Unit 5, Assignment 1: Leadership Development Plan

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1

Unit 5, Assignment 1:

Leadership Development Plan

Tom W. Lewis

MBA 6026

The Global Leader

Capella University

June 28, 2015


Abstract

This paper will identify the current global trends driving a

typical global leadership agenda, with the goal of establishing

means and method for developing situational awareness of a global

business leader’s organization. It will consider emerging

leadership theories that serve most constructively to guide

development in our time, and establish a personal plan for global

leadership competencies. As we consider the complexities of

global business in the new era, the paper will put forward a plan

that supports personal growth for the global leader.


Introduction

Our current global business environment requires leadership

that can be conscious of many factors. Such consciousness will

assist in effective planning, sustain and support an

organization, allow for its growth, and provide for its continued

operations into the future. Leaders must foster awareness of an

organization’s position internally and externally, within its

markets—and, especially, on the international stage. They must

also adopt a new way of looking at how business is conducted,

which requires accepting and acting on the responsibility to

develop the self. This will then convert into real change and

evolved activity on the part of the organization itself. Finally,

business leaders must be willing to communicate strategic

concerns and initiatives to all stakeholders in the business’

pursuits.

The risks and rewards involved in the new-era context are

great, even if we ignore a simple reality: most businesses were

founded on and continue to function under principles that no

longer apply to the twenty-first-century situation in which they

operate. If leaders are unwilling to acknowledge this changed


business landscape, their functions as leaders will not serve

their organizations. In the long term, their failure to

comprehend the global realities of business will erode their

control of the business, losing out to companies whose leaders do

understand the situation and know how to determine the best path

forward, one that will lead to success and market dominance.

That is ultimately what is at stake when we speak of

developing global leadership perspective and expertise.

The points just mentioned accrete around a single concept—

situational awareness—which forms the nexus of any leadership

action to be taken. But how can a leader develop this situational

awareness? We hold that the following activities represent the

core of any approach a leader can take to constructively develop

him- or herself and establish the proper mindset for situational

awareness:

1. Understanding of the environment in which the

organization operates (awareness)

2. Recognition of the most appropriate

actions/reactions to that environment so that the


organization’s strengths are supported and its

weaknesses are mitigated (recognition)

3. Determination of the best path forward according to

the needs of the organization and the environment in

which it operates (decision-making)

4. Communication of the path and its implications to

those whom he or she leads (plan communication, or

implementation)

With these activities in mind, the following discussion seeks to

identify the current global trends for driving a global

leadership agenda, adopting emerging leadership theories that

serve most constructively to guide development in our time, and

establishing a personal plan for global leadership competencies.

As we consider the way global business occurs now, in all its

complexity, chaos, challenge, and great opportunity, we can adopt

a development plan toward business leadership that should yield

positive results and responses to any challenge or opportunity.

Current Global Trends

Any approach to leadership development must adopt a global

outlook, recognizing and responding to concerns for the future as


they apply to a global strategy. The current global sphere of

operations poses a significant challenge to leaders at every

level. The following description offers a succinct representation

of the stage on which current global leadership operates:

Organizations require leadership that is fluid, not simply

positional, dispersed rather than centralized, and agile not

inflexible. . . . [T]he external environment and continuous

advancements in technology are major driving forces

underlying change in organizational leadership. A single

leader or leadership team rarely has enough knowledge,

information, expertise, or ability to understand and respond

quickly, effectively, and ethically to the dynamic changes

in the environment and adapt or transform the organization

and its participants.” (Hickman, 2010, p. x).

Global trends in business have an impact on all aspects of an

operation that seeks to move beyond the confines of its original

home. This expansion leads to concerns with regard to the

“geographic location, scope of operations, revenues, and

organizational levels” encountered as the organization seeks to

build trust, efficient realization of goals, and increased market


share beyond the new horizon (Perrin, Blauth, Apthorp, Bonterre,

Daniels, Perrin, & Duffy, 2012, p. 196). In this context,

situational awareness of the global environment and the capacity

to react to the identified situation within a market will drive

any global leadership agenda.

Perspectives on Global Trends

Butner and Lubowe indicate that the transformation of

leadership’s perspective is “essential . . . to any globally

integrated enterprise . . . in today’s complex marketplace”

(Butner & Lubowe, 2014, p. 6). They describe four global trends

that are hallmarks of this new-era context in which all

businesses with an international perspective operate:

globalization, social networks, big data, and shifts in

demography. They find that a globally integrated enterprise that

seeks to transform its strategy and vision must adopt principles

that:

Take a horizontal view of all processes and

customer/consumer interactions across business units

and geographies


Instill a culture of innovation and continuous

improvement with collaborative communications

Leverage skills and competencies globally with local

execution when required

Build an enterprise-wide culture focused on customer

intimacy

(Butner & Lubowe, 2014, p. 6).

