آینده ی توسعه رهبری : اهمیت هویت، رویکردهای چند سطحی، خود رهبری، آمادگی جسمانی، رهبری اشتراکی، شبکه، خلاقیت، احساسات، معنویت و فرایند یکپارچه سازی استخدام های جدید
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|2206||2007||5 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Human Resource Management Review, Volume 17, Issue 4, December 2007, Pages 355–359
Leadership and, consequently, leadership development have taken on far greater import in recent times. As organizations have steadily progressed into the knowledge economy we can no longer rely on simple notions of top–down, command-and-control leadership, based on the idea that workers are merely interchangeable drones. Accordingly, in this special issue you will find seven articles that provide a glimpse over the horizon, so to speak, of leadership development: Together the authors provide a rich research roadmap and a practical set of options for leadership development professionals regarding the next important steps for leadership development, which will carry us well into the 21st Century.
Leadership development has taken on far greater import in recent years (Day, 2000, McCauley and Van Velsor, 2004, Murphy and Riggio, 2003 and Pearce et al., 2006). The reasons for this are manifold and multiplying. Primarily, however, as Peter Drucker identified nearly half a Century ago (Drucker, 1968), we have entered the age of knowledge work. Knowledge work relies on the, necessarily, voluntary contributions of skilled professionals: After all, knowledge workers can withhold their intellectual capital and they can take it with them if and when they choose to leave. Accordingly, we need to rethink the very concept of leadership, and by extension, leadership development, in the age of knowledge work—and that is the very purpose of this special issue on leadership development. The authors of the seven articles that comprise this special issue tackle a wide breadth of topics that are critical to the future of leadership development. Some approaches are general and some are specific. Some focus on leaders occupying roles, while others focus on leadership as a process. Some document current best practices, while others offer agendas for future research. Some focus on lower to mid-hierarchical levels, while others focus on executive levels and yet others identify cross-level issues. Some focus on capacities, capabilities and behaviors while others focus on physical and spiritual dimensions of leadership. What they all have in common, however, is a deep and profound grounding on the historical research foundations of leader and leadership development. Interestingly, in juxtaposition to the deep grounding of the articles that comprise this special issue is the fresh tilling of new, rich and fertile soil for cultivating our next generations of leaders in multi and varied organizational contexts. Most current leadership development efforts focus on transactional and transformational leadership and focus quite narrowly on individuals who occupy formal leadership positions or are being groomed to occupy such positions eminently. In contrast, in this special issue, the authors argue that the focus of leadership development should be greatly expanded to include a much broader array of behaviors and competencies and should include followers in the process of leadership development (see Pearce, 2004 and Pearce and Conger, 2003). Leadership has long captured the interest of practitioners and academics, as well as the more general public. The scope of this popular interest in leadership—what it is, where it comes from, how we develop and implement it—is readily apparent when one walks into any bookstore. Alternatively, simply click on amazon.com and type in the term “leadership” in the book category. I did this on 7 July 2007. It returned 223,726 results. Clearly, there is an insatiable thirst for knowledge about leadership. In our normal, everyday lives we frequently hear arm-chair analyses of peoples' leadership styles—be they corporate leaders, religious leaders, political leaders or civic leaders—as being “blank” types of leaders, further evidencing our perennial preoccupation with leadership, and all that it entails. Indeed, most professionals—be they in the for profit, governmental or social sector—would most likely concur that developing a keen sense of different types of leaders, how they behave, and what they expect, is essential for success, no matter what the organizational context. Forgetting our formal academic descriptions of leadership, lay descriptions of leadership, at least implicitly, refer to patterns of behavior that seem (perhaps intuitively) consistent or related. For example, an employee's description of a “micro-managing” boss might be intuitively supported by examples of his/her manager's overly precise specification of goals, continual follow-up on progress, ongoing needling, picayune review of performance, and the like. Whether they are intuitive—based on personal experience—or formalized through rigorous research, these clusters or types of related behavior make it easier to size up leaders and make sense of patterns of leadership behavior. Two or more contrasting types of leadership, in turn, form a typology (see Doty & Glick, 1994) or model of leadership. Leadership models offer the guiding frameworks that are critical for implementing coherent leadership development efforts. The models guiding leadership development define and, in some cases, limit the leadership development efforts (Cox, Pearce, & Sims, 2003). Accordingly, the purpose of this special issue is to widen the scope of leadership development beyond today's dominant transactional–transformational leadership model, to include identity, multi-level approaches, self-leadership, physical fitness, shared leadership, networking, creativity, emotions, spirituality and on-boarding processes.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
As much as we are attempting to push the frontiers of the science of leadership development, leadership is, above all, a performing art with a range of leadership roles that must be filled and enacted in different situations. Oft times a single leader is called upon to fill these many varied roles. Having said that, any single, unitary approach to leadership will be unlikely to effectively address changing leadership demands over time (Cox et al., 2003). To endure successfully, leaders must be prepared to navigate smooth, rapid transitions across a range of leader behaviors in response to situational demands, as well as navigate smooth transitions between leadership and followership (Pearce, 2004 and Pearce and Manz, 2005). This is a significant challenge, a challenge shared by leaders and the professionals charged with developing leadership capability. From a development perspective, this challenge requires that development strategy, infrastructure, and curricula be designed to include an array of leadership options, options, at least partially, identified by the authors in this special issue. Hopefully leadership scholars and leadership development professionals will be able to take from this special issue some alternative models and frameworks and options for building the knowledge, experience, and confidence of aspiring leaders at all levels of organization. Collectively, the authors of the special issue have presented seven alternative views on leadership development in hopes that they will broaden perspectives about what constitutes appropriate leadership development and will encourage leadership development professionals to build a broader range of models into their development efforts. Conceptually, the seven articles in this special issue build the case for distinguishing between the models presented. Having said that, there is no logical reason leadership development professionals cannot pick-and-choose certain aspects of the models presented here and recombine them, cafeteria style, into programs specifically tailored to their organizational circumstances. Each of the models has compelling advantages and is appropriate for certain circumstances. Clearly, each model contributes significantly to the lexicon of leadership development. Just as certainly, considered individually, each model is insufficient to meet the range of challenges that today's leaders are likely to face over time, and across situations. My only hope is that this special issue encourages debate and offers a useful resource guide to those considering a more comprehensive leadership development offering and stimulates thought among those conducting the research necessary for solid, scientifically-based leadership development.