Tag Archives: leadership

Organizational Theory: Historical Evolution, Major Perspectives, and Contemporary Relevance

Leave a reply

Abstract

Organizational theory explains how organizations are designed, coordinated, governed, and transformed in response to internal dynamics and external pressures. This article rewrites and synthesizes major perspectives in organizational theory by tracing the field from classical concerns with efficiency, hierarchy, and control to contemporary concerns with adaptation, uncertainty, and innovation. It argues that organizations should be understood not only as formal structures but also as social and open systems shaped by people, culture, communication, technology, and environmental change. The discussion reviews classical theory, neoclassical and human relations perspectives, systems theory, contingency theory, and chaos theory. The article concludes that no single theory fully explains organizational behavior; instead, effective organizational analysis requires an integrated approach that balances structure and flexibility, productivity and employee well-being, and stability and change.

Keywords: organizational theory; classical theory; neoclassical theory; human relations; systems theory; contingency theory; chaos theory; organizational design; organizational change; management

Introduction

Organizations are central to modern economic, political, educational, religious, and social life. They coordinate people, resources, information, and technology in pursuit of shared goals. Organizational theory provides a body of concepts for explaining how organizations are formed, how authority and responsibility are distributed, how work is divided and coordinated, and how institutions respond to uncertainty. As an interdisciplinary field, it draws from sociology, psychology, economics, public administration, management studies, and political science. Its purpose is not merely to describe organizational structures but also to explain why organizations succeed, fail, adapt, or resist change.

The evolution of organizational theory reflects broader historical changes in work and society. Early theories emerged during the Industrial Revolution, when large factories and bureaucratic institutions required new methods of coordination and control. Later approaches challenged the assumption that efficiency alone determines organizational success, emphasizing the importance of worker motivation, informal groups, communication, culture, and environmental adaptation. Contemporary organizations now operate in rapidly changing contexts shaped by globalization, digital technology, competition, regulation, and social expectations. For this reason, organizational theory remains relevant for managers, scholars, policymakers, and practitioners seeking to understand complex institutions.

Historical Development of Organizational Theory

The historical development of organizational theory is closely connected to industrialization and the rise of large-scale production. Before industrial capitalism expanded, much work took place in households, farms, workshops, and small craft-based settings. Industrialization concentrated workers, machinery, capital, and managerial authority within factories and large enterprises. As organizations grew larger, questions of specialization, hierarchy, discipline, efficiency, and accountability became increasingly urgent.

Early organizational theorists attempted to develop principles that would make collective work more predictable and productive. Their ideas emphasized formal rules, clearly defined tasks, supervision, and standardized procedures. These principles helped managers coordinate large groups of workers, but they also produced criticism because they often treated employees as mechanical parts of a production system. Later theories expanded the field by examining human relations, decision-making, organizational culture, environmental pressures, and the unpredictable character of change.

Classical Organizational Theory

Classical organizational theory developed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as scholars and managers sought to improve efficiency and control in rapidly expanding organizations. It assumes that organizations perform best when work is divided into specialized tasks, authority is clearly centralized, and employees follow established rules and procedures. The classical perspective views management as a rational process in which tasks can be measured, standardized, and optimized.

Frederick Winslow Taylor’s scientific management is one of the most influential examples of classical theory. Taylor argued that managers should study work scientifically, identify the most efficient method for completing each task, select and train workers carefully, and separate planning from execution. This approach improved productivity in some industrial settings, but it also encouraged close supervision and limited employee discretion.

Max Weber’s theory of bureaucracy also shaped classical organizational thought. Weber described bureaucracy as a rational-legal form of authority based on hierarchy, formal rules, specialized offices, written records, and impersonal decision-making. Bureaucracy can promote consistency, accountability, and fairness because decisions are guided by established procedures rather than personal preference. However, bureaucratic systems may also become rigid, slow, and disconnected from the needs of employees and clients.

The main contribution of classical theory is its emphasis on structure, coordination, formal authority, and managerial responsibility. Its limitation is its tendency to understate the human and informal aspects of organizational life. By prioritizing control and output, classical theory can overlook motivation, creativity, morale, communication, and the social conditions that influence performance.

Neoclassical and Human Relations Perspectives

Neoclassical theory emerged as a response to the limitations of classical theory. While it did not reject formal structure, it argued that organizations cannot be understood only through hierarchy, rules, and efficiency. Neoclassical and human relations perspectives emphasize the social and psychological dimensions of work, including employee attitudes, informal group norms, communication patterns, leadership style, and motivation.

The human relations approach showed that workers are not passive instruments of production. They bring values, needs, expectations, identities, and emotions into the workplace. Employees are more likely to contribute effectively when they experience recognition, trust, participation, and a sense of belonging. From this perspective, productivity depends not only on technical design but also on morale, cooperation, and supportive leadership.

Neoclassical theory contributed to the development of modern human resource management by encouraging managers to consider communication, motivation, group behavior, and employee participation. Its strength lies in its recognition of organizations as social systems. However, critics note that human relations approaches may sometimes underemphasize structural inequalities, power relations, and broader economic pressures that shape organizational life.

Modern Organizational Theories

Modern organizational theories extend earlier perspectives by emphasizing complexity, adaptation, and the relationship between organizations and their environments. These theories reject the assumption that one structure is universally best. Instead, they examine how organizations adjust to changing technologies, markets, regulations, cultures, and social expectations. Three influential modern perspectives are systems theory, contingency theory, and chaos theory.

Systems theory views an organization as an open system composed of interdependent parts. Departments, teams, technologies, procedures, and people influence one another, while the organization as a whole interacts continuously with its external environment. Inputs such as labor, capital, information, and materials are transformed into outputs such as products, services, decisions, and social outcomes. Feedback from the environment then affects future decisions. This perspective highlights the importance of coordination, communication, feedback, and adaptation.

Contingency theory argues that organizational effectiveness depends on fit between structure, strategy, technology, leadership, and environment. There is no single best way to organize; a structure that works well in a stable environment may fail in a dynamic one. Managers must therefore diagnose situational factors and design structures that match organizational goals and external conditions. Chaos theory further emphasizes unpredictability, nonlinearity, and sensitivity to small changes. It suggests that organizations often operate in uncertain environments where innovation, communication, flexibility, and rapid learning are essential.

Contemporary Relevance of Organizational Theory

Organizational theory remains highly relevant because contemporary institutions face complex pressures that cannot be solved by a single managerial formula. Digital transformation, remote and hybrid work, global supply chains, artificial intelligence, social responsibility, workforce diversity, and economic uncertainty all require organizations to combine formal coordination with flexibility and learning. Classical theory remains useful for clarifying authority, accountability, and procedure. Human relations theory remains important for understanding motivation, leadership, and employee well-being. Systems and contingency theories help explain adaptation, while chaos theory encourages organizations to prepare for uncertainty and disruption.

A balanced approach to organizational analysis recognizes that structure and people are inseparable. Formal rules and reporting relationships provide stability, but informal networks, trust, culture, and communication influence how work is actually performed. Organizations that rely only on control may become inflexible, while organizations that rely only on flexibility may lack direction. Effective management therefore requires the ability to align strategy, structure, people, culture, and environment.

Conclusion

Organizational theory has evolved from a narrow concern with efficiency and control into a broad field that examines structure, human behavior, environmental adaptation, and uncertainty. Classical theory contributed valuable principles of hierarchy, specialization, and administrative order, while neoclassical theory corrected its limitations by emphasizing motivation, communication, and informal social relations. Systems theory, contingency theory, and chaos theory further expanded the field by showing that organizations are open, interdependent, adaptive, and often unpredictable. The continuing value of organizational theory lies in its ability to help scholars and practitioners understand how organizations function and how they can be designed to serve both institutional goals and human needs. In contemporary environments marked by rapid change, effective organizations are those that combine clear structure with learning, participation, innovation, and resilience.

References

Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Harvard University Press.

Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. Tavistock Publications.

Daft, R. L. (2016). Organization theory and design (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern organizations. Prentice-Hall.

Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2013). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Jones, G. R. (2013). Organizational theory, design, and change (7th ed.). Pearson.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). Wiley.

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard University Press.

March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Wiley.

Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. Macmillan.

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Prentice-Hall.

Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay (3rd ed.). Random House.

Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2007). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open systems perspectives. Pearson Prentice Hall.

Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers.

Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill.

Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans.). Oxford University Press.

Authentic Leadership as a Practice of Purpose, Self-Awareness, and Organizational Stewardship

Leave a reply

Abstract

This paper examines the leadership framework associated with Bill George’s concept of authentic leadership and analyzes how its central themes – ethical accountability, purpose, self-awareness, and relational trust – contribute to organizational effectiveness. Drawing on an interview with George conducted by Michael Useem and on George’s published work on authentic leadership and True North, the paper argues that authentic leadership is best understood not as a personality trait but as a developmental practice grounded in life experience, values clarification, and disciplined reflection. The analysis shows that George’s framework emphasizes both personal congruence and institutional responsibility, positioning leadership as a moral and strategic activity. The paper concludes that authentic leadership remains a useful model for developing leaders who can align organizational performance with long-term trust and mission integrity.

Keywords: authentic leadership; leadership development; ethical leadership; organizational trust; self-awareness

Introduction

Authentic leadership has become an influential perspective in contemporary leadership studies because it shifts attention away from charisma, positional authority, and stylistic imitation toward self-knowledge, ethical consistency, and purpose-driven action (George et al., 2007). Bill George, former chief executive officer of Medtronic and a long-time faculty member at Harvard Business School, has been one of the most prominent advocates of this approach (George, 2007). His work argues that effective leadership emerges from a deep understanding of one’s values, motivations, and formative life experiences rather than from conformity to a fixed model of the “ideal” leader (George, 2007; George et al., 2007). This paper synthesizes George’s core ideas into a structured analysis of authentic leadership as a developmental and organizational practice.

This paper examines leadership lessons concerning the prompt correction of unethical conduct, the removal of executive privileges, commitment to mission and values, the cultivation of authenticity, the interpretation of adversity as a developmental resource, the discovery of one’s “True North,” constructive engagement with boards, the pursuit of meaningful work, and reciprocal mentoring. Although these ideas are often presented as practical guidance, they can also be situated within broader scholarly discussions of ethical leadership, leader identity development, and organizational trust (George, 2007; George et al., 2007). More specifically, this paper argues that George’s framework remains analytically relevant because it links personal authenticity to concrete organizational practices that strengthen legitimacy, alignment, and long-term institutional effectiveness.

Thematic Analysis

A first major theme in George’s leadership framework is ethical accountability. The insistence that leaders address unethical behavior quickly and visibly reflects the view that organizational culture is shaped not only by declared values but by the consistency with which standards are enforced (Useem & George, 2014). In this sense, ethics is not an abstract commitment; it is a public organizational practice. Leaders establish legitimacy when they demonstrate that integrity applies equally across levels of authority and cannot be suspended for convenience, performance pressures, or status.

A second theme concerns symbolic equality and stewardship. George’s recommendation to remove executive perks suggests that leadership credibility depends partly on visible signals of respect and solidarity (Useem & George, 2014). Such actions reduce status distance and communicate that leadership is oriented toward the mission of the organization rather than the comfort of senior executives. From an academic perspective, these gestures can be understood as mechanisms that reinforce cultural alignment, strengthen employee identification with leadership, and underscore the leader’s role as steward rather than privileged overseer.

A third theme is the relationship between authenticity and trust. George argues that leaders should not emulate dominant leadership archetypes but instead lead from a coherent sense of self (George et al., 2007). This position aligns with research suggesting that trust develops when followers perceive congruence between a leader’s stated values, observable behavior, and interpersonal conduct. Authenticity in this framework is not mere self-expression; it is disciplined congruence. It requires honesty, self-awareness, openness to feedback, and the ability to form relationships that are credible because they are not performative (George, 2007).

A fourth theme is developmental learning through adversity. George’s concept of “crucibles” refers to difficult experiences that challenge identity and judgment but can also deepen wisdom and resilience (George, 2007). This idea is significant because it reframes leadership development as a process shaped by interpretation rather than by credentials alone. Leaders become more capable not simply by accumulating authority but by reflecting on hardship, integrating its lessons, and translating personal insight into more empathetic and grounded leadership behavior.

A fifth and related theme is purpose, described by George as finding one’s “True North” (George, 2007). Rather than defining leadership success primarily in terms of wealth, prestige, or positional power, the framework emphasizes intrinsic motivation and contribution. Purpose functions as a stabilizing orientation that helps leaders make decisions under pressure and maintain consistency when external incentives compete with internal values. In leadership theory, such purpose-based orientation is especially important because it connects personal identity with collective mission, thereby strengthening both direction and meaning.

Finally, the paper highlights the social dimension of leadership through advice on boards, passion, and mentoring. George’s emphasis on drawing out quieter board members suggests that good governance depends on inclusive deliberation and the active use of diverse expertise (Useem & George, 2014). His guidance on passion and mentorship likewise frames leadership as relational and generative: leaders are expected not only to pursue meaningful work but also to support the development of others (George, 2007; Useem & George, 2014). This reciprocal perspective broadens authentic leadership beyond self-discovery and presents it as an ongoing responsibility to cultivate capacity throughout the organization.

Discussion

George’s model remains relevant because it addresses recurring leadership failures associated with image management, ethical inconsistency, and excessive identification with positional power (George et al., 2007). This relevance is reinforced by broader scholarship on authentic leadership. Avolio and Gardner (2005) argue that authentic leadership should be understood as a developmental process grounded in self-awareness, self-regulation, and relational transparency, which supports the paper’s interpretation of George’s framework as more than practitioner advice. Walumbwa et al. (2008) further strengthen this view by identifying measurable dimensions of authentic leadership: self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing, that closely align with George’s emphasis on ethics, trust, and purpose. At the same time, Gardner et al. (2011) caution that the field still faces challenges of conceptual clarity and methodological rigor, suggesting that authentic leadership is most useful when it is linked to observable organizational practices rather than treated as aspirational rhetoric. For this reason, George’s framework is analytically strongest when connected to concrete practices such as accountability systems, inclusive decision-making, mission reinforcement, and mentoring structures that reproduce leadership capacity beyond the individual leader (George, 2007; Useem & George, 2014).

Conclusion

Viewed in light of both practitioner and academic scholarship, George’s authentic leadership framework is best understood as a developmental model that links self-awareness, moral perspective, relational transparency, and purpose to concrete organizational practices (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; George, 2007; Walumbwa et al., 2008). The paper’s analysis has shown that the framework’s value lies not only in its normative appeal but also in its capacity to explain how leaders build legitimacy, foster trust, and sustain institutional coherence through accountability, inclusion, and mentoring. At the same time, the concerns raised in the literature about conceptual clarity and methodological rigor suggest that authentic leadership is most persuasive when treated as an observable practice rather than an aspirational ideal (Gardner et al., 2011). For that reason, George’s contribution remains most significant as a bridge between leadership theory and organizational application.

References

  1. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001
  2. Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1120–1145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007
  3. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913
  4. George, B. (2007). True north: Discover your authentic leadership. Jossey-Bass.
  5. George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A. N., & Mayer, D. (2007, February). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 129–138.
  6. Useem, M., & George, B. (2014, July 16). Authentic leadership: Former CEO Bill George interview on building management skills [Video]. Knowledge at Wharton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TkEA3awGnc

On Leadership Legacies

Leave a reply

Abstract

This article examines the concept of leadership legacies, highlighting how many successful individuals eventually seek significance beyond mere achievement. Drawing on research and surveys, it explores the shift from “success thinking” to “significance thinking” among leaders, focusing on the lasting impact they wish to leave. The article categorises legacies into physical, intellectual, social, and spiritual forms, acknowledging both positive and negative examples from history and the corporate world. It emphasises the growing importance of positive legacies in contemporary business, with a majority of leaders prioritising the development of others as a key legacy. Social legacies, those that improve the lives of others, are identified as the most valued. The piece concludes by advocating for leaders to model their values consistently, asserting that authentic actions create enduring legacies that shape both individuals and organisations.

Keywords: Leadership legacies, significance thinking, success thinking, physical legacy, intellectual legacy, social legacy, spiritual legacy, positive legacy, negative legacy, business leadership, values, authentic leadership, organisational impact, development of others, modelling values, enduring impact.

Success is insufficient. Many high achievers ultimately perceive success as devoid of meaning unless it fosters importance in their own lives and in the lives of others (Stevenson and Nash 2004). Interviews with leaders suggest that, ultimately, many transition from “success thinking” to “significance thinking.” Significance thinking is contemplating, “What is the effect of the legacy I/we wish to establish?” This might be referred to as legacy (Key and Stearns 2006).  

There exist multiple forms of legacy. Initially, there exist tangible legacies, such as constructing a building like the Trump Tower or funding a chair at a university. Secondly, there exist intellectual legacies, including authoring a book, securing a patent, or formulating a novel corporate best practice. Third, there exist emotional or social legacies, including enhancing employee quality of life by amicable work practices, implementing cutting-edge environmental procedures, or nurturing children to be compassionate and responsible.  

Ultimately, there are what may be termed spiritual legacies, such as embodying one’s principles daily or enhancing the earth for future generations. Consider the legacies bequeathed to us by figures such as Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mahatma Gandhi. They likely never formally documented their “legacy,” although their visionary leadership and capacity to exemplify their principles resulted in what many regard as significant legacies, potentially exceeding their own expectations.  

Legacies may also possess scary and ominous qualities. Few would contest that Hitler, Idi Amin, and Saddam Hussein bequeathed a legacy of animosity and division. At the business level, numerous individuals lost their savings and were fraudulently deceived by the personal avarice and duplicity of executives at firms like Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom.
It is advantageous that numerous contemporary business experts aspire to create a more favourable legacy. In September 2007, the Institute for Corporate Responsibility, in collaboration with HR.com, conducted the Leader Legacy Practitioner Consensus Survey, revealing that over two-thirds (68%) of respondents indicated that their organisations are significantly concerned with leaving a legacy or improving conditions as a result of their existence. The study revealed that a significant majority, 86% of the 210 respondents, consider leaving a professional legacy to be a high or very high priority.  

This fascination with positive legacies may appear unexpected in a business milieu that prioritises bottom-line metrics. Legacy is evidently significant to numerous business executives and frequently fulfils the requirements of the entire organization. In anecdotal study presented in CEO Road Rules: Right Focus, Right People, Right Execution (Key and Stearns 2006), over 60% of CEOs indicated that their legacy was “developing others as leaders.” Numerous individuals remarked that witnessing the success of their mentees was an immensely gratifying experience. Many asserted that the influence of developing leaders was exponential and that participating in such transformation was exhilarating. I take great pride in witnessing the influence of my mentees. One of the interviewed CEOs remarked, “They have surpassed my own self-perception significantly.”  

The Leader Legacy Practitioner Consensus Survey conducted by the Institute for Corporate Responsibility yielded a comparable conclusion. When enquired, “To what degree does the leadership within your organization prioritise the support of others’ growth and development?” Fifty-eight percent indicated that their leaders prioritise this to a high or very high degree.  

