TY - JOUR
T1 - Walking Our Evidence-Based Talk
T2 - The Case of Leadership Development in Business Schools
AU - Leroy, Hannes L.
AU - Anisman-Razin, Moran
AU - Avolio, Bruce J.
AU - Bresman, Henrik
AU - Stuart Bunderson, J.
AU - Burris, Ethan R.
AU - Claeys, Johannes
AU - Detert, James R.
AU - Dragoni, Lisa
AU - Giessner, Steffen R.
AU - Kniffin, Kevin M.
AU - Kolditz, Thomas
AU - Petriglieri, Gianpiero
AU - Pettit, Nathan C.
AU - Sitkin, Sim B.
AU - Van Quaquebeke, Niels
AU - Vongswasdi, Pisitta
N1 - Acknowledgments:
The authors want to acknowledge the helpful comments of Denise Rousseau, Brad Bell, Frederik Anseel, and Lindy Greer in preparing this manuscript. We also would like to thank Sean Hannah (the editor) for useful insights.
Publisher Copyright: © The Authors 2021.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Academics have lamented that practitioners do not always adopt scientific evidence in practice, yet while academics preach evidence-based management (EBM), they do not always practice it. This paper extends prior literature on difficulties to engage in EBM with insights from behavioral integrity (i.e., the study of what makes individuals and collectives walk their talk). We focus on leader development, widely used but often critiqued for lacking evidence. Analyzing 60 interviews with academic directors of leadership centers at top business schools, we find that the selection of programs does not always align with scientific recommendations nor do schools always engage in high-quality program evaluation. Respondents further indicated a wide variety of challenges that help explain the disconnect between business schools claiming A but practicing B. Behavioral Integrity theory would argue these difficulties are rooted in the lack of an individually owned and collectively endorsed identity, an identity of an evidence-based leader developer (EBLD). A closer inspection of our data confirmed that the lack of a clear and salient EBLD identity makes it difficult for academics to walk their evidence-based leader development talk. We discuss how these findings can help facilitate more evidence-based leader development in an academic context.
AB - Academics have lamented that practitioners do not always adopt scientific evidence in practice, yet while academics preach evidence-based management (EBM), they do not always practice it. This paper extends prior literature on difficulties to engage in EBM with insights from behavioral integrity (i.e., the study of what makes individuals and collectives walk their talk). We focus on leader development, widely used but often critiqued for lacking evidence. Analyzing 60 interviews with academic directors of leadership centers at top business schools, we find that the selection of programs does not always align with scientific recommendations nor do schools always engage in high-quality program evaluation. Respondents further indicated a wide variety of challenges that help explain the disconnect between business schools claiming A but practicing B. Behavioral Integrity theory would argue these difficulties are rooted in the lack of an individually owned and collectively endorsed identity, an identity of an evidence-based leader developer (EBLD). A closer inspection of our data confirmed that the lack of a clear and salient EBLD identity makes it difficult for academics to walk their evidence-based leader development talk. We discuss how these findings can help facilitate more evidence-based leader development in an academic context.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122923391&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/15480518211062563
DO - 10.1177/15480518211062563
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85122923391
SN - 1548-0518
VL - 29
SP - 5
EP - 32
JO - Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies
JF - Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies
IS - 1
ER -