|
|
Lesson 13 - Strategic Leadership in the 21st Century
For DLO 1: Contrast key leadership factors for strategic, organizational, and direct levels.
The five P’s, people, purpose, pride, professionalism and product, are interrelated and significant in that they are synergistic and require each piece for the model to work. People are paramount for the success of an organization and by taking care of them (care, feeding, growth, etc.) you will instill sense of commitment. This in turn will drive the leader to recognize the various purposes and meld them into a common organizational purpose (mission) that transcends their own personal ones. You can’t ignore the personal ones and the challenge for a leader is to address them in such a way to build esprit de corps and individual motivation. People need to have a sense of purpose and belonging and this is manifested through having pride in their work and their unit. Excellent leaders recognize this and need to promote a climate that produces pride. Professionalism is borne through instilling and requiring adherence to certain norms of behavior, a commitment to excellence, and high standards. Only through living these requirements and actually following them can a leader instill a sense of professionalism. A good organization will be able to focus on what their product is and provide a means of how it can be measured to determine performance. It can be as innocuous as a few goals, but for it to work the people must have a purpose that they are proud of and can professionally execute. This is how they relate and why they fail if they are apart or if one is accentuated at the expense of the others.
Effective leaders are those who add value by undertaking responsibilities for which they are uniquely qualified, either by virtue of unique talents or the positions they occupy. They look ahead, generally focusing more on next steps than on current operations, and this is increasingly so at the higher levels of most organizations. They balance and reconcile the competing values of those who are critical to the pursuit of current and future goals, and they understand who is and is not critical. The are the umpires/referees mediating conflict and reconciling competing interest within their sphere of influence as well as fostering debate using it constructively to promote broad based support. They understand both their stated and operating values, and strive to reduce discrepancies and play fair themselves. They create leadership climates enabling members to see purpose in their lives and fulfillment in their work. They teach to enable others to achieve their potential and represent their organizations well both internally and externally. Lastly, they understand competitive advantage and have the capacity to enhance the competitive advantage of their organizations.
At higher levels, requirements are less clear, problems are less defined, and there are situations where developed procedures or precedents do not exist.
Strategic leadership is about defining elements of strategy and bringing strategies to fruition. Strategic decisions must be made under conditions of uncertainty, in a volatile strategic environment, containing a great deal of complexity, where many key events are or may be ambiguous. At lower levels problems tend to be more straightforward and amenable to technical solutions, but those at higher levels demand more sophisticated perspectives and skills. Strategic leaders must also be skillful at working in a collegial, but, at the same time, competitive environment where each member bids for a share of limited resources. Although they compete with one another, they also rely on each other to reduce uncertainty and to build consensus and shared vision.
DLO 2: Summarize the USAF strategic planning process and characterize the role of the senior leader in strategic planning.
This question will have to be answered by each individual as it is based on the individual’s experience and opinion. You can garner best practices if they are relevant to the particular process, mission or procedural uses of the military. The military is different in that many of our "products" don’t always appear to have tangible customers until we are directed to use them by competent authority. However, much of the work we accomplish to maintain our prowess is actually mirrored in the private sector and we can benefit from some of their experiences. The danger for the military is that when we determine to institute a service wide initiative we tend to alienate the whole force by not properly educating the masses and setting up a new "office" to measure expected results which leads to overkill and resistance.
The strategic planning model is not intended to be a static model; it is intended to provide constant evolution via the periodic and annual reviews or metrics and other data. This information goes into the next planning cycle that begins the strategic planning process all over again. It starts with mission analysis, envisioning the future, assessing current capabilities, providing gap analysis (progress required to move the organization from where it is to where it needs to be), strategic goal setting, developing and then implementing action plans (then back to periodic and annual reviews).
