Collective Leadership Values and Behaviours

EXPLORING THE FUTURE OF THE COLLECTIVE LEADERSHIP INVENTORY IN ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING VALUES AND BEHAVIOURS

Assessing and developing values and behaviours through intelligent networks and knowledge

We can recall that collective leadership represents a form of both shared and distributed leadership in which different stakeholders collaborate in achieving shared aims whilst ensuring that their own aims and objectives are supported. Intelligent networks and knowledge lie at the heart of this collective activity.

The purpose of this topic is to explore how the CLI can be applied in further supporting the development of collective leadership and in assessing the intelligent-network style of leadership as well as its outcomes. In the 'tabbed' section below you can explore different aspects of how the Collective Leadership Inventory can be applied in achieving these aims. More detailed information is available in the LeadershipQ section and the Knowledge hub for all aspects of the future orientation of the CLM/CLI.

The Benefits of the Collective Leadership Model (CLM) for the Future

The CLM is premised on the definition of collective leadership as a means of defining a shared purpose with the overall aim of leading the in the public interest. It builds on the Collective Leadership Framework (CLF) which comprises the 20 Ps of New Public Leadership. The difference between the framework and model is described as follows:

New Public Leadership — **Collective Leadership Framework**

Enlarge Image

A framework is a way of representing the empirical relations between aspects of inquiry and highlighting how the variables relate to each other. Statistical tests can be applied. The 20P outline of New Public Leadership represents this framework.

A model is something used to represent or explain the operation and mechanism of the variables and outcomes. It is a conceptual model which exists in one’s mind, often consisting of symbolic representations. It helps in explaining and interpreting the operation of the mechanisms in practice but with the confidence on knowing that it is consistent with the validity and representativeness of the research.

Enlarge Image

The empirical and statistical facets of the research are briefly described in the in the final topic (#7) of this section with more detailed explanation available in the book “The Selfless Leader”. We have confidence that the validity and representativeness of the research will enable both the Framework and the Model to be applied in any leadership context, whether for-profit or not-for-profit. It has been used in relation to local authorities, policing and health organisations in the UK, focused on public leadership in support of a local authority leadership development programme, community safety across multiple agencies and, similarly, tackling inequalities in health more specifically.

We began this journey by providing a narrative and discussion in relation to the meaning, application and strengths and areas for development of collective leadership in the previous section. The Collective Leadership Framework and Model are well placed to assess leadership in all contexts. It draws on our three-dimensional approach to Leadership3 which is also briefly reviewed on this portal.

The three dimensions are consistent with the CLF and CLM, comprising (1) the need to build capacity and capability of collective leaders, (2) using a collective style of leadership incorporating individual, shared and distributed leadership and (3) focusing on not just the known/knowns and known/unknowns but also giving emphasis to discovering the patterns that will help in identifying and responding to the unknown unknowns. This is the essence of authentic transformational leadership. The three-dimensional approach to leadership which is illustrated below.

Highlights for Leadership³

Leadership3 is premised on the core question: “Are we doing the right things for the right reasons?”

Leaders tackle complexity by exploring the unknowns as well as the knowns

Leaders need to understand the synergy of the whole system as well as the mechanisms of its parts

Innovation and creativity will rely on the collective wisdom and the application of different levels of knowledge

Leadership is a complex adaptive systems which requires action oriented and adaptive leadership at all levels

Do you want to Explore Further?

Embodiment of Institutional Core Purpose through a Strategic Collective Leadership Process

Let us return to the future of the CLI, building on its humble beginnings:

The CLI has displayed its usefulness in identifying and defining collective leadership capacity and capability requirements across a range of different institutional settings. This is briefly evidenced in the final section of this web resource section which summarises the initial CLI research and assessments. The further development of the CLI has drawn on wide ranging experiences and research which has been presented throughout our online resource.

The Case for Embodiment

The need to adapt to the changing political, economic, social, technical, legal and environmental conditions of the current world may well emerge. The case for reimagining leadership and repurposing management has been around for a long time – some forty years – but has rarely taken root in practice. The preponderance of targets and objectives introduced in the 1970/80s through, for example, management by objectives (MBOs) and so-called public sector reform targets (New Public Management) has led to a focus on what Einstein referred to as ‘Counting what can be counted’ rather than what ‘counts.’

This is not just of importance to the public not-for-profit sector but, equally, the for-profit sector. In both the financial crisis of 2008 and the pandemic, it is the public sector that played the major role in recovery, rebuilding and, we suggest, reimagining. As the leadership world continued to adapt with an increasing tendency towards globalisation and where technology enables the transfer of trillions of dollars across the globe literally in seconds, corporate greed emerged. This was accompanied by the demise of the traditional engine (and primarily family-owned businesses) creating a shift towards corporatism. The mindset, however, was driven by common interests towards financial dominance. The continuance of traditional management and leadership is not what was needed but there was a tendency to show a shift in values that become more corporate-facing as opposed to public-facing values. The financial crash of 2008 brought these matters to a head. It took another decade for the global economy to recover although the impact of austerity measures remained up to the point at which the Covid-19 pandemic overshadowed even the financial crash.

The CLI offers potential to assess the need for strategic change, to influence change programmes through well informed and designed systematic change approaches and to assess the impact of both service/product improvement but equally important, the development of leadership and leaders at all levels and across collaborating platforms. Reimagination puts the front-line fully and squarely within the leadership.

