Transformative Learning: the future of leadership development?

Shenaz N. Malik and Joseph R. Roberson

December 10, 2014

Author Note:

Shenaz N. Malik, Instructional Systems Development, UMBC

Contact: shaz@shazmalik.com

Joseph R. Roberson, Instructional Systems Development, UMBC

Contact: robjo1@umbc.edu

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 3

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING: THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT? .... 4

DEFINING LEADERSHIP ............................................................................................................ 6

A NEW WORLD, A NEW MODEL OF LEADERSHIP .............................................................. 7

LEARNING .................................................................................................................................... 9

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING ............................................................................................. 10

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ........................... 13

PUTTING IT INTO PRACTICE: TRANSFORMATIVE LEADERSHIP IN ACTION ............ 16

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 20

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 21

TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... 25

FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 30

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 33

ABSTRACT

Technological progress occurs at an ever-increasing rate, changing not only the speed of

business, but the very nature of how business is conducted. In response to these changes, a

new paradigm of transformative leadership has emerged. Leadership development (LD)

initiatives that incorporate transformative learning principles demonstrate positive impact on

executive performance (Ciporen, 2008). Transformative leaders actively foster leadership by

employees throughout the organization; this, in turn, catalyzes systemic learning (Watkins,

Marsick, & Faller, 2012). Transformative learning remains controversial, however, due to

questions regarding deliverability and measurability at both the personal and organizational

levels. We conclude that transformative learning will continue to evolve as an important

framework for developing the next generation(s) of leaders.

KEYWORDS: Transformative Learning, Leadership Development

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING:

THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT?

Although leadership development has been discussed as far back as Plato’s The Republic,

the modern concept of leadership development in organizations emerged in the mid-twentieth

century, when war disrupted long-established leadership structures. While experienced leaders

were away at war, leadership within businesses fell to people ill-prepared to lead or supervise

(Estep, 2008, p. 16). What followed were decades of attempts to understand what leadership is

and how to teach it. Through the 1940s, leadership development focused on the development of

personality characteristics and traits. When this proved inadequate, various approaches were

tried: leadership styles, teaching desired leadership behaviors, and later (in the 1990s), when

technological advances demanded different business structures, developing leadership

competencies came into play (Hernez-Broome & Hughes, n.d.).

Leadership development, while always important to organizations, became a critical need

for businesses during the late 1990s. Simply stated by Hernez-Broome & Hughes (n.d.), “The

effective use of technology is proving to be a hierarchy buster” (p. 30). The emerging digital age

provided new ways of conducting business and created new pathways for communication at all

levels of an organization. The mainstream business model designating who solves problems and

improves systems has oscillated back and forth between experts only and everybody, albeit with

a different configuration each time around (Weisbord, 2008. pp. 336-342).

Table 1: “The Learning Curve” (Weisbord, 2008)

Experts/Leaders Everybody

1900 Experts solve problems

1950 Everybody solves problems

1965 Experts improve whole systems

2001+ Everybody improves whole systems

Say brother, can you paradigm?

The concepts of paradigm and paradigm shift are central to our discussion, as they were

central to Mezirow’s development of transformative learning theory. Through overuse and

misuse in popular culture, the original context and meanings may be unfamiliar to some readers.

Therefore, a refresher seems appropriate. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas

Kuhn (Kuhn, 1996) employed the term paradigm shift to describe how scientific theory

development progresses in epochal revolutions instead of, or in addition to, the traditional view

that progress occurs gradually, only by development-by-accumulation. A paradigm shift is the

end result of what is often a long, drawn-out process to forge an (often radical) change in

prevailing theory (p. 139). As part of his investigations into perception, Kuhn proved that

objective observation– the cornerstone of scientific investigation– is actually a myth.

Experiments demonstrated how two scientists, albeit observing the exact same thing, reported

conflicting data in accord with their theoretical biases. Kuhn explained this relativism of

perception with the thesis of the theory-dependence of observation (p. 150). The battle between

competing paradigms is not won by superior logic: "Though each may hope to convert the other

to his way of seeing science and its problems, neither may hope to prove his case. The

competition between paradigms is not the sort of battle that can be resolved by proofs" (p. 148).

Kuhn used the duck-rabbit optical illusion to demonstrate the way in which a paradigm

shift could cause one to see the same information in an entirely different way:

"The subject of a gestalt demonstration knows that his perception has shifted because he

can make it shift back and forth repeatedly while he holds the same book or piece of

paper in his hands. Aware that nothing in his environment has changed, he directs his

attention increasingly not to the figure (duck or rabbit) but to the lines of the paper he is

looking at. Ultimately he may even

learn to see those lines without

seeing either of the figures, and he

may then say (what he could not

legitimately have said earlier) that

it is these lines that he really sees

but that he sees them alternately as

a duck and as a rabbit. ...As in all similar psychological experiments, the effectiveness of

the demonstration depends upon its being analyzable in this way. Unless there were an

external standard with respect to which a switch of vision could be demonstrated, no

conclusion about alternate perceptual possibilities could be drawn” (Kuhn, The Structure

of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed., p. 114).

DEFINING LEADERSHIP

“We don’t have enough strong leaders. No wonder. We can’t even define the term”

(Wagner, 2014, p. 1). Who (or what) is a leader? What is leadership? How are they different? No

Figure 1 Duck/Rabbit Illusion. Source: Jastrow, J. (1899). The mind's eye. Popular Science Monthly, 54, 299-312.

final definitions exist, yet you may have come across examples from the old paradigm that go

something like Theodore Roosevelt’s “The best executive is the one who has sense enough to

pick good men to do what he wants done, and self-restraint enough to keep from meddling with

them while they do it” or Peter Drucker’s “The only definition of a leader is someone who has

followers” (both quoted in Wagner, 2014, p. 1). As Wagner points out, both definitions (and

dozens other he collected for his commentary) are woefully inadequate. Roosevelt’s definition

ascribes no role beyond assigning tasks to ‘good men.’ The second definition is written in the

past tense, indicating that leadership can never be identified until after the fact; that is, some

post-facto evaluation must happen before we can call it leadership. Conversely, Rost (1993)

insists that a definition of leadership “must be constructed in the present tense so that it can be

used as a criterion to decide if some process is leadership” (p. 99).

A NEW WORLD, A NEW KIND OF LEADERSHIP

Due in large measure to technological progress, “modern organisations face challenges

that are unprecedented in complexity and scale. The globalisation of international trade is

creating more complex flows of people, goods, funds, and technology across national and

political boundaries” (DeRue, Sreitzer, Flanagan, & Allen, 2013, p. 57). While corporations do

continue to manufacture light bulbs and clothes and widgets, the way those traditional industries

(and all other businesses) conduct their business and solve their problems has changed

dramatically. Indeed, the constant evolution of technology is accelerating the trend “towards a

greater dependence on knowledge, information and high skill levels, and the increasing need for

ready access to all of these by the business and public sectors” (OECD, 2005, para. 71).

In this new landscape, leadership is needed at every level of the organization, not just at

the top. And the kind of leadership needed is markedly different from what has come before. As

Peter Drucker noted in the early years of this paradigm shift, “In the traditional organization—

the organization of the last one hundred years—the skeleton or internal structure was a

combination of rank and power. In the emerging organization, it has to be understanding and

responsibility [italics added]” (Drucker, 1995, p. xxvii).

In her literature review concerning “values based leadership,” Mary Kay Copeland

(2014) laments that the beginning of the 21st century was plagued with “extensive, evasive and

disheartening leadership failures. Moral and ethical deficiencies were prevalent” and cites Bass

(1985, 1990), who “clarified that authentic, transformational leadership necessitated a moral

foundation” (Copeland, 2014, p. 112). We have all seen how a few mouse-clicks can lead to

scandal, or even ruin. Take, for example, the recent commotion surrounding Uber, a highly

successful taxi/rideshare startup. In the old paradigm, the unethical behavior of Uber’s executive

leadership (plotting revenge schemes, planting fake media stories, surge pricing during

emergencies, etc.) might have gone unchallenged. But today’s instant global publishing– via

online communication tools– means that anybody, at any time, within minutes, can launch an

influential challenge in the public sphere.

Thus, the old workplace has been upended by our own success with technologies, and the

new workplace calls for yet another stab at defining (and developing) leadership. In the new

knowledge-based model, leadership is increasingly horizontal. That is, leadership is now a more

fluid activity or process where an individual at any level of the organization may act as a change

agent. Where in the past leadership development was reserved for designated leaders, now

leadership development is needed at multiple levels, at least as far down as managers (Rost,

1993, pp. 97-98).

Leadership is an act of influence, no matter who does it. We define a leader as a person

who does leadership rather than as a person designated as a leader merely by rank, title, or

position. For the purposes of this paper, we define leadership as a social process, as a creative

act carried out via communication, within conversation and dialogue. Our working definition is

“Leadership is inspiring others to pursue a vision of a preferred future, to the extent that

manifesting that future becomes a shared effort, a shared vision, and a shared success” (adapted

from Zeitchik’s definition (cited in Mielach, 2012, p. 1).

