by Gary Miller, Director of HR Process Transformation at DePaul University
To overcome blindness to operational realities, leadership must embrace a mindset focused on empowering the frontline.
-------------------------------------
“Most ailing organizations have developed a functional blindness to their own defects. They are not suffering because they cannot solve their problems, but because they cannot see their problems.” -John Gardner[1]
Attitudes and beliefs, if not grounded in reality, can cause this blindness at the individual level as well. Consider the case of Hiroo Onoda, a Japanese soldier in World War II who didn’t get the message when Japan surrendered and didn’t believe those who tried to persuade him. For almost three decades, he hid in the jungles of the Philippines, foraging for food and stealing from local farmers. In 1974, he returned to civilization after his former commander finally convinced him of the truth.[2]
Mindsets can have a strong grip on societies and communities as well. In 1962, Thomas Kuhn introduced the idea of scientific revolutions and paradigms.[3] He explained how better interpretations of research findings can take a long time to become influential because of the tenacity of prevailing attitudes and beliefs associated with prevailing scientific theories.
In 1972, the social psychologist Irving Janis coined the term groupthink to describe the tendency of leadership groups to make bad decisions because of being “blind” to certain realities often obvious to many on the outside. The term became famously associated with the narrow and errant mindset of American auto industry executives who failed to “see” changing consumer preferences. “Over time, they [the auto makers] cultivated leadership and a culture that believed that not only were Americans the undisputedly best automakers in the world, but that these companies knew exactly what the American population wanted,” reported one article.[4]
Universities seemingly do a lot to counter groupthink, with some seeking broad representation from all segments of the communities they serve. Further, many seek diversity among board members, administrators, faculty, and staff and have ongoing outreach initiatives, even beyond the federally required affirmative action regulations. Faculty and staff councils bring additional eyes to senior leadership, helping broaden the collective mindset of the institution and making sound strategic decisions more likely.
Yet, depending on the individual mindsets that senior administrators and managers bring to their leadership role, which can vary widely across a college or university, they could be blind to significant organizational problems and inefficiencies. Some who really know the ropes bring insights from having a detailed knowledge of the work and the strengths of the people who perform the work. As Craig Mousin pointed out in his column in the winter 2016 edition of Update (page 9), “A leader who has learned the ropes can be trusted by others in the team to know all the ins and outs of a skill or a profession and lead well.”
In today’s complex organizations, however, with rapidly changing technologies, greater competition, new opportunities, and changing student demographics, few leaders really know all the ropes. Consequently, boards and senior executives are now more dependent than ever on the experiences and insights of faculty and student-facing staff. These frontline professionals — the face of the university to students — are the ones who know their institutions’ strengths and weaknesses at the operational level. They know what is needed to improve the student experience, eliminate frustrating bureaucracy, and streamline processes. The quality of efforts meant to unleash the potential of these frontline professionals varies from college to college and across departments.
Failure to empower these individuals may have significant negative consequences. David Graeber’s article in a recent edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education suggests that some senior administrators are completely oblivious to what’s happening among their staffs. He cites survey results, albeit from Britain and Holland, that show 37 to 40 percent of all workers are convinced that their jobs make no meaningful contribution to the world. He claims that higher education is no better, describing testimony he’s received from staff: “Many… don’t end up doing much; some administrative staff will inevitably end up sitting around playing Fruit Mahjong all day or watching cat videos. But it’s generally considered good form to give all staff members at least a few hours of actual work to do each week.” Graeber further claims that some senior administrators view staff’s role as serving them: “They must be provided with a tiny army of flunkies” to feel “appropriately impressive and powerful.”
Leaders who view their role as being the boss and the staff’s role as primarily there to help them look good do not value the insights of the frontline nor do they empower them. Consequently, these leaders are unaware of the opportunities and challenges in their areas. As Gardner observed, their units will suffer because they cannot see their problems.
The Mindset that Brings Sight
In order to bring operational and service challenges — as well as opportunities — into sight, leaders must empower the frontline. This means that university boards and senior executives should emphasize the development of a leadership culture whereby those in positions of authority over others view their role primarily as serving the organization, faculty, and staff. Mindset must shift from being boss to being servant, as Adam Grant might put it, from being a “taker” to being a “giver.”[5]
The approach to leadership that is consistent with the giver mindset and unleashes the power of the frontline is that of servant leadership, which has long been recognized as a best practice. Carol Walker’s 2015 Harvard Business Review article argued the importance of a servant leadership philosophy for new managers. She wrote:
Robert Greenleaf coined the term [servant leadership] 35 years ago, but the concept is still vital and empowering. Granted, “servant” doesn’t sound nearly as powerful as “boss,” but it has the potential to deliver far more of what most of us are really after: influence. The reason is simple. When you have a servant mentality, it’s not about you. Removing self-interest and personal glory from your motivation on the job is the single most important thing you can do to inspire trust. When you focus first on the success of your organization and your team, it comes through clearly. You ask more questions, listen more carefully, and actively value others’ needs and contributions. The result is more thoughtful, balanced decisions.
The power of servant leadership flows from a right view of the use of power and position, as depicted by the Catholic Social Teaching principle of subsidiarity. “On the basis of this principle, all societies of a superior order must adopt attitudes of help (“subsidium”) — therefore of support, promotion, development — with respect to lower-order societies. In this way, intermediate social entities can properly perform the functions that fall to them without being required to hand them over unjustly to other social entities of a higher level, by which they would end up being absorbed and substituted, in the end seeing themselves denied their dignity and essential place.”[6]
The guiding principle of subsidiarity underlies organizational and societal efforts to create equal opportunity for all, especially the under-resourced. It underlies the laws, policies, and practices to promote diversity and inclusion. The principle stresses the development of persons and groups to enable their success. Vocation of the Business Leader puts it this way:
The principle of subsidiarity offers business leaders great insights. It encourages them to use their power at the service of everyone in their organization and prompts them to question whether their authority serves the development of all their employees…. For business leaders on every level, from team leader up to chief executive, this is very demanding but rewarding. Working under the principle of subsidiarity calls for restraint and a humble acceptance of the role of a servant leader.[7]
A leadership culture that embraces the philosophy of servant leadership and, consequently, the giver mindset and the subsidiarity principle, in which senior administrators and managers see their role as serving others and the organization, is key to unlocking the full potential of an institution. Such a prevailing culture would help avoid many of the organizational ills described by Graeber. Faculty and frontline staff so enabled by leadership, who know they can make a difference and that their opinions are valued, and who understand clearly how their work contributes to the mission of the university, will remedy the functional blindness organizations may have to their own defects.
Universities seemingly do a lot to counter groupthink, with some seeking broad representation from all segments of the communities they serve. Further, many seek diversity among board members, administrators, faculty, and staff and have ongoing outreach initiatives, even beyond the federally required affirmative action regulations. Faculty and staff councils bring additional eyes to senior leadership, helping broaden the collective mindset of the institution and making sound strategic decisions more likely.
Yet, depending on the individual mindsets that senior administrators and managers bring to their leadership role, which can vary widely across a college or university, they could be blind to significant organizational problems and inefficiencies. Some who really know the ropes bring insights from having a detailed knowledge of the work and the strengths of the people who perform the work. As Craig Mousin pointed out in his column in the winter 2016 edition of Update (page 9), “A leader who has learned the ropes can be trusted by others in the team to know all the ins and outs of a skill or a profession and lead well.”
In today’s complex organizations, however, with rapidly changing technologies, greater competition, new opportunities, and changing student demographics, few leaders really know all the ropes. Consequently, boards and senior executives are now more dependent than ever on the experiences and insights of faculty and student-facing staff. These frontline professionals — the face of the university to students — are the ones who know their institutions’ strengths and weaknesses at the operational level. They know what is needed to improve the student experience, eliminate frustrating bureaucracy, and streamline processes. The quality of efforts meant to unleash the potential of these frontline professionals varies from college to college and across departments.
Failure to empower these individuals may have significant negative consequences. David Graeber’s article in a recent edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education suggests that some senior administrators are completely oblivious to what’s happening among their staffs. He cites survey results, albeit from Britain and Holland, that show 37 to 40 percent of all workers are convinced that their jobs make no meaningful contribution to the world. He claims that higher education is no better, describing testimony he’s received from staff: “Many… don’t end up doing much; some administrative staff will inevitably end up sitting around playing Fruit Mahjong all day or watching cat videos. But it’s generally considered good form to give all staff members at least a few hours of actual work to do each week.” Graeber further claims that some senior administrators view staff’s role as serving them: “They must be provided with a tiny army of flunkies” to feel “appropriately impressive and powerful.”
Leaders who view their role as being the boss and the staff’s role as primarily there to help them look good do not value the insights of the frontline nor do they empower them. Consequently, these leaders are unaware of the opportunities and challenges in their areas. As Gardner observed, their units will suffer because they cannot see their problems.
