Latin America is increasingly contributing to scientific research on leadership, although less than other regions. What are the predominant paradigms on leadership within the scientific community in Mexico? The article reviews doctoral dissertations on leadership from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and the Anahuac University of Mexico (UA) defended before 2021. The findings highlight that 1) the number of doctoral dissertations has grown from 2016 onwards, especially in educational leadership. 2) In both universities a “functionalist” paradigm prevails, based on the transformational leadership model. 3) Two other leadership paradigms are present, referred to in this article as ‘political’ and ‘humanistic’. 4) These three paradigms have their characteristics and preferences in terms of research methodology, language, and reference authors. 5) The use of a paradigm is associated with the type of faculty rather than the type of university (public or private): in business faculties the functionalist paradigm predominates, in education faculties the humanist paradigm, and in political science or communication faculties the political paradigm. In conclusion, it is recommended to confirm the exploratory result obtained and to promote the dialogue between leadership paradigms.

1. Aguilar-Bustamante, M. C. & Correa-Chica, A. (2017). Análisis de las variables asociadas al estudio del liderazgo: una revisión sistemática de la literatura. Universitas Psychologica, 16(1), 1-13.
2. Alvesson, M., & Einola, K. (2019). Warning for excessive positivity: Authentic leadership and other traps in leadership studies. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.04.001
3. Anand, G., Larson, E. C., & Mahoney, J. T. (2020). Thomas Kuhn on paradigms. Production and Operations Management, 29(7), 1650-1657. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13188
4. Arar, K., Yilmaz, M., & Koschoreck, J. W. (2024). Mapping doctoral dissertations in an educational leadership programme: A longitudinal examination of knowledge construction in the last two decades. Review of Education, 12(1), e3446. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3446
5. Aravena F. A. & Hallinger, P. (2018). Systematic review of research on educational leadership and management in Latin America, 1991-2017. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(2), 207-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217745882
6. Aravena, F., Báez, C. P., Gorosave, G. L. & Garduño, J. M. G. (2020). Liderazgo de directores noveles de Latinoamérica a través de las metáforas: Chile, Colombia y México. REICE: Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 18(3), 71-92. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2020.18.3.004
7. Arias-Coello, A., Simon-Martin, J., & Gonzalo Sanchez-Molero, J. L. (2020). Mission statements in Spanish universities. Studies in Higher Education, 45(2), 299-311. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1512569
8. Ashford, S. J., & Sitkin, S. B. (2019). From problems to progress: A dialogue on prevailing issues in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 454–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.01.003
9. Ávalos, B. (2011). Leadership issues and experiences in Latin America. In, T. Townsend & J. MacBeath (Eds.). International handbook of leadership for learning 25, pp. 57-63. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1350-5_4
10. Avery, G. C. (2003). Understanding leadership: Paradigms and cases. Sage Publications Ltd. https://sk.sagepub.com/books/understanding-leadership
11. Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations. New York: The Free Press.
12. Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. (1990). Manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Consulting Psychologist Press.
13. Bordieu, P. (1980/2003). Cuestiones de sociología. Istmo.
14. Breznik, K., & Law, K. M. (2019). What do mission statements reveal about the values of top universities in the world? International Journal of Organisational Analysis, 27(5), 1362-1375. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-08-2018-1522
15. Brooks, E. (2021). A New Generation of Wise Thinkers and Good Leaders. The Journal of Character & Leadership Development, 8(2), 32-44. https://jcldusafa.org/index.php/jcld/article/view/36
16. Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. Harper Perennial Political Classics.
17. Cameron, K. (2011). Responsible Leadership as Virtuous Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(Suppl 1), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1023-6
18. Case, B., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2024). Integrating the humanities and the social sciences: six approaches and case studies. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02684-4
19. Ciulla, J. B. (2004). What is good leadership? Center for public leadership. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/55929
20. Collinson, D., & Tourish, D. (2015). Teaching leadership critically: New directions for leadership pedagogy. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(4), 576-594. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.0079
21. Contreras, F. (2008). Liderazgo: perspectivas de desarrollo e investigación. International Journal of psychological research, 1(2), 64-72.
22. Denscombe, M. (2008). Communities of practice: A research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. Journal of mixed methods research, 2(3), 270-283.
23. Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2010). Influences on college students’ capacities for socially responsible leadership. Journal of college student development, 51(5), 525-549. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2010.0009
24. Flessa, J., & Weinstein, J. (2018). School leadership in Latin America: New research from an emerging field of study. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(2), 179-181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217751728
25. Flessa, J., Bramwell, D., Fernandez, M., & Weinstein, J. (2018). School leadership in Latin America 2000–2016. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(2), 182-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217717277
26. Franco, J. V. A., Arancibia, M., Simancas-Racines, D. & Madrid, E. (2018). Synthesis of biomedical information: narrative reviews, systematic reviews and emerging formats. Medwave, 18(07). https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2018.07.7354
27. Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant Leadership. A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Paulist Press.
28. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln, Y.S. Handbook of qualitative research, pp. 105 – 117. Sage.
29. Guthrie, K. L., & Jenkins, D. M. (2018). The role of leadership educators: Transforming learning. Information Age Publishing.
