Otto Scharmer: Blind Spots of Leadership


Below, I summarize Scharmer's theory as it relates to my area of interest. In my current thinking, I see a connection between Scharmer's Fields with the way in which Wilber's quadrants evolve and interact.

William Isaacs and Otto Scharmer speak to reframing our collective paradigm of leadership as a "generative dialogue" as a means to examine the beliefs and assumptions driving current mental models and how these mental models shape paradigms of leadership (Forman & Ross, 2013, location 173 of 3841).

Otto Scharmer (2008) describes successful leadership as dependent on two behaviors a leader brings to a situation: attention and intention. The origins of each, source dimension, is the 'inner place' from which "effective leadership and social action come into being" (p. 52). This dimension is further articulated through what Scharmer refers to as field structures of attention. Each field is characterized by different ways of operating: Thinking (individual); Conversing (group); Structuring (institutions); and Ecosystem coordination (global systems). The ways in which these behaviors are engaged, both individually and collectively, determine "the path the system takes and how it emerges" through levels: personal, group, institutional, and global. Scharmer contends that the first two fields reflect "reactive responses and quick fixes on a symptoms level (Fields 1 and 2) to generative responses that address systemic root issues (Fields 3 and 4)" (p. 55).

Figure 2: How the Structures of Attention (Field 1-4) Determines the Path of Social Emergence (p. 55)

Scharmer describes the process within which one engages in these behaviors that draws attention and is intentional as U Theory. U Theory is comprised of seven leadership capacities that are engaged as follows: Holding the space, Observing, Sensing, Presencing, Crystalizing, Prototyping, and Performing. Holding space invites others in. 




References:

Scharmer, C. O. (2008). Uncovering the blind spot of leadership. Leader to Leader, 2008(47), 52-59.

Wilber, K. (2000). One taste: Daily reflections on integral spirituality. Shambhala Publications.

Images:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Ffigure%2FHOW-THE-STRUCTURE-OF-ATTENTION-FIELDS-1-4_fig2_246910035&psig=AOvVaw3xyQJwoWkAiBE4cxn-TY28&ust=1634516504768000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAsQjRxqFwoTCMCMq9uW0PMCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAm

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fthesystemsthinker.com%2Fleading-from-the-future-a-new-social-technology-for-our-times%2F&psig=AOvVaw3xyQJwoWkAiBE4cxn-TY28&ust=1634516504768000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAsQjRxqFwoTCMCMq9uW0PMCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAg

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hobfall's Conservation of Resources (CoR)- SCT and Adaptive Leadership

Image
Conservation of Resources An interesting title for a theory that I've come to learn is associated with crisis management.  Bajaba et al., (2021) interject Hobfoll's (1989) theory as a means to explain how particular managers recognize and are able to adjust resources that create conditions necessary in a time of crisis. These resources are not limited to physical assets. These resources include personality traits and skills of individuals within the organization that advantage opportunity and overcome challenges in times of crisis: traits and skills that become invaluable resources in times of stress. "COR theory, a motivational theory introduced by Hobfoll (1989), defines resources as "those objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies that are valued by the individual or that serve as a means for the attainment of these objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies" (Bajaba et al., citing Hobfoll, 1989, 2021, p. 3);  The authors prese...
Read more

Looking past the 'what we do' and focusing on the 'why we do'

Image
I was watching a movie last night with my family- Inception. The storyline is very complex but it goes something like this... invading the dreams of others to learn more about what they know and why they do what they do in order to change or explain what has been and influence the actions of the dreamer (at the subconsciousness level) to change a future outcome.  One scene has the character seeking out the sage advice from another character, attempting to dig deeper into the subconscious dreamworld of another. The advice was simple, one cannot assume that merely entering and influencing sufficiently changes the course of action. One must delve into the idea at a point of inception- the place in which the idea is reduced to its simplest form. If you enter anywhere higher up the perspective-evolutionary ladder, you risk obfuscating the idea and calling it something that it isn't holding the belief that this "is", which means that the change you incite does not change the o...
Read more

Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings: A Commentary

Image
  Conservation of Resources Steven E. Hobfall Individuals hold on to the things that are central to their perceived wellbeing and safety. O bjects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies when “threatened, lost,[or] believed to be unstable" are recognized as having value and are perceived to be of value. W hen "individuals and groups cannot set a path to the fostering and protection of [these] resources through their joint effort” stress is experienced (Hobfoll, 2001, p. 342); w hen such conditions persist, the "stress resistance" within the individual or the group is compromised. Furthermore, a  persistent loss of resources contributes to further loss of resources, enabling a cyclical process referred to as a loss spiral, leaving individuals and groups even more vulnerable (Hobfoll, 1998). In such times of loss, individuals and groups take great effort to adapt in ways to conserve and utilize available resources . If such adaptation is successful, there ...
Read more