PARALLEL WORLDS: HOW COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE THEORY, COMPLEXITY LEADERSHIP THEORY AND POSITIVE ORGANISATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

Transcription

1 TITLE PARALLEL WORLDS: HOW COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE THEORY, COMPLEXITY LEADERSHIP THEORY AND POSITIVE ORGANISATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH IS BOTH CONFIRMING WHAT REALLY WORKS AND TRANSFORMING LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PRACTICE. SHORT DESCRIPTION Up to 80 Words This paper and presentation seeks to expand the knowledge of which leadership development activities are most effective, given what we are learning about the emerging fields of cognitive neuroscience, complexity leadership theory and positive organisational psychology. It compares the design and content of successful leadership programs with what we are learning about how to develop leaders and leadership capability, and builds a case for the R&D of leadership development incorporating thinking from these emerging fields. INTRODUCTION Leadership development programs are a key element of strong leadership development systems and organisations with strong leadership development systems have a return on earnings and profit that is 7% higher than that of competitors with poor leadership development systems (Roebuck 2011). Leadership development is not only a key influencer for profit and organisational performance and it is also important in an era of economic change and business complexity. This practitioner paper undertakes and initial exploration of what we are learning from emerging research frameworks and what may need to change in leadership program strategy and activities. The aim is to identify development strategies and activities that will increase the ability of leaders to engage with and create effective business and organisational responses in a complex and rapidly changing environment and also as a result, positively impact on the world in which they operate. A number of writers have suggested that to deal 1

2 with complexity and rapidly changing business environments, it is necessary to research leadership development strategies and activities that includes, but goes well beyond, individual leader development. It includes the development of the connections between individuals, the development of the capacities of collectives, the development of the connections between collectives in an organization, and the development of the culture and systems in which individuals and collectives are embedded (McCauley and Van Velsor eds, 2004 p.22) Compared with the significant amount of dialogue on leadership itself, there is relatively little empirical research that explores and evaluates the efficacy of different leadership development activities in creating outcomes at individual, organisational and community level (Kets De Vries & Korotov 2011: Nohria & Khurana 2002). Three emerging research frameworks are examined here in relation to their influence on leadership development and leadership programs - cognitive neuroscience, complexity leadership, and positive organisational psychology. These three were selected because recent research and discussion amongst practitioners and academics indicates that these frameworks have significant potential to support the research and development (R&D) for leadership development programs and leadership development practice. Assessing how cognitive neuroscience, relational leadership theory, complexity leadership and positive organisational psychology might influence the R&D of leadership programs is a key question for leadership developers as is the question of how choices are made in relation to leadership programs. That is, what models and techniques of program structure including design, leadership models, and program content along with facilitation approach could be used to improve the effectiveness of leadership development programs. This paper examines the design and activity components of a group of successful leadership development programs and identifies which 2

3 elements of the programs may be reflected in what we are learning about leadership development through the three emerging research frameworks. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS THREE EMERGING FIELDS OF RESEARCH An outline of these emerging fields of research is provided here to set the scene for exploring how they may be able to provide insight into leadership development practice and leadership development systems. Cognitive neuroscience and leadership development Cognitive neuroscience research is both being conducted by and adapted by leadership researchers to explore its application to leadership development. Examples include the work of Boyatzsis and his co-authors, in examining the neurological impact of coaching and compassion (Boyatzis, Jack, Cesaro, Khawaja and Passarelli: 2010), along with researchers who are examining the ways in which what is being learnt in cognitive neuroscience can be adapted to refine the strategies and activities of leadership development such as Siegel and Pearce-McCall (2009) and Ringleb, Rock and Conser (2010). In an overview of the emergent field of cognitive neuroscience and its application to leadership development, McDonald identified that cognitive neuroscience has a major contribution to make to leadership development practice. Key factors identified include the need to focus on emotion in leader development, the contribution that mindfulness/selfawareness/mindsight is making to emotional management, and the ability of leaders to move beyond rejection, loneliness and self-deception (Seigel: 2011). Research into the cognitive neuroscience approach to leadership development identified by Ringleb and Rock explores key elements of leadership development including: decision making and problem solving, emotional regulation, collaborating with and influencing others, and indicates that facilitating change and developing skills in these areas requires accessing the prefrontal cortex which is 3