LEARNING

The success of the human species is due in large measure to a highly evolved capacity for

learning; our domination of the world and its resources is a direct result of this ability. Learning

is a process of adaptation, resulting in a lasting, adaptive change within a system’s internal

organization undertaken in order to improve functioning (Piaget, 1974). Although often thought

of as an exclusively human activity, learning occurs in many organisms; it occurs in non-living

systems as well, both natural and man-made. TL theory applies to individual development and

organizational development.

Learning occurs along a continuum, ranging from the kind that simply adds one more bit

of information to the kind of epochal learning that ‘rocks our world’ and radically alters our

worldview. This continuum is divided into three levels: informative, formative, and

transformative. Each level is associated with specific objectives and outcomes [see Table 2:

Levels of Learning]. Most training and development, and in fact most education of any kind,

occurs within the first level, adding information and skills. The second level is where we learn

cultural rules of engagement, emotional intelligence, and interpersonal skills– in business, think

of sales, customer service training, or of management training.

Table 2: Levels of Learning (Frenk, 2011. P. 1951):

LEVEL OBJECTIVE OUTCOME

1. Informative Learning Information, Skills Experts

2. Formative Learning Socialization, Values Professionals

3. Transformative Learning Leadership Attributes Change Agents

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING

The third level is transformative learning: this is where we learn why we believe what we

believe, and why we do what we do. We reappraise our mental maps, gauge how effectively they

represent external reality, and most importantly, how well they guide our actions. Transformative

learning requires critical self-reflection– thinking-about-thinking, or metacognition– a skill that

(ideally) develops along the way to adulthood [see Figure 2 for a comparison with Bloom’s

taxonomy of learning]. In actuality, the experience of transformative learning typically coincides

with a crisis, what Mezirow calls a disorienting dilemma. In such a situation, strategies that

carried the day previously simply do not work. Drawing on any preexisting knowledge

structures, or acting from any mental maps or conceptual models already in place, are ineffective

in this unfamiliar landscape. In fact, they often make things worse instead of better. An updated,

more accurate map of the landscape is required to surmount the challenge. Transformative

learning involves reevaluation of existing schemas, habits of mind, and meaning perspectives in

order to arrive at a more accurate map of reality: a new paradigm.

Although Mezirow began developing his theory in 1975 as part of his doctoral

dissertation, it was not until after his 1990 publication of Fostering Critical Reflection in

Adulthood, followed the next year by publication of Transformative Dimensions of Adult

Learning, that it became widely known. Mezirow describes eleven [originally ten] phases of a

process [see Table 3: Eleven Phases of Transformative Learning] “by which we transform our

taken-for-granted frames of reference (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mind-sets) to make

them more inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and reflective so that

they may generate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action”

(Mezirow, 2000. pp. 7-8). This process requires “using a prior interpretation to construe a new or

revised interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in order to guide future action"

(Mezirow, 1996, p. 162), subsequently causing a “…a deep, structural shift in basic premises of

thought, feeling, and actions…” (Transformative Learning Centre, 2004, quoted in Kitchenham,

2008. p.1).

Table 3: Mezirow’s Eleven Phases of Transformation (in Cranton, 1994)

1. Experiencing a disorienting dilemma

2. Undergoing self-examination

3. Conducting a critical assessment of internalized role assumptions and feeling a sense of alienation from traditional social expectations

4. Relating one’s discontent to similar experiences of others or to public issues–recognizing that one’s problems are shared and not exclusively a private matter

5. Exploring one’s options for new ways of acting

6. Building competence and self-confidence in new roles

7. Planning a course of action

8. Acquiring knowledge and skills for implementing ones plans

9. Making provisional efforts to try new roles and to assess feedback

10. Reintegrating into society on the basis of conditions dictated by the new perspective

11. Altering present relationships and forging new relationships

TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

Research about transformative learning in leadership development has grown

significantly over the past twenty years. During 2014, 13 times more articles were published in

academic journals –1,177 (where the titles contained both transformative learning and

leadership development; with “SmartText” and “apply related words” selected) than were in

published in 1994–88. A broader search, including the full texts but limited to 2014, returned

4,473 matches.

Who provides TL/LD programming? Large organizations may develop their own in-

house program; smaller organizations usually hire consultants. Many colleges and universities

offer it, especially in MBA programs: “While the majority of global leadership development is

coming from the business field, colleges and universities can be formidable agents in terms of

growing a diverse pool of culturally competent leaders while simultaneously serving higher

education’s broader mission: transforming young people. (Forbes, 2014, p. 1)”

How many trainings, courses, and degree programs are available? The number of TL/LD

initiatives provided by and for specific organizations for their members is unknown; however a

cursory Google search for transformative learning + leadership development + program course

training returned 106,000 matches. Looking for a public degree-granting program? A cursory

Google search for transformative learning + leadership development + degree program + past

year returned 496 matches.

Who receives TL/LD training in organizations? Traditionally, only top-level executives

are offered leadership training– plus those few selected for advancement to the executive suite.

Should first-time managers receive TL/LD training? Linda Hill (2004) writes, “...the first

managerial assignment is a pivotal developmental experience for future executives. It is when an

executive’s basic philosophy and leadership style are shaped” (p. 121). The first transformative

experience encountered on the way towards leadership is likely to be while a rookie manager.

Transformative learning can be even more dramatic during this transition than after one has

ascended to the executive suite. How many first-time managers fail to make the transition?

Perhaps TL during this liminal period would improve the success rate.

Challenges and Criticisms: Deliverability

While TL is a natural occurrence for many adults in response to life events, it is rarely an

explicit instructional objective of formal learning or training. One of the biggest challenges to

implementing TL noted in the literature is that learning on such a deep level is difficult, if not

impossible, to cause to happen within the controlled conditions of a training event (Taylor,

2014). Additionally, TL challenges preexisting ideas, received notions, and cultural norms: it can

be disorienting and emotionally upsetting, making the process inappropriate for typical training

environments. Providing appropriate levels of challenge, on one hand, versus support, on the

other, is essential. The balance between challenge and support must be orchestrated–the right

degree of challenge here, the right amount of support there. This requires skilled facilitation.

Successful TL programming needs to include supports before and after the training event,

but particularly after. This is to offset the inevitable frustration, setbacks, and other barriers to

transfer the learner encounters back on the job. Perhaps surprisingly, participants cited

intrapersonal obstacles as the most significant to transfer, as evidenced by one participant’s

feedback: “...Importance of intention and commitment in any attempt to sustain change or

interrupt old habits... people who are committed to making change need to have extensive

internal resources to overcome their own tendency towards stasis” (Ciporen, 2008, p. 197).

Will organizational cultures become more accepting of a process that requires not just

time, but a willingness of leaders to radically change their existing ways of thought? Those for

whom the status quo works tend to resist change. Can it be reasonably expected that a process

requiring such depth of reflection will find more than a slim ledge of a foothold in the

workplace?

Challenges and Criticisms: Measurability

The value of any training is ideally gauged by quantifiable results–results that can be

attributed to the training. One of the primary objectives of Dr. Ruth Ciporen’s study of a month-

long executive retreat was to measure the impact back on the job:

Interviews and statistical analysis of 360-degree feedback scores suggest that undergoing

personally transformative learning had a positive effect on a wide set of executive

competencies. Deep personal change led to more positive interactions with others;

together, these improvements on both the individual and interpersonal levels facilitated

better handling of business challenges...and helped executives in team-building, leading

change, and approaching business challenges from a fresh, more inclusive perspective

(Ciporen, 2008. p. 212).

Similarly, Belias and Koustelios (2014) conclude that “In the banking sector,

transformational leadership has proven to be quite appropriate and effective, having a positive

influence on several aspects, like employees’ performance, job satisfaction, and job

commitment” (p. 197).

Will the essence of TL be lost as researchers and practitioners race to develop the

evaluations and efficacy measures that are of such comfort for the accountability of a

corporation? Much of learning is measured indirectly. However, we convince ourselves that

quantitative measures are essential. Transformational learning, as we have seen in the leading-

edge work of Ciporen and of Belias & Koustelios, thus far appears to be better measured through

qualitative measures, leaving it open to serious questioning.

Evaluating the effectiveness of transformative learning in leadership development

is an area of continuing debate and research. For an overview of some methods of such

evaluation, the reader may wish to refer to Advances in leader and leadership development: A

review of 25 years of research and theory (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm, & McKee, 2013), as

well as Virtuous cycles of learning: using formative, embedded, and diagnostic developmental

assessments in a large-scale leadership program (Stein, Dawson, & Van Rossum, 2013).

