A633.9.3.RB_HansardCarey

In traditional leadership, there are top executives, mid-level managers, and followers. There may be many different ways leaders interact with followers but in general, top executives make the decisions involving strategy and then leave the mid-level managers to decide what that will look like. The mid-level managers are in charge of delegating tasks associated with making that strategy come alive to the followers in the department. The opinions and ideas of those at the bottom are rarely factored into the strategic initiatives of the organization.  This oligarchic style can be adapted to a more modern style as suggested by Obolensky (2010, p. 196). This style, John Adair’s Leadership Model, shows that the leader is at the center of the task/team/individual relationship. Using complex adaptive leadership, this style can be transformed into a polyarchic style (Obolensky, 2010, p. 196). The functions of leadership as described by John Adair can be transferred to the leader in a polyarchic style allowing subordinates to have more control and say over what happens in their jobs roles and departments. Leaders can still be at the center of this process but their roles will be completely different. As a polyarchic organization, leaders will be in charge of supporting the process and ensuring that it is completed rather than being responsible for everything him/herself.

Although there is no magic “buffalo map” for leaders to follow, there are certain methods that can be utilized to help people think and feel like a leader. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink applies to people as well. You can lead them where you want them to go; but ultimately, it will be their decision as to whether or not they become part of the leadership mentality or continue to be a follower waiting to be told what to do. I think that if these people have the opportunity to be part of the team that leads, the ownership and pride that they feel will be the driving force behind realizing strategic initiatives in the long run. The confidence that success provides will inevitably lead to these people taking on the mentality and feeling of a leader.

As a future leader, complex adaptive leadership will have an enormous impact on me. I see now that leaders do not have to do it and know it all. It is ok to ask for help from others and most of the time, it is actually better to let those who work “for” you lead you instead. As subject matter experts, these individuals will know more about certain processes than I will. Having said that, the degree to which I am able to allow others to lead will depend on the organization I am with at the time. Unfortunately, not all organizations have an open mind regarding leadership. In a case where this type of leadership is not practiced, I would hope that I could influence those in positions of leadership to adopt a new philosophy. When everyone understands their role, has input into the final product, and is able to freely share ideas, strategy is positively impacted.

Reference: Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company. 

A633.8.3.RB_HansardCarey

Coaches are able to provide their clients with confidence that they themselves have the capability to solve their own problems. In order for people to be able to understand that they are the best people to make their goals become reality they have to be convinced that their decisions are valid. Being able to talk issues through with someone who is non-judgmental can be a helpful tool in providing clarity to leaders. Coaches should refrain from making judgmental statements when working with clients but instead focus on talking through issues with the client.

Coaching is helpful to both the individual and organization. Coaching helps individuals determine goals and deadlines. The benefits to the individual are that with goals, productivity increases and with deadlines, people are able to focus on what needs to be accomplished which again, increases productivity. The coach can help employees create a better work/life balance which leads to happier employees. Periodic support and feedback provides the coachee with regular self-assessment tools that will promote flexibility and adaptability. When the organization is willing to invest in employees in this way, employee retention increases and skillful and talented people are attracted to the organization.

From an organizational standpoint, coaching, as mentioned above, creates happier employees which will increase productivity. This happiness and self-awareness will produce better relationships with organizational partners and customers positively impacting strategy. Coaching improves the perception that leaders and managers are interested in employees and their personal growth which means they will work harder for the organization.

In my organization, I think the impact would be substantial. There are many who do not feel as though their opinion matter and they show up, do their jobs, and go home. Coaching would provide motivation to these employees so that their ideas and opinions can be heard. It may also impact employees to seek further knowledge and responsibility within the organization.

For me, it would be helpful to have someone to talk through issues with. Coaches asking probative questions would provide me with the opportunity to analyze issues form different perspectives. I would also hope that the coach would provide useful feedback that allows me to grow and pursue help for areas of weakness.

For my organization, I only see benefits. There are many people here who are tied to their desks the entire day and need someone to point out their strengths and encourage them to form personal goals for themselves. When you invest in your employees, they will invest in you creating a win-win situation for employee and organization.

References: Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company.

von Hoffman, C. (1999). Coaching: The ten killer myths. Harvard Management Update, 4(1), 4. 

