24 HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

Leadership Development:Past, Present, and Future

This article reviews notable

trends in the leadership

development field. In the

past two decades, such

trends included the proliferation

of new leadership development meth-

ods and a growing recognition of the

importance of a leader’s emotional

resonance with others. A growing

recognition that leadership develop-

ment involves more than just devel-

oping individual leaders has now led

to a greater focus on the context in

which leadership is developed,

thoughtful consideration about how

to best use leadership competencies,

and work/life balance issues. Future

trends include exciting potential

advances in globalization, technolo-

gy, return on investment (ROI),

and new ways of thinking about

the nature of leadership and leader-

ship development.

Gina Hernez-Broome, Richard L. Hughes, Center for Creative Leadership

HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING 25

The PastLooking back at the state of leadership and

leadership development over the past 20 years,we were surprised to discover more than adecade passed before HRP first contained an article with the word “leadership” in its title. Atthe risk of making too much out of mere titles,we note with interest the contrast between thatearly period and the fact that leadership develop-ment is now one of HRP’s five key knowledgeareas. The last two decades have witnessedsomething of an explosion of interest in leader-ship development in organizations. Some of themost noteworthy issues and trends in the field of leadership development in the past 20 yearsfall under these two general headings:

1. The proliferation of leadership developmentmethods;

2. The importance of a leader’s emotional reso-nance with and impact on others.

Proliferation of LeadershipDevelopment Methods

One clear trend over the past 20years has been the increasing useand recognition of the potency of avariety of developmental experi-ences. Classroom-type leadershiptraining—for long the primary formaldevelopment mode—is now comple-mented (or even supplanted) byactivities as diverse as high ropescourses or reflective journaling.

Classroom training should not bethe only part of a leadership develop-ment initiative, and may be the least critical.While training may even be a necessary elementof leadership development, developmental experi-ences are likely to have the greatest impact whenthey can be linked to or embedded in a person’songoing work and when they are an integrated setof experiences. Activities like coaching, mentoring,action learning, and 360-degree feedback areincreasingly key elements of leadership develop-ment initiatives.

Developmental relationships primarily taketwo forms: coaching and mentoring. Coachinginvolves practical, goal-focused forms of one-on-one learning and, ideally, behavioral change(Hall, et al., 1999). It can be a short-term inter-vention intended to develop specific leadershipskills or a more extensive process involving aseries of meetings over time. The most effective

coaching allows for collaboration to assess andunderstand the developmental task to challengecurrent constraints while exploring new possibili-ties, and to ensure accountability and support forreaching goals and sustaining development (Ting& Hart, 2004). Mentoring is typically defined asa committed, long-term relationship in which asenior person supports the personal and profes-sional development of a junior person. It may be a formal program or a much more informalprocess. Recognizing the value of mentoring,organizations are increasingly looking at ways toformalize these types of relationships as part oftheir leadership development efforts.

Action learning is a set of organization devel-opment practices in which important real-timeorganizational problems are tackled. Three kindsof objectives are sought: delivering measurableorganizational results, communicating learningsspecific to a particular context, and developingmore general leadership skills and capabilities(Palus & Horth, 2003). Effective action learningmay range from tacit, unfacilitated learning atwork to focused and high-impact learning pro-

jects to transformations of people and organizations (Marsick, 2002).

Challenging job assignments are apotent form of leadership developmentand provide many of the develop-mental opportunities in organizationstoday. The level of organizationalinvolvement in making job assign-ments part of their leadership devel-opment process runs the gamut from simply providing people withinformation about developmental

opportunities in their current job to a systematicprogram of job rotation. Using job assignmentsfor developmental purposes provides benefitsthat go beyond getting the job done and mayeven result in competitive advantages for theorganization (Ohlott, 2004).

One developmental method has been so perva-sive that it deserves somewhat greater attentionhere: the use of 360-degree feedback to assessleader competencies. Chappelow (2004) recentlynoted that perhaps the most remarkable trend inthe field of leader development over the past 20years has been the popularity and growth of 360-degree feedback. Others called it one of the mostnotable management innovations of the pastdecade (Atwater & Waldman, 1998; London &Beatty, 1993). To help those organizations disap-pointed with 360-degree feedback results, here is

Using job assign-

ments for develop-

mental purposes

provides benefits

that go beyond get-

ting the job done.

26 HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

some of what we have learned over the yearsabout how to implement them effectively(Chappelow, 2004):

1. An assessment activity is not necessarilydevelopmental. Three-hundred-sixty-degreefeedback should not be a stand-alone event. Inaddition to assessment there need to be devel-opment planning and follow-up activities.

2. Boss support is critical for the process itself, as well as for buy-in for the recipient’s specific developmental goals stemmingfrom the feedback.

3. The 360-degree feedback process works bestif it starts with executives at the top of anorganization and cascades downward through-out the organization.

4. Shoddy administration of a 360-degree feed-back process can be fatal.

5. The timing of the process accounts for otherorganizational realities that could dilute orconfound its impact.

Another kind of leadership developmentmethod gaining popularity during thepast 20 years has involved teams(Ginnett, 1990). The prevalence andimportance of teams in organizationstoday, and the unique challenges ofleading teams, make it easy to forgetthat teams were not always so perva-sive a part of our organizational lives.One way to convey the magnitude ofthat shift is to share an anecdoteinvolving one of our colleagues.During his doctoral work in organiza-tional behavior at Yale about 20 yearsago, our colleague Robert Ginnettwould tell others about his specialinterest in the leadership of teams. Routinely, hesays, they would assume he must be an athleticcoach; who else, they’d say, would be interestedin teams?

Importance of a Leader s Emotional Resonance with and Impact on Others

Twenty years ago, our understanding of lead-ership in organizations was dominated by theclassic two-factor approach focusing on task andrelationship behaviors. That general approachcan be characterized as transactional in nature,as distinguished from a qualitatively differentapproach often described as transformational.

Transactional leadership is characterized by

mutually beneficial exchanges between parties to optimize mutual benefit including the accom-plishment of necessary organizational tasks. Theexchange-model nature of transactional leadershiptends to produce predictable and somewhat short-lived outcomes. Transformational leadershiptouched followers’ deeper values and sense ofhigher purpose, and led to higher levels of fol-lower commitment and effort and more enduringchange. Transformational leaders provide com-pelling visions of a better future and inspire trustthrough seemingly unshakeable self-confidenceand conviction.

Conger (1999) reviewed 15 years’ research inthe related fields of charismatic and transforma-tional leadership, and observed that scholarlyinterest in these areas may be traceable to changesin the global competitive business environment atthat time such as competitive pressures to rein-vent themselves and challenges to employeecommitment. Prior to that time, leadershipresearchers generally had not distinguishedbetween the roles of leading and managing: A

person in any position of authoritywas largely assumed to hold a leader-ship role. It was a novel idea thatleadership and management mightrepresent different kinds of roles andbehaviors. Hunt (1999) was evenmore blunt about the state of scholar-ly research in the field of leadershipin the 1980s. He described it as agloom-and-doom period character-ized by boring work, inconsequentialquestions, and static answers.Research in the areas of transforma-tional and charismatic leadership bothenergized scholars and interested

organizational practitioners.One factor presumably underlying the interest

in charismatic and transformational leaders is thenature and strength of their emotional impact onothers. The nature of the leader’s emotional con-nectedness to others is also apparent in the growinginterest over the past decade in topics like theleader’s genuineness, authenticity, credibility, andtrustworthiness (Goleman, et al., 2002; Collins,2001). These seem related more to the affectivequality of a leader’s relationships with others thanto specific leader behaviors and competencies.Attention given during the last decade to the con-cept of emotional intelligence also attests to thatshifting interest. For example, Goleman, et al.(2002) present data that a leader’s ability to

Development today

means providing

people opportuni-

ties to learn from

their work rather

than taking them

away from their

work to learn.

HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING 27

based on this paradigm are more difficult todesign and implement than those that have beenpopular for the last several decades in which theobjective was to train leaders to be good man-agers. In light of this, several themes describethe state of leadership development today:

1. Leadership development increasingly occurringwithin the context of work;

2. Critical reflection about the role of competen-cies in leadership development;

3. Revisiting the issue of work/life balance.

Leadership Development Within theContext of Work

Leadership development initiatives today typ-ically offer performance support and real worldapplication of skills through such methods astraining programs, coaching and mentoring,action learning, and developmental assignments.Combining instruction with a real business settinghelps people gain crucial skills and allows theorganizations to attack relevant, crucial, real-timeissues. The goal of leadership development ulti-mately involves action not knowledge.Therefore, development today means providingpeople opportunities to learn from their workrather than taking them away from their work tolearn. It is critical to integrate those experienceswith each other and with other developmentalmethods. State of the art leadership developmentnow occurs in the context of ongoing work initia-tives that are tied to strategic business imperatives(Dotlich & Noel, 1998; Moxley & O’ConnnorWison, 1998).

Furthermore, best practice organizations rec-ognize leadership as a key component of jobs atall levels and are committed to creating leadersthroughout their organizations. Increasingly,organizations have CEOs who model leadershipdevelopment through a strong commitment toteach leaders internally. For example, CarlyFiorina at HP is annually teaching at 12 leadingbusiness results classes. The targets of leadershiptraining programs are no longer relatively isolat-ed individuals who were “anointed” by seniormanagement. Instead of the thin horizontalslices, the program design is likely to involvework groups or several vertical slices of theorganization (Fulmer, 1997).

The proliferation of leadership developmentmethods was previously noted. Not just the vari-ety of development methods matters; greatervariety is not necessarily better. It is also critical

resonate emotionally with others is a better predictor of effective executive leadership than is general intelligence. Recent research at theCenter for Creative Leadership (CCL) has uncov-ered links between specific elements of emotionalintelligence and specific behaviors associatedwith leadership effectiveness (Ruderman, et al.,2001). Effective leadership is clearly about morethan just enacting the “right” behaviors, or merelytranslating feedback (e.g., from 360-degree feed-back) into changed behavior. One way 360-degree feedback can positively impact an individ-ual’s effectiveness as a leader is by deepeningthat person’s self-awareness about the impact ofhis/her behavior on others.

Much leadership development feedback natu-rally affects how people think about themselves,not just their interactions with others. Similarly,it can lead to re-evaluations of many aspects ofone’s life, not just one’s role as a leader. It canaffect the whole person. It follows, then, that insome ways leadership development itself involvesthe development of the whole person. The Centerfor Creative Leadership began during the heydayof the human potential movement, and its idealsand educational philosophy still reflect a com-mitment to the value of self-directed change and growth (albeit informed by knowledge about the needs of the organization). Virtually all CCL leadership development programsinclude numerous activities to increase manager-ial self-awareness, and most address balance inlife, including the relationship between health,fitness, and leadership. From our own participants,representing diverse companies across virtually all industries, the feedback is that bal-ance in life has so far been more of an aspirationfor them than a reality.

The PresentToday, effective leadership is commonly

viewed as central to organizational success, andmore importance is placed on leadership devel-opment than ever before. Developing “more andbetter” individual leaders is no longer the solefocus of leadership development, although itremains a critical aspect. Increasingly, leadershipis defined not as what the leader does but ratheras a process that engenders and is the result ofrelationships—relationships that focus on theinteractions of both leaders and collaboratorsinstead of focusing on only the competencies ofthe leaders. Leadership development practices

28 HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

to integrate various developmental experiencesto each other as well as to both developmentaland business objectives. That way they can havea greater collective impact than they otherwisecould have. But such efforts at integration are far from universal.

In reviewing the entire field of leadershipdevelopment, McCauley and VanVelsor (2003)noted that the approach of many organizations isevents-based rather than systemic. One methodof making leadership development more systemicis to make sure it involves more than training.An array of developmental experiences must bedesigned and implemented that are meaningfullyintegrated with one another.Leadership development efforts andinitiatives must be ongoing, not asingle program or event. The idea of leadership development strategiesthat link a variety of developmentalpractices including work itself (e.g.,action learning projects) with otherHR systems and business strategy isan emerging and probably necessaryevolution of our state-of-practice(Alldredge, et al., 2003).

Critical Reflection about theRole of Competencies inLeadership Development

Although the field is moving away fromviewing leadership and leadership developmentsolely in terms of leader attributes, skills, andtraits, leadership competencies remain a coredimension of leadership development activitiesin most organizations. A recent benchmarkingstudy found that leading-edge companies defineleadership by a set of competencies that guideleadership development at all levels (Barrett &Beeson, 2002). A majority of organizations haveidentified leadership competencies, or at leasttried to define the characteristics and qualities of successful leaders. How then are leadershipcompetencies most effectively used in leadershipdevelopment?

