Consulting Psychology Journal

© 2023 American Psychological Association 2023, Vol. 75, No. 3, 297–314

ISSN: 1065-9293 https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000262

THE EMERGENCE OF SPECIALIST

DISABILITY LEADERSHIP
DEVELOPMENT—A CASE STUDY OF
THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE IN AUSTRALIA
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Christina Ryan1 and Christina Guthier2

1
Disability Leadership Institute, Canberra, Australia
2
Department of Business Education and Management, Johannes Gutenberg-
Universität Mainz

We live in a world where it is rare for disabled people to sit in parliaments or boardrooms or
hold leadership positions. This lack of representation in communities, organizations, and
management positions seems to be one of the key drivers for inequality in work and
leadership opportunities for disabled people. Many organizations have already developed
specific leadership programs for female, Indigenous, and culturally diverse people (e.g.,
Australian Indigenous Leadership Centre), and Stanford Business School has now
developed a specialist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer leadership
program to decrease inequality and increase diversity. However, leadership programs
targeted at disabled people were lacking until the Disability Leadership Institute (DLI)
developed the Future Shapers program (Ryan, 2018). The present article focuses on three
common barriers that disabled people are facing when heading for leadership positions: (a)
lack of structured support systems, (b) lack of specific leadership development programs
for disabled people, and (c) lack of visibility. By describing the pioneering work of the DLI
in Australia as a case study, we want to show best-practice approaches to (a) build an
international community of disabled leaders (e.g., member groups at the DLI), (b) develop
specific leadership programs run by disabled people specifically targeted at disabled
people, and (c) increase the visibility of disabled leaders (e.g., National Awards for
Disability Leadership). Finally, we discuss the need for more systematic research on
leadership by disabled people.

Christina Guthier https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3496-7602

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Christina Guthier, Department of Business
Education and Management, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Charlottenstraße 32, 40210 Düsseldorf,
Germany. Email: cguthier@uni-mainz.de

297
 298 RYAN AND GUTHIER

What’s It Mean? Implications for Consulting Psychology

This case study provides insights into the approach and thinking of disability leaders in
relation to their professional development. It uncovers how ableism impacts disabled
people and impairs their capacity to absorb information and to grow professionally.

Keywords: disability, leadership, inequality, leadership development, support

In 1990, President George H. W. Bush signed the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) into law
(Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 1990). The ADA prohibits discrimination and guarantees
that disabled people have the same opportunities as everyone else to participate in American mainstream
life, including employment opportunities.1 According to the ADA, a person with a disability is someone
who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

This includes people who have a record of such an impairment or who are regarded as having such an
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

impairment. In 1992 the Australian Government signed the Australian Disability Discrimination
Act into law. According to World Health Organization (2020), disabled people are the largest
group of minorities, covering over 1 billion people worldwide, or 15% of the global population
(Dickson, 2005).
Ten years after the ADA became law, Schwochau and Blanck (2000) discussed mixed evidence
on whether it had helped or harmed disabled people with employment (see also Donohue et al., 2011).
Metts (2000) stated that unemployment rates for disabled people tend to be high in high-income
countries and even higher in low- and medium-income countries, resulting in an estimated gross
domestic product lost due to disability of about 1.3–1.9 trillion dollars around the world. In 2008
the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act was enacted to ensure that disability should
be construed in favor of broad coverage of individuals without a need for extensive analysis.
In 2006 the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRPD). This is designed to stop discrimination as well as strengthen rights and opportunities for disabled
people. Article 3 of the CRPD outlines the rights of disabled people to “full and effective participation and
inclusion in society”; the importance of “respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities
as part of human diversity and humanity”; and the need for “equality of opportunity.” In Article 27 of the
CRPD, “the right of persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others” is legally ensured. The
CRPD has been ratified by 182 states, for example, Australia, all members of the European Union, but not
the United States (cf. Treaty Series). Hence, from a legal point of view, disabled people should no longer be
able to be discriminated and disadvantaged against in the labor market.
Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Labor reports an unemployment rate of 12.6% of disabled
people, compared to 7.9% of people without disabilities. The Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare (2020) reported that 53% of disabled people were in the labor force, compared with 84% of
those without disabilities. Hence, it is not surprising that it has remained a remarkable thing to see
disabled people sit in parliaments or boardrooms or hold leadership positions. Very little presence of
disabled people—either because there are no disabled people present or because they hide their
disability2—in governmental departments seems to make not addressing the specific needs of disabled
people likely. For example, the Australian Government failed to address disabled people during
the development of pandemic policy in early 2020 (Australian Government, 2021; Henriques-
Gomes, 2020).

1
The Disability Leadership Institute (DLI) has arisen from the global disability rights movement and uses the
language of that movement, which is identity-first language rather than people-first language. Thus, this article uses
the term disabled people throughout rather than people with disability, motivated by Andrews et al., 2019, and
comments like the following one by DLI members: “When I see orgs using identity-first language like the DLI, that
is a clear signal to me that they are led by disabled people and that is so significant and important to me. If they are
not using identity first, I feel like I want to know how peer led they are.”
2
See Cureton (2018) for reasons why people with disabilities might be reluctant to disclose their disabilities.
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 299

In Germany, Wolfgang Schäuble, who is the president of the German Bundestag, was the victim
of an assassination attempt that left him partially paralyzed (Schmemann, 1990). He is one of the very
few exceptions internationally of a publicly visible politician with a disability in such a prestigious
leadership position. Nevertheless, the German Federal Employment Agency (Arbeit, 2021) reported
that only 49% of people with severe disability are employed, compared to 78% of the overall
population.
Whereas there are specific leadership development programs targeted at, for example, developing
women for leadership positions due to gender biases (e.g., Ely et al., 2011), similar leadership
development programs targeted at disabled people who are facing challenges due to, for example,
“othering” (e.g., Procknow et al., 2017) were, to the best of our knowledge, lacking until the Disability
Leadership Institute (DLI) was founded. The DLI3 provides, as far as we know, the world’s
first intentional community of disability leaders and has developed specific disability leadership
development programs (e.g., Future Shapers). This way, the DLI is working on addressing the
inequality of disabled people directly by offering ongoing leadership development programs and a
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

community of practice for disabled leaders.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

The present article shows the best-practice approaches of the DLI to (a) build an international
community of leaders with disabilities (e.g., member groups and community of practice at the DLI),
(b) develop specific leadership programs run by disabled people specifically targeted at disabled
people (e.g., Future Shapers, Foundations of Disability Leadership, Represent), and (c) increase
visibility of disabled people (e.g., National Awards for Disability Leadership). First, we will illustrate
barriers to leadership for disabled people by providing a brief theoretical overview of ableism,
othering, and the critical disability theory. Second, we will describe the online survey used by the
DLI and sample characteristics in the Method section. Third, we will report the findings and key
learnings of the online survey conducted by the DLI to understand the experience of disability leaders
and their expressed leadership development needs in Australia. Fourth, we will describe all of the
activities the DLI has undertaken guided by the survey results to (a) build an international community
of disabled leaders (e.g., member groups at the DLI), (b) develop specific leadership programs run by
disabled people specifically targeted at disabled people (e.g., Future Shapers), and (c) increase the
visibility of disabled leaders. Last, we will discuss the need for more systematic research on leadership by
disabled people.

Barriers to Leadership for Disabled People

According to Vornholt et al. (2018), disability is most commonly defined using the International
Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health by the World Health Organization (World
Health Organization, 2001). This definition emphasizes that disability is present when the lack of
person–environment fit is key, compared to the former most prominent definition by the International
Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps (World Health Organization, 1980) where
disability is seen as a defect of a person only. Despite this positive definitional development, disabled
people have been shamed and stigmatized, and this experience of discrimination seems to continue,
particularly in the workplace.
According to McLean (2011, p. 13), “Ableism is discrimination on the grounds that being able
bodied is the normal and superior human condition.” Hence, disabled people have been commonly
regarded as “the other” (Kudlick, 2005), assuming that they are inferior to people without disabilities. The
critical disability theory by Rocco (2005), which is built on the critical race theory (Delgado & Stefanic,
2001), illustrates common difficulties disabled people face in life making it harder for them
to be perceived and seen as productive persons. The critical disability theory is based on six principles:

3
The DLI is a rights-based organization that uses the CRPD and the social model of disability to underpin its
work. This means disability is recognized as an identity chosen by individuals, rather than centered on specific
impairment types. All disabled people mentioned in this case study have identified as disabled and are accepted as
disabled by the DLI.
 300 RYAN AND GUTHIER

(1) Ableism is invisible, (2) epistemic violence is experienced by the disabled, (3) ableism creates a binary
view (able vs. not abled) when it is more accurate to consider a continuum, (4) disability is a socially
constructed phenomenon, (5) the disabled have the right of autonomy and self-determination, and (6)
the medical industry commodifies the disabled. (Procknow et al., 2017, p. 365)

Hence, the inequality of disabled people is a complex product of several misconceptions and
misattributions mainly, driven by nondisabled people. These make it especially challenging for
disabled people to strive for leadership roles.

Understanding the Leadership Development Needs of Disabled People

Disability leadership should be understood in two ways—first, as the practice of disabled people
being leaders and, second, as a specific approach to leadership taken by disabled people. This is a new field
of discovery that is developing deeper understanding about how disabled people undertake leadership and
why this produces the need to respond to developing them with specialist leadership development
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

programs. Additionally, it confirms the diversity imperative; why it is important to have disability diversity
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

in decision-making rooms to achieve superior outcomes (Sherbin & Kennedy, 2017).

To be able to create leadership development programs that will support disabled people to
become and be leaders, one of the first things the DLI did after its founding was to conduct an
exploratory online survey. The aim of the survey was to better understand the experience of disability
leadership and disability leaders’ development needs. According to our knowledge, no similar survey
had ever been undertaken before 2016, although the work of Todd (2018) also provides some insight
into how disability leadership develops and is supported. This survey study served as the basis for
building a needs-based disability leadership program.

Method

The DLI conducted a short, mainly qualitative, online survey of Australian disability leaders using
Survey Monkey in June 2016.

Survey Development
The survey was developed with support from an advisory group that was assisting with the
establishment of the DLI. The DLI advisory group had seven members overall: (a) an Indigenous
leadership and adult learning specialist and business mentor; (b) a leadership specialist (doctorate),
qualified teacher, adult-learning expert, and business mentor; (c) a professor of governance and
university researcher; (d) a qualified teacher and expert in disability and adult learning; (e) a leadership
and adult-learning specialist and an expert in disability; (f) a business mentor; and (g) a graphic
designer. Three of the seven members identify as disabled.
The survey was developed based on advice from the advisory group as a means of understanding the
experience of disability leaders and their professional development aspirations and requirements.
No systematic literature review was undertaken to develop the survey because, to the knowledge of the
advisory group, there was no published peer-reviewed research on disability leadership in 2016. The present
study most closely resembled market research undertaken to ascertain what services the DLI might provide
and what programs might be developed. Table 1 shows the questions included in the survey.

Data Collection
The survey was distributed via personal networks on email and social-media platforms and through
disabled people’s organizations. Data collection was closed on July 15, 2016.

Participants
The survey was intended to be completed by Australian disabled leaders or emerging disabled
leaders, working in a wide range of fields, both paid and unpaid, so that the DLI could better
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 301
Table 1
Questions Included in the Disability Leadership Institute Survey for Australian Disability Leaders

Questions Answer format

(1) Are you a person with disability? Yes/no

(2) What leadership development or training have you undertaken? Text box
(include both formal and informal development)
(3) Did this training lead to any leadership opportunities? Yes/no
If yes, what types of opportunities; if no then why not? Text box
(4) Do you consider yourself a leader already? Yes/no
What type of leadership or type of positions? Text box
(5) Have your access requirements been any barrier to leadership opportunities that Yes/no
you have taken or wanted to take?
If yes, please explain how Text box
(6) What leadership development or support would be useful for you in the next year? Text box
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

(7) What are your long-term aspirations for leadership and how will you achieve Text box
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

them?
(8) The Disability Leadership Institute is establishing a register of leaders. What type Text box
of opportunities would you like this register to connect you with?
(9) Have your received any awards? Please list. Text box
(10) Would you like to receive information about the outcomes of this survey and about Yes/no
further activities of the Disability Leadership Institute?
Note. Survey copyright is held by the Disability Leadership Institute; reproduced with permission.

understand what development they were looking for, what they had tried (and its levels of success),
and what recognition leaders had received for their work and the opportunities this provided. We
defined disability based on the social model of disability (Oliver, 1983, 2013), which proposes that
people are not disabled by their impairments but by the disabling barriers they are facing in society.
Hence, no questions directed at details of the individual impairments were asked in addition to
Question 1.
The sample size was 47 respondents, all identifying themselves as disabled person (Question 1;
Oliver, 1983). The DLI has arisen from the global disability rights movement and uses the language of
that movement, which is identity-first language rather than people-first language. Thus, this article uses
the term disabled people throughout rather than people with disability, motivated by Andrews et al.
(2019). The majority (42) of respondents considered themselves a leader already (Question 4),
although about 70% of the respondents had also experienced access requirements as a barrier to
leadership opportunities that they had taken or wanted to take (Question 5). Over 90% of the respondents
(44) asked for a summary of the survey results or for further information about the DLI (Question 10).

Data Cleaning and Coding

To report the text-box responses, inductive content analysis (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008) was used because
knowledge about disability leadership development was limited. This approach consists of three
phases: (a) preparation, (b) organizing, and (c) reporting of the data. First, all words included in a single
answer of a question were selected as units of analysis (Guthrie et al., 2004). And because the survey
study was conducted online, we focused on manifest content (the provided answers), and no latent
content (e.g., differences in answering time) was analyzed. Since we were interested in better
understanding the needs for leadership development in disabled people, sampling disabled leaders
seemed representative of the targeted population. The answers of the questionnaire were read several
times by both the authors to become completely familiar with the data.
Second, we used open coding to create categories. As the first author provides disability and
leadership expertise, she openly created categories for the answers covering all of the aspects provided
in the answers. Afterward, both authors grouped categories for each question (McCain, 1988). Some
categories were combined to provide a higher level overview of the data. For example, discussing the
 302 RYAN AND GUTHIER

categories for Question 4 (“What type of leadership or type of positions?”), we recognized that there
were only two respondents assigned to the category “mentor.” Because we think that mentoring is a
specific type of informal leadership, we decided to delete the mentor category and focused on the more
abstract category “informal leadership.”
Third, both the authors assigned all of the responses to the created categories. Because the second
author did not have expertise in disability leadership, the assignment of answers to Question 9 (“Have
you received any awards?”) was not always possible due to lack of knowledge. After discussion
between both the authors, all of the assignments were then adjusted for consistency and the final result
is illustrated in Table 2.

