Professional Bureaucracy The professional services firm by 9DvZVQ


									Portland State University
              MIM 512
     Global Leadership & Ethics
           January 2012
• Review & Questions from last class
  • Javidan Article discussion
• Guest Lecture: Anna Young, Senior
  Director of Strategy and Learning- Mercy
• Lecture
  •   Leadership & identity
  •   Change and culture
  •   Leadership, organizations, and change
  •   Distance Leadership
Javidan’s Model
Visionary – develop a new sense of direction
Innovator – risk takers who generate ideas
Mobilizer – develop a pool of intellectual energy
Auditor – High performance expectations
Ambassadors – understands intra/inter orgs
Socializer – inclusive of others
Consideration - listens
Self-sacrifice – viewed as participative
Analyzer – understands and listens
Taiwan versus Canada
Shared Charisma, ambassador, & auditor
 in leaders
Canadians value visionary leaders
  • advancement
  • individualistic
Taiwanese value mobilizer leaders
  • cooperation
  • belongingness
  • work climate
Leadership & Identity
Social identity has a significant impact in how we lead and
  behave as followers
Leaders that take on the group norm often gain trust from
  followers to work in their interest
Leaders that gain trust and identity are effective regardless of
  whether they are involved in group work, leaders that lack
  identity must be involved in group activities
Leaders that gain group identity reduce uncertainty & drive
  change effectively
        Quote (p. 484) “..despite all the changes, the core
  aspects of the collective identity are maintained”
Does this work in distance leadership across borders &
Leadership & Identity
Followers with a high degree of group identity generally feel
   leaders with a similar identity are more fair
Leaders that strive for identification tend towards LMX
Leaders with group identity are more likely to be viewed as
Entrepreneur of identity – Leaders create group and leader
   identity by empowerment


Does this work in distance leadership across borders & cultures?
Culture and Change
Acculturation: Ability to adapt
   Assimilation – adapt to dominant group
   Integration – accept universalism
   Separation – keep distance from host group
   Marginalization – lose home culture completely
Willingness to take risks and learn from those risks
Six change questions to ask:
   What are our customers telling us?
   How relevant is our mission?
   What are our stockholders telling us?
   What are our competitors saying?
   What are our employees trying to say?
   Are we ahead or behind?
Culture and Change
How ready is the organization to change?
  Evolutionary change?
  Revolutionary change?
What is the Process of change?
  Momentum – can the change stick?
  Chaos during the change
  Power and politics – leader’s ability to influence
  Incentives / intrinsic rewards
How much is right?
  150 / 7
Culture and Change
Key is learning agility:
   Critical thinking skills
   Comfort with ambiguity
   Comfort with risk and making mistakes
Change in practice
   Certain changes cannot be controlled
   Control what you can
   Recognize fear
   Sell the benefits
   Remind group that change is going to occur
Culture and Change
Organizational Learning is:
   Adapting to external environment
   The willingness to adapt
   Know when to reinforce and when to destruct work patters
   Know when to create new work patters
   Reward collective learning
   Learn to rapidly utilize new learning in the org
Four types of Social units
   The   workgroup – interdependent toward one goal
   The   team – peers – specific objectives
   The   network team – virtual
   The   community – related by non-task work
  Your existing system is designed to give
  you the results Requires Change
Improvement you’re currently getting.
   Somebody once said: - "the only person who likes
   change - is a wet baby".

   Someone else said - "No one resists change - they
   resist being changed“

   If you want different results, you must
   change the system!

 Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions

Operating core: people who do
   the work
Strategic Apex: Leadership
Middle line: Hierarchy
Technostructure: staff / ideas
Support Staff: staff / services
Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions
Confusion - difficulty in realizing that change
  is going to happen.
Immediate Criticism - rejecting change before
  hearing the details.
Denial - refusing to accept that things have
Malicious Compliance - smiling and seeming
  to go along, only to demonstrate a lack of
  compliance later on.
Sabotage - taking actions to inhibit or kill the
Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions
Easy Agreement - agreeing with
   little resistance, without
   realizing what is being agreed
Deflection - changing the subject
   and hoping "maybe it'll go
Silence - complete absence of
   input, which may be the most
   difficult resistance to deal with.

