Friday, February 14, 2014

Heart of Leadership


by Dr. Denise Trudeau Poskas
At the heart of effective leadership is skillful strategic followership.  Trying to understand how influences of both the leader and the follower impact leadership effectiveness, leader-member exchange (LMX) theory has focused on the development and effects of this relationship (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1999).  Strategic followership is a philosophy of allowing this relationship to have flexibility in context.  By this, it means the leader realizes that the leader/follower relationship is the key to effectiveness. Strategic followership means the leader allows themselves to at times guide the follower while other times, allowing the follower to have more autonomy.
 
(Image via Shutterstock.)
Leaders lead better also when they understand active followership. By placing themselves in the role of followers when applicable a leader relinquishes the need to oversee everything and learns the value of empowering others resourcefulness.  Whether we lead or follow, we are responsible for our actions and influence” Chaleff.  Leaders that embrace strategic followership rely on communication, resourcefulness, encouragement and accountability.  They determine to what extent their followers need autonomy.  In order to practice strategic followership there are four strategies:
  1. Assess what you do well
  2. Know your limitations
  3. Surround yourself with people who are exceptional at what you are not
  4. Choose Boundaries
At the heart of leadership is understanding the importance of surrounding yourself with active, empowered followers that can move the mission forward.  This requires all to know their resources, develop skills, and work together for effective change.

Monday, February 10, 2014

Perspective Changing


by Dr. Denise Trudeau Poskas

Effective leadership revolves around the understanding of perspectives.  Everyone has them and most people like to keep their perspectives.  One of the first things I learned in graduate school in Psychology is that everyone believes their perspective is reality.  Albert Ellis said that, and it is so very helpful to remember when dealing with others.

(Image via Shutterstock.) 

I am reminded just how perspectives at time can be faulty, yet individuals still remain insistent on keeping that perspective.  Case in point; not long ago I was sitting in the airport waiting for my flight.  I am not keen on lay-overs, but they happen, so I spend that time either reading or chatting with fellow passengers. 

One particular passenger; a nice man, early thirties, career oriented, from the East Coast leaned over to strike a conversation.  When he asked where I was from and I mentioned Minnesota, he got a smile on his face and looked at me in disbelief.  “Well you do not have the accent”.   
 
And what type of accent would that be?”  
 
“You know… ‘yah bet chah!’”  He then proceeded to run through a few phrases emulating an unique imitation of an accent that I begrudgingly realized where he got it from.  Let me guess, you watched Fargo.”   
 
“Yes!” he exclaimed in such a manner it was as though his research of dialogue was an extension of a PhD in Linguistics.  
 
 “That stupid movie!” I thought.  “You do realize that movie was not real?  That Fargo is not even in Minnesota?  That they exaggerated most everything in the movie especially the accents?  You realize that, right?” 

I had never actually watched “Fargo” it until this year, and only because I had heard the same perspective connecting Minnesotans to that movie.  The guy sat back in true disbelief “You are kidding!  It says the story is based on true events!  I just believed that is how you guys talked”.  
No,” I said.  “Not accurate.  And believe it or not… people cannot fit down a wood chipper,”  I said with a smile.   
He sat back again.  “Well, have you always lived in Minnesota?” he asked.  I could see he was still reluctant to give up his perspective, even though it was based on one movie made many years ago with entirely exaggerated, stereotyped information.  It created a perspective about all people in Minnesota.   
 
“No, actually, I spent half my life living in other states.”   
 
A smile came back on his face, “Oh that explains it!”   
 
Explains what?  

"Well you would have that accent if you lived in Minnesota all your life”.  He sat back, relaxed into his seat, feeling justified and happy he did not have to give up his perspective.  
 
So I sighed and thought, “Everyone believes their perspective is reality.”
  

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Creating Change in Organizations


by Dr. Denise Trudeau Poskas

Organizations frequently find themselves debating the depth and breadth of change that is needed to make and how those decisions must be made.  Change can be discussed in decision making terms.  All this change requires decision making processes and a strategy to resolve issues, plan ahead and implement proactive ways to embrace change.  All too often this change is threatening to organizations and thus meets with resistance, fear or denial.  Change and change strategies requires opinions and participation of many people at different levels of hierarchy.  The decision-making process in an organization should be structured and resolved in a formal, detailed, consistent, and transparent manner.
 

(Image via Shutterstock.)

There are always external factors that stimulate the need for strategy.  World financial crises provoked by financial speculators have made it clear that the practical and theoretical knowledge in economy or finance are only the starting background to confront the market of financial speculation (Shimizu, 2006).  Some barriers to change come from problems such as the globalization of the world economy, the need to manage the environment, combat poverty, etc., affect an organization's choice of strategy.

Change tools can include strategic decision making models.  Simon (1997) stresses that the solution to any decision problems in the business, scientific, or artistic areas can be visualized in four stages:
  1. The perception of the need for a decision or an opportunity.
  2. The formulation of action alternatives.
  3. The evaluation of the alternatives in terms of their respective contributions.
  4. The choice of one or more activities to be carried out.
The authors also discuss that one can look at change through analysis.  Thus, in addition to making the best decision about the strategy at the time, the company might also like to know the other possible decision alternatives.  The company could be content with a good decision within its possibilities or, the second-best decision might be more appropriate.

In addition, a decision about any one type of problem requiring change can be differentiated by the level of decision:  
  • Strategic (usually, a decision for two to five years)
  • Tactical (decision for a few months up to two years)
  • Operational (a few days or a few months)
  • Dispatching (an "in loco" decision just for some hours)
Developing strategies in organizations requires the use of wide and deep participation of organizational intelligence.  Research on strategic organizational decision-making seeks techniques for improving the intelligence of actions by organizational decision-makers.
  
Changing a culture is a large-scale undertaking, and eventually all of the organizational tools for changing minds will need to be put in play.  In general, the most successful change strategy is to begin with leadership tools, including a vision or story of the future, cement the change in place with management tools, such as role definitions, measurement and control systems, and use the pure power tools of coercion and punishments as a last resort, when all else fails.  For example, leaders can use tools such as negotiating, decision making, and strategy for change.  Managers have tools that can promote change through incentives, control systems, policies and communication factors (Shimizu, 2006).

As change is a whole systems approach, it is important that organizations look carefully at creating a harmonic, effective and strategic change.



References

Denning, S. (2011). How do you change an organizational culture? Forbes Magazine. Retrieved online at forbes.com.
 
Shimizu, T., Monteiro de Carvalho, M., & Laurindo, F. (2006). Strategic Alignment Process and Decision Support Systems: Theory and Case Studies. IGI Global. Retrieved from Books 24x7
 

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Our New Website is Now Live


BlueEggLeadership.com

Check out our new website at www.BlueEggLeadership.com!  Bookmark us or add to us to your favorites list for leadership that shapes your life!  Feel free to comment below or share this link with others.  We look forward to serving you with an engaging approach through our
Triad Solution.
  
-Blue Egg Leadership