Results

Out of the overall 47 respondents, 22 reported formal leadership training, 20 had informal leadership
training (e.g., on-the-job learning), and five had not undertaken any (Question 2). Leadership
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

opportunities as a consequence of leadership training were reported by 27 respondents, with 12

having opportunities in their field (e.g., unpaid position as president of a local disability
organization), 8 having senior appointed positions (e.g., CEO position), and seven had built
confidence; 20 respondents reported no opportunities (Question 3). When asked about the type of
leadership or positions, five respondents reported not considering themselves as a leader yet, 22 had
already a senior appointed position, 20 informal leadership positions predominantly in community
contexts, two mentioned being a mentor, and a single person indicated public-speaking activities
(Question 4).
Concerning Question 5 on barriers to leadership opportunities, 16 respondents reported no
barriers, 10 physical barriers, eight ableist attitudes (e.g., “limited understanding of nonvisible
disability”), six adaptive tech barriers, two costs (e.g., extra costs due to traveling challenges not
covered), and a single person mentioned time of the event (early morning). When asked about what
kind of leadership development or support would be useful (Question 6), 10 respondents reported peer
support, seven leadership training, five help with getting funds, four mentoring, and seven did not
mention any specific support. Additionally, we assigned 13 responses to other suggestions (e.g.,
conducting a research project, networking, empowering female disability board participation, public-
speaking skills, a computer update course). When asked about long-term aspirations (Question 7), 14
respondents reported mentoring others, 13 making progress in their field, five public recognition, five
some kind of study or development, four a senior appointed position, three a board-appointed position,
and three reported no identified aspirations.
When being asked about what type of opportunities the respondents would like to be connected
with via the Register (Question 8), 15 respondents reported information on networks, 12 information
on appointed positions, eight information on education, and seven information on informal positions;
five did not report any specific opportunities. And when finally asked about awards (Question 9), 20
respondents reported no awards, 13 reported different kinds of community recognition, 10 reported
disability-specific awards (e.g., Victorian Disability Sector Awards), eight mentioned work positions
and academic achievements, and seven reported mainstream awards (e.g., Australian Capital Territory
Woman of the Year Award).
Looking at the overall survey responses (Table 2), alongside simultaneous studies undertaken
including the Doing it Differently report (Evans et al., 2016),4 the Westpac Social Change Fellowship
(Ryan, 2018), and the Churchill Fellowship (Todd, 2018), all of which were published, to our
knowledge, without any peer-review processes, we believe there is a lack of any systematic approach
to disability leadership development across Australia. In the absence of any body of peer-led research,

4
Doing it Differently is a University of Canberra research project, which undertook a systematic analysis of the
experience of disability employment in the Australian Public Service. It was independent and undertaken by
university professors and PhD students. For further information, see https://scholars.westpac.com.au/scholarships/
social-change-fellowship.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 2
Categorized Text-Box Questions Responses of the Disability Leadership Institute Survey for Australian Disability Leaders in 2016 (N = 47)

Number of
Questions Categories Example responses assigned results

(1) What leadership development or training No leadership training “No formalized training” 5 (11%)
have you undertaken? Formal leadership training “YWCA leadership workshop” 22 (47%)
(include both formal and informal Informal leadership training “A long history of involvement with the disability movement” 20 (43%)
development).
(2) Did this training lead to any leadership No opportunities “Organization continued to be run by the traditional old guard” 20 (43%)
opportunities? Opportunities in my field “Gained leadership roles within employment” 12 (26%)
If yes, what types of opportunities Senior appointed position “Current CEO role” 8 (17%)
Built confidence “Gave me the confidence to go onto a Disability Advocacy Board” 7 (15%)
(3) Do you consider yourself a leader No position “[no response]” 5 (11%)
already? What type of leadership or type Senior appointed position “DCEO of Disabled Peoples Organization” 22 (47%)
of positions? Informal leadership “Run health support group” 20 (43%)
Public speaking “Public speaking, running my own consultancy” 1 (2%)
(4) Have your access requirements been any No barriers “Not that I am aware of” 16 (34%)
barrier to leadership opportunities that Physical barriers “Having ramps put around my local area” 10 (21%)
you have taken or wanted to take? Inflexible conditions “Need to consider flexible work and leave arrangements which often do 9 (19%)
If yes, please explain how not fit with leadership roles”
Ableist attitudes “Limited understanding of nonvisible disabilities” 8 (17%)
Adaptive tech barriers “Started a Leadership program, but being print handicapped, I had to 6 (13%)
withdraw as information wasn’t available electronically”
Costs “Some leadership roles interstate travel and due to mental health 1 (2%)
disabilities and my blindness I need a person (usually my wife) to travel
with me. This makes travel more expensive and hence don’t do it as
often. Some orgs argue about paying travel and accommodation.”
Time of event “It takes a while for people to take you seriously in areas outside of 1 (2%)
disability. Some events are difficult to get to and to move around. Early
CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE

mornings are impossible but lots of things are breakfast events.”

(5) What leadership development or support No specific support mentioned “None come to mind, though I’m open to suggestions!” 7 (15%)
would be useful for you in the next year? Peer support “Networking support, information about upcoming events” 10 (21%)
Leadership training “I would appreciate a little more training in the business side of things. 7 (15%)
Also, some training in handling difficult people.”
Funds “The location and the cost to further develop my leadership skills” 5 (11%)
Mentoring “Mentoring” 4 (9%)
Other suggestionsa See footnote 13 (28%)
303

(table continues)
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

304

Table 2 (continued)

Number of
Questions Categories Example responses assigned results
(6) What are your long-term aspirations for No identified aspirations “No specific long-term aspirations” 3 (6%)
leadership and how will you achieve Mentoring others “Being a mentor and a role model” 14 (30%)
them? Progress in my field “To work in arts and disability” 13 (28%)
Public recognition “become a known leader within disability” 5 (11%)
Study/development “I’d like to be able to participate in an online leadership program” 5 (11%)
Senior appointed position “To run a successful disability organization.” 4 (9%)
Board appointed position “To be a professional board member” 3 (6%)
(7) The Disability Leadership Institute is No specific opportunities “Don’t know” 5 (11%)
establishing a register of leaders. What Networks “Networking, conferences, upcoming events, and informal social 15 (32%)
type of opportunities would you like this connections”
register to connect you with? Appointed positions “Opportunities in the social welfare sector” 12 (26%)
Education “Training and support” 8 (17%)
Informal positions “Voluntary roles with advocacy focus” 7 (15%)
(8) Have you received any awards? Please No “None as yet” 20 (43%)
list. Community recognition “Was nominated for the Women in Community Life Award in Geelong 13 (28%)
last year”
Disability specific awards “Victorian Disability Sector Awards 2016” 10 (21%)
Work and education “Public Defenders Prize, UNSW Law School” 8 (17%)
Mainstream awards “Medal in the Order of Australia (OAM) Centenary Medal Rotary Paul 7 (15%)
RYAN AND GUTHIER

