RENAISSANCE LEADERS: GLOBAL TRENDS ANDEMERGING FORMS OF LEADERSHIP
INTRODUCTION
stAs we enter the 21 Century there are serious questions
arising concerning our capacity to deal with its
challenges. Based on a review and synthesis across a
range of literatures covering management, organisation,
leadership, and learning and development, and global,
social, business, and technology trends, this paper
identifies some of the issues, challenges, and
opportunities likely to characterise the early decades of
the new millennium. This new age will be increasingly
challenging in ways not before experienced. This suggests
that a new kind of leader and leadership are needed,
and this paper outlines the most compelling of current stthought on leadership qualities demanded of the 21
Century leader. A fair degree of consensus exists across stthe literatures on the 21 Century canvas and the kinds of
1
CHRISTOPHER C. KIM*
By
leaders and leadership that might there make their mark.
From the analysis of approximately 300 sources, eight
distinct, primary categories of competence and
capacity have been distilled:
2
*,** The Australian National University.
ABSTRACT
stConventional leaders and leadership of the past are insufficient to meet the demands of the 21 Century. As we enter the
new millennium, our world is characterised by unprecedented complexity, paradox, and unpredictability. Change is
rapid and relentless. Today's leaders face demands unlike any ever before faced. Standard leadership approaches that
have served us well throughout much of history are quickly becoming liabilities. Conventional wisdom regarding
leadership and many of its habits must be unlearned. The strong, decisive, charismatic, and independent leader and
leadership we have idealised, strived to be, depended upon, and longed for may prove counter-productive in the new stmillennium and undermine a sustainable future. The challenges and opportunities of the 21 Century call for a new type
of leader and leadership, indeed an entirely new and different way of thinking about leadership and of developing
future leaders. This paper explores the nature of the nascent millennium and the leader and leadership qualities and
capabilities expected to be crucial in the uncertain decades ahead. Eight general categories of leadership attributes
have been identified as essential for the future. Those who possess or are developing these competence sets are
Renaissance Leaders—individuals who are different and make a difference. A significant gap remains between current
leadership competencies and those needed in the future. Implications of this gap are discussed. One important finding
is that leadership development programs in industry and higher education have yet to refocus to produce the kind of
leaders needed. Suggestions for reform are offered.
Keywords: st 21 Century Leadership, Emergent Leadership, Global Trends, New Millennium, Leadership Development,
Leadership Competencies.
JAY M. HAYS**
1
2
We do not distinguish leader and leadership, suggesting that both can be characterised by the same qualities. We acknowledge, however, that “leader” sounds like an individual and may be confused with positional, hierarchical leadership; further, “leader” has traditionally been and continues to be treated in the literature as “the head” or top echelons of an organisation. We claim that leaders and leadership exist and are required at all levels of and throughout the organisation. This will be increasingly recognised as crucial in the evolving and emerging organisations of the new millennium.About 100 of these sources are included as references in this paper, the first
in a series of publications based on a larger research project.
1li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
· Social Engineer and Relationship-
Builder
· Leader as Integrator
· Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and
Ethical
· Capacity for Complexity and
Strategic Thought
· Emotional Intelligence and
Authenticity· Transformational Potency
· Service- Servant Leadership· Learnership-
Teacher
Leader as Learner and
While aspects of these competencies have been
recognised over time, others are recent. The attention
these competencies are receiving in both academic
and practitioner literatures may represent a shift in
leadership thought and practice, or what it is referred to as
“the leadership renaissance.” The synthesis of the stemerging views of leadership suggest that the 21
Century leader is personally more adaptive and resilient,
broader in perspective, and more proactive than his or
her predecessors. Importantly, the Renaissance Leader is
also more effective in cultivating these qualities in others.
Taken together, the Renaissance Leader is expected to be
more effective in the tumultuous and uncertain stenvironment of the 21 Century.
This paper consolidates diverse perspectives on the
leadership challenges of the new millennium, and offers
practical recommendations for developing leaders who
possess the competencies necessary for leading today's
and tomorrow's organisations and institutions. While the
original sources referenced in this paper are worthwhile
reading, often insightful and sometimes provocative, this
paper also distils and organises the vast range of
descriptions, objectives, issues, and recommendations
into one source of relevance and utility to academics and
practitioners. It contrasts conventional and emerging
notions of leadership, showing how evolving views and
practices of leadership correspond to shifts in larger
contextual and environmental conditions.
Having intensely researched the topics of leadership and
environment, it is the authors' view that the world is
dramatically different than ever before and, thus, that the
leadership challenge is entirely different. While threats
and challenges loom large, we are heartened by the way
leaders and leadership are beginning to be conceived.
Renaissance Leadership is very different. We are intrigued
by the question of which comes first: Is Renaissance
Leadership a consequence of environmental demands
and an evolving world view, or is The New Leadership—as
conveyed by the numerous sources cited in this
paper—promoting the revolution in leadership theory
and practice? We believe the answer to this question will
be revealed, perhaps in the coming decade. For now,
the answer remains obscured by a cacophony of voices
and a landscape shifting too fast to map.
1. Review of the Literature
1.1 Context
This study set out to determine what the leadership
requirements of the near-future are and how prepared
our organisations and institutions are to fulfil those
leadership demands. The authors thought it necessary to
explore a range of literatures touching on different, but
related topics. First, there are two future-oriented aspects:
a. Depictions of the future – what the authors refer to stherein alternatively as the 21 Century or the new
millennium. This is the environment in which leaders can
expect to find theirselves in the approaching decades;
and,
b. Descriptions and prescriptions for leaders and stleadership in the 21 Century—what the authors are
calling Renaissance Leadership. Here, they draw on
notable and influential authorities on leadership. By
exploring these two future-oriented subjects against the
context of relevant past and current leadership
paradigms we sought to reveal whether or not there were
any significant gaps in the theory and practice of
leadership, and to identify specifically what these gaps
and their implications might be. Specifically, are current
beliefs about and practices of leadership sufficient to stmeet the leadership demands of the 21 Century?
st1.2 The 21 Century
Most of the topics covered in the various treatments on stthe 21 Century trends the authors have reviewed the
segmented into five interrelated divisions:
a) technology,
b) globalisation,
c) diversity,
d) Knowledge Workers, and
e) uncertainty,
stAs we hope is clear from our overview of the 21 Century,
momentous changes are underway and more expected
that significantly impact on organisations and society,
and on those who lead them. Coinciding with these
li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 20102
RESEARCH PAPERS
changes in the environment are shifts in the ways leaders
and leadership are viewed and, thus, how they are
enacted. The 21st Century is a very different place than
were any centuries that preceded it. The leadership
landscape is entirely new, uncharted territory where
everyone is finding their way, somewhat tentatively. The
coming decades will be an interesting time for both
leaders and those they would lead.
1.2.1. Technology
Technology will increasingly be driven by global
competition: the need to do things faster, cheaper, and
better will only continue. It continues to change the nature
of business and will only accelerate the speed of change
and influence of other trends, such as making the world
economy more competitive (Van Opstal, 1998);
i n c r e a s i n g o u t s o u r c i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s a n d
internationalisation (Centron and Davis, 2008); increasing
knowledge work and value of knowledge workers
(Davenpor t, 2001; Lawler, 2001) ; expanding
telecommuting (Mamaghani, 2006; Matathia and
Salzman, 1998; Townsend et al., 1998) and may give
competitive edge to younger employees who are likely to
remain more technologically savvy than their older
counterparts (Boddie et al., 2007; Marston, 2007).
Advancements made elsewhere will be more readily
incorporated locally. Ideas – the great generators of
progress – will come from harnessing the collective
brilliance of a diverse workforce, some of whom may
never even physically be in the same space. None of this
comes automatically, however, or naturally. Leaders of stthe 21 Century are going to have to be consummate
creators of community, architects and bridge-builders
that bring people together and enable and inspire them
to do great things. They will need to be the role models for
overcoming the challenges and making the most of
diversity.
1.2.2. Globalisation
Globalisation, in large part, is an inevitable consequence
of advances in technology. Notably the internet and the
access it has provided to citizens the world over to
information and the connectivity it permits to people
virtually no matter where they are. True, softening of
regimes, borders, and trade restrictions are enabling
greater traffic of people, products, and ideas. The world's
increasing interdependence and interconnectivity will
continue to impact business and organisational life,
making everything more complex than ever before
(Centron and Davis, 2008; Maciariel lo, 2006;
Mamaghani, 2006; van Opstal, 1998; Rao, 2006). In the stglobalised early-21 Century environment enabled if not
driven by digital communication and media, we cannot
distance ourselves from these hotspots. Greater options
and opportunities may be offset by greater risk and
complication. There will continue to be vast migrations of
people and jobs, with jobs flowing to cheaper labour
markets in developing countries (Centron and Davis,
2008; Spreitzer and Cummings, 2001), and huge
immigration to developed countries (Centron and Davis,
2008; Hankin, 2005). Even managerial and professional
jobs are likely to be outsourced (Goldsmith, 2006). For
better or worse, we are al l connected and
interdependent. On a positive note, the coming
generations may experience an upswing in global
citizenship such as we have never seen, characterised by
acts of brotherhood and stewardship on a grand scale,
partially as recognition that we are all in this together,
harking to notions of “spaceship earth” popularised in the
60s.
1.2.3. Diversity
As technology fuels and enables globalisation,
globalisation, in turn, promotes diversity. The future
workplace will not be anything like it has ever been in terms
of the “mix” of employees (Helgesen, 2006). With evolving
values and lifestyles, longer life spans, improved health,
and other factors, the new worker looks, sounds, and acts
differently, expects more from his or her employer (indeed
from community and society), and is unwilling to accept
unfair treatment or unreasonable demands. Diversity in
gender, race, and generation, amongst other
differences, poses many challenges in addition to the
opportunities and strengths that “hybrid vigour” brings to
3
3 Buckminster Fuller published his book Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth in 1963. Kenneth Boulding presented his work “The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth” in 1966.
3li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
the workplace. Organisations will have to contend with this
mix, while attracting diverse employees in a world where
competition for talent makes recruitment and retention
more difficult than ever (Hankin, 2005).
With employment possibilities available to people
anywhere in the world, employers are going to have to be
even more attentive to serving their employees - catering
to needs, preferences, quality of life and work-life balance
issues, and professional development; and, in general,
creating workplace environments that are caring,
accepting, humanising, and offer more than just a pay
check. Migration, especially, is changing the face of
developed countries. It will account for dramatic
demographic shifts, changing the face of developed
countries forever (Centron and Davis, 2008). Generational
differences probably unlike ever before will exist in the
workplace (Hankin, 2005). Differences in age and the
respective values and attitudes and skills and experience
that accompany them will challenge workers and
organisations, and intensify potential conflict between
generations (Headington, 2001). Older and more
experienced workers are leaving employment (Tulgan,
2004), which has implications for management, as does
the swelling of youthful workers (Hankin, 2005; Marston,
2007). It is hard to predict what the trade-offs will be
between loss of experience and gain in adaptability.
There also appears to be a significant shift in what
employees seek and expect from work, from having the
best and newest technologies to maintaining Quality of
Life / work-life balance (Boddie, et al., 2007; Mamaghani,
2006; Matathia and Salzman, 1998) and work that
provides meaning and serves a higher purpose (Hankin,
2005).
1.2.4. Knowledge Workers
The authors are entering a new age, the era of human
capital (Lawler, 2001). The next social order will be a
knowledge society (Davenport, 2001). Here knowledge is
the key resource, and knowledge workers are the
dominant group and its most valuable asset (Teo-Dixon
and Monin, 2007). People business is the next
management frontier (Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski, 2007).
A people orientation will define the new leadership
(Covey, 2006; Glaser, 2006). Highly-skilled workers and
knowledge professionals will be in greater demand than stever, and employers in the 21 Century will struggle to hire
and retain them (Spreitzer and Cummings, 2001).
Knowledge professionals will be demanding. They will
make up their own minds as to how much of themselves
they will give to their work, according to how they are
treated and the opportunities they are accorded (Covey, st2006). In the 21 Century, organisational worth will no
longer, at least exclusively, rest in buildings, tools and
technologies, or Intellectual Property – permanent things
– but in people. Lorenzi (2004) notes that
Managers manage resources; leaders manage
people, who comprise the organization's one critical,
unique resource. Factories can be copied, as can
plans, ideas, systems, and other forms of resources.