By adopting these principles, an organization and its leadership

can address each of the hallmarks of the new era of business.

A different, though congruent, approach to global trends in

leadership requirements calls for a “reflective leader” who can

apply “emotional intelligence and a sincere motivation to examine

oneself” in order to reach “greater career success and display

greater leadership ability and better adaptability in an

unpredictable workplace” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 177). This

approach calls for the comprehension of and adaptation to six

different “zones” in which a leader operates:

Reflection: assessment of “motives, beliefs, attitudes,

and actions” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 176).


Society: application of “fairness, respect, and

[conceptualization of] ‘the greater good’ to balance

individual and group welfare” (Perrin et al., 2012, p.

178).

Diversity: recognition and acknowledgement of diverse

values and the wide scope of “human differences,

including gender, ethnicity, age, physical and mental

ability, culture, beliefs, and work styles” (Perrin et

al., 2012, p. 178).

Ingenuity: execution of “practical ideas” as they reflect

“the currency of success in a capricious global economy”

(Perrin et al., 2012, p. 179).

People: connection with stakeholders, both internal and

external to the organization, in a manner that can

constructively harness human capital and “[get] work done

through others” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 179).

Business: developing strategies that allow the leader and

his or her organization to “make and execute plans and

decisions, organize the work of others, and guide effort

toward predicted results” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 180).


When combined, these “zones” allow a leader and his or her

organization can implement effective strategies that will guide

global activities in the “complex matrix of practices required

for competent responses to rapidly evolving market and human

realities” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 196).

What is Required for Global Leadership Development

Based on the foregoing, it is clear that the global business

environment requires a reflective leader capable of adopting

“emotional intelligence” capable of leveraging skills and

competencies in a way that addresses the needs of the

organization in a flexible, transformational way. In the business

leadership context, emotional or cultural intelligence can be

fostered in order to bridge gaps between the corporate and the

market environment using the personal growth of involved

individuals as the basis for interaction. Such a relationship

affords new insights and increased flexibility when encountering

different cultural attitudes, which are essential qualities for

new-era, global interaction. As Banerjee states:

We can begin to see that the essential resource of the

knowledge era appears to emulate that of other known complex


systems. The dynamics of the cognitive capital available to

individuals and organizations thus reveals a changing

resource contingent upon only a few variables to move from

stability to instability to emergent forms. (Banerjee, 2013,

p. 265).

We acknowledge that attaining “situational awareness” is the

most appropriate goal for a global leader, in order to respond to

“dynamic changes in the environment and adapt or transform the

organization and its participants” (Hickman, 2010, p. x).

This, in turn, can lead to further perspective that allows

for recognition, decision-making, and plan communication and

implementation on a global scale. A clear-eyed perspective here

is key to the pursuits of effective global leadership, which will

ultimately be the bedrock on which any global leadership

development plan is founded.

Emerging Leadership Theories

When we consider emerging leadership theories that guide

leadership development, we should look for models that allow for

the capacity to expand, contract, and innovate based on the

following characteristics. A plan should allow the leader to


develop skills to focus on internal well-being in operations and

human resources management, achieve growth (personal and

organizational), and adapt to external challenges and

opportunities. This is important, since, without a clear

understanding of the global trends in business—and the needs for

action and adaptation within the global business environment,

described above—leaders can make decisions that are divergent

from the true situation in which they find themselves, with grave

consequences.

Any leadership development plan should include collecting

valid and actionable intelligence about the organization and its

environment, while also allowing for the transmission of

leadership’s decisions concerning that intelligence (that is,

situational awareness and the capacity to act upon it). Perrin et

al. state the questions a reflective leader should ask when

evaluating his or her own approach to leadership like so: ““How

can I make sure my own blind spots and biases don’t cause me to

make poor decisions?’ and ‘How can I leverage my strengths to

become a better leader?’” ((Perrin et al., 2012, pp. 176–177).

Another way of stating this approach is as a dual action: first,


recognize the situation (“what is going on?”), then react to the

situation (“what is the most appropriate response to what is

going on?”). Any version of a leadership plan will reflect some

attempt to undertake answering these questions meaningfully.

The following discussion of leadership theories considers

analyzes the emerging leadership theories that are appropriate

for a global agenda, in particular how they focus on

communication in the form of situational awareness and the action

called for according to that awareness.

Leadership Theories: Analysis

As noted in the introduction, attention to concerns as they

relate to the organization is key to leadership’s role in guiding

the business to success.

