Creating Inspiring Workshops and Courses in Transdisciplinarity: A Guide - Manual / Resource - Page 59
K/Q
M
Traditionally, leadership has been assigned to, or assumed to
lie with, those in certain positions – the chair of a department
or board, the CEO of a company, the head of a family or church,
the elected or chosen president of a country, or the initiator
and lead of a research project. Positional leadership makes
everyone else associated with the entity or project a follower –
someone waiting for and carrying out the leader’s commands
or instructions, while having limited or narrowly circumscribed
authority, influence, roles, rights, and responsibilities. The leader,
in this case, is thought to “know best,” be most qualified, and
carry the responsibility for the effort and for others; if the effort
succeeds, she or he tends to be the one getting most of the
kudos, and if it fails, bears the brunt of the blame (we assign
the caricature of “king” or “queen” to this notion of leadership in
Figure 1).
Critiques of positional leadership, voiced particularly over the
past half-century, have led to alternative views of leadership.
One variant assumes that leadership can be acquired through
training or practice. Here, various strands of the literature
emphasize that leadership is not something that is inherited or
assumed – an inherent set of traits of a person – but instead can
be attained by skill-building, practice, and experience. This notion
of leadership is the driver behind an entire industry of leadershiptraining programs. It democratizes leadership in the sense that
one is not “born” a leader but can “become” a leader, and those
that have done so tend to display greater learning orientation,
flexibility, adaptability, and resilience in the face of challenges
compared to occupants of the “inborne” leadership camp.
Particularly in the brand of “authentic” leadership, people display
more of their humanity and bring their whole selves to the tasks
at hand (we assign the moniker of “Master” to this notion of
leadership in Figure 1).
In-depth exploration of leadership
Positional leadership
makes everyone else
associated with the entity
or project a follower.
A different strand of leadership-thinking is primarily concerned
with the distribution of leadership and authority for an effort
(“from one to the many”), which results in common (if slightly
different) labels, such as shared, collaborative, collective, or
systems leadership. This kind of leadership is typically more
distributed and achieved by choice and design. It also requires a
different set of skills, as more emphasis is placed on cooperation
and coordination, as well as a different kind of communication,
shared agency and responsibility, innovation, and creativity.
Leaders who bring together people with different strengths
and intelligences might form a powerful team whose members
complement one another (we term this variant the “Lucky
Team”). When the team succeeds, everyone shares in the pride of
success. When the team falls short, it is assumed that “the right
expertise” or a particular viewpoint was missing, or that the team
did not collaborate well.
LT
p. 54
