Thank you for such a thoughtful and insightful article. As someone who aspires to be a systems leader, I found this article very helpful and a valuable resource for my own personal and professional journey.
System implies mental grip over. The future shows there is less and less grip. The intermingling of actions, reactions, dialogue, debate, strive and co-creation is the key to all societal change. Plans can be made, some will work, other fail. But more and more people feel losing grip. And I say, control never has never been real anyway. I say more and more we are aware of the interconnectedness of all things. And out of this interconnected interplay all new movements will arise. So the point is not to regain control; it is about hosting what wants to happen.
This demands both system awareness, service to and a more personal attitude with integrity. http://www.mediafire.com/view/3gl2uklk7fla9u1/Swarm+Leadership.pdf
To extend on this very interesting article, I want to add the notion of a shared language of change - in generative conversation or through interactive intervention, organizations cocreate a story of change; connecting the system (or structure) and culture (the heart, the mind and the will). Under the right conditions, these stories spread, become contagious and cause social epidemics. Pushing forward change, not only top down, through leadership, but in cocreation and dialogue from all angles, giving voice to social networks through all levels.After all, If we can change they way people speak, we can change the way they behave , according Paul Bate (2005).
Thank you for a wonderful and inspiring article. It was though-provoking but mostly it fed my thoughts and aspirations in working in the field of collaborative work and systemic change. The references and tools are fabulous; I kept deflecting to other sites to explors…it took me forever to read this article.
Excellent article. My own personal journey attempting to be a system leader has been shaped by SSIR articles on organizational change by Kotter, Collective Impact thinking by Kania and now this article that feels like words have been created for the sensation that I’ve been living and not able to articulate to family and friends, except with platitudes like “trying to move a mountain” without the permission to ask anyone to shovel or “herding cats” which never seems to provide a destination. The one sensation that I don’t think it adequately describes is the almost constant having to do things (or not do reactive things which at least make you look busy) that the majority of stakeholders not understand until they see what they define as “progress” being made and the personal toil and lack of appreciation inherent to “profound commitment.”
Although the article touches lightly on some of the challenges and personal fortitude required to walk this system leadership path, I would love to hear from others (or another article) describing what their “particular gateways” or challenges that slap you in the face when using some of the articles principles in the midst of the work and very much lead to the desire to quit (which I consider a little different from just “floundering”.
For example, early on in my work shaping an improved homelessness system I attempted (even graphically) to display the larger system and got yelled at that I had no understand and there was no way anyone was ready for that. Two years later, the graphic has improved, but the embedded concepts are what the community has agreed on. At another point during this journey, which I came into as more of a “systems” expert then a “homelessness” expert, a significant stakeholder told a larger group of stakeholders that I knew nothing about the topic. The first incident happened in a very small group and may have delayed the work, but it definitely shut down my willingness to risk sharing a different vision for quite a while and caused me to seriously think about finding other “issues” to go help with. Luckily, the second incident came after I had build trusting relationships with most of the audience and did more to discredit the attacker than me personally. However, because there wasn’t much progress being made yet, I had to seriously consider whether the work was worth the personal attacks.
I would love to hear from others on how they do things like convince a foundation that building trust among the collective leadership is worth funding or when political issues interfered with getting the right tool into use that “will gradually cause them over time to think different.”
Thanks for a very thought provoking article. The comment about collaboration initiatives often floundering ‘..in part because they failed to foster collective leadership within and across the collaborating organizations.’ certainly strikes a chord with my own experience here in the UK.
But there are emerging islands of good practice - sadly it often seems that organizations and their leaders have to experience the pain of a collaboration failure before they are able to modify their leadership behaviour in ways which will support systemic change.
You talk about 3 core capabilities - I’d like to suggest a 4th and that is the ability to really share control across a system. Its a cliché but you can’t be a collaborative leader on your own - and yet its surprising how many leaders I still see trying to be a hero and do just that. Developing leaders who can share control with confidence and are prepared to handle the inevitable conflict in a healthy manner are I think now key foundations of success in so many areas of the global economy.