Leadership competencies need to correspondto the organization’s particular strategy and busi-ness model (Intagliata, et al., 2000). Leadershipdevelopment programs implemented in isolationof the business environment rarely bring aboutprofound or long-lasting changes; therefore,organizations must develop leaders and leader-ship competencies that correspond with and are

specific to their distinct business challenges andgoals. While common leadership qualities orcompetencies characterize effective leaders,developing such core leader qualities may not be enough. The leadership competencies of abest-practice organization uniquely fit the organi-zation, its particular strategy, and its businessmodel (APQC, 2000).

This perspective has also been applied to theindividual level. Not only may organizations differ in their identification of critical leadershipcompetencies, some would argue it is unlikely allleaders within an organization must all possessthe same set of competencies to be successful—

or make the organization successful.According to this perspective, lead-ers should not be accountable fordemonstrating a particular set ofbehaviors but rather should be heldaccountable for desired outcomes.This perspective looks beyond com-petencies, which have a tendency tofocus on “what needs fixing,” andinstead focuses attention on thewhole person and on peoples’strengths and natural talents, not ona reductionist list of idiosyncraticcompetencies (Buckingham &Vosburgh, 2003). Development is

increasingly seen as a process of developing andleveraging strengths and of understanding andminimizing the impact of weaknesses.

Work/Life Balance Revisited Health and well-being at work are issues of

increasing interest and attention, including theirrelevance to leadership. In an environment ofconstant change and unrelenting competition,managing stress and personal renewal to avoidburn-out are becoming a central focus for leader-ship development. Dealing with multiple andcompeting demands of a fast-paced career andpersonal/family relationships and responsibilitiesis a common challenge, and there is increasingrecognition that a person’s work and personallife have reciprocal effects on each other. Weknow that individual leader effectiveness isenhanced when people manage multiple roles athome and at work but we continue to learn moreabout the organizational benefits and maybe eventhe benefits to family and community as well.We also know leadership effectiveness is corre-lated with better health and exercising

Most organizations

will not need the

"Lone Ranger" type

of leader as much

as a leader who can

motivate and coor-

dinate a team-

based approach.

HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING 29

(McDowell-Larsen, et al., 2002). We need to better understand which assumptions about organizational life are challenged by the idea ofwork/life integration as well as which changesorganizations need to make to facilitate greaterwork/life integration.

Challenging work/life situations are integrallyrelated to the need for, and development of,resilience. Resilience is the ability to bounceback from adversity or hardship, a characteristicthat can be developed at any time during a per-son’s life. It is an active process of self-rightingand growth that helps people deal with hardshipsin a manner that is conducive to development(Moxley & Pulley, 2004). One of the fundamen-tal characteristics of resilience is that it allowsindividuals to take difficult experiences in theirlives and use them as opportunities to learn.This, in turn, develops their ability to face hard-ships successfully in the future.

The FutureSeveral trends will have a major role in our

future understanding and practice of leadership andleadership development. They represent, in differ-ent ways, the critical role changing contexts willplay in leadership development.

1. Leadership competencies will still matter;2. Globalization/internationalization of leader-

ship concepts, constructs, and developmentmethods;

3. The role of technology;4. Increasing interest in the integrity and charac-

ter of leaders;5. Pressure to demonstrate return on investment;6. New ways of thinking about the nature of

leadership and leadership development.

Leadership Competencies Will StillMatter

Leadership competencies will still matter, butthey will change as the competitive environmentchanges. According to a Conference Board study(Barrett & Beeson, 2002), five critical forces willshape leadership competencies (requirements) inthe future: 1) global competition, 2) informationtechnology, 3) the need for rapid and flexibleorganizations, 4) teams, and 5) differing employ-ee needs. Given these, most organizations will notneed the “Lone Ranger” type of leader as muchas a leader who can motivate and coordinate ateam-based approach. This new environment willhave greater ambiguity and uncertainty, and many

if not all aspects of leadership (e.g., strategydevelopment) will require a more collaborativeapproach to leadership. The model of effectiveleadership in the future will be one of encouragingenvironments that unlock the entire organization’shuman asset potential.

