Recent searches
Search options
I’m super excited about the upcoming Generosity and Leadership in Higher Education virtual panel event, being held by University of Bath on 25 June, 10-11.00 EDT.
In a time when academia often rewards competition over collaboration, how can we lead with generosity, compassion, and care? Join me and Bath’s Kate Elliott and Professor Davide Mattia as we explore how generous leadership can reshape research culture for the better.
This is a free online event as part of the University of Bath’s Research Culture Month. Register here: https://www.bath.ac.uk/events/generosity-and-leadership-in-higher-education-webinar/
Let’s reimagine what leadership in Higher Ed can look like. #GenerousLeadership #HigherEd #ResearchCulture
@kfitz got registered, just read your book on leadership, so I'm really looking forward to your talk
@kfitz That was a very interesting and inspiring discussion. Thank you very much. It just came in time for me, as I have just finished reading the book, with many questions on my bookmark :-). I can relate to a lot that was said, as for example the lack of time people feel they have to get involved in more collaborative practices. However, when they motivate themselves to participate in collaborative organisational change, and then for higher level reasons, the change did not come about, a lot of demotivation and disillusionment can be the result . It's then very difficult to keep the motivation of the group to go on. And unfortunately there can be many reasons (good and bad ones) why a solution that people have worked on and therefore can relate to, won't be applied. What institutional practice could keep people motivated ?
@olibrendel That problem of demotivation and disillusionment is huge. I don’t know that I have a perfect answer, but one of the keys seems to me to be to keep focused on the deepest long-term goal and how the smaller steps along the way lead there — and then to take time to acknowledge the stumbling blocks along the way, to mourn the setbacks but keep them from derailing the longer-term project. Honestly, it’s one of those places where organizational life could stand to learn a lot from political/community organizing…
@kfitz yes, I agree, keep small achievable goals, that should lead to a bigger more risky one. Haven't had the possibility to do it this way, as it means a lot of perceiving things that might arise in the future, to actually have the time to think and do the small steps. Because when pressed for time, it's usually the big goal that is first. This brings me to a question that I would have liked to ask : perceiving problems that will arise gets me thinking about "Leading from the emerging Future : Theory U" by Otto Scharmer (seemingly a close collaborator of Peter Senge, whom you cite a lot :-). I would have wished to stumble in your book over an example where Theory U has been used in an academic context, something that I really would wish to see, but haven't come across, yet. Do you know Theory U ? Any experience with this methodology ?
@olibrendel Ooh, interesting! I didn’t come across that in the research process but will have to take a look. Thanks for the reference!
@kfitz You're welcome :-) Theory U is really about profound organisational change. The problem is that the methodology is not "standard" (that is , working groups, post-its, group discussions, might even include WorldCafé here, which becomes more well known even in academia), but needs people to first acquire and practice the methodology. And that in itself already needs motivation in time. I suspect that the results could be astounding, especially in academia, and even more so when talking about research vision and programmes.
Here is their webpage :
https://www.presencing.org/
And now I have a long reading list coming out of your book, foremost "The fifth discipline"