December
12, 2016
Is
the traditional oligarchy structure of most organizations redundant? The oligarchy assumptions may be redundant in
some aspects. An example I like to use
is the very funny scene in the movie “Office Space”, where the main character
has several people in about a three-minute time span, including his top boss,
ask if he saw the memo on the new TPX report cover sheets. This memo mandated a new cover sheet for the
TPX reports and the main character inadvertently used the old one. It is funny to those who may believe that
their organization has too many layers of management performing the same
functions. With this example one could
argue redundancy from several points of view.
It could be a mistake to label all oligarchic structures redundant. Every situation is different, and as
Obolensky argues in his book, the true leaders are not influenced by potential
obstacles. They flow around them like
water in a stream. I like that analogy
and find it a useful tool to add to my personal repertoire. The true leaders empower their employees and
appear to not even be leading their teams.
That is the optimal state of the truly enlightened leader.
The
implications of learning techniques and knowledge during this course (MSLD 633,
Strategic Leadership; Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University) has forced me into
a critical examination of myself. What
am I good at? What am I weak at? How can I get better? My personal improvement must start with
honestly evaluating where I am at as a leader.
I have put some serious critical thought into these questions and
issues. As part of my own critical
evaluation and improvement, I have already begun implementing various
techniques into my work as a leader at the Corpus Christi Army Depot
(CCAD). I have utilized the hard and
soft techniques of the Yin and Yang model.
I have started to listen more and talk less. These are just small examples of an
implementation plan that will not be realized overnight.
I
have always lived my life with the purpose of continually improving all aspects
of my life. It is hard to try and do a
makeover all at once. The process has
been gradual and has taken decades. I
now try to pick out the three most important areas of improvement and work on
that list until it is satisfied. Then I
re-evaluate where I am at, and pick another three issues to work on.
My
needs over the next three years will include re-looking at the material covered
in this course, seeking out additional sources of information, and taking
advantage of training opportunities as they arise. My immediate goal for next year is to
complete my lean six sigma blackbelt training and to complete my CP-12
certification. CP-12 is a nationally
recognized program for safety professionals.
It is almost like a leader getting an MBA only illustrated as a safety professional
getting a nationally recognized certification.
I have 6 courses to complete out of 38.
One of the six courses, is the 30-hour OSHA certification.
Of
course, as I complete my MBA through Embry-Riddle, the courses remaining will
also focus on various aspects of leadership and how they relate to different
aspects of business. Finally, the
experience gained as a supervisor will also help me grow in the current
position and prepare me for the next level of leadership.
I
touched on this above, but after I read the 70-20-10 presentation, which
describes a person spending 70% of their time on their core competency, 20% of
their time on related projects to their core competency, and 10% of their time
on learning new information or taking on projects unrelated to their core
competency. The work that I have
completed for CCAD over the past year closely mirrors the 70-20-10 breakdown,
but it gave me pause as I considered the possibility that I had skewed my own
percentages. I had to critically analyze
whether I had broken barriers with the number of projects and areas that I have
attempted to influence. For example,
trying to fix the quality deficiency reports (QDRs) for CCAD is a safety
officer function, but is not considered a core competency. Therefore, it must fall within the 20% realm
of related projects to the core competency.
It can be argued that nearly EVERY aspect of CCAD falls in some way under
the safety umbrella. However, that begs
the question. Am I ignoring my 70% core
competency in regards to my time spent on Aviation Safety? I am not sure. I think that will require more self-examination. I feel that I have been positively influenced
by the Strategic Leadership Course and by Nick Obolensky’s book. I have recommended it to other leaders who
make it their business to teach leadership at the senior levels. Only time will tell as to whether my personal
plan will be effective and useful for CCAD.
John
H2O
References:
Obolensky,
Nick. (2016). Complex Adaptive Leadership
Second Edition, New York: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment