Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice Robert Emmerling, Basak Canboy, Ricard Serlavos, and Joan MB Foguet, Ramon Llull University – ESADE Business School, Leadership Development Research Centre, Sant Cugat (Barcelona), Spain Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract Leadership theory has evolved from an emphasis on traits and behavioral styles, to the more interactive theories associated with contingency theory, transactional and transformational leadership, and the emerging areas of servant leadership and shared leadership. The implication of evolving leadership theory for the education and development of leaders is explored as well as the methods commonly associated with developing leaders. Methodological issues related to research on leadership education and emerging areas related to developing leaders are also discussed.

Introduction Developing effective leaders is one of society’s most critical tasks, and one that directly affects the well-being, productivity, and sustainability of the organizations and societies in which we live. As such, it is important to understand how leaders can be best prepared to effectively deal with current and future challenges. Business, government, military, educational institutions, and not-for-profit organizations all require effective leaders to function well and serve the needs of their various constituencies. Today’s modern organizations are characterized by rapid change and increasing complexity, which makes the need for effective leadership even more acute. Thousands of studies on leadership, various definitions of leadership, and theories of leadership development have made the field of leadership studies a complex one (Bass, 2008; Yukl, 2012). According to a survey of Human Resource (HR) leaders, the number one problem for HR directors is identifying and developing the leadership talent needed for growth and expansion of their respective organizations (Fegley, 2006). Organizations have made leadership development a top priority in terms of education and training. In fact, 2012 saw an estimated increase of 14% in spending on leadership development in the United States, bringing annual spending to more than 13 000 000 000 dollars (O’ Leonard and Loew, 2012). However, even with the substantial amount of money and resources allocated to leadership development, organizations and stakeholders often complain about the lack of effective leaders as well as the efficacy of leadership development efforts to bring about meaningful improvement in leadership capability. Moreover, the consequences of ineffective leadership reverberate across all spheres of society, leading many to question the motives, ethics, and capability of today’s leaders. High-profile scandals involving business leaders, government officials, and leaders in various other domains has put a renewed emphasis on ethics and corporate social responsibility and has generally revitalized the debate on how best to educate and develop leaders (Ghoshal, 2005).

Evolving Definitions and Theories of Leadership According to Yukl (2012), “Leadership is the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Volume 13

done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives.” Bennis (2009) defined leadership as “. a function of knowing yourself, having a vision that is well communicated, building trust among colleagues, and taking effective action to realize your own leadership potential.” While definitions of leadership vary among authors and scholars, all tend to agree that the process of leadership involves the ability to influence, motivate, and enable others toward achieving goals important to the group(s) to which they are members. Even though agreement might be found on this general definition, how to conceptualize leaders and how they go about the leadership role has evolved over time. These evolving conceptualizations have had direct implications for how leadership education has been framed and implemented. Interest in more scientific leadership research started in the early part of the twentieth century with trait and ‘great man’ theories of leadership (Borgatta et al., 1954), which typically viewed leadership as an inborn quality of individuals. Early trait theories of leadership assumed effective leaders can be defined by a set of traits and abilities that they possess that nonleaders or ineffective leaders do not. More recent metaanalytic studies of personality have found extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism/ emotional stability to be related to leader emergence and leadership effectiveness, with extraversion being the factor with the most consistent relationship (Judge et al., 2002; Bono and Judge, 2004). This is most likely due to the tendency of extroverts to convey more positive emotions and optimism as well as their tendency to be energized by group settings. Metaanalytic studies of cognitive intelligence (Judge et al., 2004) have also shown a correlation with leadership, but in the words of the authors, “. results suggest that the relationship between intelligence and leadership is considerably lower than previously thought.” Even when personality traits and intelligence are taken into account, what seems clear is that understanding leadership requires additional constructs to provide a more complete picture of leadership effectiveness. Research on leadership effectiveness conducted at Ohio State University in the 1940s (Hemphill and Coons, 1950) and Michigan State University in the 1950s (Katz et al., 1950) began a research tradition often referred to as the behavioral approach to leadership which, instead of focusing on traits, focused on the specific behaviors associated with leadership. Key findings

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92126-3

655

656

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

from the Ohio State University studies were the dimensions of ‘consideration’ and ‘initiating structure.’ Consideration is the degree to which the leader is concerned with the welfare of group members and ‘initiating structure’ is the leader’s concern for roles, actions, and how to organize activities so that tasks are accomplished by the groups they lead. Studies at Michigan State University in the 1950s had similar findings but also identified a construct labeled participative leadership. This represented an extension of leadership theory by viewing leadership as more of a process of mutual influence by which the leader seeks out and values the input and contribution of followers. Occurring in the historical context of the growing influence of behaviorism in psychology more generally, these theories differed from trait theories in that they sought to understand the specific behaviors of effective leaders; behaviors which could then be taught to current or prospective leaders. As theory and research progressed, a move to incorporate characteristics of followers, and the environment in which the leader is embedded, started to become more salient. The 1960s and 1970s found interest emerging in contingency theories of leadership, which held that there was no one ‘right’ way to lead, but that leadership effectiveness depends on matching leaders to situations in which they were likely, because of their natural dispositions, to be successful. The contingency theory of leadership by Fiedler (1967) posited that leaders will excel if their leadership style matches the dimensions of the situation. However, a leader’s style was not viewed by Fiedler as particularly malleable or adaptable. An alternative contingency approach to leadership can be seen in the situational leadership model (Hersey and Blanchard, 1969), which posits that leaders can be taught to diagnose specific aspects of the leadership situation (e.g., follower needs or readiness to engage in specific tasks) and modify their leadership behavior to a delegating, supporting, coaching, or directing style based on the situation. Like behavioral theories, skills such as assessing the needs of followers, as well as the specific behaviors associated with specific styles, represent knowledge and skills that could be transferred to leaders through training. The 1970s saw the rise of transactional theories of leadership, which held that leaders motivate employees by providing sought after rewards for members to engage in behavior consistent with the leader’s agenda and threats or punishments for poor performance. More recent research and theory have focused on transformational leadership, which is a leadership style defined by a dynamic interchange between leader and followers in which each challenges the other to higher aspirations. This leadership style tends to be characterized as a more visionary and charismatic style less reliant on the reciprocity characteristic of transactional forms of leadership. In this way, the leader appeals to higher level needs, aspirations, and expectations of followers. Transformational leadership has been operationalized into (1) idealized influence, in which the leader is seen as a role model, is authentic, trustworthy, and highly credible; (2) inspirational motivation, in which the leader provides a shared vision meaningful to followers and works to simplify complex ideas and problems; (3) individualized consideration, in which the leader appreciates the individuality of followers while treating them equally and developing them to higher levels of potential; and (4) intellectual stimulation, in which the leader encourages followers to

question their old way of doing things and to break with the past. These facets of the transformational leadership model can be measured with the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass and Avolio, 2000) and provides a specific framework of leadership capabilities that can be measured and taught. The leader’s motivational profile has also been put forward as a useful construct to better understand what drives specific behavioral patterns. The social motives of achievement, affiliation, and power, originally conceptualized by McClelland as on-going needs, wants, or concerns that drive patterns of thoughts and behaviors, have also been linked to leadership (McClelland and Boyatzis, 1982). The social motives are believed to operate at the unconscious level, meaning that most people likely have very little insight into their motive profile. The position that leadership behavior, like other forms of behavior, is partially determined and driven by forces outside of conscious awareness has been held by other leadership scholars as well (cf Kets de Vries, 2006). Research on the need for achievement, defined as a need to surpass a standard of excellence and need for power, defined as the need to have impact on others, have both been linked to effective management/leadership (McClelland and Boyatzis, 1982). The affiliation motive, defined as a need to establish, maintain, or restore harmonious relationship with others, was found to be lower than both achievement and power motives in more effective leaders. Building on a theory of social motives, a theory of competencies, now referred to as the behavioral approach to emotional intelligence (EI) (Boyatzis, 2009), began to emerge from applied research on distinguishing characteristics of average vs effective leaders (Spencer and Spencer, 1993). The social motives are viewed as driving the frequency and intrinsic satisfaction derived from engaging in specific leadership behaviors associated with a given competency. While the social motives can be viewed as a trait, arousal of a given motive by factors in the environment may increase the frequency of specific behavioral manifestations of the motive. For example, when a leader’s power motive is aroused, he or she is more likely to demonstrate behaviors associated with competencies such as influence or inspirational leadership. Also influencing, behavioral expression of specific competencies are the leader’s values and self-image. The competency-based approach has implications for developing leaders by pointing to a more complex interplay between intentional behaviors driven by forces below conscious control and moderated by personal values and the leader’s self-image. This research line contributed to a growing realization that developing one’s capacity as a leader required a more complex approach than simply imparting knowledge, skills, and abilities. For leadership development to be truly transformational, it requires that leaders explore their identity as a leader, their values, and their future goals and aspirations. The transformation of motives and personality traits of leaders has been challenged by many as these constructs have traditionally been viewed as more fixed and static in adults. This has given rise to questions about the efficacy of attempting to change these constructs through leadership development initiatives targeted at adults. The belief that leaders are born is one, which has stimulated several studies that have attempted to better understand the role of genetics in understanding both

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

personality and leadership. While personality traits have a significant genetic component, behavioral-genetic research on complex behavioral traits leaves much of the variability in personality traits unexplained. A review of this research by Plomin and Daniels (1987) concluded that it is rare for any study to find genetic evidence to account for more than half of the variance in complex behavioral traits. Genetic research aimed at predicting who ends up in leadership roles does not only demonstrate a significant relationship between genetics and leader emergence (De Neve et al., 2013), but also makes clear that other factors are needed to more fully explain leader emergence. Moreover, recent research also provides evidence that personality traits continue to change in adulthood and that these changes may be quite substantial and consequential (Roberts and Mroczek, 2008). The limited explanatory power of genetic explanations of leadership, combined with questions about the fixed nature of personality traits, calls into questions about the deterministic notions of who can and cannot become a leader. While genetic and trait-based explanations may provide some insight into leader emergence, leader effectiveness once in the leadership role might be better explained by a leader’s developmental history and experiences. Ligon et al. (2008) researched the life histories of 120 outstanding historical leaders and reported that more positive and constructive leaders had experienced life events that had firmly established positive personal beliefs and values early in their life span. The opposite was found for more destructive or selfish leaders, which tended to have experienced more negative events early in their development. The experience of such events likely influence one’s narrative identity, defined as an internalized and evolving life story from which individuals seek to give meaning and purpose to significant life experiences (McAdams and Olson, 2010). The fact that narratives evolve overtime, and are subject to modification through different experiences and subsequent interpretation provides support for many leadership development practices. Understanding the leader’s life in context and the practice of encouraging leaders to focus on the construction of a future vision, help leaders better understand their life context, and shape their future development plans. The importance of a personal vision is integral to many contemporary theories and practices related to leadership development. Leadership theories reviewed up to this point tend to assume a more hierarchical, or vertical model of leadership. However, the realities of modern organizations have prompted us to view leadership as a shared or reciprocal process among team members. Pearce and Conger (2003) define shared leadership as “a dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both. This influence process often involves peer, or lateral, influence and at other times involves upward or downward hierarchical influence.” The framing of leadership as shared, in the context of changing authority dynamics, requires a fundamental shift in how leaders think about their role. Preparing leaders to operate within less formal hierarchies in which they may need to play the role of leader, peer, and subordinate all in the same meeting requires developing leaders with flexible influence and collaborative skills. Additional implications of

657

shared leadership theories for leadership education include the need for action learning that requires teams to work on actual or simulated problems/projects without assigning a formal leader. Training, simulations, or developmental assignments that require leaders to assume multiple roles and to exercise influence in situations where they do not have formal authority should prove useful in developing the skills necessary to work effectively in situations, which require shared leadership. A competing leadership theory is servant leadership, which was originally coined by Greenleaf (1991) but has been reinterpreted and expanded since its original conceptualization. A literature review by Russell and Stone (2002) found that servant leadership can be understood in terms of functional attributes of servant leaders, which include having a vision, being honest, trustworthy, service oriented, a role model, demonstrating appreciation of others’ service, and empowerment. In relation to abilities and competencies, servant leaders are characterized as good communicators and listeners, credible, competent, encouraging of others, teachers, and delegators. In contrast to other theories of leadership, which tend to assume that the leader is primarily focused on achieving organizational goals, servant leaders are assumed to prioritize the needs of followers, with organizational objectives taking a secondary role. The conceptualization of servant leadership suggests that development of the associated attributes and competencies could be accomplished through service-learning projects that encourage learners to address issues outside their immediate organizational environment. Servant leadership makes an explicit link between leadership, ethics, and prosocial behavior, and defines a leader’s contribution as measured by their impact on consumers, employees, communities, and a more widely defined network of stakeholders. This way of defining leadership corresponds well with contemporary notions of corporate social responsibility, which have now become more visible in business school curriculums. The increased use of service-learning programs both in universitybased programs and other organizations throughout the world can partially be attributed to a rise in the popularity of servant leadership as a theory of leadership (Table 1).

Can Leadership Be Taught and Developed? While theories of leadership vary, and tend to emphasize different knowledge, skills, abilities, and values, programs designed to enhance a leader’s effectiveness also differ significantly in terms of structure, content, and approach. Given the wide swath of programs that fall within the leadership education paradigm, it should not be surprising that the return on time and money invested in leadership development can vary dramatically (Burke and Day, 1986; Collins and Holton, 2004; Avolio et al., 2009, 2010). While a comprehensive and accepted theory related to leadership development remains elusive, compelling evidence suggests that leaders can be educated to be more effective. Research on job performance has demonstrated that job performance varies as a function of job complexity such that the more complex the job, the more performance variability there will be among individuals holding that job (Hunter et al., 1990). Leaders often have to deal with multiple levels of complexity and

658

Summary of leadership theories

Leadership theory

Time period

Implications for leadership education

Selected references

‘Great man’ theories Behavioral approach to leadership as a process of mutual influence Contingency theories including situational leadership model Transactional leadership theory

Early twentieth century Mid-twentieth century

Leadership cannot be developed because it was seen as an inborn quality Focus on teaching leaders specific behaviors associated with leadership

1960s and 1970s 1970s

Transformational leadership theory

1980s and onward

Shared leadership theories

1990s and onward

Servant leadership

1990s and onward

Social motives and competencies

1970s and onward

Individual developmental history and experiences

Twenty-first century

Focus on teaching leaders to diagnose specific situations and follower needs in order to use adequate leadership style Teaching leaders to understand what motivates employees in order to provide adequate rewards or punishments Focus on teaching leaders how to be a role model, inspire with a shared vision, appreciate individuality of followers, and stimulate them intellectually Less-defined hierarchies require leaders to develop flexible influence and collaborative skills. Action learning offers an adequate framework as leaders usually work in teams on actual problems without formally assigned leadership roles Leadership education involves service-learning projects, which encourage learners to address issues outside their immediate organizational environment with a focus on the needs of employees, consumers, communities, and other stakeholders Intrinsic social motives impact the frequency of specific behaviors associated with different competencies. Leadership education has to allow leaders to explore their identities, values, and future goals and aspirations Leadership development practices focus on one’s understanding of life in context, interpreting life narratives and modifying them through positive experiences as well as constructing a future vision

Borgatta et al. (1954) Hemphill and Coons (1950) Katz et al. (1950) Fiedler (1967) Hersey and Blanchard (1969) Bass (2008) Bass and Avolio (2000)

