Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development

Date

2021-01-23

Department

Program

Citation of Original Publication

Wallace, David; Torres, Elisa M.; Zaccaro, Stephen J.; Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development; The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 32, Issue 5, 23 January, 2021; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101494

Rights

This item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.
Public Domain Mark 1.0
This work was written as part of one of the author's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 U.S.C. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under U.S. Law.

Subjects

Abstract

The scientific advancement of leader and leadership development has offered various conceptualizations and operationalizations of evaluation criteria. However, because the complex learning that occurs during leader and leadership development is typically ignored, current leader and leadership development evaluation criteria do not fully capture the multidimensional and temporal nature of learning which serves as a critical mediating mechanism between training and more distal outcomes. Further, evaluations of leadership programs tend to focus on individual (i.e., leader development) outcomes without consideration of collective (i.e., leadership development) outcomes. Thus, we present a comprehensive typology of leader and leadership development learning outcomes that elucidates the multidimensional and multilevel nature of such outcomes and provides greater construct definition and precision. Our purpose is to integrate multiple theoretical perspectives, generating a more precise classification to provide researchers and practitioners assistance in 1) designing and evaluating the effectiveness of leader and leadership development, and 2) clarifying the limits of generalizability of both conceptualizations and empirical research across learning outcomes.