Assignment- Doctorate Level- Please READ Entire Post First!!!

A rtic le s f r o m In te g ra l L ead ers h ip R evie w L ead ers h ip S ta g e D ev elo pm en t a n d it s E ffe ct o n T ra n sfo rm atio nal C han ge 2012-0 8-0 8 1 4:0 8:1 0 J o rg e T aborg a Jo rg e T aborg a Jo rg e T aborg a A bstr a ct T his c ase s tu dy in ve stig ate s th e im pact o f le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent in tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s. In p artic ula r, it lo oks a t h ow th e s tr u ctu re a nd chara cte ris tic s o f le aders hip te am s d ete rm in e la rg e c hange o utc om es in org aniz atio ns. T he c ore th eory th at g ro unds th is r e searc h is th at p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders hip is r e quir e d fo r o rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n to ta ke p la ce. T his th eory com es fr o m th e w ork o f B ill T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues. A lo ng w it h th is th eory , th e re searc her e xp lo re s a c hange le aders hip te am s tr u ctu re ( h ola rc hy) a nd chara cte ris tic s a ssocia te d w it h a h olis tic te am o rg aniz ed a lo ng th e in te gra l dim ensio ns o f in te rio r-e xte rio r a nd in div id ual- c olle ctiv e . In te gra l m odels a re le ve ra ged to c onve y th e d eve lo pm enta l n atu re o f le aders hip te am s a nd th eir e ffe ct on tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange. T w o q uestio ns a re p urs ued in th is r e searc h: a ) h ow le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent c orre la te s to th e s uccess o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s, a nd b ) h ow th e m ake -u p o f a c hange le aders hip te am a ffe cts o utc om e in th e a bsence o f le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent a w are ness. T his r e searc h fo llo w s a com para tiv e c ase s tu dy r e searc h m eth odolo gy. S enio r le aders o f a n o rg aniz atio n th at h as u nderg one a t le ast tw o la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio ns in th e la st 5 y e ars p ro vid ed th e d eta ils fo r th is r e searc h.

In tr o ductio n P urp ose T he p urp ose o f th is c ase s tu dy r e searc h is to d ete rm in e h ow p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders hip a s d efin ed b y R ooke a nd T orb ert ( 1 998) a ffe cts th e o utc om e o f la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in o rg aniz atio ns. In p artic ula r, th is r e searc h a im s to lin k post- c onve ntio nal le aders hip w it h th e w ay o rg aniz atio ns s tr u ctu re th eir le aders hip te am s fo r la rg e c hange in it ia tiv e s a nd th e r e sult s th ey a chie ve .

B ackg ro und S in ce th e tim e th at la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hanges in o rg aniz atio ns b ecam e th e subje ct o f r e searc h in th e fie ld s o f m anagem ent a nd le aders hip s tu die s, it a ppears th at o nly o ne in th re e c hange in it ia tiv e s h as b een d eem ed s uccessfu l ( M eaney & P ung, 2 008). S ocia l s cie ntis ts , p syc holo gis ts a nd o rg aniz atio nal d eve lo pers h ave am assed th ousands o f v o lu m es a bout c hange m anagem ent a nd th e r o le o f le aders hip in c hange in it ia tiv e s ( V in son & P ung, 2 006). H ow eve r, th is la rg e b ody o f re sourc es h as n ot a lt e re d th e s uccess r a tio in tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange s in ce sta tis tic s s ta rte d to a ppear in th e n in etie s. A ik e n a nd K elle r ( 2 009) s ta te “ it s eem s th at, d espit e p ro lif ic o utp ut, th e fie ld o f c hange m anagem ent h asn’t le d to m ore successfu l c hange p ro gra m s” ( p . 1 ).

Is ern a nd P ung ( 2 007) c hara cte riz e la rg e o rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n a s h avin g “s ta rtlin gly h ig h a m bit io ns, th e in te gra tio n o f d if fe re nt ty p es o f c hange, a nd a pro lo nged e ffo rt o fte n la stin g m any m onth s, in s om e c ases, e ve n y e ars ( p . 1 )”.

K otte r ( 2 006) a nd o th er c hange lu m in arie s h ave p ro vid ed c om ple te m eth ods fo r m anagin g la rg e c hange, o fte n c la im in g th at th eir m eth od w ould a t le ast r a is e th e pro babilit y o f s uccess. A ik e n a nd K elle r fr o m M cK in sey in th eir a rtic le The Ir ra tio nal S id e o f C hange M anagem ent (2 009) o ffe r fo ur b asic c ondit io ns fo r la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio n to ta ke p la ce in a n o rg aniz atio n: a ) a c om pellin g s to ry , b ) r o le m odelin g, c ) r e in fo rc in g m echanis m s, a nd d ) c apabilit y b uild in g.

