Leading Strategicially

Following up on Jillian’s request, it is time to write a report that responds to the questions below. Your answers should demonstrate your understanding of strategic management and leadership theories. You should not only incorporate references to class discussions and learning topics but also cite at least two relevant scholarly resources on strategic leadership, such as many of those listed in the reference list of your course readings.

• What values, traits and abilities do you think are most important in a CEO to meet its performance objectives, while simultaneously developing a resilient organization that can respond to the challenges of sustainability? Why are resilience and sustainability important?
• Identify a CEO who has those values, traits and abilities. How have they played a role in the company’s success?
• What are the major barriers to being an effective CEO?
• Which theory or theories of leadership do you feel are relevant to your situation at work?
• Describe an instance when you demonstrated leadership.

The report should be six to seven pages, excluding cover page, executive summary, reference list, and appendices. Any tables, graphs, and figures should be included as appendices. Your report should have one-inch margins and be double spaced in 12-point Times New Roman font. In-text citations and references should abide by APA format. The report should be organized using headings and subheadings to improve its readability.

1/23/2021

Perspectives in Leadership Theory and Research

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/perspectives-in-leadershiptheoryandresearch.html?ou=541222 1/4

Perspectives in Leadership Theory and Research

It can be useful to classify leadership theories according to the type of variables that are

relevant for understanding leadership effectiveness. These variables include the following:

characteristics of leaders

characteristics of followers

characteristics of the situation

Most leadership theories emphasize one category more than the others as the primary

basis for explaining effective leadership. Over the past half-century, leader characteristics

have been given the greatest emphasis.

Leadership theories are often classified into the following five approaches:

trait approach—Emphasizes attributes of leaders such as personality, motives, values,

and skills.

behavior approach—Examines how managers cope with demands, constraints, and

role conflicts in their jobs.

power-influence approach—Examines influence processes between leaders and

other people. It takes a leader-centered perspective with an implicit assumption that

causality is unidirectional (leaders act and followers react).

situational approach—Emphasizes the importance of contextual factors that

influence leadership processes. Major situational variables include the characteristics

of followers, the nature of the work performed by the leader’s unit, the type of

organization, and the nature of the external environment.

integrative approach—Includes two or more types of leadership variables in the

same study.

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Perspectives in Leadership Theory and Research

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/perspectives-in-leadershiptheoryandresearch.html?ou=541222 2/4

Another way to classify leadership theories is in terms of the “levels of conceptualization,”

or the type of constructs used to describe leaders and their influence on others.

Leadership can be described as the following:

an intra-individual process

a dyadic process

a group process

an organizational process

The levels can be viewed as a hierarchy, as depicted in the figure below:

Leadership Levels of Conceptualization

1/23/2021 Perspectives in Leadership Theory and Research

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/perspectives-in-leadershiptheoryandresearch.html?ou=541222 3/4

The important variables in play at different levels of conceptualization for leadership are

shown in the table below.

Variables at Different Levels of Conceptualization for Leadership

Intra-Individual
theories Dyadic theories

Group-level
theories

Organizational-
level theories

How leader
traits and
values
influence
leadership
behavior

How leader
skills are
related to
leader
behavior

How leaders
make
decisions

How leaders
manage their
time

How leaders
are
influenced
by role
expectations
and
constraints

How leaders
react to
feedback
and learn

How a leader
influences
subordinate
motivation
and task
commitment

How a leader
facilitates
the work of a
subordinate

How a leader
interprets
information
about a
subordinate

How a leader
develops a
subordinate’s
skills and
confidence

How a leader
influences
subordinate
loyalty and
trust

How a leader
uses
influence

How different
leader-
member
relations
affect each
other and
team
performance

How
leadership is
shared in the
group or team

How leaders
organize and
coordinate the
activities of
team
members

How leaders
influence
cooperation
and resolve
disagreements
in the team or
unit

How leaders
influence
collective
efficacy and

How top
executives
influence
members at
other levels

How leaders
are selected
at each leve
(and
implications
of the proce
for the firm)

How leaders
influence
organization
culture

How leaders
influence th
efficiency an
the cost of
internal
operations

How leaders
influence
human
relations an
human capit
in the
organization

Source: Adapted from Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. 8th ed. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

1/23/2021 Perspectives in Leadership Theory and Research

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/perspectives-in-leadershiptheoryandresearch.html?ou=541222 4/4

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

Intra-Individual
theories Dyadic theories
Group-level
theories
Organizational-
level theories

from
experience

How leaders
can use self-
development
techniques

tactics with a
subordinate,
peer, or boss

How a leader
and a
subordinate
influence
each other

How a leader
develops a
cooperative
exchange
relationship
with a
subordinate

optimism for
the team or
unit

How leaders
influence
collective
learning and
innovation in
the team or
unit

How leaders
influence
collective
identification
of members
with the team
or unit

How unit
leaders obtain
resources and
support from
the
organization
and other
units

How leaders
make
decisions
about
competitive
strategy and
external
initiatives

How conflic
among
leaders are
resolved in a
organization

How leaders
influence
innovation
and major
change in an
organization

Source: Adapted from Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. 8th ed. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

1/23/2021

Strategic Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/strategic-leadership.html?ou=541222 1/3

Strategic Leadership

Strategic leadership is concerned with managing a company’s resources, including its

strategy-making process, to create and sustain competitive advantage. An increased

interest in strategic leadership reflects the need to understand how executives respond to

rapid technological and social change and increasing international competition to lead

their companies and outperform competition.

There are three important responsibilities for strategic leadership in an organization: (1)

monitoring the external environment to identify threats and opportunities, (2) formulating

strategy, and (3) implementing the strategy for the future prosperity of the organization.

(Narayanan, Zane, & Kemerer, 2011; Porter, 1980).

The following guidelines are based on research and practitioner insights (Bennis & Nanus,

1985; Kotter, 1996; Nanus, 1992; Narayanan, Zane, & Kemerer, 2011; Wall & Wall, 1995;

Worley, Hitchin, & Ross, 1996):

Determine long-term objectives and priorities.

Learn what clients and customers need and want.

Learn about the products and activities of competitors.

Assess current strengths and weaknesses.

Identify core competencies.

Evaluate the need for a major change in strategy.

Identify promising strategies.

Evaluate the likely outcomes of a strategy.

Involve other executives in selecting a strategy.

