RA 1—Literature Review

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 57

A Leadership and Professional Development Teaching and Learning Model for Undergraduate Management Programs

Belinda Johnson White Morehouse College

This article describes a holistic leadership and professional development teaching and learning model for undergraduate students with universal application across all disciplines and functional areas of organizations due to its emphasis on the non-technical skill requirements of leadership. The model highlights the development of intrapersonal, interpersonal and professionalism skills or KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities) and uses the mnemonics FOCUS and ACTION to structure the large number of traits, behaviors and KSAs. The model is useful in the early stages of career development as it succinctly identifies management competencies expected of emerging leaders, signaling a readiness for the leadership pipeline.

The topic of leadership development in higher education has received significant attention over the

past three decades (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm & McKee, 2014; Riggio, 2008). Many college programs endeavored to understand fully their efforts to develop the next generation of leaders (DeRue, Sitkin & Podolny, 2011). The management education program of this undergraduate liberal arts institution took on the task via the department�s goal of receiving the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation. Accreditation first requires alignment of the mission of the business program with the mission of the institution. The business program faculty chose the mission �to develop skills requisite for excellence in leadership�� to complement the college mission �to develop students with disciplined minds who will lead lives of leadership and service� (college website).

In addition, accreditation requires development and implementation of a curriculum to accomplish the business program mission. Through arduous rounds of committee meetings, retreats and discussions, the business department faculty agreed on a set of ten learning objectives for the business program: (1) discipline specific goals and outcomes; (2) communication; (3) critical/analytical thinking and problem solving; (4) ethics and social responsibility; (5) global awareness; (6) information systems and technology; (7) leadership, professionalism and civic engagement; (8) interpersonal and teamwork skills; (9) organization and synthesis of learning; and (10) graduate education and professional career preparation.

To remain true to the business department�s newly created mission�develop skills requisite for excellence in leadership, the business faculty agreed to the creation of a three-hour core course titled Leadership and Professional Development (LPD) to specifically address learning objective seven� leadership, professionalism and civic engagement. The responsibility for the design, development and delivery of the course was assigned to a two-person team comprised of a business faculty member and the director of career counseling and placement, hereafter referred to as the LPD instruction team. The

58 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

members of the instruction team were selected because of their combined 44 years of corporate, teaching and career development experience. The collective background of the team members provided the skills necessary to create a course that would meet the criteria established by the faculty.

Essential elements identified by the business faculty for inclusion in the LPD class centered on (1) teaching and learning leadership basics and management competencies; (2) contributing to the realization of the college mission and the department mission; (3) teaching and learning professionalism and soft skills; (4) integrating content and activities that would address other skills identified in the business department learning objectives of communication, interpersonal and teamwork skills, graduate education and professional career preparation; and (5) ensuring the requirement for a service-learning project.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to describe the LPD teaching and learning model and content designed by the instruction team to address the business department�s learning objective focused on leadership, professionalism and civic engagement. The modular design and absence of business technical skills (such as accounting, finance, management and marketing) positions the model for adaptive use in a variety of educational and training settings, independent of the subject matter skills associated with the activity. Therefore, this article is beneficial to academics and practitioners who wish to use the model in their own functional area. This article presents the LPD model�s origin and supporting literature; its purpose, design and components; and summary followed by a section offering conclusions with recommendations. LPD MODEL ORIGIN: LITERATURE REVIEW

To accomplish the task set before them by the business department faculty, the LPD instruction team

sought a variety of sources to identify class content and delivery. The sources included student leadership theoretical models�the Social Change Model (Haber & Komives, 2009; Wagner, 2006) and the Student Leadership Practices Inventory (Kouzes & Posner, 1998; Posner, 2004); the college mission and nine institutional values; professionalism guiding principles and selected literature on soft skills; and a management development model�Hogan and Warrenfeltz�s (2003) domain model of managerial education. Considered below are some key elements of the aforementioned sources. The Social Change Model

Created in the early 1990s, the Social Change Model (SCM) has been referred to �as the most widely used model of leadership development in higher education� (Haber & Komives, 2009, p. 138). The SCM resulted from the collaborative efforts of ten leadership specialists and student affairs professionals. The group, led by Helen and Alexander Astin, identified �what knowledge, values, or skills students need to develop in college in order to participate in effective leadership focused on social change� (Wagner, 2006, p. 8). The result was the SCM of leadership development.

Key assumptions of the SCM informed the LPD model in that the SCM encourages change based on values, presents opportunity for collaboration, underscores individuals� passionate commitment to social justice, and is made accessible to all students. The above-mentioned group of researchers summarized their findings by identifying seven critical values to leadership development, all beginning with the letter C, grouped into three categories: (1) individual values�consciousness of self, congruence and commitment; (2) group values�collaboration, common purpose and controversy with civility; and (3) community values�character. These seven values, known as the Seven C�s, revolve around change, which is considered to be the hub of SCM. The SCM is founded on the belief that the ultimate goal of leadership is positive social change, defining change as �believing in the importance of making a better world and a better society for oneself and others� (Wagner, 2006, p. 9).

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 59

The Student Leadership Practices Inventory The Student Leadership Practices Inventory (Student LPI) is similar to the SCM in that they both

were created specifically for the college undergraduate. The Student LPI results from the work of Kouzes & Posner (1998). As one of the few leadership development instruments targeted for college students, the Student LPI identifies specific behaviors and actions that students report using when they are at �their personal best as leaders� (Posner, 2004, p. 443-444). Research by Kouzes and Posner on student leadership behavior was based on a case-study approach to determine a pattern of behaviors used by students when they were most effective as leaders. The results of their research are summarized in what is described as the five practices of exemplary leadership: (1) modeling the way; (2) inspiring a shared vision; (3) challenging the process; (4) enabling others to act; and (5) encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 1998; Posner, 2004).

College Mission and Values The SCM and Student LPI provide a theoretical foundation that supports the college mission and

values. The SCM call to service and social justice along with the exposed values and ideals of the Student LPI are in congruence with the college mission to �develop students with disciplined minds who will lead lives of leadership and service� and the nine institutional values (college website). In 2008, the college president commissioned a year-long dialogue titled the Institutional Values Project (IVP). Its purpose was to engage faculty, staff and students in dialogue about the values considered important to the college community and necessary for the achievement of its vision of becoming one of the best liberal arts colleges in the nation. The LPD instruction team faculty member was selected to serve as a member of the leadership team for the project.

Group discussions, surveys and other assessments were used to identify the shared values and enabling behaviors that represent the college. The emphasis on engaging faculty, staff and students in the development of the shared values was identified as key to the success of the academic community, as well as preparing students for citizenship and leadership. The year-long process resulted in the adoption of nine college values. These nine values are listed as follows: spirituality, community, accountability, trust, respect, integrity, honesty, civility and compassion (college website).

