Leadership opportunities occur in many formal and informal settings. Workplaces seek leaders to motivate employees in an official capacity, but often leadership can happen situationally, without intention, within casual working groups. Regardless of the leadership situation, characteristics of leadership are not only determined through external processes such as a person’s perceived knowledge and experience, they are also determined through the internal process of reflection on one’s actions, values, opinions, motivations and objectives (Castelli, 2015). The purpose of this reflection is to establish a preferred leadership approach, answer the question, “Can technology influence leadership?”, and provide an opinion on which leadership theory may lend itself best for digital learning environments.
Every career has its challenges and successes. Developing as a leader is a process including failures and accomplishments. It is the reflection on these experiences that will determine what kind of a leader one chooses to be and what leader one will become. Reflecting on my own experiences as a leader, the greatest challenge to overcome in the beginning was, to not impose my own agenda on employees (O’Toole, 2008). Letting go of a personal agenda at first felt like letting go of values and principles. However, watching people take initiative and pour their hearts into common projects, demonstrated quite the opposite. By letting go of personal expectations, multiple possibilities arose, each unique in their own way, and some more effective than the original intentions. This process creates a whole new set of values, a respect for other people’s opinions and perspectives, and challenging held beliefs and assumptions, offering new insights. The ability to be empathetic to other’s needs and the willingness to listen is a value that facilitates this process of letting go and creates an environment that is safe for everyone (Castelli, 2015). Reflective practice lies at the core of effective practitioners and is a value that is central to experiential learning. As an educator of children, this approach to learning transferred to my approach in leadership (Dennison, 2012). Reflective leadership affords the individual the ability to change, and creates a climate for innovations in the search for solutions to complex problems (Castelli, 2015). The digital age created new and unique conditions for people in leadership positions and needs to be considered in the development of one’s leadership identity.
Digital technology brought about changes to the way we communicate with each other and computer-mediated communications are central to how we interact as a society today. The perception of relationship has shifted from a singular experience with easily identified individuals to one of a multi-level experience of relationships across several networks of people, linking institutions and working groups (Wellman, 2001). In addition to groups of people, we live in a world of loosely knitted networks. More specifically, Boyd (2011), identifies these digital social groups as “networked publics” and defines them as “publics that are restructured by networked technologies …[and invented groups]… as a result of the intersection of people, technology, and practice” (para. 2). This immersion in digital relationships requires reflection about considerations on how to transform leadership into digital leadership, as a motivator for changes in professional practice, to allow the emergence of innovative solutions for complex challenges (Sheninger, 2014). Harnessing the knowledge of a vast digital networked public is a huge advantage for the leader who is seeking answers to remove barriers and bring about results that incorporate and address diverse perspectives. Therefore, reflective practice remains central for the digital leader when addressing changes in the learning environment of today’s digital learner. The reflective leader does not only react to changes, but is forward looking, anticipating changes in digital learning environments to select the best solutions (Khan, 2017).
The environment in which a leader functions is affected by continuous changes such as differences in values and abilities of followers, rapid changes in technology, and different responsibilities and skills, according to the task at hand, requiring flexibility and responsiveness (Yukle & Mahsud, 2010). This adaptability to a variety of situations is coined as Adaptive Leadership Theory and described as leadership that activates people to successfully find solutions for difficult problems (Khan, 2017). This form of leadership can create tension within organizations and working groups, generating resistance to any resulting solutions, due to the leader’s willingness to challenge “beliefs, values and norms” (Khan, 2017, p. 179). It does, however, provide foresight and responsiveness in a rapidly changing world and affords leaders to “address problems based on current realities rather than actions based on the past” (Khan, 2017, p. 180). Bates (2015) states institutions today still replicate earlier times of inception and online students access environments that fail to adopt to the needs of today’s learner. “If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s students, we rob our children of tomorrow” (Dewey, 1916). Digital learning environments need leaders who are responsive to the needs of digital learners, are able to adapt to ever changing conditions in the environment, and are not afraid to challenge the status quo if it means bringing about results that will increase the quality of the learning environment.
Reflective practice is the foundation for digital leadership. It affords the ability for the adaptive leader to have foresight and respond to environmental conditions quickly. Adaptive Leadership Theory strengthens reflective practice and frames a leader’s ability to find solutions, using a collaborative and responsive approach. Digital environments need this kind of flexible and forward thinking leadership in order to serve today’s learner.
References
Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. BC Campus. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/
Boyd, D. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self (pp. 39–58). New York, NY: Rutledge.
Castelli, P. (2016). Reflective leadership review: a framework for improving organisational performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217-236.
Dennison, P. (2012). Reflective practice: The enduring influence of Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 1(1).
Dewey, J. & Dewey, E. (1915). Schools of tomorrow. New York, NY: The Knickerbocker Press. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/schoolsoftomorro005826mbp/page/n21
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).
Sheninger, E. (2014). Pillars of digital leadership. International Centre for Leadership in Education.
Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(5537), 2031-2034.
Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Research and Practice, 62, 81–93.