The Mindset that Brings Sight
In order to bring operational and service challenges — as well as opportunities — into sight, leaders must empower the frontline. This means that university boards and senior executives should emphasize the development of a leadership culture whereby those in positions of authority over others view their role primarily as serving the organization, faculty, and staff. Mindset must shift from being boss to being servant, as Adam Grant might put it, from being a “taker” to being a “giver.”[5]
The approach to leadership that is consistent with the giver mindset and unleashes the power of the frontline is that of servant leadership, which has long been recognized as a best practice. Carol Walker’s 2015 Harvard Business Review article argued the importance of a servant leadership philosophy for new managers. She wrote:
Robert Greenleaf coined the term [servant leadership] 35 years ago, but the concept is still vital and empowering. Granted, “servant” doesn’t sound nearly as powerful as “boss,” but it has the potential to deliver far more of what most of us are really after: influence. The reason is simple. When you have a servant mentality, it’s not about you. Removing self-interest and personal glory from your motivation on the job is the single most important thing you can do to inspire trust. When you focus first on the success of your organization and your team, it comes through clearly. You ask more questions, listen more carefully, and actively value others’ needs and contributions. The result is more thoughtful, balanced decisions.
The power of servant leadership flows from a right view of the use of power and position, as depicted by the Catholic Social Teaching principle of subsidiarity. “On the basis of this principle, all societies of a superior order must adopt attitudes of help (“subsidium”) — therefore of support, promotion, development — with respect to lower-order societies. In this way, intermediate social entities can properly perform the functions that fall to them without being required to hand them over unjustly to other social entities of a higher level, by which they would end up being absorbed and substituted, in the end seeing themselves denied their dignity and essential place.”[6]
The guiding principle of subsidiarity underlies organizational and societal efforts to create equal opportunity for all, especially the under-resourced. It underlies the laws, policies, and practices to promote diversity and inclusion. The principle stresses the development of persons and groups to enable their success. Vocation of the Business Leader puts it this way:
The principle of subsidiarity offers business leaders great insights. It encourages them to use their power at the service of everyone in their organization and prompts them to question whether their authority serves the development of all their employees…. For business leaders on every level, from team leader up to chief executive, this is very demanding but rewarding. Working under the principle of subsidiarity calls for restraint and a humble acceptance of the role of a servant leader.[7]
A leadership culture that embraces the philosophy of servant leadership and, consequently, the giver mindset and the subsidiarity principle, in which senior administrators and managers see their role as serving others and the organization, is key to unlocking the full potential of an institution. Such a prevailing culture would help avoid many of the organizational ills described by Graeber. Faculty and frontline staff so enabled by leadership, who know they can make a difference and that their opinions are valued, and who understand clearly how their work contributes to the mission of the university, will remedy the functional blindness organizations may have to their own defects.
[1] Bibeault, D. B. Corporate Turnaround: How Managers Turn Losers into Winners. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981).
[2] Onoda, H. No Surrender: My Thirty-Year War. (Tokyo/New York: Kodansha International, 1974).
[3] Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015).
[4] See examples of the Groupthink impact at https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/311864.
[5] In his book Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, Adam Grant presents a common but destructive leadership mindset: the “taker” mentality. Simply put, takers like to get more than they give. “They feel that to succeed, they need to be better than others.... They self-promote and make sure they get plenty of credit for their efforts.” See Adam Grant. Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success (New York: Penguin Books, 2014), p. 21, 35.
[6] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004), sec. 186. See http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html.
[7] Naughton, M.M & Alford, H. J. Vocation of the Business Leader: A Reflection. (Vatican City: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, 2014). Obtain a copy from https://www.jesuitdigitalnetwork.org/authoring/8731-vocation-of-the-business-leader/view.
[2] Onoda, H. No Surrender: My Thirty-Year War. (Tokyo/New York: Kodansha International, 1974).
[3] Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015).
[4] See examples of the Groupthink impact at https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/311864.
[5] In his book Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, Adam Grant presents a common but destructive leadership mindset: the “taker” mentality. Simply put, takers like to get more than they give. “They feel that to succeed, they need to be better than others.... They self-promote and make sure they get plenty of credit for their efforts.” See Adam Grant. Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success (New York: Penguin Books, 2014), p. 21, 35.
[6] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004), sec. 186. See http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html.
[7] Naughton, M.M & Alford, H. J. Vocation of the Business Leader: A Reflection. (Vatican City: Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, 2014). Obtain a copy from https://www.jesuitdigitalnetwork.org/authoring/8731-vocation-of-the-business-leader/view.