40\40 and the Adaptive Challenge - Part 2 of 2
Having defined in Part One, the adaptive challenge set before our 40\40 group I would suggest that our leadership approach should be adaptive as opposed to organizational. What do I mean? I love how Hirsch explains it below.
Adaptive vs. Organizational Leadership
The kind of leadership required in an adaptive challenge must also be adaptive. These are terms coined by Harvard’s Ronald Heifetz between “technical (operational) leadership” and “adaptive” leadership.” (as quoted by Hirsch on. p. 255)
“The former entails the exercise of authority and is an entirely appropriate response in conditions of relative equilibrium. Operational leadership works best when the problems faced can be dealt with by drawing upon a pre-existing repertoire. Operational leadership goes hand in hand with the tenets of social engineering. A solution is devised from above and rolled out through the ranks. If an organization is in crisis; if downsizing, restructuring, or reducing costs is called for; if sharpened execution is the key to success then operational leadership is probably the best bet.” (Pascale, Millemann, and Gioja, Surfing the Edge of Chaos, 39.)
Hirsch observes that this describes our normal approach to church leadership during our recent history given our focus on church growth, pastoral care, management, technique and programs. I think this describes the first fifty years of my own ministry, “Campus Crusade for Christ.” If things don’t work, either work harder, or make adjustments to our strategies. It is increasingly curious to me that we like to think of ourselves as a movement, but we strap a command, control, and an operational leadership approach to it. Movements are more like living systems.
“In living systems problems arise, however, when a species (or organization) misapplies a traditional solution to an adaptive problem. in this situation, the current repertoire of solutions is inadequate or just plain wrong. In nature, the alpha male silverback mountain gorilla draws its troop together in a tight circle and behaves aggressively toward rival males or other natural threats. This traditional solution works effectively — unless the troop is facing poachers armed with guns, tranquilizer darts and capture nets.”
The gorilla faces an adaptive problem, “unless they learn to adapt to the new threat and find new responses, they are history.” (Hirsch, 256) Perhaps, I hope, you see where I’m going. Our 40\40 group of younger leaders need to figure out how to adapt and create new responses (proactively) to the threat/opportunity before the church in San Diego today.
I’m thinking we need to figure out how to be the adaptive leadership that the church in San Diego needs today. Hirsch suggest that as leaders, we need to be able to move people and organizations into adaptive modes, pushing them to the edge of chaos where conditions are ripe for change and innovation.
The same conversation should be had within Campus Crusade. Do we recognize that we are facing an adaptive challenge requiring innovation. I suspect that operational leadership is part of our “DNA.” We are prone to drawing from a “pre-set repertoire” (perhaps we call it “transferrability”) and addressing challenges with “sharpened execution.”
If Campus Crusade is facing an adaptive challenge, perhaps our organizational posture needs to be adaptive, and we should re-evaluate just what constitutes our DNA. Why preserve elements of operational leadership when innovation is the need of the hour?
There is so much more in this book.
Shameless plug warning!!!
Buy it here and 3% goes toward my book buying budget.
Links:
Short review of “Surfing the Edge of Chaos” including key principles.
Another one by MIT Sloan Management Review.