PUTTING IT INTO PRACTICE: TRANSFORMATIVE LEADERSHIP IN ACTION

Transformative leadership is the style of those who “motivate their subordinates

to perform at a higher level by inspiring them, offering them intellectual challenges and paying

attention to their individual needs” (Belias and Koustelios, 2014. p. 187). Contrast this to the old

paradigm of transactional leadership, where leaders “engage in a process of negotiation, offering

subordinates rewards in exchange for the achievement of specific goals and completion of

agreed-upon tasks” (ibid, p. 190). Transactional leadership style tends to be impersonal; the

transformational style engages leader and followers in a deeper way. Transformational leadership

is based on the idea of leadership as a relationship of influence from leader to follower, and relies

upon trust, and thus upon integrity and authenticity (see Table 4). Transformative leadership

development cultivates these intrapersonal and interpersonal qualities and competencies.

Table 5: Ethical, Authentic, Spiritual, and Transformational Leadership Characteristics

A corporation is a manmade system. As with any system, corporations depend upon

effective adaptation. In order to thrive in the business landscape of the 21st century,

organizations have to learn to adapt faster. In such an atmosphere of flux, the organization must

adapt–must learn–in a New York second, and the success of constant adaptation lies in the

strength of its leaders—appointed and naturally emergent (Watkins, Marsick & Faller, 2012. p.

373). As we discussed, neither informative nor formative learning can adequately prepare

organizations to respond effectively to such turbulent times: transformative learning can.

Transformative learning, although originally focused on personal TL, applies to organization-

level learning also. Leadership is key because it is the process by which an organization orients

itself to current and future circumstances. While it is the management function that executes

policies and procedures, it is the leadership function that formulates and communicates the

shared vision of the organization’s direction. In the Handbook of Transformative Learning,

Watkins, Marsick, and Faller suggest strategies and interventions for the change leader to

employ in fostering organizational transformation.

FIGURE 3: Model for Facilitating Transformative Learning in Organizational Change

As stated previously, technology has provided access for many people to ‘do’ leadership,

regardless of company culture. However, when the company does welcome it– when leaders set

the stage for it to happen– then leadership can appear from the most unlikely sources. In The

Three Laws of Performance: Reinventing the Future of Your Organization and Your Life, Steve

Zaffron and Dave Logan (Zaffron & Logan, 2009) explain how individuals, and the

organizations they are part of, can use the principles of TL to perform beyond their self-imposed

limitations [refer to Appendix A: The Three Laws of Performance]. The authors describe how

Lonmin, Plc, a South African mining company, was able to dislodge the toxic, bleak climate

permeating the workplace and replace it with one more conducive to a thriving future for the

organization. Without transformative leadership, it seems highly unlikely the exchange

summarized below would ever have occurred:

During a town hall meeting in a nearby village where many of Lonmin’s laborers live,

Selinah Makgale, an elderly black woman from the community–who doesn’t even work for

Lonmin–stands up and insists on being heard. She proceeds to apologize to Antoinette Grib, a

white woman and senior manager, for hating her. Makgale suffered abuse at the hands of a white

woman when she was young “and I've been hating white South African women ever since” (p.

9). Without the supportive atmosphere created by TL leadership processes [refer to Figure 2],

Makgale would probably not have spoken up and would have gone on hating Ms. Grib as before.

In fact, she most likely would never have had the critical insight into her own prejudice–and its

effects– at all. Because Makgale did speak, others, black and white, saw into their own prejudice.

Makgale finished with: “Please accept my apology—you and all the other white South African

women here. I apologize to you all for making you a faceless group and hating you (p. 9)”. The

exchange ends in tears of real breakthrough, raucous applause, a genuine transformation of

worldview–and the possibility of reconciliation and cooperation towards a better future.

[For full text of exchange, see Appendix B: Lonmin]

CONCLUSION

Why is TL appropriate for leader and leadership development?

First, despite all the things that are different today because of technological progress,

what it takes to lead has not changed much. The qualities fostered by TL are the same as those

required for effective leadership–integrity, ethics, morals, authenticity, relatedness,

trustworthiness, etc. Authentic, transformational leadership requires a “moral foundation” (Bass

1985, 1990, in Copeland, 2014, p. 112). [see Table 5: Ethical, Authentic, Spiritual, and

Transformational Leadership Characteristics].

Second, TL principles and practices apply to organizational development as aptly as they

do to personal development. Both individuals and organizations are systems. Each has to adapt to

changing circumstances in order to stay on course– to survive, grow, and thrive. Transformative

learning in leadership development provides leaders with the tools to empower anyone in the

organization to be a leader. When everyone leads, everyone learns; when everyone learns, the

organization becomes what Peter Senge (Senge, 1990) calls a learning organization: "...learning

organizations are organizations that are continually enhancing their capacity to create." (p. 127)

Transformative Learning in Leadership Development has a long way to go before it

becomes common practice. But because transformative learning is fundamental to adult

development in general, and because maturity–highly developed ethics, morals, integrity,

relatedness, authenticity, and, most especially, trustworthiness– is fundamental to leader and

leadership skill development, it seems reasonable to assert that Transformative Learning has an

important role in the future of advancing the fields of adult education– but most especially in

leadership development.

