Polyarchy Reflections

Once again we have come to the end of another phenomenal opportunity to learn more about Leadership. These past 9 weeks we have covered a considerable amount of information relating to the strategic applications and concepts of leadership development.We have uncovered a historic path leadership and it's many forms have traveled in the transformation from traditional and oligarchical roots to the more complex and adaptive nature defining today's (and tomorrow's) organizations. The times are most definitely a'changing.

The main point to understanding history, of anything, is to understand the journey involved. Where we are today is a product of where we have been and the mistakes and triumphs of the past. Where we are today is the foundation for the direction we are going. The history of leadership is no different. This history of leadership is intertwined with the history of organizational structure in the developed world. However, I would be more apt to state that leadership development was more reactive to the evolution of organizations through industrial revolutions and innovation. Now... in a more complex world with advancements moving at break-neck speeds the two histories are a closer resemblance of a symbiotic relationship. What we now know of leadership and its many faces is reflective of a fluid and adaptive nature of business and social structures.

The genie can not go back in the bottle. We will see less and less of oligarchic, hierarchical organizations as they become obsolete. Polyarchic and flat organizations make more sense to be adaptable to rapidly changing environments. Communication and speed are married to advancement, and adaptability is the new norm. Be fluid or be stagnant, and this is true for so many different types of organizations.

For me, as I move forward  into the next phase of my life with my Navy career in my rear-view mirror I, like many, embrace the uncertain future ahead. Uncertainty is no longer to be feared, but welcomed. Uncertainty is the breeding ground for creativity and opportunity. My next adventure will be running a small business retail store with a variety of products designed to enhance the out-door lifestyles of suburban America. I have an opportunity to build upon an established market and find new ways to bring our products to people. We will also be creating jobs as we grow our business. I have a tremendous mentor and leader that has not only embodied the true nature of entrepreneurship, but has plans to take his business to a new level. He has a grand strategy and I will be a part of making his vision happen. We will create and build and grow. We will adapt and overcome... and we will bring many people with us.

The future is bright, and my journey into the complex adaptive nature of leadership has just begun.

JP signing off for Strategic Leadership

How do Coaches Help?

"To be an executive coach, it is necessary to know that clients are the first and best expert capable of solving their own problems and achieving their own ambitions, that is precisely the main reason why clients are motivated to call on a coach. When clients bring important issues to a coach, they already made a complete inventory of their personal or professional issues and of all possible options. Clients have already tried working out their issues alone, and have not succeeded."

 When in doubt ask the Coach. I learned this lesson as a child playing organized sports in South Texas. It was a valuable lesson for me to learn because it taught me to incorporate a student mentality when I just didn't know or understand whatever it was I was up against. It is a scary feeling to not know while people are depending on you to make a play (or decision)... so you ask someone who knows.

Now, there is a grand canyon sized difference in making a bad decision at the little league field and not being sure about a business decision that could cost you valuable time and money... or both. However, the need for a good coach to rely on is exactly the same.

Before I joined the Navy I sold cars for a living. Now, I am fully aware of the bad rap car guys have in the industry (and some of them rightly earned). Tricksters, liars, swindlers. Ironically, this is exactly the reason I decided to enter that industry. I was stuck in traffic in downtown San Antonio one afternoon looking around at all the cars contributing to a  five-lane parking lot and the thought entered my mind "Someone sold everyone of these cars to these people at some point and time... and a commission was paid in return." Why not me?

I never had to lie, cheat, or steal to sell a car. Instead I took an approach as a kind of coach to every new person I helped solve a problem. They needed a car, truck, or SUV and I had cars, trucks, and SUVs for sale. It was just a matter of asking a few discovery questions and leading them to what they want to buy.

Buying a car can be a highly stressful scenario. After all, there is usually tens of thousands (and sometimes hundreds of thousands when I sold Benzes in LA) at stake. A bad decision could land you in the wrong car for a long time. For me, I felt is was my responsibility to know as much as I could about the vehicles, financing options, and the entire sales process. Why? So I could help people make an informed decision and be happy parting ways with their hard earned money. In return I made a very nice living (until the economic crash of 2008... but that is a different story). After a few years selling cars I discovered the majority of my sells were from repeat and referral customers. They trusted me to take care of their needs and I treated them like family.