Most resources are hardware or software; leadership
requires the management of 'know-ware'—people
and their unique cognitive skills, emotional capacities
and intellectual talents (p. 285).
The cliché “people are our greatest asset” will no longer
be rhetoric, but the essential reality. People will comprise
the crucial resource.
1.2.5. Uncertainty
With the complexity and speed of change only likely to
increase, uncertainty will define our lives. The future is
more unpredictable than it has ever been and the
planning window even narrower because of the
multiplicity of things to consider (quantity and kind of
variables) and the complicated nature of their
interrelationships, and the speed with which opportunities
and threats come upon us. This makes traditional
planning and preparation difficult, if not impossible
(Hinterhuber, 1996). We can, however, better learn to read
emerging trends and consider their implications (Day and
Schoemaker, 2008). The better we can foresee coming
challenges and respond to them confidently and
creatively, the greater our competitive advantage over
those who do not attempt to (Spreitzer and Cummings,
2001). While we may not be able to predict and control
events with much certainty, we can prepare ourselves to
li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 20104
RESEARCH PAPERS
contend with the unknown, what is referred to as the
frontier “over the horizon” (Whyte, 2004). To help
employees and future leaders equip themselves for an
uncertain future, we need to begin taking them out of their
comfort zones, while at the same time helping them
develop the coping skills and positive attitudes that will
enable them to navigate uncharted terrain (Day and
Schoemaker, 2008). In so doing, individuals become
more confident and competent at leading themselves,
and less dependent on external, superior authority. This is
no easy task.
2. The Leadership Gap
Drawing on the extensive research into emerging
impressions and expectations of leaders and leadership
juxtaposed against the backdrop of more mainstream
understandings, our view is that the gap between the two
is huge. Table 1, shows a comparative overview of
conventional views of leadership and those that appear
to be gaining acceptance – The New Leadership.
As the comparisons in Table 1 show, there is a substantial
divergence between mainstream and emerging views of
leaders and leadership. We speculate that individuals
Leader as creator and patron of meaning. The 21st Century leader sees it as his or her role to elicit meaning from work and circumstances and help employees and other stakeholders connect with that meaning. This is largely the vision, values, and purpose discussed so broadly. Work is seen as a most likely place for people to find needed meaning, purpose, and even community. At the same time, there is a groundswell belief that people will go above and beyond the call of duty for causes (work) they believe in.
à
Leader as executor. The leader’s task is to get the job done as efficiently and economically as possible. To manage, coordinate, and control effectively (or ensure these functions are carried out diligently). To take direction from superiors or the board of directors and implement accordingly.
Leader as proselyte of complexity. The leader of the new millennium is a student of and preaches complexity. Liberated by the fact that the world is too dynamic and complex for any one person to understand it, reduce its uncertainty, or make it behave, the new generation of leaders wi ll take pleasure in studying complexity and engaging in deep and meaningful dialogue with a wide range of enlightened and / or concerned souls to plumb the depths of emerging problems and opportunities and to consider best, not quickest or most economical solutions.
à
Leader as KISS apostle. The leader’s job is to “keep it simple, stupid.” Make communiqués and instructions as simple as possible; target the least common denominator. Employees and other stakeholders will be confused by and distrust complexity and see weakness in indecision.
The leader as servant and steward. Increasingly, leaders are being sought and lauded for their demonstrated values of service, altruism, and stewardship. These are people who care about others, the communities in which they work, and the planet we inhabit. Such dedication is of special importance today given the rate of resource depletion, environmental and ecological destruction, and the urgent requirement to focus on sustainability, not to mention the recurring instances of corporate greed that have spawned greater vigilance and emphasis on social responsibility.
àThe leader as instrument of shareholders. The primary responsibility of the CEO and other executives is to shareholders—to profit and ROI. The corollary is short-term gains (quarterly returns).
Leader as change agent. Consensus is that it is the leader’s role and responsibility to create changeable organisations – responsive and adaptive –and to envision and usher in change that keeps the organisation abreast of changes in the environment or, better, anticipates and proactive ly leads the organisation to contend with and capitalise upon emerging trends. This is the leader as “destabiliser.”
à
Leader as stabiliser. It is the leader’s role and responsibility to ensure employees and other stakeholders feel secure and confident with strategic policy and direction, to assure everyone that strong leadership is at the helm and capable of steering through whatever weather may present it. Consistency, reliabilit y, predictability, composure, and control are the catchwords.
The leader / leadership as a process. Increasingly, leadership is seen as a relationship and a dynamic process, less as a person or activity. Since leadership is not vested in a particular person or position, it is distributive in nature—everyone might have some. Ideally, leadership flows amongst people when, where, and how it is most needed. It is offered and received graciously and with best intentions. While not everyone wants or has the skills to lead, such an environment generates higher levels of commitment and performance than in strictly regimented, hierarchical systems, and creates unsurpassed future leadership capacity.
à
The leader as agent. The superior in any situation is the leader. It is this person’s prerogative, role, and responsibility to use his or her position and associated power and influence to get the job done through “leadership acts.” Accountability resides in the position. Accordingly, others are not required to have ownership, responsibility, or commitment exceeding that strictly prescribed by job description or role statement; nor are they generally rewarded for going above and beyond the call of duty, and, in fact, may be chastised for doing so.
The leader as equal. There is little dispute that The New Leadership is about empowering and enabling others to learn and develop, and, notably, to lead. The new leader does not see him- or herself as “superior” in a superior-subordinate relationship, but as an equal amongst others, all who have unique and different qualities and can and should lead as circumstances call for.
à
The leader as superior. By virtue of rank, title, or position, the leader is the authority—the one who challenges, inquires, advocates, controls. The posit ion of superior has been earned or conferred, and there are few positions at the top. While seldom stated, the inference is that anyone not in top positions is inferior or, at best, subordinate; as such, they do not lead, and, taken to its extreme, nor could they or should they lead.
The leader as a work in process. It is decreasingly thought of as a final or penultimate objective—when you’ve arrived, you’ve made it; rather a lifelong, continuous process of learning and development.
àThe leader as “made it.” It is a destination, not a journey. Leadership positions are about having attained rank, title, power, and influence, using them effectively; and, in some cases, working hard to retain them.
The leader as human It is increasingly recognised that leaders are human. It would be impossible to list the attributes of what it is that makes us human, but the point is that denying our humanity limits our own potential and distances us from those we would lead and inspire.
àThe leader as machine The leader is (should be) and must be perceived to be hard, cool, calm, and collected; objective, calculating, precise.
Emerging Views: The New LeadershipConventional Leaders and Leadership
Table 1. Comparative Leadership Modes: Conventional versus Emergent.
5li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
“schooled” in more conventional forms of leadership will
increasingly confront a workforce, peers, and other
stakeholders who hold views and expectations that
depart from conventional wisdom and norms. They may
find this cognitively troubling and practically problematic.
While we do not claim that the emerging trends are
better—that is, will be more effective in the long run—we
do not think the emerging trends will revert. For the present,
we are on a certain trajectory toward a more human type
of leadership and, perhaps, a more enlightened one.
3. Toward Renaissance - Unifying the New Leadership
Leaders and leadership have been portrayed and
arrayed in many ways by many authors. This present
paper strives to consolidate and distil the competing and
complementary perspectives on leaders and leadership
represented in the most current leadership literature. The
intent is neither to criticise nor rehash previous work, but to
build upon it. The outcome, the result of three years labour,
is a manageable set of distinctions, the eight sets of
leadership attributes introduced at the beginning of this
paper.
3.1. Learnership - Leader as Learner and Teacher
stThe leaders of the 21 Century are continuously learning
and developing new knowledge, skills, and capacities
(Ghani, 2006; Maxwell, 2008), and are committed to
helping others learn and develop, championing
individual, team, and corporate learning and
development (Ghani, 2006; Maciariello, 2006; Maxwell,
2008). Learning is an essential part of leadership as noted
by Kouzes and Posner (2001). Blanchard and Miller (2007)
assert that great leaders are always concerned with how
they and their people will continue to grow and develop
(Table 2) Bennis (2003) states that the key essential
competence for leaders is adaptive capacity, the quality
that “allows leaders to respond quickly and intelligently to
relentless change” (p. xxii).
Learnership equates the role of the leader as teacher –
helping employees and other stakeholders to learn and
grow as human beings, public servants, professionals,
and leaders (Brown and Posner, 2001). Ulrich, et al., (2008)
liken leaders who strive to develop others to good parents.
Spendlove (2007) states, for example, that “coaching
and mentoring are key competencies of leadership” (p.
411). The Leader as Learner and Teacher is humble and
remains open to others and their ideas (Weick, 2001;
Bailey, 2006), and is not judgemental (Scharmer, 2008).
Learning leaders foster meaningful dialogue and
conversations amongst organisational members (Martin,
2007) and with all stakeholders. They are open to
challenge and critique (Ghani, 2006), and able to learn
from mistakes (Spreitzer and Cummings, 2001). They know
their shortcomings (what they, their people, and the
organisation do not know and what capabilities are
needed) and resolutely work to close gaps and anticipate
future needs. They develop organisational learning
capacity, instil values and mindsets for learning, and build
long-term sustainability (Helgesen, 2006). They are always
vigilant to recognise beliefs, assumptions, and habits that
may be impeding performance or learning and change.
To them, unlearning (Akgün, et al., 2003; Akgün, et al.,
People development is a high priority and is not supplanted by every crisis or new challenge that arises. Professional development is high on meeting agendas.
Staff rotate through positions and sections on a reasonable schedule so as to ensure everyone develops corporate knowledge.
Strategic measures are in place for promoting learning and innovation, including rewards and recognition for idea generation and “lauding failures.”
Performance reviews emphasise professional development, and individuals are placed in positions where they can grow.
Every employee has a professional development plan clearly linked to corporate, team, and individual needs and aspirations.
Executive team places high priority on its own learning and development, and this is widespread knowledge through the organisation.
Budget for professional development is generous and sacrosanct.
Learning remains at the forefront of community focus and organisational activity.
Indicators
li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 20106
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 2. Learnership
2007; Cegarra and Rodrigo Moya, 2005; Sinkula, 2002) is sta strategic imperative. The 21 Century leaders are not
master of all they survey, but are students of all they
confront. And, as Weick (2001) observes: leadership is
learned, so keep learning!
3.2. Service – Servant Leadership
Twenty-First Century leaders are servants and stewards
first, to the public they represent, their employees, and
other designated key stakeholders (Beaubien, 1998;
Maciariello, 2006). Servant Leaders demonstrate ideals
and behaviours of service, including “putting others first.”
First responsibility and priority are others, not self
promotion, aggrandisement, or comfort (Fisher, 2004;
Rao, 2006). Servant Leaders consistently show high levels
of faith, respect, trust, and compassion to all they serve
(Hays, 2008).
Followership (Baker and Gerlowski, 2007; Rosenau, 2004;
Townsend, 2002; Townsend and Gebhardt, 2003), a topic
that continues to grow in importance, will assume more
precedence in the next ten to twenty years, as
foreshadowed by Kanungo (1998). Its increase in
prominence mirrors the shift toward more collaborative,
power-sharing, and decentralised models of leadership.
You cannot have leaders that “let go” without followers
who “step up” to the task of self-management. Where
management research focus in the past has been on
leaders and leadership and their affects, we are likely to
see a greater focus on followers and effective followership
in the coming decades (Bjugstad, et al, 2006),(Table 3).
stThe 21 Century leaders lead from the heart, as well as the
head (Bezzina, 2000; Freiberg and Freiberg, 2004; Love,
2005; Whyte, 2004). Effective leadership starts on the
inside with a servant heart, Blanchard (2000) tells us, then
moves outward to serve others. Part of the courage
needed as we go forward is the strength to show one's
heart, one's human side, including a measure of stvulnerability. The service-oriented leaders of the 21
Century build a culture of community (Goldsmith, 2006),
shared purpose, and service (Rao, 2006), and treat staff
and other stakeholders as equals and partners (Stallard
and Pankau, 2008), and with utmost dignity (Fairholm,
1996). They show concern for individual well-being and
the health of the organisation (Beaubien, 1998), including
seeking work-life balance (Stallard and Pankau, 2008) and
ensuring justice (Rao, 2006). Abshire (2007) noted that true
leaders provide servant leadership. Wheatley (2004)
emphasised that the leadership the world needs today is
servant leadership. Blanchard and Carey (2006) argued
that servant leadership is required to restore faith, trust,
and respect in modern business. Hays (2008) stressed that
the teacher as servant was necessary to bring about
major reform in the way universities educate the leaders
of tomorrow, an education that prepares individuals for
the challenging times ahead. Clearly, Servant Leadership
values, principles, and practices will increasingly define
enlightened leadership and the expectations we have for
our leaders.
