Leadership and Change

In case anyone is interested there is a series at the Carlson School called Inside the Boardroom. It is free and open to the public.

http://carlsonschool.umn.edu/Page8238.aspx

Enjoy Irene

I got this as an email and thought some might find it interesting:

Carlson School Associate Professor Paul Vaaler, his co-instructor Humphrey Institute Senior Fellow Jay Kiedrowski, and Center for Integrative Leadership Executive Director Anna Lloyd, invite you to attend their class about integrative leadership at 5:45 p.m. on Tuesday, April 15, in the Carlson School's 3M Auditorium. Participants will join students for a conversation about human trafficking, which will be based on a case study by global businesswoman and human rights activist Marilyn Carlson Nelson. Download the case study for review in advance. All are welcome.

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/hhhevent/insider/documents/Carlson.Human.Trafficking.Case.Study.pdf

Enjoy Irene

check out this little article on Yahoo about positive and negative responses given by bosses through body language:

http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/career-articles-whatthebossbodylanguage_says-306

This is useful information for anyone who is in a leadership position to consider. Sometimes we can be sending the wrong signal, or speaking in a way that doesn't match our actions, without realizing the perspective of the listener. - nan

Here I am again, asking the dumb question--or at least taking a different viewpoint. So many blog entries and class discussions have been critical of K&P as being too simplistic, too optimistically one-sided, somehow not sufficiently sophisticated or complicated a theory to be useful. Is that true? Is a more complex theory of leadership or change actually a "better" tool? In real world situations, which theory can you recall and apply? What are your results?

For me, K&P provide sufficient "bones" for action, but I am enjoying the challenge of reading the more intricate theories and analyses. But I wonder how these would actually be put into practice. I am probably missing something, being a newbie to this field. Would those of you with a broader leadership experience be willing to weigh in on this?

Thanks - nan

In my opinion, Kouzes and Posner’s weakness is an unfortunate preference for case studies in which a “catalytic leader” dreams about a positive future and turns “her dream into reality,” (p. 104).

This is, in my opinion, overly simplistic, especially in the context of considering their model as described thus far for application in the complex public sector.

I think about my years as a school board member, and wince. It was my great fortune to be elected to serve with five other people who believed in regular retreats, twice annually. There was respect for group process, considerable communication within legal boundaries, many decisions to make in a high-growth district, and diverse abilities and perspectives around the table.

Therefore, when we gathered in 1993 in a retreat to consider a district mission statement that would illuminate the “Excellence, Integrity, and Innovation” mission created with a diverse group of internal stakeholders the year before, it was an exciting time for me as the rookie.

Together with the administrative leadership team, we settled on a mission to help each and every child achieve his or her fullest potential through an individual learning plan. That was the mission statement, virtually verbatim, that was adopted by unanimous consensus. It was a shared statement of imagined possibilities. National and state public policy leaders were rumbling about graduation standards, and, although I don’t recall any of us objecting to the idea, we agreed that our local job was to view any published standards as a floor, not a ceiling, for individual students.

I wasn't sure what the 'Primary Category' would be for this but I thought everyone might find this article interesting in regard to leadership and change.

New York Times February 8, 2008 In Bronx School, Culture Shock, Then Revival By ELISSA GOOTMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/nyregion/08principal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

So last night’s discussion about the course blog was interesting to me because in my job I’ve been considering what a blog’s role in my leadership might be. (That thought grew out of some feedback I got from people about how I share information.) The thought grew from specifically about a blog to more generally: What might be technology’s role in my leadership? I’m sure people “out there” have considered and written about these kinds of questions – I just haven’t taken the time to look into it.

Watching the movie "Whale Rider" elicited some intense feelings deep inside me that I'd long forgotten. The young girl, Pai, reminded me of when I was around her age and feeling very hurt and angry when I was left out of activities or discussions just because I was female.

Male hegemony has overstayed its welcome, in my book, and it's high time the glass ceiling is broken. Unfortunately, I still don't see enough happening; however, I'll take any small strides that come my way. Having said that, it really is up to me to help make change happen. Sitting back certainly hasn't helped - fighting sometimes only had me labeled as too emotional. By enlisting some of the leadership qualities discovered and discussed in our text by Kouzes and Posner, perhaps the movement toward equality will progress at a quicker pace. As stated in Ch. 1 of the text, "All leaders challenge the process." It may not happen in one giant step, but (as the text suggests) "change can happen through incremental steps and small wins...little victories building confidence" that strengthen the commitment to long-term future.

Pai understood true leadership qualities - that leaders need others to also be leaders, as leaders sometimes get tired and need help leading. By all working together, anything is possible. By leaning on each other, gaining knowledge from each other, and leading together, the world can indeed change.