REAL Leadership in Turbulent Times Tobias Leadership LEAD

REAL Leadership in Turbulent Times Tobias Leadership LEAD Conference Indianapolis April 20 -21, 2017 Dr Herman J. van Niekerk Associate Dean: Instruction: Doctoral Business and I-O Psych Programs Herman. vanniekerk@phoenix. edu Dr Kelley Conrad Faculty: I-O Psych Programs Kelley. conrad@phoenix. edu

Structure of Presentation • Introduction o The Leadership studies landscape and Emerging Alternatives • A Changing World requires skilled Leadership o o • REAL Leadership o o • Technological Dominance Globalization / unstable geo-political landscape. Knowledge Society Agile Organizations Relationships and building your network Environmental situational awareness Action-bias Lifelong learning Areas for Future Research o Discussion and Questions o Real-time Survey School of Advanced Studies

The Leadership Landscape and Emerging Alternatives • Leadership – many theories but what advice is reliable? (Allio, 2013). • Alternative perspectives are emerging: ü Leadership as an individual property OR ü Leadership as practice detaching leadership from personality (Raelin, 2011). • REAL framework offers and alternative perspective: Leaders-as-Practice (L -A-P) movement. • An attempt to synthesize theory and practice in an applied leadership model. School of Advanced Studies

Leadership Models are Outdated Leading in Turbulent Times • Leadership models are outdated and not well-suited for the information society and knowledge-orientated economy. • The new leadership paradigm should frame “leadership as a complex interactive dynamic with adaptive outcomes such as learning, innovation and adaptability. ” Uhl-Bien, Marion, and Mc. Kelvey (2007: 298). • Successful leaders see themselves as facilitators. These leaders saw their primary responsibility as unleashing the talent of others so the collective vision could be realized. Bennis (2012). • How should Leadership models look like to address the current and future challenges? • Contingency / Servant / Authentic Leadership? / Scholar-Leader-Practitioner (SLP)?

Four Key Imperatives Reshaping Leadership • • Rapid and far reaching technological changes, especially the digitalization of information and communications technology. (ICTs); Complex flow of information; Competitive Landscape Financial pressures Technology Adoption Globalization • • Shift toward knowledge as the Value of Knowledge central factor of production. Emphasis on intangible assets. Information glut. • Agile and Connected Organizations Accelerated globalization Ease of creating networks and build relationships. Geo-politics. Ukraine / ISIL Manage ambiguity. Distributed, less hierarchical organizational forms with greatly accelerated movement within and across organizations and sectors.

Individual Characteristics Enhancing the REAL leadership framework 1. Digital leaders must be flexible and adaptable, and possess wide intellectual curiosity and a hunger for new knowledge. 2. Willing to see value in sharply different perspectives, and be comfortable with uncertainty, and like all leaders at all time, must possess true passion for what they do. 3. They look globally for solutions and challenges, and also hunger for constant learning and insist on constant learning from their collaborators and followers.

R REAL Leadership Relationships, Networks, Power and Reputation • Leadership scholars must be familiar with the history of leadership and the lessons it teaches. • Leadership and management are still firmly rooted in a mechanistic top down model. • Leadership and Globalization – Information and relationship building flow across borders. Becoming Inward looking will not stop leaders from establishing relationships across national boundaries.

R Relationships, Networks, Power and Reputation • Leadership: A different approach is needed in building Power and Influence o o o Power is to have control over resources and access to information. Social media and information society are challenging the old leadership paradigm. Employees are expecting more clarity, transparency and change. • Capitalizing on the transformational power of social media while mitigating its risks calls for a new type of leader ( Mc. Kinsey, 2013): • Developing a Digital Identity. o Social Media has shifted the power to the individual o Leaders who can master social media will be able to significantly increase their influence, establish authenticity and influencing a new generation. (Tredgold, 2014).

How to establish a Digital Identity and to increase influence • Create an Online profile (Twitter, Linked. In, Instagram or Facebook Page). • Ensure a professional look and feel to your profile – photo and description. Ensure your profile is up-to-date and promotes your areas of expertise. • Search for current thought leaders via social media and browse through their connections or those who they follow; use this to build your own network. • Following someone on Twitter or inviting someone to connect on Linked. In will mean they are likely to read your profile. • Ensure Tweets include a group with large numbers of followers within your captive audience, for example @RCGP_Innov. Ai. T in the hope they will Retweet to them. • Social media allows direct access to professionals who are in a position to influence change on a larger scale, so your ideas get noticed and work recognized. • Social media makes keeping up-to-date and staying informed easier.

Personal Example of Building Influence and Power: Twitter • Need to Dominate Social Space • Build reach and influence • Increase of Social Power (social voltage)

Social Networking, Leadership Power and Influence Trump vs Clinton on Twitter Source: https: //www. weforum. org/agenda/2016/08/hillaryclintonordonaldtrumpwinningontwitter /

A Twitter Comparison…… In terms of efficacy, Donald Trump would seem to outperform Hillary Clinton, since his tweets have been retweeted a total of 12 million times – twice as many as Clinton’s, which have been retweeted 5. 5 million times. Trump has also received 33 million likes for his tweets, almost three times as many as Clinton, who has a total of 12 million likes. Trump averages 5, 639 retweets per tweet, compared with 2, 154 retweets per tweet for Clinton. Icon Trump Clinton Averages Followers 24. 7 mil 13. 2 mil 13 Feb. 2017 Retweets 12 mil 5. 5 mil 5, 639 Likes 33 mil 12 2, 154

E Environmental Scanning Sense making and Situational Awareness • World Economic Forum – Davos 2015: Emphasis on Leadership and intelligence. • Leader must possess three key attributes: contextual intelligence, emotional intelligence, and inspired intelligence. • Contextual intelligence enables leaders to develop a greater awareness and see through the short term imperatives and make better informed, more timely decisions on how best to mobilize resources in ways that deliver the greatest long- term, sustainable value. (Business Foresight – my interpretation). • Wave of digitalization is fundamentally altering the way we do business. Companies fail because their products are out of date, their core competencies have become obsolete or new technologies have altered processes. • Various surveys have identified critical thinking as the number one requirement for successful leadership in the 21 st century.

Environmental Scanning - an age of radical Ignorance • Importance of keep abreast of emerging trends and innovations—not just their competitive and marketplace implications, but also what they mean for communications technologies, which are fundamental for creating an agile, responsive organization. (Mc. Kinsey 2015). • We live in an age of radical Ignorance – BBC, 2016 • Study of deliberate propagation of ignorance: Agnotology is the study of willful acts to spread confusion and deceit, usually to sell a product or win favor. • Fake News • Bounded Rationality and Satisficing – Do not just look for evidence to support / satisfy your viewpoints / critically evaluating alternatives. • Sense making – thinking about human perception, cognition and action. • Weick’s sensemaking theory – understanding our own individual biases.

A Action Bias Pro-active change • Leadership and Agency – interdependent and inseparable. Leadership is action. • “A distinctive human characteristic through which personal agency is exercised is the capacity of forethought. ” Bandura (1989, 1179). • “Leadership-As-Practice is concerned far more about where, how and why leadership work is being accomplished than about who is offering visions for others to do the work” (Raelin, 2011, p. 3). • Key principle of a Scholar-Practitioner-Leader (SPL) model Theory is incorporated with Practice. • REAL model is firmly embedded within the domain of Leader-as. Practice movement.

