Addressing the Dark Side of Leadership in the University System Using Community of Practice (CoP) Approach
Abstract
:1. Introduction
Research Questions
- What are the potentials of community of practice as an approach to respond to the dark side of leadership in universities?
- How can the potentials/assumptions of the community of practice assist in responding to the dark side of leadership in universities?
2. Methodology
3. Presentation and Analysis
3.1. Concept of Community of Practice as an Approach
3.2. CoP and University Leadership Management
4. Potentials/Assumptions of Community of Practice
4.1. Shared Commonality as an Assumption of CoP
4.2. Collective Problem-Solving as an Assumption of CoP
4.3. Mutual Participation as an Assumption of CoP
4.4. Social Interactions as an Assumption of CoP
5. Assumptions of CoP as Remedies for the Dark Side of Leadership in Universities
- Shared commonality as a remedy for the dark side of leadership: It is increasingly evident that shared commonality can serve as an effective remedy for the dark side of leadership in the university system. To begin with, greater collaboration between academic staff, management and, senior leaders could help to ensure that decision-making processes are fair and equitable. At a more basic level, creating opportunities for dialogues between all members of a university environment creates a platform for discussion of challenges and ideas as opposed to individual initiatives. Furthermore, recognising the impact of our heterogeneity within a university setting—such as gender, ethnicity, and cultural diversities—can allow space for students to self-advocate without fear of discrimination or isolation. Moreover, developing an empathic awareness among colleagues serves to strengthen respect and understanding of differences while pursuing collective aims in the interest of collective well-being. In sum, shared commonalities offer constructive means by which to mitigate conflicts and dissolve perceived opposition when confronting the dark forces of leadership in a university context.Shared leadership, a phenomenon where leadership roles and influence are distributed among team members, has been a topic of extensive research. While it has been associated with positive outcomes such as team performance and satisfaction (Drescher and Garbers 2016), it also has potential negative impacts, including power struggles and role stress (Chen and Zhang 2023). The success of shared leadership is contingent on factors such as intragroup trust and task interdependence (Wu et al. 2018), and it is particularly important in commercial organisations (Sweeney et al. 2019). The concept of shared leadership is closely linked to responsible leadership, with the former potentially supporting the latter (Pearce et al. 2014). However, this is consistent with the argument that the transition to shared leadership is not without its challenges, as it requires a shift from traditional, hierarchical leadership (O’Toole et al. 2002).Furthermore, by identifying shared goals and ambitions for all parties, universities can craft leadership strategies that empower individuals around their own aspirations. For example, increasing student input when creating university policies and initiatives can provide a sense of ownership and ensure that decisions are made with knowledge of how they may affect those they most impact. Not only does this foster trust among stakeholders in academia, but it can also create a more conducive positivity among the leaders. Thus, building ties through collaboration is one way that universities can continue to refine their operations to promote an atmosphere of growth and success for all.
- Collective problem solving as a remedy for the dark side of leadership: While the university system has done much to shape and improve learning across cultures, it is notably not without its dark side. Specifically, the unchecked imposition of leadership can lead to unfair power dynamics and even unchecked aggression in some cases. In an effort to remedy this problem, collective problem-solving initiatives can seek to diffuse the power imbalance between individuals while promoting shared decision-making and collaborative processes. While still in its nascent stages, this form of leadership holds significant potential as both a proactive approach to addressing a noted issue in universities worldwide and a form of facilitation that could help ease tensions and encourage active engagement. Ultimately, by fostering awareness of group dynamics while promoting open dialogue and discussion, collective problem solving has the potential to be an effective way to counteract risks associated with autocratic university leadership structures (Nzimakwe 2014; Alt et al. 2023). A range of studies have explored the role of collective problem solving in addressing the challenges of leadership. Maupin et al. (2020) highlights the need to consider power dynamics and methodological challenges in this context. Yahosseini (2020) introduces a novel approach to aggregating judgments, the transmission chain, which has shown promise in fostering collective intelligence. These studies collectively underscore the potential of collective problem solving as a remedy for the dark side of leadership, particularly in small-scale societies where leadership can help overcome collective action problems (Glowacki and von Rueden 2015).University leadership is tasked with making decisions that are beneficial to the greater community in the academic context; however, there are times when a less-than-optimal situation arises due to decisions made by those in positions of power. In order to combat this dark side of university leadership, collective problem solving may be a viable remedy. By providing a platform for collaboration amongst leaders, faculty, and students, issues related to inefficient decision making can largely be addressed and potentially resolved in an amicable way. Through this process of collective problem solving, interactions between key players in the university system can become more constructive and result in better outcomes overall.
- Mutual participation as a remedy for the dark side of leadership: Inside universities, leadership is essential to the successful operation of academic and administrative teams. The dark side of this manifests itself in initiatives that may promote job insecurity, resistance to collaboration, and silencing of constructive dissent on administrative decisions. As such, mutual participation strategies can be useful remedies in responding to these issues. By increasing the collective sense of ownership among university leadership teams and giving members a sense of investment in decision-making processes, all stakeholders can have their voices heard and collaborate toward a shared vision for the university system. Open dialogue involving all levels of staff, faculty, and student participants in decision making aims for pluralistic and legitimate solutions that actively seek to resolve any challenges incurred within the system. Mutual participation thus provides benefits beyond a single “leader” and creates an environment of positive change in a university’s structure by utilising diverse perspectives from its participants.Mutual participation in leadership has been explored in various contexts, with a focus on the role of followers in educational organisations (Owens 2013) and the potential for community participation to improve society (Redondo 2016). However, the effectiveness of leadership in culturally heterogeneous groups is questioned, with poor leadership and uncertainty about reciprocity hindering cooperation (Keuschnigg and Schikora 2014). Despite these challenges, participatory leadership is seen as a valuable tool for social and organisational development (Magzan 2011), particularly when a political approach is taken (Hickey 2004).
- Social interaction as a remedy for the dark side of leadership: The argument so far has shed light on the importance of social interaction as a viable remedy for the dark side of leadership within the university system. A growing body of research indicates that fostering meaningful interpersonal relationships across various departments and student groups can help reduce conflict (Butt and Ahmad 2019). Social interaction can also serve as a remedy for the dark side of leadership by providing a platform for constructive feedback and support. Simonet et al. (2018) highlight the potential for subclinical personality interactions and psychological pressures to accelerate leader derailment, suggesting that social interaction can help mitigate these risks. Clements and Washbush (1999) further emphasise the importance of considering the role of followers and the potential negative outcomes of leadership, which can be addressed through open communication and collaboration. Clifton et al. (2020) advocate for a focus on leadership as a practice and interaction, which can foster a more inclusive and supportive environment. Naseer et al. (2016) provide empirical evidence of the impact of despotic leadership and leadership status on social interaction, underscoring the need for positive and constructive interactions to counteract these negative influences.Therefore, creating shared experiences, not only among senior administrators but also among faculty and staff, allows members of a university to relate to one another on a more humane level, thus improving communication and understanding. Additionally, collaborative activities within curricula offer opportunities for individuals to interact outside traditional hierarchical roles, strengthening connections among academics and improving morale. This is important to consider when seeking positive transformations in university systems.
