Systematic Literature Review and Future Agenda: Leadership Style and Dimension in Rural Tourism Settings

This article aims to outline research developments regarding leadership styles in rural tourism and a leadership measurement index to explore future research direction opportunities. A systematic literature review was conducted by reviewing a total final sample of 15 articles published from 2012-2021; the database sources used in the study were Elsevier, Emer-ald, MDPI, Taylor and Francais, and Harzing's Publish or Perish with the Scopus API Key based on inclusion and exclusion criteria for analysis and synthesis to meet the purpose of the article. Leadership styles in rural tourism are currently found in 14 leadership styles. All leadership styles in rural tourism illustrate the need for integration and networks to develop successful rural tourism, in contrast to the leadership styles adopted by other sectors. The dimension of leadership measurement in rural tourism is based on the rural tourism characteristics. There are twelve leadership dimensions measurement in rural tourism that are different from the measurement of leadership in general. There are theoretical and empirical gaps, so one of the challenges in applying the dimensions of leadership measurement is bridging research with applications in other sectors. This literature review is presented to describe the leadership style in rural tourism that is needed and has been widely adopted to help and support the community to find a successful leadership style in developing rural tourism.


INTRODUCTION Background
Rural development strategies are often carried out through tourism. Rural tourism can provide income for rural communities to cover the economic and social gap between urban and rural areas. The gap is due to a lack of investors, limited opportunities for higher education, and a lack of social services in rural areas. Rural tourism greatly contributes to the village community to improve the economy and welfare. In addition, specifically, rural tourism opens opportunities to create agricultural diversification, food and beverage promotion, and destination resource management. However, according to Moscardo (2008) case studies on tourism development, often villagers do not receive the benefits of tourism activities directly; only certain groups in the community feel the benefits of tourism activities. In the context of rural tourism development, rural communities often do not yet have a strong network with stakeholders, making it difficult for governments to integrate local and regional tourism policies into national tourism policies. Based on this, a leadership role is needed in developing rural tourism so that rural tourism development strategies can be implemented competitively, sustainably, and positively.
The positive impact of rural tourism development can be achieved with effective leadership. Effective leadership for rural tourism requires sensitivity to local culture and innovation of rural tourism products. Liburd and Edwards (2010) also affirmed that strong, committed, and effective leadership is needed for destinations at all levels, government, business, society, and stakeholders must have a proactive role. On the other hand, Long and Nuckolls (1994) and Moscardo (2005) argue that effective tourism leadership in rural tourism development is a leader who has knowledge and enthusiasm in tourism, strong networking capabilities, and broad networking in the community. Rural tourism development strategies through leadership are something to consider. Wilson (2001) identified that cooperation between tourism operators and local leadership is a success factor in rural tourism development. Dwyer et al. (2009) said that leadership in rural destinations should focus on developing tourist products based on cultural and natural experiences and prioritizing this area as a potential resource. Another challenge for rural tourism development is the need for cross-sectoral cooperation.
Leadership becomes a planning and evaluation tool to improve the quality and process of implementing successful rural tourism development. However, on the other hand, Haven-Tang and Jones (2012) identified that rural tourist destination strategies are often developed in different ways not to have a coherent rural tourism development strategy. Therefore, the role of destination leadership must include in long-term strategic planning. Several literature studies identified relevance to destination leadership in rural areas with the fulfillment of the need for increasing rural tourism development strategy. Leadership in tourism development must be sensitive to local, regional, and tourism products (Hampson et al., 1999;Nordin, 2005). The role of leadership in rural tourism development is often ignored. Literature studies on rural tourism development have been widely conducted, but those focused on leadership in rural tourism are still limited. This paper focuses to review how leadership styles are adopted in rural tourism. The composition of this paper consists of introductions, methodologies, discussions of leadership styles and leadership dimension on rural tourism. Finally, the paper can summarize findings, implications, and considerations for future research agendas.

Leadership in Rural Tourism
The concept of "the great man" popularized by Kirkpatick and Locke (1991) has become the basis of leadership theory. Initially, leadership theory focused only on the individual as a leader. However, Bass (1999); Bass and Avolio (1993); Kirk and Shutte (2004) opposes leadership theory that focuses solely on individuals. Kirk and Shutte (2004) describe many ways to lead, and they define leadership as harnessing the power of one's role that is valuable to society. Leadership theory has evolved into many leadership styles. A wide variety of leadership styles have been adopted according to the needs. A leader must have a leadership style that can direct and manage his subordinates to achieve common goals. Approaches to leadership styles have been widely made, including community-based leadership, authentic leadership, and servant leadership (Avolio et al., 2009;Bass and Avolio, 1993;Bass and Yammarino, 1991;Kirk and Shutte, 2004;Russell and Stone, 2002). Although leadership styles are already developing, literature studies focusing on leadership styles in rural tourism are limited. Therefore, this literature review is important to discuss specifically the leadership styles and leadership dimension that were successfully adopted in rural tourism used by researchers.