The Conference Board report “DevelopingBusiness Leaders for 2010” (Barrett & Beeson,2002) identified four essential roles for meetingthe business challenges of the future, and thecareer derailers that will matter most in thefuture. The four essential roles for meeting futurebusiness challenges include master strategist,change manager, relationship/network builder,and talent developer. The most important derailersin the future include hesitancy to take necessarybusiness risks; personal arrogance and insensitiv-ity; controlling leadership style; and reluctance to tackle difficult people issues.

Changes in the context in which leadership ispracticed will bring certain competencies evenmore to the forefront, including globalization, theincreasing use of technology, and public scrutinyof the character and integrity of leaders.

Globalization/Internationalization ofLeadership Concepts, Constructs,and Development Methods

Future leaders will need to be conversant indoing business internationally and conceivingstrategies on a global basis. Globalization willintensify the requirement that senior leaders dealeffectively with a complex set of constituenciesexternal to the organization. (e.g., responsibilityfor managing the company’s interface with trade,regulatory, political, and media groups on a widerange of issues).

Leadership development is rapidly moving toinclude substantial components involving interna-tional markets, world economic trends, and focuson particular regions such as the Asia Pacific rim(Cacioppe, 1998). Leaders are being exposed tohow the world is becoming interdependent andthe need to be up to date with international trendsthat are vital to the success of the business. Useof the internet to obtain information and to mar-ket products and services worldwide is a topic inmany current leadership development programs.

The Role of TechnologyThe technology revolution has changed organi-

zational life. It has changed the ways informationand knowledge are accessed and disseminated, andthe ways in which people can communicate and

30 HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

share with one another. This has profound impli-cations for what effective leadership will looklike as well as how to use technology most effec-tively in leadership development.

Leaders will clearly have to be much moresavvy with regard to technology in general.Facility and comfort with communication tech-nology and the internet will be a necessity. Giventhe pace of change and the speed of responsetime that leaders are now required to demonstrate,technological savvy has rapidly become an integralaspect of leadership effectiveness. It has evenbeen noted that the effective use of technology is proving to be a “hierarchy buster.” It can be an avenue for people to communicatewith leaders at all levels and when-ever they need to at any time.Leading virtually is already a reality,and requirements to lead geographi-cally dispersed units and teams willonly increase. Technology will not be a solution for this challenge, but it will surely be a tool.

The pressure on costs, increasedreality of virtual teams, and availability of tech-nology in leadership development has reducedthe need for people to travel to training programs,will make learning opportunities available togeographically dispersed leaders, and will allowindividuals access to learning opportunities whenit best suits their schedule. Technology canextend learning over time rather than limiting it to time spent in the classroom. Technology willalso enhance the emergence and sharing ofknowledge among participants via such venuesas chat-rooms, thought leader access, e-learningadvances, e-mentoring/ shadowing, and businesssimulations.

While technology is useful for some aspectsof leadership development, it cannot replace theimportance of bringing leaders together to deep-en their relationships and their learning experi-ence. Maximizing the effectiveness of leadershipdevelopment offers the best of both worlds: inte-grating face-to-face classroom and coachingexperiences with technology-based tools andprocesses, i.e., blended learning solutions (e.g.,Alexander & Ciaschi, 2002).

Increasing Interest in the Integrityand Character of Leaders

The 1990s witnessed ethical lapses and arrogance among senior executives of certaincompanies of disturbing-if-not-unprecedented

magnitude. Enron and WorldCom were twonotable examples. Such events probably acceler-ated and deepened growing sentiment amongmany—including members of organizationalgovernance boards—that interrelationshipsamong leadership, character, and values ought to be made more salient.

It is probably not a coincidence that a recentarticle in CEO Magazine (Martin, 2003)observed that “the age of the imperial CEO iswaning. In its place, a crop of new CEOs – humble, team building, highly communicative –are rising” (p.25). Similarly, one of the intriguingand unexpected findings in the book Good to

Great (Collins, 2001) was of the universally modest and self-effacingnature of CEOs in the good-to-greatcompanies. This contrasts consider-ably with the often flamboyant andself-promoting style of many popularbusiness leaders in recent years who,despite celebrity status, typically didnot have an enduring positive impacton their companies.

Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) noted that trans-formational leadership is only authentic when it is grounded on the leader’s moral character,concern for others, and congruence of ethicalvalues with action. A leader’s credibility andtrustworthiness are critical, and increasing num-bers make the case that character—as defined byqualities like one’s striving for fairness, respect-ing others, humility, and concern for the greatergood—represents the most critical quality ofleadership (e.g., Sankar, 2003). Assuming thereis continuing if not increasing interest in thecharacter of leaders, much work is needed in theyears ahead to assure greater clarity of conceptabout these vital-yet-elusive concepts if they areto play a prominent role in leadership develop-ment practices in organizations.

Pressure to Demonstrate Return onInvestment

The future trends noted reflect in part aresponse to the changing context of leadership.Perhaps the strongest pressure facing leadershippractitioners in the future may be to demonstrateROI (Kincaid & Gordick, 2003). While leadershipdevelopment is strategically important, it is usual-ly expensive. Yet while leading-edge companiestoday such as PepsiCo, IBM, and Johnson andJohnson spend significant time and resources onleadership development, attempts to quantify its

The effective use

of technology is

proving to be a

"hierarchy buster."

HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING 31

benefits precisely have remained elusive and haveled some to speculate that investment in develop-ing better leaders may be falling short of thedesired impact. In today’s economy, leadershipdevelopment expenses will likely have to meetcertain standards of proof of impact or return oninvestment. Demonstrating and quantifying theimpact of leadership development investments islikely to emerge as a priority for organizationscommitted to building leadership strength.

To maximize ROI for leadership developmentefforts, its payoffs organizations must effectivelyplan, implement, and evaluate their initiatives.They must create a “chain of impact” that con-nects leadership development to relevant organi-zational outcomes (Martineau & Hannum, 2003).Historically, most organizations have not closedthe loop through systematic evaluation and thusmake assumptions about its efficacy based onanecdotes, reactions, or hunches.

New Ways of Thinking about theNature of Leadership and LeadershipDevelopment

Emerging new perspectives on the nature ofleadership may profoundly affect our thinkingabout leadership development. Increasingly, leadership and leadership development are seenas inherently collaborative, social, and relationalprocesses (Day, 2001). Similarly, Vicere (2002)has noted the advent of the “networked economy”where “partnerships, strategic and tactical, cus-tomer and supplier, personal and organizational,are essential to competitive effectiveness.”

As a result, leadership will be understood asthe collective capacity of all members of an orga-nization to accomplish such critical tasks as settingdirection, creating alignment, and gaining com-mitment. Leadership development based on thisparadigm is more difficult to design and imple-ment than those that have been popular for thelast several decades in which the focus was totrain individual leaders. Taking this next step will require a deeper understanding of the role oforganizational systems and culture in leadershipdevelopment (VanVelsor & McCauley, 2004).

ConclusionThe dual challenges of understanding the

nature of leadership development and implement-ing effective leadership development practiceswill likely be greater than ever before. At thesame time, we find ourselves guardedly opti-

mistic about the field’s future. Our optimism isdirectly tied to some of the trends that make thefuture both challenging and interesting. Forexample, leadership development practices willneed to become better integrated in the broadercontext of organizational business challenges andsystems. Thus, not only will organizations needto hire and develop leaders, they will also needto be the kind of organizations that nurture andreinforce enactment of the kinds of behaviorsdesired in those leaders. Similarly, demands todemonstrate ROI can encourage greater rigor andclarity in our understanding of the nature of lead-ership development and in how we assess itsimpact. Meeting such challenges will be oneimportant thrust of more comprehensive effortsin the years ahead to demonstrate convincinglythe strategic role of people in organizations.

Biographical SketchesGina Hernez-Broome is a senior program andresearch associate at the Center for CreativeLeadership’s Colorado Springs campus, and manages its Leadership Development for HumanResource Professionals (LDHRP). At CCL shealso researches how systemic factors affect anorganization’s leadership capacity. Prior to join-ing the Center, Gina worked in a Denver-basedconsulting firm with a diverse mix of client orga-nizations, designing and facilitating customizedtraining. She gained extensive experience designingand implementing various assessment processesincluding certification processes, assessment centertechnology, and 360-degree feedback processes.Gina has also held adjunct professor positions atthe University of Colorado. She holds an MS anda PhD in industrial/organizational psychologyfrom Colorado State University and a BS in psy-chology from the University of Colorado.

