Igas valdkonnas on mõned autorid, kelle tekste on kasulik jälgida ja kui nad midagi avaldavad või arvavad, siis oleks arukas lugeda, kuulata, vaadata. Mary Uhl‐Bien on organisatsioonide valdkonnas üks sellistest autoritest.

Siinviidatu on kommentaar, mis oma lihtsuses ja selguses on väga väärtuslik kõikidele juhtimishuvilistele. Õnneks on tekst vabalevis, st kõikidele lugemiseks avatud.

Sissejuhatuseks võib muuhulgas lugeda:

Traditional top-down and ‘hero’ models of leadership help us know what it is like to lead on an individual basis as a manager having to motivate and inspire a subordinate, or a CEO having to position an organizational strategically. They do not, however, capture the lived experience of navigating leadership in a complex world. For this we must better understand how leadership enables people and organizations for adaptability (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2018).

Avalik sektor saab nahutada:

The bad news is that public-sector and political leadership lag behind. Many still largely operate in outdated governance and political systems mired in bureaucracy and cronyism that work against collaborating for the greater good, resulting in countless unnecessary deaths and a traumatized healthcare workforce – the consequences of which we will be dealing with for years.

Ja nüüd neile, kelle arvates on juhtimine midagi väheolulist (kuigi, need siinset vist ei loegi):

For all those who argue that leadership doesn’t matter, 2020 proves them wrong: leadership can be, literally, the difference between life and death.

Keerukus-mitmekesisuse avamine: “õigeid” tööriistu ei ole, koostööd tuleb teha tundmatutega ja konfliktsituatsioonides …

Complexity begins in organizations as pressures, often in the form of an adaptive challenge – a problem for which a) there is no known solution, b) people must work together in new partnerships who haven’t worked together before, c) these partnerships are characterized by conflicting views (i.e., high heterogeneity), and d) agents have high interdependence such that, in extreme cases, they must adapt together or they will die (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2017).

Olukorras, kus kohanemisvõime on oluline, võib bürokraatia selle tasalülitada. Ja neid näiteid ei pea vist keegi kusagile otsima minema, sest need saabuvad postkast piirangute ajal kodus istudes. Näiteks jagavad mitmed avalikud organisatsioonid endiselt infot dokumendihaldusprogrammide kaudu, millele ligipääs on vaid organisatsiooni sisevõrgust. Kaugligipääs puudub. Ja nii kasvabki nende e-kirjade arv, mis teatavad, et “Sa ei ole täitnud oma tööülesannet tähtaegselt”. 🙂

The problem is that adaptive responses in bureaucratic organizing systems are not the norm. Bureaucracy stifles adaptability.

Siinviidatud tekstis kasutatakse teist terminoloogiat, kuid juhtimine on relatsiooniline (vt nt siit ja siit ja siit) ja seetõttu tuleb tähelepanu osutada ka “mittejuhtidele.”

What all of this shows, and what leadership researchers have to acknowledge, is that leadership is a co-creation. […] Leaders alone are not the problem. We can’t label it narcissistic or toxic leadership and be satisfied with examining the ‘leader’. We must also look at narcissistic and toxic followership and explore the causes and forces that give rise to their destructive co-constructions. Failure to understand why followers behave as they do in serving their own interests by elevating and empowering dysfunctional and dangerous leaders means we will never be able to prevent destructive leadership from occurring.

Uhl‐Bien, M. (2021) Complexity and COVID‐19: Leadership and Followership in a Complex World. Journal of Management Studies.