REFERENCES

Belias, D., & Koustelios, A. (2014). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction in the

banking sector: A review. International Review of Management and Marketing, 4(3),

187-200.

Ciporen, R. (2008). The role of personally transformative learning in leadership development: A

case study examining the transfer of learning from an executive education program.

Columbia University, Teachers College. Ann Arbor: ProQuest LLC.

Copeland, M. K. (2014). The emerging significance of values based leadership: a literatute

review. International Journal of Leadership Studies , 8 (2), 112.

Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for

educators of adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2013, Noveber 25).

Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and

theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, pp. 63-82.

DeRue, D. S., Sreitzer, G., Flanagan, B., & Allen, B. (2013, May). Developing Adaptive Leaders

for Turbulent Times: The Michigan Model of Leadership. European Business Review,

May 9, 2013, 57-61.

Drucker, P. F. (1995). Managing in Times of Great Change. New York: Truman Talley Books.

Estep, T. (2008). The Evolution of the Training Profession. In E. Bierch (Ed.), ASTD Handbook

for Workplace Learning Professionals (pp. 9-32). Alexandria, Virginia: ASTD.

Forbes, A. (2014). Fostering transformative global leadership: an undergraduate-level approach.

International Journal of Leadership Studies , 8 (2), 1.

Frenk, J. (2011). Health Professionals for New Century. Education of Health Professionals for

the 21st Century: A global Independent Commission. The Lancet.

Godin, S. (2008). Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us. New York: Penguin Group.

Hernez-Broome, G., & Hughes, R. L. (n.d.). Leadership Development: Past, Present, Future.

Retrieved from

http://www.ccl.org/leadership/pdf/research/cclLeadershipDevelopment.pdf

Hill, L. A. (2004, August 1). New manager development for the 21st century. Academy of

Management Perspectives, 18(3), 121-126.

Kitchenham, A. (2008). The Evolution of John Mezirow's Transformative Learning Theory.

Journal of Transformative Education, 104-123.

Marsick, V. J. (1990). Action learning and reflection in the workplace. In J. Mezirow, Fostering

critical reflection in adulthood: A guide for transformative and emancipatory learning.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Maslow, A. (1987). Motivation and Personality, 3rd edition. New York, NY: Harper & Rowe.

Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3),

158-172.

Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative Learning Theory. In J. Mezirow, & E. W. Taylor (Eds.),

Transformative Learning in Practice (pp. 18-31). San Francisco, California: Josssey-

Bass.

Mezirow, J., & Associates, a. (2000). Learning as Transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass.

Mielach, D. (2012, December 27). 10 Ways to Define Leadership. Retrieved from

BusinessNewsDaily: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3647-leadership-definition.html

OECD, Working Party of National Experts on Scientific and Technology Indicators. (2005). The

Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities: Guidelines for Collecting and

Interpreting Innovation Data: Oslo Manual, Third Edition. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from

http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=6864

Phillips, Elise (n.d.). Bloom’s taxonomy. In blog: Elise Phillip’s bPortfolio. Retrieved from

http://elisephillips.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/bloomstaxonomy2.jpgPiaget (1974). The

Epigenetic System and Development of Cognitive Functions. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

Plato (360, B.C.). The Republic. In J. Manis (Ed.), The Electronic Classics Series (B. Jowett,

Trans.). Hazelton, Pennsylvania: PSU-Hazelton. Retrieved from:

http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/plato/republic.pdf

Rocco, T. S., & Smith, D. H. (2013). Editorial: The relationship between human resource

development and adult education: Working towards an understanding. New Horizons in

Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25(4), 1-3.

Rooke, D., & Torbert, W. R. (2005, April). Seven Transformations of Leadership. Harvard

Business Review, 66-76.

Rost, Joseph C. (1993, November). Leadership Development in the New Millennium. Journal of

Leadership Studies,1(1), 91-110.

Stein, Z., Dawson, T., & Van Rossum, Z. (2013, 07 10). Virtuous cycles of learning: using

formative, embedded, and diagnostic developmental assessments in a large-scale

leadership program. Clear Impact Consulting Group. Retrieved from http://www.nous-

arc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2013_0710_ITC_Lectica_ClearImpact.pdf

Taylor, E. (2014, September 17). Professor of Education, Penn State - Harrisburg, Adult

Education Program. (S. Malik & J. Roberson, Interviewers)

Wagner, David (2014, July 3). Our Definitions of Leadership Are Mostly Wrong.

