Thursday, April 11, 2013

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


No comments:

Post a Comment