Building Theory on Leadership Development. Submission deadline: 15 December 2024. Scheduled for publication September 2026.
For this special issue, we invite submissions to all of AMLE’s peer-reviewed sections, including Research and Reviews, Essays, and Book and Resource Reviews. We particularly welcome research studies based on extensive data—qualitative or quantitative—using any well-executed and rigorous methodology.
Guest Editors:
Deadline for Submissions: 15 December 2024
Scheduled for Publication: September 2026
Leadership development has been described as the smaller brother/sister to the massive field of leadership theory and research (Leroy et al., 2022). Indeed, whereas the focus on leadership itself is a more established field of study, the sub-field of leadership development is more nascent with a smaller but growing community of scholars and practitioners interested in understanding what constitutes evidence-based development (Day & Dragoni, 2015). In stark contrast to the scant academic attention to leadership development is the fact that many (leadership) scholars find themselves spending a significant portion of their time teaching undergraduate and graduate students, as well as executives about leadership, with very little evidence of the effectiveness of their efforts (Leroy et al., 2022). And more broadly, the leadership development field has become a multi-billion-dollar industry (CCL, 2019; Narayandas & Moldoveanu, 2019), with few established guidelines set by academics for efficient and effective leadership development (Vongswasdi et al., 2023).
As a less-established field of interest, leadership development suffers from two interconnected issues (Klimoski & Amos, 2012). On the one hand, many leadership development efforts lack a scientific base and seem, therefore, rather disconnected from the theoretical and empirical knowledge we have accumulated over the last 100 years about what constitutes effective leadership. On the other hand, it is not clear how useful existing theory on leadership is for developmental efforts; simply understanding what constitutes effective leadership is not the same thing as actually intervening to change and develop leadership.
Thus, the field of leadership development can benefit from greater attention and creation of theories about developing effective leaders. Specifically, we invite submissions that will outline theory on how we “learn” leadership (i.e., management learning perspective), as well as theory on how to develop leaders effectively (i.e., the pedagogy of leadership development, which speaks to management education debates) (Lindebaum, 2023). Such contributions will not only benefit leadership development, but also advance the understanding of leadership effectiveness and management learning more generally.
With this call for papers, we invite scholars to help build more comprehensive theories on leadership development. While we have established theories of leaders(hip) and we have clear theories of (adult) development, there is an important gap in the literature when it comes to addressing leadership development in particular. We aim to set a new agenda for future work on leadership development, which will be instrumental in significantly advancing theory, research and curricula in business schools and organizations alike for the coming decades. More specifically, we extend our invitation to submit for the following audiences:
First, we invite leadership scholars to contribute, particularly with developmental theories on approaches to leadership. We propose that leadership scholars pivot to consider the developmental implications of their work on different theoretical models of leadership, thus contributing to a growing body of work on management learning focusing on leadership development. Doing so is valuable because leadership development is too frequently examined in a generic way that is atheoretical, where authors have suggested the effects of development are somewhat agnostic to the types of leadership being developed, usually recommending very generic conditions to promote positive effects from interventions (e.g., Lacerenza, Reyes, Marlow, Joseph, & Salas, 2017; Wallace, Torres, & Zaccaro, 2021). Though we have accumulated ample evidence that an individual’s leadership capabilities can be developed (e.g., Arvey, Zhang, Avolio & Krueger, 2007; Zhang, Illies, & Arvey, 2009), even through relatively short leadership development programs (Reyes, Dinh, Lacerenza, Marlow, Joseph, & Salas, 2019), it does not shed sufficient light on what specific motivations, capabilities, identities, values, or attitudes are being developed by programs focused on different types of leadership (Day & Liu, 2018; DeRue & Myers, 2014; Vogel, Reichard, Batistič, & Černe, 2021). The proximal and distal outcomes that are typically assessed, along with the conditions for successful development interventions, will depend on the specific type of leadership under investigation (e.g., Avolio, 2007). For example, we would expect that different methods will be more (less) effective when developing authentic leadership versus empowering, paradoxical, visionary, and/or strategic leadership. While some examples of testable theories of leadership development exist, such theories are still scarce. Existing examples explored leadership development as involving social identities (Haslam, Steffens, Peters, Boyce, Mallett, & Fransen, 2017) or public narratives (Ganz, Lee Cunningham, Ben Ezer, & Segura, 203); character development in leadership development (Crossan, Mazutis, Seijts, & Gand, 2013); the development of reflective ability in leadership (Ashford & DeRue, 2012; Petriglieri, Wood, & Petriglieri, 2011); and the sensemaking process in leadership development (Hammond, Clapp-Smith, & Palanski, 2017).
More broadly, we encourage researchers to consider and be explicit about the underlying values and assumption of their chosen approach - realizing that leadership development is often a value-laden and normative enterprise (Alvesson & Einola, 2021; Fisher & Sitkin, 2023; Mumford & Fried, 2014). The effectiveness of a program will depend on the readiness of the target leader and the context for change (Avolio, 2007). For instance, scholars can connect the cultural or socio-economic context within which a program exists (Lindebaum, 2023). The GLOBE research showed that what consists of effective leadership varies across cultures (Dorfman, Javidan, Hanges, Dastmalchian, & house, 2012), thus it is likely that other societal characteristics would affect effective leadership development. We welcome and encourage work that theorizes on these macro factors as anchored in the broader context. We believe this takes the research beyond the more niche field of leadership development to the broader field of management learning and education more generally.
Second, we invite scholars from cognate disciplines like education, motivation, or social psychology. We ask these scholars to translate or extend existing theories and apply them to the context of leadership in management learning and education. Often leadership development papers draw on outside theoretical perspectives like adult life-span development (e.g., Day, Harrison, & Halpin, 2009), self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), and role theory (Biddle, 1986). While foundational, and clearly relevant, these perspectives are often not specific to the unique context of developing leaders in an organizational context. For example, there are numerous programs that include specific elements of on-the-job learning that bring together the training and work sphere, thus creating conditions different from development in other contexts (Ashford & DeRue, 2012; Day, 2000; DeRue & Wellman, 2009). Yet, we currently do not have a sufficient number of theories that would explain leadership development as they occur in an organizational context (Day, Riggio, Tan, & Conger, 2021).
Third, we invite scholars in related management fields. We ask these scholars to translate or extend existing theories of management and apply them to the context of leadership in management learning and education. We see both traditional OB and HR scholars translating insights from their field of inquiry to leadership development. These OB/HR scholars often teach existing or future leaders their theories of work-related phenomena in an attempt to improve their leadership capacity. For instance, consider an HR-topic like job design (Parker et al., 2017a; 2017b): leaders play an important role in designing effective jobs for followers, and thus we might reconsider leadership development from that perspective. Similarly, we consider the literature on performance management, talent management, and career development – all are becoming key elements of leaders’ jobs and require not only specific knowledge, but also mindsets and skills (e.g., Crawshaw & Game, 2015). Similarly, we believe that various traditional OB topics lend themselves well to leadership development. For instance, topics like voice or feedback-seeking (Morrison, 2023; Sherf & Morrison, 2020) might shed light on the natural trajectory of leadership development in organizations. Similarly, topics like how people experience epiphanies in development (Dane, 2020), or the identity work that people go through in development (Caza, Vough, & Puranik, 2018; Zheng, Meister, & Caza, 2021) could be applied to the context of leadership development. Many OB/HR colleagues may not call themselves leadership development scholars, but their areas of expertise could be of significant value. We hope to create links across fields and invite scholars in adjacent fields to theorize on the developmental implications of theories in their field for leadership development in management.
Fourth and finally, we invite strategy and OT scholars to contribute to understanding the leadership development industry as a whole. As noted earlier, the leadership development industry has formed and thrived with comparatively little academic grounding (Klimoski & Amos, 2012; Vongswasdi et al., 2023). This fact begs the question of how we can best understand the inner workings of the leadership development industry – in business schools and outside them (e.g., Carroll & Nicholson, 2014). It raises issues like how leadership development is viewed and shaped in organizations, how leadership development programs are selected, how leadership development fits with the broader strategic intent of organizations, and the role of consultants and academic institutions in the industry (Guthey et al., 2023). This view would go beyond leadership development as it happens in one organization to consider the industry as a whole, looking into issues of professionalization, accreditation, and certification. Such questions do not only pertain to understanding leadership development in an organizational context, but also to leadership development as it occurs in academic institutes (Leroy et al., 2022).
In sum, we aim to attract new scholars from different areas to become part of the growing leadership development global community. We envision this special issue to be quite diverse and eclectic in perspectives and background of scholars contributing to it; the range of leadership aspects being developed; as well as in the contributions themselves – to include both conceptual theories and theories based in research (both qualitative and quantitative). Indeed, we hope to receive submissions from a variety of philosophical, theoretical, and empirical traditions, embodying the spirit of multi- and interdisciplinary research (Ogbonnaya and Brown, 2023).
This also includes critical perspectives that challenge and seek to improve the current status quo of the leadership development industry (Carroll & Nicholson, 2014), cast a different light on the inner workings of the leadership development industry (Leroy et al., 2022; Vongswadi et al., 2023) or seek to deconstruct it altogether (Guthey et al., 2023). We also encourage researchers to consider leadership development as a multi-level phenomenon (Vogel et al., 2021) that can be deeply embedded in certain contexts (e.g., cooperatives, industries, … ). Finally, please note that the emphasis here is foremost on theory development though as with many top outlets we see high-quality empirical confirmation (quantitative and qualitative) as useful in supporting the proposed theoretical contributions.
