Considering Context: Developing Students' Leadership Capacity

Osteen, Laura; Coburn, Mary B.

doi:10.1002/ss.20028

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Just because we are passionate advocates of leadership education it doesn't mean that others will share our enthusiasm. Some broad guideposts have been offered as to the context, design, variety, and delivery of leadership programs (Astin & Astin, 2000;Haber, 2011;Komives et al, 2011) and what makes them successful (Osteen & Coburn, 2012;Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhardt, 1999.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership Isn’t Minor—But It Can Be

DiPaolo¹

2016

Journal of Leadership Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leadership educators looking to successfully create and implement an interdisciplinary leadership minor can often find themselves overwhelmed and apprehensive. Little exists to help guide our way as we attempt what often is an initial academic beachhead on campus. This paper explores the creation, implementation, and outcomes of a highly-successful leadership minor on a small, private, urban campus. Reflections are offered concerning the difficulties faced in gaining approval of the minor, the problems created if you are too successful, the importance and cost of mentoring, issues of gender and race, the importance of evaluation, and the necessity of constant collaboration. A practical step-by-step guide is offered as a possible exemplar for leadership educators plucky enough to bring a new leadership minor to campus.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership Isn’t Minor—But It Can Be

DiPaolo¹

2016

Journal of Leadership Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If such studies exist, the theme is often explored in the contexts of public sector, or nonprofit organization (Mainardes et al, 2011;Middlehurst et al, 2009), which does not adequately represent the context of educational organization (Gibbs et al, 2009;McRoy & Gibbs, 2009). In addition to having academic freedom, scientific autonomy, and the fundamental of collegiality, universities (PT) are also specific in terms of context (Hallinger & Chen, 2012), affected by society's expectations on higher education, university (PT) mission, as well organizational structures and administrative systems (Osteen & Coburn, 2012). In essence, the discussion on university (PT) leadership cannot be separated from the cultural context in which the organization operates.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kalaupun ada, tema ini sering dikaji dalam konteks sektor publik, atau non-profit organization (Mainardes et al, 2011;Middlehurst et al, 2009) yang tidak sepenuhnya menggambarkan organisasi pendidikan McRoy & Gibbs, 2009). Selain khas dengan kebebasan akademik, otonomi keilmuan, dan asas kolegialitas, perguruan tinggi (PT) juga spesifik di konteksnya (Hallinger & Chen, 2012) yang dipengaruhi oleh harapan masyarakat sekitar terhadap pendidikan tinggi, misi pendirian perguruan tinggi (PT), serta struktur organisasi dan sistem administrasinya (Osteen & Coburn, 2012). Maka dari itu, pembahasan mengenai kepemimpinan perguruan tinggi (PT) tidak bisa dilepaskan dari konteks budaya di mana organisasi tersebut beroperasi.…”

unclassified

Characteristics of Leadership in Private University Organizations in Indonesia: A Conceptual Model [Karakteristik Kepemimpinan Organisasi Perguruan Tinggi Swasta di Indonesia: Sebuah Model Konseptual]

Murniati

2021

ANIMA IPJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities (PT) are complex organizations, due to their internal nature and in response to the demands of globalization and technological development. Leaders and leadership are key factors in the success of an organization in fulfilling its goals. Studies on leadership in university organizations (OPT) in Indonesia is still limited, even though leaders perform their functions depending on context. This means that leadership study from different cultures and other organizations (corporations) may not be readily implemented in private university organizations (OPTS) in Indonesia. A qualitative study on 13 leaders of private universities (PTS) aims to identify the leadership characteristics of private university organizations (OPTS); specifically, by portraying leadership functions and leadership styles played by individuals who are active leaders private universities (PTS). The phenomenological qualitative study conducted using grounded analysis presents a conceptual model with three important characteristics: (1) academic leadership; (2) community leadership; and (3) corporate leadership. The interpretation of academic leadership and community leadership relates to the tri dharma (three pillars) of universities (PT), for which the view has not been solidified among the participants at the institutional and individual levels. Meanwhile, from corporate leadership emerges several interpretations related to the adoption of performance-based strategy, succession planning, and qualifications. Facing extremely competitive external challenges, leaders of universities (PT) can consider Systems Theory framework that look at the internal components of organizations holistically, rather than part by part, such that unique leadership characteristics would emerge, such as entrepreneurial leadership with the interpretation of tri dharma that is not merely limited to the dichotomy between research and teaching universities. Perguruan tinggi (PT) merupakan organisasi yang kompleks, baik karena natur internal maupun akibat tuntutan sebagai dampak dari perkembangan teknologi dan globalisasi. Pemimpin dan kepemimpinan merupakan faktor kunci akan keberhasilan organisasi mencapai visinya. Kajian kepemimpinan di organisasi perguruan tinggi (OPT) terutama di Indonesia sangat terbatas, padahal pemimpin berfungsi tergantung pada konteks. Artinya, studi kepemimpinan dari budaya berbeda atau organisasi lain (korporasi) belum tentu dapat diimplementasikan dalam organisasi perguruan tinggi swasta (OPTS) di Indonesia. Studi kualitatif terhadap 13 pemimpin perguruan tinggi swasta (PTS) bertujuan untuk identifikasi karakteristik kepemimpinan di organisasi perguruan tinggi swasta (OPTS); secara spesifik berupa gambaran fungsi pemimpin dan gaya kepemimpinan yang diperankan oleh mereka yang tengah aktif memimpin perguruan tinggi swasta (PTS). Hasil studi kualitatif fenomenologi dengan analisis secara grounded menampilkan model konseptual dengan tiga karakteristik, yakni: (1) kepemimpinan akademik; (2) kepemimpinan komunitas; dan (3) kepemimpinan korporasi. Pemaknaan terhadap kepemimpinan akademik dan kepemimpinan komunitas terkait dengan tri dharma perguruan tinggi (PT), yang pandangannya tidak solid antar partisipan baik pada tataran institusional maupun individual. Sementara pada kepemimpinan korporasi muncul makna terkait adopsi strategi berbasis kinerja, program kaderisasi, dan kualifikasi. Menghadapi tantangan eksternal yang sangat kompetitif, pemimpin perguruan tinggi (PT) dapat mempertimbangkan kerangka systems theory yang melihat komponen internal organisasi secara keseluruhan, bukan bagian demi bagian, sehingga boleh jadi muncul karakteristik kepemimpinan yang unik seperti entrepreneurial dengan pemaknaan terhadap tri dharma yang tidak terbatas pada research atau teaching university semata.

show abstract

“…Understanding the complexity of leadership development in these environments is imperative, as “successful collegiate leadership programs are embedded in and aligned with the following four contextual layers: higher education's purpose, institutional mission, administrative support, and collaborative environment. Each of these layers contributes to or detracts from desired student learning outcomes” (Osteen & Coburn, , p. 5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%