Search results

In this concluding chapter, the editors reflect on the value-added contributions of the papers in this volume toward a better understanding of global leadership effectiveness. After highlighting some of those contributions, the editors then discuss relevant directions for future research in global leadership effectiveness and organize their discussion around (1) antecedents, (2) conditions, and (3) dimensions of global leadership effectiveness. They conclude by listing some of the paramount research questions they believe should be addressed for the field to move forward in mapping the dimensions and dynamics of global leadership effectiveness.

International experience (IE) has been acknowledged to be the most useful method for developing global leaders. However, not everyone benefits equally from IE. During the last two decades, our understanding of why this is the case and how global leaders learn from IE has rapidly increased. Several individual and organizational enablers facilitating global leader learning from IE have been identified in the literature, as have learning mechanisms that make such learning possible. However, the literature remains fragmented, and there is a great need to integrate the findings in the field. Therefore, the present paper systematically examines peer-reviewed studies on global leaders' learning from IE published between 1998 and 2019. The study contributes to the extant literature by identifying and integrating individual enablers, organizational enablers, and key learning mechanisms from global leaders' IE and by suggesting topics for future research.

San Jose State University’s (SJSU’s) Global Leadership Advancement Center (GLAC) was established in 2007 in response to a reported scarcity of global leaders in all sectors. Its mission is to advance, foster, and disseminate knowledge on global leadership and its development. The center created various programs in three focal areas: Knowledge Creation and Dissemination, Development and Training, and the Social Innovation Initiative. We briefly explain the assessment center, the GLLab (Global Leadership Laboratory), used to varying degrees in all development programs and courses. This chapter describes in detail three of GLAC’s innovative global leadership efforts and their theoretical foundations – an undergraduate global leadership course, the GLLab Exchange Program, and the Global Leadership Passport Program. All GLAC programs are based on research and best practices, which are referenced.

The chapters in Volume 15 of Advances in Global Leadership provide a comprehensive examination of the state of our field in its lenses on and through power. In this chapter, we synthesize the volume's insights around two main conclusions. First, global leadership research tends to draw on the same lenses and approaches to the study of power as the mainstream leadership research does. This is helpful for comparison and extension across contexts, but the research suggests that important insights – especially around the nature of power dynamics in highly complex environments – may be missed by limiting the perspective. Second, recent research on how global leaders work is beginning to show a pattern illuminating the importance of dynamic and shared power adaptation in global leadership. There are exciting possibilities in these directions, and this chapter concludes with a discussion on ideas for future research.

It is commonly believed that the complexities of different languages, cultures, histories, time zones, locations, governments, financial and legal systems contribute to the difficulty of leading global change. And yet, there is surprisingly little research at the intersection of global change and global leadership to guide practitioners. To fill this crucial gap, we provide a helpful framework for global leadership practitioners and scholars that emerged from a qualitative study of success factors in leading effective global change initiatives. We employed a comparative case study methodology to examine strategies and processes used by leaders of successful corporate and NGO global change projects. After comparing multiple cases of successful and unsuccessful global change initiatives in four organizations, we concluded that effective global change requires leaders to pay attention to 14 success factors categorized into three key design imperatives: (1) participatory process, (2) representative leadership, and (3) nested implementation. Participatory process consists of these success factors: (1) establish a clear vision, (2) ensure a collaborative start, (3) invite to the table as equals, (4) seek ideas from outside headquarters, (5) recognize and celebrate others, and (6) build systems for interdependence and accountability. Representative leadership includes: (7) create local leadership, (8) enable knowledgeable leadership, (9) empower willing leadership, and (10) develop bridge people. Nested implementation is composed of: (11) leverage formal communication channels, (12) attend to individual needs via interpersonal communication, (13) set global standards with local flexibility, and (14) test for regional credibility. We discuss these factors in light of existing literature and identify the implications and new horizons for global leadership theory and practice with respect to leading global change.

Although the term “trigger event” is commonly accepted and frequently mentioned by many disciplines in conjunction with sensemaking, research attention on the trigger event construct is sorely lacking. We chose to examine this construct within a specific setting that global leaders have to master – the intercultural context. After reviewing the relevant literature, we created an original model of trigger events and sensemaking in the intercultural context, which is accompanied by propositions that determine the likelihood of an event rising to the level of a trigger. It is our hope that this theoretical model will lead to a better understanding of how trigger events function in general. The chapter contributes to a greater understanding of the cognitive element of global leadership effectiveness. Finally, the model has practical implications for intercultural and global leadership training and executive coaching.