T orb ert a nd A ssocia te s ( 2 004) a ppro ach th e s ubje ct o f o rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n p ure ly fr o m th e le aders hip s ta ndpoin t ir re spectiv e o f m eth od a nd pra ctic e. T heir p re m is e is b ased o n r e searc h th ey c onducte d w hic h y ie ld ed a s eve n sta ge d eve lo pm enta l fr a m ew ork fo r le aders . R ooke a nd T orb ert ( 2 005) s ta te th at le aders e vo lv e to o ne o f s eve n s ta ges o f le aders hip w here th ey w ill m ost lik e ly s ta y fo r th e b ette r p ortio n o f th eir liv e s w it h a fe w c ontin uin g to s lo w ly e vo lv e in to h ig her le ve ls . T his e vo lu tio n is g uid ed b y th e e xp erie nces o f th e in div id ual, w hic h s ta rt e arly in lif e ( S im cox, 2 005).

T orb ert a nd A ssocia te s ( 2 004) p osit th at o nly in th e la st th re e o f th e s eve n s ta ges o f le aders hip d eve lo pm ent d o in div id uals h ave e nough r e fle ctiv e m eanin g-m akin g to successfu lly d riv e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange. T hese a uth ors a rg ue th at a h ig h le ve l o f in te rn al a w are ness is n ecessary fo r a le ader to g ra sp a ll o f th e n uances p re sent in la rg e c hange s it u atio ns. T orb ert d efin es th ese la te r s ta ge le aders a s tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn ers , th at is , th ey a re in a c onsta nt p ath o f s elf - d eve lo pm ent. T his n otio n o f tr a nsfo rm ativ e le aders a s b ein g s elf - tr a nsfo rm in g is w ell a ddre ssed in th e lit e ra tu re of le aders hip s tu die s ( N ailo n, D ela haye & B ro w nle e, 2 007). H ow eve r, T orb ert a nd his a ssocia te s a re m ore d elib era te in th eir p ro nouncem ent a nd a ssocia te c erta in le aders hip d eve lo pm enta l s ta ges w it h a c apabilit y th at p re sum ably c ould h ave pro fo und im pact in th e s uccess o f la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s.

R atio nale T he s ubje ct o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange is n ot n ew a nd, a s s ta te d e arlie r, th e r e sult s have n ot im pro ve d e ve n w it h th e e ve r-in cre asin g a m ount o f m ate ria ls a va ila ble o n th e s ubje ct. A s d ocum ente d in th e IB M s tu dy ( C apit a liz in g o n c om ple xit y , 2 010), th e prio rit y fo r m ost o rg aniz atio nal le aders is d ealin g w it h c om ple xit y d riv e n b y th e str u ctu re s o f g lo baliz atio n, w orld e conom ie s, s hif ts in c onsum er p ow er, envir o nm enta l c oncern s a nd th e n eed fo r o rg aniz atio ns to a ddre ss th e e vo lv in g re quir e m ents o f th eir s ocia l s ys te m s. T his c om ple xit y s eem s to p re sent e ve n la rg er challe nges to th e m ostly u nsuccessfu l tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s.

T orb ert’s le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork a ppears p ro m is in g in e xp la in in g w hy o nly a th ir d o f th e la rg e c hange p ro je cts s ucceed. F ro m h is r e searc h, th e auth or p osit s th at o nly 1 5% o f th e le ader p opula tio n h as th e c apabilit y to e xe cute tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange ( R ooke & T orb ert, 2 005). G iv e n th at m ost o rg aniz atio ns and le aders a re n ot fa m ilia r w it h T orb ert’s w ork , it s ta nds to r e ason th at th eir tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s a re n ot c onscio usly s ta ffe d to in clu de o ne o r m ore o f th ese la tte r s ta ge le aders . C onsequently , tr a nsfo rm atio nal p ro je cts w ill h ave a ra ndom c hance o f s uccess b ased o n th eir le ader m em bers hip .

A ssum in g th at th e r e searc h o f T orb ert a nd h is a ssocia te s is c orre ct a nd th at le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent is a k e y d ete rm in ant o f th e s uccess o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in a n o rg aniz atio n, th en c onscio us a ssig nm ent o f le aders based o n th eir d eve lo pm enta l s ta ges is p ara m ount. T his is m ost fu ndam enta l re la tiv e to tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders b ut it a ls o a pplie s to th e in clu sio n o f th e o th er sta ges o f le aders hip d eve lo pm ent. A ccord in g to B urk e ( 2 011), m ost c hange p ro je ct te am s a re a ssem ble d b ased o n r o le s, o rg aniz atio nal p olit ic s a nd o n w ho is ava ila ble . T o m ake m atte rs w ors e, w e a re c lu ele ss o n th e le aders ’ d eve lo pm enta l sta ges a nd o n th e u nin te nded c onsequences o f th eir a ssig nm ent. T his r e searc h corre la te s th e o utc om e o f o rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n in it ia tiv e s to th e m ake -u p o f change le aders hip te am s.

R ese arc h Q uestio ns T w o q uestio ns o rie nt th is r e searc h: a ) h ow le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent c orre la te s to th e s uccess o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s, a nd b ) h ow th e m ake -u p o f a change le aders hip te am a ffe cts o utc om e in th e a bsence o f le aders hip s ta ge deve lo pm ent a w are ness.

R esearc h o f t h e L it e ra tu re F our to pic s a re e xp lo re d in th e lit e ra tu re r e searc h fo r th is s tu dy: a ) in te gra l tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange, b ) le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent, c ) tr a nsfo rm atio nal change a nd tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g, a nd d ) th e h olis tic le aders hip d eve lo pm ent m odel. In te gra l T ra n sfo rm atio nal C han ge T he c oncept o f th e holo n w as in tr o duced in 1 967 b y A rth ur K oesle r in h is b ook The G host in th e M achin e ( K oestle r, 1 990). A h olo n is b oth a p art a nd a w hole . K oesle r aim ed to b rid ge th e d ic hoto m y o f p hilo sophic al h olis m a nd s cie ntif ic r e ductio nis m th ro ugh a s tr u ctu re th at c ould e xp re ss b oth ( E dw ard s, 2 005). S ocia l s cie ntis ts h ave sin ce u sed h olo ns to d escrib e o rg aniz atio nal s tr u ctu re s. T hey a re r e curs iv e in natu re a nd s hare p ro pertie s a cro ss le ve ls .

K en W ilb er, th e p hilo sopher b ehin d th e In te gra l m ove m ent, in tr o duced th e A Q AL (A ll- Q uadra nts , A ll- L eve ls a nd A ll- L in es) fr a m ew ork to a rtic ula te th e “ fu ndam enta l dom ain s in w hic h c hange a nd d eve lo pm ent o ccur” ( E dw ard s, 2 005, p . 2 72).

W ilb er’s in te gra l th eory p ro poses th at s ocia l p henom ena r e quir e th e c onsid era tio n o f at le ast tw o d im ensio ns o f e xis te nce: 1 ) in te rio r-e xte rio r, a nd 2 ) in div id ual- c olle ctiv e (W ilb er, 2 000; C acio ppe & E dw ard s, 2 005a, 2 005b; E dw ard s, 2 009). T he in te rio r- exte rio r d im ensio n c orre sponds to th e s ubje ctiv e /r e fle ctiv e e xp erie nce in r e la tio nship to th e o bje ctiv e o r b ehavio r-b ased r e alit y . In th e s econd d im ensio n, th e in div id ual- colle ctiv e r e fe rs to th e r e la tio nship o f th e e xp erie nce o f s elf - a gency a nd th at o f com munit y . T he A Q AL fr a m ew ork is r e pre sente d a s a 2 × 2 m atr ix d em arc ate d b y th ese tw o d im ensio ns. F ig ure 1 s how s th is fr a m ew ork .

F ig ure 1 : T his v e rs io n o f th e A Q AL fr a m ew ork w as a dapte d fr o m E dw ard s ( 2 005) a nd C acio ppe and E dw ard s ( 2 005a).

In th e fr a m ew ork s how n in F ig ure 1 , th e c onscio usness q uadra nt c orre sponds to th e o ve ra ll le ve l o f a w are ness in th e o rg aniz atio n. P ru zan ( 2 001) e xp lo re s th e subje ct o f o rg aniz atio ns h avin g c onscio usness a ttr ib ute s s im ila r to in div id uals s uch as “ b ein g r e fle ctiv e , p urp osefu l a nd v a lu es o rie nte d” ( p . 2 76). P andey a nd G upta (2 007) d efin e c onscio usness a s th e w ay o rg aniz atio ns m ake m eanin g a nd r e la te to th e w orld . In th eir v ie w , o rg aniz atio ns m anif e st th eir c onscio usness in th re e d is tin ct m anners : m ark e t ( w ealt h c re atio n), s ocia l r e sponsib ilit y , a nd s pir it u al ( c olle ctiv e evo lu tio n a nd e xis te ntia l h arm ony).

T he c ult u ra l q uadra nt o f th e o rg aniz atio nal h olo n r e pre sents th e v a lu es a nd b elie fs and th e u nderly in g a ssum ptio ns in a n o rg aniz atio n. T his is in lin e w it h S chein ’s defin it io n o f o rg aniz atio nal c ult u re a s a p atte rn o f s hare d b asic a ssum ptio ns, v a lu es and b elie ve s, a nd a rtif a cts th at th e g ro up d eve lo ped a s it s olv e d it s p ro ble m s o f exte rn al a dapta tio n a nd in te rn al in te gra tio n ( S chein , 2 010). T he b ehavio ra l q uadra nt em bodie s th e c olle ctio n o f e m otio ns, c ognit iv e p ro cessin g, a nd a ll m anif e ste d actio ns. O rg aniz atio nal le arn in g is a k e y p art o f th is q uadra nt ( E dw ard s, 2 005). T he la st q uadra nt in th e o rg aniz atio nal h olo n c orre sponds to th e s ocia l. P olic ie s, pro cedure s, p ro cesses, s tr u ctu re s, s ys te m s, te chnolo gie s a nd s ocia l n orm s a re a ll m anif e sta tio ns o f th e s ocia l q uadra nt ( C acio ppe & E dw ard s, 2 005a).

W ilb er d efin ed d eve lo pm enta l s tr u ctu re s in th e A Q AL fr a m ew ork ( W ilb er, 2 000).

T w o o f th ese s tr u ctu re s a re r e le va nt to o rg aniz atio ns: d eve lo pm enta l lin es a nd le ve ls . F ig ure 1 s how s h oriz onta l a nd v e rtic al a rro w s th at s ym boliz e th e c ontin uous and in cre m enta l c hange th at o rg aniz atio ns g o th ro ugh. W ilb er c alle d th ese d yn am ic deve lo pm enta l lin es, w hic h in a n o rg aniz atio n m ay in clu de “ c ult u re , g oals , c usto m er and c om munit y r e la tio ns, e th ic s, c orp ora te m ora ls , m ark e tin g, g ove rn ance a nd le aders hip ( C acio ppe & E dw ard s, 2 005b). In cre m enta l c hanges ty p ic ally o ccur fr o m th e c o-e vo lu tio n o f th e q uadra nts ( E dw ard s, 2 005).

T he o th er d yn am ic s tr u ctu re in A Q AL is th e d eve lo pm enta l le ve ls d epic te d a s dia gonal a rro w s in F ig ure 1 . T hey c orre spond to th e s ta ges o f d eve lo pm ent th at in div id uals a nd o rg aniz atio ns g o th ro ugh a s th ey a re e xp osed to lif e e xp erie nces.

S eve ra l r e searc hers h ave c onceptu aliz ed d eve lo pm enta l fr a m ew ork s in clu din g P ia get, L oevin ger, C ook-G re ute r, G ra ve s, K egan, K ohlb erg , W ilb er a nd T orb ert (L ic hte nste in , 1 997). M ovin g fr o m o ne le ve l o f d eve lo pm ent to th e n ext r e quir e s la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hanges a s a r e sult o f a s ig nif ic ant e xp erie nce a nd a p ro cess o f re fle ctio n a nd in quir y .

E xp andin g o n th e s ubje ct o f a tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange, a h olo n c an b e b uilt th at ta ke s in to a ccount th e d yn am ic s o f la rg e c hange in sid e a n o rg aniz atio n. F ig ure 2 show s th is h olo n. T he c onscio usness q uadra nt ta ke s o n th e s pecif ic d im ensio n o f tr a nsfo rm ativ e c onscio usness . P andey a nd G upta ( 2 007) s ta te th at a t th e h ig hest le ve ls o f c onscio usness “ th e o rg aniz atio n is a ble to u nle ash th e h um an p ow er o f in tr o spectio n a nd r e fle xiv it y a nd s how th e c apabilit y to r e new , a dapt a nd tr a nsfo rm it s elf ” ( p . 8 94).

Tra nsfo rm ativ e c ult u re is th e o th er in te rn al q uadra nt in th is h olo n. It re fle cts th e c ult u ra l v a lu es a ssocia te d w it h c hange. S arro s, C ooper a nd S anto ra (2 008) s ta te “ th e ty p e o f le aders hip r e quir e d to c hange c ult u re is tr a nsfo rm atio nal because c ult u re c hange n eeds e norm ous e nerg y a nd c om mit m ent to a chie ve outc om es” ( p . 1 48).

F ig ure 2 . T he tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange h olo n. T he in div id ual q uadra nts in th is fig ure c orre spond to th e d eve lo pm enta l lin es ( c hanges) a nd le ve ls ( tr a nsfo rm atio ns) in a n o rg aniz atio n.

A lo ng th e e xte rn al d im ensio n o f th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange h olo n w e h ave th e tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g q uadra nt. M ezir o w ( 2 000), H enders on ( 2 002), a nd G am bre ll, M atk in a nd B urb ach ( 2 011) v ie w tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g a s a fu ndam enta l b ehavio r or p ra ctic e in sid e a n o rg aniz atio n to a chie ve la rg e c hanges. P ete r S enge ( 1 990) a nd th e le arn in g o rg aniz atio n m ove m ent c hara cte riz e th e in te rn al c ondit io ns fo r c hange as d ir e ctly c onnecte d to th e o rg aniz atio n’s a bilit y to le arn . H enders on ( 2 002) s ta te s “tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g is th e p ro cess o f e xa m in in g, q uestio nin g, v a lid atin g, a nd re vis in g o ur p erc eptio ns o f th e w orld ” ( p . 2 00).

T he la st q uadra nt in th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange h olo n c orre sponds to th e c hange sys te m s p re sent in a n o rg aniz atio n ( C acio ppe & E dw ard s, 2 005a). T hese s ys te m s support in cre m enta l a nd la rg e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange ( lin es a nd le ve ls o f deve lo pm ent) . L eader d eve lo pm ent is a n e xa m ple o f a tr a nsfo rm atio nal s ys te m th at could h ave fa r r e achin g im plic atio ns in tr a nsfo rm atio n. H ow eve r, m ost le aders hip deve lo pm ent p ro gra m s fo cus o n b ehavio r a nd s kills a nd n ot tr a nsfo rm atio nal- ty p e le arn in g ( G am bre ll, M atk in & B urb ach, 2 011).

L ead ers h ip S ta g e D evelo pm ent In 2 007, A ccentu re c onducte d a w orld w id e s urv e y o f 9 00 to p e xe cutiv e s a cro ss la rg e o rg aniz atio ns to d ete rm in e th eir e ffe ctiv e ness in d eve lo pin g to p le aders th at could h andle r a pid c hanges a nd b e a dapta ble . H aru ng, T ra vis , B la nk, a nd H eato n (2 009) c om munic ate th e r e sult s fr o m th is s urv e y s how in g a m ere 5 5% s uccess ra te in d eve lo pin g to p le aders . T hese r e sult s in dic ate th at w e a re s till lo okin g fo r how to d eve lo p le aders a nd le aders hip in o rg aniz atio ns.

T here a re m any le aders hip fr a m ew ork s in e xis te nce, m ost a im in g to p oin t o ut w hat good le aders d o a nd h ow le aders s hould p erfo rm in c erta in s it u atio ns ( H aru ng, T ra vis , B la nk, & H eato n, 2 009). W illia m T orb ert in tr o duced th e c oncept o f a ctio n- lo gic a s a w ay to d escrib e s ta ges o f d eve lo pm ent fo r le aders . A lo ng w it h o th er s ta ge deve lo pm ent th eoris ts s uch a s P ia get, L oevin ger, C ook-G re ute r, G ra ve s, K egan, K ohlb erg , a nd W ilb er, T orb ert fo rm ula te d th at le aders p ro gre ss th ro ugh s uccessiv e sta ges o f d eve lo pm ent “ in vo lv in g g re ate r le ve ls o f c om ple xit y , r e sponsib ilit y , em path y, u nders ta ndin g o f th e w orld , a nd a ppre cia tio n o f th e u ndefin ed c re ativ e pote ntia l o f e ach m om ent” ( L ic hte nste in , 1 997, p . 4 00).

D urin g th e e ig htie s, T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues c onducte d a m ult i- y e ar s tu dy w it h th e le aders o f te n c om panie s ( R ooke & T orb ert, 1 998). In th is r e searc h th e a ctiv it ie s of m ult ip le le ve ls o f le aders hip w ere o bserv e d a nd a ls o v a lid ate d th ro ugh th e e go deve lo pm ent te st in it ia te d b y J a ne L oevin ger a nd fu rth er r e fin ed b y C ook-G re ute r th at u tiliz es th e W ashin gto n U niv e rs it y S ente nce C om ple tio n T est ( S C T). T hro ugh th eir o bserv a tio ns a nd te stin g, T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues e sta blis hed a s eve n s ta ge le ader d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork . E ach s ta ge is c om pris ed o f s pecif ic a ctio n-lo gic s o r m in dsets . In th e fr a m ew ork , le aders d eve lo ped fr o m s ta ge o ne a nd g ra dually m ove to a s ta ge w here th ey w ill o pera te fo r m ost o f th eir liv e s ( S im cox, 2 005). L ik e o th er sta ge d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork s , T orb ert’s le aders hip s ta ges c aptu re th e e le m ents of c om ple xit y a nd m eanin g-m akin g th at le aders e xp erie nce in th e c onte xt o f th eir ro le s. T able 1 s um mariz es th e s eve n a ctio n-lo gic s p re sent in th is fr a m ew ork .

T able 1 . T his ta ble s um mariz es th e s eve n a ctio n-lo gic s in T orb ert’s le aders hip deve lo pm ent s ta ges. It is a n a dapta tio n o f T orb ert a nd A ssocia te s ( 2 004), a nd R ooke a nd T orb ert ( 2 005). T he c olu m n w it h th e “ p erc ent p ro filin g a t a ctio n-lo gic ” com es fr o m 4 95 le aders te ste d w it h th e L eaders hip D eve lo pm ent P ro file ( L D P) (B ark e r & T orb ert, 2 011).

Actio n Logic Chara cte ris tic s Str e n gth s % pro filin g at actio n lo gic O pportu nis t Win a ny w ay p ossib le ; self - o rie nte d; manip ula tiv e ; “ m ig ht make s r ig ht” Em erg encie s a nd com petit iv e o pportu nit ie s 5% D ip lo m at Need to b elo ng; a vo id ove rt c onflic t; fo llo w gro up n orm s; Routin e w ork ; e nfo rc e sta ndard s; h elp b rin g people to geth er 12% Exp ert Logic a nd e xp ertis e; seek r a tio nal e ffic ie ncy; be u niq ue; p erfe ctio nis t Pro ble m s olv in g; d esig n; im pro vin g e ffic ie ncie s; contin gencie s; deve lo pin g w ork pro ducts 38% Achie ve r Long te rm g oals ; effe ctiv e d ele gatio n; bala nce m anageria l dutie s a nd e xte rn al dem ands; h andle fe edback Day-to -d ay im pro ve m ents ; g enera l te am le aders hip a nd managem ent; a ctio n a nd goal a chie ve m ent 30% In div id ualis t Rela tiv is tic p ers pectiv e ; aw are o f e m otio ns a nd self - e xp re ssio ns; n on- ju dgm enta l; m ave ric k; again st n orm s In dependent c re ativ e work ; c onsult in g; d riv e change 10% Str a te gis t Valu e a ctio n in quir y , mutu alit y a nd auto nom y; in te rw eave short w it h lo ng te rm ; aw are o f p ara dox; cre ativ e c onflic t re solu tio n; Handle m ult ip le r o le s; pla nnin g; fu tu re d esig n; tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange 4% Alc hem is t In te gra te m ate ria l, spir it u al, a nd s ocie ta l tr a nsfo rm atio n Lead s ocie ty -w id e tr a nsfo rm atio ns 1% A ccord in g to T orb ert a nd T aylo r ( 2 008), le aders hip d eve lo pm ent s ta rts e arly in o ur liv e s a s w e n avig ate th ro ugh th e a ctio n-lo gic s fr o m th e O pportu nis t le ve l to th e o ne in w hic h w e fe el m ost c om fo rta ble . T his w ill b e th e s ta ge w here w e e xp erie nce o ur “m ost c om ple x m eanin g-m akin g s ys te m s, p ers pectiv e , o r m enta l m odel w e h ave m aste re d” ( S im cox, 2 005, p . 4 ). T he s eve n a ctio n lo gic s a re d iv id ed in to conve ntio nal a nd p ost- c onve ntio nal. T he fir s t fo ur s ta ges ( O pportu nis t, D ip lo m at, E xp ert a nd A chie ve r) c orre spond to th e c onve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s. T he m ajo rit y o f le aders ( 8 5% ) o pera te fr o m o ne o f th ese c onve ntio nal s ta ges ( R ooke & T orb ert, 2005). C onve ntio nal le aders a re fo cused o n o bje ctiv e r e alit y a nd th eir le aders hip actio ns a re a im ed a t e xe cutio n w it h m in im al r e fle ctio n, a nd m odif ic atio n o f o nly behavio rs a nd n ot a ctio n-lo gic s th em selv e s. In c ontr a st, th e p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders a re m ore lik e ly to r e fr a m e p ro ble m s a nd c onstr a in ts a nd to r e cogniz e dif fe re nt a ctio n-lo gic s in o th ers ( T orb ert & A ssocia te s, 2 004). T heir a im is to c re ate share d v is io ns fo unded in d iv e rs it y . C olla bora tiv e in quir e is a h allm ark o f p ost- conve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s w hic h is u sed to d eve lo p s olu tio ns ( R ooke & T orb ert, 2005). T hese la te r-s ta ge le aders c an id entif y in congru it ie s in th eir o w n th in kin g a nd exp erie nce a nd m odif y th em to s erv e th e g lo bal g ood.

In th eir r e searc h, T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues fo und th at p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders are th e o nes c apable o f le adin g tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in o rg aniz atio ns. T hese re searc hers d id n ot fin d e vid ence o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c apabilit ie s in c onve ntio nal le aders ( T orb ert & A ssocia te s, 2 004). O ne o f th e k e y d if fe re nces b etw een conve ntio nal a nd p ost- c onve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s is s in gle , d ouble a nd tr ip le lo op aw are ness. T orb ert & A ssocia te s ( 2 004) s ta te th at c onve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic le aders have d em onstr a te d s in gle lo op a w are ness o nly . W it h th is ty p e o f a w are ness, o nly behavio rs a nd o pera tio nal fa cts c an b e a ssessed a nd m odif ie d. D ouble lo op aw are ness is n eeded to r e fle ct o n g oals , s tr a te gie s a nd s tr u ctu re s. In th is c onte xt, str u ctu re r e fe rs to th e a ctio n-lo gic s th em selv e s. S ta rtin g w it h th e In div id ualis t s ta ge, T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues o bserv e d d ouble lo op a w are ness r e la tin g it w it h th e abilit y to tr a nsfo rm a n o rg aniz atio n ( S im cox, 2 005). T rip le lo op a w are ness, w hic h is associa te d m ostly w it h th e A lc hem is t le ve l, b rin gs r e fle ctio n a t th e a tte ntio n a nd in te ntio n le ve ls a lo ng w it h v is io n.

In th e c onceptu aliz atio n o f le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent, T orb ert a nd h is colle agues s ta te , “ [L ]a te r s ta ges a re r e ached o nly th ro ugh jo urn eyin g th ro ugh th e earlie r s ta ges” ( S im cox, 2 005, p . 4 ). O nce a s ta ge h as b een in te gra te d b y a le ader, it r e m ain s p art o f h is o r h er c apabilit ie s e ve n w hen n ew s ta ges a re r e ached. T he exp ecta tio n is th at le aders o pera te th ro ugh v a rio us a ctio n-lo gic s d ependin g o n th e sit u atio n. A le ader m ay b ehave a s a “ D ip lo m at” in o ne s ettin g a nd a s a n “In div id ualis t” in a noth er b ased o n w hat is r e quir e d. A s w it h a ny s ta ge d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork , th ere is a lw ays th e r is k o f b elie vin g th at a la te r s ta ge is b ette r th an a n earlie r o ne. O rg aniz atio ns n eed le aders in a ll s ta ges o f d eve lo pm ent to b e successfu l ( R ooke & T orb ert, 2 005). F urth er, c om pete nce is n ot a n a ttr ib ute o f a deve lo pm enta l s ta ge.