3.3. Transformational Potency
The leaders who present transformational potency are
forward-thinkers who remain focussed on the long-term.
They have a clear vision of future possibility and help all
stakeholders see the future and, providing strategic
direction, the ways and means of fulfilling it (Bell, 2007;
Blanchard and Miller, 2007; Fisher, 2004; McCormick and
Davenport, 2004). Ulrich et al., (2008) claim that effective
leadership is related to projection into the future and
definition of a context where organizations and their
7li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Indicators
The organisation monitors its service charter and sets and strives to meet increasingly high levels of service.
Decisions and courses of action periodically reviewed againststanding principles are shown to “measure up” well.
Where exigencies arise not covered by regulations and policies,decisions are made with respect to “the greater good,” not based onease or popular opinion (Spreitzer and Cummings, 2001).
Senior managers and executives are rated on review, and are shown to have consistently high ratings. (Those whocan’t or won’t are let go.)
“service” at everyEmployees rate their units and the organisation highly on communteamwork, and other measures of corporate health.
ity,
Service is stressed in all communiquperformance discussions.
és and in all meetings, includingEvery employee is fulfilling his or her potential and developing leader and good corporate citizen.
as
Table 3. Service - Servant Leadership
people can be successful. They also suggest that
effective leaders should be strategists who “envision a
future state that creates or responds to opportunities”
(p.26). Bryman (2007) agrees, finding that clear strategic
vision and direction and communicating these well are
two of the thirteen key leadership effectiveness
behaviours found in his extensive review of the literature
(Table 4).
The leaders with transformational potential are inspired
and inspirational. They spread energy, excitement, hope
and belief; they animate people to act (Rao, 2006; Weick,
2001). This is very much about meaning-making, helping
people make sense of their world and to find meaning
and value in what they do, their contributions to the
organisation and to something bigger than they and even
the organisation are (see Raelin, 2006). They keep
focused on the highest possible future for staff (Scharmer,
2008), help them realise their potential, and want them to
be fulfilled. Buckminster Fuller (cited elsewhere herein) was
a leader who focused on the best possible future – what
the world should be like (Gabel and Walker, 2006). Weick
(2001) notes that such leaders are improvisational. Not
fixated on formality of structure or process, they are willing
to try new ways of doing things. They thus are adaptive
and promote adaptability. Helping people become
adaptive is needed when businesses and communities
must change to thrive, when current ways of doing things
won't suffice or are unsustainable (Heifetz, 2006).
Enlightened transformational leaders, however, aren't
blindly focused on the future and change. They also
understand and honour the past and the present, and
appreciate what must be taken forward (Bell, 2007).
The leaders with transformational potential understand
strategic and operational aspects of change, and ensure
change is undertaken positively – in ways that achieve
corporate outcomes, build capacity, and promote
employee welfare. This is not about change for change
sake, but about making work a more productive and
fulfilling task and making the organisation a more
sustainable and worthy enterprise. They enlist, enthuse,
and engage people in change agendas; and everyone
feels a valued part of the change (Martin, 2007).
Scharmer (2008) says of such leaders that they connect to
the deepest forces for change by opening the heart. One
must feel the potential to be gained through change.
In se r v ice o f cont inuous improvement and
transformational change, the leaders of the 21st Century
are willing and able to transform themselves, and create
an open and nourishing environment wherein staff and
other stakeholders can transform themselves and their
work. They build corporate capacity for innovation and
change; create “space” for new and different ideas
(Martin, 2007) and invite people into that space to learn
and to share (Scharmer, 2008). Such leaders seek diverse
experiences (Martin, 2007) and create cultures where
diversity of thought and practice are promoted.
3.4. Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
Twenty-First Century leaders know themselves as well as
they know their people (Fisher, 2004); they represent
themselves as they really are and encourage others to
“be themselves” (Scharmer, 2008). They understand their
own emotions and accept the emotionality of their staff Indicators
All employees have links to corporate vision and change agendas their individual role descriptions and performance agreements.
inLeaders at all levels are charged with responsibility for leadineffectively, rated, and accorded appropriate training and development.
g change
All members of the executive team assess themselves ontransformational qualities and undertake professional development andcoaching, as needed.
Managing organisational change is seen as a crucial capacity andexpertise is continually developed through training and developmentalexperience.
There is a framework for conceiving organisational change anddeveloping change competence throughout the organisation.
The organisation has and follows a robust roadmap for organisatitransformation that includes evaluation and incorporates lessons learnt.
onal
Links are established with government and private organisationsinvested in future thinking, including universities and other scientificinstitutions.
Foresight reigns: current problems and priorities are not permitdetract from the requirement to think forward.
ted to
Corporate vision (future state) is clear and compelling, emphasiall meetings and in all communiqués; corporate change and otherinitiatives are all linked to vision.
sed at
li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 20108
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 4. Transformational Potency
and other stakeholders. They display and develop
empathy (Bailey, 2006; Kakabadse, et al., 2008).
Foremost, they are self-reflective and encourage others
to practice reflection. They are self-aware; authenticity
begins with self-discovery (Bailey, 2006). Being deeply
self-aware, enlightened 21st Century leaders connect to
their deepest sources of self and will (Scharmer, 2008;
Ulrich, et al., 2008). We would expect this to be
experienced as extremely empowering (Table 5).
Twenty-First Century leaders are characterised by a deep
sense of purpose, engagement, fulfilment, truth to core
values, and meaningfulness (Barendsen and Gardner,
2006). They help others find meaning and fulfil their
dreams (Goldsmith, 2006). People are probably at their
most committed best when purpose and endeavour are
so deeply connected (Markow and Klenke, 2005). We
believe that emotionally intelligent, authentic leaders of
the new millennium are honest and open about who they
are, and their motives, values, desires, and concerns (see
Sarros, 2003). Whyte (2004) notes that authenticity is the
product of “courageous conversations” one has with
oneself, probing honestly into sensitive areas others
neglect, such as how readily and ably one changes, what
one resists facing, or why one does what one does or does
not do.
Emotionally intelligent and authentic leaders know and
play to their strengths; they compensate for shortcomings
by surrounding themselves with capable advisors,
mentors, and subordinate leaders. “Vigilant leaders
surround themselves with a smart, dynamic executive
team that is always on the lookout for new opportunities,”
Day and Schoemaker (2008; p. 46) emphasise. They use
emotions constructively and positively, maintain
composure in stressful and challenging circumstances,
and understand others' emotions. Thus, leaders of the new
age “need to be human and authentic; often admitting
to not knowing but wanting to learn and find out” (Nixon,
2003; p. 164).
3.5. Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Thought
Twenty-First Century leaders see the big picture and
accept that everything is interrelated, appreciating that
action and inaction have profound social and
environmental impacts and implications. They
understand the nature of dynamic complexity and help
others learn to understand and cope with uncertainty and
to become more responsive and adaptive to complex
challenges (Martin, 2007). Capitalising on intuitive,
divergent, and synthesising thinking, the strategic leaders
of the 21st Century are able to adapt and innovate more
dynamically in f luid circumstances than their
predecessors who sought stability (Graetz, 2002). Such
leaders understand that seemingly small indications of
change in the environment can have drastic
consequences for the organisation (Day and
Schoemaker, 2008; Montuori, 2000), and they are
constantly scanning over the horizon and around the
corner for threats and opportunities.
They see the big picture and understand potential
challenges to the success of the organisation, and seek
counsel from advisors and subordinate leaders who
understand and capably contend with context (Frohman
and Howard, 2008; Spendlove, 2007). Montuori (2000)
asserts that capable leaders in times of turbulence and
uncertainty possess and rely on complex conceptual skills
Indicators
Members of the executive team have composure. Any executive displaying “temperatures” above a healthy levelmust show how he or she is endeavouring to bring heat to acceptable levels.
“thermometers” showing their
Employees undergo various assessments and training and may havementors or coaches assigned to help them understand and value whothey are as people; to help them close the gap between how they seethemselves and how others see them, and to help them continue todevelop as individuals (authentic selves).
All team leaders and above are assessed semiIntelligence, the results of which are discussed in performancemanagement sessions and development plans agreed and put into effect.
-annually on Emotional
Rewards and Recognition for individuality and authenticity aredeployed.
Reflection is are asked to reflect as part of the appraisal process. Teams undertakeshared reflection when conducting progress checks and projectdebriefs. Coaches and mentors use reflective processes and tools inworking with individuals and teams.
“part of the way we do things around here.” Employees
Realistic and meaningful measures are taken to monitor corporatehealth, with results publicly displayed and all employees involved inactivities to sustain or improve health.
9li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 5. Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
and abilities. They anticipate problems and opportunities
and prepare for them by building capacity (Higgs, 2003).
They need to possess foresight and be forward-thinking to
capitalise upon emerging trends (Johansen, 2009;
Maciariello, 2006).
Such leaders are able to “tune into” relevant topics, “tune
out” the noise, and act at the right time (Gabel and
Walker, 2006; p. 40). They are able to penetrate
conflicting and ambiguous masses of symptoms, trends,
possibilities, and problems and distil what matters, put
things together in ways that make sense, and take
appropriate courses of action—the synthesising mind
(Gardner, 2007). They also have the presence of mind to
make quality decisions in the midst of complexity,
differences, and tensions (Thomas, 2006) and are able to
reframe hopelessness as hope (Johansen, 2009). They
are comfortable with fluidity and chaos; reduce hierarchy
and control (Slater, 2001); accept, even legitimate doubt
and uncertainty (Schwandt, 2005; Weick, 2001). Leaders
and those led must be open to not having all the answers
(Senge, 2006). Tomorrow's leaders will have less time for
planning and forecasting; they must be nimble, agile,
and learn through and while doing (Spreitzer and
Cummings, 2001), which is different from traditional
leadership that has always put more emphasis on thinking
things through before acting (Johansen, 2009, p.115).
3.6. Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical
Twenty-First Century leaders see wisdom as the only
salvation for the future. They seek to deepen their own
wisdom and develop deep pools of wisdom throughout
the organisation (Hays, 2010). It is not about being clever,
successful, or impressive, but doing the right thing for the
greater good (Hays, 2007). They know their values and
motives (Blanchard and Miller, 2007), and conduct all
affairs in accordance with a moral code and set of
upstanding values and principles (Fairholm, 1996). They
place virtue and values at the centre of decisions and
behaviour (Heifetz, 2006). They show courage in doing the
right things (Bailey, 2006), even when hard and unpopular,
or what might be called hard love. They can be
“uncompromising” and “outspoken” when it comes to
matters of principles and values (Fairholm, 1996). Abshire
(2007) maintains that such leaders – “true leaders” –
speak up based on what they believe. Lorenzi (2004)
describes the “prosocial leader,” someone who leads for
the social good—the “collective utility.” Such leaders'
“intentions, visions, and goals are positive ('pro'); they
create or add value” (p. 283).
Leaders as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical are the role models
for staff and other stakeholders. Bryman (2007) found that
leaders as role models are an important aspect of
mentoring and staff development; being trustworthy and
demonstrating personal integrity are linked to their
capacity to be effective role models. Beaubien (1998)
declared that such leaders serve as the role model for Indicators
White Knights are impaled.4
Employees at all levels are involved in / engaged with crossand inter-organisational groups and initiatives.
-functional
Time is set aside to allow people to think. Extra time is built and deadlines to enable people to best understand challenges andopportunities and to do the job right.
into tasksSpaces exist and forums are provided to allow people to work andplay together.
