Storytelling Process Model

Boje_process_model_storytelling

Organizations fall into a common trap. They often rely on just their CEO, President, PR office to do their storytelling. The problem with this is any organization has is an Ensemble of storytellers doing storytelling: all the employees, managers, staff, customers, suppliers, and competitors.  Some organizations try to ‘brand’ their storytelling, a kind of logo-centric approach.  The problem is that branding storytelling is not a Process Model. A successful Storytelling Strategy needs an Ensemble to care for the storytelling process.

What is Storytelling Process? 

Storytelling process is dynamic.  Storytelling of a situation begins with the first phase of antenarrative, the ‘social’ and ‘material’ processes out of which storytelling you internal story, and what is storyable in performance, begins. As William James (1907: 98) puts it “things tell a story.” It is not just people that are storytelling agents, the products, services, the sculptures, the land on which the buildings rest, all tell a story. I work with the material storytelling labs (founded by Anete Strand, in Denmark) and have developed some methods to work with veterans and family members, working with material things, to tell their story, to tell it without words.  I call it an ‘Embodied Restorying Process” a method for doing sociomaterial storytelling https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rni–9m4H7Y   and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh3ED76wxjs

Storytelling process also proceeds to creation of narratives (& counternarratives) of the Past, and the second aspect of the antenarrative process, world-making possible futures.  Out of possible futures, one gets selected and changes our storytelling of the situation, including changes to the situation itself.  Attention in the Here & Now creates an uncertainty effect, as does the performance of storytelling to some audience.

Let the situation define the storytelling action. Mary Parker Follett, the godmother of systems thinking, Ensemble Leadership (Boje, Rosile, & Nez, 2016) means working out a system of leadership in a new kind of human relations, in what Mary Park Follett called the Law of the Situation. Follett (1924) develops the law of the situation in its “total situation: (p. 152) and “as part of a total process” and “of the continuous process of self-renewal” (p. 153). The total situation is within the “total environment: the “immediate relation to the individual that its forces can be reckoned with both as cause of and effect of his activity, that is, that much of environment which comes within the appreciable range of circular behavior” (p. 109). Circular or integrative behavior is considered “seminal for our future thinking, a conception which is surely destined to influence largely the social sciences: (p. xv).

Ensemble storytelling is about democratic participation rather than the usual top-down CEO stump speech, or the glossy PR brochure. The problem with top-down storytelling is the personality cult of leadership becomes divorced from science of the storytelling process. A situation changes, shifts, emerges and the fearless leader comes up with a storytelling event.  David Armstrong (1993) manages by storying around, walking about his company to ask workers, customers, and managers their stories. He is the Chief Storytelling Officer of his company (Armstrong, 2002). The storytelling gurus try to convince the leader that one stump speech, one elevator pitch, one story performed with passion of a Toast Master, will change an organization.  Armstrong is not developing the usual stump speech. Snap goes the storytelling performance, and a day later, its all pretty much the same as before. Like Stew Jr., Armstrong makes storytelling part of the management process.

Ensemble storytelling takes it one step purpose, everyone is answerable for the storytelling process.

Let’s look at an Ensemble Process Approach to Storytelling

The problem is the personality cult of leadership is divorced from science. “A trembling subordinate enters, states his problem; snap goes the decision from the chair” (Follett, 1941: 119). Barry and Elmes (1997) write an amazing article on the ways a single source (CEO) storytelling strategy process is not as effective as a polyphonic strategy, where many voices go into developing it. I worked on the many spacetime ways of doing storytellings strategy (Boje 2008) and worked with colleagues to apply storytelling strategy to McDonald’s (Haley & Boje, 2014), and to Burger King (Boje, Haley, & Saylors, 2016).

Tourani’s (2014) dissertation worked out the storytelling in Sears and Wal-Mart annual reports. The main finding was that Sears lost the thread of one of the most successful storytelling strategies in corporate history. Growing up, Sears dominated retail marketing, and were the pinnacle of how to manage. They brought in new CEOS, who forgot everything that the founders new about storytelling. They tried to be high quality fashion, insurance peddlers, and in the end, they lost their market share. Wal-Mart, by comparison, kept the thread of their founder’s storytelling. They were cared for the Sam Walton storytelling legacy. Counternarratives developed, when labor practices turned exploitative. The supply chain was severely critiqued for sweatshop practices, and for environmental damage. However, Wal-Mart keeps restorying Sam, reinventing supply chain, making it sustainable, but still puts the squeeze on the supplier.

How can an organization care for its storyline?

Ensemble storytelling means facing the conflict, the many sides of the story, told and untold (Hitchin, 2014). Ensemble storytelling is dialectic, a development process of communicating everyone’s Living Stories to fashion a ‘polyphonic’ blend, one that abides by Follett’s Law of the Situation. Mary Parker Follett’s (1941: 94) recommendation to have the imagination to see the possibilities of enterprise democracy to ‘integrative unity.” y integrative unity, conflicts are resolves by face-to-face communication, by jointly investigating the facts and values, then jointly fitting the interests into one another (Follett, 1941: 39).  As Follett puts it we need to implement the Principle of the Situation, in a process of scientific discovery, experiment, and evaluation of the results.

Kaylynn Twotrees (2000) Seven Directions storytelling approach is an ensemble process. It is a process that takes months for people in an organization to share their stories, to construct a generative account, one where people recognize their input in the narrative they are co-constructing.

Storytelling needs to be cared for.  At Stew Leonard’s very popular dairy stores, there is a storytelling meeting every morning, and managers actually read the stories told by customers, and then actually change their systems that day to get different results.

Boje (2007) “Stew Leonard Jr. (of Stew Leonard’s Dairy) took two Ph.D. seminars on storytelling when I was at UCLA, and he was in the MBA program. Here are few more of Stew Jr.’s ideas on stories. “Here’s a few ideas” (Stew Jr. told me) Pick anyone you like or mix and match.”

“If there’s no story, it’s too complicated to explain to over 2,000 team members”

“If you hear a story being told in the company cafeteria by a front line worker, promote the manager that initiated that story!”

“Our company is made up of lots of stories. We’ve found that “stories” get told and retold and become the fabric of an organization. “Policies” lay unread in the company handbook or training manual”

Storytelling to be most effective has to be the lifeblood of the organization, a process that is cared for: “At the Stew Leonard’s organization there is a focus group every week. Every week, Stew Jr. and his other family members sit and listen while customers tell them stories about services and products” (Boje & Dennehy, 1993/2008: p. 89)

More of Stew Leonard’s ideas on storytelling

“How do you get your message heard in an organization with thousands of people? David Boje taught me the value of stories in an organization. Stories are the “oil” that makes the gears work.” – Stew Leonard Jr.

“If there’s no story, it’s too complicated to explain to over 2,000 team members”

If you hear a story being told in the company cafeteria by a front line worker, promote the manager that initiated that story!

“Our company is made up of lots of stories. We’ve found that “stories” get told and retold and become the fabric of an organization. “Policies” lay unread in the company handbook or training manual”.

Ensemble storytelling is part of the ensemble leadership process. . “Our conception of [Ensemble] leadership is everywhere restricted by the persistence of the fallacy in the old idea of obedience, namely that obedience is necessarily passive” (Follett, 1941: 275, bracketed additions, mine). For Ensemble Leadership to be effective there is an active obedience, a testing of consent, an intelligent self-direction, an empowered action to be reciprocally involved, in the group process in order to accomplish what is “integral to the situation” (IBID.). Being actively obedient to the Whole Situation means checking out an order from above, sideways, and below, and being exigent with our voice of fore-caring, assertive in our dialogues with other leaders of every kind.

Ensemble storytelling means facing the conflict, the many sides of the story, told and untold. Ensemble storytelling is dialectic, a development process of communicating everyone’s Living Stories to fashion a ‘polyphonic’ blend, one that abides by Follett’s Law of the Situation. Mary Parker Follett’s (1941: 94) recommendation to have the imagination to see the possibilities of enterprise democracy to ‘integrative unity.” y integrative unity, conflicts are resolves by face-to-face communication, by jointly investigating the facts and values, then jointly fitting the interests into one another (Follett, 1941: 39).  As Follett puts it we need to implement the Principle of the Situation, in a process of scientific discovery, experiment, and evaluation of the results.

”You must remember how Alice in Wonderland had to run as fast as she could to stand still” (Follett, p. 264). The Storytelling Process has aliveness (Tyler, 2010), is moving and running fast, and it takes a lot of care to keep up.  Follett’s Law of the Situation, engage in co-operative study, making actual experiments, evaluate results, and only then make an informed decision about university reorganization. As Follett (1941: 51) puts it “we should try experiments, and note whether they succeed or fail, most important of all, why they succeed or fail.”

What Follett proposes is a joint responsibility for integrative unity, implementing democratic participation by everyone taking responsibility, an d jointly analyzing the Total Situation, scientifically.

Storytelling is a Dialectical Process

I need to develop how Follett’s dialectic (Hegelian) approach.  Her focus is on systems thinking, and  implementing democratic modes of organizational involvement. We are not talking about thesis-antithesis-synthesis. There is no synthesis, just a process of unfolding contradictions in thesis-antithesis, narrative and counternarrative interplay. Follett rejected the idea of Hegelian synthesis as a misunderstanding of Hegelian dialectic. This more precise understanding of dialectic, as the uncovering of differences, and how to develop power-with rather than power-over.  The tie-in to Ensemble Storytelling is that is power-with, and integrative unity of differences.

Mary Parker Follett (1918) stresses self-organization to negotiate a fore-caring process. Follett (1941: 280) puts this last point this way: “foresight is essential to leadership” and if you are not ‘fore-caring’ in Ensemble Leadership, outcomes (results) are disastrous. It is a ‘fore-caring’ for the Whole Situation, to its constant changes, to new trends. It is an “uncanny approach to the complexity” of the emerging Situation, the ability of leaders to interrelate and co-ordinate to “organize its essential elements” (p. 281). Ensemble Leadership is captured by Follett (1941: 281) when she says “anticipating the problems of to-morrow” and “solving the problems today” Situations that are “complex, intricate, far-reaching.” That is the Law of the Situation as it relates to Ensemble Leadership.

What is dialectic?

There are many kinds of dialectic. Hegel (1807) wrote against the idea of a ‘synthesis’ kind of dialectic. You have heard of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Do a search of Hegel’s book online, and you will not fund the word ‘synthesis.’ If you read a commentator on Hegel, and they tell you Hegel’s dialectic is thesis-antithesis-synthesis, they really never read Hegel at all. Close the book, and go to the original. Instead of synthesis, Hegel wrote about a kind of dialectic where thesis and antithesis in a conflict unfolding, each have contradictions that come forth, and those difference keep intertwining in entanglement after entanglement. See Appendix for more on dialectic. more on this point

What is Relationship of Ensemble Leadership Theory to Hegel’s and Mary Parker Follett’s Dialectic?

In sum, a storytelling process that is effective is well cared-for, ongoing reflection by many participants on the efficacy of the storytelling strategy. There are untold stories that need to be addressed, and counternarratives to the dominant organizational narrative.

References and Related Blog Posts

Armstrong, D. M. (1995). Managing by storying around. David M. Armstrong.

Armstrong, D. M. (2002). Chief storytelling officer: More tales from America’s foremost corporate storyteller. Armstrong International.

Barry, D., & Elmes, M. (1997). Strategy retold: Toward a narrative view of strategic discourse. Academy of management review, 22(2), 429-452.

Implementing Mary Parker Follett’s and Bernie Sanders’ Social Democracy Practices could SAVE New Mexico State University!

[…] ways NMSU might implement Ensemble Leadership (Rosile, Boje, & Nez, 2016). See blog post (click here). How, for example, could departments of faculty, units of staff, faculty senate, and ASNMSU senate […]

 

Boje, D. M. (2007) Living story consulting. https://business.nmsu.edu/~dboje/690/cpscBOOK/cpsc0intro.htm

Boje, D. M. (2008). Storytelling organizations. CA/London: Sage.

Boje, D. M. (Ed.). (2011). Storytelling and the future of organizations: An antenarrative handbook. Routledge.

Boje, D. M. (2012). Reflections: What does quantum physics of storytelling mean for change management?. Journal of Change Management, 12(3), 253-271.

Boje, D. M. (2014). Storytelling organizational practices: Managing in the quantum age. Routledge.

Boje, D. M., & Dennehy, R. F. (1993/2008). Managing in the postmodern world: America’s revolution against exploitation. 1993, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Reissued 2008  Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press.

Boje, D. M., Haley, U. C., & Saylors, R. (2016). Antenarratives of organizational change: The microstoria of Burger King’s storytelling in space, time and strategic context. human relations, 69(2), 391-418.

Boje, D. M., & Henderson, T. L. (Eds.). (2014). Being quantum: Ontological storytelling in the age of antenarrative. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Boje, D. M., & Rosile, G. A. (2001). Where’s the power in empowerment? Answers from

Follett and Clegg. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(1), 90-117.

Follett, M. P. (1918). The New State: Group organization the solution of popular government. University Park, PN: Penn State Press.

Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review, 28(6), 576-588.

Follett, M. P. (1924/1930). Creative Experience. Рипол Классик; NY/London: Longmans, Green and Co. on line at http://ww.pqm-online.com/assets/files/lib/books/follett.pdf

Follett, M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific foundations of business administration, 156-162.

Follett, M. P. (1941). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of mary Parker Follett, edited by Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. F. NY/London: Harper and Brothers.

Follett, M.P. (1949.1987). Freedom and Co-ordination. Lectures in Business Organization. Edited, with an Introduction by L. Urwick. NY/London: Garland Publishing.

Haley, U. C., & Boje, D. M. (2014). Storytelling the internationalization of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(9), 1115-1132.

Hegel. (1807). The Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller with analysis and foreword by J. N. Findlay, Oxford University Press download online version:

Attachment Size
Phenomenology of Spirit – G. W. F. Hegel.epub 638.7 KB
Phenomenology of Spirit – G. W. F. Hegel.mobi 1.04 MB

Hitchin, L. (2014). Method and story fragments: Working through untold method. Pp. 2130238 in Izak, M., Hitchin, L., & Anderson, D. (2014). Untold stories in organizations (Vol. 33). Routledge.

Twotrees, Kaylynn . (2000). Seven directions practice: A practice for the crossroads. The Fourth R, 92.

Tyler, J. A. (2010). Story aliveness. Dance to the music of story: Storytelling and complexity. Mansfield, MA: ISCE Publishing.
Rosile, G. A., Boje, D. M., Carlon, D. M., Downs, A., & Saylors, R. (2013). Storytelling diamond: An antenarrative integration of the six facets of storytelling in organization research design. Organizational Research Methods, 16(4), 557-580.

Rosile, Grace Ann; Boje, David M.; Nez, Carma Claw. (2016). “Ensemble Leadership Theory: Collectivist, Relational, and Heterarchical Roots from Indigenous Contexts.” Leadership journal. CLICK HERE for online prepublication draft

Tourani, N. (2014). Storytelling and strategy in annual reports: A study of Sears and Wal-mart annual reports. New Mexico State University.

The University is a Butterfly: It Needs Two Wings to Fly

David M. Boje April 26 2017

A university, corporation, church, temple, government, industry, environment, ecology, economy, and so on, are many systems, not one system.  These systems have recurring patterns of self-sameness across levels of magnification, called fractals. Since there is always more than one fractal in a complex organization, we need to look at multifractal systems dynamics. It has a recurring trajectory than can look like a Lorenz attractor, called the butterfly.  My essay is about how to have a butterfly that has wings that allow flight, a trajectory of movements. Butterflies with one wing, do not fly. By not having wider basis systems change participation of everyone, an organization risks becoming a one-wing butterfly. This is the story of a university using top-down change (one wing) instead of broad participation by students, faculty, and staff, as well as community. Two wings is better way to fly.

I teach systems theory, and have done so for 35 years. It is that time of year to drum up more doctoral students to take the course. https://business.nmsu.edu/~dboje/655/  If you know of any who want to study advanced systems thinking, send them my way.

I also do change management. We are in the middle of the biggest systems change in the history of the Public University. My purpose is to suggest some constructive uses of complex adaptive systems theory, and ways that multifractal, chaos theory, and strange (chaotic) attracts can be applied, to make better changes to a public university (Boje, 2015; Henderson & Boje, 2015). For introduction to fractal and multifractal systems theory see https://davidboje.wordpress.com/2016/05/24/dialectical-storytelling-science-in-a-multifractal-world/  In Ensemble Leadership, there is broad based participation, not a few people appointed to a committee or team.

These days organizations are complex adaptive systems that are not only dynamical they are self-organizing. They are to complex for one-wing change strategies to be effective.

A university is a physical system, living biological systems, governance systems, HR systems, operations systems, accreditation systems, enrollment systems, and so on. Its a complexity of many sorts of systems working through differences, or not. It is also a place of conflict where conservative and liberal standpoints on how a university is to be run are worked out, or not. A university was once considered a learning system, a knowledge society, but now a university is run like a business in a knowledge economy. The switch from public education as a social good to an act of consumption, treating students as customers instead of citizen, is global.  Eve Tavor Bannet (1993) calls the university a universe-ity, a place that tries to be both Ivory Tower and is a Babel of different languages, disciplines, ideologies, and all kinds of differences that come into ongoing conflict. There are political incommensurabilities in a public university. There are also discontinuities and many contradictions. The insiders, the Aggies, are in conflict with the Outsiders, including the foreigners, and those who neither farm nor ranch, plow nor ride. The public university is a site of conflicting life-styles.  Bourdieu calls it a ‘academic capital’ when one gains power by having the right background, the right race, the right gender, the right immigration papers, the right friends, gets on the right committees to gate-keep other’s progress.  Then there is ‘scientific capital” gained by research publications, doing excellent teaching, having a strong external audience that likes your work.

How does a university survive all its many differences, its heterogeneity, its site of conflicts. For faculty, the administrative order keeps everyone in silos, while claiming that interdisciplinary work is important. The silos are even in a given department. My department has these disciplines: Human Resource Management, Management, Strategy, Operations Research & Production (and Supply Chains), Small Business (with and without Entrepreneurship), Organization Behavior (which is divided between micro and macro, psychological and sociological, efficacy and leadership, and many more), Try to get this faculty to agree on anything is a tall task. In that mix I do systems theory, small business, some leadership, sustainability, and some seminars in qualitative methods, and some change management. My point is there are conflicts to be managed and when a small team of a few disciplines put together changes for all Other disciplines, without input, there are predictable results.

An administrative solution is to keep faculty apart, yes have a senate, yes some committee work, but not to really work through their disciplinary differences.

Organization systems are multiple, and in n-dimensional space, and move along n-dimensional vector (trajectory) in time working through a myriad of conflicts, or keeping folks in their silos. In short, in multifractal spacetime-states, with phase shifts along recurring  trajectory paths. Within complex systems, attractor-spaces (aka basins) form and evolve, from a wide variety of starting conditions developing into multifractality dynamics.  The complex systems multifractal goes through space-state phase transition, that get close enough to the attractors values in particular basins.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractor

The attractor-basins can become significant changes to multifractal structure known as a ‘strange attractor.’

In complex systems theory, describing the chaotic dynamic system states produced the specialty called chaos theory, and to understand its behavior, we need an understanding of multifractality.

Let’s start with an example of complex adaptive systems behavior being influenced if not determined by strange attractors.

The old change paradigm of linear paths, and tightly recurring cycles without deviations, are being replaced by dynamical systems theory understandings of trajectories in relations to strange and chaotic attractor basins.

It is easy to show that the cycles of our university’s enrollment are being made unstable by the lack of budget agreement being reached by the State (legislature and governor), and this this is part of a deeper and wider global vortex.

For example, in the Management Department, where I work, the any additional funds for  recruiting a cohort of Graduate Assistantships has been put on hold, until such time as the State makes its budget. In 28 years, we have always had a cycle of recruitment once a year.  However, since there has been a shift in insurance (they moved out of state, and dropped coverage, and no other agency could be found), that administrative order, raised the amount paid to GAs by $500. Since the Business College does not have funds to make up this difference, and the Graduate College is not saying it will, the College Executive Committee (CEC) decided to cut the GAs of one department and leave the others mostly untouched. In short, Management took the hit, drew the short straw, was in the dog house, or as they say on the shit list anyway. I was told by members of CEC, that I had it all wrong, that the Business College does support the Management Department Ph.D. program. Time will tell this story.

In anticipation that the Governor and legislature will remain at an impasse, budget cuts have happened at a university level (as you well know), and NMSU is telling students (by email) to expect a significant tuition increase, when the Board of Regents meets, at graduation in May 2017.

https://www.abqjournal.com/962502/budget-cuts-force-nmsu-to-make-hard-choices.html (March 6, 2017) Amid shrinking budgets, NMSU leaders face hard choices By Lauren Villagran / Journal Staff Writer

“On the butcher block at New Mexico State University: programs, positions, millions of dollars, the status quo. A top-to-bottom reorganization of the university is moving from the administrative side to the colleges this semester, a potentially thorny effort that could see academic programs meshed or eliminated and schools reorganized. The restructuring is both a product of New Mexico’s broken budget and Chancellor Garrey Carruthers’ vision for transforming the NMSU system into a more sustainable, more efficient institution. There have been about three-dozen layoffs and a workforce reduction of several hundred positions through attrition and retirement. Beyond that, changes have run the gamut. They range from revamping procurement – everyone will use a single Amazon account instead of running to the local office supply store – to stripping down layers of management – some will lose power, some will gain it – to restructuring departments and rethinking the “why” of almost everything.”
nmsu_tuition_inc

Figure above from Alb j. IBID. Note: The students report they got emails the Regents will likely increase tuition in May 2017 see http://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/education/nmsu/2017/04/01/nmsu-regents-vote-tuition-hike/99871632/ “

Under the 6-percent increase proposal, the cost per credit hour on the main campus would increase from nearly $254 to about $269, according to the proposal. A student taking 15 credit hours would pay about $196 more per semester.

NMSU Chancellor Garrey Carruthers has said he’d seek the tuition increase in light of higher education budget cuts likely to be handed down by state.”

Back to ALB J: “NMSU has slashed $30.5 million from its “instruction and general” budget over the past two fiscal years, including a 5 percent emergency reduction in appropriations required by the Legislature in a special session last fall. NMSU’s I&G budget – 62 percent of which is funded by legislative appropriations – currently stands at $178.1 million and is what pays for everything related to classroom instruction. Slight further cuts by the Legislature are still expected this session. NMSU’s total operating budget in fiscal 2017 is $621.8 million.”

“Carruthers has thus far managed the reorganization with substantial support from the Board of Regents and without significant push back. That may change as academia, too, comes under the knife.

As institutions of higher education in New Mexico face the unrelenting squeeze of reduced appropriations, falling student enrollment and limited tuition hikes, colleges and universities statewide are having to make tough decisions. NMSU may be going farther than any other large institution in the state, opting for a complete overhaul rather than piecemeal cuts…”

“NMSU Provost Dan Howard oversees an array of functions at the university, from the graduate schools to diversity programs to human resources. The Journal was invited to witness the decision-making process. Team members tossed out questions. Why is there an “assistant dean” in this area? Why are we using such an old model? What is the purpose of these units? Can you back that up with metrics? Broad sheets depicting “before” and “after” organizational charts color-code the tough decisions in pastels: orange for an eliminated position, green for a reclassification that might mean a lower salary for a new hire, purple for a reporting change that might mean that one manager loses some In this next sentence (apologies for its length, notice now the local micro-managing decisions are related to global influences).”

We all share in the pain of reorganization, budget cuts, misery of reengineering a complex public bureaucracy. My side of the story: I asked the CEC, a few weeks ago,  about the future graduate assistantships for the Management Department, and was told that the future cannot be determined until the Graduate School has a budget, which cannot happen until the legislature has a budget, which cannot happen until the governor stops vetoing the budget because she signed a contract with some think tank to never ever raise any taxes, and does not appear to be a supporter of public education, which is part of a global conservative movement to move public education out of the ‘public good’ ideology into the ‘consumer good’ one, which opens the way for charter schools, high tuitions and student consumer debt, doing away with tenure in favor of short term contracts and overall salary savings, and so on.

This series of attractor basins conjugates a fundamental change to NMSU, and to all of public university, and results in changes to dynamical self-organizing systems.

Dynamical systems in the organizational world tend to arise by bringing together heterogeneous differences that attempt to find at least some points of systems convergences. More differences create more perturbance, but also yield more innovation, creativity, and variation.

As external and internal differences multiply, the organization can be knocked off one trajectory to another one, in an adjacent basin, or phase space).

Budget cutting and reorganization tend to be fixed point transformations, a point is mapped to which the systems are encouraged to evolve (like a damped pendulum, of where sloshing water) finds a fixed point (equilibrium).

A limit cycle in a dynamical system, such as the phase space of the ideal pendulum, as the pendulum makes its periodic orbit is attracted to a limit cycle.

Limit Torus has a periodic trajectory of the complex systems through a limit cycle, such as how NMSU and State Legislature (& Governor) are oscillating bodies, where the limit cycle becomes a limit torus of incommensurate frequencies. For example, NMSU’s budget cycle is thrown off by the inability of State legislature and governor to come to a budget agreement for education.

Strange attractors, have a fractal structure.  Often NMSU’s strange attractors are chaotic attractors, but there are also non-chaotic attractors that exist at NMSU.  A strange attractor has dependence to initial conditions of the self-organizing systems that make up a university.  NMSU goes through a number of self-organizing dynamical systems iterations, subject to the confines of the attractors that can converge into a recurrence trajectory.

Basins of attraction occur at NMSU. There is a region of the phase space, such that any initial condition in that region will eventually iterate into the attractor. NMSU is not a stable linear or hierarchical system. NMSU has many nonlinear systems that plunge into different basins of attraction, and do not map into non-attracting points, cycles, or basins.

One basin of attraction is business process reengineering (BPR) brought to NMSU by Deloitte consulting firm, and continued in the reorganization efforts by the appointed members of Team 6.  http://provost.nmsu.edu/blog/2017/02/23/team-6/

Team 6 discusses ways to save budget costs by collapsing departments to save one department head and one secretary, moving from 12 to 9-month department heads to save 3-months of salary, and even possiblity of collapsing entire colleges to collapse more departments, courses, majors, minors, and release personnel (faculty, staff, administrators from further employment). It is a basin of attraction that is disruptive, provokes anxiety, and encourage faculty- and staff- flight to other universities, or into retirement. This BPR basin of attraction move along one phase space to the next over the course of the academic calendar year.

A second basin is the State budget, which is late in coming to manifestation. The delay results in many people leaving, budgets of colleges, departments, including termination of graduate assistantships, elimination of entire programs, as well as departmental secretaries taking on multiple departments’ workloads, faculty increasing their course load, salaries being frozen, and so on.

The first basin (BPR) and the second basin (State budget) are mapping forces upon the university reorganizations into one another. The interactions of the basins are not simple. Rather, the interactions form a complex plane within the dynamical self-organizing systems of NMSU.

These basins of attraction are fractals. They are not the only basins of attraction. The third basin has several global attractors. For example, Starving the Beast is an ideology and a practice, happening globally as neoliberal advocates starve public education (K-12 & higher education) institutions, leading to downswings in performance results, and then calls to further downsize funding, since results are so miserable.

The (Edward) Lorenz attractor can look like butterfly wings.

Lorenz_moving_trajectory

http://www.stsci.edu/~lbradley/seminar/attractors.html

There are phase states where by chaotic behavior, one wing atrophies, as the complex adaptive systems trajectory moves from one wing-state to the other, and back.

To what extent is NMSU a Lorenz attractors dynamical systems’ fractal?

lorenz_butterfly_onewing_bigger

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenz_system

It would seem that as NMSU goes through its reorganization (Teams 1 to 6) practices, that the multiple possible solutions to Lorenz attractor fractality need sharper consideration.

Lorenz_moving_trajectory

Knowing the exact starting points of the heterogeneous NMSU systems and help determine their future phase states, and the overall limit cycle path from one butterfly-like wing of Lorenz fractal to the other one, and back, again and again.

To do otherwise is to court the chaotic attractors, whose outcomes are more unpredictable, and can become the impetus for downward spiral fractal behavior of the entire scientific and arts community of the university.

Conventional change management methods of BPR and university-reorganization are based on linear assumptions. However, as complex adaptive multi-systems of plurality and diversity, a university is exceedingly nonlinear in its trajectories, in spacetimemattering (see Barad, 2007).

The wings of the NMSU butterfly, the behavior of that Lorenz self-organizing system is being radically altered in ways that are going to change the fractal patterns.

The Lorenz attractor is dominant conceptual paradigm of chaos theory. It plays a major role in organizational systems theory. Rather than naive notions of open or closed systems thinking, the Lorenz attractor allow us to understand systems dynamics, the phase state transformations of organizational systems in spacetimemattering.

In chaos theory terms, an organization’s dynamical systems are highly sensitive to initial conditions. The future evolution of the complex adaptive systems fall under the influence of strange, and chaotic attractors, as the institution moves through its trajectory cycles, and move closer to are farther away from a recurrent path.  The overall path can be observed and studied by its relation to various basins of attraction.

By focusing on dynamic systems theory, including multifractality, NMSU reorganization can work with rich and nontrivial information that is being ignored by Teams 1 to 6. The reason is these teams are bent on finding linear point solutions, when in order to anticipate future states, the fractals, basin attractors, and evolving situation and context need to be analyzed.

Variations in the initial circumstances of NMSU product variations in the phase states and the recurrent trajectory of its complex systems. A small change by Teams 1 to 6, can produce variation in the limit cycle, resulting in a major outcome, for better or worse, performance.

Not paying attention to multifractality of systems dynamics of self-organizing can change balances in the force field (Kurt Lewin) that are unintended consequences, perhaps a devastating cyclone is unleashed, a downward spiral into oblivion.

Linear thinking as an obstacle to a global understanding of university dynamics.  By careful observation we can better understand and predict future self-adaptive, self-organizing systems phenomena. I am not asserting rigorous accuracy of predictions of the future of NMSU. Rather, we can get closer to accuracy by looking at phase-transitions organizations are making.

I call upon Teams 1 to 6, to widen their participation, actually solicit input form all the students, faculty, and staff. I call for more attention to nonlinear dynamical systems theory, chaos theory, and to how organizations have multifractality, and trajectories, often much like Lorenz attractors. A butterfly without two wings, one that over relies on central administrative task forces, does not usually fly too well.

