LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT: A REVIEW IN CONTEXT
David V. Day* The Pennsylvania State University
Interest in leadership development is strong, especially among practitioners. Nonetheless, there is conceptual confusion regarding distinctions between leader and leadership development, as well as disconnection between the practice of leadership development and its scientiﬁc foundation. The present review examines the ﬁeld of leadership development through three contextual lenses: (1) understanding the difference between leader development and leadership development (conceptual context); (2) reviewing how state-of-the-art development is being conducted in the context of ongoing organizational work (practice context); and (3) summarizing previous research that has implications for leadership development (research context). The overall purpose is to bridge the practice and science of leadership development by showing the importance of building both human and social capital in organizations. Speciﬁc practices that are reviewed include 360- degree feedback and executive coaching, mentoring and networking, and job assignments and action learning. Practices and research are framed in terms of a general need to link leader development, which is primarily based on enhancing human capital, with leadership development that emphasizes the creation of social capital in organizations. In the traditional organization—the organization of the last one hundred years—the skeleton or internal structure, was a combination of rank and power. In the emerging organization, it has to be mutual understanding and responsibility. —Peter F. Drucker, Managing in Times of Great Change Interest in leadership development appears to be at its zenith. One indicator of this interest is seen in survey results highlighting the increased attention and re- sources given to leadership development (The Conference Board, 1999). Many organizations are viewing leadership as a source of competitive advantage and are investing in its development accordingly (McCall, 1998; Vicere & Fulmer, 1998). * Direct all correspondence to: David V. Day, Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802; e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581–613. Copyright 2001 by Elsevier Science Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 1048-9843 582 LEADERSHIP QUARTERLY Vol. 11 No. 4 2000
Another indicator of the burgeoning interest in leadership development is the number of current publications on the topic. One of the most notable offerings is the Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development (McCauley, Moxley, & Van Velsor, 1998), which summarizes much of what Center researchers and trainers have learned about leadership development over the past 30 years. In addition, there are a number of recently published books and book chapters devoted to various aspects of leadership development (e.g., Conger & Benjamin, 1999; Dotlich & Noel, 1998; Giber, Carter, & Goldsmith, 1999; Hollenbeck & McCall, 1999; McCall, 1998; Vicere & Fulmer, 1998). An immediate distinction must be made, however, between leadership develop- ment and management development. Literatures between the two areas are parallel and do overlap, but there are several key differences. Justas leadership and management are different (but inter- related)concepts (Yukl,1998),the irrespective development has unique emphases. Management development primarily includes managerial education and training (Latham & Seijts, 1998; Mailick, Stumpf, Grant, Kﬁr, & Watson, 1998) with an emphasis on acquiring speciﬁc types of knowledge, skills, and abilities to enhance task performance in management roles (Baldwin & Padgett, 1994; Keys & Wolfe, 1988; Wexley & Baldwin, 1986). Another characteristic feature of management development is the application of proven solutions to known problems, which gives it mainly a training...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document