Being a good coach means providing those in need with tools they can use to find solutions they seek. It does not ever mean doing for others what they can't do for themselves. There is a student-teacher relationship between coach and coachee. Customers, or clients, or whomever is in need of help can help themselves out by seeking out someone who knows the answers. We all can understand that feeling of making the right decision based on knowledge we acquired from a really good coach. We earned something, and learned something that made us more informed, better prepared, and more capable than we were before we met Coach.

In relation to strategy and leadership coaching is a vital component. Both strategy and leadership can have certain unseen twists and turns that create barriers to the overall success of the mission, or goal. Having a good coach in an organization can make all the difference in the world to successful goal accomplishment and painful learning lessons. When we don't know... we ask Coach.

In my current organization, the Navy, we thrive on the coach/coachee cycle. Typically, we spend between 3 and 5 years at a particular duty station. This means we have 3 to 5 years to get as many qualifications as we can before we rotate to the next stop. Therefore, we Sailors are always somewhere in the coach/coachee cycle. Typically, but not always, we can't move on to the next qualification until we effectively train our replacement. This is how we have standardized our jobs. We can do the same qualifications in the Red Sea that we learned in San Diego. We have mastered this cycle and we have well trained coaches at every duty station in the reach of the US Navy.

So, to recap... whether you are learning to play organized sports, or run a mutli-billion dollar industry you need to have a good coach to rely on. There is always something to learn and always someone to learn it from. If you find yourself out of new things to learn then you have just graduated to the coveted position of Coach. Now pass it on!

Leader Follower Relationship

Throughout these past few weeks I have dug a little deeper in discovery of complex and adaptive leadership. At the beginning of this course I was probably a tad more focused on the aspects of leadership that I could improve upon to become more effective. However, I am understanding now how the leadership-follower dynamic is really the driving force in the give and take relationships of complex organizations. In other words,good leaders need good followers and great followers make great leaders.

My understanding of strategy in leadership has developed as well. Strategy is the long term vision of an organization which requires leadership and guidance. Tactics may change in the course of strategic accomplishment and so should leadership. It is an adaptive dance that ebbs and flows with the needs of the whole. Leadership is cultivation towards a desired end. It answers the question how do we get there? Leadership is bringing out the best in people through shared experiences and application, or showing the way to gain maximum results. A true leaders is a catalyst in the overall grand scheme of things.

My future aspirations as a leader is rooted deep in my desire to help others reach their potential. The one true, universal truth I encapsulate is that we can always be doing something to better ourselves, and in turn better those around us. Ultimately, we create a better environment for ourselves as we improve and grow.

In the next few months I will be traversing another major life change. I will be leaving my Naval Service and taking a job as a general manager of a flourishing retail store in south Texas. I have big plans to improve some processes that are not quite where they need to be, developing brand strategies and marketing concepts for amazing products, and cultivating a sales and installation force. For the first time in my professional career I will be solely responsible for uncovering the true worth of a market. The excitement is almost distracting to my current duties as I finish up my duties, and I will be using every bit of knowledge I have acquired as a leader to make the most of this opportunity. 

There is a lot of uncertainty in complex adaptive leadership. before immersing myself in this Master's in Leadership Degree I may have had some apprehension to such an uncertain future. Thankfully I have learned to embrace the unknown and use it to create. I have learned to humble myself and value the experiences of others. Most importantly, I believe that I can succeed. This burning desire to grow and prosper will be the very foundation I use to build my office, policies, and future endeavors with an amazing company. I will be a great follower. I will be a great leader.

JP

Circle of Leadership

Nick Obolensky describes a vicious circle of "followers and leaders" in chapter 9 of his book Complex Adaptive Leadership.  This cycle is dependent on the skill and will of the followers and the responses of leadership. Below is the diagram depicting a cycle most of us can relate to in the complex organizations we live in.

This vicious cycle is the result of failing to understand the four-square model between skill and will as depicted below. 

We as leaders depend on both skill and will of our people so we may live and work that utopia we so earnestly yearn for. This utopia consists of highly skilled people who are motivated to do their best work... all the time. Unfortunately, this is not always the case (hence the suggestions in the four-square above). 

We have all seen the new guy show up rip-roaring and ready to go. The problem... he has no idea what he is doing. High motivation (or will) with low skill will need a lot of guidance, teaching, and training. On the other side of the spectrum we have seen that person who has all the knowledge, skills, and experience, but is just not plugged in. Now, leadership needs to take that proactive approach and figure out what will motivate this person to reengage and continue to produce at their expected level, or train his replacement.

In the Navy I have seen all aspects of this circle. However, because of our highly fluctuating environment with people always coming and going we have developed a standardized training process. We are constantly working on our qualifications with Performance Qualifications Standards, or PQS's, that outline from start to finish a particular aspect of a job, watch, or process. Everyone uses the PQS system in the Navy, from SEALs to cooks. Once you have finished up and completed all the required signatures for a specific PQS you may be required to take a test or oral board to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter. Pass that, and you are now officially qualified (with a few higher ranking signatures and approvals of course). 

We essentially have three levels of training. These are trainee, new qual, and experienced qual/trainer. You usually do not move on to the next qualification without training your replacement, and everyone should know a few different jobs incase someone goes down. The mission will continue. Depending on how technical, engaging, or interesting your job is, in the Navy you will have a high probability of finding the burned-out, highly experienced, but ultra-low motivated Sailor. Why does this happen? Usually he or she has trained enough people to move themselves into a supervisory role, or they are anxiously awaiting transfer orders in which case their training has stopped (no more qualifications). either way, once they reach their next destination they will begin the PQS process all over again.

Looking back on Obolensky's vicious circle of leadership I can see a few minor tweaks that a leader can use to avoid this trap. First of all, as a leader we need to know and understand the composition of those we lead. We should have a good working knowledge of the skills, and a solid grasp of the wills. These are what we are looking for to make the process run smoothly. Another thing that can help us from not spinning our wheels is open and honest communication. Our low skill folks need to feel comfortable asking questions and seeking information. Our low will folks need to feel comfortable discussing their lack of motivation. And leadership should actively listen!

Below is a more efficient circle of leadership. One where continuous confidence building and mutual trust spin the gears. 

This is the ultimate goal of an organization. Steady production with efficiency for all. A balance between the rule makers and advice givers, leaders and followers, and the yin and yang of an organization.

JP

Reflections on Chaos

There is an exercise designed to open your mind and gain insight to how complexity can work in a group setting. This exercise, or game, can be played with 8 - 80 people, has established boundaries and rules, and purposefully leaves the participants guessing as to how the objective will be attained. The game goes something like this:

After establishing the out-of-bounds area of the game have everyone stand randomly about the area. The objective is pick two other people at random (without letting them know who you picked) and move yourself within equal distance from them. As they move and adjust you move and adjust, but the game is over when everyone is equal distance from their chosen points of reference.

Once the game begins, and after a few chuckles of uncertainty from the participants, the objective usually is completed within a few minutes (followed by a few more chuckles at the ease at which the objective was reached). Now... the catch.

The person overseeing the game then asks how much longer would this exercise have taken if they had ONE person leading the efforts. The overall response is... FOREVER!

The purpose of the game is to demonstrate how simple complexity can be. With eight very simple principles a random group of people unified in an underlying purpose can achieve and objective laced with complexity and uncertainty, and in less time than most would imagine. Here are those eight principles:

1. Clear Individual Objective
2. A Few Simple Rules
3. Clear Boundaries
4. Continuous Feedback
5. Skill/Will of the Participants
6. Discretion and Freedom of Action
7. Underlying Purpose
8. Ambiguity and Uncertainty

How can these principles and this game have an affect on strategy? Sounds like a complex question, but the answer is as simple as the results of the exercise. Strategy is what we want to accomplish down the road. With a few rules, boundaries, and a purpose there are many ways to accomplish the long range goals. Strategies can be broad, but the actions to get there can be small and fluid.

The lesson here is that even though complexity and uncertainty exist all around us we can maneuver to accomplish our objectives. The eight principles are not some astrophysical equation. They are easy steps, and all of them are innate within a good organization.

As leaders we should embrace the resilience and collective knowledge of our people. We should be observers in our environments and make small adjustments when necessary. We must learn to use complexity and uncertainty to our advantage and allow others to grow and gain experience through their efforts. We might live in a complex world, nation, and organization, but there is always simplicity with good leadership.

