Cultures can, over time, be intentionally shaped and directed by visionary and resilient leaders. But the complexity of organizations, markets and other social ecosystems invariably worsens with scale, raising the bar for mitigation ever higher.
My thoughts about leadership are three fold
Leadership is about taking part not imposing
An organization ‘led’ by someone who aspires to impose preconceived ideas is not a healthy place for anyone.
Organizations are not forever
A contextually-sensitive organization also knows when it is time to die. A healthy organization values purpose and will support other purposes when its own is not the most relevant to the wider ecosystem.
Organizations are healthy when they are dynamic
We don’t need a specific culture. We need healthy psychology. Losada’s model works for me
- Positive to negative ratios of 3:1 or more
- Context-sensitive slightly enhanced over internal focus
- Asking questions (sincerely) slightly more frequent than advocating positions.
Testing this simple view of leadership with this post
This post does not live up to those three criteria.
- Other than the link love at the top, I am rebutting throughout the post. The Positivity:Negativity ratio is not good.
- I am talking about management theory to other management theorists. We need to be talking about the world! Clay Shirky is a good example of commentators who comment on the world not the commentators!
- I am advocating, almost exclusively. Chris, I didn’t pick up from your post who you are (no About page) or your aspirations. A post please?