Search results

The transformational leadership concept differentiates between instrumental motivation and normative commitment. The high motivation levels, the relative freedom given to junior officers, and the esprit de corps in infantry units in the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) have made the concept of transformational leadership highly suitable for junior commanders. Reports on a three‐day transformational leadership workshop for officer cadets designed and conducted by civilian psychologists at the IDF School for Leadership Development. Found qualitative and quantitative attitudinal data collected for six consecutive training cycles over a period of 18 months to be very favourable. A further programme attempts to integrate the transformational leadership model as an ongoing effort throughout the infantry cadets′ six‐month training programme.

Argues that hierarchical level is frequently not given enough consideration in analysing managerial jobs. Describes the qualitative differences existing at the various hierarchical levels in terms of time‐span, task complexity, and mental capabilities required. Specifically argues that the cognitive complexity required at senior managerial levels may be a liability at lower managerial levels where direct judgment and quick action are needed. Consequently, postulates an inverse “Peter Principle”. Elaborates on the implications of this inverse “Peter Principle” for management selection promotion and development of these hierarchical differences.

The implications of disabilities, whether already existing at the time of appointment or incurred during the working career, are examined at the macro‐organisational levels – productivity and human resources strategy. It is argued that the extent of physical disability of an individual may be quite independent of his/her contribution to the organisation. Consequently, a diagnostic model was developed which assesses an individual’s Total Productivity Capacity (TPC). The TPC index proposed is a multiplicative function of a disabled worker’s Productivity Potential (PP) at work, assessed by the direct supervisor, and individual Sickness Absence (SA) rate compared with the organisation’s average (SA\sb\(x)): TPC = [1 ‐ (SA\sb\(n) – SA\sb\(x))] x PP. A 2 x 2 matrix, measuring extent of physical handicap and TPC allows grouping of handicapped into four categories: mildly handicapped with low TPC scores, mildly handicapped with high TPC scores; highly handicapped with high TPC scores; highly handicapped with low TPC scores. The utility of this classification scheme is demonstrated through an exploratory study conducted at a production plant for military vehicles where 12 per cent (n= 310) of the workforce were medically defined as disabled. TPC indices were derived for each disabled employee, and for the different plants/shops. Comparison of average TPC scores with incidence of disabilities indicated the independence of these measures, partially validating the proposed diagnostic model. Implications for production planning and differential personnel policies appropriate for disabled employees within the categorisations suggested are elaborated upon.

This case study, of an intervention in a region of the Israeli water supply company, demonstrates that the application of well known management techniques such as MBO, performance appraisal and bonus schemes, affect not only the technical but also the cultural and political subsystems of the organisation. These subsystems should be thoroughly assessed beforehand, with the prognosis of the possible effects of the change strategy on all of them.

Research in commercial organizations has provided a multitude of examples on how leadership development can effectively foster employees’ performance and work-related attitudes such as commitment or satisfaction. In contrast, to date systematic leadership development is largely lacking for employees in higher education. However, we suggest that the positive effects of leadership development in commercial organizations also apply to the academic context. Thus, the purpose of this applied article is to present two approaches to the development of leadership in higher education. More specifically, we provide a detailed description of two different programs offered to researchers at a large German university. The first program constitutes a leader development initiative for junior faculty on an individual level, whereas the second focuses on the development of leadership within university departments on a group level. We provide recommendations for establishing and evaluating effective leadership development in higher education.