Leadership Development - Best Practices
Leadership Development - Best Practices
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 318888 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
LODJ
28,5 Leadership development:
learning from best practices
Sheri-Lynne Leskiw and Parbudyal Singh
444 School of Administrative Studies, York University, Toronto, Canada
Introduction
Leadership development is becoming an increasingly critical and strategic imperative
for organizations in the current business environment. Recent historical events and
emerging trends emphasize the need to invest in the active development of leaders.
Despite the fact that executives are increasingly expressing the need to focus on such
initiatives, few are actively growing organizational leaders as part of their business
Leadership & Organization strategy. These findings are apparent in one study that found that while almost all of
Development Journal the organizations surveyed indicated the need to develop leaders, only 44 percent
Vol. 28 No. 5, 2007
pp. 444-464 actually had a formalized process to do so (Giber et al., 2000). As a result, these
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
organizations may not be adequately prepared to compete in the ever-changing
DOI 10.1108/01437730710761742 business environment. IBM learned this lesson the hard way and associated their loss
in market leadership with the fact that they stopped focusing on leadership Leadership
development in the 1980s (Ready and Conger, 2003). It is evident that organizations development
with a passion for growing the right leaders, appropriate organizational structures and
culture, and a strategic plan to implement leadership programs will be better prepared
for future challenges (Fulmer, 1997; Miller et al., 2001). The key purpose of this paper is
to systematically review the literature on leadership development and offer
organizational leaders practical advice on effective approaches to this issue. 445
Recent tragic events such as the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York
and Washington, and the Asian tsunami disaster have shed light on the fact that the
contributions of organizational leaders can be quickly terminated and organizations
must be in a position to appoint replacement leaders for the organization to continue to
move forward. Many organizations lost key executives who were on the planes or who
worked out of New York’s World Trade Center at the time of the terrorist attack,
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
including Sun Microsystems, Cisco Systems, Oracle and AON Insurance. Cantor
Fitzgerald, a bond-trading firm, lost about 700 out of its 1,000 World Trade Center
workers, including many top executives (Davis and Lucchetti, 2004; Greengard, 2001).
The New York Fire Department lost over 350 of its employees, but its leadership
succession plan helped it to replace many of its top leaders within days. In a less
dramatic instance, McDonald’s Corporation faced related challenges when they were
forced to replace their CEO twice within seven months due to sudden death and illness.
Fortunately, successors had been groomed enabling the business to continue with
minimal impact (Business Week, 2005). However, ensuring leaders are in place in the
event of a tragedy is by no means the only reason to focus on developing
organizational leaders and investing in “leadership insurance”. It is inevitable that
leaders will retire and/or move out to other organizations at which time their role may
need to be replaced. In fact, a recent study by Drake Beam Morin (2000) found CEO
turnover to be on the rise, reinforcing the need to ensure well-trained successors.
Organizations will also face increasing difficulties in filling leadership vacancies
with qualified candidates externally due to anticipated skill shortages in North
America and Europe. For instance, in Canada, it is anticipated that up to two-thirds of
the workforce will retire within the next two decades, with one-thirds projected to retire
in just the next few years (Brieger, 2004). In addition, the targeted age group (35-44
years of age) for senior leaders has a projected fifteen percent decline and this does not
even address the predicted premature burnout that will further shrink this candidate
pool (Giganti, 2003). In the USA, the number of older workers (age 55 and up) is rising
as baby boomers approach retiring; this figure is projected to reach 15.2 percent by
2010. Furthermore, the 35-44 age group is expected to decline by approximately 13
percent in the next decade (US Dept. of Labor Statistics, 2005)
Moreover, increased competition, both local and global, is forcing organizations to
be more adaptable and deliver quality products and services in a timely and unique
fashion. As a result, teams are more prominent and organizational structures are flatter
demanding stronger leadership skills at more levels within the organization (Giber
et al., 2000; Hernez-Broome and Hughes, 2004). Consequently, the increased presence of
teams in the workplace emphasizes empowerment resulting in a completely different
management role and an altered leadership style. Other changes contributing to a new
style of leadership include the increased need for strategic thinking to avoid
complacency, as well as coping with anticipated changes in the needs of the new
LODJ workforce (Brieger, 2004; Hatfield, 2002). Younger generations are inspired by growth
28,5 and development opportunities. Striving for a work-life balance, they typically have
with a less intensive focus on work than the preceding generations demanding a
different kind of leader (Hatfield, 2002). These changes point to a need for internal
processes and practices to ensure the required leadership skill-sets are built within an
organization.
446 Whatever the reasons for leadership development – in preparation of turnover, in
response to the increased number of jobs requiring leadership and/or in response to the
changing leadership style driven by competition, altered organizational structures and
changing demographics – organizations should be adequately prepared for such an
undertaking. While there is some literature pertaining to effective leadership
development methods, practices, processes, and systems (for instance, see Giber et al.,
2000; Hernez-Broome and Hughes, 2004), there is a need to consolidate these into a
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
comprehensive framework of best practices that can be applied and adapted to fit
organizational needs.
Thus, the main objective of this paper is to identify the best practices, processes and
systems in leadership development discussed in the literature through a
comprehensive analysis of publications pertaining to practices that could be
described as “best” in the leadership development area. Essentially, a “best practice” is
considered to be one that has resulted in positive outcomes for the organization and is
recognized by independent analysts as contributing to the organization’s performance.
This paper offers human resource management stakeholders, especially practitioners,
action-oriented advice that is based on the experience of other organizations, and for
which there is support in theory.
and clear understanding of what leadership means for that organization and how these
principles can be applied to guide leadership practices (Kesler, 2002; Zenger and
Folkman, 2003). This analysis typically involves looking at both external and internal
influences and perspectives.
External information is gathered regarding managerial tools, typical business
challenges, market trends and perspectives from leading edge thinkers (Beeson, 2004;
Fulmer et al., 2000). This provides a larger context for the internal analysis and brings
to light important information that may not be otherwise considered, including the
impact of forecasted trends such as globalization on effective leadership. Best-practice
organizations emphasize future trends in their analysis and use anticipatory learning
tools such as focus groups, strategic planning sessions and the Delphi technique to
increase awareness and consensus (Fulmer et al., 2000). Shell International ensures
they are up to date on the latest thinking through involvement with a Global research
group on leadership and training as well as working closely with consultants and
professors (Fulmer et al., 2000). Meanwhile, Illinois-based Abbott Laboratories
conducted extensive research to identify best practices and then made conscious
decisions to include and exclude certain practices after reviewing their effectiveness
and applicability within their particular culture (Giber et al., 2000). They also engaged
in partnerships with faculty members for program delivery in order to tap into
expertise external to the organization.
Ensuring an external perspective involves several issues: researching changing
trends and their impact on effective leadership, identifying and researching theoretical
perspectives, and benchmarking to identify what other organizations are considering
key to their perspective business areas. Developing leaders who think strategically can
actually be a competitive advantage, thus observing organizations known for effective
leadership development efforts can be priceless (Fulmer et al., 2000; Gordon, 2002;
Intagliata et al., 2000; Ready, 2004). In a study that provided in an-depth look at sixteen
best -practice organizations, four prominent leadership requirements emerged: global
leadership, strategic thinking, an appreciation for customer perspectives, and the
ability to manage change (Giber et al., 2000). Gordon (2002) provides a more extensive
list of typical critical leadership competencies for individuals; they must be:
trustworthy, avid learners, comfortable with change, innovation champions,
relationship builders, open to taking action, self-aware, be able to foster
development in others, and, oriented towards achieving results.
Although leadership needs should be grounded in research, an organization’s needs Leadership
cannot be determined solely by external analysis. Best-practice organizations typically development
conduct an extensive internal analysis with the key stakeholders to depict a clear
picture of leadership for their unique organization and culture. As Melum (2002, p. 12)
states, “the challenge and opportunity is to drive leadership results from organizational
excellence. The organization’s strategic direction and intent should define leaders,
instead of someone designing leadership in a vacuum and trying to imprint it on the 449
organization.”
Organizations need to look at the type of managers and career professionals needed
to achieve their objectives in a different market, economy, or perhaps even society
(Conger and Benjamin, 1999; Melum, 2002). Barclays Global Investors (BGI) held focus
groups with over 100 mid-level managers and associates and interviewed 25 top
executives specifically geared at revealing the critical abilities that needed to be
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
developed (Giber et al., 2000). At GE, the corporate leadership development team
frequently interviews company leaders around the world to gauge future business
needs and anticipated leadership competencies (Fulmer et al., 2000). The needs
assessment also should include a clearly articulated picture of the types of results
expected from ideal leaders (Hernez-Broome and Hughes, 2004).
Most best practice organizations, whose practices have been reviewed in the
literature, have developed their own competency model to define the behaviours of
successful leaders. The Bose Corporation actually developed three different leadership
competency models recognizing the different requirements for first line, middle and
senior management levels within their organization and aligning it with their business
requirement to build a leadership pipeline. Furthermore, they ensured that their core
values were defined and considered as an equally important factor in their
determination of an effective leader (Giber et al., 2000). Other companies, such as GM,
focus on specific level such as executives, and a particular competency area, such as
global leadership (Alldredge and Nilan, 2000).
2. Audience selection
Once specific leadership needs are defined in a best-practice organization, the
appropriate audience to develop is selected. Best-practice organizations do not
necessarily select the same level, position, or type of employee as the target of
leadership development. While some organizations focus on higher-level management
positions, IBM’s notorious “Basic Blue” leadership development program involved a
blended learning program for over 5,000 first-level supervisors (Bolch, 2001; Schettler,
2003).
However, despite the different audiences, there does need to be a clear connection
between succession plans, high potential employees and leadership development
initiatives (Charan, 2005; Redecker, 2004; Risher and Stopper, 2001). Furthermore, as
Fulmer and Conger (2004, p. 2) affirm, “by aligning succession planning and leadership
development, you get the best of both: attention to the skills required for senior
management positions, along with an educational system that can help managers
develop those skills.” Best-practice organizations provide a clear link between
succession plans and leadership development (Ibarra, 2005). It did not take SmithKline
Beechman long to understand this need as they initially underwent three distinct
initiatives of executive development, succession planning and a leadership competency
LODJ model only to find there was significant overlap. They amalgamated their initiatives
28,5 and began an integrated approach under one umbrella focused around leadership
planning (Giber et al., 2000).
Similar to the needs assessment phase, effective audience selection practices are
grounded in strategic human resource management theory. An underlying argument
of this theory is that a firm’s intellectual/human capital is a potential source of
450 competitive advantage, especially in an environment when other probable sources
(such as technology and marketing systems) can be quickly imitated. Thus, there is a
need to nurture and develop leadership talent that would serve the strategic purposes
of the organization. Such leadership development would be difficult for the competition
to mimic or replicate, thus enhancing the firm’s competitive advantage (Lado and
Wilson, 1994; McCall, 1998; Vicere and Fulmer, 1998).
Essentially, business needs should drive the efforts. A succession plan linked to the
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
It is theorized that there are two other organizational types – deterministic and
animated/biological – that are different from social systems. In these other systems
employees do not generally make choices that affect both means and ends (Ackoff,
1994; Ackoff, 1999; Ackoff and Gharajedaghi, 1996). From a systems theory
perspective, social systemic organizations would be ideal for leadership development,
since this would facilitate and support independent and purposeful decision-making by
leaders and the embedding of leadership development within the organization.
The process of embedding leadership development into the organizational systems
and culture begins with the initial needs assessment in which organizations should
have demonstrated a direct link to the business strategy, and thereby be consistent
with the values and mission guiding the organization’s culture. However, it needs to be
further embedded in the organization through shared ownership and accountability
across the different functions and organizational levels. In other words, one
organizational development person or particular function cannot have the sole
accountability for developing leaders. The accountability must be shared among the
CEO and executive staff, the leadership development function, line managers and
employees (Ready and Conger, 2003). Thus, the culture needs to be one that accepts
accountability throughout the entire business for leadership development to avoid it
being perceived as just another human resource management program or management
trend. As Melum (2002, p. 7) asserts:
As with quality management, strategic planning, and many other initiatives, there is a
tendency to treat leadership development like a program – a program that is someone
else’s job, and one that gets in the way of “real work”. To get beyond this pitfall and to
leverage its power, leadership development needs to be deeply embedded into the
organization.
Aligning appropriate systems such as performance management, rewards, succession
planning, as well as the incorporation of responsibilities into daily work can help
reinforce accountability in the culture (Kesler, 2002; Melum, 2002; Ready, 2004). At
SIAC, selection systems, succession plans, performance reviews and, to an extent,
compensation is tied to the leadership development program to make the connection
between the principle of leadership development and employees’ daily work (Giber
et al., 2000). At IBM, accountability at the line management level is accepted within the
culture as managers are fully engaged in identifying and developing high potential
employees and understand that their skill in leadership development impacts their Leadership
ability to attain more senior executive positions (Ready and Conger, 2003). development
Most organizations reviewed in the literature, including 3M and Colgate-Palmolive,
involved senior management and executives directly in teaching the course material.
Often, the CEOs will participate in some of the program delivery and show ongoing
commitment and attention to the process. This shared responsibility also means that
employees are responsible for their development path, and they are expected to apply 453
their learning to their work (Zenger and Folkman, 2003). The organization, however,
still needs to ensure a climate in which employees have the opportunity to develop
(Melum, 2002).
In addition to shared accountability, the acceptance of feedback must be
incorporated into the culture to encourage the continuous improvement of those
individuals being developed. Tools such as 360-degree feedback procedures, ongoing
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
on-line simulation exercises that reinforce their new skills, coaching or mentoring
relationships and planned development experiences such as rotational assignments
(Zenger and Folkman, 2003). Any particular learning experience has a larger impact if
it is linked to other experiences and when these experiences are part of a supportive,
thoroughly designed system (Melum, 2002).
5. Evaluate effectiveness
Best practice organizations are committed to evaluating the effectiveness of their
leadership development efforts. Although many organizations believe that what
cannot be measured cannot be valuable, it is argued that leadership development may
be the exception in that it is not measurable in quantifiable terms that dictate
assessment of capital expenditures but through asking the right questions of the
leadership programs (Ready and Conger, 2003).
There is a fairly large body of empirical research on the effectiveness of leadership
development programs, including two meta-analyses (Burke and Day, 1986; Collins
and Holton, 2004). A leadership development initiative that is evaluated effectively
would involve questions in terms of how effective the program is in fulfilling the initial
needs outlined in the assessment process wherein the program objective, leadership
characteristics, and the desired types of results expected were outlined and defined for
the organization. Its success, therefore, should be a measure as to how well those
results, or outcomes are achieved. That said, organizations are changing and so are
their associated needs. Therefore, need assessments should continuously occur as part
of the process in order to account for changes in the leadership capacity (Martineau,
2004). Furthermore, these needs and associated outcomes cannot be determined in
isolation but need to include all relevant stakeholders in order to accurately access the
need, agree on the outcomes related to success, and identify desired levels of “mastery”
in which organizations can benchmark performance against (Martineau, 2004).
The evaluations should focus on the impact leadership development initiatives have
on an organization’s ability to operate more strategically because of its leadership
capability. Some important questions that could be included in the evaluation are
(Ready and Conger, 2003):
.
Is the organization better able to fill key leadership roles when needed?
.
Is the organization building managerial commitment to the organizations
strategic direction?
LODJ .
Do managers behave more strategically?
28,5 .
Are inter company efforts more coordinated because business leaders now
understand how other businesses and locations function?
Essentially, the model suggests a pyramid of four levels of evaluations with each
consecutive level increasing the rigor and thoroughness of the evaluation. The first
level of evaluation in Kirkpatrick’s model measures the reactions of the participants in
the leadership development program, i.e. how they feel about the program itself. The
next level of evaluation intends to measure what the participants actually learned from
the development program such as the skills, knowledge and abilities they were able
take away as a result of the training. This evaluation typically occurs through some
sort of testing. The next level in the model involves the evaluation of how the
participant’s behavior actually changes on the job as a result of their participation in
the leadership development programs. The final and most comprehensive level of
evaluation in Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model proposes to evaluate the link of
these changed behaviours to organizational performance by reviewing the impact the
learning has on actual organizational results. Although the cost typically increases
with each level (Head and Sorenson, 2005), the return on investment and the end value
to the organization is best determined through the final evaluation stage of
Kirkpatrick’s model by measuring the programs impact on an organizations bottom
line results.
