A633.4.3.RB - Changing Dynamics of Leadership

A633.4.3.RB - Changing Dynamics of Leadership

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.

If so, how would leadership dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes?  What are the implications on strategy?

So…for the exercise at the beginning of chapter four, I indicated that of 100 percent of the solutions that actually make a difference to the workforce, 0% originated at the top.  Here’s why:

When I worked at Skin & Spar in Frederickson in Boeing’s Fabrication division, we got a new director about once every 18 months. It seemed that Skin & Spar was one of those assignments that directors took so they could claim experience in fabrication for their loftier goals of becoming VPs and more senior leaders. We got a new director in the spring of 2014. He was not a Boeing insider and had come from the world of trains and General Electric. In one of the first “All Team” meetings with him, he showed us all the inverted leadership triangle. He talked about “servant leaders” and removing roadblocks for us. I was so hopeful. I had heard these things before but this director seemed so honest and sincere. He talked about how he understood who did the real work and that he and his leadership team were primarily there to remove any roadblocks that kept us from being successful. This all made so much sense to me! Of course! That is exactly what senior managers should be doing…they have the authority to remove obstacles that the regular workforce just didn’t. It made so much sense to me! Finally a director who got it right! I was cautiously optimistic.

As the months went on, it was beginning to appear that our biggest roadblock to success was actually this new director. He did the exact opposite of the things he said he was going to do and the workforce became even more jaded. When he had been with our organization for about 9 months, he was promoted to site supervisor over all of Skin & Spar. Another new director was installed, this time a woman, and we all hoped this guy would be like the site supervisor he replaced…rarely seen or heard from. That was not the case. He still came to all of the meetings and board walks in the shop…making each meeting at least 30 minutes longer than it needed to be. He saw himself as a great teacher and liked to tell us parables about trees and sheep and rocks in a stream…it all became very ridiculous but no one said anything. One time, in a project review meeting, where the director was not present, we were going over the list of things that we were concerned about and it was all dancing around this central thing…so I said it. “Well someone needs to tell the emperor that he’s not wearing any clothes.” This statement was met with some laughter and some nods of agreement. Either way, it went on the meeting notes. I don’t know what ever came of it because shortly after that, I transferred to South Carolina where I am now. (It was by choice…haha!)  

The idea of stopping the charades is so refreshing to me. The idea of having leadership admitting that they need the workforce’s knowledge to be successful would be a powerful message to send to the employees and their middle management. The expectations for everyone would change! “So the fact is those at the top do not know the solutions to the problems faced by the organizations they lead. And generally speaking, they know that they do not know. However, they cannot say that they do not know.” (Obolensky, 2015) It would be such a relief to senior management to be able to confer with SMEs and actually get problems solved. Suddenly, the shop would have to take responsibility for parts shortages or for why they aren’t receiving their kits on time. The problems would bubble up from the bottom and have to be sorted out by the SMEs – not management. The idea that the workforce has to be dependent on themselves for solutions would be amazing and it would force people to think critically about how their work impacts other areas in the factory. Right now, because it’s easier to just blame problems on management and in response, management and senior leaders seem to think they need to fix the problems…because if THEY can’t figure it out…well…who can? It becomes a game of sorts and then nothing actually gets fixed. “Meanwhile those at the bottom of the organization are just as culpable. They know the solutions (or most of them). They also intuitively know that the people at the top do not know.” (Obolensky, 2015)

This brings me back to that inverted leadership triangle. What that director said was correct. Senior management should be there to remove roadblocks. The implications on strategy is that they don’t need to know what the roadblocks are before anyone else…that’s the responsibility of the workforce. The people who see the roadblocks need to communicate up and then senior leadership needs to act on this problem in a collaborative manner. I do think it is indicative of what is just starting to happen in my organization...just peeping out from behind the door is a realization that things have to change. The strategy becomes about fixing the organization and changing the culture and not about who can hold out longer in a power struggle.

References:

Obolensky, N. (2015). Complex Adaptive Leadership. Farnham, Surrey, England: Gower Publishing Limited.