Leading at All Levels

Using Systemic Ideas to Get the Most from the Workplace

Annette MacArtain-Kerr

• Éditeur: Routledge
• Année: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429868283
• Édition: 1
• Sujet: Psicología
• Sous-sujet: Psicología industrial y organizacional

Leading at All Levels: Using Systemic Ideas to Get the Most from the Workplace moves away from traditional perspectives on leadership and, utilising ideas from systemic consultation, provides a rationale for leadership at all levels, emphasising the potential of everyone in organisations to lead in their own area of work. Reviewing the theory of resilience and its place in organisational life, the book provides guidance on how to foster resilience in the workplace.

Written in accessible language, the book is divided into three sections: on work and leadership, on problem solving and finally on approaches to leading at all levels. A variety of perspectives on leadership are explored, as well as barriers to effective leadership and there are many suggestions for improvement. The book discusses the ways in which systemic thinking can contribute to enhance leadership, which includes considering different perceptions and experiences of leadership, the influence of power in workplace relationships and organisational outcomes, the link between positive employee engagement for performance and well-being at work, and the importance of interpersonal and relational behaviour on leadership. The book also considers the importance of everyday workplace interactions to our understanding of leadership and supports a wide understanding of workplace conflict. It contains examples throughout, which are applicable to different types and sizes of organisation, and provides suggestions for readers relating to the practice of leadership at all levels.

Good leadership is of great importance to today's organisations. The book suggests that by paying more attention to leadership at all levels, organisations can work towards improving productivity, which has been highlighted as a critical issue in the UK since the 2008 recession.

Leading at All Levels will appeal to systemic trainees, practitioners and systemic consultants and to those in related professions, as well as to personal development practitioners and coaches.

Chapter 1

Work and leadership

Introduction: why leadership at all levels

I became interested in leadership at all levels through observation of my own and others’ experiences in the workplace. One of the main aims of the book is to explore ways to improve people’s experience of the workplace and I will argue that this can be done through assuming more leadership of one’s work, regardless of the level one is at in the organisational hierarchy. This differs from a traditional view, and a focus on leadership exclusively for those at the top takes a back seat to forms of leadership in the hands of both workers and managers. The changing nature of the workplace due to technology is a context for the need for new ways forward. People’s reasons and motivations for work are examined as well as levels of well-being at work and how individuals and organisations can influence these.

In order to help with improving the experience of the workplace, the book aims to make sense of the workplace experience in all its complexity. Sometimes there is a tendency to see and describe the world in simple terms so as to make it more acceptable or manageable. This book challenges that idea and argues that by accepting the complex nature of things we can seek more appropriate ways to problem solve and manage our experience. If we have had experience of poor management, the aim is to provide a context within which one can understand how it came about. It aims to address the question: what can we learn from our experience so as to manage better if similar things happen in the future? Another key objective is to explore an inclusive concept of leadership, one which applies to everyone in the hierarchy and includes everyone leading in their own role, managing their work, their working relationships and the situations they find themselves in.

Central to the book is systemic thinking, which had its origins in systems theory. Gregory Bateson (1972), an anthropologist and early systems thinker, has been highly influential. Systemic thinking places emphasis on relationships between people in the systems they find themselves in, such as family, school, university and work. In addition, each of these systems is also seen as having its own complex, internal structure, similar to an ecosystem (Carr, 2000; Rivett & Street, 2009). Systemic thinking also takes account of multiple viewpoints, pays attention to issues like power and gender (Burck & Speed, 1995; Krause, 2002) and offers a framework for integrating diverse ideas (Vetere & Dallos, 2003).

As many do, I have had both positive and negative experiences working in organisations in the course of my career. However, training as a family therapist with an interest in systemic consultation has increased my understanding of these. Prior to my systemic studies, my background was mainly in education and the voluntary sector. I came late to education but embraced it, and hold bachelor’s and master’s degrees as well as postgraduate studies in business and education. My CV has many twists and turns, from full-time working to full-time study, from self-employed to permanent full-time to permanent part-time, in second and third level education as well as organisational training; as an organisational consultant, a volunteer, a team leader as well as a leader and manager in education and in the voluntary sector. This experience has had considerable highs as well as lows, however what I have gained most of all from it is that no matter how bad a situation seems, there is always learning to be had.

Unsurprisingly therefore, a motivation for writing this book is adversity because it creates the need to seek resources in order to overcome it. Experiences such as rejection after a career of straightforward progression led to diminishing levels of confidence. Knowing that one’s talents were being wasted or at best under-used, was for me an assault on my self-belief. Finding myself suddenly on a career plateau with no clear road map, forced me to dig deep so as to find some meaning and value in my working life. The experience felt akin to treading water and because I was unable to see how I could progress, I thought it best to maximise other developmental opportunities available to me.

A form of rescue came from my studies in systemic psychotherapy, which provided me with a framework from which to make sense of some of my experience. For more than a decade and a half, it has informed how I approach personal and professional development, training and management. An interest in applying its principles into organisational settings provided motivation to write about some of these experiences, which ultimately led to this book. There is much valuable systemic literature and this book is an effort to add to it by sharing some of the ideas that have helped me. The activity of researching, reflecting and writing in itself has helped stimulate and support learning. This has not been a straightforward process and when I started I had no idea of the extent of the endeavour. Despite this, the process of writing, no matter how difficult, has been helpful in reminding me to apply the principles to my own circumstances. Having access to ideas and tools to understand organisational life better has helped me to take more control of my workplace experience. In addition, it has helped me to understand and reflect on, not just my own experience but also that of others around me. I have shared some of these experiences, altering them as necessary in order to protect confidentiality.

In this respect this book differs from other systemic consultation texts in that it is informed not only by consultation practice and theory but also includes and shares systemic understandings at the level of ordinary everyday life in the workplace. This includes experience at team member level, without any formal responsibility, experience at management level, as well as of the set up of new services. I draw on experience as an organisational consultant working with individuals, teams and larger groups in organisations. What follows is what I believe can be usefully passed on about surviving, striving and at times thriving in these varied workplace situations. While I do not believe that there is a one size fits all model, I think there are resources that can be helpful in different ways and at different times. I will describe below some of the ideas that have become part of the framework within which this idea of leading at all levels has evolved.

A systemic framework

A belief in the ability of the individual to manage and progress is fundamental to my practice. The roots of this belief lie in the narrative idea that each person can author their own story, and can use their resources to transform negative narratives (White & Epston, 1990). Personal learning experiences have supported this by demonstrating to me the power of ideas and therapeutic or consultation interventions. The “not knowing” position (Anderson & Goolishian, 1988) is a good fit with the above belief. The rationale behind the position is that of understanding each individual or group in its own right, with a way of working that is unique. Notwithstanding, when doing a Master’s in Systemic Psychotherapy, I was concerned about the contradiction between “not knowing” on the one hand, and the need to know enough to practice systemically on the other. If I tried to “not know”, was there not a danger that service users would think I really did not know? From the practice perspective I managed to avoid the pitfall, to the best of my knowledge, however asking the question began a quest for clarity about integrating the two positions. There are many perspectives to bear in mind and although I have found it useful to adopt a tentative approach (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992), later readings have reminded me to avoid the pitfall of systemic practitioners not owning their expertise because they are striving for equality with service users (Mason, 1993). Mason also emphasises the need for transparency regarding the differences in power between therapist and service user. He advocates a combination of authority and doubt, which contains both expertise and uncertainty (Mason, 1993).

My belief in people’s ability to manage has grown over the years through working with individuals and groups in therapy and consultation. Experience has reinforced the idea that I cannot in any real sense “know” what an individual, much less a group is experiencing. An understanding of problems service users bring is always bound by context, which continually shifts and changes. What we know depends on what information service users choose to share, so that in a real way our understanding is incomplete. In conversation, what we understand relates to the moment only and is part of the process of working towards understanding, without ever getting there fully. This is as it should be for total understanding would mean there will be nothing to be curious about (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992). Remaining curious, sometimes challenging, is of the greatest importance because it helps to leave space for the individual or group to develop responses appropriate for them.

Exposure to theory delivers the constant reminders necessary to avoid the barriers to curiosity, for example when experience of similar situations suggests that one knows the correct way forward, or when we think a certain theory will apply to a certain situation. There is a deep need to remain open to other ideas, and recognise the potential for one’s ideas being the wrong ones in any particular moment. The movement between these is what Larner (1995) calls deconstruction and it is not always comfortable. However, it is I believe, necessary for good practice and is a constant reminder to keep in mind these important questions, when working with people and when reflecting on the work afterwards and in supervision.

The process of writing this book has helped me to examine how my practice has evolved over time. For instance in regard to the idea of working collaboratively with clients, I realise that there is a danger of accepting it as the only way of working. Yet it should not be taken for granted that it will be how the individual wants to work. People may accept it as a way of working simply because the consultant suggests it (Burnham, 2005). However it may be at odds with the desire for problems to be resolved, regardless of how that may happen. By this I mean that someone may simply want advice and may not be interested in collaborative practices. Giving advice in this instance may be the best option but would be understood as the consultant offering an expert opinion, rather than collaborating to increase understanding around the problem situation, before working towards resolution. It can be helpful here to bear in mind the interplay between knowing and not knowing, where not knowing shows uncertainty about being able to fix the situation, while knowing contains the idea that there are theories and experiences in practice which can help. This is similar to Mason’s (1993) idea of safe uncertainty, relevant to the common situation when an individual sees another as being solely responsible for a problem.

Using process as part of problem resolution can also help to counter getting caught up in the urgency of problem solving. Burnham (2005) makes a distinction between self-reflexivity or awareness of self as consultant, and relational reflexivity. In this instance relational reflexivity is where service users are invited to give their views on how the process of (therapy or) consultation is carried out (Burnham, 2005). This distinction is also present in Wosket’s (2001) definition of reflexivity which carries the idea of inner reflexivity, concerning the thought processes and reflections of the consultant, and agency, or reflexivity which is oriented outwards. This latter reflexivity shows in behaviour and can mean including, through questions and other means, the voices of service users in all aspects of consultation. Sharing ideas about process creates a context in which service users can gain some control over how the problem is to be resolved. In the workplace for example, it can mean including others’ viewpoints, for example, inviting people to notice recurring behaviour patterns, rather than sharing one’s own observations about them. It can also mean sharing one’s written notes, and inviting or leaving a space for comment. In my experience, service users almost always value the opportunity to participate in this way. Finally, it can mean offering choices about the service, for example, offering the possibility of attending consultation as an individual or with a colleague or manager.

Teaching and practice have helped me to remain in contact with research in the field and frequently offer new perspectives on areas of interest. An example is a piece of research by Sutherland and Strong (2011), which examined how a collaborative approach worked in practice. To do this they used conversation from a therapy session with a couple, which was recorded for research purposes. Karl Tomm was the therapist and he demonstrated ways to combat the issue of therapist power. This was done by offering ideas, by being open to argument, by listening carefully to clients’ perspectives and by incorporating these into the conversation. Although this may sound simple, it is anything but as therapists and consultants will understand. During the session Tomm made a statement to the man about being intimidating, which the man contested. In response, Tomm modified his statement and later made a distinction between intimidating practices and an intimidating person (Sutherland & Strong, 2011). Despite using similar distinctions, I must admit to experiencing discomfort in such situations. For example I have worried that clients might interpret the distinction as a softening, therefore by implication making the negative behaviour more acceptable. However this was not the case and Tomm illustrated the delicate process of maintaining the balance between right and wrong, while working with language and meaning in such a way as to make talking about wrongdoing acceptable enough to the person, to allow for work towards change. This way of working between power and non-power, resists theory according to Larner (1995), yet works within a theoretical framework. It resists theory in that it captures the reality of working from more than one theoretical position, i.e., in this case co-constructing the narrative with the client is one position held by the therapist; however the therapist’s responsibility to safeguard is another position that they must maintain. In order to protect people at risk of harm, a therapist must act to protect vulnerable clients. In this capacity, along with the collaborative position is a need for judgement, which is the opposite of collaboration. Giving power over to the client is as much a theoretical position as any other (Larner, 1995) and as mentioned above, may not fit all situations of those attending for consultation. He goes on to suggest that therapists, who will feel uncertainty despite their theoretical knowledge, hold themselves open to a variety of theories to help with the challenge and ambiguity, which results from what can emerge in the process of therapy.

Theory and absence of theory have an ironic resonance for me. My original idea for this text was to have a practical focus, outlining ideas for others to apply to their situations, with a minimum of theory. However, this is necessarily difficult to achieve because one cannot half explain an idea; either one engages with the theory or one asks the reader to accept at face value one’s interpretation of it, which is another way of taking the expert position. Thus the reality has been an altogether different process which has meant struggling at times to identify and pin down some of the theories that have been informing my practice. I am reminded of a good mark I got at an early stage of university for an essay on Spanish literature that I had found very difficult. I expressed my surprise to the lecturer and he replied that what was of value was this sense of wrestling with ideas in an effort to gain insights and draw conclusions. The process has not been without advantages because as mentioned earlier, thinking about theory and practice has enriched my work.

Returning to the consultation work, many of the ideas informing my systemic framework are about finding ways to work which allow the voice of service users to have control. This idea of control, be it over one’s life or one’s work life, can be seen as a building block in taking leadership, no matter what the level. One of the settings in which I have practised is as a systemic consultant in Higher Education, where I found a systemic framework to be a good fit with the complex issues postgraduate students can face. It makes it possible to work with them as individuals who are embedded in many institutional, discipline-specific and other systems (MacArtain-Kerr, 2012). Working in training settings allows me to use systemic ideas when working with professional relationships or when working to understand and resolve conflict. Another Higher Education setting in which I work is offering personal and professional development to systemic therapists in training. Working in these settings has made me realise that leadership skills are frequently necessary. For example, trained family therapists are professionals who need to demonstrate leadership qualities in order to manage all aspects of clinical work effectively. Systemic thinking and practice contain the above ideas and many others which inform how I approach and think about leadership in the workplace and will be discussed throughout this book.

The changing nature of the workplace

Organisations today more than ever need to be flexible and responsive to change. Technological developments have impacted across science, engineering, production and service industries bringing large-scale change. The level of adaptation that is required is considerable and this is best achieved by skilled people mandated to deal with situations as they arise (Harman, 1990). Because this does not fit with traditional leadership, new models of leadership need to surface, some of which will be discussed in Chapter 3 on leadership.

Assumptions need to be questioned. McGregor said that it is impossible to take a managerial action without it being influenced by our assumptions, whether they are “adequate” or not (McGregor, 1960, p. 7). In other words our assumptions inform how we understand the world around us. If we do not question our assumptions, it can lead to an acceptance of the ways things are, or if we are unhappy with the status quo, a lack of belief in the possibility of change. An example is maternity leave – in 1975 the Employment Protection Act introduced statutory maternity provision in the UK and made it illegal to sack a woman because she was pregnant. The context – in Britain – was different to now in that not so long before, women had to stop working when they got married. In Britain, it was not until 1944 that female teachers were able to continue working after marriage, and 1946 when the same applied to women civil servants (www.historyofwomen.org). In the Republic of Ireland where I grew up, the marriage bar was not fully removed until 1973, meaning that my mother had to stop working when she got married. When I started work in the late 1970s, maternity leave was a norm which I accepted. It was only later that I became aware that the term “maternity leave” contains a fixed assumption that the woman is the parent who gives up work in order to take the time to look after the baby. Today the term “parental leave” allows for a change in this assumption and creates the possibility of new realities in the workplace. However, a recent Institute of Leadership and Management survey of females in the workplace showed that 44 per cent in the over 45 age group believed that their gender had not helped their career (2011).

The context has changed again since April 2015 because new UK legislation allows parents to share 12 months of leave after the birth of a child. However, a 2016 report suggested that only 5 per cent of men who are eligible for this leave have taken it and that additional supports from employers need to be in place for this figure to increase (Calnan, 2016). Workplace culture also needs to change before it will become the norm for parents to share leave. Sometimes looking to other countries can b...

Table des matières

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Series editors’ foreword
• Foreword
• 1 Work and leadership
• 2 Workplace stress and resilience
• 3 Leadership
• 4 Systemic perspectives on problem solving
• 5 Using systemic questions in consultation
• 6 Solution-focused approaches to problem solving
• 7 Systemic and other approaches to leadership at all levels
• 8 Positioning theory
• 9 Working with conflict in organisations
• 10 Alternative approaches to leadership
• 11 Systemic contributions to the practice of leadership at all levels
• References
• Index