandemic perspective (pp. 183–199). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003429890-13

Atoevna, T. S. (2025). Evaluating the effectiveness of traditional vs. emerging strategic management tools in a rapidly changing business landscape. Modern Educational System and Innovative Teaching Solutions, 1(7), 283–295. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://esiconf.org/index.php/MESAS/article/view/2455

Becker, L., Coussement, K., Büttgen, M., & Weber, E. (2021). Leadership in innovation communities: The impact of transformational leadership language on member participation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39(3), 371–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12588

Bernardino, P. (2024). CEO activism: Connecting with stakeholders. In Stakeholder engagement essentials (pp. 34–48). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802208771.00013

Bray, M., Macneil, J., & Spiess, L. (2021). Unions and collective bargaining in Australia in 2020. Journal of Industrial Relations, 63(3), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221856211003597

Broome, M. E. (2024). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (4th ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

Chukwukelu, T. I. (2023). Examining the impact of leadership styles on teacher motivation and teacher turnover intentions (Doctoral dissertation, Unicaf University in Zambia). Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://cdn.unicaf.org/websites/unicaf/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Theodora-Ifeyiuche-Chukwukelu-FINAL-thesis.pdf

Crowley, M. C. (2022). Lead from the heart: Transformational leadership for the 21st century. Hay House, Inc.

C‑Suite Insider. (2025, May 7). Alan Joyce steps down as Qantas CEO (1 min read). C‑Suite Insider. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.c-suiteinsider.com/news/alan-joyce-steps-down-as-qantas-ceo/#:~:text=Joyce%2C%20who%20took%20over%20the,haul%20travel

da Silva, J. (2024, August 8). Former Qantas boss exit pay slashed by millions. BBC News. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz73jydj4z1o

Dong, B. (2023). A systematic review of the transactional leadership literature and future outlook. Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 2(3), 21–25. https://doi.org/10.54097/ajmss.v2i3.7972

Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management (C. Storrs, Trans.). Pitman. (Original work published 1916)

Freri, M., & Ferguson, S. (2023, August 24). Qantas CEO Alan Joyce rules out paying back COVID ‘bailout’ as company celebrates record profits. ABC 7.30. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-24/alan-joyce-qantas-record-profits-covid-bailout-730/102772616

Halvorsen, B., Bartram, T., Kia, N., & Cavanagh, J. (2022).
Meeting customer needs through ethical leadership and training: Examining Australian bank employees. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 61(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12329

Harrison, G., Chen, J., & Jiao, L. (2023). Transformational leadership style and holistic accountability mechanisms in not‑for‑profit organisations. Accounting and Business Research, 55(2), 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2023.2277919

Heiets, I., & Xie, Y. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the aviation industry. Journal of Aviation, 5(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.933296

Ilevbare, J. O. (2021). Leadership styles for creating shared value in small and medium‑sized enterprises (Doctor of Business Administration dissertation, Walden University). Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies, 10239. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/10239

Jerab, D. A., & Mabrouk, T. (2023). How to design an effective organizational structure & the 21 century trends [Preprint]. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4584646

Jiménez, C. S. H. (2025). A systems theory perspective on academic culture in Latin American engineering education: A literature review. International Contemporary Management Review, 6(2), e290. https://doi.org/10.54033/icmrv6n2-010

Kaushal, N. (2023). Servant leadership: An inextricable technique and persuasive criterion for emerging leaders. In J. Marques (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of fulfillment, wellness, and personal growth at work (pp. 549–568). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35494-6_30

Kleynhans, D. J., Heyns, M. M., Stander, M. W., & de Beer, L. T. (2022).
Authentic leadership, trust (in the leader), and flourishing: Does precariousness matter? Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 798759. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.798759

Knights, D. (2021). Challenging humanist leadership: Toward an embodied, ethical, and effective neo‑humanist enlightenment approach. Leadership, 17(6), 674–692. https://doi.org/10.1177/174271502199364

Ladkin, D., & Bridges Patrick, C. (2022).
Whiteness in leadership theorizing: A critical analysis of race in Bass’ transformational leadership theory. Leadership, 18(2), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715021106644

Leader, J. (2023, October 6). APEX Aviation Book Review: Alan Joyce and the Resilient Rise of Qantas. APEX Aviation. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://apex.aero/articles/apex-alan-joyce/#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Connection%3A%20The%20bond,nation%20and%20its%20flagship%20carrier

Liu, J. (2016). Large‑scale organisation management of change – The case of Qantas (Executive summary & selected sections). [Unpublished case study]. Academia.edu. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.academia.edu/22337453/Large_scale_organisation_management_of_change_the_case_of_Qantas

Liu, Y., & Watson, S. (2023). Whose leadership role is more substantial for teacher professional collaboration, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A lens of distributed leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(6), 1082–1110. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1820580

McGuire, A. (2023, September 5). Alan Joyce to leave Qantas early. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved September 5, 2023, from https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/alan-joyce-to-leave-qantas-early-20230905-p5e20h.html

Mindapa, A. K. (2022). Critical evaluation of Blake and Mouton’s managerial grid and its application to Baze University Library (Library Philosophy & Practice, 1–14). University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/7103/

Nadeem, M. (2024). Distributed leadership in educational contexts: A catalyst for school improvement. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, Article 100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100835

Pacheco‑Cubillos, D. B., Boria‑Reverter, J., & Gil‑Lafuente, J. (2024). Transitioning to agile organizational structures: A contingency theory approach in the financial sector. Systems, 12(4), 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12040142

Peters, M. A. (2023). Who Leads, Who Follows? Critical Review of the Field of Leadership Studies: From the ‘Great Man’ & Trait Theory to Equity & Diversity Leadership in the Biodigital Era. Beijing International Review of Education, 5(1–2), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1163/25902539-05010009

Qantas. (2022, May 2). Qantas confirms future Airbus fleet [Press release]. Airbus. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-05-qantas-confirms-future-airbus-fleet

Qantas. (2025). Our governance. Qantas Group. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.qantas.com/us/en/qantas-group/about-us/our-governance.html#:~:text=The%20Qantas%20Board%20of%20Directors

Radtke, L. (2022). 7.3 From management by objectives to the balanced scorecard. In Principles of leadership & management. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/leadershipandmanagement/chapter/7-3-from-management-by-objectives-to-the-balanced-scorecard/

Riggio, R. E., & Newstead, T. (2023). Crisis leadership. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 201–224. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-044838

Ritchie, H. (2023, September 13). Qantas illegally fired 1,700 workers during pandemic – top court. BBC News. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-66793496

Saha, S., Das, R., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., Malik, A., & Chillakuri, B. (2023). Emotional intelligence and leadership: Insights for leading by feeling in the future of work. International Journal of Manpower, 44(4), 671–701. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-12-2021-0690

Shala, B., Prebreza, A., & Ramosaj, B. (2021). The contingency theory of management as a factor of acknowledging the leaders–managers of our time: Study case—the practice of the contingency theory in the company Avrios. Open Access Library Journal, 8, e7850. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107850

Smith, C., Babich, C., & Lubrick, M. (2020). 2.1 Classical Management Theories. In Leadership and Management in Learning Organizations (pp. x–x). eCampusOntario. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/educationleadershipmanagement/chapter/2-1-classical-management-theories/

Smith, M. (2016, August 9). True Leaders 2016: How Qantas CEO Alan Joyce became the turnaround king. The Australian Financial Review. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/management/true-leaders-2016-alan-joyce-qantas-ceo-20160711-gq37e9

Stewart, A., Stanford, J., & Hardy, T. (2022). The wages crisis: Revisited. Centre for Future Work. https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Wages-Crisis-Revisited-WEB.pdf

Su, L., & Wu, H. (2024). Full-range leadership, follower envy, and the effects on organizational citizenship behaviors and work deviances. Current Psychology, 43(5), 3201–3215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07272-y

Su, M. (2024). Adaptive leadership in times of crisis: Exploring situational responses and contingent factors at sub-national levels. Journal of General Management. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063070241250092

Suk, M., & Kim, W. (2021). COVID-19 and the airline industry: Crisis management and resilience. Tourism Review, 76(4), 984–998. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-07-2020-0348

Taylor, D. (2024, August 8). Independent review slams Qantas’ management culture [Audio broadcast]. ABC PM. Retrieved June 14, 2025, from https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/pm/independent-review-slams‑qantas‑management‑culture/104202446

Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers.

Thakadipuram, T. (2024). Servant Leadership and Spiritual Intelligence: A Synergistic Approach. In: Leadership Wholeness, Volume 2. Palgrave Studies in Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28967-5_5

Ugoani, J. (2023). The Hawthorne Experiments: Workers motivations and positive experiences (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 4404821). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4404821

Uribetxebarria, U., Garmendia, A., & Elorza, U. (2021). Does employee participation matter? An empirical study on the effects of participation on well‑being and organizational performance. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 29(4), 1397–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-020-00704-7

Usman, M., Ghani, U., Cheng, J., Farid, T., & Iqbal, S. (2021).
Does participative leadership matter in employees’ outcomes during COVID‑19? Role of leader behavioral integrity. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 646442. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646442

Van Wart, M., Suino, P., Van Wart, M., & Medina, P. S. (2023). Leadership in public and nonprofit organizations: An introduction (4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003261896

Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). University of California Press. (Original work published 1922)

Younis, R., & El‑Farr, H. (2023). McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. In SAGE Encyclopedia of Management Theories. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071923474

---

[1] Original year of creation uncertain; published posthumously in 1921/22 by his wife Marianne Weber, translated into English later in 1978.

[2] Originally written in 1916, English translation published in 1949.

Explore Recent Blogs