All senior managers and executives undertake courses with a“complexity college” to develop systems thinking and big picture skills
What may seem extraordinary and unnecessary measures are takento engage staff and other stakeholders in collaborative problem-solving,decision-making, and planning, building more capable people andensuring better solutions.
Executives require of all proposals that they incorporate a compsystems view to reduce the tendency to over-simplify and to increasethe likelihood of identifying solutions that will work.
lexSenior managers and executives prepare themselves for uncertainfutures through scenario and contingency planning. Learnings are builtinto planning processes and training and development priorities.
4The White Knight is the expert who single-handedly solves problems. Like the knights of old, this manager or consultant rides in to save the day. While they remain stattractive, White Knights are anachronistic in the 21 Century. They are as misguided as they are honourable. White Knights thrive on crises and the respect and
admiration they accrue as heroes. While beyond scope, here to elaborate, this creates a vicious cycle involving crisis, expert solution, and disenfranchisement. This is why the wise leader “impales” White Knights. The lesson is not that courage is unwarranted or that chivalry is dead, but that single acts of expertise are unsustainable. The courage, knowledge, and skill of the knight need to be transferred to team members and other stakeholders, boosting their individual capabilities and the overall capacity of the organisation to solve problems or implement needed change.
10 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 6. Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Though
professionalism and ethics. Barendsen and Gardner
(2006) elaborate: leaders must demonstrate exemplary,
unwavering ethical leadership, especially in the complex,
g loba l env i ronment characte r i s ing the 21s t
Century—they must “stay the course” to provide the role
models for staff. Leading by example is also a theme in
Gardner et al (2005) who stress the importance of leaders'
modelling “of positive values, psychological states,
behaviours and self-development” (p. 358) in influencing
followers and promoting their healthy development.
3.7. Leader as Integrator
Twenty-First Century leaders are inclusive and involving
(Martin, 2007; Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski, 2007), and
unifying: architect of coherence. They help employees
and other stakeholders see where and how the
organisation fits in the bigger picture; where and how they
fit in or relate to the organisation, and how their attitudes
and behaviours contribute to its important mission
(Goldsmith, 2006); why things are done as they are or
should be done differently. The Leaders as Integrator help
people find meaning and purpose with respect to the
organisation (Beaubien, 1998; Driscoll and McKee, 2007;
Markow and Klenke, 2005), and find themselves and their
ideal roles (Cober, Hacker, and Johnston, 1998; Stallard
and Pankau, 2008).
Meaning-making is a key leadership role (Raelin, 2006):
leaders fulfilling this role help employees get the most out
of working together, often finding answers that were
always there, inherent strengths that may have been
overlooked or neglected. Inclusiveness is unifying diverse
parts into a meaningful whole (Kuczmarski and
Kuczmarski, 2007). Fairholm (1996) went so far as to say
that the leader's primary role is as “whole-maker,” creator
of “oneness” and community. The New Leadership is
about helping people feel connected—to others, to
meaning and purpose, to something higher or more
transcendent than a job (Driscoll and McKee, 2007;
Markow and Klenke, 2005; Raelin, 2006).
Leadership, Alexander (2006) notes, is the collective
activities of all members devoted to purpose and task; it is
the result of collective interaction. Leaders as Integrators
work assiduously to ensure everyone works together in a
coordinated, unified way toward shared purpose,
objectives, and rewards. Ulrich et al., (2008) support
Alexander by saying,
“When employees can actively participate in
deciding where you are going, they will help you
Indicators
Awards, honours, and recognition are given to employees and othestakeholders who uphold highest ethical and virtuous standards ofbehaviour as judged by peers. Such awards carry as much prestige andmerit as do any awards for performance or productivity.
rIndividuals at all levels of the organisation are acknowledged f“living” corporate values and principles.
or
Decisions and policies are set based on principles and values.
Qualities and values are manifest in corporate statements of vispurpose, ideals, and objectives.
ion,
The executive team is willing and able to assess themselves agaicorporate values, principles, and priorities, and confident that they aredoing well and / or genuinely improving.
nstPrinciples and values are manifest in role descriptions andperformance agreements, and in performance appraisals and rewardsand recognition.
Principles and values are stressed in all communiqumeetings.
és, includingThere is an annual wisdom award for individuals and teams, and aculture of commitment to award (and win) the honour.
There is a widespread feeling of moving forward together.No one feels isolated or “left behind.”
There is a palpable sense of team. There are high levels of collaboration and all manner of working interdependently.
There is a high level of respect for the organisation and what it doesand of trust for the organisation’s leadership.
Everyone knows where they fit. Any employee can explain what he orshe does, why, and how it fits into the bigger picture.
Employees or outside observers do not speak of rhetoric or spin incorporate communications, but of reality… truth, good intention, transparency.
Executive communiqués are forthright and as personal as possible. There is high congruity between informal communications and the glossy public affairs ones.
The executive communicates consistently, frequently, and effectively with staff and other stakeholders about things that matter: directions, priorities, values, etc.
Indicators
11li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 7. Leader as Wise, Virtuous and Ethical
Table 8. Leader as Integrator
make a better decision about where you are going
and help make sure that you get there” (p.44).
We are moving increasingly quickly toward global
democracy; the leader of tomorrow must encourage
and exploit the power of equality and freedom (Slater,
2001). Workplaces are expected to be more democratic,
but they will become so only if relationships amongst
people at work change and the relationship people have
with work changes (Driscoll and McKee, 2007). The Leader
as Integrator assures people find their place—a
contributing role that is valued, fulfilling, and continues to
evolve as individuals themselves develop and have more
to offer.
3.8. Social Engineer and Relationship-Builder
Leadership is relationship, Kouzes and Posner (2001) write.
Elsewhere they have pointed out that success in leading is
wholly dependent on the ability to build and sustain
productive relationships (Kouzes and Posner, 2006). The
future world is inclusion; the leader's role is to make it
happen and get the most out of it (Helgesen, 2006;
Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski, 2007). As Social Engineer
and Relationship-Builder, the leader of the 21st Century is
master connector and conduit, facilitating and
encouraging all staff and other stakeholders to network
and collaborate within and without the organisation
(Adler, 2007; Ghani, 2006; Johansen, 2009; Martin, 2007)
and build and utilise networks (Day and Schoemaker,
2008; Goldsmith, 2006). Johansen (2009) writes,
The leader of the future will be less controlling, since
there will be fewer things they can control. They will
also be more engaged with others, since connectivity
will be required to make the future. Everyone is part of
a network. Leaders are nodes, and the best ones are
hubs that form, nurture, and grow networks that stretch
far beyond the individual leader (pp.18-19).
Here, the 21st Century leader sees opportunities to
connect people and ideas that might not normally have
cause to come together. The crucial task is to share power
and promote shared ownership and collective effort
resulting in greater capability and commitment and
producing more sustainable solutions. Brooks and Brooks
(2005), for example, advocate that creating learning
community can be ideal in order to add value to and
increase performance of organizations. They remark,
The world is changing too rapidly. Leaders can no
longer just respond to change; they need to be able
to anticipate it, adapt, be flexible, and change
direction when necessary to meet market conditions,
demands, and crises. Organizations need to foster
collaboration. They need to work with people to
improve their ability to share knowledge and to help
them understand how they learn and how they use
and share information and knowledge (p.30).
Shared leadership and empowerment is the leadership
model of the future; the future organisation is all about
effective teamwork and collaboration (Greenberg-Walt
and Robertson, 2001). Leadership in the future will be
increasingly about leadership throughout the
organisation, at all levels (Spreitzer and Cummings, 2001).
While the need for individual leadership will probably
never d i sappear, ca l l s fo r democracy and
empowerment seem increasingly justified. In their review
of the literature, Eddy and VanDerLinden (2006) conclude Indicators
Staff receive on-going / advanced training in “relationship management” and teamwork and collaboration.
There are visible and effective Communities of Practice and SpecialInterest Groups within and across business lines and with indust ry partners.
All staff are encouraged to “branch out,” enter into dialogue with staff in other units / locations and with people in other organisations to exchange ideas and cultivate opportunities for collaboration. 10 – 15% of individual work time is set aside for this and an account established to fund visits and other expenses.
“Competitors” are re-evaluated as “collaborators” and partners.
Awards and recognition are slanted towards team achievements andother successful collaborative efforts.
Managers are rewarded and promoted based not on individual achievements but on their outreach initiatives and success in promoting partnering and collaborative efforts amongst their teams.
All managers receive training in leading collaborative projects.
The executive team periodically examines and “redraws” its business boundaries, geographic, political, and operational.
Awards and recognition are provided to individuals and teams who“break the box”—who come up with ways of working more collaboratively and exploiting networks, partnerships, and otherrelationships.
12 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Table 9. Social Engineer and Relationship-Builder
that leadership is increasingly defined not by position or
hierarchy, but understood as relationships amongst
people. The leader's role is to compile an integrating
vision tapping into the power of the collective (Kouzes and
Posner, 2006). We-centric leadership, Glaser and Pilnick
(2005) and Glaser (2006) note, is about sharing power; it
involves inclusion, support, development, learning, and
nourishing that enable and lead to co-leadership and co-
creation. On the way there, the 21st Century leaders
decentralise decision-making, and respects and value
staff judgement and ability (Stallard and Pankau, 2008).
They build ownership and adaptability amongst people.
The idea of one right leader must be done away with
(Heifetz, 2006): everybody must develop leadership
potential.
3.9. Terrain and Trajectory
We do not claim that our leadership representation is the
best or the last. There is some greying of the lines between
and across our eight dimensions. It was hard for us to
always find a precise and distinct fit for the many and
varied depictions we have found in the literature.
U n e q u i v o c a l p r e c i s i o n a n d d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s
notwithstanding, we are confident that most of the
attributes described by authors on emerging forms of
leadership have been included in our eight sets. The eight
dimensions are distinctive and encompassing enough to
provide researchers and practitioners alike a useful way of
thinking about leaders and leadership. On the whole, we
present leadership that is quite different than that ever
previously conceived. We cannot yet know whether or not
Renaissance Leadership will solve global problems
substantially better than leadership of the past or lead to
an era of enlightenment such as we have never seen. We
can with certainty, however, predict that if leadership
continues on its current trajectory that the world as we
know it will change dramatically.
4. Leadership Development
4.1. Context
In an effort to discover best practice in leadership
development, the authors sourced over 100 articles and
research papers dealing centrally with leadership or
management development and / or management
education where leadership or management was a focal
concern. After reviewing relevant literature, what we can
say is that (a) much has been published, (b) there is
considerable overlap amongst that which has been
published, and (c) there is little that we would describe as
particularly novel, inspired, or compelling (with some
prime exceptions included in our review).
It may be that leadership development is a behemoth
industry, fairly conservative, well-established, and slow to
change. It may be that the consulting companies,
corporate universities, and business schools have got it
right. There is certainly much being done in terms of
leadership and management development. We have
seen estimates of expenditures in the billions (Beddowes,
1994; Hartman, Conklin, and Smith, 2007; Ready and
Conger, 2003), with some individual organisations
spending millions annually on leadership development
(Weiss and Molinaro, 2006). Dramatically, Connaughton,
Lawrence, and Ruben (2003) go so far as to say that
“corporations waste between $5.6 and $16.8 billion each
year on ineffective leadership development programs”
(p. 46). We have also seen some practical, progressive,
and ambitious efforts (Nixon, 2003; Shefy and Sadler-
Smith, 2006). But, despite a chorus of calls for more
integrated, continuous, and holistic development
strategies (Boyatzis and McLeod, 2001; Hernez-Broome
and Hughes, 2004), mainstream development efforts, on
the whole, do not appear to be keeping pace with
emerging views of leaders and leadership (Doyle, 2000).
The major disconnect between Renaissance Leadership
and companion development initiatives may be
explained by the fact that the compendium of 21st
Century leadership competencies is complex. These
competencies, which tend to be intangible and
subjective, do not lend themselves to the standard
training course or university classroom, as many
traditional leadership development programs do
(Cooper, et al., 2005). Becoming more authentic, for
instance, may require more time, deeper and intense
experiences, greater breadth of situations and
environments, and more capable facilitators and
13li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
coaches than allowed for by most current formats,
venues, and budgets. They may also pose greater risk to
and demand more courage of the participants of such
programs and the organisations that source and fund
them.