I share the sentiment expressed by most that this is a wonderful way forward.
Can’t help wondering though what went wrong with the adoption of Mandela’s lead - there is little doubt that the wrong scenario is transpiring, that his leadership style has not taken hold, that the new South African reality is dire (state creep, corruption, rampant crime, growing poverty, government triggering deeper racial divides ....
A admire what Mandela did in bring South Africa back from the brink, but perhaps ‘excessive tolerance’ turned out to be the ground in which new, unwelcome seeds flourished ....
This is not intended as a political comment, but rather an inquiry into what seeds of failure may be contained in systemic, collaborative leadership unless the right checks and balances are in place. Certainly in the case of South Africa there has been no ‘self-regulation’...
Funny, I seemed to remember being immersed in systems leadership back in the 80’s studying public health & reading Russell Ackoff who had been writing about systems work back in the 70’s. As with much that is being repackaged as new, this article comes across as pretty paternalistic. One just needs to review the history of a public health movement like Tobacco Control in California, to see that many of us came up through the ranks of systems thinking. Unfortunately, it is not practitioners who are clueless about systems but it is the fragmented and non-systemic way in which social innovation is funded that inhibits system thinking and systems acting. Fortunately these are pockets where real systems change is occurring but please don’t repackage the toothpaste and try to sell it as an innovation
I’m one of the authors and thank you for these very thoughtful comments.
Suzanne, I resonate with “creating a shared language of change.” In my work we always have to balance emergent change with ways that those changes respond to the already shaped goals of the people and organizations. We’re seeking where one plus one might equal three, and we also have to make sure we achieve specific deliverables in order to keep the somewhat-less-committed on board long enough for commitment to settle in.
Jason, I agree that this is hard work, of which a crucial and time-consuming step is to have all the one-on-one conversations that build an energetic field among the players so that they own the initiative.
David, your comment about shared control is along the same lines. Shared credit is also a principle.
Finally, one colleague asked me the other day why we didn’t use the word “empathy” as we described system leadership. I thought that this was a really good suggestion. If I care about you, in addition to understanding your goals, I will be much more likely to create a generative environment that includes you. I’ve found that one requirement of this work is to like people.
Great write - in a world of diverse fields that more or less try to tackle the same systemic issues but using different language that is common for their peers yet not understood by others it needs:
- awareness/mindfulness of what is happening around us on a systemic level
- learning to put into understandable (by all) words that grasp the imagination of people
- create a “platform understanding” that pulls people into action
Probably this is not a one-day, or seven-day task. It will take longer especially as all people on this planet have come from very different backgrounds, personal experience, and knowledge basis.
Moving forward is an art of planting our feet one at a time in the desired direction.
Outstanding collection of global thinking around system leadership! It brings to mind how many of us are reluctant to shift from the Cartesian paradigm to the Systemic paradigm - that the parts are best understood by a clear vision of the whole.
The thinking in this article has numerous applications. As a retired educator and school administrator, much of my time is now spent on spreading the word about a new social science framework for K-8 schools, an “outside-in” model as I describe it, where first we consider our common humanity and then we identify the diverse components within which we are personally involved - usually by chance.
The article also brings to mind what a unique contribution the members of the Bahá’í Faith are making with their worldwide efforts in promoting the Junior Youth Spiritual Empowerment Program. I believe their “animators” - those who help facilitate the groups - truly aspire to practice system leadership.
All efforts made in this realm offer great opportunities for our eventual understanding of unity in diversity as a universal virtue of recognition of the oneness of humanity.
The ANC always made the point to say that Mandela was part of the collective leadership of the ANC, so your point is spot on on the need for system leadership.
Perhaps achieving “the deep changes necessary to accelerate progress against society’s most intractable problems” requires two different kinds of leadership: the visionary who sees the possible future and the trail blazer who clears the path. Sometimes one person can be both by following Gandhi’s example, which he described as being the change. Mandela took Gandhi’s work in South Africa another step forward in this way, and King brought it to America through his living example. All three of these men were visionaries who walked the talk, and all three “catalyzed collective leadership” by doing a third thing: getting out of the way of those whom would go further.
