META-LEADERSHIP 2.1-THE SYNERGISTIC LEADER

In several blog articles , I have discussed meta-leadership in terms of where the perspective takes us in the future. In THE LEADERSHIP CHANGE TRIANGLE(Feb. 2009), I discussed the importance of reciprocity in the development of relationships inside and outside the public health agency. The article also discussed transformational leaders as those systems thinkers who are concerned about policy development, new applications of the systems perspective to change initiatives, and the importance of maintaining ethical standards in these change activities. In META-LEADERSHIP 2.0(April 2009), the issue of networks was discussed and the need to be aware that our partners are often embedded in a number of different network relationships. There is also a need to recognize the importance of the differences in culture in the organizations that our partners represent. Meta-leadership is also affected by the impact of the Internet on our activities. THE RURAL PUBLIC HEALTH SYNERGISTIC LEADER(June 2009) explored the issue of partnerships in small communities where large organizational entities do not exist and where leaders must develop skills to engage both community grassroots leaders as well as organizations to address community priorities in all sorts of public health initiatives. The meta-leader must develop into a synergistic leader who works to create new organizational models that are innovative and adaptive to the communities that they serve. The synergistic leader works to increase the value of the relationships built so that there is more that what was there at the beginning. In SILOS AND PARADIGMS(May 2009), I discussed the difficulty in working across organizational silos where governing paradigms increase barriers between these silos. Leaders become paradigm busters who redefine boundaries and remove barriers to change.

The concept of connectivity that is used by the proponents of meta-leadership simplifies complex relationships between partners. This may be partially due to the fact that the meta-leadership model was initially developed to explore relationship-building in a public health emergency environment. The future requires that we be able to move not only across silos but also across different public health challenges. Arthur Himmelman has argued that it is important to look at the building of relationships as moving from a form of networking to more complex collaboration. However, this clearly takes time to accomplish. Meta-leaders tend to become expert at building relationships across silos. Once connectivity occurs, the partners often address short term solutions to a crisis situation. Heifetz and Linsky in LEADERSHIP ON THE LINE(2002) stated that short term fixes do not change the system. It is long term change that is adaptive and that leads to transformation. Connectivity must not only involve relationship-building. The leader must be able to pull together a different set of leaders for transformational change. The synergistic leader sees beyond the gathering of the partners to the structures that will be needed to change systems for the better. Synergistic leaders understand complexity and how changing technology affects the models that are developed and the changes that are needed for communities to function at a higher level of adaptability. The types of connections that get created with given subsets of partners becomes an important part of relationship management needed by synergistic leaders. Perhaps we need to explore this more under the rubric of “connectivity connections.”

Connectivity connections are impacted by the commitment of other partners from within the silo or from organizations outside of the one of which you are a member. Even with the best of intentions, the leader may not be able to get other organizations or individuals to play the game. In addition, the levels of connectivity or the structures developed to contain the meta-leadership group may take the form of a coalition, an alliance(issue-oriented relationship) or a contractual partnerships(See Rowitz,2009, Chpt. 9). The life-span of the connectivity connection will also vary depending on the reasons why the connections exist.

Synergism is about the end product of the connectivity connections leading to value-added results. The synergistic leader understands systems and complex social relationships. Transformation guides these leaders from policy development to strategic implementation of these new transformational policies.

This posting is partially based on the American Public Health Association session on Silos and Paradigms, November 9,2009

I NEED TO LEARN

As a biological species, we are programmed to learn. We are by our very nature lifelong learners. And yet, many of our species fight against the learning. In fact, as budgets tighten, as our elected officials fight for their causes, education and training initiatives end up on the cutting room floor. We have developed cultures that put rules, regulations, and protocols around us. We become ethnocentric by judging everyone else by our rules. We often close our minds to all the wonderful things that this world has to offer us. We often expect others to pay for all our learning, do not think there is anything more for us to learn, or we do not often financially invest in ourselves. There is always more to learn. We become effective managers and leaders by building a Toolbox full of wonderful things that enhance our skills and natural talents. I have spent my life with a commitment to my learning that I hope to continue until my last day. Learning enriches my life and I hope the lives of those with whom I share my knowledge and skills through action and discourse. That is the important message here. Sharing knowledge of ourselves and others will make our communities richer and stronger. Building social and human capital needs to be our goal. For us in public health and the human services field, social justice and servant leadership is our modus operandi. Every time we read a book, take a course, attend a conference, work collaboratively with others, use our creativity skills, solve a problem, resolve a conflict, improve the quality of our organizations, or communicate with others, we increase the return on investment in our personal growth and on the organizations for which we work. Knowledge management is cost effective and increases cost efficiency.

