Leadership Bingo: How to assess leadership performance in the General Election debates

April 6, 2015

QueencerseiIn their attempts to appear authentic, political leaders ‘leak’ information about their leadership styles. Here are some signals which help you play a game of Leadership Bingo during the General Election debates

I examined the great ‘seven leaders’ debate of April 2nd, in search of leadership styles.

Using my notes, I began to work out a more comparative analysis of the leaders combining their performance on the night with more general patterns of leadership behaviour to be found in the literature and in popular culture (Game of Thrones candidate above).

A jumble of leadership styles

My first efforts resulted in a jumble of leadership styles which began to connect what I had observed with more general concepts:

Charismatic style [CS]: (induces belief in those around without need to use statistics or reference to other evidence of authority. Offers hope (vision) for future}
Democratic style [DS] (Distributed leadership: Let’s share leadership responsibilities)
Empathic style [ES]: (I share your pain)
Heroic Warrior style [HWS] : (Lone Ranger: This dude has something special in a tough fight)
Level 5 style [L5S] : Modest but with evidence of determination (‘fierce resolve’)
Nurturing style [NS]: ( I’ll look after you)
Servant leader style [SLS]: (I am an instrument to help you achieve your goals)

The leadership bingo card

So there you have it: the political wonk’s bingo card for use alone, electronically, in the classroom or in the pub (suited for UKIP gatherings).

Fill in the card for each speaker. Needless to say, the winner is the bingo player who can identify every speaker with a leadership style line.

In the case of a tie, the winner goes to the player who has identified the most additional styles on the card.DSCN0938
Make your own cards for other leaders you are interested in. Here is the card I used

Let me know (comments) if you like Leadership Bingo.

 

 


21st Century Leadership: the jury is out [part 2]

May 1, 2014

Venus ascendingThe judge continues his summing up by examining the evidence brought before the court of five emerging trends in 21st Century Leadership

Members of the jury. I will complete my summing-up this morning and then provide you with final instructions which you are to follow in reaching your verdict.

I turn first to the five emerging theories brought before this court as relevant to leadership in the 21st century. Before I do that I will comment on the uniqueness of the five theories. In this respect I am reminded of an ancient authority who said that there is nothing new under the sun. Indeed, each of these ‘new’ theories has connections with earlier theories, and may be seen as emergent of the old with new definitions. You must not become confused by such labels. I will offer a working definition and a few brief notes on each theory paying particular attention to connections with the Dominant Rational Model of Leadership

First we heard about Level 5 leadership. This is considered a style which is characterized by personal humility and fierce resolve. The theory presents itself as evidence that Level 5 leaders are more successful than charismatic leaders in comparable situations. This is seen as evidence we are moving towards a post-charismatic understanding of leadership effectiveness. I should add that the major study of Level 5 leadership reported to us applied the scientific methodology of establishing rational proof. This makes its approach modern and supporting the dominant rational model, rather than post-modern and challenging it.

The second emerging theory, is Distributed Leadership. As implied in its name, Distributed Leadership is a theory about sharing of leadership responsibilities. This description is close to the roles and structuring found in in the older models of scientific management. Witness statements were provided from contemporary sports teams, musical ensembles and military tactical teams. Distributed leadership was presented mostly as a strictly rational approach. However, business practitioners also mentioned the benefits of fostering team spirit and initiative, leading to ’empowered’ team participants acting beyond formally designated leadership roles. You may conclude that such considerations go beyond a totally rational explanation of the theory

The third emerging theory is Trust-based Leadership. Trust-based leadership has become popular among consultants and practicing leaders as we heard from the witness statements. The special feature of trust-based leadership is achieving results through gaining trust of colleagues and the wider network of social contacts. As described my practitioner leaders, trust based leadership appears as an instrumental approach to achieving a leader’s goals. This was described by the academic Joseph Rost as typical of the technological and rational belief system of much of 20th century leadership. In other words, the belief systems of advocates of trust-based leadership are strongly influenced by the dominant rational model.

The fourth emerging theory is that of Creative Leadership. A creative leader is someone who stimulates creative outcomes in others through a style encouraging change and innovation. An important aspect of creative leadership is that it helps overcome dilemmas in decision-making by escaping ‘either-or’ thinking. Creative leadership is a challenge to purely rational approaches and as with trust-based leadership can be traced to pre-modern theories such as charismatic leadership.

