Location: A New Leadership Mindset
Showing 3 threads
|Started By||Thread Subject||Replies||Last Post|
|Gradymcg||refining the model of collective leadership||9||Jul 19 2010, 8:26 AM EDT by amacgillivray|
Thread started: Mar 16 2010, 10:33 AM EDT
I think Debra makes a good case for the limits of leader development, which is an expression of the increasingly anachronistic "heroic" model of leadership, and a equally good case for the power of leadership development, which taps into the wisdom and energy of the collective and focuses more directly on impact. It also makes a nice contribution by articulating the model underlying leader development, and mapping the elements of an alternative emphasis on leadership development. What remains to be done, from my point of view, is to create a new model that makes cause/result connections as explicit as the old model, while incorporating--or acknowledging--elements like those Debra points to. The Center for Creative Leadership offers one way of thinking about such a model by positing three outcomes of leadership--direction, alignment, and commitment. What I like about this model is that it leaves entirely open how one gets there and who is involved. It focuses only on results. But the model stops short of specifying community- or system-level impact, which Debra stresses. I'm thinking it would be worth exploring how to integrate these two approaches.
1 out of 1 found this valuable.
Show Last Reply
|DeborahMeehan||Relational||2||Mar 8 2010, 12:58 PM EST by DeborahMeehan|
Thread started: Feb 24 2010, 1:48 PM EST
Thanks Eugene. Great editing to get us right to the heart of it. Took another try at addressing the relational question. I see what you mean. The main point we are trying to get at is that we are describing a different way of looking at leadership that is not unilateral or directive with one person influencing a group. As we look at how groups connect to act we believe that leadership engages a group that may even be constantly changing in nature and composition in a process in which people assume and change roles and in which there does not need to be a dominant point of influence. In this type of process individuals actually relax their identity and attachment to specific points of view to create space for direction to emerge and being enriched by many, highly engaged participants.
Show Last Reply
|eekim||I love it!||0||Feb 24 2010, 1:57 AM EST by eekim|
Thread started: Feb 24 2010, 1:57 AM EST
I made some cuts in the first section, which you can see by checking the document history of this page. I'm also a little bit unclear about the meaning of "relational process," a term which you use a lot in that first section. Later sections help clarify it somewhat, but I think it might be helpful to choose some different words.
Beyond that, I love this, and I love that you wrote it. It's tight, it's clear, it takes an unambiguous stance, and I think it will be very helpful in grounding the conversations for this project.