22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Higher Education Governance Reform in Kazakhstan: Translating Best Management Practices
Dinara Sultan, Tatiana Fumasoli
University College London, United Kingdom
Presenting Author: Sultan, Dinara;
Fumasoli, Tatiana
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, member countries gained independence and sought to adopt educational practices from the West (Silova, 2010) in an attempt to break away from the Soviet model. Kazakhstan, one of those countries, has undergone significant reforms in the higher education system. It aims to transition from a centralised system controlled by the Ministry of Education and Science towards a market-driven structure that allows for greater institutional autonomy. Despite the government’s efforts since independence, the universities remained less competitive with a governance style similar to the Soviet system. The decision-making process lacked academic involvement and transparency and also displayed limited autonomy.
In 2018, the government introduced the Law "On amendments and additions to some legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the expansion of academic and managerial autonomy of higher education institutions" to 29 public universities. The objective of the Law was to grant academic and managerial autonomy to higher education institutions by creating independent governing bodies with decision-making powers similar to those in Western countries. The Law was expected to be the foundation for transforming HEIs by enabling institutional flexibility and establishing an accountability system through governing boards. Universities have received increased powers to create endowment funds, open start-up companies, and attract additional sources of financial and material resources to implement statutory activities. Academic autonomy has been extended to determine the content of education programmes. Before the 2018 Law, this was the Ministry's responsibility. This has enabled universities to become more independent from state control and focus more on their core mission of education and research.
Indeed, enacting the 2018 Law transformed the landscape of governance structure, changed decisions and extended academic autonomy. However, transitioning to a more autonomous system through introducing and establishing a new governance model was challenging across the sector.
The study's main objective is to understand the factors of university implementation of the 2018 reform. We analyse how different types of public universities in Kazakhstan responded to, implemented and experienced a new governance model at institutions. Our analytical framework is based on the literature on higher education forms and the public sector. Accordingly, we hypothesise that 1) organisational age and size; 2) institutional type and mission; 3) distribution of resources; 4) geographical, economic and political centrality; 5) organisational identities affect the implementation of reforms. To achieve this, we conducted 46 semi-structured interviews with top management leaders of HEIs and analysed official governance documents such as the Law, by-laws, and institutional meeting minutes. Finally, we used national statistical data to compare universities' evolution over time.
The findings of the empirical study reveal variations in the implementation of governance reform at the organisational level. Interestingly, successful implementation was not contingent upon university age and size, types and missions, research activities, funding, or geographical location. Instead, it was strongly correlated with the active engagement of university leaders in the policymaking process at the governmental level. Findings show that peripheral universities in Kazakhstan successfully implemented the policy reform due to the involvement of the top and middle-level management team in the decision-making process of the Ministry. Based on our analyses, we have shown that the main factors affecting reform implementation are the following. 1) the greater involvement of institutional actors in policy-making activities leads to better implementation of reforms. 2) the key role played by the government in designing the consultations for the reform 3) the importance of the broader political national context 4) the significant role that peripheral universities can play in the reform process as well as in the development of the HE sector.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study employed qualitative case study approach using semi-structured interviews to gather qualitative data from university leaders, decision-makers, and management team members who participated in the implementation of governance reform at higher education institutions.The study was conducted in five public universities in Kazakhstan. To gain a more comprehensive understanding, universities of different types were selected, and to understand regional aspects towards the implementation of and response to the governance reform, case universities were selected from different geographic regions, including North, East, West, and Central. These universities play essential roles in meeting the needs of regional markets and employers, as well as in economic and social development. Despite having similar goals, regional aspects could differ based on location, potentially impacting the implementation of the reforms. Additionally, document analysis were conducted at national and institutional levels: national level – laws, governmental policies, and regulations; institutional level – charters, regulations, corporate documents, minutes of the Board meetings, institutional reports.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe findings from our empirical study reveal variations in the implementation of governance reform at the organisational level. Interestingly, successful implementation was not contingent upon university age and size, types and missions, research activities, funding, or geographical location. Instead, it was strongly correlated with the active engagement of university leaders in the policymaking process at the governmental level. By successful implementation, we mean the positive impact on the development of institutions, the involvement of various stakeholders and their active engagement in decision-making processes, a strong management team with accountability among stakeholders, and continuous improvement. However, findings demonstrate that academics as main stakeholders are not part of decision-makers and are not involved in institutional policies. Findings show that peripheral universities in Kazakhstan successfully implemented the policy reform due to the involvement of the top and middle-level management team in the decision-making process of the Ministry. These institutions’ practices and learned lessons were being translated into leading national research universities and played an essential role in guiding institutions. Based on our analyses, we have shown that the main factors affecting reform implementation are the following. 1) the greater involvement of institutional actors in policy-making activities leads to better implementation of reforms. 2) the key role played by the government in designing the consultations for the reform 3) the importance of the broader political national context 4) the significant role that peripheral universities can play in the reform process as well as in the development of the HE sector.