Pearce and Conger (2003)

Greenleaf (1991) Stone et al. (2004)

Boyatzis (1982) McClelland (1987) Spencer and Spencer (1993) Ligon et al. (2008) McAdams and Olson (2010)

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

Table 1

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

lead others through ambiguous situations fraught with varying levels of risk, making leadership roles highly variable in terms of performance. Given the large variability in leadership performance, understanding the specific leadership competencies that account for variance in measurable organizational outcomes can help to focus leadership development efforts on specific competencies linked to specific organizational outcomes identified through applied research on high performing leaders (Ryan et al., 2009). An evaluation of a leadership development program, which was customized to develop specific competencies, identified through applied research, demonstrated favorable return on investment when business unit profitabilities of trained leaders were compared with a control group of untrained leaders in the same organization (Spencer, 2001). Moreover, the potential for training effects of leadership development to ‘cascade’ down through the organization also provides a mechanism by which the Return on Investment (ROI) of training leaders may potentially be magnified. While the potential for significant, measurable impact from leadership development is great, systematic investigations of leadership development interventions are somewhat rare in the literature as are theories of leadership development. Nonetheless, several research studies and program evaluations have shown that leadership development interventions can have a positive effect on the attitudes, behaviors, and performance of leaders and their followers (Avolio et al., 2010). The first formal meta-analysis of managerial and leadership development initiatives conducted by Burke and Day (1986) analyzed studies published from 1952 to 1982 and found such interventions to be moderately effective. Collins and Holton (2004) extended and updated the previous study by conducting a meta-analysis on 83 intervention studies published between 1982 and 2001 and found moderate to strong effect sizes. Another meta-analysis also showed that the majority of leadership development initiatives both in laboratory and field settings have a positive impact, but this effect varies dramatically based on the type of intervention and the specific theory, which guided the design and implementation of the program (Avolio et al., 2009). While research has been generally supportive of the positive effects of leadership development initiatives, some significant methodological issues have to be considered. Evaluations of leadership development programs typically focus on one or two specific leadership tasks or skills, for example, communication methods such as discussing performance problems constructively, motivation, or participative problem-solving techniques. Given the complexities associated with the leadership role, it is unlikely that these types of isolated interventions match the desire of organizational stakeholders to develop more capable leaders. Moreover, research that evaluates leadership development tends to be more focused on immediate or short-term outcomes, yet those sponsoring and participating in leadership development initiatives likely expect the effects of such interventions to be more long term. Though not unique to leadership theory and practice, the wide range of leadership definitions poses a significant methodological challenge to research on leadership education. To test any substantive hypothesis related to leadership, the meanings of variables involved must be specified in observational terms and a method established for how they can be

659

measured. However, as Bass (2008) points out, “There are almost as many definitions of leadership as there are persons who have attempted to define the concept.” As a consequence, generalization about the effectiveness of leadership development becomes problematic, as does the implication of leadership development research for practice. The multiple settings and different populations, which regularly engage in leadership education also introduces unique factors that limit the development of a general theory of leadership development. Venues traditionally associated with educating leaders have been business schools and universities. While interest in leadership education within university settings has been growing, compelling evidence of the effectiveness of such universitybased programs has been elusive, causing many to question the utility of such programs. A notable exception is the competency-based MBA program at the Weatherhead School of Management (WSOM) at Case Western Reserve University (Boyatzis et al., 1994). Longitudinal studies at WSOM have demonstrated that MBA students can improve the emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies that distinguish outstanding leaders and that improvements can be maintained for several years after program completion. The program at WSOM along with 14 other programs were identified as model programs by the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations (www.eiconsortium.org) due to evaluation data, which demonstrated that these programs had a measurable impact on social and emotional competencies and/or organizational outcomes. Based on model program evaluation, expert panels and applied research, 22 guidelines for best practice were established and now provide a comprehensive framework for developing social and EI competencies in adults (Cherniss et al., 1998). While universities would seem a natural choice of venue for the education of leaders, critics both outside and inside academia have questioned this assumption. Mintzberg (2004) in his influential book Managers not MBAs argued that several factors work against the development of effective managers in traditional MBA programs and that managing is a practice that cannot be taught in a traditional classroom setting. He argues that teaching theories of management to nonpracticing managers is ineffective as they have a limited amount of relevant experience that can be related to what is being taught. Training in management and leadership should be limited to practicing managers and efforts made to leverage the knowledge and experience of those managers and share with them theories, which help them make sense of their current reality. Sharing of experience, self-reflection, and the necessity of application and experimentation of management theories back on the job lead to the transfer of theories into the practice of effective management and leadership.