The three inputs outlined above�SCM, Student LPI and the college mission and institutional values, provide rich character-based context to inform the LPD model. The following discussion will detail inputs related to competencies and knowledge needed for success in the organizational setting�professionalism, soft skills and managerial education. Professionalism Guiding Principles

To better understand how to incorporate professionalism into the new course, the LPD instruction team reviewed Andrews� 1969 Harvard Business Review article, �Toward professionalism in business management.� He identified five criteria to be used to evaluate the professional quality of any occupation: (1) knowledge that has been subjected to disciplined analysis; (2) competent application to a class of practical problems; (3) social responsibility through which practitioners are motivated less by personal gain than to accomplish goals appropriate to his field; (4) self-control by which the membership of a profession has effective means for setting standards of conduct and influencing behavior; and (5) community sanction whereas those served by the profession grant respect, authority and status to the occupation and its practitioners (Andrews, 1969, p. 50-51).

Further investigation into professionalism led to the work of McGuigan (2007) on the attributes of professionalism that are to be exhibited by the practitioner through which the individual earns the community sanction described in Andrews� fifth criteria of professionalism in business management. McGuigan (2007, p. 1) says �whether or not the occupation itself has attained professional status, the individual can attain the attributes of professionalism.� His five attributes of professionalism for the individual include: (1) reliance on a high personal standard of competence in providing professional service; (2) the means by which a person promotes or maintains the image of the profession; (3) a

60 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

willingness to pursue development opportunities that improve skills; (4) the pursuit of quality, competence and ideals within the profession; and (5) exuding a sense of pride about the profession.

Soft Skills

A discussion of professionalism is tightly coupled with a discussion of soft skills. Research studies since the 1990s have classified soft skills under the umbrella of professionalism and noted its critical role in career success (Kryer, 1997; Levenburg, 1996; Sergenian & Pant, 1998). More recent studies show evidence that soft skills are critical to one�s future workplace success due to the collaborative nature of today�s business environment (Azevedo, Apfelthaler & Hurst, 2012; Bedwell, Fiore & Salas, 2014; NACE, 2014).

Soft skills are defined as �interpersonal qualities, also known as people skills, and personal attributes that one possesses� (Robles, 2012, p. 453) and the �nontechnical skills related to personal traits� (Onifade & Stivers, 2014, p. 13). Noting that �leadership involves a relationship process that requires working with others to accomplish a goal or to promote positive change,� Brungardt (2011, pg. 1) defines soft skills as �that relationship factor involved in human interaction required to achieve positive outcomes from the leadership process.� The soft skills cited in Brungardt�s (2011) study as desirable by employers but deficient in their incoming hires include communication, interpersonal, adaptability, leadership, teamwork, working with diverse groups, decision-making and creative thinking.

Two studies of particular interest to the LPD instruction team are Robles (2012) and Onifade and Stivers (2014). Both studies addressed the identification of soft skills that employers said were important but lacking in business graduates, with a recommendation for business educators to revise their curricula to meet the needs of the workplace.

Research conducted by Robles (2012) based on a survey of 49 business executives identified ten soft- skill attributes determined as critical to employee success that employers want business educators to promote in their curriculum. The ten soft-skills attributes are as follows: communication, courtesy, flexibility, integrity, interpersonal skills, positive attitude, professionalism, responsibility, teamwork and work ethic. The soft-skills competencies desired by employers identified in the research conducted by Robles (2012) were matched by Onifade and Stivers (2014). Using a cluster organizational structure, they reported desirable soft skills in three clusters: (1) personal skills cluster�interpersonal/people skills, professionalism, et cetera; (2) communication cluster; and (3) global social competencies�global perspective, intercultural competence and social responsibility. Hogan and Warrenfeltz Domain Model of Managerial Education

With the aforementioned delineations of professionalism and soft-skills competencies identified, the LPD instruction team expanded its research base to a teaching and learning model designed for a business management program�the Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003) domain model of management education. The research on career and organizational success conducted by Hogan and Warrenfletz shows the need to go beyond technical issues in the development of the modern manager and include training in self-mastery, including knowledge, awareness and management of self. As the intent of the addition of the LPD course is to serve the college business program in this capacity, the Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003) findings were of specific interest to the instruction team.

The taxonomy of learning outcomes for a business management program proposed by Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003) was created based on existing competency models. Their taxonomy is organized in terms of four competency domains: (1) intrapersonal skills such as core self-esteem, emotional security or resiliency, self-confidence, stability and self-control; (2) interpersonal skills such as the ability to engage with others, socially adept, approachable and rewarding to deal with; (3) leadership skills seen as the ability to build and maintain effective teams; and (4) business skills, which involve several cognitive abilities such as planning, monitoring budgets and forecasting costs. According to Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003), these four domains �define the content of management education; they provide a basis for designing curricula, assigning people to training and evaluating management education. Finally these four domains form a natural, overlapping developmental sequence, with the later skills depending on the

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 61

appropriate development of the earlier skills. We also think they form a hierarchy of trainability, in which the earlier skills are harder to train and the later skills are easier to train� (p. 78).

The extensive literature review conducted by the LPD instruction team clearly identified a magnanimous amount of information that should be covered in the LPD course. The competencies identified contained a multiplicity of traits, abilities, skills, knowledge and behaviors (TASKBs) that the learner should be exposed to in order to meet the business department learning objective in leadership, professionalism and civic engagement. Using the Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003) domain model of management education as a framework, the LPD instruction team assigned the TASKBs identified in the literature review to one of Hogan and Warrenfeltz�s four domains. Considering the literature review did not find complete agreement among all researchers on the classification of TASKBs within the domain competencies of intrapersonal, interpersonal and leadership skills or professionalism and soft-skills categories, the LPD instruction team made the final decision as to the domain placement of the TASKBs. This assignment is reported in Table 1 Leadership and Professional Development Competency Comparison.

