9-Unit Structure
Unit 1: Foundations — Leadership & Mental Models
Opening the latticework
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | What is leadership, and how should leaders think? |
| Topics | Leadership vs. management (Kotter); Digital transformation context (VUCA, digitization → digitalization → DT); Mental models & latticework thinking (Parrish); Decision-making under complexity |
| Retained from | Current “Introduction” + “Mental Models” (merged, as you already deliver them in one session) |
| Key reading | Parrish (2020), Ch. 1–2 |
| Latticework thread | Introduction of the meta-framework; first models (first principles, inversion, systems thinking) |
Rationale: Keeps your strong opening. Merging intro + mental models into one unit frees a slot. The latticework becomes the “red thread” students will add models to throughout the course.
Unit 2: The Leader — Traits, Evolution & Self-Awareness
Who are you as a leader?
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | What makes a leader, and what kind of leader am I? |
| Topics | Brief historical arc of leadership thought (Great Man → Trait → Behavioral → Contingency → Transformational → Adaptive); Big Five & leadership (Judge et al., 2002); LTEE model (Judge et al., 2009); Bright/dark side of traits; Emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998); Self-awareness as leadership foundation |
| Retained from | Current “Leader Characteristics” (enhanced with historical evolution framing) |
| New | Explicit evolution-of-thought narrative gives students a map of the theoretical landscape before diving in |
| Key reading | Judge et al. (2002) |
| Latticework thread | Cognitive bias models, nature vs. nurture as mental model |
Rationale: The evolution overview is essential context — students need to see where trait theory sits before they can appreciate why we move beyond it. The existing content on Big Five and EI is strong; adding the historical frame costs ~15 minutes and pays off in coherence.
Unit 3: Adaptive Leadership — Paradoxes & Behavioral Complexity
Leading through contradiction
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do leaders navigate competing demands? |
| Topics | Paradox & contradiction in organizations (Denison, Putnam); Ambidexterity (Tushman, O’Reilly); Competing Values Framework (Quinn); Behavioral complexity as meta-competence; Situational leadership & adaptive approaches (brief: Hersey-Blanchard → Heifetz adaptive leadership) |
| Retained from | Current “Leadership Paradoxes” (core content preserved) |
| New | Explicit connection to adaptive/situational leadership traditions; Heifetz’s technical vs. adaptive challenges as a framing device |
| Key reading | Lavine (2014) |
| Latticework thread | Inversion (what would inflexible leadership produce?), map vs. territory |
Rationale: This unit becomes the theoretical engine of the course. The CVF is not just a typology — it’s a diagnostic tool for behavioral complexity. Adding adaptive leadership (Heifetz) here creates a bridge to the contextual unit later. Removing the “Leading Innovation” section (currently in Paradoxes) avoids scope creep — innovation leadership can be a student presentation topic instead.
Unit 4: Motivating & Engaging Followers
From path-goal clarity to intrinsic motivation
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do leaders create conditions for high performance? |
| Topics | Path-Goal Theory (House, 1996); Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan); Engaging leadership model (Schaufeli, 2021); Work engagement vs. work addiction; Disengaging leadership as counterpoint; Expectancy-value connections |
| Retained from | Current “Leadership Behavior” (refocused) |
| Key reading | House (1996) + Schaufeli (2021, summary handout) |
| Latticework thread | Incentive models, feedback loops (engagement → performance → engagement) |
Rationale: Separating motivation/engagement from team dynamics (which were entangled in the current unit) gives each topic room to breathe. Path-Goal → SDT → Engaging Leadership creates a clean theoretical progression: contingency → needs → engagement.
Unit 5: Building & Leading High-Performing Teams
From group to team
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do teams develop, and what makes them effective? |
| Topics | Team development stages (Tuckman; Wheelan’s IMGD as empirical refinement); Psychological safety (Edmondson, 1999); Team effectiveness criteria (Hill, 2003; Google’s Project Aristotle as case); Managing team paradoxes (Hill’s four contradictions); Diversity, equity & inclusion as team performance driver; Leading virtual & distributed teams (challenges, practices, trust at distance) |
| Entirely new | Yes — this is the biggest content addition |
| Key reading | Edmondson (1999) “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams” |
| Latticework thread | Complex adaptive systems (teams as emergent), network effects within teams |
Rationale: This is the most significant gap in the current lecture. Team dynamics is where leadership theory meets daily practice. Edmondson’s psychological safety research is both rigorous and immediately applicable. Virtual/distributed team content is essential for the digital context. The team paradoxes from Hill (already in your behavior unit) find their natural home here.