Theory and Practices Related to Developing Leaders Early practice related to developing leaders relied on the state of theory at the time. As such, earlier attempts to develop leadership relied more heavily on trying to teach theory and specific behaviors thought to be associated with effective leadership. Perhaps the biggest shift in educating leaders is to reframe

660

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

the process of leadership education from isolated training events to a learning process with various stages and that involves multiple training and development strategies in addition to traditional classroom-based training. Issues related to the formation of the person’s identity as a leader, selfawareness, self-exploration, developmental readiness, motivation to change, the role of the leader’s life experiences, and social environment have all begun to take a more central role in theory and practice related to developing leaders. An example of viewing leadership development as a process can be seen in the more recent emphasis on understanding, and in some cases trying to enhance, a leader’s readiness to engage in and benefit from leadership education. Developmental readiness is related to concepts previously identified in the training literature such as ‘learner readiness’ (Holton et al., 2000) or ‘trainability’ (Noe and Schmitt, 1986) but differs somewhat from these constructs in that developmental readiness goes beyond readiness to acquire more basic knowledge and skills and is related to a willingness to expand one’s overall capacity and develop aspects of one’s identity and social and emotional competencies associated with leadership. A review of the literature in clinical psychology suggests that the readiness of the individual to engage in therapy is likely more important than either the therapist or specific therapeutic technique employed (Avolio and Hannah, 2008). Given the transformative nature of many leadership development initiatives, such programs require individuals be ready to engage in a process that is essentially about a ‘metamorphosis in actions, habits, or competencies associated with leadership effectiveness’ (Boyatzis, 2008). While individual level constructs are key to developmental readiness, the organizational climate must also be perceived as psychologically safe and supportive to facilitating transfer of training. Research on leadership training dating back to the 1950s (Fleishman, 1953) demonstrated that trainees that were trained to adopt a more supportive leadership style were only able to transfer this style to their role if their own supervisor had a similar leadership style. Intentional change theory (ICT) (Boyatzis, 2006) explicitly addresses issues related to increasing motivation to engage in the developmental process as well as aspects of the social context in which leadership development occurs. In ICT, development is seen as an integrated process by which first individuals develop a clear longer term vision of their life and the leadership role(s) they would like to aspire to. This future vision of one’s ideal self is then compared against one’s current state in terms of competencies, values, and traits. This current state is referred to as the real self. Aspects of the real self are often assessed through tools such as multirater feedback, psychometric assessments of personality variables and values, or assessment center methodologies and simulations. Comparing one’s future ideal self with the current real self motivates leaders to work to reduce the difference between the two selves and thus bring themselves more in line with their ideal self. Development of a detailed vision of one’s ideal self is of critical importance as it helps to provide an emotionally engaging, positively framed ideal to which the leader can aspire. Without a clear and emotionally engaging future vision, motivation to develop will be limited and the ability of the learner to persist in the

face of obstacles and setbacks related to their development will be reduced. According to ICT, once the ideal and real selves have been defined, only then does one start to set learning goals and to work on a learning plan, which could include traditional skill-building courses (e.g., presentation skills), developmental assignments, which require a person display and practice specific competencies, individual coaching, and/ or mentoring. With the plan completed, often with the help of a coach or mentor, the leader begins to implement their learning plan and begins to practice and experiment with new behaviors and competencies. In ICT, development is seen as a circular process in which the leader again returns to the question of their personal vision. Meaning that as one develops greater capacity and achieves one’s developmental goals, thus bringing one closer to one’s ideal self as articulated in their personal vision, a revised vision is often needed given the individual’s changing role, career stage or life circumstances. Also central to ICT is the role of resonant relationships characterized by trust, support, and a positive emotional connection, which serve to provide encouragement, feedback, and advice to aid the leader in the pursuit of their development goals. Consistent with contemporary thinking on adult learning, the specific development goals are achieved primarily through experiential learning techniques. The experiential learning theory of Kolb (1984) builds on earlier theories, which emphasized the role of experience in learning. Experiential learning theory defines learning as “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984). In this way, cognitive, affective (emotional), and behavioral systems are all engaged as part of an initial experience, which are later reflected on and incorporated in the form of new knowledge, skills, and abilities. Researchers from the Center for Creative Leadership have suggested that 70% of leadership development is accomplished through experience on the job (e.g., developmental assignments), 20% is accomplished through the social effects of mentoring, coaching, and shadowing role models that demonstrate specific leadership competencies and 10% through attending formal courses or reading about specific leadership topics (Lombardo and Eichinger, 2000). The emphasis on multiple learning methodologies offers the learner a diverse experience and is generally consistent with current thinking in leadership education about the need to provide training using multiple methods to appeal to people with different learning styles. Developmental assignments expose leaders to new and novel experiences that can work to enhance personal development and build leadership capacity. Often developmental assignments broaden the current role of a person within the same organization. Such assignments can also be a valuable method to develop leadership competencies through collaboration in practical projects outside one’s current role. Service learning can be seen as a specific type of developmental assignment, and is often applied in educational settings with the objective of developing specific leadership skills and competencies. Such assignments commonly revolve around activities that address human and community needs,