The easy development subjects are offered extensively
and well enough. These are the subjects with
“packageable” course content consisting of discrete
knowledge bits and easily-demonstrated skills. One of the
underlying drivers for such practical courses is that they
are measurable. Corporate sponsors can readily assess
return on training investment. This is one of the
characteristic requirements of the contemporary
leadership development movement as evidenced in
numerous research papers from the field (see Pernick,
2001 and Ready and Conger, 2003, as examples). Such
training is also easy to cost.
Ironically, courses and programs addressing the simpler
leadership development tasks pose a complex of
insidious problems. In part, those courses and programs
deceive participants and organisations into believing that
meaningful leadership development is occurring, while
diverting funding that could be devoted to more effective
leadership development. They detract attention from the
big picture and undermine its importance by focusing on
peripheral and simplistic issues. Thus, they lead to
scepticism and derision amongst participants and
prospects and become self-reinforcing, as a result of the
“training as reward” phenomenon, the visibility of
graduates demonstrating evidence of training,
satisfaction ratings on course feedback, and other
dubious indicators. In other words, they pander to the
“quick fix” mentality and undermine the real complexity of
leadership and the leadership development task.
Of course, corporate-wide training offers advantages
such as creating shared language and experience,
fostering networking and relationship-building, exposing
participants to other parts of the business, and
embedding use of new techniques and business
process—all valid benefits. But one must ask whether
these reasons merit the spending of limited leadership
development dollars. Given the complexity of the world
we live in and the problems we face, simple approaches
to leadership development are insufficient, at best, and
quite possibly counterproductive. It is time we recognise
this fact and begin demanding more of program
developers, providers, and participants.
4.2. Management Education / Higher Education
One need not look far to find criticisms with higher
education, in general, and management education, in
particular. Criticisms generally centre on the lack of
education's relevance and often point to particular
deficiencies such as ethics and moral development,
reasoning and critical thinking (Huber, 2003). While
debate on the value of higher education, per se, is
beyond the scope of this paper, the authors happen to
believe that a little education goes a long way – and the
more the better. This notwithstanding, more often than
not, relevance critics generally decry the preparedness of
graduates to enter the professional workforce smoothly,
quickly catch their stride, and begin productive
work—work that is increasingly team-based and requiring
high levels of inter-personal skill (Morrison, et al., 2003).
Universities must “lift their game.”
In the review of several dozens of scholarly articles on
higher and management education that we thought
might be of relevance to this paper, the authors conclude
that, on the whole, management education fails to
contribute much to developing leaders of the future who
possess the attributes needed by the 21st Century. Worse,
in some cases, management education is counter-
productive in this regard, as exemplified by:
·Perpetuating independent study and competition over
collaboration and teamwork.
·Promoting passivity and dependence, as opposed to
the fostering of autonomy and initiative.
·Subtly or not-so-subtly discouraging students from
challenging ideas and authority or taking risks, while
encouraging them to follow instructions and rules.
·Rewarding “right,” mainstream answers and behaviour
rather than promoting unconventional, out-of-box
thinking, what's needed for creativity and innovation.
·Perpetuating the power status quo—teacher is the
14 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
authority; the only one whose views count.
These and other classroom dynamics undermine
development of leadership competencies for the 21st
Century. What management education does well – like its
industry counterparts – is prepare the analysts and
functional specialists of the future. This does allow
graduate to find jobs and to begin or advance their
careers. But is does not prepare them to work in the
tumultuous environment in which modern managers and
leaders operate. Higher education and management
and business schools can and should be doing more to
prepare the next generation.
4.3. The Leadership Development Gap
Industry and higher education are doing a fair job of thpreparing leaders for the 20 Century, but not the 21st. We
may think of a history of failed leadership development
programs; and there may remain a harbouring of belief
amongst executives that leadership cannot be taught.
While there is some agreement that leadership can be
learnt (not taught) (Allio, 2005), many believe that learning
leadership takes considerable time and may require
confronting and rebounding from difficulty and, possibly,
failure in the “crucible of experience” (Thomas, 2008).
Specific problems with past and some current leadership
development initiatives include that they are simplistic,
disunified, and unintegrated with or difficult to translate to
the real work context (Doyle, 2000). They often promote
development of functional knowledge and skill (and may
be fun and rated highly by participants), but what they
learn should not be confused with leadership. When
training and courses do promote development of
relevant leadership knowledge and skill, the job,
managers, and their organisational culture may
unwittingly work against them applying their new abilities.
The gap is significant. The eight sets of Renaissance
Leadership qualities represent a daunting omnibus of
competencies. Many of these emerging competencies
are new and different from the skills, knowledge, and
abilities – ways of being – ever widely thought previously to
be important aspects of leaders and leadership.
Compounding this problem was the generally-held belief
that individuals were born with such traits; you either had
them or you didn't. There has been a gradual trend away
from this narrow view of leaders toward one that
increasingly holds that leaders are bred, not born. This
means leadership can be taught (or at least learnt). At the
same time, however, we confront an increasing
recognition of the world's complexity and uncertainty,
and that the leaders of tomorrow must possess
sophisticated capacities to lead our organisations,
institutions, and nations. Moreover, there is a growing trend
toward democracy, egalitarianism, and empowerment.
Employees and citizens expect to have a voice, and are
more equipped to express it. Never has it been as possible
or more important for the governed to be self-governing.
The implications of this are profound. In the modern, stglobal organisation of the 21 Century, everyone is not
only entitled to but must demonstrate leadership. There is
much work to be done to enable the workforce to
develop and exhibit leadership. And, it is not just people
development of concern. Organisations and institutions
must change to accommodate a more capable
workforce, or their efforts will be stymied. Current leaders
must change the way they lead to ensure the next
generation of leaders is being developed now.
4.4. Leadership Development Reform for the 21st
Century
Having explored leadership in the context of the 21st
Century and having revealed substantial gaps in
leadership and leadership development, the important
question becomes what can we do to reduce the gap?
Clearly, we cannot continue to prepare future leaders as
we have done in the past. Our focus on both content of
leadership development programs and targets for
leadership development has missed the mark. We can
and must change the way we are preparing the next
generation of leaders. This involves who participates, who
delivers, what is delivered and how. The authors do not
believe that the solution is increasing the budget for
leadership development, at least not exclusively. What is
needed is a wiser use of the resources available.
Also in desperate need of change is the “tick the box”
mentality that sees leadership development as
15li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
administration and something to be managed in discrete
bits: scheduling and running participants through training
courses or packaged programs. Similarly, we do not
advocate measurable ROI on leadership development
initiatives as many currently do, as this leads to simplistic
and short-term development objectives, strategies, and
measures rather than meaningful, encompassing, and
long-term behaviour change. Effective leadership
development is not something that HR or external
providers do, it is something in which we are all involved
and for which we are all responsible.
Renaissance Leadership capacities such as authenticity,
service, transformational potency, and holistic thinking do
not lend themselves to “stand-alone” professional
development or single university courses. Deepening
appreciation for and ability to demonstrate such
competencies must be seen more as a journey than a
destination, gradual growth rather than instant behaviour
change. This is not to say that individual courses cannot
provide introductory or even more-advanced awareness
and skills. Courses, seminars, and workshops can be very
effective if complemented by a variety of leadership
development activities across a curriculum, and
embedded or fully integrated into “the way things are
done.”
Effective leadership development courses employ and
embody the principles, values, tools, and behaviour
desired. Participants should experience as realistically as
possible what it is they are meant to learn. For example,
instructors and facilitators should model collaborative
behaviour, facilitating shared decision-making and
giving participants substantial responsibility for success of
the course. When they see what it's like for participants
(subordinates) to have a significant voice in what they do
and how they do it, they are likely to reproduce this
behaviour themselves on the job. Of course, this is just one
example of creating an environment wherein individuals
begin acquiring requisite awareness and skill. To be fully
genuine and effective, every task and lesson should
represent the ideal and real. While this might be
impractical, trainers and instructors should consider how
each and every task or lesson could better reflect one or
more 21st Century competence. Indicative guiding
questions include:
· How can the complexity of this problem be
revealed?
· How can this task build a sense of service?
· What are the relationship-building opportunities
inherent in this situation?
· How can we rethink the job such that participants
have more chance to exercise creativity and
latitude?
· How can this project be used to help individuals find
out more about themselves and each other?
· What are the potentials in this activity for participants
to discover and express themselves authentically?
· How might we reveal the many perspectives
possible on this particular issue?
The point is that the range of 21st Century competencies
cannot be learned overnight. Nor is it the case that
ever yone can master al l of the renaissance
competencies thought necessary of 21st Century
leaders. But everyone can develop in each of these
areas. While the competencies may be hard to teach,
they can be quite fun and interesting to learn, and the
importance of development in these areas should not be
underestimated.
The pie chart, Figure 1 reflects one way that an individual's
status with respect to renaissance leadership can be
displayed. Each of the eight segments represents one of stthe 21 Century competency sets. Individual measures
can be ascertained employing the thermometers
presented in the conclusion to this paper. Using this pie
chart with ratings in each competence set, we see that
L
SL
EQ&A
TPCC
&ST
WV&E
I
SE&BB
L
SL
EQ&A
TPCC
&ST
WV&E
I
SE&BB
16 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Figure 1. Pie Chart Showing relative
the designated manager is well along her development
path and fairly well-rounded, having appreciable levels of
attainment in each segment, or competence set. She
has particular strengths in Emotional Intelligence and
Authenticity (EQ&A) and Integration (Leader as Integrator
– I), with room for improvement in Service – Servant
Leadership (SL) and Wisdom, Virtue, and Ethics (WV&E).
Lower scores in these two areas may be more a function
of values and aspirations the manager has than any
assessment from her manager or other associates. She
may feel the need or desire to develop in and
demonstrate more of the qualities associated with service
and wisdom. Discussing results with managers and peers
helps clarify expectations and normalise ratings. Such
dialogue sets the stage for projects and learning tasks that
will help individuals capitalise on their strengths and
develop in other areas.
Arrival at this point already indicates that an organisation
has come a long way, showing both commitment to
leadership development and sophistication in program
implementation. There first needs to be a general
awareness of the importance of these competencies
across the organisation. This can start with statements of
philosophy and values, but must be reinforced constantly
through word and deed. Then, employees at all levels
need to undergo continuing education, suited to their
personal attainments and positions in the organisation. All
organisational systems and practices need to be aligned
with the competencies so that they are continually
monitored, shaped, and rewarded, and over time
become part of the fabric of the culture. Each
organisation may want to adapt and adopt the
competencies in their own unique ways. Having a battery
of operationalised competencies could help ensure that
the right people are being recruited, hired, developed,
promoted, and retained. The indicators provided for
each of the eight sets of attributes in Section 3 might be a
useful place to start.
4.5. Development Strategies
In reflecting on the leadership development strategies
included here, program designers and evaluators should
carefully consider the leadership qualit ies the
organisation (or graduates) need today and in the near
future. Realise also that we have included development
strategies only for the emerging leadership qualities
sought. While they may not apply to every organisation
across all industries, these leadership qualities are both
generally applicable and widely thought needed in the st21 Century. In addition to these, the organisation may
already have or still need to develop strategies for more
conventional leadership development and for the
specific operational discipline / functional areas required.
Table 10 presents the eight dimensions of Renaissance
Leadership and corresponding leadership development
strategies. While some of the dimensions and / or their
attendant leadership development strategies might be
more appealing to readers than others, or thought to be
of more utility to a particular organisation or leader,
careful thought should be given to selection. If anything, stthe Renaissance Leader of the 21 Century is well-
rounded, not one-dimensional; human from every angle
and enlightened in his or her many facets. This being the
case, choosing one dimension or single development
strategies would be insufficient. For simplicity or
accountability, program managers might seek to narrow
the development focus or limit the breadth of strategies. It
would be natural, for example, to see each dimension as
a stream. Different leaders could be placed in various
streams, as suited to their developmental needs. This,
however, is too much like the professional development
on offer: discrete and fractured, with little relationship
17li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Leader
as
Servant
Capability and
Strategic Thought
Leader as Wise,
Virtuous,
and Ethical
Emotional
Intelligence and
Authenticity
Transformational
Potency
Social Engineer
and
Relationship -
Builder
Leader as
Integrator
Leader as
Learner and
Teacher
The New LeadershipCurriculum
Leader
as
Servant
Capability and
Strategic Thought
Leader as Wise,
Virtuous,
and Ethical
Emotional
Intelligence and
Authenticity
Transformational
Potency
Social Engineer
and
Relationship -
Builder
Leader as
Integrator
Leader as
Learner and
Teacher
The New LeadershipCurriculum
Figure 2. Renaissance Leadership Integrated Curriculum.
amongst training courses and less to the workplace.