JP

Changing Dynamics of Leadership

In 1964 Bob Dylan released a prophetic song titled The Times They are a-Changin.

"Come gather 'round people wherever you roam. And admit that the waters around you have grown. And accept it that soon you'll be drenched to the bone. If your time to you is worth savin' then you better start swimming or you'll sink like a stone. For the times they are a-changin."

The times are most definitely changing, and so is the concept of leadership. The old hierarchical approach to running a business is slow and outdated in today's fast paced and well connected world. The speed at which business moves must equal the speed of change within an organization for it to remain viable in a chosen market. But, how does change become effected? It comes through communication. It comes by the top leadership communicating the mission down the chain and the bottom communicating up what they need to make it happen. Business is now a two-way street.

Obolensky describes the leadership charade well in his book Complex Adaptive Leadership. It looks something like this... the leaders at the top acting like they have all the answers and their omniscient vision will lead the company to the promise land while those on the front lines complain around the water cooler that the top has no idea which way they are steering. The solution to this age old problem is a paradox of complexity and simplicity wrapped around communication and understanding of the roles each "level" plays in the grand scheme of things. I will touch on this a little later.

First, let's identify a few reasons this shift in leadership is occurring. Bob Dylan had it right when he said the times are changing. In today's world fast is steady and slow is dead. Organizations, large and small, need to be fluid to compete. This means that in order to work effectively towards a common goal people at the top need to know what is going on at the bottom. Now, I am not insinuating that the CEO needs to know how to do the job of the line operator, but they need to know how the basic processes work. Conversely, The front line worker does not need to know how the CFO manages the money, but they should understand how their work contributes to the bottom line.

Currently I am stationed on one of the Navy's most impressive floating platforms ever conceived... the aircraft carrier. In essence, this floating city is capable of delivering air superiority to the far reaches of the globe at a moments notice. The pieces in motion to make this ship function are mind blowing to say the least, and we have established a pretty good system that ensures the harmonious operation of our ship. It takes team work. The captain is overall in charge of the entire ship. However, I would not expect the skipper to be able to run the reactor or coordinate the supply lines for an underway replenishment anymore than I would expect a deck-seaman to oversee flight ops. We do expect the captain to be in tune to our needs and general understanding of what each department needs to carry out their mission effectively. This takes an incredible amount of communication up and down the chain of command. And this is how we answer our nation's call at the drop of a hat anytime... anywhere.

Solutions to problems typically come from those who face the issues creating the problem. If the security department onboard the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower needs second-chance vests to increase their survivability in the event of a gun fight they would send that request up the chain. With approval of such a request we would expect our top leaders to provide these vests to the men and women standing posts. Problem solved. If the top tier commanders feel like we need to add additional security measures to tighten up the ship's force protection then they pass that down the chain and we (at the bottom) make it happen. They let us know the mission, we let them know what we need, and that is how we maneuver through our ever changing strategic events that make up a Navy Day.

This is what I was talking about earlier... the old leadership charade dissolves when people know their places within an organization, communicate their needs up and down the chain of command, and work together to implement solutions to the problems we encounter along the way. Leadership is now more about listening and responding than forcing and telling. This change in leadership dynamics also dictates the strategy of leadership within an organization. Find out what works and make it happen. That is the new role of strategic leadership in this ever a-changin world.

JP

Complex Adaptive Systems

How amazing would it be to have a job where there are no bosses? What if you had the ability and authority to bottom line a purchase for the new ergonomic office chair you've been wanting to replace that old uncomfortable one you've been sitting in for too long. Would this type of work environment "work" for you? If you answered yes then you might want to consider changing jobs to a self-managed company like Morning Star, St. Luke's Advertising, or Gore Creative Technologies.

There is undisputed evidence that the nature of business is changing on a global scale. Technological advances, improved communications, and a world wide transportation network have linked more people together to form new frontiers in global enterprise. Nick Obolensky discusses the natural evolution of the corporate structure in his book Complex Adaptive Leadership. He describes the traditional organization as a functional silo where each department works independently from the other. Established hierarchical levels of management oversee the level below, and inter-departmental communication may only happen at the company Christmas party once a year. This business model reminds me of the movie Office Space where Peter is telling the "Bobs" how he has eight different bosses, so when he makes a mistake he has to hear it from eight different people.