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

promoting ethical and socially responsible behavior in participants (Dumas, 2002). Though more common in academic settings, companies have started to discover these types of collaborations as meaningful opportunities to enhance leadership skills within their in-company development programs. The ‘Ulysses Program’ has leaders participate in an 8-week collaboration project with social entrepreneurs, companies, or NGOs. Combined with individual assessment, coaching, and team building, this international field experience allows participants to develop in concepts like responsible mind-set, ethical literacy, cultural intelligence, global mind-set, selfdevelopment, and community building (Pless et al., 2011). Service-learning assignments in higher education and corporate settings have been employed, in part, as a response to calls for leadership education interventions, which specifically seek to develop business ethics and corporate social responsibility along with other leadership competencies. The use of leadership coaches in conjunction with leadership development programs has expanded dramatically in the last 20 years. The Center for Creative Leadership (Ting and Hart, 2004) defines coaching as a formal one-on-one relationship, “in which the coachee and coach collaborate to assess and understand the coachee and his or her leadership developmental tasks, to challenge current constraints while exploring new possibilities, and to ensure accountability and support for reaching goals and sustaining development.” Leadership coaching tends to be an individualized process developed to meet the unique needs, characteristics, and experiences of the coachee taking into account the needs of the organization in which the coachee is a member. Leaders engage in coaching to address a wide variety of needs, which may include a desire to increase self-awareness, develop specific leadership competencies, career transition issues, or to seek insight and perspectives on current or future challenges. The diversity of coaching approaches, and issues addressed by coaches in relation to leadership development, has made research into the coaching process and outcomes difficult. As a result, empirical research on coaching outcomes is currently limited to a handful of studies, many of which suffer serious methodological issues. Like other areas of leadership education, coaching is an area that could benefit from additional research to better understand how it impacts specific facets of leadership and leads to valued outcomes. Formal and informal mentoring programs have also become more prevalent over the last 20 years and represent a more customized and context sensitive approach to educating and developing leaders. In contrast to coaching, where the relationship is built with an external professional, mentoring is based on a relationship linked to a more senior person within the same organization but outside the direct reporting line (McCauley and Douglas, 1998). Mentors help their mentees by supporting them with organizational understanding and creating a network that will be useful to the mentee’s career advancement. The opportunity to observe and seek feedback and practical advice on current and future leadership challenges makes mentoring a useful form of relational learning for leaders. Moreover, the nature of learning in mentoring relationships is two way, meaning that both enter into the relationship expecting to be both expert and learner, to give and

661

receive feedback, and enable and be enabled (Kram and Cherniss, 2001). Leaders operating in today’s more globalized environment are required to deal with a level of complexity and interconnection not previously seen. International and intercultural work has become the norm for large companies as well as a growing number of small- and medium-sized enterprises. Advances in technology has facilitated collaboration across international borders and heightened the need for leaders to develop their cultural intelligence. In terms of leadership education in university settings, this has often meant the opening of satellite extensions in different countries, international partnerships, and research collaborations intended to expose students and leaders to a diversity of cultural perspectives. The structure of many university-based programs now encourages students to work in cross-cultural project teams. More traditional approaches to developing the cultural intelligence of leaders have been to educate leaders about different cultural values and norms from the work of anthropologists and cross-cultural psychologists.

Emerging Trends in Leadership Education Recent research and theory from psychology, neuroscience, organizational behavior, and corporate social responsibility are currently influencing trends in leadership education. The positive psychology movement and strength-based approaches to leadership have been emerging and exerting an influence on the practice of leadership education. In contrast to the ‘disease model of human nature’ that had dominated the last century of theory and practice within psychology, positive psychology seeks to understand what allows people to flourish and thrive. The role of positive emotions on learning, developing, and relationship building also represents a contribution of this emerging area to leadership education. An example of this can be seen in Fredrickson’s (2001) broaden-and-build theory, which assumes that a key function of positive emotions is to encourage the broadening and building of social networks and open people to the possibility of developing new skills. According to Fredrickson, positive affective states could provide leaders with more positive psychological resources that they can draw on to support development. A trend to focus on a leader’s current strengths and how these might be leveraged and used to overcome or compensate for weaknesses provides a different lens through which to view leadership development. Theory related to EI has also begun to exert an influence in leadership theory and education. EI has been defined by Mayer et al. (2004) as “. the capacity to reason about emotions, and of emotions to enhance thinking as well as abilities to accurately perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth.” Building on this definition and linking EI to a theory of work performance, Boyatzis (2009) defined a behavioral approach to EI as “. an ability to recognize, understand, and use emotional information about oneself that leads to or causes effective or superior performance.” Given that emotions are a critical factor in

662

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

creating and sustaining motivation that makes the intelligent use of emotions an important leadership task. Competency in the area of empathy and emotional management should help leaders develop and communicate their visions and help them establish an emotional bond with followers. Moreover, the intelligent use of emotions also seems important to allow leaders to cope with the potentially distressing emotions associated with personal change, as well as permitting the leader to stay open to and learn from the emotional experiences inherent in more experiential methods of leadership development. Emotion-related processes have historically been absent from most theories and models of leadership. The integration of emotional processes into leadership and management theory has provided a more complete picture of how leaders go about motivating and engaging those around them. Key findings from affective neuroscience have also begun to influence theory and practice related to leadership development. How leaders affect the emotions of followers and how emotional process works to build rapport and resonant relationships with followers is being informed by neuroscience. The concept of resonance has its neurophysiological underpinnings in neurons in the brain referred to as mirror cells (Rizzolatti et al., 2001). These cells are widely dispersed in areas of the brain and lead us to mimic and mirror the feelings and behaviors of others. The process of emotional contagion, characterized as processes that allow the sharing or transferring of emotions from one individual to another, often occurs without conscious knowledge (Barsade and Gibson, 2010). Research on leaders and emotional contagion has found the leader’s positive mood, had a subsequent influence on group coordination and effort (Sy et al., 2005). Neurological research has also begun to understand the dynamic neurological underpinnings of concepts such as transformational leadership mechanisms that may underpin the leadership qualities of individuals (Balthazard et al., 2012). Moral reasoning and decision making has become an interesting area for affective neuroscience. Though research on neuroscience and leadership is in the early stages, this research could potentially see neurological assessment used to compliment more traditional leadership assessment for use in leadership development. E-leadership and virtual teams is also emerging as an important issue for both research and practice related to leadership as the nature of virtual work teams continues to expand and evolve. Survey research has shown that areas that tend to be addressed related to the leadership of virtual teams includes leading virtual team meetings, coaching and mentoring team members virtually, developing trust in a virtual environment, as well as how to monitor performance and deal with performance issues virtually (Rosen et al., 2006; Malhotra et al., 2007). While research is increasing in this area, few program evaluation studies on the effects of specific training content or methodologies have been conducted. However, research has shown that virtual teams that perceived themselves to have more of a shared leadership model, vs a more traditional hierarchical model, had higher levels of performance (Hoch and Kozlowski, 2012). As technology continues to advance and globalization continues, it is likely that leading virtual teams will become even more relevant for leaders in the future.

