Traditional leadership from the perspective of complex adaptive leadership (CAL) can have many implications for organizations. A successful organization will grow from a “functional silo” organization through to a complex adaptive structure (Obolensky, 2010, p. 23-27), or perish; therefore, leadership models will adapt and change along the way. CAL can promote increased flexibility within the realm of traditional leadership. More organizations need to become more bottom up and the way to do this is through change, coaching, motivation and innovation. It can also encourage more upward leadership because CAL helps traditional leaders to consider interaction and adaptability in their changing environment.
Polyarchy is somewhat of a paradoxical change from old oligarchical assumptions. Instead of a single leader providing direction, a polyarchic view is where many people are led by many people (Obolensky, 2010, p. xiv). In addition, a leader is more concerned for all members of the organization and thus, ensures that each member obtains the skills and knowledge required to perform day-to-day practices.
Leaders today will grow to understand that being a leader no longer requires knowing the solutions and passing then on; it requires having the ability to listen well, in order to spot solutions and support those who proposed them. When I think about micromanagement of employees, I wonder what the point is in keeping people around that a manager does not believe can do the work alone. Someone needs to leave - either the employee or the manager - because the point of hiring is to spread to load of responsibility! We need to coach - empowering teams instead of hovering over them, telling them when they are doing something wrong, and closing our office door behind us (Bajic, 2013). This change in workplace dynamics is being seen across industries as companies revisit how they work, where they work, how to increase efficiency, reduce operational costs, and what will attract and retain the best talent (SMPS New York, 2015). According to Obolensky (2010), "the ability to follow, and know when to do so, is as important as the ability to lead” (p. 143). In addition, knowing when to act is just as important as knowing when not to act.
My goal is to focus on the strengths of my followers and helping them to embrace change by facing it up front and not being afraid to take a chance. Collaboration and team work is a big focus for me as well as promoting individual growth from each follower. To do this, I need to know what they want. In most companies, managers believe that if they grow a employee too much, a good employee will find a better opportunity elsewhere. As a manager, that's how you manage to keep a few people, usually from personal circumstance and not a love for the job. As a leader, that mindset is how you send people out the door. Thinking that people need their companies and that companies do not need employees is perhaps the most poisonous of concepts from the traditional structured workplace - the old notion of “just be grateful you have a job” is a fast ticket to low performance and high turnover (Duncan, 2013). I had this boss; my only wonder for managers who think like this is, "do you write the check for this person, personally?" If not, chances are they have someone to answer to as well! The polyarchic pedagogy from which transformative leadership rests, notes that people are multitalented, so a leader can get more done from a worker when they understand their passions. My director knows some of my talents are creative (as in artistic - graphic design specifically); though my position do not directly require a handling of such communications, when he handed me the social media presence of our department last year, I felt like a kid in a candy store! Point? If a supervisor does not know how an employee would like to grow professionally, they cannot tailor opportunities to meet their needs, and that is how companies lose good people (Bajic, 2013).
Luckily, in my position, I know my supervisees will be going into other career fields. I have no fear of them leaving (to graduate) - I want them to leave - but they should see direct connections with what their responsibilities were in their role and how they should be treated (and treat people) in the workplaces of their tomorrow. Although the use of polyarchy differs significantly in each organization, the concept is the same. The key is to understand that the traditional dynamic between leader and emerging leader has changed. Supervisors needs to encourage their supervisees to lead while also being open to their supervisees opinions, concerns and needs.
A way to do this is through the ‘wu wei’ concept (art of inaction and waiting until the right time to take action). Stepping back and seeing how my supervisees approach and solve issues has been a matter of not turning around as much to answer a question for them when they hesitate, and questioning them when they come see me to give them an answer. I do not want them to come to me with questions and leave with my answer; I want to challenge them to think logically and weigh the benefits and setbacks of their own thoughts and assumptions. It is the process of showing a man to fish:
References
Bajic, Elena. (2013).The 6 Steps For Retaining Good Employees. Forbes. Accessed at http://www.forbes.com/sites/elenabajic/2013/07/15/the-6-steps-for-retaining-good-employees/
Duncan, R. (2013). Nine Ways To Keep Your Company's Most Valuable Asset -- Its Employees. Forbes. Accessed at http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2013/08/20/nine-ways-to-keep-your-companys-most-valuable-asset-its-employees/
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership. Burlington, VT; Gower Publishing Company.
