“Most leadership models have the
assumption of oligarchy” (Obolensky, 2014) .
This assertion may generally hold true in many organizations. However, the assumptions about leadership
models are shifting as a consequence of today’s complex environments (Obolensky, 2014) . In reflecting on traditional leadership from
the perspective of complex adaptive leadership, leadership models ought to
change. The ‘new’ leadership models must
be able to empower followers, instill collaboration, and provide feedback.
Today’s
businesses operate in complex environments – business must adapt to
technological, demographic, social/political, and environmental changes (Obolensky, 2014) . Those businesses that adapt the fastest and
most efficiently to change have the competitive advantage (Reeves & Deimler, 2011) . Thus, the hierarchical organization, with its
‘topdown’ leadership model, is becoming antiquated. The problem solving and decision-making in
the hierarchical organization is centralized and slow. In topdown leadership, power comes from a
position of authority i.e. a CEO, manager, foreman, etc. The authority figure creates the
vision/strategy, determines the objectives and solutions, and then directs his
or her followers to execute. This model
of leadership limits the flow of information/knowledge as it often travels
one-way (from top down) with minimal feedback (bottom up) (Obolensky, 2014) .
Thus, the hierarchical organization fails to recognize and/or solve
problems when they arise – and when they do, it is not quick enough.
On
the other hand, a flatter (polyarchic) organization models its leadership on complex
adaptive leadership. Complex adaptive
leadership makes several assumptions: that power resides in the individual,
information/knowledge is shared in all directions, and there is constant
feedback from leader to follower and vice versa (Obolensky, 2014) .
For example, a leadership model such as ‘Level 5 Followership’ has the
aim to develop initiative, information sharing, and accountability in followers
(Obolensky, 2014) .
Another example is the Hersey/Blanchard Situational Leadership model in
which the leaders adapts (befitting of complex adaptive leadership) his or her
style to the “Skill/will’ of the follower (Obolensky, 2014) .
The benefits of polyarchic leadership are followers take more
responsibility, communication is faster across the organization, and decision-making
becomes easier i.e. less ‘red-tape’ in the process (Reeves & Deimler, 2011) .
As
a developing leader, this author will seek the resources that develop the
‘content’ and ‘process’ needs of his leadership development. ‘Content’ refers to the resources that help
build positive and effective relationships with people (Obolensky, 2014) .
‘Process’ refers to the resources that help the leader ‘get it done’,
that is, a leader developing tactical and technical skills, decision-making,
and management skills (Obolensky, 2014) .
Both the content and process will be addressed using the 70–20–10
approach. The 70–20–10 approach is which
one learns from a) 70% from challenging assignments, b) 20% from developmental
relationships, and c) 10% from coursework and training (Groth, 2012) . However, this author’s current strategy has
focused heavily on ‘coursework and training’ as he completes his MBA.
In
conclusion, this leader must change his assumptions of leadership if he is to
adapt with constantly changing business environments. The leader’s traditional assumptions of
oligarchy will be replaced or enhanced with polyarchic leadership assumptions. He must consider ‘new’ leadership models that
enable empowerment, create teamwork, and open communication. Moreover, using the 70–20–10 approach will
ensure the focus of development on the ‘vital few’ in an efficient and
progressive manner.
References
Groth,
A. (2012, November 27). Retrieved from www.businessinsider.com:
http://www.businessinsider.com/kyle-westaway-how-to-manage-your-career-2012-11
Obolensky, N.
(2014). Complex adaptive leadership - Embracing paradox and uncertainty.
New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Reeves, M., &
Deimler, M. (2011, August). Adaptability: The new competitive advantage.
Retrieved from hbr.org:
https://hbr.org/2011/07/adaptability-the-new-competitive-advantage
No comments:
Post a Comment