A633.6.4.RB
Circle
of Leadership
In this reflective blog, I am asked to critically
think about how strategy is formulated in my organization and include both
upward and downward leadership. Now, considering all of the readings in this
module and the learning exercises regarding upward and downward leadership;
reflect on the diagram (figure 9.5; below) "the vicious circle for leaders".
Does this happen in your organization? What are the effects on the
organization? Create a new circle that would promote strong followership and
even leadership at the lower levels of the organization. Ensure that this
reflects the actions and involvements of all significant departments such as;
Sales, Marketing, Finance, Accounting, Operations, Marketing, and Distribution.
My
organization is a public High School.
Moreover, I am an Army Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC)
Instructor. I am my own department. Yes, JROTC is an elective but the impact of
my course is far reaching across the curriculum. Let me explain. I teach approximately 170 Cadets. The majority of them have six additional
classes besides my JROTC course. When
one of these Cadets is not performing to standard in his or her others classes
or have a behavior issue these other teachers make an effort to make sure I
know either face-to-face, by telephone or email. Obviously these other teachers want me to
manage their classrooms for them. I don’t
call the math teacher about one of my Cadets and say, “you math student is not
behaving in my JROTC class…can you take care of it?” It is not only this odd phenomenon. My Cadets, on average out perform their
fellow students in their other classes regularly.
With
regards to the “vicious circle for leaders” in my organization, it is a more
stove piped situation. It has more followership,
when it comes to teachers than leadership with a few exceptions such as
department chairs. It is more in line
with Obolensky’s “Level Five Followership”.
According to Obolensky:
• Level 1: Wait to be told. This is the lowest level
and an unacceptable state of affairs. It assumes the individual will just sit
and wait to be told what to do. This puts a large and unsustainable strain on
leadership.
• Level 2: Ask to be told. At this level, the
individual would come to the leader and ask to be told what to do next. Whilst
a little bit more pro-active than level 1, it is still at a low state and
assumes a low level of skill and will. The first two levels should be
unacceptable – the lowest acceptable level should be level 3.
• Level 3: Seek approval for a recommendation. This is
where the individual is unsure what to do, has an idea, but comes and seeks
approval before acting. It may display a lack of confidence or just an honest
appreciation that the situation is slightly more difficult than one which the
individual is used to.
• Level 4: Seek approval for action undertaken. In
this situation the individual has taken action but is unsure if it is right, so
seeks confirmation from the leader. It may be a lack of confidence, or seeking
to communicate action.
• Level 5: Get on and inform in a routine way. This is
the best that should be aimed for. The key point here is ‘routine’ – there must
be a routine for reporting to ensure accountability. Such a routine could
include a weekly update meeting, a routine report, routine measurement etc.
(Obolensky, 2014)
Many
teachers in my organization hover around Level 1 and Level 4 and seldom make it
to Level 5.
If I
were to create a new circle for followership and leadership in my organization,
policy would have to change policy and law.
Also, teachers would need to be enabled and a true chain of command
would need to be created.
At
the end of the day, top down leadership is alive and well in my organization
and teachers make good followers.
Reference
Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty. (2d
ed). Gower Publishing: Burlington, VT
No comments:
Post a Comment