ABSTRACT
The significance of governance structures for leadership in city development cannot be over-emphasised; in many ways they frame leadership processes and practices. As Beer states, the leadership of places cannot be examined in isolation, as the relationship between leaders and governmental or other powers either enables or constrains generative leadership significantly (Beer, 2014). Parkinson (1990: 21–22) argues that there are places where political differences lead to situations in which “no coherent response, negotiation or agreement among a broad range of political and social groups is possible”. Fortunately, there also are places where coherent place leadership is a central part of a city’s competitive advantage (Parkinson, 1990; Stimson et al., 2009; Stough, 2003; Parkinson et al., 2012). Interestingly, as leadership in cities and regions is gaining importance, the forms and modes of government have also been in flux, and in its own way, generative leadership responds to shifts from government to governance (Rhodes, 2000), from the generic trend of hierarchies to networks (Powell 1990), and the search for new approaches to managing complexity and “wicked issues” at the interstices of sector-based policy silos (Sotarauta, 1996; Klijn, 1996).
