A633.3.3RB_McNerneyLeighAnn

St Lukes Communications is a fairly newer advertising company in the UK who has developed into a polyarchy organization. At St Lukes there is not a hierarchy system in place, rather a more un-formal group of employees following a few simple rules in order to accomplish tasks efficiently. Andy Law is the organization’s cofounder and chairman and he believes the company’s success lies in “the firms determination to continuously reinvent itself in a world populated by dotcoms and mega-ad agencies”. Dotcom and mega-ad agencies are traditional styled companies that fall short of achieving excellence. Andy chooses a very untraditional style of leadership by “carefully managing a paradox: it pushes its people to take enormous risks, but it has built a working environment that feels as safe to its employees as, say, a small-town bank in the 1950s”.

            All of this combined St Lukes has hard and soft aspects that create an environment where creativity flourishes throughout. The company has no bosses and is entirely owned by employees and this is considered normal now to employees who are working at St Lukes, and many believe “this is what the element of fright is all about”. Employees at all levels are constantly being required to evaluate “not only how you perform but also who you are. People tell you exactly what they think of you.” Hearing what people think of you in this type of openness can be a little but difficult to endure. Andy states “Individuals who are used to hiding behind power-or talent-have trouble getting used to it”. This is an effective way I believe to mange employees because it creates a degree of trust and also gives everyone an opportunity to be a coach as well as be coached during their time at St Lukes. (HBR: Creating the Most Frightening Company on Earth)

At Morning Star their strategy is to involve and devolve to keep productions flowing efficiently. Morning Star also practices an polyarchy styled approach and finds that “inefficiency stems from a top-heavy management model that is both cumbersome and costly…As decisions get bigger, the ranks of those able to challenge the decision maker get smaller…it's the hierarchical structure that systematically disempowers lower-level employees.” Morning Star's goal, according to its organizational vision, is to create a company in which all team members "will be self-managing professionals, initiating communications and the coordination of their activities with fellow colleagues, customers, suppliers, and fellow industry participants, absent directives from others." At Morning Star they empower employees to better themselves while bettering the company. Having employees that can take the initiative will not only create a connection based on trust and loyalty, but will foster creativity enabling them to take the company beyond what was originally planned. (HBR: FIRST, LET'S FIRE ALL THE MANAGERS)

Companies like these two are few and far in today’s world as most organizations are stuck in the past of traditional oligarchy strategies, however I believe I work for a more polyarchy structure at ERAU. ERAU enables their employees to better themselves by giving them free education as an incentive. Not only can the employee attend school, but their spouses and dependents can as well. Employees are given many opportunities to grow within the organization as well as they prefer to promote within rather than outsource. ERAU is a very diverse and complex environment, we serve students, teachers and employees globally, valuable skills that they can utilize in their everyday lives. ERAU is current with technologies and we are always advancing and setting the example for others to follow; giving a helping hand to help other colleges when help is needed. ERAU practices upward communication and an open door policy. At all times we have the ability to bring our thoughts and concerns to our managers to gather their input or have an issue resolved.  

Employees at ERAU are given a few simple rules and the four+four principal s is in place to advance employees to a Level 5 Followership. My current director also gives his employees an opportunity to speak up if we dislike a process or asks how we can better it. There is never a moment when I don’t feel appreciated. Although there is still a hierarchy system in place I feel that they are well on the way to continuing to be the example for other universities to follow. Giving employees a chance to learn and expand their current skills gives employees and their managers a chance to see their true potential while also reinforcing their value. Engaging with employees and having a strong relationship also improves efficacy in that employees because they are less fearful to bring their directors any issues that may need to be addressed and also any hiccups that could be fixed prior to them unfolding into a larger disaster. I can foresee ERAU continuing to expand the organization, letting go of more responsibilities to employees so our leadership can focus on bigger tasks to enable us to keep going above and beyond what’s expected.

References

Hamel, G. (2011). FIRST, LET'S FIRE ALL THE MANAGERS. (Cover story). Harvard Business Review, 89(12), 48-60.

