Leadership and Change

I agreed in general that most previous models that we have reviewed do not necessarily delve into the individual person as a part of this new ‘living organism’ of shared leadership. Other models seem to touch upon; the process, aspects, concepts and phase without ever incorporating the ‘self’ or the individual person. I feel that this aspect is truly the most important part of the shared leadership view. A few questions that come to mind; how does a leader of a hundred differ from a leader of one? Without an understanding of people how can you lead? How does an organization motivate each person through the process without alienating them? As the tenets (Self-in-relations, Conditions, Skill, Outcomes, Systemic Power) of the Stone Center Relational Theory pointed out (page 27) “They argue that growth, rather than occurring primarily through processes of separation, occurs primarily through processes of connection. The hallmark of growth they (Stone Center relational theorists) suggest is not increased ability to separate oneself from others but increased ability to connect oneself in ways that foster mutual development and learning. While transactional models of growth include the importance of human connection, relation theory recasts the nature of these interactions.’ Along with coupling the Four (Talking Nice, Talking Tough, Reflective, Dialogue) Phases of Learning Conversations (Scharmer 2001) (page 35) I believe are reasonable outlines when working with individuals, although, in my opinion are still rather vague. We can still certainly go through the process by way of theory; how people should, could and would communicate to one another although it is a whole different circumstance when you are in a room trying to communicate your thoughts. The dynamic, to me, maybe difficult to explain but I will try to illustrate a point. Let us take for example the first phase; “Talking Nice” (page 36), “Because individuals do not speak up or say what they really think, conversation devolves to a rule-repeating interaction.” So, you walk into your first meeting wearing red, you have no idea that your cohorts take offense to this color. How will that change the outcome of the conversation? Will this be held against you? Will the other members not even engage you because of it? This is just one small aspect that can come into play when dealing with the human element. A model or theory cannot take this, something so small and what most would consider insignificant into consideration until it has actually happened. Because people in general would not speak their minds (as stated earlier) this chain of events may or may not ever be realized in making a difference. I agree, in general, with the Four Phases of Learning Conversations as being a good working tool or starting point although, an organization cannot lose sight of or discredit ‘real life’ situations that can occur.
Ultimately, the article spelt out how difficult the process is to move from a hierarchal to a shared leadership organization. There are dynamics of individual people that need to be taken into account and considered. Overall there seems to be substantial focus on the leader and what methodology would give them the tools to lead but not a great deal about the understanding of the people they intend on leading. Individuals come from different backgrounds, ideologies and an array of different value systems, needs and motivational factors. All of these factors need to be considered in order for the organization to accomplish its goal of shared leadership.

Irene