The lacunae with the current leadership models

From our literature survey, we find that research on Leadership

Development has majorly focused on models and interventions to
make our understanding of leadership development much clearer.
The problem however, with current thinking on leadership
development and the evaluation of leadership development is the
exploration of the extent of connect and alignment between an
individual leader and the organization they work for. We strongly
believe that the aspects of how individual leaders navigate their
personal leadership development ventures and how the
organizations for which they work interface with them to provide
effective development opportunities and practice are very important
to be considered in evaluating the effectiveness of leadership
models
The solution
Considering the problem, we feel that we need to move away from
isolated methods towards an interconnected process of personal
and organizational discovery and learning. When leaders and
organizations coordinate to enhance the interconnectedness of
leadership development, learning may become more entrenched
and aligned which could drive better development outcomes and
value. Our model inches towards providing an integrated
perspective of leadership development and exploring a whole
system view so both leaders and organizations can engage, plan,
and evaluate their efforts in an aligned and holistic way.
We propose a navigational frame to go beyond a set itinerary of
leadership
development activities towards how development activities
influence the needs and context of individuals and organizations.
From secondary research (Hanson, 2007), we have found that
Leaders and organizations cite many leadership development
challenges such as accountability, application, feedback and
methods and it is clear that often leaders and organizations have
differing views of how these aspects of leadership development will
pan out. Yet it is found that many organisations continue to provide
a variety of leadership development
interventions without understanding and evaluating this important
interfacing relationship from an alignment perspective. In essence,
before we do leadership development, we need to define a
comprehensive leadership development system to empower both
leaders and organizations to map their development efforts.
The approach
First we propose to differentiate between leader development and
leadership development. Then we propose 4 possibilities in the form

of a matrix that connects leader and leadership development with

individuals and the organizations for which they work. Further, we
will focus on testing the assumption that an aligned systemic view
of the leadership development interface will result in more
measurable leadership development outcomes.

Leader Development contrasted with Leadership Development

Through secondary research, we found that David Day in 2001
advocated that leadership development borders on two main areasthe leader within and leadership in action. Leadership, in our
understanding, is both an internal process of personal discovery of
values and beliefs and an external action of influencing, directing,
and building teams and organizations. In essence it is an and and
not an or relationship when building leadership talent. One cannot
do leader development without doing leadership development as
well, they are interconnected, linked and both are important when
navigating learning interventions.
PART I
Leader Development
Leader development, according to us, starts with the intrapersonal
interaction of an individual in building self-awareness around values,
beliefs, character, spirit, and personality. The focus of the individual
undertakes an inherent assumption in the form that a leader is the
sum of his or her life experiences and comes into a leadership role
with a conscious or unconscious philosophy of life and leading
authentically as proposed by Avolio & Luthans, 2006. This notion
that a leader needs to lead his or herself through personal
understanding and philosophy as well as seeing his or her whole life
as part of the leadership journey is critical because leading in action
such as building relationships and trust comes from a leaders selforientation as proposed by Green & Howe in 2012. This inward view
of the leader also ensures newness in an organizations leader
pipeline whereby leaders know why and how they lead as per Ready
& Conger in a paper published in 2007.
Leadership Development
Leadership development is about dissecting leadership into learned
and teachable aspects through formal and informal interventions as
per Hernez-Broome & Hughes, 2004. Leadership development
delves upon the transactional and transformational nature of
leadership and webs of social systems in which leadership is
displayed. This social view directs leadership development into
constructing interactive, technical, and connective skills required in
the process of leading organizational strategy and operations as well
as leading people and teams according to Kaplan & Kaiser, 2006.

Through secondary research, we have found that to build leadership

capabilities, organizations and individuals are turning to different
types of intervention methods. Sometimes these leadership
development interventions are standalone or sometimes they are
connected as a menu of connected interventions. The
shortcomings of these types of leadership development
interventions is that they have a this then that and this or that
framework forming a building block approach that is both
incremental and linear. However, leadership development, in our
view, is more dynamic than linear. The question of leadership
development is changing from: How one effectively develops
leadership to how one can participate effectively in all of the
leadership processes.
PART II
The proposed Leadership Model
Our leadership model has emerged from the academic research
studies that we have mentioned hitherto. The model was guided by
the question of why leadership development interventions work for
some but not for others in the context of applied leadership in
organizational settings. How do the relational contexts of leader and
leadership development connect and align to individual and
organizational perspectives? Through a series of qualitative
interviews with leaders at some of the global companies such as
Mckinsey and Co., Hindustan Unilever and Procter and Gamble, we
constructed our model.
The intersection between the individual and the organization and
leader and leadership development reveals the four key elements
and definitions of our leadership model. The interface portrays the
holistic nature of leadership development in both activity and
accountability of individuals and organizations.
In the following sections the 4 permutations and combinations of the
leadership model will be explored and thus the ramifications of
alignment to achieve better leadership development outcomes will
be exemplified.
Possibility 1: (originating from the interaction between the
individual self and a leader role)
Leader introspection and self-awareness
As per our secondary research, we find that much of the current
thinking on leader development suggests that a leader must be
willing to introspect and how their own self-awareness impacts the
way they authentically lead. Leaders must ascertain and challenge
their fundamental values and beliefs, personality, personal wellbeing (health/spirituality), authenticity, character, and qualities,
personal vision/goals.

This possibility leads to the exploration of an individual leaders

philosophical
frame where the thinking about their thinking is awakened and
accounted for as an integral part of the our model.
Possibility 2: (originating from the interaction between the
organization and a Leader role)
Multilayered feedback system
We believe that there is an onerous need for feedback that enables
leaders to develop. Feedback is an effective way for a measurement
methodology over time for leaders to establish how they are doing
and highlights areas for improvement. Feedback needs to be
meaningful, personal and specific and provided in various focus
areas, modes, and methods including formal assessment, 360
degree feedback, uncovering multi-stakeholder perceptions,
measured ability/potential and coaching.
Leaders need to train themselves to ask for feedback and be willing
to hear it, but most importantly it is the organizations prerogative
to provide it in constructive and enabling ways.
Possibility 3: (Originating from the interaction between the
organization and The construct of Leadership)
Leadership viewed in terms of context, fit and practicing
environments
The third possibility is about our belief that leadership development
needs a supportive environment as a learning place, and a context
and purpose that is linked to organizational performance.
Organizational settings provide performance expectations (reward
and consequence), learning space (opportunity and resources),
succession planning, facilitated development projects and positions
(action learning), leadership culturefit/political dynamics. Without
context, practice, and fit, leadership development can have abstract
meanings for individuals. Without it, the development can become
general and nonspecific and deemed great in theory but not
necessarily applicable in a leaders real world or interest.
Possibility 4: (Originating from the interaction between the
individual self and the construct of Leadership)
Capturing interventions and processes around developing leadership
The final aspect of leadership development revolves around building
the skills and behaviors that lead to effective leadership learning as
an outcome and action. Leadership development requires an
interactive basis and can focus on competence/skill training
(behavioral and technical), networks/community/organizational
connections, formal and informal life-long education, team and
hierarchical interactions.

Leadership learning and development trains the individual to

identify key
leadership social and relational competencies to develop in their
leadership style to enhance conversations with others. Self-directed
or externally facilitated, individuals must determine the areas of
leadership in action they need to improve at and then hone these
through applied learning strategies to develop those essential
leadership competencies.