|
Improve the odds of acceptance! Post complete session proposals to ILA's
2012 conference
The “proposals in progress” below are printed as a service to
potential ILA presenters who are in the process of developing session proposals
for the annual meeting and are seeking to add panel members to their session.
This does not imply endorsement or acceptance of the proposals by the 2012
Program Committee. If you are interested in working with one of these
individuals, you must contact that person directly. The individuals who have
published abstracts below are solely responsible for following up, in a timely
and collegial manner, with each person who contacts them to express an interest
in being included in the session submission, and for indicating whether or not
each person who contacts them will be included in his or her final proposal
submission. Individuals who have published a “proposal in progress” below are responsible for
submitting their complete proposal via the online submission form
(follow link from the CFP page) during the
call for proposals period.
At past conferences, the odds of acceptance of a complete session, especially
ones which include presenters from a variety of organizations, have been much
higher than for the acceptance of individual papers/presentations which not only
need to pass the test of excellence but also must fit with other individual
papers/presentations to form a panel with internal coherence. Pre-proposal
networking toward the formation of complete sessions circumvents this problem.
The exception to these odds are complete papers submitted along the refereed
scholarly paper track.
Additional “proposals in progress” will be published on the ILA Web site up to
the call for submissions deadline. If you wish to post a "proposal in progress" for
the 2012 conference, please post your proposal in
progress via the this form.
THE MODERN AMERICAN PRESIDENCY AND GLOBAL LEADERSHIP Fascination and controversy have historically surrounded the American presidency. Today is no exception. Once seen as the leaders and the champions of the free world, recent presidents are often criticized, maligned and disparaged.
The 9/11 tragedy, the Great Recession, and the global financial crisis have added to the debate and controversy concerning American global leadership and have tarnished the image of the American president as the most powerful and influential person in the world. Are these attitudes and opinions justified? How do our twenty-first century presidents compare with those of the past? What makes a great (and not so great) president? What makes a great leader and world leader? How do George W. Bush and Barack Obama compare with each other, to past U.S. Presidents, and to other world leaders, past and present? How do the Republican challengers for 2012 compare?
DAVID RADER
SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY
d-rader@pacbell.net
650-210-8370
Coming Home: Returning to Virtue Ethics The 21st Century provides new versions of traditional leadership challenges of motivation, organization, development, resource allocation, strategic planning, and alignment. After decades of searching for alternative understandings of ethics, morality, and decision making and in a time of unprecedented levels of global connectivity and competitiveness, some researchers are returning to the basics. After considering moral relativism, social biology, and positive psychology as keys to effective leadership, the 25 hundred year old ideals from the Greek tradition of virtue ethics are once again drawing an audience. I believe one reason they have endured is that they work. I review competing theories of ethical leadership in current literature and juxtapose them against the more classical approaches to ethics. Then, I propose a practical lens through which leaders might cultivate their own ethical habits of mind and conduct. The result can be a personal return to answering the question, “who should I be?” rather than taking the short cut to “what should I do?” In the end, if we get the first question right, the second one will take care of itself. Leadership will improve, because leaders will improve. People will find work more fulfilling, and communities could benefit from a more collaborative view of corporate citizenship. Lee DeRemer
Doctoral student, Center for Values-Driven Leadership, Benedictine University, Lisle, IL
marcieandlee@yahoo.com
717-586-2511
Why Globalization Favors Participatory Leadership Styles in Multi-National Firms and International Joint Ventures Leadership styles have been the subject of debate since Aristotle, Plato and Cicero took center stage in ancient times. Today’s increasingly global world creates a juxtaposition of cultural, societal and spiritual differences within Multi-National Firms (MNFs) and International Joint Ventures (IJVs) that necessitate a new look at leadership theory to find leadership styles that accommodate these differences and create synergies from them. Additionally, the advancement of technology has contributed to an increase in cross cultural encounters via the use of virtual teams. While this technology has the potential to connect continents, it also has the potential to create virtual boundaries between leaders and those they lead. Participatory styles of leadership appear to be more suitable for business in our increasingly global world than autocratic or directive styles of leadership. Therefore, leaders of the modern MNF and IJV must increase their understanding of participatory leadership while simultaneously building upon global and cultural competencies. The use of teams and team building is perhaps the best way to synthesize this transition and build cross cultural bridges that allow a firm to maintain competitive advantage and continue creating value in a continuously changing global world. Joseph J. Lestrange
PhD Student - Indiana Institute of Technology
Joevangogh68@aol.com
347-880-2599
Cross-Cultural Issues with Mexico The awareness of the overall importance of a growing Hispanic presence in the US is common knowledge. I aim to show how cultural differences influence work practices. I would provide the opportunity to view the world from a global perspective to modify prior cultural misconceptions in relation with Mexico and Latin America, and in general help companies improve job satisfaction both for US and Mexican employees who work together. Monica Stevens
APROMEX, ALPFA
mstevens96@yahoo.com
248-739-0836
