Weitere ähnliche Inhalte Ähnlich wie Ila presentation (20) Kürzlich hochgeladen (20) Ila presentation1. Building Complexity Bridges
Across Great Divides
Keith Carpenter, Kent Covenant Church
Scott Conger, United States Air Force (Ret.)
Brian Davenport, Whitworth University
Kevin McDermott, University of Guelph
Commentator: Caroline Fu, Gonzaga University
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
2. Leadership Lessons from Nature: The Living
Bridges of Meghalaya
Scott Conger, United States Air Force (Ret.)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
3. Lesson One: Leaders Do Not Need All the Answers
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
4. Lesson Two: Leaders Do Not Need All the Answers
“Dependable certainty … lies in confidence that one’s preparation is adequate
so that one may venture into the experience without pre-set answers but with
the assurance that creative insight will emerge in the situation when
needed, and that it will be right in the situation because it is an answer
generated in the situation” (Greenleaf, 1977)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
6. Lesson Two: Commitment to Learning
“What if nine out of ten change initiatives in our organizations or
societies, were driven by excitement, by the idea that this would
serve somebody in a different way, that this would give us a
better way of living?” (Senge, 2006)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
7. Lesson Three: Fewer Rules and Less Control
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
8. Leadership Lessons from Nature: The Living
Bridges of Meghalaya
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
9. Don’t Curse the
Chaos—Learning to
Lead Complex
Churches
Keith Carpenter, Kent Covenant
Church
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
11. Emergence
In nature and history change leaps into
existence following
disruption, turmoil, tension, or chaos
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
12. Pastors Often Try to
Suppress Turmoil
Turmoil Accompanies
Emergent Change
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
14. The Revitalization of Mission Church
“What Would Jesus Do?”
See Plowman, D. A. (2007) The role of leadership in
emergent, self-organization. The Leadership
Quarterly, 18, 341-356.
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
16. Do followers see complexity
leadership as bad leadership?
Reconciling Complexity Leadership with
Implicit Leadership Theories
Kevin McDermott, MBA, PhD Candidate (ABD)
University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
Department of Business
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
17. Agenda
• Theoretical Positioning
– Complexity Leadership
– Implicit Leadership Theories
• Complexity Leadership and Constituent
Perception
– Implicit complexity absorption vs. Implicit
leadership theories
– Explicit complexity absorption reconcile the
differences?
• Discussion
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
18. Theoretical Positioning
• Complexity Leadership Theory
“leadership should be seen not only as position and authority
but also as an emergent, interactive dynamic—a complex
interplay from which a collective impetus for action and
change emerges when heterogeneous agents interact in
networks in ways that produce new patterns of behavior or
new modes of operating”
(Uhl-Bien, Marion & McKelvey, 2007, emphasis added)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
19. Theoretical Positioning
• Can this be operationalize this in terms of
positional leadership behaviours?
– Those that encourage an interactive dynamic and
fosters adaptive dynamics that progress
organizational goals
(Uhl-Bein, Marion & McKelvey, 2007)
– Those that can absorb complexity, make use of
disorder, irregularity, and differences (complexity
absorption) vs. those that seek to reduce uncertainty
and error (complexity reduction)
(Stacey, 1995; Boisot & Child, 1999)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
20. Theoretical Positioning
• Can this be operationalize this in terms of
positional leadership behaviours?
• Hybrid-Strategies
(Boisot & Child, 1999; Walters & Bhuian, 2004)
• Self-Organization
(Ashmos, Duchon & McDaniel, 2002)
• Participative Decision Making
(Clarke, 2006)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
22. Theoretical Positioning
• Implicit Leadership Theories: constituents tend to
perceive leaders as effective if they possess
certain traits or characteristics
– Culturally dependent
(Ling, Chia & Fang, 2000)
– Western cultures tend to favour:
•
•
•
•
Dedication (disciplined, prepared)
Tyranny (pushy, domineering)
Intelligence (knowledgeable, wise)
Strength (forceful, powerful)
(Offerman, Kennedy & Wirtz, 1994).
