Abstract
Andragogical leadership is a term yet to be coined. The evidence from four interviews with experts indicates that it might be a promising solution to grasp the fast and disruptive transformation processes companies are currently facing. Based on the research results, the author argues that andragogical leadership is a set of responsibilities that might at best be taken over by passionate experts in a shared leadership approach. The genuine implementation of andragogical leadership either requires or goes hand in hand with a transformation toward self-directedness, a participatory culture, and the democratization of an organization. Future research requires theoretical discussions and practical experiences contributed by experts from business studies, humanities, and psychology. The relevance of andragogical leadership and its potential to be a solution to urgent questions was proven within this chapter.
TopIntroduction
Nowadays, companies across all industries are challenged by increasingly fast-changing business environments with digital transformation, shifts in demographics, and sustainability (resource scarcity/ climate change) being among its main drivers (Brown et al., 2018, pp. 3-6). For example, the World Economic Forum (WEF) (2020) predicts that by 2025 85 million jobs will be replaced by machines and that an estimated 40% of the workforce requires reskilling of up to six months. Regarding this, “94% of business leaders report that they expect employees to pick up new skills on the job” (WEF, 2020, p. 5). Kropp and McRae (2022) expect that also up to 65% of managerial tasks might be automated by 2025, too (para. 23). Considering both, the tasks of leaders will likely become more associate centered, e.g., “managing their perception of their career trajectories” (Kropp & McRae, 2022, para. 25) or acting as “training coaches” (Kovács-Ondrejkovic et al., 2019, para. 38).
The tremendous impact of such long-term trends is certain, “but the speed at which they unfold can be hard to predict.” (Brown et al., 2018, p. 6) However, whilst these trends allow companies to plan and prepare accordingly (Brown et al., 2018, p. 38), the COVID-19 pandemic showed us the hard way that we are also living “in an environment that can shift from moment to moment” (Volini et al., 2021, p.4). A short-term shock happened. The WEF (2020) referred to this situation as a “double-disruption” scenario as the pandemic-induced disruption and economic contraction interweave e.g., with technology-driven transformation processes (p. 5). Hence, companies must be prepared for both continuous and episodic change, they should learn to thrive on it, and embrace it as a chance to develop sustainably (Volini et al., 2021, p. 4).
The required organizational development processes highly depend on the competence development of a company’s workforce, they are mutually constitutive (Meyer & Haunschild, 2017, pp. 1, 7). Organizations must build the human capital that allows them to not only react to change but to shape it in their favor. For this purpose, companies should offer structured re-/ upskilling and give associates the freedom to take initiative e.g., to run passion projects that allow them to grow in a self-governed way (Volini et al., 2021, p. 20). Thereby, crucial information about an associate’s “interests, passions, and capabilities that may otherwise remain hidden” (Volini et al., 2021, p. 20) can be revealed, too. This information could now be used to “redeploy workers against critical business priorities” (Volini et al., 2021, p. 20) as they occur. Moreover, workers will leave familiar paths as they follow their individual learning interests. In doing so, they nudge the organization to move, to get out of its comfort zone, to develop, and thereby to become more resilient to substantial change (Meyer & Haunschild, 2017, p. 7; Teine, 2022, p. 153). Having the freedom to be more self-governed in their development also requires the workers to continuously adapt in a way that they can even be thought of as entrepreneurs marketing their knowledge and competencies which they must reproduce goal-oriented, actively, and efficiently in a self-responsible way (Gonon, 2002, p. 327; Teine, 2022, p. 152). It is them ensuring that their capabilities are needed, bought, and used efficiently (Gonon, 2002, p. 327; Kovács-Ondrejkovic et al., 2019, para. 34). In this respect Kovács-Ondrejkovic et al. outline that “individuals who want to remain in demand in a changing job market must take responsibility for keeping their skills up to date and accept that job-related training is a career-long commitment.” (2019, para. 5)1 This shift in responsibility is even further emphasized by the WEF’s Future of Jobs Report 2020: “The window of opportunity to reskill and upskill workers has become shorter in the newly constrained labor market. This applies to workers who are likely to stay in their roles as well as those who risk losing their roles due to rising recession-related unemployment and can no longer expect to retrain at work.” (WEF, 2020, p. 6)
Key Terms in this Chapter
Self-Directed Learning: Supports the learner’s self-determination regarding his/ her goals, the allocated time for and timing of the activities, identifying suitable resources, choosing an appropriate method, structuring the learning, assessing the outcomes, and partnering with others (Aepli et al., 2005 AU64: The in-text citation "Aepli et al., 2005" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. , pp. 2f.). Thus, self-directed learners are in charge of their own learning, there are autonomous in defining what for, how and where they are learning (Aepli et al., 2005 AU65: The in-text citation "Aepli et al., 2005" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. , p. 10). This indeed includes that a self-directed learner can autonomously decide to attend highly instructor-led courses as this might suit his needs best ( Knowles et al., 2005 AU66: The citation "Knowles et al., 2005" matches multiple references. Please add letters (e.g. "Smith 2000a"), or additional authors to the citation, to uniquely match references and citations. , p. 186). Possessing this competence must therefore be seen as a precondition for successful and sustainable lifelong learning.
Andragogy: A theory primarily coined by M. S. Knowles defining key assumptions about adult learners, with self-directedness probably being the most prominent. Wang and Bain outline that this theory “has the potential to encourage adults to become self-directed learners, to inspire them to realize actualization, especially when psychological needs are met that foster and support internal well-being and motivation” (2017, p. 251).
Leadership Development: Focuses on building social capital, i.e., “networked relationships among individuals that enhance cooperation and resource exchange in creating organizational value” ( Day, 2000 , p. 585). Commitment, trust, and respect coin the respective relationships, which can be viewed from a structural (e.g., transaction of resources), relational (e.g., mutually developed trust and trustworthiness), and cognitive (e.g., shared visions, common values) point of view ( Day, 2000 , p. 585).
Competence: In contrast to the term competency , which refers to a specific and quite narrowly defined set of capabilities needed e.g., to perform a certain task, the term competence refers to a more holistic concept, “A fundamental disposition that enables an individual to act appropriately and ethically correctly (= adequately) in the situation.” ( Sloane & Dilger, 2005 ) They are the precondition to acting creatively and self-organized in open, complex, dynamic, and sometimes even chaotic situations ( Erpenbeck & Sauter, 2013 , p. 32).
Leadership (Concept): Leadership in contrast to Management is not bound to formal authority and aims to “generally enable groups of people to work together in meaningful ways” ( Day, 2000 , p. 582). It is neither limited to a position, nor to an organization ( Day, 2000 , p. 582). Speaking of followers rather than employees of leaders further stresses the difference between Leaders and Managers (cf. Day, 2000 , p. 583).
Leader Development: Emphasizes the “purposeful investment in human capital” ( Day, 2000 , p. 584) resp. the “individual-based knowledge, skills, and abilities associated with formal leadership roles” ( Day, 2000 , p. 584), typically including e.g., self-awareness, self-regulation, and self-motivation ( Day, 2000 , p. 584).
Leadership (Skill): Leadership might be defined as a set of skills, and anyone might possess them. Thereby, leadership is a result, an effect, “an emergent property of effective systems design” ( Day, 2000 , p. 583), and thus anyone might be considered a leader.
Andragogical Leadership: Andragogical Leadership shall be understood as a leadership concept, in which the organizational capacity to solve complex, crucial, and unforeseen problems is determined by leaders whose main responsibility lies in genuinely supporting and enabling the associates acquiring the respectively needed competencies by solving emerging problems that match their development aspirations .