Coutu, D. L. (2000). Creating the Most Frightening Company on Earth. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 142-150.

A633.9.3.RB_McNerneyLeighAnn

Personally I have not had a lot of experience as a leader within the work environment, although yes I have moments when I have taken the lead, I have never been in a position of lead. Looking ahead I would eventually like to be a manager of some type within my current organization Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide because I feel like they are already on the verge of polyarchy. However advanced we may be currently there is still traditional mentalities throughout that need to be updated and not changed. What I mean by this is traditional leadership is here to stay, at least for a little while, so as a future leader I need to embrace it and try to start a transformation one person at a time. By embracing it I am understanding the purposes of hierarchy systems and why they have been in place for so long; even dating back to the monarchy in England.

People have always seen order as security. It is appears to me that people typically feel more comfortable knowing others are responsible and will take the fall should they fail. A hierarchy system also gives people the opportunity to critique from afar and without suffering any backlashes. In today’s world technology is taking us beyond any foreseen futures of the traditional method approaches because technology is becoming readily available to everyone on Earth. With the globalization of networking, teams are now the best way to obtain success because they give organizations diversity, commitment, shared sense, common goals and support in order to accomplish difficult tasks.

As a leader my plan is to internalize this class’s lessons on strategy as well as the lessons learned throughout the program and then become a leader I know best, me. Getting to know who I am individually first can best develop me as a leader; getting to know what I stand for, what I want to accomplish, what values I hold to be true, what my morals are, why I have my goals, what I am willing to do to accomplish them, as well as what I will do if I fail. Next I will need to associate myself within the organization and identify what role I will play in the overall picture. I will need to get to know my employees and ask them what they want to change, what they want to keep, what they worry about most, what they want from their leader and anything else that can present an obstacle in the future.

As the leader I will begin to align the goals and create a shared vision for the future. The vision is just an idea so until its put into action it will remain just an idea. Developing a strategy that can benefit employees at all levels will help get the ball rolling and the solicitation of continuous feedback will keep it rolling as the there will be many adjustments made along the way. As the leader I will create a positive environment by keeping it up beat and happy. In order to do this I will need to keep an open door policy for employees to be able to come in and express their thoughts and concerns allowing me time to assess the situation and create deeper relations with all employees. Communication will also be opened up with the door being open as many people when faced with a challenges will feel comfortable bringing the issue to the source so that they can obtain more training, more resources or just express the challenge keeping the me in the lop so I can take the appropriate action to resolve it. This will break any charades that may have existed.

As a leader I will need to foster creativity and innovation through team building activities or fun ways to express new ideas. For example Google has an entire room where their employees can brainstorm in a fun interactive way together building team skills and allowing free thoughts to flow off one another. Fostering creativity innovation and critical thinking skills is just one of the responsibilities of a leader.

This program has taught me that the leader needs to coach employees through the different changes the organization encounters, and they need to build employees skills sets so they are adaptive and quick to respond to the change. They are compassionate and objective and they keep an open mind to all situations they encounter. They can work in complex environments with diverse people and have a global awareness of what’s going on around them. The leader educates employees and lets go of responsibilities so that the employees have the chance to become more proficient. Employees grow on their own while the leader is coaching them along the way.

The leader’s strategy is to go in knowing whom they are and what their weakness and strengths are and then build a team that can accommodate these characteristics adding to the overall equations making it complete. Leaders create a team where everyone is a leader and everyone is a follower supporting one another through the pit falls and successes. Overall there is no specific way to lead except the way in which you lead best is the overall messages I have obtained in the past 9 weeks.

The best way to lead is to do so using what you see others doing successfully while aligning the strategy with ways you could make it possible. Be a good person, do on to others as you would want them to do to you, do not judge any one until you walk a mile in their shoes and understand the dilemmas they are facing day-to- day and then try to make their lives better through education, training, incentives, benefits, resources to do their job better. Overall use your time as a leader to make someone else better and then learn to follow them along the way, and this is the way I hope to lead down the road ahead.

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate

A633.8.3.RB_McNerneyLeighAnn

In my discussion this week I feel I described a coach very well and I want to reiterate this definition before moving on to describing an executive coach’s roles and responsibilities. “Coaching is an important behavior for strategy, organizations and individuals because everyone benefits from the developments. Coaching is not a “one size fits all” (Coaching the ten killer myths) it’s a practice that focuses on the weakness and strengths of the employee, and then concentrates on helping the employee understand why they need to improve and then helps develop ways to improve; while fostering independence. Coaching enables employees to figure out problems on their own which equip them with problem solving skills building confidence and increasing their resourcefulness as well as their critically thinking skills. Coaching increases engagement among employees at all levels increasing opportunities for fluid communication both up and down, breaking the charade because everyone is in the know through feedback. Skills are improved at the employee level which transfers to the overall organizations success. The increased attention on the employee contributes to the value they have and can increase their loyalty to the organization.
Executive coaches perform in similar ways within the business environment. They are coaches brought into an organization to better employee’s professional as well as individual skills in order to increase growth and improve their performances.  They usually are people who have a general understanding of diversity and differences experienced in the workplace and can assess the different challenges with an adaptive style. Once they can meet the employees and get to know what their thoughts and concerns are as well as what motivates them they can begin the coaching technique focusing on specific goals put in place within a \particular time frame. Through open communication channels they can deliver feedback back to upper management and vice versa to the employee in order to break the charades many organizations face.
In a Harvard Business Review: What can coaches do for you? HBR conducted a survey to a 140 leading coaches asking important questions on what their jobs do for people and where their field is going. Of the survey findings the general agreements among all of them was that “most companies engaged a coach to help fix a toxic behavior at the top. Today, most coaching is about developing the capabilities of high-potential performers…executives who get the most out of coaching have a fierce desire to learn and grow” (Harvard business Review). What this means is people getting coached in today’s world are the lower leveled employees all the way up to the executives and through this coaching they are producing employees with leadership characteristics.
Executive coaching has the capabilities of discovering employee’s hidden potentials they didn’t even know existed until they started asking and answering open non-suggestive questions to help them discover these hidden potentials. Michael Norris is an executive coach and he believes that most executive coaches only “skim the surface” when developing employees skills and discovering these unknown attainable qualities. He goes on to suggest that many employees “have no one they can talk to about their dreams and aspirations”. That’s where he comes in an simply gives them the opportunity to talk and all he will do is listen. Throughout the process “Norris tells people what to do (they have to figure that out for themselves), but makes them ‘aware of the choices available” (The Executive Coach).
Throughout my research thus far as well as the reading it is clear to me that leadership depends on coaching and coaching enables effective leadership.

A good leader is one that can create SMART goals with a few simple rules implementing the four + four principles. They can devolve responsibilities enabling each of their employees to have the ability to take the lead. A good leader can ask questions and seek help form others. The leader is able to successfully keep the energy positive and motivating when their employees will falls. A great leader operates with a team mentality and drops titles and focuses on building employees professional and personal skills. They are a coach helping the individuals better themselves and they are resourceful. They lead by example, do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do. A good leader can play the mediator when disagreements arise and foster innovation and creativity. A good leader is someone whom can better the team members for the common good of bettering them, while also keeping focus on the objective at hand. That is why these two roles go hand in hand and rely 100 percent on each other.

Having a leader described above will restructure an organization completely transforming it to become a polyarchy organization. Within this organization everyone builds their skill sets and they all play a part in boosting one another to excel.  The organization can administer clear direction and promote an understanding that can be internalized throughout each employee. Roles are defined and feedback plays a vital role in the operations success. Upper management ensures their employees receive adequate information, training and facilitate knowledge sharing. Employees have common goals and personal goals that can be developed and acquired through their careers with this organization. The overall big picture of what needs to be done is accomplished with the shared vision and cohesiveness runs all the way through. 

My organization relies heavily on the descriptions above and they enforce a modern interactive way of doing it. Through coaching our leadership team is able to raise the bar every year and keep our organization efficient and empowered to continue doing this.

