Description
That is the crux of AchieveGlobal’s multi-phased, multi-level study of how leadership is changing to keep pace with today’s business challenges.
A multi-level analysis of global trends
in leadership challenges and practices
Contributors:
Craig Perrin Sharon Daniels Kathleen Clancy Jefferson, Ph.D.
Chris Blauth Mark Marone, Ph.D. Colleen O’Sullivan
East Apthorp Joyce Thompsen, Ph.D. Linda Moran, Ed.D.
Developing the
21st-Century Leader
Executive Summary
1 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
To succeed in the shifting business landscape of the 21st-
century, leaders must rethink their historical views and
cultivate a new configuration of attitudes and abilities.
That is the crux of AchieveGlobal’s multi-phased,
multi-level study of how leadership is changing to keep
pace with today’s business challenges. The research
began by identifying leadership trends documented
in peer-reviewed academic and industry journals
over a two-year period. Later focus-group sessions
supported development of a survey completed by 971
business and government leaders and employees in
Europe, Asia, and North America. Survey results in
turn facilitated development of a comprehensive new
model of leadership today and a related individual
assessment instrument.
The literature review, focus groups, and survey painted
a detailed picture of the business challenges and
required practices for leaders at multiple levels in
organizations worldwide. Among the key research
findings and conclusions:
• Leadership in the 21st-century is more than
ever a complex matrix of practices, which
vary by geography, organizational level, and
individual circumstances.
• In all global regions, modern leadership may be
distilled into six “zones,” or categories of best
practices, which the study identified as Reflection,
Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, People, and Business.
• Effective leaders recognize their own leadership
strengths and liabilities, adjust current strategies,
adopt new strategies, and recognize strengths and
liabilities in other people.
• Leaders strong in the Reflection zone are better
equipped to leverage their strengths and reduce
their liabilities in other zones.
• Leaders from organizations with greater geographic
scope, numbers of employees, and worldwide
revenues tend to value the Diversity zone more
highly than leaders do in smaller organizations.
• Organizations with wider global operations
identify their most pressing challenges in the
Diversity zone, notably in “creating virtual
workplace structures” and “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions.”
• At the same time, leaders worldwide rank Diversity
of lowest importance among all leadership zones.
• In alignment with the overall top business challenge,
“cost pressures,” survey respondents ranked
Business as the most important leadership zone.
• Leaders who adapt their zone strengths to their
geographic location, scope of operations, and
organizational level are better able to meet their
specific combination of challenges.
• Leaders who maintain active awareness of their
environment and apply the practices demanded
by that environment are more likely to achieve
individual and organizational success.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 2
The world has experienced profound changes in the
early years of the 21st-century. Countless challenges—
notably the rise of the global economy and its impact
on countries everywhere—have forced leaders worldwide
into uncharted territory and literally redefined what
it takes to succeed. In the context of AchieveGlobal’s
earlier research on leadership principles
1
, these
challenges raised key questions to be addressed by
comprehensive new research on leadership today:
• What challenges confront leaders in the 21st-century?
• How has leadership changed to keep pace?
• What key practices are still important for leaders?
• What new practices have emerged in response to the
shifting business landscape?
To answer these and other questions, a new worldwide
study sought to uncover what makes leaders successful
by examining their main challenges and daily practices
against the backdrop of a dynamic business climate.
1 An earlier AchieveGlobal study confirmed the continuing relevance of six “Basic
Principles” of leadership, universal guidelines time-tested worldwide with leaders
for decades:
1. Focus on the situation, issue, or behavior, not on the person.
2. Maintain the self-confidence and self-esteem of others.
3. Take initiative to make things better.
4. Maintain constructive relationships.
5. Lead by example.
6. Think beyond the moment.
Introduction
The study was designed to
isolate and analyze current
concerns among leaders and
employees, with the ultimate
goal of a comprehensive model
articulating key areas of focus
for 21st-century leaders.
Research Process: A Three-Phased Approach
The study was designed to isolate and analyze current
concerns among leaders and employees, with the
ultimate goal of a comprehensive model articulating
key areas of focus for 21st-century leaders.
2
This model
would give leaders:
• A well-documented and detailed picture of
effective leadership in the 21st-century
• A tool to identify and make use of existing
strengths, as well as to identify and reduce
or eliminate potential liabilities
• The ability to track progress by re-assessing
leadership strengths and liabilities over time
Three research phases included secondary research
in phase 1 and primary research in phases 2 and 3.
Phase 1 was a review of articles from eight peer-reviewed
business and leadership journals published in Europe,
Asia, and North America. This review produced two
long lists of business challenges and of best practices that
leaders need to address them. Phase 1 laid the foundation
for development of a preliminary leadership model.
Phase 2 tested this preliminary model with two focus
groups of mid-level and senior leaders. Focus-group
results helped prioritize the business challenges and
aided further development of the leadership model.
In phase 3, a survey on key business challenges and
commensurate leadership practices was developed
and launched in the United States, Mexico, India,
China, Singapore, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
Survey results of 971 responses from respondents at all
organizational levels were analyzed to produce the final
leadership model.
This research design, with extensive feedback
from practicing leaders, produced a truly discursive
definition of leadership. During this process, multiple
voices from the major global regions contributed to
the final picture of today’s leadership challenges and
best practices.
2 A detailed summary of the three-phased research process, along with the analysis
of findings in each phase, appears in “Appendix – Research Process, Findings,
and Analysis.”
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 4
The research team used the
term practice to refer to
a range of behaviors and
thought processes, i.e.
actions that leaders take or
central issues about which
they have evolving thoughts
and feelings.
The Leadership Zone Model
The core finding of the AchieveGlobal study was
validation of 42 practices—some behavioral, some
cognitive—required to meet the challenges of 21st-
century leadership. The research team used the term
"practice" to refer to a range of behaviors and thought
processes, i.e. actions that leaders take or central issues
about which they have evolving thoughts and feelings.
Researchers sorted these 42 practices into six categories,
or “zones,” represented here in a hexagonal model,
in which each zone contains seven unique practices,
identified below.
Reflection
In this zone, leaders assess their own motives, beliefs,
attitudes, and actions. Reflective leaders look within
and ask, “How can I make sure my own blind spots and
biases don’t cause me to make poor decisions?” and
“How can I leverage my strengths to become a better
leader?” To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Take responsibility for their own mistakes.
• Seek the knowledge required to make sense
of the big picture.
• Examine what role they play in the challenges
that they face.
• Treat failure as a chance to learn and grow.
• Reflect often on their performance as a leader.
• Give serious consideration to opinions that differ
from their own.
• Speak frankly with others to learn from them and
build trust.
Reflection helps leaders avoid pitfalls in other zones,
make the most of honest feedback, recognize the limits
of their knowledge, and avoid repeating their mistakes.
When leaders see their mistakes as a chance to learn
and grow, they gain the ability—and credibility—to help
others do the same.
Society
In this zone, leaders apply principles—such as fairness,
respect, and “the greater good”—to balance individual
and group welfare. Here, leaders attend to economic,
environmental, and ethical matters that affect the
larger society. To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Act ethically to serve the larger good, not just to
obey the law.
• Encourage others to take socially responsible action.
• Openly challenge what they consider unethical
decisions and actions.
• Take action to benefit others, not just themselves.
• Recognize and reward others based on merit,
not on politics.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 6
Business Re?ection
Ingenuity Diversity
Society People
• Make fair decisions, even if they have a negative
impact on themselves.
• Take steps to reduce environmental harm.
Recent unethical business practices with worldwide
consequences highlight the need for leaders to serve and
encourage others to serve a larger good. While every
leader must achieve short-term goals, socially aware leaders
know that some short-term goals sabotage long-term
health—of the organization, the society, and the planet.
Diversity
In this zone, leaders value and leverage human
differences, including gender, ethnicity, age, nationality,
beliefs, and work styles. Here, leaders prove their ability
to work with diverse people and appreciate cultural
perspectives. To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Strive to meet the needs of customers representing
other cultures.
• Encourage collaboration among people from
different groups.
• Display sensitivity in managing across
cultural boundaries.
• Collaborate well with people very different
from themselves.
• Effectively lead groups made up of very
diverse people.
• Learn about the business practices of other cultures.
• Manage virtual teams with explicit customer-
centric goals and practices.
This ability to derive value from human differences is
a core skill for 21st-century leaders. A global workforce
requires a leader’s awareness of cultural nuances; a
dispersed workforce requires structured yet flexible leader-
ship; and a diverse workforce requires tailored collaboration
and coaching. All of these tasks require leaders who
balance their own strong identity with their daily effort
to understand people very different from themselves.
Ingenuity
In this zone, leaders not only offer and execute practical
ideas, they also help others do the same by creating
a climate in which innovation can thrive. To succeed
in this zone, leaders:
7 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
The Leadership Assessment Instrument
To help leaders improve their performance in all
six zones, a full-scale assessment instrument was
developed. Self-reported, 180-, 270- or 360-degree
ratings for the 42 practices paint a detailed picture of
an individuals strengths and liabilities in each zone,
visualized in a graphic display, or zone profile, as in
this sample profile for a middle manager:
A zone strength a score of 29 or above on the
scale of 7 to 35 is both a continuing interest and
a strong tendency to apply related abilities in one
zone. In the sample profile, this leader has
strengths in Business and Ingenuity. Beyond its
direct help in solving problems, a strength in any
zone can increase overall leadership credibility
and therefore mitigate liabilities in other zones.
A zone liability a score of 21 or below, in the
sample profile, Reflection, is a relative lack of
interest or ability that undercuts the success of
an otherwise competent leader. A single zone
liability compromises credibility, hence effective-
ness, in other zones. Serious liabilities call for
immediate action to reduce this and other risks.
0
5
15
25
35
Ingenuity
Diversity
Society
Reflection
Business
People
35
25
15
5
5
5
5
5
15
15
15
15
25
25
25
25
35
35
35
35
implied in every innovation. Ingenuity is also vital
to helping groups develop a motivating vision of
future success.
People
In this zone, leaders connect with others on the human
level shared by all to earn commitment, inspire effort,
and improve communication of every kind. To succeed
in this zone, leaders:
• Read a range of emotions in others and respond
appropriately.
• Adapt to the leadership needs of different groups.
• Help others resolve issues of work-life balance.
• Make a daily effort to inspire the trust of customers
and colleagues.
• Help other people to adapt quickly to changes.
• Help groups to develop a shared picture of
a positive future.
• Develop themselves with the goal of improving
overall group capabilities.
• Solve real-world problems by thinking clearly and
engaging others.
• Tell stories to motivate others toward strategic goals.
• Create a work environment in which innovation
can thrive.
• Find ways to promote speed, flexibility, and innovation.
Ingenuity is the currency of success in a capricious
global economy. Closely allied is the ability to manage
the changes—on the business and human levels—
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 8
The Zones in Action: What’s Changed?
Clearly, none of the six leadership zones is altogether new. Still, the research revealed them as especially
critical and understood differently today. A look at what’s changed:
Zone In the past, leaders; Today, leaders:
Reflection Made mistakes due to over-confidence
in their own knowledge and abilities.
Recognize and take steps to expand the limits
of their knowledge and abilities.
Society Neglected the health of the economy,
society, and environment.
Promote their own success by acting with the
greater good in mind.
Diversity Merely accepted the facts of a diverse
workforce and global economy.
Respect and make positive use of key
differences including gender, age, ethnicity,
nationality, and points of view.
Ingenuity Focused ingenuity mainly on ways
to preserve the status quo.
Re-think core assumptions to respond
to new threats and opportunities.
People Motivated people mainly with incentives
and rational argument.
Motivate people through strong relationships
based on mutual trust.
Business Sacrificed almost everything for short-term
performance.
Make the plans and hard decisions
to sustain long-term success.
• Minimize the negative human impact of their
decisions and actions.
• Build and maintain a cross-functional task network.
• Communicate well with customers and colleagues
at all levels.
Leadership in part is getting work done through
others—a real challenge without the skill and zeal to
engage people in a team effort. Leaders effective in
this zone inspire trust and loyalty, weather difficulties
through a wide support network, soften the human
impact of hard decisions, and encourage shared
commitment to business goals.
Business
In this zone, leaders develop strategies, make and
execute plans and decisions, organize the work of
others, and guide effort toward predicted results.
To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Adapt quickly to changing business conditions.
• Manage the costs of operation.
• Learn new ways to make the business competitive.
• Develop and implement effective business plans.
• Analyze and use hard data to promote business
results.
• Manage customer acquisition, retention, and
lifetime value.
• Add clarity to their organization’s vision and values.
Yet 21st-century challenges demand more than text-
book formulas. Beyond the hard skills of analyzing data
and managing costs, leaders must respond quickly to
threats and opportunities—a skill that requires close
attention to key trends and events. Still vital is a leader’s
ability to shape the customer’s experience, but also to
cultivate that customer’s lifetime value.
Balancing these six zones can be daunting because it
is nearly impossible to give equal attention to every
zone all the time. Even so, increased awareness of the
zones and activities can help leaders make conscious
trade-offs in response to shifting conditions.
9 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
Higher-level leaders more
highly valued all six zones
of leadership and were more
likely to select the business
challenge Quality of leaders.
Other Findings
11 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
• Business growth
• Competitors
• Cost of healthcare
• Cost pressures
• Diversity in the
workforce
• Driving sales growth
• Employee productivity
• Expanding into
new markets
• Improving customer
satisfaction
• Product/service innovation
• Quality of leaders
• Retaining talent
• Succeeding with mergers
and acquisitions
• Technology challenges
• Virtual workplace
structures
• Number of Direct Reports:
As compared to leaders with fewer direct reports,
leaders with more direct reports more highly valued
all six zones of leadership.
• Geographic Scope of Operation:
Individuals from organizations with a greater global
scope of operation were more likely to select the
business challenges “succeeding with mergers and
acquisitions,” “diversity in the workforce,” and “vir-
tual workplace structures” than were individuals
from organizations with a more domestic or local
scope of operations.
• Number of Employees Globally:
Individuals from organizations with a greater
number of employees globally were more likely
to select the business challenge “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions” than were individuals
from organizations with a smaller number of
employees globally.
• Worldwide Revenue:
Individuals from organizations with a higher
approximate 2008 worldwide revenue were more
likely to select the business challenge “succeeding
with mergers and acquisitions” than were individuals
from organizations with a lower 2008 revenue.
• Time Working at Current Level:
Individuals with more time at their current level
were more likely to select the business challenge
“controlling healthcare costs” than were individuals
with less time at their current level.
• Number of Direct Reports:
Individuals with a greater number of direct reports
were more likely to select “virtual workplace struc-
tures” than were individuals with fewer direct reports.
Of special note, individuals in organizations with a wider
scope of operation, a greater number of employees,
and/or greater worldwide revenues more highly valued
the Diversity zone than did individuals from organizations
with a narrower scope, fewer employees, and/or lower
approximate worldwide revenues.
The literature review (phase 1) identified a range of
business challenges for 21st-century leaders, including:
3
As noted, analysis of focus-group responses to these
challenges (phase 2) helped the research team isolate
the six essential “zones of leadership” outlined earlier.
4
Respondents in the primary survey (phase 3) included
leaders and employees at all levels in a wide cross-sec-
tion of organizations of varying size. Respondents were
asked to identify their “top five” business challenges
and to rate the importance and observed application
of various practices within each leadership zone. These
findings were analyzed for immediately evident trends
in business challenges and leadership practices across
global regions and organizational levels.
Among other statistical analyses, a Cronbach’s alpha was
used to calculate the internal consistency and accuracy
of the leadership-zone model. This alpha value was .983,
indicating a highly consistent and accurate description of
leadership today (1.0 is perfect), and therefore a very
reliable model. Further, all six zones correlate very highly
with each other, suggesting that the six zones triangulate
on a larger leadership construct. In other words, the
six-zone approach is accurate.
Further analysis revealed a number of statistically significant
differences and correlations among the identified business
challenges, the zones of leadership, and the survey
respondents’ organizational levels, global region,
company size, and approximate annual revenue:
5
• Managerial Role:
As compared to lower-level leaders, higher-level
leaders more highly valued all six zones of leader-
ship and were more likely to select the business
challenge “quality of leaders.”
3 See in “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis” for the complete list of
identified business challenges.
4 The final terms for the six zones of leadership are Reflection, Society, Diversity, Ingenuity,
People, and Business. The corresponding six terms used in the survey were Introspective,
Ethical, Global, Creative, Human, and Business.
5 For greater detail, see “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis.”
Survey respondents world-
wide rated the observed
use of most leadership
practices lower than they
rated the actual importance
of those practices.
Discussion: Practical Implications
5. Survey respondents from organizations with
wider global operations (in terms of scope,
number of employees, and revenue) rated the
most pressing challenges as “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions,” “diversity in the work-
force,” and “virtual workplace structures”—all
logical correlations since these challenges more
deeply affect organizations operating globally.
6. Notably, the business challenge “diversity in the
workforce” ranked lowest among all respondents,
but highest among respondents from organizations
with greater global scope. A question for further
study is whether organizations that value diversity
are more likely to grow globally, or global scope
causes leaders to place higher value on diversity.
The answer is likely a little of both.
Overall findings for all organizational levels paint a
detailed picture of 21st-century leadership. The practical
implications of several specific findings deserve
further discussion:
1. Survey respondents worldwide rated the observed
use of most leadership practices lower than they
rated the actual importance of those practices. In
other words, respondents rated many practices as
critical but not always seen in action. One implication
is that this result highlights that leadership, like
service, depends on meeting customer expectations.
A middle manager, for example, serves at least two
internal customer groups: direct reports (supervisors)
and superiors (executives). If these groups expect
more zone competence than the leader can deliver,
credibility suffers, relationships suffer, results suffer,
and ultimately the leader suffers.
2. In two of three global regions (Asia and North
America), ratings of the importance of the leadership
zones rose with organiz ational level. Since these
higher-level leaders have a wider purview of
organizational success, they apparently value
a wider range of practices required to achieve
that success. So at least in these global regions,
improved zone awareness and competence would
seem the very definition of “executive material.”
6
3. Focus-group participants and leaders who
subsequently completed the assessment instrument
often observed that leaders strong in Reflection are
better equipped to recognize their liabilities and
leverage their strengths in other leadership zones,
adjust their current strategies, adopt new strategies,
and recognize strengths and liabilities in other people.
4. Most middle managers gave high importance
ratings for practices in the People zone—a window
through which any leader can demonstrate
commitment in other zones. Every role has its
“core zone.” For an executive, it may be Reflection.
For a supervisor, it may be Ingenuity. For a middle
manager—at the center of the organization, who
must cultivate make-or-break relationships in two
directions—it is very likely the People zone.