A633.7.3.RB_HansardCarey

Over the past six weeks, my view of leadership has changed slightly. Upward leadership is not a concept that I was ever able to experience as a public high school teacher. Since the concept itself was foreign to me for so long, I have had a hard time adjusting to the fact that employees have a say in the daily operations and that leaders look to us for our help and ideas for the future. The information provided during the past six weeks has further convinced me that upward leadership can be effective and is a method that I would like to employ. As a follower, I appreciate my opinions and knowledge being considered. As a leader, it is advantageous to be surrounded with subject matter experts who can actively contribute to the formulation and implementation of strategy. Problem solving by those who are experiencing the problem allows employees to feel pride in their work and decision-making.  Style 3, Consulting Leadership, where leaders consult with followers who are at an advanced state of readiness is a style that I think will work for me (Obolensky, 2010, p. 138). Leaders can only be informed to a certain extent. Those who are in the trenches, so to speak, know their jobs inside and out and are best able to determine their needs within the context of organizational goals. The leader is able to then mesh the needs of the employee and organization.

As I look to the future, I am considering how I can use upward leadership effectively. I have applied for a promotion at work. I am not sure if I will get the position or not but it has definitely caused me to think about what kind of leader I want to be. I am convinced I am more relationship-oriented than task oriented. I understand the importance of tasks but I believe if you do not have a good relationship with your co-workers, tasks will not be carried out as efficiently or enthusiastically. Because I am a relationship-oriented person, I think upward leadership will work well for me. Capturing the trust of employees and being able to reciprocate forms the foundation of this leadership style. My only concern is that employees who are not used to this style may think that instead of empowering them, my style makes me look weak and like I am unable to decide things for myself. If I am promoted to director, I would like to meet with my employees to let them know what I expect of and want from them. Obolensky (2010) talks about the democratic style of leadership as being a “participative and involving style, and is very much a ‘pull’ style” (p. 140).  In this case, pull seems to refer to getting information and ideas from people as opposed to a pushing style, which would tell people what to do and how to do it (Obolensky, 2010, p. 140). Pulling styles of leadership require that employees be very knowledgeable and capable. Therefore, in order for me to use this style, it will be necessary for me to surround myself with the right people and be able to recognize their strengths. In addition, once those people are in place, they must understand that they are an integral part of the organizational process. My hope is that they will quickly adapt to not being pushed along themselves but rather push themselves to make the organization more successful.

Reference: Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company.

A633.6.5.RB_HansardCarey

The “vicious cycle of leadership” referred to by Obolensky (2010) is unfortunately one that I recognize in my organization. This is not the norm and is not a situation that I would like to find myself in. My former supervisor would make decisions that his supervisor did not necessarily agree with. He also demonstrated poor spelling and grammar when communicating with others in the organization. Because of this, his supervisor would speak to him frequently about these issues in their weekly meetings. These talks led to his confidence fading and therefore, he began to check with her more frequently about the decisions he was making. Eventually, the circle was complete and she began to lose confidence in his skills and would check up on him more frequently. Ultimately, he was put on a performance improvement plan. He did not want to be fired and therefore, tendered his resignation. This is a clear case of a follower and leader not really understanding each other. She is looking for solutions and confidence. He was looking for guidance and reassurance. Because they were not able to understand each other, the relationship fell apart. Followers have to establish trust in them by their superiors (Useem, 2001, p.1). He was obviously unable to do this mainly due to a lack of confidence. This situation could have been different. As the Harvard Business Management Update (2000) points out, “Asking those of lesser rank to say what they candidly think and complimenting them for doing so are among the small measures that can make for a big improvement in attitude” (p.1). Had he been complimented for the things he was doing right and mentored and coached in what he was doing wrong, the outcome could have been different. He was unwilling to reach out for help. I do not happen to know what her attitude was toward helping him. It may be that she tried unsuccessfully to do so and it may be that she was frustrated with his constant questions. Either way, a sincere compliment goes a long way.

The effects on an organization can be many. If followers are insecure, their productivity diminishes. They will constantly second-guess themselves and their decisions. When people are not sure about the decisions they make, they may not make them at all. This slows production and the feeling of uncertainty would eventually trickle out to customers. On the other hand, if a leader feels as though subordinates cannot handle making decisions of their own, he/she steps up to the plate and begins to make decisions for them. This can cause leaders to resent employees. Undue stress can also be a product of such a relationship.

The Harvard Business Management Update (2000) suggests 5 goals for improving lateral leadership: establish goals; think systematically; learn from experience; engage others; and provide feedback. These steps will bring out cooperation from peers rather than resentment for being bossed around. Thinking systematically happens to be an area I would like to improve upon. I have seen colleagues collect and present data to their superior and get results. A little research and some facts to back it up will go a long way to making you and your solutions more reliable.

New Circle:

-•Follower presents data & research With ideas

-•Leader gains confidence in follower

-•Leader begins to value follower opinions

-•Follower gains more confidence in self

-•Leader seeks out follower to contribute to solutions

References:

How to lead when you're not the boss. (cover story). (2000). Harvard

Management Update, 5(3), 1.

Gabarro, J. J., & Kotter, J. P. (1993). Managing Your Boss. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 150-157.

Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company.

A633.5.3.RB_HansardCarey

The complexity exercise this week was fascinating to watch in practice. The video clearly demonstrates that with a clear goal and little direction from a leader, people can make amazing progress toward accomplishing a goal by using their own skills and intuition. At the end of the video he asks the group what would have happened if there was someone who had been appointed in charge of making everyone go where they were supposed to. In my mind, it certainly would have been a much lengthier and more involved project. Any time you have one person trying to manipulate the actions of many others, there will be a lot of confusion by those following directions and stress by those giving them. It reminds me a lot of teaching school. When I wanted my students to research a specific topic and create a project, I gave some basic directions and allowed them to complete the assignment on their own. The variety of ideas that comes out of this strategy leads to more creativity. It is time consuming to direct every activity involved in realizing a vision. Students understood the basic task and were able to accomplish that task in many different ways.

As demonstrated in the video, once people receive the direction, they take time to process what they are supposed to do before they move. Once that happens, they quickly determine in their own minds how they are going to accomplish the goal. It does not mater what others do because everyone adapts as necessary to the quickly changing environment. Words were not necessary as individuals used other skills to determine what the necessary actions were on their part. They relied on one another to provide clues to their next steps. It wasn’t always pretty, but in the end, only small adjustments were necessary by a few people before the goal had been accomplished. If the director had continued to provide direction, he would have had to waste time asking everyone who they had chosen as reference points, arrange people while talking over and around everyone, and finally, walk around making sure that everyone is actually where he wants them to be. These activities are reminiscent of what a micromanager does.

I would love to be able to watch this play out in my own department. To a certain extent we have independence but management tends to want to babysit along the way. This exercise could go a long way toward demonstrating that people can and do find their way on their own with minimal instruction. I also think this is important for employees to see. Some who may not have confidence in their skills as a leader are sure to feel a renewed sense of faith that they can do it.

Strategically, the exercise illustrated that employees in a complex situation do not necessarily need more leadership. In fact, leaders play a minimal role while employees are working much more efficiently and effectively.  Strategy needs to include input from all stakeholders from the beginning all the way through to the end. Giving people in the organization the ability to lead themselves and each other will be motivating.

Reference: Obolensky, N. (Performer). (2008, April 08). Who needs leaders? [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41QKeKQ2O3E

A633.4.3.RB_HansardCarey

The shift in leadership that Obolensky (2010) describes refers to leadership becoming more spread out in the organization to include employees, commonly called bottom up leadership (p. 35). In my organization, I believe this happens to a certain extent. Employees are asked by their leaders what their opinions are about pressing issues and what possible solutions look like. However, it is still ultimately up to management how issues are handled and whether decisions made at lower levels are acceptable and effective. According to Bill Hampton, Executive Director of marketing and Student Retention for ERAU Worldwide, the attitude of leadership in general has been shifting to empowering employees to make decisions and come up with solutions to problems that plague them. This does not mean that bottom up leadership is occurring the way Obolensky (2010) describes it.

In order for this to occur, Obolensky (2010) says that leaders must be willing to admit that they do not know the answers to all of the questions and be willing to open dialogues with those who know (p. 36). Do I see this happening? Not really. From my point of view, the hierarchy continues to grow instead of diminish and leaders are still not at a point where they are willing to relinquish the decision-making control they have.

The idea of forming cross-functional teams is one that has been successful in bottom up leadership (Jurkowitz, 1998, p.1). Cross-functional teams are given the ability to form ideas and come up with solutions for the organization. The fact that many different stakeholders are involved in this process, in my opinion, makes the decisions more sound and easily adopted by others since they had a say in the final decisions. In my organization, although we may occasionally work with another team on a project, we do not have cross-functional teams consistently working together. These cross-functional teams have to be allowed the freedom to make decisions and come up with solutions. These teams allow employees to learn about different aspects of the organization and transparency begins to emerge within the organization.

In addition, for bottom up leadership to work, employees need to have the desire to make the organization better and ideas to make it happen to have a significant impact on management (McCrimmon, p.1). McCrimmon mentions that employees can be seen as leaders this way without being in charge. This article had a real impact on me. When I have thought about the term leadership in the past, I usually associate the term with a manger of people. However, they are not synonymous. People who show initiative and pioneer a cause are leaders no matter where they are in the organization. A bottom up style of leadership demonstrates this concept well.

The implication on strategy would be that employees can now feel as though they are a real part of making the vision happen. Employees would have the chance to broach new ideas that align with the company’s strategy. The strategy itself would not have to change but how it is achieved would. Managers would no longer assign tasks related to the strategy to employees but rather they would seek out opinions from them as to how the strategy or vision could be realized.

Seems like a winning proposition to me. Everyone likes to feel valued and by making them a part of the process, that goal can be achieved.

Jurkowitz, M. (1998, Feb 18). Bottom-up newspaper leadership. Boston Globe. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/403928365?accountid=27203

McCrimmon, M. (n.d.). Bottom-up leadership. Retrieved from http://www.leadersdirect.com/bottom-up-leadership

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate

A633.3.3.RB_HansardCarey

According to Keith Yamashita and Sandra Spataro, in a complex adaptive system, chaos is essential so that the organization can adapt and therefore, survive. Actions within the organization do not take place because of planning but rather because the organization is evolving to meet the changing needs of those involved. Changes do not have to be huge to make a big difference in the organization. Feedback is also an important aspect of a complex adaptive system as it comes from all sides and allows adaptation to occur based on comments made.

As a leader, it seems as though establishing a truly complex adaptive system would be very difficult. Aspects of this system currently exist in my organization but I believe that we are actually in some type of transitional state. For example, upper level management recently instated 360 degree feedback. Other members of the team, however, were not included in that initiative.  To some extent, employees are also responsible for certain initiatives and running projects; however, there is always oversight by management, making what Obolensky  (2010) refers to as a mix of top down and bottom up (p. 30). Leaders within the organization believe that employees have more say in strategic planning than employees believe they have. This insight should help leaders adapt their leadership style to make their assumptions but, as of this point, this has not happened. For this reason, employees may not be fully invested in the strategies coming form the top. Obolensky (2010) states that people need to be involved in the formulation of strategy to expect a high degree of understanding (p. 30). If followers do not feel as though they have been included in strategic planning, and they do not necessarily understand the strategy or reasons for it, they are less likely to be actively involved in its implementation.

The most difficult aspect for making the transition to a CAS is reducing the hierarchy that generally appears within an organization. I am sure that there are not many CEOs willing to give up their corner offices and leave the strategizing to others.

As for moving forward, I do not believe that my organization will ever truly become a CAS. As a matter of fact, I see the opposite occurring. There are more levels of management being added all the time. For example, we have people within the organization with the titles of executive director, director, associate director and, in some areas, managers. This, in my opinion, makes those who work without a management level title feel further removed from upper level management, meaning that their ideas never come to the table or they believe that their opinions don’t matter. One of the things that I like about the idea of a CAS is that those who do the work and best understand the processes and needs of the customers are making decisions. They are also able to constantly provide feedback to others involved in project as a means of self-policing. According to Obolensky (2010), individuals not rising to the occasion are quickly identified and eliminated, making way for more productive individuals (p. 27). In my opinion, this would be a highly motivating factor to do a great job and be productive in my role.

Although I do not really feel as though I understand how to transition a traditional business model into a CAS, there are aspects of the CAS that appeal to me and hope to be able to include when I am a leader.

Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing Company.

Yamashita, K., & Spataro, S. (n.d.). Unstuck: A tool for yourself, your team, and your world. Retrieved from http://www.exinfm.com/board/complex_adaptive_systems.htm

A633.2.3.RB_HansardCarey

The butterfly effect, according to Obolensky (2012), demonstrates that, “ a very small change within a complex system can produce a very large difference to what would have otherwise happened” (p. 66). This effect can be observed in many organizations.