4 switched on by strong relationships (Siegel and Pearce-McCall: 2009, p. 27). McDonald also discusses the contribution of cognitive neuroscience to leaders in understanding their response to ethical challenges, and to their ability to move beyond attending to negative situations in the past and focus on positive possibilities (McDonald: 2010, p. 13). Links between leadership development as a social or relational engagement concept can be drawn from the research and writing on leadership and leadership development approaches being posited by all three of the leadership development frameworks being considered here. A key example is relational connection, which is being highlighted as a driver of individual behaviour in cognitive neuroscience where research indicates that leaders and leadership development programs need to focus on interpersonal and relationship capability with David Rock s SCARF model which stands for status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, fairness (Rock: 2009, 197). These elements, if used positively in leadership programs could provide a strong foundation for learning by reducing anxiety and by providing participants with information in a way that lets them focus. If these elements are triggered negatively, they provide strong blockers to effective leadership development (Mobbs and McFarland: 2010, p. 56). Positive Organisational Psychology (POS) and leadership development Positive organisational psychology is the study of phenomena associated with what individuals and organizations aspire to be when they are at their very best (Cameron, Dutton, Quinn, & Wrzesniewski, 2003, p. 362). A recent article by DeRue and Workman explores how positive organisational psychology can be useful for leadership development in organisations, and also for leadership development theory and research (DeRue and Workman in Cameron and Spreitzer eds, 2012, p. 785). Three key areas of investigation for leadership development are suggested: moving from a deficit approach to human development practices which are often the foundation of leadership development activities, to 4

5 building on strengths; how leadership development can instigate positive cycles of development in an organisational setting, instead of negative cycles; and finally how the relational aspects of leadership development can be engaged, as most research on leadership development fails to account for the relational elements of leadership, (DeRue and Workman in Cameron and Spreitzer eds, 2012, p. 786). As DeRue and Workman say By extending POS [positive organizational psychology] to the domain of leadership development we hope to redirect existing theory toward a more relational-oriented approach to conceptualizing and studying the process of leadership development (DeRue and Workman in Cameron and Spreitzer eds, 2012, p. 786). Complexity science and leadership development Complexity science is also emerging as an influence in leadership development. Hazy and Uhl-Bien suggest that leadership is key to three areas of human activity including: setting vision and strategy; helping to adapt to change through generating ideas and plans of action; and lastly bringing together different and divergent views to achieve a common direction (Hazy & Uhl-Bien in Day D Ed, 2013, p. 3-4). In the fast-changing global ecosystem, approaches to management grounded in linear assumptions may overly emphasize applying controls on interactions, thus failing to stimulate information flows, learning and growth. New techniques that exploit nonlinearities and embrace fast-paced interaction are needed. (Hazy & Uhl-Bien in Day D Ed, 2013, p. 6) In complexity theory, the implications for leadership development include the assumption that leadership development has to go beyond a focus on individual self-understanding and communication skills to providing tools to help understand nonlinear effects in complex systems, and understanding how issues emerge in real time and to identify ways in which interventions can be made in complex systems without creating unintended consequences (Hazy & Uhl-Bien in Day D Ed, 2013, p. 44). In complex systems theory as it applies to leadership, relationships are the foundation of the 5

6 network of interactions which compete, challenge, critique, create alternatives, and recombine ideas to create emergence, with a leader s role being both to create top-down control and also to create environments that allow for instability and allow emergence to thrive. DeRue and Workman define leadership: leadership is not an individual act but rather an exchange relationships whereby social actors engage in a process of mutual influence we need to understand how relationships emerge and develop in organizational settings (DeRue and Workman in Cameron and Spreitzer eds, 2012, p. 791). Linking positive organisational psychology with relational leadership, Boyatzis, Passarelli, Koenig, Lowe, Mathew, Stoller, and Phillips on relational leadership theory and its foundations write: Relationships between a leader and follower develop from a series of smaller interactions or episodes (Fletcher & Ragins, 2007). Dutton (2003) referred to positive interactions that occur between individuals in organizations as high-quality connections marked by the subjective experience of positive energy or vitality (Quinn & Dutton, 2005), positive regard (Rogers, 1951), and mutuality (Miller & Stiver, 1997). Additionally, the quality of a connection is measured by its emotional carrying capacity (the ability to express a full range of emotions), tensility (adaptability and resilience), and connectivity (degree of openness to new ideas and influences, or generativity) (Boyatzis, Passarelli, Koenig, Lowe, Mathew, Stoller, and Phillips: 2011 p. 261). In complex systems theory as it applies to leadership, relationships are the foundation of the network of interactions which compete, challenge, critique, create alternatives, and recombine ideas to create emergence, with a leader s role being both to create top-down control and also to create environments that allow for instability and allow emergence to thrive (Marion and Uhl-Bien: 2012, p. 150). 6

7 Each of these research perspectives provides a lens through which to view the robustness of leadership development strategies and methodologies and potentially, the integration of these approaches to support stronger returns on investment for leadership practitioners, leaders and organisations. LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM CASE STUDY To explore what we are learning about designing leadership programs and strong leadership development strategies, this paper reflects on the strategies and activities of a group of leadership development programs (named ELDP here) delivered since 1997 and continuing to be delivered today, to over 10,000 people as a case study. Even though these programs are delivered for different organisations, the underlying elements of design, models of leadership, and facilitation principles were used across all of these programs. The ELDP programs were established to support senior executives and managers to manage in an increasingly complex public sector environment, with multiple stakeholders, high expectations of results and declining funding. Objectives were to build leadership capability, collaboration skills and higher performing organisations to ensure that the public sector can able to respond flexibly to this complex and challenging environment. The programs have been rigorously evaluated to test the outcomes delivered, including leadership and organisational behaviour. The underpinning program design and delivery approaches and assumptions are considered in light of what we are learning about leadership development options from these three research frameworks: cognitive neuroscience; complexity leadership theory; and positive organisational psychology. Evaluation outcomes Cross-government ELDP leadership programs delivered from These programs were evaluated in 2001, with results including, 80% saying that they were more able to deliver results, 85% said that they had an improved ability to work strategically, 7

8 90% of participants said that they had an improved ability to build good relationships, 83% said they had an improved ability to communicate with influence and 80% said they had a stronger personal drive and integrity (Office of Public Service Merit and Equity: 2001). Education organization ELDP leadership programs delivered from A large education organization of 35,000 staff with 1,300 sites delivering services to over 500,000 students established a leadership development strategy to support improved organization performance. Leadership activities were delivered to more than 6,037 organisational leaders over 2.5 years. Research identified that over 90% reported improved leadership skills and over 90% developed and more often utilised cross-organisation collaboration. These results were confirmed by research with supervisors and through culture survey (Martin A, Hagan D, and Rutyna B: 2004). Health organization leadership programs 2006 to date The Queensland Health leadership programs were established in 2006, with the aim to achieve improvements in the leadership of Queensland Health leaders (clinical and nonclinical) that will bring about improvements in both clinical care and workplace culture. (Crethar, Phillips and Brown: 2011, p308). Two of the leadership programs established under this initiative, the Medical Leadership In Action (MLIA) Program, and the Emerging Clinical Leaders Program (ECLP) had their genesis in the programs outlined above and the program leader was part of the establishment of the 1997 programs. To date, 973 health leaders have participated in these two programs since 2006 and return on investment calculations highlighted the success of the programs. ELDP LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT APPROACH The ELDP programs use a common set of principles, program design, facilitation strategies and research foundations (Martin A, Hagan D, and Rutyna B, 2004) While some elements of the programs have evolved over time, the fundamental principles have not 8

9 changed. A very brief overview of the key program structure and process elements of these multi-layered programs includes: experiential and group development processes held over 3-6 months with workshop and action learning incorporated into the design to support on-the-job application using participant examples and cases drawn from the real world of participants reflective and action learning weaved into program elements processes to support strategic thinking and broadening perspective intra and interpersonal development processes with instruments and feedback data available to participants strategies to support self-care, relaxation, and exercise focus on building relationships and collaboration both as a foundation of leadership behaviour and as an element of the program. FIT WITH LEARNING FROM COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, COMPLEXITY LEADERSHIP THEORY AND POSITIVE ORGANISATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY The section below explores how elements of the ELDP programs identified above may have parallels and intersections with what is being learnt from these emerging research frameworks. Experiential and group development process Ringleb and Pagon, researching how cognitive neuroscience is engaging with leadership development, concluded that traditional informational leadership development learning was not producing significant behavioral change. They quote a study by Thompson which indicates that a knowing-doing gap is created through traditional leadership informational development practices and identify three types of learning that are relevant for leaders: knowledge, rational process and behavior change, and that only the knowledge component 9

