Coda / November 2002

Mary Hessler-Key, Ph.D. and Robin Wood, Ph.D.,
Developing Leadership Capacity: Searching for the Integral
A paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Integral Leadership,
London, England, October 2002

Abstract: Leadership studies generally brush over the issues that differences in values and cultural relativism raise by defining the test of leadership as the achievement of results (i.e. – “Does this leader accomplish what he or she set out to do? If so, the person must be a good leader.”) From an analysis of much of the leadership theory of the past century, we cannot decisively reject any of the theories as “wrong.” But neither, it appears, can we applaud any one of them as the comprehensive theory that explains all others. This article integrates the many truths found in each of these leadership theories so that we can develop leaders who are up to the challenges we face in the new millennium.

To read this article click here.

^––––––– ^

And from Fast Company (December 2002):

No More Heroes (or Victims)

“The current obsession with the fall of the hero CEO is woefully one-sided, according to Roger Martin, management guru and dean of Toronto’s top-ranked Rotman School of Management. In his new book, The Responsibility Virus: How Control Freaks, Shrinking violets–And the Rest of Us–Can Harness the Power of True Partnership (Basic Books, 2002). Martin introduces a framework for understanding where leadership breaks down and how to strengthen it for the long run. It starts with a virulent germ–fear of failure–that sets off an endless loop of what Martin calls’under-‘ and ‘over-responsibility.’ The responsibility virus is a classic Goldilocks syndrome: The heroic leader assumes too much responsibility for success, and the people around him assume too little. The challenge of course, is to get it just right.”

> Russ Volckmann