Search results

The purpose of this paper was to examine the definitions of global leadership and indigenous leadership, identify leadership capacities inherent in human resource development (HRD) and determine relationships of the three as a means to develop a model to aid and guide opportunities for future research.

Following a two-stage integrative literature review of HRD, global and indigenous leadership literature, the grounded theory constant comparative method established 31 positive and 1 negative leadership domains, and respective capacities, and compare domains from literature.

The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel informs researchers of strengths and areas for additional research, has resulted in a more complete model of global leadership and calls for increased clarity for leadership capacity model development, especially for complex, global environments and local constructs and theories.

Although the literature had adequate representation in the business and organizational acumen and managing people and relationships central global leadership domains, more research and reporting is required for managing self and indigenous leadership capacity development subdomains.

Leadership development is a high priority and core function of HRD. The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel provides a tool for scholars and practitioners to guide global leadership development programs and research.

Understanding the relationships of leadership capacities from global and indigenous perspectives is helpful to examine cultural, identity and macro-contextual dimensions and their influence on leadership.

The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel provides a type of road-map, a holistic representation, in the context of developing global leaders in today’s complex environment.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the different leadership development techniques used to develop leaders from the human resource development (HRD) and performance improvement (PI) literature, and to categorize the development techniques using Garavan et al.’s (2015) multifaceted typology of development where development has recently emerged in the literature as a “central and important process” (p. 360).

This literature review followed the guidelines for an integrative literature review presented by Torraco (2005) and Imel (2011). This literature review was a freestanding literature review designed to provide directions for future research and development within the HRD discipline.

This literature review categorized over 500 leadership development techniques and mapped them with previously identified leadership capacities into Garavan et al.’s (2015) development typology. Once mapped, the authors were able to identify the most common leadership capacities and related development techniques for each development domain in the typology.

This research provides a tool for identifying required leadership capacities and development techniques that could be used by scholars and scholar-practitioners to conduct further research, as an aid in designing future leadership development programs and as instructional materials in the classroom.

Leadership is becoming a shared construct in today’s literature. Leadership as a shared construct has multiple shareholders, both internal and external of the agent. To better meet the needs of these shareholders, this research provides tools for the scholar and scholar-practitioner for leadership development that can be catered to one’s needs – as opposed to a one-size fits all strategy.

This paper highlights the HRD and PI literature, and provides a pragmatic tool for leadership development. This tool can be used by scholars for future research and for testing, as well as by scholar-practitioners for designing future leadership development programs.

This paper aims to identify the life-cycle of leadership theory from both the human resource development (HRD) and the organizational/leadership literature while providing a contrast between the two bodies of literature. The current research identifies which theories are being represented within the HRD literature, followed by a review of current directions in the leadership fields, primarily from literature in the organizational and leadership fields. By identifying these two bodies of leadership theories, the following research question will be answered: How current are the leadership theories provided in the literature of HRD compared to research that is reported from other external leadership fields?

This paper examines how leadership theories are represented in the HRD literature. Data for the current article provide a preview of leadership theories that are used to inform HRD scholars and scholar–practitioners for a period of 15 years (2000-2015) in the four Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) publications (Advances in Developing Human Resources; Human Resource Development International; Human Resource Development Quarterly; and Human Resource Development Review). The four journals within the AHRD were reviewed to identify which leadership theories were being researched and used to inform members of HRD. The search terms for the current study included “leadership AND theory,” “team AND leadership,” “leadership AND development” and “team AND development.” Studies that presented a leadership theory and either described or defined the theory were coded for the current study. Within this body of literature, there were a total of 74 leadership theories identified (some repeating), among those there were a total of 20 unique leadership theories. The literature external of HRD was identified using the ScienceDirect database for 10 years (2007-2017) with the topics limited to “topics–leadership.” Once the HRD and organizational/leadership literature are presented, a comparison between the two literature streams will be provided, highlighting any deficiencies within either body of literature and recommendations for future research efforts for the field of HRD.

This examination of leadership theory study within HRD and other fields highlights the deficiencies within either body of literature and offers recommendations for future research efforts for the field of HRD. In line with the trend in leadership research, HRD should call for more longitudinal and multi-level research efforts to be conducted as opposed to cross-sectional studies.

The current study is limited in the literature that was used to collect/code data. Also, the time frame for the HRD literature ended in 2015 due to the long duration required to review articles and to code the data. Secondary data were obtained from organizational/leadership literature and are more current because they are more recent. Overall, even with an end date of 2015 for the HRD literature, the HRD field has not changed too much during this time and the authors recognize some minor changes, but the research findings are still relevant and the leadership deficits presented are still realized.

The field of HRD is behind when it comes to leadership theories. This paper identifies this in an effort to aid researchers, students and practitioners to look beyond the leadership theories presented in the HRD literature for more relevant and current leadership theories. This paper highlighted a number of newer and current leadership theories and trends for scholars and scholar-practitioners to begin to focus on; however, this list is only a snapshot and is bounded by the data collected for the current paper.

This paper is original in that it is both critical of leadership research within the HRD literature while also providing new directions for the field. The snapshot of where the field of HRD is compared to the leadership and organizational fields becomes apparent with multiple future directions for research.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyze Alfred Chandler's ideological shift from American exceptionalism to transnational history in research assumptions to identify significant corollaries for the study of management history.

Using the determinism‐indeterminism classifying framework proposed by Tucker, the paper classifies Chandler's works based on the extent to which they reflect Chandler's ideological commitment to exceptionalist versus transnational perspective.

The paper found that the year of 1980 was the turning point for Chandler's ideological shift from American exceptionalism to a more transnational comparative perspective.

The paper outlines the relevant implications of our findings for management history, calling for an emulation of Chandler's pursuit of comparative examinations of established concepts and management philosophy within the historical development of contemporary and past transnational firms and managers. It believes this holds great importance to furthering a historical perspective in relative management history, and global management, which, in turn, will further illuminate the history of American business and management as well.

The unique contribution of this paper is that it provides the first historical analysis of the ideological assumptions underpinning Chandler's works.

Within the expansive body of literature on knowledge management, very little research is found that examines the use of teams as a sub‐process for knowledge management. This article addresses this limitation by seeking to provide a theoretical framework that examines the similarities between the benefits of incorporating teams into the workplace and incorporating knowledge management principles. Recognizing that knowledge management has several critical dimensions, the framework that ties workplace teams to each of these knowledge management dimensions is built. Knowledge management and teams in the workplace are viewed at the individual, team and organizational level of analysis.

This is a conceptual paper that reviews current literature on teams and matches the functions of teams to those of knowledge management critical dimensions as outlined by Argote et al. knowledge management context and knowledge management outcomes.

The deficit in current literature is identified by placing teams as a sub‐process for knowledge management. Additionally, the benefits teams can have on an organization within the knowledge management process are identified.

The research contributes to the field by offering a framework that can serve to further the research on utilizing teams as a sub‐process to knowledge management. Teams are identified as a sub‐process to the knowledge management process within an organizational framework.

This paper, based on the experience of running a workshop on library automation in Estonia combined with visits to several major libraries, outlines the main problems faced by Estonian libraries in recent years and the steps taken to improve the situation. It provides insight, through analysis of articles published by (mostly) Estonian professionals into the problems of identifying the problems — lack of funds, lack of qualifications, organisational problems, and searching for possible solutions: networking, resource sharing, use of information technology and international co‐operation. A description of the role of the Open Society's Regional Library Programme in supporting these steps and details about some of the Estonian libraries that were visited prior to the workshop complete the picture of a varied library landscape, richer for its splendid new national library in one of the smallest states on the outskirts of the new Europe.