Special Issue on New Paradigms in Evaluating Leadership Development

Edwards, Gareth; Turnbull, Sharon

doi:10.1177/1523422312467147

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is particularly so for programs delivered in complex environments because the impact on leadership skills requires deeper, more personal insights regarding skill development and learning outcomes (Gosling and Mintzberg, 2006) such as changed mindset (Kennedy et al, 2013). Thus while leadership theory recognizes the behavioral and cognitive complexity required to lead (Uhl-Bien et al, 2007), the theory and practice of development evaluation does not generally match that interpretation (Edwards and Turnbull, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collusion with denial: leadership development and its evaluation

King

Nesbit

2015

Journal of Management Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate ways to gain deeper understanding of the evaluation challenge by reporting on insights about the impact of a leadership development program. It focusses on participants’ reflective post-course analysis of their learning, comparing this to a traditional evaluative analysis. Recently there has been a greater focus on programs to develop leaders who have the requisite cognitive and behavioral complexity to lead in challenging environments. However models for the evaluation of such programs often rely on methodologies that assume learning of specific skills rather than assessment of how well participants are able to cognitively and behaviorally adapt to uncertain and complex environments. Design/methodology/approach – The leadership development program was evaluated in two stages and the findings compared. Stage 1 elicited responses to the program using a traditional evaluation approach. Stage 2 involved 30 semi-structured interviews with the participants exploring the connections made between their development experience, work environment and approach to challenge. Findings – Evaluation approaches which focus on assessing reflection about personal learning provide greater detail on learning experience than traditional approaches to evaluation and can increase our understanding of the broader impact of leadership development programs. Current evaluation practices are mostly traditional despite dissatisfaction with outcomes. There are functional and financial benefits flowing from this practice suggesting collusion with denial between the suppliers and purchasers of leadership development and posing a question of causation. Originality/value – This study supports the use of qualitative evaluation techniques and in particular a focus on post-learning reflection to increase understanding of the impact of leadership development programs. The increased understanding provided by this type of evaluation can play a significant role in both the design of leader development programs and the creation of strategic alignment between business strategy, the purpose of leadership development interventions, learning objectives, program design and program evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collusion with denial: leadership development and its evaluation

King

Nesbit

2015

Journal of Management Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Leadership development is a collective, social process (Edwards and Turnbull, 2013a, 2013b; Folkestad and Gonzalez, 2010) that is most successful when it is performed in situ addressing real-world problems while addressing all of the complexity’s experienced by today’s leaders. Leadership development is no longer an activity that can focus primarily on one individual as it must account for social interactions that take place in a dynamic environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership development techniques

Turner

Baker

Schroeder

et al. 2018

EJTD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the different leadership development techniques used to develop leaders from the human resource development (HRD) and performance improvement (PI) literature, and to categorize the development techniques using Garavan et al.’s (2015) multifaceted typology of development where development has recently emerged in the literature as a “central and important process” (p. 360). Design/methodology/approach This literature review followed the guidelines for an integrative literature review presented by Torraco (2005) and Imel (2011). This literature review was a freestanding literature review designed to provide directions for future research and development within the HRD discipline. Findings This literature review categorized over 500 leadership development techniques and mapped them with previously identified leadership capacities into Garavan et al.’s (2015) development typology. Once mapped, the authors were able to identify the most common leadership capacities and related development techniques for each development domain in the typology. Practical implications This research provides a tool for identifying required leadership capacities and development techniques that could be used by scholars and scholar-practitioners to conduct further research, as an aid in designing future leadership development programs and as instructional materials in the classroom. Social implications Leadership is becoming a shared construct in today’s literature. Leadership as a shared construct has multiple shareholders, both internal and external of the agent. To better meet the needs of these shareholders, this research provides tools for the scholar and scholar-practitioner for leadership development that can be catered to one’s needs – as opposed to a one-size fits all strategy. Originality/value This paper highlights the HRD and PI literature, and provides a pragmatic tool for leadership development. This tool can be used by scholars for future research and for testing, as well as by scholar-practitioners for designing future leadership development programs.

show abstract

“…Overall, this study highlights the need to go beyond traditional methods of assessing outcomes of leadership development, such as individual training evaluations and pre-post competency assessments, as they are not sufficient to adequately capture whether participant learning is meaningful, embedded, and implemented effectively within participants' organizations (Edwards & Turnbull, 2013;Feser et al, 2017;Schweiger et al, 2020). While this research still relies on participant perceptions, our efforts are creating a bridge between individual and collective learning and understanding the impact on mindset, behavior change, and organizational practices among women in human service nonprofits (who are rarely the subjects of leadership development assessment.)…”

Section: Program Representationmentioning

confidence: 99%