Harris Fellow”
Note. YWCA = Young Women’s Christian Association; DCEO = deputy chief executive officer; UNSW = University of New South Wales.
a
Examples for other suggestions are as follows: conducting a research project, networking, empowering female disability board participation, public-speaking skills, and a computer
update course. For Question 4, one response was assigned to two and another one response to three categories; for Question 5, three responses were assigned to two categories and one
response to three categories; for Question 6, one response was assigned to two categories; for Question 9, nine responses were assigned to two categories and one response to three
categories.
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 305

these three reports provide insight into disability leadership that might assist in building an
understanding of the field that has previously been absent. Additionally, the strongest sentiment
expressed throughout the different survey respondents’ answers was about having better-structured
access to mentoring, leadership coaching, and general support that might lead to, for example, board
placement of disability leaders or speaking at conferences. To get started with connecting disability
leaders in a more structured way, the DLI first created member groups for experienced leaders such
as “peer mentoring for mentors,” a group for experienced leaders with disabilities who wanted to
share their experiences of leadership, in October 2016.

Building Communities of Leaders With Disability—DLI Member Groups and the

Community of Practice
As a direct result of the 2016 survey of leaders, the DLI created member groups, small groups of
leaders who regularly meet in a peer-coaching format, alongside a community of practice, a large
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

discussion space open to all members of the DLI to share information and resources, have
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

conversations about issues of common interest, and receive notifications about events, training, and
employment opportunities. The community of practice is similar to the networking that happens in
most professional associations. Both of these initiatives fulfilled a desire expressed by respondents
to the survey that they could have discussions about their leadership development and practice in a safe
space free from ableism. Group members have become very committed to their group and attend from
everywhere possible (e.g., from the mental-health ward at the hospital while being an inpatient, from
the transit bus at an international airport, and often from hotel rooms while doing work traveling)
because “this is a safe place to talk” (quote from a group member, 2018) and a growing network of
support.

Creating Leadership Development Programs Specifically Targeted at Disabled People

One of the centerpieces of the work by the DLI has been to create the first leadership development
program that is specifically developed and facilitated by disabled people and at the same time builds
on suitable mainstream leadership program elements. The personal exploration by Todd in her
Churchill Fellowship of 2018, of various initiatives across two countries and six cities (Sydney twice,
Melbourne, Hobart, Wellington, Brisbane, and Auckland), suggested that leadership development was
most usually offered in mainstream (nondisabled) spaces or was targeted at disabled people but run by
nondisabled people. She also identified that most disability leadership development in Australia
happened through “on-the-job” mentoring through disabled people’s organizations.
Many mainstream leadership programs are focused on authenticity (Procknow et al., 2017) and the
capacity for leaders to show vulnerability (Edmondson & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2020). For disability
leaders, this can create a paradox: They are already seen as vulnerable due to their disability yet are
being asked to show vulnerability to be seen as leaders. Being vulnerable as a disabled person can be
discounted as lacking credibility because it emphasizes the “otherness,” which is likely to enhance
stigma. Whereas being authentic and vulnerable as a leader without disabilities is likely to strengthen
leadership status. For leaders with disabilities, showing their identity by being authentic and vulnerable
can be problematic (Ladkin & Taylor, 2010). Therefore, many disability leaders develop a façade of
invulnerability specifically to operate as leaders in the mainstream.
Building the—as far as we know—world’s first leadership development program designed by and
for disabled people required several considerations, particularly the following seven ones. First, it
needs to be credible to mainstream employers. There are a wealth of entry-level programs claiming to
be about leadership, but they are not targeted at existing leaders or high-potential (fast-track) talents
who have disabilities. Second, the program needs to have elements that explore the experience of being
disabled while doing leadership; this aspect is unique to the leadership development program designed
by the DLI. Third, the program needs to provide participants with high-caliber leadership development,
recognized by mainstream leadership developers. The DLI uses vertical leadership (Torbert, 2004) and
aligns with the work and teachings of the Global Leadership Associates (for more details, see https://
www.gla.global). Fourth, it needs to be recognized as a leadership program, so the DLI undertakes
 306 RYAN AND GUTHIER

assessments, provides textbooks and readings, requires a personal project from each participant, and
includes workshops and dialogue sessions throughout a year of study. These are all common elements
for leadership development programs (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Executive
Leadership Program by Stanford Business School; Williamson Leadership Program by Leadership
Victoria; Leading for Results by INSEAD: The Business School for the World).
Fifth, the program needs to be accessible to disability leaders. This means that the DLI runs
a 3-day workshop instead of commonly 5 (and is working toward delivering the workshop entirely
in virtual format), adjusts the hours of the workshop to suit participants’ support needs, ensures
accessible documents for all participants, and has also had participants attend remotely who are
unable to travel (prepandemic and during the pandemic). The DLI has a loose interpretation of
reading—for example, there are people who listen instead of reading and those who watch videos.
So, it accepts that information arrives differently and is sourced differently for different
people and has legitimized that. The experience of disability is as much a part of how the DLI
approaches leadership as the “leadership” part. They are woven together, so navigating disability
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

requirements is part of that.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Sixth, the leadership program needs to be a safe environment for disabled people. The results of
the online 2016 survey and strong anecdotal evidence from DLI members and the broader disability
community informed the DLI that disability leaders had foregone development because they
encountered barriers or ableist attitudes. Hence, there needed to be a program that avoided this, while
also recognizing that exploring disability in the context of leadership would require a psychologically
safe environment. This meant having disabled people develop, guide, and deliver the program. The
DLI took all of these considerations into account when creating its program.
Seventh, the program needs to recognize disability and what that brings to leadership practice.
Drawing on the experiences shared in the DLI community of practice, its member groups, and its
leadership coaching program, we note several common threads of disability leadership practice,
including what disability brings to leadership, how to maintain leadership capacity as a disabled
person, working within ableist and marginalizing environments, and effecting change or influence
from a position of minority or marginalization. This addressed the regularly expressed experience of
masking disability and connected directly to the more holistic approach of vertical leadership (Torbert,
2004) development. By acknowledging and using their disabilities, leaders shared that they were more
comfortable in being openly disabled, were more able to maintain a consistent functional capacity
due to a reduction in the stress created by masking and disability denial, and became more their
“whole” selves.
The program developed by the DLI is a 12-month program that commences with an intensive
3-day workshop. Besides getting to know each other, the participants get introduced to the overall
journey of the program.
Specifically, the program participants learn about (a) vertical leadership concepts (Torbert, 2004),
(b) design thinking techniques (e.g., Liedtka, 2017, 2018), (c) Blue Ocean Strategy (Kim &
Mauborgne, 2004), and (d) quantum theory principles, as key leadership development, and strategic-
thinking frameworks. Additionally, participants begin a process of examining what their disability
brings to their leadership, how to use their disability as an asset, and how disability interacts with
vertical leadership action logics, including fallback centers of gravity and heat experiences.
Vertical leadership is based on five key ideas: First, people continuously evolve and grow, not only
as children but also as adults. Second, there are predictable stages of development, with each new stage
getting more complex. Third, there are seven measurable developmental stages (or action logics) of
leaders that build on each other (Global Leadership Associates, 2021): (a) opportunist (focus on own
needs), (b) diplomat (focus on conforming with rules), (c) expert (focus on gaining expertise), (d)
achiever (focus on achievements), (e) redefining (focus on meaning), (f) transforming (focus on
individual and organizational transformations), and (g) alchemical (focus on a sense of global
conscience). Fourth, there are two ways of development: (a) horizontal development (focus on gaining
more knowledge about the person’s current stage) and (b) vertical development (focus on upward
growth by transforming one’s own perspective on the world). And fifth, fill and expand the cup by
combining horizontal and vertical development (Petrie, 2020a). Vertical leadership provides an
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 307

opportunity to develop leaders differently with its greater focus on self-awareness, personal reflection,
and collaboration. This opens the door to leaders who move beyond skills to become more robust
at using their whole self and who recognize that brushing aside elements of themselves (which can be
a common expectation disabled people are confronted with) acts as a barrier to their ability to continue
developing as leaders.
The program commences with a preprogram Global Leadership Profile (GLP) assessment and
debriefs for each participant (Global Leadership Associates, 2020). This identifies where their center of
gravity is in relation to the seven vertical leadership stages as identified by Torbert (2004). The GLP
uses 30 sentence stems that the participant answers in a single sitting. These answers are reviewed by
qualified assessors who then prepare an individual report for a certified debrief coach to share with the
individual.
The GLP is also undertaken at the conclusion of the 12-month program to ascertain any shift in
vertical leadership development by individual participants. This beginning and end assessment process
provides gauges for the progress of each individual through the program. At present, the GLP is being
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

used for the program completion assessment. Global Leadership Associates have recently developed a
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

new assessment tool called a Comparative Growth Report, which is under consideration for use in the
end program assessment.
In addtion, design thinking is a powerful technique for raising good questions (Wylant, 2008) that
then can lead to innovation. It also provides a useful way of assessing the needs of end users of systems
and processes. The Stanford’s d.school and IDEO created a curriculum capturing a five-step process
of design thinking comprising (a) empathize, (b) define, (c) ideate, (d) prototype, and (e) test (e.g.,
Thompson et al., 2017). Dependent on the individual characteristics of innovation projects, these five
steps can be used sequentially, but more commonly design thinking is described as a system without
predefined steps (e.g., Brown, 2008).
The Blue Ocean Strategy is a strategic tool that reframes markets and systems (Kim & Mauborgne,
2004). It is based on the idea that companies can focus on value creation in uncontested markets that
are labeled as “blue oceans.” This differs from many conventional business strategy models that
usually focus on competition and cutting costs in already existing markets, which are referred to as “red
oceans” (Lindič et al., 2012). Blue Ocean Strategy is used by the DLI to reconfigure program
participants’ concepts of competition and collaboration.
Finally, the central principles of quantum theory act as stretch tools for program participants
(Bertsch McGrayne et al., 2021). First, the idea is that everything remains in play; all particles on a
quantum field have some role to play and cannot be discarded or discounted as relevant. And, second,
there is no “on” or “off,” rather everything is in a state of constant flux; this takes participants away
from the binary, and polarities, to consider the world in more nuance.
The DLI’s observation that disability leaders have a highly collaborative and inclusive operational
style led to the use of design thinking, the Blue Ocean Strategy, and quantum theory. These three tools
stretch thinking about designing structures and systems for the individual while also demanding
a collaborative approach to develop outcomes. The tools also use innovation to build solutions; this
draws on the recognized higher levels of innovation and problem-solving present in disabled people
(Sherbin & Kennedy, 2017). Considering everything as potentially relevant, while working at both the
micro (individual) and macro (global or big-picture strategy) levels, generates a greater strategic vision
awareness in participants. Moving away from the individual “I” to the more global “we.” Building
a more conscious use of individual responses, problem-solving and collaboration align well with
vertical leadership development principles and understanding.
Throughout the program, the DLI asks participants how their disability contributes to their
leadership. Initially, this question is highly confronting and often results in responses about barriers
and challenges (cf. answers to Question 6 of the DLI online survey before). For some, it reinvigorates
memories of bullying or harassment. As participants develop vertically, they usually take a more
holistic approach to this question and become less confronted and more fully integrated in their self-
reflection. Usually, as the program progresses, each participant becomes more engaged with their
disability and how it works for them. For some participants, this process is deeply confronting, for
others, it generates ramifications and periods of unwellness as bodies recalibrate (heat experience,
 308 RYAN AND GUTHIER

Petrie, 2020b), resulting in stronger, more self-aware leaders with an extra layer of resilience beyond
their already high levels of resilience (quote from a former program participant: “I’ve learned to hide
my disability very very well. Now I no longer apologize for when my disability shows up. I own it.”).

Lessons From the First Cohort of the Program

Throughout the first iteration of the program, as participants recalibrated and embraced how their
disability contributed to their leadership practice, the need for a more advanced vertically developed
disability leader to be the program facilitator became apparent. The deep dialogue being undertaken by
participants turned increasingly to discussions about the combined zone of vertical leadership and
disability. The process of self-realization was increasingly holistic. Without someone as a facilitator
who was experienced in both disability leadership and vertical leadership, the dialogue would be less
well supported and risked reintroducing the ableism that the program was designed to avoid.
These dialogues would be impossible with a nondisabled person. Each participant acknowledged,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

at a time in their personal development when it became evident to them, that such conversations would
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

not be possible unless the other participants in the dialogue were all disabled people (including the
facilitator). The ability to talk openly in a supportive environment, without explaining or justifying
disability and how it behaves, became increasingly necessary for participants. This was not a planned
aspect of the program; rather it arose from the process of vertical leadership development and the
realization that operating as a whole person is a key part of moving into postconventional vertical
leadership stages.
Participants in the program are already working in the mainstream. Although they are all openly
disabled, they also have experiences of bullying and harassment, of feeling required to put their
disability to one side, and of struggling daily with ableism in the workplace. They report maintaining a
certain wariness to navigate the still hostile world that most disabled people experience daily. It is very
likely that participating in a mainstream leadership program would not have addressed this wariness
and thereby denied these leaders the opportunity to approach their leadership holistically.
After several years of operating the leadership development program, the DLI has also started to
identify seven areas of knowledge and skills that are crucial to foster disability leadership: first,
knowledge on disability rights, their context, the CRPD, and how disability rights interconnect with
broader human rights and domestic rights instruments; second, knowledge on how to use one’s skills
of excellence by means of understanding what one is good at, what one excels at, and focussing on
improving those qualities even further; third, knowledge on how disabilities work and how one can use
personal management and self-care practices to stay productive and healthy; fourth, using horizontal
and vertical leadership principles (Torbert, 2004) to better navigate typical barriers (such as prejudice)
for disabled leaders; fifth, using effective networking as a core leadership skill; sixth, knowing the
challenges that come with often being the only known disabled person in the room or workplace and
learning skills that help to manage these challenges (e.g., high-level negotiation skills to assist with
gaining adaptations to physical or attitudinal barriers), the implications of that ideas to manage it; and,
seventh, knowing oneself—with one at their best, what is a good way for one to do things, developing
one’s own style so that one can sustain one’s work, be openly disabled, and not crash and burn?
The DLI is frequently asked why disability leaders could not achieve the same outcome they will
get from its major program by undertaking a mainstream leadership program. Shared experiences of
the DLI community of practice and coaching program in addition to the DLI survey results indicate
that mainstream leadership programs don’t seem to factor in disability adequately. Mainstream
leadership programs appear to deny disability, either by not mentioning it at all or by suggesting that
disability leaders will succeed once they learn to “overcome” their disability and its impact. This
ableist approach has been cited by many DLI members as the reason they have withdrawn from
programs or failed to find them useful. Whenever leaders are encouraged to mask major aspects of
themselves, they will continue to struggle with authentic leadership practice.
The DLI’s major leadership program could be considered more rigorous than mainstream
leadership programs because of its holistic approach to disability and leadership. As the first program
that weaves the two elements together, it is understandable that the processes involved in applying this
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 309

integrated approach are not well understood. It is becoming clearer that it is this interweaving process
that is transformative for participants and results in a more holistic leader who has a greater ability
to draw on all aspects of themselves.
DLI members and program participants have commented that mainstream leadership programs
they have undertaken ignore disability and how it is used as a leadership quality. The closest such
programs come to recognizing disability is to focus on gathering disabled people together, usually in
recognition of the low numbers who are in leadership positions. It is also unusual for disability-focused
leadership programs to move beyond an entry-level approach, so more developed disability leaders
have no recourse except to participate in mainstream leadership programs, which place them in groups
of nondisabled people and ignore their disability, often actively encouraging participants to put their
disability to one side, attempting to “overcome” it. Putting your disability to one side, all day every
day, takes energy and is depleting. Over time working “despite” one’s disability becomes a
conditioned response to the mainstream world, requiring an unconscious and ongoing expense of
personal energy: an ever-present undercurrent of negativity and denial.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Increasing Visibility of Disability Leaders

To gain national visibility for disability leadership and therefore emphasising that disability is
something that can be embraced, (a) collaborations and (b) ongoing training options at a low threshold
are vital. First, the DLI started collaborating with Disabled People’s Organisations Australia. Together
this collaboration created the National Awards for Disability Leadership (for further information, see
https://disabilityleaders.com.au/disability-leaders/national-awards/) in 2018. Since then, there has
been an annual national awards ceremony. The seven national awards categories5 reflect what is
important to disabled people and the ways they are effecting change and pursuing equality for their
community: (a) the arts, (b) change making, (c) rights activism, (d) innovation, (e) social impact, (f)
inclusion, and (g) The Lesley Hall Award for Lifetime Achievement.
Second, it is also important to provide disabled people with ongoing training options at a low
threshold. For example, the DLI created an online course, Represent, which aims at providing training
for disability leaders to undertake work representing their communities, “from the grassroots to the
United Nations.” This course consists of six modules: (a) what is representation, (b) getting your
message clear, (c) forums you might end up in, (d) politics, (e) the United Nations, and (f) implementing
outcomes.
Represent was designed to fill a gap in succession planning in the disability rights movement.
Until the DLI was founded, one of the few ways to gain the skills required for rights activism was to
find an existing experienced disability leader and ask to be mentored (Todd, 2018) or to learn through
experience (trial and error). Having an on-demand online course has provided interested people with
the opportunity to learn from an experienced leader without the need to do that individually. Alongside
membership of the DLI, and participation in its members’ community of practice, this has provided
the first ongoing on-demand training and development opportunity for aspiring rights activists.
Represent is available to anyone who wants to access it via the DLI online training portal and has been
included in the other DLI leadership programs as a package.

Discussion

By describing the work of the DLI in the past 5 years, this article has shown what kind of support
disabled people value when it comes to developing leadership skills and experiences. First, building
an international community of leaders with disabilities by creating member groups has been and
continues to be a huge success. A community of practice can contribute to continued growth, including
mentoring/peer mentoring, provide a recognized safe space of discussion among equals, and connect

5
The National Awards for Disability Leadership categories were devised through a codesign process
undertaken by the DLI in conjunction with Australia’s major national disability representative organizations.
 310 RYAN AND GUTHIER

disability leaders through a growing global network, which provides support, shared learning, and
cross-connection as with other business networks.
Additionally, the National Register of Disability Leaders (which was proposed in Question 9 of the
DLI’s online survey) now has over 500 disability leaders on it and sends out a weekly bulletin
containing opportunities. It is gaining popularity with employers and is now being used widely. Here is
a quote from an employer:
I just wanted to let you know I’ve had such a great response to the advertisement. I’ve had some really
great conversations with incredible applicants today. You have a really impressive network and I’ll be
recommending the leadership search to everyone I know looking for senior roles!

Second, by developing disability leadership development programs designed and delivered by

disabled people, the DLI created the first place where disability became an aspect of leadership
development. Previously, disability had been ignored, or deliberately sidelined, by mainstream
leadership programs, embedding self-ableism and stigma around disability. At a time when
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

organizations are working to build their disability diversity and use the wealth of innovation and talent
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

that this can bring, disabled people have been encouraged to mask their disability and work to
assimilate to achieve leadership roles. The DLI has shown that it is possible to augment mainstream
leadership program elements with disability-specific leadership development training. We believe that
this augmented approach makes it more likely that disability will be seen as a leadership asset and
encourages people to identify as disabled because it is not stigmatized as a weakness anymore. This
open use of disability is a vital addition to the field of disability diversity, which has the capacity
to contribute to greater innovation, problem-solving, and improved outcomes for businesses,
governments, and the global community.
Third, the National Awards for Disability Leadership and the Represent program have proven to
be effective means to increase the visibility of disabled leaders. Represent helps disabled people to
prepare for becoming visible in public, and the National Awards for Disability Leadership legitimize
the way disabled people change the world for the better.

