Journal of Leadership Studies最新文献

Systems thinking is an essential leadership capacity, particularly in complex contexts like peacebuilding, which involves interdependent and evolving systems of communities, cultures, and political structures. This article explores the intersection of systems thinking with the Integral Peace Leadership Model (IPLM), examining how systems thinking can enhance peace leadership. Systems thinking, which focuses on the interrelationships and patterns within systems, provides a valuable framework for identifying leverage points and addressing complex, wicked problems in peacebuilding. By examining the four key domains of IPLM—Innerwork, Knowledge, Community, and Environment—the article demonstrates how systems thinking skills, including mindset, content, structure, and behavior, can deepen leaders’ understanding of peace processes and foster more effective, collective approaches to peacebuilding. The integration of systems thinking into peace leadership promotes a shift from command-and-control models to collaborative, community-driven strategies that reflect the dynamic, multifaceted nature of peace efforts.

Social network approaches have been widely applied to understanding leadership, emphasizing the relational processes that influence group dynamics and effectiveness. Despite this extensive application, research integrating social network approaches with peace leadership remains limited. Social network approaches emphasize that individuals are embedded in webs of relationships that influence access to resources and shape individual and collective outcomes. The current article explores how social network concepts, theories, and methods can advance peace leadership by enabling a deeper understanding of conflict, informing targeted interventions, and promoting long-term social stability. We discuss how network analysis can diagnose conflict patterns and identify leverage points for intervention. We conclude with practical recommendations and future research directions for integrating social network approaches and peace leadership.

This paper examines the integration of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) principles with peace leadership to address societal divisions and foster sustainable harmony. By defining DEIB concepts and their interconnectedness with social justice, the authors highlight their critical role in shaping inclusive leadership practices. Diversity is presented as the acknowledgment of social differences; equity as the provision of fair opportunities tailored to individual needs; inclusion as the transcending of barriers to build coalitions; and belonging as a reciprocal sense of community and purpose. Rooted in Johan Galtung's distinction between negative and positive peace, peace leadership is positioned as essential for addressing structural violence and envisioning equitable societies. Through historical examples such as Nelson Mandela's leadership in post-apartheid South Africa and the Northern Ireland peace process, the study underscores how DEIB-driven frameworks advance mutual respect, reduce systemic inequities, and promote reconciliation. The paper argues for a peace leadership model that addresses root causes of conflict by intertwining social justice and moral imperatives, aligning with ethical traditions and sustainable development goals. The authors propose peace leadership as a transformative force capable of uniting diverse communities under shared principles of justice and inclusivity. By adopting DEIB principles, peace leaders can navigate contemporary societal challenges and catalyze progress toward a more harmonious global society.

This article explores the integration of emotional intelligence (EI) and the emerging field of peace leadership. Highlighting the critical need for intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual awareness and competencies, the manuscript connects EI and the emotionally intelligent leadership (EIL) framework to peace leadership. The author discusses key EI and EIL dimensions and competencies alongside peacebuilding skills (e.g., self-awareness, relationship-building, conflict management, and systems thinking). Emphasizing EI and EIL as foundational frameworks for peace leadership, the author advocates for a focus on EI and EIL for fostering leadership that promotes justice, inclusivity, and sustainable change in communities and organizations.

The current paper explores the facilitative role of leadership in the context of peacebuilding and conflict resolution. It highlights the importance of skilled facilitation in navigating complex, multi-stakeholder environments characterized by divergent perspectives and interests. The authors suggest that conflicts can sometimes be unlocked by re-framing the kind of narrative that parties and peacemakers jointly inhabit; in these cases, peace leadership works at two levels—to enable a narrative re-framing and to facilitate appropriate peace-making within-the-frame. When successful, these two rather different leadership functions enable constructive dialogue toward shared understanding and commitment. The paper develops the notion of hybrid configurations of leadership, illustrating how various leadership styles and processes coexist and interact. It suggests how peace-leaders may use narrative re-framing to help create more inclusive narratives that transcend divisions and locate conflicts in a wider context. The conclusion calls for further research into the hybrid styles of leadership appropriate to varied types of facilitation and suggests practical implications for leadership research, development, and practice, particularly in sustaining adaptive spaces for open communication and develop mutual respect in contexts characterized by conflict and difference.

Humility is an essential foundation for peace leadership, serving as a critical lens through which leaders can navigate the complexities of peacebuilding and conflict resolution. The article Without Humility, There Can Be No Peace Leadership explores the indispensable connection between humility and peace leadership, positing that without humility, effective peace leadership is unattainable. Drawing on Sowcik's (The H-Factor: The Intersection Between Humility and Great Leadership. New Degree Press) definition of humility as “a proper perspective of oneself, one's relationship with others, and one's connection to something bigger,” the article integrates existing research on humility with the Integral Peace Leadership Model, which emphasizes self-awareness, interpersonal connection, and systemic awareness. The paper underscores how humility fosters self-reflection, adaptability, and resilience, while enabling leaders to engage in inclusive, relationship-centered practices essential for trust and collaboration. It also emphasizes humility's role in counterbalancing power dynamics, mitigating ego-driven behaviors, and anchoring leadership in a commitment to collective well-being. By examining diverse perspectives, including non-Western and spiritual frameworks, the paper highlights how humility transcends cultural boundaries to support transformative peacebuilding.

Despite a growing body of scholarship on leader and leadership (i.e., leader[ship]) identity development (LID), there has been surprisingly little systematic attention devoted to the connection between LID and meaning making, which is notable because meaning making has been regarded as foundational to the LID process. Accordingly, the current scoping review explores the scholarship and key characteristics at the intersection of LID and meaning making. Specifically, the year of publication, research method and design, country of participants, and theories central to author justification are analyzed. After sharing the results, contributions, and implications for the constructs of LID and meaning making are outlined, with attention given to theoretical and methodological areas for future research. Finally, an integrated constructivist model of LID is proposed that urges leadership scholars and practitioners to incorporate developmental, identity, learning, and meaning-making theories into their discussions of LID.

Accelerated development and engagement of artificial intelligence are among the most significant global challenges in transforming the social and economic environment, resulting in the heightened emphasis on inclusive, collaborative, ethical decision-making and responsible leadership. Higher education is an integral part of the global landscape of society and is influenced by its changing context. Accordingly, leadership educators must respond to the changes in the global and institutional environments and the new leadership paradigm in designing and implementing their leadership education programs. Here, we consider the macro level of the “place” within which higher education institutions are situated and reflect upon the impact of Artificial Intelligence on the design and delivery of leadership education programs.

The current article examines interdisciplinary programs in higher education through the lenses of collective leadership, liminal spaces, and communitas. Interdisciplinary programs often exist in transitional, in-between spaces within academic institutions, challenging traditional hierarchical and disciplinary structures. The current article explores how these liminal spaces can be leveraged to foster collective leadership and a sense of communitas, shared community, and identity among program members. Using Kansas State University as a case study, the article highlights the importance of sociomateriality in constructing leadership and practices such as coaching, mentoring, and advising that can support communitas and collective leadership in interdisciplinary contexts. The article suggests that relationship-focused practices are key to navigating and transforming hierarchical pressures in academic environments, ultimately advocating for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to leadership in higher education.