Leadership Development Programs Today: A Guide to Effective Strategy Execution or Fads du Jour?

Hester Nienaber, Richard McNeill
{"title":"Leadership Development Programs Today: A Guide to Effective Strategy Execution or Fads du Jour?","authors":"Hester Nienaber, Richard McNeill","doi":"10.34190/ecmlg.19.1.1671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Leaders are answerable. Organizational performance is attained by successful strategy execution. Consequently, organizations heavily spend on leadership development to hone leaders’ competence aimed at ensuring the organization’s competitive success. However, the success of such programs is questioned because of, amongst others, (a) frequently reported strategy implementation failure, allegedly owing to the absence of a competitive advantage and (b) observations that leadership as a mandatory source of competitive advantage has declined, despite leadership development initiatives. Thus, the question arises whether organizations systematically use leadership development foundational metrics (e.g., direction-setting capacity, trust, etc.) for effective strategy implementation. As part of a larger study, this report accounts for organizational use of leadership development metrics in strategy implementation. We followed the guidance of reputable scholars in conducting the empirical study. Limited information on the topic dictated an exploratory approach to gain insights to lay the foundation for future descriptive and explanatory studies. The considerable amount of data required to answer the question necessitated an exploratory survey. We collected data from a purposely selected population with an online questionnaire, based on a literature review and pre-tested with Human Resource professionals, complying with ethical principles. The findings include: The study met norms for exploratory surveys and trustworthiness criteria. More than half of the diverse respondents (concerning demographic variables, strategies applied, and ensuing organizational performance) reported the use of leadership development metrics in strategy implementation. However, few respondents linked the metrics used to competitive advantage. The implications include that the leadership development interventions may not have been optimal in ensuring effective strategy implementation based on competitive advantage. It can be concluded that the leadership metrics the respondents’ organizations have used may have been ineffective in ensuring competitive success. The value of this paper stems from its actionable insights based on proven theory and validated by an exploratory survey. However, the main limitation of the study is its cross-sectional nature. Hence, we recommend further descriptive and explanatory research to enable broader generalizations.","PeriodicalId":496514,"journal":{"name":"European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance","volume":"27 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/ecmlg.19.1.1671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Leaders are answerable. Organizational performance is attained by successful strategy execution. Consequently, organizations heavily spend on leadership development to hone leaders’ competence aimed at ensuring the organization’s competitive success. However, the success of such programs is questioned because of, amongst others, (a) frequently reported strategy implementation failure, allegedly owing to the absence of a competitive advantage and (b) observations that leadership as a mandatory source of competitive advantage has declined, despite leadership development initiatives. Thus, the question arises whether organizations systematically use leadership development foundational metrics (e.g., direction-setting capacity, trust, etc.) for effective strategy implementation. As part of a larger study, this report accounts for organizational use of leadership development metrics in strategy implementation. We followed the guidance of reputable scholars in conducting the empirical study. Limited information on the topic dictated an exploratory approach to gain insights to lay the foundation for future descriptive and explanatory studies. The considerable amount of data required to answer the question necessitated an exploratory survey. We collected data from a purposely selected population with an online questionnaire, based on a literature review and pre-tested with Human Resource professionals, complying with ethical principles. The findings include: The study met norms for exploratory surveys and trustworthiness criteria. More than half of the diverse respondents (concerning demographic variables, strategies applied, and ensuing organizational performance) reported the use of leadership development metrics in strategy implementation. However, few respondents linked the metrics used to competitive advantage. The implications include that the leadership development interventions may not have been optimal in ensuring effective strategy implementation based on competitive advantage. It can be concluded that the leadership metrics the respondents’ organizations have used may have been ineffective in ensuring competitive success. The value of this paper stems from its actionable insights based on proven theory and validated by an exploratory survey. However, the main limitation of the study is its cross-sectional nature. Hence, we recommend further descriptive and explanatory research to enable broader generalizations.
今天的领导力发展项目:有效战略执行指南还是一时流行?
领导者是负责任的。组织绩效是通过成功的战略执行来实现的。因此,组织在领导力发展上投入了大量资金,以磨练领导者的能力,以确保组织的竞争成功。然而,这些项目的成功受到质疑,因为(a)经常报告战略实施失败,据称是由于缺乏竞争优势;(b)尽管有领导力发展计划,但领导力作为竞争优势的强制性来源已经下降。因此,问题出现了,组织是否系统地使用领导力发展的基本指标(例如,方向设定能力,信任等)来有效地实施战略。作为一项更大的研究的一部分,本报告说明了组织在战略实施中使用领导力发展指标。我们在知名学者的指导下进行了实证研究。关于该主题的有限信息决定了一种探索性方法,以获得见解,为未来的描述性和解释性研究奠定基础。回答这个问题需要大量的数据,因此有必要进行探索性调查。我们在遵循道德原则的基础上,根据文献综述和人力资源专业人员的预先测试,通过在线问卷从有目的地选择的人群中收集数据。研究结果包括:本研究符合探索性调查规范和可信度标准。超过一半的不同受访者(涉及人口变量、所应用的战略和随后的组织绩效)报告了在战略实施中使用领导力发展指标。然而,很少有受访者将这些指标与竞争优势联系起来。其含义包括领导力发展干预措施在确保基于竞争优势的有效战略实施方面可能不是最佳的。可以得出的结论是,受访者的组织所使用的领导指标可能在确保竞争成功方面是无效的。本文的价值在于其基于已被证明的理论和探索性调查验证的可操作的见解。然而,该研究的主要局限性在于其横断面性质。因此,我们建议进一步进行描述性和解释性研究,以实现更广泛的概括。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信