LP762-L2- week 4
WJC LP 762: The Psychology of Leadership and Followership Dr. Dan Jacobs William James College
Notes 4
1
Overview
Further exploration of different types of leadership
Transactional and Transformative leadership
Classic Exchange Theory
Domains of leadership
Contingency theory
The “Lone genius” model and implications
Transformational leadership
Complex adaptive systems
2
Transactional Leadership & Burns
“The nature of these goals is crucial. They could be separate but related; that is, two persons may exchange goods or services or other things in order to realize independent objectives…This is transactional leadership. The object in these cases is not a joint effort for persons with common aims acting for the collective interests of followers but a bargain to aid the individual interests of persons or groups going their separate ways.” –Burns (1978)
3
Transformative Leadership & Burns
“Leaders can also shape and alter and elevate the motives and values and goals of followers through the vital teaching role of leadership. This is transforming leadership. The premise of leadership is that, whatever the separate interests persons might hold, they are presently or potentially united in the pursuit of “higher” goals, the realization of which is tested by the achievement of significant change that represents the collective or pooled interests of leaders and followers.” –Burns (1978)
4
Burns on Both Transactional and Transformative Leadership
“Both forms of leadership can contribute to human purpose. If the transactions between leaders and followers result in realizing the individual goals of each, followers may satisfy certain wants, such as food or drink, in order to realize goals higher in the hierarchy of values, such as aesthetic needs.” -Burns (1978)
5
Leadership and Collective Purpose (Transactional and Transformative)
“The chief monitors of transactional leadership are modal values, that is, values of means—honesty, responsibility, fairness, the honoring of commitments—without which transactional leadership could not work.
Transformational leadership is more concerned with end-values, such as liberty, justice, equality. Transforming leaders “raise” their followers up through levels of morality, though insufficient attention to means can corrupt the ends.”-Burns (1978)
6
Why are some leaders transformative and others are more transactional?
“We know that the early influences propelling persons toward leadership roles are closely affected by parental attitudes and behavior, peer relations, schooling, and youthful orientation toward leaders and leadership positions.
Many of these influences are not sufficient in themselves to propel persons into leadership channels; the influences may produce political activists, dutiful citizens, or ideological fanatics.” -Burns (1978)
7
Process of Becoming
“Early personal and social dispositions must be linked to political interest and activity, and these to political careers, if leadership is to be achieved…The linkage consists of an array of political motives applied to a structure of political opportunity. Motive without a structure of openings and closures would produce motion without direction (if not anarchy).” -Burns (1978)
8
“The Crucial Distinction”
“For the study of leadership the crucial distinction is between the quest for individual recognition and self-advancement, regardless of its social and political consequences, and the quest for the kind of status and power than can be used to advance collective purposes that transcend the needs an ambitions of the individual.” -Burns (1978)
9
The Need for Gratification
“Maslow identified two sets of needs power requires: the desire for strength, achievement, adequacy, mastery and competence, autonomy and freedom; and the desire for reputation or prestige, status, dominance, recognition, attention and appreciation—the desire for skill, in effect, and the desire for fame…
Ambition for political power is only one—and often among the less important– of a wide range of need-resolving motivations…the acquisition of power is connected directly to only one of Maslow’s values—dominance…” -Burns (1978)
10
Ambition
“…for now we conceive ambition in its broadest sense as springing out of a host of motives that come into play with differing force depending on roles taken in different cultures and different situations.
One generalization seems safe on the basis of both systematic and casual observation: the most potent sources of political motivation—the key elements of political ambition—are unfulfilled esteem needs (both self-esteem and esteem by others). Both power wielders and leaders have such needs.” -Burns (1978)
11
Desire for Esteem
“Desire for esteem is not always pathological: some persons simply have large appetites…The crucial question becomes the nature of the linkage between their attempts at self-gratification or other gratification, their achievement of gratification, and their consequent impact on history…
self-esteem is not simply a generalized force but relates to specific expectations and realizations about specific behaviors and outcomes in specific situations.” -Burns (1978)
12
Self-Actualization
“Self-actualization, Maslow notes, is “intrinsic growth of what is already in the organism, or more accurately of what is the organism itself.”
Development proceeds from within rather than without.
And self-actualizers, Knutson adds, may possess a flexibility, an ability to assess the personality needs of others as well as of oneself, and an open-mindedness (cognitively, nor normatively) that is likely to make for successful leadership.” -Burns (1978)
13
Self-Actualization
“This kind of self-actualization—this need to grow and achieve, to fulfill oneself and respect others’ needs—embraces also a feeling of competence and confidence in one’s own performance…Ambition feeds on skill.”
“…one talent all leaders must possess—the capacity to perceive the needs of followers in relationship to their own, to help followers move toward a fuller self-realization and self-actualization along with the leaders themselves.” –Burns (1978)
14
Self-Actualizers
“Just as self-actualizers are potential leaders at all levels—because of their capacity to grow, their flexibility, their creativity, their competence—the concept of self-actualization is a powerful one for understanding the processes of leadership.
Its applicability to leadership has been stultified, however, by an overemphasis on self-actualization rather than mutual actualization with others.” -Burns (1978)
15
Self-Actualizers as Leaders
“I suggest that the most marked characteristic of self-actualizers as potential leaders goes beyond Maslow’s self-actualization; it is their capacity to learn from others and from the environment—the capacity to be taught.
That capacity calls for an ability to listen and be guided by others without being threatened by them, to be dependent on others but not overly dependent, to judge other persons with both affection and discrimination, to possess enough autonomy to be creative without rejecting the external influences that make for growth and relevance. Self-actualization ultimately means the ability to lead by being led.” -Burns (1978)
16
Self-Actualizing Leaders & Followers
“It is this kind of self-actualization that enables leaders to comprehend the needs of potential followers, to enter into their perspectives, and to act on popular needs such as those for material help and for security and esteem.
