What I experienced at NZLI as a research fellow and facilitator over the past couple of years is worth capturing, as many of my experiences there go against the grain of what is regarded as conventional leadership development. So what is it that makes NZLI unique and special?
First, it is committed to an R&D of leadership development. The mantra of the Institute is that really we should remove the ‘&’ in the equation because the research and development conducted there is so interwoven. Perhaps a case of ‘revelopmerch’? It does help of course that the employees of the Institute are people who naturally think across and between the research and practice domains.
Either the researchers (who are leaders in their field, people like Brigid Carroll and Brad Jackson) also think in terms of practice relevance, or the facilitators (people like Joline Francoeur and Sarah Bowman) value the role of developing theory in developing leadership. Then there is the hybrid, Fiona Kennedy, who finds it difficult to ascertain whether she is a ‘practitioner’ or ‘researcher’ – a true pracademic, something I aspire to. Delve just slightly in the background and you encounter Phil Collins, Ann Moore and Josh Firth – it is a mark of a great organisation when every member of the team is just as enthusiastic about learning and leadership. And of course let’s not forget the energetic and challenging presence of Lester Levy, who founded NZLI almost a decade ago now. Lester is a man who has achieved a lot in his life and could easily now just kick back and enjoy his well-earned material comfort, but instead has decided to direct an ambitious university research institute.
 |
| The NZLI team in 2012 |
The overlap of R&D can be witnessed in the Institute’s continuous design meetings. I say continuous because the conversations never really end and stretch across media and time. These are what are commonly referred to as ‘generative conversations’, little practiced but oft written about. Not just soft conversations, although they can be, but also ‘rattling good rows’, as Brigid Carroll refers to them: that getting out in the open passionately held views concerning the progress of a programme or direction of theory. Both are essential.
Second, the Institute is selective in terms of who it takes on as a client. It is run as a not-for-profit charitable trust within the University of Auckland. This is surely a key differentiator – remove the overriding money element and you arrive in a zone where better understanding of leadership becomes the paramount concern. I have taken the notion of bespoke leadership development to heart as a result of working with NZLI – careful research in the context of the organisation followed by a programme targeted at appropriate participants and linked to experience. How often the two apparently straightforward words ‘appropriate participants’ haunt development programmes – people who were sent and don’t want to be there; people who are there expecting something quite different (charisma lessons or management training anyone?); people who are there because it will look good for future promotions; even people sent along as punishment, to be straightened out!
Third, NZLI is committed to critical theory. This is not the poke-your-tongue-out, holier and-purer-than-thou stuff which often plagues critical theory. NZLI tries to learn core lessons from critical thinking – constructionist thought, critical identity theory, discourse analysis and political theory – to shape design of development interventions.
Finally, the development and research work is linked closely to purpose. Developing more humane, as well as robust and relevant leadership is the goal. So this is best described as collaboration with a hard edge. The classic iron fist in a velvet glove. Collaborative leadership is so important when tackling intractable and complex problems. But it is not a case of group hugs and endless discussions about feelings – it can be a hard process of challenging dominant discourses.
Interventions which deal with the realities of local power relations rather than wishful thinking. Interventions which ask participants to re-evaluate the identity they carry in their work – to enact ‘wicked’ leadership you can’t carry around a managerial mindset! It takes guts to pursue this kind of pedagogy. The early programme evaluations and feedback can reveal some participant discomfort as their dominant constructions of what constitutes leadership are challenged and they begin to grapple with the implications of this challenge for their everyday work. This is not edutainment, folks. Surely if a development programme results in comfort and entertainment, it is not really a development programme but a passive, detached, if interesting, experience.
 |
| Leadership confronts: a characteristic calling card of NZLI |
• Crossover between theory and practice to the extent that they are almost indistinguishable and participants who embrace this challenge.
• The adoption of participating groups and individuals who are prepared to be unsettled.
• A commitment to relevant critical theory.
• Leadership development for a purpose: the development of more humane, creative and relevant organisations.
These are all lessons I will take with me into the future and into Our Leadership. So farewell NZLI and thank you indeed for all of that Foucault – you made him relevant and essential.
- Owain
You can explore the NZLI world here:
http://nzli.co.nz/
No comments:
Post a Comment