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
23. Complexity Absorbing Behaviours
vs. Implicit Leadership Theories
Leadership behaviours that encourage SelfOrganization, Participative Decision Making and HybridStrategies may negatively influence constituents’
perception of a leader’s effectiveness because of the
constituents’ implicit leadership theories.
In contexts where these leaders don’t frame these
behaviours in terms of their instrumental value to the
organization (Implicit Complexity Absorption)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
24. Complexity Absorbing Behaviours
vs. Implicit Leadership Theories
Self-Organization
Participative Decision
Making
Dedication
(disciplined, prepared)
Tyranny
(pushy, domineering)
Intelligence
(knowledgeable, wise)
Strength
(forceful, powerful, dec
isiveness)
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
Hybrid Strategies
25. Complexity Absorbing Behaviours
vs. Implicit Leadership Theories
Self-Organization
Proposition #1
Dedication
(disciplined, prepared)
Participative Decision
Making
Proposition #2
Preparedness
Tyranny
(pushy, domineering)
Intelligence
(knowledgeable, wise)
Strength
(forceful, powerful,
decisiveness)
Hybrid Strategies
Proposition #3
Preparedness
Tyranny
Wisdom
Wisdom
Preparedness Conger, Davenport, &
Strength
© Carpenter,
McDermott, 2012 ILA
Wisdom
Decisiveness
26. Explicit Complexity Absorption
Purposefully communicating with constituents regarding
the instrumental value of self-organization,
participative decision making and hybrid-strategies, as
well as explaining the environmental context that make
complexity absorption strategies appropriate
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
27. Explicit Complexity Absorption
Self-Organization
Proposition #1
Dedication
(disciplined, prepared)
Participative Decision
Making
Proposition #2
Preparedness
Hybrid Strategies
Proposition #3
Preparedness
Proposition #5
Tyranny
(pushy, domineering)
Intelligence
(knowledgeable, wise)
Proposition #4
Tyranny
Frame Self-Organization and Participative
Decision Making in terms of Employee
Empowerment
Wisdom
Wisdom
(Dewettinck & Ameijde, 2008)
Strength
(forceful, powerful,
decisiveness)
Preparedness Conger, Davenport, &
Strength
© Carpenter,
McDermott, 2012 ILA
Frame HybridStrategies in terms
of organizational
capacity building
in Wisdom of
the face
environmental
dynamism
Decisiveness
28. Discussion
Thank you
1) Is it theoretically appropriate to categorize complexity
absorbing leadership behaviours as a subset of
complexity leadership (as per Uhl-Bein et al.)?
2) Other complexity absorbing leadership behaviours
that should be included besides hybridstrategies, self-organization and participative decision
making?
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
30. COMPARING TWO EVENTS IN
ZUCCOTTI PARK
• Empire State Rebellion
– Date: June 14, 2011
– Objective: Occupy Zuccotti Park
– Attendance: 4 People
• Occupy Wall St.
– Date: September 17, 2011
– Objective: Occupy Zuccotti Park
– Attendance: ≈ 2,000 People
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
31. EXTERNAL FACTORS
• It is important to understand the external forces that
have an impact on any given social system (Castellani &
Hafferty, 2009).
• National unemployment rate was at 9.1% and had
been over 9% for just over two years. There hasn’t
been an unemployment rate over 9% since 1983
(Bureau of Labor Statistics).
• Success of the “Arab Spring”. After seeing the success
of the numerous revolutions that took place in North
Africa, it only makes sense that a frustrated populace
would see beginning a protest movement as a viable
option.
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
32. INDEPENDENT AGENTS
• Independent agents are necessary for complex
realities to emerge (Castellani & Hafferty, 2009;
Plowman & Duchon, 2008).
• For any idea to truly spread a few select types of
people need to be involved performing specific
functions, people he called connectors, mavens,
and salesmen (Gladwell, 2002).
• Connector: Someone who knows a lot of people
in different social groups.
• Adbusters served as the connector
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
34. INDEPENDENT AGENTS cont.
• Mavens: People who are “information specialists”.
• David Graeber introduced the idea of the general
assembly to the people who were early participators
in the planning of Occupy Wall St.
• Salesmen: People “with the skill to persuade us when
we are unconvinced of what we are hearing”.
• For the Occupy Wall St. movement this role was
played by a group of hacktavists known collectively
as Anonymous.
• Specific agents, not specific people, are necessary for
an idea or a movement to emerge from the complexity
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
35. IMPACT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
• The connection of independent agents is essential to
the emergence of complex adaptive systems.
• The use of the general assembly in the Occupy Wall
St. movement allowed for each person, or node,
involved in the movement to communicate with other
nodes.
• “Each person in a network is a “node” and through
talk and interaction “connections” among the nodes
are formed. The addition of new nodes or changes in
the nature of the connections between the nodes can
lead to changes that have enormous consequence”
(Plowman & Duchon, 2008 p. 132).
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
36. IMPACT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
• If a problem couldn’t be solved in the general
assembly, a working committee was formed to
continue working on the problem with the goal of
reporting back to the general assembly (Bennett,
2011).
• Each social system is compiled from networks of
attracting clusters.
• The working committees allowed for the creation of
attracting clusters around specific ideas
• General Assemblies and working committees allowed
for process wisdom (Vaill, 1998).
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
37. IMPACT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
• This process wisdom allowed the Occupy Wall
St. movement to develop a system that
facilitates in-time responses to both internal
and external stimuli.
• This allowed for a positive response to the
disequilibrium created by numerous external
stimuli and the injection of new energy into
the system.
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
38. Occupy Today
• The movement has lost significant
momentum. Why?
– Division
– Lack of goals
• Can the movement regain prominence?
– Yes?
© Carpenter, Conger, Davenport, &
McDermott, 2012 ILA
Hinweis der Redaktion Chair and presenter introductions followed by presentation video.In the book Emergence: From Chaos to Order, author John Holland stated, “We’ve seen repeatedly that much complexity can be generated in systems defined by a few well-chosen rules. When we observe emergent phenomena, we ought therefore try to discover the rules that generate the phenomena” Uhl-Bien and Marion (2008) recognized this phenomenon when they stated that “humans are predisposed … to try tto centralize and control the behaviors of the collective”… and this is a conscious effort aimed toward certainty and answers. However, “there is an aspect of our mind that is exceedingly capable of dealing with complexity” this is our unconscious, our intuition, our faith, our dependable certainty” (Senge) Why is it right because it is generated in the situation? Well, according to L’ Engle, there are no right answers, just the best wrong answer for the situation… and we’re stuck with it. In the living bridges I see a commitment to learning that is at the heart of Servant Leadership. Commitment without expectation of personal gain “Such people … have a capacity for delayed gratification, which makes it possible for them to aspire to objectives which others would disregard, even considering the impact of their choices on succeeding generations . (Senge, p.132)2. Commitment and allegiance to the learning process itself rather than change“Learning requires change… but change does not require learning” (Senge, as cited in Greenleaf) Are we as servant leaders committed to the results… or to the learning process itself?Peter Senge connected commitment to learning and servant leadership together when he stated “one of the important tasks of leaders in learning organizations is to be the steward [servant] of the vision within the organization. Being a steward means clarifying and nurturing a vision that is greater than oneself” Coax the roots… take care that they are not broken or disturbed… be consistent… be caring… be patientChilean biologist HumbertoMaturana… “Evolution is a process of transformation through conservation” Nature conserves a few basic features , and in doing so, frees everything else to change. (p. 335 Senge)The real question here for leaders is what do we hope to conserve? In the case of the Khasi, they are conserving a centuries old process that serves others, they are conserving the importance of a learning organization. As servant leaders, we are conserving our work relationships, innovation… in short, our commitment to a learning organization. Conclusion