A633.7.3.RB_StevensEric

• Has your thinking changed over the course of the past six weeks, if so; why, and, if not; why? Over the past six weeks my ideal of management and leadership has been changed in a variety of ways. I thought that leadership was a more hands on visual approach. The leader should have been the one to become a role model whom I still understand should be a characteristic. I know have a better understanding that being a leader can take the form of different types of strategies. The leader is more of a facilitator and in this role can be viewed as a role model. I think that using these techniques that I have learned and use them in my role as a supervisor will allow me to begin to stand out in the crowd. • What is the significance of this in the context of your future leadership goals and objectives? This can change some ideas that I have in order to become a more effective leader. I feel that this change will improve my chances in success. The leader and manager are different and a leader can manage effectively and efficiently. The manager who cannot lead cannot manage effective. My objectives will slightly change in the sense that I know what my weaknesses I have and how to overcome these challenges and become a better leader.

A633.6.4.RB_StevensEric

Does this happen in your organization? Unfortunately I can say without a doubt that this vicious circle does exist in my organization. It is sad that the cycle seems to never end as the book alludes to in the module. The vicious cycle in some ways is built into the culture. What are the effects on the organization? The effect this cycle has in my organization is the fact that it harvests an atmosphere of distrust between the supervisors and the subordinates. The subordinates are afraid to make the wrong decision because the supervisors may reprimand them for making a decision without prior approval. In the other side of the coin the supervisors try and say they want the subordinates top think critically. Create a new circle that would promote strong followership and even leadership at the lower levels of the organization So in order to eliminate this vicious circle we open up the lines of communication from top to bottom and vice versa. The followers go into the circle knowing what the supervisors want and how they want it. The supervisors clearly articulate what their expectations are and reverse the flow of information with the subordinates. The subordinates establish what they expect a supervisor to do and they both find a common ground that is beneficial to all parties.

A633.5.3.RB_StevensEric

I particularly found the video interesting and I did not expect the results as it unfolded. I thought that the beginning of the video that the people in the video were going to be unable to find the two partners ass instructed by the facilitator. The start of the video was to me chaos in action with the subject milling about in a pattern that did not seem to make sense. The participants seemed to be lost for the first 20 or 25 seconds and then slow down and then the chaos began to work like a waltz was being performed. This was very interesting to me and I was very surprised when all of a sudden the subjects stopped and began to look around at everyone else. I think this in some ways surprised the subjects who seemed to have satisfaction that they had accomplished this task without direction other than the instructions at the beginning. So with that being said the thought that each of these participants which I am sure had a strategy at the beginning had to adjust. You could see the planned movement in the strategy at first when the exercise began. Then you could see the abandonment of this strategy and the adjustment to accomplish the goal. This to me was a very powerful video which showed without doubt that the individuals worked in unison to achieve their objectives. This occurred in a rather short period of time and this surprised me. This exercise demonstrated that strategy may not work as well as we may have thought and that situations and circumstances change and dictate the necessary response. I thought this was an outstanding exercise and demonstrations of the chaos theory.

A633.4.3.RB_StevensEric

Reflecting on the opening exercise at the beginning of Chapter 4 of the of Obolensky text and other readings, why do you think the shift in leadership is occurring and do you think this is indicative of what is happening in your organization. List three reasons that support or refute this position. I think that leadership is changing to a leadership oriented style instead of the managerial aspect. The change in the way the leadership is looking at the organization as a whole. The change in the dynamics of the decision making process in today’s organization is indicative of the high performance teams and the employees the companies are hiring. The generation Y employees tend to enjoy the results now and the self-gratification of their work. The solutions provided by the employees seem to come from the bottom and middle management predominately. This comes from free thinking employees whose ideas are becoming more vocal. I would like to say that this style of leadership would be great in my organization but the reality of the leadership is not indicative of what is actually is occurring in the organization. Some of the reasons this is not occurring inside my organization is one the change in the leadership structure has not changed in the flattening of the chain of command. The leadership in the organization has actually increased the layers of beaurcracy have been increased. The second reason that my organization has not made great strides in the solutions is the upper management has become disengaged in ideas from below the senior middle management level. The third reason is the issue with the line employee’s level of communication and cooperation with the upper management’s directives. The line employees have learned that senior management employees have almost made demands in the communication of their desired results. The line employees have learned to manipulate the way these communication goals and strategies are conducted. If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes? What are the implications on strategy? In order to smooth out the communication issues and to allow all solutions to be considered the administration along with the line employees the upper management should regain the trust of the line employees. The line employees should have an open communication and an understanding of what each desires and how they both can operate in an equal solution process. The implications of this strategy is if the upper management and line employees come together then the chance for motivated and dedicated employees to excel in providing the solution that will work for all parties.