Because leaders themselves are continually going through self-actualization processes, they are able to rise with their followers, usually one step ahead of them, to respond to their transformed needs and thus to help followers move into self-actualization processes.” -Burns (1978)
17
Leaders and Followers
“As the expression of needs becomes more purposeful—that is, as that expression becomes less subjective, egoistic, body-bound, direct and immediate, as it becomes more related to socially sanctioned aims and collective goals and values—leaders help transform followers’ needs into positive hopes and aspirations. “ -Burns (1978)
18
Hopes and Aspirations
“Hopes emerge from needs but are closely influenced by leaders who arouse or dampen them.
Hope (looking forward with desire and with belief in possibility) can readily be escalated into aspiration (eagerly and ambitiously desirous of a higher goal) by leadership and other socializing influences.” -Burns (1978)
19
Expectations
“Leaders can, in turn, help convert hopes and aspirations into sanctioned expectations.
Expectations carry more psychological and political force than hopes and aspirations. They are more purposeful, focused, and affect-laden; the expectation is directed toward more specific and explicit goals, ones that are valued by the builder of expectations…
Expectations are closely influenced by what leaders hold out as necessary, desirable, deserved, and possible.” -Burns (1978)
20
Interaction Among Leaders and Followers
“To begin to sort out the channels of interaction among leaders and followers, we may think in terms of activators, the activated (respondents), and the nature of the response—ultimately its function, however small, in changing an existing structure of interaction.
Activation consists of any initial act that stimulates a response; if no response results from an activation effort, activation does not take place.” -Burns (1978)
21
Activation
General patterns of activation include:
1. Face-to-face conversations
2. Membership in groups and associations
3. Political party arousal of members
4. Established regimes retaining/expanding hold on followers (e.g., electorate)
5. Appeal by public and private communicators to foreign governments and populations
“The context of activation is a key factor.” -Burns (1978)
Q: How do these political activation scenarios translate to business settings regarding activation of followers?
22
How else to view “Activation”?
Think of a CEO wanting to engage the members of her workforce (her followers) in a major overhaul of company culture and practices. What does she need to do to enlist the followers’ support and engagement—what does the CEO need to do to “activate” the workers to be engaged in the goal-aligned mission?
What psychological factors might be in play?
23
Intellectual Leadership
“Intellectual leaders deal with both analytical and normative ideas and they bring both to bear on their environment.
However transcendent their theories and values, intellectual leaders are not detached from their social milieus; typically they seek to change it…Intellectual leadership is transforming leadership.” -Burns (1978)
24
Conflict (again)
“But intellectuals, like intellectual leaders, cannot stand outside society, for they are a response to needs of society…The needs that give rise to functional intellectual roles, Shils notes, also impel intellectual creativity…
“The catalyst that converts these generalized needs into specific intellectual leadership is conflict.” -Burns (1978)
Q: Why does conflict keep coming up?
25
How does the individual interact with the system?
Limitations of Intellectual Power (and Leadership)
Let us assume a leader has “all the answers” and “knows what to do” to help the organization get from Point A to Point B in “the best possible way.”
This is still not enough.
Does she ALSO know how to convey this plan to her followers in an effective manner that results in activation and buy-in (AND follow through?)
27
Our Model So Far…
CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT
LEADER
Transactional Transformational Other
SKILLS/TRAITS
Abilities Styles Experiences
CONTEXT FOLLOWERS CONTEXT
Types Reasons Connection Collective
ACTIVATION
Social Action Business Tasks Religious Message Goal Achievement
CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT
28
Not Enough to Be Smart…
“It’s not enough to be smart” anecdote
Rebuttal to anecdote
Additional thoughts
Now beyond context, what about the leader—follower exchange interests us in our study of leadership and followership?
29
Classic Exchange Theory
One key group theory of leadership connected to social psychology is Classic Exchange Theory (a “cousin” of “transactional leadership”, discussed above) which posits that:
“The leader provides more benefits/rewards than burdens/costs for followers…there must be a positive exchange between the leaders and followers in order for group goals to be accomplished.” –Luthans (2010)
30
Classic Exchange Theory
The social exchange view of leadership can also be described as:
“Exchange theories propose that group members make contributions at a cost to themselves and receive benefits at a cost to the group or other members. Interaction continues because members find the social exchange mutually rewarding.” -Luthans (2010)
31
Leadership and Exchange
As we have discussed before there is an exchange process (a give and take, a back and forth, a relational model with expectations) between a leader and her followers and part of the exchange or process involves the influence the followers have on affecting the leader connected to this exchange-based type of leadership. (This could also be seen as connected to the types of systemic or relational feedback loops we have discussed).
32
Domains of Leadership
Talking about exchange theory and how this relates to a particular leader’s style raises the issue again about different types of leadership (not “better” or “worse” but just “different” leaders accessing different traits/domains.
Let’s review some types/domains of leadership:
33
Three Domains of Leadership (Sources: Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Luthans, 2010)
| Leader-Based | Follower-Based | Relationship-Based (e.g., Exchange theory) | |
| What is leadership? | Appropriate behavior of the person in the leader role | Ability and motivation to manage one’s own performance | Trust, respect, and mutual obligation that generates influence between parties |
| What behaviors constitute leadership? | Establishing and communicating vision; inspiring, instilling pride | Empowering, coaching, facilitating, giving up control | Building strong relationships with followers; mutual learning and accommodation |
34
Three Domains of Leadership (Sources: Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Luthans, 2010)
| Leader-Based | Follower-Based | Relationship-Based (e.g., Exchange theory) | |
| Advantages | Leader as rallying point for organization; common understanding of mission and values; can initiate wholesale change | Makes the most of follower capabilities; frees up leaders for other responsibilities | Accommodates differing needs of subordinates; can elicit superior work from different types of people |
| Disadvantages | Highly dependent on leader; problems if leader changes or is pursuing inappropriate vision | High dependent on follower initiative and ability | Time-consuming; relies on long-term relationship between specific leaders and members |
35
Three Domains of Leadership (Sources: Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Luthans, 2010)
| Leader-Based | Follower-Based | Relationship-Based (e.g., Exchange theory) | |
| When appropriate? | Fundamental change; charismatic leader in place; limited diversity among followers | Highly capable and task-committed followers | Continuous improvement of teamwork; substantial diversity and stability among followers; network building |
| Where most effective? | Structured tasks; strong leader position power; member acceptance of leader | Unstructured tasks; weak position power; member non-acceptance of leader | Situation favorability for leader between two extremes |
36
Accessing Different Domains
Many leaders “stick” with a particular style, based on their traits and backgrounds (as we have discussed in earlier classes) but a few are able to utilize or access skillsets relevant to different domains (e.g., Leader-based, Follower-based, Relationship-based) at different times (remember our discussion about “ambidextrous leadership”?).