In gathering the necessary data to evaluate the effectiveness of leadership
development, multiple methods are recommended in order to increase validity. In
determining the appropriate evaluation method, an organization should consider the
unique objectives of the program and the level of desired outcome. Individual outcomes
of leadership development are best assessed by daily evaluations, end of initiative
evaluations, learning and change surveys and behavioral observation (Hannum, 2004).
Team outcomes are best determined though dialogue and focus groups, while
organizational outcomes are best determined through return on investments analysis,
document analysis, workplace statistics, customer satisfaction results, climate and
culture surveys as well as the analysis of organizational processes and systems
(Hannum, 2004). Furthermore, these tools should be intended not only to assess the
feedback and perspective from the participants but from their managers as well (Green,
2002). Colgate-Palmolive evaluates both participants and managers perceptions,
demonstration of skills learned through the participant’s ability to solve a realistic
business case, on the job behavior improvement and an impact on actual business
results as part of their evaluation process.
6. Reward success and improve on deficiencies Leadership
The final stage is to put the feedback from the evaluation to use. There will essentially development
be elements of the feedback that require celebration and those that require
improvements. Embracing both of these responses is important within leadership
development initiatives. Success in leadership development means that the whole
organization embraces the program. Managers who effectively build leadership
capability for their organization should be recognized and rewarded. As mentioned 459
previously, the managers at IBM know and understand that they will be rewarded
through promotion and opportunity only if they demonstrate an ability to build
leadership capability. Rewarding success is grounded in several theories, with
reinforcement theory being a primary one.
Reinforcement theory, sometimes called behaviorism or operant conditioning, posits
that an individual will repeat behaviors that are satisfying and rewarded (Skinner,
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
Conclusion
The organization of the existing literature into the six key areas defined above
provides a new consolidated step-by-step approach in leadership development. These
are the formal processes best practice organizations have in place to successfully grow
organizational leaders. They provide a simple yet meaningful approach for developing
leadership capability within any organization. Within each stage, details of the
best-practices have been further researched and reported along with specific
organizational examples. It is critical to ensure the appropriate program objectives and
organizational leadership requirements are jointly defined and a targeted audience and
supporting infrastructure are aligned with the development and implementation of an
LODJ entire learning system. Furthermore, an evaluation process to monitor effectiveness
28,5 and corresponding action to reward success and improve on deficiencies will lead to a
well-refined initiative, aligned with the specific needs of the organization.
Future research should focus on the size issue, since there is not much research
pertaining to the differences in leadership development initiatives between different
sizes of organizations. Most of the best practices organizations in terms of leadership
460 development programs appear to be large organizations that typically have more
capital to invest in these programs. However, small organizations need to develop
leaders as well. In fact, it could be argued that since smaller organizations typically
require employees to perform broader roles, the requirement for leadership throughout
the organization is accentuated. The cost of the existing programs illustrated through
the literature may not be practical for all sizes of organizations. More in-depth reviews
of how small and medium size organizations effectively develop their leaders at a lower
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
cost may prove to be very valuable. Furthermore, much of the literature and research
conducted focuses on an overview of practices and the perceptions from the
perspective of the Human Resources department. Participant viewpoints and
perspectives from the organizational leaders need to be incorporated into future
research in order to gather a more rounded viewpoint from all stakeholders.
Leadership development will continue to be a key organizational issue in the future.
An opportunity exists for organizations to employ the best practices explored in this
paper and develop a competitive advantage through leadership. Organizations that are
able to survive and compete in the ever-changing marketplace will be those that have
proactively and strategically prepared themselves for future challenges through
effective leadership development programs, practices, and systems.
References
Ackoff, R.L. (1994), The Democratic Corporation: A Radical Prescription for Creating Corporate
America and Rediscovering Success, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Ackoff, R.L. (1999), Re-Creating the Corporation – A Design of Organizations for the 21st
Century, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Ackoff, R.L. and Gharajedaghi, J. (1996), “A reflection on systems and their models”, Systems
Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 13-26.
