Search results

This paper aims to measure the effect of supply discrepancy reports (SDRs) on military aircraft readiness metrics, including aircraft availability, not mission capable supply (NMCS) hours, cannibalizations and mission-impaired capability awaiting parts (MICAP) hours.

Monthly SDR, NMCS, aircraft cannibalizations and MICAP data from 2009 to 2018 are analyzed using linear regression and independent samples t-tests to examine whether discrepant shipments negatively impact aircraft readiness.

Results of linear regression were significant in 4 of 12 analyses, suggesting that SDRs are a significant predictor of increased cannibalizations. Results of independent samples t-tests found MICAP hours were significantly higher on discrepant shipments compared to nondiscrepant shipments in all three analyses.

This research will increase awareness of the extent to which SDRs degrade aircraft readiness, and provide an opportunity for United States Department of Defense (DoD) supply chain leaders to take action to improve order fulfillment performance in their organizations.

Little research has been done investigating the impact of SDRs within the DoD, and to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no previous study has examined the effect of SDRs on military aircraft readiness metrics.

The development of upcoming inclusive leaders requires not just knowledge of inclusion competencies but also knowledge of how to develop them and when to use them. This chapter examines the effectiveness of combining a psychometric assessment tool – the Inclusion Competencies Inventory (ICI) – and an improvement approach that places developmental responsibility in the hands of the student, not the instructor. The increased need for inclusivity in organizations requires business school graduates, who will soon be taking on the role of organizational leaders, to develop inclusion competencies. We seek to enhance inclusion competencies through a model based on reflective development and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). There are several implications for academicians and practitioners who may choose to adopt this unique, participant-driven approach to developing inclusion leadership competencies.

This article proposes a new disruptive innovation in healthcare through the development of a physician assistant business model, which can be most readily applied in vulnerable rural health care settings.

This study reviews the current state of the health care system in terms of physician assistant utilization and primary care shortages in rural communities. The study proposes that the physician assistant-owned and -operated primary care business represents a disruptive innovation, via the application of the five principles of Clayton Christensen’s (1997) thesis on disruptive innovation.

Considering the current state of the health care industry, the study logically defends the proposed model as a disruptive innovation in that it: focuses on an underserved market, has lower costs, has few competitors, offers high quality and provides a sustainable competitive advantage.

The physician assistant business model is a viable solution for providing primary care for rural communities with educational, financial, transportation and other resource limitations.

This is a unique application of the theory of disruptive innovation, which illustrates how a new business model can solve a chronic shortage in primary care, especially in underserved populations.

The study of power is essential to any study of leadership, as power is fundamental to human organization and is understood to be a driving force of leadership. Power is typically thought of in terms of having dominance over others from a hierarchically higher position. In this chapter, we explore how power is typically defined in the literature and propose that mutualism represents an expanded definition of power and one that more closely aligns with the concept of inclusive leadership. We make a case for viewing power as a capacity that can be developed in others rather than a commodity that can be obtained, horded, or doled out. With this in mind, we explore how these two phenomena intersect from the perspectives of powerdistance, hierarchy, and empowerment. We argue that power expressed as dominance creates distance between leaders and employees, while mutualistic expressions reduce such distance, and that hierarchy and power have been erroneously conflated and when disaggregated can serve a useful purpose in a low-power-distance culture. Finally, through empowerment, we consider approaches to the development of power in others, which is a topic that is rarely considered in the leadership literature. Inclusive leadership offers an important pathway for moving organizations and society toward justice through the creation of cultures characterized by cooperation, unity, and diversity where greater numbers of people step into their capacity for power and begin to address the challenges facing humanity. This is realizable in cultures that promote mutualistic power.

While diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) in the workplace means making space for all employees, it has unique implications for Indigenous employees who live and work in countries built on colonialism. Indigenous peoples represent diverse groups with unique and rich cultures that in general share values that are more holistic, spiritual, traditional, egalitarian, and other-oriented than non-Indigenous populations. Such distinct worldviews help explain why non-Indigenous organizations struggle to understand and accommodate Indigenous employees’ priorities and goal-oriented behavior. Creating equity, inclusivity, and belonging in the workplace for Indigenous employees requires more than implementing existing organizational practices with a new cultural awareness, it requires rethinking, reframing, and recreating organizational to facilitate a culture of trust. Re-examining organizational norms and assumptions with the ideas of relationship and responsibility that allow collaborative approaches to collective well-being and inclusivity is required. Creating inclusive workspaces requires that attention must be paid to both organizational (group-level) factors, such as organizational cultures of trust, and interpersonal (individual-level) factors, such as interpersonal trust. However, to build foundations of high-functioning and supportive organizational cultures and interpersonal trust that are sustainable, time and resources are necessary. Without this, the ability to reach the crucial result of engaging Indigenous employees and creating safe workplaces serves only to be performative and not meaningful in terms of action, longevity, and the overall well-being of Indigenous people in the workplace.

Treating team members fairly, valuing different voices, and celebrating uniqueness are the behaviors that successful inclusive leaders exhibit and role models within the workplace. Actions such as these can impact how engaged (the active and intentional use of physical, cognitive, and emotional energies put into job responsibilities) employees are in their relationships with colleagues and how they feel about their work. Research revealed that when leaders act in ways that demonstrate inclusivity (such as treating others fairly, being open to differences, valuing unique perspectives, and authenticity), women, people of color, and those individuals at small or midsized companies feel stronger connections with their colleagues. This is valuable as engaged employees positively affect the organization’s success. We know that perceived or actual commonalities can cause individuals to feel a sense of connection to others based solely on that perception, so it should only follow that the level of engagement should be impacted when team members and managers feel a sense of connection based upon actual or perceived identity similarities. This provides a unique opportunity for leaders to create spaces of bravery and safety through inclusive leadership actions that allow all individuals to share the aspects of their identity that allow these connections to occur. This chapter identifies behaviors and actions of inclusive leaders, explores original research on the connection between perceptions of identity and employee engagement, and provides practical advice on how leaders can support and encourage employee engagement regardless of the perception of identity.

This chapter explores the many dynamics of diversity initiatives and presents a central argument that diversity initiatives are most effective when organizational leaders create and strategically implement them to form an inclusive organizational culture. This chapter addresses diversity from a global perspective in three ways. First, it defines diversity and emphasizes one goal: diversity of perspectives. Second, it advocates for creating an organizational culture to overcome conflicting aspects of traditional, demographic-centered, or individual-centered diversity initiatives. Third, it introduces the DURCI Diversity Model, which stands for Define, Understand, Review, Communicate, and Implement, as a five-step method to foster a diverse, inclusive organizational culture. This chapter begins with a definition of diversity as efforts to synchronize unique demographic groups. It emphasizes the importance of defining diversity as it applies to an organization and ultimately creating an organizational culture that transcends individual demographics and defines diversity by what it means explicitly to the organization, including what diversity the organization already possesses. This chapter proceeds to use nonprofit, private, and public organizations, such as the US Department of Health and Human Services, Google, the American Red Cross, Cisco Systems, Americans for the Arts, the National Diversity Council, and the Gates Foundation, to illustrate the wide applicability of the DURCI Diversity Model to frame successful organizational diversity initiatives.

In this chapter, the author argues that in order to meet the United Nations’ sustainable development goal 4 which calls for education to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all by 2030,” transformative leadership may be key. Transformative leadership goes well beyond traditional technical and rational approaches to leadership; it includes but extends theories such as social justice leadership and transformational leadership and involves two general principles and eight interconnected tenets. These include knowing oneself, one’s community and organization; deconstructing frameworks that perpetuate inequity and reconstructing them in more equitable ways; addressing the inequitable distribution of power; emphasizing individual and collective good; focusing on democracy emancipation, equity, and justice as well as interconnectedness and global awareness; and offering both critique and promise. Transformative leadership theory is a critical, holistic, and normative approach that focuses on values, and on beliefs and mindsets as well as knowledge and action. It is characterized by its activist agenda and its overriding commitment to social justice, equity, and democratic society. Thus, it is an approach to leadership that is anti-racist, anti-homophobic, anti-xenophobic, etc.; it calls for rejection of deficit thinking and for inclusive and equitable practices that require moral courage. It is such a holistic and critical theory that would help to promote the United Nations’ education goal by the target of 2030.