Most leaders today seek power by validating the poor choices of the mob through standing at their head and pointing at an enemy. For example, the affluent leaders on the left point to the right and say the problem is their conservative ideology, and the affluent leaders on the right point to the left and say the problem is their liberal ideology; the leaders on both sides seek power and both constituencies continue to eat the world alive. Gandhi, King and Mandela all renounced that kind of affluence and were living examples of persons achieving profound success not measured in personal material wealth; and all three renounced personal power and thus left the way clear for those whom would follow that path.
Wow. Where to even begin? Eh, the beginning I suppose -
Nelson Mandela - He has been transformed by the left into figure of religious stature. I have no problem with the man, and empathize with his goals, but the author seems completely unaware, perhaps unconcerned, with uncomfortable facts - such as his wife’s propensity to burn people alive in a gasoline-soaked tires, and the current crime-ridden, corrupt, and dire state of South Africa under the Marxist ANC. A minor point, but the citations would indicate the authors consider themselves scholars. Act like it.
The remainder, including the comments, are nothing but an electronic 21st century version of what COMINTEL groups in the US did in person for decades. You want communism. You get to. Yet you don’t have the cajones to come out and say it. Instead, it’s wrapped up in univeralist, Orwellian double talk. When you have to alter the meaning of words into focus grouped, deceptive irrelevance, perhaps your motives are not as pristine as you present them.
I honestly have more respect for the Weather Underground terrorists. Yes, they were despicable, unrepentant, bomb chucking killers, but they were honest (brutally) about what they wanted!
There’s a photo someone texted me last year. I shows a confrontation between a large group OWS-style rioters screaming and nose to nose with a huge contingent of militarized police in riot gear. Above the protesters it says “Wants more government”. Above the cops it says “More government”. And there in lies your fatal deceit. The progressive left has pushed for government growth and increased spending at every turn. The wobbly Chamber of Commerce Republicans happily joined the spending orgy after Clinton. Well, you got your behemoth, and it’s thoroughly corrupt, unaccountable, and eager to lash out at anyone who opposes it.
Pray tell - how do you plan to put that genie back in the bottle once you succeed in impoverishing the citizenry to 3rd world village peasant status….or a “sustainable” and “just” lifestyle if you prefer? Perhaps you expect to be elevated to Nomenklatura status for helping usher in “utopia”? Good luck with that.
Perhaps it is as simple as “playing radical is fun”. Wouldn’t know. I’ve been working since I was 15, putting myself through college, and building a career. Don’t get the wrong idea, I’m not rich by any means. But don’t expect any pats on the back from me should you march triumphantly over the hill singing the Internationale.
I was really inspired of what has been brought up here as one of the most important and pressing questions of mankind at this time of our evolution. My 38 + 1 questions Ω try to illuminate parts of the wider field of System Leadership.
Here a short inroduction to the questions find in the corresponding link:
38 + 1 Questions on System Leadership
... and what lies ahead
“... Is there any realistic hope that a sufficient number of skilled system leaders will emerge in time to help us face our daunting systemic challenges?”
—Peter Senge, Hal Hamilton, John Kania
There is no hope at all and the system leaders won’t emerge in time!!! Of course this answer is to be understood as a challenge to wholeheartedly engage in what lies ahead us to face the challenges.
My questions on System Leadership try to illuminate parts of the wider field of System Leadership. They arose out of meditations on “The Dawn of System Leadership”. The 39 questions are clustered around important themes which are:
- System Leader Type(s)
- Integrated System Leader
- The “Now” and the “Should” of System Leaders / System Leadership
- An inquiry into illuminating the blind spots of current System Leadership / System Leaders
- Learning / Education
- Practice
Let us engage in one of the most important and pressing questions of mankind as above formulated by Senge, Hamilton and Kania. We are called to bring in our courage, hands, hearts and minds. There is hope and system leaders will emerge as soon as we hold that intention in the global community of change makers.