Alldredge, M. and Nilan, K. (2000), “3M’s leadership competency model: an internally developed
solution”, Human Resources Management, Vol. 39 Nos 2/3, pp. 133-44.
Alldredge, M., Johnson, C., Stoltzfus, J. and Vicere, A. (2003), “Leadership development at 3m:
new process, new techniques, new growth”, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 26 No. 3, p. 45.
Anderson, J. (1987), “Skill acquisition: compilation of weak-method problem solutions”,
Psychological Review, Vol. 94, pp. 192-210.
Balkin, D.B. and Gomez-Mejia, L.R. (1990), “Matching compensation and organization
strategies”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, pp. 153-69.
Becker, B. and Gerhart, B. (1996), “The impact of human resource management on organizational
performance: progress and prospects”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39,
pp. 779-801.
Becker, B. and Huselid, M. (1998), “High performance work systems and firm performance:
synthesis of research and managerial implications”, Research in Personnel and Human
Resources Management, Vol. 16, pp. 53-101.
Beeson, J. (2004), “Building bench strength: a tool kit for executive development”, Business Leadership
Horizons, Vol. 47 No. 6, pp. 3-10.
Bolch, M. (2001), “IBM”, Training, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 76-7.
development
Brieger, P. (2004), “Boomers’ exit from workforce will open doors, analysts say: more positive
view”, National Post, p. FP7.
Burke, M. and Day, R. (1986), “A cumulative study of the effectiveness of managerial training”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 232-45. 461
Business Week (2005), “Succession screw-ups”, No. 3915, p. 84.
Cappelli, P. and Singh, H. (1992), “Integrating strategic human resources and strategic
management”, in Lewin, D., Mitchell, O. and Sherer, P. (Eds), Research Frontiers in
Industrial Relations and Human Resources, IRRA, Madison, WI, pp. 165-92.
Chandler, A. (1962), Strategy and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
Charan, R. (2005), “Ending the CEO succession crisis”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 83 No. 2,
pp. 72-84.
Collins, D. and Holton, E. (2004), “The effectiveness of managerial leadership development
programs: a meta-analysis of studies from 1982-2001”, Human Resource Development
Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 217-25.
Conference Board of Canada (2004), Hot HR Issues for the Next Two Years, The Conference
Board of Canada, Ottawa.
Conger, J. and Benjamin, B. (1999), Building Leaders: How Successful Companies Develop the Next
Generation, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Davis, A. and Lucchetti, A. (2004), “‘New’ Candor Fitzgerald now looks to compete: bond-trading
firm recovers from losses in the 9/11 attack, but electronic rivals are tough”, Wall Street
Journal, September 10, p. C1.
Day, D. (2001), “Leadership development: a review in context”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11,
pp. 581-613.
Day, D. and Halpin, S. (2004), “Growing leaders for tomorrow: an introduction”, in Day, D.,
Zaccaro, S. and Halpin, S. (Eds), Leader Development for Transforming Organizations:
Growing Leaders For Tomorrow, Eribaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 3-22.
Delery, J. and Doty, D. (1996), “Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:
tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, pp. 802-35.
Drake Beam Morin (2000), CEO Tenure At Risk Worldwide, Reports Drake Beam Morin,
available at: www.amgr.com/pdf/0200.pdf. 1-3 (accessed April 2005).
Dyer, L. (1983), “Bringing human resources into the strategy formulation process”, Human
Resource Management, Vol. 22, pp. 257-71.
Foulkes, F. (1975), “The expanding role of the personnel function”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 53, pp. 71-84.
Foxon, M.J. (1998), “Closing the global leadership competency gap: the Motorola GOLD process”,
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 5-12.
Fulmer, R. (1997), “The evolving paradigm of leadership development”, Organizational
Dynamics, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 59-72.
Fulmer, R.M. and Conger, J.A. (2004), “Developing leaders with 2020 vision”, Financial Executive,
Vol. 20 No. 5, p. 38.
Fulmer, R.M. and Goldsmith, M. (2000), “Future leadership development”, Executive Excellence,
Vol. 17 No. 12, p. 18.
