A633.9.3.RB_StevensEric

Most leadership models have the assumption of oligarchy – leadership is done by a few leaders over many followers. If polyarchy is fast replacing the old oligarchy assumptions does this make these old leadership models redundant? Reflecting on traditional leadership from the perspective of complex adaptive leadership, address the implications and how they will affect you as a leader in the future. What impact will they have on your future strategy?

The thought that the old leadership models are becoming redundant is not entirely true. I think that the old leadership model will not be completely replaced given the para military and military organizations. With these organizations I can say that the thought of the leadership style that we have talked about these 9 weeks and introducing it in a military setting is intriguing so say the least. Looking at how Complex Adaptive Leadership has affected me and how I will handle leadership in general I can say without doubt that I had been in a more traditional leadership. The traditional leadership was something that I learned from the military and from the law enforcement field coming from a para military background. The result of this new to me leadership called Complex Adaptive Leadership I will focus more on the Yin Yang theory and what it means to be a leader. Being a leader allows your co-workers to have a degree of autonomy in their work. So for the future I will be more observant of how the team is working as a whole and less on the thought of what I am doing. The team makes you a good leader and when the team performs and does a great job it is so much easier to steer the ship than to have it reverse course or come to a sudden stop.

A633.8.3.RB_StevensEric

• Given the statement above what is it that coaches do to provide value to their clients? The coach provides assurances that they are heading in the right direction and that the client is making the right decisions. Many times the clients are just looking for approval of the actions that they have already chosen to take. • Why is coaching a vital aspect of both leadership and strategy? Coaching allows the leadership to know that the process that they have taken is an appropriate one. The idea of making a wrong decision in how a strategy or vision should go does not often sit very well with the top of any organization. The head of the organization will often have checks in balances in place to ensure a critical mistake does not occur. • How can it make a difference in an organization? Coaching allows the organization some room for error. What I mean is that the leadership does not have to so involved with a decision and if they make a bad decision because the coach will guide them in a good direction. The coach will advise the leadership of an organization on whether critical errors are made and give them suggestions. Not saying that the coach’s job is to run or become a censor of an organization but the coach often allows the leadership to become free thinkers. This will allow the leadership to consider more options on how to proceed with the solution to a problem. • What does this mean to you and your organization? This will give us as an organization more options on how to handle issues. This will instill the confidence booster that some employees inside an organization may need. This is by no means saying that these individuals cannot operate on their own it just allows them to be guided in making the correct decisions

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.