Ingress: Organisationer tycks inte bli mer rustade av att förlita sig enbart på traditionella kursupplägg. Företag som presterar starkt ekonomiskt prioriterar verksamhetsnära insatser där ledarskapet utvecklas i det dagliga arbetet, skriver beslutsfattare från näringsliv och akademi.

I projektet System för ledarskapsutveckling har forskare vid Jönköping University i partnerskap med ett tiotal svenska organisationer och genom en nationell telefonintervju med drygt 1 300 privata och offentliga verksamheter fördjupat kunskapen om hur ledarskapsutveckling organiseras, uppfattas och omsätts i praktiken. Resultatet i denna rapport bygger på ett varierat material i form av dokument, intervjuer och workshops.

Genom projektet har vi fördjupat vår förståelse av att ledarskapsutveckling kräver systematik och integration. Det handlar om att arbeta medvetet och långsiktigt med olika arbetssätt som är kopplade till organisationens syfte, samtidigt som vi reflekterar över de antaganden och idéer som påverkar utformningen. Ett ledarskapsutvecklingssystem omfattar de arbetssätt som främjar utveckling av ledarskap anpassat efter verksamhetens syfte, kontext och föränderliga behov.

I rapporten beskriver sju organisationer sin syn på ledarskap och hur de arbetar för att utveckla detsamma. Genom deras egna ord får vi en inblick i hur ett system för ledarskapsutveckling kan se ut i praktiken. Särskilt markeras att ledarskapsutveckling måste skräddarsys utifrån organisatoriska förutsättningar och individuella behov. De aktiviteter och metoder som används måste kontinuerligt testas, förstärkas eller fasas ut beroende på relevans. Hellre hålla fast vid en genomtänkt metod än att ständigt byta.

Den nationella kartläggningen ger en översikt av vilka aktiviteter som är mest använda och till vem de vänder sig. Fördjupande analyser visar att de organisationer som har starkast finansiella resultat värderar fem verksamhetsnära metoder främst; chefsmöten, gruppreflektioner, utvecklingssamtal, förbättringsarbete och tillfälliga uppdrag.

Slutligen presenterar vi en uppsättning framgångsprinciper, frågor och verktyg för att arbeta mer systematiskt med ledarskapsutveckling. Vår förhoppning är att de ska fungera som en kompass för ett mer nyfiket och reflekterande arbetssätt och öppnar vägen mot en hållbar och framgångsrik ledarskapsutveckling.

In the project System for Leadership Development, researchers at Jönköping University have, in partnership with about a dozen Swedish organizations, deepened their knowledge of how leadership development is organized, perceived and put into practice. This was, among other things, done through national telephone interviews with more than 1,300 private and public organizations. The results presented in this report are based on various empirical sources in the form of documents, interviews and workshops.

Through the project, we have deepened our understanding of the need for leadership development to be systematic and integrated. It is a matter of working deliberately and with a long-term perspective with different practices that are linked to the organization’s purpose, all the while reflecting on the assumptions and ideas that influence the design. A leadership development system encompasses the practices that promote the development of leadership, adapted to the purpose, context and changing needs of the organization.

In this handbook, seven organizations describe their views on leadership and how they work to develop it. Through their own words, we get an insight into what a system for leadership development can look like in practice. In particular, it is emphasized that leadership development must be tailored to organizational conditions and individual needs. The practices and methods that are used must continuously be tested, strengthened or phased out depending on relevance. It is better to stick to a well-thought-out practice than to constantly change.

The national survey provides an overview of the practices most used and which target groups they are aimed at. In-depth analyses show that the organizations with the strongest financial results primarily prioritize five practices close to daily operations: leadership forums, performance and developmental reviews, improvement work, group reflections and temporary assignments.

Finally, we present a set of success principles, questions, and tools for working more systematically with leadership development. Our hope is that they will serve as a compass for a more curious and reflective way of working and that they will open the way towards sustainable and successful leadership development.

Problem framing

How to develop leadership and create sustainable leadership development systems in times of constant and multiple changes poses a significant and complex challenge for most contemporary organizations. One way to address these challenges is to form research–practice partnerships (Vogel et al., 2021), where the role of theory is argued to establish equitable collaboration and develop a “third space” (Thavenius & Malmström, 2025), as well as in identifying factors that support such collaboration (Sjöö & Hellström, 2019).