I have suggested ways that change could happen differently that reengineering, I invoke the greatest systems theorist of all times, Mary Parker Follett, who taught about ways to management conflicts, even at a university, and change by using power-with instead of power-over, using integrative decisions, or what professor Rosile, doctoral student Nez,  and I call Ensemble Leadership (Rosile, Boje, & Nez).

https://davidboje.wordpress.com/2017/02/25/how-to-develop-a-university-of-the-future-at-new-mexico-state-university/ 

Some References

Bannet, Eve Tavor (1993). Postcultural Theory: Critical Theory after the Marxist Paradigm. NY, NY: Paragon House Publishers.

Boje, David M. (2015). Change Solutions to the Chaos of Standards and Norms Overwhelming Organizations: Four Wings of Tetranormalizing. London/NY: Routledge.

Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review28(6), 576-588.

Follett, M. P. (1924/1930). Creative Experience. Рипол Классик; NY/London: Longmans, Green and Co. on line at http://ww.pqm-online.com/assets/files/lib/books/follett.pdf

Follett, M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific foundations of business administration, 156-162.

Follett, M. P. (1941). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett, edited by Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. F. NY/London: Harper and Brothers.

Henderson, Tonya L.; Boje, David M. (2015). Managing Fractal Organizing Processes. NY/London: Routledge.

Rosile, Grace Ann; Boje, David M.; Nez, Carma Claw. (2016). “Ensemble Leadership Theory: Collectivist, Relational, and Heterarchical Roots from Indigenous Contexts.” Leadership journalCLICK HERE for online PDF

The Ethical Answerability of ‘Storytelling Billionaires’ Leadership In Society

David M. Boje, April 17, 2017

ABSTRACT

Storytelling is an act of translation of what one person/group/organization/nation is doing to and for another. ‘Storytelling billionaires’ to and for another points in two directions at once: to the billionaires and to and for another who are not billionaires. Billionaires consume more and have a larger carbon footprint than the poorest 50% of the world’s population. ‘Storytelling billionaires’ is thereby transmitting to them an ethics of answerability for the situation that the non-billionaires find themselves in. This essay considers how ‘answerability ethics’ extends to leadership of billionaires to and for non-billionaires, who inhabit the same planet are part of the same global system of capitalism.

INTRODUCTION 

The class I teach, leadership in society (Mgt 388v) at New Mexico State University, has a presentation on April 19 2017 on billionaire leaders in society. Last week there was a presentation on 1% leaders in society. Most students in the leadership in society class wanted to be on one of these two project/presentation teams.

 

My purpose here is to put billionaire (& 1%) leadership in a societal context. Since my specialty is storytelling, I will focus on the competing storytelling that our US and New Mexico society has about billionaire leadership.

 

‘Storytelling billionaires’ find itself in a situation of two audiences: other billionaires and translation of their situation to and for another, non-billionaires. Mikhail Bakhtin (1993) says there is an ethical answerability, which means ‘Being’ the one person who has the knowledge and capacity to intervene in the once-occurrent eventness of Being. Answerability ethics does come into play as the storytelling of and by billionaires, to and for non-billionaires, has ethical-answerability points here and now, in this situation, to and for these two different audiences (Bannet, 1993: 174).

 

Billionaires are leaders in society and in global capitalism who have ethical-answerability points to and for, non-billionaires. Why? There is extreme carbon footprint inequality between billionaires and the poorest, 50% of the world’s population. Billionaires and the poorest 50% of the world’s population live on the resource limits of one world. “Climate change is inextricably linked to economic inequality.”[1] ‘Storytelling billionaires’ is therefore what Bakhtin calls answerability ethics for the situation of late modern capitalism and climate change, of the haves and have-nots, as well as the situation of the planet.

 

  1. World’s richest 10% produce 50% of global carbon emissions.[2] Billionaire storytelling of how the 10% richest on the planet are answerable for half the greenhouse-gas emissions carries an ethical answerability to aiding climate-vulnerable non-billionaires exist in the climate change.

 

“Rich, high emitters should be held accountable for their emissions, no matter where they live,” Oxfam climate policy head, Tim Gore, said in a statement (IBID.). “The poorest half of the global population – around 3.5 billion people – are responsible for only around 10% of total global emissions attributed to individual consumption (Oxfam Report, 2015).

10 percent rich and 40 percent poor

Figure 1: Contrast of Richest 10% and Poorest 50% lifestyle of consumption emissions

How do billionaires and the poorest 50% share out answerability for curbing greenhouse gas emissions, which derive mainly from burning coal, oil and gas? Billionaires in the US and other developing countries developing countries have polluted for much longer and should shoulder a bigger obligation for cutting back, than billionaires and poor in the poorest countries.

1 percent richest and poorest life styles

Figure 2: Contrast of 1% Richest with 40% Poorest and Global Average for Lifestyle Consumption Emissions (source Oxfam Report, 2015).

 

Therefore, it is the leadership by the richest 1% that has ethical answerability to do something substantial about curbing their own carbon footprint, since the carbon footprint of the poorest 40% is already extremely low.

nation with largest and smallest footprint

Figure 3: Examples of where in the world people in the poorest half of global population live, and the scale of their lifestyle consumption emissions footprints (Source Oxfam Report, 2015).

If we look more closely at which countries on the planet have the largest carbon footprint, it is reasonable to expect ethical answerability and positive leadership for climate change, from that country’s billionaires.

household CO2 rates of 10percent

Figure 4: Per capita lifestyle consumption emissions in G20 countries for which data is available (Oxfam Report, 2015).

 

In the USA, the top 10%, the billionaire class, per capita life style of CO2 emissions is 50 tons (in green), where as the bottom 50% (in red) is about 8 tons CO2 emissions per family. Billionaires are in a stronger, more resourceful, and answerable position to lead climate change.

 

  1. What is the ‘Storytelling Billionaires’ that is used to justify the extreme CO2 emissions inequality? Billionaires are heterogeneous. There are different ways of ‘storytelling billionaires’ carbon footprint inequality. Each has a different twist, a different translating of the situation that is answerable for and to another. Each storytelling claims to be an accurate translation of the situation of inequality. One group is storytelling billionaires as answerable for leadership, such as Figure 1 to 4 of the 2015 Oxfam Report. For example, storytelling billionaires: “that in many countries the richest 1% have a much higher carbon footprint per person than the income deciles below them”.[3] “Piketty and Chancel estimate that the country where the people making up the richest 1% have the highest carbon footprints per person is in the United States” (IBID.).

 

  1. Other groups are storytelling billionaires, by blaming the poor, for their own situation and circumstance. “If only you were smarter, had more credentials … all would be yours” (Bernstein, 2008: 173). This is the meritocracy approach, storytelling billionaires, how unbiased market forces are solely responsible for wealth distribution, and we dare not tamper with the game rules ‘free market’ capitalism. As this storytelling goes, the poor are just aware of the free market principles of global economics.

 

We cannot expect those billionaires in control to share the reins of power. There are deep-pocketed billionaires with vested interests in the current carbon footprint inequality, even though the path is not sustainable. E.g. The Koch brothers. If billionaires playing the game of monopoly capitalism, continue on the path they are on, blaming the victim, fairly soon, nation states will devote such a large share of the economy to war and health care cost, without anything left over for education or paying the price for the climate change problem

 

  1. Environmental Justice – storytelling billionaires.

“In the summer of 1978, a trucking company illegally dumped 31,000 gallons of used transformer oil along hundreds of miles of roads in Warren County, North Carolina. The location was no accident: This was the poorest county in the state, and the majority of its residents were black. Adding insult to injury, the state decided to place a hazardous-waste landfill in the area that would store the used oil and also serve as a repository for toxins from other counties. Rather than accept their fate, locals filed a lawsuit charging racial discrimination and were arrested for staging protests and sit-ins. Borrowing language and strategies from the civil rights struggle, they helped shape an emerging social movement for ‘environmental justice’.”[4] This is also structural racism: Race is the most significant determinant of the location of hazardous waste facility. Facilities are sited where land is cheap and environmental laws are lax. The storytelling plays out this way: The local population becomes aware of the health effects, the contamination of their bodies and their local environment. They begin to organize ‘citizen science’ to gather health data on the results of the hazardous waste landfill. The corporate player here is Shell, and they use blame-the-victim storytelling: “ Shell’s social-responsibility rhetoric as well as its blame-the-victim argument that contamination comes not from industry but from unhygienic slum dwellers” (IBID.).

 

 

  1. Hypothesis: Billionaire elites Protect their Environmental Privileges using Green Storytelling. ‘Storytelling billionaires’ from the ‘Green’ movement is subject to environmental justice critique. Billionaires, like it or not, do profit from environmental inequality, enjoy environmental privileges: access to material consumption amenities that are denied to the 50% poorest on the planet (open ‘green’ space, including green forests, organic food to eat, organic wine bars, well-insulated homes, clean air to breathe, and clean water to drink). The mainstream billionaire environmental (Green) movement is often hostile to environmental justice, but amenable to green amenities, and protecting them from the poorest of the poor. For example in 1999 the Aspen City Council passed a resolution petitioning US Congress and the president to restrict the number of immigrants entering the US. The storytelling rationale was that immigrants tax the nation’s scarce resources and ecosystems, and negatively impact population stabilization. This puts a moral gloss on the racist agenda of environmental inequality, and sustains environmental privilege. The white and wealthy billionaires seldom form a alliance with environmental justice advocates. Rather the storytelling billionaire logic of Green-sustainability protects environmental privileges.

 

 

  1. In New Mexico, Unchecked carbon pollution that causes climate change is fundamentally altering our environment and putting fish and wildlife populations and our outdoor heritage at risk.[5]

 

Of the 525 billionaires in the USA, zero are living in New Mexico.[6] According to Forbes, the richest person in New Mexico is Mack Chase, president of Chase Energy Corporation in Artesia. The entrepreneur and philanthropist is worth $650 million.[7] In 2012 Mack Chase was honored with a distinguished leadership award. The Chase Foundation of Artesia, N.M., has donated $100,000 to the New Mexico Poison and Drug Information Center. The money will be used by the center to provide drug information to health care professionals.[8] “Nearly 40,000 New Mexican households are millionaires according to the new Phoenix Marketing International 2014 Global Wealth Monitor report, or about 5 percent of the state’s total households”.[9]

 

New Mexico population is 2,045,525 and the number living in poverty: is 436,153, or 21%.

 

 

Conclusions

 

In sum, billionaires throughout the world have a miserable carbon footprint track record. ‘Storytelling billionaires’ is caught up in an apologetic for environmental privileges, known as blaming the victim. Billionaires sustain a Horatio Alger mythology, that if the poor got off their duff, saved their wages, got an education, and competed in the game free market capitalism, they could become a billionaire. There are no billionaires living in New Mexico. The number of millionaires is growing, while New Mexico ranks at the very bottom in child poverty in the entire USA, and second from the bottom in family poverty. New Mexico has landfills in the poorest places in New Mexico, including a nuclear waste storage facility.

 

It is time that New Mexico enact environmental justice in its millionaire leaders, who are answerable ethically and monetarily for their environmental privileges.

Billionaire leadership can be answerable, and create environmental justice, as well as cut back on his or her own carbon footprint. Billionaire leaders can also be answerable for billionaire storytelling. Each storytellers gives antecedent ‘billionaire storytelling’ its meaning context. These storytellings are not by accident. It is a situation of demand, survival of the billionaire class, and a counter-storytelling, for the survival of the poverty class.

 

I agree with Eve Tavor Bannet (1993), a university is an Tower of Babel, commonly known as the Ivory Tower. Bannet points out there are several ways to understand the Ivory Tower. The reason I bring up these versions of Ivory Tower, is they have quite different ‘billionaire storytelling.’

 

Roland Barthes looks at the university as a ‘happy Babel’ the opposite of the biblical confusion of languages. A university has the language of physics, economics, business, sociology, art, history, engineering, philosophy, ecology, to name a few disciplines, plus the languages of Spanish spoken at home, by most families in our New Mexico community. In a ‘Happy’ public university, no one language is dominant, nor has power over any other language. Of course, this is an idealized version of the Ivory Tower, and right now Business and Engineering are the dominant languages of power and control. NMSU is far from an egalitarian model of Ivory Tower.

 

Pierre Bourdieu has a more negative rendition of Ivory Tower. As Bannet (1993: 159) summarizes:

 

“The ‘outsiders’ in question – provincials, foreigners, intellectuals, left-wingers, innovators, Jews, and children of poor families who had been educated at public expense instead of in elite private schools (no mentiaon of women) – had the imprudence to expect the same career structure as those faculty members whose inherited (Roan-Catholc-Parisian-bourgeois) social and cultural norms really entitled them to the highest University psots.”

 

In other words, the Ivory Tower, including here at NMSU is heterogeneous languages, life-styles, politics, intellectual interests, and attitudes of what constitutes a University. There are conflicts among the rivals. One group Bourdieu calls “academic capital’ who get power in the university (including NMSU) by having the right background, making the right friends, sitting on key committees, administering grants, and deciding promotions and tenure of friends. Since accumulating ‘academic capital’ is so very time consuming, there is not much time for research. It is an academia meritocracy where power is invested in who you know in seats of power within the University.

 

Another powerful group forms in the Ivory Tower, is comprised of ‘academic researchers’ such as myself, who write journal articles in top-tier journals (& quite a few books) that appeal to an international audience.

 

The two groups ‘academic capital’ and ‘academic research’ pfovide ‘happy Babel’ with some measure of plurality, but there is a definite struggle of each against the other. I am part of another group, those who came from poor family, on welfare, going to a state university (U of I) on a military war (Vietnam) entitlement, and am therefore not from the correctness of ‘academic capital’ and identify with ‘academic research.’

 

There is another version of Ivory Tower, by Gerald Graf. The American university is a proliferation of many disciplines. Even in my own management department, we have the storytellers, human resource management, organizational behavior, leadership, operations research, strategy, and systems (no enrollees). There is a further heterogeneity between faculty and students specializing in quantitative methods (most) and a few that choose the qualitative methods (e.g. storytelling). Check out any department at NMSU, and you will find as much heterogeneity. For Graf, Babel is not ‘Happy’ University. Rather the University, its colleges and departments, have to isolate various languages (disciplines) in order to avoid interdisciplinary chaos and confusion (Babel of conflicting language/discipline groups). The solution the American university ahs adopted is to use administrative spacing, rather than actually have the various languages (& ideologies) engage in debate.

 

For the ‘billionaire storytelling’ we have various languages (& ideologies) in the class that mirror those in society. There is much ado about Horatio Alger, the by your bootstraps path to leadership in society, and this storytelling of leadership is opposed by those with an ear for inequity, how the ‘system’ is much like a game of Monopoly, where the billionaires already own all the railroads, Park Place, and Boardwalk, before the poorest 50% put their player on the board. The two groups of students (& faculty) talk past one another, each subscribing to a different ‘billionaire storytelling’ of leadership. This is a conflict of translations, a difference of interpretations, and why the storytelling of billionaire leadership is a difficult topic, yet highly relevant to a leadership in society course.

 

As an ‘academic researcher’ I provoke an ethical answerability debate. I decenter the Horatio Alger myth of bootstraps to riches, by putting the situation in a climate change and environmental justice, and environmental privilege context.

 

There are world-making possibilities. There are ‘new worlds’ in which there is environmental justice, and an answerability of leadership for environmental privilege. This would give climate action a new destination and destiny. Bannet (1993) recommends translation, as a path forward.

 

How can the Horatio Alger bootstraps-to-rich billionaire storytelling ‘translate’ into an environmental justice and equity billionaire storytelling? This would make ‘storytelling billionaires’ into translation between narrative and counternarrative, between haves and have-nots, who share the Earth, unequally. As the number of billionaires increases, do too toes the impossibility of achieving equivalence.

 

References

 

Bannet, Eve Tavor. (1993) Postcultural Theory: Critical Theory after the Marxist Paradigm. NY, NY: Paragon House.

 

Bernstein, J. (2008). Crunch: Why Do I Feel So Squeezed?(and Other Unsolved Economic Mysteries). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

 

[1] Oxfam Report 2 December 2015, EXTREME CARBON INEQUALITY Why the Paris climate deal must put the poorest, lowest emitting and most vulnerable people first

https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/mb-extreme-carbon-inequality-021215-en.pdf

[2] World’s richest 10% produce half of global carbon emissions says Oxfam, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/02/worlds-richest-10-produce-half-of-global-carbon-emissions-says-oxfam

[3] Reducing inequality and carbon footprints within countries

By Dario Kenner – WhyGreenEconomy.org – February, 2016 http://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/know-how/reducing-inequality-and-carbon-footprints-within-countries

 

[4] August 7, 2012 Colin Jerolmack. Chocking on Poverty: Inequality and Environmental Justice, http://www.publicbooks.org/choking-on-poverty-inequality-and-environmental-suffering/

[5] National Wildlife factsheet. New Mexico: Top Power Plant Carbon Polluters

https://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Global-Warming/ghg%20nm%20fact%20sheet.ashx

[6] Billionaires by state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_the_number_of_billionaires

[7] Bizjournal blog http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/blog/morning-edition/2015/05/and-the-richest-person-in-new-mexico-is.html

[8] http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/afterhours/2412.html

[9] Bizjournal blog http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/blog/morning-edition/2014/01/new-mexico-gains-more-millionaires.html

What is Leadership in K-12 Schools?

David M. Boje
April 4, 2017

Abstract
I theorize that K-12 leadership is enmeshed in the encompassing superstructure system and its base. There is disagreement does the base or the superstructure most constrain K-12 leadership options, rendering it more conformity to external control and embedded sociopolitical and socioecoomic relationships of school to society.

Introduction
A student in our ‘Leadership in Society’ course (Mgt 388v) asked for help yesterday. His’ team’s term project, a co-facilitation of a two and a half hour session on leadership in K-12 is happening tomorrow (April 5, 2017).

I am writing a reply. ‘I don’t think the in-the-box (traditional) leadership theories will be of any help to you.’ You will need to go out-of-the-box into ‘leadership is theater’ (our theme this term).

Start with something simple like a YouTube clip from a couple of these: Breakfast Club, Dazed & Confused, Mean Girls, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Grease, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Mean Creek, Stand by Me, and so on. This could set the stage for a Boalian ‘Forum Theater’ interactive event, where you have the varied K-12 student groupings discourse on leadership in the school.

I would preface it with some slides showing how Leadership in K-12 is unthinkable, unspeakable, and unstoryable. Why? Because all the Breakfast Club social structure is encompassed by a wider Superstructure where ‘all resistance is futile’ because there is what Mary Parker Follett (1949/1987: 57) calls the ‘invisible leader’ she calls the ‘law of the situation’ (p. 47) would be the answer to how one leads, K-12. A pioneering and quite original system thinker, Follett held that letting the ‘law of lead by leaders facilitation and doing participative inquiry into the ‘situation’ at hand, and how it is unfolding, was a means of connecting to a [invisible leader] specter (a ghost) called Follett called the ‘invisible leader.’ It is not a flesh and blood leader, not corporeal, yet it does manifest in K-12. What is the ‘law of the situation’ and this ‘invisible leader’ specter that a K-12 positional leader (such as principle or PTA chairperson, or a teacher’s union) would gather participants to investigate the situation dynamics, and then in participative togetherness generate a possible course of action? For more on ‘invisible leader’ see:
David M. Boje, Ph.D. 9:53 am on February 25, 2017
How to develop a University of the Future at New Mexico State University?

What is the Situation of K-12? Karl Marx would have several answers. “Nature of man’s totality of social relations” (Marx’s 1845/1967 6th Thesis on Feuerbach, as cited in Bannet, 1993: 9). It also contained the “epigrammatic 11th thesis and final line”: “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” A related answer, the Law of the Situation, for Marx, is the Superstructure.

Develop a slide or two to show that a K-12 leader is not autonomous, and is conforming, adapting, constrained, and totally answerable to superstructure of social relations, political relations, the Superintendent of Schools, the School Board, the Parents Teachers Association (PTA), the union of janitorial workers, the union of food handlers, the nutritionist, and State Department of Education, ‘No Child Left Behind’ (some call it Every Child Left Behind in an obsession for testing over everything else), the National Education Association (NEA), and to that new Department of Education head, Betsy Devos who favors school choice, and her opposition Matthew 25 Declaration on Public Education (‘Universal public education is a critical pathway’ to justice and equity). In New Mexico, the superstructure includes the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), a set of high quality-standards in mathematics, English language arts (ELA), including reading and writing standards for social studies, science, and technical subjects.

I would like to see a slide of K-12 Leadership in a Downward Spiral Vortex of great Turbulence, over a great abyss. K-12 envelops everything in society: art, science, math, reading, business, letters, sports, and so on in a swirling spiral whorls of socioeconomic, sociopolitical, and socialmaterial expectations that attempts to ameliorate classism, racism, sexism, poverty, bureaupathology, science, humanities, history, algebra, coming of age, anti-bullying, and fascism in a place, time, and mattering (spacetimemattering) called K-12.

World-Making The K-12 leader is in the midst of making possible worlds of K-12 in the downward spiraling situation, and that is what the invisible leader (specter) the ghost in the superstructure of K-12 is all about. You see all those constituents from the School board, PTA, the CCSS, and so on are all matting different ‘possible worlds’ quite different from the ‘actual world’ of K-12. It’s kind of like merging Breakfast Club with Stand and Deliver and expecting Sixteen Candles to have a happy ending. It’s not going to work. There are too many dialectical contradictions in both thesis and antithesis for any happy ending. Yet, the K-12 leaders and their higher ups, do put out these master narratives about ‘No Child Left Behind’ and the importance of standardized testing and more testing, and every school teaching the same grade-level lesson plan across the state. There are just way too many entanglements for a school elader to do much else than fall prey to one hegemony and counterhegemony ideology after another. Consensus is futile. How do you get consensus form school choice and strong public school advocates? Impossible! What exists in K-12 is the eternal struggles, endless oppositions between fictional ‘possible worlds’ and the ‘actual world’, and that dialectic is the Law of the Situation, the Superstructure that permeates and interpenetrates K-12.

I student master narratives and counternarratives, how they constrain, truncate, emasculate the living story lives, rendering them into untold stories of participants, including leaders, students, parents, janitors, nutritionists, nurses, and so on of K-12 worlds.

How does a leader turn impossibilities into possible world? It is done by “world-making” leaders who can facilitate joint inquiry, co-operation among difference, integrative unity of differences, while respecting differences (Bannet, 1993: 153).

Verisimilitude in the performance of K-12 leadership means finding authenticity, credibility, and believability in the performance or ‘world-making’.

My suggest is to discuss leaders in their ‘world-making’ theatrical performance, how the varied different possible worlds of various stakeholders and the actual world are dialectical. Of course, there are many kinds of dialectical models to choose from.

School Leadership Project that Make Changes to Society
Choose A, B. or C.
A – Aristotelian Dialectic Theater – Political Coercion of Spectators by Tragic Catharsis of Pity & Fear empathy for [VIllan] Actors. Spectator delegrates POWER to the Actors on stage, who controls by catharsis of Pity & Fear, coercing them into submission and passivity (Boal’s Theater of the Oppressed, pp. 119). In Aristotelian dialectic, the plays on stage coerce the sudience by pity and fear to have a moral compass, or face tragic reversal of fortune.
B – Hegelian Spirit of Dialectic Theater of spirit-conscience manifests in thought, then transforming materiality of Action-Habit-Character-Destiny into Romanitic resolution of contradiction, but more contradiction breask through in both thesis and antithesis. What is dialectic between spirituality, and its manifestation in society. For Hegel, Spirit materialized in society.
C – Marxist/Boalian theater of the oppressed by material conditions, no thought and no Spirit involved. Spectator does NOT delegate power to actors on stage (hero or villan), rather audience is placed in protagonist role by Joker. For Marx, Spirit does not matter. choose 1
Image Theater
Show the parts of above skit acts, and have Joker STOP ACTION to get audience commentary, and Joker can interview audience members on both sides of the issue (or not).
or
Invisible Theater
Show the act of don’t care about spiritual leadership from one or more spiritual traditions. Joker does STOP ACTION, to get some interviews with spectators.
or
Forum Theater
choose 1
Image Theater
Show the parts of above skit acts, and have Joker STOP ACTION to get audience commentary, and Joker can interview audience members on both sides of the issue (or not).

Dialectics is all about the contradictions in the con-texts that is the Situation of the K-12. Consider New Mexico, the state with poorest children, and 2nd poorest families in the entire United States, with a governor that signed the no taxes agreement. In a state where gas and oil severance taxes are no longer sufficient to finance K-12, and all the bail out bills of the state legislature vetoed, the K-12 leader has to raise their own revenue, cut positions, cut programs, do away with extracurricular affairs, but still meet the CCSS outcomes metrics, keep the students taking test after test, keep the teachers doing their lesson plans, keep the janitors working, and so on.

I would suggest getting the untold stories told, the stories people have not thought to tell, or are afraid to tell, or do not give themselves permission to tell – about middle school worlds. I visited a Las Cruces middle school last week, and the lunchroom had a sign, that read “Live Above the Influence … Don’t Bully. Bullying is a crime. “Six out of ten American teenagers witness bullying in school at least onece a day.”

I hope this is helpful.

David Boje

References

Bannet, E. (1993). Postcultural theory: critical theory after the Marxist paradigm. NY/NY: Paragon House Publisher.

Follett, M.P. (1949/1987) ‘The Essentials of Leadership’, in L. Urwick (ed.) Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in Business Organization, New York: Garland Publishing.

Marx, K. (1845/1967). Sixth Thesis on Feuerbach. The German Ideology, International Publishers, chapter one. Written in 1845 first published in 1888 in pamphlet by Engels.
no_bully_sign

Students and Faculty of NMSU: Resist Trump at March 1st March 2017!

May 1st Speech by David M. Boje, Ph.D.

march_on_march1st

In other universities today, this is a strike, not a march for unity. Perhaps a strike, faculty-cancelling classes, students walking out, is what we need next. source: Click here.

Today we hold a peaceful march to unite all faculty and students at New Mexico State University (NMSU) to resist President Trump’s policies that intensify injustices, build walls, bring us to brink of more  endless war.

We cannot dwell in fear, indifference or apathy while NMSU refuses to become a Sanctuary campus or to take a stand like the Las Cruses Public Schools.

Las Cruces school board wants to create a countywide sanctuary for immigrants

The school board in Las Cruces wants to coordinate with other local governments to protect immigrants who could face deportation while Donald Trump is president.

Dec 14, 2016 source

NMSU should be doing the same. We are an Hispanic Serving University. That is what the Board of Regents says. https://regents.nmsu.edu/.

Faculty must stand with our Students at NMSU against all the Donald J. Trump demagoguery appeals to people’s emotions and prejudices. It is a form of manipulation that damages democracy. It tries to divide us. It appeals to greed capitalism. “The astonishing triumph of Donald Trump can be traced to the bitter defeat of Occupy Wall Street, a pro-democracy movement that transcended left and right, sparking unrest in hundreds of cities and rural towns in 2011” source: http://occupywallst.org/. Now we have a Wall Street Trump Tower President on a build up to war.

This March today is at least 10 movements that I support, all combined into unity.

I am the Change, and ‘You’ each are the Change, and We stand together and We change. I am a member of Standing with our Students; A member of March for Science (Earth Day, April 22nd); a Member of veterans for peace.

  1. I support Students Lives Matter! I am for the Free Tuition & end student-debt movements in our Public Universities. Bernie Sanders had it right. If we don’t do this the days of public university are numbered. The total outstanding student loan debt in the U.S. is $1.2 trillion, that’s the second-highest level of consumer debt behind only mortgages. See https://davidboje.wordpress.com/ for my Valentine’s Day speech on this point. Yes, we must become a Sanctuary University.
  1. I support Women’s Lives Matter movement. Including their reproductive rights and right to live without violence: “Consider this–a woman in the United States is literally a million times more likely to be hurt by an American than by an ISIS terrorist. More women are killed each year in acts of domestic violence then were killed on 9/11. Which is not to say that we should not fight ISIS or other terrorists, but rather that we should fight for sanctuary and equality for women with the same intensity.” Source: http://duckofminerva.com/2016/10/womens-lives-matter-so-do-elections.html
  1. I support Black Lives Matter movement. African Americans constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population, and13.3% of police-involved killings. “We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension all people” source: http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles

adults-in-prision

growth-prisons

 

  1. I support Latino Lives Matter movement – we need to raise awareness of police use-of-force in Latino communities. As of today 94 Latinos have been killed by police in 2016 alone, making up 16 percent of the 585police-involved killings this year. Source: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/black-men-werent-unarmed-people-killed-police-last-week/ The problem:  Nestor Rodriguez, a sociology professor at the University of Texas, Austin à“police have been killing black and Latino youth for decades,” the swift response by the black community—first on social media, then offline— made the difference in forming a movement, he said. “When it comes to Latinos, a large percent are immigrants or children of immigrants, so they have a host of issues to deal with in regard to status,” Rodriguez said. “To some extent the Latino community is already overwhelmed by other issues,” such as trying to keep families together. NBC’s Reyes offers an alternative view. He argues the country’s limited definition of race is partly to blame. “Part of the problem is that for hundreds of years this country is used to thinking of race relations, literally, as black and white,” he said during Díaz-Balart’s show. Although Latinos—a group comprised of people from various nations and races—have been in the U.S. since before its founding, Reyes argues the nation has failed to include them in discussions about race. Source: http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/03/28/why-you-probably-havent-heard-about-latino-lives-matter-movement
  1. I support Native American Lives Matter movement, e.g. Standing Rock movement is more than just pipelines. “Unsettling reports of unfair treatment towards Native peoples by law enforcement are not isolated incidents, rather they are endemic of a deeply discriminatory justice system. Native American men are admitted to prison at four times the rate of white men and Native women at six-fold the rate of white women. Additionally, Native Americans are the racial group most likely to be killed by law enforcement.” Source: http://lakotalaw.org/special-reports/native-lives-matter
  1. I support Muslim Lives Matter movement. 12 Nobel laureates, thousands of academics sign protest of Trump immigration order By Susan SvrlugaJanuary 28 2017
  1. I support Gay and Transgender Lives Matter movement. According to Black Lives Matter, a guiding principle “We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence” source: http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/
  1. Can we agree, all Lives Matter! Support peace, not endless war and not a Wall. The Ban the Wall movement is beginning a new anti-war movement. I served in Vietnam War, and I opposed the war, and each new war after that. In 2016 USA spent $622 billion on its military. Trump proposes to raise it 40 more billion to 642 billion a year. The USA spends more than next 7 nations combined

war-budgets-by-nationsource: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/us-military-spending-vs-world/ That is 54% of all federal discretionary spending, while Education spending is only 6% and health (Medicare) is 6%, and veterans benefits 6% and housing also 6%, Science only 3%, and Social Security (Unemployment), only 2%

war-versus-education-budgetssource: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/military-spending-united-states/

  1. I support People’s Climate Action movement. I chair Sustainability Council at NMSU. Time to mark your calendars for the next March (March for Science from NMSU to Young Park) on April 22 Earth Day, and just a week latter a March April 29th, 2017 of the People’s Climate Mobilization, a major march in Washington, D.C., when we will come together with hundreds of thousands of people to reject Trump’s attack on our communities and climate, and push forward with our vision of a clean energy economy that works for all. Source: https://350.org/april-29-2017-lets-march/ More on MARCH FOR SCIENCE AT NMSU  Donate March for Science NMSU
  1. Farm Workers Lives Matter movement. I support Fight for $15 movement – The Fight for $15 started with just a few hundred fast food workers in New York City, striking for $15 an hour and union rights. Today, we’re an international movement in over 300 cities on six continents of fast-food workers, home health aides, child care teachers, airport workers, adjunct professors, retail employees – and underpaid workers everywhere (http://fightfor15.org/about-us/). Join the Coalition of Immokalee Workers. Source: http://www.ciw-online.org I will be traveling with my wife Grace Ann Rosile and doctoral student, Mabel Sanchez to support – the tomato workers union organizing drive against Wendy’s fast food – Wendy’s has not only refused to join theFair Food Program(FFP), but has stopped buying tomatoes from Florida since the implementation of the FFP there. Justice for Farm Workers.

 

join-farm-workers

For more on Standing with Our Students:

https://www.instagram.com/standingwithourstudents_nmsu/

StandingwithOurStudents_NMSU (@standingwithourstudents_nmsu) • Instagram photos and videos

www.instagram.com

Make NMSU a Sanctuary Campus NOW! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfvSKkW5wD1H8X9svKdHVXodeBDJGVSwTj7V9ZNZPLjGVnARw/viewform

 

NMSU-SOS has an informative website (Standing with Our Students) with multiple resources on how to get involved, take action, and stand with our students! https://www.youcaring.com/external-link.htm?target=http-#–_–_-standingwithourstudents.org-_- 

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/sosnmsu/ and also on instagram (link on facebook). I posted this one today.

 

I like the values: Inclusion, justice, fairness, opportunity, Access. 

 

SOS  petition  https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfvSKkW5wD1H8X9svKdHVXodeBDJGVSwTj7V9ZNZPLjGVnARw/viewformThank you.

How to develop a University of the Future at New Mexico State University?

Updated with input by staff, heads of departments, and faculty comments on Feb 26, 2017. Thank you all for your inputs

 

Abstract The current university strategy to lower costs, by zero participation of faculty, students, staff, and workers at New Mexico State University (NMSU) in the selection of ‘Team 6’ appointments, zero solicitation of our ideas for change, and zero consultation with the entire university, is quite alarming. The implementation of ‘Team 6’ continues the downsizing and cost cutting, the exodus of faculty, staff, students, and workers fleeing NMSU. Team 6 is an outgrowth of the unscientific, antiquated consulting advice of Deloitte consultants who in 10 weeks, with zero input from the entire university, changed the university $622,700 for their downsizing, and span of control reorganization strategy. Teams 1 to 5 did downsize our staff, with zero input from the staff. Now Team 6 will carry on Deloitte’s unscientific (and peer-reviewed journals show the inefficacy of Deloitte’s business process reengineering strategies that have failed both business and education, since 1996). Team 6 is a strategy of defensiveness to the budget deficit of the State of New Mexico’s legislature, its over-dependence on gas and oil severance taxes, and its refusal to reform the tax base of its K-12 and higher education.   Rather than continue this inane external consultancy unscientific approach called Team 6, I propose a useful and scientifically validated modification. I will propose a viable alternative to Team 6, one successfully implemented in 2500 organizations around the world, and its self-financing, is not downsizing, does control costs, and leaders to higher quality outcomes. It is called the Socio-Economic approach because it combines a social emancipation of human potential in an economic understanding of how to create a quality university that sustains high professional performance of students, faculty, staff, and administrators. And we have the technology, the knowledge, and the expertise here at NMSU. So why not let Team 6 do their downsizing, reorganizing thing, and enact socio-economic approach at same time, and see empirically, which is best of NMSU.

Team 6, at its most benign, creates a document that gets filed away somewhere. My preference would be to rely on Faculty Senate to be be our voice, instead of team 6. Faculty Senate can become engaged, enthusiastic idea-generators. I hope there is a memorandum to this effect. Ultimately more shared governance through showing that we do have a voice is needed (in my opinion).
Introduction

The implementation of Team 6 is a big error in the strategic analysis of this university by Deloitte consultancy. In its first meeting, NMSU’s Team 6 was presented with a proposal to merge at least the Colleges of Education and College Health and Social Services (HSS). It is interesting that the composition of Team 6 lacks anyone in leadership roles in either of COE or HSS-just one faculty member each. This speaks to a lack of participation of those who do the work who will bear the result of Team 6 choices. It is naive to think that academic programs will not be cut or that they will be at the table if their units are being reorganized. From what I understand, our college deans were not at the table about the discussion to centralize advisors. They were told their personnel were being moved out of the colleges and into Garcia Annex by next summer when the offices are to be ready. Again this speaks to lack of shared governance at NMSU. I believe it is naive to think that these advising changes and the Team 6 proposed merger of Education and HSS will result in an increase of customer service whether it be to students or to each other. While I am happy Team 6 includes a former and current head of Faculty Senate, one only has to look at the dismantling of NMSU policy over the last three years under the current leadership to see that the Faculty Senate need only to be consulted on academic reorganizations. Perhaps, for faculty, a shocking development: ‘continuous faculty’ contracts, beginning this academic year, include verbiage stating faculty could be terminated by the provost.

Team 6 is a misunderstanding of the socioeconomic performance of NMSU. NMSU has already lost too much momentum, and is hemorrhaging its best talent. This loss of students, faculty, staff, and some administrators to other universities is worsening our national and international reputation, and will likely lower our status in competitive rankings. Further, there are multiple dysfunctions occurring on a daily-basis that heavy-handed reshuffling faculty, staff, and students between departments, between colleges, or combining various now much smaller departments (result of attrition) will not increase the quality of student education nor the quality of faculty research, nor achieve the promised $53 million in cost-cutting savings. Team 6 will no doubt continue to exist and sort out how it will combine, or eliminate academic departments to lower the faculty salary budget, the staff wages budget, the student worker budget, the graduate assistantship budget, and the department head salary in order to accomplish greater span of control move department heads from 12 to 9 month pay structures, and so on.   Let them do this.

  That will also have to go through the Senate and receive faculty input, unless the Regents completely throw out the manual.  The equestrian team decision is not an academic matter, and there is unfortunately no venue for involvement in the change in the athletics programs since change has been blocked.  The Chancellor implemented a team to work on the many problems but that effort was ignored and publicly rendered pointless by the regents.

My Story Let me tell you my story at NMSU, and then propose a better alternative. In 1996, 2008, and now in 2016, it was, each time of crisis, proposed that Management and Marketing Departments be combined, to cut costs (eliminate one department head, and one or two redundant secretaries) from the merger. However, each time, the initiative failed, and now Team 6 will carry this merger out (aka ‘administrative unit’ reorganization), and we will carry out. Already Engineering College eliminated an entire department ‘Survey Engineering’.The Survey Engineering Department was merged into what is now EngineeringTechnology and Surveying some 10 years or so ago (proposal passed by Faculty Senate).   What has now been talked up publicly in the press, by the upper administration is the elimination of the Surveying major. That will also have to go through the Senate and receive faculty input, unless the Regents completely throw out the manual.

And in ACES (Ag College) eliminated Equestrian Team, even though they were winning national championships.  As I understand it, the equestrian team decision is not an academic matter. There is unfortunately no venue for involvement of the equestrian team in the change in the athletics programs changes.  The Chancellor  I am told did implement a group to work on the many problems but that effort, but this attempt was ignored and publicly rendered pointless by the final decision of our Board of Regents.

Back to my own first hand story. In 1997, the university strategic planning committee decided, for example to merge Management Department with Marketing, eliminate the Management Ph.D. program (only one of 20 such programs put on the chopping block), and move the new administrative unit to the Agriculture College. I was department head and did successfully produce data showing Management had the 2nd best of all 20 Ph.D. programs, and nevertheless the two departments merged, and I was promoted to faculty member, and headed up the Ph.D. program for next six years or so. Now, the graduate assistantships to the Management Department have been eliminated so that College of Business, anticipating a likely cut in GA funds, can sustain its remaining GA support to all the other departments. Sacrifices must be made. But, is there an alternative to this defensiveness and helplessness NMSU strategy of self-destruction, and self-annihilation?

Bigger issues –>  The university has a significant problem because there are three or more significant constituencies in the university:

1)Those who are being managed and who make the place function (faculty, students, graduate assistants, staff, & operations workers),

2) Managers (department heads, unit heads), especially the upper administration who provide overall guidance, some of whom take regular feedback from members of the first and third groups and generally do not lie awake at nights figuring out how to shaft people, and

3) Board of Regents, which has the task of coordinating the efforts of the university to fulfill its mission in accordance with state law but which has arrogated all power to itself in violation of long-standing practice and in the service of a political agenda that is not friend to public education.  They seem to be so far down in the weeds that they can’t see the trees, let alone the forest.  They seem to think that business tools  (aka Academic Capitalism; treating Public University as a Business) are the appropriate ones to apply to what is manifestly not a business and has historically been much more successful than businesses. If NMSU were a business, it would have been bankrupt decades ago. Universities date back to the 13th century and have continually, if slowly, adapted to new social, cultural, and economic conditions to achieve long-term goals. They originally were faculty and students’ joint ventures, had few staff or administrative members.

Any solution to our current woes will need to take into account how to get all these folks together.  You can in fact get groups no. 1 and 2 to work together, admittedly with some tension.  At this point, I despair about turning no. 3 into a body that actually works for the benefit of the university.

            I Propose a  Viable Alternative to Team 6 It is a solution that works with the participation of all three groups above. What if we form small teams of regents, administrators, faculty, staff, and students that would work for six months, in an experiment, to cut ‘hidden costs’ (defined as invisible in the budget book methods or reporting) in order to self-finance changes that dramatically improve human potential, the quality of instruction, and results of research, and land NMSU in several years (should the experiments in intervention continue) in higher national and international competitive rankings? Said more succinctly: What if we unleash the human potential and collective intelligence of NMSU to bring about meaningful changes to the quality of teaching and research, by moving hidden costs into productive performance?

My proposal is to engage in a scientifically validated and reliable change management approach that has a higher likelihood of improving NMSU’s performance. It is called the “Socio-Economic Approach to Management” (SEAM). I have worked with the SEAM methodology for 17 years. NMSU has a signed MOU to use this methodology for the past 12 years, and unlike Deloitte, it is an MOU implemented at zero cost. I edited the Journal of Organizational Change Management for 13 years, and during that time did a special issue on the approach (Savall, 2003a, 2003b; Boje & Rosile, 2003). There is also a study abroad exchange program with Lyon III University and NMSU. SEAM has been used in universities in Europe, in Mexico, and elsewhere with great success since 1974 (Worley, Zardet, Bonnet, & Savall, 2015; Savall & Zardet, 2008, 2011; Buono & Savall, 2007; Savall, Zardet, Bonnet, & Moore, 2001; Smith, Boje, & Foster, 2011; Ruvalcaba, 2007; Hayes,McGilsky, D., & Lepisto, 2007). The scientific approach of SEAM is rooted in qualimetrics, defined as an integration of qualitative and quantitative metrics to assess the opportunities and the results of change interventions. Interventions are done on jointly planned short-term self-financing ‘experiments’ that include a qualimetric analysis of results (Boje, 2004, 2011; Savall & Zardet, 2011).

What is the Socio-Economic Approach to Management (SEAM)?

SEAM is a change management strategy that consists of improving enterprise’s social and economic performance by developing the actual human potential by converting hidden costs into performance gains measured by quality changes with accounting, financial, and economic metrics. Instead of a defensive strategy of business process reengineering and its downsizing of personnel to cut wages and salary budgets, SEAM would increase full-time employment and rewards to students, faculty, staff, and workers by unleashing their human potential. Through a series of experiments people at NMSU would reduce hidden costs. Hidden costs are defined as unintelligible in the current university budget books, unavailable in the information reports administrators are using to pilot (steer) the university.

How can SEAM be implemented in this University?

 Hidden Cost Definition “Hidden costs are those costs which are not detected by the [university] information systems, including budgets, profit and loss accounting, general accounting, analytic accounting, piloting logbook” (Savall, 1979, as cited in Savall & Zardet, 2008: 27).

Hidden Costs (HC) is what the Visible Costs, such as the personnel costs (faculty & administrator’s salaries & fringe, student worker and operation worker’s wages), equipment costs, etc. that are showing in the university budgets information system.   Hidden Costs are a result of Structures and Behaviors of the university that create ongoing dysfunctions (gap between highest possible effectiveness & current result), plus what the administration implements to compensate, prevent, and manage the ongoing dysfunctions. Instead of solving the root of the dysfunctions (structures & behaviors), the administration uses visible cost data to organized (business) process reengineering (BPR, from Deloitte consultant’s advice) to make short-term cuts in personnel, and budget cuts, that do NOT address the HC or their root causes in the university structures and behaviors.

HC’s are diffused and dispersed throughout the entire university systems. HCs occur at the level of each individual (faculty, student workers, staff, administrators, operations workers). Visible costs are calculated in existing accounting systems at level of colleges, operational units, and departments (& operational units).

HC’s include results of tacit complicity of everyone at NMSU, because with the accumulated dysfunctions, the turnover, the loss of key personnel, the lack of resources to recruit competitively salaried faculty, fully funded doctoral students, state funds to hire student workers, and so onà everyone pitches in to make up the gap. However, what happens is administrators fill in for missing staff members, remaining staff are filled in by work study students. More things are centralized, privatized (outsourced), and so on. This is the dysfunction of a slippage in productivity, quality, and an escalation of expenses when people left after the downsizing and budget crises are left doing work of people who departed, and so on.

Its never a good sign, when a university calls in an external consulting firm, such as Deloitte (paid $622,700) to come up with a downsizing, reorganization, what in the consulting field is called ‘business process reengineering’ (BPR). The problem with BPR is that NMSU gets lean and mean (in more ways than one), and while the budget balances (at lower and lower levels) with fewer and fewer people doing the work of the whole, the people tire, many leave (high turnover), health claims and lawsuits increase, and the competitive position of the university declines in the long term.

The next figure gives some idea of typical dysfunctions from structures and behavioral adaptations NMSU has been making in last few decades.