My first example does not reference my current employer, but it is something that I noticed as a trend recently at several different places I have visited, indicating that the idea is working. Recently, I visited the Plant City Strawberry Festival here in Florida and noticed that there was an attendant in the restroom. She was doing several things. I’m sure you have never personally experienced the line for the women’s restroom but possibly a companion you had to wait on has. It can be frustrating and time-consuming because lines are generally long, it is hard to tell if a stall is occupied, some are out of toilet paper, others are non-operational, and the restroom itself is usually a mess. The attendant was able to solve many of these problems. She was able to direct women to open stalls ensuring that the line kept moving, clean throughout the day to minimize litter, and guarantee that supplies were restocked as needed. I mentioned this to my husband who said that Daytona International Speedway had also adopted this policy in their restrooms for the Daytona 500 and that the difference in cleanliness was amazing. Last week, we attended a show at our local theater where there were also attendants in the restrooms. This small change has greatly benefited customers, employees, and organizations. Customers appreciate a well-maintained and clean restroom. Employers benefit because people are less likely to do things that cost the company money, like clog the toilets or steal supplies from the restroom, if there is an attendant there. For employees, they are able to earn money from the business as well as taking home tips from appreciative customers.

Another example of the ripple effect (or butterfly effect) within my organization was the upgrade of EagleVision a couple of weeks ago. When the vendor, Saba, announced the upgrade, we decided that we would no longer support the desktop client but instead, would switch to the browser version. This announcement caused many unexpected results. We have used this upgrade as a catalyst for making changes to the website, the way we train, and the documentation. We were able to get rid of outdated and duplicated support materials. We are also reevaluating the way we train and are looking to make changes to how we conduct the sessions. Another result of this decision for training is that we were able to secure funding for a third trainer. Although it has been a chaotic time, some great ideas and collaborative relationships have emerged during the process.

In addition to the butterfly effect, I also see connections to the Buttons and Threads Experiment detailed by Obolensky (2012, p. 79). Several times, seemingly unrelated conversations suddenly seem to intertwine creating moments of insight and clarity.

    

Reference: Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company.

A633.1.2.RB_HansardCarey

Obolensky (2010, p. 3) poses 3 questions for consideration:

1.     Has your own attitude to leaders changed in your life, and if so, how?

2.     If we take as a starting point the attitude to those in authority/leaders as held by your grandparents, and then look at those attitudes held by your parents, and then by you, and then by the younger generation, is there a changing trend? If so, what is it?

3.     Why do you think this has occurred?

My attitude towards leaders in general has definitely changed throughout my adult life. In my former position, I looked to my principal and assistant principal for guidance. These people seemed to have all of the answers themselves. They rarely looked to those they were leading for any input. It seemed more like an “us vs. them” environment. In this environment, the leader was often too busy to deal with situations that arose because she was too busy. Everyone respected the principal because of her title but did not feel very connected to her. Now, I am in an environment where leadership is very different. The CTO makes herself available to those she leads. She wants their ideas and input on projects for the department and frequently meets with us in small groups to keep her finger on the pulse of the department. This has changed my views on leadership a great deal. Leaders no longer seem unapproachable. I still think that the leaders in my life are extremely busy and may not always have time to listen to me , but when they do, I know they are really invested in what I have to say.

Throughout the years, it seems to me that my elders were more submissive to leaders than my generation. Leaders were more likely to be held up on a pedestal than they are now. Although I cannot base this on the corporate world, I can reference personal life.  My father used to own a business. He expected certain behaviors from his employees and not much input from them. In other words, it was a dictatorship in his business. The employees may not have agreed with what he decided or said but they did what he asked. It was an interesting dynamic, however. In the late 80s, he decided to sell his business and he was no longer the leader. He worked for the company that bought him out, but only for a very short time. As he had been accustomed to being the boss for so long, he was unable to stand back and let someone else take the lead. He eventually left the company, but he always had problems after that working for others. I think this is because the general attitude about leadership changed from the days when he had been the leader but his attitude about the subject had not changed. Leadership had become a group effort rather than an individual one. Although input from the bottom up was still not totally acceptable, decision-making was a collaborative effort at the top.

In my opinion, the outlook change in regards to leadership happens because of society’s views about life in general. People now are feeling more entitled and therefore, expect that their leaders will listen to and value their opinions. Leaders, on the other hand, understand that employees feel more valued when their perspectives are taken into account by their leaders. When employees feel that their opinions have been considered, they take more pride in their work and are more productive.

I think that the gap in the quality of our leaders comes because people do not always understand the need to lead, listen, reflect, and learn. They may think that leadership involves making decisions and ignore one or more of the other aspects. Today’s successful leaders combine all of these attributes and earn the respect of their peers and followers alike.

Reference: Obolensky, N. (2012). Complex adaptive leadership, embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing Company.