What we have here is an anthology of 26 essays that were generated by those who participated in a Harvard Business School Centennial Colloquium on "Advancing Leadership." Nitin Nohria and Rakesh Khurana are its co-editors and deserve high praise for their efforts. They acknowledge the assistance of dozens of others and, given the nature and extent of what must have been involved to get the book published, Nohria and Khurana should be commended. The material is organized within five sections, each of which has a core assumption or theme.
One: "The significance of leadership for organizational life is best assessed by the direct impact of leadership on organizational performance." Two: A multi-faceted examination of the theory of leadership (personal attributes, functions, and relationships) "across eight major disciplines, including organizational behavior, psychology, psychoanalysis, sociology, economics, history and political science." Three: Three papers focus on the variability of leadership (i.e. what's core and contingent), despite a widespread assumption among leadership scholars "that there is no universal model or one best way to lead and that leadership must be contingent on the specifics of any given situation." Comment: I agree that "effective leadership must to some extent be contingent on the situation and the person," and, that "a contingent theory of leadership that is broad enough in scope to include virtually all situational factors makes integration and a middle-range theory substantially more difficult." Four: The focus is on some of the most important practical problems facing leaders, such as "how to cope with the complexity of the CEO's role, how to build effective senior leadership teams, how to lead in a more global environment, how to make critical leadership decisions, how to mobilize social movements that can address some of society's most pressing problems, and how to lead to stimulate innovation." Five: The five essays in this section focus on the "knowing, doing, and being" issues of leadership development, affirming that all three are important. "How do we help leaders develop along these dimensions?" In my opinion, the more important question is, "How should we help leaders develop along these lines...and along other lines that are also appropriate?"
In each section, the contributors focus on "some of the key themes and tensions found in the literature [to provide] a useful lens on organizing this vast and sprawling field." I hasten to add that, in fact, multiple lenses and prisms have been used, from a commendably diverse range of scholars' perspectives, to produce what I characterize as a 360º examination of especially important issues.
For example, here are some of the questions that are addressed:
"What kinds of leaders are these institutions [i.e. business, government, other spheres of public life] developing that have caused so much hardship for so many?"
Question: What about academic institutions with which most of the contributors are now associated?
"Are these institutions developing leaders who have the competence and character to lead the web of complex institutions that have become so vital to the collective health of modern societies?"
"What is the vision or model of leadership that animates the curriculum and developmental models in these institutions?"
Comment: I think there are multiple visions and multiple models and doubt if there is any one of each that is sufficient to accommodate multiple needs and objectives.
"If there is such a model, does it need to be revisited, reexamined, and revised in light of the widespread failures in leadership?"
"Do we really understand what it takes to develop better leaders?"
Question: If not, then what?
"What advice can scholars give leaders who are entrusted with the challenges of leading organizations and ensuring their continued viability and prosperity?"
I'm not saying that questions such as these should not be asked...and answered. However, as I navigated my way through almost 800 pages of the sequential and thematic narrative, I wondered what non-"scholars" also think about various issues. For example, those who head the leadership development programs for the military services (including the academies located at West Point, Annapolis, and Colorado Springs) and those who head the leadership development programs at major corporate universities (e.g. Accenture, ADP, KPMG, Motorola, and Ritz-Carlton). What are their perspectives on major business schools, notably Harvard and others with which the contributors of this book are associated? Those now involved in efforts to solve the problems to which Nohria (recently appointed dean of HBS) and Khurana refer in the first chapter may well share at least some of the responsibility for causing or neglecting them.
My guess (only a guess) is that this book will be of greatest interest and value primarily -- but certainly not exclusively -- to those who comprise the academic community, especially classroom instructors and others now involved in research relevant to the theory and practice of leadership.
