Download - The Leadership Triad Summary

Book Summary – The Leadership Triad Author: Dale Zand

SECTION I: Summary Knowledge Section

Chapter 1: Leadership – The New Conditions What constitutes effective leadership in a turbulent, information‐driven society? The subject matter in the book attempts to answer that question by constructing a model of leadership based on three forces: knowledge, trust and power. The author refers to his model as the "leadership triad." It forms the foundation for a comprehensive primer on the principles, skills, and attitudes that constitute effective leadership. "Leadership in the new world has three dimensions: processing knowledge, building trust and using power sensitively," author writes. Successful leaders enhance and integrate all three of the forces.

Here the author talks about the change that the concept of leadership has undergone. The traditional role of a manager in a manufacturing concern thinking of a solution and expecting the compliance of the same and the role of knowledge that is bringing about a fundamental change in how leader should operate.

The transmission of knowledge is very fast but the barriers could be emotional as well. The role of an effective leader is to unlock this potential and transient knowledge that is inherent in the individuals that build an organization and harness this to define and achieve appropriate goals.

Knowledge is critical to effective leadership in today's globally competitive and information‐driven society. In the contemporary marketplace, Author says, "the core competence of organizations is shifting to the processing of knowledge." This shift in strategic direction necessitates an equally important shift in the attitudes of leaders who now find they heading knowledge organizations. In a knowledge‐driven society, leading by directive proves dysfunctional and is rapidly overwhelmed by structural changes. Knowledge is the source of competitive advantage; the leader and his staff are no longer the font of all wisdom in the company, disseminating information and issuing edicts from on high. "The heroic fantasy of one person at the head of a column of followers shouting 'Charge' as they mount the battlements is outdated," Author writes.

In the information age, the sheer volume of knowledge production is staggering and continuously increasing. In such a society, knowledge becomes dispersed throughout organizations. Subordinates, particularly specialists, know more than the leaders, whose role is to search out and marshal the knowledge of all the people within the organization. Failure to act on this role can lead to isolation for the leader and to disastrous consequences for the company. Author gives the example of General Motors, with billion‐dollar buyout of major stockholder Ross Perot. Much to the chagrin of GM's management, Perot walked the plant floors seeking out problems and possible improvements. From his discussions with employees, Perot realized that GM's management had isolated itself, creating a stifling bureaucracy. All the while GM's competitive position and capabilities were eroding. Perot subsequently used this information to openly question management's policies at board meetings. GM's buyout of Perot was a "spectacular example of misdirected position power at work."


The diffused nature of knowledge is now the defining the new leader one who can learn and think across the organization.

Fear of falling behind competitors is the major impetus behind the search for new knowledge in a company. Finding and disseminating knowledge in an organization is a key role of the leader, whose attitudes and behaviors can help or hinder that process. Effective leaders understand the organic and systemic nature of their organization. They foster a seamless communication network and a free flow of information. They encourage diverse views among subordinates. This openness in turn enables leaders to facilitate the implementation of new knowledge in an organization. Ineffective leaders suppress knowledge and communication by punishing those who disclose adverse information or express opinions at odds with the leaders. This behavior causes subordinates to protect themselves by concealing knowledge from their leaders.

Leaders cannot use the traditional authority to command other people to reveal or use what they know. Nor the leaders can assume that formal power gives the greater insight and understanding of the others. Due to conflicts the managers are unable to use the distributed knowledge in an organization.

Market uncertainty, new product risk, rapid technological advancements new approaches to marketing have shortened the product life cycles. Decisions on new products / predicting the competition after X number of years offer you a range of choices. Add to that the factor of Globalization, the factors and answers multiply manifold.

The uncertainty factors are the regional trade agreements, removing the trade barriers and opening of the gigantic market areas. These changes present a huge challenge to a single designated leader to comprehend the 3600 import of the challenges so presented. For a better comprehension the leader needs to use the distributed knowledge present within the organization and evaluate the challenges so presented.

A leadership that is based on knowledge and trust is more effective than the one that is based on authority given the nature of cross cultural teams and markets.

The leaders need to balance the vision with the operational needs and the managers need to balance the operational need with the vision. Hence the roles are interchangeable within an individual.

Most of the profitable companies are knowledge intensive. The way knowledge is utilized and the manner in which the manager has derived that knowledge from the subordinates who formulate judgments, designs, proposals etc. The smaller companies cannot duplicate the level of knowledge that these companies possess. The leaders in a knowledge organization are fairly pressured to release and use the distributed knowledge present in the organization.

Knowledge exists in the head it cannot be seen or cannot be produced in tangible quantities plus it is difficult to measure. The progress in knowledge is also non linear, it is very hard for a leader to know what stimulates the mind and how the work is progressing. The thinking, ideas al happens in the mind


and unless the subordinates trust the leader it is very difficult to extract that knowledge from the minds of knowledge workers or subordinates.

The role of leaders in finding the distributed knowledge in any organization is crucial. It is the leaders that create the conditions that would lead to knowledge sharing and create platforms that would make that happen.

The leadership has 3 dimensions – Knowledge, trust and power. The leader has to process knowledge, build trust and use power judiciously. The leaders when use relevant knowledge, people trust them and grant them the power to as the people know that the leaders know what they are doing. Any deficiency in the 3 dimension distorts the leadership role and reduces the effectiveness of any leader.

CHAPTER 2: FINDING KNOWLEDGE

The organization is a store house of knowledge as ideas and information are constantly generated and disseminated. The leaders continuously utilize this knowledge to make crucial decisions. The problem lies in the fact when the leaders do not create conditions / situations that would make the path for free flow of knowledge and the result is that crucial knowledge stands blocked. The role of an effective leader is also to create knowledge pathways for free flow and dissemination of information and knowledge.

The role of leaders is also to act as teachers, planting ideas and nurturing them. The effective leaders know and build networks of people as the networks of people act as reservoirs of knowledge and act like a complex network that acts like a brain that continuously synthesizes knowledge and disseminates it. The crux of the teacher learner leader lies in the fact that finding the right knowledge and utilizing the knowledge so distilled from the internal channels within an organization.

The poor leaders ignore and suppress the knowledge, the errors are not taken into account and a willful neglect is there in not learning from mistakes so made. These leaders ignore the persons who are at variance to their ideas and ignore any inputs given are ignored.

The leaders depend on the knowledge of the subordinates and do not conceal the fact that they are dependent on the knowledge that is present in the organization and in the minds of the individuals in the team.