METHODS
The methodology used in the literature review process is a narrative approach oftenused to study the medical field using systematic literature review (SLR) techniques and meta-analysis (Tranfield et al., 2003). Systematic reviews in management continue to grow to find out the development of research on the topic in question. Development of research on a topic is done by collecting research relevant to the topic in large numbers, regardless of the source of the article and the background of the discipline (Pittaway, 2005). Literature searches are limited to articles published in October 2012-2021. Articles searched by keywords "leadership" and "rural tourism" in the title and keywords. Keywords are searched in various scientific databases, including Elsevier, Emerald, MDPI, Taylor, Francais, and Harzing's Publish or Perish with Scopus API Key.
The method used is preferred reporting items for systematic review and metaanalytic (PRISMA). All articles that pass the selection will be reviewed and summarized based on the author's name, year of publication, analysis method used, findings, and article type. Inclusion criteria formulated include 1) articles in the scope of leadership and rural tourism, 2) academic journals ranked Q1 and Q2, and 3) abstract and title containing keywords "leadership" and "rural tourism". Exclusion criteria include 1) all articles published before 2012, 2) journals ranked below Q2, 3) Abstract not containing keywords "leadership" and "rural tourism". Based on the criteria to search, 441 articles were collected. Of the 418 are out of context from the topic, so that ther are 23 articles left. Of the 23 articles, six articles have the same title, so there are 17 articles left. Then, based on the criteria of the journal that has been determined, two articles are issued, and 15 articles left. No additional articles are included so that 15 articles are qualified and tabulated in the summary table. Systematic review and meta-analysis chart (PRISMA) can be seen in figure 1.

FINDINGS
The literature reviews found two main classifications of articles, namely empirical papers and conceptual papers, to discuss leadership in rural tourism. Based on table I, although there are some differences in research approaches, researchers' main goal is to examine leadership styles in rural tourism. Current research uses the leader-member exchange theory popularized by Fisher and Robbins (2015), which identifies charismatic, transformational, transactional, servant, and authentic leadership styles. Complex problem situations encourage the development and approach of leadership. A leadership style is neither right nor wrong, and it is just that a leader needs to find the leadership style of what is best. Tom Boydell, Mike Pedler (2010) identified that leadership must be able to find direction and purpose to face critical and challenging situations so that in the context of this research, tourism development in a rural area can be led by leaders who can bridge all stakeholder interests.  A community leader approach with a strong network, capabilities, and knowledge derived from outside communities has a positive impact on rural tourism development. The study also understands the action characteristics of entrepreneurs and tourism leaders to predict the impact of tourism in the countryside.
Australia/Oseania (19) Amerika Utara (8) Eropa (7) Afrika (6) Asia (4)  A leadership style is neither right nor wrong, and it is just that a leader needs to find the leadership style of what is best. Tom Boydell, Mike Pedler (2010) identified that leadership must be able to find direction and purpose to face critical and challenging situations so that in the context of this research, tourism development in a rural area can be led by leaders who can bridge all stakeholder interests.

Descriptive Analysis
The final sample consist of 15 articles collected from 8 different journals. Table II summarizes the distribution of articles in each journal by focusing on the discipline areas of the journal as defined by Scimago Journal and Rank (SJR) (SJR 2020). The journal Tourism Review has the most papers (4), accounting for 27% of the sample. This journal focuses on highquality research articles on business, management, social science facing the tourism industry. Overall, 86.67% of publications appeared in the top journals (Q1) and 13.33% in (Q2). The articles found were spread from various research journals with varying amounts. The most frequently found articles were those published in the Journal of Tourism Review with the total of four, three articles published in the Journal of Sustainability, two in the Journal of Tourism Planning and Development, and two in the journal Tourism Tourism Management Perspective. Each article published one article in the International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Advances in Hospitality and Leisure, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, and European Planning Studies (Figure 2). The study of leadership in rural tourism began to develop from 2012 to the present. The number of articles containing studies on leadership in rural tourism was in 2014, which was six articles. However, in 2020 only found 1 article discusses leadership in rural tourism (figure 3). demonstrates an opportunity to continue to develop studies on leadership in rural tourism.

DISCUSSION
Leadership is one of the topics that interests researchers to develop leadershiprelated literature in rural tourism. Research on leadership has been done to contribute to the development of management science, especially leadership. However, leadership studies on rural tourism have not been done so much that this literature study can view how leadership is adopted ( Table 3). The development of leadership style is also very rapid, but there is a difference between leadership style in the company and leadership style in rural tourism. Differences can be identified based on the unit of analysis by which the leadership style is applied. Villagers have different characteristics than employees in a company. In addition, their background, education, knowledge, and culture are different, so that the leadership style in rural tourism will be different from in the company. The results of a 15 articles literature study show that the leadership style currently widely adopted in rural tourism is community leadership. Rural communities can trust people who can blend in with their daily habits and the local culture, so leaders widely adopt community leadership in rural tourism in developing rural tourism. Community leadership adopts transformational leadership's charismatic and intellectual attributes by focusing on the leader's vision and empowering abilities. Community leadership proposed by Kirk and Shutte (2004) uses a collective vision to cover the diversity of people's backgrounds. Backbone leadership (Selin, 2017) leadership of the governance network Leaders who apply a community-led approach empower individuals to understand each other through discussion and problem solving (Avolio et al., 2009;Kirk and Shutte, 2004). McGehee (2015). McGehee (2015) identifies three successful rural tourism leadership styles in their countryside through a social capital perspective. The three leadership styles are serving leadership, community leadership, and authentic leadership. Social capital is an important component of leadership development (McGehee, 2015). The use of social capital in leadership can change the culture so that the community has its uniqueness (Pearce and Conger, 2002). Community leadership can overcome some transformational leadership shortcomings because it can be measured effectiveness (Avolio et al., 2009). Based on the results of the literature review, almost all articles propose leadership have network, partnership principles, and integration. Rural tourism development process requires the involvement of stakeholders so that leadership roles can be incorporated into rural tourism development strategies. In addition, through its leaders, the community is expected to directly involved in the planning process of rural tourism development. Leaders who can connect with external communities and governments are needed by rural tourism to get an injection of funds and make investors interested in making investments.