Figure 2, below, shows Renaissance Leadership as an
integrated curriculum. Leadership development for the st21 Century needs to be as systemic and integrated as
possible in order to produce leaders who encompass and
embody the eight dimensions.
What we are suggesting is that businesses and universities stconsider all eight dimensions of the 21 Century leader as
an integrated and continuous program, and structure
leadership development accordingly. One way to do this,
and building on the strategies listed above, would be to
pick and choose one or more strategies from each of the
eight dimensions for any given individual. Such latitude
18 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
Every employee has a service commitment as part of his or her annual plan of at least 15% of time. Service commitments can be within the organisation (e.g ., leading efforts that might not normally be in the individual’s job purview, such as running a club with a service connection), but emphasis should be on the local community (Big Brother, hostel visits, teaching / training).The organisation has at least one strategic objective that is al truistic / service related, appropriate to the size of the organisation and its industry.Values and principles of service / Servant Leadership are integrated at every level, from corporate values statement to individual performance plans.Every university major has at least one course on service / Servant Leadership and every course has some component (that might be assessable).Course credit is awarded by institution of Higher Education for supervised projects and work experience of a service nature.
Service – Servant Leadership. The leader as servant and steward.
Reflective journal-writing.Group / team shared reflection on experience.Training in Emotional Intelligence.Incorporation of EI into performance management system (professional development plans and appraisals) along with coaching and / or mentoring.Incorporation of an emotional / reflective component in individual and group projects.Incorporation of EI into corporate “health checks” and employee surveys.
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity. The leader as human.
Leaders at all levels of the organisation have and periodically update learning and development plans.Executives’ plans are posted on the organisation’s intranet site. Shortfalls and what they are doing to overcome them are there for everyone to see.Leaders at all levels have learning roles and teaching assignmen ts, which might include training, facilitation, or mentoring.Organisational Learning objectives and activities are visible and focused.The CEO or delegate is Chief Learning Officer; mandate and agenda are clear and progress closely monitored.
Learnership – Leader as Learner and Teacher. The leader as a work in process.
Leadership Development StrategiesRenaissance Leadership
The organisation has and runs a “complexity college,” a centre of excellence or institute offering advanced training in the science and practice of complexity and systems thinking.Universities offer courses and majors in uncertainty, emergence, chaos, and complexity leading to certificate or degree.All proposals and business cases require a systems perspective, including discussion of short-versus long-term costs and benefits, not just in terms of the business but i ncluding the community or larger environment as well.All students have to take at least one course on sustainability or ecology and environment.All courses have at least one unit (topic, chapter, etc.) on sustainability or ecology and environment.In selection, organisations weigh formal coursework in complexit y topics as “highly desirable.”
Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Thought.Leader as proselyte of complexity.
Every organisation should have a change curriculum, whether or not there is an on -going change program (implementation). Larger organisations might have a “change college” and might even host individuals and teams from other businesses. Ind ividuals might pass through several ranks, earning certificates or credentials, each with as sociated responsibilities in change management.Everyone needs to learn how to develop visions and facilitate vision development. Every individual should have a personal vision at least partially related to his or her team or organisation’s vision, purpose, and objectives.Universities need to offer programs in change management and transformational leadership, awarding certificates and degrees / credentials, as appropriate. A basic course in change / change management must be a part of every degree program.All students should have one or more courses or major projects i nvolving change or implementation of some initiative, and that offers some leadersh ip experience.Coursework offerings should include at least one course where st udents have to undergo some personal transformation, and where they learn the stages of change people go through. Such courses must include a reflective component, and may need to be facilitated by professionals with advanced skills. This model can and shoul d be adopted by industry as well.
Transformational Potency. Leader as change agent.
al lows for personal preference and program
requirements, while not diluting the overall curriculum.
Everyone involved – learner, manager, administrator, and
facilitator – would be using the same language and
working toward the same overall outcome: well-rounded
leaders with requisite skills, knowledge, and attitudes for
the new millennium.
Conclusion
The Future is Here
Imagine just for a moment a world characterised by the
leadership we have described here, where leaders of
businesses, institutions, and organisations of all types really
serve their employees and other stakeholders first, and
demonstrate unwavering commitment to stewardship of
the organisation, the community, and the planet. Where,
leading from the heart and soul as well as the head, they
bring out the best in everyone and ensure every individual
feels centred and connected, and whose contributions
are valued. Where problems are solved not with stop-gap
measures or counterproductive solutions that erode faith,
trust, and posterity, but sustainably and compassionately,
with the widest, most genuine consultation and in the
interests of the greater good.
This is the vision of our future shared and touted by leading
minds today. Not only does this vision seem worth
pursuing, but it may be our best, if not only hope. Whether
perceived as an ideal, a pipe-dream, or a necessity, we
do not have to look far to find a disparity between the stdescriptions and expectations of 21 Century leadership
and the reality of leadership as it actually is at present.
Despite considerable and compelling agreement that a
new leadership is both possible and desirable, we have
some distance to travel before we attain it.
Summary of Important Points
A number of issues in this paper of relevance to industry
and community leaders, practitioners involved in
leadership development, and management educators
and researchers have been raised in this paper. These
include:
· Leading through times changing more quickly than we
can observe and interpret them is one of the great
leadership challenges of the new millennium. This has
significant implications for leading and the development
of leadership, and for conceptions of organisation.
Current leaders must learn to be sensing at the farthest
reaches of the known and exploit our collective
19li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
All leaders and managers undertake training in team-building, collaboration, strategic partnering, building and sustaining Communities of Practice. As appropriate, running one or more of these groups is included in duty statements and assessed as part of the appraisal process.All leaders and managers undertake training and have as part of their professional development plans and performance appraisal process courses in shared decision-making, empowerment, and group problem-solving.Awards and recognition are offered to individuals and teams who spearhead initiatives to partner or collaborate across the organisation or with other bus inesses and organisations.Leadership positions are rotated so everyone has a chance to develop leadership skills and learn more about the business.Competition is downplayed amongst individuals, while team and collaborative efforts are encouraged and rewarded.
Social Engineer and Relationship-Builder. Leader as community-builder. The leader as equal. The leader / leadership as a process.
All leaders and managers undertake training in inclusion and facilitation, including such topics as how to build consensus, involvement and engagement.All leaders and managers undertake courses / training in communications, including speechcraft / public speaking. Communities of Practice flourish within which members dialogue concerning organisational “meaning-making,” looking for opportunities to highlight and further develop the organisations purpose and values.
Leader as Integrator. Leader as creator and patron of meaning.
All students have to take at least one course on ethics and / or corporate social responsibility.All courses have at least one unit (topic, chapter, etc.) on ethics and / or corporate social responsibility. Could be on the philosophy of virtue.Organisations and communities sponsor wisdom awards. Individual s, teams, business units, and organisations compete for the prestigious honour of winning.Organisations identify wisdom criteria, offer training, include as professional development and performance appraisal objectives and measures.People are selected for advanced development and positions based on demonstrated virtuous, wise, and ethical behaviour.
Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical. Leader as peacemaker.
Table 10. Leadership development strategies keyed to the eight dimensions of Renaissance Leadership
intelligence (Hays, 2010) to interpret and respond to
changes before they overcome us.
· Fiver major, interrelated trends of the 21 Century were
highlighted that will impact upon organisations and
society at large, and provide the context for leaders and
leadership in the coming decade: technology,
globalisation, diversity, Knowledge Workers, and
uncertainty.
· The ability to envisage possible futures is a crucial quality
of thinking that leaders will increasingly need in the new stmillennium. Not only do leaders of the 21 Century need
to be visionaries – the best leaders have always been so –
they need to take visioning to new levels to conceive of
the inconceivable. Never has the need to be creative
and innovative been so important.
· Not only must our leaders be able to anticipate
possibilities and discern emerging trends, but they will
need to identify those of most concern or opportunity.
Moreover, they wil l need to be consummate
communicators, leading others to see future possibilities
st
and to forge visions themselves. Individual eloquence will
always be admired and will sometimes be necessary, but
the greatest communication challenge and opportunity
is dialogue amongst people. The leader's task is to
connect people in meaningful ways and encourage
open exchange.
· The leader of the 21 Century will have to be able to
mobilise people to undertake tasks in uncertain, rapidly-stchanging environments. This is where the 21 Century
leader will bring all his or her assets to bear to encourage
and inspire, to involve and engage as leaders in the past
have not had to do.
st· The effective leader of the 21 Century is whole and
leads with heart, head, and soul. Such authenticity and
wholeness touch others, those who work for, with, and
above him or her, partners, and other stakeholders.
· Twenty-First Century leaders are global citizens who
embrace diversity, straddle continents, and penetrate
complexity, knowing how to make the most of every
opportunity that presents itself. These are renaissance
st
Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and EthicalThe 21st Century leader sees wisdom as the only salvation for the future (survivability and sustainability); seeks to deepen his or her own wisdom, and develop deep pools of wisdom throughout the organisation. It is not about being clever, successful, or impressive, but doing the right thing for the greater good. 21st Century leaders know their values and motives and conduct all affairs in accordance with a moral code and set of upstanding values and principles. They are the role mode ls for staff and other stakeholders.
Capacity for Complexity and Strategic ThoughtThe 21st Century leader sees the big picture and accepts that everything is inter-related, appreciating that action and inaction have profound social and environmental impacts and implications. He or she understands the nature of dynamic complexity and helps others learn to understand and cope with uncertainty and to become more responsive and adaptive to complex challenges. These leaders resisttemptation to solve problems or make decisions alone.
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity21st Century leaders know themselves as well as their people; they represent themselves as they really are and encourage others to “be themselves.” Diversity and individuality are honoured. They are honest and encourage honesty—building and maintaining trust is essential in the networked, virtual, and autonomous world of the 21 st Century. They are vulnerable and, most of all, human. They understand their o wn emotions and accept the emotionality of their staff and other stakeholders. Foremost, they are self -reflective and encourage others to practice reflection.
Transformational PotencyA forward-thinker, the 21 st Century Leader remains focused on the long-term. He or she has a clear vision of future possibility and he lps all stakeholders see the future and the ways and means of fulfilling it. The 21st Century leader spreads energy, excitement, hope, and belief. I n service of continuous improvement and transformational change, the leader of the 21st Century is willing and able to transform him- or herself and creates an open and nourishing environment wherein staff andother stakeholders can transform themselves and their work.
Service – Servant LeadershipThe 21st Century leader is servant and steward first, to the public he or she represents, his or her employees, and other designated key stakeholders. The Servant Leader consistently shows high levels of faith, respect, trust, and compassion to all he or she serves. The 21 st Century leader leads from the heart, as well as the head.
Learnership – Leader as Learner and TeacherThe leader of the 21st Century is continuously learning and is committed to helping others learn and develop. Learning remains at the fo refront of community focus and organisational activity. Unlearning is astrategic imperative. The 21 st Century leader is not master of all she surveys, but is student of all she confronts.
Social Engineer and Relationship-BuilderAs Social Engineer and Relationship-Builder, the leader of the 21 st
Century is master connector and conduit, facilitating and encouraging all staff and other stakeholders to network and collaborate within and without the organisation. Here, the 21 st Century leader sees opportunities to connect people and ideas that might not normally have cause to come together. The crucial task is to share power and promote shared ownership and collective effort resulting in greater capability and commitment and producing more sustainable solutions.
Leader as IntegratorThe 21st Century leader is inclusive, involving, and unifying: architect of coherence. He or she helps employees and other stakeholders see :where and how the organisation fits in the bigger picture,where and how they fit in or relate to the organisation and how their attitudes and behaviours contribute to its important mission,why things are done as they are or should be done differently.The Leader as Integrator helps people find meaning, belonging, a nd purpose.
stTable 11. The Eight Essential Categories of the 21 Century Leader.
