Search results

This chapter describes the change efforts and action research projects at a Dutch multinational which, over a period of 25 years, produced in one of its businesses a zigzag path toward collaborative leadership dynamics at the horizontal and vertical interfaces. The chapter also identifies the learning mechanisms that helped achieve this transformation. Changing the patterns at the vertical interfaces proved to be a most tricky, complex, and confusing operation. The data show that organizations need hierarchical interfaces between levels, but are hindered by the hierarchical leadership dynamics at these interfaces. The data furthermore show that competitive performance requires more than redesigning horizontal interfaces. A business can only respond with speed and flexibility to threats and opportunities in the external environment when the leadership dynamics at agility-critical vertical interfaces are also changed.

Global businesses create and sustain operational success and create value by balancing the centripetal and centrifugal organizational forces they generate. Productive efforts to achieve strategic and operational success are enabled by the balance of competing tensions not their oscillations. Internal regulators contribute to this balance when they are understood and systematically integrated into both short and long-term decision-making. Inattention to the intricacies of interactive regulating dynamics and systems dilute value creation, or worse, destroy it. The whole business organization must be greater than the sum of its parts to deliver optimum value. Anything less creates gaps which competitors will exploit to the detriment of shareholder value creation. The business landscape is replete with companies that failed to create or sustain balance. There are also examples of great companies that nurture tensions to promote proper balance.

The situation in South Africa regarding leadership learning has received ample attention since independence in 1994. Developers have to perform their duties within new multicultural requirements in the form of contextual challenges, social justice measures and ethical responsiveness. Close attention also had to be paid to the constitutional imperatives of equity, access and redress that were pronounced as measures correcting past injustices. Apart from having to perform effectively, organisations were further obliged to implement affirmative action in the form of requirements on non-discrimination, inclusiveness, non-racialism and non-sexism.

From a leadership perspective, the main concern addressed in this chapter is how such multiple cultural realities are accommodated as part of leadership development. A transformational approach has been selected to serve this purpose. In this approach, learning is seen as workplace oriented and built on the engagement and reflection of adult learners on issues in the real-life setting. It is understood that these learners are self-directed and independent; they strive for immediate application and continually reflect on problems and issues in their organisations.

Stanford contributed significantly to the organizational culture movement that occurred in organization studies from 1970–2000. This chapter traces developments at Stanford and puts the contributions of its researchers and scholars in the context of the many influences that shaped the study of organizational culture during this period. In addition to the historical account, there is speculation about why the culture movement at Stanford more or less ended but might yet be revived, either by those studying institutionalization processes or by those who resist them.

Traditionally, the main goal of empirical research has been to test theories. Yet, theory-testing is problematical in the social sciences. Findings from empirical studies have proven hard to replicate and there is a lack of progress in creating a coherent and cumulative knowledge base. There are both practical and epistemological issues that prevent effective empirical tests. It is difficult to operationalize constructs and design decisive tests of theories. The laws and regularities posited in theories in the natural sciences are independent of human actors, while theories in the social sciences describe systems and structures that are created and maintained by human actors. Nonetheless, human actors are sometimes guided by theories. They may change their behavior or make different decisions based on academically produced knowledge. This relationship is usually mediated by the use of tools of various sorts (i.e., design principles, diagrams, or stories). I discuss why scholars should conduct empirical research to test the pragmatic validity of tools that are derived from theories rather than testing the scientific validity of the theories themselves.

In this chapter, the story of professional development of Barica Marentič Požarnik (Professor Emerita, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) is shared in an interview conducted by Barbara Šteh. Central to the story is the impact of her participation in ISATT together with other influences (organisations, projects, conferences, individual contacts) on her professional activities and beliefs. Through the telling, the Slovenian context, particularly in the areas of initial teacher education, continuous professional development, curricular reform and research practice, becomes visible. At the end, some remaining issues are revealed.