The problem and the solution. Buddhism is a way of life practiced by more than 500 million people. The continued globalization of work and the expanding economic power and influence of Asian nations ensures that the beliefs, goals, practices, and traditions of Buddhism will take on increasing importance to business, education, and human resource development (HRD) professionals in every part of the world. Buddhism, like most worldviews, is not homogeneous and has many variations. Indeed, this adaptability is one of the hallmarks of Buddhism and is a major contributing factor to its spread and applicability around the world. The differences in these approaches are not as relevant to this article as are their commonalities in foundational beliefs, goals, and methods. Thus, this article presents a Buddhist view of learning, not the Buddhist view.

The problem and the solution. The workplace, classrooms, and the world in general are becoming increasingly diverse. Globalization, communications technology, immigration, an increased focus on religion and spirituality, and the ease of both domestic and international travel offer an opportunity to work, learn, and interact with people whose backgrounds differ from our own. To be effective, HRD practitioners must recognize how cultural background, assumptions, and view of the world influence an understanding of adult learning. The dangers of not developing such an understanding include inconsistent and/or atheoretical practice, misunderstandings, miscommunication, and the dangers of cultural imperialism.

Situational leadership theory (SLT)—it sounds great, but will it work? SLT, a popular theory based on task behavior, relationship behavior, follower (subordinate) maturity, and effective leader behavior, may not be what the training‐management professional expects. Johansen reviews the three major areas of research on SLT: conceptual validity, validity of the instrument associated with SLT— the Leadership Effectiveness and Adaptability (LEAD) survey—and the effect on subordinates' performance when the theory is accurately practiced by a leader or manager. According to Johansen, research has failed to support the conceptual basis of the theory and the validity of the instruments. Research regarding the effect on subordinates' performance when situational leadership is properly practiced by the leader has provided mixed results and only limited support for the theory. Johansen found that it is not possible to make a definitive statement based on experimental findings. Yet SLT does have redeeming qualities: it has opened much discussion about the many factors that affect leadership behavior and about the nature of leader‐subordinate relationships, and it has generated critical research. But until the validity and performance questions are answered, Johansen strongly suggests that SLT will be appropriately used only as a starting point for discussion about the dynamics of leadership behavior, subordinate expectations, leadership effectiveness, and decision making.

No abstract