Although various reviews about leadership development (LD) have been published in recent years, no one has attempted to systematically review longitudinal LD studies, which is arguably the most appropriate way to study LD (Day, Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 561–571, 2011). In this way, the focus of the present scoping review is to understand how true longitudinal LD studies have been investigated and what inconsistencies exist, primarily from a methodological perspective. Only business contexts and leadership-associated outcomes are considered. To achieve this, ample searches were performed in five online databases from 1900 to 2021 that returned 1023 articles after the removal of duplicates. Additionally, subject experts were consulted, reference lists of key studies were cross-checked, and handsearch of leading leadership journals was performed. A subsequent and rigorous inclusion process narrowed the sample down to 19 articles. The combined sample contains 2,776 participants (67% male) and 88 waves of data (average of 4.2). Evidence is mapped according to participants, setting, procedures, outcomes, analytical approach, and key findings. Despite many strengths, a lack of context diversity and qualitative designs are noticed. A thematic analysis indicates that LD authors are focused on measuring status, behavioral, and cognitive aspects. Implications for knowledge and future research paths are discussed.
Read full abstract