At the same time the knowledge as to be synthesized from a plethora of sources that continuously dumps the knowledge to the recipient. The job of a leader is to look for useful knowledge that is there in the vast dump of knowledge and extract it for utilization. The knowledge that is worthwhile helps to reduce uncertainty. The knowledge that is worthwhile can be categorized as the knowledge that impacts any business decision.


The leaders in the present context have to depend on others for seeking knowledge, learning and action. A confident leader will not believe everything that he/she hears. But they are discriminatory in their approach at the same time not demeaning the subordinates. These values are observed by the subordinates and the leader gains respect over time. In contrast the arrogant leaders are in a denial mode for knowledge sharing. They neither share nor seek knowledge. Subordinates with such leaders are fearful of the fact that these leaders when it comes to sharing and exchange of fresh ideas.

The informed leaders keep asking questions and focus on the relevant answers. The questions flow a logical cycle and same goes for logical answers. The leaders separate the wheat from the chaff and derive knowledge that is consistent with the assumptions. These go a long way in relating to the important decision making process. The magic is in identifying what is unknowable and searching for those answers to the unknowables. By continually monitoring the unknowables the fine tuning of the assumptions happens. Any good question formulation depends on the knowledge that one has on the subject and that unlocks a branching process that opens up new thoughts and possibilities. This usually comes when the leader uses an extensive body of knowledge about business strategy to frame the relevant questions.

The key is that the leader has to keep abreast of the important changes and improvement that is happening in these areas to ask the questions those are really relevant. These questions have no immediate answers but nonetheless these need to be asked in order to keep the organizations strategy fine tuned to the market.

Even failure to get the correct answer should result in reverse logic being applied to learn from any failure. And it’s the leader’s job to make that happen. The leaders need to ask penetrating questions that provoke new concepts and ideas. This is so because the knowledge does not follow a logical path and can come from really unknown areas and sources.

In view of imperfect knowledge the leaders know that how to base their decisions on the existing knowledge and work on that, in the event of a failure they learn from it and move on to refine that strategy.

The synergy unless defined by asking hard nosed questions proves to a worthless strategy, unless boosted by making concrete information available about all the aspects of the synergy and taking decisions based on them. The danger comes in form of useless knowledge and the time taken to process such information. The decisions that are based on appropriate usage of time to assess the information at hand results in fewer failures.

Again the danger stems from the fact that any organizations churn volumes of data that is meaningless to the people that have to take decisions. The leaders should take initiative to ask for and process only the information that is usable. The formulation of new knowledge should alter the existing structures and paradigms. Knowledge is a precursor to the success or failure of any company as in the case of M&A industry. This knowledge is new to the leader but known to others. The other aspect defines the knowledge that is new to all. Here the leader has to make a strategy that is based on speculative creative thinking and original insights to create the new knowledge.


The creation of knowledge is a process that needs freedom of thought and the thought that questions the established norms and procedures. Working in a routine and a structured environment kills this aspect of creating knowledge. Acquiring knowledge from others requires negotiation skills whereas creativity depends on the ability to concentrate on a problem without sensitivity to others and an indifference to power that might inhibit the pursuit of unconventional ideas.

The leaders need to formulate studies and guidelines that how their organization stimulates, creates and absorbs new knowledge. The negative trait of a leader is hiding the new knowledge lest their position gets diminished or searching for new knowledge the leader may feel that he / she is appearing as a weak leader. Any effective leader would stimulate new ideas and information but they are subject to resistance as the people may say that the new information is not their creation. On the other hand the poor leaders resist acquiring of new knowledge as it may lower their image in the eyes of their superiors.

The leaders have to make the new knowledge as a means to better the competition. The fear of lagging behind a competitor is perhaps the greatest motivators to acquire and utilize new knowledge. The process of acquiring the new knowledge has to be practical and demonstrable that it will impact the desired change in a positive way.

CHAPTER 3: FROM KNOWLEDGE TO ACTION Without action the knowledge is of no use. From the actions the outcomes are strategies, investment plans and coordinated performance to better the product and service offerings of the organization that they represent. The road to actions has to be navigated with many pitfalls that a leader can encounter. The pitfalls can be termed as status quo leadership, success that breeds complacency, unfamiliarity that blocks action, a resistant organization culture and negative attitude towards technology.

The action desired to be taken faces 2 potential dilemmas. The first is the options conflict, the second is the conflicting views on competition and the third is the vision conflict. These can be aggravated by people with their own visions and dilemmas. The job of a leader is to cut beyond these and formulate a coherent course of action by effectively resolving these dilemmas. Some do it by not doing anything. The resultant is that there is a small island of prosperity until the sea of competition drowns them out or forces them into action. The assumption here is that the competition will allow them time to act out but opposite is the case. These leaders need to have an alternative course of action and implement in the event of competition catching up with them. Potential obstacles that can cloud a leader’s vision are success, lack of familiarity with some aspects of business, corporate culture and a fear of technology. The fear to introduce competing products in the existing ones stems from the idea that it will displace the existing successful product line or that the existing monopoly position will allow them to dominate the market for years to come.

The success is a fragile commodity and it needs to be nurtured and sustained by attention and adaptation/ innovation for the status quo to be maintained in the dominant position that is currently


being enjoyed by the company. That is achieved by people being constantly made to get a higher degree of knowledge, goals and performance.

The knowledge and strategies emanating from other divisions are mostly ignored by leaders from other divisions. This has to be countered by rotating these leaders into learning assignments in unfamiliar divisions and encourage the flow of best practices across all divisions.

The organization culture is the bedrock that will define how the knowledge and ideas from a leader are absorbed and acted upon. The company culture has to adapt to facilitate strategic action and the role of the leader is to circulate his ideas to make that happen.

The fear of technology stems from two factors one being redundancy and the second being relegated to lifestyles that will leave them in a monotonous routine. The message that has to go across is that the competition will out do us and our position will suffer as a consequence of rejecting technology.

The action strategy that has to be implemented works around rational and well thought out conversion decisions. The ambiguity has to be constantly challenged and assumptions clarified. For that the probing questions have to be asked that examine the key assumptions in the plan of action and concepts are continually challenged.

Some examples of probing questions:

1. What customer needs and wants? Does this action satisfy that? 2. How will this action contribute to the organizations goal? 3. What is the productivity and cost efficiency of the proposed action? 4. How does the proposed action fit into the organizations plan? 5. What are the human and social effects of the proposed action?

The course of action that has been decided warrants that the team should be geared to take it to its logical conclusion. For that the people have to be sent on rotational assignments, simulations and opportunities to relearn the customer needs.

Rotations work best as the leaders are exposed to a hands on approach to the learning methodology. The exposure in terms of how action of one division affects the other division and vice versa, build relationships across divisions to help in problem solving as and when they crop up. It also helps in building a cross functional teams that values and integrates the process and procedures of other division in their decision making process.

Simulations are a crucial tool that prepares persons from other division to get an inside knowledge of how the other operates. As all the managers cannot be rotated the simulation exercise is a cost effective tool that makes the process easy. The domino effect is very visible when the manager of one division makes a decision that has a cascading effect across the organization.

The customer is an ever‐changing enigma. A good leader knows this fact and facilitates the learning of this new attitudes and choices of customers. As the products, markets and competition are an ever


changing phenomenon a good leader is constantly evaluating these to gain new knowledge about this ever changing field. This knowledge is then disseminated across the organization to prepare them for the new course of action which leads to a better output in terms of strategy, service and offerings.

The knowledge that has to be implemented runs into delays and wrong implementation of the same. The preventative course of action here is that the leader’s link knowledge and action by soliciting an early involvement of people managing boundary conflicts, using radial organization and encouraging problem centeredness.

The early involvement of people builds a cross functional team that encompasses all the divisions of design, manufacturing, marketing and accounting. A lack of this results in confusion across all these divisions about the product that is being offered. The resultant delay incurs great costs and undermines the morale of the people. These teams need to focus very early on the aspects related to manufacturing costs, financing and pricing, distribution and promotion, consumer use and product repair, product disposal and environmental impact.

A result of an action by a leader changes the status quo leading to some stress in the organization at departmental boundaries and precipitates conflict. The different groups in the organization can be termed as people “who do” and people who “know”. “Staff” are people separate from and loosely coupled to the “line” people. Functional experts, project managers and brand managers are ambigiously connected to operating managers. The stress occurs at these thin boundaries when an action is initiated by a leader. The idea is not to be trapped in these conflicts and keep asking the right questions and maintain a focus on the critical issues.

The role of a coordinator becomes very important is an organization has one. The coordinator has to link the knowledge with action or the coordinator becomes a part of the problem instead of being a solution. The coordinator has to monitored very carefully by the leader in question initiating the change.

A radial organization is an ad hoc group of people who are brought together by and radiating from a person with an urgent problem. The problem requires an urgent solution that requires the skill of people across the organization. This kind of an ad hoc setup gives a direct access to the resources and competencies of the organization at one place. The problem resolution happens at a very accelerated pace since the knowledge required to resolve the problem is at hand. The hierarchy can act an impediment to problem resolution hence a radial organization plays very important role in this area.

The problem centered nature of a radial organization is very effective is problem resolution without undermining the current hierarchy of the organization.

CHAPTER 4: LEARNING AND KNOWLEDGE The leaders are the centre points in any organization who foster a learning environment for the subordinates as well as they learn in the learning of the subordinates. The market is so idea driven that


unless there are is a high degree of innovation of ideas in any organization, the competition is bound to overtake. That makes nurturing the intellectual capital a prime concern of any effective leader. Each lesson that has been learnt or that has been incorporated in the organization makes an organization even more adaptive and flexible for any change in the market conditions.

The knowledge that is required by the leader is what he will get and maybe a little more and this becomes a determinant of what people will discover and learn. Thus the leader has to frame the questions in a manner that stimulates knowledge that has range and depth, and which is an output of an inquiring mind. The factors that stimulate learning are fostered by the leader and these include creative deviance, mastery of existing knowledge, unstructured time and new perspectives.

The creation of new knowledge or attempting any thing new is to challenge the existing paradigms and structures. The result is the new way of doing things in a better way and more efficient way. The process of creation is very different from the product itself. And that process works well in a climate that encourages such deviant ideas those are totally in variance with the established norms. At 3M it is said that to be a “ZEALOT” is normal. The leaders at 3M expect that the 50 divisions generate 30% of sales from products that did not exist 5 years ago. Unstructured time is set aside for pursuing personal projects by the scientists. This leadership stimulates almost a hectic demand for innovation and creativity in almost zealous manner. No idea howsoever small is allowed to die, even if no body/ division in the company are receptive to that idea.

The knowhow that is existing is not the area of further learning but mastering the existing knowhow is the key for making innovation possible. It is the use of existing knowledge that is the key for developing the new and efficient ways of doing the same thing. For any creativity to emerge from a persons mind he / she has to be given some time outside the usual sphere of work so that the mind is free to explore the various dimensions of irrational thought. The usual leaders who foster structured thoughts and processes can never take advantage of any new ideas or innovation. The role of an effective leader is to push the people into the unknown and giving unstructured time for them to ruminate on their thought process which is a precursor of innovation.

The leaders who encourage new perspectives have a totally new way of seeing the same problem. A problem given to different set of people or departments would yield numerous solutions; many of them would be so innovative that they merit serious attention. But how do you gain that new perspective. Here the role of an effective leader is to stimulate the team to take really unusual ways to thoughts that are unheard of, but they should be rational enough to stimulate coherent solutions. The strength of an idea or a solution is more effective in heterogeneous groups. These really challenge the existing paradigms and thought structures in the process uncovering the information that had been hidden from the very obvious.

Knowledge get obsolete if it is not renewed continuously on a regular basis. Thus a leader has to keep his knowledge bank updated lest the lack of knowledge does not hamper his day to day decision making. The leaders who do not believe in this erode their competitive advantage as also the organizations. The leaders usually lag behind their people as the knowledge advances and if they do not then they are


having mediocre people on board or in some way inhibiting the growth of the individuals. The leaders however keep abreast of the latest developments so that the knowledge gap remains within the working boundaries. The idea is not to become experts but to understand the advice that they receive and the implications thereof. In contrast a poor leader using his position circumvents this learning and discourages the team that he is working with.

The leaders should be discriminative enough to separate the fine theories from “know all” knowledge worker who thinks in abstract terms with little touch with the real world. There is a danger that these two can clash on the ideological plane, where one tends to undermine each others competencies. Here the role of the leader is to understand the disconnect between the theory and the conceptual gap that it represents. They are not intimidated by the arrogant attitude of the knowledge workers. They encourage such individuals as these are crucial for the competitive edge of the company when the products of the company grow obsolete. But they have to ensure that they completely understand the explanations of assumptions and the theories. They ask for demonstrations and pilot tests so they the full import of the new theory is clear and also helps in better understanding of the things that they do not understand and the knowledge gap becomes less. The leaders work on a need to know basis so that they can utilize and manage the sophistication of the newer products and processes that the organization is going to utilize in the near future. On the other hand the leaders who are lagging in knowledge, expose their organization to serious risks and blame some one else for the costs of their knowledge obsolescence.

