Transforming organizational leadership : a schema change perspective

Successful organizational transformation typically requires transformed leadership; that is, fundamental changes in the implicit leadership schema that underpin observed organizational leadership practice. The purpose of this study is to elaborate leadership schema change theory by investigating a case study in which the CEO of a public infrastructure organization sought to transform traditional organizational leadership to facilitate wider organization transformation. Data were generated through focus groups and semi-structured interviews at four points over a three-year period. Our findings suggest that (a) change leader initiatives do not necessarily activate the cognitive processing required to achieve leadership schema change, (b) collective schema change, defined in terms of the system of beliefs and values underlying the new leading-managing schema did not occur, however, (c) sub-schema change did occur. The research contributes to existing literature on implicit leadership schema change in three main ways. First, we provide a schema change framework to guide current and future research on schema change. Second, we highlight the role that both change leader initiatives and individual and social processing play in schema change. Finally, we stress the role of teleological processes in leadership schema change.

Gaps in organizational leadership : linking strategic and operational activities through design-led propositions

The relationship between design process and business systems has been of interest to both practitioners and researchers exploring the numerous opportunities and challenges of this unlikely relationship. Often the relationship is presented as building design thinking capability within an organization, which can be broadly described as the union of design and strategy. Brown (2008) notes that design thinking is ‘‘a discipline that uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what is technically feasible and what business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunities’’ (p. 1). The value that design thinking brings to an organization is a different way of framing situations and possibilities, doing things, and tackling problems: essentially a cultural transformation of the way it undertakes its business. The work of Martin (2009) has clearly shown the generalized differences between design thinking and business thinking, highlighting many instances in which these differences have been overcome, but also noting the many obstacles of trying to unify both approaches within an organization. Liedtka (2010) encourages firms to try and persist in overcoming these barriers, as she has noted that ‘‘business strategy desperately needs design ... because design is all about action and business strategy too often turns out to be only about talk ... fewer than 10 percent of new strategies are ever fully executed’’ (p. 9).

Global Nursing Issues and Development: Analysis of World Health Organization Documents

Purpose To analyze World Health Organization (WHO) documents to identify global nursing issues and development. Design Qualitative content analysis. Methods Documents published by the six WHO regions between 2007 and 2012 and with key words related to nurse/midwife or nursing/midwifery were included. Themes, categories, and subcategories were derived. The final coding reached 80% agreement among three independent coders, and the final coding for the discrepant coding was reached by consensus. Findings Thirty-two documents from the regions of Europe (n = 19), the Americas (n = 6), the Western Pacific (n = 4), Africa (n = 1), the Eastern Mediterranean (n = 1), and Southeast Asia (n = 1) were examined. A total of 385 units of analysis dispersed in 31 subcategories under four themes were derived. The four themes derived (number of unit of analysis, %) were Management & Leadership (206, 53.5), Practice (75, 19.5), Education (70, 18.2), and Research (34, 8.8). Conclusions The key nursing issues of concern at the global level are workforce, the impacts of nursing in health care, professional status, and education of nurses. International alliances can help advance nursing, but the visibility of nursing in the WHO needs to be strengthened. Clinical Relevance Organizational leadership is important in order to optimize the use of nursing competence in practice and inform policy makers regarding the value of nursing to promote people's health.

Navigating a complex organizational landscape : leadership challenges and practices

This paper discusses exploratory research to identify the reported leadership challenges faced by leaders in the public sector in Australia and what specific leadership practices they engage in to deal with these challenges. Emerging is a sense that leadership in these complex work environments is not about controlling or mandating action but about engaging in conversation, building relationships and empowering staff to engage in innovative ways to solve complex problems. In addition leaders provide a strong sense of purpose and identity to guide behaviour and decisions to overcome being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of demands in a unpredictable and often unsupportive environment. Questions are raised as to the core competencies leaders need to develop to drive and underpin these leadership practices and the implications this has for the focus on future leadership development programmes. The possible direction of a future research programme will be put forward for further discussion.

When leadership meets organizational change : the influence of the top management team and supervisory leaders on change appraisals, change attitudes, and adjustment to change

Despite the importance of adaption and change for firm survival, the failure rate of organizational change efforts remains alarmingly high (Beer and Nohria, 2000; Kotter, 1995). In a recent global survey of over 3,000 executives,Meaney and Pung (2008) reported that two-thirds of executives indicated that their firm had failed to successfully implement organizational changes. Similarly, academic researchers have also concluded that difficulties in implementing and managing organizational change efforts often precipitate organizational crises (Probst and Raisch, 2005). As a result, attention has been directed to identify the factors that improve the likelihood of successfully implementing organizational change efforts. While there has been practitioner-oriented discussion around the pivotal role of workplace leaders in reducing resistance to change, only a limited number of empirical studies have examined relationships between leader behavior and employee change attitudes (e.g., Bommer, Rich, and Rubin, 2005; Herold, Caldwell, and Liu, 2008; Nemanich and Keller, 2007; Oreg and Berson, 2011). However...

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition in development projects

New product development projects are experiencing increasing internal and external project complexity. Complexity leadership theory proposes that external complexity requires adaptive and enabling leadership, which facilitates opportunity recognition (OR). We ask whether internal complexity also requires OR for increased adaptability. We extend a model of EO and OR to conclude that internal complexity may require more careful OR. This means that leaders of technically or structurally complex projects need to evaluate opportunities more carefully than those in projects with external or technological complexity.

A new look at leadership in collaborative networks : process catalysts

Collaborative networks have come to form a large part of the public sector’s strategy to address ongoing and often complex social problems. The relational power of networks, with its emphasis on trust, reciprocity and mutuality provides the mechanism to integrate previously dispersed and even competitive entities into a collective venture(Agranoff 2003; Agranoff and McGuire 2003; Mandell 1994; Mandell and Harrington 1999). It is argued that the refocusing of a single body of effort to a collective contributes to reducing duplication and overlap of services, maximizes increasingly scarce resources and contributes to solving intractable or 'wicked’problems (Clarke and Stewart 1997). Given the current proliferation of collaborative networks and the fact that they are likely to continue for some time, concerns with the management and leadership of such arrangements for optimal outcomes are increasingly relevant. This is especially important for public sector managers who are used to working in a top-down, hierarchical manner. While the management of networks (Agranoff and McGuire 2001, 2003), including collaborative or complex networks (Kickert et al. 1997; Koppenjan and Klijn 2004), has been the subject of considerable attention, there has been much less explicit discussion on leadership approaches in this context. It is argued in this chapter that the traditional use of the terms ‘leader’ or ‘leadership’ does not apply to collaborative networks. There are no ‘followers’ in collaborative networks or supervisor-subordinate relations. Instead there are equal, horizontal relationships that are focused on delivering systems change. In this way the emergent organizational forms such as collaborative networks challenge older models of leadership. However despite the questionable relevance of old leadership styles to the contemporary work environment, no clear alternative has come along to take its place.

Queensland Emergency Medical System : a structural and organizational model for the emergency medical system in Australia

Objective: The emergency medical system (EMS) can be defined as a comprehensive, coordinated and integrated system of care for patients suffering acute illness and injury. The aim of the present paper is to describe the evolution of the Queensland Emergency Medical System (QEMS) and to recommend a strategic national approach to EMS development. Methods: Following the formation of the Queensland Ambulance Service in 1991, a state EMS committee was formed. This committee led the development and approval of the cross portfolio QEMS policy framework that has resulted in dynamic policy development, system monitoring and evaluation. This framework is led by the Queensland Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee. Results: There has been considerable progress in the development of all aspects of the EMS in Queensland. These developments have derived from the improved coordination and leadership that QEMS provides and has resulted in widespread satisfaction by both patients and stakeholders. Conclusions: The strategic approach outlined in the present paper offers a model for EMS arrangements throughout Australia. We propose that the Council of Australian Governments should require each state and Territory to maintain an EMS committee. These state EMS committees should have a broad portfolio of responsibilities. They should provide leadership and direction to the development of the EMS and ensure coordination and quality of outcomes. A national EMS committee with broad representation and broad scope should be established to coordinate the national development of Australia's EMS.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition and exploitation in development projects

Principal Topic: Project structures are often created by entrepreneurs and large corporate organizations to develop new products. Since new product development projects (NPDP) are more often situated within a larger organization, intrapreneurship or corporate entrepreneurship plays an important role in bringing these projects to fruition. Since NPDP often involves the development of a new product using immature technology, we describe development of an immature technology. The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft is being developed by the U.S. Department of Defense and eight allied nations. In 2001 Lockheed Martin won a $19 billion contract to develop an affordable, stealthy and supersonic all-weather strike fighter designed to replace a wide range of aging fighter aircraft. In this research we define a complex project as one that demonstrates a number of sources of uncertainty to a degree, or level of severity, that makes it extremely difficult to predict project outcomes, to control or manage project (Remington & Zolin, Forthcoming). Project complexity has been conceptualized by Remington and Pollock (2007) in terms of four major sources of complexity; temporal, directional, structural and technological complexity (See Figure 1). Temporal complexity exists when projects experience significant environmental change outside the direct influence or control of the project. The Global Economic Crisis of 2008 - 2009 is a good example of the type of environmental change that can make a project complex as, for example in the JSF project, where project managers attempt to respond to changes in interest rates, international currency exchange rates and commodity prices etc. Directional complexity exists in a project where stakeholders' goals are unclear or undefined, where progress is hindered by unknown political agendas, or where stakeholders disagree or misunderstand project goals. In the JSF project all the services and all non countries have to agree to the specifications of the three variants of the aircraft; Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL), Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) and the Carrier Variant (CV). Because the Navy requires a plane that can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, that required a special variant of the aircraft design, adding complexity to the project. Technical complexity occurs in a project using technology that is immature or where design characteristics are unknown or untried. Developing a plane that can take off on a very short runway and land vertically created may highly interdependent technological challenges to correctly locate, direct and balance the lift fans, modulate the airflow and provide equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft and at the same time control engine temperatures. These technological challenges make costing and scheduling equally challenging. Structural complexity in a project comes from the sheer numbers of elements such as the number of people, teams or organizations involved, ambiguity regarding the elements, and the massive degree of interconnectedness between them. While Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, they are assisted in major aspects of the JSF development by Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Pratt & Whitney and GE/Rolls-Royce Fighter Engineer Team and innumerable subcontractors. In addition to identifying opportunities to achieve project goals, complex projects also need to identify and exploit opportunities to increase agility in response to changing stakeholder demands or to reduce project risks. Complexity Leadership Theory contends that in complex environments adaptive and enabling leadership are needed (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKelvey, 2007). Adaptive leadership facilitates creativity, learning and adaptability, while enabling leadership handles the conflicts that inevitably arise between adaptive leadership and traditional administrative leadership (Uhl-Bien and Marion, 2007). Hence, adaptive leadership involves the recognition and opportunities to adapt, while and enabling leadership involves the exploitation of these opportunities. Our research questions revolve around the type or source of complexity and its relationship to opportunity recognition and exploitation. For example, is it only external environmental complexity that creates the need for the entrepreneurial behaviours, such as opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? Do the internal dimensions of project complexity, such as technological and structural complexity, also create the need for opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? The Kropp, Zolin and Lindsay model (2009) describes a relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO), opportunity recognition (OR), and opportunity exploitation (OX) in complex projects, with environmental and organizational contextual variables as moderators. We extend their model by defining the affects of external complexity and internal complexity on OR and OX. ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: When the environment complex EO is more likely to result in OR because project members will be actively looking for solutions to problems created by environmental change. But in projects that are technologically or structurally complex project leaders and members may try to make the minimum changes possible to reduce the risk of creating new problems due to delays or schedule changes. In projects with environmental or technological complexity project leaders who encourage the innovativeness dimension of EO will increase OR in complex projects. But projects with technical or structural complexity innovativeness will not necessarily result in the recognition and exploitation of opportunities due to the over-riding importance of maintaining stability in the highly intricate and interconnected project structure. We propose that in projects with environmental complexity creating the need for change and innovation project leaders, who are willing to accept and manage risk, are more likely to identify opportunities to increase project effectiveness and efficiency. In contrast in projects with internal complexity a much higher willingness to accept risk will be necessary to trigger opportunity recognition. In structurally complex projects we predict it will be less likely to find a relationship between risk taking and OP. When the environment is complex, and a project has autonomy, they will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. When a project experiences high competitive aggressiveness and their environment is complex, project leaders will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. This paper reports the first stage of a three year study into the behaviours of managers, leaders and team members of complex projects. We conduct a qualitative study involving a Group Discussion with experienced project leaders. The objective is to determine how leaders of large and potentially complex projects perceive that external and internal complexity will influence the affects of EO on OR. ---------- Results and Implications: These results will help identify and distinguish the impact of external and internal complexity on entrepreneurial behaviours in NPDP. Project managers will be better able to quickly decide how and when to respond to changes in the environment and internal project events.

A model of organisational leadership development informing succession development : elements and practices

It is noted from observations of Compton (2009), Richards (2008), Taylor and Bennett (2002), and others that succession leadership planning and development fails to receive adequate attention in the corporate sector (see Byham 2002; Richards 2008; Wellins and Byham 2001). This paper acknowledges a marked paucity of systematic succession leadership development in education organisations. The need would seem to be compounded at a time when substantial attrition in the leadership ranks is expected over the next five years, reflecting widespread workforce demographics (Busine and Watt 2005; Jacobzone, Cambois, Chaplain, and Robine 1998; Taylor and Bennett 2002). The Lantern model has been developed in response to a perceived need to offer an integrated, systematic approach to organisational and succession leadership development. The model offers an organising framework for considering succession leadership development in a strategic, integrated way. The concept is based on organisational development and leadership literature which sees leadership development not as a series of 'tacked on' activities but as an organic 'whole of organisation' approach fostering the relevant knowledge, skills and understandings which support and 'grow' leaders as the organisation goes about its business. This paper explores how such an ideal might happen, and it suggests that pursuing such an ideal is timely. The leadership baton is set to shift at an accelerated rate in universities, as for organisations broadly, owing to age-related attrition. Moreover, given the increased complexity and demands of the leadership remit in the education leadership environment, it would seem particularly opportune to explore a framework concentrating on engendering a positive, connected organisational climate capable of growing strategic leadership strength from within. Eight core elements of the model, derived from the literature and practice research, are explored. The Lantern model purports to 'cover the bases' of succession leadership development, with particular reference to the education environment. The model is next described

The contribution of leadership attributes to large scale, complex project success

Mismanagement of large-scale, complex projects has resulted in spectacular failures, cost overruns, time blowouts, and stakeholder dissatisfaction. We focus discussion on the interaction of key management and leadership attributes which facilitate leaders’ adaptive behaviors. These behaviors should in turn influence adaptive team member behavior, stakeholder engagement and successful project outcomes, outputs and impacts. An understanding of this type of management will benefit from a perspective based in managerial and organizational cognition. The research question we explore is whether successful leaders of large-scale complex projects have an internal process leading to a display of administrative, adaptive, and enabling behaviors that foster adaptive processes and enabling behaviors within their teams and with external stakeholders. At the core of the model we propose interactions of key attributes, namely cognitive flexibility, affect, and emotional intelligence. The result of these cognitive-affective attribute interactions is leadership leading to enhanced likelihood of complex project success.

Occupational driver safety : conceptualising a leadership-based intervention to improve safe driving performance

Occupational driving crashes are the most common cause of death and injury in the workplace. The physical and psychological outcomes following injury are also very costly to organizations. Thus, safe driving poses a managerial challenge. Some research has attempted to address this issue through modifying discrete and often simple target behaviors (e.g., driver training programs). However, current intervention approaches in the occupational driving field generally do not consider the role of organizational factors in workplace safety. This study adopts the A-B-C framework to identify the contingencies associated with an effective exchange of safety information within the occupational driving context. Utilizing a sample of occupational drivers and their supervisors, this multi-level study examines the contingencies associated with the exchange of safety information within the supervisor-driver relationship. Safety values are identified as an antecedent of the safety information exchange, and the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship and safe driving performance is identified as the behavioral consequences. We also examine the function of role overload as a factor influencing the relationship between safety values and the safety information exchange. Hierarchical Linear Modelling found that role overload moderated the relationship between supervisors’ perceptions of the value given to safety and the safety information exchange. A significant relationship was also found between the safety information exchange and the subsequent quality of the leader-member exchange relationship. Finally, the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship was found to be significantly associated with safe driving performance. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.