20 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
persons, well-rounded and always eager to learn more.
· Prevailing beliefs about and practices of leadership are stinsufficient to meet the leadership demands of the 21
Century. A groundswell of interest in revolutionary ideas on
leaders and leadership spearheaded by forward-thinkers,
however, suggests these anachronistic beliefs and stpractices can be overcome. Attributes of 21 Century
leaders have been distilled into eight sets, as identified in
this paper.
· While no one individual will likely master all eight sets of st21 Century leadership competencies, organisations can
begin to recruit and select, develop, and promote based
on them. If possessed sufficiently, these competencies
should predict individual, team, and organisational
effectiveness and resilience over the long haul.
· Organisational and global activity will increasingly be stdominated by pervasive uncertainty. A prime task for 21
Century organisations is developing leaders at all levels
with a high tolerance for ambiguity. Comfort zones must
become a thing of the past, and 'discomfort zones' will
become the new preoccupation.
· Finally, eight dimensions of The New Leadership were
developed. These are summarised here for reference.
Since emerging views of leaders and leadership are so
different than those conventionally held, and the voices
propounding these views so many and convincing, the
authors believe that we are experiencing a renaissance in
leadership—a transformation in the way we think about
leaders and practice leadership. Individuals who possess stand are developing the capabilities portrayed as 21
Century competence sets are Renaissance Leaders.
Those who practice Renaissance Leadership are
t ransforming thei r teams, organisat ions, and
communities.
Caveats and Considerations
To develop the eight sets of leadership attributes
presented in this paper we have drawn on hundreds of
research papers and over seventy books. We found
overwhelming consistency across authors and topics for
the individual competencies we have synthesised into the
eight categories. We found no significant disagreement
or alternatives. Given our interpretation of the global
environment, what these many researchers and scholars
have to say regarding leaders and leadership makes a lot
of sense to us. What we cannot say is whether or not what
we are seeing is an abundant case of idealism and
wishing thinking.
stConceptions of the leader of the 21 Century are much
different than ever before. Does this reflect a dawning
age of enlightenment or a widening schism between
theory and practice? We do not know how aligned the
notions of leaders and leadership are between emerging
depictions and real-world practice. To this end, we would
point to an important area of empirical research needed:
How embedded in today's organisations are the attributes stthought necessary to 21 Century leadership? Is there
evidence that they are being incorporated in leadership
development programs, performance management
processes, and promotion? Are employees and
managers even aware of the emerging competencies?
Do they believe they are important? –likely to ever be
adopted?
Despite the fact that we obviously see value in people
and organisations that embody the eight dimensions of
Renaissance Leadership, we accept that the skills,
knowledge, abilities, and attitudes that comprise these
capacities are somewhat intangible. There will be many stwho discount 21 Century leadership attributes purely as
they are difficult to measure. Some of the best things in life,
however, are hard to define and difficult to grasp, though
none the less important. We have tried to make the
attributes presented in this paper a little more tangible for
readers. Care was taken in discussing the individual
competencies in the section titled Toward Renaissance -
Unifying the New Leadership, and performance indicators
were provided for each. Il lustrative leadership
Learnership – Leader as Learner and Teacher
Service – Servant Leadership
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
Transformational Potency
Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical
Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Thought
Leader as Integrator
Social Engineer and Relationship -Builder
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
MasteryUnaware Growing Awareness Reasonable Practice Advanced Practice
Learnership – Leader as Learner and Teacher
Service – Servant Leadership
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
Transformational Potency
Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical
Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Thought
Leader as Integrator
Social Engineer and Relationship -Builder
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5
Learnership – Leader as Learner and Teacher
Service – Servant Leadership
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
Transformational Potency
Leader as Wise, Virtuous, and Ethical
Capacity for Complexity and Strategic Thought
Leader as Integrator
Social Engineer and Relationship -Builder
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
MasteryUnaware Growing Awareness Reasonable Practice Advanced Practice
Figure 3. Twenty-First Century Leadership Portfolio Assessment.
21li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
development strategies were enumerated for each
competency set in Table 2.
We believe that most organisations are capable of stdeveloping useful measures for each of the 21 Century
leadership attributes. In fact, just having the conversation
amongst individuals about the characteristics and how
they might be demonstrated and measured could
become part of a leadership development strategy. Just
such a conversation informed the assessment that
resulted in the manager's pie chart shown previously, and
the professional development plan subsequently crafted.
As staff discuss and debate the competencies and what
behaviours might discriminate appreciably over nominal
performance they come to a shared understanding of
what's valued, how it’s displayed, and how it might be
fostered.
Pending such dialogue, the authors provide this simple
device, a set of “thermometers” for each of the eight sets stof 21 Century leadership competence. Any individual or
organisation can use this device to begin assessment and
awareness-building.
Simply fill in the “thermometers” to the degree that you (or
you collectively) feel most closely describes your level of
achievement. You may also “tick” a box, place an “X”
where it belongs on the continuum, or circle the number
that best sums your current level. These bars can also be
used to show progress. Remember that capacities in the
eight dimensions have knowledge, attitude or value, and
behavioural aspects to them. Everyone may know, for
example, what an attribute represents and assert that
they believe it is important, but may not demonstrate it
through day-to-day behaviour. Whether you feel more
specific assessment of these different aspects is useful is
up to you. The point is the more time spent thinking about
how these attributes are shown and what their importance
to the organisation and its culture are the better. The
authors don't score higher than “6” on any of the 5dimensions. How do you stand up?
In finalising this paper, the authors have concluded that
there is a dearth of substantive studies or articles
showcasing best practice in leadership development.
Many published sources lack detail, theoretical
underpinnings, or empirical data to substantiate them.
Perhaps not surprisingly, papers on academic programs
tend to be more-defensibly written, but paradoxically
may be perceived as having less to offer the corporate
practitioner. In any event, more studies and articles that
provide solid contextual background and thorough detail
on design, delivery, and evaluation of leadership
development programs are needed. The authors
challenge academics and practitioners alike to publish
results on programs that are attempting to genuinely deal
with the dynamic complexity that characterises the world
in which we live.
References
[1]. Abshire, D. (2007). Trustworthy leaders. Leadership
Excellence, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 20.
[2]. Adler, H. (2007). Key leadership characteristics.
Leadership Excellence, Vol. 24, No. 12, pp. 5.
[3]. Akgün, A., Lynn, G., and J. Byrne. (2003).
Organizational learning: a socio-cognitive approach.
Human Relations, Vol. 56, No. 7, pp. 839–868.
[4]. Akgün, A., Byrne, J., Lynn, G., and H. Keskin. (2007).
Organizational unlearning as changes in beliefs and
routines in organizations. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 794–812.
[5]. Alexander, J. (2006). The challenge of complexity. In
Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the
Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the New
Era, pp. 85 – 94. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[6]. Allio, R. (2005). Leadership development: teaching
versus learning. Management Decision, Vol. 43, No. 7/8,
pp. 1071–1077.
[7]. Bailey, D. (2006). Leading from the spirit. In Hesselbein,
F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2:
Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp. 297
– 302. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[8]. Baker, S. and D. Gerlowski. (2007). Team effectiveness
and leader-follower agreement: an empirical study.
22 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
5 Thermometer scores for one manager are shown in the pie chart introduced earlier in the section on reform. She scored highly for Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity (9) and Integration (8), with room for improvement in Wisdom, Virtue, and Ethics (4) and Service – Servant Leadership (5).
Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 12, No. 1,
pp. 15–23.
[9]. Barendsen, L. and H. Gardner. (2006). The three
elements of good leadership in rapidly changing times. In
Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the
Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the New
Era, pp. 265–280. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[10]. Beaubien, J. (1998). Leadership evolution.
Executive Excellence, Vol. 15, Is. 5, p. 12.
[11]. Beddowes, P. (1994). Reinventing management
development. Journal of Management Development,
Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 40–46.
[12]. Bell, A. (2007). Using vision to shape the future.
Leader to Leader, Vol. 45, pp. 17–21.
[13]. Bennis, W. (2003). On Becoming a Leader (Revised
Edition). Cambridge: Basic Books.
[14]. Bezzina, C. (2000). Educational leadership for
twenty-first century Malta: breaking the bonds of
dependency. International Journal of Educational
Management, Vol. 14, No. 7, pp. 299.
[15]. Bjugstad, K., Thach, E., Thompson, K., and A. Morris.
(2006). A fresh look at followership: a model for matching
followership and leadership styles. Behavioral and
Applied Management, pp. 304–319.
[16]. Blanchard, K. (2000). Leadership by the book.
Executive Excellence, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 4.
[17]. Blanchard, K. and D. Carey. (2006). Regaining
public trust: a leadership challenge. In Hesselbein, F. and
M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2: Visions,
Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp. 153–164.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[18]. Blanchard, K. and M. Miller. (2007). The higher plane
of leadership. Leader to Leader, Vol. 27, No. 46, pp.
25–30.
[19]. Boddie, W., Contardo, J. and R. Childs. (2007). The
future workforce: here they come. Public Manager,
Vol.36, No.4, pp. 25–28.
[20]. Boyatzis, R. and P. McLeod. (2001). Our educational
bottom line: developing the whole person. Journal of
Management Education, Vol.25, No.2, pp. 118–123.
[21]. Brooks, D. and L. Brooks. (2005). Ten secrets of
successful leaders: the strategies, skills and knowledge
leaders at every level need to succeed. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
[22]. Brown, L. and B. Posner. (2001). Exploring the
relationship between learning and leadership.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 22,
No. 6, pp. 274–280.
[23]. Bryman, A. (2007). Effective leadership in higher
education: a literature review. Studies in Higher
Education, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 693–710.
[24]. Cegarra, J. and B. Rodrigo Moya. (2005). Business
performance Management and unlearning process.
Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.
161–170.
[25]. Centron, M. and O. Davis. (2008). Trends shaping
tomorrow's world: forecasts and implications for business,
governments, and consumers (Part One and Two). The
Futurist, pp. 35–52.
[26]. Cober, R., Hacker, S., and C. Johnson. (1998).
Spiritual leadership and vision alignment. ASQ's Annual
Quality Congress Proceedings, pp. 917–923.
[27]. Connaughton, S., Lawrence, F., and B. Ruben.
(2003). Leadership development as a systematic and
multidisciplinary enterprise. Journal of Education for
Business, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 46–51.
[28]. Cooper, C., Scandura, T., and C. Schriesheim.
(2005). Looking forward but learning from our past:
potential challenges to developing authentic leadership
theory and authentic leaders. Leadership Quarterly, Vol.
16, pp. 475–493.
[29]. Covey, S. (2006). Leading in the knowledge worker
age, In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader
of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the
New Era, pp. 215–225. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[30]. Davenport, T. (2001). Knowledge work and the future
of management, In Bennis, G., Spreitzer, M., and T.
Cummings (Eds.), The Future of Leadership: Today's Top
Leadership Thinkers Speak to Tomorrow's Leaders,
pp.41–58. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
[31]. Day, G. and P. Schoemaker. (2008). Are you a
'vigilant leader'? Sloan Management Review, Vol. 49, No.
3, pp. 43–51.
[32]. Doyle, M. (2000). Managing development in an era
of radical change: evolving a relational perspective.
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 19, No. 7, pp.
579–601.
[33]. Driscoll, C. and M. McKee. (2007). Restorying a
culture of ethical and spiritual values: a role for leader
storytelling. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 73, pp.
205–217.
[34]. Eddy, P. and K. VanDerLinden. (2006). Emerging
definitions of leadership in higher education: new visions
of leadership or same old “hero” leader? Community
College Review, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 5–26.
[35]. Fairholm, G. (1996). Spiritual leadership: fulfilling
whole-self needs at work. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 17, No. 5, p. 11.
[36]. Fisher, J. (2004). Servant leadership: begin with the
what and why. Executive Excellence, Vol. 21, Is. 5, pp.
15–16.
[37]. Freiberg, K. and J. Freiberg. (2004). How gutsy
leaders blow the doors off business-as-usual. Leader to
Leader, Vol. 33, pp. 32–37.