Survey participants said that, of the four categories of legacy, social legacies are deemed the most significant, with 71% expressing a high or very high interest in establishing a social legacy that enhances the lives of others. It was subsequently ranked in significance alongside intellectual, physical, and spiritual legacies.  

Numerous methods exist for establishing a legacy; but, for leaders, one of the most effective strategies is to exemplify exemplary behaviour for others. Effective corporate leaders exemplify their principles daily (Galford and Maruca 2006). If a leader asserts integrity as a fundamental principle, others should observe behaviours that exemplify integrity in their leadership and commercial practices. This encompasses consistently conveying the truth, attentively listening to people with respect, and acting ethically, regardless of potential consequences.

Rather than merely articulating their principles, senior leaders embody them via action. They do not proclaim, “This is my identity; emulate me.” They consistently exemplify and articulate their beliefs in their daily activities at work, home, community, and other environments. Ultimately, this significantly contributes to leaders’ legacies, as the ideals and behaviours they exemplify impact numerous individuals. This can be articulated as a succinct equation: Values Action = Legacy.  

The concept of legacy can be integrated into the leadership development process, assisting leaders in contemplating the creation of their legacies. Ultimately, legacy also influences the strategic decision-making of the entire firm as leadership teams determine what, beyond financial success, their enterprises will bequeath.

Conclusion

The exploration of leadership legacies reveals that authentic, principled leadership is not merely about achieving success, but about leaving a lasting imprint that enriches others and shapes organisational and societal futures. As the discourse shifts from the pursuit of success to the pursuit of significance, it becomes clear that the most valued legacies are those which foster growth, compassion, and ethical conduct. Leaders who consistently model their core values through action inspire positive transformation, creating ripple effects that endure well beyond their tenure. The evidence suggests that contemporary leaders are increasingly mindful of their impact, prioritising the development of others and the improvement of collective well-being as central to their legacy. Ultimately, the enduring power of a leader’s legacy lies in its ability to influence generations, guide strategic decisions, and contribute meaningfully to the world. It is this commitment to significance that distinguishes truly impactful leadership and ensures that the values and actions of today’s leaders will be remembered and emulated long into the future.

References

  • Stevenson, Howard, and Laura Nash. “Success that Lasts.” Harvard Business Review, February 2004.
  • Key, Mary, and Dennis Stearns. CEO Road Rules: Right Focus, Right People, Right Execution, Davies-Black, 2006.
  • Leader Legacy Practitioner Consensus Survey. Institute for Corporate Productivity, September 2007.
  • Galford, Robert M., and Regina Fazio Maruca. Your Leadership Legacy, Harvard Business Press, 2006.

Promoting Virtue Development in Young People and the Workplace: An Academic Review of Theories, Practices, and Outcomes

Leave a reply

Introduction

Virtue, traditionally understood as moral excellence, is increasingly acknowledged as a cornerstone of personal development and organisational success. In both youth and workplace contexts, cultivating virtues such as honesty, integrity, empathy, and perseverance is linked to positive behavioural, academic, and professional outcomes (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Wright & Goodstein, 2007). This paper aims to address the following research questions:How is virtue defined and conceptualised across disciplines? Which methods and strategies effectively promote virtue among young people and within workplace settings? What are the primary challenges to virtue development, and how might these be overcome? The scope encompasses educational and organisational contexts, as well as a comparative analysis of similarities and differences in approaches for youth and adults.

Theoretical Framework

Definitions of Virtue

Virtue is generally defined as a habitual disposition to act in ways that are morally commendable (Aristotle, trans. 2009). Contemporary definitions expand this to include character strengths and prosocial behaviours (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Virtues are often categorised as cardinal virtues (e.g., courage, temperance, justice, prudence) or as context-specific traits relevant to modern life, such as teamwork or fairness (Dahlsgaard, Peterson, & Seligman, 2005).

Historical and Contemporary Theories

Aristotelian virtue ethics posits that virtues are acquired through habituation and practical wisdom (phronesis), emphasising the development of moral character over time (Aristotle, trans. 2009). In contrast, Kohlberg’s stages of moral development focus on cognitive aspects of moral reasoning, suggesting that virtue is linked to the progression through universal stages of moral judgement (Kohlberg, 1984). Recent frameworks, such as positive psychologyconceptualise virtue as a set of measurable character strengths and advocate for interventions that foster these traits in educational and organisationalal settings (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Park & Peterson, 2009).

Virtue Development in Young People

Educational Approaches

Schools play a central role in virtue development, with character education programmes designed to promote values such as respect, responsibility, and empathy. Evidence suggests that sucprograms, when implemented systematically, can enhance social and emotional skills, reduce behaviouralal problems, and improve academic performance (Berkowitz & Bier, 2005; Lickona, 1991). Approaches range from explicit instruction in moral reasoning to experiential learning through service projects and restorative practices (Nucci, Narvaez, & Krettenauer, 2014).

Family and Community Roles

Families arthe primary agents of virtue socialisation, modelling ethical behaviourur and reinforcing moral norms (Grusec & Goodnow, 1994). Communitorganisations, such as youth clubs and religious institutions, provide additional opportunities for young people to practice virtuees in real-world settings (King & Boyatzis, 2004). Empirical studies point out the importance of supportive, value-orientated environments in fostering resilient and virtuous youth (Scales et al., 2000).

Empirical Studies

Longitudinal research indicates that early experiences with supportive adults and structured opportunities for moral action predict later prosocial behaviour and reduced engagement in risky activities (Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Morris, 2014). School-based interventions, such as the PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) curriculum, have demonstrated significant improvements in self-control, empathy, and conflict resolution among participants (Domitrovich et al., 2007).

Promoting Virtue in the Workplace

Organisational Culture

Workplaces that prioritise ethical values and psychological safety create conditions conducive to virtue development among employees (Schein, 2010). Organisational culture influences the extent to which virtues such as honesty, accountability, and fairness are enacted and rewarded (Kaptein, 2008). Mechanisms include codes of conduct, recognition programmes, and open communication channels.

Leadership

Leaders play a pivotal role imodelling and reinforcing virtuous behavioursur. Transformational leadership, which emphasises integrity, vision, and consideration for others, is positively associated with employee engagement and ethical conduct (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999)Research has linked ethical leadership to reduced workplace deviance and increased organisational citizenship behaviours (Brown, Trevio, & Harrison, 2005).).

