Chapter 29

Why Leadership Development Should Go to School

Lyndon Rego, Steadman D. Harrison III, and David G. Altman

In This Chapter

• How developing leadership skills early can make a difference.
• The Center for Creative Leadership’s role in bringing leadership into schools.
• Examples of activities used to teach leadership in schools.

 

The president of the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), John Ryan (a former chancellor and retired Navy admiral), observed that leadership is not something to which many mainstream college students aspire. In his years as president of several universities and then as chancellor in the State University of New York system, he was known to ask incoming freshman students at orientation the question, “How many of you are here to learn to be a leader?” He usually found that fewer than one-third of the students would raise their hand, and many of these would do so only after they looked around to make sure that someone else had raised their hand. In contrast, when he was superintendent (that is, president) of the U.S. Naval Academy and posed this same question to freshman midshipmen, every student would immediately raise their hand and some even raised both hands.

This is mirrored by another account by the late Gordon MacKenzie of Hallmark Cards, who wrote that when he went into first grade classes and asked students how many were artists, every child would stick up their hand enthusiastically. The number willing to be identified as artists shrunk to half by second grade, and by sixth grade, only a child or two would acknowledge being an artist. MacKenzie (1996) noted that schools are somehow banishing the creativity that children innately possess.

As staff members of CCL, an organization focused on creative leadership, we have also heard a regret expressed by many of the 40-something participants who attend our leadership development programs around the globe. We hear them sigh that they wished they’d had this experience 20 years earlier, when it would have made a greater difference in their lives. Curiously, in our work with youth, we’ve also heard a 15-year-old student reflect at the conclusion of a leadership program, “I can’t tell you how many things I would have done differently if I had only had this training back in junior high school.”

This gap in leadership development among young people is something we’ve heard bemoaned by employers in the developing world who are frustrated by the limited capabilities of many graduates of the education system. For instance, a senior executive at a software company in India stated that even prominent management schools aren’t equipping students with adequate self-awareness and clarity about what they want from a career and life. A managing director of an Indian steel company echoed this sentiment, saying that students need to spend much more time reflecting in an organized way on their thinking processes, aspirations, and strengths, because these are the keys for personal and professional growth (Altman, Rego, and Harrison 2009).

A feature in BusinessWeek notes that employers also want creativity: “The driving forces of innovation and globalization are pushing companies to revamp their managerial ranks and hire people with new skills. . . . And in an era of constant change, they want people who are comfortable with complexity and uncertainty. Schools that teach design thinking, with its emphasis on maximizing possibilities rather than managing for efficiency, are in high demand” (Woyke and Atal 2007).

All this reveals a need for educational systems worldwide to create an added emphasis on leadership skills, creativity, emotional intelligence—or however we label this sphere of development that extends beyond academics and technical knowledge. In this chapter, we explore why leadership development (our label for this area of development) is essential to young people, and how CCL and other kindred organizations are working to make it part of what young people study in school.

A Look at the Literature

The literature on the value of leadership development is broad and deep. Here, we focus on a slice of the literature that maintains that creative leadership skills can be developed. This perspective has grown in acceptance in recent years, though there are still some believers in the philosophy that leaders are born and not made or that there are innately creative and noncreative people. Over the years, psychology has expanded its focus from a predominantly problem-based orientation to one that covers topics such as wellness and resilience (Rappaport 1977; Rudkin 2003). Indeed, the subfield of “positive psychology,” with a focus on the strengths that help humans thrive in life, has established a foothold and considerable interest among scholars and practitioners (Seligman 1998).

As we began working with young people in developing countries and teenagers in the United States from disadvantaged communities, we were continually impressed with their ability to take on tough odds. It became clear that if we didn’t move beyond societal stereotypes or victim blaming about the long odds that these individuals faced in attempts to be successful as leaders or as important contributors to robust community life, our efforts would be for naught. Indeed, some have argued that youth development—and the subsequent political engagement and empowerment it engenders—is central to building a more humane, democratic, and just world (Ryan 1971; Ginwright and James 2002).

