Dictation of Action by Environment

  Leadership is best exemplified by actions and these actions cannot be separated from the environment that they occur in.  In many ways, the environment dictates the appropriate action.  If a leader comes to a decision, one option could be completely detrimental given the situational, historical, and social backdrop the decision is placed within.  This post will discuss a wide-lensed view of the topic from J. Wren and M. Swatez as well as a specific example of Martin Luther King's social reform movement in the context of that day.  

  Wren and Swatez begin by acknowledging the efforts made previously to recognize all the possible environmental factors in a leadership decision.  They propose a model that is completely holistic yet ordered in the addressing of a leadership context.  The model is characterized by a set of three concentric circles that envelop two remaining linked circles. The outermost circle is the historical context of leadership that looks at long term influences and effects of social, economical and political environments.  Inside the historical context circle is the contemporary context of leadership circle.  This looks at the modern social, economical and political norms as a means to judge the current situation.  Next, the immediate context of leadership circle is concerned with the immediate situation's context of structure, culture and characteristics of the given task.  In the example of a business decision, the historical context would involve looking back in history for similar decisions and how they worked out, the contemporary context would look at the current market and social constructs to examine potential gains, and the immediate context would be within the company if a decision would be successful and received well.  Finally, within those three concentric circles, Wren and Swatez place the leader and follower within interlocking circles, signifying the importance of both agents in the leadership process (Wren, 1995).  This simplified model can be expanded upon depending on the position of a given leader but the model holds as a valuable asset in the evaluation of the context a leadership decision is made within. 

  In Carson's commentary on MLK, he first discusses the historical exaggeration of MLK.  Carson calls attention to mass media's singling out of MLK as the sole initiator and indispensable element of the southern black struggles and most importantly, mass media calls too much attention to King's exceptional leadership qualities and not enough to the impersonal, large-scale social factors that enabled King's leadership to be seen and utilized.  MLK did indeed have charisma and incredible oratory skills but the words he spoke fell on willing and open ears due to the social environment they were spoken in.  Of interesting note was Carson's discussion of MLK's use of rhetoric in the context of intellectualism disguised by the language of a evangelical African-American preacher.  In short, Carson affirms MLK's incredible leadership ability but proposes that the black struggle would have followed its course with or without MLK due to the social, political and economic environment of the time.  

  As a Biblical tie-in, the story of Moses is an incredible narrative about the utilization of the perfect environment and situation.  Moses was able to take advantage of the hardness of Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 8:12), the bitterness of the Israelite people in response to the Egyptian brutality (Exodus 1:13-14), and the increasing number of Israelite people (Exodus 15-22) to change the course of Israelite history.  

  In the context of my future application of leadership, two things are absolutely fundamental to impact: the readiness of self and the ability to recognize the appropriate situation.  This section of the Wren text highlights the importance of that second aspect of leadership ability.  Leadership is always possible and applicable but the greatest change and impact occurs when the able and willing leader recognizes and capitalizes on the perfect situation.  

The New Oxford Annotated Bible: NRSV (2010). New York: Oxford Press
Wren, J (1995) A Leader's Companion. New York: The Free Press

Leaders ---- Followers ---- Leaders ---- Followers

  After exploring both the position of leader and the position of follower in previous posts, this post will explicitly explore the relationship between the two agencies.  The dynamic between the two positions is as important as the exploration of the individual positions.  
  Situational Leadership is a theory coined by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard used to describe the relationship between leaders and followers.  It hinges on the explanation of how a leader should respond to and behave in the readiness level of followers in a given situation.  In this model, the leader must constantly remain sensitive to the follower's readiness level (Wren, 1995).  This creates a consistent tension between the followers and leaders to assess the readiness levels of the followers and the actions of the leaders.  The follower has a readiness level that can fluctuate between varying amounts of willingness and ability while the leader's behavior can fluctuate with varying levels of task-oriented behaviors and relationship-oriented behaviors.  These levels are interdependent and vary depending on the fluctuation of the opposite positions' levels.  Hersey and Blanchard label four quadrants of relationship between the leader and follower levels and give explanation to the proper relation between the leader and follower given the quadrant the relationship is found in.  
  SuperLeadership is a concept that originated with Charles Manz and is based around the concept that great leaders are not those who inspire their followers to incredible action, but rather great leaders are those who are able to lead others to lead themselves (Wren, 1995).  True leadership is then a result of internal leadership and influences, not external leadership or influences.  This idea of self-leadership is by no means novel but is vitally important as corporations grow and independence increases in many venues within society.  
  I cannot help but connect both of these leader-follower dynamic theories back to John Wooden and the stories he tells of his years coaching basketball at UCLA.  In many instances, the way he led those young men depended on their commitment and level of readiness.  What may have been the most exceptional aspect of John Wooden was that he was able to bring his players to the highest level of readiness through his behaviors so that he maximized their potential each and every year.  John Wooden sent numerous players to the professional basketball league after college in part because he taught those men how to lead themselves and constantly improve who they were.  
  As I transition into this next phase of life, I hope that I can navigate relationships and leadership opportunities with as much skill as Coach Wooden, with the ability to bring people to the highest level of readiness to achieve greatness while still enabling them to reach a level of self-confidence in which they can proceed to lead themselves.  That really should be the goal of any relationship between two individuals.  
  
Wooden, J (2004) They Call Me Coach.  New York: McGraw-Hill Books
Wren, J (1995) A Leader's Companion. New York: The Free Press

Followership is not the antithesis of leadership

  John Gardner has served in six different presidential administrations in varying capacities and now resides as professor at the Stanford Business School.  His professional life has largely taken on the role of serving a higher authority within an organization.  While he led his subordinates, he also was a consistently active follower and these experiences have formed his opinions on followership (the act of following).  Gardner calls attention to the sociologists', Max Weber and Georg Simmel, theories of the role of the follower being of equal importance to an achieved goal to the actions of the leader (Wren, 1995, p. 185-186).  These conclusions were drawn in a very non-populist environment - pre-World War I Germany.  An important tension arises in comparing the two options a leader has in the face of responsibility to the follower; should the leader impose their will after making decisions without consultation to the followers or does the leader need to invite varying degrees of follower participation? This and other corresponding questions to the reciprocal participation between leader and follower have answers muddled by conditions and exceptions (Wren, 1995, p. 187).  Gardner boils the questions down to the ability of the leader to meet the explicit and implicit needs and expectations of the contingents who they are placed in leadership over (Wren, 1995, p. 188).  

  Joseph Rost is a leadership professor at the University of San Diego and instead of taking a relative top down viewpoint to the responsibility of a leader to their followers, he views the relationship between the follower and leader as shared agency in the work.  Rost begins by dispelling the notion that followers are innately passive and unproductive unless directed in favor for the notion that we are all leaders, albeit in differing roles.  Rost attempted to shine understanding and meaning onto the term, "follower" by using five points:

  1) Passive people are not followers for only people actively participating in a leadership process are followers

  2) Activity is a spectrum with the influence correlated to activity.

  3) Followers can become leaders and leaders can become followers in any one leadership relationship.

  4) The role an individual plays as follower or leader is not indicative for every relationship - leaders can be followers in different relationships.

  5) Followers do not do followership, they do leadership (Wren, 1995, p. 191-192).  

  In Joseph Rost's new leadership paradigm, followers and leaders both do leadership.  This brings followers into the fold as equal partners, co-creators, sharing agency.  

  There are not many majors that induce more independence of their students than biology.  There is rarely a group study session and never a group presentation or project.  This makes it difficult to hold a leader and follower role within the major because it is so individualistic.  But in a future healthcare career, there is a distinct hierarchy between physicians and their "followers" consisting of nurses, interns, social workers, and other workers that surround the healthcare process.  If Rost and Donald Miller share a common thread in theory, it is this: that co-agency was meant for the creation of something great (The Storyline Conference, 2014).  Rost would say that co-agency is utilized in leadership relationships for success at achieving objectives while Miller would suggest that humans delve into co-agency with God in the writing of their human story.  Both of these actualizations are useful for my future direction.  Bringing a team mentality into healthcare enables each person to share their expertise and strengths to provide the best form of healthcare for the patient.  And as the story of my life is continually written, co-agency with God can facilitate the making of a captivating story worth sharing.  

  

Miller, D (2014) The Storyline Conference.  San Diego. March 1, 2014.

Wren, J (1995) A Leader's Companion. New York: The Free Press