Month: February 2018

Over the course of my consultations with members of my professional network I was able to explore how leadership approaches change to a digital environment in three different organizational structures. The three organizations I was exposed to were a public school board, private college, and a private sector company in the construction field. While each of these settings were different, they all had similarities, most notably the fact that the decision-making process was top-down with little input from staff. The approach could be described by the power leadership theory where those with the might have all the control (O’Toole, 2008).

At the public school board, input from staff was more difficult due to the sheer size of the organization, but key members of the transition team still felt out of the loop and ill-prepared for the changes that came with transitioning to hybrid learning. Over time, staff and students alike adapted to the process and a system was established albeit more piecemeal than teachers would have liked. More communication and ongoing support was cited as necessary for staff buy-in and would have greatly assisted in a smoother transition. In short, the organizational readiness which includes task demands, resource availability, and also situational factors (Weiner, 2009) were not properly assessed.

The transition to an online modules-based course at the private college was also a process that lacked consultation. The college had decided to go with a course divided into modules that could be completed online, forgoing the in-class teaching delivery model. This was believed to cut costs such as textbooks and training for instructors as instructors would be facilitators versus teachers in this new model. They would only be called upon when there were questions by students. The college was under the assumption that any instructor would be able to assume the role of facilitator as all the material needed for the students would be online. In reality, staff had challenges answering certain questions from students and in turn students had challenges completing the modules. Leadership was not mindful or aware that staff would encounter these issues. The confidence that instructors have in their knowledge needed to be built up by leadership (Castelli, 2015) to support the learning of the students. Over time staff and students adapted to this new model but there likely would have been fewer challenges had staff been consulted on how the new delivery model would be phased in and what was the best way to facilitate the learning for the students.

The company in the construction field had wanted to transition to online safety training. After completing modules online, tradespeople would get their safety accreditation. This decision was made by the owner unilaterally as this was a small company where the boss made most decisions on his own. While the transition was completed, the staff member who was in charge of the transition was saddled with a tight deadline and limited resources to complete such a process. This was coupled with the pushback and resistance from labourers who were less technologically proficient and felt that they were forced to change to this new system. Weller and Anderson (2013) note that change can happen even with resistance, “but it requires strategic direction, leadership and is not done quickly”. More time and planning would have assisted in this process.

My own approach to leadership has been that of shared and adaptive leadership. While it is possible to lead in a manner where those that have the most power dictate what happens, these examples have shown that challenges arise when implementing a major overhaul such as a shift to a digital learning environment. Employees are not motivated and they feel forced to comply when they are not consulted or the rationale has not been explained to them. Each of the organizations could benefit from reflective leadership which allows for a more motivated workforce, renewed interest and effort, and improved performance in working towards the change (Castelli, 2015). Also in each of the situations, there were unexpected outcomes which could have been remedied by an adaptive approach that assesses the changes in environment and manages the situation accordingly (Khan, 2017). The three lessons learned, involving more communication, support and time show adaptive and shared/collaborative leadership which will guide my future leadership endeavours.

 

References

Castelli, P. (2016). Reflective leadership review: a framework for improving organisational performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217-236.

Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or Transactional Leadership in Current Higher Education: A Brief Comparison. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3).

O’Toole, James (2008). Notes Toward a Definition of Values-Based Leadership. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 1(1).

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(67).

Weller, M., & Anderson, T., (2013). Digital Resilience in Higher Education. European Journal of Open Distance and E-Learning, 16(1), 53-66.

It is my opinion that the theories/models for change have not evolved too much over time. Theories such as Systems theory and Theory E are broad and overarching. In the Systems theory, an organization is a complex system where any type of change in one area will inadvertently cause a shift elsewhere. Theory E is a change management theory that describes the process of achieving the best economic results for an organization (Biech, 2007). Both these theories can be adopted into today’s contexts with minimal effort. For example, an adaptation would be depending on the environment, an implementation of technology may or may not cause a shift everywhere. Also, as a society it is hoped that the most important thing to an organization is not the bottom line and therefore Theory E should incorporate social license within the change management mandate.

In terms of an organizational change theory that aligns with my leadership approach, I believe that the Six step method most closely fits with my values. This method involves reassigning roles to accomplish a specific task with the six steps being: 1) jointly diagnosis change, 2) develop a shared vision, 3) foster consensus for change, 4) spread revitalization to all department, 5) institutionalize revitalization through policies, and 6) monitor & adjust strategies (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). I strongly believe in shared leadership and collaborative endeavours, which the Six step method espouses throughout. While this method is not ideal in a large organization such as my own, the shared leadership component is strongly encouraged by my executive through all departments.

Leadership itself has a very important role to play in managing change. Chiefly, this is because often change is dictated from the top. To manage change well though, there needs to be an assessment of organizational readiness for the change. Weiner (2009) notes the three factors that influence the ability to implement change as being task demands, resource availability, and situational factors. If leadership fails to take stock of these factors, the organizational change will not have buy-in from staff and the process will be far less smooth than it could be, and perhaps even fail.

Failure can be caused by resistance. The resilience theory captured my attention as I had always wondered why large organizations were resistant to change. Holling’s ecological system analogy on how systems can absorb and adapt to change is fascinating (as cited in Weller & Anderson, 2013). I can now see how bureaucracies in their entrenched ways refuse to change institutionally. While there may be individuals who want change, the established ways and infrastructure may not give way. Mindset can also play a part. I believe once an effective strategy is in place such as one that informs all staff of the benefits of change and/or dictates the shared responsibility (Biech, 2007), there can be a positive transition which while may be slow, moves the organization into the future.

 

References

Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 234-262.

Biech, E. (2007). Models for Change. In Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s Practical Guide to Change Mastery. Alexandria, VA: ASTD [Books24x7 database]

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(67).

Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital Resilience in Higher Education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.

My Approach

In my current role as a research analyst, I have not had many opportunities to take up the task of being a leader. When the situation does arise, often I have to take the reins unexpectedly. This is why adaptive leadership as described by Khan (2017) resonates with me. I do not think any two situations or projects are the same. While there can be many similarities and processes can be replicated, circumstances change; whether it is the people or the task at hand. Therefore the holistic view of adaptive leadership which takes into account leader-follower relationships and environmental issues (Khan, 2017) makes the most sense for me. My approach has always been one of open communication. I want to know what everyone is thinking and I value the input of all team members. Being a communicative leader creates a culture of trust and team members respect leaders who are transparent, actively listen, and are open to communication (Castelli, 2015). I think I am able to portray mindfulness, where I recognize the diversity of the team and am aware of the relationship dynamics at play. I have been lucky so far in that most of my leadership endeavours, I have been able to select who I would like to work with. This is not the case for most people, but I took into account my experience with the potential team members along with assessing their ability to both complete the task and work with others. My journey of self discovery in this Unit has revealed that I do take a values-based leadership approach and encourage others to share the values of working for a common good. O’Toole (2008) notes that values-based leaders “find personal satisfaction and fulfilment by providing the opportunity for others to realize their goals and potential” (p. 6). While I had not thought of it before, I do strive to assist others in their goals and help them try and reach their potential. That leads into my belief of shared leadership and having all take ownership of their tasks. There should be growth and credit for all and not just the leader.

Introduction of Digital Technology

Digital technologies have made an impact on education, but also on how people and situations can be managed. Where meetings would have to take place face-to-face in the past, teleconferences or web meetings are now common place. The dynamic of how people work has changed where physicality of an individual does not matter anymore. This is especially pronounced when working with team members who may be from another region or country altogether. The ability to respect diverse cultures and customs comes into play as these individuals may be bringing a different way of approaching situations which may not be familiar. The leader needs to lead by example in how to work with others of diverse cultures to show the team how best to interact with each other (Castelli, 2015).

Meaning and intention can also get lost when presented in text, so I have found that it is best to make sure everyone is clear and any potential miscommunication is cleared up. For example, a comment made in jest may not come across lightly and could be taken seriously. This is a danger when there is a lack of face-to-face situations to clear things up.

Building a social team environment can also be difficult with a lack of physical communication. There can be feelings of detachment or loneliness. I feel there needs to be enough check-ins/meetings so that all members can be in the loop while recognizing that too many of these sessions might cause an individual to feel like they are being checked up on or micromanaged. Team members need to be trusted with tasks as the leader cannot possibly do every little thing. Such check-ins should be to motivate and provide feedback that can improve performance and update on any changes that may have occurred.

Moving Forward

In summary, I believe that adaptive leadership must form the basis in terms of leading in digital learning environments, especially when ushering in change. The very concept of change implies that there will be unforeseen variables at play and new initiatives/concepts that need to be enacted. If one is not adaptive and follows a standard ‘playbook’, they run the risk of not being able to handle situations that are not standard and potentially mismanage a vital part of a project. Transactional leadership works well in situations where goals are clearly laid out with a set out process (Khan, 2017). Change in digital learning environments can often be unexpected and continuously evolving. Team members must also be motivated to continue working on their tasks, which could be a challenge when goals have not yet fully emerged or are in flux. Adaptive leaders “carefully recognize potential changes in the external environment and consider the best path that will positively affect the organization” (Khan, 2017, p. 179).

Utilizing values-based leadership is also an important tool towards ushering in change in digital learning environments. By having everyone on the same page and working towards a common good, all members of the team can work cohesively while maintaining motivation and morale (O’Toole, 2008). Shared leadership can be incorporated along with values-based leadership. Team members should be proud of their work and actively contribute towards the process. Moving forward, the model I aspire to adopt is one of values-based leadership that is adaptive and encourages shared ownership.

 

References

Castelli, P. (2016). Reflective leadership review: a framework for improving organisational performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217-236.

Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or Transactional Leadership in Current Higher Education: A Brief Comparison. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3).

O’Toole, James (2008). Notes Toward a Definition of Values-Based Leadership. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 1(1).