TABLE 1 LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPETENCY COMPARISON

Skill Domain

Intrapersonal Develops early; has important consequences for career development

Interpersonal Easily measured; predicts a wide range of occupational outcomes

Leadership Depends on intrapersonal and interpersonal skills

Domain Model of Managerial Education (Hogan &

Warrenfeltz, 2003)

Core self-esteem Emotional security resiliency; self-confident; stable, positive moods; positive attitudes toward authority; self-control; core of emotional intelligence

Charming, poised, socially adept, approachable, rewarding to deal with; Dealing effectively with the other; Maintaining relationships with a variety of people

Building and maintaining effective teams through recruiting, persuading, motivating, visioning and persistence

Social Change Model

(Haber & Komives, 2009; Wagner, 2006)

Consciousness of self: self aware of beliefs, values, attitudes and emotions Congruence: actions consistent with values and beliefs Commitment: investment and energy to serve group and goals

Collaboration: effectively working with others Common purpose: shared aims and values Controversy with civility: effectively managing differences

Citizenship: responsibly connected to community and society Change: making a better world and society for self and others

Student Leadership Practices Inventory (Kouzes & Posner,

1998)

(Not referenced in model) (Not referenced in model)

Modeling the way; Inspiring a shared vision; Challenging the process; Enabling others to act; Encouraging the heart

College Mission; College Values (1867, 1998)

Values: spirituality, accountability, trust, respect for self, integrity

Values: community, trust, respect for others, honesty, civility, compassion

Mission: leadership and service

Professionalism Occupation

Criteria (Andrews, 1969)

(Not referenced in model) Behavior monitoring and discipline by membership

Social responsibility; Community sanction

62 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

Professionalism Individual Attributes

(McGuigan, 2007)

High personal standards of competence; Promote and maintain image of profession; Pursuit of developmental opportunities to improve skills; Pursuit of quality, competence, and ideals within profession; Sense of pride about the profession

(Not referenced in model) (Not referenced in model)

Soft Skills (Robles, 2012)

Integrity: honest, ethical, high morals, positive attitude Professionalism: businesslike, well-dressed, appearance, poised Responsibility: accountable, reliable, resourceful, self- disciplined Work ethic: hard working, willing to work, loyal, self- motivated

Communication: oral, speaking, written, presenting, listening Courtesy: manners, etiquette, gracious Flexibility: adaptability, adjusts, teachable Interpersonal skills: nice, personable, friendly Teamwork: cooperative, agreeable, collaborative

(Not referenced in model)

Soft Skills (Onifade & Stivers,

2014)

Personal skills: dependability, reliability, initiation, self-motivation, professionalism, work ethic, accountability, honesty, integrity, ethical values, personal productivity, time management

Personal Skills: adaptability, flexibility, collaboration, teamwork skills Communication: oral, written, presentation Global Social Competencies: intercultural competence

Personal skills: leadership ability, creativity, innovation Global Social Competencies: global perspective, social responsibility

The LPD instruction team was then faced with the dilemma of how to present a vast amount of

material to students in such a way as to effectively achieve the business department learning objective in leadership, professionalism and civic engagement. Based on our experience in teaching the college�s student body population, we concluded that a structured, simplified presentation of the wealth of TASKBs that comprise the competency domains was necessary; in other words�an LPD model.

The three components of the business department learning objective�leadership, professionalism and civic engagement would be used as category headings for the LPD model: first, intrapersonal and professionalism skills; second, interpersonal and leadership skills; and third, civic engagement representing the experiential learning activities required for inclusion in the class such as the service- learning project. Collectively these components would enable the overlap of the designation of the TASKBs into the intrapersonal, interpersonal and leadership categories by other researchers, allowing some flexibility in the assignment of TASKBs. This flexibility accommodated our desire to create an easy to remember three-component LPD model using two mnemonics�FOCUS for the first component, ACTION for the second component and the term Great Leadership for the third component.

LPD MODEL PURPOSE AND DESIGN

The purpose of the model is to assist students in developing the traits, abilities, skills, knowledge and behaviors (TASKBs) expected of business graduates pursuing lives of leadership and service in the twenty-first century. Using Kolb�s (1984) learning theory as the pedagogical framework, the LPD model is designed to provide an integrated, holistic, experiential learning approach to leadership development (see Figure 1).

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 63

FIGURE 1 LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (LPD)

TEACHING & LEARNING MODEL

Informed by (a) leadership theoretical models, (b) the college mission and values, (c) soft skills/professionalism guiding principles and (d) a domain model of managerial education, the LPD model outlines specific management competencies for the emerging leader. At the foundational base, the model identifies developmental needs in the area of intrapersonal and professionalism skills, represented by the mnemonic FOCUS. The middle section of the model identifies developmental needs in the area of interpersonal and leadership skills, represented by the mnemonic ACTION. A third and final component of the model, Great Leadership, is an experiential learning category. This category provides the platform for the inclusion of experiential activities that require students to utilize the FOCUS and ACTION TASKBs in career development and civic engagement activities. The overarching outcome for students engaging the LPD model is to engage the business department mission �to develop skills requisite for excellence in leadership�,� which complements the college mission �to develop students with disciplined minds who will lead lives of leadership and service� (college website).

The LPD model subscribes to the teaching of management skills with the goal of �increasing students� intra- and interpersonal awareness combined with the development and practice of interpersonal and team skills within a managerial context� (Bigelow et.al., 1999, p. 356) that began in the 1980s. Subsequent research shows that competency-based models lead to increased student satisfaction and learning (Brownell & Chung, 2001; Hess, 2007; Hill & Houghton, 2001; McEnrue, 2002). Another strategy employed by the LPD instruction team to enhance the student learning experience was the use of the mnemonics FOCUS and ACTION.

Great

Leadership

(career

development and

civic engagement

activities )

ACTION

(interpersonal and

leadership skills )

FOCUS

(intrapersonal and

professionalism skills)

64 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

Mnemonics have been reported to be used with success in statistics (Hunt, 2010) and accounting education (Seay & McAlum, 2010). Encouraged by their professions to require students to be active learners rather than passive listeners and to �replace staid teaching methods with techniques that motivate students to practice and learn,� Seay and McAlum found mnemonic techniques to be effective in teaching �basic auditing concepts more effectively and better prepare students for professional auditing careers� (2010, p. 33, 34). A mnemonic is a ditty, rhyme or word based on the initial letters of a list of items used as an aid to memory. They organize information, which can enhance learning and improve later recall of the information through an imagery eliciting process often where the order of the items is crucial (Hunt, 2010; Seay & McAlum, 2010). When the mnemonic word defines or summarizes the concept it represents, as it does for FOCUS and ACTION, the mnemonic becomes specifically helpful (Hunt, 2010).

FOCUS: Intrapersonal and Professionalism Skills

The skills that make up the FOCUS component of the LPD model are associated with leading one�s self and closely align with Hogan and Warrenfeltz�s (2003) intrapersonal skills, the first domain of managerial education. �Intrapersonal skill is the foundation on which management careers are built,� state Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003, p. 78). Confirming this assessment are Kaiser and Kaplan (2006, p. 463) who call this skill set the �inner game� of leadership and Posner (2008, p. 26) who states �the development of leadership is fundamentally the development of the inner self; it�s driven more by internal forces than by external forces.�

While often overlooked in management theory and education, how leaders function in an intrapersonal sense is pivotal. What goes on under the surface of the behavior, one�s motivation for action, is as fundamental to performance as a solid foundation is to the structural integrity of a house or a massive building. Intrapersonal skill development works at the deepest of level of being, ��the province of one�s basic beliefs and assumptions�, and allows for the creation of �strategies for regulating one�s impulses and emotional needs�� (Kaiser & Kaplan, 2006, p. 463).