Relational leadership. A model of relational leadership

builds on management’s credibility through its emphasis on

“accountability, appropriate moral decision-making, and trust”

(Pless & Maak, 2011, p. 4). As such, the decisions that are made,

their consequences (both positive and negative), and the further

actions to be taken as a result must be supported by the

leadership’s position as it impacts the organization’s


stakeholders. Employees in this context should understand what

the company is doing, why it is pursuing the initiatives it does,

and how their continued efforts to support manager’s decisions

will help sustain the company.

Contingency theories. Based on a principle of duality in the

manager-follower relationship, contingency leadership theories

orient workers and their leaders either to the task at hand or to

the relationship between the various participants in the business

activity. With these two motivations as the bases for such

activity,

[t]he model purports that task or relations motivations are

contingent on whether the leader can control and predict the

group’s outcome (i.e., situational favorability).

(Seyranian, 2010, p. 153).

While the original form of this theory, first formulated in the

early 1960s, has become outdated, its focus on leader-follower

relations, task structure, and the leader’s position of authority

vis-à-vis employees (i.e., position power) serve as the focal

points for later “consideration[s] of person and situational

aspects in leadership” (Seyranian, 2010, p. 153). These have led


to subsequent models, such as the normative decision model,

situational leadership theory, and path-goal theory.

Of these, path-goal theory retains the most interest in this

discussion, as it offers a view of the leadership-employee

relationship where “subordinates accept a leader’s behavior only

so far as they view it as resulting in immediate or future

benefit” (BusinessDictionary.com, n.d.). The original proponents

of path-goal theory defend their ideas in this way:

Subordinates with high needs for extrinsic rewards would be

predicted to see leader directiveness or coaching behavior

as instrumental to their satisfaction if such behavior

helped them perform in such a manner as to gain recognition,

promotion, security, or pay increases. (House & Dessler,

1974, pp. 31–32).

While still based on a duality (leader-follower), the Path-Goal

theory draws its strength from leadership’s attention to what

motivates stakeholders, rather than falling back on management’s

authority as the motivating factor. When leadership can clarify

why decisions have been made and how all participants can effect

the positive results expected by implementing such decisions,


this can lead to an improved sense of ownership of both the

business activity and any solutions that help solve a problem or

avert a crisis.

Substitutes for leadership. An attempt to address the

duality understood to exist between leaders and their followers

resulted in the so-called “substitutes for leadership” model.

Kerr and Jermier describe this alternative theory in this way:

[T]hese theories and models share an implicit assumption

that while the style of leadership likely to be effective

may vary according to the situation, some leadership style

will be effective regardless of the situation. It has been

found, however, that certain individual, task, and

organizational variables act as “substitutes for

leadership,” negating the hierarchical superior's ability to

exert either positive or negative influence over subordinate

attitudes and effectiveness. (Kerr & Jermier, 1978, p. 375).

Such a concept foregrounds the internal drive of individuals to

provide the necessary motivation for their work, the pursuit of

business-oriented solutions, and the fulfillment of the business’

(and their own) goals. This idea challenges the traditional top-


down, hierarchical model upon which most other leadership

theories build. The authors conclude their analysis by stating

that

a commitment should be made to the importance of developing

and operationalizing a true situational theory of

leadership, one which will explicitly limit its propositions

and restrict its predictions to those situations where

hierarchical leadership theoretically ought to make a

difference. (Kerr & Jermier, 1978, p. 401).

Here, duality is deemphasized in favor of an intelligent,

internally motivated workforce that understands the business’

goals and knows implicitly how to meet them. In this theory, a

hierarchy must be avoided unless it makes sense in the context of

a specific business situation. for example, if a team requires

strong guidance through an individual task, leadership step in to

assist through motivation, goal-setting, and so on.

While not all businesses could follow this model, it is

interesting to note that many companies now focus on hiring self-

motivated employees who can make decisions for themselves,


allowing management to focus on system-wide issues instead of

day-to-day operations.

Theory U. The challenges and opportunities that global

leaders face in the new era reside in questions related to where

an organization stands within its market, how its operations can

be altered in order to gain a stronger market share, and what

steps the company should take in order to meet such goals. In

this way, leadership had the opportunity to employ the “structure

of attention” described by Scharmer:

The turbulent challenges of our time force all institutions

and communities to renew and reinvent themselves. To do

that, we must ask: Who are we? What are we here for? What do

we want to create together? The answers to these questions

differ according to the structure of attention (and

consciousness) that we use to respond to them. (Scharmer,

2009, p. 14)

According to Scharmer’s Theory U model, a shift in leadership’s

attention will allow the company to address its “blind spot” as

it moves from the “inner place” of present operations to process

improvements (the “how”), leading to effective organizational


change (Scharmer’s “what”) that benefits everyone (Scharmer,

2008, p. 53). This shift reflects what the author has described

as a change in the “field structures of attention” where an

organization pursues “radically different outcomes depending on

the structure of attention from which a particular activity is

performed . . . [that is,] “I attend (this way)—therefore it

emerges (that way)” (Scharmer, 2009, p. 13).

Selecting an Appropriate Theory

Which of the theories discussed above represents the most

appropriate for professional growth and for guiding an individual

global agenda? Since we are seeking a “reflective leader who can

apply emotional intelligence and a sincere motivation to examine

oneself in order to reach greater career success and display

greater leadership ability and better adaptability in an

unpredictable workplace” (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 177),

Scharmer’s Theory U applied in conjunction with the multisource

feedback mode offers the most effective frame for developing key

global leadership skills, attitudes, and practices.

Scharmer’s approach to leadership development easily aligns

with multisource feedback collection and response, which allows


the leader a clear response and reflection on the questions “Who

are we? What are we here for? What do we want to create

together?” By evaluating an individual’s activities in a “360-

degree” manner by peer groups and others who have a direct

experience of his or her working habits, interpersonal behavior,

and other ratable metrics (cf. Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005,

p. 33). Such evaluations

can help leaders enhance the intrapersonal skill of self-

awareness by illustrating the effects they have on others

and by highlighting any discrepancies between various

perceptions of performance. (Day & Harrison, 2006, p. 458).

When employed as part of implementing Scharmer’s Theory U, the

multisource feedback method can pinpoint areas for growth and,

potentially, “translate into enhanced leadership” (Day &

Harrison, 2006, p. 458).

Rationale for Selection

Any leader must understand where his or her role in the

organization, through deep self-awareness and reflection, as

related to the larger context of the organization, its mission

and goals. Where the organization stands and how it impacts the


global business environment aligns directly with the various

intersections of local ecosystems as they encounter the

organization and its activities. The key in developing such deep

self-awareness lies in tying objective evaluation to real-world

impacts and authentic plans for change.

Scharmer’s Theory U approach is grounded in activity that

“attends with your mind wide open”:

Observe with an open mind by suspending your voice of

judgment (VOJ). Suspending your VOJ means shutting down the

habit of judging based on past experience. Suspending your

VOJ means opening up a new space of inquiry and wonder.

Without suspending that VOJ, attempts to get inside the

places of most potential will be futile. (Scharmer, 2008, p.

56).

Further, Scharmer’s advice to “act in an instant,” based on the

thinking of the economist W. Brian Arthur (Scharmer, 2008, p.

55), comprehends three action points:

1. “Observe, observe, observe” . . . stop downloading and

start listening. It means to abandon our habitual ways of


operating and immerse ourselves in the places of most

potential for the situation we are dealing with.

2. “Retreat and reflect: allow the inner knowing to

emerge” . . . [go] to the inner place of stillness where

knowing comes to the surface.

3. “Acting in an instant” . . . prototype the new in order

to explore the future by doing

. . . etc. (Scharmer, 2008, p. 55)

This “U process” (“because it can be depicted and understood as a

U-shaped journey,” Scharmer, 2008, p. 55), requires a deep

understanding of self and the way others in an organization

relate to that self in order to be fully implemented. Because of

this need for deep self-awareness, multisource feedback

evaluation can be used as a tool to develop a clear understanding

of one’s leadership behavior, how it impacts those around the

leader, and what steps can be taken to improve leadership skills

and effectiveness.

In this way, the leader can develop situational awareness of

one’s own place in an organization, the impact one has on one’s

followers, and the general state of the organization in relation


to leadership and the employee hierarchy allows for active and

open-minded evaluation of a situation. A complex leadership

activity, this process can best be realized through continual

two-way engagement with internal and external stakeholders who

play a role in the organization’s global position.

The core elements of any feedback communication will include

awareness, recognition, decision-making, and plan communication

and implementation, as discussed above. When individual

contributors are encouraged to discuss aspects of the leader’s

behavior and the behavior of the organization in general, these

factors can be incorporated into the leader’s environmental

awareness, speed and efficiency of response to change and/or

challenge, efficacy of decision-making abilities, and follow-

through. This can result in effective course direction change,

mindful strategic development based on the global situation, and

communication to all stakeholders with results-oriented

information sharing and instruction.

Ultimately, this implementation of Theory U can yield

results that Scharmer identifies as “presencing,” which


signifies a heightened state of attention that allows

individuals and groups to operate from a future space of

possibility that they feel wants to emerge. Being able to

facilitate that shift is the essence of leadership today.

