Wednesday, October 4, 2017

A521.9.3.RB- A Different Kind of Leader- Trey McNeil

I must admit that I did not look forward to this class. I have always been a poor communicator and I thought that the process of learning about the areas in which I struggle would be disheartening. However, this class helped me understand some of the areas that I lack and provided guidelines and a map to correct my negative tendencies. Denning (2011) discussed how language (both verbal and non-verbal) have meaning and this language can be effective in creating actions through storytelling or narrative. The tips and guidelines discussed by Denning (2011) culminated in the description of a different kind of leader. This type of leader is not necessarily the one who has the best ideas, talks the loudest, or has been employed with the company the longest. The leader described by Denning (2011) is described as an interactive leader.

When I first heard the term interactive leader I thought of the 1980’s game Simon. In the 1980’s Simon was about as interactive as it got and resembled the childhood games Simon says and follow the leader. The handheld game consisted of for buttons that would light up in a random sequential order. The participant must push the buttons in the same order as they lit up or would be subject to losing the game. Reminiscing about this game brought two thoughts to my mind. First, toys have come a long way since I was a child. Also, leadership has evolved since the prominence of the game Simon. 

Of course, Denning (2011) was not describing a 1980’s childhood game when he mentioned interactive leadership. However, he was discussing a more involved type of leadership with various dimensions. Three of the dimensions listed by Denning (2011) were (a) interactive leaders work with the world rather than against it, (b) interactive leaders build on personal integrity and authority, and (c) interactive leadership does not depend on the possession of hierarchal authority. As I began to ponder how I can become an interactive leader, I thought about how these three dimensions could be incorporated into my vision of leadership.

Denning (2011) stated that the interactive leader allows the world to do some of the work for them. I have traditionally answered to leaders who attempted to control everything in their power. They would set strict rules and regulations that their followers would be asked to obey. These rules and regulations were seen as an attempt to get everything in their power to bend to their will. Though a leader may maliciously plan everything out and believe their manipulation is going to be triumphant, the world does not always go as they thought it would. Sometimes leaders must ride the current in order to produce the best result.

Though I am a planner, my leadership strategy would include allowing the world to do some of the work for me. I do not believe in manipulation or control because I think they take away from trust and respect. I also believe that when Denning (2011) referred to the world, he was not only discussing the economy or environment but the ‘world’ of your organization. The ‘world’ of your organization would include the followers. I believe allowing the followers to have a sense of autonomy and make decisions affecting the strategy of the company is not only a great way to let the world do some of the work but also a great way to connect with your followers.

Denning (2011) stated that another dimension of an interactive leader is disclosing your personal integrity and authenticity. As I have gotten older, I realized the value of disclosing who I am and what I believe in. I feel that transparency is only fair and that if everyone was transparent in the beginning then time and effort could be saved.

Before this week, I thought the transparent side of me just meant that I was comfortable with clarity. However, Denning’s (2011) description of an interactive leader indicates that this characteristic could be considered leadership. Denning (2011) stated that the interactive leader who is open about what they stand for should be rewarded with respect. Four of the values that I would like to see in each of my followers are (a) honesty, (b) trust, (c) respect, and (d) kindness.  As an interactive leader, I would trust and respect my followers in hopes that both a connection and reciprocity would occur.

Denning (2011) also stated that interactive leaders do not depend on the possession of hierarchal authority. In analyzing the dimensions of interactive leadership listed by Denning (2011), this was my favorite dimension. I have worked in two organizations as a professional. Both of these organizations operated under the traditional hierarchal structure. Decisions are made at the top level of management as they saw fit. Strategical changes that occurred were made without the input of lower level employees.

As an interactive leader, I would allow for the voice of all employees to be heard no matter their place in the hierarchy.  Actually, as a leader, I would like to create a culture that eliminated the organizational hierarchy, but that is a different blog and a different story. According to Obolensky (2014), nearly sixty percent of all strategic ideas or solutions come from lower level employees. If more than half the strategic ideas come from the bottom of an organization, why are more leaders not interested in listening to what they have to say? Denning (2011) stated that any employee who can simplify the direction or configuration of the organization is, in turn, providing leadership. Not only would I like to be an interactive leader by allowing all levels of the hierarchy to have a voice, I would like to implant a culture where each voice was recognized as a form of leadership.

References

Denning, S. (2011). The leader’s guide to storytelling; Mastering the art and discipline of business narrative. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.

Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty (2nd ed.). Gower.

No comments:

Post a Comment