Richard L. Hughes is a senior enterprise associatewith the Center for Creative Leadership at its cam-pus in Colorado Springs, CO. Rich trains in manyof the Center’s leadership development programsfor senior executives including Developing theStrategic Leader and Leadership at the Peak, andhis research focuses on strategic leadership. He ison HRPS’s Publications Committee, and is an asso-ciate articles editor for HRP in the key knowledgearea of leadership development. Rich is seniorauthor of an undergraduate textbook surveying thefield of leadership, now in its fourth edition. Beforejoining CCL, Rich headed the Department ofBehavioral Sciences and Leadership at the U.S. Air

32 HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

Force Academy. He received his BS from the U.S.Air Force Academy, his MA from the University ofTexas, and his PhD from the University of Wyoming.

ReferencesAlexander, J. & Ciaschi, E. (2002). “Leadership Development in theDigital Age.” Presented at the Human Resource Planning Societyannual conference.

Alldredge, M., Johnson, C., Stoltzfus, J., & Vicere, A. (2003).“Leadership Development at 3M: New Processes, New Techniques,New Growth.” Human Resource Planning, 26(3): 45-55.

Atwater, L. & Waldman, D. (1998). “360 Degree Feedback andLeadership Development.” Leadership Quarterly, 9: 423-426.

Barrett, A. & Beeson, J. (2002). “Developing Business Leaders for2010.” The Conference Board, New York.

Bass, B.M. (1999). “Two Decades of Research and Development inTransformational Leadership.” European Journal of Work andOrganizational Psychology, 8(10): 9-32.

Bass, B.M. & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). “Ethics, Character, and AuthenticTransformational Leadership Behavior.” Leadership Quarterly: SpecialIssue, Part I: Charismatic and Transformational Leadership: TakingStock of the Present and Future, 10(2): 181-217.

Berdahl, J.L. (1996). “Gender and Leadership in Work Groups: SixAlternative Models.” Leadership Quarterly: Special Issue, Part 1:Leadership and Diversity, 7(1): 21-40.

Buckingham, M. & Vosburgh, R.M. (2001). “The 21st Century HumanResources Function: It’s the Talent, Stupid!” Human ResourcePlanning, 24(4): 17-23.

Cacioppe, R. (1998). “An Integrated Model and Approach for theDesign of Effective Leadership Development Programs.” Leadership& Organization Development Journal, 19(1): 44-53.

Chappelow, C.T. (2004). “360-Degree Feedback.” In McCauley, C.D.& VanVelsor, E. (eds.) Handbook of Leadership Development (3rd ed.).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 58-84.

Collier, J. & Esteban, R. (2000). “Systemic Leadership: Ethical andEffective.” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(4):207-215.

Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great. Harper Business: New York.

Conger, J.A. (1999). “Charismatic and Transformational Leadership inOrganizations: An Insider’s Perspective on These Developing Streamsof Research.” Leadership Quarterly, 10(2): 145-179.

Consortium Benchmarking Study (2000). “Developing Leaders at AllLevels.” American Productivity & Quality Center.

Day, D.V. (2001). “Leadership Development: A Review in Context.”Leadership Quarterly, 11(4): 581-613.

Dering, N.Z. (1998).“Leadership in Quality Organizations.” Journalfor Quality & Participation, Jan/Feb: 32-35.

Dotlich, D.L. & Noel, J.L. (1998). Action Learning: How the World’sTop Companies Are Re-Creating Their Leaders and Themselves. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Facteau, C.L., Facteau, J.D., Schoel, L.C., Russell, J.E.A., & Poteet,M.L. (1998). “Reactions of Leaders to 360-Degree Feedback FromSubordinates and Peers.” Leadership Quarterly: Special Issue: 360-Degree Feedback in Leadership Research, 9(4): 427-448.

Fulmer, R.M. (1997). “The Evolving Paradigm of LeadershipDevelopment.” Organizational Dynamics, 25(4).

Fulmer, R.M. & Vicere, A.A. (1996). “Executive Development: AnAnalysis of Competitive Forces.” Planning Review, 24(1): 31-36.

Ginnett, R.C. (1990). “Airline Cockpit Crew.” In Groups That Work(and Those That Don’t). J. Richard Hackman (ed.), San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal Leadership.Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S.A., Dorfman, P.W.,Jacidan, M., Dickson, M.W., Gupta, V., Kennedy, J.C., & GLOBEAssociates (1999). “Cultural Influences on Leadership andOrganizations: Project Globe.” In W.H. Mobley, M. J. Gessner, & V.Arnold (eds.), Advances in Global Leadership. Stanford, CT: JAIPress, 171-233.