4_leaf_with_arrows

Figure 1: Four-Leaf Clover Model of Hidden Costs relation to Dysfunctions in Structures and Behaviors

 

Individual, Group, and Collective Behaviors à become routine normalized Structures in NMSU daily routine (Physical, Technological, Organizational, Demographic, & Mental) à which accumulate more and more bureaucratic BPR Dysfunctions (Working Conditions, Work Organization, Communication-Cooperation-Coordination [3C’s], Time management, Training, and Strategic implementation deficits) and result in Hidden Costs (HCs) that are not tracked in the overall NMSU budget or information systems upon which hard choices and decisions are made). The HCs are deeply rooted in the effective day-to-day performance of NMSU and its socioeconomic results relative to our 15 peer institutions.

 

The next Table gives an overall way of doing what we call ‘Mirror Effect’ looking in the mirror as NMSU, at the qualitative and quantitative results of hidden costs.


 

Table 1: General Model of Hidden Cost Calculation

 

5 Indicators of Dysfunctions:

Components
Over-Salary

1

Excess Time

2

Over-Compensation

3

Non-production

4

Non-creation of Potential

5

Total Hidden Costs

1+2+3+4+5

RISKS TO NMSU
Absenteeism              
Accidents              
Turnover              
Non-Quality              
Productivity Variance              
TOTAL Excess salary from 5 indicators Overtime from 5 indicators Over-consumption from 5 indicators Non-production form 5 indicators Non-creation of potential from 5 indicators TOTAL HIDDEN COSTS Risks from all 5 Indicators

 

The next table is an illustration of hypothesized NMSU ‘Hidden Cost’ (HC) calculations in the next table. Note, this is not a final calculation. Rather it is for illustrative purposes, so you get an idea of the Mirror Effect of staring at the qualitative and quantitative data on how many dysfunctions produce what kinds of HCs. The purpose is to target HCs (costs & lost revenue, & lost human potential) in NMSU as a whole that can be addressed (resolved) in the projects to made NMSU a high performance, high quality, and de-bureaucratized institution of higher education.

Table 2: Illustration of Hypothesized ‘Hidden Cost Calculation’ at NMSU

 

5 Indicators of Dysfunctions:

Components
Qualitative examples Quantitative examples

 

Over-Salary

1

Excess Time

2

Over-Compensation

3

Non-production (lost revenue)

4

Non-creation of [human] Potential

5

Total Hidden Costs

1+2+3+4+5

RISKS TO NMSU
Absentee People from Downsizing, etc. People left & not replaced; Higher paid administrators micromanage remaining faculty, 7% more time to get things done by those left $600000 300000 500000 1000000 500000 $2,900,000  
Accidents More health claims from stress of overwork 5% more health claims $70000 200000 100000 200000 300000 $870,000  
Turnover High turnover faculty due to low morale, uncertainty of change, & frozen salaries 20% more Cost of training students to do work of staff; staff to do work of faculty who left $200000 100000 600000 300000 900000 $2,100,000  
Non-Quality Less qualified people (student workers, etc. pitch in but with weaker results 20% more costs of Faculty and graduate student teachers, and temps (visitors) filling in for classes of missing faculty $400000 300000 400000 2000000 800000 $3,900,000  
Productivity Variance Since everyone is doing work of the missing personnel, much of the work of teaching and research, and coordination falls through the cracks 10% loss in NMSU reputation, which means fewer students & faculty willing to come he $900000 600000 700000 300000 800000 $3,300,000  
TOTAL   Excess salary from 5 indicators Overtime from 5 indicators

 

Over-consumption from 5 indicators Non-production form 5 indicators Non-creation of potential from 5 indicators TOTAL HIDDEN COSTS Risks from all 5 Indicators

Add 2 million more in lawsuits

 

    $2,170,000 1500000 2300000 3800000 3300000 $13,070,000 $15,070,000

The above table is just for illustrative purposes. Final list of dysfunctions and number would depend on the work of project team doing the participative interviews, archival research, and qualimetric analyses.

Here is a summary model of SEAM. Three forces of changes are implemented at once, starting from the center of each Axis and moving outward.

3-axes

Figure 2 – Model of SEAM intervention teams

 

The three axes (forces of change) uplift NMSU simultaneously. Spiral A is implementation of successive short-term, self-financing projects to unleash human potential by diagnosing NMSU hidden costs and their dysfunctions (see clover at center of model). This is done with the DPIE approach to building upward positive self-financing momentum to unleash human potential at NMSU.

Figure 3: Implementing successive DPIE’s (Diagnosis-Project Design-Implementation-Evaluation cycles) to rebuild NMSU Momentum

 

Spiral B consists of implementing six straightforward and pragmatic tools to coordinate the interventions and keep them sustainable.

 

Spiral C is the developing the overall strategic changes to the rules of the game of strategy at NMSU. Without changing the rules of the game, shuffling people between departments, merging departments, cutting personnel here and there, will have no sustainable long time performance result.

 

The three axes of change (A, B, C in Figure 1) begin with the diagnosis, which in participative, democratic involvement of students, faculty, staff, workers, and administrators. In the joint project teams using DPIE (Figure 2) they begin with an analysis of the dysfunctions (Figure 3 top leaf), the structures and behaviors (left and right leaf) that drive the dysfunctions (bottom leaf), and are atrophying the deep root stems (excess salary, overtime, over consumption of time, financial, and material resources, non-production of education and research, non-creation of human potential (of students, faculty, staff, administrators, and workers), and creating risk of socioeconomic failure, lawsuits, loss of federal funding, loss of state funding, and loss of accreditation.

abcseammodelwithdpie

Figure 4: Root Causes of Financial Consequences from the Runaway Hidden Costs and Dysfunctions at NMSU

 

Here are some examples of how the three axes of change (Figure 1) are implemented using the diagnostic framework (Figure 2).

 

  1. Diagnosis-Project-Implementation-Evaluation (DPIE). By each project team doing a series of DPIE’s we rebuild NMSU momentum and put it in a path of increase performance by releasing human potential. Our DPIE projects would finance themselves through hidden cost reductions that generate long-term university performance gains, and slowly change the NMSU structures and behaviors, and the rules of the game of NMSU strategy implementation. Rather than lowering wages and salaries and just widening spans of administrative control without diagnosis, with out input from the NMSU workforce or students (Deloitte approach) we actually build joint teams of faculty, students, staff, workers, and administrators into project teams. Rather than top down arbitrary appointments, we invite each college, and each department (if they choose) to voluntarily self-organize project teams. We also do this in operational units, financial units, auxiliary units, and so on, throughout the university. We ask them to head to the libraries on main campus and check out copies of the budget and salaries of NMSU, and get geared up to understand the actual financial picture of NMSU.

 

  1. Priority Action Plan (PAP). Each team of faculty, staff, administrators, and students would develop a PAP, after doing a diagnosis of hidden costs, then propose small scale projects of redesign by making successive modification in such areas as work organization, working conditions, communication-cooperation-coordination (hereafter, 3C’s), time management, training, and strategy implementation that increases quality performance. These would be self-financing interventions from diagnosing hidden costs of various NMSU dysfunctions, adapting both the NMSU structures and patterns of human behavior, to lower hidden costs that gets us into a better competitive and quality performance position. Rather than lowering wages, we actual cut hidden costs of NMSU (bureaucratic) dysfunctions in order to increase rewards for all. See Appendix A for example of simple organizing form to use. The PAP is short-term (say six months) and the next tool is longer term.

 

  1. Internal-External Strategic Action Plan (IESAP). Instead of one grand 2020 strategic plan, with goals flowing from on high, without our active democratic participation as students, faculty, staff, and workers à let’s have let’s implement a participative and democratic approach. This can be implemented in each college, each department (if they choose), each operational and auxiliary unit (if they choose). Internal refers to the internal world of NMSU, and external to our performance relative to other universities, our accreditation bodies, our state legislature, and our international community. See Appendix B for sample of IESAP tool.

 

  1. Competency Grid (CG). The CG is done before and after the change initiative. Rather than eliminating, dismissing, or downsizing people employed at NMSU, their competencies are developed through coaching and training. For example, during the Great Depression, Lincoln Electric refused to dismiss workers to achieve budget control. Instead the assessed needed competencies to get where they needed to be to keep everyone employed. They actually retrained a good many workers on the factory floor making welders, and trained them in sales. They did sales, increased sales during an economic downturn, and everyone kept their jobs. They also shared in the rewards of bringing about economic sustainability. In our NMSU implementation instead of encouraging folks to leave, or retire early, etc., the idea of CG is to assess competencies needed to achieve PAP and IESAP results, then get them the training and coaching, and assess the results after the training is don. See Appendix C for sample of CG tool.

 

  1. Periodically Negotiated Activity Contracts (PNAC). This is a major change for NMSU. It is sharing some percent of the savings in hidden cost reductions with the students, faculty, workers, administrators, and staff members who actually bring that change about. Releasing human potential means rewarding human potential. It is a contract negotiated with the administration and the members of the university bringing about changes. It rewards quality improvements, increases in outcomes, and increases in university performance. It can begin with small rewards, and as everyone trusts the system, be expanded. See Appendix C of this document for example of PNAC tool

 

There are two other tools, such as time management and the logbook (see links):

 

Discussion

 

The SEAM alternative to Team 6 ties well to Mary Parker Follett’s ideas of integrative unity, democratic governance, shared responsibility, and power-with rather than power-over. It is also a way to bargain, to negotiate change by negotiating reward in an integrative manner of conflict resolution.

follett_formula

Figure 5: How Mary Parker Follett key dialectic concepts

 

Mary Parker Follett, has this Notion of the dialectic, where the common purpose of a group (organization or society) can allow ‘invisible leaders’ (they are not people, but something non-corporeal), allows the kind of power-with, so that group, we (Rosile, Boje, & Inez, 2016) are calling ELT, can obey the situation.

There are a few more Notions that Follett draws from Hegel’s dialectical development approach.

follett_elt

Figure 6 – How ELT relates to Six Key Notions of Follett’s Dialectic

 

Follett wanted to resolve conflicts by integrative unity, rather than by domination or by forcing ‘compromises.’ Genuine democracy is not majority rule, not that shallow vote sort of democracy, rather its having groups that self-organize, self-manage, and are at the community level, and the backbone of a business, or a university. The Law of the Situation, is as they say in Dragnet ‘Just the Facts’ but it’s a jointly studied Situation, and an agreement by all parties, all sides, to do co-inquiry into the facts of the Situation, including how the Situation is emerging, changing, and moving along. Celebrate diversity, means treating differences and diversity of cultures as an assets, rather than trying to eliminate diversity, integrate the differences, into something creative in what we now call Problem-Based-Learning (in Denmark). Grow your power-with, avoid power-over, and learn that no one can empower you, you have to Self-Empower your own Self by gaining capacity for power. Invisible Leaderà Common Purpose means that the Situation itself is the ‘invisible leader’ and by scientific co-study, joint-projects of inquiry across divides, it is possible to create common purpose, which for me, is the basis and foundation of Ensemble Leadership.

“To me, this comes out in Follett’s appreciation of Hegel’s dialectic. Its not the tired old saw of these-antithesis-synthesis. The point of Hegelian dialectic is there is no synthesis, as Follett puts it, just continuously evolving Situation in a play of differences in the Whole Situation” (See blog post How to Implement Ensemble Leadership Practices at a Public University? And blog post What is Relationship of Ensemble Leadership Theory to Hegel’s and Mary Parker Follett’s Dialectic? for more on this point).

The result of successive DPIE implementation in a short time (say six months) by each project team is that the momentum of change and adaptation becomes a positive upward spiral of breadth and potential that will change game rules of overall NMSU performance.

 

Conclusion

 

I believe that together we can initiate a viable alternative to Team 6 (Deloitte strategy). I think at the very least let both Team 6 and SEAM teams co-exist, and assess which actually delivers the goods.

 

NMSU has an addiction to bureaucracy, and addition to central planning of others jobs, an addition to micromanagement administration. In SEAM, we call this the doctrine of Taylorism-Fayolism-Weberism, or for short the TFW Virus. To break an addition of TFW, it takes a commitment to changing the rules of the game.

 

We can enhance everyone’s professionalism, everyone’s competencies, and develop our human potential for everyone. SEAM is a hopeful approach as way to emancitate us from TFW virus.

 

NMSU;s may dysfunctions are well known, and they are producing hidden costs that are unknown (invisible in our reporting systems as NMSU). Without democratic and scientific diagnosis, and experimentation, we will continue in TFW addiction.

 

We can achieve transparent shared governance with SEAM. We can try a little ‘Ensemble Leadership’ at NMSU (Rosile, Boje, & Nez). Why not give it a try.

 

More resources

(See blog post How to Implement Ensemble Leadership Practices at a Public University? And blog post What is Relationship of Ensemble Leadership Theory to Hegel’s and Mary Parker Follett’s Dialectic? for more on this point).

 

References

 

Boje, D. (2004). Qualimetrics contributions to research methodology. H. Savall & V. Zardet, Recherche en sciences de gestion: approche qualimétrique, Economica, 6-12.

 

Boje, D. M. (2011). An Antenarrative Theory of Socioeconomic in Intervention Research. Pp. 383-394 in D. M. Boje (ed.) Storytelling and the Future of Organizations: An Antenarrative Handbook. London: Sage.

 

Boje, D., & Rosile, G. A. (2003). Comparison of socio-economic and other transorganizational development methods. Journal of Organizational Change Management16(1), 10-20.

 

Buono, A. F., & Savall, H. (2007). Socio-economic Interventions in Organizations: The Intervener-researcher and the SEAM Approach to Organizational Analysis. Information Age Publishing, Inc.

 

Follett, M. P. (1898). The Speaker of the House of Representatives. Longmans, Green & Co. NY, NY.

 

Follett, M. P., & Hart, A. B. (1902). The Speaker of the House of Representatives with an Introduction by AB Hart. Longmans, Green, & Company.

 

Follett, M. P. (1918). The New State: Group organization the solution of popular government. University Park, PN: Penn State Press.

 

Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review28(6), 576-588.

 

Follett, M. P. (1924/1930). Creative Experience. Рипол Классик; NY/London: Longmans, Green and Co. on line at http://ww.pqm-online.com/assets/files/lib/books/follett.pdf

 

Follett, M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific foundations of business administration, 156-162.

Follett, M. P. (1941). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett, edited by Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. F. NY/London: Harper and Brothers.

 

Follett, M.P. (1949.1987). Freedom and Co-ordination. Lectures in Business Organization. Edited, with an Introduction by L. Urwick. NY/London: Garland Publishing.

 

Hayes, R., Ertel McGilsky, D., & Lepisto, L. (2007). An interdisciplinary management consulting concentration to develop the AICPA core competencies and meet the 150-hour requirement. In Advances in Accounting Education Teaching and Curriculum Innovations (pp. 93-114). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

 

Rosile, Grace Ann; Boje, David M.; Nez, Carma Claw. (2016). “Ensemble Leadership Theory: Collectivist, Relational, and Heterarchical Roots from Indigenous Contexts.” Leadership journalCLICK HERE for online PDF

 

 

 

Ruvalcaba, M. F. (2007). SOCIO-ECONOMIC APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT IN MEXICO. Socio-economic Interventions in Organizations: The Intervener-researcher and the SEAM Approach to Organizational Analysis, 251.

 

Savall, H. (2003a). An updated presentation of the socio-economic management model. Journal of Organizational Change Management16(1), 33-48.

 

Savall, H. (2003b). International dissemination of the socio-economic method. Journal of Organizational Change Management16(1), 107-115.