These guidelines focus on understanding the environment that determines need for

strategic change, the performance determinants, and ways leaders can influence these

performance determinants (Cannella & Monroe, 1997). “The theory and research on

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Strategic Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/strategic-leadership.html?ou=541222 2/3

leadership has long recognized that effective leaders empower others to participate in the

process of interpreting events, solving problems, and making decisions” (Argyris, 1964;

Likert, 1967).

Events and industry trends are often not well defined. They pose multiple alternatives and

choices. Successful strategic leadership, therefore, requires ability to manage ambivalence

and to give an organization a sense of direction. Leaders create a clear and compelling

vision of where the organization should go, and energize people by eloquently

communicating this vision to make it a part of the organization culture (Wesley &

Mintzberg, 1989).

References

Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: John Wiley.

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York:

Harper & Row.

Cannella, A. A., Jr., & Monroe, M. J. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on strategic leaders:

Toward a more realistic view of top managers. Journal of Management, 23(3), 213–237.

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Nanus, B. (1992). Visionary leadership: Creating a compelling sense of direction for your

organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Narayanan, V. K., Zane, L. J., & Kemerer, B. (2011). The cognitive perspective in strategy:

An integrative review. Journal of Management, 37, 305–351.

Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New

York: Free Press.

Wall, S. J., & Wall, S. R. (1995). The new strategists: Creating leaders at all levels. New

York: Free Press.

Worley, C. G., Hitchin, D. E., & Ross, W. L. (1996). Integrated strategic change: How OD

builds competitive advantage. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

1/23/2021 Strategic Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/strategic-leadership.html?ou=541222 3/3

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Management of Change and Trust

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/management-of-changeandtrust.html?ou=541222 1/2

Management of Change and Trust

Even with a well-crafted strategy, leading an organization to gain and sustain competitive

advantage is an arduous process. Change can occur in many areas of an organization and

can be deliberate or accidental, incremental or sudden, local or global, and focused or

broadly applied across an organization. Regardless of the type or magnitude of change,

change management involves people.

Central to human nature is the need to be in a state of control and predictability (Thiétart

& Forgues, 1995). Discomfort with change is, in part, a result of a perceived or real loss of

control and the related fear that an unknown or unpredictable outcome might be harmful

or run counter to one’s norms and values. The level of trust within an organization is an

important descriptor of the unease experienced during change.

Trust, or the state of reduced uncertainty and undesirable conduct, favors the comfort of a

predictable, steady state. Resistance to change is implicit in the desire for certainty and

predictability, regardless of whether that steady state is, in fact, the state that will help the

organization stay competitive in the face of changing circumstances.

According to Lewicki, McAllister, and Bies (1998) trust is the “positive expectation

regarding another’s conduct” (p. 444). If a person trusts another, social complexity and

uncertainty have been reduced by having removed specific undesirable conduct. Trust is

developed and modified both on an individual basis and through group affiliation (Lewin,

1975).

The change-trust relationship is not necessarily linear. For example, increasing

communication increases trust and decreases resistance. These influencing factors make

trust seem elastic: trust is enhanced by influencing factors that mitigate uncertainty.

Many organizational practitioners claim to have identified factors that reduce uncertainty

and package these as a remedy. However, leaders should however be aware that each

situation is unique, and applying the plan developed for a previously successful change

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Management of Change and Trust

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/management-of-changeandtrust.html?ou=541222 2/2

initiative will not guarantee success, even within the same company and involving the

same group of individuals. This is because nothing really remains unchanged (Orlikowski &

Holman, 1997).

Thiétart and Forgues (1995) account for this phenomenon through the application of

chaos theory to organizations. A change-trust model might be able to describe a current

change initiative at a particular point in time. But unless it takes into account the effect of

the continuously changing variables, it can never be accurately used to predict future

success and its application to other groups and situations will be limited.

References

Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships

and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438–458. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umgc.edu

Lewin, K. (1975). Field theory in social science. Westport, CT: Westwood Press, Publishers.

Orlikowski, W. J. & Hofman, D. J. (1997). An improvisational model for change

management: The case of Groupware technologies. Sloan Management Review, 38(2), 11–

21. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umgc.edu

Pietersen, W. (2002). The Mark Twain dilemma: The theory and practice of change

leadership. Journal of Business Strategy, 23(5), 32–37. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umgc.edu

Thiétart, R. A., & Forgues, B. (1995). Chaos theory and organizations. Organizational

Science, 6(1), 19–31. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umgc.edu

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 1/12

Resilience

The COVID-19 pandemic has shown how vulnerable individuals, organizations, and

countries at all levels of development are to disasters.

Experience of adversity and unforeseen situations are common to individuals,

organizations and societies at large. In coping with forces beyond the control of an

organization, resilience is an essential for continuity and sustainable growth. The

McKinsey management and consulting group’s study of the 2008 economic crisis noted

that some companies were hurt but recovered more quickly than others. “By 2009, the

earnings of the resilient companies had risen 10 percent, while that of the nonresilients

had gone down almost 15 percent (Sneader & Singhal, 2020).

This note looks at resilience with a view to understand the factors that foster or hinder

resilience.

The questions resilience seeks to answer: Why do some organizations experiencing

operational and financial stress succumb while others prove resilient and even thrive?

What are the key attributes that contribute to resiliency?

The search for competitive advantage is relentless following a crisis. Strategic leadership

requires an understanding of how the resilience operates at different levels and their

linkages to effectively cope with changes.

What Is Resilience?

Resilience, as defined by Hamel and Välikangas, “refers to a capacity for continuous

reconstruction. It requires innovation with respect to those organizational values,

processes, and behaviors that systematically favor perpetuation over innovation” (2003).

The concept of resilience has been examined from various perspectives. Ecologists such as

Holling (1973) and Perrings (2001) have defined it as the capacity to absorb stress and

shocks. Tinch (1998) notes characteristics such as stability, persistence, resistance,

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 2/12

nonvulnerability, and stochastic return time.

An integral part of resilience is a business continuity plan (BCP) that identifies major risks

of business interruption, plans to mitigate or reduce the impact of the identified risks, and

tests the plan to ensure its effectiveness. Business continuity equals revenue continuity

(Ruettgers, 2003).

Knowing what to secure, assessing risks, and developing business recovery policies is

central to business continuity.

The challenge for individuals, organizations, and societies is to build their capacity to

absorb or recover from change without draining resources. As part of the larger social

fabric, organizational resilience is understood in the context of the communities and the

society they operate in.