Huey, J. (1994). “The New Post-Heroic Leadership.” Fortune,February 21.

Hunt, J.G. (1999). “Transformational/Charismatic Leadership’sTransformation of the Field: An Historical Essay.” LeadershipQuarterly: Special Issue, Part I: Charismatic and TransformationalLeadership: Taking Stock of the Present and Future, 10(2): 129-144.

Hunt, J.G. & Peterson, M.F. (1997). “Two Scholars’ Views of SomeNooks and Crannies in Cross-Cultural Leadership.” LeadershipQuarterly, 8(3).

Intagliata, J., Ulrich, D. & Smallwood, N. (2000). “LeveragingLeadership Competencies to Produce Leadership Brand: CreatingDistinctiveness by Focusing on Strategy and Results.” HumanResource Planning, 23(3).

Kincaid, S.B. & Gordick, D. (2003). “The Return on Investment ofLeadership Development: Differentiating Our Discipline.” ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55(1): 47-57.

London, M. & Beatty, R.W. (1993). “360-Degree Feedback as aCompetitive Advantage.” Human Resource Management, 32: 353-372.

Marsick, V.J. (2002).“Exploring the Many Meanings of ActionLearning and ARL.” In L. Rohlin, K. Billing, A. Lindberg, and M.Wickelgren (eds.), Earning While Learning in Global Leadership: TheVolvo-MiL Partnership. Vasbyholm, Sweden: MiL.

Martin, J. (2003). “Rise of the New Breed.” CEO Magazine,August/September: 25-29.

Martineau, J.W. & Hannum, K.M. (2003). Evaluating the Impact ofLeadership Development: A Professional Guide. Greensboro, NC:Center for Creative Leadership.

McDowell-Larsen, S.L., Kearney, L., & Campbell, D. (2002). “IsThere a Relationship?; Regular Exercise Correlates With HigherLeadership Ratings in Senior Level Executives.” Journal ofManagerial Psychology, 17 (4): 316-324.

Moxley, R.S. & O’Connnor Wison, P. (1998). “A Systems Approach toLeadership Development.” In C.D. McCauley, R.S. Moxley, & E. VanVelsor (eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook ofLeadership Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 217-241.

Moxley, R.S., & Pulley, M.L. (2004). “Hardships.” In C.D. McCauley& E. Van Velsor (eds.) The Center for Creative Leadership Handbookof Leadership Development (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,183-203.

Nevins, M., & Stumpf, S. (1999). “21st-Century Leadership:Redefining Management Education.” Strategy, Management,Competition, 3rd Quarter: 41-51.

Ohlott, P.J. (2004). “Job Assignments.” In C.D. McCauley & E. VanVelsor (eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook ofLeadership Development (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 151-182.

Palus, C.J. & Horth, D.M. (2004). “Exploration for Development.” InC.D. McCauley & E. Van Velsor (eds.), The Center for CreativeLeadership Handbook of Leadership Development (2nd ed.). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass, 438-464.

Pulley, M.L., & Wakefield, M. (2001). Building Resiliency: How toSurvive in Times of Change. Greensboro, NC: Center for CreativeLeadership.

Ruderman, M.N., Hannum, K., Leslie, J.B., & Steed, J. (2001).“Making the Connection: Leadership Skills and EmotionalIntelligence.” Leadership in Action, 21(5): 3-7.

Sankar Y. (2003). “Character Not Charisma is the Critical Measure ofLeadership Excellence.” Journal of Leadership and OrganizationalStudies, 9(4): 45-55.

Spiro, L.N. (2003). “In Search of Leaders.” CEO Magazine, October:25-30.

Tichy, N.M., DeRose, C. (1996). “The Pepsi Challenge: Building aLeader-Driven Organization.” Training & Development, 50(5): 58-66.

VanVelsor, E. & McCauley, C.D. (2004). “Our View of LeadershipDevelopment.” In C.D. McCauley and E. VanVelsor (eds.), The Centerfor Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development (2nded.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1-22.

Vicere, A.A. (2002). “Leadership and the Networked Economy.”Human Resource Planning, 25(2): 26-33.