In the last few postings, this writer has been reviewing a
set of qualities that characterizes a leader who seeks to establish an
inclusive and collaborative environment in his/her organization. As pointed out in the last posting, those
qualities are ones that should exist between a singular participant – a member
or employee – and the organization.
The participant, among his/her
personality and other traits, has a status designation, conscience, set of
practical skills, and a claim of rights that defines that person’s integrity within
the organization. These qualities were
described and explained in the last posting.
Reflecting these qualities, the
participant in a healthy relationship owes the organization conscientious rendering
of his/her loyalty, trust, skill, and knowledge. In return, the organization provides equal
standing (all subject to the same rules) and special allowances when times turn
negative. But these relationships do not
exist in a vacuum.
Leadership needs to back these
relationships with a conducive atmosphere in the organization. There are four general qualities that should
exist there. These are: a functioning community with a sense of a “group
as a whole,” a cultural commitment toward members or employees feeling a sense
of partnership or a federation, institutionalized processes of interaction that
facilitate these qualities, and a community that holds a moral primacy.[1]
Of course, how exactly these
qualities are instituted and maintained in a given organization depends on a
host of factors: the nature of the
organization, the outer cultural environment in which the organization exists,
the cultural makeup of the members or employees, local obstacles, local
economic conditions, and the like.
Given that, though, these four
qualities pretty much speak for themselves and are mostly intuitive. While they are easy to understand, they are
difficult to establish. The status quo,
no matter how dysfunctional it might be, has reasons for its existence. In most collectives, to establish or enhance
these collaborative qualities usually calls for a transformation. This is especially true in an age of extreme
individualism.
[1] Phillip Selznick, The
Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and
the Promise of Community, (Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1992).
No comments:
Post a Comment