And now the questions are yours. What other questions and comments do you have?
As evidenced by the Lao Tzu proverb; leadership itself is the systemic interaction of influence among followers, ideas, those who lead and even within ourselves. For this higher order, more aware influence interaction to permeate and influence our broader society, I believe the tools and learning must be made universally available and adopted by followers and leaders alike. Our traditional hierarchical thinking and top-down procedural norms must be purposefully overridden by explicit activities promoting these systemic practices in everyone’s professional development. I am doing this in my work rethinking how all knowledge work is pursued/practiced. see - http://transformationalknowledgework.com
I notice “we” continue to use strings of sequential words to describe complexity - holistic concepts. From my experience, strings simply don’t work well.
Here is my naïve idea. If “creating a shared language of change” is important then why not use Codons? They are holistic and they demonstrate “Complexity need not be complicated.”
I have spent a lot of time researching economic development and revitalization efforts in an attempt to learn why some efforts enjoy tremendous success while others fail miserably. Now, I have my answer: is there a system leader in the house?
Its true I also think that there are 2 parallel wings in every organization which are far different then each other, the people who allot the fund and the one who works on grass root level. Most of the times I found that due to lack of collaboration between the two the organization can’t drive the impact it can. So the system leader can also collaborate between the two and help in achieving objective. Just my 2 cents.
Good point. I do believe the bottom line is that fixing one piece of the puzzle does not complete the picture. From personal experience, I see local failures explained quite well in terms of “system leadership.” I also agree that most do not truly understand the commitment required to bring about a successful turn around.
Excellent article. It would be nice to see the authors follow it up with a review of “Authentic Leadership” and then do a comparison between the two schools of thought
I have pledged commitment to be of service with our grassroots communities not only in thoughts and project plan proposals but launching it this time. Infant car seat example http://healthychildren.webs.com/
The above article truly inspires. A guide for start-up integrators.
Really appreciate this read!
A very inspiring and encouraging article.
Systems Thinking in sustainable development is going to play a major role in the coming years.
Well written and structured article to systemic leadership and the tools needed tells us all that real leadership is developed collectively and singularly, shows the deeper learning emerging as the path we all must relearn, optimistically.
COMMENTS
BY Cassie Robinson
ON November 20, 2014 03:33 PM
Brilliant article, thank you.
I’m wondering if you’ve seen this site - http://www.systemschangers.com?
Lots of great snippets of film about systems leadership.
BY Adrienne Luce
ON November 21, 2014 11:39 AM
Thank you for such a thoughtful and insightful article. As someone who aspires to be a systems leader, I found this article very helpful and a valuable resource for my own personal and professional journey.
BY Floris Koot
ON November 23, 2014 08:00 AM
System implies mental grip over. The future shows there is less and less grip. The intermingling of actions, reactions, dialogue, debate, strive and co-creation is the key to all societal change. Plans can be made, some will work, other fail. But more and more people feel losing grip. And I say, control never has never been real anyway. I say more and more we are aware of the interconnectedness of all things. And out of this interconnected interplay all new movements will arise. So the point is not to regain control; it is about hosting what wants to happen.
This demands both system awareness, service to and a more personal attitude with integrity.
http://www.mediafire.com/view/3gl2uklk7fla9u1/Swarm+Leadership.pdf
BY Suzanne Tesselaar
ON November 23, 2014 11:16 PM
To extend on this very interesting article, I want to add the notion of a shared language of change - in generative conversation or through interactive intervention, organizations cocreate a story of change; connecting the system (or structure) and culture (the heart, the mind and the will). Under the right conditions, these stories spread, become contagious and cause social epidemics. Pushing forward change, not only top down, through leadership, but in cocreation and dialogue from all angles, giving voice to social networks through all levels.After all, If we can change they way people speak, we can change the way they behave , according Paul Bate (2005).