(Scharmer, 2008, p. 59).

Presencing, in this context, will allow the leader to adapt to

the current global environment, construct a development agenda

that includes “emotional intelligence,” and build on skills and

competencies that will apply flexibility, innovation, and

transformation to the decision-making process. In this way, the

leader can develop a strong attitude toward perceiving and acting

upon the global environment, applying recognition, decision-

making, and communication skills in the areas that most need

these actions.


Developing a Personal Plan

Adopting a personal plan that will develop global leadership

competencies requires a strong identification with and responses

to global environmental factors mentioned above, by means of

awareness, recognition, decision-making skills, and plan

communication and implementation.

Responsibility for Adapting and Growing as a Global Leader

Taking a page from medicine, a global leader should “first,

do no harm” to his or her organization. We can expand on this

simplistic idea and note a deeper, though equally relevant,

message: “strive to be a force multiplier.” Such a leader will

adopt the skills, attitudes, and practices needed to build a

strong global strategy within a globally minded operation. When

the leader can effectively apply his or her leadership skills to

yield the greatest results from a given situation, that person

can be described as a “force multiplier.” Gardner’s “five minds

for the future” offer a clear framework for such development,

which will be discussed in detail below.

Discipline as Leadership Philosophy


A “philosophy” supports a leader in his or her actions,

whatever the context or task at hand. Gardner’s description of

the “disciplined mind” reflects such a ground for leadership

activity, which he describes in this way:

[A] discipline constitutes a distinctive way of thinking

about the world. Scientists observe the world; come up with

tentative classifications, concepts, and theories; design

experiments in order to test these tentative theories;

revise the theories in light of the findings; and then

return, newly informed, to make further observations, redo

classifications, and devise experiments. (Gardner, 2006, p.

27).

In the context of business, this translates as all of the steps

and “ingredients” for an effective operation: what planning is

involved in implementation, what resources (people,

physical/virtual tools, systems for review and quality control,

etc.) are required, and the triggering mechanisms for each step

to move toward fulfillment of the task.

At any level, a leader, should have direct experience of the

work that his or her employees perform. An understanding of the


processes, varied points of view of all stakeholders, and the

needs of the organization and the consumers dwelling within its

global markets, can be obtained by an individual to the degree

that a leader can offer mindful opinions and guidance to drive

the process to successful completion.

When postulating a disciplined mind in the context of a

global leadership development plan, such a “structure” underlying

any business activity can be understood in terms of its planning,

steps, and goals, which a leader can comprehend as part of his or

her strategy for its successful implementation.

Synthesis, Recognition, and Action Within Assumed Structures

Leading on from the disciplined mind (that is, the mind that

accepts a structure or ground upon which to build a sensibility

for the context at hand), the synthesizing mind attempts to

define the disparate parts of experience that make up the

structure of the business environment. As Gardner states in a

2012 lecture:

[T]he synthesizing mind says, “What do I pay attention to,

and why? What do I ignore, and why?” And then when I begin

to pay attention to it, how do I put it together? If I can’t


put it together in a way that makes sense to me, as I walk

out of the room or as I walk out of the conference, it’s

gone, forever. Synthesizing means putting it together in a

way that you can hold onto it. (Gardner, 2012).

This mind calls out the various actors within the organization

and its operations (that is, the structure determined by the

disciplined mind) and reflects on how they can interact with each

other.

In order to counteract (or at least mitigate) the potential

for blind spots that any act of perception implies, synthesis as

an approach to engaging with the structure of the global business

environment requires an omnivorous approach to data, perceptions,

and experiences. This in turn leads to a richness of perception

that each piece on its own would not offer.

The leader who can master synthesis evinces an ability to

cast a perceptive net as widely as possible, minimizing the drive

to “select out” the most important factors within a given

business situation. Pieces of information pertinent to the global

business environment are sorted and held in reserve, for future

reference, and for application in areas that do not appear


initially relevant. Such mental flexibility allows for a broader

and deeper field in which to allow for synthesis, which is

ultimately the ability to draw parallels and develop metaphorical

connections. Such “connectivity” allows the leader to wield

“emotional intelligence and a sincere motivation to examine

oneself,” in addition to building a wider perspective on the

environment and the ways the organization and approach challenges

and opportunities (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 177).

In this way, the complexity facing a leader in the new-era

business operations actually take on a pattern, which in turn

offer new insights and lead to conclusions that will be

productive in the future.

Creation as Active Perception

Discipline (that is, underlying structure) and synthesis

(the development of perspective and analytical consideration of

the structure and its implications) can be further elaborated

through developing the capacity to act on environmental factors

in a constructive way, “pos[ing] new questions, offer[ing] new

solutions” (Gardner, 2006, p. 156).


Gardner describes the “strong . . . tendency of young

children to see, make, and even force connections,” which he

finds

constitutes an invaluable deposit in one’s intellectual

bank, an investment that can be redeemed at many times and

in many ways in the future. . . . Celebrate, don’t censor or

curtail, the connections that are effortlessly effected by

the young mind. (Gardner, 2006, pp. 67–68).

How is this distinct from the process of “open-minded” perception

associated with synthesis? In that case, such activity occurs

through the identification and connection of different (seemingly

unconnected) elements of our environment (that is, perceiving the

structure and its associations as they relate to the

organization). As mentioned above, the creating mind is the force

that does something with those connections.

Gardner’s call not to censor (or edit) the creating mind

reminds me of a classic concept within literature, first named by

the poet John Keats in an 1817 letter to his brothers:

[A]t once it struck me what quality went to form a Man of

Achievement, especially in Literature, and which Shakespeare


possessed so enormously—I mean Negative Capability, that is,

when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries,

doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason

. . . . (Keats & Scudder, 1899, p. 277).

This idea, “negative capability,” requires the suspension of the

judging nature of the mind, allowing new perceptions and

connections to take shape and then lead to a deeper understanding

of the qualities of each piece in relation to all the others.

As with most forms of enlightenment or higher brain

function, negative capability is not something that you can “just

do”—it must be adapted as an ongoing practice. However, the act

of pursuing this mind quality seems to be the essence of the

creating mind in action.

Respect Can Lead to Clear Perception

When the leader acknowledges the values, needs, and

worldview of other individuals and groups also engaged in the

organization’s activities, a respectful approach will account for

how the business affects all stakeholders. According to Gardner,

“One can have excellent scientific, mathematical, and technical

education in an environment that is extremely intolerant”


(Gardner, 2006, p. 114). While the education (or perception) one

receives can be superficially “excellent,” in reality the biases

introduced by an intolerant environment can lead to a clouding of

perceptions, further limiting of the leader’s lens—thereby

contributing to the “blind spot”—rather than offering a valid,

truthful perspective on operations and their impact on the global

environment. In other words, bias and intolerance impede the

process that the synthesizing and creating minds seek to perform.

Since “[an intolerant person has a very low threshold for

unfamiliarity” and “the default assumption is that ‘strange is

bad,’” such a person’s capacity to open up and truly see the

state of affairs, to make connections, and to construct a

productive strategy within the context of the task at hand will

be limited, perhaps fatally (Gardner, 2008, p. 21). While we can

never completely remove all filters in order to see everything

with unlimited clarity (much as we can never live completely in a

state of negative capability, with no judgments or opinions in

mind), Gardner’s call for a respectful mind offers us a goal to

strive toward, welcoming diverse opinions, attitudes, and

backgrounds as part of what is acceptable in our field of play.


The rules cannot be infinitely variable (a state that would

lead to chaos), but the human experience (whether in business,

government, the arts, or other constructs) is broad enough to

accept many variations as valid. Our work in terms of the

respectful mind is to learn how such variations fit into the

larger structure.

Ethical Behavior Leads to Broad Benefit

An ethical perspective derives from and extends the

opportunities made available by respect. Where the respect for

diversity implies acceptance of other points of view and

experiences as equally valid as one’s own, the respectful mind in

and of itself does not allow for inclusion in a global leadership

environment—only acceptance of variable interpretations as

equally legitimate within the given structure.

The ethical mind “includes others actively” in the task at

hand. For example, Gardner describes the cellist Yo-Yo Ma’s

“three distinct obligations” for being a leading musical

performer: play the repertoire excellently, work in an ensemble

effectively, and “pass on one’s knowledge, skills, understanding,

and orientation to succeeding generations” (Gardner, 2008, p.


151). The last point indicates an active inclusion what is going

on, both of current members of the group and those that will

follow. Such an example of “good citizenship” grows the

population of competent participants in the field of play while

also encouraging further development of diverse opinions and

innovative solutions, which can ultimately feed back to the

business at hand and increase the support structure.

The ethical mind encourages others to become aware of what

is going on, then includes them in the response to that

situation. By creating a safe environment in which the leader can

practice the activities described above, ethical awareness

supports diverse, guided thinking through challenges. In a way,

growth through inclusion leads all participants to become fully

formed, competent contributors in the process, active

participants in the operation and beneficiaries of its results.

“Good citizenship,” as described by Gardner, can be seen as

the opposite of “estrangement.” Adopting activities in this

regard represents a fuller engagement with the process that

ultimately supports global leadership in all of its various

aspects, through the use of all of the perspectives described


here (Gardner, 2008, p. 134), integrating all to reach a common,

constructive purpose in tandem.


Global Leadership Plan: Areas for Improvement

This author’s leadership survey yielded the following

results:

Thinking Globally .........5.00Appreciating Diversity ....5.00Developing Technological Savvy ...........................5.00Sharing Leadership ........5.00Demonstrates Empowering People ...........................5.00Creating a Shared Vision . .4.80Maintaining Competitive Advantage .................4.80

Anticipating Opportunities 4.75Ensuring Customer Satisfaction ...........................4.60Building Partnerships .....4.50Developing People .........4.50Achieving Personal Mastery 4.40Encouraging Constructive Dialogue ..................4.40Integrity .................4.00Leading Change ............3.60

This set of data points is color coded, showing a range from 5

points (green) to 4.80–4.00 (yellow), and 3.60 (red). This can be

depicted visually in a table (see figures 1 and 2).

While we can see several clear leadership strengths in this

data (that is, results of 4.8 or higher), fully half of the

leadership characteristics fall below the median level,

indicating growth areas that should be addressed in the

leadership development plan to be adopted. More than half of

these low-performing characteristics fall under the general

category of interpersonal relationship:


Building Partnerships

Developing People

Encouraging Constructive Dialogue

Leading Change

The remaining areas, Achieving Personal Mastery and Integrity,

are important secondary characteristics that should be considered

as we construct our leadership development plan.

Recall that we have established the principal goal of our

global leadership development as one that seeks to build

“emotional intelligence and a sincere motivation to examine

oneself,” in particular as such qualities reflect awareness,

recognition, decision-making, and plan communication and

implementation (Perrin et al., 2012, p. 177). In order to focus

attention on areas for improvement in this plan, we should

concentrate our efforts on interpersonal relationships,

communication across teams and within various leadership and

follower structures of the organization.

Further, conversations with key stakeholders inside and

outside the organization should be conducted with emphasis placed

on ways that individuals feel their leaders can contribute to a


positive result in light of the organization’s mission and goals.

Such conversations, grounded in multisource feedback techniques,

will target “peer groups and others who have a direct experience

of his or her working habits, interpersonal behavior, and other

ratable metrics (cf. Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005, p. 33), in

order to determine where deficiencies in communication and

direction exist. Once these areas have been established, steps

will be taken to align the leader’s activities appropriately.

Progress in this plan will be measured through follow-up

conversations with the same individuals, conducted in three-month

intervals following the initial contact with stakeholders (see

figure 3). The global leadership inventory survey will be applied

following each conversation, in order to establish that

development goals have been met, and measure the extent of this

development.

Remembering that the goal of this activity is to enhance the

leader’s situational awareness in terms of his or her place

within the organization, as an effective agent of the

organization’s mission and goals, the key concern in this

exercise is one of learning and enhancing his or her


understanding of how best to apply skills and knowledge of the

global business environment, how best to apply leadership

practice in the context of operational efficiency, and

comprehension of the organization’s impact on the global markets

in which the company operates.

Conclusion

We have seen that our current global business environment

requires leadership that can be conscious of many factors. Such

consciousness will assist in effective planning, sustain and

support an organization, allow for its growth, and provide for

its continued operations into the future. Any leadership

development plan must adopt a global outlook, recognizing and

responding to concerns for the future as they apply to a global

strategy.

Situational awareness is the core responsibility of

leadership at every level of this process. This quality of deep

understanding of the global environment and the leader’s capacity

to react to the identified situation within a market will drive

any global leadership agenda.


Comprehension and awareness of environmental factors,

response to those factors, context-driven decision-making, and

interpersonal communication align with Gardner’s five minds

concept as well as the “outside-in” transformational leadership

model presented by Butner and Lubowe. The leadership development

plan presented here incorporates these elements in an effort to

foster deep self-awareness on the part of the global leader and

growth in his or her team, organization, or business ecosystem. A

leader who incorporates recognition, decision-making, and plan

communication and implementation into his or her global

leadership agenda should be capable of addressing the challenges

and opportunities presented by the new era of global business

activity.

Such a model for growth will also encourage cultural

intelligence by making the leader aware of global concerns and

opportunities, building a pattern of innovative thinking that

allows for the ambiguity that arises from receiving new inputs

for unexpected sources. This, ultimately, is at the heart of the

global, new-era business context that has stirred up the

corporate world over the last few decades. When these qualities


are approached openly and assimilated in the leader’s practice,

the results can stimulate new ideas while increasing the

organization’s stability as it seeks to develop an integrated

global strategy.