A large literature in social psychology on attribution theory is relevant to this discussion. There is considerable evidence that when attributions are made about behavior, we are more likely to attribute behavior to dispositions (for example, a trait or personal quality of an individual) than to the environment in which the behavior occurs (Ross and Nisbett 1991). In our work with young people, we have tried to make situational attributions more than dispositional attributions. Where others might look at the challenges young people in developing countries face as a reflection on their own inabilities to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps,” we instead tried to understand how the context in which these young people lived affected their behavior (Trickett 2009). This minor shift in our thinking had a major effect on our work. Where others might have found it easy to write off these “disadvantaged” young people as unworthy of attention or engagement, we decided to take a strengths-based approach informed by the tradition of positive psychology. As such, in these young people with whom we worked, we saw strengths rather than deficits. Where others might be focusing on “fixing” these young people through problem-based interventions, we focused instead on unleashing their potential. Where others might have seen the environment in which young people lived as squalid, we focused on the many indigenous resources that could be tapped if we were more creative and persistent in considering the possibilities.

We were also influenced by the body of research on the “self-fulfilling prophecy” (Smith and Mackie 2007; Rappaport 1977; Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968). Numerous studies have found that expectations significantly affect behavior. That is, when we have certain expectations about the qualities and skills of another person, we explicitly and implicitly find ways to reinforce the behaviors of others in ways that ultimately prove that our expectations were correct. Hence, our expectations and perceptions of others may create corresponding behaviors in others and thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In a classic experiment conducted several decades ago, Rosenthal and Jacobson found that when teachers were informed of which students were (supposedly) about to “bloom” academically (or were “gifted” in today’s lexicon), the students labeled as “bloomers” had greater gains on end-ofyear IQ and performance tests and were rated by teachers more favorably than students not labeled as “bloomers.” In this and other studies, teachers’ high expectations for certain students had a significant effect on the students’ actual achievements, even when the students were randomly assigned a “bloomer” or “not bloomer” label. In our own work, we made the assumption that every young person had gifts, regardless of his or her socioeconomic status, family situation, or the home or community in which he or she lived. We engaged with these young people with the expectation that they could develop their leadership skills. Moreover, we conveyed to them the importance of having what Carol Dweck (2006) has labeled a growth mindset, or the belief that one’s skills and effectiveness are not predetermined by traits such as intelligence but rather are developed by cultivation, practice, effort, feedback, and time.

Likewise, we were influenced by Albert Bandura’s (1997, 2001) work on self-efficacy, or the beliefs people have about the relationship between their behavior and outcomes. Bandura (2001) has found that to successfully navigate the vicissitudes of life, individuals must have self-awareness of their capabilities, an ability to estimate the probable causes and effects of actions they take, an understanding of the context in which they operate, and an ability to regulate their behavior. He has also written about collective efficacy, or the confidence that a group of people have in their ability to achieve a desired outcome. Because efficacy influences whether individuals or groups are optimistic, take on challenges, persevere against challenges, or expend energy on a task, it stands to reason that increasing perceptions of efficacy through educational and behavioral interventions and through the adoption of a growth mindset was a keen focus of our leadership development activities with young people. The perspective we took is also consistent with key tenets in the literature on youth development. For example, the five key elements of youth development programs—the five Cs—have been identified as competence, confidence, connections, character, and caring (Roth and Brooks-Gunn 2003). As noted throughout this chapter, each of these Cs has been at the root of our work on youth leadership development.

Thus, our perspective on reaching out to underserved young people is influenced by our commitment to unleashing the capabilities of indigenous resources. In summarizing the essence of human motivation, Smith and Mackie (2007, 17) suggest that three principles dominate: “As they construct reality and influence and are influenced by others, people have three basic motives: to strive for mastery, to seek connectedness with others, and to value themselves and others connected to them.” These three principles certainly resonate with our philosophical and tactical approach. We made an explicit choice to look carefully for resources in individuals and communities rather than for deficits that needed to be fixed.

As we reflect on our experiences to date, we think it is important to make the distinction between capacity and capability. In simple terms, capacity refers to the reservoir of potential knowledge and skills at one’s disposal. Rather than being fixed, capacity is dynamic and can be increased through education, learning, and practice. In contrast, capability refers to the skill sets that are available to an individual, team, or organization. Using simple arithmetic as an analogy, capacity is the denominator (that is, the theoretical maximum possible resources and skills that can be brought to bear) and capability is the numerator (that is, the resources that are actually brought to bear). Our goal, then, was to work with the existing capacity of young people and the contexts in which they live, with a constant eye toward increasing their capacity and capability. This was done by employing principles related to a growth mindset, improving self-efficacy and collective efficacy, tapping these young people’s strengths and resilient behaviors, and setting a high bar with respect to our and their expectations for leadership development.