CHAPTER 5: KNOWLEDGE STRESS AND KNOWLEDGE WORKERS

The new paradigm these days is to acquire knowledge as fast as possible before your competitor has that knowledge and out paces your initiatives. Secondly the attitudes of the workers also define these stress levels to a great extent. As these knowledge workers have a distinct views about their roles and those of the leaders.

The distinction between the knowledge worker and the production worker is decreasing. The resultant stress emanates from the newly acquired knowledge that they have to use and learn as they switch their roles in a cross functional teams. The introduction of new technology also entails that the workers update and acquire knowledge. The established practices are abandoned for the newer practices thus the new components of the knowledge create increasing levels of anxiety and stress. Global market is a dynamic market which entails that the goals and strategies also act in tandem of these changes which may happen very rapidly leaving very less time to react to the changing scenario of market and the competitor.

These decisions have to be understood that how will they interact with the interplay of the market and the dynamics of the competitors decisions. The consequent results may provide and negative effect on


the company’s overall policies and bottom lines. Hence the crux here is the knowledge and the awareness of the consequences of all the decisions taken.

The why’s and how’s of any decision and the consequent result creates a state of ambiguity that every leader has to encounter. As any one decision cannot be attributed to the results that a company may face in light of if any good or bad happens. Thus the problem is compounded when the leader forces the employees to look for links where they may not exist. This is also true when the people when interaction at professional level in any company and with a leader they have their own interests and views. Hence the leader has to listen to the departments across the length and the breadth of the organization. There is a need to balance these so that these do not add to the stress component.

In the era of transient relationships across all the functions and teams the various levels of stress are generated as these relationships are very short in nature. Given the uncertain nature of the job stability the stress levels multiply depending on the fact that whether the individual is needed or not.

With the rejection of an idea proposed by and individual the leader has to be careful in managing that as the most valuable contributions these days are ideas and concepts that are being proposed by the individual. The leader has to balance people who are constantly berating others ideas and trying to prove that they have the best of ideas. The leader also has to constantly keep his knowledge updated about the workers and their attitudes as the knowledge workers have different mindsets which values the questioning approach.

They feel that the leaders are answerable for the decision they take and explain the logic behind that. The leaders who are not comfortable with these workers keep them in check while an effective leader will utilize these to create new challenges and improve their decision making process. The leaders need to give freedom to the teams to operate on their own terms and deliver results. The knowledge workers are hungry for knowledge, as these workers are seeking knowledge in all spheres hence the leaders should allow them to develop their skill sets so that they can upgrade their mental horizons.

Knowledge workers are aware of the larger picture that an organization operates in. Therefore any unethical and morally wrong decision is not looked up by these people. The effective leaders have to realize the fact that they are accountable for their decision that affects the society as a whole.

SECTION II: SUMMARY TRUST SECTION

CHAPTER 6: TRUST AND DESIGN PROCESS


The ability of the leader to trust and be trusted directly affects how the leader makes decisions and the quality of those decisions. Trust implies vulnerability and a loss of control over others. The more a leader controls employees, the less trust he has in them. Trust also affects how much information is shared between the leader and employees and how willing each is to be influenced by another party. Trust is also reciprocal and self‐fulfilling. Numerous factors predispose the propensity of an individual to trust. Early life experiences and the degree to which dependency needs were fulfilled by family and friends are contributing factors. Trust is also affected by occupational training, perceived competence, and the design of reward systems. Leaders' ability to understand the basic elements that affect trust are essential both in understanding their own trust patterns and those of their followers. Armed with this knowledge, leaders can work at improving trust, motivation, loyalty, and commitment with the organization.

The trust and trust levels will define the relationships that a leader can expect to have with his team. It then leads to greater levels to knowledge sharing amongst the team and their leaders. The leaders express trust through information, influence and control. High trust leaders collaborate with their staff to produce business decisions and the mistrusting leader will take decisions in isolation and alienate the staff decreasing the employee loyalty to the organization. Trust and trust levels vary according to the tasks.

Components of Trust model, high vulnerability, low control, modest benefit, high possible loss and the belief that the other person will not abuse the vulnerability. The trust is expressed through 3 elements namely, how they disclose information, share influence and exercise control.

Information that a leader discloses may lead the other person to thwart the plans and take credit himself. On the other hand if leader mistrusts he may disclose misinformation, hide crucial facts give untimely information.

Influence is the information, its source and how it affects the leader. The leader when he accepts the counsel of his superiors or subordinates, he put a level of trust on them. And these can be a negative or positive influence on him depending on the view of the superior or peer or subordinate that has counseled him. When the leaders mistrust they deliberately resist the attempts to influence his decisions. These leaders reject the outcomes of others results and findings and push only their way of thought and action.

Control is exercised by limiting others behaviors and thoughts. The leaders who are trust oriented delegate vital tasks such as problem analysis and information gathering to the subordinates hence increasing their level of vulnerability and a decrease in control, the consequences could be fatal for them. The mistrust leaders are power centre’s and all authority and power flows from them. They never relinquish control.

Spiral Model of Trust

Trust between two individuals develops through a circular, mutually reinforcing process that begins with one’s expectations about another’s behavior. Trust spirals up or down depending on how people


disclose information, share influence, and exercise control. When people trust one another, they provide comprehensive and accurate information without fear that exposure will lead to abuse. They are open to influence from those they trust and are confident that control is not necessary because the other person will fulfill their obligations. Mistrust, on the other hand, occurs when people conceal or distort relevant information out of fear of exposure and vulnerability. Suspicion of malevolent behavior leads to a deflection of others’ attempts to exert influence. One who does not trust makes every effort to decrease their dependence on others and seeks to impose controls on others’ behavior. People have predisposing beliefs about how trusting they should be and how trustworthy other people are. Predisposing beliefs lead one to regulate how much information to reveal, how receptive to be toward others, and how much control to exercise. They gather impressions of others’ trustworthiness through repeated interactions. Short‐cycle feedback of these impressions confirms or disconfirms one’s predisposing beliefs. Equilibrium occurs after short‐cycle feedback becomes repetitive and trust reaches a plateau. “When people trust each other, the three phases flow in a beneficial spiral… When they start with a lack of trust, people can get caught up in a downward spiral…until they reach a plateau of mistrust”. Page 95

The trust cycle defines how two people can work in tandem and produce concrete results. It is said that trust begets trust and that is the trust cycle that is emphasized in the book. This goes on till the trust levels reach a plateau phase where the vulnerability increases and the control decreases; result is an increased level of problem solving effectiveness. The opposite is true for the mistrust cycle.

