Introduction
This
week’s MSLD633 blog is about “the vicious circle for leaders” found in
Obolensky (2014), Chapter 9 and whether elements of this circle are found in my
organization and what the effects are on the organization. Additionally, ideas
on how a new circle can be created that promotes strong follower-ship and
elements of leadership at the lower levels of the organization will be presented.
The Vicious Circle
for Leaders
Found in Oblensky (2014), Figure 9.5, provides a
circle that is a cause and effect diagram of what cascading action(s) follow
when a follower demonstrates low skill (initiating action) or the leader takes
a hands on approach (initiating action). Each initiating action can perpetuate the
other initiating action, creating a circle of events. In other words, if a
follower demonstrates low skill then a leader could be expected to take a more
hands on approach and if a leader takes a hands on approach a follower’s
confidence could be expected to lower causing him / her to demonstrate what
could be interpreted as low skill. And this in turn reinforces the leader’s
belief that a hands on approach is needed. (Oblensky, 2014, p. 162).
The vicious circle for leaders has other applications
other than low skill / hands on approach. In Chapter 4 of Oblensky (2014), the
vicious cycle was a scenario where the leader pretended to know the answers,
the follower knew the leader was wrong and withheld the answers because they
expected to the leader to know the answers.
Is There a Vicious
Circle Present in My Organization and what are the Effects?
My organization (Technical Publications) has two components;
Advanced Aircraft Programs (AAP) and legacy.
Both components have highly skilled followers. One seems to be more
motivated (AAP) than the other (legacy). AAP, by virtue of having to deal with
advanced aircraft development, utilizes more complex systems so consequently
the organization of this component is transforming to a bottom – up organization,
where small teams (that are self-sustaining) are
empowered to make decisions, decisions that managers in a traditional system
would have made a few years ago.
The only potential for ‘a vicious cycle’ present in AAP that is discernible to me can be attributed to the manager not fully developing strong
bonds with each team. “Effective managers take time to manage relationships
with their subordinates as well as their bosses.” (Gabarro & Kotter, 2005,
para. 2). The lack of a strong bond, in my opinion, promotes speculation as to
what the ‘boss’ is thinking and sometimes leads to team leads asking unnecessary
questions to understand what the leader expects. The impact would appear to be
minimal. Our manager knows he has a highly skilled workforce and doesn't overreact and take the reins away from the teams when asking questions. That
being said he probably could use some relief from getting questions.
The legacy manager could also spend more time with his followers
to reduce ambiguity in his thinking patterns, however the biggest impact could
be to inspire and motivate. As stated previously, both AAP and legacy followers
are highly skilled. Where the difference is between the two groups is that the
followers in the AAP component are effective followers, and followers in the
legacy group are more ineffective than effective. “What distinguishes an
effective from an ineffective follower is enthusiastic, intelligent and self-reliant
participation—without star billing—in the
pursuit of an organizational goal.” (Kelly, 1988, p. 143). Because the manager
has little interaction with the followers in the legacy group, most are content
with slogging along, performing the tasks exactly as expected in an unmotivated
and uninspired atmosphere.
How to Create a New
Circle that Promotes Strong Followership and Leadership?
As mentioned above, if our leaders became more interactive and
engaged employees on a routine and regular basis more often instead of being
buried in work all the time our organization would benefit greatly. Gabarro
& Kotter, (2005) reminded me recently how important it is to consider your
bosses needs and workload “At a minimum, you need to appreciate your boss’s
goals and pressures. Without this information, you are flying blind, and
problems are inevitable.” (p. 94). And this is where perhaps the potential for ‘a
vicious cycle’ is present. The managers are so swamped with work that they cannot develop
personal relationships and the managers believe the followers are so overloaded
with their own work to that delegating some of their responsibilities to them
is not even a consideration. And so the story goes that followers continue to
be underdeveloped. Recently a request for additional manpower by our managers was
denied.
The leadership tool that
could help them the most to break this cycle as presented in the MSLD program
is storytelling. My managers must become better at compelling those who
allocate manpower resources to give them the manpower they need. They need to
tell good stories to justify why they need the people they are asking for. Simply asking for them and
showing on paper why they are needed is just not enough. They need to tell a
good story, and if there is one area that awareness and training could help
them become more effective at getting the resources they need it would be
storytelling.
…storytelling has gained
recognition as a core competence of leadership…storytelling is more than simply
a communication tool and implied the emergence of a different kind of
leader—someone who engages in interactive conversations rather than merely
telling people what to do. (Denning, 2012, p. ix).
Ending my blog on this note seems a little strange at first...this is not how this blog was envisioned to end...on a note of storytelling. However, the four + four principles introduced to me in Obolensky (2014) is only a little out of balance and storytelling would seem to be a good fit to bring things back into harmony.
References:
Denning,
S. (2011). The leader's guide to
storytelling: Mastering the art and discipline of business narrative. San
Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
Gabarro,
J., & Kotter, J. (2005). Managing
your boss. Harvard Business Review,
83(1),
92-99.
Kelley,
R. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard
Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.
Obolensky,
N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership:
Embracing paradox and uncertainty. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing
Company.