Submissions for this special issue should specifically focus on theoretical contributions to the leadership development literature. We invite scholars to consider the following questions and offer some examples to illustrate them:
For this special issue, we invite submissions that align with AMLE’s peer-reviewed section of Research and Reviews or essays, as well as relevant book and resource reviews. Submissions will be subject to the normal editorial decision-making and peer-review processes.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss a possible submission, please contact Hannes Leroy or Moran Anisman-Razin. Please note that such consultation is not a precondition, requirement, or guarantee of acceptance for any submission. Authors who have not consulted with the Guest Editor Team are equally welcome to submit.
Submit your special issue manuscripts between 1 November 2024 and 15 December 2024 through AMLE’s manuscript central system.
The Guest Editor Team will hold an online workshop on 24 June 2024 and an in-person workshop at the 84th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (AOM 2024, Chicago, USA). We will also offer opportunities at the IPLS conference (Thessaloniki, Greece) and the NDLR conference (Fontainebleau, France).
We encourage prospective authors to participate in these opportunities and receive feedback on their ideas or proposals. Further details will be made available closer to the dates on the AMLE website and will be distributed through prominent social media channels (e.g., Connect@AOM, LinkedIn, X, and others).
Arvey, R. D., Zhang, Z., Avolio, B , & Krueger, R. 2007. Developmental and genetic determinants of leadership role occupancy among women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 693-706.
Ashford, S. J., & DeRue, D. S. 2012. Developing as a leader: The power of mindful engagement.Organizational Dynamics, 41: 146-154.
Avolio, B.J. 2007. Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory building.American Psychologist, 62: 25-33.
Biddle, B. J. 1986. Recent developments in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 12: 67-92.
Carroll, B., & Nicholson, H. 2014. Resistance and struggle in leadership development. Human Relations, 67: 1413-1436.
Caza, B. B., Vough, H., & Puranik, H. 2018. Identity work in organizations and occupations: Definitions, theories, and pathways forward. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39: 889- 910.
CCL. 2019. Benchmarking the state of leadership development: Today & tomorrow. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Crawshaw, J. R., & Game, A. 2015. The role of line managers in employee career management: An attachment theory perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26: 1182-1203.
Crossan, M, Mazutis, D., Seijts, G., & Gand, J. 2013. Developing Leadership Character in Business Programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12: 285–305.
Dane, E. 2020. Suddenly everything became clear: How people make sense of epiphanies surrounding their work and careers. Academy of Management Discoveries, 6: 39-60.
Day, D. V. 2000. Leadership development: A review in context. The Leadership Quarterly, 11: 581-613.
Day, D. V., & Dragoni, L. 2015. Leadership development: An outcome-oriented review based on time and levels of analyses. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology Organizational Behavior, 2: 133-156.
Day, D. V., Harrison, M. M., & Halpin, S. M. 2009. An integrative approach to leader development: Connecting adult development, identity, and expertise. New York: Psychology Press.
Day, D. V., & Liu, Z. 2018. What is wrong with leadership development and what might be done about it? In R. E. Riggio (Ed.), What’s wrong with leadership? Improving leadership research and practice. New York: Routledge.
Day, D. V., Riggio, R. E., Tan, S. J., & Conger, J. A. 2021. Advancing the science of 21st- century leadership development: Theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 32: 101557.
Dorfman, P., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., Dastmalchian, A., & House, R. 2012. GLOBE: A twenty year journey into the intriguing world of culture and leadership. Journal of World Business, 47: 504-518.
DeRue, D. S., & Myers, C. G. 2014. Leadership development: A review and agenda for future research. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The oxford handbook of leadership and organizations: 832– 855. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. 2009. Developing leaders via experience: The role of developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 859–875.
Ganz, M., Lee Cunningham, J., Ben Ezer, I., & Segura, A. 2023. Crafting public narrative to enable collective action: a pedagogy for leadership development. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 22: 169-190.
Guthey, E., Spoelstra, S., Empson, L., Uhl-Bien, M., Lowe, K. B., Karreman, D., & Butler, N.
2023. Scholars as Workers in the Leadership Industries: Performance Pressures and Professional Identities. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings. July 24, 2023.
Hammond, M., Clapp-Smith, R., & Palanski, M. 2017. Beyond (Just) the workplace: A theory of leadership development across multiple domains. Academy of Management Review, 42: 481-498.
Haslam, S. A., Steffens, N. K., Peters, K., Boyce, R. A., Mallett, C. J., & Fransen, K. 2017. A social identity approach to leadership development. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 16: 113-124.
Jury, L. 2004. 'Fountain' most influential piece of modern art. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/fountain-most-influential-piece-of- modern-art-673625.html Accessed on 28 July 2023.
Khurana, R. 2007. From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Klimoski, R., & Amos, B. 2012. Practicing evidence-based education in leader development.Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11: 685-702.
Lacerenza, C.N., Reyes, D.L., Marlow, S.L., Joseph, E. & Salas, E. 2017. Leadership training design, delivery, and implementation: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102: 1686-1718.
Leroy, H., Anisman-Razin, M., Avolio, B., Bresman, H., Bunderson, S., Claeys, J., Detert, J., Dragoni, L., Giessner, S., Kniffin, K., Kolditz, T., Petrigilieri, G., Pettit, N., Sitkin, S., Van Quaquebeke, N., & Vogswasdi, P. (2022) Walking our Evidence-Based Talk: The case of leadership development in business schools. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 29: 5-32.
Lindebaum, D. 2023. Management learning and education as ‘big picture’ social science.Academy of Management Learning & Education.
Martin, T. 1999. Essential Surrealists: 42. Bath, UK: Dempsey Parr.
Morrison, E. W. 2023. Employee voice and silence: Taking stock a decade later. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10: 79-107.
Narayandas, D., & Moldoveanu, M. 2019. The future of leadership development. Harvard Business Review, 97: 40–48.
Parker, S. K., Morgeson, F., Johns, G. 2017a. One hundred years of work design research: looking back and looking forward. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102: 403-420.
Parker, S.K., Van den Broeck, A., & Holman, D. 2017b. Work design influences: A synthesis of multi-level factors that affect the design of jobs. Academy of Management Annals, 11: 267- 308.
Petriglieri, G. 2020. F**k Science!? An invitation to humanize organization theory. Organization Theory, 1(1): 1-18.
Petriglieri, G. & Peshkam, A. 2022. Stranger leaders: A theory of marginal leaders’ conception of learning in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 65: 1240-1273.
Petriglieri, G. & Petriglieri, J.L. 2010. Identity Workspaces: The case of business schools.Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9: 44-60.
Petriglieri, G. & Petriglieri, J.L. 2015. Can business schools humanize leadership? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14: 625-647.
Petriglieri, G. & Petriglieri, J.L. 2020. The return of the oppressed: A systems psychodynamic approach to organization studies. Academy of Management Annals, 14: 411-449.
Petriglieri, G. & Petriglieri, J.L. 2022. The work is alive! Systems psychodynamics and the pursuit of pluralism without polarization in human relations. Human Relations, 75: 1431-1460.
Petriglieri, G. Petriglieri, J.L. & Wood, J.D. 2018. Fast tracks and inner journeys: Crafting portable selves for contemporary careers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63: 479-525.
Petriglieri, G., Wood, J. D., & Petriglieri, J. L. 2011. Up Close and Personal: Building Foundations for Leaders' Development Through the Personalization of Management Learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10: 430–450.
Podolny, J. M. 2011. A conversation with James G. March on learning about leadership. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10: 502-506.
Ogbonnaya, C., & Brown, A. D. 2023. Crafting review and essay articles for Human Relations.Human Relations, 76: 365-394.
Reyes, D., L., Dinh, J., Lacerenza, C., Marlow, S. L., Joseph, D. L., & Salas, E. 2019. The state of higher education leadership development program evaluation: A meta-analysis, critical review, and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 30: 101311.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55: 68-78.
Schein, E.H. 1996. Kurt Lewin's change theory in the field and in the classroom: Notes toward a model of managed learning. Systems Practice, 9: 27–47.
Selznick, P. (2008). A humanist science. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Sherf, E. N., & Morrison, E. W. 2020. I do not need feedback! Or do I? Self-efficacy, perspective taking, and feedback seeking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105: 146-165.
Vogel, B., Reichard, R. J., Batistič, S., & Černe, M. 2021. A bibliometric review of the leadership development field: How we got here, where we are, and where we are headed. The Leadership Quarterly, 32: 101381.
Vongswasdi, P., Leroy, H., Anisman-Razin, M., Claeys, J., & Van Dierendonck, D. 2023. Beyond Developing Leaders: Toward a Multi-Narrative Understanding of the Value of Leadership Development Programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education.
Wallace, D. M., Torres, E. M., & Zaccaro, S. J. 2021. Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 32: 101494.
Zhang, Z., Illies, R., & Arvey, R. D. 2009. Beyond Genetic Explanations for Leadership: The Moderating Role of the Social Environment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110: 118-128.
Zheng, W., Meister, A., & Caza, B. B. 2021. The stories that make us: Leaders’ origin stories and temporal identity work. Human Relations, 74: 1178-1210.