The topic of leadership and leadership education will continue to hold the attention of both scholars and the general public for the foreseeable future. Determining the conditions and practices that must exist to meaningfully enhance leadership capability should continue to drive research on leadership education. What is certain is that that the landscape in which leaders operate will continue to change, yet the need for leaders to effectively motivate and inspire others will not.

Acknowledgments The authors of this article are funded by MICINN (Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation) via the project EDU2010/15250 and some have additionally received financial support from SUR del ECO de la Generalitat de Catalunya (Catalan government).

See also: Affect-Regulation Motivation; Behavioral Theories of Organization; Charisma, Social Aspects of; Cultural Intelligence and Competencies; Education and Learning: Lifespan Perspectives; Emotional Intelligence and Competencies; Emotions and Work; Globalization in Education; Leadership in Organizations, Sociology of; Leadership; Organizational Climate; Organizations: Authority and Power; Personality, Trait Models of; Power, Politics, and Influence in Organizations; Social Intelligence and Competencies; Teamwork and Team Performance Measurement.

Bibliography Avolio, B.J., Avey, J.B., Quisenberry, D., 2010. Estimating return on leadership development investment. Leadership Quarterly 21, 633–644. Avolio, B.J., Hannah, S.T., 2008. Developmental readiness: accelerating leader development. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 60, 331–347. Avolio, B.J., Reichard, R.J., Hannah, S.T., Walumbwa, F.O., Chan, A., 2009. A metaanalytic review of leadership impact research: experimental and quasi-experimental studies. The Leadership Quarterly 20, 764–784. Balthazard, P.A., Waldman, D.A., Thatcher, R.W., Hannah, S.T., 2012. Differentiating transformational and non-transformational leaders on the basis of neurological imaging. The Leadership Quarterly 23, 244–258. Barsade, S.G., Gibson, D.E., 2010. Why Does Affect Matter in Organizations? [References]. Readings in organizational behavior Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; US, New York, NY. Bass, B.M., 2008. Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications, fourth ed. Free Press, New York. Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., 2000. MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Mind Garden, Redwood City. Bass, B.M., Bass, R., 2008. Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Application. Free Press, New York. Bennis, W., 2009. On Becoming a Leader, fourth ed. Basic Books, New York. Bono, J.E., Judge, T.A., 2004. Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 89, 901–910. Borgatta, E.F., Bales, R.F., Couch, A.S., 1954. Some findings relevant to the great man theory of leadership. American Sociological Review 19, 755–759. Boyatzis, R., 1982. The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Boyatzis, R.E., 2006. An overview of intentional change from a complexity perspective. Journal of Management Development 25, 607–623. Boyatzis, R.E., 2008. Leadership development from a complexity perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 60, 298–313. Boyatzis, R.E., 2009. Competencies as a behavioral approach to emotional intelligence. Journal of Management Development 28, 749–770.

