A REVIEW OF LEADERSHIP THEORY AND COMPETENCY FRAMEWORKS.pdf
If you are looking for a quick overview of leadership theories, Bolden, Gosling, Marurano and Dennison succinctly review the key points of a variety of leadership theories ranging from trait based through to transformational leadership. Each section provided a quick summary of the key theoretical aspects and touched on a variety of leadership theories including:
A REVIEW OF LEADERSHIP THEORY AND COMPETENCY FRAMEWORKS.pdf
Of interest is how the focus of the research has expanded to not only include the leader but the followers and situational context. The authors noted that there is no one size fits all leadership style and each theory lends itself to different styles, followers and situations (p. 8). Bolden et. al. reviewed several leadership models and competency frameworks by notable organizations such as Federal Express, Lufthansa, Shell, Ministry of Defence, and the National College for School Leadership. Each framework highlighted priorities and characteristics unique to its developing company, yet there were many similarities when you moved beyond the choice of language descriptors.
Though Gasior was ultimately successful in juggling multiple demands, not all leaders achieve the desired results when they face situations that require a variety of decisions and responses. All too often, managers rely on common leadership approaches that work well in one set of circumstances but fall short in others. Why do these approaches fail even when logic indicates they should prevail? The answer lies in a fundamental assumption of organizational theory and practice: that a certain level of predictability and order exists in the world. This assumption, grounded in the Newtonian science that underlies scientific management, encourages simplifications that are useful in ordered circumstances. Circumstances change, however, and as they become more complex, the simplifications can fail. Good leadership is not a one-size-fits-all proposition.
A critical review and thematic synthesis of research literature conducted using systematic methods to identify and construct a framework to explain the available evidence about leadership in interprofessional health and social care teams.
Twenty-eight papers were reviewed and contributed to the framework for interprofessional leadership. Twelve themes emerged from the literature, the themes were: facilitate shared leadership; transformation and change; personal qualities; goal alignment; creativity and innovation; communication; team-building; leadership clarity; direction setting; external liaison; skill mix and diversity; clinical and contextual expertise. The discussion includes some comparative analysis with theories and themes in team management and team leadership.
This paper reports on the results of a critical literature review (Grant and Booth, 2009) that aimed to evaluate the evidence and to present an analysis of leadership in interprofessional teams in health and social care organisations.
Concerns over leadership in the UK National Health Service (NHS) first became an area of focus in the late 1980s when professional management was introduced (Mackie, 1987). When the labour government came to power in 1997, leadership capacity was recognised as a critical factor in the reform agenda; to modernise the NHS (Goodwin, 2000). The Department of Health set up a National Centre for Leadership in 2001 as part of the NHS Modernisation Agency and this led to a plethora of leadership initiatives commissioned by NHS organisations that included public health (McAreavey et al. (2001), a range of leadership frameworks (Bolden et al., 2003) and competency frameworks (Bolden et al., 2006). For nearly two decades, leadership development has been a priority within health care but less attention has been given to the effectiveness of leadership on the outcomes of teams. Reports on health service failures at an organisational level have further regularly identified poor leadership as a contributory factor in criminally negligent care (Keogh, 2013; Francis, 2013; Berwick, 2013).
This paper presents a review of leadership in interprofessional health and social care teams, seeking to identify elements that are characteristic of and/or associated with higher performance and achieving better patient outcomes.
Critical review is undertaken as a method for enabling new conceptual insights by seeking to embody existing or derive new theory from existing literature (Torraco, 2016). A potential difficulty with the approach is that the evaluation of contribution is dependent on the type of evidence. In management literature, publications about the topic may be small in quantity, of poor quality, and/or inconsistent in terms of both the application of methods and epistemology (Tranfield et al., 2003).
In addition, systematic reviews in management literature need to relate directly to the context of health and social care (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008) to be considered the best evidence available, even though these may not be rigorous experimental studies of the type normally conducted within the medical sciences and may even propose theory where no empirical evidence exists.
The specific aim of the review was to describe facets of leadership within interprofessional health and social care teams and generate a thematic framework that explains and develops conceptual understanding of that role.
The review addresses the following key objectives:research and grey literature on interprofessional team leadership in health and social care, to appraise any key theoretical constructs and tested variables; and
The critical review aims to develop an evidence-based theoretical understanding of interprofessional team leadership, including conceptual models for practice. It is based on empirical findings or narrative examples from practice, described and/or evaluated. Selection began with an initial screening of the papers by title and abstract using the specific decision rules to identify relevant papers. A set of decision criteria were developed; to identify relevant papers that would distinguish between leadership theories in health care and those particularly referring to interprofessional teams. The initial categories related to main methodology i.e. empirical study, qualitative research, or a narrative study, or systematic review. This method sorted papers and enabled authors to select key papers related to the review objectives and enhanced decisions about which papers to include or exclude (Paterson et al., 2001). Further selection identified any papers including reference or outcomes achieved through interprofessional team leadership in health and social care. As there were few papers specifically on this topic, the search was extended to include papers on interprofessional teamwork, again allowing leadership to become the emerging narrative within publications on health care team practice. Owing to the dearth of literature on inter* (professional, disciplinary) team leadership publications discussing primary or secondary research on interdisciplinary team leadership, or interdisciplinary team working were included. Papers that had no apparent evidence base were excluded from the review and these included opinion pieces and editorials with particular views of a single author.
In contrast, the IpTL framework specifically highlights a leadership function for the team and the review demonstrates that as well as maintaining the managerial function an interprofessional team requires a person who can promote transformation and change and support creativity and innovation as key elements of their role. Significantly, a meta-analysis by Burke et al. (2006) shows that transformational leadership behaviours, (often linked to change and innovation) can have a potent effect within teams. West et al. (2003) also found that teamwork and team leadership processes consistently predict innovation.
This critical literature review examines how leaders of interprofessional teams are functioning and the synthesis identifies a framework of factors that contribute to good leadership practice. With a continuing paucity of empirical research data on IpTL, there is still much that is unknown about the IpTL process.
This study was motivated by the premise that no nation grows further than the quality of its educational leaders. The purpose of this theoretical debate is to examine the wider context of leadership and its effectiveness towards improving school management. This academic evaluation examines recent theoretical developments in the study of educational leadership in school management. It begins with a concise overview of the meaning and concept of leadership in terms of research, theory, and practice. This is followed by an examination of the theories of leadership, principles and styles of leadership. Each section ends with an identification of contemporary issues and possible means of amelioration. This article concludes that success is certain if the application of the leadership styles, principles and methods is properly and fully applied in school management because quality educational leadership tradition offers great opportunity to further refine educational leadership and management policies and practices by accepting and utilizing the basic principles and styles of educational leadership.
Regular assessment of cultural competence goals, moreover, is an essential factor in their ongoing relevancy and effectiveness. Informed decisions regarding culturally sensitive services can be made through consistent review of competence standards within the context of organizational values as a whole. Because cultural competency standards are only as good as their effects can be measured, it is important that the profession put into place opportunities for training in diversity recognition and outcomes-based evaluation of culturally sensitive practice.
Self-determination theory describes the reciprocity between human motivation and a purposeful life. It highlights the role of internally regulated and intrinsic motivation as a driver behind self-leadership behaviors (Deci & Ryan, 1985).