ReferencesAmaral, A., Jones, G. & Karseth, B. (Eds.). (2002). Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Austin, I., & Jones, G. (2016). Governance of higher education: Global perspectives, theories, and practices. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Balen, M. E. and Leyton, C. (2015). ‘Policy translation: An invitation to revisit the work of Latour, Star and Marres’. Global Discourse. 6 (1-2), pp. 101 - 115.
Birnbaum, R. (1989) The cybernetic institution: Toward an integration of governance theories. Higher Education, 18, 239-253.
Boer, H., & File, J. (2009). Higher education governance reforms accross Europe. Brussels.
Boer, H. de, Enders, J., & Leišyte, L. (2007). Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: The or-ganizational transformation of the university. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.
Clarke, J., Bainton, D., Lendvai, N. and Stubbs, P. (2015). Making policy move: towards a politics of translation and assemblage. Bristol: Policy Press.
Clark, B. R. (1983). The Higher Education System. Academic Organisation in Cross- National Perspective, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. 6th ed. Oxford, England: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Los Angeles: SAGE.
Czarniawska, B., and Sevón, G. (1996). Translating Organizational Change. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Degn, L. Translating Governance Ideas in Danish Higher Education. High Educ Policy 28, 295–313 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2014.12
Dobbins, M., & Knill, C. (2014). Higher educa tion governance and policy change in Western Europe: International challenges to historical institutions . Palgrave http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137399854
Gornitzka, A., & Maassen, P. (2014). Dynamics of convergence and divergence. Exploring accounts of higher education policy change. In P. Mattei (Ed.), University adaptation in difficult economic times (pp. 13–29). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gornitzka, A., Maassen, P., & de Boer, H. (2017). Change in university governance structures in continental Europe. Higher Education Quarterly, 71, 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12127
Dobbins, M., & Knill, C. (2009). Higher education policies in Central and Eastern Europe: Convergence toward a common model? Governance 22 ( 397 430.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468 0491.2009.01445.
Fumasoli, T. and Stensaker B. (2013). Organisation studies in Higher Education. Higher Education Policy, 26, 479-496.
Maassen, P., Gornitzka, A., Fumasoli, T. (2017) University reform and institutional autonomy: A framework for analysing the living autonomy, Higher Education Quarterly, 71(3).
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Transformative Agency in Higher Education: Ukrainian Universities in the Times of Existential Crisis
Anatoly Oleksiyenko
EdUHK, Hong Kong S.A.R. (China)
Presenting Author: Oleksiyenko, Anatoly
Existential crisis can be a major driver of transformations in the universities. Using interviews and survey responses from Ukrainian professors and administrators affected by the Russian invasion of 2014-2022, this paper examines the transformative agency of academic communities in Ukraine. The data are analyzed through the prism of agency as “relational pragmatics” (Emirbayer and Mische, 1998) where determination, creativity, will to power and other qualities of taking actions within social constructs of institutional development are supposed to lead to desired outcomes. Yet, the legacies and values of the previous phases of institutional development often interfere and generate unintended outcomes. Grounded in idiosyncrasies (Kramar 2014), human agency naturally develops tensions with forms of institutional agency that are constructed through the misaligned influences of governments and universities which are often unable to coordinate properly or respond to the stakeholders’ demands in a timely manner.
The agency undergoes a major transformation itself in the context of major crises (Oleksiyenko et al. 2023). In war zones affected by destruction and death existential crisis can be particularly glaring (Benedek, 1997; Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyj 2023). The loss of intellectuals drastically impoverishes the human habitat and educational landscape of universities and their communities (Milton, 2018). While humanitarian assistance can play a significant role in alleviating the problem, technical intervention is only a temporary solution (Heath, 2009). More sustainable strategies, including the re-establishment of educational institutions and their infrastructure, are usually difficult to advance in the absence of substantial resources, and commitment of donors and local educators and governments. These challenges grow in the absence of respectful conduct among the belligerent parties (Milton, 2021). Leadership and determination for transformations in such environments is particularly back-breaking as hopes are difficult to sustain (Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyj, 2023).