Why Resilience Matters

Organizations that fail to adjust to their changing environment soon lose their relevance

as they go out of business or get acquired. While new entrants, takeovers, and

bankruptcies are part of sustaining competitiveness, they cannot address the resilience

problem. First, there are organizations that are not open to takeovers, such as privately

owned companies, national service organizations such as the Red Cross, and government

agencies. Lack of resilience would lead to their inability to serve their objectives. Failure of

organizations means their intellectual capital disintegrates and may take years to recover.

Nonadaptive organizations lead to gross underuse of society’s resources. The reason to

care about institutional resilience is that it improves its capacity for continual renewal.

Events such as the financial crisis of 2008, Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in August

2005, the tsunami earthquake in the Indian Ocean in December 2004, the Fukushima

Daiichi nuclear disaster in March 2011, terror attacks of September 2001, and the

Chernobyl reactor failure in Ukraine in 1986 highlight the world’s vulnerability to

disasters. The devastating effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic have affected

countries across the globe. In planning for the future, we must expect that all disasters are

possible, assume the worst, plan for the impact, and lay the foundation for speedy

recovery.

Upheavals profoundly change management practices. The Great Depression irrevocably

transformed management theory which had until then relied on mechanical input-output

measurements, giving rise to the human relations movement. The global financial crisis of

2008-10 led companies to shift from permanent employment. This eventually prompted

individuals to take on multiple jobs, now referred to as the “gig” economy.

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 3/12

And the latest of these upheavals, COVID-19, will have a lasting impact on organizations

and leadership styles. Supply chains will be relooked; companies will restructure as more

work is done from home. As we become more digitally connected and more physically

disconnected, trust may become more important and more fragile. Organizations have to

step up to address such issues.

The degree of psychological and economic losses that individuals, organizations, and

societies suffer depends upon their resilience. Resilience goes beyond survival; it is the

ability to bounce back and even become stronger in spite of the threats to survival.

Preventive and predictive actions may reduce our vulnerability. However, it is our ability to

reduce loss through resilience that determines how well and how fast we return to

normalcy.

Carver (1998) describes potential outcomes of adverse events as succumbing, surviving

with impairment, recovery (resilience) and thriving. “A shared passion to be successful is a

crucial ingredient in creating resilient enterprises” (Sheffi, p. 15).

To understand the role of strategic leadership in ensuring that organizations bounce back

with speed in the face of adverse events, let us examine how resilience is developed.

Putting Resilience to Work

The environmental changes in recent years have created a keen interest in both

management scholars and practitioners to understand how individuals and organizations

cope with these changes. Psychiatrists have explored the factors that enable individuals

perform well under stress and to recoil from setbacks. For business leaders, therefore, the

focus is on both the individual and the

organizational resilience.

According to Larry Mallak (1998), there are seven resilience principles that organization

leaders can put in place to ensure a resilient organization.

1. Perceive experiences constructively.

2. Perform positive adaptive behaviors.

3. Ensure adequate external resources.

4. Expand decision-making boundaries.

5. Practice bricolage.

6. Develop tolerance for uncertainty.

7. Build virtual role systems.

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 4/12

Why do many organizations succumb when adversity strikes them? Dalziell and McManus

(2004) point out that the traditional approach was to make systems less vulnerable to

hazards. However, system resilience can be increased by increasing the speed of the

system to re-bounce from adverse events. The failure lies in their inability to execute

(Charan & Colvin, 1999).

Individual Resilience

The indivisible element in coping with change is the individual. The reaction of the

individual—

as a subordinate or a leader—determines how the organization would react to its changing

internal and external demands. Dalziell and McManus (2004) say that a key in system

resilience is the ability of the system to respond and recover from an event, but as they

note, “recover to what?” is also important.

Charles Carver (1998) cites four potential consequences when adversity strikes.

first, the downward slide in which the individual succumbs,

second, where the individual survives but with capabilities weakened,

third, when the individual bounces back to the original level, and

fourth, where the individual surpasses previous levels of functioning.

Resilient individuals carve out coping strategies that may be either positive (resilient or

thriving) or negative (surviving with impairment or succumbing). Resilience in individuals

comprises of developing self-efficacy that consists of confidence in one’s own ability to

perform and its execution in the face of adversity (Mallak, 1998). They develop an innate

ability to move forward and succeed.

According to Bandura (1989), individuals effect changes in themselves and their situations

through their own efforts, including controlling thought processes, motivation, and

actions. Through empirical tests, Bandura shows that persons make “causal contribution to

their own motivation and action” within a system of what he calls “reciprocal causation

(Bandura, 1989).

Individual self-efficacy beliefs affect thought patterns that Bandura terms “self-aiding or

self-hindering” (1989). According to this social cognitive theory, much human behavior is

regulated by cognized goals and self-appraisal of capabilities. As Bandura (1989) states,

“The stronger their perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goals people set for themselves

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 5/12

and the firmer their commitment to them.” While short-term help is important for

recovery, Bandura states the key to building personal resilience is to avoid dependency

and therefore loss of control.

As organizations face unprecedented changes, they face a growing “boundarylessness” of

their organizations. Baruch (2004) notes that DeFillippi and Arthur (1994) argue that “a

major consequence of boundaryless organizations is the emergence of boundaryless

careers.” As careers become multidirectional, individual resilience in a turbulent

environment demands that they retain a sense of their personal security through

continuity of their jobs. The blurring of boundaries has demolished static career systems

—”they have become more diverse and less controlled by employers” according to Baruch

(2004), who notes that managing individual careers requires qualities that differ

considerably from those in the past.

Baruch (2001) suggests that although the idea of employability is beneficial, it is

impractical for organizations to use it as a substitute for loyalty and trust-based

relationships. The multidirectional career model suggested by Baruch (2004) takes into

account the full scale of what he calls “landscapes” in which the individual “can climb the

mountain, opt for another mountain, take some hills instead, or wander along the plains”

as a way of illustrating options. The focus of most scholarly work on individual resilience is

on self-efficacy and self-navigation.

For a strategic leader, development of individual resilience is a first step to developing

organizational resilience.

Organizational Resilience

The model of a resilient organization is based on interaction between the individual and

the environment. Dalziell and McManus (2004) use the term resilience to describe “the

overarching goal of a system to continue to function to the fullest possible extent in the

face of stress to achieve its purpose, where resilience is a function of both the

vulnerability of the system and its adaptive capacity.” They point to the “need to focus not

only on the vulnerability of our systems to failure, but also on our ability to manage and

minimize the impact of any failures (Dalziell & McManus, 2004).