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate
http://hbr.org/2009/01/what-can-coaches-do-for-you
The executive coach. (2006). Management Today, , 84-84. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/214771632?accountid=27203

A633.7.3.RB_McNerneyLeighAnn

In chapter 10 of Complex Adaptive Leadership there is a short quiz called Where are you on the map? And according to the map I am operating from a Participative/Facilitative leadership type on the Situational Leadership model. I scored the highest in the third column which represents a Style 3 (S3) consulting (low structuring, high developing) with 7 points , then following with a score of 5 points in Style 4 (S4) delegating (low structuring, low developing), 2 points in Style 1 (S1) telling (high structuring, low developing) and then only 1 point in Style 2 (S2) selling (high structuring, high developing). I was kind of shocked with my scores because I didn’t realize I rely more on consulting then I do selling, but reviewing the specifics behind each of the styles it makes sense why I scored the highest in S3.

I am very concerned with people; especially if I am working one-on-one with them. I am conscious when they need something I can reach for something before they ask for it and I will adjust the room temperature if I see they are hot. I just like to make people feel as comfortable as I can in order to have their full attention on whatever I am working on with them. One could say that I have a tendency to be accommodating and in tune to their needs so consulting with people seems to have become second nature for me. S3 involves low structuring; “behavior which relates more to the need of the task in hand” and high developing which “relates more to the needs of the relationship with people” (Obolensky, 2010). My concern with others explains why I would focus more on developing good relationships with people then the overall tasks, and also why it’s important for me to consult with others prior to making a decision that affects everyone involved.

The S4 approach is the most effective style; yet seems to be the hardest style to achieve as a leader. S4 types delegate tasks because followers are assumed to be “fully capable to do the task and that they can just get on with it” (Obolensky, 2010).  S4 leaders provide their followers with support through the completion of their tasks while keeping a safe distance so that he or she does not become a distraction of the overall flow of operations. The Situational Leadership model reveals that the S4 style is the point attractor for all the other styles to focus around. The point attractor or reference point guides all other behaviors and keeps everything in line. We learned how this is possible through the readings comparing  complex adaptive leadership to complexity science, but it wasn’t until I witnessed the video with the chaos game in Module 5 that I was able to fully understand how having a reference point is necessary for everyone in an organization to revolve around.

In the game they were given a few simple rules and then were asked to identify silently a reference point, and then make themselves of equal distance. Once the game began everyone was able to complete the task in less than 2 minutes without input from the leader. This is exactly the same way a S4 leader operates, they give their employees a few simple rules and advise them of their responsibilities and let them go to complete their tasks while only coming back in to give them moral support.

Research of the different Styles has established that the S1 and S2 types when paired have yang characteristics in which there is more of a focus on pushing to get things done. The S3 and S4 types when paired have characteristics of a yin leadership approach and they tend to pull from people letting things flow more naturally. S3 and S4 types are more geared to the polyarchy method, but taken as a whole each of the styles is required at different points in time for any leadership role. The goal is be able to be flexible and identify when the necessary tactics should be enforced as well as the correct context in which you are leading in.

Throughout the past 6 weeks I have learned more about leadership then I had ever considered existed prior to taking this class. I have never really thought about the relationships between the leader and the follower being equally effective in enabling one another to succeed. A follower is responsible for their leader’s behavior and vice versa. If the leader’s behavior is negative then the follower has the abilities to take action by becoming a leader themselves setting the example for others to follow. Anyone can truly be the difference and overall it’s the strategy in which you take that makes you successful. In order to become a great leader one needs to drop the hierarchy structure and adapt a polyarchy structure, develop a few simple rules in which everyone can internalize and identify with, maintain the four + four principles and interrelate them to maintain a polyarchy structure when tensions arise, train and positively reinforce employees to reach a level 5 followership, let go so others can take the lead, break the charade through a typical Q&A session, achieve a Taosit state of ‘wu-wei’ and simply accept the that change is the inevitable and it’s in the chaos of the unknown that good happens.