L Learning in a continuous and agile way • Have a passion for learning in order to become the best leader you can be (Kouzas and Posner 2012). • Open to new experiences and honest examination of how you and other perform. • The importance of (self)-reflection in learning and becoming self-aware. “Grounded in self-knowledge your leadership becomes more authentic. ” • Agile and being responsive to changes. • Underlying factors (Hojat, et al. 2009): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recognition of own learning needs Participate in research projects Self-directed learning Technical and PC literacy skills Personal motivation

Leadership and Impact of Learning on Millennial workforce A 3 out of 5 B 4 out of 5 C 4 out of 5 Milliennials feel that they will switch jobs in less than five years Millennials want regular feedback from their boss. . Millenials think they deserve to be recognized more for their work Source: http: //visual. ly/millennial-takeover 60% 80%

Learning Lifelong learning is the development of human potential in the areas of knowledge, values and skills, through a continuously supportive process that is stimulating and empowering and that fosters confidence, creativity and enjoyment in all roles and circumstances (Hojat, et al. 2003). Role of Social Media in Lifelong Learning: • Extend real-life learning and relationships in a shared space to foster professional growth. • Allows learners to share ideas, questions and goals. • Relevant thought leadership developments “pushed” to the leader/learner. • CAUTION: Content is user generated – unverified by experts and commented on by peers.

Summary • REAL leadership framework departs from the premise that Leadership is an individual characteristic and is rather embedded within practice. • Leadership can improve with practice – Experience, Introspection, Skills development contribute in developing an authentic personal identity. • The four elements of the REAL framework is an attempt to address modern day leadership development in an integrated and systemic manner. • Focus moves away from individualistic traits to practice focused approach.

Analysis • Leaders, including Leadership Education, are faced with challenging times. • Leaders will destroy their own credibility if they fail to make good sense of their environments and develop an acute sense-making capability which led them cut through fake news and false narratives. • The importance of developing Critical Thinking. • Leadership Studies need to respond to changing times.

Literature Research and Review – Methodology – part 1 1. Literature / Source Database created using Mendeley with the following articles imported. 2. Exported to NVIVO for Content Analysis and documents examined related by content mapped to themes in the literature. 3. Used Tree Mapping Cluster Analysis, Word Clouds and Frequency Analysis to identify relations to the four elements of the REAL leadership framework. Focus Area Number of Articles Action Research 20 Leadership 27 Micro Learning 20 Practice 23 Scholarship 8 SPL 8 Assessment 34 Miscellaneous 26 TOTAL 166 School of Advanced Studies

Literature Research and Review – Methodology – part 2 Nvivo was used to conduct Content Analysis to map themes in the literature knowledge base. Used Tree Mapping, Cluster Analysis and Word Clouds of Frequency Analysis to identify relations to the four elements of the REAL Leadership framework. REAL Indicators Number of Articles All cited in final slides of presentation Relations and Networking 17 Environmental Scanning and Awareness 8 Action Bias 9 Lifelong Learning Agility 23 Total 57 / 166 [34%]

REAL Leadership Framework A multi-disciplinary and integrated framework • Relations and • Environmental networks scanning and awareness Social Networks Power and Influence Followers Strength of network Collaboration Ecosystems Leadership-As. Practice (L-A-P) Change Management Apply what you learn Calculated Risk taking • Action-orientated Complexity, Ambiguity and Uncertainty Sense making Business Foresight Critical thinking and Questioning skills Asking “Why? ” “How? ” and “Why not? ” Curiosity Seeking intentional learning opportunities Leading others to learn Reflection and Self. Awareness Learn from mistakes Ability to ask great questions • Lifelong Learning Agility

REAL Leadership Sources R Relationships and social networking E Environmental and situational awareness A Bias for Action L Life-long and continuous learning • • Building reputation (as a thought leader). Attract Followers, build a power base and exert influence. Consistent worker relations increase productivity. Understands and creates alignment with stakeholders. • • • Using sweeping generalizations. Premat. Sociotechnical analysis. Customers respond to sustainability practices. Energy Certificates can offset power use. Paperless processes are faster, easier, and cheaper. • • • Speed matters in business. Many decisions and actions are reversible. Value of calculated decision making. Recognize a bias for action can be negative. Secret of getting ahead is getting started (M. Twain). • • LA one of top ten 2020 leader competencies. Correlates with long-term potential for promotion. Difference between successful and non successful. Ability to find meaning in negative events and learn from them one of most reliable indicators of leadership.