Unit 6: Conflict, Power & Organizational Politics
Navigating organizational realities
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do leaders exercise influence and manage conflict? |
| Topics | Conflict dynamics & styles (Thomas-Kilmann model); Constructive vs. destructive conflict; Power in organizations (Hill, 2003); Sources of personal & positional power; Organizational politics — functional and dysfunctional (Buchanan & Badham); Leading without formal authority; Lateral leadership across functions and hierarchies |
| Retained from | Current “Power Dynamics” (first half, refocused) |
| New | Conflict dynamics (Thomas-Kilmann); lateral leadership framing |
| Key reading | A practitioner-accessible conflict text or Hill (2003) chapter on power |
| Latticework thread | Game theory (cooperation vs. competition), incentive structures |
Rationale: Splitting the current Power unit in two allows (a) conflict + internal power dynamics here and (b) social capital + stakeholder management in the next unit. This is a more natural conceptual boundary: Unit 6 = navigating within the organization; Unit 7 = navigating the stakeholder environment.
Unit 7: Stakeholder Management & Coalition Building
Mapping and mobilizing your environment
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do leaders identify, analyze, and engage stakeholders? |
| Topics | Social capital theory (Nahapiet & Ghoshal; Burt’s structural holes; strong vs. weak ties); Stakeholder identification & salience (Mitchell, Agle & Wood, 1997); Interest-influence mapping; Stakeholder network analysis; IAP2 engagement spectrum (inform → consult → involve → collaborate → empower); Managing conflicting stakeholder demands; Coalition building & political navigation |
| Retained from | Current “Power Dynamics” (social capital portion, expanded) |
| New | Stakeholder mapping tools, IAP2 spectrum, coalition building |
| Key reading | Nahapiet & Ghoshal (1998) + Mitchell et al. (1997) salience model |
| Latticework thread | Network effects, second-order thinking (stakeholder ripple effects) |
Rationale: This is the second major content addition. Social capital theory — already well-developed in your current lecture — becomes the theoretical foundation for practical stakeholder management. The progression from “understanding networks” (theory) to “mapping stakeholders” (tool) to “choosing engagement strategies” (practice) gives students an actionable framework. This unit also naturally sets up storytelling: you need to communicate differently with different stakeholders.
Unit 8: Leadership in Context — Culture, Ethics & Transformation
Leading across boundaries
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How does context shape what effective leadership looks like? |
| Topics | Cross-cultural leadership dimensions (GLOBE study highlights; Hofstede as mental model); Leading across hierarchies, functions & geographies; Ethical leadership frameworks (authentic leadership, servant leadership); Sustainable leadership — long-term organizational health; Adaptive leadership for digital transformation (revisiting DT from Unit 1 with full toolkit); Integration: the latticework revisited — how all models connect |
| Entirely new | Mostly new (DT context from intro is revisited, not repeated) |
| Key reading | Selected GLOBE findings or House et al. (2004) summary |
| Latticework thread | Explicit meta-reflection: which mental models did we add? How do they interconnect? Map vs. territory revisited |
Rationale: This unit contextualizes everything. Cross-cultural competence and ethical frameworks address the “how does leadership differ by context?” question. The digital transformation thread from Unit 1 returns — but now students have the full toolkit (adaptive behavior, engagement, team building, stakeholder management, power navigation) to address it meaningfully. The latticework reflection creates a satisfying intellectual arc.
Unit 9: Storytelling — The Leader’s Voice
Communicating with impact
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Core question | How do leaders communicate to inspire action? |
| Topics | Storytelling as leadership necessity (Guber, 2007); Four truths of the storyteller; Aristotle’s persuasion model (Ethos, Pathos, Logos); Narrative structure & maps; Adapting stories to stakeholder audiences (connecting back to Unit 7); Practical exercises (pitch exercise, peer feedback) |
| Retained from | Current “Storytelling” (enhanced with stakeholder communication angle) |
| Key reading | Guber (2007) |
| Latticework thread | Storytelling itself as a mental model for influence |
Rationale: Storytelling as the capstone is perfect — it’s the most applied unit and synthesizes behavioral complexity (adapting to audience), stakeholder awareness (who are you speaking to?), and power dynamics (persuasion as influence). One small addition: explicitly connecting story adaptation to the stakeholder engagement spectrum from Unit 7 reinforces the course arc.
Implementation Notes
The latticework as running thread. Consider starting each unit with a brief “model check-in” — what new mental models does this unit add to our latticework? This turns the latticework from a one-time concept into a course-long learning journal.
The “Leading Innovation” section (currently in Paradoxes) could be removed from the lecture and offered as a student presentation topic — it’s interesting but tangential to the new core logic.
Exercises. Units 5 and 7 particularly lend themselves to interactive exercises: a team simulation or case for Unit 5; a stakeholder mapping exercise on a real organizational scenario for Unit 7.
Assessment alignment. The current assignment (research a leader, apply a theory, present) still works beautifully — but students now have a richer theoretical toolkit to draw from. You might consider requiring them to address stakeholder dynamics or team leadership in their analysis, not just individual traits/behavior.
135-minute session design. With the expanded scope, a recurring session structure could be: (a) model check-in / latticework update (10 min), (b) paper discussion (20 min), (c) new content (50 min), (d) break (15 min), (e) application / exercise / case (30 min), (f) reflection & homework briefing (10 min).