Complementary evidence from narrative literature reviews and meta-analyses leads to the conclusion that much research suffers from a lack of attention to the context in which leadership occurs. Several possible reasons for this context deficit are refuted, including notions that context is unimportant for leaders, contextualized research is less scientific than decontextualized research, and useful contextual descriptors are lacking. Rather, it is argued that the context deficit is a negative manifestation of the romance of leadership. Advantages of enhanced attention to context include reduction of omitted variable bias, improved understanding of anomalous research results, differentiation and integration of research findings, and enhanced teaching and practice of leadership. Improved contextual appreciation can be facilitated by consulting contextual success stories, embracing an interdisciplinary perspective, focusing on events, behavior, and change, employing experience sampling, conducting more qualitative research, using a configural approach, studying how leaders construe and process contextual cues, adopting context-specific leadership measures, and improving writing, editing, and review practices concerning context.

来自叙述性文献综述和荟萃分析的补充证据得出这样的结论：许多研究都缺乏对领导力发生的背景的关注。造成这种情境缺陷的几个可能原因都被驳斥了，包括情境对领导者来说不重要、情境化研究不如去情境化研究科学，以及缺乏有用的情境描述符。相反，有人认为，情境缺陷是领导浪漫主义的负面表现。加强对背景的关注的优点包括减少遗漏变量偏差、提高对异常研究结果的理解、研究结果的区分和整合以及加强领导力的教学和实践。通过咨询情境成功案例、采用跨学科视角、关注事件、行为和变化、采用经验抽样、进行更多定性研究、使用配置方法、研究领导者如何解释和处理情境线索、采用针对特定背景的领导措施，以及改进有关背景的写作、编辑和审查实践。