2011
DOI: 10.1080/00049670.2011.10722554
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Designing and evaluating library leadership programs: improving performance and effectiveness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5 Comer & Sohman, 1996;Roberson, Kulik, & Pepper, 2001;Russon & Reinelt, 2004;Kalev et al, 2006;De Meuse, Hostager, & O'Neill, 2007;Black & Earnest, 2009;Romaniuk & Haycock, 2011 Use of specific metrics Use of tracking metrics for basic statistics such as retention and advancement rates. 6 Laudicina, 1992;Desvaux et al, 2007;Desvaux et al, 2010;ILM, 2011 *engagement surveys Regular deployment of an employee survey that gauges levels of individual engagement.…”
Section: N/amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Comer & Sohman, 1996;Roberson, Kulik, & Pepper, 2001;Russon & Reinelt, 2004;Kalev et al, 2006;De Meuse, Hostager, & O'Neill, 2007;Black & Earnest, 2009;Romaniuk & Haycock, 2011 Use of specific metrics Use of tracking metrics for basic statistics such as retention and advancement rates. 6 Laudicina, 1992;Desvaux et al, 2007;Desvaux et al, 2010;ILM, 2011 *engagement surveys Regular deployment of an employee survey that gauges levels of individual engagement.…”
Section: N/amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Romaniuk and Haycock (2011) echo this and note the importance of addressing issues of gender, diversity and leader self-efficacy. Many evaluations (for example, Barney 2004;Neely 2009) have built on the evaluation questionnaire of the Snowbird Leadership Institute (Neely and Winston 1999;Winston and Neely 2001).…”
Section: Evaluation Of Library Leadership Programmesmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Interestingly, many participants named networking during and after the program as a positive outcome, with several naming it as a support mechanism for skill‐practice utilization. Other research has found mentoring, networking, and connecting with peers in the workplace after training important for leadership development (Romaniuk & Haycock, ). Another positive outcome reported was increased understanding of different organizational roles and departments, with several participants commenting on being able to communicate more effectively with organizational stakeholders.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Organizations expect that managerial-leadership development investment will automatically improve organizational performance (Romaniuk & Haycock, 2011). Yet three meta-analytic reviews (i.e., Burke & Day, 1986;Collins & Holton, 2004;Powell & Yalcin, 2010), which collectively examined studies from 1951 to 2002 regarding managerial-leadership development programs, found effect sizes were on average low (Collins & Holton, 2004;Powell & Yalcin, 2010) to moderate (Burke & Day, 1986) and differed largely across programs, ranging from poor to highly effective (i.e., effect sizes ranged from -1.39 to 2.10) (Collins & Holton, 2004).…”
Section: Leadership and Management Skillsmentioning
confidence: 99%