The global leadership capacity wheel

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper was to examine the definitions of global leadership and indigenous leadership, identify leadership capacities inherent in human resource development (HRD) and determine relationships of the three as a means to develop a model to aid and guide opportunities for future research. Design/methodology/approach Following a two-stage integrative literature review of HRD, global and indigenous leadership literature, the grounded theory constant comparative method established 31 positive and 1 negative leadership domains, and respective capacities, and compare domains from literature. Findings The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel informs researchers of strengths and areas for additional research, has resulted in a more complete model of global leadership and calls for increased clarity for leadership capacity model development, especially for complex, global environments and local constructs and theories. Research limitations/implications Although the literature had adequate representation in the business and organizational acumen and managing people and relationships central global leadership domains, more research and reporting is required for managing self and indigenous leadership capacity development subdomains. Practical implications Leadership development is a high priority and core function of HRD. The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel provides a tool for scholars and practitioners to guide global leadership development programs and research. Social implications Understanding the relationships of leadership capacities from global and indigenous perspectives is helpful to examine cultural, identity and macro-contextual dimensions and their influence on leadership. Originality/value The Global Leadership Capacity Wheel provides a type of road-map, a holistic representation, in the context of developing global leaders in today’s complex environment.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.