InformationWeek. Retrieved from

http://cached.newslookup.com/cached.php?ref_id=165&siteid=2138&id=6923927&t=14

04392760.

Watkins, K. E., Marsick, V. J., & Faller, P. G. (2012). Transformative Learning in the

Workplace: Leading Learning for Self and Organizational Change. In E. T. Taylor, & P.

Cranton (Eds.), The Handbook of Transformative Learning: Theory, Research, and

Practice (pp. 373-387). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Weisbord, M. (2008). Large Group Methods: A Shopper's Guide. In E. Biech (Ed.), ASTD

Handbook for Workplace Learning Professionals (pp. 333-346). Alexandria, Virginia:

ASTD.

Zaffron, S., & Logan, D. (2009). The Three Laws of Performance: Rewriting the Future of Your

Organization and Your Life . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

TABLES

Table 1: “The Learning Curve” (Weisbord, 2008)

Experts/Leaders Everybody

1900 Experts solve problems

1950 Everybody solves problems

1965 Experts improve whole systems

2001+ Everybody improves whole systems

Table 2: Levels of Learning (Frenk, 2011. P. 1951):

LEVEL OBJECTIVE OUTCOME

1. Informative Learning Information, Skills Experts

2. Formative Learning Socialization, Values Professionals

3. Transformative Learning Leadership Attributes Change Agents

Table 3: Mezirow’s Eleven Phases of Transformation (in Cranton, 1994)

1. Experiencing a disorienting dilemma

2. Undergoing self-examination

3. Conducting a critical assessment of internalized role assumptions and feeling a sense of alienation from traditional social expectations

4. Relating one’s discontent to similar experiences of others or to public issues–recognizing that one’s problems are shared and not exclusively a private matter

5. Exploring one’s options for new ways of acting

6. Building competence and self-confidence in new roles

7. Planning a course of action

8. Acquiring knowledge and skills for implementing ones plans

9. Making provisional efforts to try new roles and to assess feedback

10. Reintegrating into society on the basis of conditions dictated by the new perspective

11. Altering present relationships and forging new relationships

Table 4: Qualities of a transformational leader (Belias & Koustelios, 2014)

1. Empowers followers to do what is best for the organization;

2. Is a strong role model with high values;

3. Listens to all viewpoints to develop a spirit of cooperation;

4. Creates a vision, using people in the organization;

5. Acts as a change agent within the organization by setting an example of how to initiate and implement change;

6. Helps the organization by helping others contribute to the organization.

“Taking all aspects of transformational leadership into consideration, Northouse (2001)

described the following qualities of a successful transformational leader: 1) Empowers

followers to do what is best for the organization, 2) Is a strong role model with high

values, 3) Listens to all viewpoints to develop a spirit of cooperation, 4) Creates a vision,

using people in the organization, 5) Acts as a change agent within the organization by

setting an example of how to initiate and implement change, 6) Helps the organization by

helping others contribute to the organization (Belias & Koustelios, 2014, p. 191).”

Table 5: Ethical, Authentic, Spiritual, and Transformational Leadership Characteristics

Figure 2 Duck/Rabbit Illusion. Source: Jastrow, J. (1899). The mind's eye. Popular Science Monthly, 54, 299-312.

FIGURES

Figure 1: Duck/Rabbit Illusion

Thomas Kuhn used the duck-rabbit optical illusion to demonstrate the way in which a paradigm shift could cause one to see the same information in an entirely different way: "The subject of a gestalt demonstration knows that his perception has shifted because he can make it shift back and forth repeatedly while he holds the same book or piece of paper in his hands. Aware that nothing in his environment has changed, he directs his attention increasingly not to the figure (duck or rabbit) but to the lines of the paper he is looking at. Ultimately he may even learn to see those lines without seeing either of the figures, and he may then say (what he could not legitimately have said earlier) that it is these lines that he really sees but that he sees them alternately as a duck and as a rabbit. ...As in all similar psychological experiments, the effectiveness of the demonstration depends upon its being analyzable in this way. Unless there were an external standard with respect to which a switch of vision could be demonstrated, no conclusion about alternate perceptual possibilities could be drawn” (Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed., p. 114).

Figure 2: Bloom’s Taxonomy

Transformative Learning involves metacognition: the higher-order mental processes of learning–

analysis, evaluation, and synthesis–directed towards the processes themselves.

