MIM 512
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 26

MIM 512 Global Leadership & Ethics January 2012 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 102 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

MIM 512 Global Leadership & Ethics January 2012. Portland State University. Agenda. Review & Questions from last class Javidan Article discussion Guest Lecture: Anna Young, Senior Director of Strategy and Learning- Mercy Corp Lecture Leadership & identity Change and culture

Download Presentation

MIM 512 Global Leadership & Ethics January 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Mim 512 global leadership ethics january 2012

MIM 512

Global Leadership & Ethics

January 2012

Portland State University


Agenda

Agenda

  • Review & Questions from last class

    • Javidan Article discussion

  • Guest Lecture: Anna Young, Senior Director of Strategy and Learning- Mercy Corp

  • Lecture

    • Leadership & identity

    • Change and culture

    • Leadership, organizations, and change

    • Distance Leadership


Javidan s model

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

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

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 & cultures?


Leadership identity1

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 leadership

  • Leaders with group identity are more likely to be viewed as charismatic

  • Entrepreneur of identity – Leaders create group and leader identity by empowerment

  • But…

  • Does this work in distance leadership across borders & cultures?


Culture and change

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 change1

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 change2

Culture and Change

  • Key is learning agility:

    • Critical thinking skills

    • Self-knowledge

    • 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 change3

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


Improvement requires change

Your existing system is designed to give

you the results 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!

Improvement Requires Change


Mintzberg s organizational divisions

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 divisions1

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 changed.

  • 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 change.


Mintzberg s organizational divisions2

Mintzberg’s Organizational Divisions

  • Easy Agreement - agreeing with little resistance, without realizing what is being agreed to.

  • Deflection - changing the subject and hoping "maybe it'll go away."

  • 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 divisions3

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. - USA

  • 4. Divisionalized Form

  • Multi-divisional organization: relies on standardization of outputs; middle-line managers run independent divisions. - USA


Mintzberg s organizational divisions4

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

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

Distance Leadership

  • What creates distance leadership?

    • Globalization

    • Outsourcing / off-shoring

    • M&A

    • 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

Virtually through ‘linkages’

  • The concept of global production network (GPN)

Source: Ernst & Kim, 2001


Distance leadership1

Distance Leadership

  • Challenges to distance leadership:

    • Borders – organizational and financial

    • Knowledge sharing

      • Tacit

      • Codified

      • Decision rights

      • Alienable rights

  • What should be co-located and how should it be organized?

  • Culture both in the organization and the geography


Findings in study

Findings in Study

  • Geographic dispersion was not associated with performance

  • 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 study1

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

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

    Leadership traits in distance orgs

    • Transformational Leadership – in Virtual teams has been more effective do to encourage exchange of ideas

    • 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 orgs1

    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

    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


  • Login