Conclusion: integration and the road to mastery
1. Integration and behavioral complexity
So far, we used ‘managers’ and ‘managerial leaders’ interchangeably. Learning to
perform well as a managerial leader requires a different approach from learning to
perform well in a single quadrant of the competing values framework. In the same
way that none of the models we covered was Sufficient for ensuring organizational
effectiveness, leadership effectiveness cannot be achieved by a management
approach based on a limited number of competencies or a single action imperative.
Becoming a master manager requires:
- The ability to use competencies associated with all four quadrants of the CVF
- The ability to blend and balance the use of different competencies in support of
all four actions Imperatives in an appropriate way. Behavioral repertoire =
number of leadership approaches and skills a manager can use effectively.
Behavioral differentiation = ability to use the skills they have in their behavioral
repertoire differently
When managers fail to demonstrate behavioral complexity, their actions are likely to
result in
Negative outcomes as explained below. Without behavioral complexity, one’s strengths
can become the source of one’s failure.
The negative zone
The figure on the left shows the organizational-level effectiveness. The right one shows
us the leader effectiveness at the individual level. The outer circles reflect what happens
when each set of positive values is pushed until it becomes negative. In the middle
circles (positive zones), we see the positively stated values that we have focused on in
this book. The inner circle represents unclear values that result in the loss of direction
(left) and a lack of awareness or ability to perform the skill associated with different
management models (right).
, 2. How master managers see the world?
Master Managers are masters in what they do because of experience and a different
view on the
World. We discuss two models of thinking that are related to behavioral complexity.
Systems thinking
This is ‘a discipline for seeing wholes, for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for
seeing
Patterns of change rather than static snapshots, for seeing the structures that underlie
complex
Situations and for discerning high from low leverage change. Feedback has an
important role in this. Few organizations exist in stable predictable environments,
therefore we cannot think of simple cause-and-effect-terms. Organizations exist in
dynamic changing environments, where small changes can have a major impact in
every segment of the future organization. We need to be (more) aware of
interrelationships and of the long-term impact of actions
Paradoxical thinking
Organizations and their leaders exist in an environment of competing pressures:
choices between
1. Integration and behavioral complexity
So far, we used ‘managers’ and ‘managerial leaders’ interchangeably. Learning to
perform well as a managerial leader requires a different approach from learning to
perform well in a single quadrant of the competing values framework. In the same
way that none of the models we covered was Sufficient for ensuring organizational
effectiveness, leadership effectiveness cannot be achieved by a management
approach based on a limited number of competencies or a single action imperative.
Becoming a master manager requires:
- The ability to use competencies associated with all four quadrants of the CVF
- The ability to blend and balance the use of different competencies in support of
all four actions Imperatives in an appropriate way. Behavioral repertoire =
number of leadership approaches and skills a manager can use effectively.
Behavioral differentiation = ability to use the skills they have in their behavioral
repertoire differently
When managers fail to demonstrate behavioral complexity, their actions are likely to
result in
Negative outcomes as explained below. Without behavioral complexity, one’s strengths
can become the source of one’s failure.
The negative zone
The figure on the left shows the organizational-level effectiveness. The right one shows
us the leader effectiveness at the individual level. The outer circles reflect what happens
when each set of positive values is pushed until it becomes negative. In the middle
circles (positive zones), we see the positively stated values that we have focused on in
this book. The inner circle represents unclear values that result in the loss of direction
(left) and a lack of awareness or ability to perform the skill associated with different
management models (right).
, 2. How master managers see the world?
Master Managers are masters in what they do because of experience and a different
view on the
World. We discuss two models of thinking that are related to behavioral complexity.
Systems thinking
This is ‘a discipline for seeing wholes, for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for
seeing
Patterns of change rather than static snapshots, for seeing the structures that underlie
complex
Situations and for discerning high from low leverage change. Feedback has an
important role in this. Few organizations exist in stable predictable environments,
therefore we cannot think of simple cause-and-effect-terms. Organizations exist in
dynamic changing environments, where small changes can have a major impact in
every segment of the future organization. We need to be (more) aware of
interrelationships and of the long-term impact of actions
Paradoxical thinking
Organizations and their leaders exist in an environment of competing pressures:
choices between