What is the effect of trust? The book describes trust as a force that makes people open up, be more trusting and willing, taking the relationships to new heights. On the other hand the mistrust destroys relationships through frustrations and rage. In a mission critical department the trust levels often define

SPIRAL MODEL OF TRUST


the outcome solutions and a mutual trust and acceptance. On the other hand the mistrust levels create boundaries and people are generally defensive about their actions. The motives of others are generally seen as dubious and commitment to a motive is generally low. Hence it can be inferred that trust levels describe the social certainty and uncertainty levels.

The CONRAD study substantiates these findings with the 2 groups that were created and the SPIRAL model is vindicated as the high trust group is the one that communicates the relevant ideas in resolving the various dilemmas. The study also found out that the executives are generally unaware of the effects of trust and mistrust in teams and how it affected the outcomes and behavior of the team members.

Chapter: 7 DETERMINANTS OF TRUST The 2 factors that contribute directly to the trust levels are ‐ #1 Personality #2 Training.

These are discussed as compared to Lee Iacocca and Harold Geneen. The style of functioning of Lee Iacocca was that of building trust and confidence levels which shaped by his personality that developed in the early childhood; As he came from a loving and caring childhood, a family that was a tight knit and very supportive. These factors helped him turning around Chrysler compared to others who had a difficult childhoods were not as responsive to challenges as the ones which came from happy childhoods. In essence the growing up days and a happy childhoods shape the personality of a leader and his responses to the various challenges.

In case of Harold Geneen we look at how training affects the leader’s responses and the outcomes of his actions. As each business specialty gives you a distinct perspective in terms of trust levels, the lawyers, accounts people and finance people are naturally distrustful of other people. In contrast the engineering and scientist community go by the word of the mouth, trust is implicit. Coming back to Geneen, he comes from an immigrant broken family, laggard at school in sports, in short a complete opposite of Lee Iacocca. His style of functioning was that he saw people as an extension of his mistrust. On an operational scale he used to collect 2 types if information. The first one was the financial which included the minute details. The second was his budgeting, planning and cost control systems. The two leaders left behind a legacy that was a sustainable and an unsustainable one. Lee’s legacy of trust and faith was a positive legacy that continued much after his exit, whereas Geneen left behind a legacy that was negative which could not sustain after his exit.

Trust Levels have 5 factors:

1. Competence 2. Openness 3. Supportiveness 4. Intentions

Trusted leaders tend to:‐


Be aware of their own values. They know themselves well. Faults and all. This helps them to know why others may trust them, what can reinforce trust and what could be an obstacle. People want to trust when they can align with values. For example, if someone knows they tend to listen with their hand on the trigger, they should get others to point this out to them.

Work hard on cultivating trust at every opportunity. They work consciously to develop trust. They use the space between stimulus and response to chose to think of the consequences for trust of their behaviors. They also set boundaries or ‘rules of engagement’ and make their expectations clear to prevent a ‘free‐for‐all’.

Take responsibility. They have humility and strong will. They are understated and free of egotism. They share credit, looking out of the window at every opportunity when things go well and straight in the mirror if things go poorly. They don’t blame. They have a strong internal locus of control and are resilient to setbacks. But have a hunger to learn. Window in good times, mirror in bad.

Be clear and honest – without hidden agendas. Trusted leaders are open. They say what they think and feel. They are an open book. On occasions when confidentiality is essential they acknowledge this but say they must respect the confidentiality of the situation.

Genuinely have the organization’s and team member’s interests at heart. Their ambition is channeled into the organization and the team not their own personal ambition. They want to leave a legacy. They know what they want to hear people say of them when they leave. They contribute rather than seek gain. How can we ultimately trust someone who is pursuing a personal rather than collective agenda?

Chapter 8: Laws of Trust

1. There are regularities, or reliable predictions, in the trust systems that we call laws of trust; a

particular outcome is likely if leaders do not change the level of trust. 2. Mistrust drives out trust; does not reciprocate acts of trust from others. Trust increases

cohesion: holds people together; means that people have confidence that they can rely on each other. Mistrusting groups self‐destruct: as a corollary, when members mistrust each other, they repel and separate, turn against each other, pursue their own interests.

3. Trust stimulates productivity; it gives people confidence that they can depend on each other to define and achieve appropriate goals; also encourages people to think of productivity with satisfaction and joy.

4. Mistrust depresses productivity: people who mistrust do not believe they can depend on each other; they conceal and secretly pursue their own interests; obstruct creativity; distort information, interpretations, and decision making.


5. Rapid growth masks mistrust: as sales and profits increase, leaders seek expedient solutions, misshape relationships, and encourage short‐term thinking.

6. Increasing trust: effective leaders deal with a paradox‐‐minimal trust in order to improve trust ability.

a. Through integrated reward systems. b. Through reciprocal increases in trust. c. Through relationship analysis; reviewing how they can increase trust.

SECTION III: SUMMARY POWER SECTION

CHAPTER 9: LEGITIMATE AND DECISION PROCESS POWER

Legitimate power remains the formal basis of leadership. It gives leaders the basis of authority on which to act. In large organizations, a leader's authority to select the strategy of the organization can elevate or devastate the lives of thousands of people, as in the recent restructurings at AT&T and Scott Paper. The actual exercise of legitimate power ranges along a continuum of decision modes from commanding, consulting, concurring, and consigning. Legitimate power enables a leader to determine the organization's goals, select its staff, and exercise the right of review. Effective leaders rely also on consultation, a form of legitimate power, to work with distributed knowledge in their organizations. By acting as consultants, leaders seek and exchange knowledge, overcome power differences, and build trust throughout the organization.

Power is defined as the ability to influence people. It is described as the ability to get someone to do or not to do something. The 4 fundamental decision modes are:

1. Commanding 2. Consulting 3. Concurring 4. Consigning


The legitimacy of power is depicted in the case of NBC. The takeover by GE in 1995 of NBC resulted in Robert Wright replacing Tinker who could not be persuaded to stay. Wright by his default power that came with the position wanted to curtail the news department’s budgets. The move was resisted by the current head of the division Larry Grossman. Ultimately he was replaced as the independent consultant’s vindicated Wrights contention that the news division was over staffed and over budgeted. Hence by wielding his default authority Wright was able to bring about the desired changes in the company. In the short term these Leaders loose popularity in face of such decisions but the long term effects of popularity and sound business decisions, it’s the sound business decision that wins hands down. The comic strip of SUPERMAN says that “With great power comes great responsibility”. Thus leader who has been given this should choose to use power judiciously lest it ends up destroying lives and homes of their subordinates.