The resiliency audit model for organizations developed by Hind et al. (1996) suggests that

a critical dimension of the interaction between the individual and organization is the

“psychological contract” based on a reciprocal relationship of individual’s commitment and

trust in exchange of the organization providing job satisfaction, job security and

promotion prospects (Hind et al., 1996). Resilient organizations score high on the factors

in resiliency audit and ensure that the risk of violating the “psychological contract” in

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 6/12

periods of change is minimized. They do this through helping individuals regularly assess

their skills and interests and support their life-long learning and career development to

ensure their employability in times of downturns.

Peter Senge (2005) explains that rapid changes require organizations to be flexible and

adaptable to stay competitive. The five disciplines that Senge identifies converging to

innovate learning organizations are:

1. systems thinking

2. personal mastery

3. mental models

4. building shared vision

5. team learning

Resilient organizations encourage and nurture a shift of mind, according to Senge, “from

seeing parts to seeing wholes, from seeing people as mere reactors to becoming active

participants in creating the future” (Senge, 2005).

Bricolage

Bricolage is the creation of solutions from whatever happens to be available. In times of

rapid change, formal organizational roles systems often collapse but need not result in

failure if the individuals retain the whole picture in their minds and assume whatever role

is vacated. Faced with unforeseen situations, according to Weick (1993), leaders know

they don’t understand what is happening because they have never had to confront such

an event. “Extreme confidence and extreme caution both destroy what organizations most

need in changing times, namely, curiosity, openness, and complex sensing” (Weick, 1993).

When formal organizational structure is inadequate to meet with changes or it collapses,

the individual and social interactions developed in the organizations have to come in play

to counteract vulnerability.

Weick (1993) suggested a structure of organizational resilience by analyzing the Mann

Gulch fire in 1949, made famous in Norman Maclean’s Young Men and Fire, which

resulted in the death of 13 men. He identified bricolage, virtual role systems, the attitude

of wisdom, and respectful interaction as factors in organizational resilience.

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 7/12

The concepts of psychological contract, the learning organization, resiliency audit, and

distributive leadership cut across all organizations, large or small, and situations brought

about by change, gradual or sudden, and even in organizations where attention to routine

working is critical to their safety and survival.

Societal Resilience

“Societal” resilience is our adaptive response to unforeseen events and takes place at the

level of the individuals, private and public organizations, families, local communities and

the county, state and federal governments. Rose (2004) shows economic resilience to

disasters can be seen as dimensions of resilience. He also proposes a “general equilibrium

model” for analyzing the behavior of individuals, businesses, and markets.

The measurement of resilience and its audit are important, Rose says, because they

“enable us to evaluate strategy for reducing economic losses” from external changes

(2004). Inclusion of resilience in policy-making helps react to adversity and reduce losses.

Reich (2006) provides a psychological perspective and incorporation of three principles of

resilience in disaster planning: control, coherence, and connectedness. Disaster responses

should focus on reducing uncertainty through extensive communications and

understanding to generate cognitive clarity. Providing structure and coherence in

interactions helps people understand how the events in their lives are going to be

impacted. Reich notes: “The individual’s need for social connectedness is probably never

greater than in times of disaster” (2006). The value of an integrative model, according to

Reich, “is that it provides a conceptual framework for understanding human resilience”

(2006).

A resilient community is based on resilient individuals. The resilience at individual,

organizational, and societal levels are interwoven, and any model of resilience should

reflect this interconnectedness. See Appendix.

Metrics for Evaluating Resilience

In light of events that show the vulnerability of countries throughout the world to

disasters, metrics are needed to measure and benchmark the resilience of organizations.

The 2019 FM Global Resilience Index Annual Report by Pentland Analytics provides

ranked scores for 130 countries by combining the 12 core drivers of resilience (FM Global,

2019):

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 8/12

Facto
rs

Economic Risk Quality Supply ChainFacto
rs

Economic Risk Quality Supply Chain

Drive
rs

Productivity Exposure to Natural
Hazards

Control of Corruption

Political Risk Natural Hazard Risk
Quality

Quality of
Infrastructure

Oil Intensity Fire Risk Quality Corporate Governance

Urbanization
Rate

Inherent Cyber Risk Supply Chain Visibility

The structure of the index enables business executives to identify the sources of strength

and vulnerability in a country’s resilience.

BSI explores organizational resilience best practices by tracking how confident business

leaders

feel in the ability of their organizations to adapt to change. The BSI Organizational

Resilience Benchmark tool focuses on 16 elements in building and developing

organizational resilience, and its website allows a user to create a “spider diagram” for an

organization (BSI, 2020):

Leadership People Process Product

Leadership Culture Governance and
Accountability

Horizon
Scanning

Vision and Purpose

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 9/12

Leadership People Process Product

Reputational Risk Community
Engagement

Business
Continuity

Innovation

Financial Management Awareness
Training and
Testing

Supplier
Management

Resource Management Alignment Information and
Knowledge

Adaptive
Capacity

Organizational resilience results help to review how an organization’s strengths and

vulnerabilities in leadership, people, processes, and product categories based on the 16

key elements compare against other organizations.

References

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist,

44(9), 1175–1184.

Baruch, Y. (2001). Employability: a substitute for loyalty? Human Resource Development

International, 4(4), 543–566.

Baruch, Y. (2004). Transforming careers: From linear to multidirectional career paths –

organizational and individual perspectives. Career Development International.

9(1), 58–73

BSI. (2020). Organizational resilience index: Third annual report.

https://www.bsigroup.com/globalassets/localfiles/en-us/organizational-

resilience/index-report-2019

Carver, C. (1998). Resilience and thriving: Issues, models and linkages. Journal of Social

Issues, 54(2), 245–266.

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 10/12

Charan, R., & Colvin, G. (1999, June 21). Why CEOs fail.

Dalziell, E., & McManus, S. (2004). Resilience, vulnerability and adaptive capacity:

Implications for systems performance. International Forum on Engineering

Decision Making. 1–17.

DeFillippi, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency-based

prospective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(4), 307–324.

FM Global. (2019). 2019 resilience index annual report.

https://www.fmglobal.com/research-and-resources/tools-and-

resources/~/media/AB230A1E308247D9B4863EF7FEFDD517.ashx

Hamel, G., & Välikangas, L. (2003). The quest for resilience. Harvard Business Review,

81(9), 52–63.