Appendix: Figures

5.00

4.00

3.00

Thin

king

Glo

bally

Appr

ecia

ting

Dive

rsity

Deve

lopi

ng T

echn

olog

ical S

avvy

Shar

ing

Lead

ersh

ip

Dem

onst

rate

s Em

powe

ring

Peop

le

Crea

ting

a Sh

ared

Visi

on

Mai

ntai

ning

Com

petit

ive A

dvan

tage

Antic

ipat

ing

Oppo

rtuni

ties

Ensu

ring

Cust

omer

Sat

isfac

tion

Build

ing

Partn

ersh

ips

Deve

lopi

ng P

eopl

e

Achi

evin

g Pe

rson

al M

aste

ry

Enco

urag

ing

Cons

truct

ive D

ialo

gue

Inte

grity

Lead

ing

Chan

ge

Figure 1: Global leadership inventory, survey results.

Figure 2: Global leadership inventory, survey results sorted in descending order.

0.001.002.003.004.005.006.00


1

Self-Assessment—Personal evaluation

Conduct global leadership inventory (self)

Self-Assessment—Multisourcefeedback evaluation

Conversations and deep inquiry into leader’s behavior and effectiveness asrelated to organization’s goals, etc.

2 Planning for Change

Establish clear parameters for change based on conversations and self-assessment (1)

3 Execution and Reflection

Implement plan (2), with clear communication of actions to be taken and meansof measuring the results; continued reflection on activities and impact (through off-cycle interactions, conversations with stakeholders)

4 Moving Forward

Establish that activities andimplementations (2 and 3) have been completed, collect results, evaluate based on expectations and any unplanned (out-of-scope) results

5 Shared Learnings

At end of interval cycle, meet with key stakeholders todiscuss final results (processed in 4), conduct follow-up evaluation and feedback session to establishadditional benchmarks, coursecorrection, further areas forimprovement, etc.

6 Repeat Return to 1 and conduct follow-up self-assessment andmultisource feedback


evaluation

Figure 3: Leadership development plan, to be repeated in three-monthintervals.


References

Banerjee, S. (2013). Chaos and complexity theory for management: Nonlinear

dynamics. Hershey, Pa: Business Science Reference.

BusinessDictionary.com. (n.d.). Path goal theory. Retrieved from

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/path-goal-

theory.html#ixzz3bwe0GsTL

Butner, K., & Lubowe, D. (April 15, 2014). Global transformation

from the inside out, Retrieved from

http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/gb/en/gbe03600usen/

GBE03600USEN.PDF

Day, D. V., & Harrison, M. M. (2006). Leadership development. In

Encyclopedia of career development. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage

Publications.

Hickman, G. R. (2010). Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era. Los

Angeles: SAGE Publications.

Gardner, H. (2008). The Five Minds for the Future. Schools: Studies In

Education, 5(1/2), 17-24.

Gardner, H. (March 21, 2012). Howard Gardner: The synthesizing

mind [video]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=qT-lJN6rhK8


Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future. Boston, Mass: Harvard

Business School Press.

House, R. J., & Dessler, G. (1974). The path-goal theory of

leadership: Some post hoc and a priori tests. In J. G. Hunt

& L. L. Larson (Eds.), Contingency approaches to leadership.

Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Keats, J., & Scudder, H. E. (1899). The complete poetical works and

letters of John Keats. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.

Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. (January 1, 1978). Substitutes for

leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance, 22, 3, 375-403.

Perrin, C., Blauth, C., Apthorp, E., Bonterre, M., Daniels, S.,

Perrin, P. B., & Duffy, R. D. (March 1, 2012). Factor

analysis of global trends in twenty-first century

leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 33, 2,

175-199.

Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (January 1, 2011). Responsible

Leadership: Pathways to the Future. Journal of Business Ethics, 98,

3-13.


Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Learning from the future as it emerges : the

social technology of presencing. San Francisco, Calif: Berrett-

Koehler.

Scharmer, C. O. (2008). Uncovering the blind spot of leadership.

Leader to Leader, 2008(47), 52–59.

Seyranian, V. (2010). Contingency theories of leadership. In J.

Levine, & M. Hogg (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Group Processes &

Intergroup Relations, pp. 152-156.

Smither, J. W., London, M., & Reilly, R.R. (2005). Does

performance improve following multisource feedback? A

theoretical model, meta-analysis and review of empirical

findings. Personnel Psychology, 58, 33–66.

Unit 5, Assignment 1: Leadership Development Plan

Documents

Transcript of Unit 5, Assignment 1: Leadership Development Plan