A633.2.3.RB_StevensEric

Find a company which reflects Morning Star and St Luke’s image of a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) and reflect in your blog what the implications are for you and your present organization (or any organization you are familiar with). Identify what you believe are appropriate actions to move your organization forward. When we look at the complex adaptive system in a sense of whether this is the way the future of organizations should go some may ask if this is truly the right path to take. The idea of flattening the hierarchy and allowing the employees to virtually run the company themselves through different high performance teams this may sound a little off base. The complexity science is made to be operated on the edge of chaos and the results that have been found have been beneficial for this type of management. With that being said the CAS is not saying that no one should be in charge of payroll, hiring, and firing. CAS is saying that when the need arises special teams form and handle specific issues that would move the organization forward. I work in the public sector of a government employer and when I read the CAS method I wonder if that would work in my job. The one thing that I can definitely say is that my agency still works under the Silo style of leadership where one person remains in constant control of the decisions the organization faces. The idea that the organization is very top heavy with administrators to say the least is true. For an agency of 5,000 we have over 400 administrators moving up from the line employee. In using the steps of the CAS Organization I can see that the organization as a whole can improve on how the current state of the organization is now and what direction the organization should head in. The flattening of the organizational chart dramatically would improve communication fron the bottom to the top and the flow of ideas and suggestions would be greatly improved. I think over a period of several years the transition of bottom up and top down dynamic can be achieved. With everything the slow implementation of change will cause less of a rejection from the embedded culture that is already in place.

A633.2.3.RB_StevensEric

Based on this week's reading, reflect on complexity science and theory in organizations and the butterfly effect (p.66). Identify 2 examples where “small changes yield large results” in your organization. What are the implication of complexity theory for you and your organization and how can you use this to drive improvements. The complexititey of organizations to run effectively and efficently often sounds like a small task once the organziation has set goals. In some workplaces the ideal that trying to balance the needs of the company and the needs of the employees sometimes seem it can be lost in the rift of time. Over time when the needs of one of or the other are forgotten to a degree or overlooked the chain reaction of events can be hard but not difficult to change. The introduction of complexity science in the leadership role of the organization introduces all aspect of the organization coming together for one goal or cause. Reflecting on what this means for an organization and how this theory of complexiity yet simple philosphy of management can for some challenge everything that they may have known or thought they knew about leadership. I for one can say that I have opened my eyes to the possibility that the complexity of leadership is not complex at all but simple. The merging of these ideals into one cascading effect which leads to the idea of the butterfly effect. With one simple change it can have a dramatic effect on the organization as a whole. I work in a field where changes are ever evolving because of court decisions, i.e. case law or changes in statutory law, or the method of operation. One change that we as a whole in the organization has experienced was one additional process of logging into our data base which the change was an added security feature. This simple change has dramatically changed the was we as an organization operates. This extra step has improved greater accountability of each employee to do the right thing. This change keeps employees on track and the effectiveness of the programs that run off of this added feature have improved with less errors or misuse of data. The second change is the addition of manpower to a unit that has caused a resonating effect throughout the entire organization. The addition of more employees which caused the workload of the organization to be more evenly spread out. The morale of the organization has improved and with this improvement come greater productivity.

A633.1.2RB_StevensEric

When I look back at the idea of what a leader's role is and how I view the leader it has changed over the past several years especially. My attitude toward leaders has changed greatly over the lifetime and especially the last several years. I have learned several valuable things over the past several years which I can say has come from experience and educational learning. I originally thought that leadership and management were relatively the same thing.The idea that a leader is a natural ability that some may have stated in the past and the thought that leadership cannot be taught. I do believe that leadership can be a tool that is taught with proper guidance and instruction. Leadership in my own perspective has changed for the reason that leaders are individuals who have a understanding of what the employees and fellow co-workers need and desire.

If we look back at what our grandparents experienced in leadership roles we can see a fundamental difference between what they had and what is happening today. The leader of yesteryear was the type of leader who led in more of an authoritative style and the directives that they issued were not second guessed. The leaders of today have become a team player and have developed a method of a sense of joint leadership corroboration with the workers and allowed the workers to have an active role in the leadership process. The leaders of today are looking for an immediate results and returns on the work that they are providing. The leaders of today have the technological advantage and they have an increased critical thinking ability as a whole. With that being said does that make the leaders of today better than our grandparents? The answer for me is no because the leaders 50 years ago were faced with different challenges and the technology that was at hand was different.

I believe this fundamental change has occurred because of the improvement in communication and technology. The increase in the educational opportunities that has become available to society has allowed many things to become transparent in the leadership role. The improvement of these has allowed the average worker to become more of a free thinker and want to become more involved in the decision making process. The idea of being an important part of the team has become a way of life in the workers of today. The Generation Y workers of today are looking for immediate acknowledgement or feedback on the work they have supplied. The Gen Y workers have a very focused ability to get the job done and they want it done now. The generation as a whole is more technological savvy then the baby boomers. This can be attributed to the culture of today.

The gap in the leadership of today can be attributed to conflicting ideas on how leadership should be defined. The definition of leaders can be interpreted several different ways according to the source you are researching. The market for leadership training and all the corners of the market so many people claim to have can be a reason why leadership quality can be identified. The leaders who are providing this training may use tactics that have not been fully tested and explored. With this lack of experience the curriculum and quality of training may have serious flaws.