How Leaders Think: Measuring Cognitive Complexity in Leading Organizational Change
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HOW LEADERS THINK: MEASURING COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY IN LEADING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IVA VURDELJA A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Ph.D. in Leadership & Change Program of Antioch University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy May, 2011 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled: HOW LEADERS THINK: MEASURING COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY IN LEADING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE prepared by Iva Vurdelja is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Leadership & Change. Approved by: Jon Wergin, Ph.D., Chair date Laurien Alexandre, Ph.D., Committee Member date Carol Baron, Ph.D., Committee Member date Daryl Conner, M.A., Committee Member date Linda Hoopes, Ph.D., Committee Member date Sara Nora Ross, Ph.D., External Reader date Copyright 2011 Iva Vurdelja All rights reserved Dedication In memory of my late grandmother, Marija Resetic, who taught me the power of unconditional love and of my wonderful colleague, Michel Gessner, who helped me discover the art of and passion for teaching. Acknowledgements This dissertation would have never happened without the great help and support I received from many trusted friends, colleagues, and faculty members. My profound gratitude goes to the faculty of Antioch University—especially to the committee members, Dr. Laurien Alexandre, Dr. Carol Baron, Dr. Sara Nora Ross, and my dissertation chair, Dr. Jon Wergin, for their guidance and support. I want to thank many people and organizations that had an impact on my personal and professional development and to whom I am indebted: Dr. Otto Laske, who stimulated my curiosity and inspired me to explore dialectical thinking as a research topic; My mentors, Daryl Conner and Dr. Linda Hoopes, who challenged my thinking, inspired me to aim higher, and were by my side every step of the way helping recruit participants for this research and translating some of the most complex concepts into more simple, easy to understand communication messages; The 10 extraordinary individuals who volunteered their time to participate in this study. Without your interest, engagement, and invaluable feedback, this work would have not been the same. Thank you so much, you were awesome; My classmates from IDM Institute who served as an international team of co-scorers for my research: Dr. Doug Stuart from the U.S., Nick Shannon from the United Kingdom, Monique Blokzyl from Belgium, and Alan Show and Diane Hewitt from Australia. Nadia Sleem and Dr. Shaker Mustafa cheered for and encouraged me throughout the scoring process. Without this exceptional group, this research would not have been the same. Thank you, you were terrific, inspiring, and motivating; i Many friends who consistently believed in my ability to complete a Ph.D. degree more than I believed in myself: Christine Baker, Dr. Charlene Blockinger, Nancy Bragard, Brigitte Crepin, Jerry Haderlein, Dr. Carmen Hutu, Joyce Olinga, Marilee Snyder, Joyce Schmucker, Dr. Sandra Swantek, and Mae Sylvester. My profound gratitude goes to my Croatian friends in Chicago for years of friendship and moral support: Tonka and Ranko Igric, Davorka and Branko Kirincic, Ana and Darko Petercic, Dee Plecic, Vesna and Zdravko Praljak, Mare and Mario Romanovic, Meri and Davor Rukavina, Zdenka and Tomislav Siljkovic, and many others. Life would not be the same without you. I would like to thank and acknowledge my life-long friend and companion, Jean-Philippe Allenbach, and his family for their loving support, loyalty, and encouragement during many years of my educational journey. Finally, I want to thank Ana and Alex for rewarding me with my precious granddaughter Adriana, who arrived at the right moment to be my greatest joy and inspiration during the final phase of this dissertation writing process. My appreciation and profound thanks to all of you! ii Abstract The ability to lead complex organizational change is considered the most difficult leadership responsibility. Habitual linear thinking based on sequential procedural decision making is insufficient when responding to ambiguous and unpredictable challenges and interpreting systemic variables in the context of unforeseen problems, risks, and invisible interrelationships. The purpose of this exploratory multiple case study was to expand our understanding of the structure of the thinking employed by executive leaders as initiators and enablers of complex, large-scale organizational change. The researcher integrated knowledge of adult cognitive development and organizational leadership to examine the higher forms of reasoning abilities required for dealing with the complex and nonlinear nature of change. By using Laske‘s (2009) dialectical thought form (DTF) framework, the researcher explored the existence of dialectical thinking through structural analysis of interviews with 10 senior leaders who successfully transformed their respective organizations. Specifically, the study explored: (1) To what degree do the sponsors of organizational change engage in dialectical thinking in their work? (2) Is complexity of thinking related to complexity of sponsorship roles? (3) What phase of cognitive development must sponsors of transformational change attain to become effective change agents? (4) Does a higher level of dialectical thinking lead to more effective sponsorship of transformational, complex change? The results revealed that all 10 effective leaders were fully developed dialectical thinkers and that each one had a unique pattern of dialectical thinking. Data illustrated how metasystemic thinkers, despite their surface similarities, have deep epistemological differences that indicate profoundly different areas of strength and developmental needs. The potential application of the DTF framework as a developmental tool for expanding cognitive capabilities to deal with complex change is addressed and explored. The iii study opens an array of opportunities for another, richer way of looking at adult development. The electronic version of this dissertation is available in the open-access OhioLink ETD Center, www.ohiolink.edu/etd. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements i Abstract iii Table of Contents v List of Tables ix List of Figures xi Chapter I: Introduction 1 Research Problem 3 Purpose of the Study 4 Research Questions 5 Assumptions 6 Scope of the Study 6 Rationale for Investigating the Question 7 Gap in the Literature 10 Framework of the Study 15 Dialectical Thinking 16 Epistemological Approach 17 Study Limitations 18 Overview of Methodology 19 Significance of This Research 20 Organization of the Dissertation 21 Ethical Issues Involved in the Study 22 Definition of Terms 23 Chapter II: Literature Review 26 Leadership and Change 26 How Does Change Happen in an Organization? 26 Foundational (or Traditional) Theories of Organizational Change 27 Lewin—Force Field Theory 28 Nadler and Tushman—Congruence Model 28 Bridges—Model of Ending, Neutral Zone, and New Beginning 29 Kotter—Eight-Steps Model 29 Contemporary Theories of Organizational Change 30 Systems Theory 31 Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) 33 Jaques‘ Requisite Organization 34 Mental Models 35 What Do Major Leadership Theories Have to Say About Leading Change? 35 Burns—Transformational Leadership 35 Greenleaf—Servant Leadership 36 Heifetz—Adaptive Work 37 Roles and Tasks in the Change Process 38 Leader Versus Manager 38 Sponsorship of Change 41 v Skills and Qualities of Change Leaders 43 Leaders‘ Attributes and Behaviors Necessary for Major Organizational Change 46 Empirical Research on Leading Change 48 What Is Known About the Inner Landscape of a Change Leader? 53 Why Leaders‘ Inner Transformation Must Precede Organizational Transformation 56 Martin—Integrative Thinking 60 Summary 61 Adult Development 63 Definition of Development 65 Organization of Developmental Theories 66 The Legacy of Jean Piaget 68 Limitations and Critique of Piaget‘s Theory 69 Post-Piagetian Research 70 Progression of Thinking from Preconventional to Conventional to Postconventional 72 Constructive-Developmental Theory 73 Stages of Adult Development and Leadership Effectiveness— Implications for Organizations 76 Postformal Cognitive Development 78 Early Development of Postformal Research 78 Definition of Cognitive Development 78 Postformal Thought and Leadership 79 Research in Postformal Development 80 Mechanism of Intellectual Development—Complexity of Pattern of Thought 83 Postformal Thought as Transcendence of Formal Operations 85 From Dualistic Toward Relativistic and Dialectical Thinking 88 Dialectical Thinking 90 History of Dialectics 90 What Is Dialectical Thinking? 95 Operating Principles of Dialectical Thinking 96 Movement Through Forms 97 Constitutive and Interactive Relationships 97 The Treatment of Contradiction in Dialectics 98 The Key Principles in Dialectical Thinking 99 Emphasis on Change 100 Emphasis on Wholeness 100 Emphasis on Internal Relations 100 How Dialectical Thinking Occurs (Steps in the Dialectical Process) 100 Three Models of Dialectics 102 Empirical Evidence of Dialectical Thinking in Adults 103 The Pioneering Work of Michael Basseches 104 Phasic Model of the Development of Dialectical Thinking 106 The Work of Otto Laske 108 Theoretical Framework for Empirical Study of Dialectical Thinking 108 The Four Quadrants of Dialectics 108 Process Quadrant 110 Context Quadrant 111 vi Relationship Quadrant 111 Transformation Quadrant 111 Dialectical Thought Forms 113 Process-Oriented Thought Forms 115 Context-Oriented Thought Forms 116 Relationship-Oriented