.Hind, P., Frost, M., & Rowley, S. (1996). The resilience audit and the psychological

contract. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11(7), l8–31.

Holling, C. (1973), Resiliency and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of

Ecological Systems, 4, 1–24.

Mallak, L. (1998). Putting organizational resilience to work. Industrial Management, 40(6),

8–.

Perrings, C. (2001). Resilience and sustainability. In H. Folmer, H. L. Gabel, S. Gerking, & A.

Rose (Eds.). Frontiers of Environmental Economics. Edward Elgar.

Reich, J. W. (2006). Three psychological principles of resilience in natural disasters.

Disaster Prevention and Management, 15(5).

Rose, A. (2004). Defining and measuring economic resilience to disasters. Disaster

Prevention and Management, 13(4).

Ruettgers, M. (2003). Business continuity for global enterprises: The importance of

protecting and managing information assets. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs,

27(2), 279–287.

Senge, P. (2005) The fifth discipline: A shift of mind. In J .M. Shafritz, J. S. Ott, & Y.S. Jang

Classics of Organizational Theory (6th ed.). Thompson, Wadsworth Publishers, pp.

441–449.

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 11/12

Sheffi, Y. (2005). The resilient enterprise: Overcoming vulnerability for competitive

advantage. The MIT Press.

Sneader, K., & Singhal, S. (2020). The future is not what it used to be: Thoughts on the

shape of the next normal. McKinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-

insights/leadership/the-future-is-not-what-it-used-to-be-thoughts-on-the-shape-

of-the-next-normal

Tinch, R. (1998), Resilience and Resource Management Under Risk, School of

Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, Norwich.

Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch

disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652.

Appendix: Resilience Culture

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

1/23/2021 Resilience

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/resilience.html?ou=541222 12/12

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 1/11

Circular Economy

The ramifications of COVID-19 will go beyond the short-term worldwide health and

financial effects. Aside from a need for a more coordinated response from governments

and corporation, the coronavirus has exposed the fragile state of the world economy.

“The ‘coronacrisis’ has demonstrated the fragility and unsustainability of our current

model of economic growth” (Dixson-Declève et al., 2020). Without economic change,

future worldwide crises are likely to trigger similar upheaval.

Economists worldwide are pointing to an old idea – the circular economy – as an

alternative. The circular economy is “an idea where we move away from the old linear way

of consumption – produce, use, discard – and towards … an economy where what we use

is produced with the purpose of being reused, recycled, or repurposed” (Lyche, 2020). The

conceptual framework has been with us for over 40 years but was seen as an expensive

move and hard to justify when the current framework was viable.

But as entire nations went into lockdown, sustainability of resources got a closer look, and

the role of strategic leadership in developing and implementing policies to minimize waste

and use of our resources becomes critical.

Life Cycle Thinking Framework

Built-in obsolescence of a product is often incorporated by companies at the design stage

to render it obsolete or nonfunctional after a certain period to stimulate consumer

demand.

The practice of continuously replacing, rather than repairing, products creates more waste,

uses more resources, and is being increasingly challenged by the customers. The issue of

forced obsolescence goes beyond ecological consideration of waste disposal and resource

intensity. Software companies stop supporting older technologies to force users to

purchase new products.

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 2/11

That said, the dominant forces behind product obsolescence are technology and

innovation. The pace of innovation, which was shown years ago by Kondratieff in his “long

waves” theory (1935), has been accelerating giving rise to rapid product obsolescence

(e.g., 5¼ inch floppies to 3½ inch floppies to CDs to DVDs to solid state memory storages):

Kondratieff’s Long Waves

Source: Rursus (2009).

Whether obsolescence is planned or driven by technology changes, an evaluation of a

product’s entire life cycle needs to be part of enterprise strategy of cradle-to

grave evaluation (Rainey, 2006, pp. 507–551) that includes upstream supply network

management and manufacturing, and downstream aspects of product sale, use, and end-

of-life considerations.

Sonntag (2000) points out that the sustainability focus in the past has been on limiting the

ecological impact of production on a per unit of activity. This approach has been used

in the life cycle assessment that provides a framework for measuring the environmental

footprint of a product (Finnveden et al., 2009).

However, with faster product cycles and competition, this generates newer products and

faster product obsolescence, and we find competition promotes an overall increase in

consumption. So, despite a decreasing ecological impact per unit, when viewed in totality,

we see greater ecological impact due to an overall increase in consumption driven by

faster product cycles driven by competition. This impact is exacerbated with standards of

living rising around the world and the increasing demand for consumer goods.

The importance of full recycling recovery of products has accelerated. In fact, this trend is

evident as regulations seek to make companies responsible for “cradle to grave”

products. In the UK, embedded planned obsolescence in products is a breach of customer

rights, enforced by the Office of Fair Trading.

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 3/11

The Conceptual Framework

The circular economy model synthesizes several major schools of thought.

The environmental movement that began roughly in the 1960s brought about reform

legislation in several countries, but the idea of sustainable growth was highlighted in an

economic light by a Club of Rome report, “The Limits to Growth.” The lead author of that

report, Donella Meadows, cowrote a 1992 book, Beyond the Limits (Dixson-Declève et al.,

2020).

Meadows noted years ago that “humanity’s future will be defined not by a single

emergency but by many separate yet related crises stemming from our failure to live

sustainably” (Dixson-Declève et al., 2020). By using “resources faster than they can be

restored, and by releasing wastes and pollutants faster than they can be absorbed,”

(Dixson-Declève et al., 2020), disastrous consequences can result. The Club of

Rome warning about resources remains valid in terms of the need to reevaluate

exploitative attitudes toward use of natural resources.

Nearly 50 years after the UN Conference on the Human Environment at Stockholm

(1972), 23 years after the World Commission on Environment and Development

(Brundtland Commission) defined sustainable development as “a development which

meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations

to meet their own needs” (1987), and 26 years after the Earth Summit at Rio (1992), the

concept has inspired many scholars and practitioners to seek ways to include

sustainability in corporate strategy and develop tools to measure and evaluate

sustainability in company operations.

The Blue Economy is an open-source movement featuring case studies provided to the

Club of Rome by Gunter Pauli, a former CEO of Ecover and a Belgian businessman (Ellen

MacArthur Foundation, n.d.). The Blue Economy calls for solutions being determined by

the local environment and promotes physical/ecological characteristics, emphasizing

gravity as an energy source. The movement’s initial report includes “100 innovations

that could create 100 million jobs within the next 10 years” (Ellen MacArthur Foundation,

n.d.).

Schmidheiny (1992), with business leaders in the Business Council for Sustainable

Development, developed the concept of “eco-efficiency,” which would allow companies to

achieve higher efficiency while preventing pollution. Elkington (1998) coined the term

“triple bottom line” (TBL) to enable companies look not merely at the economic (profit)

outcome of their business, but also the environmental at social costs. Basically, the term

provides a framework to measure and report corporate performance against economic,

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 4/11

social, and environmental parameters. In a broader sense, TBL embraces a wide spectrum

of values, issues, and processes companies must address to minimize any harm resulting

from their activities and to create economic as well as social and environmental value.

Transitioning to a circular economy, however, is not confined to “adjustments aimed at

reducing the negative impacts of the linear economy. Rather, it represents a systemic shift

that develops long-term sustainability, creates new economic opportunities, and provides

societal benefits” (EcoGlobal

Foundation, n.d.).

Walter Stahel and Genevieve Reday presented a 1976 report to the European Commission

on their vision of what they called “an economy in loops” (Product-Life.org., n.d.) and

effects on jobs, economic competitiveness, resource savings, and waste prevention. The

report, “The Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy,” was published in 1982 as a

book, Jobs for Tomorrow: The Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy.

Today these factors are commonly referred to as the three pillars of sustainable

development: ecologic, economic, and social compatibility (Product-Life.org, n.d.). Many

have credited Stahel with the phrase “cradle to cradle,” and his Product Life Institute

supports those goals, including “the importance of selling services rather than products.”

Stahel worked at developing a “closed loop” approach to production processes. That

approach pursues four main goals: product-life extension, long-life goods, reconditioning

activities, and waste prevention. It also advocates the importance of selling services rather

than products, now popularly known as the “performance economy” (Ellen MacArthur

Foundation, n.d.).

The concept of harm, counterintuitive to development model of profit maximization,

extends to nonhuman life. Naess (1973) and Devall and Sessions (1985) provide the deep

ecology perspective to sustainability that includes biocentric equality and emphasizes the

intrinsic right of all species to exist.

Benyus (1977) describes the biomimicry principles focusing on nature’s attributes and

illustrating the lessons from evolutionary experiences. Nature optimizes resources by

using only the energy it needs, recycles everything, and curbs excesses from within.

Nature’s optimization is in contrast to the waste in manufacturing, inefficient use of

nonrenewable energy, and excessive consumption in industrialized societies.

Biomimicry relies on three key principles (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, n.d.):

1. Nature as model: Study nature’s models and emulate these forms, process, systems,

and strategies to solve human problems.

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 5/11

2. Nature as measure: Use an ecological standard to judge the sustainability of our

innovations.

3. Nature as mentor: View and value nature not based on what we can extract from the

natural world, but what we can learn from it.

As a business case for sustainability, Arnold and Day (1998) point out that businesses

pursue sustainable development for three reasons:

morality – based on the assumption that business owes to society to improve

people’s lives and the environment in exchange for the privilege to operate

compliance – driven by the threat of regulations

opportunity – the result of seeing a chance of increased revenues and profits

Willard (2002) presents quantifiable evidence that investing in sustainable development

pays off with bottom-line benefits. Hawken, Lovins, and Lovins (1999) show that the use

of eco-design and eco-measures enhance resource productivity and give rise to a new set

of practices.

In a book by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins, Natural Capitalism:

Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, the authors discuss “interdependencies that exist

between the production and use of human-made capital and flows of natural capital

(MacArthur Foundation, n.d.)

The following four principles underpin natural capitalism (Ellen MacArthur Foundation,

n.d.):

1. increase the productivity of natural resources by increasing the life of products

2. shift to biologically inspired production models and materials; model closed-loop

production systems where every output is either returned to the ecosystem as a

nutrient, or becomes an input for another manufacturing process

3. move to a “service-and-flow” business model that aligns the interests of providers

and customers in a way that rewards resource productivity

4. reinvest in natural capital

The circular economy of cradle-to-cradle is based on the design philosophy that considers

all material involved in industrial and commercial processes to be nutrients, technical, and

biological (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, n.d.).

Circular Economy: From Cowboy Economy to Spaceship Economy

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 6/11

Boulding in 1966 discussed a shift from what he called the “cowboy economy,”

characterized by endless resources and an option to move on, leaving problems behind to

the “spaceship economy,” where resources needed to be reused to keep life support viable

(EASAC, 2015).

The concept has since been developed by many authors such as Smith (1972), Mäler

(1974), and Dasgupta and Heal (1979), according to a report on circular concepts by the

European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EACAC,

2015).

Before we can understand the circular economy, it helps to define the linear economy.

Most organizations today operate in the linear economy, which is based on a “take, make,

and dispose” model. Companies take raw materials and make them into products, which

are purchased by consumers. Those consumers eventually throw away the products and

create waste.

The Linear Economy

The circular economy is not about just recycling the products. In a circular economy, the

manufacturer maintains ownership of the products, much like leasing a car. The model

looks more like this: make, use, reuse, remake and recycle.

The Circular Economy

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 7/11

Example

In a linear economy, consider the use of a light bulb. Once the light bulb burns out,

the customer disposes of it and neither the seller nor the customer will see that bulb

again. The resources to make the bulbs, such as glass or metal, are also not seen by

the seller or customer again. In this linear economy model, the light bulb company

buys materials at the lowest cost to sell as many bulbs as possible. This model

assumes there are infinite resources, like glass or metal, in the world (Leonard,

2018).

By contrast, in the circular economy, you would lease light, just as you would a car

or an apartment.

The financial shock of 2008 reignited the idea of “resource productivity and efficiency”—

doing more with less, and subsequently, the European Commission (EC) presented a

“Resource Efficient Europe” in 2011 (EASAC, 2015). The EC eventually compiled proposals

in 2014 for a road map to a circular economy, after studies that showed that “improving

resource efficiency along value chains” could significantly reduce material inputs (EASAC,

2015).

The European Union (EU) adopted an action plan (European Academies, 2015) aiming to

make supply chains more circular. This includes everything from production to

consumption, repair and manufacturing, and waste management. One report (European

Commission, 2020) estimates a shift toward the circular economy in the EU could increase

GDP by an additional 12 percentage points by 2050.

