Filetype PDF | Posted on 22 Jan 2023 | 2 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
171x Filetype PDF File size 1.22 MB Source: essay.utwente.nl
Rotating leadership: the process within
organizational improvisation
Author: A.M. Brunink
University of Twente
P.O. Box 217, 7500AE Enschede
The Netherlands
ABSTRACT: This research is about rotating leadership and the process within
organizational improvisation. Where, for example, directive leadership has one central
leader, this leader is absent in rotating leadership. With help from the unorthodox and
relatively new research method theatrical simulation, the process of rotating leadership
within new product development teams is visualized. The results are the conclusions that
the beginning moments of the creative process are very important. In this first part, most
of the ideas were presented and also the informal leader raises. This in contrast to the
expected situation of equality within rotating leadership. In most of the cases the informal
leader was not explicitly chosen but stands up with the support by his own personality.
Supervisors: K. Visscher
M. Ehrenhard
G. van Bilsen
Keywords
Leadership, rotating leadership, organizational improvisation, new product development teams and theatrical
simulation.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee
provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and
the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires
th th
prior specific permission and/or a fee. 4 IBA Bachelor Thesis Conference, November 6 , 2014, Enschede, The
Netherlands. Copyright 2014, University of Twente, Faculty of Management and Governance.
1
1. INTRODUCTION ‘being the leader’ is shifting from one to another and how this
For organizations it is, nowadays, very important to adapt to process is organized.
and capitalize on a rapidly changing environment (Crossan et To find this out, theatrical simulation is used as research
al., 1996). Besides this fast reaction on unexpected change, it is method. Within this research deeper investigation of rotating
for organizations important to innovate in order to survive leadership gets a central role. Where earlier research was more
(Amabile, 1998). Over the last years improvisation has received focused on organizational improvisation (Moorman & Miller;
recognition as a strategic competence. A strategic competence Akgün et al., 2007) and on leadership within organizational
that helps today’s organizations’ requirements for change, improvisation (Pina e Cunha, 2003; Van Bilsen, 2010), this
adaptability, responsiveness to the environment, loose research is focused on the process of rotating leadership within
boundaries and minimal hierarchy (Hatch, 1996). Where organizational improvisation. How does rotating leadership
planning becomes impractical, the ability to lead improvisation work? What are arguments for changing the leadership role?
is critical (Vera & Rodriguez-Lopez, 2007). 1.3 Research method
1.1 Organizational improvisation In the research of Van Bilsen (2010), an unorthodox research
Early research into the topic of improvisation was mainly method called theatrical simulation was used. Theatrical
focused on Indian and Jazz music (Zack, 2000) and the theatre simulation is an innovative method where situations from
(Vera & Crossan, 2004). These researches were focused on the reality are simulated. Wagenaar (2008) described in her
outcome on stage and the process. Moorman & Miner (1998), research that simulation has a focus on ‘what could be’ in an
Pina e Cunha (1999) and Akgün et al. (2007) focused their abstract world.
researches on organizational improvisation as a specific subject. Van Bilsen used theatrical simulation to show the differences
Where earlier research was focused on music and theater, the for three different leadership styles in organizational
focus is nowadays more on organizations and their traditional improvisation. For every leadership style about ten scenes were
business goals. Examples for these goals are efficiency, cost developed. For every single one of these scenes, the actors got
reduction and new product development (Moorman & Miner, an assignment.
1998; Eisenhardt & Tabrizi, 1995). Organizational
improvisation can be defined as: Two of the conclusions from Van Bilsen’s research (2010) are
that rotating leadership solves the paradox between control and
“The conception of action as it unfolds, by an organization freedom as mentioned in Pina e Cunha et al. (2003) and that
and/or its members, drawing on available material, cognitive, rotating leadership is suitable for organizational improvisation
affective and social resources” (Pina e Cunha et al., 1999, p. (Van Bilsen, 2010). In this research the process of rotating
302). leadership in combination with organizational improvisation
Within the research into organizational improvisation also the will be deeper investigated.