 

Savall, H., & Peron, Michel. (2015). Socially Responsible Capitalism (No. hal-01140272).

 

Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2008). Mastering hidden costs and socio-economic performance. Information Age Publishing, Inc.

 

Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2011). The qualimetrics approach: Observing the complex object. Information Age Publishing, Inc.

 

Savall, H., Zardet, V., Bonnet, M., & Moore, R. (2001). A system-wide, integrated methodology for intervening in organizations. Current trends in management consulting1, 105.

 

Smith, William L., David M. Boje, and Taylor W. Foster III. (2011). “On the tetranormalization of US GAAP and IFRS: A socioeconomic approach.” Proceedings of the American Accounting Association (AAA) 1: 27.

 

Worley, C. G., Zardet, V., Bonnet, M., & Savall, A. (2015). Becoming Agile: How the SEAM Approach to Management Builds Adaptability. John Wiley & Sons.

 

 


 

Appendix A: PAP

PAP (Priority Action Plan)

Team Name________________________________________ duration: 6 MONTHS

þ-Clarify High Value-Added Sustainability Tasks to Implement/Continue

☐-Identify Low Value-Added (Un) Sustainability Tasks to Eliminate

–Implement tasks that stem from external strategy (who it involves)

ý-Tasks that prevent Unsustainable dysfunctions (tackle difficult internal strategy)

STRATEGIC AXES OBJECTIVES PRIORITY ACTIONS PEOPLE CONCERNED FORCAST PLANNING 6 months METRICS: Qualitative & Quantitative
J F M A M J
Our Team’s Collective Target

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ☐-

 

☐-

 

☐-

☐-

☐-

☐-

☐-

 

            ☐-
Our Team’s Mission Target

 

 

 

 

☐- ☐-

☐-

☐-

☐-

          ☐-
Our Team’s Vision Target

 

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

 

          ☐-
Our Team’s Operations Targets

 

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

☐-

          ☐-
Our Team’s Research Targets

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

          ☐-
Our Team’s Strategic Targets

 

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-.

☐-

☐-

.

            ☐-
Team Member 1

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

        ☐-
Team Member 2

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

            ☐-
Team Member 3

 

 

 

☐- ☐- ☐-

☐-

 

          ☐-

 

Add team members…                    

Appendix B

IESP (Internal/External Strategic Plan)

OBJECTIVES 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall
OBJECTIVE 1:

 

                 
Actions to fight against depletion of resources

 

               
OBJECTIVE 2:

 

                   
Actions to increase human potential                    
OBJECTIVE 3:

 

                   
Actions that create SUSTAINABILITY                    

Please move the arrows and resize to indicate time horizon for each objective and action. Edit actions above as needed, but have at least one GREEN one.

 

 

APPENDIX C: CG TOOL (note: the items are for illustration)

COMPETENCY GRID BEFORE THE CHANGE
  Traditional Competencies in old objectives New Competencies to be Acquired
WORKERS Green Product Design Green Supply Chain Materials Recycling Energy Savings Product Knowledge Contracts Project Management Customer Service
A n n n
B n n n
C   n     n
D n    
E n n n n  
F n   n n  

 

COMPETENCY GRID AFTER THE CHANGE
A n n n n n
B n n n n n
C n n   n
D n n
E n n n n n n
F n n n n n n n

 

n=Frequently Practiced =Occasional Practiced/Not all Mastered

=Knowledge of Principles without Practice BLANK= No Knowledge or Practice

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX D

PNAC (Periodically Negotiated Activity Contract)

NAME:________________________________ for 6 MONTHS

þ-Focus on your targets; negotiate ways to do them; rewards sought for achieving target levels

☐-PNAC connects with PAP, Strategic Indictors & Economic Balance

–Economic balances compare cost of means to reach objective with returns once targets have been attained (in terms of potential gains)

ý-$$ incentives self-financed by reduction in hidden costs

Types of Objectives Objectives Weighting (of 100% total) Target Level Means Metrics
CLIENT’S GENERAL TARGET

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
CLIENT’S

COLLECTIVE PRODUCTION TARGET

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
Your TEAM TARGET

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
INDIVIDUAL # 1 TARGET 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
INDIVIDUAL # 2 INDIVIDUAL TARGET 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
INDIVIDUAL # 3 INDIVIDUAL TARGET 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐- ___% What: How: ☐-
INDIVIDUAL # 4 INDIVIDUAL TARGET 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

☐-2 Book project ___% What? How: ☐-

 

 

 

 

 

What is Relationship of Ensemble Leadership Theory to Hegel’s and Mary Parker Follett’s Dialectic?

 

 

Mary Parker Follett learned Hegel in school, and then wrote about how the dialectic process can be an alternative way of leadership, consulting, and democracy.

After yesterday’s (Feb 22, 2017) class on Ensemble Leadership Theory (ELT, for short) (Mgt 388v), I went to a small Mexican Market to get bananas and tomatoes. I ran into two people that are relevant to homework questions:

1.) How is the first follower the most important leader (in Ensemble Leadership Theory, ELT for short)?

2.) In your goal to be more sustainable in everyday life, what major changes can you make and how will it affect you, the people around you, and your communities (again, please use ELT notions).

STORY ONE: The clerk at the Mexican Grocery Store.

I asked “How are you doing?”

“Better since I began working here”, he replies.

“How so?”

“My last job, I worked under a micro-manager. She stood over me telling me everything to do, how to do it, and it was not a good experience”, said the clerk.

“I know what you mean. I teach leadership. Micromanaging is ruining the country, and it’s an addiction at my university. Too much hierarchy, red tape, too many bully bosses”, I replied.

“Here I am my own boss, I get to make decisions on how to handle customers, what to reorder, and so on. We all work together here”, said the clerk.

“We called that ‘Ensemble Leadership’ in class today”, I replied.

Story Interpretation: The young man had gotten beyond the former micro-managed power-over boss into a Situation where and ensemble of leaders are engaged in what Follett calls power-with, rather than the old, power-over kind of leadership. Giving a taste of freedom to self-organize in the store, he was able to reflect upon what was here and now, and how different it was from what he left behind in the micromanaging world, I call XYZ, in-the-box leadership in America.

3d_leader_types

Figure 1 – The In-the-Box of XYZ ‘dead’ leadership Notions (see https://business.nmsu.edu/~dboje/teaching/490_psl/myers_briggs_and_leadership.htm for more info.

What are the X, Y, and Z dimensions of In-the-Box leadership?

X Dimension – Transactional to transformational leadership, as studied by Burns (1978) and Bass (1985). This is a classic dualism in leadership studies.  Burns looked at modal thinking (the means over ends reasoning) in the early stages of development and held these leaders to be “transactional.” Transactional leadership “requires a shrewd eye for opportunity, a good hand at bargaining, persuading, reciprocating” (Burns, 1978:169). A “transformational leader,” on the other hand, “recognizes and exploits an existing need or demand of a potential follower… (and) looks for potential motives in followers, seeks to satisfy higher needs, and engages the full person of the follower” (p. 4).

X – Are you more transactional or transformational in your leader personality, style and the organization situation you lead?

Y Dimension – From the Will to Server to the Nietzschean Will to Power. The Will to Power is specifically excluded from transaction and transformational leader theory by both Burns and Bass. I therefore treat it as a second dimension of leadership.  It is quite silly study leadership as just a well to serve; many leaders pursue power, some are able to do good things with it, others are swallowed by power. Nietzsche wrote about Will-to-Power (WTP) and Thus Spoke Zarathustra (TSZ) as having something to do with the will to initiate and implement a goal as well as the more macro construct of Darwin’s theory of natural section, the power to transform the inherited advantages from generation to generation (WTP #362). And WTP is also a Will to Truth (TSZ, pp. 28, 113). The WTP is a will to overcome the small people, “they are the superman’s greatest danger” (TSZ, p. 287). And the superleader is not satisfied with the happiness of the greatest number of workers or consumers (TSZ, p. 287). The Super leaders sees the abyss with the eyes of an eagle and grasps the abyss of poverty and misery with the talons of an eagle (TSZ, p. 288).

Y- Are you more about will-to-serve or will-to-power in your leader personality, style and the organization situation you lead?
Z Dimension  – From monophonic (single voice) narrative to (polyphonic) narrative. Some leaders cultivate one voice, their own, and others are more pluralistic, able to create polyphonic leadership.

First – there was one voice -In bureaucratic theater, there is mostly monologue. In bureaucratic leadership, for example, there is mostly monologue; other voices are there on the stage but forbidden to speak, or they can only be whispered, their words unhearable, drowned out by the one official narrator who is authorized to take center-stage and speak and speak some more.  As Kirkeby (2000: 232) argues it is the right of power to narrate events, to declare them romantic, tragic, comedic, or ironic, and then of course make them all into a romantic narratives that fits the bureaucratic pension for monophonic (single voiced) influence.   For any other voice to speak would be an act of bureaucratic espionage; certainly for the secretary to speak would be unthinkable rebellion.

Second – there were two voices – In the Quest two or more players take the stage, but it is rarely more than dialog. In dialogue the “I” and the “Other” take the stage and we hear voices, but little reflection. It is no longer the monologue of the I declaring the Other as villain. The Other gets to speak and be heard by the ‘I.”

Third – there were three voices – To me, this voice that Kirkeby describes is the same one discovered long ago by Adam Smith. Smith looked at global capitalism and say that without ethics events might well follow a logic of the market place that would not lead to ethical relations among buyer and seller, employer and employed, monopolist and entrepreneur. It is the internal spectator, the voice that speaks to us while observing the First and Second (the I and the Other) rehearse there dialogue on the stage in our mind’s eye. And in this model, even two actors on the stage visualize the dialogue of the Triad in their own head, but as well in the head of the other.

Fourth – then there were four voices – This is a very special voice, one we sense is about to speak but does not, one that is on the stage but stays in the shadows. In the Fourth, “the event is never over and done with” (Kirkeby, 2000: 237). And with the about to speak voice of the Fourth, we are intuitively aware of the simulation and almost can here the polyphony of voices, a mob about to take storm the stage. We may hear a groan, a murmur, a mumbling sound, but we can never quite make out the words. We can sense somehow the bureaucratic machine, the quest journey, and even chaos itself are just mythic metaphors some people have speculated and articulated about the web of human events (web is yet another one, as it theater a metaphor). We sense the gap, and we know with one more step we will certainly fall into chaos. See Boje (2000c) for more on the multiple voices of leadership.

I could try to stay in the XYZ-Box, and say ELT is X-transformational; Y-will-to-serve, and Z-four voices. And that micromanaging is the opposite: X-transactional-micromanager; Y-will-to-power, and Z-One-Voice (micromanager in the usual bureaucratic theater. The problem, of course, is that ELT is dialectical development process, and its Out-of-the-XYZ-Box.

The clerk in the Mexican store is here and now, Out-of-the-XYZ-Box, and traversing the Situation of ELT. He has discovered his own agency, the capacity he is building that he is building for power-with (as Follett calls it). He is out of the chaos of micromanagement, able to make choice according to what Follett calls the Law of the Situation. He is obeying the Situation, instead of obeying the bullying micromanager doing her micromanaging of another human being.

Story Interpretation To me this first story is a beautiful example of the dialectical development of ELT. He is like an acorn seed about to become a mighty oak tree (Hegel, 1807, see Preface, section #3 for tree story). He us Out-of-the-XYZ-Box, and most likely, will never go back into such a Situation. He is like a bod on that tree, with some tree roots extended, and knows some fruit is about to happen in his life space. He is fleeing the micromanaged Box and engaged in moments of leader development, necessary in his Self-development.

Usually a ‘how are you’ is a superficial moment between clerk and customer. But this is a necessary moment, where I can reinforce the process of his dialectical development, and my own, as well. For both of us, ELT, here and now, lacks actual existence (IBID, Hegel #3). The bud, for each of us, is not yet a blossom, and even with the blossom, it has no fruit, not yet. He and I, tarry for awhile, noticing our respective moves away from the XYZ-Box, into exploring a new emerging shape and form of leadership, one I hope is ELT arriving from its future, like the way the oak arrives from the acorn.

In early dialectical stages you get acquainted with the general conception of XYZ-leadership, then learn to refute it, as the concrete abundance of life comes your way in all its richness (Hegel, #4).

Hegel wants Science to be part of what is grasping the sequential existence of something emergent, manifesting, in actuality, which in this case study in this first story, is ELT. ELT is one its day in its dialectical development to become the new leadership science. Its necessity seems obvious to the young clerk and to myself.

The truth of the existence of Out-0f-the-Box-ELT is only an assertion, something it will take science to study and verify, and to make the refutation, it is better than XYZ, better than micromanaging, better than structural-functionalism, better than strongman leadership. Right now I have “intuition” (#6). What is required is an exposition of the Notion, of this intuition, in the abductive logic (abductive is a wild guess, a hunch, an assertion; comes from pragmatist Charles Sanders Peirce, his triadic of induction-deduction-abduction, and a kindred dialectic that is beyond our scope).

STORY TWO: The Man Panhandling Outside the Store

As I exit the little Mexican store, I am confronted by a man asking me for spare-change. I stare at him in disbelief. We had just talk of the homeless Situation in Las Cruces in the Leadership in Society class (Feb 22 2017 Mgt 388v). The presenting team did a Forum Theater skit linking homelessness views in New Mexico to ELT. Should you give money to the homeless? Definitely not, said the class, and me. Give it to social service agencies. Come with me and the American Legion, the Vietnam Veterans Chapter, the Legion Riders Chapter (I belong to all three) and collect food and cash donations in front of Wal-Mart, almost monthly, in Las Cruces that we hand over to Gospel Rescue Mission, Mesilla Valley Community of Hopes, Oak Street veterans apartments, the Soup Kitchen, the Veterans Home, and so on.

I decide to ask some questions. “Are you homeless?”

“No”, he replies, “I live in a house across the highway. My truck transmission is busted, and I have no way to earn a living without it.” FYI: Panhandling in Las Cruces, is a $500 fine (I keep this to myself).

“I need to buy some food at Family Dollar, for the family”, he continues. I think about all this, looking him in the eye, and wandering what is the right thing to do? Do I give, or not? Do I go with him to Family Dollar, and make sure the money goes to food. I decide that would be micro-managing the Situation. He is coherent, does not seem drunken, etc. He is not aggressive.

“Do you know where to get free food? I ask. He shakes his head. “You can go to the Soup Kitchen at Mesilla Valley Community of Hope campus, for free lunch, and fore free dinner, to the Gospel Rescue Mission. They also have free clothing, and so on”, I add.

“I think I would like to do that”, he says, smiling, looking me in the eye. Its what I call an abductive moment, and I reach my decision.

I pull out three, dollar bills. I usually don’t open my wallet, but place is well lit, and I am in eyesight of the young clerk in the store.

I get in my car with my groceries. As I wait on traffic, so I can back out of my parking place, I notice him enter Family Dollar. Trust the Law of the Situation, obey that law, says Follett.

Dénouement I am in a period of transition, a new era of leadership is emerging, and I am helping it along. MY leadership until 2000, was out of the XYZ-box, and it was in the past, since I took my first leadership course in my Ph.D. program at University of Illinois, taught by leadership theorist Greg Oldham, back in 1976. He said, ‘leadership has been dead for 50 years” and that was some 40 years ago, 90 all total. That is how long we have known and taught the XYZ-In-The-Box approaches.

My two stories are a “qualitative leap” into a new leadership formation, taking its shape, as I encounter the “vague foreboding of something unknown, these are the heralds of approaching change” (Hegel, 1807: # 11). Foreboding means something bad is going to happen, and it’s an intuition. On one hand, ELT is emerging Out-of-the-XYZ-Box, but on the other hand, a fearful apprehension, an anxiety, some trepidation, and a dread of alarm that the ELT will not surface fast enough to be the future of these two heralds of storytelling. The two heralds, the store clerk, the begging man, are part of the sunburst, a brief abductive flash at the little Mexican store, a glimpse of the new world of leadership Out-of-the-XYZ-Box, and the antithesis, that its too little ELT, and too late.

The point of the ELT’s class event, their Forum Theater, is that ‘we the people’ are the creators and agents of the Situation, both herald are facing, the micromanaging everywhere, as we saw in last week’s class 39% of Americans work for a bully boss, and as we discussed Feb 22nd, there is a growing homelessness in USA, and all the donations generously given in front of the Wal-Mart is not closing the gap of need.

What is dialectic?

There are many kinds of dialectic. Hegel (1807) wrote against the idea of a ‘synthesis’ kind of dialectic. You have heard of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Do a search of Hegel’s book online, and you will not fund the word ‘synthesis.’ If you read a commentator on Hegel, and they tell you Hegel’s dialectic is thesis-antithesis-synthesis, they really never read Hegel at all. Close the book, and go to the original. Instead of synthesis, Hegel wrote about a kind of dialectic where thesis and antithesis in a conflict unfolding, each have contradictions that come forth, and those difference keep intertwining in entanglement after entanglement. See Appendix for more on dialectic.

For dialectical development Hegel (1807: #12) gives the example of the newborn child. The newborn need a lot of what I call ‘fore-caring’ by its parents, and by Science. Hegel calls Science the “crown of Spirit: in the beginnings, the newborn, in this case ELT, is in its beginnings, it is in the midst of widespread upheaval in the USA, a “complicated” and “tortuous” requiring “strenuous effort” along an unfolding path way beyond the “simple Notion of the whole”, as the “Science” makes it way.   “The new spirit is the product of widespread upheaval in various forms of culture” (IBID, #12). Leadership science, the science of ELT is newborn, and in a Situation, the newborn is taking her first steps, and acquiring, newly born meaning.

While the initial appearance of ELT is being unveiled, in the class event of Forum Theater, in the stories of the two heralds, it is a precarious existence of the newborn. The newly emerging shape of ELT, making antithesis opposition to XYZ-Box, and tarrying with some story encounters, at the Mexican story. It helps make articulations that give the appearance of ELT Being-present, Being-here, in manifestations that are somewhat comprehensible, somewhat intelligible, already familiar to me in an unscientific way. These close encounters with direct access ELT, are in the early stages, and no where near ready to refute the criticisms of 90 years of In-the-Box-XYZ leadership scientists. The struggles of leadership in society (Mgt 388v) are to find intelligibility, to get at stories of first sightings of ELT, to create the ground for ELT science to emerge. I have said XYZ-In-the-Box leadership has unfulfilled promises (Hegel, #14), and so does ELT. XYZ is everywhere in American organizations of every kind (business, government, non-profit, university, and so on). But ELT is hardly anywhere, in a classroom, once, in and out of a Mexican store in Las Cruces, twice.

The PowerPoint, the formula I gave, on Feb 22, 2017 in the Leadership in Society course:

follett_formula

Figure 2: How Mary Parker Follett is a Dialectical Development from Hegel

Mary Parker Follett, has this Notion of the dialectic, where the common purpose of a group (organization or society) can allow ‘invisible leaders’ (they are not people, but something non-corporeal), allows the kind of power-with, so that group, we (Rosile, Boje, & Inez, 2016) are calling ELT, can obey the situation.

There are a few more Notions that Follett draws from Hegel’s dialectical development approach.

follett_elt

Figure 3 – How ELT relates to Six Key Notions of Follett’s Dialectic

Follett wanted to resolve conflicts by integrative unity, rather than by domination or by forcing ‘compromises.’ Genuine democracy is not majority rule, not that shallow vote sort of democracy, rather its having groups that self-organize, self-manage, and are at the community level, and the backbone of a business, or a university. The Law of the Situation, is as they say in Dragnet ‘Just the Facts’ but it’s a jointly studied Situation, and an agreement by all parties, all sides, to do co-inquiry into the facts of the Situation, including how the Situation is emerging, changing, and moving along. Celebrate diversity, means treating differences and diversity of cultures as an assets, rather than trying to eliminate diversity, integrate the differences, into something creative in what we now call Problem-Based-Learning (in Denmark). Grow your power-with, avoid power-over, and learn that no one can empower you, you have to Self-Empower your own Self by gaining capacity for power. Invisible Leaderà Common Purpose means that the Situation itself is the ‘invisible leader’ and by scientific co-study, joint-projects of inquiry across divides, it is possible to create common purpose, which for me, is the basis and foundation of Ensemble Leadership.

“To me, this comes out in Follett’s appreciation of Hegel’s dialectic. Its not the tired old saw of these-antithesis-synthesis. The point of Hegelian dialectic is there is no synthesis, as Follett puts it, just continuously evolving Situation in a play of differences in the Whole Situation” (See blog post How to Implement Ensemble Leadership Practices at a Public University? For more on this point).

What is Ensemble Leadership Theory?

Ensemble Leadership Theory (ELT, for short) is the rescue of an old tribal approach to leadership that is thousands of years old, recovered in a paper just published by Rosile, Boje, and Nez (2016, click for online version). Its next iteration is in the Follett concepts in Figures 2 and 3 above,

We don’t delve into the Hegel or the Follett roots of ELT in the article. This exploration I am doing here and now with you.

What are the Follett Relations to ELT?

Follett brilliantly was able to put Hegel’s dialectics into accessible writing. As I summarize in my blog post: “Ensemble Leadership is about democratic participative leadership displacing top-down leadership in the public university, and in society.  It is closing the circle, so there is two-way influence, not one-way influence. By closing the circle, Mary Parker Follett is referring to Hegel, to a dialectic that had a manifesting spirit, in the spirit of reason, and that included scientific methods of working out a Situation. Ensemble Leadership is dialectic, and it is the Law of the Situation, surrender to the situation, just like Alice in Wonderland. What is a university if not a Wonderland? “”You must remember how Alice in Wonderland had to run as fast as she could to stand still” (Follett, p. 264). Is that not how fast our adjuncts and graduate student teachers are running? Ensemble Leadership is fore-caring for the good of the New Mexico Community (the nation, the world) and its fore-caring for the ecology, it’s fore-caring for the Total Situation of NMSU” (IBID.). And a bit more “Follett rejected the idea of Hegelian synthesis as a misunderstanding of Hegelian dialectic. This more precise understanding of dialectic, as the uncovering of differences, and how to develop power-with rather than power-over, is something that could extend the socioeconomic approach of Savall” (IBID, Savall is text we use in Mgt448 small business consulting). Fore-caring is my own term, colleagues and I use to explore ways in which Martin Heidegger made his corrections to Hegel’s dialectics (that is something I teach in Mgt 685 and Mgt 655 doctoral courses).

It is more than the opposition between truth and falsity. That simplistic opposition does not comprehend the diversity of systems of unfolding of truth in its dialectical process. We have in the United States and in our university more than simple disagreements (# 2, Hegel, 1807, Phenomenology of Spirit).

Conclusion

I have this gives you some Notion of the development possibilities of ELT, how we are dipping our toes into the new ELT Science of leadership how self-organizing, self-differentiating, self-integrating can help us arrive Out-of-the-Box, then realize there is no Box, but the one of our own making. The Situation is changing, evolving, and morphing into something else. I believe it is calling forth as invisible leader, the new paradigm of leadership, the newborn, called ELT.

I made some recommendations at a speech on Valentine’s Day:

1.No tuition for students attending public universities and colleges. Public education is a ‘social good’ a way to build middle class mobility.

2.Increase number of full-time tenure line faculty because the quality of teaching and learning goes up with more faculty, not with more administrators.

3.Adopt Mary Parker Follett’s (1941: 94) recommendation to have the imagination to see the possibilities of enterprise democracy to ‘integrative unity.” The university is not a business and should not be run like one.

4.Mary Parker Follett’s consulting approach be adopted and NMSU never again hire the Deloitte consulting firm, who were paid $622,700 dollars of tax payer money for 10 weeks and one PowerPoint presentation to Board of Regent and the Chancellor, and Deloitte is not scientifically proven to be best practice, are actually discredited in peer-reviewed studies

5.Abolish ‘Team Six’ rearranging deck chairs on our Titanic. Alternative is science, fact-gathering by scores of teams that are face-to-face meetings of students, with faculty, with staff, with administrators the jointly do science according to Follett’s Law of the Situation, engage in co-operative study, making actual experiments, evaluate results, and only then make an informed decision about university reorganization. As Follett (1941: 51) puts it “we should try experiments, and note whether they succeed or fail, most important of all, why they succeed or fail.”

6. Embrace diversity and our differences. Do ‘real’ scientific methods of university change. What Follett proposes is a joint responsibility for integrative unity, implementing democratic participation by everyone taking responsibility, and jointly analyzing the Total Situation, scientifically.

7. Stop using tax money to develop a 27-hole golf course, and in the name of transparency put the reports back on line of how golf at NMSU with 18 holes used one million gallons of water a day, that could be better used by agriculture, keeping the Rio Grande River flowing all year round, getting water to the colonias on both sides of Mexico-New Mexico border. Colonias are considered semi-rural subdivisions of substandard housing lacking basic physical infrastructure, potable water, sanitary sewage, and adequate roads.

8. Deconstruct the TINA Narrative. TINA stands for ‘There Is No Alternative’ a favorite saying of Margaret Thatcher, and repeated by Ronald Regan, was they went after Public Education budgets. There is an alternative to TINA! Just stop using roulette speculative capital funding of K-12 and higher education with gas and oil severance taxes. This is the Situation, the facts of the case: Gas and oil is boom and bust cycles, which serve to send public education into downward spiral. Hoping for the next gas and oil boom is a form of gambling addition,

9. Our governor appoint a bipartisan Board of Regents, each of whom has a masters degrees or Ph.D., preferably in Education.

10. Follow Mary Parker Follett’s ways of resolving conflict. There are three ways to resolve conflict. First, by domination, the administrative order (from Governor to Board of Regents, to the Chancellor) can implement by domination, by power-over, by top-down authoritarian rule, appoint task teams of narrow or no participation, to decide all the changes made. Second, conflict can be resolved by compromise, where there are sides, and one side wins while the other loses. Resolve conflicts by integrating differences in creative problem soling, where we co-actively and jointly obey the Law of the Situation, study it with scientific methods, experiments, sharing results, and make democratic intelligent decisions based on the facts of the situation (not majority vote, not domination, not compromise, rather by integrative unity).

See previous blogs on Mary Parker Follett and Ensemble Leadership

 

PowerPoint, on Mary Parker Follett and Ensemble Leadership I gave, on Feb 22, 2017 in the Mgt 388v Leadership in Society course

References  

Follett, M. P. (1898). The Speaker of the House of Representatives. Longmans, Green & Co. NY, NY.

Follett, M. P., & Hart, A. B. (1902). The Speaker of the House of Representatives with an Introduction by AB Hart. Longmans, Green, & Company.

Follett, M. P. (1918). The New State: Group organization the solution of popular government. University Park, PN: Penn State Press.

Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review, 28(6), 576-588.

Follett, M. P. (1924/1930). Creative Experience. Рипол Классик; NY/London: Longmans, Green and Co. on line at http://ww.pqm-online.com/assets/files/lib/books/follett.pdf

Follett, M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific foundations of business administration, 156-162.

Follett, M. P. (1941). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett, edited by Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. F. NY/London: Harper and Brothers.

Follett, M.P. (1949.1987). Freedom and Co-ordination. Lectures in Business Organization. Edited, with an Introduction by L. Urwick. NY/London: Garland Publishing.

Heon, F.; Davis, A.; Jones-Patulli, J.; Damart, S. (2014). The Essential Mary Parker Follett Ideas we Need Today. Published by the authors. ISBN: 978-0-9939553-0-3

Rosile, Grace Ann; Boje, David M.; Nez, Carma Claw. (2016). “Ensemble Leadership Theory: Collectivist, Relational, and Heterarchical Roots from Indigenous Contexts.” Leadership journal. CLICK HERE for online PDF

Hegel. (1807). The Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller with analysis and foreword by J. N. Findlay, Oxford University Press download online version:

Attachment Size
Phenomenology of Spirit – G. W. F. Hegel.epub 638.7 KB
Phenomenology of Spirit – G. W. F. Hegel.mobi 1.04 MB

Rosile, Grace Ann; Boje, David M.; Nez, Carma Claw. (2016). “Ensemble Leadership Theory: Collectivist, Relational, and Heterarchical Roots from Indigenous Contexts.” Leadership journal. Online at http://davidboje.com/vita/paper_pdfs/Ensemble_Leadership_article.pdf

 

APPENDIX: From chapter I am doing for Book on Follett and Hegelian Dialectic

“Many scholars have ignored or failed to recognize the Hegelian and dialectic roots of Mary Parker Follett’s work. Salimath and Lemak (2004), for example, do not review dialectics or Hegelian philosophy as influential to Follett’s lifelong learning philosophy. Bathurst and Monin (2010) miss the Hegelian aspects of Follett’s key notions, such as circularity, and treat dialectic as a simple paradox: “Follett’s philosophy leads her to insist on circularity as her predominant construct, for circularity implies continual movement and renegotiation of meanings” (p. 128). Eylon (1998) remarks how Follett applies dialectic and cyclical process to empowerment, but misses how Follett is thoroughly Hegelian. “Until we acknowledge the dynamic and dialectic nature of empowerment, and the potential this offers to organizations, its value is limited” (Eylon, 1998: 25).

Follett (1918) comments on false readings of Hegel is widespread and even the pragmatist William James misses how their solution is against the spirit of Hegel (p. 266-267). Hegel reconciles it in the not in of the ‘compounding of consciousness’ (total relativity where the true Self is not warring against the Whole) (p. 266). Follett (p. 163) refers to Hebert Spencer’s social Darwinism (survival of the fittest) as a “false political philosophy built on an unrelated individual” and to the “disastrous results of laissez-faire” (p. 163). Follett is looking at dialectics as complex interpenetration in a social process “out of the intermingling, interacting activities of men and women surge up the forces of life” powers are born which we had not dreamed of, ideas take shape and grow, forces are generated which act and react on each other. This is the dialectic of life” (p. 149). Follett’s conflict and power in her notion of integrative unity among differences are embedded within a dialectic process.

Verstegen and Rutherford (2000: 209-210) attribute synthesis to Hegel in the misguided model of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Hegel never used the term synthesis, and saw dialectic as an uncovering of successive contradictions. As Kaag (2008: 149) explains: ‘Follett’s understanding of ideal group dynamics stands apart from a standard understanding of consensus formation, compromise, or political unity. She explains that “to integrate is not to absorb, melt, fuse or reconcile in the so-called Hegelian sense. The creative power of the individual appears not when one wish dominates others, but when all wishes unite in a working whole’ (Follett, 1919: 576).””