Reflections on Chaos
I will admit, I have struggled more
with the concepts in this course than any other I have taken in this
program…well… perhaps with the exception of Storytelling. What is worse is that I truly believe the
subject material in this course is also the most important and relevant to the
leadership environment that I have studied to date. Difficulty understanding a subject that I
know is critical to the vast majority of organizations operating today, has
kept me extremely frustrated. Of course,
the subjects deal with chaos and complexity in leadership and the tools needed
to lead in the contexts of chaos and complexity. I had to ask myself why has it been so difficult to grasp? It was a bit too abstract. My experience lies completely in the strict
hierarchical structure of the military…blah, blah, blah. The fact is it contradicts everything I understood
about leadership. I read the material
with a closed mind and then could not make the concepts work in my mind. Sometimes intelligent people are not very
smart.
I have read the material again,
some sections many times. This helped me
to understand how the concepts Obolensky (2014) describes should be applied
within the context from a literal and very mechanical view point. Gary Hamel’s description and review of the
Morning Star Company in his article First,
Let’s Fire All the Managers and my research on the Valve Corporation
convinced me that polyarchy and Complex Adaptive Leadership work very well and can
be effective in any organization.
Morning Star and Valve are two very different companies, (tomato
processing and video game development respectively), yet they employed nearly
identical structure, leadership approach, and operational philosophy. It was at this point, that my mind opened and
I realized not only is this a viable option, it is a superior option. When I watched Nick Obolensky’s video ‘Who Needs Leaders?,’ I saw clearly how chaos
gives way to order. I watched it several
times. It was a visual proof of concept
for me. By applying eight relatively simple
principles and without any further direction, a group of people were able to
resolve a complex problem in under a minute without saying a word to each other. The video took the doubt, anxiety, and
mystery out of chaos and complexity for me.
The rapid changes in technologies that began in the early 1990s and
continues still, ultimately changed the concepts in which we base our
leadership assumptions (Obolensky, 2014).
Prior to the technology
explosion, most organizations primarily operated within the simple and
complicated contexts which are deterministic, causal, and predictable. Afterwards, many companies had to resolve
issues in the complex and chaotic contexts. These contexts are non-deterministic, have cause
and effect combined, and are seemingly unpredictable. Obolensky (2014) suggests that polyarchy and
Complex Adaptive Leadership can be used effectively in complex and chaotic
environments and the time to transition is now.
I agree that a flat structure where people can be self-directed and the
expertise and decision making can be placed closest to where issues often arise,
will allow the organization to thrive.
The rapid changes are still happening and leadership context is still
trending toward the complex, so yes the time to evolve is now.
Today, we know more about what motivates people to
their best performance, and, although we still have a way to go, we
understand complexity and chaos in the leadership realm better than we ever
have. We also know enough about
hierarchical structures to know that they are not well suited for self-directed
people/organizations nor are they well suited to operate in the complex or
chaotic contexts for extended periods.
Obolensky’s chaos game changed my
attitude about chaos in a positive way.
I do not automatically have to think hopeless tragedy. Using the correct approach, chaotic behavior is a problem that can be solved. It "actually has a simple deterministic explanation" (Obolensky, 2014, p. 68). The exercise also provided me
eye witness proof that out of chaos emerges order. The implication of the game on strategy is
“under a polyarchic assumption, strategy is defined by the dynamic of the
relationships within which the organization exists" (Obolensky, 2014, p. 103). The game with its boundaries in place seems
to illustrate this point. However, CAS organizations extend the boundary to include external relationships. Finally, less
traditional leadership is needed when things are complex. Instead utilize the 8 key principles to enable
followers to become self-directed and the leader to practice wu-wei.
~Pete
References:
Hamel, G. (2011). First,
Let's Fire all the Managers (Links to an external site.)Links to an
external site. (cover story). Harvard Business
Review, 89(12), 48-60.
Internet. (2017, November 12). In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved: November 15, 2017, from: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet&oldid=809902517
Obolensky,
N.,(2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty,
(2nd ed). Farnham Surrey, England. Gowan PublishingLimited.
Obolensky, N. (2008). Who needs
leaders? Nick Obolensky,(April 12, 2008). Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=41QKeKQ2O3E
Valve Corporation (2012).
Handbook for new employees. Accessed November 4, 2017. Retrieved from: http://media.steampowered.com/apps/valve/Valve_NewEmployeeHandbook.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment