Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management (ETDs)
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/37778
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item Leadership Development Impact Evaluation Approaches(University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 2022) Mbatha, Vuyile Cynthia; Matshabaphala, ManamelaThis mixed methods multiple case study research investigated the approaches used in the impact evaluation of leadership development initiatives within the context of financial services corporate organisations operating in the African continent and headquartered in South Africa. Organisations around the world are continuously investing incremental amounts of money into learning and development, more specifically directed towards leadership development initiatives (Boyett & Boyett, 1998; Clark & Clark, 1994; McCauley, Moxley, & Van Velsor, 1998) and yet to date, research and literature on leadership has been predominately focused on theories and approaches to leadership (Bass & Stogdill, 1990; Boyett & Boyett, 1998; Brungardt, 1996; Gardner, 1990; Jackson, 1992; Northouse, 1997; Yukl & van Fleet, 1992) with limited research focused on demonstrating the holist impact of leadership development investments (Avolio, 2007). Although research has been done on evaluation practices in relation to training and development, few researchers have addressed the matter of impact evaluation specifically for leadership development, through case study research using the mixed methods lenses. This research study was aimed at investigating the approaches used to measure the impact of leadership development initiatives, through engaging with stakeholders that have a vested interest in leadership development. The qualitative results revealed that the current leadership development evaluation approaches are a case of a self-fulfilling prophecy, enabled by the unilateral design of the current evaluation approaches and matrices for evaluation are not agreed upfront with relevant key stakeholders. Furthermore, the current approaches do not measure leadership impact holistically. This is problematic as business stakeholdersare not able to obtain a sense of the true and holistic impact of leadership development initiatives, in relation to their context and matrices that are important for them as business stakeholders are not included. The quantitative findings highlight the importance of having a leadership development evaluation approach that is 1) credible; 2) simple; 3) enables the evaluation to be done across all three levels of the triple bottom line; and an approach that is 4) theoretically sound. The results provided insights into the core elements that should be included in evaluating leadership development impact holistically and through this theory emerged which informs the theoretical contribution in this research study. In this, a proposed holistic leadership development impact evaluation approach is presented as an evaluation framework with underlying principles used to explain what informs the framework and how the framework may be applied in the evaluation of leadership development initiatives within the context of corporate leadership in South AfricaItem Evaluation process use in the University Capacity Development Programme at Walter Sisulu University(2021) Mantshongo, MandlaThe study investigated the effect of evaluation process use as a mechanism in the performance of the University Capacity Development Grant at Walter Sisulu University (WSU). The significance of the study was to enlighten the project leaders who participated in the evaluation process to acknowledge the changes that have arose, and the learning associated with that the process. Literature identified the lack of clearly defined measures of the process changes with regards to the performance of projects in the context of higher education and further understanding of the effectiveness of the involvement or engagement of stakeholders in the process of evaluation. This research adopted the qualitative approach as the method that was utilised in collecting the data. Both primary and secondary data collection methods were used to undertake this study in the form of semi-structured interviews through Microsoft Teams adopted due to the COVID-19 restrictions, focus groups, and document review in the form of progress reports and assessment reports. Fifteen participants participated in the data collection with seven individual semistructured interviews and two focus groups each made up of four participants. The findings of the study demonstrated that: (1) individual thinking or behavioural change cannot be solely attributable to process use as there are other factors that contribute to change, (2) the change and performance could be measured or viewed differently at different levels such as at individual, institutional, evaluators and funders/DHET level, (3) Learning is inevitable to the stakeholders involved in the process, however, the skill transfer to other members who did not participate in the process is lacking, (4) non-conceptualised and non-researched interventions and (6) no convergence in findings for implementation that influences the change of institutional culture. Overall, at individual and project level there are glaring changes in implementation of a project rather than on the performance of UCDG.Item Leadership development impact evaluation approaches(2022) Mbatha, Vuyile CynthiaThis mixed methods multiple case study research investigated the approaches used in the impact evaluation of leadership development initiatives within the context of financial services corporate organisations operating in the African continent and headquartered in South Africa. Organisations around the world are continuously investing incremental amounts of money into learning and development, more specifically directed towards leadership development initiatives (Boyett & Boyett, 1998; Clark & Clark, 1994; McCauley, Moxley, & Van Velsor, 1998) and yet to date, research and literature on leadership has been predominately focused on theories and approaches to leadership (Bass & Stogdill, 1990; Boyett & Boyett, 1998; Brungardt, 1996; Gardner, 1990; Jackson, 1992; Northouse, 1997; Yukl & van Fleet, 1992) with limited research focused on demonstrating the holist impact of leadership development investments (Avolio, 2007). Although research has been done on evaluation practices in relation to training and development, few researchers have addressed the matter of impact evaluation specifically for leadership development, through case study research using the mixed methods lenses. This research study was aimed at investigating the approaches used to measure the impact of leadership development initiatives, through engaging with stakeholders that have a vested interest in leadership development. The qualitative results revealed that the current leadership development evaluation approaches are a case of a self-fulfilling prophecy, enabled by the unilateral design of the current evaluation approaches and matrices for evaluation are not agreed upfront with relevant key stakeholders. Furthermore, the current approaches do not measure leadership impact holistically. This is problematic as business stakeholders ii are not able to obtain a sense of the true and holistic impact of leadership development initiatives, in relation to their context and matrices that are important for them as business stakeholders are not included. The quantitative findings highlight the importance of having a leadership development evaluation approach that is 1) credible; 2) simple; 3) enables the evaluation to be done across all three levels of the triple bottom line; and an approach that is 4) theoretically sound. The results provided insights into the core elements that should be included in evaluating leadership development impact holistically and through this theory emerged which informs the theoretical contribution in this research study. In this, a proposed holistic leadership development impact evaluation approach is presented as an evaluation framework with underlying principles used to explain what informs the framework and how the framework may be applied in the evaluation of leadership development initiatives within the context of corporate leadership in South