Leadership: the opium that clouds our minds

Ricardo I. Guido-Lavalle, PgMP, PMP

Most of our assumptions have outlived their uselessness. Marshall McLuhan Talking on Skype last week with y colleague and !riend "ailash #wati on certain anage ent topics he told e $...nothing of all this is new, Ricardo!%. I co ple ented $yes, and &ishop 'erkeley and his to be is to be perceived with his !alling trees in the wild was conte porary o! Sir Isaac (ewton. )e all re e &er (ewton and our inds are (ewtonian in shape. )ho re e &ers 'erkeley now*%. That+s it. There+s little actually new knowledge showing up these last decades, other than ,iggs+ &oso s, &ig-&ang theory, genetic discoveries, new aterials develop ent and sweet pi--a in Rio de .aneiro. This article is not against Leadership. In !act we need true leaders !or the new ti es. It is a&out the arketing o! it that delays the answers we all need to key /uestions in anage ent and value delivery. Please !ollow e in the ne0t pages. I+ a a-ed reading Thinking, 1ast and Low, &y the (o&el Pri-e 2aniel "ohne an. ,e &rings to e a key insight I need to add to an assertion I ade in a previous article3
There4s a &ias well ingrained in in our inds a!ter Isaac (ewton4s success, that I1 we do our part, T,5( things will happen !ollowing a controlla&le casual !ashion. 'ut co ple0ity, being causal, behaves like it4s not. #t all practical purposes, ost &ig challenges have any, any degrees o! !reedo , any stakeholders, - any pieces, and the pro&a&ility o! !ailure increases 6ust &ecause o! this co ple0ity. 7ou cannot si ply 8control8 your progra 3 you at ost can govern it.

"ohne an de onstrated that hu an &eings auto atically &uild causal stories o! non-causally linked events, and that characteristic is natural, ost pro&a&ly an evolutionary adaptation9:;<. Thus the /uest &eing sustained &y a lot o! people towards a non-causal =non-linear> way o! thinking regarding pro&le s and organi-ations is !ar ore co plicated than initially thought. It see s that syste ic thinking is not natural, and re/uires an e0tra ental e!!ort !ew people is willing to do. Take !or instance the !ollowing sentence !ro Peter 2rucker I picked al ost at rando 3

# . 4

The dark side of this impressive study is that we no longer need Evil Geniuses to deceive people. Kohneman's discoveries suggests that marketers and not-too brilliant people can grab a book and e ecute mass-manipulation devices. Taking advantage of the natural human bias to build causal histories by using few! unreliable data! communications people can prime minds and induce erroneous conclusions. "nce the mass buys an idea! it's hard for anyone to rollback it from minds. $egarding the previous comment. Today % open the newspaper and read that &resident "bama says that the '( is in risk to be as une)ual as *rgentina. The fact is that *rgentina has a little better ine)uality Gini inde ! and is the best performer in +atin *merica! as you can easily check in the ,%* -actbook. -eelings count in communications! not knowledge. Even more/ %n a previous blog post % commented on a (oftware -actory % worked at! whose historical records! showed 100-.00 slippage in cost and 10-#102 slippage in time! even for small engagements. *nd that would never influence the cost-time estimates of further pro3ects/ *nd more/ -or George (tinney! 14 5you read it right! 14 years old6! the 3ury took some 10 minutes to condemn him to the chair in 1744! based 3ust in a police declaration about a supposed self-incriminating confession by the boy. $acism is great part of the e planation! but reason in this case was absolutely overwhelmed by the anger that came from the crime characteristics! instead than by the evidence.

2id you think those ideas a&out e power ent were new* 2rucker pu&lished his Manage ent in 9?@<, !orty !ull years agoA 'ishop 'erkeley o&6ected (ewton+s idea o! a&solute ti e and space in early 9Bth century, and even with 5instein+s Relativity theories well in place it is still hard !or us to accept the idea even now in the :9st century. Today I open y note&ook with a cup o! co!!ee in y hand and !ind a post &y so eone in LinkedIn3

