All content in this area was uploaded by William Torbert on Feb 08, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... Rather, they require a fresh and extraordinarily alert attention to oneself and the environment in the moment of practice. 10 They require the analogical ability to move back and forth between abstract thought about ethical and political ideals and concrete instances of managerial practice as these occur. And they require the flexibility of behavior of an accomplished actor, so that one's speech and nonverbal actions simultaneously convey three things: ...
What makes a leader ethical? This paper critically examines the answer given by developmental theory, which argues that individuals can develop through cumulative stages of ethical orientation and behavior (e.g. Hobbesian, Kantian, Rawlsian), such that leaders at later developmental stages (of whom there are empirically very few today) are more ethical. By contrast to a simple progressive model of ethical development, this paper shows that each developmental stage has both positive (light) and negative (shadow) aspects, which affect the ethical behaviors of leaders at that stage. It also explores an unexpected result: later stage leaders can have more significantly negative effects than earlier stage leadership.
This article examines spiritual growth and the business career. Rather than a certain decline into workaholism or materialism, the world of business becomes a necessary step on the path of enlightenment, through the transcendant philosophical models of the Hindu householder and the Native American Medicine Wheel.
The householder concept, including mastering the material world and the resulting spiritual growth, stresses the importance of action, also a criterion for success in business. Current views, based on studies of modern life, Judaic thought, and Christian beliefs, add further dimension to this executive's model of enlightenment.
– The growing interest in developing and applying “integral” approaches to organisations has been accompanied by a corresponding increase in different ways of interpreting this term. This article aims to present a set of criteria to help in defining the varieties of integral approaches to the study of organisations.
– These criteria are derived from Ken Wilber's integral framework. The constitutive elements of Wilber's multi‐paradigm framework are used to develop a typology that honours the many forms that integral approaches can take.
– It is proposed that the key criteria for assessing integral approaches to organisational life are: the structural focus, the engagement with process, and the emphasis on spirituality or essential purpose. Four type categories result from applying the structural criteria. These range from a general type that utilises broadly holistic concepts through to type which employs the detailed application of developmental quadrant and level concepts that formally define the integral approach as conceived by Ken Wilber. The engagement and spirituality criteria are additional enriching criteria that establish the integrity of the methods and purposes used in truly integral approaches.
– The proposed typology will help in understanding how different authors, researchers and practitioners represent and apply the term “integral” within organisational contexts.
The influence of decision style on strategic decisions made by 137 top executive is described. Decision style is defined, using concepts proposed by Jung, in terms of the decision maker's introversion-extroversion and judgement-perception predispositions as well as in terms of data and data-processing preferences. The executives evaluated hypothetical capital-expansion scenarios with strategic importance. In these scenarios, types of information, the decision environment, and uncertainty were defined in terms of decision style and then systematically manipulated. Each executive's age and experience were collected to qualify the findings. Decision style was found to be a highly significant factor in explaining the adoptability and perceived risk for strategic decisions. Decision style-uncertainty and decision style-environment interactions were found to be important and were used to explain the preferences that top executives express for diagnostic information and ways of measuring organizational performance. These preferences suggest that style may explain why managers make different strategic decisions when faced with similar choices.
The influence of a manager's decision style in strategic decision-making is explored using simulations. The Jungian style classification is extended to identify ‘data and process dominant’ styles of decision-making. Managers with process dominant styles can use several types of data and managers with data dominant styles can apply various modes of data processing. Both the expanded and the traditional definitions of style are used as factors to explain how 79 top executives and 89 middle managers rated project simulations. Decision style is found to be a key factor in explaining the likelihood of taking strategic action and the risk seen in this action. Decisions made by top executives are more style dependent than those of middle managers. The extended definition of style reveals more about the preferences of top executives than traditional style categories.
An exploration of the relationship of academic knowledge to practical action requires a discussion of the dominant assumptions governing the conceptualization of time and its role in the production and transfer of knowledge between academic and practitioner sources. The disciplines of managerial and organizational science are constrained in their effectiveness as applied science because of their primary focus on generalized, objective, 3 rd -person knowledge of the past, whereas all human practice in organizations requires the interweaving of 1 st-, 2 nd-and 3 rd -person inquiry and knowledge about the past, present and future in the midst of action at particular times.
Managers who have access to several modes of understanding have been described as ideal decision-makers. This article reports on research that explored how flexible styles of decision-making, defined by the number and kinds of accessible modes of understanding, influence the choices of top executives. Instruments were used to measure attitude toward ambiguity and uncertainty and to determine the style of the participating top executives. the participants were asked to evaluate eight capital expansion projects in terms of adoptability and risk. Inferences about decision-making were drawn from these evaluations. the tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty scores and the adoptability and risk ratings were associated with the participant's style. Top executives with a flexible style who have access to each of the modes of understanding were found to be aggressive decision-makers with a high tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty.
Decision styles, defined by the primary and secondary considerations in choice making and the implementation tactics preferred by managers, are used to explain the ways in which managers with a given style take action. Examples are used to illustrate the unique approaches taken by managers with each style in their decisions concerning leadership, team building, strategic management, control, and related issues that managers grapple with to fashion a desired future. The basis for shifts in style and the potential for conflict or collaboration between individuals with particular styles is discussed.