Managing Leadership^®

Some years ago, at an early peak in the frenzy stirred up by the modern leadership movement’s gurus, doctorates in fields generally related to leadership began to appear in universities across the United States. Most of these were designed to create PhDs in something called “leadership studies;” the intent, presumably, to develop the field into a professional avenue of scholarly study.

Given the true state of our understanding of leadership at the time – what it is, where it comes from, how it works – that was at once a problematic and perhaps an overdue ambition. On the one hand, who was qualified to teach it? On the other, it certainly does warrant clear-eyed, methodical study – to the extent to which that is even possible.

One of the problems, though, is that many of the programs were inspired, guided, or even headed by some of the more effusive proponents of grandiose individual leadership around. Aside from the foam-speckled bias this applied to the putative “scholarship” these assembly lines mass produced, there existed a parallel, unspoken presumption that these programs developed experts in not merely the study of leadership, but also in the practice of it.

And it was only a matter of time before this became the overt purpose of these doctorates. Now, you can go to a number of programs around the country and emerge as not only a leader, but a doctor of leadership. In a fit of unintended irony, the appearance of these appears to be timed to solve the leadership crises precipitated by those who followed the same prescriptions – and who were misled by the same fundamental conceptual errors – being taught to their newly capped and gowned successors.

What do you suppose these programs will look like? Will doctoral candidates attend lectures not just describing, but purporting to teach how to be, visionary leaders, or how to become charismatic? Will they take turns getting up in front of class to demonstrate it? Will they “learn” empathy, innovation, passion? How will they demonstrate mastery of these, thus earning their diplomas? Indeed, is it possible to reconcile the acquisition of a doctorate of leadership with the much heralded leadership trait of profound humility?

Some of the programs presumably include “learn by doing” modules. How will those look? Who will provide these students the opportunity to do this in their own organizations? Who will evaluate their performance, based on which criteria and against what standards? Will the graduates be hired a few months later over the organizations’ own employees who have actually been doing for a living what the former did for learning?

How will newly minted doctors of leadership present themselves to the world upon graduation? How will they be regarded by potential employers as they proffer the evidence of credentials specifically calculated to establish the fact of their superior learning, understanding, and ability over their presumptuous inquisitors? How will they fit in with their colleagues (decidedly not their peers), or with the corporate culture?

You have to know that these will come to be called clown colleges, because only merriment can ensue. Their appearance is merely the most obviously disturbing implication of the gravely ill-considered approach to leadership so widely accepted today.

We will return to some of the even more dangerously mundane ones next week. We will then take a look at what, after all, we are to make of all of this. Please be sure to join us.

—

Today’s tips: Speaking of real people and titles, please see these pieces: by Steve Roesler on how roles can distort the people, and by Michael Wade on how people can distort their roles.

—

Did you know you can now read the Managing Leadership Blog on your Kindle? Amazon makes it incredibly easy, so give it a try!

Of course, if you prefer to do your reading here, welcome aboard! And don’t forget to subscribe, by email or RSS reader!

Technorati Tags: leadership, guru, doctorate, United States, PhD, leadership studies, professional, scholar, ambition, scholarship, expert, leader, visionary, charisma, empathy, innovation, passion, trait, humility, organization, performance, employee, employer, credential, colleague, culture, clown college, Steve Roesler, Michael Wade