6. Discussion of Major Arguments
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
8. Implication for Practice
9. Implication for Multi-Cultural Nature of the University
10. Limitations
11. Contributions to Knowledge
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Abdillah, Muhammad Rasyid, Rizqa Anita, and Nor Balkish Zakaria. 2021. Trust in leaders and employee silence behaviour: Evidence from higher education institutions in Indonesia. Human Systems Management 40: 567–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrifoglio, Rocco. 2015. Knowledge Preservation through Community of Practice: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Evidence. New York: Springer. [Google Scholar]
- Akhtar, Robina, and M. N. Nazarudin. 2020. Synthesising literature of leadership, job satisfaction and trust in leadership. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure 9: 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Alt, Dorit, Yoav Kapshuk, and Heli Dekel. 2023. Promoting perceived creativity and innovative behavior: Benefits of future problem-solving programs for higher education students. Thinking Skills and Creativity 47: 101201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Zoubi, Zohair H., Khaledah Kh Alkailanee, Adab M Al-Saud, Hytham M. Bany Issa, and Omar T. Bataineh. 2021. Administrative Transparency and its Relation to the Level of Support for the Scientific Productivity of Faculty at Universities. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry 12: 4434–56. [Google Scholar]
- Andrews-Todd, Jessica, and Carol M. Forsyth. 2020. Exploring social and cognitive dimensions of collaborative problem solving in an open online simulation-based task. Computers in Human Behavior 104: 105759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrews-Todd, Jessica, G. Tanner Jackson, and Christopher Kurzum. 2019. Collaborative problem solving assessment in an online mathematics task. ETS Research Report Series 2019: 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aniodoh, H. C. O., C. N. Ebouh, and Jonathan O. Nweke. 2017. Academic corruption and students achievements in tertiary institutions in Enugu State. International Journal of Progressive and Alternative Education 4: 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Bikard, Michaël, Keyvan Vakili, and Florenta Teodoridis. 2019. When collaboration bridges institutions: The impact of university–Industry collaboration on academic productivity. Organization Science 30: 426–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowen, Jonathan P., and Peter T. Breuer. 2022. Formal Methods Communities of Practice: A Survey of Personal Experience. In International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods. Cham: Springer, pp. 287–301. [Google Scholar]
- Brandt, Patrick D., Susi Sturzenegger Varvayanis, Tracey Baas, Amanda F. Bolgioni, Janet Alder, Kimberly A. Petrie, Isabel Dominguez, Abigail M. Brown, C. Abigail Stayart, Harinder Singh, and et al. 2021. A cross-institutional analysis of the effects of broadening trainee professional development on research productivity. PLoS Biology 19: e3000956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruce, Bertram C., and John A. Easley Jr. 2000. Emerging communities of practice: Collaboration and communication in action research. Educational Action Research 8: 243–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butt, Atif Saleem, and Ahmad Bayiz Ahmad. 2019. Personal relationship and conflicts in supply chains: Exploration of buyers and suppliers in Australian manufacturing and service sector. Benchmarking: An International Journal 26: 2225–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Care, Esther, Claire Scoular, and Patrick Griffin. 2016. Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Applied Measurement in Education 29: 250–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, Hsin Hsin, and Shuang-Shii Chuang. 2011. Social capital and individual motivations on knowledge sharing: Participant involvement as a moderator. Information & Management 48: 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Wei, and Jun-Hui Zhang. 2023. Does shared leadership always work? A state-of-the-art review and future prospects. Journal of Work-Applied Management 15: 51–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clawson, Michelle C. 2015. Leadership Malpractice in Higher Education: Effects of Organisational Ethical Culture and Followers’ Perceived Organisational Support on Abusive Supervision and Vicarious Abusive Supervision. Ph.D. dissertation, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Clements, Christine, and John B. Washbush. 1999. The two faces of leadership: Considering the dark side of leader-follower dynamics. Journal of Workplace Learning 11: 170–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clifton, Jonathan, Magnus Larsson, and Stephanie Schnurr. 2020. Leadership in interaction. An introduction to the Special Issue. Leadership 16: 511–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cole-Lewis, Heather J., Arlene M. Smaldone, Patricia R. Davidson, Rita Kukafka, Jonathan N. Tobin, Andrea Cassells, Elizabeth D. Mynatt, George Hripcsak, and Lena Mamykina. 2016. Participatory approach to the development of a knowledge base for problem-solving in diabetes self-management. International Journal of Medical Informatics 85: 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Davies, J., M. T. Hides, and S. Casey. 