Leadership in organizations - from a systemic perspective
It's Saturday evening and arte is showing a documentary about tango. I get stuck. Then a scene: two women in pinstripe suits, wide pants, both with top hats. Everything in the style of the 40s. Dancing together. But something is different, better than the couples before them. Before I can figure out what it is, the speaker explains: the women take turns in the lead. A whole new dynamic and harmony can be seen. When the documentary is over, I decide to learn to tango. I wanted to experience this dynamism and harmony.
Well-done leadership has an effect on us
Now, not everyone among us is a born tango dancer - and I have to say that I soon stopped after my first attempts. But one thing has remained: I am still fascinated by the harmony between leading and being led and the dynamic between the two.
Nowadays, I experience this in interaction with my colleagues. Leadership to the power of three (Leadership³) call this collective leadership and mean that the person with the greatest situational competence should lead.
Leaders should be those who have the greatest situational competence to do so
Having the highest level of situational competence - what does that mean in practice? Bertil he has the greater expertise in technical matters relating to requirements engineering. I, on the other hand, am responsible for group dynamics and process quality. We know each other and are aware of each other's skills. The leadership can change and flows back and forth between us like a large pool of water that is lifted on one side.
Three forms of influence
In organizations, this free flow between competencies is often not possible. Other rules and mechanisms of influence apply here. Here are three examples:
Influence through experience
A medium-sized company with a long-standing, well-established workforce is very successful internationally. However, due to digitalization and the need to rely more and more on AI, requirements are becoming increasingly complex. A new RM system is to be introduced, but it is not yet entirely clear which one. Most employees are used to the processes with Word. The impending changeover is weighing heavily on the minds of many. Thomas, a previously rather inconspicuous engineer who has only been with the company for a few months, suddenly stands out. He used to work with Polarion at his old company and his colleagues and superiors quickly realize: he knows his way around! It wasn't long before he was invited to join the key committees. There he advises on the introduction and use of Polarion across all hierarchical levels. His superiors released him to train a team of multipliers. The changeover was a complete success - thanks to Thomas. Although he had no hierarchical power, he exerted his influence by talking about his experiences and accepting responsibility. His colleagues and superiors trusted his experience.
We often refer to this form of influence as authority.
Influence through persuasion
We change the scene and take a look at a software development team: A problem is raised in a retrospective. Three solution options are developed. All seem equally valid, but from an efficiency perspective, it only makes sense to choose one of the options. How does the self-organized team decide? Toni, one of the juniors in the team, makes a gut suggestion. Lena and Carsten agree with him. The whole team then joins in and the decision is made.
What has happened? In this example too, Toni has no hierarchical power - the team is self-organized. Also, as a junior, Toni cannot look back on many years of experience or expertise. Nevertheless, Toni has managed to exert influence.
The situation is very reminiscent of the collective leadership from the beginning of the article. Here, too, we see dynamism and harmony. But in a choice between equally valid alternatives, it doesn't even require situational competence, but Toni's courage to speak out in favor of a solution. However, the decision would not have been made if Lena and Carsten had not also agreed. This shows the importance of the "first and second follower" (see video), but also that leadership is a function in the social system: Toni cannot decide to lead by virtue of his own thoughts. He can only make an offer. Only the consent of others to be led brings him into a real leadership situation.
Influence through power
There is a third form of influence in organizations, and it comes in two varieties: charisma and power. At first glance, the two appear to be contradictory, but at a second glance you can see the relationship: both power and charisma refer to the future of those affected. Either as a hopeful ideal world, or as a horror scenario of threat, exposure and violence. Like any form of influence, the exercise of charisma can be just as unhelpful as the exercise of power. This is well illustrated in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_to_Great. And even if in many agile or New Work contexts, power, especially hierarchical power, is demonized, it still makes sense in certain situations. Here is our third example:
A Scrum team is blocked by an impediment. This impediment can only be resolved by another department. The sprint goal is breathing down the customer's neck and he is eagerly awaiting the new functionality that will finally offer him legal certainty under changed legal regulations.
The Scrum Master talks to the department. He gets no answer. He tries again - and is rejected. His fallback strategy: he goes to his department head - who wields power in the company and can convince his colleague that the impediment will be removed immediately. The functionality can be delivered and the customer is satisfied.
This has a positive impact on the exercise of power in companies.
In practice, this means...
I don't think there is an inherently positive or negative form of influence in companies. But there are situations in which one form of behavior can be more helpful than the other. I believe that the trick is to observe the right situation carefully and then find a form of influence that is appropriate to the situation. Sometimes this may be collective leadership, sometimes authority and sometimes charisma or a hard power strategy. The more we know about ourselves and our environment, the more precisely we can assess which actions are helpful and which are not.
More and more, my colleagues and I are observing that companies are facing new challenges in their business and that, despite good will and all efforts, the old recipes no longer help. And this is where we at HOOD like to come in, preferably with a customized digital and agile transformation, without recipes but with a lot of methodology.
Please feel free to contact me:
julia.grassinger@hood-group.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juliagrassinger/
Further information can also be found at www.metatheorie-der-veraenderung.info and https://www.leadershiphoch3.de/blog-post/kollektive-fuehrung/
More articles from me here on SE-Trends http://www.se-trends.de/author/julia/
Or meet me at our RECönfchen for a discussion: https://www.linkedin.com/events/6805145450732101632/about/
