Evaluating transformational leaders: the challenging case of Eric Shinseki and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
By: Wart, Montgomery Van.
Material type:
ArticlePublisher: 2015Description: p.760-769.Subject(s): Leadership
In:
Public Administration ReviewSummary: Evaluating less than fully successful transformational leaders is difficult. One common method of assessing leadership is to focus on a single temporal narrative. A second approach uses a particular theory, such as transformational leadership, to frame the analysis. The latter, less common strategy is used with the example of Eric Shinseki, who served as both chief of staff of the U.S. Army and as secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The analytic framework used here has six major elements that are specified by 22 factors. Using those factors to evaluate Shinseki's tenure at the VA, he is found to be very poor in only 2 factors but poor in 11, adequate in 6, good in 1, and excellent in only 2. While using a list of factors does not eliminate subjectivity or the challenges of reaching a single assessment, it does clarify the elements of judgment and weighting. - Reproduced.
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | Volume no: 75, Issue no: 5 | Available | AR109826 |
Evaluating less than fully successful transformational leaders is difficult. One common method of assessing leadership is to focus on a single temporal narrative. A second approach uses a particular theory, such as transformational leadership, to frame the analysis. The latter, less common strategy is used with the example of Eric Shinseki, who served as both chief of staff of the U.S. Army and as secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The analytic framework used here has six major elements that are specified by 22 factors. Using those factors to evaluate Shinseki's tenure at the VA, he is found to be very poor in only 2 factors but poor in 11, adequate in 6, good in 1, and excellent in only 2. While using a list of factors does not eliminate subjectivity or the challenges of reaching a single assessment, it does clarify the elements of judgment and weighting. - Reproduced.
There are no comments for this item.