Ole's point (to the degree that I understand it) is interesting. But
there's something that bothers me about the idea of the leader's art as
being about creating social relations (beautiful, sublime, comic, ugly, or
grotesque). As a follower, I think that I co-create the social relations I
have with my fellow followers and my leader. As a leader, I think that I
work to sculpt an environment that will enable or allow social relationships
to flourish in a particular way. But my medium is not the social
relationships themselves, but rather the breeding ground, the hot house, the
nursery where the social relationships develop and grow. In that way, my
role as a leader is more like my role as a director in theater, where I do
not create roles, or even a production in any direct way. The actors act,
the designers design and I direct. I have a vision, but I also am willing
and happy to surrender to the emergent processes and embrace what emerges.
I don't tell the actors how to act, but I do coach them, ask them questions,
nurture them and give them feedback. By the time the curtain rises for the
audience I (the director) am no longer really a part of it - the stage
manager is running it all.
If I am to let the metaphor run even farther (and it has probably run far
enough) I have to ask myself, what role do I play as an academic? Am I a
critic, am I a playwright? I think too often (for my taste) I am a critic
and probably usually a playwright whose work circles the theatrical world
trying desperately to be staged.
- Steve
Steven S. Taylor, PhD
Assistant Professor
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Department of Management
100 Institute Rd
Worcester, MA 01609
USA
+1 508-831-5557
[log in to unmask]
|