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate

A633.6.5.RB_McNerneyLeighAnn

There is a vicious cycle many leaders face today in their current organization as follows:

The reason this cycle continues to rotate around is because the leader is disabling their employees and the employees are disabling the leader, both parties are involved in a relationship that feeds one another. If this charade doesn’t end soon the organization will face many challenges that could inevitably lead to failure. In my current organization I have witnessed this vicious cycle defined by Nick Obolensky and I identified the negative effects and now understand why it will continue after this weeks readings.

There are multiple departments within Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide that make the success of our organization possible. We have a Marketing Department, Admissions, Advising, Financial Aid, IT, and many other specific departments that I am unaware of all working together in a sort of streamlined way of doing things. We all have our reference points and we all center on making it possible to remain in line with one another. When changes occur we all sense and respond accordingly, so that we can realign and continue functioning. During the recent changes it has become apparent to me that the bubble I have been living in while working in the Financial Aid Department is that not everyone has the same benefits we have and do not work for the same type of leader that we do.

In one department I will not name, I have learned that they are in constant fear of losing their jobs. Their leaders practice a more micromanaged leadership strategy and in doing this all the employees are scared to make independent decisions for fear of the backlashes they could face if the decision was wrong. A normal day constitutes with the vicious cycle pictured above. An employees is given an issue to resolve that they may be unfamiliar with; they then go ask their leader for some guidance on how to resolve the issue at hand. The leader becomes concerned in the employee’s ability to resolve the issue and starts to go behind them and check their work thinking the employee doesn’t know this is happening; however all the employees know it happens because it happens a lot. The employee knows the leader doesn’t trust them and will be going behind their back causes them to over think and over analyze the situation and they become stuck and unable to critically think effectively because they are too busy thinking about their boss coming behind them. They continue to second guess themselves so their leader takes a more hands on micromanaged approach and completes the task for them. Instead of training them they baby them and the employee’s leaves the assignment feeling more confused and less confident in their ability to complete the next issue. When presented with another issue they continue to over think and ask for help and their leader lacks even more confidence and continues getting more involved than necessary. The leader’s own responsibilities fall behind and then they are asked why the department is not operating efficiently.

This is a horrible way to live and I would not want to be a part of this department because the stress alone would make me unable to perform at my best. There’s not empowerment and no motivation and a lack of trust throughout. All the employees continue to feed this negative behavior and same for the leaders. If no one stops this charade then they will never change and get out of this cycle. I feel in order to change, they needs to create a new circle.

With the new circle I have created, I based it off the leadership I am influenced under currently. In the first block I have the follower asking for advice and the leader is able to recognize he/she skill or will level is low and assesses the issue by taking the time to train and motivate. Within this section the leader will recognize the follower is either unmotivated to perform their job and try to find a solution. They will either engage with the employer and find out if they are having a rough day, or are unable to connect with their responsibility or any other challenges. Once they have identified the issues preventing the employee from feeling motivated they can then try and either work with the employee and get them to a more motivated level, or allow that employee to work on a different project that would better suit them. If the employee’s skill level is not up to par they can train and educated them so that they can complete the assigned task successfully. The next section involves having the leader following up with employees and to obtain feedback on how the task was completed and determine if the employee could use some more training. If the employee feels more confident then the leader can move to the next section which involves the leader allowing the employee to learn from process and then the if necessary they can adjust the process to what the employee feels necessary allowing for a bottoms-up  role to unfold. Working hand-in-hand allows the leader and the employee to develop a stronger relationship and trust to be earned by both parties. Once this relationship is developed on a solid foundation on trust the leader can then move to the next section in which they let go of the responsibility allowing the follower to take the lead. The employee feels a sense of empowerment and confidence with the new found freedom. Now the next time the follower feels like they need help they will be more encouraged to take the initiative before asking for help because they will feel more confident in their decision making, and if they need the help they will be more inclined to speak up when the opportunity arises. I feel the only way to break the vicious cycle is for someone to step out and be the first to try. If they can gain the support of their leaders then the leaders will also gain the support from their followers and the department will become more successful.

References:

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (1st edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate