This article is the introduction to the special issue on ‘Critical and Alternative Approaches to Leadership Learning and Development’. This article reviews the past approaches to researching and theorising about leadership learning and development and proposes a shift towards critical and alternative approaches. This article then describes the various articles in the special issue and how they contribute towards this paradigm shift.

/pdf/critical-and-alternative-approaches-to-leadership-learning-42mueoukb2.pdf

Critical and alternative approaches to leadership learning and development

Sustainable urban water management: understanding and fostering champions of change

In partnership with other denominations in England, the Church of England is currently engaged in a collaborative exercise to design a suite of common curricula to guide ministerial education. This process has been the catalyst for fruitful discussion about the nature of ministerial education and in particular the role of character. This article examines the relationship of character and reflective practice and the kind of knowing that is implied by these. It shows how the understanding of learning required to see character development as integral to ministerial formation is well supported epistemologically and psychologically and explores the implications of these insights for the process of HE validation of ministerial education.

Educating Ministers of Character

This article examines the first creation story in the Book of Genesis from the perspective of complexity theory. Traditional views of this narrative conceive of a deity harnessing chaos to create order. They reflect a loathing of chaos and a desire for control: a Newtonian worldview of cause and effect. It is an approach we see repeated in contemporary organizations. However, a radically different perspective sees the formless void as opening up the possibility of emergence and self-organization. This approach is used to prompt interaction both with the Judaeo-Christian tradition and organization studies. Four particular leadership challenges are examined: notions of control, attitudes to change, co-creating an environment for self-organization, and using emergence in relation to values. A concluding section highlights the importance of consistency in leadership to promote emergence.

The formless void as organizational template

Building leadership capacity to drive sustainable water management: the evaluation of a customised program.

In an exclusive interview for Manager, John Adair answers IAM Members' questions.THE THREE CIRCLES MODEL"All working groups, provided they have been together for some time, develop what I call a group personality. Yet the other side of the coin is that they also have present in them group needs. These are common or universal, in the sense that all working groups have them. They are:* the need to achieve the common task;* the need to be held together or maintained as a working unity;* the needs which individuals bring into them by virtue of being embodied persons.The next step is to say that these three areas of need are not separate or static - they are interactive and dynamic. "JohnAdair, "How to Grow Leaders"Ray MoorcroftIn your 1984 book, "The Skills of Leaders", you raised the issue of 'shared leadership', asking, "How far should (the) designated leader share his leadership functions with group members?". Given the increased size of organisations, (and 'team unit size') do you think the shared leadership approach has more validity today?John AdairYes. The larger the organisation, the less you can do yourself, and therefore the leadership ream becomes more important. The leader needs to ask who can do which functions, and who can do or lead parts of functions. The key for the leader is "not thinking you have to do it all yourself."RM I like your dismissal (page 27) of the debate regarding the distinction between Leadership and Management- "an issue of semantics and secondary in importance." Taking the debate further, could you consider the question of distinguishing between "managemenfi.and "administration"?JA In the Civil Service context, historically the 'administrator' was ranked higher than the 'manager', and this, of course, is evident in the title of the MBA degree/award. Sometimes I think it would be better to bring 'administration' back into the spotlight. We have semi-sorted 'leadership' as a topic-and we have, despite what the Americans believe, but I'll talk about that later. However, we have to accept that organisations do need planning and control. Therefore we need to address what really is the 'management' end of the spectrum about?As to 'Administration', well it is the proper, efficient and careful use of resources. Coinddentally, I have spent the last few days revisiting the meaning of Leadership, Management and Administration in preparation for a speech in the City of London, and I have noted that the one thing that doesn't come into leadership thinking is people being frugal about resources. However, as to the difference between 'management' and 'administration' -well, they are basically the same.The title 'manager' got off the blocks mainly because industry became the dominant sector for the study of Leadership, and in the USA (the dominant industrial nation), the title of 'executive' came to the fore. As a result, titles were ratcheted up and 'industrial administration' became 'management'. Henley College and the Civil Service surrendered 'administration' in the light of this development.But I wouldn't mind championing the return of 'administration' now that 'leadership' is under the microscope. We need to ask what is 'management'? And isn't it 'administering the business'? After all, a manager is in charge of resources, and administration is the key-it has to be right.The Nelsons and Wellingtons were good leaders and good administrators, but we don't have a word which combines the two - it ain't 'manager'!RM In "How to Grow Leaders", you note that "knowledge and technical knowledge are more likely a necessary condition for Leadership, rather than an essential strand of Leadership itself" (page 39). However, in the light of the information and knowledge 'explosion', does the Three Circle model still hold true for you? Are all three circles still equal? For example, Bill Gates is simply a 'techie' isn't he? …

Ray Moorcroft

Papers

How to Grow Leaders