2001. Leadership in higher education. Total Quality Management 12: 1025–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delgado, Janet, Serena Siow, Janet de Groot, Brienne McLane, and Margot Hedlin. 2021. Towards collective moral resilience: The potential of communities of practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Journal of Medical Ethics 47: 374–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drescher, Gesche, and Yvonne Garbers. 2016. Shared leadership and commonality: A policy-capturing study. The Leadership Quarterly 27: 200–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerashchenko, Daria. 2022. Academic leadership and university performance: Do Russian universities improve when they are led by top researchers? Higher Education 83: 1103–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glowacki, Luke, and Chris von Rueden. 2015. Leadership solves collective action problems in small-scale societies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 370: 20150010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Harris, Alma, and Michelle Jones. 2018. The dark side of leadership and management. School Leadership & Management 38: 475–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hellawell, David, and Nick Hancock. 2001. A case study of the changing role of the academic middle manager in higher education: Between hierarchical control and collegiality? Research Papers in Education 16: 183–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hickey, Samuel. 2004. Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation: Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development. London: Zed Books. [Google Scholar]
- Hoadley, Christopher. 2012. What is a community of practice and how can we support it? In Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. London: Routledge, pp. 286–99. [Google Scholar]
- Hodson, Randy, Vincent J. Roscigno, and Steven H. Lopez. 2006. Chaos and the abuse of power: Workplace bullying in organisational and interactional context. Work and Occupations 33: 382–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, Heng. 2015. What makes an online community of practice work? A situated study of Chinese student teachers’ perceptions of online professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education 46: 6–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Jai, Xiaoming Zheng, Benett J. Tepper, Ning Li, Xin Liu, and Jia Yu. 2022. The dark side of leader–member exchange: Observers’ reactions when leaders target their teammates for abuse. Human Resource Management 61: 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jimenez-Silva, Margarita, and Kate Olson. 2012. A community of practice in teacher education: Insights and perceptions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 24: 335–48. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, David W. 1991. Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4, 1991. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. 20036-1183. Washington, DC: George Washington University. [Google Scholar]
- Jordan, C. Greer, and Diana Bilimoria. 2007. Creating a productive and inclusive academic work environment. In Transforming Science and Engineering: Advancing Academic Women. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 225–42. [Google Scholar]
- Keuschnigg, Marc, and Jan Schikora. 2014. The dark side of leadership: An experiment on religious heterogeneity and cooperation in India. The Journal of Socio-Economics 48: 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, Muhammad Asif, and Nasreen Hussain. 2016. The analysis of the perception of organisational politics among university faculty. Pakistan Business Review 18: 451–67. [Google Scholar]
- Kislov, Roman, Gill Harvey, and Kieran Walshe. 2011. Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: Lessons from the theory of communities of practice. Implementation Science 6: 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kliewer, Brandon W. 2019. Disentangling neoliberalism from leadership education: Critical approaches to leadership learning and development in higher education. New Political Science 41: 574–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lakitan, Benyamin, Dudi Hidayat, and Siti Herlinda. 2012. Scientific productivity and the collaboration intensity of Indonesian universities and public R&D institutions: Are there dependencies on collaborative R&D with foreign institutions? Technology in Society 34: 227–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langley, Alyson, Harshada Patel, and Robert J. Houghton. 2017. Fostering a Community of Practice for Industrial Processes. In Dynamics of Long-Life Assets. Cham: Springer, pp. 151–68. [Google Scholar]
- Lave, Jean, and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Lesser, Eric L., and John Storck. 2001. Communities of practice and organisational performance. IBM Systems Journal 40: 831–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levine, Thomas H. 2010. Tools for the study and design of collaborative teacher learning: The affordances of different conceptions of teacher community and activity theory. Teacher Education Quarterly 37: 109–30. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23479301 (accessed on 21 February 2023).
- Mackey, Jeremy, B. Parker Ellen, Charn P. McAllister, and Katherine C. Alexander. 2021. The dark side of leadership: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of destructive leadership research. Journal of Business Research 132: 705–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magzan, Maša. 2011. The art of participatory leadership: A tool for social and organisational development and change. Journal of Engineering Management and Competitiveness 1: 21–26. [Google Scholar]
- Mathezer-Bence, Michelle. 2017. Exploring Transformative Learning within a Community of Practice: A Case Study of Teacher Professional Development in Early Literacy. Master’s thesis, Werklund School of Education, Calgary, AB, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Maupin, Cynthia K., Maureen E. McCusker, Andrew J. Slaughter, and Gregory A. Ruark. 2020. A tale of three approaches: Leveraging organisational discourse analysis, relational event modeling, and dynamic network analysis for collective leadership. Human Relations 73: 572–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLoughlin, Clodagh, Kunal D. Patel, Tom O’Callaghan, and Scott Reeves. 2018. The use of virtual communities of practice to improve interprofessional collaboration and education: Findings from an integrated review. Journal of Interprofessional Care 32: 136–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naseer, Saima, Usman Raja, Fauzia Syed, Magda B. L. Donia, and Wendy Darr. 2016. Perils of being close to a bad leader in a bad environment: Exploring the combined effects of despotic leadership, leader member exchange, and perceived organisational politics on behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly 27: 14–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndambakuwa, Yustina, and Jacob Mufunda. 2006. Performance appraisal system impact on university academic staff job satisfaction and productivity. Performance Improvement Quarterly 19: 117–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngambi, H. C. 2011. The relationship between leadership and employee morale in higher education. African Journal of Business Management 5: 762–76. [Google Scholar]
- Nzimakwe, Thokozani Ian. 2014. Practising Ubuntu and leadership for good governance: The South African and continental dialogue. African Journal of Public Affairs 7: 30–41. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/2263/58143 (accessed on 21 February 2023).
- O’Mahony, Mary. 2020. Measuring performance and accountability in higher education: A review article on productivity in higher education. International Productivity Monitor 38: 145–54. [Google Scholar]
- O’Toole, James, Jay Galbraith, and Edward E. Lawler III. 2002. When two (or more) heads are better than one: The promise and pitfalls of shared leadership. California Management Review 44: 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olssen, Mark. 2016. Neoliberal competition in higher education today: Research, accountability and impact. British Journal of Sociology of Education 37: 129–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Omonijo, D. O., O. O. C. Uche, O. A. Rotimi, and K. L. Nwadialor. 2014. Social analysis of moral malpractice challenging education sector in Nigeria. British Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science 4: 965–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owens, Michael A. 2013. The Feeling’s Mutual: Student Participation in Leadership as a Cooperative Effort. The Review of Higher Education 36: 435–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palchoudhury, Arpita. 2016. Productivity and ethical conduct: A correlation. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 21: 93–94. [Google Scholar]
- Parker, Ian. 2014. Managing neoliberalism and the strong state in higher education: Psychology today. Qualitative Research in Psychology 11: 250–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearce, Craig L., Christina L. Wassenaar, and Charles C. Manz. 2014. Is shared leadership the key to responsible leadership? Academy of Management Perspectives 28: 275–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popoola, Babatunde Adedeji, and Elizabeth Chinomona. 2017. The influence of trust, communication and commitment on ethical behaviour in universities: A case of South Africa. Problems and Perspectives in Management 15: 266–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Puccio, Gerard J., Cyndi Burnett, Selcuk Acar, Jo A. Yudess, Molly Holinger, and John F. Cabra. 2020. Creative problem solving in small groups: The effects of creativity training on idea generation, solution creativity, and leadership effectiveness. The Journal of Creative Behavior 54: 453–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Racine, Timothy P. 2015. Conceptual analysis. In The Wiley Handbook of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology: Methods, Approaches, and New Directions for Social Sciences. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Redondo, Gisela. 2016. Leadership and community participation: A literature review. International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences 5: 71–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Risjord, Mark. 2009. Rethinking concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 65: 684–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacco, Donald F., and Mohamed M. Ismail. 2014. Social belongingness satisfaction as a function of interaction medium: Face-to-face interactions facilitate greater social belonging and interaction enjoyment compared to instant messaging. Computers in Human Behavior 36: 359–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samier, Eugenie A., and Michèle Schmidt, eds. 2010. Trust and Betrayal in Educational Administration and Leadership. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Schulte, Benjamin, Florian Andresen, and Hans Koller. 2020. Exploring the embeddedness of an informal community of practice within a formal organisational context: A case study in the German military. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 27: 153–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwen, Thomas M., and Noriko Hara. 2003. Community of practice: A metaphor for online design? The Information Society 19: 257–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simonet, Daniel V., Robert P. Tett, Jeff Foster, Anastasia I. Angelback, and Jennifer M. Bartlett. 2018. Dark-side personality trait interactions: Amplifying negative predictions of leadership performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 25: 233–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soubhi, Hassan, Elizabeth A. Bayliss, Martin Fortin, Catherine Hudon, Marjan van den Akker, Robert Thivierge, Nancy Posel, and David Fleiszer. 2010. Learning and caring in communities of practice: Using relationships and collective learning to improve primary care for patients with multimorbidity. The Annals of Family Medicine 8: 170–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sporn, Barbara. 2003. Management in higher education: Current trends and future perspectives in European colleges and universities. In The Dialogue between Higher Education Research and Practice. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweeney, Anne, Nicholas Clarke, and Malcolm Higgs. 2019. Shared leadership in commercial organisations: A systematic review of definitions, theoretical frameworks and organisational outcomes. International Journal of Management Reviews 21: 115–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tremblay, Diane-Gabrielle, and Valéry Psyché. 2012. Analysis of processes of cooperation and knowledge sharing in a community of practice with a diversity of actors. Computer Science and Information Systems 9: 917–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van den Bossche, Piet, Wim H. Gijselaers, Mien Segers, and Paul A. Kirschner. 2006. Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: Team learning beliefs and behaviors. Small Group Research 37: 490–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warren, Simon. 2017. Struggling for visibility in higher education: Caught between neoliberalism ‘out there’and ‘in here’–an autoethnographic account. Journal of Education Policy 32: 127–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waters, Johanna. 2018. The toxic university: Zombie leadership, academic rock stars, and neoliberal ideology. British Journal of Sociology of Education 39: 729–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wenger, Etienne. 2004. Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice. Ivey Business Journal 68: 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Wenger, Etienne. 2010. Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice. London: Springer, pp. 179–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Qiong, Kathryn Cormican, and Guoquan Chen. 2018. A meta-analysis of shared leadership: Antecedents, consequences, and moderators. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 27: 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yahosseini, Kyanoush Seyed. 2020. Experimental Study and Modeling of Three Classes of Collective Problem-Solving Methods. Berlin: Freie Universitaet Berlin. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Chang, and Merve Zayim-Kurtay. 2018. University governance and academic leadership: Perceptions of European and Chinese university staff and perceived need for capacity building. European Journal of Higher Education 8: 435–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Omodan, B.I. Addressing the Dark Side of Leadership in the University System Using Community of Practice (CoP) Approach. Adm. Sci. 2023, 13, 246. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13120246
Omodan BI. Addressing the Dark Side of Leadership in the University System Using Community of Practice (CoP) Approach. Administrative Sciences. 2023; 13(12):246. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13120246
Chicago/Turabian StyleOmodan, Bunmi Isaiah. 2023. "Addressing the Dark Side of Leadership in the University System Using Community of Practice (CoP) Approach" Administrative Sciences 13, no. 12: 246. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13120246
APA StyleOmodan, B. I. (2023). Addressing the Dark Side of Leadership in the University System Using Community of Practice (CoP) Approach. Administrative Sciences, 13(12), 246. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13120246