Search results

Proposes that leadership is effective influence, is not authority‐position dependent, can be taught and learned in non‐positional settings and is vital to developing managerial potential. Proposes 11 criteria for implementing a non‐positional leadership instructional process. Provides a summary of an initial offering of such a course, emphasizing proactive self‐assessment, which argues for the validity and appropriateness of these concepts. Data are presented which suggest that the psychological make‐ups and predispositions of students should be considered in designing and implementing courses employing the concept of non‐positional leadership.

To take advantage of the opportunities, and to effectively face the challenges, which the future will present, managers need to enhance their competence for making leadership decisions. These decisions affect all issues in strategy formulation, and implementation, for organizations and organizational units. The resultant relationships will be discussed using several well‐known strategy implementation models. Learners can develop and improve leadership‐in‐management decision making by applying three relatively simple questions, which provide a foundation for adding practical perspective to the findings of leadership research. These three questions serve as reminders of all the issues that should be considered by managers. They address the establishment of direction (vision and goals), development and improvement of individual and stakeholder competence, and the strengthening of an achievement‐oriented climate that is satisfying for all stakeholders.

Total enterprise simulations are often used and included as graded elements by instructors in business degree capstone “policy courses” under the assumption that their use enriches the learning experience. This suggests a belief that people who perform best in simulations have learned how to play the game better. The studies reported on here attempt to determine and evaluate the relationship between learning and simulation performance. These studies have consistently found that, while simulation‐related learning does occur, there appears to be no direct, positive relationship between the two variables. Suggestions for further research are proposed.

This essay reflects a profound sense of frustration with the concept of leadership and the enormous and every increasing body of research and pontification about it. Given the ongoing failure to define leadership as a coherent construct, it aims to argue that continuing along this omni‐directional path is not likely to produce anything truly useful for those who study, teach about or work in organizations; rather, abandoning the concept altogether and emphasizing a focus on improving decision making in organizations may prove more fruitful.

Looks at different concepts of leadership and the enormous and ever‐increasing body of research and pontification about it.

In the end, however, the author believes that we are mostly left with endless discussions and perspectives of a word that simply sounds better. We seem to remain intent on calling almost everything leadership – but, if everything is leadership, then logically nothing is leadership.

This review is a useful source of information for anyone interested in the concept of leadership.

This paper suggests that competency‐based, outcome‐focused management development and education programs might benefit from redirecting the non‐technical subjects away from emphasis on theories and skills, to emphasis on the decisions which managers have to make. To do this effectively, there is a need for defining the types of decisions, for organizing the knowledge and skills for making these decisions, and for a model that permits a pedagogically sound process for learning the many concepts that have to be mastered. In addition to the paper, the Peernet reviewer’s comments are provided, as well as a response to them.

A number of years ago, the psychologist David McClelland, in his studies of managerial motivation, identified two types of power: egoistic (using others for personal gain) and social (facilitating group cooperation and effort for the achievement of the general good). Clearly, the power motive is intimately related to the concept of leadership. However, over the last two or three decades, a school of thought has arisen which equates leadership with “doing the right thing”. Defining leadership in such an ethical light is both misleading and dangerous. Leadership, as influence skill, possesses the ability to induce both positive and negative results. A failure to acknowledge and examine the “dark side” of leadership can distort efforts to learn about leadership, may encourage development of a blind‐eye approach to examining the results of influence attempts, and might turn well‐intentioned groups into lemmings heading for the sea. Authenticity requires a balanced discussion.

A number of years ago, David McClelland, in his studies of managerial motivation, identified two types of power: egoistic (using others for personal gain) and social (facilitating group cooperation and effort for the achievement of the general good). Clearly, the power motive is intimately related to the concept of leadership. However, over the last several decades, a school of thought has arisen which equates leadership with “doing the right thing”. Defining leadership in such an ethical light is both misleading and dangerous. At the same time, little has been done to address the role of followers in the influence process, and transformational models of leadership have exacerbated this problem. Failure to acknowledge the role of followers and to examine the “dark side” of leader‐follower dynamics can distort efforts to understand influence processes in an authentic way. This paper provides balance to this discussion and identifies a number of critical implications for leadership education.

This article questions the widely held proposition that the management philosophy of W. Edwards Deming, with its focus on quality improvement and pragmatic thinking, is a new conceptual paradigm which renders previous management thought, particularly that represented by the scientific management concepts of Frederick W. Taylor, obsolete and wrong‐headed. A closer examination of the similarities between older management theories and those of Deming indicates that there is significant commonality. Deming has provided, not a radical new school of thought, but a complementary body of emphases that enrich our understanding of management rather than revolutionize it.