BY Lise
ON November 27, 2014 12:41 PM
Thank you for a wonderful and inspiring article. It was though-provoking but mostly it fed my thoughts and aspirations in working in the field of collaborative work and systemic change. The references and tools are fabulous; I kept deflecting to other sites to explors…it took me forever to read this article.
BY Joe Capozza
ON December 3, 2014 05:01 PM
A great article! I’ve taken many notes that will assist me with my future role within a low socio-economic region.
BY Jason Bohn
ON December 4, 2014 11:47 AM
Excellent article. My own personal journey attempting to be a system leader has been shaped by SSIR articles on organizational change by Kotter, Collective Impact thinking by Kania and now this article that feels like words have been created for the sensation that I’ve been living and not able to articulate to family and friends, except with platitudes like “trying to move a mountain” without the permission to ask anyone to shovel or “herding cats” which never seems to provide a destination. The one sensation that I don’t think it adequately describes is the almost constant having to do things (or not do reactive things which at least make you look busy) that the majority of stakeholders not understand until they see what they define as “progress” being made and the personal toil and lack of appreciation inherent to “profound commitment.”
Although the article touches lightly on some of the challenges and personal fortitude required to walk this system leadership path, I would love to hear from others (or another article) describing what their “particular gateways” or challenges that slap you in the face when using some of the articles principles in the midst of the work and very much lead to the desire to quit (which I consider a little different from just “floundering”.
For example, early on in my work shaping an improved homelessness system I attempted (even graphically) to display the larger system and got yelled at that I had no understand and there was no way anyone was ready for that. Two years later, the graphic has improved, but the embedded concepts are what the community has agreed on. At another point during this journey, which I came into as more of a “systems” expert then a “homelessness” expert, a significant stakeholder told a larger group of stakeholders that I knew nothing about the topic. The first incident happened in a very small group and may have delayed the work, but it definitely shut down my willingness to risk sharing a different vision for quite a while and caused me to seriously think about finding other “issues” to go help with. Luckily, the second incident came after I had build trusting relationships with most of the audience and did more to discredit the attacker than me personally. However, because there wasn’t much progress being made yet, I had to seriously consider whether the work was worth the personal attacks.
I would love to hear from others on how they do things like convince a foundation that building trust among the collective leadership is worth funding or when political issues interfered with getting the right tool into use that “will gradually cause them over time to think different.”
BY David Archer
ON December 9, 2014 01:33 AM
Thanks for a very thought provoking article. The comment about collaboration initiatives often floundering ‘..in part because they failed to foster collective leadership within and across the collaborating organizations.’ certainly strikes a chord with my own experience here in the UK.
But there are emerging islands of good practice - sadly it often seems that organizations and their leaders have to experience the pain of a collaboration failure before they are able to modify their leadership behaviour in ways which will support systemic change.
You talk about 3 core capabilities - I’d like to suggest a 4th and that is the ability to really share control across a system. Its a cliché but you can’t be a collaborative leader on your own - and yet its surprising how many leaders I still see trying to be a hero and do just that. Developing leaders who can share control with confidence and are prepared to handle the inevitable conflict in a healthy manner are I think now key foundations of success in so many areas of the global economy.
BY Graham Williams
ON December 10, 2014 09:06 AM
I share the sentiment expressed by most that this is a wonderful way forward.
Can’t help wondering though what went wrong with the adoption of Mandela’s lead - there is little doubt that the wrong scenario is transpiring, that his leadership style has not taken hold, that the new South African reality is dire (state creep, corruption, rampant crime, growing poverty, government triggering deeper racial divides ....
A admire what Mandela did in bring South Africa back from the brink, but perhaps ‘excessive tolerance’ turned out to be the ground in which new, unwelcome seeds flourished ....
This is not intended as a political comment, but rather an inquiry into what seeds of failure may be contained in systemic, collaborative leadership unless the right checks and balances are in place. Certainly in the case of South Africa there has been no ‘self-regulation’...
