If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes? What are the implications on strategy?
Leadership is changing. Today’s business climate evolves so quickly that oftentimes leaders today feel that they cannot keep up. Strategies that are developed to cope with change are frequently obsolete before implementation. “We have changed the context within which we lead faster than we can change our assumptions about what leadership is” (Obolensky, 2016). Leaders today are dealing with more complexity and uncertainty than ever before, and “Leaders seem more cornered, confused, and defensive than ever before” (Obolensky, 2016). Competitive advantage used to be obtained through superior products, quicker response time, or more efficient processes. In the current environment in which information about virtually everything is available, trade secrets and proprietary processes are almost non-existent. Nearly any product or process can be replicated.
In the past, a leader’s source of power and influence was knowledge. Those that were “in the know” wielded power over subordinates. What was it they knew? Leaders had better and more current information regarding the industry, the product, the competitors, and the customers than subordinates did. Leaders had a systems view; they understood better than others how the parts and pieces interacted with each other. Today, with the endless source of information available, leaders frequently are not privy to any better or more current information than subordinates. It is not the case that leaders are less knowledgeable than those of previous generations; the fact is that the general population is more aware and more knowledgeable today than any other time in history. Obolensky stated “Power has really shifted and diffused more than ever before” and “Power is more a dynamic than something to be exercised by a single entity” (Obolensky, 2016). Power has been diffused from top management, and has been dispersed down the hierarchy to the lower levels.
I believe I have seen evidence of the shift in leadership at the organization where I am employed. It takes time to turn a ship around; it has been a long, slow process, but change is evident. Three reasons that I feel the shift has been happening are: first, traditional command and direct leaders have been replaced; Second, upward communication has improved; and third, the leadership charade has started to break.
In the past we have had numerous chief pilots at different times that were very traditional “command and direct” leaders. They thought it was important for their authority to be felt and for the pilot group to respect them and so they motivated through threats and fear. They perpetuated the leadership charade by trying to make everyone believe that they had all the answers and all the solutions to every problem. In the last few years those traditional leaders have been replaced. We have currently a director of operations that is a fantastic leader. He expresses concern for the individual, asks for suggestions, and is more willing to listen than to be heard.
With the aforementioned change in leaders over the last few years there has also come a change in leadership style. Previously communication generally flowed down the hierarchy. Management would implement policies and the workforce would have to comply with them. Suggestions from the lower levels were rarely sought. Today there is an open forum, and a system in place for improvement suggestions. There have been occasions when bonuses have been offered for the best suggestions for improvement. There are still many employees that are “old school” that are suspicious of management and the current reporting culture, but as mentioned above it takes time to turn a ship.
Obolensky (2016) describes the leadership charade: “those at the top do not know the solutions to the problems faced by the organisations they lead. And generally speaking they know that they do not know. However, they cannot say that they do not know.” This is especially true as the leaders at the top become more disconnected and remote from those on the front lines. “Meanwhile, those at the bottom of the organisation are just as culpable. They know the solutions (or most of them). And they often know that the people at the top know they do not know! But they still expect the top to know” (Obolensky, 2016). This leadership charade has started to break up over the last few years as changes to key leadership positions have been made and as upward communication has improved.
While I was writing this Reflection Blog this morning I had additional evidence of the shift in leadership at my place of work. Last week I emailed some comments about the insufficiency and lack of organization of our company Emergency Response Plan to the director of safety. This morning he came over to the department where I work to discuss some of the concerns and ask for my suggestions and input for future revisions. This would not have happened even just a couple years ago.
Today’s leaders need to be aware that they may not be privy to the most current information. Having a strategy that fosters a free flow of information is key to success. This can be accomplished by ensuring that the right people are in place who value the input and suggestions of the people at the front lines.
References
Obolensky, N. (2016). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Taylor & Francis
No comments:
Post a Comment