The fifth emerging theory is Positive Leadership Positive Leadership promotes positive self-image as a means of personal development. It is based on the positive psychology movement, which itself can be traced to humanistic psychology. The style is affirmative, encouraging and celebrating success. It is regarded with suspicion by many authorities of cognitive psychology who remain more closely wedded to models of internal mental constructions. Put simply, Positive Leadership challenges the dominance of rational models of psychology and of leadership.

You will have to examine each theory in turn and explore how it relates to the dominance of the rational model of leadership. Before you retire to begin that task, I intend to summarize one more set of witness statements. These were five other leadership themes which were mentioned more briefly in the evidence provided in this trial. They may nevertheless turn out to be highly significant in your deliberations. I suggest we take a short break, after which I will complete by summing up with reference to these five theories.

Witness Statements

British Quality Foundation: Leading with Vision, Inspiration and Integrity

To be concluded


21st Century Leadership: the jury is out

April 29, 2014

The jury is out on the emerging leadership maps of the 21st century. In this first report, we hear the summing up by the judge dealing with the evidence of the rise of rational belief systems from the time of Plato to the 18th century enlightenment and beyondThe Judge

Members of the jury. You have the responsibility to evaluate the credibility of the case for and against the leadership theories of the 21st century. To do so, you have to assess the accounts of witnesses brought forward by the prosecution and the defense. The theories placed before you are: Level 5 leadership, Distributed leadership, trust-based leadership, creative leadership, positive leadership, authentic leadership, sustainability leadership, discursive leadership, visionary leadership, charismatic leadership, and transformational leadership,

The theories brought before you are those that have become more powerful since the start of the millennium. Before I summarize the evidence, I believe it will be helpful if I outline the historical background to these theories, and particularly the influence of the dominant rational model, accused of being the ring leader of the entire group.

You will recall hearing from several witnesses that the influential leadership theories of the 20th century were broadly considered to be based on a dominant belief system in the effectiveness of rational actions informed by rational reasoning. That is to say, leadership was the execution of rational behaviours by rational actors.

The advocates of rationality have pointed to the great advances made through application of such rational behaviours for over two millennia. Two thousand years, members of the jury. Rationality, it has been claimed, was worked out as a means of establishing truths about the material world, and the worlds of science and mathematics. Many centuries later a new philosophic approach to rationality was worked out which claimed it to be the key that unlocked human consciousness from a state of ignorance or unenlightened beliefs. You heard the philosopher Immanuel Kant state that [I quote] “immaturity is the inability to use one’s own understanding without the guidance of another.” In other words, enlightenment is the process of undertaking to think for oneself, to employ and rely on one’s own intellectual capacities in determining what to believe and how to act.

The French academician René Descartes gave evidence of his rationalist system of philosophy and of the objectivity which reveals reality. The Enlightenment is sometimes called “the Age of Reason”. Its leading philosophers followed Descartes’s attempts to deal with the issue of objectivity and the reality of what we perceive and believe to be true.

The enlightenment ushered in an age of rationality and modernity as science and the scientific methods of analysis helped in the advances in industrial practices. An age of modernity in thinking and creating had replaced earlier less enlightened ages.

By the 20th century, the scientific approach of rationality, if I may use a popular expression, appeared to be the only show in town. As I have explained it, I have not yet made an important point. The rational model has indeed been dominant for over two centuries. Dominant but not, if I am to be precise, utterly without rivals. There were other shows in town, and it is witnesses of these that were introduced by the prosecution, who argue that they remain muted as evidence of the excessive power being wielded by the dominant rational model in leadership theorizing.

I will now move to the ten theories and the evidence of the influence of the dominant rational model.

[To be continued with the judge’s summing up of the ten theories]

Level 5 leadership,
Distributed leadership,
trust-based leadership,
creative leadership,
positive leadership,
authentic leadership,
sustainability leadership,
discursive leadership,
visionary leadership,
charismatic leadership,
transformational leadership.

Expert witness statements

Matheson, Carl, “Historicist Theories of Rationality“, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

Bristow, William, “Enlightenment“, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),