Appreciative Inquiry: Leaders' most valuable tool for visioning and planning Appreciative Inquiry, rooted in social constructionism and action research, is steadily increasing in popularity as a tool for organizational development. However, many leaders are unfamiliar with the process and lack first-hand experience with the benefits of appreciative inquiry. This is an opportunity to form a panel of academic scholars and practitioners to illuminate the difference between appreciative inquiry and other forms of strategic planning and to share practical tips for success in application of appreciative inquiry. The focus will be on the use of appreciative inquiry as a visioning process for leaders. Eric Kaufman
Virginia Tech
ekaufman@vt.edu
540-230-5693
Complexity Leadership and Implicit Leadership Theories: Do followers see complexity leadership with bad leadership? Complexity leadership and complexity absorption theories are becoming more prevalent in the leadership and organizational literatures. But there has been little discussion of how some of the key leadership tenants of complexity leadership, namely fostering self-organization, participative decision making and hybrid-strategies, may run contrary to some followers’ implicit leadership theories. How can leaders embrace complexity leadership without running afoul with these implicit leadership theories and run the risk of followers perceiving them to be ineffective leaders? Perhaps explicitly framing these leadership techniques in terms of follower empowerment and organizational capacity building could attenuate this perception. I have propositions exploring this topic from the perspective of organizational sensemaking and sensegiving and would like collaboration to expand upon and improve this important and under-examined topic. Kevin McDermott
Department of Business, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
mcdermok(at)uoguelph.ca
Bridging the Diversity Divide: Creating Intentionally Inclusive Geographic Communities This session will explore the Great Divide by taking a look at models being used in geographic communities to bridge diverse contexts and create cultural inclusion. My segment of the presentation will focus on work taking place over the last decade in Columbus, Indiana to bridge the diversity divide and intentionally create an inclusive, welcoming community culture. The work has been driven by both the realities of creating an economically viable region and the shared values of a critical mass of key individuals, not-for-profit organizations, and corporations. The work is based on a participative, community-based, action research model. So that others can learn from this example, this presentation will focus on the intent, context, and content of the work by : providing a brief summary of the theoretical foundation underpinning the work; describing driving forces, key constituencies, and useful applied models; sharing a detailed description of the highly participative community-based, action research process that was used; sharing the results of 2004 pre-intervention data collection (200 participants) and 2011 post-intervention data collection (1400 participants); reviewing specific action strategies that grew out of this initiative. And, proposing a set of distilled key principles and lessons learned. Fredricka F. Joyner
Indiana University East
fjoyner@iue.edu
812-343-1660
Anthropology of Leadership: An Integrative Approach to Intercultural Leadership Cultural Anthropology provides a framework for understanding leadership behaviors and styles across the great cultural divides. Cultural diversities result diverse leadership behaviors and styles. For instance, leadership in individualistic or collectivistic cultures takes the “I” or “we” identities differently. Some cultures seem more relationship- than task-oriented. The concept of power, influence, and gender roles in leadership are perceived and practiced differently in different societies around the world. Cultures with long-term orientation strategize the future differently from that of short-term orientation cultures. The high uncertainty or low uncertainty avoidance attitude shapes one’s decision-making. Moreover, the concept of time varies from culture to culture. Cultures with linear time, multi-active, cyclic time, or back to the future perceive life differently, which influences one’s worldview, behavior, and attitude toward tasks, relationships, and circumstances. Furthermore, as a result of self-deterministic or fatalistic worldviews, global leaders hold different views on social justice and change. Finally, people communicate differently in different cultures (direct vs. indirect cultures, high vs. low context communication). Thus, I propose interculturation (acculturation, differentiation, original synthesis), an integrative approach to cultural differences in leadership studies, for understanding, interpreting, and predicting leadership behaviors and styles across cultures toward intercultural collaboration in today’s globalized world. Petros G. Malakyan
Indiana Wesleyan University
petros.malakyan@indwes.edu
765-677-2068
Describing the Shuttle leadership model of second level Indigenous leaders in Fiji. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to describe the leadership model second level Indigenous Fijian leaders employ to shuttle between villagers and Westerners. This type of systematic design approach is appropriate due to the requirement to gain a deep understanding of the perceptions of this South Pacific leadership community. The Indigenous Fijian leaders shuttled from a pre-colonial to colonial to post-colonial society without losing their established methods of leadership or land ownership. This method of shuttling was accomplished without debilitating regional conflict. The terms politeness, food gathering, people mapping, love, village interaction, and volunteerism were revealed as positive personal definitions of the shuttle model used by Fijian Indigenous second level leaders. In conjunction, the personal definition rudeness was the negative term associated with the shuttle model used by Fijian Indigenous second level leaders. Dr. Vernon T. Cox
Grand Canyon University
vcox@my.gcu.edu
702-726-7407
Analysis of Global Leadership Challenges One of the global leadership challenges is managing the complexity of political and economic change. It is important to understand that basic human issues of management and leadership remain the same in a complex and uncertain environment. The global environment is characterized by regional instability, failed states, increased weapons proliferation, and global terrorism and requires greater global leadership. An argument can be made that leadership scholars and researchers have constructed theoretical frameworks to improve the understanding of management and leadership best practices. Therefore, this paper argues for a global theoretical leadership construct that addresses differing ideological management, intercultural competences, ethnocentric frameworks, and conflict resolution of cultural tension. This paper aims to address the need of a common lexicon for global leadership; the author also looks at the global leadership challenges and the comparison of global leadership traits and its competences; and the author expresses a need for further research to enhance the leadership domain. The author believes, as global leaders come to shift their thinking and understanding ideological differences, that there is a commonality of human interests in economic security, political freedom, and protection of human rights, all of which transcends across boundaries as transnational corporations seek a competitive advantage. Andrew Campbell
Doctorate of Executive Leadership
andrew.h.campbell3@gmail.com
402-871-0160
Leadership and Systemic Change Change is imminent – this is something we can be assured of. Successful leaders must be able to navigate their environment in the context of continual of change. Another prevailing element – organizations are systems. Like a biological system such as the human body, or a political system, such as the government, when changes are made in one area, other areas will naturally react in kind. Regrettably, leaders often don’t consider the systemic impact of organizational change, thus creating unintended, and often negative, outcomes. Successful leaders must understand how to effectively impact change in the context of an organizational system. Yet, leadership development programs rarely teach emerging leaders how to effectively lead change from a systemic view. This panel discussion will focus on research in the arena of leadership and systemic change, with the hope of furthering the applicable knowledge in this vital area. Beginning by discussing the seminal work of Margaret Wheatley and looking forward, panel members will engage in dialogue about how to incorporate leadership and systemic change into leadership development educational programs and organizational training programs. Jennifer Moss Breen
Bellevue University
jennifer.moss@bellevue,edu
402-557-7133
Global Positioning Leadership The session is to examine ways that global leaders might position themselves in the complexity of a world appearing at once as globalized and un-globalized. While a handful of scholars hold a positive view of the phenomenon of globalization because of its seemingly power to unify various areas of the world, others have decried the palpable brokenness that this reality has created in the globe. On the one hand the earth seems flat and harmonized (Friedman, 2007); on the other it remains round with visible and invisible regions depending on whom and from where one is looking at it (Isbister, 2005). Friedman heralds the possibility of an increasing amount of people who can collaborate and compete with more other people of different backgrounds in the globe “on a more equal footing than at any previous time in the history of the world" (p. 8). Thomas-Slayter (2003), Isbister (2005) and the like wonder what a flat world would mean to the Global South people of Kazakhstan, Kenya, Haiti or East Timor. Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory may help to contextualize the cross-cultural environment of the global leader. Jean-Pierre Bongila
University of St. Thomas, MN
JPBongila@stthomas.edu
651-962-8830
Complexity Theory and Human Development as a Means to Understand Leadership Becoming increasingly apparent is the relevancy of various fields of study to connect in new and insightful ways. Within leadership, these connections have brought about new ways to envision change, transformation, and potential. In incorporating complexity theory and the study of human development, understandings of leadership can be expanded. For meaning is derived not just from the individual, the process, or the system in isolation. Instead, it is in the interaction of all three that a deeper understanding can be obtained. This session will explore the connections across bodies of knowledge in science, psychology, and leadership in an effort to bridge conceptual divides. Crystal Dujowich
University of San Diego
crystald@sandiego.edu
619-260-4600 x 4379
Global Leadership and Soft Power: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Japan’s Use of Foreign Aid My argument highlights the relationship between being a global leader and the use of soft power. In particular, I will examine the important role of foreign aid as an expression of a global leader’s use of soft power. To demonstrate the relevancy of soft power in foreign aid, I will focus on Japan’s unique foreign aid policy; indeed Japan’s development and use of soft power is transforming Japan into a global leader, especially in the area of foreign aid. The questions raised in this paper include the following: How can we understand Japan as a global leader; what is the role of foreign aid in its use of soft power; and what are the rising challenges facing Japan as it seeks to remain committed to the use of soft power in its role as a global power? Howard P. Lehman
University of Utah
lehman@poli-sci.utah.edu
801-581-6246
From The purpose of this presentation is to explain the importance of frameworks, theories, and models of cultural dimensions and to identify how cultural assessments can contribute to the development of global leaders. This presentation will examine the work of Hofstede and Trompenaars’ models of cultural dimensions to provide a foundation of understanding of cultural competencies and why organizations should use cultural assessments. Next, an evaluation of The Intercultural Effectiveness Scale (IES), The Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI), The Intercultural Readiness Check (IRC), and The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) assessments will outline the necessary competencies for global leadership. Finally, recommendations on how cultural assessments can be best utilized by organizations to develop culturally competent leaders will be provided. Misty Resendez/Olivia Valencic-Miller
Health Care/ Education
mdresendez@gmail.com
317-345-6331
| 