SMPS New York. (2015). The Ever-Changing Dynamics of the Corporate Workplace. Society for Marketing Professional Resources. Accessed at http://smpsny.org/events/workplace201/
 |
| From Obolensky, 2010, p. 110 |
Polyarchy is somewhat of a paradoxical change from old oligarchical assumptions. Instead of a single leader providing direction, a polyarchic view is where many people are led by many people (Obolensky, 2010, p. xiv). In addition, a leader is more concerned for all members of the organization and thus, ensures that each member obtains the skills and knowledge required to perform day-to-day practices.
Leaders today will grow to understand that being a leader no longer requires knowing the solutions and passing then on; it requires having the ability to listen well, in order to spot solutions and support those who proposed them. When I think about micromanagement of employees, I wonder what the point is in keeping people around that a manager does not believe can do the work alone. Someone needs to leave - either the employee or the manager - because the point of hiring is to spread to load of responsibility! We need to coach - empowering teams instead of hovering over them, telling them when they are doing something wrong, and closing our office door behind us (Bajic, 2013). This change in workplace dynamics is being seen across industries as companies revisit how they work, where they work, how to increase efficiency, reduce operational costs, and what will attract and retain the best talent (SMPS New York, 2015). According to Obolensky (2010), "the ability to follow, and know when to do so, is as important as the ability to lead” (p. 143). In addition, knowing when to act is just as important as knowing when not to act.
My goal is to focus on the strengths of my followers and helping them to embrace change by facing it up front and not being afraid to take a chance. Collaboration and team work is a big focus for me as well as promoting individual growth from each follower. To do this, I need to know what they want. In most companies, managers believe that if they grow a employee too much, a good employee will find a better opportunity elsewhere. As a manager, that's how you manage to keep a few people, usually from personal circumstance and not a love for the job. As a leader, that mindset is how you send people out the door. Thinking that people need their companies and that companies do not need employees is perhaps the most poisonous of concepts from the traditional structured workplace - the old notion of “just be grateful you have a job” is a fast ticket to low performance and high turnover (Duncan, 2013). I had this boss; my only wonder for managers who think like this is, "do you write the check for this person, personally?" If not, chances are they have someone to answer to as well! The polyarchic pedagogy from which transformative leadership rests, notes that people are multitalented, so a leader can get more done from a worker when they understand their passions. My director knows some of my talents are creative (as in artistic - graphic design specifically); though my position do not directly require a handling of such communications, when he handed me the social media presence of our department last year, I felt like a kid in a candy store! Point? If a supervisor does not know how an employee would like to grow professionally, they cannot tailor opportunities to meet their needs, and that is how companies lose good people (Bajic, 2013).
Luckily, in my position, I know my supervisees will be going into other career fields. I have no fear of them leaving (to graduate) - I want them to leave - but they should see direct connections with what their responsibilities were in their role and how they should be treated (and treat people) in the workplaces of their tomorrow. Although the use of polyarchy differs significantly in each organization, the concept is the same. The key is to understand that the traditional dynamic between leader and emerging leader has changed. Supervisors needs to encourage their supervisees to lead while also being open to their supervisees opinions, concerns and needs.
The first time, we will do it together. Then I want to see you try alone, and I'll steer you when I think you may hurt yourself, but you will either figure out how to do it how I do, or find an even better way. My goal it to give my supervisees enough space to teach me a better way!Though polyarchy is fast replacing old oligarchical assumptions, the old models are yet to become redundant and unnecessary. Many larger corporations, those who have been around for quite some time and have complex leadership systems, still have niches within their establishment who run a top-down environment; it would be daunting for someone who is expecting to be valued as the source of information to realize their department is expecting them to be order-takers. This is not a beneficial environment for an emerging leaders, but there are skills to be learned while coping through the eventually overhaul of the structural dynamic. Knowing the old model will help leaders strive forward in whatever organization they may be in.
References
Bajic, Elena. (2013).The 6 Steps For Retaining Good Employees. Forbes. Accessed at http://www.forbes.com/sites/elenabajic/2013/07/15/the-6-steps-for-retaining-good-employees/
Duncan, R. (2013). Nine Ways To Keep Your Company's Most Valuable Asset -- Its Employees. Forbes. Accessed at http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2013/08/20/nine-ways-to-keep-your-companys-most-valuable-asset-its-employees/
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex Adaptive Leadership. Burlington, VT; Gower Publishing Company.
SMPS New York. (2015). The Ever-Changing Dynamics of the Corporate Workplace. Society for Marketing Professional Resources. Accessed at http://smpsny.org/events/workplace201/
No comments:
Post a Comment