In this supporting sub-topic, we follow on from the discussion in the primary topic influenced by two of the Intelligent Leadership Questions (ILQs) namely the 'why' and the 'how' of reimagining leadership. Influenced initially by Simon Sinek's contention that WHY is the important first question and by Selznick's fifty-year classic argument for institutional embodiment of values, we also briefly consider the 'HOW' question.

WHEN YOU ARE READY, EXPLORE THE REMAINING EXAMPLES OF HOW TO REIMAGINING LEADERSHIP

From Mission and Vision to Values: Stages of Reflection, Redefinition and Reimagination

In this sub-topic we pay attention to the longer term aims of the vision. Although the vision should be clearer than, and provide more substance to, the organisational mission, as we progress further through the ILQs we start to define the strategic capabilities which are specific enough to make the difference in shifting the mission and vision from concept to reality. We address this in the following sub-topic ‘From Core Purpose to the Creation of Public Value’. The CLM and CLI provide a strong foundation for both embodying the institutional core purpose in all that leaders do and in embedding the core purpose and public value in practice. We will briefly recap from where we left off in the primary topic.

The vision sets out the strategic intention forming the first horizonal pillar of institutional design supported by the second horizontal pillar as the foundation, the shared values.

The core institutional purpose comprises the mission based on the institutional purpose informed by the vision and values. Goals identify the general statement of the aim or purpose supported by the more precise objectives. The values will often be implicit from the original mission albeit stated in general terms (such as 'worthiness', 'integrity', 'collaborative' etc). The values will need to be reinforced or redefined within the analyses that lead to the vision.

NOTE: Sometimes, the terms of 'purpose' and 'mission' are used interchangeably. This is not a major issue. As our llustration demonstrates the mission statement is the main element of the core purpose, supported by the broad goals and objectives. This is discussed in more detail below.

Identifying and developing the Institutional Core Purpose: Reflect, redefine and reimagine

The vision asks, “what are the organisations strategic ambitions and aspirations and what should the future look like?” Similarly, values (which underpin the organisations vision) also asks the ‘what’ question; “What does the organisation see as important”. Both of these questions will inform the development of the mission as the first step in either reaffirming or reimagining the core purpose by asking “Why … does the organisation exist?” In our opinion, both Sinek and Selznick concur in that the most important question is the ‘why?’ question although Selznick takes this further in viewing vision as statesmanlike foresight. The first three stages (reflect-redefine-reimagine) are premised on the assumption that “we know why the institution exists and we have an image of what we want to achieve but we have yet to design how we will do it”. The next subtopic will consider the ‘how?’ in more detail.

The subtlety of Selznick’s argument in creating purpose can be paraphrased and described (herein with supporting additions) in what we describe as three defining stages of institutional embodiment:

The Defining Stages of Institutional Embodiment

Stage 1

REFLECT

The institution should reflect on its mission as part of its core purpose; why does the organisation exist? Reflecting on its history, institutional leaders should seek to define or redefine its future vision by framing it in a way that it creates the right solution but remaining aligned and true to the mission and purpose through empathic understanding of the problem which led to the original purpose. In the private sector companies described by Jim Collins as ‘good-to-great’ many make a wholesale transition to a new core purpose or even sector in adapting to significant market change, but public institutions such as health, local government services, policing and criminal justice and the voluntary and community sector will need to stay wedded to the well-being of the public/citizens.

Stage 2

REDEFINE

IL Questions

In seeking to define or redefine the vision, it should first be acknowledged that the aims of large organizations are often very broad and that an intelligence-led approach to strategic assessment is therefore required. A certain vagueness must be accepted because it is difficult to foresee whether more specific goals will be realistic or wise; this is considered in stages four to six. Taking account of the original purpose will help to define/redefine the vision. Irrespective of the content, the aims should be consistent with the mission (purpose) and take account of institutional experiences and motivations by immersing the institution in its working environment to gain a deeper understanding of the issues involved in reflecting the learning from reflection in stage one.

Stage 3

REIMAGINE

Once agreed, we can start the process to reimagine leadership. The next steps are to embody key institutional values based on the building of the institutional core in steps one and two in defining expectations and behaviours which underpin the values. What do we want leadership to be? The embodiment aligns the mission (the why), the vision (the broad what/when of potential goals) and values (and underpinning the desired behaviours (the beginning of the how). All of this combines to create, reinforce and reimagine the core purpose of the institution.

Stages 1 to 3 are supported in planning and implementation terms by the corresponding steps 1 to 3 of the CLEAR^TM process.

REFERENCES

Collins, J. C. (2001) Good to great : why some companies make the leap-- and others don't. London: Random House Business.

OPEN YOUR ARMS TO CHANGE, BUT DON'T LET GO OF YOUR VALUES
(Dalia Lama)

From Core Purpose to the Creation of Public Value:
Designing Strategic Activities

Placeholder image — Figure 1: Developing the Strategic Activities.
Source: The Selfless Leader (2016)

Dynamic Interactions between External and Internal Contexts of Collective Leadership and the Strategic Mechanisms

So far, our consideration of the collective leadership framework (CLF) has been focused on both the external and internal contexts of collective leadership in defining the institutional core purpose (ICP). Our focus now shifts to the mechanisms of collective leadership. Mechanisms are the interconnected parts in any complex process, pattern, or arrangement which mutually adapt to work together.It is also important to say that it is mechanisms that our people use (what we do) which are likely to make a difference in terms of impact rather than structures (where we are positioned within the institution).

If the external context is primarily focused on informing the core purpose (through its mission, goals and objectives), the dynamics between the internal institutional contexts and the underpinning mechanisms concern the strategic activities (by virtue of its capability, business model and governance processes). This is further illustrated in figure 1.

The internal contexts of the conceptual CLF mediate between the external contexts and the mechanisms and inform the operational CLM. The strategic mechanisms act as ‘triggers’ to ‘fire’ particular actions that are aimed at achieving the outcomes embodied within the core purpose. Mechanisms refer specifically to what is done and how it is done. They focus on the behaviours and actions of individuals and the actions taken on behalf of organisations, thus representing both agency and structure.

Structure thus supports the people doing the work rather than our people supporting a structure. The four strategic mechanisms are policy, practice, problemitisation and pedagogy. Influenced by the external contexts, the mechanisms will play a part in both determining and delivering the strategic activities through the business plan and in ensuring accountability through governance arrangements. We comment on this further in the CLEAR^TM process which follows this sub-topic. First, we will consider the dynamic interactions between the internal leadership contexts.

Policy is the course or principle of action which leaders adopt or propose and is the main mechanism through which the collective vision and intended desired outcomes are put into effect. Practice seeks to influence the patterns at the different levels of the institution and it networks leading to evidence-based outcomes in defining the customs, skills and behaviours required. Both policy and practice will rely on the extent to which problemitisation occurs, particularly in aligning practice with the contextual problem profiles that underpin the purpose of leadership and in determining whether the problem profile requires a tame or wicked response. Thus, the fourteenth 'P' defines problemitisation as that to "make into or regard as a problem requiring a solution". Finally, pedagogy will draw practice and problem solving together in creating a cycle of leadership development as often practice and problem-solving take place in isolation from learning and development. The most effective pedagogy represents a virtuous learning cycle, informing practice and practice informing research and more learning.

These four mechanisms will be implemented (or 'triggered'using realist evaluation terms) through the more operational Collective Leadership Model (CLM, structured around 'COMPASS³⁶⁰'). How the mechanims are used will be determined in part by the nature of the interaction between the seven internal contexts, to which we now turn.

Interactive Dynamics of Internal Contexts

The Compass Leadership Values are illustrated in figure 2 which shows how each of the seven contextual domains comprise three dimensions of which both the first and the third act as a link with respectively the preceding and the following domains. We will now explore this further by aligning each of these seven interactions to the development of the strategic activities.

Strategic Capability

The mechanisms of policy and practice will combine to create the institutions strategic capability initially through the institutional core purpose. Capability encompasses the resources, the activities and the processes that define the unique contribution of each institution. The identified capabilities will draw on the dynamic internal contextual interactions to create the collective vision and outcome focus of the Collective Leadership Model (CLM). The COMPASS³⁶⁰ framework, throught the Collective Leadership Inventory (CLI) will be able to assess the stenghts and areas for development of the collective leadership practice at different levels of the institution and its networks.

Collective Vision-Outcome Focus — **Figure 2: Collective Value and Outcome Focus values)**

This first example illustrates how the development of strategic capability will emerge from the first domain (collective vision) comprising interaction between ‘purpose’, ‘partnership’ and ‘problem (profile)’ – with ‘problem’ acting as the link with the next domain which supports the strategic activities through realistic goals and objectives that seek to satisfy the outcome focus. The outcome focus comprises ‘problem profile’ (aligned also to collective vision), ‘purpose’ and ‘process’.

In building strategic capability, the leadership task is to emphasise the collective nature of people through partnerships, within a sense of the shared purpose (the ICP) in tackling wicked problems. In other words, leaders should frame the problem based on the overall core purpose and in sharing and distributing the leadership across its networks aligning skills and capacity to the framing of the problem. The outcome focus rests on a framework and culture that aligns the shared purpose (ICP) to public value needs (the problems and issues being experienced). Public value will be assessed through the process of assessing institutional capability and achievement evidenced through the realistic goals and objectives.

In combining values and behaviours of both the collective vision and outcome focus the ICP can be given more substance by articulating how the institution will build its competitive and/or collaborative advantage (see the penultimate sub-topic in which our CLEAR^TM process provides a practical approach in creating the strategic activities). Our approach suggests focused questions to enable the development of the strategic capability plan which provides the foundation of the business plan.

Business Model

The business model takes account of the product or service created or delivered and where this process of creation and delivery is shared and delivered across the institution and (where appropriate) its networks. The strategic mechanism of problemitisation takes the capability of the institution to the next level by aligning the networking processes with those who deliver the services at the different levels and understanding the power dynamics at play (both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ power).

Leadership exists at multiple levels and across collaborating partnerships. A critical element of the business model is to identify and align the processes that will define collective leadership efforts across these multiple levels through both shared and distributed leadership.

As we pointed out in the section that defines collective leadership, all forms of collective leadership involve individuals. An essential collective leadership requirement is to bring individuals together within the shared purpose and in supporting the shared values to work together in taking action to deliver the outcomes required. This requires leaders to motivate and mobilise collective others to achieve the collective vision through appropriate values and behaviours.