Each of these five parts in the chart
   has a tendency to pull the
   organization in a particular
   direction favorable to them
  Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions
1. Direct setting or simple structure: relies on direct supervision
   from the strategic apex, the CEO. - China

2. Machine Bureaucracy
Large organizations: relies on standardization of work processes by
   the techno-structure. - EU

3. Professional Bureaucracy
The professional services firm: relies on the professionals'
   standardization of skills and knowledge in the operating core. -

4. Divisionalized Form
Multi-divisional organization: relies on standardization of outputs;
   middle-line managers run independent divisions. - USA
  Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions
5. Adhocracy
Project organizations: highly organic structure with little
   formalization; relies on mutual adjustment as the key
   coordinating mechanism within and between these project teams.
   – EU
 In later work Mintzberg added two more configurations:

6. Missionary Form
Coordination occurs based on commonly held ideologies or beliefs:
   standardization of norms. - USA

7. Political Form
No coordination form is dominant: control is based on forming
   alliances. - China
Leadership & Change
The pre-launch stage:
  Self awareness – tolerance for ambiguity
  Motives – personal goals versus organization
  Values – is it the culture that needs to be changed?
The Launch stage:
  Communicating the need
  Initial activities – rally around “customer” or “products”
  Dealing with resistance – turf & politics
Post-launch stage:
  Hold people’s feet to the fire
  Deal with avoidance mechanisms – finger pointing and blaming
  Take the heat
  Be consistent – repeat the message
Distance Leadership
What creates distance leadership?
  Outsourcing / off-shoring
  New developing markets
     Content requirements
Leader communication
  Intragroup communication – tasks in projects, knowledge sharing
  external communication – customers & suppliers
  Mechanisms – e-mail, face-to-face, travel, phone, etc
   High Performance groups prefer face-to-face
Virtually through ‘linkages’

 The concept of global production network (GPN)

               Source: Ernst & Kim, 2001
Distance Leadership
Challenges to distance leadership:
  Borders – organizational and financial
  Knowledge sharing
     Decision rights
     Alienable rights
What should be co-located and how should it be
Culture both in the organization and the geography
Findings in Study
Geographic dispersion was not associated with
Leader intra-group communication was found
  critical to performance, intergroup was not
Leader intra-group communication in a dispersed
  geography was highly critical to performance
Leadership that best fosters “problem solving” by
  open communication
Findings in Study

Electronic groups: hard time reaching consensus and
  can over communicate
How do leaders foster trust remotely?
Face-to-face mtgs were far and away to most
  effective form of communication in geographically
  dispersed groups
However, informal communication was found to be
  just as important as formal reviews and meetings
Leadership Distance
Co-location for a substantive time at the
 beginning of a project has a significant
 effect on completion of projects
    • training but also culture
    • Aligning expectations
    • Cross fertilization of knowledge
Distance leadership has pitfalls:
    • Team members don’t know who is in the room
    • Mistakes are transparent
    • Trust again is paramount
Leadership traits in distance orgs
Transformational Leadership – in Virtual teams has
  been more effective do to encourage exchange of
Enthusiasm, confidence, appreciation for diverse
  views, & looking at problems in new ways
Face-to-face teams act in a more constructive style
  versus Virtual teams that are defensive
The higher the constructive style, the more the
  teams are accepting of another team’s solution
Expertise may overcome Virtual team errors however
  they have a harder time becoming cohesive
Media type only effects leadership interaction style
Leadership traits in distance orgs
Leaders of Virtual teams need to develop a
  constructive interaction style, again supporting the
  need for initial face-to-face mtgs
Virtual teams are less effective if they are temporary
  versus long term strategies
Leaders of distance orgs must be tech savvy
In virtual teams and matrix orgs, unassigned leaders
  may emerge as group leaders informally
Singaporean Hospital example

Transformational leaders – charisma
  improves distance leaders
Hospital employees respected their distance
  leader more than onsite leaders
    • High power distance
    • Knowledge of leader behavior was low
    • Only saw high level vision, not execution
    • Saw local leaders as task command & control

To top