paradox between freedom and control obtained a more 1.4 Research questions
significant role (Pina e Cunha et al., 2003). The main problem In order to elaborate this thesis in a systematic way, one main
related to this paradox is that leaders want to control and want research and three sub questions were stated. The main focus
(or have) to give a certain amount of freedom to their for this research is on rotating leadership and how this
employees. Some examples of control can be controlling the leadership style is organized during the innovative processes of
outcomes (final products) or taking care for an efficient way of new product development teams within organizational
working. On the other way, there is also need for freedom. For improvisation. The main research question for this research is:
example, to motivate employees to come up with their own
ideas and work them out. ‘How and why does rotating leadership in NPD teams work
Employees want on the one hand freedom to do what is ‘good’ during the process of organizational improvisation?’
in their opinion. But on the other hand they want to have some The reason that organizational improvisation was selected, is
control about the process and the other employees. So this because of the earlier mentioned growing importance of fast
paradox is relevant for both employees and leaders. reactions on environmental change (Crossan et al., 1996).
The relationship between different leadership styles and Working with new product development (NPD) teams is a good
improvisation was topic of earlier research (Pina e Cunha et al., reaction on this. These teams are especially focused on new
2003; Van Bilsen, 2010). These researches concluded that product development (Koen et al., 2001). Also other forms of
servant leadership and rotating leadership are leadership styles new product development teams can be used. For example new
where organizational improvisation can have some benefits. In product development teams which take care for the complete
contrast to servant and rotating leadership, directive leadership process of bringing a new product to the market
is supposed to have a negative influence on the outcomes of (Sivasubramaniam et al., 2012).
organizational improvisation. The research goal for this research is to analyze how rotating
leadership is organized in organizational improvisation. The
1.2 Research goal following three sub question will help to reach this goal, the
The goal for this research is to analyze how rotating leadership first one is:
is organized in organizational improvisation. Rotating - What is rotating leadership?
leadership is a leadership style where leadership is not only one Within this sub question the concept of rotating leadership will
person’s responsibility. Instead of this, leadership is the be elaborated. Also how rotating leadership is used in new
responsibility of the whole group (Pearce et al., 2010). product development teams and organizational improvisation
Therefore rotating leadership is a bit difficult to use in will be discussed.
organizations. For example the question ‘who is responsible for
failures?’ is more difficult to answer. Also the implementation - How is rotating leadership distributed during
has to be good in order to prevent a situation without any form organizational improvisation?
of leadership. Interesting is to analyze how and why the role of
2
Within this question, the focus is on the way the rotating Lopez, 2007). After all, leaders help the organizations and also
leadership role shifts from one to the other during the process of help new product development teams to set goals, shaping
organizational improvisation. Two different kinds of figures teams and select workforce (Denehy, 2008). Furthermore
will be used. This to make a clear overview of the shifts within leadership is important to solve the paradox between freedom
the scenes. and control (Pina e Cunha et al., 2003). Later on more will be
- Why does leadership change during the process of reported on this.
organizational improvisation? In the literature on organizational improvisation, different
Within this question the focus will be on the question ‘why researchers (Pina e Cunha, 2003; Bastien & Hostager, 1988;
leadership does change?’. The last two questions will be Van Bilsen, 2010) found that there are two leadership styles that
answered with help from the scenes as made by Van Bilsen have a positive effect on organizational improvisation. These
(2010). two leadership styles are servant leadership and rotating
1.5 Structure leadership.
The structure for this paper is as follows: after this introduction, Servant leadership is a leadership style which is known as a
the theoretical framework of this research will be presented. people-centered leadership style (Clegg et al., 2007). In the
This framework will consist out of a description of the terms servant leadership style the ideal of service is embedded in the
leadership and rotating leadership. The third part will be a follower-leader relationships. In contrast to directive leadership,
chapter about methodology. Here the way the research will be leaders are more focused on the human part (Greenleaf, 1977)
elaborated is explained. After the methodology part, the data for than on the organizational objectives (Graham, 1991). In short,
this research will be showed. The next part will be the analysis servant leadership is a style in which leaders should be servants
part. Here the data will be analyzed. After this a conclusion will first and leaders second (Greenleaf, 1970). Rotating leadership
be drawn and a discussion will be presented. will be discussed later.
