Search results

The leadership identity development (LID) grounded theory (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005) and related LID model (Komives, Longerbeam, Owen, Mainella, & Osteen, 2006) present a framework for understanding how individual college students develop the social identity of being collaborative, relational leaders interdependently engaging in leadership as a group process (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 1998, 2007). Challenges to applying and measuring this stage based developmental theory are discussed and recommendations are included.

The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine how college students define the concept of leadership and to identify gender, racial, and age differences within these definitions. Participants were 1100 undergraduate students drawn from a national sample. Participants were asked to detail their definitions of leadership, which were analyzed using thematic content analysis. The definitional themes served as dependent variables in determining differences by gender, race, and age. Ten leadership themes describing the relationship between the leader and followers, leader characteristics, and leadership outcomes were identified, and the frequency of themes reflected fairly hierarchical perceptions of leadership. Findings by gender, race, and age emerged for nine of the ten themes. More contemporary understandings of leadership were demonstrated by women than by men, and the interaction of gender and age for three themes suggested more contemporary understandings of leadership for traditionally-aged students than non-traditionally aged students.

The purpose of our research was to use Day, Harrison, and Halpin’s, (2009) theory of leadership development as a premise to investigate how students’ constructive development is related to their leader identity development and understanding of leadership. Baxter Magolda’s Model of Epistemological Reflection (MER, 1988, 2001) was used to understand constructive development, Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen’s Leadership Identity Development (2005) to determine leader identity, and Drath’s principles of leadership (2001) to determine understanding of leadership. Fifty junior and senior college student leaders filled out the MER and participated in an interview about their leadership experiences. Interviews were coded according to the above constructs of leader identity development and leadership understanding. Although there was a relationship between leader identity development and understanding of leadership, no relationship was found between these two constructs and constructive development. Findings suggest that most of the student leaders still depend on others to help them construct reality. Furthermore, many believe that because they are in a leadership role, they are leaders while others are not.

Developing leaders for a diverse democracy is an increasingly important aim of higher education and social justice is ever more a goal of leadership education efforts. Accordingly, it is important to explore how dominant leadership models, as blueprints for student leadership development, account for and may unwittingly reinforce systems of domination, like racism. This critical discourse analysis, rooted in racialization and color-evasiveness, examines three prominent college student leadership development models to examine how leaders and leadership are racialized. We find that all three leadership texts frame leaders and leadership in color-evasive ways. Specifically, the texts’ discourses reveal three mechanisms for evading race in leadership: focusing on individual identities, emphasizing universality, and centering collaboration. Implications for race in leadership development, the social construction of leadership more broadly, and future scholarship are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether students’ completion of an introductory leadership minor course is associated with their first-year retention and their four-year graduation or continued enrollment. The authors used propensity score matching techniques and discovered that first-year students who enrolled in an academic leadership course had significantly greater odds of retention, graduation in four years (over withdrawal), and continued enrollment in four years (over withdrawal) compared to their peers who did not enroll in an introductory leadership minor course.

This study aims to examine how leadership identity manifests at the individual and collective levels within a relational training context among a group of multicultural higher education students.

This is a case study and examines the interactions among eight multicultural students through the theoretical lens of leadership identity development (LID) theory.

The main findings of this study suggest that LID manifests through an open will and intensifying motivation to the collective impulse of achieving shared goals through nurturing the collective cognition to integrate diverse perspectives and a broadening view of leadership as a collective capacity for co-creation and generativity.

Although the paper builds on a case study with a limited number of participants and the ability to generalise its findings is partial, the study may provide practical applications for training leadership in other collaborative contexts and supporting it at the individual and collective levels.

The LID theory and LID model have been applied simultaneously to a training lab to examine how LID manifests among a multicultural group of higher education students. The lab emphasises a participatory leadership-oriented pedagogy.

In the 21^st century, effective church leaders need to be prepared to emphasize and demonstrate ethical leadership, personal responsibility, and community service. The foundation for success in all those areas lies in the ability of church leaders to initiate, develop, and maintain positive functioning relationships. Based on over 40 years experience in various church leadership roles, the author provides his unique relational principles of effective church leadership, including (a) mission, (b) conflict management, (c) power and influence, (d) collaboration, (e) emotions are facts, (f) forgiveness, (g) reconciliation, and (h) love.

As teachers of leadership, we have noticed that our students often get “stuck” thinking about leadership in overly simplistic ways that dichotomize task and relationship-orientations, often resulting in overly simplistic understandings of leadership processes. In this reflective essay, we draw upon two approaches to leadership theory—leadership psychology and discursive leadership—to consider why the leadership dichotomy occurs and provide ideas for how leadership instructors might restructure and refocus their courses to help students transcend it to develop more reflexive, contextualized understandings of leadership. We suggest four ideas for innovating leadership pedagogy: 1) rethink the typical chronological organization, 2) challenge students to identify leadership myths, 3) engage students in applied leadership contexts, and 4) emphasize leadership as a communicative practice.

For a long time, researchers have stressed the importance of identity for collaborative supply relationships. Accordingly, it has been proposed that supply relationships may be efficiently managed by establishing a shared collective identity among partners. However, this strategy may challenge the partners' individual distinctiveness and thus lead to adversarial relationship outcomes. In this article, it is argued how and when establishing an intergroup relational identity may be a better choice than building a collective identity.

The conceptual research is based on an analysis of previous literature. Relational identity theorizing and the theory of intergroup leadership are applied to build on and extend previous views on identity in interorganizational contexts.

It is proposed that when supply chain actors are subject to identity threats in collaborative supply relationships, such threats are driven by the imbalance of power between or among the parties. Therefore, establishing an intergroup relational identity should be preferred over a collective identity in situations characterized by a high identity threat.

Future studies could support this article's theoretical suggestions with empirical evidence.

Intergroup relational identity preserves the distinctiveness of all parties involved in a collaborative relationship and is based on their individual contributions. Managers could support a collaborative environment and promote a shared vision between or among organizations through appropriate rhetoric.

This study contributes to an understanding of the relational aspects of interorganizational behavior by adapting social psychological theories to this area of research.