Leadership Education: Theory and Practice

Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S., Kolb, D.A., 1994. Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Burke, M.J., Day, R.R., 1986. A cumulative study of the effectiveness of managerial training. Journal of Applied Psychology 71, 232–245. Cherniss, C., Goleman, D., Emmerling, R.J., Cowan, K., Adler, M., 1998. Bringing Emotional Intelligence to the Workplace. Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations: Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Collins, D.B., Holton, E.F., 2004. The effectiveness of managerial leadership development programs: a meta-analysis of studies from 1982 to 2001. Human Resource Development Quarterly 15, 217–248. Daloz Parks, S., 2005. Leadership Can Be Taught. Harvard Business School Press, Boston. De Neve, J., Mikhaylov, S., Dawes, C.T., Christakis, N.A., 2013. Born to lead? A twin and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy. The Leadership Quarterly 24, 45–60. Dumas, C., 2002. Community-based service-learning: does it have a role in management education? International Journal of Value-based Management 15, 249–264. Fegley, S., 2006. SHRM 2006 Strategic HR Management Survey Report. Society for Human Resource Management, Alexandria, VA. Fiedler, E., 1967. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. McGraw-Hill, New York. Fleishman, E.A., 1953. Leadership climate, human relations training, and supervisory behavior. Personnel Psychology 6, 205–222. Fredrickson, B.L., 2001. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist 56, 218–226. Ghoshal, S., 2005. Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education 4, 75–91. Greenleaf, R.K., 1991. The Servant as Leader. The Robert K. Greenleaf Center, Indianapolis, IN. Hemphill, J.K., Coons, A.E., 1950. Leader Behavior Description. Personnel Research Board, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H., 1969. Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal 23, 26–34. Hoch, J.E., Kozlowski, S.W., Dec 2012. Leading virtual teams: hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. No Pagination Specified. Holton III, E.F., Bates, R.A., Ruona, W.E., 2000. Development of a generalized learning transfer system inventory. Human Resource Development Quarterly 11, 333–360. Hunter, J.E., Schmidt, F.L., Judiesch, M.K., 1990. Individual differences in output variability as a function of job complexity. Journal of Applied Psychology 75, 28–42. Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Ilies, R., Gerhardt, M.W., 2002. Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology 87, 765–780. Judge, T.A., Colbert, A.E., Ilies, R., 2004. Intelligence and leadership: a quantitative review and test of theoretical propositions. Journal of Applied Psychology 89, 542–552. Katz, D., Maccoby, N., Morse, N., 1950. Productivity, Supervision, and Morale in an Office Situation. Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI. Kets de Vries, M.F.R., 2006. The Leader on the Couch: A Clinical Approach to Changing People and Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Kolb, D.A., 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kram, K.E., Cherniss, C., 2001. Developing emotional competence through relationships at work. In: Cherniss, C., Goleman, D. (Eds.), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Ligon, G.S., Hunter, S.T., Mumford, M.D., 2008. Development of outstanding leadership: a life narrative approach. Leadership Quarterly 19, 312–334. Lombardo, M.M., Eichinger, R.W., 2000. The Career Architect Development Planner, third ed. Lominger Limited, Minneapolis, MN. Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., Rosen, B., 2007. Leading virtual teams. The Academy of Management Perspectives 21, 60–70. Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D.R., 2004. Emotional intelligence: theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry 15, 197–215. Mcadams, D.P., Olson, B.D., 2010. Personality development: continuity and change over the life course. Annual Review of Psychology 61, 517–542.

663

Mccauley, C.D., Douglas, C.A., 1998. Developmental relationships. In: Mccauley, C.D., Moxley, E., Van Velsor, E. (Eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Mcclelland, D.C., 1987. Human Motivation. Cambridge University Press, New York. Mcclelland, D.C., Boyatzis, R.E., 1982. Leadership motive pattern and long-term success in management. Journal of Applied Psychology 67, 737–743. McKee, A., Boyatzis, R.E., Johnston, F., 2008. Becoming a Resonant Leader: Develop Your Emotional Intelligence, Renew Your Relationships, Sustain Your Effectiveness. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Mintzberg, H., 2004. Managers, not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA. Noe, R.A., Schmitt, N., 1986. The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: test of a model. Personnel Psychology 39, 497–523. O’ Leonard, K., Loew, L., 2012. Leadership Development Factbook 2012: Benchmarks and Trends in US Leadership Development. Bersin & Associates, LLC, Oakland, CA. Pearce, C.L., Conger, J.A., 2003. Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Pless, N.M., Maak, T., Stahl, G.K., 2011. Developing responsible global leaders through international service-learning programs: the ulysses experience. Academy of Management Learning & Education 10, 237–260. Plomin, R., Daniels, D., 1987. Why are children in the same family so different from one another? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10, 1–16. Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., 2001. Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2, 661–669. Roberts, B.W., Mroczek, D., 2008. Personality trait change in adulthood. Current Directions in Psychological Science 17, 31–35. Rosen, B., Furst, S., Blackburn, R., 2006. Training for virtual teams: an investigation of current practices and future needs. Human Resource Management 45, 229–247. Russell, R.F., Stone, A.G., 2002. A review of servant leadership attributes: developing a practical model. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 23, 145–157. Ryan, G., Emmerling, R.J., Spencer, L.M., 2009. Distinguishing high-performing European executives: the role of emotional, social and cognitive competencies. Journal of Management Development 28, 859–875. Spencer, L.M., 2001. The economic value of emotional intelligence competencies and EIC-based HR programs. In: Cherniss, C., Goleman, D. (Eds.), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace: How to Select for, Measure, and Improve Emotional Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Spencer, L.M., Spencer, S., 1993. Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Stone, A., Russell, R., Patterson, K., 2004. Transformational versus Servant Leadership: a difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 25, 349–361. Sy, T., Cote, S., Saavedra, R., 2005. The contagious leader: impact of the leader’s mood on the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of Applied Psychology 90, 295–305. Ting, S., Hart, E.W., 2004. Formal coaching. In: Mccauley, C.D., Van Velsor, E. (Eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development. John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA. Van Velsor, E., McCauley, C.D., Ruderman, R.N., 2010. The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Yukl, G., 2012. Leadership in Organizations, eighth ed. Prentic Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Relevant Websites www.ccl.org – Center for Creative Leadership. www.eiconsortium.org – Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. http://www.esade.edu/research-webs/eng/glead – Leadership Development Research Centre – ESADE.