Research

The Institute's research role, as the LCABOK™ describes it, is to build and steward the evidence base that grounds the discipline's claims, to support the ongoing development of its assessment methodology, and to advance the field's understanding of how character architecture operates in organizational systems.

Research

The Institute supports and publishes research that advances the discipline of leadership character as a rigorous field of study.

Evidence Standard

The evidence standard defines what counts as credible research in the discipline and how findings are evaluated.

Research Program

The research program identifies priority questions and supports work that builds the empirical foundation of the discipline.

Papers

The Institute publishes working papers, position papers, and research summaries that advance the discipline.

A discipline that proposes a structural account of leadership has to be willing to have that account tested. The Institute therefore publishes the standard it claims to uphold, and it states plainly what has been established and what has not. The evidence standard page sets out that approach. It treats evidence against the discipline's claims as seriously as evidence for them.

The Institute publishes its research as papers. It does not publish a journal. The papers page will list the Institute's paper series as they are established, and no paper is described here that has not been released.

Researchers who want to test the framework, replicate a finding, or propose a collaboration can read the page for researchers and academics and then write through the contact page. Organizations asked to take part in any study will be told its purpose and how their information will be used before they agree.

Research

Researchers who want to test the framework, replicate a finding, or propose a collaboration can write through the contact page.

For Researchers Contact

Research

Research Program

The Institute's research program is being established. This page states the questions the discipline itself leaves open, so that a reader can see where evidence is most needed, and it commits to publishing the program's agenda, priorities, and methods when they are set.

Questions the discipline leaves open

How well do the framework's assessment methods meet its own validity and reliability standards in practice?

How reliably do independent practitioners reach the same findings from the same evidence?

How do the sufficiency criteria in Section 6.1 behave across different roles and organizational settings?

How do the failure patterns the LCABOK™ describes appear in cases studied before the failure, which Section 1.2 treats as the only legitimate basis for a causal claim about a real organization?

Once the program is set, this page will outline its agenda, how priorities are chosen, the methods used, how studies are reviewed, how findings are released, and how conflicts of interest are disclosed. Until then, the Institute does not describe any study as underway.

Research

Researchers who want to test the framework, replicate a finding, or propose a collaboration can write through the contact page.

For Researchers Contact

Research

Evidence Standard

The Institute holds its own claims to a stated standard of evidence. This page explains the standards so that a reader can judge the Institute's work by them.

Behavioral evidence over assertion

The assessment framework requires behavioral evidence grounded in patterns observed over time and treats self-report and interview data as hypotheses requiring behavioral confirmation. The Institute applies the same discipline to its own claims. A statement that a pattern exists should rest on observed behavior and not on the preference of the person making it.

Evidence that existed before the event

Where the Institute writes about a real organizational failure, it relies only on evidence that existed before the failure. Hindsight can make any outcome look inevitable, and an account built on evidence gathered afterward cannot show that the structure caused the outcome. Section 1.2 sets this limit, and the Institute applies it to its articles, papers, and casework.

Sufficiency and limits

The criteria in Section 6.1 for sample sufficiency, observation period, severity, and thresholds apply to the Institute's own studies as they apply to practitioners. Findings are reported with the limitations under which they were reached, as required by the limitation transparency principle.

What the Institute does not claim

The Institute does not claim that the framework has been empirically validated. It presents the discipline as a body of knowledge with stated standards and treats validation as work still to be done and openly reported. Evidence that cuts against a claim will be published and will be treated as a reason to revise the claim.

Research

Researchers who want to test the framework, replicate a finding, or propose a collaboration can write through the contact page.

For Researchers Contact

Papers

What a paper page will show