Research shows that in relationship to business skills, the intrapersonal skills are the hardest to develop (Hogan and Warrenfeltz, 2003) and result from concentrated effort, commitment and dedication to the task, in other words focus (Goleman, 2013). FOCUS acknowledges these skills and presents them as five tenets in the LPD model:

F Find your power source O Open your internal systems C Connect to external systems U Understand the big picture S Sell yourself as excellence

The tenets are defined below along with literature references that support the inclusion of each tenet in the LPD model. Find Your Power Source

Placed in the first tenet of the LPD model is the first of the college nine identified values� spirituality. It is explained as �the belief that everyone carries a spark of the Divine. As you ignite your spark into a flame, encourage others to do no less than the same. At the college, we honor each individual's spiritual path to greatness� (college website).

Research has identified spirituality as a source of employee motivation. Research reported by Guillén, Ferrero and Hoffman (2015) on ethics and spiritual motivations in the workplace reports �that employees do not bring only their bodies and minds to work but also their hearts, souls, creativity, talents, and unique spirits� (p. 814). As a result, the acknowledgement �of the roles of morality and spiritually in the workplace may help the implementation of more holistic leadership models� (p. 814) and improved management practices.

In his book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Covey (1989, p. 288) details the importance of �preserving and enhancing the greatest asset you have�you.� He says this is done by renewing the four dimensions of one�s nature�physical, spiritual, mental and social/emotional. In regards to spirituality

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 65

Covey says �renewing the spiritual dimension provides leadership to your life� (p. 292). As the core and center, spirituality represents a commitment to one�s value system. Spirituality inspires and uplifts and ties one to the timeless truths of all humanity (Covey, 1989).

Other focus topics of significance placed in this tenet by the LPD instruction team that represent a source of power in the life of a leader include the role and importance of family relationships (Friedman, 2008), fitness and wellness (Moore, 2015) and financial management (Rainer, 2015). Open Your Internal Systems

The role of values, attitudes, personality, emotions and principles�the summation of one�s intrapersonal being, in leadership effectiveness is the focus of this tenet. Intrapersonal skills are the underlying drivers of managerial behavior and surfaces through one�s abilities to regulate their emotions, attitudes and motivations (Kaiser & Kaplan, 2006). The intrapersonal is �the province of one�s basic beliefs and assumptions, as well as strategies for regulating one�s impulses and emotional needs� (pg. 464). The term �inner theatre� is used by de Vries (2001) to describe the home of intrapersonal skills. Emotional intelligence (EI) is another term used to describe intrapersonal skills and is defined as knowing one�s emotions, managing emotions, motivating oneself, recognizing emotions in others and handling relationships (Goleman, 1995). EI has been found to be helpful in the development of leaders (Phipps, Prieto & Ndinguri, 2014).

Implicit within this tenet is the focus on an awareness of one�s inner-self or voice, which leads to reflecting on values, beliefs, personality, purpose, passion and goals; possessing emotional intelligence; and knowing strengths and weaknesses. In today�s workplace, employees must manage their own careers that may span five decades. Therefore, cultivating a deep understanding of self��not only what your strengths and weaknesses are but also how you learn, how you work with others, what your values are, and where you can make the greatest contribution� (Drucker, 2005, p. 100) is the responsibility of the employee. Connect to External Systems

Building, maintaining and growing relationships are the focus of this tenet. Terms such as networking (de Janasz, Sullivan & Whiting, 2003; Grayson & Baldwin, 2007), relationship currency (Harris, 2014) and social capital (Roberts, 2013) are all used to describe a must-do and must-have aspect of a professional�s life. According to Harris, �building relationships in an organization is as important, if not more important, than your performance on the job� (p. 113). Emerging leaders should be aware that acquiring senior-level positions will require more than being good at your job; it will be based on the power of your relationships (Harris, 2014). An effective network is comprised of diverse relationships inside and outside of one�s organizational setting, consisting of mentors, sponsors, advisors, life coaches, organizational and professional associates, and community connections.

Work of the Center for Creative Leadership (Grayson & Baldwin, 2007) details the concept of leadership networking. �Leadership networking is not about collecting business cards or schmoozing. Leadership networking is about building relationships and making alliances in service to others� customers, clients, constituents, peers, bosses, and employees�and in service of the organization�s work and goals. A robust leadership network helps provide access to people, information, and resources. Leaders can use those connections to solve problems and create opportunities� (p. 7). Understand the Big Picture

The twenty-first century leadership challenge includes issues of �globalization and instant communication�and business must learn to deal with this new reality where any news and actions can be made public within a matter of minutes� (Smith, 2008, p. 29). Innovations, both sustaining and disruptive, abound across �virtually every industry, from electronics to transportation� (Christensen, 2008, p. 32). Leadership challenges will move from the technical�problems for which people have the necessary know-how and procedures to solve, to the adaptive�requiring �experiments, new discoveries, and

66 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

adjustments from numerous numerous places in the organization or community� (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002, p. 13).

Adaptive problem solving is accomplished, according to Heifetz and Linsky (2002), via a balcony perspective, taking oneself out of the fray �to get perspective in the midst of action� (p. 52) through the mental exercise of self-reflection. �We call this skill �getting off the dance floor and going to the balcony,� an image that captures the mental activity of stepping back in the midst of action and asking, What�s really going on here?� (p. 51). The balcony perspective is a way to mentally take yourself out of a situation, gaining �both a clearer view of reality and some perspective on the bigger picture� (p. 53). Big picture skills can help prepare leaders to address the globalization, technology and innovation issues inherent in a twenty-first century global marketplace. Sell Yourself as Excellence

The last tenet of FOCUS is comprised of TASKBs that are traditionally associated with professionalism and soft skills�dress, appearance, etiquette, work ethic, time management, etc., outlined in the soft-skills listing of Table 1 Leadership and Professional Development Competency Comparison. These TASKBs are summarized in this tenet as the ABCs of professional presence, defined as being �appropriate, believable and credible through appearance, body language, communication skills, deliverables (work ethic) and etiquette (business and social).

The importance of demonstrating personal mastery of these skills cannot be overstated for college students. Attire in particular is a topic that is covered extensively in this tenet. Studies as far back as the 1980s record organizations spending billions of dollars yearly on defining and monitoring dress code standards (Rafaeli & Pratt, 1993). Since that time business dress codes have fluctuated from the strict traditional suit attire for men and women (Molloy, 1988) to business casual and back to traditional (Kiddie, 2009; Peluchette & Karl, 2007). Students must be made aware of organizations� expectation of professionalism that begins with the interview process (Marci, 2016) and continues throughout their employment in the company (Onifade & Stivers, 2014; Robles, 2012). Excellence in these areas is foundational to managing others� perception of one�s reputation in the critical professionalism markers of �confidence, trust, and security to clients and customers of a company� (Bray, 2013, p. 10).

The central goal of FOCUS is to present leadership and professional development as personal, inside- out work, encompassing all facets of one�s life, over the entirety of one�s life. Friedman and Phillips (2004) acknowledge the importance of self-reflection and professional development as �part of lifelong learning; a means of gaining career security; a means of personal development; a means of assuring the public that individual professionals are up-to-date; a method whereby professional associations can verify competence; and a way of providing employers with a competent and adaptable workforce� (p. 361). Through adopting and embracing the FOCUS tenets, learners develop the foundational intrapersonal and professionalism skills that prepare them to step into the action of building and maintaining interpersonal and leadership relationships. ACTION: Interpersonal and Leadership Skills

The principal theme of ACTION is to demonstrate to learners the need to exhibit the TASKBs identified in FOCUS. The skills that make up the ACTION component of the LPD model are associated with working and leading others and closely align with the Hogan and Warrenfeltz�s (2003) second and third domain of managerial education, interpersonal skills and leadership skills. Ultimately, leaders are measured by the results of their actions rooted in their ability to influence others through strong interpersonal skills. The achievement of outcomes starts and ends with doing---in other words action. ACTION acknowledges these skills and presents them as five tenets in the LPD model: A Awesome professionalism C Courageous character TI Tenacious Inclusion

O Optimal service N Noble leadership

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 67

The ACTION tenets are named and defined below along with literature references that support the inclusion of each tenet in the LPD model.

Awesome Professionalism

The undergraduate student�s limited exposure to corporate culture is aptly described in �The Young and the Clueless� (Bunker, Kram & Ting, 2002). The authors detail the story of a corporate rising star whose career was derailing because he was unaware of the unspoken rules of corporate culture; rules that included the value of building relationships with his peers and being approachable to his subordinates. He possessed the ability to impress his superiors with talent and intellect, but was viewed negatively by others in his workplace and described as self-promoting, intolerant and remote. The more striking aspect of the story is that the rising star was not fully aware of how he was perceived by others. In other words, he was clueless.

These characteristics are commonplace in top-talented undergraduate business students. The goal of the first tenet of ACTION is to address this mindset. An awesome professionalism mindset drives students to put into action the intrapersonal skills of self-awareness and foundational aspects of professionalism learned in FOCUS so they can be identified as top talent for executive level positions. The ability to differentiate and execute top-tier elite competencies associated with executive-level management is key to career progress.

Competencies of good candidates differ from those of the elite candidate (Ciampa, 2005). Good candidates can push people to achieve more than they think they can, accurately read political currents and are star performers. Elite candidates for senior positions demonstrate these abilities and while doing so, have the ability to make people feel appreciated and remain loyal, are not labeled as political and make success look easy. Ross (2005, p. 1) concurs with Ciampa and summarizes the competencies of awesome professionalism as �job mastery, political acuity, meticulous relationship management, visibility to the right people, and a willingness to take a well-gauged risk or two.� Courageous Character

Having and knowing values and morals that distinguish right from wrong is important for a leader; however acting on one�s values and morals is what makes the leader great. Courageous leaders choose to act from a moral center, believing that �morally anchored character is the basis for visionary public leadership,� (Thurman, 1998, p. 160). Tales of public leadership gone astray abound in government and politics (Baldoni, 2008) and business including Enron, Tyco, Worldcom and the 2008 U.S. financial crisis. These business leaders turned a blind eye to morality, good judgment and strength of character. To this end, Badaracco (1998, p. 116) cautions that the actual �decisions taken cumulatively over many years form the very basis of an individual�s character� and calls them defining moments. Defining moments are experienced when one is forced to choose between two or more options that hold equally valuable importance. Knowledge of the concept of defining moments as a character formation exercise is the goal of this tenet.

Similarly Badaracco noted the absence of an obvious right choice in defining moments lends them to becoming crucial leadership growth opportunities through character formation. �We form our character in defining moments because we commit to irreversible courses of action that shape our personal and professional identities� (Badaracco, 1998, p. 116). Badaracco has identified three kinds of defining moments that are common in the workplace: personal identity, organizational and the company�s role in society. For each of these, he identified a practical question for the leader �designed to transform values and beliefs into calculated action: Who am I? Who are we? Who is the company?� (p. 116). The courageous character tenet builds on FOCUS allowing students to delve deeper into the first question on personal identity.

68 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

Tenacious Inclusion The dire need and strategic importance of interpersonal skills in multiple contexts cannot be

overstated (Bedwell et.al., 2014). Today�s collaborative work environment across functional areas, global locations and diverse workforces, requires interpersonal competence for successful interactions.

In research conducted by Bedwell et.al., it is reported that organizations �are seeking interpersonal skills in new hires�exerting pressure on business schools to address interpersonal skills so graduates are more adequately prepared to engage in effective collaboration immediately upon hiring� (p. 172). Their research defined interpersonal skills �as an umbrella term that refers to goal directed behaviors, including communication and relationship-building competencies, employed in interpersonal interaction episodes characterized by complex perceptual and cognitive processes, dynamic verbal and nonverbal interaction exchanges, diverse roles, motivations, and expectancies� (p. 173). This definition is quite suitable in explaining the need for mastery in intercultural sensitivity described as �appreciating individual differences among people� with related skills of acceptance, openness to new ideas, sensitivity to others and cross-cultural relations (p. 175).

The ACTION tenet of tenacious inclusion seeks to help students aggressively embrace intercultural sensitivity, diversity and inclusion as twenty-first century organizational imperatives. Exposure to and developing the interpersonal skills associated with intercultural sensitivity at the undergraduate level may result in a competitive advantage initially in the hiring process and later as the new hire pursues movement into the executive talent pool (Marcum & Perry, 2010; Ng, Van Dyke & Ang, 2009; Tavakoli, 2015). Optimal Service

Today�s undergraduate students will begin their careers in the globalized, interconnected twenty-first century workplace where all facets of businesses are instantly and constantly exposed to examination and missteps are quickly made public. This environment calls for a growing level of transparency, ethical behavior and sensitivity to social and environmental concerns in the work of organizational leadership (Smith, 2008). The public views this work through the lens of corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR �refers to an organization�s commitment to conduct business in a consistent manner that meets or surpasses the ethical, legal, commercial/operational and public expectations society has of it� (Anonymous, 2008, p. 12). The aim of CSR goes beyond getting �companies to �do good� for society while pursuing business as usual, but recognizes the fundamental role that businesses play in building healthy societies through the impact of their business models� (Waddock, 2008, p. 89).