6 See “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis” for further detail on region-
specific survey data.
13 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
If a raisin is a grape with
something vital missing
water so a manager is
a leader with many vital
things missing.
Conclusion
range of peer-reviewed research.
7
The result is a discursive
definition of 42 practices that help leaders meet today’s
business challenges.
Further data analysis will yield greater insight into
region-specific needs—in isolation and in relation
to other regions. With business routinely operating
across borders, understanding the business practices
and leadership expectations of other cultures can
promote collaboration, mutual benefit, and increased
appreciation of workforce diversity.
With time, as many more leaders complete or re-take
the online assessment instrument, AchieveGlobal
will continue to collect and analyze longitudinal
data on worldwide leadership strengths and liabilities.
Meanwhile, leaders who have already completed the
assessment instrument have provided positive feedback
on its utility, accuracy, and relevance.
More than ever, leadership in the 21st-century is
a complex matrix of practices, now responding to
rapidly evolving internal mandates and market realities.
When leaders actively aware of these forces apply
practices in tune with their geographic location, scope
of operations, revenue goals, and organizational levels,
they are better equipped to build on their strengths,
minimize their liabilities, and achieve success for
themselves and their organization.
The overall research findings and analysis shed new light
on the eternal question, “What is the difference between
a leader and a manager?” An analogy may illustrate: The
zone model suggests that this difference is very much
like the difference between a raisin and a grape.
If a raisin is a grape with something vital missing—water—
so a manager is a leader with many vital things missing.
Through the lens of this model, a “manager” is competent
primarily in one zone: Business. Managers “make and
execute plans and decisions, organize the work of others,
and guide effort toward predicted results.” “Leaders”
must do these things, too, but the research found that
leaders also demonstrate other interests and abilities
grouped in the model in the other five zones: Reflection,
Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, and People.
Just as a raisin has vital nutritional value, a “manager” has
vital organizational value. In fact, survey respondents at
every level in every global region consistently rated the
Business zone more highly than other zones—and for
good reason: without business results, no one succeeds.
At the same time, our respondents said that business
savvy alone is not enough to meet the complex variety
of 21st-century challenges. In summary, researchers
concluded that:
• More complex problems demand greater Reflection.
• Sustainable long-term strategy must have a positive
impact on Society.
• Large-scale efforts need to leverage Diversity in all
its forms.
• Ingenuity drives innovation, which sharpens
a competitive edge.
• Motivating People must involve their emotions
as well as their minds.
By this definition, an effective 21st-century leader moves
smoothly among the zones as conditions demand,
leveraging strengths from each zone to address
deficiencies and ultimately succeed in the other zones.
These research conclusions clearly reflect the beliefs,
attitudes, and actions of practicing leaders worldwide.
Focus-group and survey participants as well as leaders
who completed the assessment instrument drew from
their experience to confirm, extend, or correct a wide
7 See “”Bibliography.”
15 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
This appendix provides
further detail on the process,
findings, and analysis in
each phase.
Appendix Research Process, Findings, and Analysis
• Trust
• Work-life interface
The research team read the full text of 70 selected
articles and books representing the best thinking and
hard research on the identified contextual themes.
8
For each article or work, the team developed a three-
to five-page annotated bibliography summarizing key
findings on best leadership practices and the following
major business challenges driving the need for effective
21st-century leadership:
• Attracting talent
• Changing buying patterns
• Changing methods of distribution
• Controlling healthcare costs
• Corporate social responsibility
• Cost pressures
• Current competitors
• Diversity in the workforce
• Driving sales growth
• Employee productivity
• Enabling business growth
• Environmental responsibility
• Ethical leadership
• Expanding into new markets
• Gaining access to capital
• Insufficient number of leaders
• Improving customer satisfaction
• Insufficient talent overall
• Integrating new technologies
• Lack of trust among leaders and employees
• New competitors
• Operational excellence
• Product/service innovation
• Quality of leaders
The three-phased study included a review of journal
articles, two focus-group sessions, and a worldwide
quantitative survey, with each phase building on the
findings of the previous phase or phases. This appendix
provides further detail on the process, findings, and
analysis in each phase.
Phase 1 – Literature Review
The literature review focused on quantitative and
qualitative articles published over a two-year period.
To begin, researchers captured themes from a broad
range of journals and identified eight journals as the
basis of this first phase of research:
• Asia-Pacific Journal of Human Resources
• European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology
• Global Business and Organizational Excellence
• Human Resource Development Quarterly
• International Journal of Human Resource
Development and Management
• Leader to Leader
• The Journal of Management Development
• The Leadership Quarterly
A preliminary review of all article abstracts produced this
list of what the research team called “contextual themes”:
• Complex adaptive systems
• Cross-cultural leadership
• Decentralization
• Fairness
• Introspection
• Leadership type
• Organizational citizenship
• Organizational climate
• Organizational justice
• Social responsibility
• Storytelling
• Teams
8 See “Bibliography” for a complete list of articles and other works reviewed.
17 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
• In the 21st-century you have to create an environ-
ment where people can be open to present ideas…
Throw a hundred ideas on the table, maybe you
can get five of them that really work. That’s the
way I understood creativity.
• This is a good bridge from traditional to modern
leadership. You’re taking those archaic traits and
molding them for today’s workforce. The static
organizational chart we’re so familiar with is not
really the way it works anymore. This model moves
leadership into a modern environment, addressing
the world issues at hand.
Among their other responses, focus-group participants
identified the following “challenges facing organizations”:
• Boosting quality and morale
• Diversity in the workforce
• Ethical issues in the workplace
• Finding the right people
• Generational integration
• Global cultural problems
• Job-risk management
• Lack of creativity and problem solving
• Lack of trust
• Leadership development
• Performance management
• Resistance to change
• Resource management
• Velocity of change
• Virtual workplace structures
Focus-group participants also identified “skills and
knowledge required to address these challenges,”
including the following:
• Business acumen
• Conflict management
• Effective communication
• Flexibility to adapt to environment and people
• Global management skills: cultural dynamics
• Regulatory environment
• Retaining talent
• Succeeding with mergers and acquisitions
• Technology challenges
• Virtual workplace structures
During phase 1, in addition, a preliminary leadership
model was developed unifying the identified business
challenges with commensurate best practices.
Phase 2 – Focus-Group Sessions
Two focus groups were hosted for more than two
dozen mid-managers and executives representing
a range of industries and the public sector. Themes
from the journal articles and the preliminary leadership
model formed the basis for discussion. Focus-group
participants shared their real-world experiences,
confirmed some themes, and added new ones, thereby
clarifying the evolving picture of 21st-century leader-
ship. Based on focus-group findings, researchers
extensively revised the leadership model.
In the focus-group sessions, participants responded
to a range of questions, including:
• What challenges are you facing in your role as
a leader in your organization at this time?
• What knowledge, skills, and abilities do leaders
need to address these challenges?
The following are sample comments from the focus groups:
• A person really needs a personal perspective on
leadership... There are layers of a person’s charac-
ter, their behaviors, or their attributes that make
them an effective leader. Not just one attribute is
going to do it.
• Effective leaders adjust the degree of active
leadership...because from my perspective, my
management style with people from the United
States might be effective. But if I go to a different
cultural setting, their expectations of my style
might be different... I’ve got to make sure that my
style doesn’t get in the way of being effective in
different cultural settings.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 18
Researchers used the term “practice” to designate a
range of behaviors and thought processes, i.e. actions
that leaders take, or key issues about which they have
evolving thoughts and feelings. Survey respondents
facilitated further development of the leadership model
by rating the importance of the identified leadership
challenges and practices, as well as the observed
application of the practices.
Respondents completed 16 subsections in the survey,
including demographic information, free-response
questions, and Likert-scale ratings of the importance
and observed application of leadership practices
emerging from the literature review and the focus-group
sessions. A survey section on current business challenges
created a unique context for each respondent to consider
his or her leadership concerns and recommended
best practices.
Survey Demographics
Respondents included international and domestic-only
organizations ranging from fewer than 500 to more than
100,000 employees. Survey respondents represented a
cross-section of companies of varying sizes, and included
multiple levels of management as well as individual
contributors. Specifically, respondents represented:
• Companies whose scope of operations ranged
from domestic-only operations (37 percent) to
global operations (25 percent). See Figure 1.
• Companies ranging in population from fewer than
500 associates (37 percent) to more than 25,000
(18 percent). See Figure 2.
• Companies with annual revenues ranging from
less than $50 million (44 percent) to more than
$1 billion (12 percent). See Figure 3.
• Just over 25 percent of respondents had no
direct reports. Of respondents with direct reports,
29 percent managed individual contributors, 36
percent managed other managers, and 10 percent
managed entire business units. See Figure 4.
• Innovation
• Internal and external accountability
• Motivation through coaching and recognition
• Performance appraisals
Focus-group responses were analyzed and applied
to restructure and refine the preliminary leadership
model. Based on this analysis, researchers identified
six preliminary “zones of leadership,” later renamed to
reflect the highest-rated leadership practices identified
in the quantitative survey. Initial and final zone names
appear below:
These zones, or categories of leadership practices,
were then tested with a wider audience in the final
phase of research.
Phase 3 – Quantitative Survey
Based on the combined findings of the literature review
and focus-group sessions, a quantitative survey was
developed and launched in the United States, Mexico,
India, China, Singapore, Germany, and the United
Kingdom, and 971 responses were gathered from
business and government leaders and employees.
Survey Purpose and Structure
This survey was designed to answer two key questions:
• What are the central challenges for leaders in
the 21st century?
• What best practices will help leaders meet
these challenges?
Initial Zone Names Final Zone Names
Introspective Reflection
Ethical Society
Global Diversity
Creative Ingenuity
Human People
Business Business
19 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
No direct reports
Frontline managers
Mid-level managers
Business unit managers
25%
29%
36%
10%
$50 million or less
More than $1 billion
Between $50 million
and $1 billion $
12%
44%
44%
Less than 500
More then 25,000
500-25,000
38%
37%
25%
Domestic Only
Global Operations
Other
45%
18%
37%
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 20
World Bank found productivity growth in Mexico
“disappointing.”
10
“Employee productivity” rated in the
top five challenges for Europe and the USA as well,
while “growing the business” rated in the top five
challenges for Asia, Europe, and the USA, but not
for Mexico.
In alignment with the overall top business challenge,
“cost pressures,” respondents worldwide rated Business
as the most important leadership zone.
The broader comment here is that regional differences
in top business challenges tended to align with regional
differences in business use of technology, and with
other cultural and market or industry differences.
Survey Findings: Business Challenges
Responses to the survey item “Please select the TOP
FIVE most pressing challenges that your organization
will face over the next 1-3 years” were tabulated by
organizational level, company size, and global region.
The five top-rated challenges by global region appear
in the table below.
Note that “cost pressures” was the top challenge in
three of the four regions (Asia, Europe, and USA). The
fact that “employee productivity” was the top challenge
for Mexico may reflect that country’s status as one of
two countries (with Turkey) with the lowest productivity
levels in the Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) area in 2004
9
. In 2006, the
Asia Europe Mexico USA
1 Cost pressure Cost pressure Employee productivity Cost pressure
2 Competitors Growing the business Product/ service
innovation
Growing the business
3 Improving customer
satisfaction
Driving sales growth Expanding into new
markets
Driving sales growth
4 Growing the business Product/ service
innovation
Technology challenges Improving customer
satisfaction
5 Technology challenges Employee productivity Competitors Employee productivity
Survey Findings: Leadership Practices
The 42 most important leadership practices
identified by the survey were sorted into categories
(the “zones”), and results were tabulated overall and
by organizational level, industry, and global region.
To identify the most important practices, the survey
had respondents use a 7-point Likert scale (with 7
representing “very important”) to rate the importance
of each practice in meeting business challenges during
the next five years.
The Y-axis of Figures 5–7 represents the percent of
survey respondents choosing an importance rating of
6 or 7. Researchers analyzed these responses to this
survey section in order to:
• Determine which practices were most important to
respondents.
• Refine the sorting of top-rated practices into the
six leadership zones presented in the survey.
• Identify trends based on organizational level and
global region.
9 See report, International Comparisons of Labour Productivity Levels – Estimates for 2004, September 2005, athttp://www.oecd.org/topicstatsportal.
10 See Increasing Competitiveness and Productivity in Mexico, athttp://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/MEXICOEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20899029~pagePK:1497618~piPK:217854~theSitePK:338397,00.html
21 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
of Reflection higher than did supervisors, yet both
executives and supervisors rated Reflection at least
seven points higher than middle managers did.
Respondents in Asia followed a similar pattern, with
ratings in every zone rising with organizational level,
except among middle managers. Meanwhile, executives
in Asia rated all zones much higher than did other
leaders in Asia (notably rating Society 18.3 points
higher than did middle managers in Asia). A similar
trend was observed in Europe, except that European
executives rated most zones (including Business)
lower than did leaders in other global regions.
This global trend—the drop in middle-managers’ ratings
of zone importance compared to the ratings of other
leaders in their region—deserves some focus. Since
middle-managers play a challenging role, often caught
between big-picture strategy and day-to-day operations,
these leaders may tend to adopt an all-Business leader-
ship style they feel helps to operationalize strategy and
meet practical demands. It is worth noting, however,
that to realize strategy in concrete terms, most middle
managers would benefit from increased awareness and
competence in all the zones.
In Asia (Figure 5) and the USA (Figure 7), executives
rated all six zones higher than did any other organizational
level. In Europe, however (Figure 6), it was supervisors
who rated all zones higher than did other organizational
levels. This finding may indicate greater acceptance of
traditional leadership practices by European executives,
as compared to executives in other regions,.
In Asia, where all levels combined rated Society much
lower than the highest-rated zone, Business, executives
rated Society above Reflection, Ingenuity,and People.
That executives in Asia see value in action for social
good highlights their possible failure to see that action
in other zones—namely Reflection, Ingenuity, and
People—also contributes to social good.
In Europe (Figure 6), an interesting trend occurred among
respondents with no direct reports, who rated Reflection
much higher than they rated any other leadership zone.
This finding may correlate (and possibly reflect
dissatisfaction) with the relatively low rating given
by European executives of the same leadership zone.
In the United States, with the exception of middle
managers, ratings in every zone rose with organization
level. For example, executives rated the importance
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 22
Asia Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Exectives 70.4% 73.6% 74.3% 72.7% 71.8% 81.8%
Middle Manager 60.8% 55.3% 60.0% 60.8% 61.4% 66.1%
Supervisors 62.4% 60.0% 61.7% 61.4% 62.7% 65.9%
No Direct Reports 52.9% 47.9% 45.9% 50.4% 51.6% 56.4%
Total 61.6% 59.2% 60.5% 61.3% 61.9% 67.5%
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
23 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
Europe Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Executives 40.8% 36.6% 33.0% 36.6% 42.3% 44.2%
Middle Managers 40.2% 41.5% 40.4% 38.6% 41.3% 49.8%
Supervisors 48.4% 45.3% 45.5% 47.3% 50.4% 51.2%
No Direct Reports 44.1% 38.8% 34.0% 34.5% 39.6% 38.8%
Total 43.4% 40.6% 38.2% 39.3% 43.4% 46.0%
U.S.A. Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Executives 62.2% 62.8% 58.5% 62.3% 62.7% 68.8%
Middle Managers 53.5% 52.2% 52.2% 55.2% 54.5% 58.2%
Supervisors 60.6% 68.7% 53.4% 58.6% 59.2% 63.1%
No Direct Reports 51.4% 50.3% 43.2% 48.4% 51.2% 53.3%
Total 56.9% 55.9% 51.8% 56.0% 56.8% 60.8%
to measure leadership. Further, all six subscales of the
leadership survey instrument correlate very highly with
each other. These correlations are highlighted in red in
the Correlation Matrix, on the following page. These
high correlations suggest that the six zones of leadership
tapped by the instrument all triangulate on a larger
leadership construct. In other words, the six-zone
approach in which leadership was conceptualized in
this instrument is very likely accurate.
Correlations represent the degree to which changes
in one variable are associated with changes in another
variable. Larger correlations represent a stronger
relationship between two variables, whereas smaller
correlations represent a weaker relationship. For example,
in the matrix on the following page, Society and
Reflection correlate at .846, suggesting a very high
relationship between the degrees to which managers
attribute importance to these two variables. In other
words, if a manager attributes high importance to
Society, he or she will also be very likely to attribute
importance to Reflection, and vice versa. Correlations
above .10 are small, above .30 medium, and above
.50 large.
P-values represent the degree to which a correlation
is statistically significant. Values at or below .05 are
statistically significant and would be expected to occur
by chance at or below 5 percent. Correlations in red in
the matrix are statistically significant.
Survey Analysis: Correlation Matrix
A detailed correlation analysis of the survey data was
performed to establish relationships among data sets
and test the internal accuracy and consistency of the
survey instrument and commensurate leadership model.
To focus only on major trends in the survey data,
specific questions were grouped into six separate
subscales, measuring the six zones of leadership. This
data was further examined to assess whether the value
that respondents placed on each of these zones varied
in a statistically significant way according to several
organizational and managerial characteristics:
• Geographic scope of operations
• Number of employees globally
• Approximate 2008 worldwide revenue
• Organizational level
• Time working at current level
• Number of direct reports
The statistical analysis used was a series of correlation
coefficients. Since over 900 individuals responded
to the leadership survey, many of these correlations
reached statistical significance, even when the
effects were trivial. Instead of focusing on statistical
significance, the correlations were used as estimates
of effect size, which emphasizes the magnitude of the
relationships among the variables. Correlations above
.10 are considered small, above .30 are considered
medium, and above .50 are considered large.
Therefore, the focus was on correlations above .10.
To examine whether the frequency of item selection
on the question “Please select the TOP FIVE most
pressing challenges that your organization will face over
the next 1-3 years” varied as a function of organizational/
managerial characteristics, several hundred Analyses of
Variance (ANOVAs) were performed, which were
Bonferonni-corrected to control for the over-identification
of statistically significant findings (family-wise error)
when running so many analyses. Only statistically
significant differences were reported.
To test the internal consistency and accuracy of the survey
instrument in measuring leadership, a Cronbach’s alpha
was calculated. This alpha value was .983, reflecting
a highly consistent and accurate instrument (with 1.0
being perfect), and therefore very reliable in its ability
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 24
Reflection Society People Ingenuity Diversity Business
Geographic scope
of operations
Correlation -0.03485360 -0.07481 -0.05862 -0.08076 -0.18103 -0.0586
p-value 0.290684507 0.023551 0.076691 0.014711
That is the crux of AchieveGlobal’s multi-phased, multi-level study of how leadership is changing to keep pace with today’s business challenges.
A multi-level analysis of global trends
in leadership challenges and practices
Contributors:
Craig Perrin Sharon Daniels Kathleen Clancy Jefferson, Ph.D.
Chris Blauth Mark Marone, Ph.D. Colleen O’Sullivan
East Apthorp Joyce Thompsen, Ph.D. Linda Moran, Ed.D.
Developing the
21st-Century Leader
Executive Summary
1 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
To succeed in the shifting business landscape of the 21st-
century, leaders must rethink their historical views and
cultivate a new configuration of attitudes and abilities.
That is the crux of AchieveGlobal’s multi-phased,
multi-level study of how leadership is changing to keep
pace with today’s business challenges. The research
began by identifying leadership trends documented
in peer-reviewed academic and industry journals
over a two-year period. Later focus-group sessions
supported development of a survey completed by 971
business and government leaders and employees in
Europe, Asia, and North America. Survey results in
turn facilitated development of a comprehensive new
model of leadership today and a related individual
assessment instrument.
The literature review, focus groups, and survey painted
a detailed picture of the business challenges and
required practices for leaders at multiple levels in
organizations worldwide. Among the key research
findings and conclusions:
• Leadership in the 21st-century is more than
ever a complex matrix of practices, which
vary by geography, organizational level, and
individual circumstances.
• In all global regions, modern leadership may be
distilled into six “zones,” or categories of best
practices, which the study identified as Reflection,
Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, People, and Business.
• Effective leaders recognize their own leadership
strengths and liabilities, adjust current strategies,
adopt new strategies, and recognize strengths and
liabilities in other people.
• Leaders strong in the Reflection zone are better
equipped to leverage their strengths and reduce
their liabilities in other zones.
• Leaders from organizations with greater geographic
scope, numbers of employees, and worldwide
revenues tend to value the Diversity zone more
highly than leaders do in smaller organizations.
• Organizations with wider global operations
identify their most pressing challenges in the
Diversity zone, notably in “creating virtual
workplace structures” and “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions.”
• At the same time, leaders worldwide rank Diversity
of lowest importance among all leadership zones.
• In alignment with the overall top business challenge,
“cost pressures,” survey respondents ranked
Business as the most important leadership zone.
• Leaders who adapt their zone strengths to their
geographic location, scope of operations, and
organizational level are better able to meet their
specific combination of challenges.
• Leaders who maintain active awareness of their
environment and apply the practices demanded
by that environment are more likely to achieve
individual and organizational success.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 2
The world has experienced profound changes in the
early years of the 21st-century. Countless challenges—
notably the rise of the global economy and its impact
on countries everywhere—have forced leaders worldwide
into uncharted territory and literally redefined what
it takes to succeed. In the context of AchieveGlobal’s
earlier research on leadership principles
1
, these
challenges raised key questions to be addressed by
comprehensive new research on leadership today:
• What challenges confront leaders in the 21st-century?
• How has leadership changed to keep pace?
• What key practices are still important for leaders?
• What new practices have emerged in response to the
shifting business landscape?
To answer these and other questions, a new worldwide
study sought to uncover what makes leaders successful
by examining their main challenges and daily practices
against the backdrop of a dynamic business climate.
1 An earlier AchieveGlobal study confirmed the continuing relevance of six “Basic
Principles” of leadership, universal guidelines time-tested worldwide with leaders
for decades:
1. Focus on the situation, issue, or behavior, not on the person.
2. Maintain the self-confidence and self-esteem of others.
3. Take initiative to make things better.
4. Maintain constructive relationships.
5. Lead by example.
6. Think beyond the moment.
Introduction
The study was designed to
isolate and analyze current
concerns among leaders and
employees, with the ultimate
goal of a comprehensive model
articulating key areas of focus
for 21st-century leaders.
Research Process: A Three-Phased Approach
The study was designed to isolate and analyze current
concerns among leaders and employees, with the
ultimate goal of a comprehensive model articulating
key areas of focus for 21st-century leaders.
2
This model
would give leaders:
• A well-documented and detailed picture of
effective leadership in the 21st-century
• A tool to identify and make use of existing
strengths, as well as to identify and reduce
or eliminate potential liabilities
• The ability to track progress by re-assessing
leadership strengths and liabilities over time
Three research phases included secondary research
in phase 1 and primary research in phases 2 and 3.
Phase 1 was a review of articles from eight peer-reviewed
business and leadership journals published in Europe,
Asia, and North America. This review produced two
long lists of business challenges and of best practices that
leaders need to address them. Phase 1 laid the foundation
for development of a preliminary leadership model.
Phase 2 tested this preliminary model with two focus
groups of mid-level and senior leaders. Focus-group
results helped prioritize the business challenges and
aided further development of the leadership model.
In phase 3, a survey on key business challenges and
commensurate leadership practices was developed
and launched in the United States, Mexico, India,
China, Singapore, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
Survey results of 971 responses from respondents at all
organizational levels were analyzed to produce the final
leadership model.
This research design, with extensive feedback
from practicing leaders, produced a truly discursive
definition of leadership. During this process, multiple
voices from the major global regions contributed to
the final picture of today’s leadership challenges and
best practices.
2 A detailed summary of the three-phased research process, along with the analysis
of findings in each phase, appears in “Appendix – Research Process, Findings,
and Analysis.”
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 4
The research team used the
term practice to refer to
a range of behaviors and
thought processes, i.e.
actions that leaders take or
central issues about which
they have evolving thoughts
and feelings.
The Leadership Zone Model
The core finding of the AchieveGlobal study was
validation of 42 practices—some behavioral, some
cognitive—required to meet the challenges of 21st-
century leadership. The research team used the term
"practice" to refer to a range of behaviors and thought
processes, i.e. actions that leaders take or central issues
about which they have evolving thoughts and feelings.
Researchers sorted these 42 practices into six categories,
or “zones,” represented here in a hexagonal model,
in which each zone contains seven unique practices,
identified below.
Reflection
In this zone, leaders assess their own motives, beliefs,
attitudes, and actions. Reflective leaders look within
and ask, “How can I make sure my own blind spots and
biases don’t cause me to make poor decisions?” and
“How can I leverage my strengths to become a better
leader?” To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Take responsibility for their own mistakes.
• Seek the knowledge required to make sense
of the big picture.
• Examine what role they play in the challenges
that they face.
• Treat failure as a chance to learn and grow.
• Reflect often on their performance as a leader.
• Give serious consideration to opinions that differ
from their own.
• Speak frankly with others to learn from them and
build trust.
Reflection helps leaders avoid pitfalls in other zones,
make the most of honest feedback, recognize the limits
of their knowledge, and avoid repeating their mistakes.
When leaders see their mistakes as a chance to learn
and grow, they gain the ability—and credibility—to help
others do the same.
Society
In this zone, leaders apply principles—such as fairness,
respect, and “the greater good”—to balance individual
and group welfare. Here, leaders attend to economic,
environmental, and ethical matters that affect the
larger society. To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Act ethically to serve the larger good, not just to
obey the law.
• Encourage others to take socially responsible action.
• Openly challenge what they consider unethical
decisions and actions.
• Take action to benefit others, not just themselves.
• Recognize and reward others based on merit,
not on politics.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 6
Business Re?ection
Ingenuity Diversity
Society People
• Make fair decisions, even if they have a negative
impact on themselves.
• Take steps to reduce environmental harm.
Recent unethical business practices with worldwide
consequences highlight the need for leaders to serve and
encourage others to serve a larger good. While every
leader must achieve short-term goals, socially aware leaders
know that some short-term goals sabotage long-term
health—of the organization, the society, and the planet.
Diversity
In this zone, leaders value and leverage human
differences, including gender, ethnicity, age, nationality,
beliefs, and work styles. Here, leaders prove their ability
to work with diverse people and appreciate cultural
perspectives. To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Strive to meet the needs of customers representing
other cultures.
• Encourage collaboration among people from
different groups.
• Display sensitivity in managing across
cultural boundaries.
• Collaborate well with people very different
from themselves.
• Effectively lead groups made up of very
diverse people.
• Learn about the business practices of other cultures.
• Manage virtual teams with explicit customer-
centric goals and practices.
This ability to derive value from human differences is
a core skill for 21st-century leaders. A global workforce
requires a leader’s awareness of cultural nuances; a
dispersed workforce requires structured yet flexible leader-
ship; and a diverse workforce requires tailored collaboration
and coaching. All of these tasks require leaders who
balance their own strong identity with their daily effort
to understand people very different from themselves.
Ingenuity
In this zone, leaders not only offer and execute practical
ideas, they also help others do the same by creating
a climate in which innovation can thrive. To succeed
in this zone, leaders:
7 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
The Leadership Assessment Instrument
To help leaders improve their performance in all
six zones, a full-scale assessment instrument was
developed. Self-reported, 180-, 270- or 360-degree
ratings for the 42 practices paint a detailed picture of
an individuals strengths and liabilities in each zone,
visualized in a graphic display, or zone profile, as in
this sample profile for a middle manager:
A zone strength a score of 29 or above on the
scale of 7 to 35 is both a continuing interest and
a strong tendency to apply related abilities in one
zone. In the sample profile, this leader has
strengths in Business and Ingenuity. Beyond its
direct help in solving problems, a strength in any
zone can increase overall leadership credibility
and therefore mitigate liabilities in other zones.
A zone liability a score of 21 or below, in the
sample profile, Reflection, is a relative lack of
interest or ability that undercuts the success of
an otherwise competent leader. A single zone
liability compromises credibility, hence effective-
ness, in other zones. Serious liabilities call for
immediate action to reduce this and other risks.
0
5
15
25
35
Ingenuity
Diversity
Society
Reflection
Business
People
35
25
15
5
5
5
5
5
15
15
15
15
25
25
25
25
35
35
35
35
implied in every innovation. Ingenuity is also vital
to helping groups develop a motivating vision of
future success.
People
In this zone, leaders connect with others on the human
level shared by all to earn commitment, inspire effort,
and improve communication of every kind. To succeed
in this zone, leaders:
• Read a range of emotions in others and respond
appropriately.
• Adapt to the leadership needs of different groups.
• Help others resolve issues of work-life balance.
• Make a daily effort to inspire the trust of customers
and colleagues.
• Help other people to adapt quickly to changes.
• Help groups to develop a shared picture of
a positive future.
• Develop themselves with the goal of improving
overall group capabilities.
• Solve real-world problems by thinking clearly and
engaging others.
• Tell stories to motivate others toward strategic goals.
• Create a work environment in which innovation
can thrive.
• Find ways to promote speed, flexibility, and innovation.
Ingenuity is the currency of success in a capricious
global economy. Closely allied is the ability to manage
the changes—on the business and human levels—
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 8
The Zones in Action: What’s Changed?
Clearly, none of the six leadership zones is altogether new. Still, the research revealed them as especially
critical and understood differently today. A look at what’s changed:
Zone In the past, leaders; Today, leaders:
Reflection Made mistakes due to over-confidence
in their own knowledge and abilities.
Recognize and take steps to expand the limits
of their knowledge and abilities.
Society Neglected the health of the economy,
society, and environment.
Promote their own success by acting with the
greater good in mind.
Diversity Merely accepted the facts of a diverse
workforce and global economy.
Respect and make positive use of key
differences including gender, age, ethnicity,
nationality, and points of view.
Ingenuity Focused ingenuity mainly on ways
to preserve the status quo.
Re-think core assumptions to respond
to new threats and opportunities.
People Motivated people mainly with incentives
and rational argument.
Motivate people through strong relationships
based on mutual trust.
Business Sacrificed almost everything for short-term
performance.
Make the plans and hard decisions
to sustain long-term success.
• Minimize the negative human impact of their
decisions and actions.
• Build and maintain a cross-functional task network.
• Communicate well with customers and colleagues
at all levels.
Leadership in part is getting work done through
others—a real challenge without the skill and zeal to
engage people in a team effort. Leaders effective in
this zone inspire trust and loyalty, weather difficulties
through a wide support network, soften the human
impact of hard decisions, and encourage shared
commitment to business goals.
Business
In this zone, leaders develop strategies, make and
execute plans and decisions, organize the work of
others, and guide effort toward predicted results.
To succeed in this zone, leaders:
• Adapt quickly to changing business conditions.
• Manage the costs of operation.
• Learn new ways to make the business competitive.
• Develop and implement effective business plans.
• Analyze and use hard data to promote business
results.
• Manage customer acquisition, retention, and
lifetime value.
• Add clarity to their organization’s vision and values.
Yet 21st-century challenges demand more than text-
book formulas. Beyond the hard skills of analyzing data
and managing costs, leaders must respond quickly to
threats and opportunities—a skill that requires close
attention to key trends and events. Still vital is a leader’s
ability to shape the customer’s experience, but also to
cultivate that customer’s lifetime value.
Balancing these six zones can be daunting because it
is nearly impossible to give equal attention to every
zone all the time. Even so, increased awareness of the
zones and activities can help leaders make conscious
trade-offs in response to shifting conditions.
9 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
Higher-level leaders more
highly valued all six zones
of leadership and were more
likely to select the business
challenge Quality of leaders.
Other Findings
11 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
• Business growth
• Competitors
• Cost of healthcare
• Cost pressures
• Diversity in the
workforce
• Driving sales growth
• Employee productivity
• Expanding into
new markets
• Improving customer
satisfaction
• Product/service innovation
• Quality of leaders
• Retaining talent
• Succeeding with mergers
and acquisitions
• Technology challenges
• Virtual workplace
structures
• Number of Direct Reports:
As compared to leaders with fewer direct reports,
leaders with more direct reports more highly valued
all six zones of leadership.
• Geographic Scope of Operation:
Individuals from organizations with a greater global
scope of operation were more likely to select the
business challenges “succeeding with mergers and
acquisitions,” “diversity in the workforce,” and “vir-
tual workplace structures” than were individuals
from organizations with a more domestic or local
scope of operations.
• Number of Employees Globally:
Individuals from organizations with a greater
number of employees globally were more likely
to select the business challenge “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions” than were individuals
from organizations with a smaller number of
employees globally.
• Worldwide Revenue:
Individuals from organizations with a higher
approximate 2008 worldwide revenue were more
likely to select the business challenge “succeeding
with mergers and acquisitions” than were individuals
from organizations with a lower 2008 revenue.
• Time Working at Current Level:
Individuals with more time at their current level
were more likely to select the business challenge
“controlling healthcare costs” than were individuals
with less time at their current level.
• Number of Direct Reports:
Individuals with a greater number of direct reports
were more likely to select “virtual workplace struc-
tures” than were individuals with fewer direct reports.
Of special note, individuals in organizations with a wider
scope of operation, a greater number of employees,
and/or greater worldwide revenues more highly valued
the Diversity zone than did individuals from organizations
with a narrower scope, fewer employees, and/or lower
approximate worldwide revenues.
The literature review (phase 1) identified a range of
business challenges for 21st-century leaders, including:
3
As noted, analysis of focus-group responses to these
challenges (phase 2) helped the research team isolate
the six essential “zones of leadership” outlined earlier.
4
Respondents in the primary survey (phase 3) included
leaders and employees at all levels in a wide cross-sec-
tion of organizations of varying size. Respondents were
asked to identify their “top five” business challenges
and to rate the importance and observed application
of various practices within each leadership zone. These
findings were analyzed for immediately evident trends
in business challenges and leadership practices across
global regions and organizational levels.
Among other statistical analyses, a Cronbach’s alpha was
used to calculate the internal consistency and accuracy
of the leadership-zone model. This alpha value was .983,
indicating a highly consistent and accurate description of
leadership today (1.0 is perfect), and therefore a very
reliable model. Further, all six zones correlate very highly
with each other, suggesting that the six zones triangulate
on a larger leadership construct. In other words, the
six-zone approach is accurate.
Further analysis revealed a number of statistically significant
differences and correlations among the identified business
challenges, the zones of leadership, and the survey
respondents’ organizational levels, global region,
company size, and approximate annual revenue:
5
• Managerial Role:
As compared to lower-level leaders, higher-level
leaders more highly valued all six zones of leader-
ship and were more likely to select the business
challenge “quality of leaders.”
3 See in “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis” for the complete list of
identified business challenges.
4 The final terms for the six zones of leadership are Reflection, Society, Diversity, Ingenuity,
People, and Business. The corresponding six terms used in the survey were Introspective,
Ethical, Global, Creative, Human, and Business.
5 For greater detail, see “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis.”
Survey respondents world-
wide rated the observed
use of most leadership
practices lower than they
rated the actual importance
of those practices.
Discussion: Practical Implications
5. Survey respondents from organizations with
wider global operations (in terms of scope,
number of employees, and revenue) rated the
most pressing challenges as “succeeding with
mergers and acquisitions,” “diversity in the work-
force,” and “virtual workplace structures”—all
logical correlations since these challenges more
deeply affect organizations operating globally.
6. Notably, the business challenge “diversity in the
workforce” ranked lowest among all respondents,
but highest among respondents from organizations
with greater global scope. A question for further
study is whether organizations that value diversity
are more likely to grow globally, or global scope
causes leaders to place higher value on diversity.
The answer is likely a little of both.
Overall findings for all organizational levels paint a
detailed picture of 21st-century leadership. The practical
implications of several specific findings deserve
further discussion:
1. Survey respondents worldwide rated the observed
use of most leadership practices lower than they
rated the actual importance of those practices. In
other words, respondents rated many practices as
critical but not always seen in action. One implication
is that this result highlights that leadership, like
service, depends on meeting customer expectations.
A middle manager, for example, serves at least two
internal customer groups: direct reports (supervisors)
and superiors (executives). If these groups expect
more zone competence than the leader can deliver,
credibility suffers, relationships suffer, results suffer,
and ultimately the leader suffers.
2. In two of three global regions (Asia and North
America), ratings of the importance of the leadership
zones rose with organiz ational level. Since these
higher-level leaders have a wider purview of
organizational success, they apparently value
a wider range of practices required to achieve
that success. So at least in these global regions,
improved zone awareness and competence would
seem the very definition of “executive material.”
6
3. Focus-group participants and leaders who
subsequently completed the assessment instrument
often observed that leaders strong in Reflection are
better equipped to recognize their liabilities and
leverage their strengths in other leadership zones,
adjust their current strategies, adopt new strategies,
and recognize strengths and liabilities in other people.
4. Most middle managers gave high importance
ratings for practices in the People zone—a window
through which any leader can demonstrate
commitment in other zones. Every role has its
“core zone.” For an executive, it may be Reflection.
For a supervisor, it may be Ingenuity. For a middle
manager—at the center of the organization, who
must cultivate make-or-break relationships in two
directions—it is very likely the People zone.
6 See “Appendix – Research Process, Findings, and Analysis” for further detail on region-
specific survey data.