From the functional silos a transition to cross functional matrix is the next evolutionary step. CFMs allow for a higher degree of efficiency with a more open communication structure than its predecessor. The focus is on the output instead of the input and restructuring is necessary to streamline some processes. Eventually the need to keep up with a changing environment will become stifling for the organization and the organization will make a move towards a more dynamic complex adaptive system which is even more fluid and efficient... or they face becoming outdated.

The complex adaptive system model is a very unique structure that blends efficiency with fluidity. They are people focused, technologically advanced, transparent, and incorporate adaptability as a strategy. This model is constantly on the move within its environment. It is designed to "flow" with the changing needs of its market and demands. It also a fair assessment to state that this model may very well be the future of global enterprise.

A recent Forbes article on this emerging trend of self-managing CASs states a mere 3% of companies in a survey are actually self managed. The concepts of companies like Morning Star which makes tomato byproducts are captivating to those who work in the other 97%. At Morning Star there are no bosses. Employees work on a self generated mission statement governing their actions and responsibilities to the company. They are bound by a Colleague Letter of Understanding and are subject to an annual peer review to ensure each employee is living up to the standards they have set for themselves. In the Morning Star culture there are no titles and high-powered seats of authority. Oh, and the company earns an annual revenue of around 700 million! Think that turns some heads?

Will this business model work for any company? The answer is an astounding NO. While companies like Morning Star, St. Luke's, and Gore have used this CAS concept to create a completely adaptive work environment with employee "ownership" this would hardly be feasible for a corporation like Shell, BP, or Halliburton. I actually witnessed a commanding officer in the Navy turn a sickly shade of green when I asked him how our ship would run if we had no Chiefs or officers and everyone would be accountable for their own areas of responsibilities. It just wouldn't work in large corporations spanning several continents. It works well for the 3,000 at Morning Star, but not so much for a Navy with over 350,000 enlisted personnel.

Another barrier holding back complex adaptive systems from spreading through the corporate world like wild fire is that not everyone is able to govern themselves without a boss or manager telling them what to do. Let's face it... we have a lot of order takers in the labor force. The very concept of being "boss" has its assumptions of high salaries, cushy offices, and many perks with little actual work. If we just let everyone become their own bosses how much work would actually get done?

This idea of evolution takes place over time. There is no doubt that as newer generations become more reliant on available technologies to work smarter instead of harder a cultural shift might take place in the near future and grow into what we see at Morning Star. At the end of the day if it works for you... use it. If processes need to be changed to remain viable change them, or risk being left behind in the pages of corporate history. As for me... I think I will keep an eye on self-managing companies. After six years in the Navy I kind of like the idea of being my own boss.

JP

Butterfly Effect

This week we overlay some interesting theories of complexity with strategic leadership. One of these theories is the butterfly effect which can be described as a catalytic change beginning with relatively small circumstances that  amass large implications over time.

The butterfly effect is in stark contrast of the first law of thermodynamics, otherwise known as the Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that the effort injected will dictate the results received. Organizations, especially in today's dynamic organizational environment, often see dramatic results from the smallest changes in policies, markets, and economies. In other words, sometimes the greatest achievements are the results of the most random accidents.

An example of the butterfly effect in my organization, the US Navy, can be seen in some recent events regarding active shooters in the the Washington DC Naval ship yards in 2013 and in March 2014 on the Destroyer USS Mohan in Norfolk, VA. These random and unforeseen events both have had impacts that will change how we conduct business in securing our Naval assets for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, these implications are more of a reactionary measure, but none the less will have large results in force protection throughout the Fleet. As a leader of a security section on board the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower we are already enacting policy changes to step up our game and protection of our vital assets.

Another example of the butterfly effect occurred in the air traffic control facility in Key West 2010. As controllers we are constantly training our replacements in specific positions. When the training process was halted for a mere two months by our senior enlisted leadership the effects were felt around one year afterward when we had a lapse in qualified personnel able to keep the facility operational. By summer of 2011 we had only two facility supervisors to cover a 7 day a week/18 hours a day operation. Not only did we control military aircraft, but we were the terminal radar control for Key West International Airport. These two supervisors were working exhausting hours for weeks on end (which is not the safest situation when so many lives were in our hands) all because a senior chief decided to "teach" us a lesson and stop our training. Fortunately, we made it through that tough period with zero incidents which is a direct result of incredible fortitude of those controllers and our team. However, this is a prime example of a small decision having potentially huge repercussions down the road.

Understanding the butterfly effect can shed light on how we as leaders make decisions. We have to take into considerations the long term effects our decisions can have on our organizations. Rapidly changing environments in the global economy are driving new parameters in which we work and lead. We will constantly be challenged with new scenarios that will direct the course of our organizations. We must be vigilant to the concepts of chaos and complexity and be prepared to make sound decisions that will have a positive effect in both the short and long term. Understanding that small changes can yield large results is a resounding reality for today's leaders.

JP

Leadership Gap

It is hard to argue that our world is not moving at break-neck speeds. One can simply look at the technological advances in cell phones over the past five years to see the effects of our advances. It is hard to keep up with the current trends, market shifts, and the latest-and-greatest gifts of technology.

It is in this whirlwind of advancement that we are in dire need for effective leadership. First of all, we need to stop trying to define the parameters of leadership in the traditional sense of "follow me to the promise land!"and focus on the some key elements that comprise today's finest leaders. These elements include honesty, ability to delegate, superior communication, confidence, commitment, and probably most important... the ability to inspire.

Nick Obolensky's book Complex Adaptive Leadership poses a few questions in the first chapter to help the reader recognize a growing rift in the cultural attitudes when pin-pointing good leaders and bad ones. Allow me to offer my thoughts to his questions:

• Has your own attitude to leaders changed in your life, and if so how?

I am fortunate enough to have had some amazing examples of leadership throughout my life. However, the moment I joined the Navy my concept of effective leadership took a nose dive. To me a leader is someone who has knowledge and experience and are willing to share them. They reach out to people and make them better. They can rally the troops towards a common goal. Leaders rarely take the credit for a job well done and always take the heat for failure. In the Navy, on the other hand, earned leadership takes a side seat to the awarded leader, and not always are those in leadership positions the best, most qualified people for the job.

This was a culture shock for me to say the least. I grew up with stories of Patton, Eisenhower, Chesty Puller, and Stromin Norman. Not once in my Navy career have I seen a leader exhibit the qualities that set these men apart. I have seen a few good examples of good and decent men (which might be a close relative to a fine leader), but nothing that would inspire me to venture "once more into the breach, dear friends".

Therefore, my attitude has changed drastically towards what it means to be a leader. However, from these experiences I can say, with no uncertainty, that I know what type of leader I don't want to be.

• If we take as a starting point the attitude to those in authority/leaders as held by your grandparents, and then look at those attitudes held by your parents, and then by you, and then by the younger generation, is there a changing trend? If so, what is it?

My grandparents grew up in the Great Depression. What jobs were available didn't require a high degree of education, and most were happy to have a job at all. This created a power struggle for those people in management (leaders) to constantly portray the facade they were better than you, and thus deserving of such a position of leadership. Hey, if it comes to my family eating or starving I would be the best yes man around.

My parents on the other hand grew up in a much different world. The attitude towards authority took a few left-hooks on the jaw bone between the 50's and 60's (I'm not sure they remember much of the late sixties/early 70's). Women made their push into the work place and the status-quo was changed. There were still a lot of roots entrenched in the corporate structure for the earlier generations, but they weren't as hesitant to speak their minds against people and policies they didn't feel were right. They may have questioned a lot of things, but their actions were still on the timid side.

My generation seems to have a much more lenient attitude towards authority, leadership, and what is culturally acceptable. Heck, if you're not still living at home on Mom's couch after 30 you are doing ok. As a generation, if we don't like our boss, our job, or relationships for that matter we are more apt to just walk away than stick it out. And as far as the next generation of Americans... (in the voice of my Pop-Pop) they are leading the country into the very gates of hell.

• Why do you think this has occurred?

Of course these are all generalizations, and the future generations are not in fact leading us into hell. But, it is safe to say that as older generations retire and new ones emerge in the workforce the attitude towards authority and leadership will continue to change. This is the way our world works... constant change. But no matter how much change takes place the core foundations of good leaders remain the same (and in some cases is probably amplified). Great leaders are honest, delegate well, communicate effectively, are confident, are committed, and above all inspire those around them to be better individuals.