10 can be delivered through classroom teaching. They suggest that other components are best delivered using guided facilitation processes (Ringleb and Pagon: 2010, 43) Using cases drawn from the real world of participants The process design of leadership programs significantly influences the learning outcomes and the experience that participants have of the programs. Ringleb, Rick and Conser suggest that ensuring that participants are aware of the process they are going through and the realworld context of the process reduces the need for them to continuously be holding thoughts and ideas in working memory as they try to focus on what is happening and what may happen, which reduces both their level of anxiety about what s going on, but also increases the amount of energy they have available to engage in the leadership program. It also allows participants to focus on the strategic thinking required for integrating leadership learning (Ringleb, Rock and Conser: 2010: 6). Reflective learning Reflection is a key component of the ELDP program design, with reflective practices including (amongst others) learning pair partners, morning review sessions, journaling, and in the later Queensland Health programs, online collaboration journals and executive coaching. Iacoboni and McHaney indicate that the implications from cognitive neuroscience mirror neuron and associate research is that leaders must be: role models who exhibit positive, desirable behaviours; seek to understand others by better understanding themselves; able to be empathetic; and recognise that their image of the workplace has an impact on their ability to build relationships with followers (Iacoboni and McHaney: 2010, p39) Processes to support strategic thinking Complexity science is particularly providing research and thought leadership in relation to supporting strategic thinking which include the need for relationships as the foundation of the network of interactions which compete, challenge, critique, create alternatives, and 10

11 recombine ideas to create emergence, with a leader s role being both to create top-down control and also to create environments that allow for instability and allow emergence to thrive (Marion and Uhl-Bien: 2012, p. 150). The ELDP programs incorporate activities including strategy sessions looking at economic and social futures, stakeholder and social network analysis and understanding how relationships and organisational culture, along with organisational systems and structures contribute to effective strategy in complexity. Positive organisational psychology has also been influential in the ELDP programs in supporting shifts in perspective, language and engagement of stakeholders. Intra and interpersonal capability development Cognitive neuroscience research is suggesting that behaviour change requires people not to just think about a situation, it also requires that they tap into the emotions and feelings associated with the situation so that they can enact change. A simple question like how do you feel about this change provides leaders with the ability to tap into theirs and others emotional states and to take action to change (Pillay, 2011: 126) As discussed above, both positive organizational psychology and complexity theory recognize the importance of relationships and self-awareness for leaders and effective leadership development. Strategies to support self-care The ELDP programs incorporate elements of meditation, yoga, reflective journaling, reflective pair partnerships, and other relaxation approaches including exercise programs to give leaders the opportunity to learn how to manage their resilience and reduce anxiety. As outlined above, cognitive neuroscience and positive organisational psychology both highlight the importance of increasing positive engagement and reducing anxiety for successful leadership programs. Focus on building relationships and collaboration Changing behaviour is generally an explicit or implicit expectation of all leadership 11

12 programs including the ELDP programs. What neuroscience is telling us about changing behaviour is that there have to be a number of areas of focus including increased selfawareness, ability to regulate emotion, and engagement with the group social system to support behaviour change (Ringleb, Rock and Conser: 2010: 14-15, Street: ). Cognitive neuroscience research indicates that we are born wanting to engage relationally with others and that social pain is equivalent to physical pain and reduction of this pain through relationship building and other methods is crucial in leadership development (Siegel and Pearce-McCall: 2009, 24-25). Relatedness design elements in the ELDP programs promote strong connections between participants including: learning partners, multiple sources of relational support for each individual and for the group as a whole. CONCLUSIONS This practitioner paper explores how what we are learning from emerging research frameworks can apply to leadership development strategy and program activities. The design, strategy and activities that formed the foundation of the ELDP programs discussed here serves to highlight some of the thinking that is emerging from the cognitive neuroscience, complexity leadership and positive organisational science research frameworks. Parallels between the leadership programs and what is being learnt from these emerging research frameworks are strongly indicated from this early exploration and provide a story for leadership development experts to continue to explore. There are many R&D intersections between the parallel worlds of the ELDP programs and each of the three emerging research frameworks and it is in these intersections that leadership developers are most likely to find strategies, designs and activities, informed by research, that will deliver strong leadership programs, strong leadership systems for organisations and potentially transform leadership development. 12

13 REFERENCES Boyatzis R E, Passarelli AM, Koenig K, Lowe M, Matthew B, Stoller J K, Phillips M (2012) Examination of the neural substrates activated in memories of experiences with resonant and dissonant leaders The Leadership Quarterly 23 (2012) Cameron K S & Spreitzer G M Eds (2012) The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, Inc Cameron K S, Dutton J E Quinn R E & Wrzesniewski A (2003) Developing a discipline of positive organizational scholarship. In Dutton J E, Quinn R E and Cameron K S Eds (2003) Positive organisational scholarship: foundations of a new discipline (pp ) Berrett- Koehler Publishers Inc San Francisco CA Cherry N (2001) Action research: a pathway to action, learning and knowledge RMIT University Press, Melbourne Crethar M, Phillips J and Brown P (2011) Queensland Health a leadership journey, Leadership in Health Services, Vol 24 No. 4 pp Emerald Group Publishing Limited DaVachi L, Kiefer T, Rock D and Rock L (2010) Learning that lasts through the AGES, Neuroleadership Journal NY New York, pp Dutton J E, Quinn R E and Cameron K S Eds (2003) Positive organisational scholarship: foundations of a new discipline Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc San Francisco CA Hagan D, Rutyna B and Martin A: Being human: the real challenge for the 21st Century 13

14 Academy of Management Proceedings Hazy J K, Goldstein J A, Lichtenstein B B (2007) Complex systems leadership theory: new perspectives from complexity science on social and organisational effectiveness. ISCE Publishing MA USA Kets De Vries, M F R and Korotov, K Eds (2012) Leadership Development Edward Elgar Publishing Limited United Kingdom Marion R and Uhl-Bien M (2012) Paradigmatic influence and leadership: the perspectives of complexity theory and bureaucracy theory in Hazy J K, Goldstein J A and Lichtenstein B B (Eds) (2012) Complex systems leadership theory new perspectives from complexity science on social and organisational effectiveness ISCE Publishing, Mansfield MA Martin A, Hagan D, and Rutyna B: Collaborative Change Practice: Embedding Actionable Knowledge in Real Work (2004) Best Paper Annuals for the Academy of Management McCauley C D, Moxley R S and Van Velsor E (1998) Handbook of Leadership Development, Jossey-Bass Business and the Center for Creative Leadership San Francisco CA USA McDonald P (2009) The potential contribution of neuroscience to authentic leadership Neuroleadership Journal New York NY, pp Nohria N and Khurana R (Eds) (2010) Handbook of leadership theory and practice Harvard Business School Press, MA USA 14

15 O Connor M, Cooper N J, Williams L M, DeVarrey S, and Gordon E (2010) Neuroleadership and the productive brain, Neuroleadership Journal NY New York, pp37-42 Pillay S S (2011) Your brain and business FT Press New Jersey NY USA Ringleb A H and Rock D (2009) Neuroleadership in 2009, Neuroleadership Journal New York NY, pp 2-8 Ringleb A H and Pagon M (2009) The CIMBA MBA leadership process Neuroleadership Journal New York NY, pp Ringleb A.H, Rock D and Conser J (2010) Neuroleadership in 2010, Neuroleadership Journal NY New York pp 3-21 Rock D (2006) Quiet Leadership HarperCollins Publishers New York NY Rock D and Ringleb A H (2009) Defining neuroleadership as a field, Neuroleadership Journal New York NY, pp Siegel D J and Pearce-McCall D (2009) Mindsight at work: an interpersonal neurobiology lens Neuroleadership Journal New York NY, pp Uhl-Bien M and Marion R (Eds) (2008) Complexity leadership: part 1 conceptual foundations, Information Age Publishing Inc USA Uhl-Bien M and Ospina S M (Eds) (2012) Advancing relational leadership research: a dialogue among perspectives. Information Age Publishing, Inc. Charlotte NC 15