[38]. Frohman, D. and R. Howard. (2008). Leadership the
Hard Way: Why Leadership can't be Taught; How You can
Learn it Anyway. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[39]. Gabel, M. and J. Walker. (2006). The anticipatory
leader: Buckminster Fuller's principles for making the world
work. The Futurist, Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 39–44.
[40]. Gardner, H. (2007). Five Minds for the Future. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
[41]. Gardner, W., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., May, D., and F.
Walumbwa. (2005). Can you see the real me? a self-
based model of authentic leader and follower
development. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp.
343–372.
[42]. Ghani, U. (2006). The leader integrator: an emerging
role. In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader
of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the
New Era, pp. 241–250. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[43]. Glaser, J. (2006). The DNA of Leadership: Leverage
your Instincts to Communicate, Differentiate, Innovate.
Avon: Platinum.
[44]. Glaser, J. and M. Pilnick. (2005). Leadership models:
these set corporate fashion. Leadership Excellence, Vol.
22, Is. 3, pp. 4–5.
[45]. Goldsmith, M. (2006). Leading new age
professionals. In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.),
The Leader of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and
Practices for the New Era, pp. 165–172. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[46]. Graetz, F. (2002). Strategic thinking versus strategic
planning: towards understanding the complementarities.
Management Decision, Vol. 40, No. 5/6, pp. 456–462.
[47]. Greenberg-Walt, C. and A. Robertson. (2001). The
evolving role of executive leadership. In Bennis, G.,
Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.), The Future of
Leadership: Today's Top Leadership Thinkers Speak to
Tomorrow's Leaders, pp. 139–157. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
[48]. Hankin, H. (2005). The New Workforce: Five
Sweeping Trends that will Shape your Company's Future.
New York: AMACOM.
[49]. Hartman, N., Conklin, T., and J. Smith. (2007). What
leaders say versus what academics write: the relevance
of leadership theory. SAM Advanced Management
Journal, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp. 32–33.
[50]. Hays, J. (2007). Dynamics of organizational wisdom.
Business Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 2, Is. 4, pp. 77–122.
[51]. Hays, J. (2008). Teacher as servant: applications of
Greenleaf's servant leadership in higher education.
Journal of Global Business Issues, Vol. 2, Is. 1, pp. 113–134.
[52]. Hays, J. (2010). The ecology of wisdom.
Management & Marketing, Vol. 1.
[53]. Headington, E. (2001). Seeking a newer world. In
Bennis, G., Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.), The
Future of Leadership: Today's Top Leadership Thinkers
Speak to Tomorrow's Leaders, pp. 226–237. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
[54]. Heifetz, R. (2006). Anchoring leadership in the work of
adaptive progress. In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith
(Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and
Practices for the New Era, pp. 73–84. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[55]. Helgesen, S. (2006). Challenges for leaders in the
years ahead. In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.),
The Leader of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and
Practices for the New Era, pp. 183–190. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[56]. Hernez-Broome, G. and R. Hughes. (2004).
Leadership development: past, present, and future.
Human Resource Planning, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 24–32.
[57]. Higgs, M. (2003). How can we make sense of
leadership in the 21st century? Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 24, No. 5/6, pp. 273–284.
[58]. Hinterhuber, H. (1996). Oriental wisdom and western
leadership. The International Executive, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.
287–302.
[59]. Huber, N. (2003). An experiential leadership
approach for teaching tolerance for ambiguity. Journal
of Education for Business, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 52–55.
[60]. Johansen, B. (2009). Leaders Make the Future: Ten
New Leadership Skills for an Uncertain World. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
[61]. Kakabadse, A., Kakabadse, N., and L. Lee-Davies.
(2008). Leading for Success: the Seven Sides to Great
Leaders. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[62]. Kanungo, R. (1998). Leadership in organizations:
looking ahead to the 21st Century. Canadian Psychology,
Vol. 39, No. 1/2, pp. 71–82.
[63]. Kouzes, J. and B. Posner. (2001). Bringing leadership
lessons from the past into the future. In Bennis, G., Spreitzer,
M., and T. Cummings (Eds.), The Future of Leadership:
Today's Top Leadership Thinkers Speak to Tomorrow's
Leaders, pp. 81–90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[64]. Kouzes, J. and B. Posner. (2006). It's not just the
leader's vision. In Hesselbein, F. and M. Goldsmith (Eds.),
The Leader of the Future 2: Visions, Strategies, and
Practices for the New Era, pp. 207–212. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[65]. Kuczmarski, S. and T. Kuczmarski. (2007). Apples are
Square: Thinking Differently about Leadership. New York:
Kaplan Publishing.
[66]. Lawler, E. (2001). The era of human capital has finally
arrived. In Bennis, G., Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.),
The Future of Leadership: Today's Top Leadership Thinkers
Speak to Tomorrow's Leaders, pp.14–25. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[67]. Lorenzi, P. (2004). Managing for the common good:
prosocial leadership. Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 33,
No. 3, pp. 282–291.
[68]. Love, C. (2005). Using both head and heart for
effective leadership. Journal of Family and Consumer
Sciences, Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 17–19.
[69]. Maciariello, J. (2006). Peter F. Drucker on executive
leadership and effectiveness. In Hesselbein, F. and M.
Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2: Visions,
Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp. 3–27. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[70]. Mamaghani, F. (2006). Impact of information
technology on the workforce of the future: an analysis.
International Journal of Management, Vol.23, No.4, pp.
845–943.
[71]. Markow, F. and K. Klenke. (2005). The effects of
personal meaning and calling on organizational
commitment: an empirical investigation of spiritual
leadership. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 8–27.
[72]. Marston, C. (2007). Motivating the "What's in it for
Me?" Workforce: Managing across the Generational
Divide and Increase Profit. New Jersey: Wiley.
[73]. Martin, A. (2007). The future of leadership: where do
we go from here? Industrial and Commercial Training,
Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 3–8.
[74]. Matathia, I. and M. Salzman. (1998). NEXT: Trends for
the Future. Sydney: Macmillan.
[75]. Maxwell, J. (2008). Leadership Gold: Lessons
Learned from a Lifetime of Leading. Nashville: Thomas
Nelson.
25li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
[76]. McCormick, B. and D. Davenport. (2004). Leader as
shepherd. Executive Excellence, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 6.
[77]. Montuori, L. (2000). Organizational longevity:
integrating systems thinking, learning and conceptual
complexity. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 61–73.
[78]. Morrison, J., Rha, J., and A. Helfman. (2003).
Learning awareness, student engagement, and change:
a transformation in leadership development. Journal of
Education for Business, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 11–17.
[79]. Nixon, B. (2003). Leading business transformation –
learning by doing. Industrial and Commercial Training,
Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 163–167.
[80]. Pernick, R. (2001). Creating a leadership
development program: nine essential tasks. Public
Personnel Management, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 429–444.
[81]. Raelin, K. (2006). Finding meaning in the
organization. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 47, No. 3,
pp. 64–68.
[82]. Rao, S. (2006). Tomorrow's leader. In Hesselbein, F.
and M. Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2:
Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp.
173–182. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[83]. Ready, D. and J. Conger. (2003). Why leadership
efforts fail. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp
83–88.
[84]. Rosenau, J. (2004). Followership and discretion:
assessing the dynamics of modern leadership. Harvard
International Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 14–17.
[85]. Sarros, J. (2003). The heart and soul of leadership:
the personal journey. In The Heart and Soul of Leadership
(Ch. 1; pp. 6–21). North Ryde: McGraw-Hill.
[86]. Scharmer, C. (2008). Uncovering the blind spot of
leadership. Leader to Leader, Vol. 2008, No. 47, pp.
52–59.
[87]. Schwandt, D. (2005). When managers become
philosophers: integrating learning with sensemaking
Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 4,
No. 2, pp. 176–192.
[88]. Senge, P. (2006). Systems citizenship: the leadership
mandate for this millennium. In Hesselbein, F. and M.
Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2: Visions,
Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp. 31–46. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[89]. Shefy, E. and E. Sadler-Smith. (2006). Applying
holistic principles in management development. Journal
of Management Development, Vol. 25, No. 3/4, pp.
368–385.
[90]. Sinkula, J. (2002). Market-based success,
organizational routines, and unlearning. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.
253–269.
[91]. Slater, P. (2001). Leading yourself. In Bennis, G.,
Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.), The Future of
Leadership: Today's Top leadership Thinkers Speak to
Tomorrow's Leaders, pp. 103–115. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
[92]. Spendlove, M. (2007). Competencies for effective
leadership in higher education. International Journal of
Educational Management, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 407–417.
[93]. Spreitzer, M. and T. Cummings. (2001). The
leadership challenges of the next generation. In Bennis,
G., Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.), The Future of
Leadership: Today's Top Leadership Thinkers Speak to
Tomorrow's Leaders, pp. 241–253. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
[94]. Stallard, M. and J. Pankau. (2008). Strengthening
human value in organizational cultures. Leader to Leader,
Vol. 2008, Is. 47, pp. 18–23.
[95]. Teo-Dixon, G. and N. Monin. (2007). Guru of gurus:
Peter Drucker, logology, and the ultimate leader. Journal
of Management Inquiry, Vol.16, No.1, 2007, pp. 6–17.
[96]. Thomas, R. (2006). Diversity management: an
essential craft for future leaders. In Hesselbein, F. and M.
Goldsmith (Eds.), The Leader of the Future 2: Visions,
Strategies, and Practices for the New Era, pp. 47–60. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[97]. Thomas, R. (2008). Crucibles of leadership
development. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 49, No. 3,
15–18.
26 li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 ln , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Christopher Kim is currently doing his PhD on emerging forms of leadership in the College of Business and Economics at the Australian National University. He earned two bachelor's degrees in South Korea before moving to Australia: Bachelor of Business in 2002 and Bachelor of Economics (Applied Statistics) in 2004. He later received a Master of Marketing from the Australian National University in 2007.
Jay Hays did his graduate work at Boston University, earning a doctorate in education in the early 1990s. He is currently Lecturer in Leadership and Management in the College of Business and Economics at the Australian National University, and will be joining the faculty at Swinburne University in July 2010 as Academic Advisor, Professional Practice. Jay has published in the areas of organisational learning, development, and change; teamwork and collaboration / Communities of Practice; leadership and leadership development; systems dynamics and organisational ecology; performance management and measurement; and wisdom. His current focus is on team learning and Dialogue.
27li-manager’s Journal o Management Vol. No. 3 l n , 4 December 09 - February 2010
RESEARCH PAPERS
[98]. Townsend, P. (2002). Fitting teamwork into the grand
scheme of things. Journal for Quality and Participation,
Vol. 25, No. 1, pp 16–18.
[99]. Townsend, A., DeMarie, S., and A. Hendrickson.
(1998). Virtual teams: technology and the workplace of
the future. The Academy of Management Executive, Vol.
12, No. 3, pp. 17–29.
[100]. Townsend, P. and J. Gebhardt. (2003). The
leadership-teamship-followership continuum. Leader to
Leader, Vol. 29, pp. 18–21.
[101]. Tulgan, B. (2004). Trends point to a dramatic
generational shift in the future workplace. Employment
Relations Today, Vol. 30, Is. 4, 2004, pp. 23–31.
[102]. Ulrich, D., Smallwood, N., and K. Sweetman.(2008).
The New Leadership Code: Five Rules to Lead by. Boston:
Harvard Business Press.
[103]. van Opstal, D. (1998). The new competitive
landscape. Issues in Science and Technology, Vol.15, No.
2, pp. 47–54.
[104]. Weick, K. (2001). Leadership as the legitimation of
doubt. In Bennis, G., Spreitzer, M., and T. Cummings (Eds.),
The Future of Leadership: Today's Top leadership Thinkers
Speak to Tomorrow's Leaders, pp. 91–102. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[105]. Weiss, D. and V. Molinaro. (2006). Integrated
leadership development. Industrial and Commercial
Training, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 3–11.
[106]. Wheatley, M. (2004). Servant leaders: what has to
change now? Executive Excellence, Vol. 21, No. 7, pp.
15–16.
[107]. Whyte, D. (2004). Five conversations on the frontiers
of leadership. Leader to Leader, Vol. 33, pp. 20–24.
Top Related