Fig. 1
Hierarchy of leadership levels (developed by the authors).
Tab. 1
Types and characteristics of leadership levels.
| Type of leader | Characteristics |
|---|---|
| Level 1: highly capable individual | The “highly capable individual” is a person who must be capable of making productive contribution using his/her talent, knowledge, skills and good work habits (Collins 2001) |
| Level 2: contributing team members | In this level, the leader must be able to work effectively within teams to achieve the group objectives (Collins 2001). Level 2 leadership is not far from level 1, instead, the scope of contributions is slowly getting wider. Level 1 leader must be able to make productive contributions, whereas level 2 leader must be able to make productive contributions within a group and to achieve the group objectives |
| Level 3: competent manager | A “competent manager” must be able to manage and organize people and resources to work effectively to reach the organization goal (Collins 2001). In this level, a competent manager must be more matured and must understand that time is not money, but time is the measure of work done by the organization (Bassett 2015). Moreover, he/she must know that the company does demand not only for materials but also for skilled labour |
| Level 4: effective leader | In this level, the leader must get the organization with high performance standards (Collins 2001). The effective leader must have a strong personality and expert communication skills, know what the organization wants and know how to achieve it. The effective leader must be honest and trust worthy. He must motivate and encourage employees to reach the organization’s desired mission (Ulrich and Smallwood 2012) |
| Level 5: the great leader | In this level, the leader must develop all the levels of the leadership pyramid. He/she must be the one who builds a great company through a paradox combination of “humility” and “professional will”. Level 5 leaders usually put their egos away and work for making an organization great (Collins 2001) |
Tab. 2
Comparison of case studies against the good-to-great concept.
| No. | Case study | Level 5 leadership | First who then what | Confront the brutal facts and never lose faith | The hedgehog concept | A culture of discipline | Technology accelerators | The flywheel and the doom loop |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Bethlehem Steel | × | × | × | × | × | ✓ | ✓ |
| 2. | Nucor Steel | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Fig. 2
Factors causing gap of workforce skills in ADFs.
Abbreviation: ADFs, architectural design firms.
Fig. 3
Averages regarding the good-to-great concept in ADFs.
Abbreviation: ADFs, architectural design firms.
Tab. 3
Detailed description of the framework.
| Step 1 | Diagnosing the current challenge of gap of workforce skills |
| Objective | To investigate the current challenges of gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |
| Activities | Studying the current status of gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |
| Identifying the impact of this issue on the performance of ADFs | |
| Identifying, validating and classifying the challenges of gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries | |
| Conducting an orientation meeting prior to the study to establish strategic issues (study location, team, budget, resources, etc.) | |
| Gaining decision makers and top management support to facilitate securing the needed resources, accepting and implementing the study decisions | |
| Defining performance management criteria | |
| Tools and techniques | Literature review |
| Survey questionnaires | |
| Interviews | |
| Case studies | |
| Decision makers and senior management support | |
| Brainstorming and team consensus | |
| Involved personnel and needed resources | Decision makers |
| Senior management | |
| Project managers | |
| Design and construction teams | |
| Different project stakeholders | |
| Training programmes | |
| Output | Identified, validated and classified the current challenges of gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |
| Step 2 | Identifying the good-to-great concept for implementation |
| Objective | To identify the good-to-great concept to be implemented for bridging the gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |
| Activities | Identifying the role that each good-to-great concept can play towards bridging the gap of ADFs in developing countries |
| Generating innovative ideas to facilitate the implementation of the identified concept | |
| Tools and techniques | Brainstorming and team consensus |
| Good-to-great concept | |
| Leadership | |
| First who then what | |
| Confront the brutal facts, yet never lose faith | |
| The hedgehog concept | |
| A culture of discipline | |
| Technology accelerators | |
| The flywheel and the doom loop | |
| Involved personnel and needed resources | Decision makers |
| Senior management | |
| Project managers | |
| Design and construction teams | |
| Different project stakeholders | |
| Training programmes | |
| Output | Identified the good-to-great concept for bridging the gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |
| Step 3 | Planning and implementing of the good-to-great concept |
| Objective | To plan and implement the identified good-to-great concept |
| Activities | Developing implementation plans including time, cost, quality, human resources, communication channels, risk, health and safety, waste, etc. |
| Securing decision makers and senior management support | |
| Establishing corrective actions to adopt in case the developed plans are not executed as planned | |
| Tools and techniques | Planning techniques and software |
| Work authorization system to verify predecessor activities and permit the successor activity | |
| Performance management system | |
| Involved personnel and needed resources | Decision makers |
| Senior management | |
| Project managers | |
| Design and construction teams | |
| Different project stakeholders | |
| Training programmes | |
| Output | Planning and implementation plans |
| Step 4 | Monitoring and evaluating the obtained results |
| Objective | To monitor and evaluate the results obtained from the planning and implementation step |
| Activities | Measuring the results against the performance measures developed earlier |
| Identifying and evaluating the causes of failure and issues that resulted in deviation from the original plans | |
| Tools and techniques | Change control procedures |
| Financial control procedures | |
| Issue and defect management procedures defining issue and defect controls, issue and defect | |
| Identification and resolution and action item tracking | |
| Involved personnel and needed resources | Decision makers |
| Senior management | |
| Project managers | |
| Design and construction teams | |
| Different project stakeholders | |
| Training programmes | |
| Output | Action plans and corrective actions to overcome the issues raised during the implementation of the good-to-great concept |
| Step 5 | Implementing corrective actions and closing out |
| Objective | To implement the corrective actions developed during the previous step and close out projects |
| Activities | Implementing corrective actions |
| Documenting learned lessons and sharing them with decision makers, design and construction teams and related project stakeholders | |
| Obtaining acceptance of senior management of ADFs to formally close the project or phase | |
| Performing team members’ assessment and releasing project resources | |
| Tools and techniques | Expert judgement |
| Reporting | |
| Knowledge management | |
| Involved personnel and needed resources | Decision makers |
| Senior management | |
| Project managers | |
| Design and construction teams | |
| Different project stakeholders | |
| Training programmes | |
| Output | Successfully bridging the gap of workforce skills of ADFs in developing countries |