Hi Lisa,Once again, your exquisite examination of the dimensions of leadership brought me to the mouth of the cave [psychic prison] and enabled me to more fully comprehend the shadows on the wall [organizations].
Because it is a recurring theme in your treatment, I would like to discuss “transformation.” Transformation, in my opinion, is not simply about change. Managers can and do effect change. Epimetheus exemplifies management as change agent-within the parameters ordained by the Olympian Establishment. Transformation, on the other hand, suggests to me a fundamental or complete change to the very character of someone or something. Prometheus, I hold, was a transformational leader. (I don’t deny that change can be profound-I’ll use the terms “transmogrify” (grotesque change) and “transform” (developmental change) to distinguish the phenomena.
In an attempt to close the gap between the oppressed and the oppressor, Nelson Mandela stole the fire from the South African Establishment. Mandela’s experience exemplifies transformational leadership, whose gain for the people brought pain upon himself. I will encapsulate an excerpt from Organizational Behaviour in a Global Context, p.495
Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress
For most of the past 200 years, South Africa was ruled by a white minority government, although blacks have made up over 75 per cent of the populace. Whites
• owned most of the property,
• ran most of the businesses,
• controlled most of the country’s natural resources,
• did not have th right to vote, and
• often worked for little or no wages.
Nelson Mandela reacted to the oppression of white-minority rule by:
• organizing a non-violent organization- the African National Congress (ANC),
• provoking demonstrations and strikes.
• promoting acts of sabotage to pressure the South African government to change-in response to the killing and injury of blacks in Sharpeville where previous riots had resulted in several whites being killed.
“Nelson Mandela was arrested in 1962, and he spent the next 27 years in prison. While in prison, Mandela continued to promote civil unrest and majority rule, for which he gained international recognition. He was offered but turned down a conditional release from prison in 1985, which was offered to him only because of the enormous pressure put on South African President F.W. de Klerk to release Mandela unconditionally. Finally, bowing to this pressure, the South African government was forced to “unban” the ANC and unconditionally released Nelson Mandela from prison. Eventually, Mandela persuaded de Klerk to sign a document outlining multiparty elections. Mandela won the 1994 national election and became the first truly democratically elected leader of South Africa.”
To return to the myth of Prometheus, the Olympian Administration feared the loss of the fire. Perhaps they resented any act that would bring their dependent creation “closer to the gods.” They did not want to share their privileged position-their sense of elevation above and separation from their subordinates.
In terms of our analysis, the Promethean fire can symbolize reason as an energy, a capacity to recognize “the unreality of many ideas that man holds and to penetrate to the reality veiled by the layers and layers of deception and ideologies” to quote Fromm. Thank you for emanating such energy today Lisa.
Bye for now,
Carman
The seawall beckons-“like a siren she calls to me”-to quote U2. In God’s Country.
Hi Carman,
Thank you for illuminating the distinction between change and transformation, transmogrification and developmental change. It’s thought provoking.
Meditating on change… To begin with a simple example, if I move my file cabinet to the other side of my desk, not only is the physical environment changed, but in order to adapt, I must change my thought process and habits as well — there’s a psychological and physiological change to support and adapt to the environmental change.
In that change, I am not made wholly different, but I am not precisely the same person. Similarly, because life is dynamic, we are not the identical person from moment to moment. There is a natural adaptation and change.
Then, there are more profound changes, which run deeper. For example, substantial changes in our perspective that reconfigure many relationships — in how we relate ideas and in our relationships with others.
So, one dimension for considering change is “depth.”
There is also the consideration of the source of the change, and how the change is embraced. For example, when change is forced and not willingly accepted, then there may be (or may not be) an outward appearance of change, and by way of compensation, other aspects of thought and behavior change (For example, “I will comply with your demand but I will reduce my commitment”).
For me, tranformational leadership evokes both the dimension of depth and of willingness. And transmogrification suggests change as compliance, which has unintended negative systemic effects.
What are your thoughts with respect to the difference between change and transformation, transmogrification vs. developmental change?
There is also so much to discuss with respect to psychological and social rewards of separation and elevation in a Dominator system in which many people tend to feel either less than or greater than others. The former feels bad and so many people pursue the latter when circumstances allow, but there is an alternative to experiencing relationships according to these poles… and that is the Partnership perspective, which, in my experience, is subjectively much more rewarding. I think that is where we find real personal and organizational health, including flexibility, creativity, and other personal and organizational goods….
Best wishes,
Lisa
Hi Carman,
This quote from Stephen Covey’s The 8th Habit seems very appropriate to our conversation regarding change:
If you want to make *minor*, incremental changes and improvements, work on practices, behavior or attitude. But if you want to make significant, quantum improvement, work on * paradigms.* The word *paradigm* stems from the Greek word *paradeigma*, originally a scientific term but commonly used today to mean a perception, assumption, theory, frame of reference or lens through which you view the world. It inaccurate, it will make no difference how hard you try to find your destination or how positively you think — you’ll stay lost. If accurate then diligence and attutde matter. But not until.”
The term, ransformative leadership is often associated with this kind of paradigmatic change…
Best wishes,
Lisa