30. Hallinger, P. (2020). Science mapping the knowledge base on educational leadership and management from the emerging regions of Asia, Africa and Latin America, 1965–2018. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(2), 209-230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218822772
31. Harrison, C. (2017). Leadership theory and research: A critical approach to new and existing paradigms. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68672-1
32. Hershey, P. y Blanchard, K. (1969). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Prentice Hall.
33. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: international differences in work related values. Sage.
34. Hofstede, G. (1998). A case for comparing apples with oranges—International differences in values. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 39(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004476813_004
35. Hogan, R., Kaiser, R. B., Sherman, R. A. & Harms, P. D. (2021). Twenty years on the dark side: Six lessons about bad leadership”. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 73(3), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000205
36. Jiménez-Contreras, E., Ruiz-Pérez, R. & López-Cózar, E. D. (2014). El análisis de las tesis doctorales como indicador evaluativo: reflexiones y propuestas. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 32(2), 295-308. https://doir.og/10.6018/rie.32.2.197401
37. Johnson, S. K., Murphy, S. E., & Riggio, R. E. (2023). Developing leader identity across the lifespan. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2023(178), 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20551
38. Komives, S. R., & Sowcik, M. (2020). The status and scope of leadership education in higher education. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2020(165), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20366
39. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (2009). Exploring leadership: For college students who want to make a difference. John Wiley & Sons.
40. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
41. Liu, Z., Venkatesh, S., Murphy, S. E., & Riggio, R. E. (2021). Leader development across the lifespan: A dynamic experiences-grounded approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101382
42. López González, J. (2022). Paradigmas sobre liderazgo. Tesis doctorales sobre liderazgo en dos universidades de México. In A.J. Chica Núñez, A C. Tomás López & D. Navas Carrillo, Nuevas epistemologías de viejos saberes (pp. 263-273). Editorial Thomson Reuters- Aranzadi
43. López González, J. (2024). Dynamism of human action as a key to understanding virtue education. International Studies in Catholic Education, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/19422539.2024.2363317
44. López González, J., & Ortiz de Montellano, S. (2021). Educación en liderazgo para estudiantes universitarios: propuesta de un meta-modelo. In O. Buzón-García, & M. C. Romero (Eds.). Metodologías activas con TIC en la educación del siglo XXI (pp. 2100–2121). Dykinson.
45. López González, J., Fernández Espinosa, V., & Ortiz de Montellano, S. (2023). A virtue-based model of leadership education. Journal of Moral Education, 53(3), 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2023.2218058
46. López González, J., Ortiz de Montellano, S. & Tapia Cortés, C. (2024). A virtue-based measurement of leadership education. The LID questionnaire. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Develompent. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i1x.9066
47. McGregor, S. L. & Murnane, J. A. (2010). Paradigm, methodology and method: Intellectual integrity in consumer scholarship. International journal of consumer studies, 34(4), 419-427. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00883.x
48. Meng, J., Berger, B. K. & Heyman, W. C. (2011). Measuring public relations leadership in the trait approach: A second-order factor model in the dimension of self-dynamics. Public Relations Journal, 5(1), 1-24. https://prjournal.instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/Measuring-Public.pdf
49. Morgan, D.L. (2007). Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained: Methodological Implications of Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462
50. Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization theory. Administrative science quarterly, 25(4), 605-622. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392283
51. Morphew, C. C., & Hartley, M. (2006). Mission statements: A thematic analysis of rhetoric across institutional type. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(3), 456-471. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11778934
52. Newstead, T., Dawkins S.; Macklin, R.; Martin, A. (2021). We don’t need more leaders–We need more good leaders. Advancing a virtues-based approach to leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101312
53. Oxford Character Project. (2023). Character and Global Leadership. https://oxfordcharacter.org/research/character-global-leadership-report-2023
54. Parris, D. & Peachy, J. (2013). A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(3), 377-393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1322-6
55. Pilz, M., & Li, J. (2021). Approaches to International Comparative Research in Learning and Work. The SAGE Handbook of Learning and Work, 572-586.
56. Reyes, D. L., Dinh, J., Lacerenza, C. N., Marlow, S. L., Joseph, D. L., & Salas, E. (2019). The state of higher education leadership development program evaluation: A meta-analysis, critical review, and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(5), 101311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101311
57. Tourish, D. (2013). The Dark Side of Transformational Leadership: A Critical Perspective. Routledge.
58. Ueda, N., & Kezar, A. (2024). A systematic review: pedagogies and outcomes of formal leadership programs for college students. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2314718. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2314718
59. Wang, Y. (2018). The panorama of the last decade’s theoretical groundings of educational leadership research: A concept co-occurrence network analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(3), 327-365. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/mse_facpub/130
60. Weinstein, J., Muñoz, G., Sembler, M. & Marfán, J. (2019). Una Década De Investigación Empírica Sobre El Liderazgo Educativo en Chile. Una Revisión Sistemática De Los Artículos Publicados en Revistas Indexadas (2008- 2019). Calidad en la Educación (51),15–52. https://www.calidadenlaeducacion.cl/index.php/rce/article/view/671
61. Yukl, G., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1992). Theory and research on leadership in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, pp. 147–197. Consulting Psychologists Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-97201-003
62. Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. In B. M. Wildemuth (Ed.). Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science (pp. 318-329). Libraries Unlimited.