The outcomes of CSR initiatives suggest companies receive double dividends for their CSR efforts in the terms of profitability and global reputation (Smith, 2008); twin jewels for corporate leadership. Therefore, Smith (2008) suggests three ways that graduate business schools should be more intentional in their teaching of ethics and corporate responsibility (ECR): (1) include stand-alone courses in the MBA program that stress good conduct by business professionals; (2) embed ECR issues in other core courses; and (3) offer electives in the area of social entrepreneurship, environmentally friendly business practices or socially responsible leadership. The optimal service tenet of ACTION provides the undergraduate student exposure to the topics in these three areas. As a result, students become aware of the actions expected of them in the workplace to behave ethically and with sensitivity toward social, cultural, economic and environmental issues and to assist their organizations in accountability, responsibility, transparency and ecological sustainability.

Noble Leadership

The goal of the final tenet of ACTION, noble leadership, is to help students internalize the LPD model�s definition of leadership, defined by the LPD instruction team as �an influence process between team members (leaders and followers) that result in the attainment of shared goals for the betterment of the group, the organization and society as a whole.� This definition was derived from the inputs to the LPD model as follows: (1) the Social Change Model (SCM) of student leadership development states �the ultimate goal of leadership is positive social change and defines change as believing in the importance of

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 69

making a better world and a better society for oneself and for others� (Wagner, 2006, p. 9); (2) the college mission statement identifies leadership, service and a commitment to social justice as foundational principles (college website); (3) professionalism guiding principles include social responsibility and the pursuit of quality, competence and ideals within the profession (Andrews, 1966; McGuigan, 2007); (4) soft skills include high morals, ethical values, social responsibility and teamwork (Robles, 2012; Onifade & Stivers, 2014); and (5) the domain model of education defines leadership as building and maintaining effective teams (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003).

Choosing to call the final tenet of the LPD model �noble leadership� is fittingly voiced by Howard Thurman who writes, �one of the most searching demands of leadership is integrity and honesty. The leader must above all else be a seeker after truth. In his private life of thought and deed he must not violate the ideals which he embraces in his role as the leader of others. The integrity of the act cannot be separated from the integrity of the person and the word. Therefore, the leader must seek the truth� (Thurman, 1960, p. 161).

This discussion of noble leadership completes the description of the ten tenets of leadership and professionalism in the LPD model. The first five tenets represented by the mnemonic FOCUS serve as the foundation of the LPD model by presenting intrapersonal and professionalism TASKBs. The mnemonic ACTION serves as the second component of the LPD model presenting the interpersonal and leadership TASKBs and the operational definition of leadership within the LPD model. When focus and action come together, great leadership can occur. The name chosen for the third and final component of the LPD model is Great Leadership.

GREAT LEADERSHIP: CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT

Mastery of skills and behaviors associated with leadership and professionalism often take years of practice and experience in the workplace (Allen, Miguel & Martin, 2014). To assume that students become experts in an undergraduate business program is presumptuous. Nevertheless, instructional strategies must include opportunities for students to practice activities expected of them for entry into and as employees in the workplace. The third and final component of the LPD model, Great Leadership, provides the venue for exposure and experience in career development and civic engagement activities. In this component, the instructional engagement has to reach students at the theory of action level�a level in which learners are actively engaged in their learning process (Bigelow et.al., 1999). One such pedagogical theoretical framework is experiential learning.

According to Kayes (2002), four general theoretical themes appear in management learning: action, cognition, reflection and experience. Kayes writes that one of the most influential theories of management learning is David A. Kolb�s model of Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) because it �integrates multiple epistemologies into a formal theory of learning. �Action, cognition, reflection, and experience represent four interdependent processes, each of which is required for holistic integrative learning� (p. 139).

The ELT model of learning involves two interdependent dimensions of knowledge: acquisition and transformation, each process requiring the learner to resolve a set of competing learning tensions. Knowledge acquisition involves the competing tensions between apprehension through concrete experience that produce feelings and emotions; and comprehension through the gathering of knowledge from abstract concepts and symbolic representations, breaking one�s experience into meaningful events within a symbolic system of culture and society. On the other hand, knowledge transformation involves the competing tensions between knowledge intention (reflective observation), in which a learner moves inward to reflect upon previously acquired knowledge; and knowledge extension (active experimentation), in which the learner moves beyond self to interact with an external environment (Kolb, 1984).

The Kolb�s theory of learning, or ELT, is the basis of the LPD model. The ELT is aptly suited to the accomplishment of learning outcomes in the area of leadership, professionalism and civic engagement because it views learning as a holistic process of adapting to the world by engaging the total person-- thinking, feeling, perceiving and behaving, along with acknowledgement of the interactions between the

70 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

person and the environment. Given its holistic approach to learning, the ELT was chosen as the core for all teaching and learning activities associated with the LPD model, most notability the experiential learning activities in the area of career development and civic engagement, allowing students to experience and demonstrate their appreciable grasp of the tenets of Great Leadership. Through career development activities such as mock interviews, career fairs, business etiquette dinners and networking events, along with civic engagement through team-based service-learning projects that �capture social responsibility dimensions while reinforcing academic learning� (Steiner & Watson, 2006, p. 422), students can see that learning is a continuous process where new knowledge challenging existing ideas and perspectives necessitates relearning and the integration of old and new ideas (Ng et.al., 2009). SUMMARY

Using Kolb�s (1984) ELT as the pedagogical framework, the LPD model is designed to provide an integrated, holistic, experiential approach to the development of management competencies in the area of leadership, professionalism and civic engagement�one of the ten business department learning objectives. To determine what learning should be contained in the LPD model, information was gathered from five sources: (1) student development leadership theoretical models SCM (Haber & Komives, 2009; Wagner, 2006) and Student LPI (Kouzes & Posner, 1998; Posner, 2004); (2) the college mission and institutional values (college website); (3) professionalism guiding principles (Andrews, 1969; McGuigan, 2007); (4) soft skills research (Onifade & Stivers, 2014; Robles, 2012); and (5) Hogan and Warrenfeltz�s (2003) management education model. These inputs provided specific intra- and interpersonal skills, leadership skills and professionalism skills for the LPD model.