Approach

The aim of this paper is to explore the role of theory in collaborative research. We explore how theory helps develop insights into the challenges experienced in practice and facilitates learning towards developing a sustainable leadership development system. The paper draws on challenges raised by participants who took part in a collaborative research project. In social research, the role of theory has been emphasized as essential for establishing a shared knowledge base (Parsons (1938) and described as a catalyst for scientific rigour and guidance in developing a research design (Van der Waldt, 2021). Moreover, theory offers ontological/epistemological clarity and provides an analytical structure for understanding complex phenomena (Van der Waldt, 2024). Within research on Work-Integrated-Learning (WIL), the theoretical orientation commonly draws on sociocultural, constructivist and pragmatic theoretical perspectives (See Vygotsky, 1978: Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; Dewey, 1938). From these perspectives, a WIL approach in collaborative research (Billett, 2023) applies the theory as an enabler for integration of academic and workplace learning, and supports and facilitates reflective practice, while structuring authentic learning processes across academic-workplace boundaries.

The purpose of collaboration between practice and research is to shed light on phenomena experienced through the lens of theory, to develop joint solutions to challenges faced in daily practice (Ellström et al. 2020). Collaborative approaches also facilitate longer-term evidence-based practice through contemporary insights and creative research approaches (Vogel et al., 2021). By exemplifying the design of interventions from two studies (Bergmo-Prvulovic, et al. 2025; Avby et al., 2025) we present how a transdisciplinary and customized WIL-curriculum approach (Kligyte et al. 2023) served as a frame for developing integral partnership between researchers and the workplace (Billet, 2023; Choy and Delahaye, 2011). We also illustrate how the social representation theory (SRT) (Jovchelovitch, 2019; Marková, 2003; Moscovici, 2001) servedas a metatheoretical approach to disclose underlying assumptions necessary to shed light on, and create awareness about, to create a substantial base for further interventions towards work-integrated learning in daily practice. Further, we present how the analysis of organizational narratives through a systems lens (Day and Dannhäuser, 2024) and the theoretical lens of organizational identity (Bolden et al., 2008), convey how organizations shape distinct organizational leadership identities, which in turn significantly influence the shaping of how a leadership development system looks like in practice.

Lessons learnt

Through the two collaborative projects, several insights emerged with many lessons learnt. The projects showhow theory facilitated establishing and continuously sustaining an integral partnership between researchers and the workplace. Given expressed challenges at the workplace, a theoretically based design for how to reveal underlying assumptions of relevance for developing a sustainable leadership development system was presented. The role of theory thus served as both a frame for establishing an equitable collaboration (Thavenius & Malmström, 2025) and to create clarity on ontological and epistemological basis and served as a frame for scientific rigour and guidance in research design and analytical procedures (Van der Waldt, 2024, 2021; 2024). Theory served to uncover a web of social representations on leadership, that contributed to learning procedures at the workplace. Theory clearly played an essential role in establishing a shared knowledge base (Parson, 1938), enabling the workplace to develop a more aware leadership development system. Lessons learnt also show that the research–practitioner partnership created a shared space where organizational narratives, practical challenges, and theoretical perspectives could be jointly examined. Theory thus functioned as an anchoring framework that made underlying assumptions and values visible, and supported dialogue about what shapes leadership development practices. Theoretical orientations helped to interpret challenges as expressions of organizational identity, history, and contextual constraints, and enabled deeper insights into how leadership development systems emerge, where misalignments occur, and how coherence, continuity, and comprehensiveness can be strengthened in practice. Understanding the role of theory in collaborative research opens for several possibilities to facilitate new knowledge creation of value for both researchers and practitioners at various workplaces.

A leadership development system (LDS) encompasses all methods and practices used in an organisation to train and develop effective leadership. However, the underlying assumptions upon which such a system is based are often overlooked, and the workplace as a learning site is generally under-investigated, which may cause an unreflected LDS. Using a social representations theory approach, this study explores such underlying assumptions, i.e. social representations of leadership and leadership development, among 19 employees of an organisation with a non-hierarchical business structure. To collect data, the free association method was used to reveal underlying social representations shaping the company’s current LDS. Through a transdisciplinary framing and customised design of work-integrated learning (WIL) among the employees (N = 57), the study also develops an exploratory model for facilitating the development of a deliberate LDS. The results show that uncovering social representations supports professional learning in work, which helps create an LDS that is based on articulated awareness. The study further shows that the process of uncovering hidden values, ideas, and perspectives can support a context-relevant and customised WIL curriculum for professional learning and cultivate a deliberate and purposeful approach to leadership development.

The contemporary era, frequently characterized as a period of crises, is distinguished by precarity, vulnerability, and uncertainty. In a post-pandemic context, we confront a global environmental crisis and observe technological transformations of existential magnitude. These crises unequivocally reveal the numerous tensions between global and local circumstances, as individuals grapple with the rapid changes occurring worldwide.