In decision process power the leader’s innate ability to choose the decision process decides the effective/ ineffective outcomes. Command, Consult, Concur or Consign is the dilemma that a leader has to face when it comes to taking effective decisions. Command is clear it is a one way process, the leader commands and the people obey. Prior to using command sequence the leader concurs and consults his subordinates to build that trust levels and understanding. Effective leaders know even when commanding when to consult, concur and consign.

In consulting the leader effectively taps into the knowledge that is there in the organization, by posing a situation before a group of employees and asking for a possible range of solutions thereby increasing the trust levels between the leader and the people consulted. On the other hand the poor leader just uses the information sought without explaining the context or posing the dilemma in a referential way.

The concurrence sees a leader jointly consulting a group to seek a solution that affects many. The decision of the leader is final but the discussion is an open forum where the subordinates are required to make there contributions. There is an overlap zone between concurrence and consultation where the effective leader operates. They consult the subordinates implicitly seeking concurrence. The decision process is effectively held with the subordinates in the loop, wherever possible. Where not possible the leader takes into confidence the subordinates and making clear the costs of the decision if delayed. On the other hand a poor leader the image of concurrence is turned to “yes men” and there is no room for dissent. Here the subordinates learn to conceal their disagreements and learn to go by whatever comes from the leader as command.

Consignment sees the decision been effectively transferred to a subordinate and in a subtle and a not so subtle way controlling and directing the decision making process and its final outcomes. There is an effective delegation of power, which rests on guidance, development and review. The leaders set up the broad boundaries that the person taking a decision has to adhere to and the goals and strategies of the organization. The subordinates under such leaders grow in handling projects of greater scope and capacities. The concept of consignment also works as the people who have been delegated that responsibility act in concurrence with the people who are still lower in the hierarchy, and here the people are aware of what the real problems are and how to devise cost effective solutions.


Chapter 10: AGENDA, STAFFING AND REVIEW POWER

Knowledge is the base on which agenda, staffing and review power rest. The agenda is described as the navigation process defined by the leaders. The right of the leader to define goals and strategies with a road map how to get there. The assessment is a continuous process that the leaders do to evaluate constantly the rapidly changing environment, the threats, opportunities and they work with the subordinates to set the challenging goals. The strategy formulation is done to enable the organization reaches it destination. The systems and procedure are installed to have course correction in case the organizations deviates from it natural course.

Personnel selection for key positions is also done by these leaders. They will select, motivate and nurture the talent of an individual so that he / she is groomed for higher positions. The environmental changes make apparent the leader’s agenda power as the situation changes in a subtle manner the visibility is not much but as the situation changes rapidly the agenda power is more apparent.

The working style of Pfeiffer has been given as an example on how he used the “4 C’s” of decision processes, viz., consult, concur, consign and command including the change in agenda to bring about the mission critical changes in the product mix and the critical changes in the manufacturing process to turn the organization around and strategically position it as a competitive hardware manufacturer.

The staffing power is the selecting, developing and motivating people to carry out the leader’s agenda. Effective leaders surround themselves with effective people. The nature of business is such that as the business grows the interdependence amongst people also grows. The leader has to anticipate these and pick the best people to help implement the desired wide changes that would enable the organization to meet its expected goals. The leaders have an innate talent to choose the best of the candidates from the lot of people; they spot talent and know the competencies of a person that is geared for the future.

Sam Walton of Wal‐Mart did this by spotting talent and grooming for future role as managers. With his innate ability for spotting talent he was able to implement his expansion plans beating the competition by a wide margin. His record 50 stores a year, 2500 stores by the end of 1993.

At the top level the staffing proves to be a crucial decision in selection of a right candidate for the position. The level and depth of thinking has to match that of the organizations goals and strategies. The decision of the COMPAQ bosses in appointing Pfeiffer illustrates this.

Review power is used to take stock of the situation and steer the course corrections as and when needed. Review can be an important learning tool for an effective leader. The subordinates can be shown how’s and why’s of a decision making process, their own performances and that of others.

The review is of 3 types: ‐ 1. Individual 2. Operational 3. Strategic


The individual review is of personnel. It guides and focuses the individual on his working style and guided by an able leader that resource makes suitable changes to his / her working style to achieve higher standards and goals in line with that of the organization. It’s a learning process and the duty of a leader is to make that happen.

The operational review is of the way a certain business process is being done. It brings about refinements and best practices into that business process or operations. Operational review is also educating the organization on how the business is run and the changes that are being implemented.

Strategy review is more top level and is capable of drastically altering the company’s goals to be in line with the current factors in the business environment; COMPAQ, by altering its product line, top management etc.

Knowledge as Power can be defined as expertise, vision and process knowledge.

The expertise can be seen as a leader synthesizing knowledge that is spread across the organization in making his / her mission critical decisions. It is the understanding and evaluation of knowledge that the leader does not possess, while making some strategic decisions the leader has to evaluate the various options suggested by the various experts. The COMPAQ’s decision not to introduce the Pentium chips is a case in point.

Vision is the ability of a leader to see the future and make meaning of it in present. So that the firm’s strategy can be modified to suit the future envisioned scenario. Vision is an intangible and unquantifiable knowledge more as a product of long term relationships. Vision to be used effectively has to have support of legitimate power.

The process knowledge “is knowing” how things are done in a firm. Access the distributed knowledge, build trust and convert knowledge into effective actions.

Using trust as a power medium requires the leader to be influential enough to make or not to make people do things. People who trust others invariably let others control them and their fate. Trust is an outcome of leaders conduct and faith of his subordinates in his leadership style and functioning. Despite having legitimate power some leaders fail and others succeed due to the fact that these leader’s varying levels of trust that they enjoy with their subordinates.

Charisma cad be defined as a mesmeric personality, it is a rare quality found in very few leaders. These people are very adept in winning our trust. The downside is that these leaders may misuse the trust that has gained. But this cannot be a substitute for trust that is built on more solid foundations of time, effort and leadership style.


CHAPTER 11: POWER OF LEADERS AS CONSULTANTS

This brings us back where we started from – Knowledge. The leader in order to be effective and successful needs to be a consultant and a client, both at the same time. And for that to happen the leader need knowledge to take decisions in a rapidly changing context. The latent knowledge that is inherent in any organization has to be tapped by the leader to arrive at that decision.

Power has 2 dimensions, influence and control and in context of consulting it can be implied that influence and control of knowledge that the leader seeks from the distributed knowledge in the organization. The model of consulting discussed here includes 2 levels, content and process.

The need for consulting has always been there as both the leader and the subordinate require it in the face of competitive environment. The leader needs to access the large distributed knowledge pool in the organization and the subordinate the depth, vision and maturity of the leader. Prior consulting is more of a necessity than an option. Adaptive organizations need leader‐consultants who develop subordinates by providing perspective and counsel.

The leader has to act as a consultant client to steer the company through the changing business scenario. He then has to rely on his rich and varied experience to be an effective consultant client. Globalization is an everyday affair in the current business scenario and working in such an environment the best strategy is to act as a consultant client rather than issuing commands or prematurely consigning to unfamiliar people.

The consulting relation ship focuses on:

1. Content level a. Define Problem b. Generate Alternatives c. Choose and Implement

2. Process Level a. Establish Rapport b. Define Roles c. Withdraw

This model has been defined as an alternative to the regular gladiator and ferret model is commonly seen in the organizations. These 3 phases overlap and rarely follow a linear sequence. This is a know fact but still the leaders demand a quick solution for the issues. The problem gets compounded when the problem recycles through the same levels again and again. The


leader then intimidates the subordinate to resolve the issue linearly. As a rule when the simple problems amenable to linear problem solving reach the higher management they have been overly simplified or else would have been resolved without the involvement of the senior management.

First step is to define the problem that may not be the final. The leader consultant has to gather more information from his subordinates as the positions does not give much scope to have a clear view of the problem definition. Hence the consultant leader, gather more data, refine the original problem in the light of the new data.

CONTENT LEVEL

Generation a range of options requires synectics a process that encourages creative imagination, by having an all round view of the problem, by pretending to be various characters and by role playing various identities to look at the problem from their perspectives. 6 HAT lateral thinking is also employed in problem resolution.

1. White Hat – Focus on facts and figures. 2. Red Hat – Expresses feelings, hunches and intuitions. 3. Black Hat – Explains why things will not work 4. Yellow Hat – Envisions opportunities and constructive possibilities. 5. Green Hat – Grows new ideas, asks provocative questions, looks for fertile connection across

disparate fields. 6. Blue Hat – Conducts the discussions and calls on a particular hat to fill the gaps in thinking.

The whole exercise is to make the client generate his own range of solutions the leader consultant stimulated such and outcome of ideas and solutions.

The steps and assumptions have to be contentiously argued and debated again and again till all the assumptions have been accounted for and taken on record. The trade offs in the various options need careful evaluation so as to arrive at the best possible combination with various back up solutions in case plan A fails, the plan B should be put into action. Hence each assumption has been accounted for and the potential consequences understood for the range and depth of the issues at hand before jumping n to a pre determined solution as in case of poor leaders.

The implementation phase is not telling people what to do but is like a guided tour from start to finish. The client has to be told the road map, the pit falls and with periodic review and course correction.

PROCESS LEVEL

The process level works in conjunction with the content level when consulting. Here also the 3 phases are overlapping and are equally important for consulting leader to be successful.

Establishing a rapport is the basic step in going forward, for a problem resolution. Never assume that a rapport exists. Test the waters first as rapport levels vary and it is an ongoing process that will vary till the time the leader and the client are working together in the same organization.


The Leader has to define an appropriate role which may fall in one of the categories as below:

1. Acceptor 2. Reflector 3. Questioner 4. Problem Definer 5. Solution Generator 6. Evaluator

The underlying common denominator here is that the leader has to assume these roles based on the type of situation that is developing. It is a dynamic situation and a poor leader sticks to the doctor patient role thereby playing all these roles at the same time.

The “Acceptor” knows that people make errors and that’s why many situations happen. This role is critical in building rapport and trust. The “Reflector” reaffirms the problem statement by rephrasing the problem statement thereby objectifying it leading to a different perspective on the problem. That leads to a situation where the client feels that “ok, the problem is not that great and can be resolved”. In contrast a poor leader recounts his / her own experience and tries to distract the client. The “Questioner” asks more probing questions so as to put the problem in perspective and to have a handle on all the aspects of the problem. The questions are such that they give a new insight to the client and new courses of action become clearer. The poor leader would berate the client and make him / her feel small and awkward in the light of the situation and the inability of the client to resolve it. The “Problem Definer” will look at all the aspects even go to the context of the problem so that the client will get a clear idea on what the problem is as a properly defined problem will determine the client focus and future actions. The “Solution Generator” may focus on being a facilitator, helping the client to generate a solution or can co‐generate a solution or can himself generate a solution. These people can generate out of the box solutions as they are not confined by the narrow boundaries of the corporate setup. They are free to question the established norms and assumptions and create a rich range of options that were not there earlier. The “Evaluator” looks at all the sides of the solutions and gives a balanced picture to the client. They both may evaluate the solution by judging its predicted outcomes in context of the preset criteria.

Finally the leader withdraws from the consulting relationship. The idea is to let the client forge his / her own path that has been set out in consulting with the leader. This builds a new trust and faith which is very useful for future projects as it creates a level of understanding and faith.

A few problems that are encountered as a consultant are defined as follows:‐

1. Defensiveness 2. Process Skills 3. Withdrawal

The issue in “Defensiveness” lies in the fact that who has the control. The leader feels that if they are consulted they are or should be in control. If the client questions the logic or reasoning of the leader,


they feel threatened that they are loosing control of the situation. The problem and the solution has to discussed threadbare and the leader should not feel threatened on this account.

The leader assumes that the rapport is already there and the client is receptive to the ideas that are put across to him. These leaders have little knowledge of the various roles that they can play as a leader consultant and the skill that these roles require. They ignore or distort the withdrawal phase

The leader consultant here either pulls out too quickly or is not willing to let go, till the point that they assume the role of the client and overseeing the proposed solution. The effective leader consultant keeps this aspect in picture and negotiates a smooth withdrawal procedure.

The role of the client also faces some dilemmas, which are listed as:‐

1. Fear of loss of control 2. Low tolerance for Ambiguity 3. Discomfort With being a constructive client

These issues crop up when the leader feels that by consulting the superior, subordinates or co workers they can benefit but for the above mentioned 3 fears.

The fear of loss of control stems from the fact that these leaders have been schooled in the hierarchical setups where control is the buzzword. And being on the client side is seen as a weakness. But a leader who has surmounted these feelings knows that it implies that one has the courage, wisdom, and risk taking ability to confront and surmount difficulties.

