Leaders are the representatives of the movements that have made history. We picture Martin Luther King, Jr. and his poignant "I Have a Dream" speech when discussing the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s in America. We attribute Indian independence in large part to Mahatma Gandhi, who strongly advocated for nonviolent civil disobedience amid a country torn apart by war. We remember Nelson Mandela as a driving force in the movement to end South African apartheid, even from inside a jail cell. A relatively small number of leaders have exerted a disproportionately large impact on society. As a result, researchers have spent decades trying to understand how they achieved this influence (Bass & Riggio, 2005; Yukl, 2010). Although there remains debate among leadership scholars, perhaps one of the most steadfast pillars of leadership is that it is a process (Stogdill, 1948; Yukl, 2010). Put most simply, leadership involves two parties-leader(s) and followers-who work together to achieve common goals. It is generally agreed upon that leaders, assigned or emergent, use influence strategies, formal and/or informal, to aid in the process of persuading followers toward shared goals. As such, followers, or those holding a temporary or permanent supporting role in goal attainment, play a critical part in advancing both the message and agenda of leaders. What is perhaps most interesting about followers is that they can play an equally critical role either having high contact with their leader (e.g., team leader) or having never met a leader at all (e.g., presidents). This particular point is perhaps why interest in exploring the wide-reaching nature of leader influence and effectiveness has been maintained for over a century. Historically, research on effective leadership was restricted to transformational and charismatic leadership

No abstract

The third edition of Case Studies in Pharmacy Ethics presents a comprehensive series of cases faced by pharmacists that raise ethical issues, with chapters arranged in a manner that simultaneously presents the topics that would be covered in a course on ethical theory. After an introduction, the book is divided into three parts. The introduction takes up four basic issues in ethical theory: the source, meaning, and justification of ethical claims; the two major ways of determining if acts are morally right; how moral rules apply to specific situations; and what ought to be done in specific cases. Part I deals with conceptual issues. Chapter 1 presents a five-step model the pharmacist can use for ethical problem solving. Chapter 2 addresses identification of value judgments in pharmacy and separation of ethical from nonethical value judgments. Chapter 3 looks at where the pharmacist should turn to find the source of ethical judgments. Part II presents cases organized around the major principles of ethics: beneficence and nonmaleficence, justice and the allocation of resources, autonomy, veracity (dealing honestly with patients), fidelity (including confidentiality), and avoidance of killing. Part III presents cases organized around topics that present ethical controversy: abortion, sterilization, and contraception; genetics and birth technologies; and mental health and behavior control. The remaining chapters cover drug formularies and drug distribution systems; health insurance, health system planning, and rationing; pharmaceutical research; consent to drug therapies; and terminally ill patients. The book includes links to professional codes of ethics and a glossary.

No abstract

Purpose Procrastination is regularly presented as a behavior to avoid, but this paper argues that individuals who strategically engage in procrastination may experience unique performance benefits that non-procrastinators do not. The purpose of this paper is to present a balanced framework from which procrastination, beginning with a review of the procrastination performance literature and historical stance on the behavior, can be understood. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents and reviews the use of procrastination in organizations. Findings Our findings indicate that while procrastination can be dysfunctional, it can prove to be strategically valuable. To summarize, this paper recommends a holistic conceptualization of procrastination that refrains from value judgment and calls for rethinking the stigma associated with the behavior. Originality/value This paper highlights both the theoretical and practical importance of exploring the benefits of procrastination in an organizational context.