Just as leaders from across collaborating institutional networks will have different objectives and potentially different values, so individuals within those networks will be working towards their own objectives, often driven by personal interests. This is a natural human trait. Selfless leadership is not an impossible ideal, but it is certainly a very challenging outcome to achieve. The success of the business model will create the foundation for collective success in delivering the core purpose within the remit of shared values. Everything that we do within our institutions involves relationships. We ignore the dynamics of these relationships at our peril!

Governance

It is quite fitting that we complete our strategic leadership process with governance (we discuss this term in more detail at a later stage). In introducing the interactive dynamics of the internal contexts, we said that this interaction both begins and ends with purpose. This provides a feedback loop in creating a virtuous cycle of learning and application for collective leadership. The cycle associates well with the notion of a learning organisation (or institution) which represents a critical outcome of the collective leadership model (and assessed through the inventory). The role of people is critical throughout the process of governance based on the underpinning systems and structures and, clearly, in developing people.

**Figure 4 : Systems and Structures, Skills and Behaviours Values**

To assess the characteristics of a learning organisation is just as much part of governance as is the evaluation of performance per se. A learning organisation cannot be developed in the absence of a collective leadership style and therefore governance should introduce accountability responsibilities and measurements for leadership style alongside leadership outcomes in a balanced framework of performance assessment.

Accountable leadership is therefore a prerequisite for collective leadership. Power exists in all institutions and networks whether represented by ‘hard’ power (in terms of authority, position and ability to reward and sanction) or ‘soft’ power (relational leadership attributes such as emotional intelligence, empathy and knowledge/reputation). Both broad forms of power need to be harnessed and developed through systems and structures but also in developing the right skills and behaviours, in the right people, for the right purposes and in the right places. This is the essence of leadership, management and governance.

At the heart of all collective leadership approaches are people. Some of those people will possess power. This power can be both formal and informal. The role of the collective leader is to draw the power together in a way that formal and informal leaders share the same values and vision. The feedback loop will be determined by an institutional core purpose which is continuously reviewed and reflected upon as part of accountable leadership. The first step of the embodiment process becomes iterative.

"The Essence of Strategy is choosing what not to do."

- Michael Porter

A Collective Leadership Embodiment and Application Review (CLEAR^TM): From Values to Vision and Beyond

We can agree with Sinek in that WHY is the important first question and is the means by which leaders will gain authenticity by focusing on the key purpose. The HOW question is the practical and operational knowledge that brings the vision to life, and which is supported by metrics which measure how the institution advances its purpose (the why?) The longer term aims of the vision should be clearer, however, and provide more substance to the absolutely critical but less precise articulation of the organisational mission which then draws in the ‘what’, the ‘when’ and the ‘where’ questions followed by the ‘who’. We will explore aspects of the CLM and CLI which will help in responding to the questions required by each stage.

The Collective Leadership Embodiment and Application Review Process

In looking to the future, we see the further institutional benefit of the CLI as that of embodying the core purpose comprising the mission, the vision and the values. It would be helpful to use the CLI as a pre-CLEAR session task. The results of the CLI will be able to help in the questions that support the three stages described here.

Stage 1: reflect on its mission and purpose

An analysis of the external operating environment based on the Collective Leadership (NPL) framework will help in focusing on some of the major opportunities and challenges that the institution faces and in determining why the institution exists . Questions could include:

What are the drivers and barriers from the P.E.S.T.L.E contexts?
To what extent is the current paradigm of the institution supportive of the organisations core purpose? What needs to change, if anything?
What would you want your institution to be known for and how is it differentiated from either competitors or other service providers?
Who is your product or service targeted at and in which places will you be focusing?
How much is your purpose driven by knowledge and domain/sector wisdom?

In deciding to assess and validate collective leadership the senior leadership team need to reflect on the mission within stage 1 of the collective leadership embodiment process discussed earlier taking account of the institution’s history. Who are/were the original stakeholders, what was their collective vision and what was this seeking to achieve in terms of outcomes? In preparing to move to stages 2 and 3 at what levels are leaders operating at and what opportunities exist to work in partnership across appropriate networks?

Stage 2: Defining and redefine the vision

The collective vision should aim to draw together the broad aims and objectives of all institutional members and partner agencies that share a common vision and be consistent with the mission and purpose. Mutual benefit should be sought.

Do all of the stakeholders understand the challenges that the institution faces?
Who is the target client, customer or community?
What product or services are provided to the client, customer or community?
Why would the clients, customers or community choose your product or your service?
what are the priorities in terms of building both capacity (within the institution) and capability (of the institutions people)?

In concluding on stage 2 of 'CLEAR^TM' and in developing the actions needed under stage 3, consider the challenges presented in figure 5 in relation to developing the know-how, enabling development and then setting (and evaluating) collective leadership standards.

**Figure 5 : Aligning Values and Behaviours**

Stage 3: Reimagining leadership by embodying critical institutional values.

Take account of the desired outcomes and the different levels of leadership. Give some thought to the extent that the values will help in achieving the outcomes and how well the institution and its networks are positioned to live the values and at different levels.

Once the vision has been agreed, go back to the institutional values and consult within your institution and its networks. Time spent on this activity will be time very well spent. From experience one of the critical success factors for ensuring that values are reflective of the right priorities and owned by those who will deliver in accordance with them, is that they are owned. Proof test the emerging values back and forth between the vision and mission statement. Remember that the values, along with the mission statement direct the efforts of people in the organization toward common goals. Some considerations that will help these collective discussions include:

Do the values give a good sense of how people across the institution are expected to behave?
Do the values provide a moral direction that guides decision making and establishes a standard for assessing actions?
Do the values take into account the needs and expectations of clients, customers and the wider community?
Are the values capable of being reinforced at all levels of production or delivery through both shared and distributed leadership?
Are performance standards and incentives aligned with the values?
Finally, what do we want leadership to be?

The results of stages 1 to 3 of the CLEAR^TM process will then inform the first principle of strategic action planning which follows as stage 4.

Stage 4: Design Strategic action planning

Select each section below (drop down)

What is an Action Plan?

A Plan is “a scheme for accomplishing a purpose”.

Action planning, therefore, can be described as an agreed-upon set of intended actions to bring about the desired outcomes. Whereas stages 1 to 3 establish the core purpose (the Institutional raison d'être) the design and implementation of the strategic activities provide substance to the planning and delivery phases. An action plan includes both strategic goals and objectives. A strategic goal is a wide-ranging, overarching notion or vision of where you want to be within a broad timescale. Objectives are the stage posts or milestones that define the path towards reaching the goal. Objectives are important because they keep the eye on the ball in achieving the goal and are often ‘S.M.A.R.T’ (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time based.)

What does a strategic action plan include?

A good strategic action plan will help to ensure that the strategic plan agreed within stages 1 to 3 of CLEAR^TM does not gather dust on your office shelves. It should bring your ICP and strategic activities alive and will include:

Single or multiple topics and challenges.
Usually, an action plan covers a short period of time, most frequently one year, although a strategic plan generally covers a three- to five-year period.
It will define strategic capability by the identification of resources, activities and processes alongside the needs required to build the capabilities of institutional members and their partners to deliver the strategy.
Who will be responsible for different aspects of the strategic actions and ensuring that the product, service and information flow between actors and stakeholders is effective and true to the ICP.

Strategic Planning Tools and Techniques

GETTING READY FOR THE JOURNEY

With the help of
Six Honest Serving Men who taught me all I knew
Their names are
WHAT AND WHY AND WHEN
AND HOW AND WHERE AND WHO
Rudyard Kipling (1907)

A brief introduction to reflection and reflexivity

Throughout the process of the Collective Leadership Embodiment and Application Review Process reflection and reflexivity are critical.

“Looking at our actions in the mirror is the first step on the road to Adaptation.”

These skills are discussed and explored in our LINKS360 topic which follows and applied in some detail within the Knowledge Hub. For the purposes of this subtopic, it is important to point out that reflective practice is an important process through which experience leads to knowledge. We need to recall our experiences, explain why, when and how these emerged and what impact this had.

Reflection is about thinking back on our actions, defined as learning and development by reflecting on what you - as a leader - were thinking at any point in time during a leadership challenge. It also involves giving thought to how you think others perceived the event and your leadership. The reflective activity involves a detailed consideration of the events or situation beyond yourself. This can be an individual activity or supported by others. Ask the intelligent questions; what, why, when, how, and where and who?

Reflection is looking in the mirror – what actions did we take

Reflexivity concerns thinking through our actions, described as looking forward with a view to finding ways in which you can proactively question your own process of thinking in relation to both the situation and your relationships with others. You can ask the same six intelligent questions but, this time, in proactively seeking to increase your influence over the leadership situation by questioning your own attitudes, values and behaviours and the impact that you had on others around you.

Reflexivity is looking through and beyond the mirror – what can we learn from the actions that we have taken.

PRINCIPLE 1: Reflect on the reason/s for change – start with WHY!

What are the drivers for change?
Who are you stakeholders (including the authorising environment (see previous discussion on public value) and what are the common and opposing interests of the stakeholders?
How important is the public interest to the reasons for change?
Remember always that individuals will often 'come to the table' intent on pursuing their own interests. Collective leadership relies on good negotiation and good negotiators will always identify the interests of all those who have a stake in the outcome.
Have you identified all of the interests and can you distinguish between competing and common interests?
Which interests are likely to have the greatest impact on the outcomes? Develop an interest matrix to illustrate the relative importance in terms of the components of the interest and the power of stakeholders. Consider both individual and corporate interests.
Finally, do you have enough information to embark on the process of developing an agreed action plan? How well prepared are you to negoitate the relevant interests?
REVISIT THE "WHY" QUESTION BEFORE MOVING ON!

Principle 2: Observe and interpret “where are we now?” in establishing your current position

What is the current institutional core purpose (ICP comprising vision, mission, and values) and how does this relate to the reasons for change?
What needs to change to achieve the vision (whether reaffirmed or redesigned). Apply an evidence-based SWOT analysis in identifying opportunities and gaps, focusing on both known and (previously) unknown strengths and weaknesses (see Leadership3).
What is the current capacity of the institution and its networks and the capability of its members in rising to the challenges which are presented? Again, focus on both the known and unknown capabilities and capacity. Stretch minds!

Principle 3: WHERE do you want to go, and which route/s will take you there?

Start with the most critical challenges from your analysis and identify the scope and priorities for change.
What needs to change and how can this be achieved?
What can you learn from what you have done (reflexive)?
What will success look like and how is failure likely to manifest itself?

Principle 4: Establish the steps to achieve your strategic goals

Establish the steps to achieve your strategic goals within the parameters of your organisational vision and mission

Following on from principle 3, ‘when is tomorrow?’ For each of the main challenges, devise a critical time plan focused on priorities and interdependencies.
Align the challenges into evidence-based strategic goals and then devise strategic (S.M.A.R.T) objectives.
Reflect on the capabilities and capacities. Now be specific on the high-level resources (human, technical and informational) that will be needed. Be ambitious in terms of bringing appropriate resources together.

Principle 5: Determine the actions that need to be taken

Determine the actions that need to be taken to move along the path to the achievement of your objectives

Be creative, imaginative, and innovative in designing the “How?”
Open the black box of leadership and then think ‘out of the box’. What is the problem profile – is it a wicked or a tame problem? A wicked problem will not be resolved by a tame response.
A useful approach to problem solving is to follow the ‘S.A.R.A’ approach – scan, analyse, respond, and then assess.
Build evaluation into your action plan. This is so often neglected.

Principle 6: Finally, determine the collective who’s that are required to achieve the action.

Finally, determine the collective who’s that are required to achieve the action.

Protect the voices at all levels and prioritise the relational approaches to leadership.
Establish what the who’s need to support them in their task whilst maintaining disciplined attention.
Encourage ownership through responsibility and make them mutually accountable for all aspects of their task.
Seek and give regular feedback and formalise reviews.
Most important, create a leadership 'space' to bring people together in a safe learning environment. This can either be virtual or physical. We discuss this in more detail in the next sub section

IF YOU ALWAYS DO WHAT YOU ALWAYS DID, YOU WILL ALWAYS GET WHAT YOUR ALWAYS GOT

- attributed to Albert Einstein (1879–1955); Henry Ford (1863-1947)

This quote has been attributed to several people including Anthony Robbins and before him Albert Einstein, Henry Ford, and even Mark Twain. Irrespective of its provenance, what matters is what it says; If you want to change the end result, you need to change the way you do things. The corollary of carrying on as you have always carried on is to reimagine what leadership actions will bring success. Look into the black box but also think ‘out of the box'.

This quotation captures the key learnings from this topic. To rethink, reframe and reimagine leadership. Start with the core purpose of your institution. Is it fit for purpose in a changing world and a changing operating context? Set ambitious and realistic goals to achieve the success that you and your institution desire. Another classic quotation is “failing to plan is planning to fail”. If you do not set goals and support these by clear objectives and actions, then you are likely to carry on doing what you have already done and getting what you have already gotten. Don’t just rely on what you already know. Think also of what is known but which you do not know and, of most benefit to innovation and change, explore the unknown unknowns!

Create the Applied Leadership Space (ALS)

What is the Applied Leadership Space (ALS)?

The applied leadership space draws heavily from the ideas of Ron Heifetz and his colleagues^[1] in adopting the principles of adaptive leadership. One of his principles is to create a holding environment in which leaders engage with each other in tackling what are described as adaptive challenges (or, more popularly viewed as wicked problems). The applied leadership space is our example of a holding environment.

The ALS represents the foundation of our overall practical application of collective leadership which is the ‘LINKS360 ® process (‘Leading through 360^oIntelligent Networks, Knowledge and Skills').

LINKS^360® is introduced in the final section of this web resource. It reflects what we call the ‘Leadership Quomodo’ – the Latin term for the ‘How?’ question (quomodo) …. of leadership. There is an opportunity to register for our Knowledge Hub which then gives access to rich resources, discussions, and demonstrations of the practical application of collective leadership supported by a Moodle-based Virtual Learning Environment platform (VLE), designed and led by our Total Learning Consortium (TLC-VLE)). The portal and VLE represent the foundation for our ALS. For institutional and/or leadership development purposes there is the option to build on this through a physical (face-to-face) ALS occupied by Applied Leadership Challenge Sets (ALCS) grounded in the principles of action-learning.

How does the ALS work and where is it?

In starting the discussion for the Applied Leadership Space (ALS), we refer to Heifetz et.al. definition of their holding environment: “The cohesive properties of a relationship or social system that serve to keep people engaged with one another in spite of the divisive forces generated by adaptive work” (Heifetz et al., 2009: 305).

There are two essential elements within this definition; the cohesiveness of relationships and systems and the need to lead within diversity. The purpose of the Applied Leadership Space (ALS) is to create a platform for all aspects of collective leadership to be considered from stage 1 of CLEAR^TM (Reflection/Reimagining of vision and values) through to stage 3 (Embodying shared values) and the implementation of the strategic action plan and supporting objectives to achieve the vision and encourage the values (step 4). It is an iterative space which can be either physical or virtual or (more helpfully) a hybrid of both.

The aim of the ALS is to mobilise a critical mass within the context of the Institutional Core Purpose (ICP) and to provide time and space for this to take place. The work can be optionally supported by Applied Leadership Challenge Sets (ALCS) grounded in the principles of action learning. The discussions and actions within the leadership space are tested out in practice through action learning based application and feedback. The ALCSs however extend beyond individual groups/sets and combine the learning across the institution through cascaded practice and evaluation. The activity aims to develop skills of consulting and coaching and will focus on creating synergy from the learning in support of developing the wider learning organisations. These components and principles are discussed fully in the final LINKS360® topic.

In brief, one benefit of the ALS (the holding environment) is to enable the creation, reinforcement, and foundation of a platform where people can safely discuss values, perspectives, and ideas as part of the institutional collective leadership. Open discussion is encouraged. Participants at all levels can also be held to account for tasks and delivery. Representative engagement will be essential. Given the diverse nature of potential leadership participants, difficult conversations will emerge. Conflict can be positively harnessed and resolved through a disciplined approach in which aspiration and achievement are brought together through constructive debate and where equally constructive dissent and challenge is encouraged.

A balance is needed between situations where the conflict spills over into disputes or where lip service is paid to the arguments by means of insincere expression of support. Heifetz refers to this as “cooking the conflict” and the analogy of a pressure cooker is a good one! If the pressure is too high, the debate will boil over; if it is too low the conflict will not emerge but will remain lurking below the surface!

Leading in the space and across applied leadership challenge sets requires new skillsets. One example is that of negotiation skills, which we deal with in detail in our knowledge hub and through negotiation skills programmes and workshops. The skills sets are supported also by our virtual learning environment as part of our blended learning approach. The development of these skills will be supported through our LINKS360® process which includes our bespoke virtual learning platform both of which are specifically focused on collective leadership development across different organisations within a wider institution or partnership. The principles of adaptive leadership and the underpinning principles are an important component of LINKS360® based on our suggested ‘steps to improvement’ summarised below.

Steps to Improvement

Our suggested steps to improvement are similar to other classical models for change such as the ‘PDSA’ technique. As Deming once said, “A goal without a method is nonsense”. PDSA is a useful service improvement tool that has been used extensively across different sectors in assessing the potential for, and impact of service improvement projects. Given the collective nature of our work within the context of leadership we build on PDSA but reinforce some of the practical aspects of the PDSA framework from within our LINKS360® process and Applied Leadership Space. Both the process and the space focus more on the impact of strategic change across collaborating organisations. There is every reason why PDSA (or other service improvement models) could still be used for individual service or product improvement projects but feeding into the Applied Leadership Space as appropriate. The similarities and differences are summarised below. There is also an option to explore these steps further through eLearning nuggets in our Knowledge Hub.

In briefly introducing the two models it is argued that there are more similarities than differences. Click on the image to learn about the similarities and differences

Application of the Steps

The Steps to improvement described here are based on the LINKS³⁶⁰ process briefly described earlier and discussed in more detail in the final section. It should be noted that the ALS works alongside Applied Leadership Challenges (evidenced-based work improvement projects) supported when appropriate by Applied Leadership Challenges Sets (ALCS) grounded in action learning. The ALCS focus on the seven Collective Leadership Values and target the different levels of leadership from executive through to front-line leadership and across collaborating networks. The principles of ALC and the sets represent the major strand of the LINKS³⁶⁰ process.

The Applied Leadership Space (ALS) and Applied Leadership Challenge Sets (ALCS) are illustrated for information here. The Applied Leadership Space encourages engagement focused on iterative problemitisation (one of the mechanisms of the Collective Leadership Framework) and a feedback loop. One aim of LINKS³⁶⁰ is to promote the concept of an Applied Leadership Challenge (ALC) the purpose of which is to align a collective vision with the remaining six collective leadership values. It seeks to achieve this by encouraging the collective leadership behaviours in the application of learning to practice through intelligent leadership within complex network contexts and at all levels of leadership. This is an ambitious aim but one that is achievable, given appropriate will and commitment to do so across all levels of the institution/s.

The Steps are illustrated here

Step 1: REFLECT

If this has not already been undertaken, go through the CLEAR^TM process to collectively pinpoint thinking. Work across representative levels of the institution in determining the bigger picture based on the institutional core purpose (ICP)). Then take the core purpose into your strategic action planning process based on the six principles of strategic action planning described earlier. Finally, for step 1, conduct the research required to answer the strategic planning questions. Consulting stakeholders and undertaking research are the main means by which this reflection is undertaken with a key preliminary aim to identify both common and opposing interests.

Step 2: PRACTICE

The cycle for strategic improvement started with research-based reflection (step 1). The research directly informs the learning of the institution and people’s needs and reflection ensures that lessons of the past are not ignored. Focusing on the institutions desired outcomes, representative stakeholders are brought together within the leadership space in which they compare and contrast their respective knowledge and experience. Adopting the design thinking approach new ideas are suggested, debated and agreed upon and then tested in practice across different contexts. Institutional support will be needed to ensure that both pre-and-post evaluations take place which will then inform step 3. Applied learning and practice are the main means by which this improvement to practice is implemented.

