Category Archives: leadership

Going around in circles

I spent a day last month marking essays that were part of the assessment for a postgraduate module I have been teaching about engineering leadership. I use Boyatzis’s theory of self-directed learning to talk about how students can develop their leadership competences. Then, we ask the students to reflect on the leadership and ethical issues associated with one or two incidents they had experienced or observed vicariously. Most of the time we teach engineering students to make rational technical decisions based on data; so, they find it difficult to reflect on their feelings and emotions when faced with ethical and leadership dilemmas. We show them Gibbs’s cycle for reflective thinking and encourage them to use it to structure their thoughts and as a framework for their essay.  There are obvious and natural similarities between the theories of Boyatzis and Gibbs.  Of course, some students use them and some don’t. However, so far, this is an assignment for which they cannot use an essay mill or a large language model, because we ask them to write about their personal experiences and feelings; and LLMs do not understand anything, let alone feelings.

Goleman D, Boyatzis R & McKee A, The new leaders: transforming the art of leadership into the science of results, London: Sphere, 2002, p.139.

I have written previously on teaching leadership, see for example ‘Inspirational Leadership‘ on March 22nd 2017, ‘Leadership is like shepherding‘ on May 10th 2017, ‘Clueless on leadership style’ on June 14th 2017.

Are we individuals?

It has been estimated that there are 150 species of bacteria in our gut with a megagenome correspondingly larger than the human genome; and that 90% of the cells in our bodies are bacterial [1].  This challenges a simple understanding of individual identity because on one level we are a collection of organisms, mainly bacteria, rather than a single entity.  The complexity is almost incomprehensible with 30 trillion cells in the human body each with about a billion protein molecules [2].  Each cell is apparently autonomous, making decisions about its role in the system based on information acquired through communicating and signalling with its neighbours, the rest of the system and the environment.  Its autonomy would appear to imbue it with a sense of individual identity which is shaped by its relationships within the network of cells [3].  This also holds for human beings within society although you could argue the network is simpler because the global population is only about 8 billion; however the quantity of information being communicated is probably greater than between cells, so perhaps that makes the network more complex.  Networks are horizontal hierarchies with no one or thing in overall control and they can adapt to cope with changes in the environment.  By contrast, vertical hierarchies depend on top-down obedience and tend to eliminate dissent, yet without dissent there is little or no innovation or adaptation.  Hence, vertical hierarchies can appear to be robust but are actually brittle [4].  In a network we can build connections and share knowledge leading to the development of a collective intelligence that enables us to solve otherwise intractable problems.  Our ability to acquire knowledge not just from own our experiences but also from the experience of others, and hence to progressively grow collective intelligence, is one of the secrets of our success as a species [5].  It also underpins the competitive advantage of many successful organisations; however, it needs a horizontal, stable structure with high levels of trust and mutual dependence, in which our sense of individual identity is shaped by our relationships.

References:

  1. Gilbert SF, Sapp J, Tauber AI, A symbiotic view of life: we have never been individuals, Quarterly Review of Biology, 87(4):325-341, 2012.
  2. Ball P, How Life Works, Picador, 2023.
  3. Wheatley M, Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, 2nd Edition, Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc, San Francisco, 1999.
  4. McWilliams D, Money – A Story of Humanity, Simon & Schuster, London, 2024.
  5. Henrich J, The secret of our success: how culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015.

Virtual reality and economic injustice in a world with limits

Decorative photograph of a pile of carved stonesIt is sometimes suggested that materialism and greed are key drivers of our social and political system that largely refuses to acknowledge that we live in a world of limits.  However, Rowan Williams has proposed that we have a ‘culture that is resentful about material reality, hungry for anything and everything that distances us from the constraints of being a physical animal subject to temporal processes, to uncontrollable changes and to sheer accident.’  In other words, it is our desire to be in control of our lives and surroundings that drives us to accumulate wealth and build our strongholds.  Education and learning lead to an understanding of the complexity of the world, a realisation that we cannot control the world and perhaps to unavoidable insecurity, particularly for those people who thought they had some distance between themselves and uncontrollable events.  It is more comfortable to believe that we are in control, adhere to the current out-dated paradigm, and ignore evidence to the contrary. This is equivalent to living in a virtual reality.  This approach not only accelerates uncontrollable changes to the planet but also leads to economic disparities because, as Williams states, economic justice will only arrive when everyone recognises a shared vulnerability and limitation in a world that is not infinite.

Source: Rowan Williams, Faith in the public square, London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015.

Image: a pile of carved stones in the cloisters of Hereford cathedral where I bought a second-hand copy of ‘Faith in the public square’ while on holiday [see ‘Personale mappa mundi‘ on November 1st, 2023].

Do you think that you have a miserable job?

Many years ago I attended the Center for Creative Leadership in Greensboro, North Carolina. There I was introduced to a series of books by Patrick Lencioni.  I use one of them, ‘The Five Dysfunctions of a Team‘, regularly as part of module that I teach on Science Leadership and Ethics which is in turn part of a Continuous Professional Development (CPD) programme [see ‘On being a leader‘ on October 13th, 2021].  I pulled the book off my shelf a few weeks ago in preparation for delivering the class and next to it was first one I read and enjoyed, called ‘The Three Signs of a Miserable Job: A Fable for Managers‘.  If you are only reading this post to find out if your job qualifies as miserable, then the three signs are anonymity (you see yourself as being invisible), irrelevance (your work does not matter to anyone, not even the boss) and immeasurement (you have no tangible means of assessing success or failure in your job).  The message of the book is that a manager has a responsibility to ensure none of their team suffers any of these basic signs of a miserable job.