Training Programmes and Case Studies

Organisations increasingly invest in ethical training, mindfulness programs, and value-based workshops to cultivate virtues among their staff. For example, Google’s “Search Inside Yourself” programme integrates mindfulness and emotional intelligence training, reportedly leading to higher job satisfaction and team cohesion (Gelles, 2012). Case studies from the healthcare and finance sectors highlight the impact of robust ethical frameworks on reducing misconduct and enhancing trust (Paine, 1994; Treviño, Weaver, & Reynolds, 2006).

Comparative Analysis: Youth and Workplace Approaches

Both youth and workplace contextemphasise the importance of modelling, practicing, and reinforcingin virtue development. However, approaches differ in their focus: youth interventions often prioritise foundational moral reasoning and social-emotional learning, while workplace strategies centre on professional ethics, organisational values, and leadership. Adults may require unlearninmaladaptive behavioursrs, whereas interventions with young people are more preventive and formative (Narvaez & Lapsley, 2008).

Challenges and Barriers

Societal challenges include cultural relativism, media influences, and competing value systems that may undermine virtue development (Nucci et al., 2014)In organisations, barriers include misaligned incentives, a lack of leadership commitment, and pressures to prioritise performance over integrity (Kaptein, 2008).)At an individual level, cognitive biases and moral disengagement can impede the internalisation of virtues (Bandura, 1999).). Addressing these obstacles requires a multi-level approach, integrating policy, education, and organisational change.

Recommendations

For educators, embedding character education into the curriculum, fostering supportive school climates, and engaging families are key strategies (Berkowitz & Bier, 2005)For employers, it is recommended to cultivate ethical cultures, invest in leadership development, and provide ongoing ethics training (Brown et al., 2005; Schein, 2010).). Cross-sector collaboration and evidence-based evaluation of interventions can further enhance the effectiveness of virtue development initiatives.

Conclusion

Promoting virtue development in botyouth and the workplace is a complex, context-dependent endeavourur with significant implications for individual and societal well-being. Theoretical and empirical evidence supports the efficacy of intentional, holistic approaches that engage multiple stakeholders. Future research should examine the long-term impact of virtue-based interventions and explore innovative strategies to overcome persistent challenges.

References

  1. Aristotle (2009). Nicomachean Ethics (W.D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  2. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.
  3. Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behaviour. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181–217.
  4. Berkowitz, M. W., & Bier, M. C. (2005). What works in character education: A research-driven guide for educators. Character Education Partnership.
  5. Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.
  6. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue: The convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9(3), 203–213.
  7. Domitrovich, C. E., Cortes, R. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (2007). Improving young children’s social and emotional competence: A randomised trial of the Preschool PATHS curriculum. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 28(2), 67–91.
  8. Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Morris, A. S. (2014). Empathy-related responding in children. In M. Killen & J. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of Moral Development (pp. 184–207). New York: Psychology Press.
  9. Gelles, D. (2012). The mindful revolution. Financial Times Magazine.
  10. Grusec, J. E., & Goodnow, J. J. (1994). Impact of parental discipline methods on the child’s internalisation of values: a reconceptualisation of current points of view. Developmental Psychology, 30(1), 4–19.
  11. Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing and testing a measure for the ethical culture oorganizations—thehe corporate ethical virtues model. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 29(7), 923–947.
  12. King, P. E.and Boyatzis, C. J. published their work in 20044). Exploring adolescent spiritual and religious development: Current and future theoretical and empirical perspectives. Applied Developmental Science, 8(1), 2–6.
  13. Kohlberg, L. (1984). The Psychology of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
  14. Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for Character: How Our Schools Can Teach Respect and Responsibility. New York: Bantam Books.
  15. Narvaez, D., & Lapsley, D. K. (2008). Teaching moral character: Two strategies for teacher education. Teacher Educator, 43(2), 156–172.
  16. Nucci, L., Narvaez, D., & Krettenauer, T. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of Moral and Character Education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
  17. Paine, L. S. (1994). Managing foOrganisationalal integrity. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 106–117.
  18. Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Character strengths: Research and practice. Journal of College and Character, 10(4).
  19. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  20. Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D. A. (2000). Contribution of developmental assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 4(1), 27–46.
  21. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organisational Culture and Leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  22. Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006)Behavioural ethics in organisations: a review.w. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951–990.
  23. Wright, T. A., & Goodstein, J. (2007). Character is not “dead” in management research: A review of individual character and organisational-level virtue. Journal of Management, 33(6), 928–958.

What are the five classical principles of appreciative inquiry? A Mini-Lecture

Leave a reply

Appreciative Inquiry: A brief introduction

There are numerous ways to describe appreciative inquiry. Here is a practitioner-orientated definition:

Appreciative inquiry is a cooperative co-evolutionary search for the best in people, their organisations, and the world around them. It involves the discovery of what gives “life” to a living system when it is most effective, alive, and constructively capable in economic, ecological, and human terms. Appreciative inquiry involves the art and practice of asking questions that strengthen a system’s capacity to apprehend, anticipate, and heighten positive potential. The crafting of the “unconditional positive question,” often involving hundreds or thousands of people, mobilises the inquiry. Appreciative inquiry interventions focus on the speed of imagination and innovation instead of the negative, critical, and spiralling diagnoses commonly used in organisations. The discovery, dream, design, and destiny model links the energy of the positive core to changes never thought possible (Cooperrider, Whitney, & Stavros, 2008).

Appreciative inquiry is among the most effective change methodologies currently available. Numerous organisations globally have employed AI to implement transformative efforts. The premise is straightforward: Every organisation has something that works right—things that give it life when it is vital, effective, and successful. Inviting people to participate in dialogues and share stories about their past and present achievements, assets, unexplored potentials, innovations, strengths, elevated thoughts, opportunities, benchmarks, high-point moments, lived values, traditions, core and distinctive competences, expressions of wisdom, insights into the deeper corporate spirit and soul, and visions of valued and possible futures can identify a “positive core.” Appreciative inquiry links the energy of the positive core directly to any change agenda. This link creates energy and excitement and a desire to move toward a shared dream.

AI pertains to the generative rather than the affirmative (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). Perhaps we ought to refer to it as Generative Inquiry. Generativity transpires when individuals collaboratively uncover or invent novel concepts that can beneficially transform their shared future. AI exhibits generativity in several ways. The pursuit of novel ideas, images, theories, and models emancipates our collective desires, transforms the social construction of reality, and consequently reveals options and behaviours that were previously unconsidered or inaccessible. When effective, AI produces spontaneous, unsupervised actions at the individual, group, and organisational levels, aimed at fostering a better future.

