Leadership Challenge 10

LdC Template #10

Influential Practitioners (Leadership Challenge): Leading in a COP

Enhancing Action Research and Leadership Possibilities

through the Development of your Collaborative Skills

Module 10                                                                 Name: James D. Lett

The process below relates to the following new Leadership Provocative Question(s): 

Note: Identify the leadership theory from TEL 703 "Review of Leadership Theories" article that most resonates with you in terms of YOUR leadership challenges as an influential practitioner. Apply these ideas to this week’s leadership (in addition to Wenger).

What would Wenger and one additional author (Pendleton-Jullian and Seely Brown) say about this question: Where do innovations come from?

Shared leadership resonated with me because it may be a more effective way to build and sustain engagement. Also, we are knowledge driven economic environment and organizations need more than basic task management and accomplishment. Additionally, the newest generation of workers and the one the will soon join the workforce must derive some meaning or purpose from their work. If this is not fulfilled, there is the potential for disaffection, disengagement, and even early departure. 

According to Avolio, B., Walumbwa, F., and Weber, T. (2009), shared leadership is a practice of spreading responsibility and accountability across the group rather than housing the characteristics in a single supervisory role. The authors describe shared leadership as a team-level outcome with communal impact and a fluid cycle of informal leaders. Leadership effectiveness is evaluated through the relationships and connections and mutual ownership of outcomes rather than the influence of one individual (Avolio, et al., 2009).

Therefore, I see innovations as being derived from the connections and relationships among group members through sharing expertise, approaches, personal experiences, successes, and failures. In Wenger (2008), this would be part of a shared enterprise and the development of a shared repertoire. Mutual exchanges lead to the development of new ideas and the cultivation of innovative designs and systems. According to Pendleton-Julian and Brown (2011), design goes beyond problem solving. Design may not directly solve problems. Rather, it addresses the environment that surrounds the problem. Design is visionary, skeptically optimistic, and opportunistic. In simple problem solving, participants often seek to find an answer. Design encourages questioning. I believe that the greatest implication of my study is the development of a questioning point of view within my practice where members of a community of practice focus on the design that influences our behaviors rather than simply solving problems.

e. Preparing for an on-line Conversation

Quote/ideas from the book; applications/instances from your workplace setting	Page number
Joint Enterprise: It is the result of a collective process of negotiation that reflects the full complexity of mutual engagement.	77
Joint Enterprise: It is defined by the participants in the very process of pursuing it. I is their negotiated response to their situation and thus belongs to them in a profound sense, in spite of all the forces and influences that are beyond their control.	77
It is not just a stated goal, but creates among participants relations of mutual accountability that become an integral pat of the practice.	78
Over time, the joint pursuit of an enterprise creates resources for negotiating meaning	82
The elements of repertoire can be very heterogeneous. They gain their coherence not in and of themselves as specific activities, symbols or artifacts, but from the fact that they belong to the practice of a community pursuing an enterprise	82
The repertoire of a community of practice includes routines, words, tools, ways of doing things, stories, gestures, symbols, genres, actions, or concepts that the community has produced or adopted in the course of its existence and which have become part of its practice.	83

f. Holding an on-line Conversation

After participating/viewing the “fishbowl” conversation record notes here (below) about your responses to your peers or new thoughts based on their postings.  Be certain your notes here are comprehensive, as were your responses to peers. (If you participate as a “fish,” in the fishbowl your notes, which should be entered below, can be much more succinct.)

I think I talked a little too much on this one. Please forgive me. We talked about shared connections. Bret pointed out that innovations may not come from any place, but the opportunities for innovative thinking come by being in a community and sharing. Bret gave an example of shared expertise and building from what already exists by talking about his brother the toy maker. Greg spoke about not coming up with a perfect answer but it comes from trial and error, it’s process to get there, it’s a journey. Bret spoke of how a community pushes new ideas or extensions forward by people being together in communities of practice. We can’t just do our research in isolation. Greg highlight the Ted Talk with Johnson and the example of how GPS was created. He stated that the atmosphere has to be right for innovation. You have to have the environment where people can share and develop those ideas over time. Bret spoke of how a great idea happens on the spot. A good idea comes by being in the moment and not trying to force your preconceived notions. Greg spoke Wenger’s thoughts on imagination. All of these experiences expand our imagination about what’s possible.

   

g. Determining your Leadership Challenge/New Leadership Challenge

Based on your own quotes/ideas from Wenger, your workplace experiences, and new insights you developed as you reflected on your peers’ work, what behavior do you want to experiment with/try out for your leadership challenge in the next few days?

Emanating from our “why” rather than our “whats” and “hows.”   

This week we had a really great meeting where we discussed how to answer the tough questions. We ran out of time and I was not able to fully expound upon the why. However, we did plan to have a work party. In the past the advisors have simply talked the “Getting Started Steps” for students attending at the military base. However, over the past few years we have experienced increased student volume both online and in our office. As a result, we have worked to better articulate these basic steps. During our most recent meeting, I gave a basic overview of our new “Getting Started” packet. The packet included the checklist, information sheet, flagship degree plans, scholarships, and upcoming key dates.

Further, we discussed what front lobby staff would say during conversations with students and we discussed how this packet can help guide that conversation. We will have a “work party” on Monday to build about 40-50 packets that the front staff will be able to hand out to prospective students. It is our hope that providing them with more centralized information will help relieve some of the students signing in to see advisor for basic intake questions and open up more opportunities for current students to sit with an advisor for assistance with degree plans, educational plans, and transfer guidance. Our why is “committed to student success.” This effort is part of our “why.” However, we need to revisit this in our next student services meeting. The reading about practical wisdom will really support this effort. These are tools that will require some practical wisdom in order to know how to best address student questions and help the student determine which step to start with.