A633.9.3.RB - Polyarchy Reflections

The old thinking that oligarchy is the best way to lead did have its merits, it was certainly simpler, however, simpler doesn’t necessarily mean better.  As Obolensky (2014) stated “leadership in polyarchy is more complex than in an oligarchy (p. 5).  One should not shy away from something because it is more difficult; often times the most rewarding tasks are those that require some struggle.  Being successful in an oligarchy takes the ability to listen to and coach employees so that they can solve problems on their own.  This is not a skill that all leaders are comfortable teaching, some believe that if too much power is given to followers then the balance of control is upset. 

The more a leader can educate their followers the stronger the company is as a whole.  The idea that all the power and knowledge is only accessible to the few is illogical, that only creates a distinctive gap between leaders and followers.  Obolensky (2104) described that the role as leader is to attend to the needs of the task, team, and individual (p. 201).  In this model the leader needs to have knowledge of the task given, an understanding of team dynamics, and the ability to connect and motivate people.  Whereas some people see the role of leader as being a dictator, a true leader has more in common with a teacher. 

In the 70/20/10 model, where 70 percent of knowledge comes from job-related experiences, 20 percent from interactions with others, and 10 percent from formal educational events, there is a strong reliance on the workplace experience.  In other words, a person can be taught a certain amount of educational material, however, in order for them to retain that information they must have hands-on experience also.  This is a powerful realization for some leaders.  In the past leaders have told others exactly what to do, in the new models only a small amount time is spent instructing and the rest on in-the-field experience.  This model also highlights the benefit of interacting with others, which shows that followers can teach other followers.

All of these have had a large impact on my leadership style.  I have found that the style that best fits me is one that involves guidance over direction.  My teaching background has given me a different outlook on what it means to be a leader, I have a firm belief that followers can be taught to solve problems for themselves.  I also believe that by allowing followers to stand on their own only strengthens my role as leader. 

Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and

uncertainty (2nd ed.). Farnham, England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.8.3.RB - How do Coaches Help?

When I hear the word coach I picture someone teaching another to play or improve on a sport.  Maybe this is due to my athletic background, but the idea of a coach is someone that encourages you and guides you to be the best you can be.  This theory is also true in a business perspective.  Most people who have reached out to a coach have the will to succeed but are at a crossroad where they are unsure which direction they should take, a coach can help them realize their goals and achieve them. 

The first thing a coach should ask is what avenues have the client already tried and why did they work or not work.  This will not only prevent the coach from offering duplicate strategies but also give insight into the way the client thinks.  Obolensky (2014) describes the GROW model: goal, reality, options, will.  Through a series of questions, the coach can achieve an understanding about the silent and help them to move through the process of finding a suitable solution.  The role of a coach isn’t to offer the client a certain solution, but to teach them how to solve problems on their own. 

Coaching is important in both leadership and strategy.  Leaders are not born knowing everything about the business they are in, they have to learn from someone who has been through the same situations they are in now.  This is where a coach comes in, they have the knowledge the leader needs and instead of spoon-feeding them answers they instead show them how to think critically.  Once a leader has the ability and knowledge to solve the issues they can then create a strategy that works for the company.  Strategy comes from knowledge, and knowledge comes from experience, all of which a coach can offer.

An organization that is open to coaching is open to change.  Coaching is all about change, whether it is changing ideas or strategy, the end result is usually a much different scenario than was first thought of.  An organization can benefit from coaching, especially among its leaders; it gives an opportunity to see things from a different perspective, which can lead to more open-minded decisions.  It can also lead to the idea of upward communication and strategy, which will only improve the leadership quality within the company.

My organization could have benefitted greatly from upward communication.  If the leaders were open to listening to the suggestions from the people who were on the front lines then they would have realized how some of the decisions they made were not ideal.  My organization seemed to be stuck in the old school thought that the leaders knew best and did not need to ask any questions of anyone except each other.  This did not serve the business well, as they were not the ones who were in direct contact with the guest and they were too far removed to really understand exactly what the guests wanted.

Coaching exists to improve people, whether it’s their skills or the way the process and think through problems.  A coach isn’t there to tell you how to do things they are there to guide you through the process, to improve your skills and teach you new ways to think about things.  Coaching can make good leaders even better; it can also help followers to understand how the business is run and what they may need to do to climb up the ladder.          

Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and

uncertainty (2nd ed.). Farnham, England: Gower Publishing Limited.

A633.7.3.RB - Leader Follower Relationship

After completing the exercise at he beginning of Chapter 10 in Obolensky’s (2014) book I realized a lot about myself and how I lead.  The first thing I learned was that sometimes there is not a right answer, such as with the options in the exercise, I found that I may end up using a mix of two answers to achieve the desired outcome.  I also learned that I am highly people oriented, as the majority of my answers were related to Strategy 3: Involve, and on the questions where I choose more than one answer I often chose the answer corresponding to Strategy 2: Sell.  I have found my best and most productive interventions have been when I involved the follower in the conversation about my concerns, used that information to pinpoint what they feel is the issue and what they are invested in and used that to sell them on how their improvement will help not only the company but themselves also. 

Over the course of this class, a few things have changed for me, I have always believed that leaders need to be involved but also be inquisitive; some of the most useful information comes from followers themselves.  Obolensky (2014) described this as “allowing others to discover the solution” (p. 172).  When followers are involved with finding solutions they are most invested in them.  Taking the time to have a dialogue with followers is important in finding a solution.  In terms of the skill/will matrix this person may be in the low skill/low will category, and the first step is to work on their will so that they are open to learning the skill.  Once their will has improved they can receive the education needed to perform their job successfully.

On the other side of the exercise, I realized I fell under the strategy of selling but needed to step up a bit more with this.  While I believe there is a place for a leader to tell a follower to do something I do not feel it is the best thing to do on a regular basis.  It does not facilitate the follower to take any responsibility in their job.  I also feel there are times when stepping back and watching situations unfold can be a great learning experience I do not think it is an effective leading strategy on its own.  There are situations where stepping back and watching can offer insight into what is happening, however, there should be some interaction and guidance also.  For me, the best leading strategy is to be involved and then sell the idea to the followers, with a tiny bit of telling and devolving mixed in when necessary. 

Obolensky (2014) talked about overlapping the skill/will matrix with the leadership yin/yang to create a roadmap of how to lead.  This left a huge impression on me.  I was able to understand that when a follower is low on both will and skill the best intervention for me would be to become involved, listen to what they have to say, and gather the necessary information to help them move their will up to a higher level.  From there I have the chance to educate them on the skills they need to become successful, this is where the telling (or showing) strategy come into play.  I have the knowledge they need and it is my responsibility to pass that information on by either telling them or showing them.  Once the follow has the skills and the will then I need to sell them on why they should want to be productive for themselves and the company.  The final step is where I may step back and watch what the follower in action to find out how they are doing and evaluate how they are doing and if any further action is needed. 

There is no one strategy that is perfect for a leader at all times, a good leader knows which strategy to use at what time to help their followers.  They should also know when to use a different strategy on a specific follower to help them personally.   Leadership is not a one size fits all job, it is an ongoing process to find out the best way to handle different situations.  It is a job that requires ongoing education and learning.              

Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and

uncertainty (2nd ed.). Farnham, England: Gower Publishing Limited.