In the next session, we will examine the five fundamental principles of appreciative inquiry: the constructionist principle, the principle of simultaneity, the poetic principle, the anticipatory principle, and the positive principle. To effectively use AI, it is essential to understand these foundational principles of appreciative inquiry.

The Five Classical Principles of AI

The constructionist principle asserts the interconnection between social knowledge and the fate of an organisation, and it contends that the foundations of organisational transformation are inherent in the initial questions asked. The questions asked serve as the foundation upon which the future is envisioned and developed. As a result, the approach to understanding has significant implications (Gergen, 1994). To be effective as CEOs, leaders, and change agents, one must be proficient in reading, code reading, comprehending, and analysing organisations as dynamics. Understanding organisations is fundamental to virtually all organisational activities. Because different people think in various ways and the environment is becoming more complex, it’s important to keep exploring new and better ways of understanding things.

The essential resource for fostering effective organisational transformation is collaboration between imaginative and rational cognitive processes, which enable creativity and intellect in groups. Appreciative inquiry serves as a method for restoring imaginative proficiency. Regrettably, individuals’ customary metaphorical styles and analytical frameworks serve to characterise organizations manners. These techniques have frequently restricted management creativity and cognition.

Simultaneity principle: The principle of simultaneity posits that inquiry and change are not distinct phases; rather, they should occur concurrently. Inquiry constitutes a form of intervention. Change is initiated by the thoughts and discussions of individuals, the discoveries and knowledge they acquire, and the elements that shape dialogue and evoke visions of the future. Their presence is inherent in the questions posed. The questions establish the distinction between what is “found” and what is “discovered” (the data). The data serve as the foundation for the conception, discussion, and construction of future narratives.

Poetic principle: The idea that human organisations are like an “open book” is a good way to think about this poetic concept. The story of an organisation is always being written by many people. Also, the past, present, and future can all teach us something, inspire us, or help us understand something else. For instance, one can interpret a well-crafted poem or the Bible in numerous ways. The main point is that you can learn about almost any subject that has to do with people in any human system or organisation. The choice of question can focus on what makes individuals feel either alone or happy within any group or organisation. When people are creative or stressed from too much paperwork, they can be studied. There is a choice.

Anticipatory principle: talking about and picturing the future together is the most powerful way to make positive changes or improvements in an organisation. One of the main ideas behind the anticipatory view of organisational life is that the way a body or organisation acts now is based on its vision of the future. Like a movie projected on a screen, human systems are always projecting an expectation horizon ahead of themselves. This brings the future into the present in a strong way as a motivator. Groups exist because their leaders and caretakers have some kind of conversation or expectation about what the group is, how it will work, what it will accomplish, and what it will probably turn into.

Positive principle: This last principle is more concrete. It grows out of years of experience with AI. In simple terms, momentum for change necessitates significant levels of positive impact, social bonding, and attitudes like hope, inspiration, and the joy of collaborative creation. Organisations, as human constructions, are largely affirmative systems and thus are responsive to positive thought and positive knowledge. The more positive the questions used to guide a group in building an organisational development initiative, the more long-lasting and effective the change (Bushe & Coetzer, 1994). In important respects, people and organisations move in the direction of their queries. Thousands of interviews into “empowerment” or “being the easiest business in the industry to work with” will have a completely different long-term impact in terms of sustaining positive action than a study of “low morale” or “process breakdowns.”

Table: Summary of the 5 Traditional Principles of Appreciative Inquiry

PrincipleSummaryDetails
Constructionist PrincipleWords create worldsReality, as we know it, is a subjective vs. objective state and is socially created through language and conversations.
Simultaneity PrincipleInquiry creates changeThe moment we ask a question, we begin to create a change. “The questions we ask are fateful.”
Poetic PrincipleWe can choose what we studyTeams and organizations, like open books, are endless sources of study and learning. What we choose to study makes a difference. It describes – even creates – the world as we know it.
Anticipatory PrincipleImages inspire actionHuman systems move in the direction of their images of the future. The more positive and hopeful the image of the future, the more positive the present-day action.
Positive PrinciplePositive questions lead to positive changeMomentum for [small or] large-scale change requires large amounts of positive affect and social bonding. This momentum is best generated through positive questions that amplify the positive core

Source: Cooperrider, D.L., & Whitney, D. A Positive Revolution in Change: Appreciative Inquiry. Taos, NM: Corporation for Positive Change, 1999.

Conclusion

These five principles are central to the theoretical framework of AI theorists for organising evolutionary change. These principles clarify that it is the positive image that results in positive action. The organisation must make the affirmative decision to focus on the positives and lead the inquiry.

References

  1. Barrett, F., & Fry, R. (2005). Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Approach to Cooperative Capacity Building. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Publishing.
  2. Bushe, G., & Coetzer, G. (March 1994). Appreciative inquiry as a team-development intervention: A controlled experiment. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 31, 13.
  3. Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In W. A. Pasmore & R. W. Woodman (eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 1 (129-169). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  4. Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J.M. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook for leaders of change (2nd edn). Crown Custom Publishing, Inc.
  5. Gergen, K. (1994). Realities and relationships. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press and Social Construction: Entering the dialogue (2004). Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Publishing.
  6. Stanton, Nigel (2025). Appreciative inquiry, understand these 5 principles and understand how something really changes in your team or organization. Retrieved from https://www.croeso.nu/blog/appreciative-inquiry-begrijp-deze-5-principes-en-begrijp-hoe-er-echt-iets-verandert-in-je-team-of-organisatie/ (Accessed 24 June 2025).

Micromanagement: A Complex Leadership Style

Leave a reply

Abstract

Leadership is a crucial component for the efficient and successful functioning of any organisation. Various leadership styles exist inside organisations, one of which is Micromanagement, defined by managers closely monitoring and directing their subordinates. Micromanagement is a harmful leadership approach marked by excessive oversight, positioned within a spectrum of toxic leadership, and its consequences are substantial. This research confirms the necessity for businesses and organisations to address harmful leadership traits, such as micromanagement, using a systematic and strategic approach as outlined in the paper. This study provides a basis for the often-neglected topic of micromanagement and its related effects on followership. Micromanagement is a significant workplace concern that is anticipated to intensify existing challenges; therefore, this research is both relevant and important. Research demonstrates that employees or subordinates, as critical stakeholders in any organisation, display significant resistance to this leadership approach. This study has outlined the negative impacts of micromanagers hindering followers’ participation in decision-making processes.

Introduction

This reflection is not elevated academic discourse; it applies across several settings, including local McDonald’s franchises, hardware stores, as well as General Motors, “Big Blue”, and Abu Dhabi Media. It may also function within the statehouse; however, bureaucrats, clerks, and politicians often undermine objectives, primarily for self-protection and self-preservation, and infrequently for advancement. Few factors exert a bigger influence on an organization’s success and efficiency than management’s readiness to trust and delegate authority. The absence of delegation diminishes the vitality and morale of individuals who serve clients, rendering them indispensable. Lack of trust.

Micromanagement like constructing a sandcastle at high tide – intricately detailed but ultimately unsustainable. Leaders who micromanage concentrate on minutiae while neglecting the escalating issues of disengagement, lower trust, and less innovation. Rather than constructing sandcastles, erect lighthouses—edifices of empowerment, trust, and leadership that endure adversities and motivate teams to navigate their path, even under the most tumultuous storms. Empowerment and trust constitute the foundational elements of enduring success.

Definition of micromanagement

Micromanagement is a leadership approach that elicits diverse perspectives among scholars. Micromanagement is generally characterised as a domineering and excessive control exerted by leaders over their staff (Gardanova et al., 2019; Wendler, 2013; White, 2010) and is consequently regarded as a detrimental managing style (Cho et al., 2017). Pastel (2008) perceives micromanagement as a centralised decision-making strategy and an effective method for risk mitigation, a perspective that Delgado et al. (2015) consider to be illusory. Regardless of views on its efficacy, this leadership style seems to be prevalent in the workplace. Chambers (2009) indicated that 79% of individuals encountered micromanagement, while a further 85% acknowledged that these detrimental behaviours adversely affected employees. Micromanagers, however, appear oblivious to the detrimental effects of this leadership style.

Organizational leaders who “needlessly over-manage, over-scrutinize, and over-frustrate employees”, such meddlesome bosses are now called micromanagers (White, 2010). Hovering around your team (“helicopter approach”) does not mean you are leading. It means you are insecure. You do not trust them to deliver. You do not trust yourself to let go.

Origins and development

Micromanagement has been practiced and recognised long before we began to refer to it as an organisational disorder. Peter Drucker proposed the idea of a “democracy of management” in 1946, which would require organisations to decentralise and give people more authority to make decisions. Douglas McGregor identified a Theory X manager in 1960 as someone who has many of the same qualities as a micromanager today. This person is not good at distributing tasks, but they believe they are good at it. Micromanagement has been a disruptive force in organisational life for a long time, but it has only recently become a part of the working language. The term was first used in an article published in the Economist in 1975. Since that time, there has been a growing concern about the effects of petty employers. This study examines the roots and symptoms of this issue, as well as ways to develop a more empowering leadership style.

Most leaders do not realize the damage they are doing:

  • Hovering instead of empowering.
  • Controlling instead of trusting.
  • Questioning instead of listening.

You want a team that thrives? Let them breathe.

When you micromanage, your team stops trying. They do not grow. They do not care. And neither does your culture.

What happens when you do not stop?

  • Top talent leaves (Chambers, 2009). Nobody wants to stick around when they feel undervalued and over-controlled. High turnover disrupts team dynamics and can cost organisations significantly in terms of recruitment and training.
  • Productivity plummets (Chambers, 2009).
  • Trust becomes impossible to rebuild.

If micro-management can occur without the leader noticing, or even out of good intentions, how can a secure leader find a firm balance between passivity and hyper-control with their follower? In other words, how do you fix it?

  • Delegate with trust. Assign the task, not your doubts.
  • Focus on outcomes. Care about results, not the process.
  • Ask, do not dictate. Collaboration beats control every time.
  • Invest in growth. Empower your team to make decisions – and learn from them.
  • Model trust. If you do not trust, why should your team?

Micromanagement destroys what leadership should build:

  • Trust
  • Confidence
  • Growth.

You cannot build loyalty by holding people back. You build it by letting them thrive.

The best leaders do not hover. They trust. They empower. They inspire.

Great teams are not built by watching over shoulders. They are built by lifting people up.

If you want results, let your team thrive. If you want loyalty, let them lead.

Conclusion

This study concludes that micromanagement leads to negative followership patterns. The word “unfavourable followership” encompasses employee stress and worry, dissatisfaction, demotivation, and disengagement. As a result, these challenges foster a detrimental work environment characterised by diminished managerial support, decreased productivity, restricted upward feedback, interpersonal friction within team dynamics, and a deficiency in innovation. The fundamental premise of this research is that leaders have the capacity to effectuate transformation inside an organisation, either favourably or negatively. Consequently, when confronted with a detrimental leader, it is essential to first recognise such destructive characteristics and subsequently mitigated to safeguard the integrity of the organisation.

References

  1. Chambers, H.E. (2009). My Way or the Highway: The Micromanagement Survival Guide, Berrett Koehler Publishers.
  2. Cho, I., Diaz, I.D. & Chiaburu, D.S. (2017). Blindsided by linearity? Curvilinear effect of leader behaviors. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 38(2),146-163. Doi: 10.1108/LODJ04-2015-0075.
  3. Delgado, O., Strauss, E.M. & Ortega, M.A. (2015). Micromanagement: when to avoid it and how to use it effectively. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 72(10), 772-776.
  4. Erickson, A., Shaw, B., Murray, J. & Branch, S. (2015). Destructive leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 4(44), 266-272.
  5. Gardanova, Z., Nikitina, N. & Strielkowski, W. (2019). Critical leadership and set-up-to-fail syndrome. 4th International Conference on Social, Business, and Academic Leadership, Atlantis Press.
  6. Manzoni, J.F. (2011). Stop being micromanaged. Harvard Business Review Blog Network.
  7. Pastel, T.A. (2008). Marine Corps Leadership: Empowering or Limiting the Strategic Corporal? Marine Corps Command and Staff Coll Quantico.
  8. Ryan, S., & Cross, C. (2024). Micromanagement and its impact on millennial followership styles. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 45(1), 140-152. DOI 10.1108/LODJ-07-2022-0329.
  9. Tavanti, M. (2011). Managing toxic leaders: dysfunctional patterns in organizational leadership and how to deal with them. Human Resource Management, 6(83), 127-136.
  10. Wendler, W.V. (2013). Micromanagement, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, School of Architecture. Higher Education Policy Commentary.
  11. White, R. (2010). The micromanagement disease: symptoms, diagnosis, and cure. Public Personnel Management, 39(1), 71-76. Doi: 10.1177/009102601003900105

Current Research Interest

Leave a reply

The focus of my research is to investigate strategies that leaders might employ to foster unity among individuals, even in the presence of various divisive variables such as intergroup conflict, physical separation, and hierarchical structures. In addition, I also research the correlation between leadership and emotions in the workplace. Specifically, I focus on how leaders may cultivate a favourable emotional environment among their staff. In order to investigate these research inquiries, I utilize a range of methodologies, such as field studies, laboratory and field experiments, archival studies, and content analyses.

How leaders bring people together around a common goal

My initial research focuses on examining how leaders can effectively convey a shared overarching aim or vision, and how they may successfully bring people together around this objective, even in the presence of various divisive issues. The degree to which leaders effectively communicate a shared objective is crucial for comprehending not only how leaders motivate others to accomplish the objectives, but also lies at the heart of leadership itself, as leadership is defined as the act of influencing others to attain a collective purpose. Through my personal research, I aim to comprehend the strategies that leaders can employ to express a compelling vision that fosters unity among individuals and drives them towards its realization. Additionally, I explore many factors that either aid or hinder leaders in their ability to bring people together under a shared goal. The reason for this is because mobilizing individuals around a common goal is not simply a matter of conveying the vision, but also requires considering various human and organizational factors.

A look at the ways in which leaders form an emotional culture in the workplace.

“Emotions are not a form of noise.” “They are data” – Sigal Barsade

Emotions not only provide insight into an individual’s psychology, but also serve as a complex tool for understanding the culture of teams and organizations. The focus of my second study stream is to comprehend the methods via which leaders establish an emotional culture inside their teams, departments, and organizations. My primary research focuses on how leaders can establish a sense of shared purpose within an organization regarding its future goals. Additionally, my secondary research examines how leaders can cultivate a common understanding among members of a social group regarding which emotions should be expressed or suppressed during collaborative work.

The current approach to leadership development is proving to be ineffective, indicating the need for a new strategy.

Leave a reply

An insightful and intellectually stimulating essay in the Winter 2024 MIT Sloan Review (accessible through a paywall with different pricing tiers) resonates with the ideas I have presented on this blog regarding the shortcomings of organizations in their selection of leadership development programs. The article titled “Leadership Development is Failing Us – Here’s How to Fix It” by Hannes Leroy, Moran Anisman-Razin, and Jim Detert presents evidence-based results and insightful recommendations.

The essay highlights that leadership development programs often fail to effectively enhance organizational capacities for many firms.

The selection and assessment of leadership development programs primarily rely on subjective preferences rather than objective measures of enhancing participants’ talents, fostering significant performance improvement, and facilitating robust career advancement.

One of my preferred lines is: “According to an executive’s observation, decisions regarding leadership development appear to resemble the online dating industry, where the act of swiping left, or right is primarily influenced by appearance rather than substance.”

The authors propose that in order to address the prevalent and ineffective approach to selecting leadership development programs, attention should be directed towards three key factors: vision, method, and impact.

  • Vision: Will participants enhance their leadership skills and be inspired to apply their acquired knowledge?
  • Method: Does the program present a level of difficulty that is intellectually demanding, and will the participants acquire knowledge and skills even if they experience discomfort due to the intricacy?
  • Impact: Can we expect alterations in behaviors?

You should feel discontented and exhausted by the unsatisfactory outcomes of your endeavours in developing leadership skills.

I appreciate the article’s recommendations for enhancing the process of selecting leadership development programs. This article should be periodically studied and cited as a valuable resource for discussing the topic of learning disabilities (L.D.). Executives, it is important for you to take responsibility for this mindset and ensure that your supporting functions (such as H.R., Learning and Development, and sponsoring managers) are also held accountable.

Additional pragmatic suggestions to enhance the leadership development ideas in the article include implementing sustained efforts in conjunction with coaching.

First: Leadership development initiatives must be consistently maintained. Cease the practice of providing single, isolated training sessions for leadership development without any follow-up or continuation. Do not presume that individuals will acquire leadership skills solely via an online course. Guidance, feedback, and time are crucial. If the experience does not provide this combination, it is a one-time occurrence.

Second: The sponsoring manager must possess a role that extends beyond simply granting approval for the bill.

The sponsoring manager must actively fulfil the role of a sponsor, rather than merely being responsible for approving the bill for payment. The sponsoring manager must possess a comprehensive understanding of the Vision, Method, and anticipated Impact as outlined by the authors above. Subsequently, it is vital for them to actively engage by providing guidance, offering prompt criticism on behavior, and fostering a cooperative environment to discover fresh prospects alongside the individual.

Third: Seek a comprehensive development opportunity. Evaluate whether the program provides specialized, evidence-based guidance, sufficient practical application time, constructive feedback and mentoring, and a collaborative learning environment for exchanging ideas and cultivating strategies to overcome challenges. If not, press the stop button and make a more diligent effort to choose the appropriate option. Alternatively, you can create the appropriate service on your own.

Fourth: Assess the long-term effects, for goodness’ sake. Enhance and refine initiatives to quantify the extent of influence. Direct your attention to the performance, cultural, and growth-oriented measures that are significant. Below are a few options to begin with: Key performance indicator (KPI) performance, successful achievement of goals, level of engagement, ability to retain employees, capacity to handle additional tasks, increase in critical thinking skills, impact on leadership, demonstration of effective leadership on a large scale, and other relevant factors. Ensure that measures are also established for the sponsoring managers. They play a crucial role in the success of these projects. Observe these measures. Adjust them as necessary. Incorporate them within the organization’s operational framework.

Summary for the Present Moment

This subject heightens my level of energy. There is nothing more revered in our profession than discovering methods to develop the abilities that drive our organizations towards achieving our vision and purpose. For many years, managers and executives have been delegating tasks to other departments and relying on training businesses that provide one-time services. Adhere to the instructions provided in the aforementioned article and use my ideas to introduce a practical and realistic perspective. Although it is sometimes claimed that we are all technological organizations in the present century, the truth is that our success and survival as organizations depend on having the most exceptional individuals. Begin exhibiting the qualities of a leader when it comes to the development of leadership skills.