Articles - Artículos
Management - Gerenciamiento

POST-HEROIC LEADERSHIP
Managing the Virtual Organization
James P. Eicher

"...conferees...saw the leader as facilitator, coach, learner: one who articulates organizational values in a manner that weds product to purpose. ...conferees spoke up for servant leadership, the importance of self-awareness, persuasion through consultation and negotiation, and leadership as teamwork."

"In short, they invoked "post-heroic" leadership, to borrow a recent coinage, and stressed flexibility."

Bernie Ghiselin, Center for Creative Leadership

Introduction

Re-organizing, re-structuring, re-engineering.

Over the past decade global competition, changing customer demands, and rapidly evolving technologies have forced organizations to reassess their basic function and structure. A central effect of this organizational evolution has been the reassessment of what leaders need to do in order to manage effectively in changing and ill-defined organization structures.

The transition from the "old role" to the (as yet undefined) "new role" can be difficult at best, both for the individuals involved and the organization as a whole. With increased spans of control, fewer employees, elimination of layers of management, partnerships with suppliers, pressure on margins, etc., "How do I behave?" and "What do I do?" become legitimate concerns.

In order to navigate your way through these changes, I've identified two models. They show you what I believe to be the behavioral roles, skills, and attributes you will need to transition from your current role to your future role in the newer forms of organization. I term the traditional management role as "heroic" and the emerging role as "post-heroic," following both current trends in management literature (Bradford and Cohen, 1987; Huey, 1994; Ghiselin, 1994) and traditional definitions from anthropology and philosophy (Campbell, 1949).

Introduction, continued

In general, the Heroic Leader operates in a traditional hierarchy with traditional command, control, and reporting structure. The Post-Heroic leader operates in a role set, that is, an influencing relationship where there is little direct control. Effectiveness may be more a result of persuasion and communication than authority. In this case, the Post-Heroic Leader interacts with many individuals--suppliers, customers, employees, other managers, the community--not simply direct report employees. Visually, the Heroic Leader operates in a traditional organizational pyramid, and the Post-Heroic Leader acts as a hub to various organizational spokes in a wheel.

Briefly, the center circle or "hub" is the leader and the other circles represent individuals and/or organizations (e.g., purchasing, legal, manufacturing, marketing, sales, engineering, product planning, etc.) that he or she must influence in order to accomplish tasks. The emphasis in making a role set effective is on skill and relationship, not rank and functional (content) knowledge.

These arrangements are illustrated in the diagram below.

Background

There are four trends that characterize modern organizations. That is, in organizational change--whether it is termed restructuring, reorganizing, or re-engineering--the following are taking place:

(1) There is a fundamental change in organization structure away from the traditional functional structure, i.e., manufacturing, engineering, sales, human resources, finance, technical, service, etc., to a some type of cross-functional team structure, where there are members of former departments on the team.

(2) Business processes, both related to quality improvement and production time, are continuously analyzed and changed on an as-needed basis, dictated by marketplace and customer requirements.

(3) Customer satisfaction and relationships, both internal and external to the organization, are constantly surveyed and used to effect production/service quantity and quality.

(4) Expense control is a constant concern, with expenses monitored and cost/benefit analysis performed when and where needed.

Background, continued

These constant pressures affect organization structure, management roles and employee roles, and decision making. There are minimally three fiscal "red flags" or warning signs that indicate that the organization structure both needs attention and that strategic change management must be active and deliberate. They are: one, margins are being pressured both within the organization--indicating a need to analyze operational efficiencies--and outside the organization from competitors in the marketplace; two, gross revenue targets are difficult to reach indicating several factors: inaccurate customer knowledge and inappropriate products/services or product/service introductions; and, three, turnover is above normal for the organization indicating confusion about role, performance expectations, mission and compensation. If any or all of these are occurring, immediate organization analysis and change are critical.

These changes have resulted in a variety of new roles and structures, many of which are still being "tested out." In my assessment, I observe the following:

•Many organizations are evolving away from traditional hierarchy to some type of cross-functional structure, whether they be termed horizontal, non-hierarchical, "virtual," or learning organizations.

•Manager roles are evolving away from a controlling function to an influencing function, whether they be termed coaches, facilitators, "post-heroic" leaders, or conductors.