Limitations and Future Research

One of the biggest shortcomings of the present study is the small sample size of 47 respondents.
Additionally, we are not able to provide exact information on how many people received the invitation
to participate in the survey because it was distributed using mailing lists and social-media posts. We
cannot rule out that there might be significant differences in responses between disabled people who
responded to the survey and those who did not. Nevertheless, we tried to minimize technical survey
barriers so that, for example, blind participants were able to respond as well.
Although the DLI already measures the effectiveness of its major leadership program in regard
to the vertical leadership-level participants have at the beginning and at the end of the program,
systematic longitudinal evaluations of the effectiveness of the programs are lacking. There is no real
understanding of the leadership pathways taken by disability leaders nor of the nature of leadership
development required to support those pathways. Further, there is a need to understand the impact of
specialist disability leadership development programs, such as the DLI’s programs, on long-term
increases in the levels of disability leadership and the impact that these disability leaders have on
outcomes for business, government, and global problem-solving. Additionally, there has not been a
community of support for disability leaders before. Research is needed on what longitudinal impact
the presence of a supportive community of practice generates in the ability of disability leaders to
sustain their employment and their leadership roles.
Considering the findings of the DLI’s online survey, we also see a need to examine when disabled
people identify themselves as leaders. Many respondents of the online survey did not identify
themselves as leaders (Question 5: “What type of leadership positions have you held?”), although these
people are leaders in their fields and have changed the national conversation about disability. We want
to encourage further research into whether this lack of leadership identity is in a different ratio to the
broader population and what the specific factors are that lead to this lack of leadership identity.
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 311

Finally, the DLI has collected strong anecdotal evidence on greater levels of resilience and
collaboration in disability leaders. Conducting specific large-scale qualitative and quantitative studies
to study unique characteristics of disability leadership would help to better understand what is uniquely
valuable about disability leadership. Additionally, examining systematic differences in mainstream
leadership versus disability leadership could help to better understand the unique contributions
disability leaders can make in the world.

Spreading Disability Leadership

Unfortunately, there are still very few openly identifying disability leaders in appointed positions of
senior leadership. Disability is rarely included in discussions or writing on diversity. Many disability
leaders face high levels of bullying and harassment (cf. Caldwell, 2010; Evans et al., 2016). Continued
practices of appointing on “merit”6 exclude highly qualified disabled people from positions on top
company boards, political appointments, and as senior bureaucrats. The DLI is often asked why there
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

is a need for specialist disability leadership development. The inability of the mainstream to achieve
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

substantial outcomes in this area over several decades seems unnoticed. Absence translates to
invisibility. It is easy to forget that disability leaders are not in the room when nobody mentions
disability, and very few see disability leadership as a credible practice.
Nevertheless, the DLI has identified specific leadership qualities that leaders with disabilities are
very likely to exhibit. These qualities interrelate but seem to be present across the cohort of disability
leaders: (a) resilience, (b) lateral thinking, (c) persistence, (d) inclusion, and (e) collaboration. First,
resilience is considered an important quality for leadership (e.g., Kauffman, 2020), and disability leaders
seem to have it in high levels. There is nothing like being marginalized and discriminated against daily
and still managing to change the world. Many disability leaders do this while in great pain and without
the right support or equipment. Leadership training over the years has put people through extreme
situations as a way of getting in touch with themselves and how they relate to others. Being disabled
provides an extreme experience without the need to pay a course fee or undertake wilderness training.
Second, disability leaders, in most cases, operate with little or no resources, lack of support, wrong
support, no money, and while being marginalized. So, they have developed an ability to think laterally,
to find solutions outside the box, to work out a way, to approach a problem or barrier. In some ways,
this is about attitude: “I’ve decided this will happen; we just have to work out how.” Disability leaders
are experts in lateral thinking and use it constantly.
Third, it is very unlikely that a person can operate as a disability leader unless they can manage to
continue working and refuse to let anything get in their way. The barriers are enormous and varied, and
most of the things that have been achieved by the disability community have been against the odds and
through sheer persistence, with a strong sense of “get it done” and often at a cost for the people
concerned. Disability leaders are often asked to speak at conferences that have no ramps to the stage, or
where the toilets are three floors down and need a key, or to fund their own access needs, or to work in
environments that are inherently hostile, alongside people who bully and harass them. Persistence
contributes the ability to come at things another way.
Fourth, inclusion is currently very topical and creating a lot of work for diversity consultants,
yet disability leaders seem to already be specialists in this critical quality. They usually learn how to
make sure that everyone who needs to be present is and then how to make sure that everyone present
can participate equally. Disability leaders are likely to automatically think about these things because
it is part of their fabric and their modus operandi. It comes from working with such a large and diverse
community every day.
Fifth, rather than going it alone, disability leaders are likely to be highly collaborative leaders who
pull coalitions together and work with groups. For many, this is simply necessary because they are not
in a position to work alone; for others, it is part of an extension of inclusion and their problem-solving

6
The concept of “merit” refers to a term used by diversity practitioners whereby someone is preferred because
they have the correct pathway to a position based on qualifications rather than experience.
 312 RYAN AND GUTHIER

inclinations. It appears that when disability leaders have an idea, they are more likely to reach out to
colleagues to collaborate than to operate in isolation.
When we consider these attributes and the way that disability leaders approach problems, we
believe that this is a different style of leadership from what is going around already. It is leadership that
can contribute substantially to resolving big-picture, real-world challenges. We think that the world
needs disability leadership qualities to solve urgent challenges and large-scale wicked problems such
as climate change, inequality, or conflicts, yet it is not using some of the most innovative and lateral
thinking people available, disability leaders.
We hope that this article encourages and assists consulting psychologists (either nondisabled
or disabled) to identify lessons learned in developing leadership programs for disabled people
and organizations that want to adapt their cultures of working with disabled people. Consulting
psychologists have a considerable contribution to make in understanding how disability-led
programs might shift the continuing absence of disability leadership as well as the role that vertical
leadership and communities of practice have in developing more inclusive environments. Additionally,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

consulting psychologists are well placed to further investigate the experiences of disability leadership
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

and how it develops vertically through heat experiences. Is this a more effective method of leadership
development generally or does it have specific approaches that make it more suitable for disabled
people than other forms of leadership development? Is a supportive community of disability leaders
necessary as an adjunct to this form of leadership development or is it one of the key drivers of change
in bringing disability leaders into the mainstream? The work of the DLI seems to indicate the high
potential of the largely untapped global resource that is disability leadership and could represent the
beginnings of a new field of leadership inquiry.

References

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328 (1990).
Andrews, E. E., Forber-Pratt, A. J., Mona, L. R., Lund, E. M., Pilarski, C. R., & Balter, R. (2019). #SaytheWord:
A disability culture commentary on the erasure of “disability.” Rehabilitation Psychology, 64(2), 111–118.
https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000258
Arbeit, B. (2021). Arbeitsmarktsituation schwerbehinderter Menschen 2020 [Labor market situation of severely
disabled people 2020] (pp. 8–10). Blickpunkt Arbeitsmarkt.
Australian Government. (2021). Australian Government response to the Royal Commission into violence, abuse,
neglect and exploitation of people with disability—Public hearing report—Public hearing 5—Experiences
of people with disability during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. https://disability.royalcommission.gov.au/
publications/australian-government-response-disability-royal-commission-report-public-hearing-5-experiences-
people-disability-during-ongoing-covid-19-pandemic
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2020). People with disability in Australia. https://www.aihw.gov.au/re
ports/disability/people-with-disability-in-australia
Bertsch McGrayne, S. B., Bertsch, G. F., & Trefil, J. (2021). Atom. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britanni
ca.com/science/atom
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking
Caldwell, J. (2010). Leadership development of individuals with developmental disabilities in the self-advocacy
movement. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54(11), 1004–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
2788.2010.01326.x
Cureton, A. (2018). Hiding a disability and passing as non-disabled. In A. Cureton & T. E. Hill Jr., (Eds.), Disability
in practice: Attitudes, policies, and relationships (pp. 15–32). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/
oso/9780198812876.001.0001
Delgado, R., & Stefanic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York University Press.
Dickson, E. (2005). Disability discrimination in education: Purvis v New South Wales (Department of Education
and Training), amendment of the education provisions of the disability discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) and the
formulation of disability standards for education. The University of Queensland Law Journal, 24(1), 213–222.
https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.023253355343399
Disability Discrimination Act. (1992, November 5). Act No. 135 of 1992.
 CASE STUDY OF THE DISABILITY LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE 313