Step 3: REFRAME

Having implemented some of the suggested change programmes and/or projects the practice of reflection is again called upon but supported by an evaluation of the emerging impact on change. Reflection on the findings will be compared and contrasted with the institutional core purpose (mission, vision and values), the goals and objectives of the strategic action plan and a collective assessment made on the scope for reframing either the problem statement or the solution/s. Using the learning organisation process of double or even triple-loop learning (in which the impact is considered alongside the original vision and mission statements) the participants in the Applied Leadership Space will then be in a position to make evidence-based recommendations for embedding the positive change actions within the institutional systems and to suggest further modification to change actions that require further development. This demonstrates the continuing self-defining iterative process throughout the first three stages of the Applied Leadership Challenge discussions within the ALS. These three stages are also consistent with the adaptive leadership principles process of “Observe - Interpret - Intervene“ (Heifetz t al., 2009, p.32).

Step 4: SYNERGISE

The fourth step aims to anchor the successful strategic interventions within the institutions strategy and systems. It is an oft cited fact that seventy percent of institutional change programmes are likely fail. Cited by a number of authors, including John Kotter who advocates the anchoring of change as the 8th step of his sense of urgency, the data has been challenged . Irrespective of the strength of this argument either way, it is essential to recognise if only intuitively, that many change initiatives will fail. It is essential to ensure that the institution does not devote significant resources and time to a change effort only to see this relapse to its old way of working. There are two reasons for this as a main task in step 4. First, there is often a tendency to say that “everything is fine” when, actually, it is not. We do not want to embed change in the institutions systems when it is likely to return to the status quo. Second, collective leaders need to be truthful about what is likely to work and what is more unlikely and prioritise intervention and implementation on this basis. The final element of synergetics is to continuously review and adapt. This represents the kernel of the iterative nature of the steps to improvement model. Synergy is just as much about the collective leadership (which should also be continuously evaluated) as it is about the efficacy of new change programmes.

Securing Improvement

There is a role for both governance and accountability. As we conclude this section on collective leadership it is important to understand the differences and the roles of each concept. In terms of difference, governance is about directing and overseeing strategy whereas, accountability refers to being answerable for the actions and decisions taken by both individuals and institutions. Governance systems and mechanisms should both assure and ensure that the four steps to improvement lead to leadership and interventions satisfying all stakeholders and achieving the strategic objectives which they are targeted towards respectively. It is therefore quite fitting that we complete our strategic leadership process with governance which we discussed earlier and accountability, both of which we further discuss in the next and final section (LINKS360®).

REFERENCES

Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A. & Linsky, M. (2009) The practice of adaptive leadership : tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business Press.

THERE IS ONLY ONE UNIVERSAL SYSTEM, AND THAT IS THE UNIVERSE

Buckminster Fuller (1895–1983)

The corollary of this is that humans create all other systems, and the resulting systems are thus fallible.

A personal view on the future for Collective Leadership as we consider the all-important (but often neglected) “How?” question by 'Reimagining Leadership'

Dr Stephen Brookes says:

"'Reimagining Leadership' drives us to ambitiously tackle the difficult question of “how to lead collectively and selflessly”. We need to move from a reliance on the traditional pyramid of leadership dominated by a top-down approach and flip the pyramid. Leadership takes place at all levels and the role of the collective leader is to support the front line leaders in delivery. The role of senior leaders is to create the conditions in which all can lead and engage in honest debate about solutions to leadership challenges. Senior leaders start the debate by setting the intelligent leadership questions but then let collective others add to the questions and generate solutions.

The best answers often come from those who are closest to the leadership challenge. In reimagining leadership, we should create a space in which all can take part in rethinking, reimagining and redesigning responsible and empowered leadership. This is what I describe as the “Leadership Quomodo” (abbreviated as L^Q). Quomodo represents the latin for “how?” within our broad strapline of:

“Cur quomodoque ducere possumus, quo fine?®
Why and how can we lead, to what end?

I hope that you have found this resource useful so far and that you will find the final section of this leadership e-portal helpful in looking at how to apply the learning to practice. Enjoy the remainder of the journey. The Collective Leadership Model (CLM) has been developed over a number of years alongside the development of my personal thinking on collective leadership. This is described in some detail in chapter three of my book when I outline my chosen research approach of realist evaluation, briefly described earlier in this section.

In providing a link between this section of the website to the following section which explores the how? of collective leadership, I want to say that my work has been informed by my own leadership journey. I have been a passionate exponent of collective leadership for well over twenty-five years. It is a useful exercise to map out "how you got to where you you are today" in your leadership journey.

I have done this and have shared this on a recent blog. Why don't you try this?

What has shaped you as an individual. What milestones stand out (both good and bad and the downright ugly!)?

Have a go at this before you move on to the next section. Then, just as I said in the earlier action planning topic, ask your self questions about whether "what you are doing today will help or hinder your future leadership actions".

I look forward to continuing to support the development of leadership and negotiation skills with institutions and individuals who are just as passionate as I am about making a difference in reimagining leadership and in influencing a new mindset and set of skills for leading collectively. The material and resources provided in the final section will highlight the broad tools and techniques for addressing the how? I hope that you will then be inspired to contact me and register for the Knowledge Hub and commit to continuous learning!

Dr Stephen Brookes QPM FCMI FRSA Founder and CEO Compass Leadership Limited
Honorary Associate Professor (Reader) of Public Leadership, University of Manchester (Alliance Manchester Business School)

IT IS POSSIBLE TO FLY WITHOUT MOTORS, BUT NOT WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL.

(Wilbur Wright)

Introduction to the Collective Leadership Model