Developing Leadership Skills Early

The need to develop leadership skills early has been picked up by many community organizations, like the YMCA, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Outward Bound, and Rotary and Kiwanis. These programs are valuable for those who have the opportunity to participate in them. But as an optional, extracurricular activity, these social programs do not reach many children who would greatly benefit from them if they were offered as part of the basic construct of education at school. Though a large number of schools offer leadership development only outside the classroom or to those students who are high academic achievers, some schools have begun to incorporate it in significant, substantive, and inclusive ways into their curricula. Let’s look at four varied examples: the Riverside School, the African Leadership Academy, Northwest Guilford High School, and the Halogen Foundation Singapore.

The Riverside School

The Riverside School in Ahmedabad, India, was founded by Kiran bir Sethi in 2001 (www .schoolriverside.com). Kiran has created a school focused on student well-being where all processes and practices are designed to make young people “more competent and less helpless.” The Riverside School is building in its students the depth of emotional intelligence and leadership skills that many individuals only acquire through years of life and work experience. Furthermore, the school demonstrates that developing intrapersonal and interpersonal skills elevates academic performance.

At Riverside, the approach to education reflects Carol Dweck’s research that effectiveness is developed through cultivation, practice, effort, feedback, and time. The school takes the children through key stages of becoming aware of the world around them; then acquiring and honing skills and strategies to become empowered to lead the change through self-management; and aquiring an ability to work with others, appreciate differences, and realize as well as exercise their potential. Ultimately, the program at Riverside helps children “be the change” and gain confidence that they can shape their lives and the world around them through their actions. The end goal is to make children visible and active members of their communities, so that they understand and fulfill their future role as citizens.

While visiting the Riverside School, we found kindergarten children weaving stories from pictures they had seen in school. Middle school students spoke eloquently about the value of self-awareness and explained the nuances of Riverside pedagogy. The walls were covered with documentation designed to indicate the relevance of their work, the relationships they forged to get there, and the rigor with which they honed their skills.

This belief in the potential of children to be agents of change is important in a country with one of the world’s largest and youngest populations. Kiran observes that the Riverside School stands in contrast to the prevalent approaches to education in India, where children, depending on their economic status, can be either pushed very hard to achieve academically or opt out of school to help earn a living to support their families. Kiran’s efforts via the Riverside School espouse the idea that there’s “a protagonist in every child,” and her outreach efforts extend to schools around the country through sharing of the curriculum, contests for social action, and programs that enable children at large to express their creativity and their potential. Despite Riverside’s focus on a broader array of competencies, in a nationwide assessment test, its students have outperformed the top schools in India in the core competencies of language, mathematics, and science—proving that they do well when they feel good (personal communication; www.schoolriverside.com).

The African Leadership Academy

In the fall of 2007, our team was introduced to the inspirational vision of Chris Bradford, an American social entrepreneur with a heart for Africa’s future leaders. Chris and Fred Swaniker cofounded the African Leadership Academy (ALA) in Johannesburg (www.africanleadershipacademy.org). The school, with students representing nearly every country across Africa, began teaching its first classes in September 2008. The curriculum builds knowledge and skills in the areas of entrepreneurship, pan-African culture, and leadership development. The ALA model weaves in coaching, mentoring, and action learning projects. Students must implement their culminating project in the community, and through their work in these small group projects they learn to appreciate difference and diversity.

With the choice for the school name and their tag line, “Developing the next generation of African leaders,” their founding team made a point to emphasize the importance of leadership as well as academic excellence. They identify leadership development as one of the five distinctive elements of their school:

Leadership will be formally taught in the Academy’s curriculum with the goal of instilling a robust system of values in our students. Students will discover the traits of highly effective African leaders from case studies about leaders like Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf or Desmond Tutu. The Academy’s “Leadership Perspectives” speaker series will bring distinguished leaders from across the continent to share their experiences with students. Each student will also receive individual leadership coaching from his or her personal mentor, a mid-career professional who embodies the Academy values. Students will engage in various exercises and experiences designed to develop their interpersonal skills. And in their final year on campus, each student will be required to plan and execute a Culminating Project that has a lasting positive impact on an African community (African Leadership Academy 2010).

ALA’s students come from a diverse array of cultural backgrounds and have important lessons to teach one another. At ALA, they have the opportunity to share their experiences and discuss what they are learning and why it is important to them. From our work with orphaned youth in Uganda, we shared with ALA the critical role that the perspective that is taken can have in the lives of young people. By helping students understand multiple aspects of their own identities, they grow in their self-awareness as well as their understanding of how others around them see the world. We have seen the power that this self-knowledge provides. This ability to understand and lead self provides a path forward through the constant challenges and changes that these young people will face in a world that is growing in its complexity.

ALA has gained international attention because of its unique approach. It is expected that the very best universities in the world will actively recruit from this academy where African culture is taught and celebrated and nearly every country in Africa is represented. We expect to see many of these students taking the lead in meeting the challenges that Africa faces.

Northwest Guilford High School

The staff of the Center for Creative Leadership found an advocate and partner for studying and implementing youth leadership in the Greensboro, North Carolina, high schools when we began working with Brent Irwin, a guidance counselor and teacher in the school system. Brent observed, “Regardless of the career direction students are heading, having a solid foundation in leadership training is essential to their success.” He emphasized that every high school needs to provide leadership development hand in hand with other traditional subjects of study. Knowledge of and the skills needed for leadership, he believes, are just as essential for future success as the knowledge of mathematics and history and economics. He says that the study of leadership should be inseparable—that is, woven into the fabric of academic studies. His passion for leadership development led to the implementation of a leadership service club at the school where he teaches, Northwest Guilford High School (NGHS) in Greensboro, and in the last year, NGHS has seen the enrollment of its leadership classes double in size.

CCL was invited to host a series of sessions at NGHS, where Brent engaged students in relation to perceptions of leadership; more than 300 students participated. CCL’s facilitators used a tool we created, called Leader Sort, to explore perceptions of who is a leader. Leader Sort consists of a deck of cards featuring pictures of people ranging from well-known political, entertainment, and media figures to anonymous characters (such as a woman with a T-shirt that states “Soccer Mom”). The students were asked to rank order the deck from those most leaderlike to least leaderlike. The CCL research team was surprised to discover that the “Soccer Mom” made the top of most students’ Leader Sort decks. In fact, mother figures consistently ranked alongside Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. as people who represented the greatest leaders to these students. Popular people such as Bill Gates made the middle of their card sort—not because of financial success at Microsoft but because of the philanthropic work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We heard that students perceive their parents as the most influential leaders they know. Students almost universally stated that influence and confidence are the most important characteristics they can develop to help them with future success.

In a debrief, many students reflected that the most powerful lesson they learned through the use of Leader Sort was that anyone can play the role of leader—including themselves. Students voiced an interest in increasing their self-confidence and their learning and listening skills, and in becoming more decisive. They expressed a desire to learn more about “how to inspire others.” They said that they learn important skills—such as getting the job done, dedication, persistence, and being team players—from family and from life experience and not from school.

Our use of the Leader Sort card decks and other CCL interactive tools helped draw out students who were perceived as reserved or disinterested in their traditional classroom studies. At the close of these CCL focus group sessions at NGHS, teachers reported that they were surprised to observe certain students speaking up who had previously been noted for a lack of participation, interest, and engagement. As Brent put it, “When the students were using the facilitation tools from CCL, I saw them engaging in discussion at a level beyond what I normally see. In terms of the depth of content, their personal investment, and their overall enthusiasm, it was encouraging to see the students so actively involved and enjoying the learning process.”

CCL’s decision to create youth leadership toolkits to enable schools to offer leadership development experiences was significantly influenced by these initial inquiries. Even in a short exercise such as this one, it is clear that young people can quickly start to become more mindful of what effective leadership looks like and how it connects with their own aspirations for personal growth. It is our hope that these tools will make it easier for schools to incorporate leadership development into their existing coursework (also see more on this in the section below on curriculum and tools).