The benefits of the circular economy are seen as (EASAC, 2015):

improved competitiveness by controlling rising costs

reducing raw materials and energy dependency

opportunities for new businesses

reducing environmental impact of resource extraction and waste disposal

reducing greenhouse gas emissions

In spite of compelling evidence of the benefits of the circular economy, the reasons why

the economies stay locked in the linear economy include (EASAC, 2015):

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 8/11

Costs associated with the company’s environmental and social impacts of its

operations are not captured though they are a direct consequence of the company’s

activities

Ignoring the potential impact on resource depletion, pollution, and climate change on

the company itself.

Priorities for short-term profits and dividends to shareholders. This avoids the

perspective required for investments into resource efficiency.

A 2015 report on the circular economy by the European Academies Science Advisory

Council notes: “If the true cost of the circular economy model were compared with the

true cost of the linear economy model, which currently excludes most externalities, then a

proper comparison of the costs for pursuing a circular economy over a linear economy

could be made” (EASAC, 2015)

The report also states that economic indicators based on traditional national

accounts such as GDP do not measure how efficiently resources are used, and new

indicators are still “being evolved” (EASAC, 2015).

Case Studies of Circular Economy

A 2014 report from the World Economic Forum illustrated some examples of companies

taking part in initiatives that promote the circular economy (World Economic Forum,

2014). Information was provided by the companies.

Philips – The lighting equipment company offers “lighting as a service” by keeping

ownership of the equipment. Philips says it can reach more customers and those

customers don’t pay “high upfront costs.” The company also works with organizations that

dispose of bulbs containing mercury.

Vodafone – Vodafone offers “buy back” programs and is a partner in a “reverse cycle

network” to collect devices to send to secondary markets in Hong Kong and China.

H&M – H&M’s UK retailers allow customers to bring in old clothing in exchange for a

voucher. The company works with an apparel “reverse logistics” provider that handles the

sorting for reuse, recycling, or even energy generation.

Ricoh – Ricoh’s “GreenLine” brand represents its effort to design and manufacture copies

and printers to be recyclable or be reused. For productions that cannot be reused or

recycled, the company “harvests” components and materials.

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 9/11

References

Arnold, M., & Day, R. (1998). The next bottom line: Making sustainable development

tangible. The World Resources Institute.

Benyus, J. M. (1997). Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature. HarperCollins

Publishers.

Dasgupta, P., & Heal, G. (1979). Economic theory and exhaustible resources. Cambridge

University Press.

Devall, B., and Sessions, G. (1985). Deep ecology: Living as if nature mattered. Peregrine

Smith Books, Gibbs Smith.

Dixson-Declève, S., Lovins, H., Schellnhuber, H. J., & Raworth, K. (2020, March 24). A

green reboot after the pandemic. https://www.project-

syndicate.org/commentary/covid19-green-deal-by-sandrine-dixson-decleve-et-al-

2020-03

EcoGlobal Foundation. (n.d.). Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

https://www.ecoglobalfoundation.org/campaigns/ellen-macarthur-foundation/?

cv=1

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2012). Towards the circular economy: Economic and

business rationale for an accelerated transition.

https://web.archive.org/web/20121030114721/http://www.thecirculareconomy.

org/uploads/files/032012/4f6360009d31c6098f000006/original/Exec_summary

_single ?1331912704

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (n.d.). Schools of thought.

https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/concept/schools-of-

thought?cv=1

Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business.

New Society Publishers.

Esposito, M., Tse, T., & Soufani, K. (2018). Introducing a circular economy: New thinking

with new managerial and policy implications. California Management Review,

60(3), 5–19. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1177/0008125618764691

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 10/11

European Academies Science Advisory Council (EASAC). (2015). Circular economy: A

commentary from the perspectives of the natural and social sciences.

https://easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_statements/EASAC_Circular_Economy_

Web

European Commission. (2019). European Green Deal Road

Map. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/european-green-deal-

communication-annex-roadmap_en

European Commission. (2020). A new circular economy action plan. https://eur-

lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/DOC/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0098&from=EN

Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A.,

Pennington, D., & Suh, S. (2009) Recent developments in life cycle

assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(1), 1–21.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.018.

Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins, L. H. (1999). Natural capitalism: Creating the next

industrial revolution. Little, Brown and Company.

Kondratieff, N. D. (1935). The long waves in economic life. Review of Economic Statistics,

17(6).

Leonard, C. (2018, November 6). What is the circular economy and how does it affect us

[Blog post]. https://ca.kaizen.com/blog/post/2018/11/06/what-is-the-circular-

economy-and-how-does-it-affect-us.html

Lyche, H. (2020, March 24). Might a disaster trigger a new circular-economy?

https://www.hkstrategies.com/might-a-disaster-trigger-a-new-circular-economy/

Mäler, K. (1974). Environmental economics. University Press.

Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens III, W. W. (1972). The limits to

growth. Chelsea Green

Publishing.

Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., & Randers, J. (1992). Beyond the limits. Chelsea Green

Publishing.

Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movements: A

summary. Inquiry, 6, 95–100.

1/23/2021 Circular Economy

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/circular-economy.html?ou=541222 11/11

Product-Life.org. (n.d.). Cradle to cradle. http://product-life.org/en/cradle-to-cradle

Rainey, D. L. (2006). Sustainable business development: Inventing the future through

strategy, innovation, and leadership. Cambridge University Press.

Schmidheiny, S. (1992). Changing course: A global business perspective on development

and the environment. The MIT Press.

Smith, V. (1972). Dynamics of waste accumulation: Disposal versus recycling. Quarterly

Journal of Economics, 86, 601–616.

Sonntag, V. (2000). Sustainability – in light of competitiveness. Ecological Economies,

34(1), 101–112.

Stahel, W., & Reday-Mulvey, G. (1981). Jobs for tomorrow: The potential for substituting

manpower for energy. http://www.product-life.org/en/cradle-to-cradle

Sustainability Illustrated. (2020). Circular economy: Definition & examples. [Video].

Sustainability Illustrated. (2014). Triple bottom line (3 pillars): Sustainability in business.

[Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f5m-jBf81Q

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). (1992). Agenda

21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Statement of

Forest Principles, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. Rio de Janeiro.

United Nations. (1972). United Nations Conference on Human Environment

(UNCHE). United Nations.

Willard, B. (2002). The sustainability advantage: Seven business case benefits of a triple

bottom line. New Society Publishers.

World Commission on Environment and Development (WEDC). (1987). Our common

future. Oxford University Press.

