Reflecting on the opening
exercise at the beginning of Chapter 4 of the of Obolensky text and other
readings, why do you think the shift in leadership is occurring and do you
think this is indicative of what is happening in your organization. List three
reasons that support or refute this position.
If so, how would leadership
dynamics have to be altered to accommodate and promote these types of changes?
What are the implications on strategy?
It would appear that as
discussed in Obolensky (2010,) of sweeping changes to organizational strategies
that were accomplished through graduated stair-step change patterns. The truly
successful organizations were those that implemented positive and productive
change management over a period of two to five years. Simply put this could be
attributed to cultural, logistical, economic, geographically dislocation of
sub-elements of an organization that may be spread out in varying countries
under varying cultural and economic conditions. For example, an organization
like General Electric, which has 13 offshore business units, would need to
accommodate the economic, cultural, labor including import and export laws of
13 different yet distinct countries.
There
are leaders of businesses who track milestones in monthly and quarterly
increments. Jeff Immelt, General Electrics CEO, thinks in terms of decades
(Bradt, 2011.) Jeff, recently marking his 10-year anniversary as CEO of GE in a
time when 40 percent of new leaders fail in 18 months, CEO’s simply surviving a
decade is nothing more than a pipe dream. There has been a lot written
regarding what Jeff and GE have accomplished to date. Reuters, Fortune and The
wall Street Journal have all tracked successes and failures in the last decade
(Bradt, 2011.) Jeff Immelt will be forever compared to former CEO Jack Welch.
Immelt is quick to say he wants to be remembered not for the first decade
behind the wheel, or the subsequent ones after that… but rather, for his
lasting contributions over the long haul (Bradt, 2011.)
Immelt
attributes GE’s success to three priorities, strategy, culture and lastly
people. Immelt see’s himself and his main priority to pick initiatives and
businesses and get involved shaping the company and culture only after picking
the right and great people for the job (Bradt, 2011.)
This said and by default of
the economy of scales the management of any large global organization would
need to defer much of its responsibilities to those who are capable of carrying
out the solutions, strategic plans and check and balances of the parent
organization. This naturally would need to fall to those best suited in
carrying out the specific tasks and are listed below.
In my organization and
particularly the USG in general are in need of “doing more with less”. This has
been occurring for well over a decade now, and if an organization wants to
survive, grow and remain as a benefit to the US taxpayer the talent and
experience simply must come from inside.
Much of the talent,
experience and second hand knowledge in today’s governmental agencies comes
from retired and former military. The expertise, discipline and willingness to
see a project to its completion are the product of the American GI. It would be
fool hearty to hire or pay an outside organization for tribal knowledge,
experience and credentials that have been already been paid for through the
utilization of American Solders, Sailors, Airmen and Marines.
To put credit where credit
is due it would also be beneficial to know when to consult with outside
expertise such as defense contractors. Many governmental organizations
capitalize upon that expertise along with the existent internal expertise of
retired and former military in joint-ventures whereby capitalizing upon best
commercial practices and the best methods of implementing those changes,
upgrades and innovations to existing commodities through the use of military
and contractor interfaces.
The leadership dynamics
would need to be accommodating to the fact that for every dollar saved it may
lengthen the overall process via contractor to USG/military forming, storming,
norming and preforming type of interactions as a method of establishing a level
and manageable playing field for all concerned. Management and leadership would
also need to be cognizant of the fact that because these joint-venture projects
are driven by best commercial practices, tribal knowledge and expertise and not
by managerial or top leadership, the milestones, timelines or outcomes may not
be as predicted or desired. They will however be a manageable and usable
alternative with inherent trade-offs as a negotiated savings to the taxpayer
investment.
References:
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex
adaptive leadership. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing Limited. DOI: www.gowerpublishing.com
Bradt, G. (2011). Ge ceo
jeff immelt's long-term view 10 years in. Forbes.com, 2. Retrieved from http://www.fobes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment