Universities
operate in competitive, internationalised environments. Strategic capability has
consequently gained priority. Academic leadership is now at the forefront of
attention, particularly development of middle management academic roles
Leadership
development is not new for HRD scholarship, but has not attracted the same level
of interest as other areas. Yet in mainstream management literature leadership
is fundamentally linked to successful organisational change The paper is
designed to address and better understand this apparent paradox.
The
purpose of this paper is threefold:
to expand the theory
base underpinning academic leadership and HRD;
to challenge prevailing
myths about the ‘unwilling academic manager’;
open up new research
avenues and questions which have a better chance of constructively
supporting HRD practice in HE.
Debate has primarily
been conducted from ‘managerial’ and ‘critical’ perspectives’ concern with academics’
readiness and willingness to engage with management and leadership. Academics
are generally ill-prepared for these roles and need greater preparation; HRD
intervention is amply legitimised. This legitimacy is contested from the
critical perspective which contends that academics have accommodated or ‘gone
over to’ managerialism.
Both
perspectives are valid, however we propose that
social identity theory (SIT) offers a suitable theoretical framework
which can both further understanding of academics’ engagement with management
and leadership, and enhance HRD practice.
The paper argues the need for HRD to better ‘theorise’ leadership and
HRD .
SIT provides
a sophisticated explanatory framework for analysing the mobility of individuals
between groups and explains observed differences in the extent to which
academics embrace management and leadership and opens up new research questions.