Areas for Future Research Relevancy of the REAL Leadership Framework. • Research should focus on the Extent leadership functions are performed, rather than on Who performs them. • How to exercise Power and Influence using Social Media. • Rise and power of Followers in relation to Leadership. • Leadership and Business Foresight Capabilities to enhance Environmental sense-making. • Role of online education in Life-long learning. • Leadership Frameworks for a Digital Age. • Educational models to develop leadership.

Dr Herman J. van Niekerk Associate Dean: Instruction: Doctoral Business and I-O Psych Mobile: 480 -280 -0776 Direct: 606 -387 -2764 Herman. vanniekerk@phoenix. edu Dr Kelley Conrad Faculty: I-O Psych Mobile: 262 -443 -3662 Kelley. conrad@phoenix. edu

Sources Allio, R. J. (2013). Leaders and leadership – many theories, but what advice is reliable? Strategy and Leadership, 41(1), 4 -14. Dillon, C. (2016). How social media is changing leadership and innovation. Innov. Ai. T, 9(7), 436 - 439 Hallenbeck, G. (2017). Learning Agility: Unlock the Lessons of Experience – A guidebook. Center for Creative Leadership, Charlotte, NC. Kenyon, G. (2016). The man who studies the spread of ignorance. BBC Future. Retrieved from http: //www. bbc. com/future/story/20160105 -the-man-who-studies-the-spread-of-ignorance? ocid=twfut on March 2, 2017. Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The Leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Tredgold, G. P. (2014). Are you connected? Leadership in the era of social media. Development and Learning i. Organizations: An International Journal, 28(6), 9 -11. Uhl-bien, M. , Marion, R. , & Mc. Kelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298 -318. Mc. Kinsley Quarterly. Raelin, J. A. (2011). From Leadership-as-Practice to Leaderful Practice. Leadership, 7(2), 1 -29. School of Advanced Studies

REAL Model Supporting References On the slides that follow, we have listed the key sources we found that supported our LEAD Model. These are also available in a separate summary which you may obtain by emailing a request to either of the authors. School of Advanced Studies

Relations and Networks Clarke, A. C. (2003). Situational analysis: Grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn. Symbolic Interaction, 26, 553 -576. Dillon, C. (2016). How social media is changing leadership and innovation. Innov. Ai. T, 9(7), 436 - 439 Duke, J. , & Moss, C. (2009). Re-visiting scholarly community engagement in the contemporary research assessment environments of Australasian universities. Contemporary Nurse, 32(1– 2), 30– 41. https: //doi. org/10. 5172/conu. 32. 1 -2. 30 Eraut, M. (2004) Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247– 273. doi: 10. 1080/158037042000225245 Hassebrauck, M. , & Aron, A. (2001). Prototype matching in close relationships. Personality Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(9), 1111 -1122. doi: 10. 1177/0146167201279004 Hendriksen, B. , Weimer, J. , & Mc. Kenzie, M. (2016). Approaches to quantify value from business to society. Management and Policy Journal, 7(4), 474 -493. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/101108/SAMPJ-07 -2015 -0062 Jacobs, G. (2010). Conflicting demands and the power of defensive routines in participatory action research. Action Research, 8(4), 367– 386. https: //doi. org/10. 1177/1476750310366041 Kouzes, J. M. , & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lave, J. , & Wenger, E. (2003). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Lindsey, E. , Homes, V. , & Mc. Call, M. (1987). Key events in executives’ lives. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Lombardo, M. M. , Ruderman, M. N. , & Mc. Cauley, C. D. (1988). Explanations of success and derailment in upper-level management positions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2(3), 199– 216. doi: 10. 1007/BF 01014038 Niedenthal, P. , Cantor, N. , Kihlstrom, J. (1985). Prototype matching: A strategy for social decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(3), 575 -584. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/10. 1037/0022 -3514. 48. 3. 575 Noe, R. , Tews, M. , & Marand, A. (2013). Individual differences and informal learning in the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 327– 335. doi: 10. 1016/j. jvb. 2013. 06. 009 Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2015). Learning contexts, skills and social progress: A conceptual framework. In OECD, Skills for social progress: The power of social and emotional skills (pp. 31 -44). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/10. 1787/9789264226159 -5 -en Tredgold, G. P. (2014). Are you connected? Leadership in the era of social media. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 28(6), 9 -11. Whyte, W. F. , Greenwood, D. J. , & Lazes, P. (1991). Participatory action research - Through practice to science in social research. Participatory Action Research, 19– 55. School of Advanced Studies

Environmental Scanning Bakker, A. , Demerouti, E. , & ten Brummelhuis, L. (2012). Work engagement, performance, and active learning: The role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 555– 564. doi: 10. 1016/j. jvb. 2011. 08. 008 Baron, R. A. (1999). Counterfactual thinking and venture formation: The potential effects of thinking about ‘‘what might have been. ” Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 79– 91. doi: 10. 1016/S 0883 -9026(98)00024 -X Bray, D. , Campbell, R. , & Grant, D. (1974). Formative years in business: A long-term AT&T study of managerial lives. New York, NY: Wiley. Sanna, L. J. (2000). Mental simulation, affect and personality: A conceptual framework. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 168– 173. doi: 10. 1111/1467 -8721. 00086 Schon, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London, Avebury: Basic Books. Uhl-bien, M. , Marion, R. , & Mc. Kelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298318. Watkins, K. , & Marsick, V. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. New York, NY: Routledge. Watkins, K. , & Marsick, V. (1992). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning in organizations. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 11(4), 287– 300. doi: 10. 1080/0260137920110403 School of Advanced Studies

Action Orientated Argyris, C. , & Schon, D. (1989). Participatory action research and action science compared: A commentary. The American Behavioral Scientist, 32(5), 612 -624. https: //doi. org/10. 1177/0002764289032005008 Beckett, D. & Hager, P. (2000) Making judgments as the basis for workplace learning: towards an epistemology of practice. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(4), 300– 311. doi: 10. 1080/02601370050110365 Bevan, D. , & Kipka, C. (2012). Experiential learning and management education. The Journal of Management Development, 31(3), 193 -197. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/10. 1108/02621711211208943 Ellis, S. , & Davidi, I. (2005). After-event reviews: Drawing lessons from successful and failed experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 857 -871. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/10. 1037/00219010. 90. 5. 857 Ellis, S. , Ganzach, Y. , Castle, E. , & Sekely, G. (2010). The effect of filmed versus personal after-event reviews on task performance: The mediating and moderating role of self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 122 -131. doi: 10. 1037/a 0017867 Ellstrom, P. E. (2001). Integrating learning and work: problems and prospects. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12(4), 421 -435. doi: 10. 1002/hrdq. 1006 Greenwood, J. (1993). Reflective practice: a critique of the work of Argyris and Schön. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18(8), 1183– 1187. https: //doi. org/10. 1046/j. 1365 -2648. 1993. 18081183. x Knight, P. (2002) A systematic approach to professional development: Learning as practice. Teacher and Teacher Education, 18(3), 229– 241. doi: 10. 1016/S 0742 -051 X(01)00066 -X Major, D. , Turner, J. , & Fletcher, T. (2006). Linking proactive personality and the Big Five to motivation to learn and development activity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 927– 935. doi: 10. 1037/00219010. 91. 4. 927 School of Advanced Studies

doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01447. x Bear, D. , Tompson, H. , Morrison, C. , Paradise, A. , Vickers, M. , & Czarnowsky, M. (2012). Tapping the potential of informal learning. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development. Beck, J. (2012). Does learning agility vary primarily at the between- or within-person level of analysis? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 312 -315. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01453. x Bedford, C. L. (2011). The role of learning agility in workplace performance and career advancement (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Pro. Quest Dissertations & Theses. (Order No. 3465093) Colquitt, J. , Le. Pine, J. , & Noe, R. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 678– 707. doi: 10. 1037//0021 -9010. 85. 5. 678 Conlon, T. , (2004). A review of informal learning literature, theory and implications for practice in developing global professional competence. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(2/3/4), 283– 295. doi: 10. 1108/03090590410527663 Connolly, J. J. (2001). Assessing the construct validity of a measure of learning agility (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from Pro. Quest Dissertations & Theses. (Order No. 3013189) De Meuse, K. P. , G. Dai, R. W. Eichinger, R. C. Page, L. P. Clark, and S. Zewdie. (2011). The development and validation of a self-assessment of learning agility [Technical Report]. Minneapolis, MN: Korn/Ferry International. School of Advanced Studies

De Meuse, K. , Dai, G. , Swisher, V. , Eichinger, R. , & Lombardo, M. , (2012). Leadership development: Exploring, clarifying, and expanding our understanding of learning agility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 280286. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01445. x De. Rue, S. D. , Ashford, S. J. , & Myers, C. G. (2012). Learning agility: In search of conceptual clarity and theoretical grounding. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 258– 279. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01444. x Dries, N. , Vantilborgh, T. , & Pepermans, R. (2012). The role of learning agility and career variety in the identification and development of high potential employees. Personnel Review, 41(3), 340– 358. doi: 10. 1108/00483481211212977 Eichinger, R. W. , & Lombardo, M. M. (2004). Learning agility as a prime indicator of potential. Human Resource Planning, 27(4), 12– 16. Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24(1), 79– 132. doi: 10. 1016/S 0160 -2896(97)90014 -3 Hallenbeck, G. (2017). Learning agility: Unlock the lessons of experience – A guidebook. Charlotte, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Hazlett, S. , & Kuncel, N. (2012). Prioritizing the learning agility research agenda. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 296 -301. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01449. x Johnson, R. , & Scott, B. (2012). Learning agility requires proper action identification. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 309 -312. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01452. x School of Advanced Studies

Hallenbeck, G. (2017). Learning agility: Unlock the lessons of experience – A guidebook. Charlotte, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Hazlett, S. , & Kuncel, N. (2012). Prioritizing the learning agility research agenda. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 296 -301. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01449. x Johnson, R. , & Scott, B. (2012). Learning agility requires proper action identification. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 309 -312. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01452. x Mc. Call, M. W. , Jr. , Lombardo, M. M. , & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The lessons of experience: How successful executives develop on the job. New York, NY: The Free Press. Michinson, A. , Gerard, N. , Roloff, K. , & Burke, W. (2012). Learning agility: Spanning the rigor-relevance divide. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 287 -290. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01446. x Mitchinson, A. , & Morris, R. (2012). Learning about learning agility [White Paper]. Retrieved May 20, 2015 from Center for Creative Leadership: http: //www. ccl. org/Leadership/pdf/research/Learning. Agility. pdf Tannenbaum, S. I. , Beard, R. L. , Mc. Nall, L. A. , & Salas, E. (2010). Informal learning and development in organizations. In S. W. Kozlowski & E. Salas (Eds. ), Learning, training, and development in organizations (pp. 303– 331). New York, NY: Routledge Academic. Wang, S. , & Beier, M. E. (2012). Learning agility: Not much is new. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 5(3), 293 -296. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1754 -9434. 2012. 01448. x School of Advanced Studies

School of Advanced Studies

School of Advanced Studies