BY Mark Fulop
ON December 11, 2014 07:08 AM
Funny, I seemed to remember being immersed in systems leadership back in the 80’s studying public health & reading Russell Ackoff who had been writing about systems work back in the 70’s. As with much that is being repackaged as new, this article comes across as pretty paternalistic. One just needs to review the history of a public health movement like Tobacco Control in California, to see that many of us came up through the ranks of systems thinking. Unfortunately, it is not practitioners who are clueless about systems but it is the fragmented and non-systemic way in which social innovation is funded that inhibits system thinking and systems acting. Fortunately these are pockets where real systems change is occurring but please don’t repackage the toothpaste and try to sell it as an innovation
BY Hal Hamilton
ON December 11, 2014 11:14 AM
I’m one of the authors and thank you for these very thoughtful comments.
Suzanne, I resonate with “creating a shared language of change.” In my work we always have to balance emergent change with ways that those changes respond to the already shaped goals of the people and organizations. We’re seeking where one plus one might equal three, and we also have to make sure we achieve specific deliverables in order to keep the somewhat-less-committed on board long enough for commitment to settle in.
Jason, I agree that this is hard work, of which a crucial and time-consuming step is to have all the one-on-one conversations that build an energetic field among the players so that they own the initiative.
David, your comment about shared control is along the same lines. Shared credit is also a principle.
Finally, one colleague asked me the other day why we didn’t use the word “empathy” as we described system leadership. I thought that this was a really good suggestion. If I care about you, in addition to understanding your goals, I will be much more likely to create a generative environment that includes you. I’ve found that one requirement of this work is to like people.
BY Cassie Robinson
ON December 11, 2014 11:29 AM
This is a new piece of work that we have just finished in partnership with ICAEW and Oxford University.
Building a Language of Systems Change.
http://thepointpeople.com/publications/
BY RalfLippold
ON December 15, 2014 10:38 PM
Great write - in a world of diverse fields that more or less try to tackle the same systemic issues but using different language that is common for their peers yet not understood by others it needs:
- awareness/mindfulness of what is happening around us on a systemic level
- learning to put into understandable (by all) words that grasp the imagination of people
- create a “platform understanding” that pulls people into action
Probably this is not a one-day, or seven-day task. It will take longer especially as all people on this planet have come from very different backgrounds, personal experience, and knowledge basis.
Moving forward is an art of planting our feet one at a time in the desired direction.
BY Rob Siegel
ON December 16, 2014 12:33 PM
Outstanding collection of global thinking around system leadership! It brings to mind how many of us are reluctant to shift from the Cartesian paradigm to the Systemic paradigm - that the parts are best understood by a clear vision of the whole.
The thinking in this article has numerous applications. As a retired educator and school administrator, much of my time is now spent on spreading the word about a new social science framework for K-8 schools, an “outside-in” model as I describe it, where first we consider our common humanity and then we identify the diverse components within which we are personally involved - usually by chance.
The article also brings to mind what a unique contribution the members of the Bahá’í Faith are making with their worldwide efforts in promoting the Junior Youth Spiritual Empowerment Program. I believe their “animators” - those who help facilitate the groups - truly aspire to practice system leadership.
All efforts made in this realm offer great opportunities for our eventual understanding of unity in diversity as a universal virtue of recognition of the oneness of humanity.
BY Valencia Joshua
ON December 23, 2014 01:00 AM
The ANC always made the point to say that Mandela was part of the collective leadership of the ANC, so your point is spot on on the need for system leadership.
BY Nelson
ON December 24, 2014 11:16 PM
I have pledged commitment to be of service with our grassroots communities not only in thoughts and project plan proposals but launching it this time.
The above article truly inspires. A guide for start-up integrators.