LODJ Fulmer, R.M., Gibbs, P.A. and Goldsmith, M. (2000), “Developing leaders: how winning
companies keep on winning”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 49-59.
28,5 Giber, D., Carter, L. and Goldsmith, M. (2000), Linkage Inc.’s Best Practices In Leadership
Development Handbook, Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA.
Giganti, E. (2003), “Developing leaders for 2010”, Health Progress, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 11-12.
Gordon, J. (2002), “Using Business strategy to drive leadership development”, Employment
462 Relations Today, Vol. 28 No. 4, p. 61.
Goski, J. (2002), “A model of leadership development”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 31
No. 4, pp. 517-23.
Green, M.E. (2002), “Ensuring the organization’s future: a leadership development case study”,
Public Personnel Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 431-9.
Greengard, S. (2001), “Why succession planning can’t wait”, Workforce, December, pp. 34-8.
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
Hannum, K. (2004), “Best practices: choosing the right methods for evaluation”, Leadership in
Action, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 15-20.
Hatfield, S.L. (2002), “Understanding the four generations to enhance workplace management”,
AFP Exchange, , Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 72-4.
Head, T.C. and Sorensen, P.F. Jr (2005), “The evaluation of organization development
interventions: an empirical study”, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1,
pp. 40-55.
Hernez-Broome, G. and Hughes, R.L. (2004), “Leadership development: past, present, and future”,
Human Resource Planning, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 24-32.
Hofer, C. (1975), “Toward a contingency theory of business strategy”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 18, pp. 784-810.
Huselid, M. (1995), “The impact of human resource management practices on turnover,
productivity, and corporate financial performance”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 38, pp. 635-72.
Ibarra, P. (2005), “Succession planning: an idea whose time has come”, Public Management,
Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 18-23.
Intagliata, J., Ulrich, D. and Smallwood, N. (2000), “Leveraging leadership competencies to
produce leadership brand: creating distinctiveness by focusing on strategy and results”,
Human Resource Planning, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 12-23.
Kesler, G.C. (2002), “Why the leadership bench never gets deeper: ten insights about executive
talent development”, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 32-44.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1959), “Techniques for evaluating training programs”, Journal of American
Society of Training Directors, Vol. 13, pp. 3-26.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2004), “A T+D classic: how to start an objective evaluation of your training
program”, T þ D, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 16-18.
Lado, A. and Wilson, M. (1994), “Human resources systems and sustained competitive
advantage: a competency-based perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19,
pp. 699-727.
Lord, R. and Hall, R. (2005), “Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill”,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp. 591-615.
McCall, M. (1998), High Flyers: Developing the Next Generation of Leaders, Harvard Business
School, Boston, MA.
Marcus, M. (2004), “Preparing high-potential staff for the step up to leadership”, Canadian HR
Reporter, Vol. 17 No. 18, pp. 11-12.
Martineau, J. (2004), “Laying the groundwork: first steps in evaluating leadership development”, Leadership
Leadership in Action, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 3-8.
development
Melum, M. (2002), “Developing high-performance leaders”, Quality Management in Health Care,
Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 55-68.
Miller, L., Caldwell, K. and Lawson, L.C. (2001), “The leadership investment: how the world’s best
organizations gain strategic advantage through leadership development”, HRMagazine,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 152-3. 463
Peters, T. and Waterman, R. (1982), In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best Run
Companies, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, NY.
Pfeffer, J. (1994), Competitive Advantage Through People, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, MA.
Pomeroy, A. (2005), “Head of the class”, HR Magazine, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 54-8.
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
Further reading
Conger, J.A. and Fulmer, R.M. (2003), “Developing your leadership pipeline”, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 81 No. 12, pp. 76-85.
LODJ About the authors
Sher-Lynne Leskiw is a graduate from the Executive Masters Program in Human Resource
28,5 Management at York University, Canada. She has worked in several high-tech organizations
within a variety of Human Resources roles. She is currently heading up Human Resources at a
small software company, bringing to the role a fresh perspective of HR best practices and over a
decade of practical HR experience.
Parbudyal Singh (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Human Resources Management, School
464 of Administrative Studies, York University. Dr Singh’s research covers a broad array of
management issues, especially those related to the effects of the changing business environment
on human resource management and industrial relations. He has more than 40 refereed
publications, several in top journals such as Industrial Relations, Journal of Labor Research,
Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Relations Industrielles. He is listed in Marquis’s Who’s Who
in America (2003-2004). He has won several scholastic and teaching awards, the most recent
being the Atkinson Alumni Teaching Award, and the Atkinson’s Dean’s Award for Excellence
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
in Research in 2005. Dr Singh has worked as a Human Resources and Industrial Relations
manager in a large manufacturing company. He has also been a business consultant to many
organizations. Dr Singh is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
1. Belinda Dewar, Fiona Cook. 2014. Developing compassion through a relationship centred appreciative
leadership programme. Nurse Education Today 34, 1258-1264. [CrossRef]
2. Kathleen M. Matson. 2014. Revisiting the past, revamping the future. Nursing Management (Springhouse)
45, 47-51. [CrossRef]
3. Meshari Alwazae, Harald Kjellin, Erik Perjons. 2014. A synthesized classification system for best practices.
VINE 44:2, 249-266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Stavros Bekas. 2014. Evaluating leadership development in postgraduate medical education. Leadership in
Health Services 27:1, 31-40. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Richard D. Waters. 2013. The role of stewardship in leadership. Journal of Communication Management
17:4, 324-340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Catherine McCauley-Smith, Sharon J. Williams, Anne Clare Gillon, Ashley Braganza. 2013. Making
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)
sense of leadership development: developing a community of education leaders. Studies in Higher Education
1-18. [CrossRef]
7. Gina Grandy, Judith Holton. 2013. Leadership development needs assessment in healthcare: a
collaborative approach. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 34:5, 427-445. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
8. Diane Magrane, Deborah Helitzer, Page Morahan, Shine Chang, Katharine Gleason, Gina Cardinali,
Chih-Chieh Wu. 2012. Systems of Career Influences: A Conceptual Model for Evaluating the Professional
Development of Women in Academic Medicine. Journal of Women's Health 21, 1244-1251. [CrossRef]
9. Hardik Shah, Raj Gopal. 2012. Training needs analysis for bus depot managers at GSRTC. European
Journal of Training and Development 36:5, 527-543. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Curtis D. CurryBest Practices in Leadership Development 1-22. [CrossRef]
11. Gerri HuraExecutive Education 203-208. [CrossRef]
12. Busaya Virakul, Gary N. McLean. 2012. Leadership development in selected leading Thai companies.
Journal of Leadership Studies 6:10.1002/jls.v6.1, 6-22. [CrossRef]
13. Larisa Belinskaja, Rasa PaulienėOverview of the Current Leadership Theories: What it Means to Lead?
321-328. [CrossRef]
14. James Coloma, Carrie Gibson, Thomas Packard. 2012. Participant Outcomes of a Leadership
Development Initiative in Eight Human Service Organizations. Administration in Social Work 36, 4-22.
[CrossRef]
15. Aoife McDermott, Rachel Kidney, Patrick Flood. 2011. Understanding leader development: learning from
leaders. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 32:4, 358-378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Mary-Jo Romaniuk, Ken Haycock. 2011. Designing and evaluating library leadership programs:
improving performance and effectiveness. The Australian Library Journal 60, 29-40. [CrossRef]
17. Barbara Dexter. 2010. Critical success factors for developmental team projects. Team Performance
Management: An International Journal 16:7/8, 343-358. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Afroditi Dalakoura. 2010. Differentiating leader and leadership development. Journal of Management
Development 29:5, 432-441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Afroditi Dalakoura. 2010. Examining the effects of leadership development on firm performance. Journal
of Leadership Studies 4:10.1002/jls.v4:1, 59-70. [CrossRef]
20. Carolyn Ward, John Blenkinsopp, Catherine McCauley‐Smith. 2010. Leadership development in social
housing: a research agenda. Journal of European Industrial Training 34:1, 38-53. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
21. Tim Simkins. 2009. Integrating work‐based learning into large‐scale national leadership development
programmes in the UK. Educational Review 61, 391-405. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Royal Roads University At 22:48 08 December 2014 (PT)