The intrapersonal and professionalism skills are targeted toward the development of the student�s individual capacity to lead and are represented in the model by the mnemonic FOCUS. The interpersonal and leadership skills are targeted toward the development of the student�s shared capacity for leadership and represented in the model by the mnemonic ACTION. The strategic outcome for the LPD model is realized in the third category of the model�Great Leadership. This category requires the participation of students in career development and team-based civic engagement activities. The overarching goal of the LPD model is to lay a foundation for students to build upon, encouraged by a desire for life-long learning, that eventually lead to their desired level of personal and professional success through expertise in leadership and professionalism. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The efforts but forward over the past twenty-five years to develop leadership models have made significant contributions to the research literature. A succinct summary of the research findings is simply stated as �leadership matters� (Posner, 2004, p. 454). Regarding the gallant efforts put forth in academia, Doh (2003) cautions that, �As educators, we should be skeptical of our ability to mold leaders, and instead should view leadership as one of several characteristics and skill sets that may be further developed by education and practice� (p. 66). As such, educational institutions have a civic duty to provide learners leadership development opportunities with the same vigor as provided for the traditional academic subjects. The college business program addressed this challenge by incorporating leadership and professionalism as skill sets to target for student development through the LPD model. Initial application of the LPD model has shown itself to be of added value to the accomplishment of the department�s student learning outcomes and potential for making a unique contribution to undergraduate student development in the following ways:

First, by incorporating professionalism as a management competency with leadership, the LPD model distinguishes itself. In the wider academic arena, leadership development and professional development are looked upon as two separate areas. The complexities of leader and leadership models such as leader- member exchange (LMX) (Dansereau, Graen & Haga, 1975; Graen & Cashman, 1975), the LPC (least preferred coworker) contingency model (Fiedler, 1967) and transformational leadership (Burns, 1978)

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 71

may require stand-alone presentation of the theoretical underpinnings of their origins and usage in the workplace. However the leadership competencies of building and maintaining teams (Hogan & Warrenfeltz, 2003), Seven C�s of the SCM (Wagner, 2006), and five practices of exemplary leadership named in the Student LPI (Kouzes & Posner, 1998) are potentially strengthen by coupling with the teaching and learning of professionalism skills that go beyond the blue suit, white shirt and dark socks checklist.

The LPD model elevates professionalism to an endeavor with accompanying theory and social institutions and presents it as a socialization process that requires strong intrapersonal skill mastery. Therefore, through the incorporation of the three components: (1) FOCUS�intrapersonal and professionalism; (2) ACTION�interpersonal and leadership; and (3) Great Leadership�career development and civic engagement, the LPD model is differentiated from other student leadership development models, including the previously discussed Student LPI and SCM. By featuring both the practical aspects of professionalism (appearance, body language, communication skills, self-management, work ethic, etc.) along with basic skills of leadership�teamwork, visioning, inspiring, motivating and commitment to social justice, the LPD model makes a commendable contribution to undergraduate student leadership development.

Second, the fluid design of the LPD model allows flexibility in its use as a teaching and learning tool. The specific content chosen by the instructor to illustrate and teach each of the tenets and competencies of the LPD model can be easily updated to reflect current environmental trends and events in society and their effect on business culture while maintaining the integrity of the theoretical foundation of the model. Changes driven by societal forces such as generational differences in the workforce, technological advances, innovation, customer expectations, judiciary rulings and life-style differences, all have a direct effect on the workplace. Successful instructor teaching and student learning in the twenty-first century must reflect these changes, especially in the areas of leadership and professionalism.

Third, the LPD teaching and learning model does not address the development of business functional skills, known as the traditional technical skills required to perform a specific job or task in the areas of accounting, finance, management and marketing. The skills addressed in the model�intra-, interpersonal, leadership and professionalism, are transferrable across all venues. Therefore the omission of the technical skill domain allows for the model�s application across all disciplines and functional areas.

Now that the LPD model has been documented, its validity as an effective tool for the teaching and learning of leadership and professionalism TASKBs in twenty-first century emerging leaders must proceed. Research studies are needed to determine its effectiveness in all types of educational settings including institutions and programs that serve male and female, majority and minority groups. Robust pre- and post-test studies that include control groups will add insights to the validation of LPD as a successful leadership and professional development teaching and learning tool. Lessons learned through research efforts may show the model�s applicability outside of academia into the development and training programs of industry, professional entertainment, civic and community organizations.

To remain competitive in the twenty-first century, organizations are looking to hire competent individuals with strong leadership and professionalism skills supported by mastery of intra- and interpersonal skills, who can successfully engage in social interactions immediately upon hire (Bedwell et.al., 2014). Therefore, it is incumbent upon undergraduate business programs and programs of all disciplines, to assist students in acquiring current, relevant leadership and professionalism skills before entering the workforce. The LPD model is one such tool that shows much promise in its usefulness to assist in the development of leadership and professionalism skills in the emerging twenty-first century workforce.

72 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

REFERENCES Allen, S. J., Miguel, R. F. & Martin, B. A. (2014). Know, see, plan, do: A model for curriculum design in

leadership development. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 72(2), 26-38. Andrews, K. R. (1966, March-April). Toward professionalism in business management. Harvard

Business Review, 49-60. Anonymous. (2008). What is social responsibility? Why is it important? The Journal for Quality and

Participation, 31(3), 11-12. Azevedo, A., Apfelthaler, G. & Hurst, D. (2012). Competency development in business graduates: An

industry-driven approach for examining the alignment of undergraduate business education with industry requirements. The International Journal of Management Education, 10, 12-28.

Badaracco, J. L. (1998). The discipline of building character. Harvard Business Review, 76(2), 115-124. Baldoni, J. (2008, January 20). Leaders Behaving Badly. Retrieved from

http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/cs/2008/01/leaders_behaving_badly.html. Bedwell, W. L., Fiore, S. M. & Salas, E. (2014). Developing the future workforce: An approach for

integrating interpersonal skills into the MBA classroom. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13(2), 171-186.

Bigelow, J., Seltzer, J., Buskirk, W. v., Hall, J. C. & et.al. (1999). Management skills in action: Four teaching models. Journal of Management Education, 23(4), 355-376.

Bray, A. (2013). Bank notes. ABA Banking Journal, 105(3), 10-11. Brownell, J. & Chung, B. G. (2001). The management development program: A competency- based

model for preparing hospitality leaders. Journal of Management Education, 25(2), 124-145. Brungardt, C. (2011). The intersection between soft skill development and leadership education. Journal

of Leadership Education, 10(1), 1-21. Bunker, K. A, Kram, K. E. & Ting, S. (2002). The young and the clueless. Harvard Business Review,

80(12), 81-87. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Christensen, C. (2008). The future is now: On innovation. BizEd, 7(3), 32-34. Ciampa, D. (2005). Almost ready: How leaders move up. Harvard Business Review, 83(1), 46-53. Covey, S. (1989). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York: The Free Press. Dansereau, F., Jr., Graen, G. & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership with

formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E. & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63-82.

de Janasz, S. C., Sullivan, S. E. & Whiting, V. (2003). Mentor networks and career success: Lessons for turbulent times. The Academy of Management, 17(4), 74-91.

DeRue, D. S., Sitkin, S .B. & Podolny, J. M. (2011). From the guest editors: Teaching leadership�Issues and insights. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10(3), 369-372.

de Vries, M. K. (2001). The leadership mystique. Great Britain: Pearson Education Limited. Doh, J. P. (2003). Can leadership be taught? Perspectives from management educators. Academy of

Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 54-67. Drucker, P. (2005). Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review, 83(1), 100-109. Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Friedman A. & Phillips, M. (2004). Continuing professional development: Developing a vision. Journal

of Education and Work, 17(3), 361-376. Friedman, S. (2008). Be a better leader, have a richer life. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from

https://hbr.org/2008/04/be-a-better-leader-have-a-richer-life. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam. Goleman, D. (2013). FOCUS: The hidden driver of excellence. New York: HarperCollins.

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017 73

Graen, G. B. & Cashman, J. F. (1975). A role making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (143-165). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

Grayson, C. & Baldwin, D. (2007). Leadership networking: Connect, Collaborate, Create. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Guillén, M. M., Ferrero, I. J. & Hoffman, W. M. (2015). The neglected ethical and spiritual motivations

in the workplace. Journal Of Business Ethics, 128(4), 803-816. Haber, P. & Komives, S. R. (2009). Predicting the individual values of the social change model of

leadership development: The role of college student�s leadership and involvement experiences. Journal of Leadership Education, 7(3), 133-166.

Harris, C. (2014). Strategize to win: The new way to start out, step up, or start over in your career. NY: Hudson Street Press.

Heifetz, R.A. & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Hess, P. W. (2007). Enhancing leadership skill development by creating practice/feedback opportunities in the classroom. Journal of Management Education, 31(2), 195-213.

Hill, J. & Houghton, P. (2001). A reflection of competency-based education: Comments from Europe. Journal of Management Education, 25(2), 146-166.

Hogan, R. & Warrenfeltz, R. (2003). Educating the Modern Manager. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 74-84.

Hunt, N. (2010). Using mnemonics in teaching statistics. Teaching Statistics: An International Journal for Teachers, 32(3), 73-75.

Kaiser, R.B. & Kaplan, R.B. (2006). The deeper work of executive development: Outgrowing sensitivities. Academy of Management and Learning, 5(4), 463-483.

Kayes, D. (2002). Experiential learning and its critics: Preserving the role of experience in management learning and education. Academy of Management and Learning, 1(2), 137-149.

Kiddie, T. (2009). Recent trends in business casual attire and their effects on student job seekers. Business Communication Quarterly, 72(3), 350-354.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1998). Student leadership practices inventory. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kryer, L. (1997). Communication skills: What you need to succeed. New Accountant, 12(4), 12-13. Levenburg, N. (1996). General management skills: Do practitioners and academic faculty agree on their

importance? Journal of Education for Business, 72(1), 47-51. Marci, J. (2016). Giorgenti: Tips for new graduates on job-interview attire, Long Island News, 04/01. Marcum, T. & Perry, S. J. (2010). Dressed for success: can a claim of religious discrimination be

successful. Labor Law Journal, 61(4), 184-191. McEnrue, M. P. (2002). Managerial skills teaching: Ten questions and twelve answers. Journal of

Management Education, 26(6), 648. McGuigan, P. J. (2007). The ongoing quest for professionalism: Consumer decision processes for

professional services. CEPU eJournal, 60(2), 1-9. Molly, J. T. (1988). New Dress for Success: Revised edition of Dress for Success, 1975. NewYork:

Warner. Moore, P. (2015). Peak performance: How business leaders maintain their own health and well-being. NZ

Business, 29(4), 24-27. NACE. (2014). The skills/qualities employers want in new college graduate hires. Retrieved from

http://www.naceweb.org/about-us/press/class-2015-skills-qualities-employers-want.aspx. Ng, K. Y., Van Dyne, L. & Ang, S. (2009). From experience to experiential learning: Cultural

intelligence as a learning capability for global leader development. Academy of Management and Learning, 8(4), 511-526.

74 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 17(4) 2017

Onifade, E. & Stivers, B. P. (2014). Assessment of competency levels for entry-level positions: A study of business undergraduate alumni. European Journal of Business Research, 14(2), 13-26.

Peluchette, J. V. & Karl, K. (2007). The impact of workplace attire on employee self-perceptions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18(3), 345-360.

Phipps, S. T. A., Prieto, L. C. & Ndinguri, E. (2014). Emotional intelligence: is it necessary for leader development? Journal of Leadership, Accountability & Ethics, 11(1), 73-89.

Posner, B. Z. (2004). A leadership development instrument for students: Updated. Journal of College Student Development, 45(4), 443-456.

Posner, B. Z. (2008). The future is now: On leadership. BizEd, 7(3), 26-27. Rafaeli, A. & Pratt, M. J. (1993). Tailored meanings: On the meaning and impact of organizational dress.

Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 32-55. Rainer, A. (2015). How the mismanagement of personal finances creates poor leaders: 4 reasons to get

your finances right, Retrieved from http://www.artrainer.com/how-the-mismanagement-of- personal-finances-creates-poor-leaders/

Riggio, R. (2008). Leadership development: The current state and future expectations. In Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(4), 383-392.

Roberts, C. (2013). Building social capital through leadership development. Journal of Leadership Education, 12(1), 54-73.

Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today�s workplace. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 453-465.

Ross, J. A. (2005, April). Building a ladder to the top. Harvard Management Update, 1-3. Seay, S. & McAlum, H. G. (2010).The use/application of mnemonics as pedagogical tool in auditing.

Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14(2), 33-47. Sergenian, G. K. & Pant, L. W. (1998). Increasing students� professionalism: A career project for

accounting majors. Issues in Accounting Education, 13(2), 429-442. Smith, N. C. (2008). The future is now: On ethics and social responsibility. BizEd, 7(3), 28-29. Steiner, S. D. & Watson, M. A. (2006). The service learning component in business education: The values

linkage void. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(4), 422-434. Tavakoli, M. M. (2015). Diversity & inclusion drive success for today�s leaders. TD: Talent

Development, 69(5), 46-51. Thurman, H. (1960). Leadership. In W. Fluker and C. Tumber (Eds.) (1998). A strange freedom: The best

of Howard Thurman on religious experiences and public life (pp. 160-162). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Waddock, S. (2008). Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 22(3), 87-108.

Wagner, W. (2006). The social change model of leadership: A brief overview. Concepts & Connections, 15(1), 8-10.

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.