The leader has to be in “know” of the ambiguity of the problem resolution process. Diagnosing the problem and offering a solution are a circular process and to get a correct solution the leader has to dig deep lest the wrong problem gets solved.

The last part deals with the leader being a constructive client. The dogmatic aspect of the situation forbids the leader from adopting a conciliatory mindset. Constructive clients can successfully guide the consultant by providing the correct information at all stages of the relationship. The client knows what the consultant is lacking without being scornful of the consultants abilities. They can guide and periodically review the roles and their distribution amongst them.

CONCLUSION


The situations can be grouped into 2 sets:‐ 1. Well‐Structured routine 2. Ill‐Structured Non‐Routine. We have production and knowledge modes which need to be matched to the situations by the leaders and to integrate knowledge, trust and Power. We see the relationship between knowledge mode and task forces and the blend of production and knowledge modes and operational realities of using a knowledge mode.

Examples of well structured work are related to routine physical or low level mental work. Examples can include, producing automobiles, posting of cheque transactions into the computer systems, compiling the credit card statements etc.

The reverse is true for Ill structured situations; here the work is complex, non routine mental work. Examples can be deciding the right product mix, pricing decision for a new product etc. These situations are affected by outside forces not under the control of anyone. These occur infrequently and are difficult to find a perfect solution for the same.

Effective leaders work with both the modes, after studying the situation adapting to the production and the knowledge mode. Then there is also the hybrid mode.

The production mode standardizes the procedures, benchmarking the processes to achieve high productivity. Hierarchy is used to control people ensuring that they follow the standard procedures; jobs are divided into small easily learned tasks with clear boundaries. The leader has little discretion in this mode except to adjust for absence of personnel, equipment breakdown, and shortage of materials. Authority is respected boundaries crossed only with explicit permissions, leaders conform to rules, SOP,s,


past practices. Influence is determined by the hierarchy in which the person is placed. The production mode is geared to maximize the output from men and machines. The high volume production systems use the production mode.

The knowledge mode is used by the leaders to solve problems by creating & synthesizing information. Influence come from the contribution that a leader makes in terms of concepts, ideas, questions, facts and insights. The leader pushes formal power in the back ground; role is that of a facilitator consultant rather than directive commanders. Many if not all the production mode norms are tossed out of the window by creating informal channels of communication, creative individuals are given a free reign across their domain.

The effective leader knows the changing business scenario and adapts to the situation by having a production / knowledge mode working for the organization, the idea is not remain stuck on any one mode but keeping your options open to switch between the 2 modes or having a Hybrid mode if the situation so demands.

The CASE STUDY depicts how a bank working in the Production mode was able to turn itself around by having lateral knowledge mode. The external consultant in his consultant leader function enabled the established management to question the existing paradigms and build new channels for information exchange. The strategy that was followed was that the consultant gathered the basic information and developed some norms for a lateral knowledge mode to be established. Next all the key people were oriented toward this new system. The chief motivation was to the need to develop

a strategy for international banking in the changing global context. The integration of knowledge, trust and Power is amplified in the above example. The knowledge was created and synthesized and applied in a strategic context by the lateral knowledge mode. Using the knowledge created trust because trusting a leader is different than trusting a completely new process completely. Once it became clear that the creator of that knowledge and the process are they themselves, and then the trust in the new process grew even higher. The leader use of power in a mature fashion made him the leader that could be trusted and faith could be reposed on the leader. Hence he justified the power dimension of a true leader.

Formation of a task force to implement a new mode does not guarantee the results. In the banks case it succeeded because they used the knowledge mode norms, they were able to contribute creatively and enthusiastically and the task force was part of comprehensive, inclusive knowledge system which was subject to constant feedback and review.


The formal leaders were on board the task force hence the implementation was achieved at a very good rate and that linked them to the lateral knowledge mode.

The blend of knowledge and process is the Hybrid mode. Effective hybrid leaders and good listeners and team process observers, they have qualities of good interviewers and data gatherers and cooperate with others in a flat network with varying memberships to diagnose and resolve the issue.

The creation of a Hybrid mode has its own problems as it increases the use of more human interface in forms of groups and this group brings to surface the problems that existed only in the minds of the team members. The level of interaction increases the problems that never existed before. The structured problems are referred to the production organization whereas the unstructured and ill structured problems go to the knowledge mode. The frequency of the meetings reduces subsequently to reflect the establishment of a system of reducing the ill structured situations.

The stress factor on the middle level leaders multiplies as the top level management can now interact with the low level managers directly; hence they come to know that the middle order has been window dressing the information communicated to them. Thus as the barrier between the lower level management and the top level falls both sides realize that the problems that seemed insurmountable are just five minute resolution issues. This flat mode of information exchange propels the senior management to redesign the levels of authority in the process making the middle level managers redundant. In the production mode they play a vital role as a bridge between the senior and the lower level management.

The level of flexibility depends on how much a person understands the lateral and or the knowledge mode. Once the people realize that the knowledge mode complements the production mode they adapt faster. There is a danger of over optimism as people think that they have broken a higher level of trust. Here there is a real danger of overconfidence coming into play as the team solves some ill structured problems hence they believe that they have come a long way, but the real problem comes when the implementation of the solutions kicks in the whole momentum goes for a toss. The meetings are disjointed and people generally pessimistic. The leader is the only person who knows that it is the knowledge mode integrates knowledge, trust and power in a hierarchal organization.

Summary of Knowledge mode:

1. Find, define and solve ill structured problems. 2. Differentiating between the production mode and the knowledge mode problem. 3. Realigns the power structure in the organization when a team is formed. 4. The expected behavior of people in the lateral mode and the production mode differs. 5. The knowledge mode requires the people to question carefully, analyze goals, assumptions,

predictions, methods and options. 6. The knowledge mode recommends the solutions to the leader who has the formal authority to

implement those decisions in the production mode.

The Triadic Leaders display 3 major traits:


1. Wisdom 2. Integrity 3. Courage

Wisdom to have a vision, wisdom to comprehend a vision before others, wisdom to use power sensitively and wisdom to ask questions and simplify a complex situation.

Integrity of the spoken word, Integrity of action, integrity in others, integrity to support subordinates.

Courage and wisdom to take risks and ventures into uncharted waters, courage to believe in their convictions and lead others also with it, courage to believe in their subordinates, courage to use the knowledge mode and relinquish the decision taking power. The leaders have the courage to understand that the humans are prone to make mistakes and learn from them, thus the leaders have the wisdom to impart these traits to others.

Download - The Leadership Triad Summary

Top Related