In this context people are facing constant transitions requiring from them lifelong and life-wide learning. However, learning occurs in many individuals’ lives dimensions pertaining not only to their vocational but also existential dimensions. The dominant policy learning discourses often emphasize a simplified view of learning, primarily focusing on strategic aims of skills provisions through formal education for companies to maintain competitiveness in the market. When adult learning is approached, there is a tendency to either emphasize the process of workplace learning (Fenwick, 2010), represented by diverse understandings of learning processes and disciplines, or to emphasize adult learning as mainly occurring through formal education, which emphasize lifelong learning rather as lifelong continuous education. Furthermore, there is a notable paucity of analyses regarding the learning processes that occur during activities designed to support adults in career development and navigation, specifically career guidance. This inadequately explored domain of learning requires, in our opinion, enhanced comprehension to augment its capacity for supporting adults in career development and transitions in their lives.

Therefore, the aim of this presentation is to question these dominant positions and capture the “career” as a complex and life-long learning that requires “a dialogue” between diverse theoretical approaches to provide a deeper understanding of career complexity. This dialogue creates a bridge of understanding adults’ career transitions complexity in the context of local and global tensions. Drawing from our previous research that underscores the growing significance of learning in career and vocational life (Bergmo-Prvulovic, 2024: Bilon, Minta, 2016), we propose a critical approach to current perspectives and practices of learning that occurs in career.

By integrating knowledge from diverse research fields (adult education and learning, career guidance, together with philosophy, sociology, social psychology and critical psychology) we adopt a transdisciplinary approach, and emphasize the importance of uncovering social representations of career in each context and the necessity for a transformative, biographical perspective on individual learning during transitional phases of adults lives and the learning support provided through career guidance (Bergmo-Prvulovic, 2022). By paying attention to 1) the learning processes occurring in the gaps, “the spaces in between” during a transition phase, as illustrated by Bergmo-Prvulovic (2024), and 2) the role of agency and its complex relation with learning processes (Bilon, 2020) in often-neglected learning domains in policy discourses, we offer a framework that transcends simplified views on learning. Adults’ agency is stressed as fundamentally connected to the learning processes (Biesta & Tedder, 2007; Bilon, 2020), and defined as the “temporally constructed engagement by actors of different structural environment (…) which, through the interplay of habit, imagination, and judgment, both reproduces and transforms those structures in interactive response to the problems posed by changing historical situations” (Emirbayer, 1997). Therefore, our framework is built on the “dialogue” of diverse approaches. We adopt the relational nature of reality (Burkitt, 2015; Crossley, 2011) emphasizing the constitutive role of interconnectedness not only between humans but also non-humans worlds (e.g environments that interact with individuals). Our approach is also supported by Biesta's (2016) three domains of educational purposes (qualification, socialization, subjectification) as we want to stress that subjectification is strongly connected to adults’ agency.

We examine where learning takes place, what learning content is prioritized, why learning occurs, for what, and for whom learning is intended. Lastly, we discuss the implications for future career guidance practices and identify new directions for further theoretical development.

This study explores the relationship between organizational leadership identity, defined as "who we are" and "what we value related to leadership", and leadership development practices in five Swedish companies. Through the analysis of their narratives, the study reveals five distinct organizational leadership identities, ranging from individual leadership excellence to collaborative self-leadership. These identities significantly influence the shaping of a leadership development system (LDS) in practice. The study highlights three critical aspects—coherence, continuity, and comprehensiveness—that define the interdependency between leadership identity and an LDS. A closer linkage creates high interdependency, resulting in a stronger and more effective system, while weaker linkages reduce this interdependency and its potential to support organizational objectives and manage change. This research challenges traditional, linear models of leadership development, emphasizing the interaction and interconnectedness of practices within an organized "place". This place serves as a site of integration, activation, and interconnection between people, things, and experiences. By integrating concepts of organizational identity, historical context, and values, the study provides a more holistic theoretical framework for understanding how effective leadership is developed within organizations.

This session will introduce participants to the Critical perspectives on career and career guidance (COCAG) project. It will explain how to get involved in the project and then encourage participants to explore the emerging issues relating to the project's three working groups.

(1) How can the challenges and changes that are happening to careers in the contemporary world be understood?

(2) How can policymakers respond to contemporary challenges to individual’s careers?

(3) How can career guidance practice adopt a more critical stance to address the changing world more effectively?

In the workshop we will foster debate around these questions by exploring the implications for policy, practice and research and supporting the development of new ideas and collaborations.

This position paper argues for the development of a coherent body of critical career theory that responds to contemporary crises of inequality, precarity, and ecological breakdown. It rejects individualising models and synthesises diverse traditions into practice principles that cultivate critical consciousness and connect guidance to collective, organisational and policy change. Situated amid precarity, platformisation, automation, ecological transition and widening inequality, the argument defends bounded yet real agency. It also outlines our COST Action agenda to map theory, strengthen the evidence base and shift institutions. The outcome is a clearer field with a shared vocabulary and a practical plan for research, pedagogy and policy.