Like written before, not every leadership style fits into the ideas
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK of organizational improvisation (Pina e Cunha, 2003; Van
This research is about the process of rotating leadership within Bilsen, 2010). For organizational improvisation a leadership
organizational improvisation. For this theoretical framework the style where the leader is able to make a synthesis among
term ‘leadership’ will be discussed first. After this the term apparently conflicting or dissonant styles and procedures, while
‘rotating leadership’ will be discussed. allowing individual discretion for goal attainment is important
2.1 Leadership (Pina e Cunha, 2003).
In the literature about leadership, a great number of definitions In servant and rotating leadership the common characteristic
for the term ‘leadership’ were introduced. Within these can be found in the fact that the leader gives the employees
definitions a distinction can be made between a more traditional freedom and space to work out their own ideas. This in
and a more modernized view. contradiction to directive leadership, here the leader takes the
decisions himself without interventions of other people (Pina e
2.1.1 Traditional vs. modern view Cunha, 2003). In summary, leadership is important for the
Where traditional leadership makes a simple distinction relation between the organization and the amount of
between those who are the leader and those who are not, the improvisation within the boundaries of the organization. Not
modern view of leadership does not make this simple every leadership style solves the paradox between control and
distinction. For this research the following definition for freedom. Therefore not every leadership style offers the same
traditional leadership will be selected: amount of control and freedom.
“Leadership is about one person (the leader) getting other 2.2 Rotating leadership
people (the followers) to do something” (Kort, 2008, p. 1). Rotating leadership is a leadership style whereby leadership is
In contrast to traditional leadership, nowadays we can distributed among team members rather than focused on a
distinguish more and modernized leadership styles. Examples single leader (Carson et al., 2007). Rotating leadership is
are rotating leadership, servant leadership, improvisational comparable to distributed leadership and shared leadership.
leadership (Pina e Cunha et al., 2003) and democratic Where the leader of a directive leadership style has a strong and
leadership (Gastil, 1994). Within these leadership styles, it is formal position, this formal and strong position of the leader is
more difficult to make a simple distinction as made before. For absent within rotating leadership. In other words, rotating
example, within rotating leadership the leader role is leadership is characterized by equality (Pina e Cunha et al,
continuously subject to change. For this research the following 2003). This means that every member of a new product
definition for those ‘modern’ leadership styles was selected: development team has the same rights and is on the same
hierarchical level.
“Leadership is an interaction between two or more members of There are many components and factors involved in rotating
a group that often involves a structuring or restructuring of the leadership. The research of Carson et al. (2007) reports the
situation and the perceptions and expectations of the following on this: “shared leadership is facilitated by an
members… Leadership occurs when one group member overall team environment that consists of three dimensions:
modifies the motivation of competencies of others in the group. shared purpose, social support and voice” (Carson et al., 2007,
Any member of the group can exhibit some amount of p. 1222).
leadership” (Bass, 1990, p. 19-20).
More about the definition of rotating leadership for this research Within rotating leadership an overall team environment is
can be found in chapter 2.2. important. The team environment consists out of three parts.
2.1.2 Leadership and organizational improvisation The first one is ‘having a shared purpose’. This can be a shared
In order to implement organizational improvisation in an assignment or a shared profit target. Second is ‘social support’.
efficient way, it is important to keep in mind that leadership is This is the support team members give each other after
important for organizational improvisation (Vera & Rodriguez- dropping a good idea. The last one is voice.
3
Carson et al. (2007) defined it as the degree to which team leader also has consequences for the work that is delivered. No
members have input into how the team carries out its purpose. leader means less or worse teamwork (Van Bilsen, 2010). In
Wood (2005) suggested in his research the following case of (hardly) no or bad leadership, all the team members ‘o
characteristics of rotating leadership: decentralized interaction, back’ to their own expertise and do not take any responsibilities
collective task completion, reciprocal support and skill for issues out of his expertise (Van Bilsen, 2010).
development. Decentralized interaction is interaction between 2.2.3 Rotating leadership and NPD teams
two (or more) employees without intervention of a leader or Rotating leadership is one of the leadership styles in which the
supervisor. Collective task completion is the willingness to control vs. freedom paradox is solved (Pina e Cunha, 2003). By
work together and to accomplish the common task. The third solving this paradox, the idea of a central leader is rejected.
characteristic is reciprocal support. This is the support that the Instead of this central leader, the team members have to accept
team members provide to each other’s problems and ideas. The that at one moment the member can be the leader or at another
fourth and last one is skill development, this is the personal moment the member can be the follower (Clegg et al., 2002).
development of the team member during the process. One of the core characteristics of rotating leadership is adapting
Where Wood’s research (2005) focused on rotating leadership
in management teams, the research of Davis and Eisenhardt to and building on each other’s ideas. In the research of Van
(2011) focuses on rotating leadership and (collaborative) Bilsen (2010), a combination between rotating leadership and
innovation. Davis and Eisenhardt distinguished three new product development teams showed more teamwork
components of innovation within rotating leadership. The first between the team members. This mainly because of the
collective task completion and reciprocal support (Wood, 2005)
of these three components is ‘alternating decision control and the second component: ‘zig-zagging objectives to develop
between partners to access their complementary capabilities’. deep and broad innovation search trajectories’ of Davis and
This means that the members of a team will lead the team when Eisenhardt (2011). These components make (more) teamwork
their specific capability is asked. The second component is ‘zig- necessary in order to accomplish the assignments they got.
zagging objectives to develop deep and broad innovation search Besides this bigger amount of teamwork, Van Bilsen (2010)
trajectories’. This means that the team has different goals. also found that the solved paradox also brings a more positive
These goals are continuously changing and these are deep and attitude during team work.
broad trajectories to reach the goals. The third component is Another important point is the disadvantage mentioned before.
‘fluctuating network cascades to mobilize diverse participants The risk of having no leader within rotating leadership is
over time’. This means that every team member contributes to relatively big. This is because of the fact that the feeling of
the project and can also use networks to contribute to the final equality is bigger than in a directive leadership style. As said
products (Davis and Eisenhardt, 2011). before: when every team member treats each other as equals,
2.2.1 Control vs. Freedom paradox there is a change that nobody takes the leadership. Without
A paradox is “the simultaneous presence of contradictory, even leadership, less teamwork is observable (Van Bilsen, 2010). A
mutually exclusive elements”(Cameron & Quinn, 1988, p. 2). situation without leadership may arise from the lack of expertise
One of the most famous paradoxes in the literature about on a certain field.
leadership is the paradox between control and freedom. This 2.2.4 Rotating leadership and organizational
paradox can be seen in two perspectives: the manager and the improvisation
employee. Following Pina e Cunha (2003), the stimulation of improvised
The manager wants to control the employees and the final behaviors has been mainly related to two elements: minimal
products. On the other hand leaders want input from employees. structures and experimental cultures. Minimal structures are the
For example own ideas (Clegg et al., 2002). The employee set of controls employed to accomplish the synthesis of high
wants to have some room for own ideas and input but on the levels of autonomy and control (Bastien and Hostager, 1988).
other hand also wants to control the process at sometimes. For Minimal structures are based upon a social component.
example when his or her special expertise is asked. Pina e Examples for this social component are behavioral norms and
Cunha (2003) found that rotating leadership is a leadership style communicative codes. Second part is the technical component.
which solves the paradox between freedom and control. Van Examples for this component are skills, knowledge and techno-
Bilsen (2010) also found this and reported the following on this: structural conditions (Bastien and Hostager, 1988).
“Hypothesis 2a (Rotating leadership is able to solve the The second element are the experimental cultures. This is the
paradox between freedom and control) can also be confirmed, culture which promote action and learning by doing (Weick,
although because for different reasons. Rotating leadership 1995). So these experimental cultures tolerate errors and
gives the entire team the possibility to exercise control over the failures in innovations (Craig and Hart, 1992). On the one hand
process, and gives the team members the freedom to put in new serves rotating leadership the need for minimal structures. The
ideas and build on those of others. The synthesis made in team members are relatively free of control and have freedom
rotating leadership is that multiple roles of a leader can be to make most of the decisions themselves. On the other hand,
fulfilled simultaneously by different team members. This is only within rotating leadership action is promoted. An example is
possible if team member are able and willing to take and that every team member is encouraged to put in ideas in order
release the leadership role that a process needs.” (Van Bilsen, to make it possible for other team members to build on this
2010, p. 47) ideas. So, these two components are important for
2.2.2 Risk of rotating leadership implementing improvisation within rotating leadership.
A disadvantage of rotating leadership is the possibility that To summarize, rotating leadership is a leadership style in which
nobody takes the role of leader. When for example expertise in equality between the different team members is important. In
a certain field is asked and nobody owns the asked expertise. contrast to directive leadership, rotating leadership does not
This situation will result in a situation of anarchy. This is a have a central leader and nobody is responsible in case of a
situation in which nobody is the leader and there will not be any failure.
interaction between the team members. The fact that there is no
4
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
