Reflecting on the
opening exercise at the beginning of Chapter 4 of the of Obolensky text and
other readings, why do you think the shift in leadership is occurring and do
you think this is indicative of what is happening in your organization.
List three reasons that support or refute this position.
If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes? What are the implications on strategy?
If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes? What are the implications on strategy?
In my opinion I believe
that the percentage of solutions that actually make specific changes is
dispersed amongst all levels of an organization. I think that each individual
who was to perform this exercise would provide either a higher or lower number
according to different variables such as their level of expertise, level of experience,
age and culture. I would imagine that an older generation would have a
different opinion on where solutions should come from opposed to the younger
generation who seems to be less willing to give into the status quo.
Another reason the number would change would be due
to the formality and structure of the organization. If an organizations
structure is built with a hierarchical structure then it would make sense that
those who held more upper level management positions would feel that the
percentage of valuable solutions would come from the top. If the organization
was run with a more non deterministic approach then the percentage of solutions
would seem to come from the middle or bottom workers.
I believe that the shift in leadership is occurring
due to organizations leaning toward a more non deterministic view. In many
scenarios the issues that organizations face are recognized by lower level
workers. This is because they are the ones to deal with the issues of the
organization and its consumers or customers on a daily basis. Another reason this
is occurring is because leaders in many organizations do not like to admit that
they do not know the answers to some issues and that their lower level workers
may have the answers that they are looking for. For those managers and leaders
who are willing to look to their peers and colleagues for support in figuring
out top level issues, their jobs become that much easier because they are able
to forget their titles and become one with the crowd.
Lastly, leaders in many organizations are recognizing
the quality of their people. Leaders are beginning to both challenge and
support their people and bridge the gaps between management and lower level
workers. They are requesting more dynamic questions and answer a session which
creates a more dynamic environment where questions flow both up and down generating
two way intercourse and dialogue.
In order for this type of environment to be
successful leadership dynamics would have to be much more open to change.
Flexibility and adaptability are also key factors in making changes such as
these positive for the workforce in which anyone is accustomed to. The effects
these changes would have on strategy would also be extremely beneficial from
all aspects including how the corporation is run both internally and externally
as well. While some managers and leaders may find it nontraditional in nature,
these days it is necessary for leaders to move to a situation where they are
following as much as managing in order for them to be successful. No
organization can move forward without stretching their boundaries and reaching
for the stars.
Cassandra
R.
References
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate
