Seven Zones For Leadership

Robert W. Terry introduces us to the idea of different zones of leadership. However, before we delve into the seven different zones of leadership Terry finds it important to lay the groundwork in order to reach these zones. We learn about the role of action in leadership and how different actions affect leadership. He further discusses the notions of agreement, certainty, time, stability, chaos, and change.

Terry builds upon the seven zones of leadership from an action wheel he created. On the action wheel he explains the importance of: existence, resources, structure, power, mission, meaning and fulfillment. From these we are able to derive seven zones of leadership:

  1. Serving the past – “Leadership serves the past as it launches into the future.�
  2. Building Core Competencies – “matching the right people to the right jobs and ensuring they are doing the right tasks at the right time with the right skills and information for the right pay and perks to get the job done consistently, efficiently, and reliably.�
  3. Systems Thinking a. Designing Sustainable Systems: “Teams, groups, communication, and linkage are critical� b. Affirming Shared Identity: “Leadership grows the living-systems identity to include all significant players, adapting to each without selling out to any.�
  4. Creating Ownership – asks, “What uses of power make sense when the world offers less certainty of outcome and less agreement about direction?�
  5. Focusing on the Future a. Setting Direction: “Leadership engages in futuring, focusing on the destination of the journey. Leadership sets direction.� b. Anticipating Change: “Scanning, futuring, focusing less on the destination and more on the journey…�
  6. Creating Meaning in Chaos – “Events occur that were not anticipated, were not on anyone’s radarscope.�
  7. Serving the Promises of Authenticity a. Making Wise Choices: “Leadership assesses the worldly situation, listens to the stirrings, and makes wise choices that fit both what is external and what is internal to the context. b. Probing Deeper: asks, “What does wise, adepts action look like? How do I know I have it right?� c. Living the promise: “Leadership lives hope and courage by addressing the issue of spirituality, evil and theology.�

Each of these zones have deeper, more complex definitions, but the above is a snippet of how he describes he of them. One of the zones of leadership that I find to be very interesting and one that we hasn’t been addressed yet is the notion of creating meaning in chaos. Chaos refers to the idea of the unknown and reacting to something when it happens, whether when one is expecting it to happen or not. A good leader should be able to adapt, to use chaos to their advantage, whether as a learning piece or as a way to try something new. Leadership truly does “live in the midst of chaos.�

Another zone that caught my interest was affirming share identity, 3b. We have seen this idea before in the Koznes and Posner piece we read last week, “embracing others.� Terry states, “It is not where we are going; it is who we are.� I really believe that making employees feel a part of the company, team, etc. is such a big part of being a leader. A person can’t be a leader without followers and this zone speaks to that, making sure everyone know who they are and what their role is.

Terry goes into explaining the way the zones work and the importance of them working interdependtly and dependently. Each zone needs to be able to stand on its own and have enough of a foundation in order to catapult into the next zone.

Terry begins his book with a discussion of authenticity and the begging question, “What is really going on?� He states that it is authenticity that forces him to think critically, to dig deeper into subject matter and to continue asking questions, even after his prior ones have been answered. Towards the end he re-asks the same question, “What is really going on?� He explains that the important part of the question is the word really. “It suggests going beyond the obvious, the superficial. If we do not know what is really happening, we will act unwisely. ACT – another important word that Terry has introduced. It is in this discussion of authenticity that the reader is able to relate the concept to leadership because Terry “describe[s] how the human universes of action and authenticity embrace and position all leadership perspectives. I discuss how the history of the term leadership relates to the idea of action…�.

I found this section of the reading particularly interesting; mainly because of the location our previous class was held. During the past class I noticed a quote painted on the wall of the Hubert H. Humphrey Forum, it said, “Peace is not passive, it is active, Pease is not appeasement, it is strength, Peace does not happen, it requires work.� As I sat there listening to lecture and other students I couldn’t help but change the word “peace� to “leadership�: Leadership is not passive, it is active, leadership is not appeasement, it is strength, leadership does not happen, it requires work. This quote, with the use of the word “leadership� seems to encase everything that Terry discusses in his article. Leadership is definitely active, a leader must be strong: mentally and emotionally, and it takes a lot of work to be a good leader – seen through the seven zones of leadership.

The concept of seven zones of leadership is not simple, it is really rather complex. From the groundwork that needs to be explained to finally understand the actual seven zones and then to explaining how the map of the seven zones comes to fruition is cumbersome. Terry does a decent job of giving the readers an overview of this difficult task. However, I found myself waiting for this huge revelation that never came about. I’m not sure exactly what it is I was looking for, but I wanted more, I wanted a big surprise or something more than what was offered. I realize that we read the introduction and then went to the second chapter, skipping the first chapter but there was something missing – it didn’t fit together. In a way, I think the seven zones should have been presented first and the groundwork laid later – we could have worked backwards, it might have made more sense.

Comments

Just a quick response to the comment "A person can’t be a leader without followers" -- I disagree. I strongly believe that a true leader is not so unless constituents are empowered to also lead by encouraging, employing and utilizing their individual talents and strengths. A leader guides. A leader becomes the voice of the collective group, promoting and championing innovative ideas and thoughts. A true leader does not dictate (except to prevent legal and organizational consequences) -- a leader brings out the best in each member.

To follow-up to the Cheri's response about "A person can't be a leader without followers" - I understand what she is saying, but I still believe that in order to lead you need to have someone follow you. The word follow can have very different meanings. You can be an active follower, someone who believes in their leader, yet challenges their ideas and actions. You can have a passive follower who does whatever he/she is told. You can have someone that falls in the middle. Cheri states, "A leader guides." This is very true, but a leader needs someone or something to guide - followers. So while the leader may or may not be a dictator - the members of the group that he/she is bringing out the best in, is in some fashion a follower.

touche! I just got carried away with my passionate thoughts. Too much organizational heirarchy through my 40 yrs of working and 30 yrs of leading - making my own mistakes along the way - has provided me with plenty of empirical evidence to grow by.

Your comment that "The concept of seven zones of leadership is not simple, it is really rather complex." stands out to me as the most appropriate comment for both Terry's and Kotter's articles. Both emphasize a specific framework within which to operate. For Terry it's the zones of leadership; for Kotter the steps for transformation. Both share worthwhile examples of good ideas that seem to legitimize their experience and knowledge. However, both also seem so focused on their plans (zones and steps) that it seems to me they lose the forest for the trees. Not every plan (if in fact any plan) will work they way they describe. I find their articles far too specific to apply practically. (Please note that I'm not dismissing the authors' findings or legitimacy. I think good examples are always worth hearing.)

For practicality I find Kouzes and Posner's data (Characteristics of Admired Leaders) to be far more actionable. If I know to focus on being honest, forward-thinking, inspirational and competent, for example, I can do so in any circumstance. It is far easier (for me at least) to focus on being a leader in this way than attempting to follow a well intentioned plan that realistically cannot fit every circumstance.

Post a comment