13 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
If a raisin is a grape with
something vital missing
water so a manager is
a leader with many vital
things missing.
Conclusion
range of peer-reviewed research.
7
The result is a discursive
definition of 42 practices that help leaders meet today’s
business challenges.
Further data analysis will yield greater insight into
region-specific needs—in isolation and in relation
to other regions. With business routinely operating
across borders, understanding the business practices
and leadership expectations of other cultures can
promote collaboration, mutual benefit, and increased
appreciation of workforce diversity.
With time, as many more leaders complete or re-take
the online assessment instrument, AchieveGlobal
will continue to collect and analyze longitudinal
data on worldwide leadership strengths and liabilities.
Meanwhile, leaders who have already completed the
assessment instrument have provided positive feedback
on its utility, accuracy, and relevance.
More than ever, leadership in the 21st-century is
a complex matrix of practices, now responding to
rapidly evolving internal mandates and market realities.
When leaders actively aware of these forces apply
practices in tune with their geographic location, scope
of operations, revenue goals, and organizational levels,
they are better equipped to build on their strengths,
minimize their liabilities, and achieve success for
themselves and their organization.
The overall research findings and analysis shed new light
on the eternal question, “What is the difference between
a leader and a manager?” An analogy may illustrate: The
zone model suggests that this difference is very much
like the difference between a raisin and a grape.
If a raisin is a grape with something vital missing—water—
so a manager is a leader with many vital things missing.
Through the lens of this model, a “manager” is competent
primarily in one zone: Business. Managers “make and
execute plans and decisions, organize the work of others,
and guide effort toward predicted results.” “Leaders”
must do these things, too, but the research found that
leaders also demonstrate other interests and abilities
grouped in the model in the other five zones: Reflection,
Society, Diversity, Ingenuity, and People.
Just as a raisin has vital nutritional value, a “manager” has
vital organizational value. In fact, survey respondents at
every level in every global region consistently rated the
Business zone more highly than other zones—and for
good reason: without business results, no one succeeds.
At the same time, our respondents said that business
savvy alone is not enough to meet the complex variety
of 21st-century challenges. In summary, researchers
concluded that:
• More complex problems demand greater Reflection.
• Sustainable long-term strategy must have a positive
impact on Society.
• Large-scale efforts need to leverage Diversity in all
its forms.
• Ingenuity drives innovation, which sharpens
a competitive edge.
• Motivating People must involve their emotions
as well as their minds.
By this definition, an effective 21st-century leader moves
smoothly among the zones as conditions demand,
leveraging strengths from each zone to address
deficiencies and ultimately succeed in the other zones.
These research conclusions clearly reflect the beliefs,
attitudes, and actions of practicing leaders worldwide.
Focus-group and survey participants as well as leaders
who completed the assessment instrument drew from
their experience to confirm, extend, or correct a wide
7 See “”Bibliography.”
15 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
This appendix provides
further detail on the process,
findings, and analysis in
each phase.
Appendix Research Process, Findings, and Analysis
• Trust
• Work-life interface
The research team read the full text of 70 selected
articles and books representing the best thinking and
hard research on the identified contextual themes.
8
For each article or work, the team developed a three-
to five-page annotated bibliography summarizing key
findings on best leadership practices and the following
major business challenges driving the need for effective
21st-century leadership:
• Attracting talent
• Changing buying patterns
• Changing methods of distribution
• Controlling healthcare costs
• Corporate social responsibility
• Cost pressures
• Current competitors
• Diversity in the workforce
• Driving sales growth
• Employee productivity
• Enabling business growth
• Environmental responsibility
• Ethical leadership
• Expanding into new markets
• Gaining access to capital
• Insufficient number of leaders
• Improving customer satisfaction
• Insufficient talent overall
• Integrating new technologies
• Lack of trust among leaders and employees
• New competitors
• Operational excellence
• Product/service innovation
• Quality of leaders
The three-phased study included a review of journal
articles, two focus-group sessions, and a worldwide
quantitative survey, with each phase building on the
findings of the previous phase or phases. This appendix
provides further detail on the process, findings, and
analysis in each phase.
Phase 1 – Literature Review
The literature review focused on quantitative and
qualitative articles published over a two-year period.
To begin, researchers captured themes from a broad
range of journals and identified eight journals as the
basis of this first phase of research:
• Asia-Pacific Journal of Human Resources
• European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology
• Global Business and Organizational Excellence
• Human Resource Development Quarterly
• International Journal of Human Resource
Development and Management
• Leader to Leader
• The Journal of Management Development
• The Leadership Quarterly
A preliminary review of all article abstracts produced this
list of what the research team called “contextual themes”:
• Complex adaptive systems
• Cross-cultural leadership
• Decentralization
• Fairness
• Introspection
• Leadership type
• Organizational citizenship
• Organizational climate
• Organizational justice
• Social responsibility
• Storytelling
• Teams
8 See “Bibliography” for a complete list of articles and other works reviewed.
17 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
• In the 21st-century you have to create an environ-
ment where people can be open to present ideas…
Throw a hundred ideas on the table, maybe you
can get five of them that really work. That’s the
way I understood creativity.
• This is a good bridge from traditional to modern
leadership. You’re taking those archaic traits and
molding them for today’s workforce. The static
organizational chart we’re so familiar with is not
really the way it works anymore. This model moves
leadership into a modern environment, addressing
the world issues at hand.
Among their other responses, focus-group participants
identified the following “challenges facing organizations”:
• Boosting quality and morale
• Diversity in the workforce
• Ethical issues in the workplace
• Finding the right people
• Generational integration
• Global cultural problems
• Job-risk management
• Lack of creativity and problem solving
• Lack of trust
• Leadership development
• Performance management
• Resistance to change
• Resource management
• Velocity of change
• Virtual workplace structures
Focus-group participants also identified “skills and
knowledge required to address these challenges,”
including the following:
• Business acumen
• Conflict management
• Effective communication
• Flexibility to adapt to environment and people
• Global management skills: cultural dynamics
• Regulatory environment
• Retaining talent
• Succeeding with mergers and acquisitions
• Technology challenges
• Virtual workplace structures
During phase 1, in addition, a preliminary leadership
model was developed unifying the identified business
challenges with commensurate best practices.
Phase 2 – Focus-Group Sessions
Two focus groups were hosted for more than two
dozen mid-managers and executives representing
a range of industries and the public sector. Themes
from the journal articles and the preliminary leadership
model formed the basis for discussion. Focus-group
participants shared their real-world experiences,
confirmed some themes, and added new ones, thereby
clarifying the evolving picture of 21st-century leader-
ship. Based on focus-group findings, researchers
extensively revised the leadership model.
In the focus-group sessions, participants responded
to a range of questions, including:
• What challenges are you facing in your role as
a leader in your organization at this time?
• What knowledge, skills, and abilities do leaders
need to address these challenges?
The following are sample comments from the focus groups:
• A person really needs a personal perspective on
leadership... There are layers of a person’s charac-
ter, their behaviors, or their attributes that make
them an effective leader. Not just one attribute is
going to do it.
• Effective leaders adjust the degree of active
leadership...because from my perspective, my
management style with people from the United
States might be effective. But if I go to a different
cultural setting, their expectations of my style
might be different... I’ve got to make sure that my
style doesn’t get in the way of being effective in
different cultural settings.
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 18
Researchers used the term “practice” to designate a
range of behaviors and thought processes, i.e. actions
that leaders take, or key issues about which they have
evolving thoughts and feelings. Survey respondents
facilitated further development of the leadership model
by rating the importance of the identified leadership
challenges and practices, as well as the observed
application of the practices.
Respondents completed 16 subsections in the survey,
including demographic information, free-response
questions, and Likert-scale ratings of the importance
and observed application of leadership practices
emerging from the literature review and the focus-group
sessions. A survey section on current business challenges
created a unique context for each respondent to consider
his or her leadership concerns and recommended
best practices.
Survey Demographics
Respondents included international and domestic-only
organizations ranging from fewer than 500 to more than
100,000 employees. Survey respondents represented a
cross-section of companies of varying sizes, and included
multiple levels of management as well as individual
contributors. Specifically, respondents represented:
• Companies whose scope of operations ranged
from domestic-only operations (37 percent) to
global operations (25 percent). See Figure 1.
• Companies ranging in population from fewer than
500 associates (37 percent) to more than 25,000
(18 percent). See Figure 2.
• Companies with annual revenues ranging from
less than $50 million (44 percent) to more than
$1 billion (12 percent). See Figure 3.
• Just over 25 percent of respondents had no
direct reports. Of respondents with direct reports,
29 percent managed individual contributors, 36
percent managed other managers, and 10 percent
managed entire business units. See Figure 4.
• Innovation
• Internal and external accountability
• Motivation through coaching and recognition
• Performance appraisals
Focus-group responses were analyzed and applied
to restructure and refine the preliminary leadership
model. Based on this analysis, researchers identified
six preliminary “zones of leadership,” later renamed to
reflect the highest-rated leadership practices identified
in the quantitative survey. Initial and final zone names
appear below:
These zones, or categories of leadership practices,
were then tested with a wider audience in the final
phase of research.
Phase 3 – Quantitative Survey
Based on the combined findings of the literature review
and focus-group sessions, a quantitative survey was
developed and launched in the United States, Mexico,
India, China, Singapore, Germany, and the United
Kingdom, and 971 responses were gathered from
business and government leaders and employees.
Survey Purpose and Structure
This survey was designed to answer two key questions:
• What are the central challenges for leaders in
the 21st century?
• What best practices will help leaders meet
these challenges?
Initial Zone Names Final Zone Names
Introspective Reflection
Ethical Society
Global Diversity
Creative Ingenuity
Human People
Business Business
19 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
No direct reports
Frontline managers
Mid-level managers
Business unit managers
25%
29%
36%
10%
$50 million or less
More than $1 billion
Between $50 million
and $1 billion $
12%
44%
44%
Less than 500
More then 25,000
500-25,000
38%
37%
25%
Domestic Only
Global Operations
Other
45%
18%
37%
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 20
World Bank found productivity growth in Mexico
“disappointing.”
10
“Employee productivity” rated in the
top five challenges for Europe and the USA as well,
while “growing the business” rated in the top five
challenges for Asia, Europe, and the USA, but not
for Mexico.
In alignment with the overall top business challenge,
“cost pressures,” respondents worldwide rated Business
as the most important leadership zone.
The broader comment here is that regional differences
in top business challenges tended to align with regional
differences in business use of technology, and with
other cultural and market or industry differences.
Survey Findings: Business Challenges
Responses to the survey item “Please select the TOP
FIVE most pressing challenges that your organization
will face over the next 1-3 years” were tabulated by
organizational level, company size, and global region.
The five top-rated challenges by global region appear
in the table below.
Note that “cost pressures” was the top challenge in
three of the four regions (Asia, Europe, and USA). The
fact that “employee productivity” was the top challenge
for Mexico may reflect that country’s status as one of
two countries (with Turkey) with the lowest productivity
levels in the Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) area in 2004
9
. In 2006, the
Asia Europe Mexico USA
1 Cost pressure Cost pressure Employee productivity Cost pressure
2 Competitors Growing the business Product/ service
innovation
Growing the business
3 Improving customer
satisfaction
Driving sales growth Expanding into new
markets
Driving sales growth
4 Growing the business Product/ service
innovation
Technology challenges Improving customer
satisfaction
5 Technology challenges Employee productivity Competitors Employee productivity
Survey Findings: Leadership Practices
The 42 most important leadership practices
identified by the survey were sorted into categories
(the “zones”), and results were tabulated overall and
by organizational level, industry, and global region.
To identify the most important practices, the survey
had respondents use a 7-point Likert scale (with 7
representing “very important”) to rate the importance
of each practice in meeting business challenges during
the next five years.
The Y-axis of Figures 5–7 represents the percent of
survey respondents choosing an importance rating of
6 or 7. Researchers analyzed these responses to this
survey section in order to:
• Determine which practices were most important to
respondents.
• Refine the sorting of top-rated practices into the
six leadership zones presented in the survey.
• Identify trends based on organizational level and
global region.
9 See report, International Comparisons of Labour Productivity Levels – Estimates for 2004, September 2005, athttp://www.oecd.org/topicstatsportal.
10 See Increasing Competitiveness and Productivity in Mexico, athttp://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/MEXICOEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20899029~pagePK:1497618~piPK:217854~theSitePK:338397,00.html
21 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
of Reflection higher than did supervisors, yet both
executives and supervisors rated Reflection at least
seven points higher than middle managers did.
Respondents in Asia followed a similar pattern, with
ratings in every zone rising with organizational level,
except among middle managers. Meanwhile, executives
in Asia rated all zones much higher than did other
leaders in Asia (notably rating Society 18.3 points
higher than did middle managers in Asia). A similar
trend was observed in Europe, except that European
executives rated most zones (including Business)
lower than did leaders in other global regions.
This global trend—the drop in middle-managers’ ratings
of zone importance compared to the ratings of other
leaders in their region—deserves some focus. Since
middle-managers play a challenging role, often caught
between big-picture strategy and day-to-day operations,
these leaders may tend to adopt an all-Business leader-
ship style they feel helps to operationalize strategy and
meet practical demands. It is worth noting, however,
that to realize strategy in concrete terms, most middle
managers would benefit from increased awareness and
competence in all the zones.
In Asia (Figure 5) and the USA (Figure 7), executives
rated all six zones higher than did any other organizational
level. In Europe, however (Figure 6), it was supervisors
who rated all zones higher than did other organizational
levels. This finding may indicate greater acceptance of
traditional leadership practices by European executives,
as compared to executives in other regions,.
In Asia, where all levels combined rated Society much
lower than the highest-rated zone, Business, executives
rated Society above Reflection, Ingenuity,and People.
That executives in Asia see value in action for social
good highlights their possible failure to see that action
in other zones—namely Reflection, Ingenuity, and
People—also contributes to social good.
In Europe (Figure 6), an interesting trend occurred among
respondents with no direct reports, who rated Reflection
much higher than they rated any other leadership zone.
This finding may correlate (and possibly reflect
dissatisfaction) with the relatively low rating given
by European executives of the same leadership zone.
In the United States, with the exception of middle
managers, ratings in every zone rose with organization
level. For example, executives rated the importance
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 22
Asia Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Exectives 70.4% 73.6% 74.3% 72.7% 71.8% 81.8%
Middle Manager 60.8% 55.3% 60.0% 60.8% 61.4% 66.1%
Supervisors 62.4% 60.0% 61.7% 61.4% 62.7% 65.9%
No Direct Reports 52.9% 47.9% 45.9% 50.4% 51.6% 56.4%
Total 61.6% 59.2% 60.5% 61.3% 61.9% 67.5%
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
Re?ection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55%
Executives
Middle Managers
Supervisors
No Direct Reports
23 | DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER
Europe Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Executives 40.8% 36.6% 33.0% 36.6% 42.3% 44.2%
Middle Managers 40.2% 41.5% 40.4% 38.6% 41.3% 49.8%
Supervisors 48.4% 45.3% 45.5% 47.3% 50.4% 51.2%
No Direct Reports 44.1% 38.8% 34.0% 34.5% 39.6% 38.8%
Total 43.4% 40.6% 38.2% 39.3% 43.4% 46.0%
U.S.A. Reflection Society Diversity Ingenuity People Business
Executives 62.2% 62.8% 58.5% 62.3% 62.7% 68.8%
Middle Managers 53.5% 52.2% 52.2% 55.2% 54.5% 58.2%
Supervisors 60.6% 68.7% 53.4% 58.6% 59.2% 63.1%
No Direct Reports 51.4% 50.3% 43.2% 48.4% 51.2% 53.3%
Total 56.9% 55.9% 51.8% 56.0% 56.8% 60.8%
to measure leadership. Further, all six subscales of the
leadership survey instrument correlate very highly with
each other. These correlations are highlighted in red in
the Correlation Matrix, on the following page. These
high correlations suggest that the six zones of leadership
tapped by the instrument all triangulate on a larger
leadership construct. In other words, the six-zone
approach in which leadership was conceptualized in
this instrument is very likely accurate.
Correlations represent the degree to which changes
in one variable are associated with changes in another
variable. Larger correlations represent a stronger
relationship between two variables, whereas smaller
correlations represent a weaker relationship. For example,
in the matrix on the following page, Society and
Reflection correlate at .846, suggesting a very high
relationship between the degrees to which managers
attribute importance to these two variables. In other
words, if a manager attributes high importance to
Society, he or she will also be very likely to attribute
importance to Reflection, and vice versa. Correlations
above .10 are small, above .30 medium, and above
.50 large.
P-values represent the degree to which a correlation
is statistically significant. Values at or below .05 are
statistically significant and would be expected to occur
by chance at or below 5 percent. Correlations in red in
the matrix are statistically significant.
Survey Analysis: Correlation Matrix
A detailed correlation analysis of the survey data was
performed to establish relationships among data sets
and test the internal accuracy and consistency of the
survey instrument and commensurate leadership model.
To focus only on major trends in the survey data,
specific questions were grouped into six separate
subscales, measuring the six zones of leadership. This
data was further examined to assess whether the value
that respondents placed on each of these zones varied
in a statistically significant way according to several
organizational and managerial characteristics:
• Geographic scope of operations
• Number of employees globally
• Approximate 2008 worldwide revenue
• Organizational level
• Time working at current level
• Number of direct reports
The statistical analysis used was a series of correlation
coefficients. Since over 900 individuals responded
to the leadership survey, many of these correlations
reached statistical significance, even when the
effects were trivial. Instead of focusing on statistical
significance, the correlations were used as estimates
of effect size, which emphasizes the magnitude of the
relationships among the variables. Correlations above
.10 are considered small, above .30 are considered
medium, and above .50 are considered large.
Therefore, the focus was on correlations above .10.
To examine whether the frequency of item selection
on the question “Please select the TOP FIVE most
pressing challenges that your organization will face over
the next 1-3 years” varied as a function of organizational/
managerial characteristics, several hundred Analyses of
Variance (ANOVAs) were performed, which were
Bonferonni-corrected to control for the over-identification
of statistically significant findings (family-wise error)
when running so many analyses. Only statistically
significant differences were reported.
To test the internal consistency and accuracy of the survey
instrument in measuring leadership, a Cronbach’s alpha
was calculated. This alpha value was .983, reflecting
a highly consistent and accurate instrument (with 1.0
being perfect), and therefore very reliable in its ability
DEVELOPING THE 21ST CENTURY LEADER | 24
Reflection Society People Ingenuity Diversity Business
Geographic scope
of operations
Correlation -0.03485360 -0.07481 -0.05862 -0.08076 -0.18103 -0.0586
p-value 0.290684507 0.023551 0.076691 0.014711