Search results

While the steep increases in rates of incarceration seen in the United States in the late twentieth century have begun to level out, one form of incarceration has seen more drastic reductions in rates of use in the 2010s: long-term solitary confinement. Across the United States, prisons that once isolated prisoners for decades at a time stand hauntingly empty. The solitary confinement reform movement provides an important lens for examining what happens when an entrenched punitive practice faces widespread and sustained criticism and reveals the multiple paradigms through which reform operates – through politics, litigation, or charismatic leadership.

The purpose of the chapter is to develop a typology of bad behaviors characteristic of governing boards and to compare the bad behaviors identified in the typology to the governing boards’ expected roles and responsibilities. Several examples of bad governing board behaviors that have occurred at historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) are explored through the lens of the typology. The author argues that the bad behavior of governing boards responsible for the nations’ HBCUs inhibits strategic planning, undermines growth and development, and threatens the long-term viability of these institutions. Finally, recommendations intended to minimize the impact of bad board behaviors are proposed.

Serious questions have been raised regarding the necessity to continue focusing our research on what constitutes individual, or what the authors refer to as singular leadership. Although the authors consider these questions to be important to advancing the field of leadership theory, research, and practice, they also suggest that attempts to minimize the relevance of singular leadership may hinder progress in other domains of leadership research. In this chapter, the authors explore how and why singular leaders and their leadership matter, and how they may influence follower, peer, and organizational outcomes. The authors use a paradoxical framework to present a theoretical model and propositions that allow us to clarify the influence of different forms of singular leadership within organizations. In our examination of singular leadership, the authors consider both positive and harmful modes of attributes, cognitions, and behaviors.