How Leadership Development Programming Contributes to Organizational Performance

International Leadership and Management

Today, the importance of identifying suitable candidates for international leadership development has never been greater given the rapidly changing globalized marketplace and the realignment of regional trading blocs. To gain some fresh insights into these issues, the purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis and evaluation of organizational leadership perspectives in general and how an evidence-based perspective on leadership can promote optimal developmental outcomes in particular. To this end and drawing on a recent article by Anders (2021), this paper outlines the main issues and factors that shapes or affect leadership at present, including salient recommendations for leaders based on the article discussions. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning international leadership and management are presented in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

A growing body of scholarship confirms the relationship between leadership development initiatives and organizational performance, but there remains a lack of consensus concerning the main factors that produce optimal leadership developmental programming outcomes. Moreover, there are also some definitional challenges involved in identifying the main issues and factors that shape or affect leadership due to a corresponding absence of a universal definition of leadership. For example, Subedi and his associates (2021) point out that, “Leadership lacks universal definition because of its personalized application and different ways to influence people. To understand it simply, leadership is a process whereby an individual influence a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 1).

Based on this straightforward but overly broad definition of leadership, it is reasonable to suggest that the main issues and factors that shapes or affect leadership are those that facilitate individuals’ ability to lead others towards accomplishing a common goal in which they may not have any interest otherwise. Some of the factors that are cited by Anders (2021) as being important for effective leadership include interpersonal skills and relations with others and the ability to transform and motivate other people while maintaining a focus on the future. This set of leadership attributes is related to the main tenets of transformational leadership theory (Yokus, 2022), but Anders (2021) goes on to emphasize the need to take a number of other factors into account as well.

Based on a careful reading of the Anders (2021) study and relevant coursework, it is clear that there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to leadership development that is the most effective for everyone. Rather, an individualized, evidence-based approach to leadership development is consistently cited by organizational development researchers (Soria & Johnson, 2020). For instance, according to Anders (2021), “Leadership development efforts need to take into consideration individuals’ progression through stages of cognitive and moral development, and also their place in the larger context of organizational and societal influences, including culture, power and politics, and continuous learning processes” (p. 2). Although this scholarly observation is a good example of academese run amok, Anders (2021) does make it clear that the main issues and factors that shapes or affect leadership are not isolated to a given set but are rather dependent upon the unique qualities, values and experiences of leadership development (LD) candidates.

In addition, Anders (2021) painfully drives this point home even further when he restates the foregoing obvious issues in order to make it clear to anyone who may have missed it the first time: “This perspective holds that traditional LD efforts too narrowly focus on the knowledge and personal characteristics of individual leaders in ways that neglect the social and experiential aspects of leadership practice” (p. 3). Notwithstanding this restatement of the obvious, Anders (2021) does provide some useful guidance concerning the importance of using evidence-based interventions that can build in LD candidates’ strengths while simultaneously addressing their leadership needs in a rapidly changing organizational environment. This guidance is consistent with a number of other leadership development theories which advocate an individualized holistic approach (Mills-Guest, 2021).

The debate over nature versus nurture continues, but it is apparent that some fortunate individuals seem to be naturally born leaders who possess the charisma and intuitive ability to read others that are needed to guide others to achieving a common goal. In this regard, Soria and Johnson (2020) emphasize that:

The most demanding societal problems of our time require effective leaders who can collaboratively develop a vision for social change, identify the most capable individuals to contribute their strengths to collaborative efforts, value diverse ways of understanding the world and work respectfully across differences, critically evaluate existing systems and conditions, and coordinate the efforts of groups in strategic action. (p. 9)

The historical record, though, is also replete with examples of individuals who have risen to the occasion when called upon to lead others during challenging times, even when they have no particular desire to do so and no prior leadership experience. A recent example of this type of situational leader is the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy, who was a popular television comedian just a few years ago but who is now a major force in mobilizing his nation’s 44 million citizens against a drunken mob of poorly trained and ill-equipped Russian invaders who still outnumber and outgun the Ukrainians.

This reality means that it is not always easy – or even possible – to consistently identify people who already possess the “right stuff’ that is required of effective organizational leaders. On the one hand, this constraint means that the selection of candidates for leadership development opportunities is fraught with challenges from the outset, and even seemingly ideal leadership development candidates may not fully benefit from such training and experiences to the point where they achieve the intended programming outcomes (Johnson & Soria, 2020), a reality that is supported by numerous empirical observations in the workplace over the years by this writer. On the other hand, though, it is reasonable to posit that individuals who are sufficiently motivated to seek out leadership development opportunities are more likely to benefit from leadership development programming.

The foregoing challenges to the provision of effective leadership development programing are already severe, but they are greatly magnified when international leadership is involved. Even comparatively ineffective leaders can frequently succeed in just muddling through their responsibilities from time to time by simply allowing people to do their jobs rather than trying to help them. This type of suboptimal but common leadership approach is only possible in some cases because otherwise-ineffective leaders speak the same language and share many of the same cultural values and practices as their subordinates and everyone just wants to get through their day without getting in trouble or getting fired. In other words, these types of ineffective leaders only succeed in motivating their subordinates to do as much as necessary in order to just keep their jobs rather than exceeding expectations or excelling in their current positions.

Truly effective international leadership, however, requires individuals who are able to overcome such cross-cultural and linguistic differences (Duns, 2020). This reality also means that selecting candidates for domestic and international leadership development will likely involve additional and fundamentally different factors which must also be taken into account in order to produce the next generation of public and private sector leaders who are capable of responding to the exigencies of the international marketplace in timely and effective ways. Human resource practitioners and organizational leaders can improve the leadership development process, though, by ensuring they use an evidence-based, individualized, holistic approach.

Conclusion

The research was consistent in demonstrating the need for evidence-based, human-centered leadership development programming that focuses on multiple factors including intrapersonal, interpersonal, and strategic communication contexts to enhance leadership capacities and abilities. Although every leadership situation is different, one of the most important attributes that is consistently cited in the leadership development research is the manner in which leaders treat their followers. Leaders who consistently demonstrate a sincere interest in the welfare and career progress of their direct reports will likely achieve superior outcomes compared to those that do not, even if they lack any other leadership qualities. Unlike many other leadership qualities, however, this attribute cannot be taught outright but it can be learned through experiential opportunities that provide aspiring leaders with the real-world experiences they need to better understand what really motivates other people. In the final analysis, it is reasonable to conclude that many if not most organizational leaders in the future will engage in some interactions with the international marketplace, meaning that all leaders will also be international leaders to some extent.