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Managing Ambivalence

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/managing-ambivalence.html?ou=541222 1/2

Managing Ambivalence

“Ambivalence can be understood as a phenomenon characterized by conflicted desires

pertaining to a choice and one’s actions” (Simon, 2006, p. 92). Ambivalence can arise from

a conflict between two or more strategic plans or the competing factors that determine

workforce reductions. When a situation arises in which a leader is faced with ambivalence,

he or she can still act and make a decision. There is a difference between ambivalence and

indecisiveness. Indecisiveness is the in ability or failure to make a decision when faced

with conflicting factors.

Ambivalence is central to strategic leadership because evaluating alternatives is “an

essential part of the strategic decision making process and approach—avoidance conflicts

are inseparable from a decision making process” (Simon, 2006, p. 92). Ambivalence is

created when a decision maker remains open to information, leaving them vulnerability to

discovering that their decision is incorrect. A leader should retain the ability to keep an

open mind to new information during the decision-making process, as the situation might

change and influence the appropriate direction to take.

One of the chief expectations of a strategy leader is to make key decisions on behalf of

the stakeholders to create and sustain the competitive advantage of the organization. The

resulting alternatives could result in constraints for the organization. Generating

alternatives (e.g., inventing, developing, and designing products) is a laborious and costly

process, and there are many potential alternatives (Simon, 2007, p. 156). A successful

leader must be adept at generating, evaluating and analyzing alternatives for any course of

action in order to ensure that the best course of action is taken.

References

Simon, A. (2006). Leadership and managing ambivalence. Consulting Psychology Journal,

58(2), 91–105.

Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Managing Ambivalence

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/managing-ambivalence.html?ou=541222 2/2

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Shared and Distributed Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/shared-and-distributedleadership.html?ou=541222 1/2

Shared and Distributed Leadership

Traditional approaches to leadership emphasize the empowerment of subordinates to

make an individual leader more effective. With this approach, the focus is on the process

by which leaders enable others to share responsibility for leadership functions. This model

assumes that distributed leadership and power sharing are inevitable in organizations, and

the organizations cannot be understood by focusing solely on the decisions and actions of

individual leaders. Namely, strategic leadership “empowers others to participate in the

process of interpreting events, solving problems, and making decisions” (Argyris, 1964;

Likert, 1967).

This perspective recognizes that the actions of any individual leader are less important

than the collective leadership provided by many members of the organization (Day, Gronn,

& Salas, 2004). Viewing leadership in terms of reciprocal, recursive influence processes

among multiple leaders is different from studying unidirectional effects of a single leader

on subordinates.

“Distributed leadership involves multiple leaders with distinct but interrelated

responsibilities. If the various leaders are unable to agree about what to do and how to do

it, performance of the team or organization is likely to suffer” (Mehra, Smith, Dixon, &

Robertson, 2006).

References

Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: John Wiley.

Day, D. V., Gronn, P., & Salas, E. (2004). Leadership capacity in teams. Leadership

Quarterly, 15, 857–880.

Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Shared and Distributed Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/shared-and-distributedleadership.html?ou=541222 2/2

Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in teams:

The network of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadership Quarterly, 17,

232–245.

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Relational Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/relational-leadership.html?ou=541222 1/2

Relational Leadership

Traditional approaches to leadership focus on how an individual leader can develop and

maintain cooperative relationships. An alternative view of leadership describes it as part of

the evolving social order that results from interactions, exchanges, and influence

processes among many people in an organization. Relationships are acknowledged as an

important aspect of leadership in much of the literature on the subject.

According to this alternative perspective, leadership can be understood as a part of the

dynamics of the social system in which it occurs (Dachler, 1992). Instead of the traditional

focus on a single leader, this approach posits that social processes and patterned

relationships can explain how collective activity can accomplish shared objectives.

Organizations and other social entities, such as teams, coalitions, and interest groups, are

defined more by the web of interpersonal relationships than by formal charters,

structures, policies, and rules. These relationships are continually being modified as

changing conditions elicit adaptive responses.

Strategic leaders consistently influence relationships and are expected by others to have

this influence (Hosking, 1988). They interpret events, explain cause-effect relationships in

a meaningful ways, and influence people to modify their attitudes, behavior, and goals.

Individuals develop and use social networks to gather information and build coalitions to

increase their influence over decisions (Balkundi & Kilduff, 2005).

References

Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2005). The ties that lead: A social network approach to

leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16(6), 941–961.

Dachler, P. (1992). Management and leadership as relational phenomena. In M. V. Cranach,

W. Doise, & G. Mugny (Eds.), Social representations and social bases of knowledge (pp.

169–17). Lewiston, NY: Hogrefe and Huber.

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Relational Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/relational-leadership.html?ou=541222 2/2

Hosking, D. M. (1988). Organizing, leadership, and skillful process. Journal of Management

Studies, 25, 147–166.

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.

1/23/2021

Complexity Theory of Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/complexity-theoryofleadership.html?ou=541222 1/2

Complexity Theory of Leadership

Traditional leadership models that are effective for organizations based on physical

production are often not well suited for a more knowledge-oriented economy. Complexity

leadership theory focuses on enabling learning, creativity, and adaptive capacity in

complex adaptive systems (CASs) within the context of knowledge-producing

organizations. It expands the locus of leadership from the isolated, role-based actions of

individuals to the innovative, contextual interactions that occur across an entire social

system (Lichtenstein et al., 2006).

This conceptual framework includes three entangled leadership roles that reflect a

dynamic relationship between the bureaucratic, administrative functions of the

organization and the informal dynamics of CASs (Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007):

Administrative leadership involves actions and decisions by formal leaders who are

responsible for planning and coordinating activities for the

organization.

Adaptive leadership occurs when people with different knowledge, beliefs, and

preferences interact in an attempt to solve problems and resolve conflicts.

Enabling leadership facilitates the process by increasing the interdependence among

people, supporting the value of dissent and debate, increasing access to necessary

information and resources, and helping to get innovative ideas implemented in the

organization.

Complexity theory involves emergent processes and adaptive outcomes that are often

unpredictable in advance.

References

Lichtenstein, B. B, Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., Seers, A., Orton, J. D., & Schreiber, C. (2006).

Complexity leadership theory: An interactive perspective on leading in complex

adaptive systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 8, 2–12. Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/8

Learning Topic

1/23/2021 Complexity Theory of Leadership

https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/mba/mba670/2211/learning-topic-list/complexity-theoryofleadership.html?ou=541222 2/2

Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting

leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–

318.

© 2021 University of Maryland Global Campus

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity

of information located at external sites.