During the deployment phase ensure buy-in by all parties by maintaining 2-way communication by using a technique called "catchball". This is a give-and-take dialogue within the organization until everyone understands the desired focus of the organization. Each level of the organization should, in turn, develop goals, objectives, and action plans to support the overall goals. Without vision, an organization is merely existing. Vision allows the strategic planning process to be proactive rather than reactive. Leaders need to involve all levels and engage them in making the vision a reality by setting goals and objectives. They need to recognize and reward those who excel and not punish, but assist those who lag.
DLO 3: Summarize MBTI theory, background, and application.
The surveys provide an insight into the character and temperament traits of individuals. Being forearmed with this knowledge about oneself will provide a clue as to how you will likely act or respond to various situations and whether or not you are temperamentally suited to a particular position. As an example, ESTJs are not particularly well suited to organizations that require a nurturing "touchy-feely" type of individual while INFPs would not do well in a regimented organization. The same holds true for how each type will build a team. Knowing your strengths will allow you to tailor your team to take advantage of those strengths (i.e., ESTJs like to build around traditions).
Yes it does because you can use the survey results to manipulate a person to affect an outcome in an artificial and insincere way. Though we are tasked with many challenges, leadership is the ability to get people to accomplish things that they don’t want to sometimes in a coercive, but usually a duty bound manner. This is accomplished through rank and authority or presence of personality. Using the theory to understand somebody or possible group dynamics is fine, but using them to purposefully manipulate people to achieve your goals borders on abuse and is deceptive. A leader’s preferences, based on their personality in most cases, affects how they interact with individuals, groups and organizational decision-making.
As an example: ESTJ or "Supervisor Guardian" is identified by following rules and procedures and ensuring others also follow the rules and procedures. Firmly rooted in doing by experience, ESTJs seldom speculate or experiment.
This description will cause us to expect interactions between an ESTJ and individuals within the organization to be follow traditional lines. The same can be said about their interaction with groups and their organizational decision-making will also tend to follow more traditional solutions or remedies.
DLO 4: Describe the influence of culture on a military organization and its impact on change.
Culture is one part of two (climate the other) factors that determine the personality of an organization and harder to change. Factors such as conflicting demands of key constituents, fundamental differences in how things should be run, environmental challenges, and loss of competitive advantage are all indicators that culture needs to evolve. Another important factor to consider is the organization’s values because they drive behavior, which in turn defines the organization’s culture. When the organization’s values are being compromised, ignored or altered to allow a lesser degree of performance, the culture is being undermined and eroded to the point where it no longer represents the whole.
It would be more advantageous to work within an existing organizational framework when the change you are trying to institute is relevant to that particular framework. As was the case with then LT Sims in the last reading, his advocacy of the "new" naval gunfire aiming innovation was of no use to any other organization other than the Navy. Another consideration is that working within the framework will generally be seen as being a team player or organization advocate working internally to change the organization. Sims tried to work within the framework until he was totally frustrated by the bureaucracy and outright arrogance of the hierarchy within the Bureau of Ordnance and ultimately the Navy itself. Only then did he work external to the organization (President Teddy Roosevelt who had been SECNAV) to gain recognition of with his results with the new innovation.
Cultural change needs to be sponsored or driven by an individual or group that has the organizational power or capital to advocate change and engage the organization to educate and involve them. Sims was considered a deviant because he was a low-level officer, far from the center of power and intolerant of working within the framework of the organization, i.e., he rejected the absolute loyalty and obedience demanded by the hierarchy regardless how misguided they were. Change also needs to address a pressing problem within the organization, otherwise it will be seen as another useless program sponsored. If change threatens to change how people conduct business or the culture they’ve grown accustomed too, they will naturally be suspicious of it. Change can shift the balance of power within an organization creating animosity as well as friction among the players involved. Lastly, the self-importance of the organization can also lead to its inability to recognize its own shortcomings and termination of any perceived challenges to their authority/expertise no matter the significance or possibility for innovation. Organizations that handle these difficulties by addressing them openly, honestly and consistently tend to be successful in implementing cultural change.