This is not easy to do both from a personal and from a systemic level but it is possible.*
*When most possible? Hint: Rhymes with Conflict. (Actually, it is just at times of change and conflict; no rhyming necessary…)
37
A few more words about exchange
Some studies have also shown that followers have as much impact on leaders as leaders are able to affect followers.
Example: “One study found that when subordinates were not performing very well, the leaders tended to emphasize the task or initiating structure, but when subordinates were doing a good job, leaders increased emphasis on their people or consideration.” -Luthans (2010)
Q: Is this reactive or responsive? (Or flexible and smart) (Or all of the above?...)
38
A few more words about exchange
Also: “In a laboratory study it was found that group productivity had a greater impact on leadership style than leadership style had on group productivity.”
Also: “In another study it was found that in newly formed groups, leaders may adjust their supportive behavior in response to the level of group cohesion and arousal already present.”
“In other words, such studies seem to indicate that subordinates affect leaders and their behaviors as much as leaders and their behaviors affect subordinates.” -Luthans (2010)
39
Context of Leadership (Situational Variability)
We have now moved from a more linear or two-dimensional model/perception of leadership to the understanding that everything we have talked about thus far comes into play when consulting in leadership situations (e.g., roles, traits, skills, behaviors, performance of leaders and of followers, exchange expectations, etc.).
Remember our old friend Context? Keeps popping up (similar to Conflict and Change) in our discussion of leadership and once again relevant to a discussion of situational variables:
40
Situation-Based or Contingency Theory for Leadership Effectiveness
In the 1960’s into the 1970’s Fred Fielder developed “a contingency model of leadership effectiveness” and “this model contained the relationship between leadership style and the favorableness of the situation.”
“Situational favorable-ness was described by Fielder in terms of three empirically derived dimensions:
1. The leader-member relationship, which is the most critical variable in determining the situation’s favorableness
2. The degree of task structure, which is the second most important input into the favorableness of the situation
3. The leader’s position power obtained through formal authority, which is the third most critical dimension of the situation” -Luthans (2010)
41
Contingency Theory of Leadership
“Situations are favorable to the leader if all three of these dimensions are high. In other words, if the leader is generally accepted and respected by followers (high first dimension), if the task is very structured and everything is “spelled out” (high second dimension), and if a great deal of authority and power are formally attributed to the leader’s position (high third dimension), the situation is favorable. If the opposite exists (if the three dimensions are low), the situation will be very unfavorable for the leader.” -Luthans (2010)
42
Usefulness of Contingency Theory
“Fielder was convinced through his research that the favorableness of the situation in combination with the leadership style determines effectiveness” and he was “able to discover that under very favorable and very unfavorable situations, the task-directed, or hard-nosed and authoritarian, type of leader was most effective. However, when the situation was only moderately favorable or unfavorable (the intermediate range of favorableness), the human-oriented or democratic type of leader was most effective.” -Luthans (2010)
This suggested that if you can understand the situation (context) and the level of favorableness you can then help a system understand the type of leadership that is most effective.
43
Contingency Theory
Fielder’s Contingency Theory of Leadership suggested that in a situation that involves a leader with power, informal backing, a structured task, followers who are ready to be told what to do and expect to be told what to do, the task-directed leader will be most successful (e.g., airline pilot landing a plane, military leader in the field); however, in a committee or group meeting where not all of these factors are in place, and expectations about followers’ input into decision making are different, a human-oriented or democratic leader makes much more headway (and creates less tension or encounters less resistance).
You might want a task-directed leader flying your plane but you would likely prefer a human-oriented leader running a human resources department. Is this context? Is this expectations? Is this situational variability? (or all of the above again…)
44
Concerns about Contingency Theory
Early studies on contingency theory were seen as hard to replicate and limited to research conducted by Fielder and his team.
Some found the findings too rigid and did not respond to the heavy weighting given to favorableness or unfavorableness to a situation to direct a leader’s style/actions.
Fielder’s work seemed to be perceived as advocating task-oriented leadership at the expense of human-oriented leadership (which he did not state) and this rubbed some the wrong way.
Meta-analytic studies have yielded mixed results.
Other more recent studies have shown value in having a more “flexible” or “variable” emphasis on leaders accessing styles (more intelligent and flexible leaders did better with the findings than did less capable leaders who could become “stuck” with the perceived results of the study and not the meaning or gestalt picture).
45
Why is Fielder’s Model Still So Useful to Leadership Theory Studies?
1. “It was the first highly visible leadership theory to present the contingency approach.
2. It emphasized the importance of both the situation and the leader’s characteristics in determining leader effectiveness.
3. It stimulated a great deal of research, including tests of its predictions and attempts to improve on the model, and inspired the formulation of alternative contingency theories.”
46
Important Sources of Creativity:
Transformational leadership interactions (e.g., support, encouragement, attention)
Intrinsic motivation (a motivational state “in which employees are interested in a task for its own sake, rather than for the external outcomes or rewards related to the task”)
Psychological empowerment (“people who are empowered are more likely to exhibit creative behavior”)
Organizational climate (“an employee’s perception of an innovative climate encourages risk taking, and the challenge to use creative approaches at work”) –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Transformational Leadership and Creativity
“According to the proposed model, transformational leadership positively relates to followers' creativity.
Followers' intrinsic motivation, psychological empowerment, and perception of support for innovation mediate this effect.
At the organizational level, transformational leadership positively relates to organizational innovation. Furthermore, individual-level creativity influences innovation at the organizational level.” –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Perceptions Making Reality
“This study proposes that employees' intrinsic motivation and perceptions of the work environment, specifically perceptions of support for innovation and empowerment, are the mechanisms underlying the effects of transformational leadership on creativity.” –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Q: Can a leader be transformative without the support of his/her followers?
Effects of Transformational Leadership
“The findings suggest that transformational leadership has important effects at both individual and organizational levels.
At the individual level, transformational leadership positively relates to followers' creativity. This finding is valuable for two reasons.
First, previous findings were inconsistent and further research in real settings was needed to support the positive proposition in favor of this leadership...” –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Effects of Transformational Leadership
“In line with the findings of Shin and Zhou (2003), this research, conducted in real-work settings, finds a positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers' individual creativity.
Second, this positive relationship exists in collectivist Turkey (Hofstede, 1980), supporting the arguments by Bass (1990a) that transformational leadership is more likely to emerge in collectivist cultures than in the individualist cultures of the West and that collectivists perform better under transformational leadership.” –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Psychological Empowerment and Creativity
“The mediating effect of psychological empowerment, on the other hand, is significant. This finding is an important contribution to the literature in that it shows psychological empowerment as a crucial psychological mechanism through which transformational leadership influences employees' creativity.
A reason for psychological empowerment to be a stronger mediator than intrinsic motivation might be that R&D employees are already intrinsically motivated, which may act as a substitute for the influence of a transformational leader on their creative performance. This leader's effect through enabling them to make their own decisions and take initiatives might be a more powerful creativity-enhancing force for these employees than his or her effect through influencing their intrinsic motivation.” –Gumusluoglu & Ilsev (2009)
Possible Impediments to Creativity: “The Lone Genius Model”
“Despite apparent unanimity in the literature, supported by the powerful examples of Google and IDEO, we have noted the existence of leaders whose behavior flies in the face of all apparent wisdom.
They are the likes of CEOs and inventors Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, and Howard Hughes; chefs Ferran Adria (from El Bulli), Jiro, Marco-Pierre White, and Gordon Ramsay; classical music conductors Riccardo Muti and Herbert von Karajan; or movie directors Alfred Hitchcock, Lars Von Triers, and Oliver Stone.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Possible Impediments to Creativity: “The Lone Genius Model”
“We might call them creative tyrants, gurus, or geniuses. What characterizes them is that they do not coddle or encourage their creative teams. They do not give them freedom and positive evaluations. They have big egos. They are difficult, irascible, moody, critical, demanding, and inconsistent.
Their collaborators often comment on how difficult it is to work with them and please them. They apparently fit the description of lone geniuses, whose intelligence is commensurate with their annoying antics.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
What is the Lesson?
“The existence of such leaders presents a conundrum for research on leadership and creativity. Despite doing everything wrong according to the literature, these leaders nonetheless obtain extraordinary results.
At the end of his life, Steve Jobs was hailed as the ‘‘rockstar CEO,’’ and the Thomas Edison of the 21st century. Chef Ferran Adria’s restaurant, El Bulli, was dubbed the best restaurant in the world, anointed with three Michelin stars, and would fill up its reservation schedule for an entire season in just one day.
What exactly is going on? What are these leaders doing? Why does it work? Are there any negative consequences? How does their leadership compare to the prescriptive approach advocated in the creativity literature and practiced at Google and IDEO? Should their examples change the way we address leadership in creative endeavors? -Coget, et al. (2014)
What is the Lesson?
“We tackle these questions in this article and offer an alternative to the ‘‘mothering’’ model of leadership and creativity.
We do so through an in-depth analysis of two examples: Steve Jobs at Apple, and chef Ferran Adria at El Bulli. These examples describe different industries, different production processes, different contexts (USA and Europe), but they both provide evidence of a non-traditional leadership style in use in creativity processes.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Thoughts About the “Lone Genius” Model
“While we find evidence of the effectiveness of this quite unexpected model of leadership for creativity in the trajectory of some world-renowned companies and iconic leaders, research has given scant attention to it. Our research points to the need to deepen our knowledge on how these processes unfold.
Specifically, our research points to a set of issues that may be fruitfully explored. First, the ‘‘mothering’’ model might be consistent with a feminine perspective, which emphasizes collaboration, shared credit, harmony, and the maintenance of a positive mood, whereas the ‘‘lone genius’’ model is more consistent with a masculine perspective, where competition, hierarchy, individual prowess, reputation, conflict, and negative emotions are emphasized as necessary and energizing.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Thoughts About the “Lone Genius” Model
“Second, the two models might reflect different types of innovations, whereby the mothering model favors a continuous type of innovation, whereas the lone genius model favors a discontinuous type of innovation.
When facing discontinuous innovation the team might require a stronger internal commitment, and therefore a more autocratic style.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
The “Lone Genius” Model & Context
“Third, the cultures and practices of certain industries (e.g., Haute Cuisine; Hollywood), possibly male-dominated, may favor the lone genius model of leadership and creativity, whereas other cultures and industries, or founders (e.g., Larry Page and Sergey Brin of Google, David Kelley, of IDEO) might favor the mothering model.
For instance, the strict militaristic organization of a restaurant kitchen and its typical rough/outcast/ pirate culture favor the appearance of an irate, strong chef at the head, and such a style is accepted by the cooks.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Thoughts About the “Lone Genius” Model
“Fourth, it could as well be that the idea of the ‘‘lone genius’’ is a myth, because there is a team behind the lone genius, and it nonetheless works for the same reasons that are advanced in the attribution theory of leadership.
The masses need to believe in the inordinate agency of a select few ‘‘special’’ individuals (in this case, the creative genius), to simplify phenomena (in this case collective creative processes) that are too complex for them to understand.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Creating One’s Own Myth
“The people who emerge as geniuses may benefit from chance — being there at the right time, and right moment — as argued in Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers.
They also have great marketing and acting skills. They primarily market themselves as the originators of an invention, not hesitating to steal other people’s work and forgetting to give credit for ideas that originated in the team.
They carefully manage their image and create their own myth.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Followers and the “Lone Genius” Model
“Last is the need to explore the role of the followers.
One can understand this phenomenon by casting the blame more squarely on the followers than on the leader: it is our tendency to become ‘‘groupies’’ and to want to believe in creative genius that leads us to forget the team behind the genius rather than the manipulative actions that lead them to emerge as mythical figures.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Followers and the “Lone Genius” Model
“People are also likely to believe in the myth of the sole genius because it is a common explanation advanced in Western culture.
Ferran Adria, for instance, is very surprised by his success and trajectory. He purports that he did not set out to become the greatest chef in the world. It just happened to him.
The same might be said about Steve Jobs: he did not anticipate his success, although he did seem to purposefully manipulate the myth in his later career.” -Coget, et al. (2014)
Additional Questions
Why might the “Lone Genius” model be very harmful to the promotion of creativity in a company/organization?
How would this model impact our consulting work?
The Role of Strategic Leadership in Complex Adaptive Systems (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
Strategic leaders perform a variety of tasks including:
“Making strategic decisions
Creating and communicating a vision of the future
Developing key competencies and capabilities
Developing organizational structures, processes, and controls
Managing multiple constituencies
Selecting and developing the next generation of leaders
Sustaining an effective organizational culture”
Manage “the infusion of ethical value systems into the organization’s culture.”
The Role of Strategic Leadership in Complex Adaptive Systems (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…we believe strategic leaders play a central role in the organization's capacity to learn from its past, adapt to its present, and create its future…”
the concept of complex adaptive systems shows that surprising and innovative behaviors can emerge from the interaction of groups of agents, seemingly without the necessity of centralized control. This begs the question of the role of leadership in such systems…”
The Role of Strategic Leadership in Complex Adaptive Systems (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Viewing organizations as complex adaptive systems, management and leadership is seen as fundamentally involved in a basic process, creation of the context and structure of coordination among members for the purpose of searching out and processing resources vital to organizational survival…
We suggest that strategic leadership pushes organizations to the “edge of chaos” and out of stasis; without it no significant change can emerge…”
Features of Complex Adaptive Systems (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“In this paper, we first explain complex adaptive systems, and highlight a few of the features that characterize them.
We also describe how such systems settle into characteristic behavioral trajectories that are known as attractors. The patterns of particular interest here are strange attractors—paths complex adaptive systems take that allow them to operate far from equilibrium and scale rugged fitness landscapes to new levels of system performance.
Second, we focus on one particular characteristic of complex adaptive systems—tags—and show that they are essential in producing much of the complex interactions within and between such systems…”
Features of Complex Adaptive Systems (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Because of this, tags and the tagging process are indispensable to strategic leaders in helping promote strange attractor behaviors patterns. Tag-based behaviors involve information flows and access to knowledge, and strategic leaders help channel organization members into patterns of exploitative and explorative learning to promote adaptive behaviors.
Third, we argue that strategic leaders promote the sharing of knowledge of a specific type—organizational life stories—which encourages the development of a shared vision and identity as well as the potential for adaptive behaviors.
Finally, we advance the idea that information flows in organizations, such as stories, are subject to evolutionary processes, and that strategic leaders play a key role in evolutionary selection processes which allow the structure of agent interactions to change over time…”
Tagging (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Tagging is a process identified by Holland (1995) as one of a number of crucial features of complex adaptive systems. We focus on this aspect of such systems because of its impact on the structuring of connections between collections of agents and how they interact to produce attractor patterns, and also because so many of the other elements of complex adaptive systems emerge from tag-based behaviors (e.g., resource flows, sub-unit diversity, self- organization, etc.).
Rather than work against each other in competition over scarce resources, agents can organize their behavior such that synergy occurs, their interactions promoting the acquisition of resources to the benefit of all agents rather than any one individual or group…”
Tagging (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Tagging is a mechanism that facilitates the creation of aggregates by permitting agents to distinguish among each other. Tags signal to agents when interactions are possible, resulting in patterns of interactions that define boundaries among a collection of agents.
Tags serve as markers (e.g., brands, symbols, protocols, etc.) that identify different agents and control the types of transactions/interactions that are permissible. Like the effect produced among soldiers by flags on a battlefield or the chemical signals that identify cells within the immune system, tags serve to coordinate the activities of different agents by creating “identities” around different agent groupings; tags basically signal differences between agent types and act as mediators between differentiated agents (Holland, 1995)…”
Tagging Examples (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Examples abound of tags and how they mobilize coordination among agents. Holland (1995) brought up the image of flags that symbolize the members of opposing armies or political parties as examples of tags that rally members to mobilize for action, as well as the chemical scents and display behaviors that govern mating in animals.
Gershenson & Heylighen (2004) discussed tags in terms of the transmission protocols that define potential interactions between digital devices along computer networks…”
Tagging Examples (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Such tags allow e-mail messages to find their way across the Internet, and could allow digitally enhanced devices to combine together to produce added functionality seamlessly in futuristic visions of offices and homes.
Within organizations, tags may appear in the form of uniforms that distinguish members from nonmembers or that identify different ranks or status levels, trademarks and brands, or various forms of certification that help determine the pattern of interaction within and between business entities. Tags are a fundamental source of the differentiation among agents, impacting the flows of resources by defining the connections between agents and creating specific niches for them to fill tied to those flows…”
Strategic Leadership and Tags (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Strategic leadership in complex adaptive organizations acts through the tagging process to influence the context and structure of agent activity.
On a passive level, existing tags define differentiated organization structures and reinforce both independent behaviors within groups and more coordinated actions across the entire organizational system.
Tags guide the behavior patterns that produce more frequent interactions among agents within departments and less frequent or different interactions with agents in other departments or outside the organizational boundaries; that is, tags shape agents into organizational structures like “departments,” “functions,” and “teams”…”
Strategic Leadership and Tags (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…In this manner, tags serve as a form of reference signal against which behavior can be compared and mutual adjustment can occur (Heylighen, 2006).
More actively, agents acting as strategic leaders can also carry their own tags that reform the interactions among other agents and transform the activity of the entire organization (acting as a sort of “traffic cop”), disseminating information, spreading new tags, and potentially recreating the entire organizational architecture.