BY Kevin Parcell
ON January 2, 2015 06:42 AM
Perhaps achieving “the deep changes necessary to accelerate progress against society’s most intractable problems” requires two different kinds of leadership: the visionary who sees the possible future and the trail blazer who clears the path. Sometimes one person can be both by following Gandhi’s example, which he described as being the change. Mandela took Gandhi’s work in South Africa another step forward in this way, and King brought it to America through his living example. All three of these men were visionaries who walked the talk, and all three “catalyzed collective leadership” by doing a third thing: getting out of the way of those whom would go further.
Most leaders today seek power by validating the poor choices of the mob through standing at their head and pointing at an enemy. For example, the affluent leaders on the left point to the right and say the problem is their conservative ideology, and the affluent leaders on the right point to the left and say the problem is their liberal ideology; the leaders on both sides seek power and both constituencies continue to eat the world alive. Gandhi, King and Mandela all renounced that kind of affluence and were living examples of persons achieving profound success not measured in personal material wealth; and all three renounced personal power and thus left the way clear for those whom would follow that path.
BY Jeff
ON January 13, 2015 04:10 PM
Wow. Where to even begin? Eh, the beginning I suppose -
Nelson Mandela - He has been transformed by the left into figure of religious stature. I have no problem with the man, and empathize with his goals, but the author seems completely unaware, perhaps unconcerned, with uncomfortable facts - such as his wife’s propensity to burn people alive in a gasoline-soaked tires, and the current crime-ridden, corrupt, and dire state of South Africa under the Marxist ANC. A minor point, but the citations would indicate the authors consider themselves scholars. Act like it.
The remainder, including the comments, are nothing but an electronic 21st century version of what COMINTEL groups in the US did in person for decades. You want communism. You get to. Yet you don’t have the cajones to come out and say it. Instead, it’s wrapped up in univeralist, Orwellian double talk. When you have to alter the meaning of words into focus grouped, deceptive irrelevance, perhaps your motives are not as pristine as you present them.
I honestly have more respect for the Weather Underground terrorists. Yes, they were despicable, unrepentant, bomb chucking killers, but they were honest (brutally) about what they wanted!
There’s a photo someone texted me last year. I shows a confrontation between a large group OWS-style rioters screaming and nose to nose with a huge contingent of militarized police in riot gear. Above the protesters it says “Wants more government”. Above the cops it says “More government”. And there in lies your fatal deceit. The progressive left has pushed for government growth and increased spending at every turn. The wobbly Chamber of Commerce Republicans happily joined the spending orgy after Clinton. Well, you got your behemoth, and it’s thoroughly corrupt, unaccountable, and eager to lash out at anyone who opposes it.
Pray tell - how do you plan to put that genie back in the bottle once you succeed in impoverishing the citizenry to 3rd world village peasant status….or a “sustainable” and “just” lifestyle if you prefer? Perhaps you expect to be elevated to Nomenklatura status for helping usher in “utopia”? Good luck with that.
Perhaps it is as simple as “playing radical is fun”. Wouldn’t know. I’ve been working since I was 15, putting myself through college, and building a career. Don’t get the wrong idea, I’m not rich by any means. But don’t expect any pats on the back from me should you march triumphantly over the hill singing the Internationale.
BY Jurgen Grosse-Puppendahl
ON February 3, 2015 02:29 AM
I was really inspired of what has been brought up here as one of the most important and pressing questions of mankind at this time of our evolution. My 38 + 1 questions Ω try to illuminate parts of the wider field of System Leadership.
Here a short inroduction to the questions find in the corresponding link:
38 + 1 Questions on System Leadership
... and what lies ahead
“... Is there any realistic hope that a sufficient number of skilled system leaders will emerge in time to help us face our daunting systemic challenges?”
—Peter Senge, Hal Hamilton, John Kania
There is no hope at all and the system leaders won’t emerge in time!!! Of course this answer is to be understood as a challenge to wholeheartedly engage in what lies ahead us to face the challenges.
My questions on System Leadership try to illuminate parts of the wider field of System Leadership. They arose out of meditations on “The Dawn of System Leadership”. The 39 questions are clustered around important themes which are:
- System Leader Type(s)
- Integrated System Leader
- The “Now” and the “Should” of System Leaders / System Leadership
- An inquiry into illuminating the blind spots of current System Leadership / System Leaders
- Learning / Education
- Practice
Let us engage in one of the most important and pressing questions of mankind as above formulated by Senge, Hamilton and Kania. We are called to bring in our courage, hands, hearts and minds. There is hope and system leaders will emerge as soon as we hold that intention in the global community of change makers.
And now the questions are yours. What other questions and comments do you have?
BY Terry Yelmene
ON February 4, 2015 03:58 AM
As evidenced by the Lao Tzu proverb; leadership itself is the systemic interaction of influence among followers, ideas, those who lead and even within ourselves. For this higher order, more aware influence interaction to permeate and influence our broader society, I believe the tools and learning must be made universally available and adopted by followers and leaders alike. Our traditional hierarchical thinking and top-down procedural norms must be purposefully overridden by explicit activities promoting these systemic practices in everyone’s professional development. I am doing this in my work rethinking how all knowledge work is pursued/practiced. see - http://transformationalknowledgework.com
BY Bill
ON February 4, 2015 10:25 AM
Great article, great ideas.
I notice “we” continue to use strings of sequential words to describe complexity - holistic concepts. From my experience, strings simply don’t work well.
Here is my naïve idea. If “creating a shared language of change” is important then why not use Codons? They are holistic and they demonstrate “Complexity need not be complicated.”
BY David McAra
ON February 9, 2015 02:09 AM
Sounds interesting, Bill. What’s a Codon?
BY Bill
ON February 9, 2015 08:53 AM
What is a Codon?
A Codon is a pattern of 3. Living systems use Codons to keep living systems living. DNA is made up of Codons patterns of 3.
Designing “living pattern of 3” provide us with a new toolkit to improve what we do and how we think.
BY Jesse Vinson
ON February 12, 2015 03:03 PM
I have spent a lot of time researching economic development and revitalization efforts in an attempt to learn why some efforts enjoy tremendous success while others fail miserably. Now, I have my answer: is there a system leader in the house?
This article provided terrific insight; thank you
BY Linda Simmons
ON February 23, 2015 11:43 PM
Its true I also think that there are 2 parallel wings in every organization which are far different then each other, the people who allot the fund and the one who works on grass root level. Most of the times I found that due to lack of collaboration between the two the organization can’t drive the impact it can. So the system leader can also collaborate between the two and help in achieving objective. Just my 2 cents.
BY Jesse Vinson
ON February 24, 2015 07:22 AM
Good point. I do believe the bottom line is that fixing one piece of the puzzle does not complete the picture. From personal experience, I see local failures explained quite well in terms of “system leadership.” I also agree that most do not truly understand the commitment required to bring about a successful turn around.
BY Tom
ON May 23, 2015 01:49 AM
As an increasingly frustrated public sector employee in the UK’s NHS this article is music to my ears…it’s great to see the Kings Fund reference it
BY James Himphill
ON April 23, 2016 02:18 AM
Quite clear and enjoyable/thought provoking to read.
BY John Chilton
ON June 7, 2016 11:29 AM
Excellent article. It would be nice to see the authors follow it up with a review of “Authentic Leadership” and then do a comparison between the two schools of thought
BY Bob
ON November 14, 2016 02:27 AM
I have pledged commitment to be of service with our grassroots communities not only in thoughts and project plan proposals but launching it this time. Infant car seat example
http://healthychildren.webs.com/
The above article truly inspires. A guide for start-up integrators.
BY Moritz
ON October 31, 2020 10:41 AM
Really appreciate this read!
A very inspiring and encouraging article.
Systems Thinking in sustainable development is going to play a major role in the coming years.
BY Patricia Fillet
ON March 16, 2022 01:55 AM
Well written and structured article to systemic leadership and the tools needed tells us all that real leadership is developed collectively and singularly, shows the deeper learning emerging as the path we all must relearn, optimistically.