The reconceptualization of agency and examination of the impact of transformative powers on scholars’ strategies of teaching, research and service are increasingly important, as the war in Ukraine shows (Oleksiyenko and Terepyshchyi, 2023). The transformative agency is in high demand as scholars in vulnerable societies are urged to take a closer look at the processes of value-making and intentionality in their own institutions, especially as demand for strategies of trust- and partnership-building grows among colleagues, students and other members of society. These pressures also show to affect networks abroad. The massive engagement of Ukrainian refugees in the European space of higher education and science has shown to be reshaping the idea of university linkages and responsibilities. This became increasingly obvious as more Western scholars had been striving to reassess and reframe prevalent Russo-centric narratives on their campuses and in their programmes (Aslund, 2023; Prince, 2023). Ukrainians are also urging their colleagues to move away from the old paradigms of thinking about Ukraine as lacking agency, self-determination, and a predisposition to chart a European future.
With conflict-affected areas multiplying around the world, the transformative agency is becoming an intriguing concept which requires more investigation and reframing. In particular, the roles and responsibilities of academic leaders, as the core of transformative agency, grow in importance (Clifford and Montgomery, 2015), especially given that the crisis affects the growing number of stakeholders who believe in solutions to be made by exceptional individualities. The need to reconceptualize the transformative strategies for enhanced security looms thus larger on the academic radars for change management.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis paper draws on data collected and analysed with the help of interviews engaging 50 participants from across Ukraine. These participants were engaged through online interviews (N40) and emailed or web-based survey responses (N10). Most of them were female, given that many males were conscripted. The study engaged representatives of public and private universities. The responses came from universities representing all parts of Ukraine (13 – Northern, 6 – Southern, 8 – Western, 5 – Eastern, and 8 – Central Ukraine). Given the war-related context of the study, the study has acquired a phenomenological character. Indeed, the participants were located in unusual conditions and environments while being periodically affected by missile attacks, bombing and shelling. Some grieved over losses in their families and institutions. Many were under direct affect of devastation and death. With campuses closing and being restructured in view of declining public budget, many felt a direct threat of precarity with their jobs being terminated. The financial and structural crisis became staggering.
The participants shared their “lived experiences” while answering questions about the nature of crisis, academic responsibilities, and transformative challenges affecting the universities and teaching positions. The interviews were conducted online, recorded, and later transcribed verbatim using conventional guidelines for qualitative research in general (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2018), and interviews in particular (Salmons, 2011). Each interview was semi-structured and lasted between around 40 minutes. Considering participants' competing priorities, potential connectivity disruptions, and the emotional burden imposed by the war, the interviewers were cautious in managing time and respecting the participants' privacy and need for withdrawal, in accordance with the institutional ethics procedures governing data collection in this study. The interviewers posed clarifying questions and encouraged participants to engage in retrospective and prospective analysis of their universities' institutional strategies and transformative approaches.
The study sought opportunities to re-explore the concept of agency within the phenomenological context of the crisis-driven university, and examined how transformative powers of exceptional individualities affect the social construct of agency.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe study finds that transformative agency used to transpire at the Ukrainian universities over the past few decades through confrontations with the post-soviet legacy-holders who promoted mediocrity and bullying in expectation to sustain the status quo and reproduce the culture of dependency and peripherality. The legacy-holders often derided innovations. Before the war, very few universities were able to change this organizational culture and some action-driven participants argued to have suffered from uncritical thinking and apathy in their communities and institutions. By using the transformative agency, the activists however sought opportunities to undermine this culture or at least to escape it, while reaching out to peers in partner universities abroad and creating a robust exchange of teaching and research ideas and methods.
The war has brought a range of institutional pressures onto all academics to re-orientate themselves toward “useful” teaching and research agendas. As the larger number of Ukrainian citizens express their commitment to the EU accession and NATO membership, this usefulness implies joining the space of education and development promoting the competitive and accountable science. With Ukrainian universities closing their departments, merging with other institutions in their regions, and terminating redundant and unproductive professoriate, questions however emerge about the sustainability rather than re-orientation of science-based higher education. In the absence of proper resources for high-technology education, which science departments require, the transformative agency, and intellectual leadership as its extension and continuation, has been primarily expanding on the basis of international partnerships with colleagues of the former socialist camp. Meanwhile, such collaborations are not as ample in English-speaking countries, where more resources exist. The westward outreach is often limited in view of colonial legacy of anti-westernization (primarily suspicion to the intentions and capacities of partners abroad), narcissistic self-isolation, and deficient skills in scientific English – the key banes of the soviet-days academia.
ReferencesAslund, A. (2023, January 4). The end of post-soviet studies? Kyiv Post, retrieved from https://www.kyivpost.com/post/6385
Benedek, W. (1997). International cooperation and support of higher education in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Journal of Studies in International Education, 1(1), 69-78.