I hear people say that they want to increase their skills, but their bosses or elected officials won’t let them. It is true that training and educational dollars are often the first to go when budgets get cut. This is a very short sighted view. Not only do we have lower salaries than those in the private sector, there is no money to help us grow and become more effective health professionals, managers, and leaders. It often seems that there is an expectation that we will fail, that government work is for those that cannot survive in the private sector, or for those that don’t want to work hard. The anti-intellectual stance that we seem to take in our country works against us. Our value system needs to change if we are to remain a first tier country in the world. Education and training are our key to success. If change is our modus operandi, then investment in lifelong learning models must become more highly valued than it is today. For every dollar that we invest in the growth of our governmental workforce, the returns will be significant. It is not only me that needs to grow in order to be a more effective professional and leader, we all need to grow and learn throughout our lives. When will our elected officials and agency bosses change their priorities to invest in our future. Maybe they need to learn and increase their skills as well. Trusteeship of our people and our future is an important concept that our elected leaders need to practice.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO CIVILITY

 As a leader, I have become concerned about the growing lack of civility in our country. I am old enough to remember when our country loved its diversity and when we seemed to be concerned about each other even if we disagreed on things. We saw ourselves as one nation. Yet, there were clearly issues such as race and gender which appeared to be contrary to our general civility as a nation. The 21^st century has seen a decline in our concerns for others, in our willingness to listen to each other and come to consensus on contentious issues. We looked to our leaders for guidance and leadership and role models for civility. Now our leaders appear to lack leadership skills, lack civility skills, lack problem-solving and conflict management strategies, lack respect for each other, attack people rather than issues, lack compromise abilities, and forget the people they were elected to protect. Our elected officials are more concerned about getting re-elected and the organizations that fund their campaigns than they are in serving as America’s trustees. We seem to be living in a time of fear generation and a “NO” to anything innovative or oriented to change.

If we are to survive as a Nation, then we must learn how to work together and move forward with a vision of increasing civility. Civility Training must be a first step in moving toward a healthier nation. The Institute for Civility in Government (Rev. Cassandra Dahnke and Rev. Tomas Spath) has defined civility as “…Claiming and caring for one’s identity, needs and beliefs without degrading someone else in the process.” Also see http://www.instituteforcivility.org Change is necessary. I would like to use this blog posting to begin the development of a training course on Leadership and Civility. A modular approach is needed to address this topic comprehensively.

    Module 1-Civility and its components

    Module 2-Civility and Leadership

    Module 3-Silos and Paradigms

    Module 4- Creativity and Innovation

    Module 5- Problem-Solving and Decision-making

    Module 6- Conflict Resolution and Negotiation

    Module 7- Levels of Collaboration

    Module 8-Systems Thinking in Government

    Module 9- Values and Ethics

    Module 10-Civility and Trusteeship

ECOLOGICAL LEADERSHIP

It is easy to get confused about all the leadership books out there. However, I am still amazed that I seem to learn something new from most of these books and articles. Each thing that I read seems to add another layer to my overall view to the importance of leadership and to my own skill as a leader. In the article “Public health leadership development 2010: A seamless approach for the future” (Leadership in Public Health, 8, 1-2, 2008,2-4), I began to explore this issue of the many approaches to leadership development. Utilizing the concept of ecological leadership, I looked at a number of leadership approaches as subsets of an ecological approach to leadership. Ecological leaders are committed to the development of their personal talents, leadership skills and competencies throughout their professional careers while at the same time being committed to the appropriate application of these skills in their communities’ changing health care priorities. The table below, which is an expansion of the leadership skills addressed in the original paper, is a beginning of an exploration of the leadership subsets that we will need to address  involving emerging public health issues over the next several years.

Table- ECOLOGICAL LEADERSHIP SUBSETS AND LEADERSHIP SKILL AREAS

Leadership Subsets                                   Skill Areas

Managerial Leadership	Hierarchical Structures Matrix Structures Portfolio Management Coaching, mentoring Developing Others Team-Building Mission/Vision Problem-Solving Decision Making Reengineering/Reinvention
Transactional Leadership	Collaboration Coalition and Partnership Development Communication Skills Assessing the Environment Creating Clarity Sharing Power and Influence Building Trust Developing People for Teamwork Self-Reflection
Systems Leadership	Systems Thinking Analyzing Archetypes Adaptive Change Continuous Quality Improvement Complexity Analysis Learning Organization Scenario-Building Theory U Presencing(Senge)
Crisis Leadership	Emergency preparedness and Response Types of Crisis Community Readiness Family Safety Resilience Emergency Recovery Strategies Mitigation Public Health Law and Ethics Risk and Crisis Communication Tipping Point Awareness Forensic Epidemiology Pandemic Influenza Planning Consequence Management After Action Planning Change Strategies Community-Building
Meta-Leadership	Connectivity Leading Across Silos Transdisciplinary Skills Values Integration Goals Alignment Conflict Management Multi-dimensional Problem Solving
Strategic Leadership	Strategic Planning Stakeholder Analysis Negotiation Policy Analysis Futures Orientation Analytical Skills Innovative Orientation Headroom Strategies(McGuire and Rhodes)
Synergistic Leadership	Social Network Perspectives Partner Diversification Web 2.0 Systems Transformation Adaptive Leadership Sector Integration to Increase Value The Leadership Guide(Collaborative Learning) Cultural Change Agent Thinking Skills(DeBono)
Transformational Leadership	Paradigm Busting Policy Innovation Resistance to the Status Quo Strong Communications Skills Kotter Change Models
Global Health Leadership	Globalization Comprehensive Surveillance Strategies Multi-Cultural Communication International Health Law

 

This table is only meant to be a beginning of a discussion on the skills ties to a given leadership subset. The leader of the future will need to integrate and work from a number of skill orientations to effectively address the unexpected events that will guide our public health and human services future. Skill development is cumulative and interactive.

THE RESILIENCE FACTOR

In recent months, there has been increasing discussion about resilience in the context of emergency preparedness and response. Resilience is about flexibility, adaptation, and the ability to bounce back after an emergency or disaster. I started a discussion of the resilience factor in my 2006 book on leadership and emergency preparedness. In looking at the issue of planned and unplanned change, I noted that high or low resilience leaders respond differently. Resilience can be looked at as a continuum from very low resilience to very high resilience. At the low end of the continuum, leaders will try to ignore change in order to maintain an artificial status quo. Leaders at the middle of the continuum will see change and try to limit the impacts of the change on their organization or community. However, some adaptation will occur. At the high end of the resilience continuum, the leader relishes change and will often seek it out in order to improve organizational practices and community growth.

The resilience factor impacts individuals differently. We expect our leaders to be resilient. However, the personal impact of change affects individuals differently and may create a helplessness on the part of some people. Leaders live with change and the more resilient the leader, the more the leader can direct followers during a state of emergency. The more information an individual has or the more experience with certain types of change, the more their personal resilience ability is enhanced. Teams also have to be resilient in that they often have change as a major agenda item for their activities. Organizational resilience will require that the culture of the organization readily accepts change as inevitable and also realistic. These organizations will search out knowledge, experience, change and innovation as strong organizational values. At the community level, system-wide readiness is crucial. Disasters and emergencies happen. The more community residents are informed of potential change and the more the community practices potential response strategies through drills, exercise, and information exchange, the more likely that community resilience will be high

Synergistic leaders need a high level of resilience abilities. They are involved with multiple partners from different organizations as well as individuals who are not part of organizational silos but who have strong personal agenda concerns. Outcomes of collaboration are often unexpected and require leaders to be able to adapt to unexpected changes. Resilience is a systems concern and research is necessary to determine measures for resilience as well as systems measures of programmatic impact.

REALITY

Many people who have gone through my leadership workshops have told me that they go back to their work organizations which have not changed in their absence. They become frustrated by the fact that these workshops assume their leadership and teach them new tools and strategies. Then, they realize that they don’t know what to do or how to use these new tools and strategies. This brings us to a brief discussion of reality. In his now classic book Leadership Is An Art, Max DePree(Dell, 1989) pointed out that our beliefs and values come before policy and practice. He also said that a leader’s responsibility is first and foremost to define reality. With a reality check, our leadership takes place in a vacuum or a silo with a paradigm(a value system) defined by the walls of the silo and not by the system in which the organization is embedded. Leaders need a big picture view if their leadership is to flourish.

The following Baker’s Dozen is a start in helping the leader to define reality:

1. No matter how good a job you do, you can still lose your job.
2. Not all team members do the work.
3. It is your good managers that make you like your job.
4. Lists and steps don’t solve problems but they can guide actions that are process-based
5. Talent and competencies drive action; talent can’t be taught.
6. Not all leaders are the same.
7. Most leaders don’t change. The weaknesses remain. Play to the person’s strengths.
8. Training does not give you all the answers.
9. All plans lead to unexpected results.
10. Don’t expect politicians to value what you do. Their priorities are not your priorities.
11. Resilience is the secret weapon of leadership.
12. People don’t want change and they use budget considerations to justify their resistance.
13. Systems thinkers see beyond paradigms to the big reality picture.

If the leader defines reality, then the tools and strategies that are used will reflect this defined reality.