Leadership Research Summary:
- Researchers propose that distinct leadership competencies differ in their development over time. Extending the integrative model of leader development (Day et al., 2009), the study further proposes that leader identity will form complex relationships with leadership competencies over time. To test these propositions, researchers use longitudinal data (i.e., 5 months, four measurement points) of the 80 in total high-potential executives in a corporate leadership development program.
- The study finds a significant difference in the initial levels and the changes of eight distinct leadership competencies. Researchers also find that leader identity relates to the development of certain – but not all – leadership competencies. Finally, researchers demonstrate the importance of developing leadership competencies by linking them to career advancement (i.e., job promotion).
Leadership Research Findings:
- The present findings have potentially important practical implications for organizational leadership development. First, in line with calls for a more rigorous evaluation of leadership development initiatives, we demonstrate how a trajectory modeling approach can be used to evaluate the development of leadership competencies and cognitions over time. A longitudinal approach to evaluating leadership development offers a number of advantages in terms of understanding change during the actual program intervention. Most evaluation efforts only examine pre- and post-intervention changes – if at all. Given that the present intervention spanned 5 months, it is reasonable to assume that change might occur during the intervention, which was confirmed in our analyses across all eight competencies.
- Second and relatedly, researchers demonstrate that the time required to develop leaders will depend on the specific competencies being developed. This suggests a need for a more tailored approach to leadership development. For example, the study’s findings suggest that distinct leadership competencies develop at different rates, which is likely due to differences in the use of these competencies and underlying knowledge structures. Some of the more complex competencies (i.e., creating commitment, challenging the status quo) are vital to organizational success in the changing business landscape but are not used as often as other less complex competencies (i.e., managing stress). Therefore, leader development initiatives should have a greater focus on and allow a longer time for the development of more complex competencies.
- Third, researchers suggest that leader development should consider individual and organizational developmental needs (see Day, 2000). The findings also suggest that individual differences, such as leader identity, play an important role in facilitating the development of certain leadership competencies. This indicates that leadership self-views should be considered when designing developmental interventions. Potentially, this is even more important at the senior-leadership level because complex leadership competencies must be supported by strong underlying cognitive structures to facilitate their development (Lord and Hall, 2005).
- Furthermore, the study finds that individuals differ in the initial level and the rate of change in the leadership competencies. Again, this suggests the need for tailored development and warns against the common one-size-fits-all approach. As the study demonstrates, one way in which leadership development could be customized to individual needs within a broader program is coaching. Coaches are able to address the challenges faced by individual leaders and guide their development along a unique trajectory.
- Furthermore, organizational needs should determine leadership competencies that would be targeted by developmental initiatives (Lacerenza et al., 2017). Although competency frameworks have been criticized by some scientist–practitioners (Hollenbeck et al., 2006), the criticism mostly applies to the attempts to determine universal leadership competencies that apply across all organizations and industries. However, as the study also demonstrates, leadership competency frameworks can be useful in determining leadership competencies for a single organization (see also Alldredge and Nilan, 2000) and guiding the design of leadership development programs. These frameworks are readily available at many organizations and thus can be easily adapted for evaluation. Overall, the present study suggests that leader development should be tailored as much as possible to individual participants by considering their unique differences in cognition and competencies and to the organization by considering the requirements of specific positions (e.g., Claussen et al., 2014).
- Finally, the design and the methodology of the present study offer some direction for scientists–practitioners consulting psychologists, who wish to undertake a more rigorous evaluation of leadership development initiatives. A particular strength of this research is the use of coaches’ ratings of leadership competencies instead of self-reports by the program participants.
- Involving coaches in program evaluation presents advantages in gathering better informed and objective ratings, reflective of participant’s development, and also reducing the burden of over-surveying the participants. The study also demonstrates how a sophisticated, yet easy-to-apply, analytical technique (and freely available software) can be adapted for program evaluation. In addition, the technique can be used to produce individualized feedback to the program participants as it allows extracting personal developmental trajectories and growth coefficients. This could be valuable in guiding personalized leadership development.