Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The popular management approach known as leading from the middle is a vague concept that has been approached from a variety of viewpoints. In this column, we offer a perspective that we feel best addresses the needs of leaders in libraries. We believe that leading from the middle comes less from a desire for personal recognition or advancement and more from a desire to achieve a shared vision. This means that leadership must include an ethos of collaboration and mutual support. The work of behavioural scientist Marcial Losada offers some useful pointers in this regard. Losada has focused his research on what makes teams of people succeed and flourish and what makes them fail and stagnate.1 Losadas numerous observations of teams in action led him to develop The Losada Line. Teams and even families that perform above this measurable line tend to be successful. Teams and families that perform below the line tend to sputter and to face continuing difficulties. Heres why. One key indicator of performance that Losada uses is based on his observations of senior management teams and how they make decisions. Losada states that successful teams do not focus on solutions early in their discussions. Instead, they engage in what Losada calls chaotic attractor activity, meaning that they are open to considering new and unexpected ideas before narrowing their options. In contrast, members of unsuccessful teams enter meetings willing to consider only a few predictable options. Teams that are even less successful tend to have members who are focused on the results they expect and want even before meetings start. Losadas research seems to suggest that people who want to lead from the middle should worry less about whether teams accept their ideas and concentrate instead on ensuring that all team members have an opportunity to participate. The output of teams just below the line, those who consider a few options, deteriorates because in moments of extreme adversity, [they] lose their behavioral flexibility and capacity to question assumptions, resulting in endless languishing.
The performances of extremely unsuccessful teams, whose members seem to come to meetings having already determined the outcome, are even worse because team members are stuck in self-absorbed advocacy resulting in an endless loop. The other indicators that Losada uses for team performance are aimed at measuring the ways each individual team member behaves. Losadas observations tell us a great deal about what it means to lead from the middle. Working with colleague Emily Heaphy, Losada monitored the interactions of senior management teams as they went through their annual strategic planning processes. They concluded that: members of high-performing teams divide their time equally between advocating about issues for which they are responsible and finding out about issues in other team members areas of responsibility. In contrast, members of highly unsuccessful teams tend to spend three times as much time advocating in their areas of responsibility as finding out about issues in other areas; members of high-performing teams make almost six times as many positive comments as negative comments to other team members.2 In contrast, members of extremely low-performing teams make 20 negative comments for each positive comment; and members of high-performing teams ask questions about the lives of other people as many times as they share information about their own lives. In contrast, members of highly unsuccessful teams tend to talk about themselves 30 times more frequently than they ask about others. Losadas findings should not be interpreted to mean that teams can become more successful merely by having team members say nice things about each other. Its sort of a chicken and egg thing. Members of teams that tend to be successful are naturally more comfortable and less stressed.
40
www.cla.ca
Notes
1. M. Losada and E. Heaphy, The Role of Positivity and Connectivity in the Performance of Business Teams, American Behavioral Scientist 47(6) (2004), pp. 74065. 2. Positive comments fit into categories such as compassion, joy, pride, awe, gratitude, contentment and interest. Negative comments fit into categories such as anger, contempt, fear, guilt and embarrassment. Ken Roberts (kroberts@hpl.ca) is the Chief Librarian of the Hamilton Public Library, and Daphne Wood (daphne.wood@vpl.ca) is the Director of Planning and Development at the Vancouver Public Library. They share a passion for leadership research and the practices of resilient organizations.
41
Copyright of Feliciter is the property of Canadian Library Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.