Department

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Dept. of Psychology

Publisher

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

Place of Publication

Chattanooga (Tenn.)

Abstract

According to McKinsey & Company (2014), US companies are spending almost $14 billion annually on leadership development, only 7% of senior managers think their companies are effectively developing their leaders, and 30% of US companies believe their leaders lack the right capabilities. The current research addresses the leadership development issue from the antecedent perspective, and we are extending Avolio & Hannah’s (2008) theory of developmental readiness. They argue that individuals who possess higher levels of developmental readiness will be more likely to maximize their development when exposed to a developmental experience. However, there has been little empirical research on the combined components of developmental readiness in a true representative sample of leaders. This study is looking to add empirical findings to this theory demonstrating that leaders who score higher on scales of developmental readiness components benefit more from leadership training. More specifically, we will be assessing trainees from a Tennessee state leadership program (LEAD TN) on six different scales related to developmental readiness. We will also record levels of perceived improvement across the course of the program in attempt to find positive relationships between developmental readiness and this criterion. If the relationships found between developmental readiness and trainee perceived improvement are significant, it should inform organizations about the importance of assessing these characteristics as antecedents to leadership growth. The results should answer the following question: why invest time and money into developing a leader if he or is she is not ready, willing, or able to engage in such development? Best practice would be to assess the leaders’ developmental readiness using a standardized tool of validated measures and provide these leaders with individualized feedback before beginning the developmental experience. Therefore, they would have time to work on their individual motivation and abilities needed to have a positive training experience.

Date

October 2018

Subject

Industrial and organizational psychology

Document Type

posters

Language

English

Rights

Under copyright.

License

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Share

COinS
 
Oct 27th, 11:00 AM Oct 27th, 12:00 PM

Who's Ready to Lead? The Impact of Developmental Readiness on a State Leadership Development Program

According to McKinsey & Company (2014), US companies are spending almost $14 billion annually on leadership development, only 7% of senior managers think their companies are effectively developing their leaders, and 30% of US companies believe their leaders lack the right capabilities. The current research addresses the leadership development issue from the antecedent perspective, and we are extending Avolio & Hannah’s (2008) theory of developmental readiness. They argue that individuals who possess higher levels of developmental readiness will be more likely to maximize their development when exposed to a developmental experience. However, there has been little empirical research on the combined components of developmental readiness in a true representative sample of leaders. This study is looking to add empirical findings to this theory demonstrating that leaders who score higher on scales of developmental readiness components benefit more from leadership training. More specifically, we will be assessing trainees from a Tennessee state leadership program (LEAD TN) on six different scales related to developmental readiness. We will also record levels of perceived improvement across the course of the program in attempt to find positive relationships between developmental readiness and this criterion. If the relationships found between developmental readiness and trainee perceived improvement are significant, it should inform organizations about the importance of assessing these characteristics as antecedents to leadership growth. The results should answer the following question: why invest time and money into developing a leader if he or is she is not ready, willing, or able to engage in such development? Best practice would be to assess the leaders’ developmental readiness using a standardized tool of validated measures and provide these leaders with individualized feedback before beginning the developmental experience. Therefore, they would have time to work on their individual motivation and abilities needed to have a positive training experience.