•Employees are evolving from less individual contributor roles to some type of team-member role, whether they be termed project teams, cross-functional teams, self-managing teams, or "virtual" teams.

The Virtual Organization

Modern modes of organizational structure center on the concept of the "virtual" organization, whether this be a team, part of a corporation, or an entire business entity. In general, this refers to the pulling together of individuals, systems, resources, capital, equipment, etc., together around a

finite task, project, or service. After the task, project, or service is complete, the "virtual" group is disbanded, going off to other "virtual" assignments. In this sense, the model for the virtual organization is akin to motion picture production: groups of individuals--financial backers, managers (directors and producers), workers (cast and crew)--assemble around a script (the product/service) until it is complete, hand off the finished picture, and disband. The completed film (product/service) is then given to others to market and distribute. The grouping of people is temporary and focused on expertise rather job function.

While some leaders view virtual organizations as supplied from contract or temporary workers outside an existing organization, others view them as a hybrid, involving internal and external members of an organization in a type of network. I chose the label virtual organization because of its emphasis on the temporary time frame in which individuals, equipment, systems, etc. remain together and the varying location. It underlines the constant state of change and volatility that most organizations are experiencing, changes which the Post-Heroic Leader must grapple with.

Linking Post-Heroic Leadership and the Virtual Organization

I have identified four polar scales for differentiating traditional (Heroic) leadership with non-traditional (Post-Heroic) leadership. They are (note: the first descriptor on each pair represents Heroic leadership, the second Post-Heroic): omnipotence/empowerment, rightness/risk taking, face saving/participation, and co-dependency/development. The definitions follow below:

Omnipotence/Empowerment. Omnipotence refers to the need to manage based on knowing more than others, where control is the driving factor. Empowerment refers to the need to manage based on enabling others to act on the job and gain their own knowledge.

Rightness/Risk Taking. Rightness refers to the need to manage based on avoiding errors, with fear of failure as the driving factor. Risk Taking refers to the need to manage based on encouraging innovation, especially in ambiguous situations.

Face Saving/Participation. Face Saving refers to the need to manage based on maintaining a self-protective positive image, and blaming others is the driving factor. Participation refers to the need to manage based on seeking input and reaching consensus.

Co-dependency/Development. Co-dependency refers to the need to manage others because of their inferior abilities, rescuing others in need is the driving factor. Development refers to the need to manage based on fostering continuous learning.

I believe that the four characteristics of Post-Heroic leadership are necessary to effectively lead individuals and organizations in three crucial areas: role efficacy, with its focus on individual performance; organization structure, with its focus on group performance; and decision making, with its focus on process management. These three areas are discussed in the next three sections.

An Emerging Prescriptive Role Model

Flexible, volatile organizations demand that leaders have the skill set to manage individuals, groups--whether configured as internal or external customers, peers, counterparts in other organizations, or consultants--and processes. In this context the Post-Heroic Leader must be able to plan, engineer operations efficiently (whether this be engineering, marketing, sales, finance, manufacturing, human resources, etc.), facilitate interaction, negotiate mutual gain, continuously learn, and jointly solve problems. He or she as at the apex or his or her role set as a sort of "helmsman/woman" from the Greek word "cybernetic." A visual model is shown below.

An Emerging Prescriptive Role Model, continued

In this model, the Post-Heroic Leader does not command and control, but works together with others, constantly providing relevant information regarding plans and operations--related to both the marketplace and to finances and product/services--and assisting others with solving problems and shepherding (facilitating) decisions and actions.

These emerging roles require a re-evaluation of the skill set or core competencies of the leader. In my opinion the Post-Heroic Leader must be competent in the following areas:

•negotiating mutual benefit
•facilitating choice
•joint problem solving
•re-engineering business operations
•continuous learning and improvement
•planning for change.

These are, in general, process skills or competencies, void of any functional content. The theme I believe runs through each of them is communication--the Post-Heroic Leader must be a Constant Conduit of Communication (C3 [cubed]) between internal/external customers and suppliers in order for the organization to remain flexible, relevant and timely. This requires continuous 360 degree feedback to and from the Post-Heroic Leader.

Organization Structure

What does the structure of the organization look like? Whether it be a "pizza," inverted pyramid, or some type of hybrid (Byrne, 1993) the virtual organization has certain characteristics. The chart on the following page depicts the traditional hierarchy, the hybrid matrix organization and the proposed virtual organization.

Briefly, a hierarchy consists of something that looks like the traditional "org chart" with its columns of subordinates below the manager of an isolated functional area. In this organization decision making is concentrated with the management, roles are narrowly defined, based on content or functional knowledge, and autonomy is limited.

In the traditional matrix some functional expertise is "loaned" to a project manager who is charge of a particular product or service outside the bounds of the organization. The project manager often has some fiscal autonomy and control which allows him or her to pull resources out of the traditional hierarchy, often in a group or team setting, to work on the project. Autonomy is less limited, but loyalties, and therefore efficiencies, are split between the functional organizations and the project.

In a virtual organization, individual contributors are often organized into teams around a mission or business plan which may encompass more than one product or service. Each team member has a role focus, but cross- functional knowledge and expertise are shared so that team members can constantly assist each other and their customers. Each team member is in a role set, and although there may be a few senior managers, senior personnel, team members and customers (internal and external, sometimes termed partners) interact on an as needed basis--not by rank or protocol.

The diagram on the following page is a sample illustration of what the three types of organizations can look like.

From Hierarchy to Matrix to Virtual Organization

Decision Making

In each type of organization the leader must makes decisions which maintain the health of organization, both interpersonally and fiscally. The decision making process of the virtual organization is fundamentally different from either the hierarchy or the matrix (hence the need for a new skill set as outlined on page__).

I have determined at least four key elements in the mix of making decisions which characterize each organization: driving principle, decision criteria, task orientation and relationship orientation. In this section I will briefly go over the decision making characteristics required for leading a virtual organization.

Driving principle refers to the structures raison d'tre, or supposed reason to exist, outside of known mission.

In the virtual organization, customer and suppliers needs, which are constantly changing, champion the purpose of the organization. Even if customers demand a product or service outside the immediate capability of the organization, the organization will often align itself or affiliate itself with partner organizations to fulfill the need. A good recent example of this is the partnerships between telecommunication companies, software companies, media and entertainment companies and computer hardware companies. The mix and match is only bound by the imagination.

Decision criteria refers to the governing rule for making a "go/no go" choice in an organization.

In a virtual organization, decisions are made by consensus and point of contact with the customer almost exclusively, because individuals are empowered to do so (that is, they have the information, fiscal authority, and organizational access to do so). The criteria is not based on functional authority but rather on response to customer demand and relevancy of information to completing a given task. Often non-ranking, non-managerial individuals must reach a quick, informed decision with a customer and/or supplier, e.g., regarding a shipping date, in order to the timely market introduction of a product.

Task orientation refers to the central expertise and knowledge required to "hold" a job.

In a virtual organization task accomplishment is judged relevant to how well the task is carried out, often in the context of the recipient's (customer's) satisfaction. In other words, it is not the individual who is judged, but the product/service of the individual-working-with-others. Implicit in this is that, one, individual's are working in teams, and two, the flow of information absolutely critical. There is no time for bickering, internal politics, withholding critical data, etc. The timing and quality of products and services is so important to success in a competitive marketplace that any withholding of information can potentially jeopardize the business outcome.

Decision Making, continued

Relationship orientation refers to the accepted process of behaving towards others in an organization.

In a virtual organization an individual or team must also influence others--customers, suppliers, support personnel, subject matter experts-- but with a focus on facilitating results, negotiating mutual benefit to all, anticipating change, re-engineering operations on a cost-effective basis, continuously improving and learning, and solving problems together. The interests of the customer and total organization are kept in mind to guide the interaction--as opposed to narrow individual success. Developing and maintaining a viable long-term relationship with peers, customers and suppliers is also a requirement of the "helmsperson's" role.

In summary, there are a number of assumptions related to successful decision making in a virtual organization. They are: shared PNL responsibility, general knowledge of the cost of doing business, an understanding of the organization's sales cycle/process, teamwork, team compensation, continuous quality improvement, customer service excellence, and the access to training/knowledge needed for continuous learning.

Implicit for the Post-Heroic Leader's decision making is, again, communication, and the specific process skills and competencies needed to effectively conduct organizational action.

The table on the following page provides a brief summary of the different elements of decision making.

Key elements of decision making in the Virtual Organizatin

Summary: The Post-Heroic Leader

The transition from one method of leading to another is bound to have its share of failures as well as successes. However, in an increasingly competitive marketplace it is clear that new and often untried processes, systems, behaviors, and skills are necessary to ferret out what will achieve individual and organization objectives.

Drawing on the work of Kouzes and Posner (1987), Bechard and Pritchard (1992), Covey (1990), Bennis and Nanus (1985), Sashkin (1988), Peters (1989), Senge (1990), and Glaser (1990), I have identified a number of individual and organizational binds and stresses, or "pinches," which may accompany the role transition from Heroic to Post-Heroic Leader. I have also identified a number of visionary characteristics as a leader approaches consistent Post-Heroic behavior. I believe these provide a day-to-day summary of what the Post-Heroic Leader must do and avoid, and constitutes the "leader-in-action" in the virtual organization.

These are summarized in the following hourglass diagram. This diagram visually represents the transition from one role to the other and the squeeze or pinch leaders often experience in the transition. Today's leader needs to reassess his or her role given the rate of organizational and technological change. Honest, deliberate reassessment will allow today's leader to competently lead people and organizations well into the 21st century.

Summary: The Post-Heroic Leader, continued

References

Aubrey, Robert, and Paul Cohen. Working Wisdom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.

Bateson. Gregory. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine Books, 1972.

Beckhard, Richard, and Wendy Pritchard. Changing the Essence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992.

Bennis, Warren, and Burt Nanus. Leaders. New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Bradford, David and Allan Cohen. Managing for Excellence. New York: Wiley, 1987.

Byrne, John. "The Horizontal Corporation." Business Week, December, 1993.

Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Princeton University, 1949.

Covey, Stephen. Principle-Centered Leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990.

Eicher, James. Making the Message Clear. Portland, OR: Metamorphous Press, l987, 1993.

Fisher, Roger, and William Ury. Getting to Yes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1981.

Galagan, Patricia. "Beyond Hierarchy: The Search for High Performance." Training and Development, August, 1992.

Ghiselin, Bernie. "Lashed to the Mizzen: Leadership in an Era of Turbulence". Issues and Observations: Center for Creative Leadership, V.14, No. 2, 1994.

Glaser, Rollin. Moving Your Team Toward Self-Management. King of Prussia: Organization Design and Development. 1990.

Graham, Morris, and Melvin LeBaron. The Horizontal Revolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994.

Hammer, Michael, and James Champy. Reengineering the Corporation. New York: HarperBusiness, 1993.

Huey, J. "The New Post-Heroic Leadership." Fortune, February, 1994.

Jones, John. The Organizational Universe. San Diego: University Associates, 1981.

Jones, John, and William Bearley. Empowerment. King of Prussia: Organization Design and Development, 1988.

Jones, John, and William Bearley. 360 [degree] Feedback. Amherst: HRD Press, 1995.

References

Kouzes, Jim, and Barry Posner. The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.

Laing, Ronald. The Politics of the Family. New York: Pantheon Books, 1969.

Peters, Tom. Thriving on Chaos. New York: Harper and Row, 1989.

Sashkin, Marshall. The Visionary Leader. King of Prussia: Organization Design and Development, 1984, 1985, 1988.

Senge, Peter. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday/Currency, 1990.

Wellins, Richard. "Building a Self-Directed Work Team." Training and Development, December, 1992.

About the Author

Jim Eicher is the creator of Cognitive Management, a theory of management which applies research from the cognitive sciences to organization and management behavior. Jim is the of author of the highly acclaimed book on management communication, Making the Message Clear. He is also co-author, with John Jones and William Bearley, of the learning instruments The Neurolinguistic Communication Profile, Rapport: Matching and Mirroring Communication, the Conflict Syle Profile and Post-Heroic Leadership: Managing the Virtual Organization.

Jim has taught numerous seminars for Xerox, Nortel, Northrop Corp., Sony, The Los Angeles Times, Simon and Schuster, Reuters, Chevron, Symantec, Intel, Levi Strauss, and Abbott Labs, among others. He holds a Bachelor's degree in Theoretical Linguistics for the University of California, Santa Cruz, and a Master's degree in Educational Psychology from UCLA.

[ Top of this page ] [ Articles list ] [ Home Page ]
[ Comienzo de esta página ] [ Lista de artículos ] [ Página inicial ]