We all know the word ´leadership´ but our comprehension of the concept varies greatly according to our experience of the complex social phenomena referenced by this word. One complicating factor in achieving a shared understanding of this elusive concept is its contingent nature. As a social process it has multiple, emergent, contextual features, ranging from the changing moods of individuals to the deep-structural influences of the cultural habitus. Such situational flux necessitates the development of a form of ‘leadership vigilance’ that encompasses the accurate ‘reading’ of context and culture, as well as a set of contextually-informed practices through which to attempt to address the pertinent issues.If leadership is constructed in this way (as a social practice) then everyone within a particular social setting (workplace, home, project site, etc.) can enact a leadership role. One practice - that of challenging complacency - becomes vital within this notion of leadership, and it is enacted through the constructive contestation of perspectives and assumptions that take for granted the status quo (in any of its many manifestations). Through such contestation (whereby the status quo is viewed as problematic), contextual sensitivity and cultural literacy can be facilitated in the interests of social innovation and, in particular, greater awareness of the social/power dynamics that tacitly underpin a specific social reality.
There are, however, prerequisites for the constructive execution of this leadership practice. Foremost among these is the creation of a ´negotiated order´ by reaching consensus on ‘the rules of engagement´ and framing contestation as ‘intelligent caring´; as a challenging task that is undertaken as a service to the community in its search for creative solutions to issues of mutual concern. To honour this consensus in practice, however, requires sophisticated human capabilities that include the ability to offer critique (rather than criticism); to communicate competently and openly; to tolerate the psychological discomfort experienced within creatively abrasive relationships; and to recognize ‘the self in the other´.
Retaining focus amidst the ´social disorder´ that everyday contestation creates, requires a strong degree of consensus within the collective on ‘what’ and ´who´ really matters. Given the wide range of personal (and often competing) interests, values and attitudes that characterize the staff at any workplace, reaching such consensus may seem impossible. Ricardo Semler, the inspiration behind the success of the unusually democratic and innovative company Semco in Brazil, argues that this is possible when individual and organizational interests are aligned. At Semco this is achieved through an employment contract that recognizes anthropological issues and human motivational factors (as articulated in Maslow´s hierarchy of needs) through the payment of a wage (safety needs); shared ownership/leadership of business units (belonging and esteem needs); and multiple opportunities for creative self-expression through work (actualization needs). In particular, collective ownership, constituted by a profit sharing arrangement, ensures consensual focus on ´what’ really matters, while the power to choose/retain/remove stakeholders of collectively-owned business units facilitates constant focus, and regular debate, on ´who´ really matters in a dynamic operational context.
Dr. Ken Dovey. Director: MBITM/University of Technology, Sydney (UTS)
Dr. Ken Dovey is a visting fellow at Orkestra