Dimensions of Leadership in Rural Tourism.
Research on leadership has been done quite a lot that contributes to the development of management science. The results of the literature review show that the leadership dimension focuses on the topdown hierarchy and uses a dynamic and specific directive approach with communication as a tool for social progress Rondinelli, A Dennis and Heffron (2009;Yukl (1999) so there is a complex relationship between a leader and his subordinates that can make a big change. Marques (2015) measures leadership by task dimensions through focus, motivating, facilitating, and inspiring indicators, and responsibility through indicators of flexibility, trust, value focus, and empathy. Kaiser et al. (2012) describe the dimensions of leadership, namely power, influence, strategy, and operational. In addition, the results of a literature review of leadership in rural tourism are currently developing based on how leaders can empower rural communities for successful tourism development. Naderi et al. (2019) uses the dimensions of commitment, motivation, opportunityseeking ability, and key strengths to measure the effectiveness of transformational leadership in rural tourism. Meanwhile Zmyslony (2014) defines destination leadership dimensions as networking capability, analytical capability, impact capability, and economic potential and legitimacy capabilities. Kennedy and Augustyn (2014) describe the dimensions of destination leadership consisting of existence, the main factors causing development, local knowledge, and familiarity. This indicates a gap between the dimension of leadership measurement in rural tourism and the leadership measurement practiced in the industry. Differences in leadership measurement attributes are due to differences in the characteristics of the unit of analysis.
Rural tourism is often perceived as an ecologically and socially sustainable form of tourism in the countryside that creates economic and social benefits for the local communities (Pröbstl-Haider et al., 2014). Rural tourism is not just an enterprise of one village or one destination; It requires the coordination of multi-dimensional resources, including lands, funding, transportation, and marketing, which is beyond the capability of rural residents or small businesses (Liu et al., 2020). Rural tourism is closely related to empowering communities in tourism development, e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857 connecting, and integrating with stakeholders. Researchers use different dimensions to measure leadership in rural tourism because it refers to the characteristics of rural tourism itself.
Based on the 15 articles selected as samples, twelve dimensions were found developed as research instruments (table  IV). Researchers use five dimensions for rural tourism leadership that adopt destination and transformational leadership, namely dimensions of commitment, motivation, networking capability, analytical capability, and impact capability. This shows the dimensions that researchers use with indsutry is different. The thing to note is that the measurement of leadership in rural tourism is different from in companies. New Leadership Dimension in rural tourism. Table 4 needs a new dimension to measure leadership in tourism in response to global challenges. The dimension that can be developed is how stakeholder involvement in rural tourism development can increase, and rural tourism can be integrated with other sectors through leadership. If these two dimensions can be developed in a broader context, they will contribute to rural tourism management practitioners in the current era. In addition, the ability of individual leadership also needs to be considered to build the trust of stakeholders.
Theoretical gap dan preposition. The challenge often experienced by rural tourism is that they have many stakeholders, but it is difficult to connect, integrate, and have a network among stakeholders. Mitchell & Hall (2005) describe the challenge as the involvement of many small-scale businesses that must collaborate and provide all product elements, such as accommodation, food, experiences, and attractions. Haven-Tang and Jones (2012) argue that businesses in rural tourism are small-scale and many of the differences, so destination leadership is needed to provide resources, knowledge, and attachment. A study conducted by (Nylander and Hall, 2005) based on several European rural tourism policies says that there are fragmented, unclear, and uncoordinated structures in rural areas and a lack of integration with other sectors. Some studies have identified a lack of destination leadership in rural areas and a lack of analysis of actors and their profiles. A relevant theory in this study is the leader-member exchange theory popularized by (Fisher and Robbins, 2015), which identifies charismatic, transformational, transactional, servant, and authentic leadership styles.
Nevertheless, research on leadership in rural tourism is still very limited. Based on these empirical phenomena, there are still theoretical gaps that need to be filled with leadership styles that can be integrated, have a wide network, charismatic, and blend in with local culture because this leadership style is applied to rural tourism that is loaded with local culture. Destination leadership that adopts transformational leadership is perceived to accept this gap. Destination leadership carried by (Kennedy and Augustyn, 2014;Pröbstl-Haider et al., 2014;Zmyslony, 2014) is considered to integrate with rural tourism development in the community development process.
Future research needs to integrate member-leader exchange theory and destination leadership styles to achieve comprehensive and effective results in rural tourism development. The theory of memberleader exchange with destination leadership styles can be used to develop new prepositions to measure the effectiveness of leadership roles in rural tourism development, as shown below: Preposition The factors that shape the leadership dimension in rural tourism focus not only on the ability of leaders as individuals but how leaders can build networking and integrate rural tourism with other sectors, which has implications for rural tourism development.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA
A systematic literature review of the leadership in rural tourism attempts to provide an overview of the development of leadership research in rural tourism over the past few years. Based on articles that have been synthesized and understood critically, two significant findings were found. First, the leadership style in adoption in the company is different from the leadership style in rural tourism. Companies' leadership styles are often found to adopt transformational leadership styles, while leadership styles in rural tourism adopt destination leadership styles. It is based on the characteristics of rural tourism that involve many stakeholders to be interconnected and integrated. Some researchers are already building a leadership dimension by focusing more on individual capabilities, but rural tourism has twelve different dimensions of leadership measurement. Based on this phenomenon, there are still theoretical and empirical gaps that need to be aligned so that leadership in rural tourism can be successful and effective for rural tourism development. Tourism leadership that can be adopted is destination leadership by adopting transformational leadership so that leaders in rural tourism can integrate, have an extensive network, and accommodate the needs of stakeholders.
The dimension developed is how involvement in rural tourism development can increase, and rural tourism can be integrated with other sectors through leadership. If these two dimensions can be developed in a broader context, they will contribute to rural tourism management practitioners in the current era. In addition, the ability of individual leadership also needs to be considered to build the trust of stakeholders. If this leadership can be implemented in rural tourism, it can help the countryside have superior tourism with their respective rural characteristics. The countryside will have superior resources in terms of human capital and social capital. The future research agenda that can propose; First, it is necessary to conduct an indepth study so that the dimension of leadership measurement in rural tourism is as solid as the dimension of leadership measurement in other sectors. Second, future research should consider stakeholder characteristics as inputs to leadership capabilities in rural tourism that should be owned for successful tourism development. The integration of member leader exchange theory and destination leadership is one of the proposed research developments in the future.
Finally, research has limitations in conducting research limited by the research criteria used. Nonetheless, the study findings can be valuable to researchers and practitioners interested in the topic, particularly leadership in rural tourism and its implications for future research. Researchers and practitioners seeking leadership styles in rural tourism for adoption on rural tourism development can find a useful framework from the proposed article.