These new interaction patterns and activity flows leverage existing agent capabilities into new organizational properties, such as novel behaviors directed at finding new resources. Strategic leader agents may cause further differentiation among groups of agents resulting in new capabilities, or they may modify previous boundary definitions…”
How Organizations Handle Complexity (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Boisot and Child claimed that organizations handle the complexity of the environment and the resulting information processing challenges in two ways. First, they could reduce its complexity through information codification.
Codification involves precisely understanding phenomena in detail such that a specific or a few specialized responses can be developed and used. Complexity reduction through codification is the source of organizational differentiation and specialization. Learning is weighted more toward the exploitative over the explorative, as an organization uses and develops existing stores of knowledge…”
How Organizations Handle Complexity (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“The second approach absorbs complexity through information abstraction; the orientation is toward anticipating a variety of appropriate methods of engaging with the environment, and responding flexibly to the unique needs of the situation as it unfolds.
Organizations employ a variety of options in response to challenges rather than focusing on a single optimal approach. Organizational learning emphasizes explorative rather than exploitative benefits, allowing an organization to stretch to potentially higher fitness peaks through the use of novel strategies. Organizational survival and effectiveness require maintaining a balance between flexibility and stability (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1998).”
How Organizations Handle Complexity (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Without stability a firm would not be able to accumulate knowledge, and would be in a constant state of flux never being able to move any distance from a random state because improvement would vaporize at every new fad.
Organizations that are complex adaptive systems might be seen in those that adopt some of both information handling strategies, gaining the benefits of both exploitative and explorative learning by using prior knowledge as well as exploring potentially beneficial new alternatives by recombining groups of agents and modifying current interaction patterns…”
Proposition 1 (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
1. “In complex adaptive systems, strategic leaders use tags to organize agents for exploitative and explorative learning.”
“Beyond simply processing different forms of information, the dissemination of that information flow is also critically important in complex adaptive systems since knowledge and learning are distributed throughout the organization. Learning in the organization is influenced by its absorptive capacity and the level of procedural and transactive memory (the mastery of organizational routines and an awareness of the range of knowledge available, its location, and who possesses it) among members…”
Proposition 1 (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Strategic leaders enhance collective learning and the development and use of the organization's procedural and transactive memories by promoting intra- and extra-organizational dialogue that provides access to and encourages the sharing of knowledge about history, issues confronting the organization in real time, and possible futures. Jack Welch viewed the dialogue that took place at Crotonville as so important that before he retired, General Electric created a Crotonville—Europe and a Crotonville—Asia (Greiner, 2002)…”
Proposition 1 (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“A great deal of dialogue, collaboration, and exchange is frequently necessary in order to generate sense making and meaning, and thus the learning effects desired within an organization. Dialogue aids in surfacing one's own and other's thoughts and assumptions, helps create new ideas, and initiates collective action.
Because strategic leaders are central in the cognitive networks of organizations and thus the tagging processes that control contacts between organizational agents, they will have a strong influence on the exchange of information and advice and its interpretation. The giving and receiving of information and advice from one's social network forces the individual to think about the issues they are facing in ways that they would not if the information and advice was not offered…”
Proposition 1 (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…For example, in describing how he analyzed work practices among Xerox service personnel, Orr (1998) found that workers engaged in a great deal of dialogue between themselves and with customers in order to solve inexplicable machine failures; the discourse established common meanings and language between them, and thus a common ground on which to devise solutions from knowledge distributed among many individuals while explicit nowhere in established organizational routines. Dialogue with customers is important. But dialogue within the organization is crucial. It insures that everyone understands the problems and threats facing the organization, as well as opportunities and future direction of the organization.
For example, at one of his sessions at Crotonville, a class told Jack Welch that his favorite mantra of “first or second in market share, or fix, sell, or close, was now dysfunctional because the closer you get to 100%, the lower the upside. As a result of this dialogue, Welch changed his approach and at strategy meetings he started asking people to answer the question, “Imagine your market share is less than 5%. Describe your market.” (Greiner, 2002, p. 345)…”
Propositions 2 and 3 (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
2. “In complex adaptive systems, dialogue serves as a primary resource flow among organizational agents.
3. By encouraging and managing dialogue, strategic leaders promote perspective making, taking, and shaping.”
“Complex adaptive systems not only structure agent interactions and the flow of organizational knowledge through dialogue, they also link the past to the future through a path-dependent process that builds on existing tags but does not fully specify present behavior or restrict tag evolution in the future…”
Propositions 2 and 3: The Role of Time (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…in complex adaptive social systems, the role of time and its perception by and influence on organization members should also be highlighted. Discussion of time in the management literature has focused on two competing conceptions: linear and cyclical time. The linear view conceives of time as a sequence where a unique past leads to the future.
The past is considered in determining behavior, but its effect is constrained to the immediate future that follows since each point in time presents a largely unique set of contingencies to be considered. Learning may be limited to ways in which a distinctive past can be used as an input into a decision-making model of the future. In contrast to this, the cyclical view of time depicts a sequence with a broadly recurring pattern of events.
This pattern connects the past to the future by presenting organization members with sets of circumstances in the present that can be matched to previously established sets of behaviors. In this instance, organizational learning consists of determining the decisions appropriate at each point in the cycle and securing that knowledge for use in future iterations of the cycle…”
Propositions 2 and 3: The Role of Time (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Crossan, Cunha, Vera, & Cunha (2005) reconcile linear and cyclical perspectives of time in organizations through the concept of improvisation. They claim that organizations often experience both linear and cyclical time simultaneously, and improvisation allows organization members to deal with both time perspectives “because it is a process in which past and future blend together in a deep experience of the present” (p. 139).
Members draw on knowledge and experience from the past to create a capacity for action in the present, while also considering how the present fits with or accomplishes members' sense of the organization's future. The tagging process creates peculiar patterns of behavior among agents and differentiated agent groups through the influence of agent interaction and the evolution of the system, while new tags emerge across time to handle novel situations. What is experienced in the present is an organizational template, built on the past and just sufficient to provide orderly activity but also loose enough to allow for flexibility in response to changing circumstances…”
Dialogue and Storytelling (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Dialogue is important because it is an under-recognized aspect of the collaboration that is needed in order to build shared meanings and collective pools of knowledge in an organization, but storytelling gives life to the knowledge being generated and shared among organization members. Expressing the drama of daily organizational life or of an entire organization's competition against arch-rivals provides a number of benefits. As Brown and Duguid mention in their work, stories are valuable “not just in their telling, but in their retelling” (2000; pg. 107). As with dialogue, they provide opportunities to share hard won experience and serve as a point of interaction among members, but they go beyond that by giving members the chance to make sense of events by elaborating on past stories or constructing new ones…”
Dialogue and Storytelling (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“By virtue of their narrative structure, stories tend to sort information into coherent patterns, such as the appropriate sequence of events or the causal order of organizational phenomena. Stories make history available and help organizations learn from their past. Stories capture culture and informal learning, and as such, are the “soft” repositories of knowledge…
A powerful way of making outsiders feel like insiders and imparting tacit knowledge or its emotional component is through the telling of stories. Stories help link the past to the present and the present to the future. Stories help employees to see continuity in the face of change and make the radical seem more doable…”
Q: How does the strategic leader utilize stories?
The Power of Storytelling: Amcor (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“The power of stories can be seen in the experience of the Australasian firm Amcor. In one year five “new” changes were being simultaneously implemented. The changes ranged from work flow and safety changes to new gain share incentive programs to new adding a new shift and changing from a 5-day, 8 h shift, 3 shift arrangement to a 12-hour, 4-day-on/4-day-off shift system.
In a change workshop involving 30+ employees, Joline Francoueur and Darl Kolb, the consultants on the change projects, asked the longest serving employee to describe what Amcor was like when s/he first came. Next the second longest serving employee was asked the same. This went on until all of the 30+ employees had told their story.
The stories were full of humor and laughter and very few were bitter or full of complaint. The upshot of telling their stories was to connect older workers with younger ones, and the discovery that the “new” was, in fact not “new” at all…”
The Power of Storytelling: Amcor (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…Employees discovered that while the proposed changes were not identical to previous ones, they were no more radical than ones the organization and many of those present had successfully lived through. In fact, the telling of stories enhanced the status of senior employees relative to that of their junior managers because they had literally, “been there, done that.”
The result was that through the telling of stories the employees gained perspective about the proposed changes and this reduced their resistance to change (Kolb, 2003).
As Jan Bouwen and Bert Overlaet say, in their retelling of the takeover of a Belgian multinational pharmaceutical company, “There is no continuity without an appreciation of the past. People will experience continuity when they can recognize the past in their present actions and intentions for the future”…”
The Strategic Leader and Storytelling (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“As important as stories are to organizations, in order for strategic leaders to take advantage of them as storytellers something must be known about the specific type and structure of organizational stories.
It is conceivable that storytelling in organizations shares many of the same structural features as other narrative or dramatic forms; for instance, as stories are told and retold they may take on classic multi-act style with conflict, tension, and climax.
However, there may be other general structural forms for organizational stories, and individual cognitive processes will no doubt impact the construction and interpretation of story exchange within the context of the organization…”
The Strategic Leader and Storytelling (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“In particular, ongoing storytelling might take an autobiographical character, as organization members recount organizational dramas amongst themselves in attempts to generate a mutually agreeable meaning regarding past behaviors (Czarniawska, 1997).
What is needed for storytelling to serve a role in complex adaptive learning systems is a structure that integrates the past and present in a way that generates tags among organizational members that coordinates and guides future behaviors while generating exploitative and explorative learning in appropriate situations…”
Creating the Narrative (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“The enduring values, expectations, and responsibilities that maintaining coherence produces for the organization— and which are manifested in its vision—show the opportunity that strategic leadership has in defining an organization's approach to future circumstances.
Although all individual members are “coauthors” of an organization's life story…powerful individuals, such as strategic leaders, can produce narratives for which the rest of the organization is more of a passive audience.
That is the special role of strategic leaders as agents within an aggregate of agents in a complex adaptive system; they promote the proliferation of life story narratives as a tagging process which encourages the emergence of diverse functions among members while also coordinating interactions between them within the system…”
Creating the Narrative (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“…Control over storytelling and the way members interpret an organization's path over time allow control over the vision formation process, and should significantly influence the character and effectiveness of organizational vision.
Although many individuals may possess experience relevant to the development and evaluation of past mental models of the organization, strategic leaders have a unique position from which to influence this critical feedback mechanism in the vision formation process. Leader background and experience from the past are influential in developing descriptive mental models, and leader experience with those models as they confront the demands of current organizational situations influence prescriptive mental models…”
Personal Narrative (Boundaries)? (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Therefore, a strategic leader's own life story enters into the vision formation process along with the life story of the organization itself and its members. The requirement for coherence in both organizational and leader life stories means that a strategic leader imparts much of their own meaning and sense making onto the organization; actions and events are interpreted through the lenses of thematic and causal coherence in the context of the histories of both the organization and the strategic leader…”
Q: What boundaries need to be considered?
Centrality of Leader (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“By being central in the tagging process, strategic leaders influence the structure of interconnections within and between organizational systems and thus influence organizational adaptation. Strategic leaders serve as cognitive network brokers…
By interaction with a wide range of networks, inside and outside the boundaries of the firm, individuals are encouraged to bring new ideas/schema to old problems as well as discover new problems to which known or knowable shared schema can be applied. In this way the organization evolves as it increases not only the store of knowledge and procedural memory, but transactive memory as well.
The availability and access to divergent information are crucial to solve complex problems. Organizational creativity is related to the leaders' personal networking behavior or the encouragement of subordinates' networking…”
Centrality of Leader: Sharing Knowledge (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“One important role the strategic leader can play in developing the organization's procedural and transactive memories, achieving cognitive consensuality, and facilitating creative problem solving is that of providing access to and encouraging the sharing of knowledge and information: knowledge about history, knowledge about issues confronting the organization in real time, and knowledge about possible futures.
Under Jack Welch, the Crotonville training facility of General Electric grew in its offerings and had, over the course of a year, as many as 10,000+ managers and customers attending sessions. Jack Welch himself taught a course on Leadership and Values seven times a year to high-potential middle managers. In addition, courses were taught by the vice-chairman and the CFO. In fact, corporate leaders taught 60% of the senior-level courses, with Welch often standing in front of the group (Greiner, 2002). While dialog and storytelling are useful tools for developing shared conceptions of the organization, strategic leaders must also use those tools to promote the acquisition of knowledge responsiveness to the competitive environment…”
Limitations & Considerations (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Although the picture presented here shows strategic leadership as a major factor in encouraging organizational learning, a number of issues arise in organizations that actually keep them from changing or that prevent strategic leaders from acting out their roles.
First, not all organizations enable/recognize the functional capacity of a complex adaptive system. Frequently, they are structured to operate instead as stable bureaucracies, in the mold of the Weberian-ideal type, defined by stable attractors such as the hierarchy of authority, specialization of tasks, and the formalization of activities into routines. However, the presence of a strategic leader as a “strange attractor, ” or through the strategic leaders use of tags and the tagging process, organizations can take on the characteristics of a complex adaptive system…”
Limitations & Considerations (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Second, while strategic leaders may promote dialogue, they also may not fully understand that dialogue. Given their positions within their organizations, their distance from work activities may not give them the perspective needed to fully evaluate the content of dialogue among organization members.
One of the implications of the work on communities of practice is that observers of workers on the job may interpret their interactions as not work-related, or even counterproductive, when in fact they may be critically important to accomplish the task at hand. Allowing dialogue to occur unfettered by management editorial control may be difficult to accept but is inevitable given that organizational storytelling is always a joint production between leaders and followers...”
Limitations & Considerations (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Third, stories are never unequivocal accounts of reality. They may not be truly classified as fiction, but they emphasize some aspects of reality over others in building coherence.
The autobiographical structure of the stories strategic leaders promote certainly encourages selective attention to events.
The act of storytelling also produces outcomes that depend heavily on the situation in which the process occurs. Storytelling produces meaning by focusing the attention of both the storyteller and the listener, and is embedded in the storytelling act itself, the context surrounding the process, and the particular organizational constituencies involved…”
Limitations & Considerations (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“Finally, being subject to memetic evolutionary processes, the development of stories is subject to mutation and variation, perhaps in unintended directions. As mentioned above, storytelling efforts throughout an organization are influenced by the context in which they occur.
Therefore, the potentially large number of individuals involved in any organization suggests a significant source of inputs and variation in the formation of the organizational life story. There is no guarantee that counter-narratives will not also arise, providing coherent but distinctive accounts from a variety of other voices in an organization, and producing alternative identities and visions.
While strategic leaders have a great deal of control over the evolving life story and vision in an organization, they do not have direct and complete control over the generation of organizational narratives. Storytelling is only a loosely determined process for vision formation in organizations…”
Conclusions (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“In complex adaptive systems, strategic leaders affect organizational learning and adaptation through their use of tags and the tagging process. By accessing the tagging process, they influence the structure of interactions among organizational and outside agents. In doing so, strategic leaders provide access to new resources and opportunities, explore new ranges in the fitness landscape, and express their vision for the organization.
Strategic leaders articulate their visions by telling stories and promoting dialogue in which an organization's past, present, and future coalesce: stories and dialogue about our history; stories and dialogue about who we are; stories and dialogue about who we can become. Storytelling allows individuals to share their explicit knowledge and their implicit understandings, and over time, builds up a cognitive consensuality that identifies and defines the organization as an entity with a history and future…”
Conclusions (Boal & Schulz, 2007)
“While an organization's storytelling process provides a strong influence on its direction, the underlying logics of that process and the interaction patterns that support it transform over time through meme evolution.
Strategic leaders serve as a reference signal in that evolutionary process, providing a significant selection force in the development of new tags, and consequently, new organizational stories.
Through the evolving process of storytelling, strategic leaders achieve innovation and change by demonstrating its legitimacy and consistency with the past. Maintaining this balance—between the past and future, between stability and disorder—allows organizations to evolve and learn, and is the essence of operating successfully at the “edge of chaos.””
Where does Ursula Burns* fit in? (*no relation to J.M. Burns)
I am hoping that you have read/watched this lecture before watching the video of Ursula Burns (but it’s fine either way).
Watch her and think about how all of the above concepts fit in.
Some useful background information on Ursula Burns:
From 2009-2016, CEO of Xerox (also Chair 2010-2017)
Raised by single mother in a NYC housing project
Earned a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering (1980) and an M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Columbia University (1981)
First African-American woman CEO to head a Fortune 500 company
First woman to succeed another woman as head of a Fortune 500 company
Started at Xerox as an intern in 1980
Xerox has undergone great conflict and change in recent years (beginning well prior to her tenure as CEO but continuing to today)
107
Inspirational Leadership
Q: Is Ursula Burns an inspirational leader? (NOT just: “Is she inspirational?”)
Q: How does contingency theory of leadership relate to Ursula Burns?
Q: How does she fit into the discussion about tagging and storytelling in systems?
108
Next Steps
Watch Ursula Burns’ video and then come on the discussion board and share your thoughts regarding the questions in the last slide.
If you have not already started, maybe begin thinking about the first paper for this course (at least read the assignment description again, ok?)…
Thank you
109
References
Boal, K. & Schultz, P. (2007). Storytelling, time, and evolution: The role of strategic leadership in complex adaptive systems. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 411-428.
Coget, J.F., Shani, A. & Solari, L. (2014). The lone genius, or leaders who tyrannize their creative teams: An alternative to the “mothering” model of leadership and creativity. Organizational Dynamics, 43(2), 105-113.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: HarperPerennial.
Graen, G. & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6 (2), 219-247.
110
References
Gumusluoglu, L. & Ilsev, A. (2009). Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 461-473.
Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.
Luthans, F. (2010). Organizational behavior (12th edition). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
111