Leadership Development

Conceptual issues and Definitions

Leadership has proved impossible to define in a way that is universally accepted. Different leadership approaches emphasize specific behaviors (e.g., initiating structure, providing support); aggregate leadership styles (e.g., task- and relationship-oriented); trait like characteristics (e.g., charisma); the relationship between a leader and a follower (e.g., leader-member exchange quality); and so on. Leadership can include any of these emphases but is most holistically characterized as a process involving leaders, followers, and situations. Thus, contemporary approaches view leadership as a dynamic process, not as a static formal position.

Leadership development can be described as the longitudinal process of expanding the capacities of individuals, groups, and organizations to increase their effectiveness in leadership roles and processes. Increased effectiveness from this perspective pertains to anything that would improve the ability for groups of people to work together in productive and meaningful ways. Thus, leadership development is inherently multilevel in that the developmental focus can be on the individual, group or team, or the entire organization—or some combination of all three levels. Taking into account group and organizational levels is important to the goal of building a sustainable leadership-development system that supports continuous and ongoing individual self-development processes.

Although the best leadership-development processes include multiple levels, there is a long-standing confusion between leader development and leadership development. What is typically called leadership development is usually more accurately conceptualized as leader development, as it is targeted at developing individual leaders. This distinction goes beyond mere semantics, because it gets at the core of the important role that social context plays in leadership. A social context is necessary in that no leadership can occur without at least one other person (i.e., “follower”) who is influenced, directed, supported, or otherwise affected by the leadership process. Nonetheless, most so-called leadership-development efforts are focused entirely on enhancing individual leaders' knowledge, skills, and abilities (or broader competencies) in ways that are expected to improve their overall individual leadership capabilities. Developing individual or intrapersonal capabilities (i.e., human capital) can enhance the potential for effective leadership at some future point, but it does not ensure more effective leadership without attention to the social context. The broader concept of leadership emerges through social interaction and is based on the pattern and quality of networked interpersonal relationships in an organization (i.e., social capital).

Effective leadership development requires attention to both human and social capital concerns. Developing individual capabilities without any attention to the social context ignores the fundamental tenet that leadership is based on interactions among leaders, followers, and the social environment. Attempting to develop the pattern and quality of networked [Page 458]relationships that defines the social capital component of leadership without preparing individual leaders with the requisite skills to communicate, influence, inspire, and otherwise participate effectively in leadership processes could risk putting people into situations in which they are unprepared individually to lead effectively. Critical to developing effective leadership is designing and implementing developmental systems that link intrapersonal leader development with networked interpersonal leadership development in ways that build both the human and social capital components of leadership.

...