Student Reflections on Integrative Leadership

By Mary Maurice

Students from the Spring 2010 "Integrative Leadership: From Theory to
Practice" course, taught by Professors Jay Kiedrowski and Paul Vaaler, will
post their reflections on integrative leadership throughout the course of
the semester on the Time to Lead blog.

A key component of an Integrated Leadership is the sharing of power
across sector in order to pursue new solutions to sector failures
(Bryson, Crosby, Stone, 2006). Before power can be shared, it may be
important to frame issues from various vantage points. An implicit
expectation in the private sector expectation is that when power is
shared, so is risk, and when risk is shared, so is reward. Risk, in a
shared power world, may mean that no one sector is singled out for
'trying again', and may link to the source of investment funds. But
what of shared reward? What are the ethical implications of
individuals or sectors benefiting from the correction of sector
failures? Is this issue different than or related to the nonprofit
sector discomfort with housing ventures who benefit from (profitable)
revenues?

As our IL team delves into the NY Parks cases, one of the key sources of
conflict (especially as it relates to the restoration of Bryant Park) is
that although every sector has benefited from this destination park, the
visionary leader of the nonprofit (Dan Biederman, ED of Bryant Park
Restoration Corporation) is under attack for drawing salaries from two
different parks under management, plus his own consulting business. The
Bryant Park salary is report ably $229,000 - not a penance but also not
outrageous by New York standards. Biederman earned a A.B. from
Princeton University's school of Public and International Affairs and an
M.B.A. from Harvard, so clearly there are other sectors which would
gladly have compensated him for his education as well as obvious efforts
and results.

Here in Minneapolis/St. Paul the leadership of MPR is often criticized
for 'empire building' and setting up a for profit entity (since sold)
from which he received a non-disclosed salary. Minnesotans and beyond
benefit from having a strong public radio - as well as constant
affirmation that "our women are strong..our men are good looking...and
our children above average" . One could argue there should be no
personal benefit received from the creation of public good...but as long
as the private sector rewards contributions and results 'above and
beyond', how can we motivate and reward true integrative leadership in a
way that is compelling?

One possible solution is to find ways to measure and communicate cross
sector value created. Factors that could go into that equation could
include salaries paid out during restoration or building, increase in
property values and property tax assessments, numbers of citizens
served, increase in sales taxes from the businesses and venues created,
and even the value of start up business and receipts in the area.
Pieces of these economic development puzzle are sometime touted when new
stadiums are being sought, but if more consistently tracked and reported
it might help all three sectors have shared assumptions on what is the
overall societal value add of economic development or even the reversal
of urban blight. Perhaps a 'windfall' fund could be created so that if
the efforts yield a great success, it is predetermined how ear-marked
funds can be paid out across the sectors in bonuses, or reinvested in
causes of the players choice.

A reservation in this argument is the that there is that individuals do
not truly share risk in these ventures. Had Biederman 'failed' in his
efforts to restore Bryant Park, his career would have suffered, but it
would have been the philanthropies and the public who truly 'lost'.
That said, there is still a difference of assumptions of rewarding value
created across the various sectors which can be an impediment to true
integrative leadership.