Clifford, V., & Montgomery, C. (2015). Transformative learning through internationalization of the curriculum in higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 13(1), 46-64.
Emirbayer, M., and Mische, A. (1998). What is Agency? American Journal of Sociology 103 (4): 962–1023.
Heath, E. (2009). Power structures, politics and change in Kosovo’s higher education system. In Nicolai, S. (ed.). Opportunities for Change: Education Innovation and Reform During and After Conflict (pp. 151–162). Paris: UNESCO/IIEP.
Kramar, R. (2014). Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource management the next approach?. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1069-1089.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publications.
Milton, S. (2018). Higher Education and Post-Conflict Recovery. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG.
Milton, S. (2021). Higher education and sustainable development goal 16 in fragile and conflict-affected contexts. Higher Education, 81(1), 89-108.
Oleksiyenko, A., Mendoza, P., Riaño, F. E. C., Dwivedi, O. P., Kabir, A. H., Kuzhabekova, A., ... & Shchepetylnykova, I. (2023). Global crisis management and higher education: Agency and coupling in the context of wicked COVID‐19 problems. Higher Education Quarterly, 77(2), 356-374.
Oleksiyenko, A., & Terepyshchyi, S. (2023). ‘Hope despite all odds’: academic precarity in embattled Ukraine. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-15.
Prince, T. (2023, January 1). Moscow's invasion of Ukraine triggers 'soul-searching' at Western universities as scholars rethink Russian studies. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, retrieved from https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-war-ukraine-western-academia/32201630.html
Salmons, J. (2011). Cases in online interview research. Sage Publications.
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
A Conceptual Framework for Change Leadership in Higher Education
Trevor McSharry
Atlantic Technological University, Ireland
Presenting Author: McSharry, Trevor
This paper is part of a Doctorate in Education at Maynooth University in Ireland. Focusing on an emerging technological university, the primary research question is “How do stakeholders experience and value change leadership?” Examining the development and utilisation of a suitable conceptual framework, this paper will provide insights into the inter-relationships between organisational context, leadership, culture and change.
A systematic literature review identified that higher education has multiple change drivers, diverse cultures and various leadership approaches and characteristics. Unsurprisingly many of those discussed ‘complexity’ (e.g., Lazaridou 2019; Drew, 2010). Complexity theorists argue that many forces drive complexity, and the underlying factors are greater interconnectivity and redistribution of power resulting from information flows that are facilitating people to link up and drive change in unprecedented ways (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018).
Mason (2008a) states that complexity theory can provide descriptive and pragmatic insights well suited to educationalists and argues that complexity theory’s strength is that it draws existing educational leadership and management theory together using existing and familiar concepts. Hence, this theory was chosen as a suitable theoretical lens for this research. Mason (2008b) outlines that complexity theory looks at complex systems as open systems, which survive through evolution and adaptation. He believes that organisations are complex, with many connected elements or agents, which facilitate the sharing of knowledge through formal bureaucratic structures and informal social networks.
Grant and Osanloo (2014, p.16) argue that a ‘conceptual framework offers a logical structure of connected concepts that help provide a picture or visual display of how ideas in a study relate to one another within the theoretical framework.’ When reflecting on the purpose of this study, related literature, and gaps in knowledge, as well as the theoretical framework of complexity theory and its limitations, a change leadership conceptual framework has been developed. As well as serving as a suitable conceptual perspective for this study, it also intends to address the limitations of complexity theory identified in this study.
The framework synthesises the core areas relevant for this study. Firstly, it incorporates the themes of change drivers, context and staff identified in the literature review. Secondly, key complexity theory and complexity leadership concepts have been added. These include the primary concepts of continuity (Mason, 2008a, 2008b), emergence (Mason, 2008a, 2008b; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018), alignment (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018), and adaptability (Mason, 2008a; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018). Also, sub concepts of diversity (Tsai et al., 2019), feedback (Mason, 2008a; Tsai et al. 2019), networks (Mason, 2008a; Tsai et al. 2019), linking up (Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018) and sponsorship (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018) have been added where appropriate. In addition, complexity leadership components of entrepreneurial leadership, enabling leadership and operational leadership are incorporated (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKevley, 2007; Uhl-Bien and Arena 2018).
Furthermore, change leadership characteristics are important for this study and the change leadership themes of strategy, tactics, relationships, culture, and capability synthesised from literature are central to this framework as they relate to all types of change. Finally, Cameron and Quinn’s (2011) competing values of clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy outlined in have been incorporated and link the central concept of culture and other change leadership themes to the other primary concepts through these values. The competing values framework dimensions have also been included (external focus and differentiation, stability and control, internal focus and integration, flexibility, and discretion).
It is hoped that the proposed conceptual framework will be considered by other HEIs so that a better understanding of the complexities of change leadership in higher education can be gained.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFrom a research design perspective, a mixed methods approach, using both qualitative and quantitative research methods was used in this study. A key feature of this mixed methods approach is its methodological pluralism, which frequently leads to superior results when compared to taking one method (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004). This pluralist approach, generally seen as a pragmatic philosophical paradigm, avails of the strengths of both methods and will help identify actionable, practical solutions for the stakeholders to consider.
The overall scope of this doctoral research focuses on an emerging Technological University (TU) and consisted for four stages as follows:
Stage 1 involved a qualitative review using NVIVO of the TU application document to assess the initial common voice of the emerging TU and assess word frequency and emerging themes.
Stage 2 builds on this context and involved an online focus group with a representative sample of senior management (both academic and support staff) from each of the three merging organisations (18 participants). A pre-focus group survey was conducted to gather demographic data of participants and initial insights into change leadership themes as well as culture. The focus of this stage was on obtaining participant perceptions on change drivers, change and leadership as well as discuss culture for the emerging TU. Stage 2 focus groups were recorded and transcribed as well as coded and analysed using NVIVO.
Stage 3 involved an online survey (using JISC) for all staff in the three organisations. 371 participants successfully completed the survey resulting in confidence level of 95%. SPSS was utilised to analyse the quantitative data from the survey and the open question responses were coded in NVIVO also.
Stage 4 involved an interview with the new TU president to discuss the preliminary findings from the previous stages. Note a pre-interview survey was completed by the President like Stage 2, which included culture assessment. The qualitative data from this interview was transcribed and analysed using NVIVO as per Stage 2.
The primary focus of this paper is the use of the conceptual framework as a lens to view and understand the research findings from all stages.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsHaving used the conceptual framework as a lens to gain insights into the findings of this research, a better understanding of the conceptual framework itself has been gained. While the framework proved to be a valuable tool for understanding the inter-relationships between context, change leadership, change and culture, some minor refinements are proposed to facilitate future research in this field.
The TU change drivers represent the external organisational context, while culture represents the internal organisational context. Although the conceptual framework had concepts of change drivers, context, and staff located under the concept of continuity, it is proposed that the internal context, including staff perceptions which provide cultural insights, can be represented under the concept of culture. Culture is already located centrally as a change leadership theme and links to the four competing values of compete, control, collaboration and create. Therefore, it is proposed that culture will represent the organisational culture and staff considerations as well as the specific change leadership characteristics directly related to culture. This revision allows for the change leadership themes centrally located in the framework to represent the internal organisation. In addition, the concept of continuity represents the external organisational environment, where the organisation responds to its environment in the marketplace to maintain continuity.
Furthermore, some of the subheadings relating to complexity theory and complexity leadership such as ‘sponsorship, linking up, networks, diversity and feedback were useful to test the framework. However, to refine and streamline the framework for future research, it is proposed that these terms are removed as they can be assumed to be contained within the complexity leadership headings of Emergence, Adaptability and Alignment accordingly.
It is hoped that this research on a change leadership conceptual framework will act as a catalyst for further research in this emerging and important area.
ReferencesBurnes, B., Hughes, M., & By, R. T. (2016). Reimagining organisational change leadership. Leadership. doi:10.1177/1742715016662188
Cameron KM & Quinn RE, (2011). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture. Third edn. Jossey Bass, USA.
Drew, G. (2010). Issues and Challenges in Higher Education Leadership: Engaging for Change. Australian Educational Researcher (Australian Association for Research in Education), 37(3), 57-76. doi:10.1007/BF03216930
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for Your “House”. Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice and Research, 4(2). doi:10.5929/2014.4.2.9
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
Lazaridou, A. (2019). Reinventing a university principal preparation programme: complexity, change, and leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 22(2), 206-221. doi:10.1080/13603124.2017.1360947
Mason, M. (2008a). Complexity Theory and the Philosophy of Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40(1), 4-18. Retrieved from https://login.jproxy.nuim.ie/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ812783&site=ehost-live http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2007.00412.x
Mason, M. (2008b). What Is Complexity Theory and What Are Its Implications for Educational Change? Educational Philosophy & Theory, 40(1), 35-49. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2007.00413.x
Tsai, Y. S., Poquet, O., Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Pardo, A. (2019). Complexity leadership in learning analytics: Drivers, challenges and opportunities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2839-2854. doi:10.1111/bjet.12846
Uhl‐Bien, M., & Arena, M.J. (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework. Leadership Quarterly, 29, 89-104.
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity Leadership Theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298-318. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.002
|