)ow. It see s this guy ca e to know a&out 2rucker+s words, at lastA 2o you understand* )e are ostly !rying and over-!rying the sa e concepts once and again, and we want our !aces in a T-shirt as new Che Guevaras o! organi-ations. 5ven worse, the dialog a&ove is a&out a rather du & C1D discussing with a see ingly o&vious C5D. That !or people ena&le entA #s Par enides said, nothing comes from nothing. I &uy that, and I guess than you ore or less will &uy it. )e are not only not creating su&stantial new ideas, &ut we are also !orgetting the &asic onesA Manage ent+s &asic idea is control, like in the !ollowing drawing a drunkard ade !or e3

Fig. 1. A manager managing

in

This picture has al ost the sa e structure as the classical control loop !ound ost &ooks3

Fig 2. The simplest control loop's diagram

)e are used to the idea o! top anagers anaging iddle- anagers, and iddle- anagers anaging $actual working% people. Let e odel a very si ple organi-ational structure with the onitor and control loops, each anager dealing with ; people3

Fig. 3. A 3x3 organizational chart with control and feed ac! lines

5asy seeing, even with a very si ple control !eed&ack loop, the syste /uickly evolves into non-linear. # non-linear syste is one that cannot &e solved &y seg enting it, solving its co ponents and then adding up the di!!erent solutions =yes, that a&out the whole is more than the sum of its parts). #s you can easily derive, there+s a great chance that the anager either wrongly co ands, isreads the !eed&ack loop, wrongly ad6usts the co ands to the people under hi and poorly records organi-ational learning. 7ou surely witnessed it already. It+s &ecause o! this co ple0ity that so e0pensive tools and so any people =,R, CMMI en!orcers, PMDs, Consultants, Coaches, etc> are &rought to solve this kind o! anage ent syste s+ draw&acks. In !act, lots o! consultancy !ir s ake a living 6ust &y easing the anager+s control loops. I+ one o! those consultants. 7ou are. The new na e !or management is now Leadership. It see s that anagers showed too uch attention to their careers and to old idols like Control and Monitoring, so they are now &eing evolved into leaders. Leaders will &e a&le to deal

with the new challenges co ple0ity poses to organi-ations. They are going to &etter take in account hu an issues. So I read every orning under $Motivation and Leadereship%-like !eeds. I 6ust ran Google !or $myths about leadership%. Read care!ully3 out o! &arely a do-en articles on leadership yths, onl" one does not ention $leaders are born leaders%. I don+t really care whether leaders &ring leadership in the 2(#, were ilked with (an !or Leaders or they need to pay !or a leadership training course. The !act that the vast a6ority o! entries even entions the /uestion strongly suggests that our pri ary concern is not a&out leadership, &ut a&out whether we will have a place in the new order. (ow, I have a /uestion !or you3 wh" do we need leaders* 2o we need leaders* Take your ti e, it deserves. Meanwhile I invite you to check one o! the answers I !ound in the we&3

Fig. #e need leadership ecause it's important to do what managers alread" tr" to

$o "ou need a tuxedo%

May&e you do. #re you attending a pro , a party in the 'elgian 5 &assy, or your own arriage* 7ou need a tu0edo. I think this article in 1or&es can &etter e0plain what I suggest3 Thus, in the vast anage ent literature, there are calls !or organi-ations to &eco e $ ore purpose!ul%, $ ore strategic%, $ ore client !ocused% or $ ore arket oriented%, along with pleas !or ore $intrinsic otivation%, $ ore e power ent%, $&etter e0ecution%, $stronger leadership%, $servant leadership%, $strengths-&ased leadership% or $pri al leadership%. The list goes on.
These ideas have all have &een tried, so eti es with good results. 'ut none has led to a reinvention o! anage ent. ThatEs partly &ecause single-!i0 solutions cannot address the co ple0 array o! pro&le s that anage ent now !aces. 5ach idea !ocuses on a particular su&set o! anage ent challenges without tackling the co ple0 syste ic change that is needed.

(ow, why do we need leaders* Let e answer in the !ollowing indirect way3 Traditional anage ent cannot cope with co ple0, wicked endeavors. So I guess that in order to challenge the tradition and the &asic assu ptions on control and anage ent, we could work it out &y using so e sort o! deviant anagers that would take in account the whole picture, would use lateral thinking and would ake people tea work in ways we could not acco plish &y using the traditional anage ent ways and skills. Let+s call the people that ena&les such &ehavior, Leaders.

This is the very root cause o! so any leadership courses, i.e. the perception that so ething is &loodily wrong in organi-ations. The apparent need !or leaders is part of an implementation of a management strategy or model, not a silver &ullet. Meanwhile, leadership is a &est seller, and I could not avoid entioning it, like I did with #gile. The ost agreed-upon origin o! these trou&les is a&out co ple0ity, non-linear pro&le s, the i possi&ility o! actually herding cats. )hether this characteri-ation i! !inal or not, no&ody knows, &ut it has any &elievers =&ut traditional anage ent has uch ore !ollowers>. Traditional anage ent did !ine !or aking 1ord-Ts and running ancient loo s. This kind o! anage ent is a co !ort -one, and to develop careers in that old is pretty straight!orward3 step on them all and climb. In turn, current approaches talk a&out distri&uted power and responsi&ility, &rand-new value syste s and 5thics, tea work, openness and transparency. )e need, however, a change in organi-ations, and the answer to the why is deceptively si ple and power!ul3 We need a change in organi ations facing wicked challenges because they evidently cannot deliver results and benefits as e!pected at visioning time, along with a better alignment with environmental factors, and no strategy based on current management models could solve this very gap between "ision and #!ecution.

&uch ado a out nothing

2ear reader, please !orgive e !or the &lur& a&ove. #s I put it, and taking in account "ohne an research, I know it is not easy thing to change your ind with these cra-y concepts. 1or they are cra-y indeedA Co ple0ity and non-linear thinking are actually a&solutely counter-intuitive, our &rains will always look !or cause an e!!ect, regardless o! our volition. I look at the Curiosity space progra in Mars, certainly as non-linear challenge, and I auto atically ap it to a si pler, linear challenge. # purposed act is needed to not succu & to y !irst intuitive thought. )hen I applied so e concepts a&out Gap-'ased 2elivery I was seen like a ad guy. )eren+t &y the !act I was doing !airly well, I would have &een hung &y the neck on the spot. )hat is in all this !or Gap-'ased 2elivery* Gap-'ased 2elivery is an approach toward &ridging the gap &etween actual progra state and !inal, e0pected state. G'2 ay or ay not evolve in a ethod, &ut in any case it+s an use!ul way to unstuck progra s and initiatives. 7ou will use G'2 not instead o! an e0isting e0ecution strategy =&e it traditional Plan-&ased progra anage ent, #gile, Mission Leadership or whatever ethod you pre!er>, &ut you+ll use it when the selected e0ecution strategy proves una&le to ake the pro6ect succeed. G'2 assu es not necessarily ore risks, &ut a very di!!erent set o! values and engage ent rules. #nyway so e arenas are &etter !its !or G'2 than others. In the traditionally anaged organi-ation, a Gap-&ased 2elivery attitude will show as a&solutely deviant and su&versive. G'2 -in its e0tre e, un&ound !or ulation- won+t respect hierarchies nor issions and !unctions3 what atters is what each tea e &er can &ring to the solution, no atter what hisFher place in the organi-ation is. G'2 won+t care a&out careers or past history, &ut a&out the pieces each person can &ring to &uild the &ridge toward success. Conversely, Gap-'ased 2elivery !its like a glove in the new organi-ation+s architecture, assu ptions and dyna ics. In a great uni!ication work Stephen 2enning, author o! The Leader+s Guide to Radical anage ent, proposes !ive key shi!t organi-ations need to e0ecute3

9. The !irst shi!t ste s !ro a onu ental transition in the power &alance &etween seller and &uyer3 to anage ent+s astonish ent, the &uyer is now in the driverEs seat. #s a result, the !ir Es goal has to shi!t to one o! delighting clients3 i.e. a shi!t !ro inside-out =$7ou take what we ake%> to outside-in =$)e seek to understand your pro&le s and will surprise you &y solving the %>. :. The second shi!t ste s !ro the !irst transition, as well as the epochal transition !ro se i-skilled la&or to knowledge work. #gain to anage ent+s astonish ent, traditional hierarchy suddenly doesnEt work any ore. The role o! the anager has to shi!t !ro &eing a controller to an ena&ler, so as to li&erate the energies and talents o! those doing the work and re ove i pedi ents that are getting in the way o! work. To support and sustain those two shi!ts, three other shi!ts are necessary3 ;. The ode o! coordination shi!ts !ro hierarchical &ureaucracy to dyna ic linking, i.e. to a way o! dyna ically linking sel!-driven knowledge work to the shi!ting re/uire ents o! delighting clients. <. There is a shi!t !ro value to valuesG i.e. a shi!t !ro a singleinded !ocus on econo ic value and a0i i-ing e!!iciency to instilling the values that will create innovation and growth !or the organi-ation over the long ter . H. Co unications shi!t !ro co and to conversation3 i.e. a shi!t !ro top-down co unications co prising predo inantly hierarchical directives to co unications ade up largely o! adult-to-adult conversations that solve pro&le s and generate new insights.

Shi!t 9 is the re/uired contact sur!ace &etween the organi-ation and its ecological niche. It de!ines the ulti ate (orth !or every Gap-'ased 2elivery intervention. Shi!t :, speci!ically, is the sa e 2rucker asks !or in the te0t I copied !or you in the &eginning o! this article. G'2 is a&out people ena&le ent, as is Mission Leadership. Shi!t H, &eing conse/uence =or, &etter, a re/uire ent> o! shi!ts 9 and : clearly disrupts the anage ent hierarchy, as it &reaches the co unication chains and thus su&verts hierarchies, Gap-'ased 2elivery will also strive !or such dyna icsH. Shi!t ;, dyna ic linking, is a re/uire ent also !or a good Gap-&ased 2elivery dyna ics, as it is !or #gile and Mission Leadership. Shi!t < will ake things uch easier !or Gap &ased 2elivery when it is a&out looking !or !easi&le e0ecution scenarios and desira&le outco es. )hile it+s a&solutely good to have the values and the vision set &e!ore engaging in e0ecution, &oth the tactical scenarios and the outstanding reality will call !or a revision o! the original o&6ectives and the /uality o! the planned &ene!its. Things change, the world change, inds do. I dou&t George Stinney, 9< would &e e0ecuted nowadays, either guilty or innocent. #nd this is a key concept that applies3 Gap-'ased 2elivery is a&out dyna ics. )here traditional anage ent sees states, G'2 sees snapshots o! evolving structures. Manage ent will see rules as architecturally constitutive o! the very
1 *gile in fact goes after such kind of communications! when it brings to the team the solution's owner. % however think *gile was timid! and ultimately bowed to traditional management8 hori9ontal communications are to be held inside the team! thus it results in an useful patch to organi9ation's faults. % guess *gile can evolve to naturally swim in the new organi9ation's waters. :y the way! ;patch; in this conte t is not a disrespect8 we are all about solving problems! not about elegance. G:< is a patch! in fact! when applied to traditionally-managed organi9ations.

anagerial activity, while G'2 will see rules as part o! a tactical situation. G'2 will try to sur! the rules and gain o entu !ro the or !ro the gaps the rules ake. )here a traditional player sees rules as constraints, Gap-'ased 2elivery sees terrain and opportunity. 5ven a &ad rule can give you haven. Rules ake sense as long as they are use!ul to reach the ne0t organi-ation+s evolutionary step. The ideal organi-ation -and there isn+t and there will never &e such ideal thingis a people co ple0 s oothly running in sync with its environ ent, changing with the changes in its ecological niche and aintaining the har ony o! its constituents. I! e0ternal rules change, the organi-ation ust change. I! people+s rules, e0pectations and needs change, the organi-ation changes. That is the ulti ate and pre!erred arena !or Gap-'ased 2elivery.
I#!ter living with their dys!unctional &ehavior !or so any years =a sunk cost i! ever there was one>, people &eco e invested in de!ending their dys!unctions rather than changing the .I J Marshall Golds ith Mo6o ITen years ago, Peter Senge introduced the idea o! the +learning organi-ation+ (ow he says that !or &ig co panies to change, we need to stop thinking like echanics and to start acting like gardeners.I J #lan M. )e&&er Learning !or a Change IThe greatest danger in ti es o! tur&ulence is not the tur&ulenceG it is to act with yesterdayEs logic.I J Peter 2rucker

---o--Kisit g&delivery.&logspot.co