Donohue, J. J., III, Stein, M. A., Griffin, C. L., Jr., & Becker, S. (2011). Assessing post-ADA employment: Some
econometric evidence and policy considerations. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 8(3), 477–503. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01217.x
Edmondson, A. C., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2020). Today’s leaders need vulnerability, not bravado. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/10/todays-leaders-need-vulnerability-not-bravado
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1),
107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking gender into account: Theory and design for women’s leadership
development programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 474–493. https://doi.org/10
.5465/amle.2010.0046
Evans, M., Edwards, M., McGregor, C., & Upton, P. (2016). Doing it differently. Staff perceptions of the barriers to
workplace participation experienced by public servants with disability in the Australian public service. Institute for
Government and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark-Evans-7/pu
blication/313243984_Staff_Perceptions_of_the_Obstacles_to_Workplace_Participation_Experienced_by_Public_
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Servants_with_a_Disability_in_the_Australian_Public_Service_PMC_IGPA/links/5893df8baca27231da
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

f624f7/Staff-Perceptions-of-the-Obstacles-to-Workplace-Participation-Experienced-by-Public-Servants-
with-a-Disability-in-the-Australian-Public-Service-PM-C-IGPA.pdf
Global Leadership Associates. (2020). Take the GLP. https://www.gla.global/the-glp-overview
Global Leadership Associates. (2021). Levels of leadership development. https://www.gla.global/the-glp/levels-of-
leadership-development
Guthrie, J., Petty, R., Yongvanich, K., & Ricceri, F. (2004). Using content analysis as a research method to inquire
into intellectual capital reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 282–293. https://doi.org/10.1108/
14691930410533704
Henriques-Gomes, L. (2020). Lack of Covid plan for Australians with disability a “serious failure” of government,
report says. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/30/lack-of-covid-plan-for-
australians-with-disability-a-serious-failure-of-government-report-says
Kauffman, C. (2020). Without compassion, resilient leaders will fall short. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr
.org/2020/08/without-compassion-resilient-leaders-will-fall-short
Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2004/10/
blue-ocean-strategy
Kudlick, C. J. (2005). Disability history, power, and rethinking the idea of “the other.” Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America, 120(2), 557–561. https://doi.org/10.1632/S0030812900167896
Ladkin, D., & Taylor, S. S. (2010). Enacting the ‘true self’: Towards a theory of embodied authentic leadership.
The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.005
Liedtka, J. (2017). Evaluating the impact of design thinking in action. In S. Taneja (Ed.), Academy of management
proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 10264). Academy of Management. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP
.2017.177
Liedtka, J. (2018). Why design thinking works. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/09/why-design-thi
nking-works
Lindič, J., Bavdaž, M., & Kovačič, H. (2012). Higher growth through the Blue Ocean Strategy: Implications
for economic policy. Research Policy, 41(5), 928–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.010
McCain, G. C. (1988). Content analysis: A method for studying clinical nursing problems. Applied Nursing
Research, 1(3), 146–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(88)80029-6
McLean, M. A. (2011). Getting to know you: The prospect of challenging ableism through adult learning.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2011(132), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.427
Metts, R. L. (2000). Disability issues, trends, and recommendations for the World Bank (full text and annexes).
World Bank.
Oliver, M. (1983). Social work with disabled people. Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86058-6
Oliver, M. (2013). The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability & Society, 28(7), 1024–1026. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773
Petrie, N. (2020a). What is vertical leadership development? LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-
vertical-leadership-development-nick-petrie/?trk=portfolio_article-card_title
Petrie, N. (2020b). Heat experiences—The fuel of growth. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/heat-experie
nces-fuel-growth-nick-petrie/
 314 RYAN AND GUTHIER

Procknow, G., Rocco, T. S., & Munn, S. L. (2017). (Dis)ableing notions of authentic leadership through the lens
of critical disability theory. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(4), 362–377. https://doi.org/10
.1177/1523422317728732
Rocco, T. S. (2005). From disability studies to critical race theory: Working towards critical disability theory
[Conference session]. Adult Education Research Conference. https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2005/papers/17
Ryan, C. (2018). Westpac social change fellowship report. https://disabilityleaders.com.au/wp-content/uploads/
2018/02/WestpacSCFellowshipReport-CRyan-February2018.pdf
Schmemann, S. (1990). German interior minister is shot at political rally. The New York Times. https://www.nytime
s.com/1990/10/13/world/german-interior-minister-is-shot-at-political-rally.html
Schwochau, S., & Blanck, P. D. (2000). Economics of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Part III: Does the
ADA disable the disabled. Berkeley Journal of Employment & Labor Law, 21, 271–313. https://heinonline.org/
HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/berkjemp21&div=15&id=&page=
Sherbin, L., & Kennedy, J. T. (2017). The case for improving work for people with disabilities goes way beyond
compliance. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/12/the-case-for-improving-work-for-people-with-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

disabilities-goes-way-beyond-compliance
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

The ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Congress. (2009, January 1). Pub. L. No. 110-325.
Thompson, C. F., Goldwasser, E., Stanford, J., Syverson, B., & Haley, K. (2017). Tweaking design thinking
for strategic and tactical impact [Conference session]. 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human
Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3051142
Todd, Z. (2018). Developing inclusive leadership in the disability movement: Lessons and learning from Australia
and New Zealand. https://media.churchillfellowship.org/documents/Todd_Z_Report_2016_Final.pdf
Torbert, W. R. (2004). Action inquiry: The secret of timely and transforming leadership. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Vornholt, K., Villotti, P., Muschalla, B., Bauer, J., Colella, A., Zijlstra, F., Van Ruitenbeek, G., Uitdewilligen, S., &
Corbière, M. (2018). Disability and employment—Overview and highlights. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 27(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1387536
World Health Organization. (1980). International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps.
World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health.
World Health Organization. (2020). Disability and health. https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/di
sability-and-health
Wylant, B. (2008). Design thinking and the experience of innovation. Design Issues, 24(2), 3–14. https://doi.org/10
.1162/desi.2008.24.2.3

Received July 1, 2021

Revision received December 21, 2022
Accepted July 12, 2023 ▪

E-Mail Notification of Your Latest Issue Online!

Would you like to know when the next issue of your favorite APA journal will be
available online? This service is now available to you. Sign up at https://my.apa.org/
portal/alerts/ and you will be notified by e-mail when issues of interest to you become
available!