FIGURE 3: Model for Facilitating Transformative Learning in Organizational Change

APPENDICES

Appendix A: The Three Laws of Performance

The Three Laws of Performance (Zaffron & Logan, 2009)

1. How people perform correlates to how situations occur to them. (p. 6)

a. A person's performance always correlates to how the world is occurring to them.

b. Performance is not always caused by or an effect of something, but rather is

correlated to—or in a dance with—the way the world shows up for us. To say it

again, performance is a result of how the world (or a situation, or a circumstance,

or a person) occurs for us.

2. How a situation occurs arises in language. (p. 36)

a. How the world occurs in a person's experience is determined by language, by

interpretation, narrative, story, and spin, much more than by facts.

b. The second law of performance has to do with the role of language.

Oversimplified, the perspectives of “catch this ball, which we already know we

can’t catch” and “calling out which way the ball is spinning, which we know we

can do quite well” (same ball, same speed) lead to two totally different outcomes.

Each perspective is constituted in language—it is in language that we articulate,

define, and shape reality. It is the conversation in each game that yields

completely different performance outcomes.

c. We carry such conversations around with us about how things are—how we or

our corporations measure up, what’s possible and what isn’t, how things work,

what we know to be true. When we say that things are a particular way, we

become constrained and limited to what that reality allows—it’s just “the way it

is.” To coin a phrase, it becomes an “is world,” and an “is world” has a particular

design to it—it’s solid, fixed, and we have to adjust to it. We spend much of our

lives struggling with “the way things are,” rather than savoring the malleability

that a constitutive view of language can lend to our world. How things occur—

occurring—is a linguistically based phenomenon. Language is integral to

accessing breakthrough performance. But as posed in the first law, our actions are

not correlated to an “is,” fixed, or static world; rather they are correlated to an

“occurring” world.

3. Future-based language transforms how situations occur to people. (p. 68)

a. The third law of performance has to do with future-based language. When we

know it is our conversations that constitute our world, it shifts our relationship to

what’s possible. It puts us in the driver’s seat. The shift doesn’t necessarily get rid

of the lens or filters or mindsets per se, but fixed notions, old assumptions, old

realities stop defining what’s possible and what’s not. We most commonly use

and think of language in an experiential, descriptive, or representational way—as

a response to the world, a process of fitting or matching our words to the world as

we know it. Let’s call it a word-to-world fit. This use of language allows for

certain outcomes, but not others. In a future-based model, language is used in a

generative or contextual way, and is more than a response to the world. It yields

completely different outcomes and is actually what brings the world into being—a

world-to-word fit. In this model, language is both what gives rise to the world and

what gives access to what is in that world.

Appendix B: Lonmin

Full text of Lonmin, Plc exchange (Zaffron & Logan, 2009)

Antoinette Grib, a white South African senior manager of Lonmin, was speaking to a

group of about one hundred people when an elderly community member stood up,

interrupted, and insisted on saying something to her. The woman, Selinah Makgale,

began: “Antoinette, I have an issue with you.”

Grib's shock was obvious. She said, “But I don't even know you.”

Makgale continued, “Yes, I don't know you personally, but you are a white South

African woman, and I have an issue with white South African women. When I was

thirteen years old, my parents told me that I needed to be the housekeeper for the white

Afrikaans that owned the farm we worked on. It was payment for us working the farm. I

was like a slave, not earning a cent. The woman, she was very, very bad to me. Getting

through that year was tough. I've been hating white South African women ever since.”

Makgale paused, then continued, “I'm sorry, even though I don't know you, I've

been sitting here for days hating you and all the other South African women. You

probably weren't even born when all this happened.”

Grib smiled and said, “No, I wasn't.”

After another thoughtful moment, Makgale finished with: “Please accept my

apology—you and all the other white South African women here. I apologize to you all

for making you a faceless group and hating you.”

Some people became serious, others looked like they were remembering the past.

Some shook their heads. All were visibly touched by Makgale's courage and intent to

close a chapter from the past.

The senior manager took the next step, saying,

“Selinah, I see that I represent something to you with my blond hair and my blue

eyes that caused so much pain in your life all those years ago. I ask your forgiveness for

the mistakes my people made…. I think we're fortunate to live in a country now, since

1994, where we can move forward and we can live together. I offer you my support in

getting this issue completely resolved. If you want, I will go with you to visit the woman

who treated you so poorly and see if there are some amends that can be made. We can try

that.”

Both women started to cry—one elderly, poor, and black, and one young,

wealthy, and white. Makgale replied, “Yes, I am willing to do that. Thank you very

much. I hope our future can grow better than before.” The group cheered.

(p. 9)