The Halogen Foundation

The Halogen Foundation Singapore is a nonprofit organization that is a catalyst for getting leadership development into Singapore schools (www.halogen.sg). Halogen’s team is dedicated to making high-quality leadership education available and accessible to all young people. Halogen espouses the belief that every young person represents an outstanding leader in the making. In keeping with this philosophy, Halogen has worked to develop more than 40,000 young people through a combination of events, workshops, camps, and school-based engagements. In these events, Halogen brings together inspiration and challenge, encouraging young people to act in the service of their dreams and for the common good. A key event, One Degree Asia, symbolizes how small changes can make a big difference in time. This echoes Halogen’s message that leadership development should focus on the young, for they have the most potential to give over the course of their lives. As Martin Tan, Halogen’s founder and executive director, explained, a critical age at which to inspire young people is as young as 11 years—when critical images of self are shaped.

In bringing leadership development to schools, Halogen offers that “leadership development must be holistic, integrated with the formal education system and continually improved upon in order for it to be of impact and value to youths.” Halogen works with teachers to enable educators to not only impart knowledge but also affect lives as developers of people. Halogen folds in content, training methodologies, and tools from CCL and other providers and adapts these to be youth friendly. Adapting this knowledge so that it is more accessible and engaging for young people is essential. At the same time, Halogen demonstrates that young people can absorb sophisticated leadership lessons about creativity, conflict, and mentoring.

In Singapore’s affluent and achievement-oriented schools, Halogen finds a fertile ground to operate. But its aspirations extend beyond, to reach hundreds of thousands of youth in Southeast Asia for whom notions of leadership and empowerment may be less familiar but are no less essential.

Summing Up

These brief case examples illustrate the potential of young people to develop leadership skills and how leadership development can enhance student achievement and success. So what will help more schools get on board?

Broadening the Base: CCL’s Overall Role

As a leadership development organization, CCL’s efforts center on what it can do to help those who wish to bring leadership development into schools. Leadership development is something that most teachers haven’t had and may be hard pressed to offer their students. CCL’s staff believes that there are two important enablers for it and the field to focus on. One is to make evidence-based curricula and tools available for use by schools. The other entails developing facilitation skills for teachers.

Curriculum and Tools

CCL is working on developing an inexpensive, flexible youth leadership toolkit that can be used by schools and youth leadership trainers around the world. Currently, the toolkit encompasses 20 modules that are designed to be adaptable for use in a number of ways, from an hour-long session to a series of leadership workshops, to extended service-learning programs. CCL is also working on a social innovation curriculum to equip young people with the leadership and innovation tools needed to enact change.

Leadership development can perhaps be most easily incorporated into schools when it isn’t a completely new and standalone effort. Many schools today include projects that require teamwork and engagement with external organizations or populations. There are also an increasing number of service learning projects meant to help students exercise their passion for community service and apply what they have learned in school to real-life work. What is missing in many of these programs is the opportunity to help students develop their emotional intelligence—to use their experience to reflect on their behaviors and emotions, observe group dynamics, build interpersonal skills such as providing feedback, and better understand their gifts and challenges. The toolkits and curriculum that CCL is developing offer frameworks and exercises that can be used to address this gap.

It is possible to envision the youth leadership toolkit—or a stream of such products—making their way into schools around the world, touching both elite schools and the millions of modest schools in developing countries. Furthermore, this would likely create an explosion of new and innovative content as teachers adapt, create, and share the new tools and techniques they have created for development.

Teachers as Facilitators

The secret to leadership development is that it is not about teaching as much as it is about creating the space for individuals to learn about themselves and others. If leadership as a practice is to be incorporated into classrooms for younger students, it must be delivered by teachers willing to move into facilitator roles and away from lecturing. Teachers observing the leadership modules and the use of leadership tools presented by CCL staff for younger people frequently recognize the increased attention and participation of students who have previously had a reputation for “tuning out” or “having little to contribute.” At CCL, the staff believes that by creating a safe learning environment, participants are able to actively shape and internalize their own learning.

CCL’s use of the Socratic method, whereby participants are asked questions and learning comes from reflection and dialogue, closely mirrors the successful education models enacted by Marva Collins during her 30 years of teaching (1975–2008) at Chicago’s Westside Preparatory School (Collins 2009). She used the Socratic method with students living in an impoverished environment where many young people were considered “learning disabled” or “unteachable.” By encouraging these students to talk about the content that was read out loud and helping them see meaning by discussing and writing about why the subject matter was important to them, her classroom succeeded in teaching young people who had been dismissed and underserved. She was able to accomplish what others thought was impossible by moving into facilitating learning rather than teaching more and more facts. In essence, she was able to discover and unlock the human potential that had been hidden within each underprivileged student. In her words, “There is a brilliant child locked inside every student” (thinkexist.com).

As with Marva Collins’s efforts, we have seen the impact that simple tools and guided reflection can have in transforming the lives of young people, especially those less privileged or prioritized. For instance, Boomerang, a YMCA program in North Carolina that works with children thrown out of school for misconduct (Geffner 2008), uses an empowerment technique it calls the Tree of Life to help these children find what’s good in their lives and extend it to create the future they desire for themselves. This technique uses the metaphor of a tree to help young people map their roots—the strengths and resources that keep them grounded and nourished. They then trace their aspirations and hopes in the form of branches that extend outward and upward. The trunk of the tree links the roots and branches and forms the path to the future that the youth are challenged to create. Finally, the youth are asked to identify what can threaten their tree and what they can do to ward off these threats.

We took this technique to Ghana, where we shared it with Cheri Baker, a Peace Corps volunteer stationed in an isolated rural village without running water or electricity. Cheri used the Tree of Life to help a group of young girls map their aspirations (branches) and their strengths (roots) and to think about how their strengths are a pathway (the trunk of the tree) to enable them to achieve their hopes for the future. The tree took shape on a chalkboard as the girls traced the contours of their lives and dreams. “Desire and support, a nurse in the village, parents, books to learn” wrote the girls for their roots. A profusion of branches cascaded out—“tailor shop, teacher, big house, a husband who is a great parent.” The trunk of the tree represented lessons that perhaps are universal—“finish school, stay away from boys, be happy, work hard, focus, and consult respected people for advice.” Asked to identify what could threaten their tree, they marked the hard everyday realities that could snatch away their dreams—“prostitution, HIV/AIDS, and unplanned pregnancy” (http://leadbeyond.net/?p=421).

These examples make clear what is at stake in the developing world for young children whose lives depend more on individual will than entitlement. In a compelling report titled Grit: The Skills for Success and How They Are Grown (Young Foundation 2009), there is a call to action about the importance of this kind of development for young people: “When we deny children and young people the kind of educational ecology in which they can ‘grow’ their capabilities, we are also denying them their freedom.”

A Call to Action

We cannot make a call to action more evocatively than that made above in the quotation from Grit, but we echo its message for the well-being of children, their future employers, and society at large. If the purpose of school is to prepare young people for work and life, leadership development can help them do better in school and prepare them to be more effective in working with others once they arrive in the workforce. If we wait until the workforce is in its 40s before offering it formal leadership development opportunities, which is now largely the case among U.S. companies, we will have missed important opportunities to strengthen the pipeline of emerging leaders and the greater impact they can have as young people. By increasing the sense of confidence, empowerment, and purpose that young people acquire early in life, we will enable them to become more prepared to take on the mantle of leadership and serve as active members of society earlier in life.

For the readers of this chapter, likely those in human resources and training roles, we ask that you consider what you can do to enable, recognize, and reward schools that invest in leadership development. We know that the pull of employers in favor of the development of these skills will matter a great deal. There is much at stake here to improve the human condition using the lever of leadership development. A world where everyone has access to leadership development will likely become more collaborative, creative, resilient, and resourceful.

Further Reading

David Altman, Lyndon Rego, and Steadman Harrison, “Democratizing Leader Development,” in The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development, 3rd edition, ed. Ellen Van Velsor, Cynthia McCauley, and Marian Ruderman. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010.

S. M. Datur, D. A. Garvin, and C. A. Knoop, The Center for Creative Leadership. Harvard Business School Case Study N9-308-013. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School, 2008.

Christopher Gergen and Gregg Vanourek, Life Entrepreneurs: Ordinary People Creating Extraordinary Lives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008.

Center for Creative Leadership, “Young People Are Leaders, Too,” Making a Difference, www.ccl .org/leadership/ pdf/news/ newsletters/ mad0909.pdf.

R. W. Larson, Toward a Psychology of Positive Youth Development. American Psychologist 55, no. 1: 170–183, 2000.

Leadership Beyond Boundaries blog, www.leadbeyond.org.

Lyndon Rego, David Altman, and Steadman Harrison, And Leadership Development for All: Self-Management and Leadership Development. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, forthcoming.

Sandy Speicher, “IDEO’s Ten Tips for Creating a 21st-Century Classroom Experience,” Metropolis, http://www.metropolismag.com/ story/20090218 /ideos-ten-tips-for -creating-a-21st-century -classroom-experience.

References

African Leadership Academy. 2010. Our Five Distinctive Elements. http://www.africanleadership academy.org/ site/about/ five_distinctive_elements.

Altman, D., L. Rego, and S. Harrison. 2009. Democratizing Leader Development: The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development, 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bandura, A. 1997. Self-Efficacy. The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

———. 2001. Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 52: 1–26.

Collins, Marva. 2009. Bibliography. www.marvacollins.com/ biography.html.

Dweck, C. S. 2006. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballantine Books.

Geffner, I. 2008. Inspiring Program Helps Suspended Students. Carrboro [NC] Citizen, February 21. www.carrborocitizen.com/ main/2008/02/21/ inspiring-program-helps- suspended-students/.

Ginright, S., and T. James. 2002. From Assets to Agents of Change: Social Justice, Organizing and Youth Development. New Directions for Youth Development 96.

MacKenzie, G. 1996. Orbiting the Giant Hairball: A Corporate Fool’s Guide to Surviving with Grace. New York: Penguin.

Rappaport, J. 1977. Community Psychology: Values, Research and Action. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Rosenthal, R., and L. F. Jacobson. 1968. Teacher Expectations for the Disadvantaged. Scientific American 218, no. 4: 3–7.

Roth, J. L., and J. Brooks-Gunn. 2003. Youth Development Programs: Risk, Prevention and Policy. Journal of Adolescent Health 32: 170–182.

Ross, L., and R. E. Nisbett. 1991. The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Rudkin, J. K. 2003. Community Psychology: Guiding Principles and Orienting Concepts. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ryan, W. 1971. Blaming the Victim. New York: Vintage Books.

Seligman, M. E. P. 1998. Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life. New York: Pocket Books.

Smith, E. R., and D. M. Mackie. 2007. Social Psychology, 3rd ed. New York: Psychology Press.

Trickett, E. J. 2009. Community Psychology: Individuals and Interventions in Community Context. Annual Review of Psychology 60: 395–419.

Young Foundation. 2009. Grit: The Skills for Success and How They Are Grown. London: Young Foundation. www.youngfoundation.org/ files/images/ publications/ GRIT.pdf.

Woyke, E., and M. Atal. 2007. The Talent Hunt: Design Programs Are Shaping a New Generation of Creative Managers. BusinessWeek, October 4, 54–59. http://www.businessweek.com/innovate / content/ oct2007/ id2007104_575219.htm.

About the Authors

Lyndon Rego is the director of the Innovation Incubator at the Center for Creative Leadership. He focuses on innovation that addresses key leadership challenges and expands the boundaries of leadership development through new programs, tools, and delivery platforms. Via the Leadership Beyond Boundaries effort, he has helped CCL extend leadership development to a range of underserved populations, encompassing developing countries, social-sector organizations, and youth. He has an MBA from the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill and an MA in communication from the University of North Dakota. He writes and speaks on issues at the intersection of social innovation, complexity, and leadership.

Steadman D. Harrison III is the senior innovation associate for the Center for Creative Leadership. His work at CCL focuses on organizational innovation, particularly extending leadership development to new populations and through new platforms. Recent initiatives have included a focus on emerging markets, nonprofits, and young leaders. As a key member of the Research Innovation and Product Development Group, he serves as an innovation catalyst to help design, deliver, and test new and sustainable models for leadership development that are inclusive, accessible, and affordable. He holds a BA in psychology from the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill and an MA/MTS from the Houston Graduate School of Theology.

David G. Altman, PhD, is executive vice president of research, innovation, and product development at the Center for Creative Leadership. Previously, he spent 19 years in academia, 10 years as an associate professor and professor of public health sciences and of pediatrics at Wake Forest University School of Medicine and 10 years as a senior research scientist (and postdoctoral fellow and research associate) at the Stanford University Center for Research in Disease Prevention. He received his MA and PhD in social ecology from the University of California, Irvine, and his BA in psychology from the University of California, Santa Barbara.