T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues fo und th at le aders c an d eve lo p a cro ss a ctio n-lo gic s.

T his is p rim arily tr u e in th e fir s t c onve ntio nal s ta ges ( T orb ert & A ssocia te s, 2 004).

C om mon le aders hip d eve lo pm ent p ro gra m s in o rg aniz atio ns a re g eare d to d eve lo p le aders w it h E xp ert a ctio n-lo gic s in to A chie ve rs . M ost o rg aniz atio ns d o n ot h ave aw are ness o f w hat it ta ke s to d eve lo p a n A chie ve r in to a n In div id ualis t ( R ooke & T orb ert, 2 005). C onsequently , m ost p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders a re fo rm ed th ro ugh exp erie nces e xte rn al to th e w ork p la ce a nd b rin g th eir h ig her a ctio n-lo gic s to th eir org aniz atio ns a fte r th ey h ave a lr e ady fo rm ed ( S im cox, 2 005). F ig ure 3 p ro vid es a n in te gra l m odel th at c aptu re s th e e le m ents o f T orb ert’s le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork . T he in te rn al d im ensio n s how s th e r e fle ctiv e a spects o f le aders hip b oth at in div id ual a nd c olle ctiv e le ve ls . T he e xte rn al d im ensio n d oes th e s am e w it h th e obje ctiv e w orld o f a le ader.

R ooke & T orb ert ( 2 005) s ta te th at th e le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent fr a m ew ork applie s to o rg aniz atio ns a ctin g a t a c olle ctiv e a ctio n-lo gic . T hey p osit th at th e m ost effe ctiv e o rg aniz atio ns w ould a ct a t th e S tr a te gis t le ve l w here le arn in g a nd g ro w th opportu nit ie s w ould b e th e n orm fo r in div id uals a nd th e c olle ctiv e . H ow eve r, th ese re searc hers fo und th at m ost o rg aniz atio ns o pera te a t th e E xp ert o r A chie ve r a ctio n- lo gic s. T he r e ason fo r th is is th at o rg aniz atio ns p re fe r u nam big uous ta rg ets a nd deadlin es, w ork in g w it h s pecif ic s tr a te gie s a nd ta ctic s ( R ooke & T olb ert, 2 005). F ig ure 3 . T his fig ure is a s yn th esis o f th e c hara cte ris tic s o f th e s eve n actio n-lo gic s fr o m S im cox ( 2 005), T orb ert a nd A ssocia te s ( 2 005), a nd R ooke a nd T orb ert ( 2 005).

T ra n sfo rm atio nal C han ge a n d T ra n sfo rm ativ e L earn in g B ased o n th e a ttr ib ute s o f th e s eve n le aders hip s ta ges fr o m T orb ert a nd h is colle agues o nly le aders in th e p ost- c onve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s u nders ta nd a nd c an navig ate th ro ugh tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange. If th is p re m is e is c orre ct, h ow d o th ese le aders g uid e c hange w here th e fr a m e o f r e fe re nce fo r a ll in div id uals in a n org aniz atio n m ust c hange fo r a s uccessfu l tr a nsfo rm atio n? T ra nsfo rm atio nal change fo r a n o rg aniz atio n im plie s in div id ual tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange fo r it s m em bers , w hic h fu rth er im plie s th at th e le aders m ust c hange fir s t— in th is c ase th e post- c onve ntio nal le aders w hom a re c apable o f th is ty p e o f c hange. T hese im plic atio ns p oin t to tw o ty p es o f c hanges d urin g a tr a nsfo rm atio n: o rg aniz atio nal and in div id ual. A lt h ough o rg aniz atio nal c hange th eory a ddre sses th e c hange o f in div id uals a s a n e nd s ta te , m ost o f th is th eory d oes n ot a ddre ss it a s p art o f th e change it s elf ( H enders on, 2 002). T his le ave s a g ap fo r o rg aniz atio ns a nd le aders atte m ptin g la rg e c hange th ro ugh th e lim it e d s cope o f c onve ntio nal c hange m anagem ent p ra ctic es.

A dult d eve lo pm ent th eorie s h ave le d to th e fo rm atio n o f T ra nsfo rm ativ e L earn in g (T L), w hic h is “ th e p ro cess o f e xa m in in g, q uestio nin g, v a lid atin g, a nd r e vis in g o ur perc eptio ns o f th e w orld ” ( H enders on, 2 002, p . 2 00). T L is a bout in div id ual c hange and h ow w e s ee o urs elv e s a nd m ake m eanin g o f th e w orld a ro und u s. B ased o n th is d efin it io n, p ost- c onve ntio nal le aders a re tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn ers . T his is supporte d b y th e lit e ra tu re o n tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders hip ( K egan, 2 000; M ezir o w , 2000; M ezir o w & T aylo r, 2 009). A ccord in g to M ezir o w ( 1 991), c onsid ere d th e fo under o f T L, tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn ers d is tin guis h b etw een th re e ty p es o f r e fle ctio n:

a) c onte nt, b ) p ro cess, a nd c ) p re m is e. P ro cess r e fle ctio n in vo lv e s c heckin g o n th e pro ble m -s olv in g s tr a te gie s w hile p re m is e r e fle ctio n q uestio ns th e p ro ble m it s elf .

B oth o f th ese c orre spond to d ouble -lo op fe edback a w are ness, th e h allm ark o f p ost- conve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s.

H enders on’s a rtic le Tra nsfo rm ativ e L earn in g a s a C ondit io n fo r T ra nsfo rm atio nal C hange in O rg aniz a tio ns ( 2 002) p ro vid es a c om pre hensiv e a naly s is o f org aniz atio nal c hange a nd T ra nsfo rm ativ e L earn in g th eorie s. T his a uth or m aps attr ib ute s o f e ach th eory to th e tr a nsfo rm atio n o f a n o rg aniz atio n a nd th e in div id ual.

H enders on’s c onclu sio n is th at a ll th e m ajo r th eorie s o f o rg aniz atio nal c hange consid er in div id ual c hange a s a n e nd b ut n ot a s th e m eans. In c ontr a st, a ll o f th e th eorie s o f tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g c onsid er in div id ual c hange a s th e m eans. T his im porta nt d is tin ctio n e sta blis hes th e c onnectio n w it h p ost- c onve ntio nal a ctio n lo gic s w here “ in te rn al” c hange is th e p re -re quis it e fo r tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange ( R ooke & T orb ert 1 998, 2 005; T orb ert & T aylo r, 2 008; B ark e r & T orb ert, 2 011). N ailo n, D ela haye a nd B ro w nle e ( 2 007) d is tin guis h b etw een tr a nsactio nal a nd tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders . T hese a uth ors p osit th at tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders a re concern ed a bout e ffic ie ncie s a nd o rg aniz atio nal g oals w it h a fo cus o n s upportin g th eir s ta ff e m otio nally a nd in te lle ctu ally . In c ontr a st, tr a nsactio nal ( c onve ntio nal actio n-lo gic ) le aders a ccentu ate in effic ie ncie s a nd p ro vid e n egativ e fe edback.

H olis tic T ra n sfo rm atio nal T eam M odel T o g ain a d eeper u nders ta ndin g o f th e s tr u ctu re o f a c hange le aders hip te am , w e re tu rn to K oestle r a nd th e c oncept o f th e h olo n. A ccord in g to K oestle r ( 1 990), holo ns, b ecause o f th eir d ual n atu re ( p art a nd w hole ), a re n ecessarily c onnecte d to oth er h olo ns in a v e rtic al s tr u ctu re h e c alle d h ola rc hy, w hic h c an b e v ie w ed a s a m ult i- la ye r s ys te m . It is im porta nt to n ote th at h ola rc hie s d o n ot fo rm la rg er h olo ns but s im ply a rra nge th em to r e pre sent c onceptu al e ntit ie s. K oestle r ( 1 990) c onceiv e d th at h ola rc hie s s tr u ctu re s ocia l o rg aniz atio ns in to w hat h e c alle d o pen h ie ra rc hic al sys te m s c apable o f le arn in g a nd e vo lv in g.

E dw ard ’s v ie w s in a lig nm ent w it h K oestle r’s s tip ula te th at o rg aniz atio ns e vo lv e a lo ng th e lin es a nd le ve ls o f d eve lo pm ent a s a h ola rc hy ( E dw ard s, 2 005; C acio ppe & E dw ard s, 2 005b; E dw ard s 2 009). R ooke a nd T orb ert ( 2 005) in Seven T ra nsfo rm atio ns o f L eaders hip m ake th e p oin t th at o rg aniz atio ns h ave a c olle ctiv e le aders hip d eve lo pm enta l s ta ge. A pply in g th e h olo nic s tr u ctu re to th is c oncept, w e arriv e a t a h ola rc hy th at h as th e in te rn al- e xte rn al a nd in div id ual- c olle ctiv e dim ensio ns c apable o f tr a nsfo rm atio n p re sent in it s m em bers . T he q uestio ns th at em erg e a re h ow h olo ns lo ok a t e ach le aders hip s ta ge a nd h ow o rg aniz atio ns c an apply c hange h ola rc hy p rin cip le s.

E arlie r in th is d ocum ent, a c onceptu al h olo n fo r T orb ert’s le aders hip s ta ge deve lo pm ent w as p re sente d ( F ig ure 3 ). T he c onte nts o f th is h olo n c orre spond to in te gra l a ttr ib ute s th at r e la te to th e s eve n le ve ls o f th e le aders hip s ta ges. E ve n th ough th is m odel is d escrip tiv e , it p ro vid es a fu ndam enta l s tr u ctu re in w hic h to b uild th e d im ensio ns o f a h olis tic le aders hip te am h olo n. C acio ppe a nd E dw ard s ( 2 005b) postu la te th at a h olis tic m odel m ust n ot o nly c onta in th e d im ensio ns o n in te rn al- exte rn al a nd in div id ual- c olle ctiv e b ut it s hould c le arly a rtic ula te th e lin es a nd le ve ls o f deve lo pm ent a lo ng th ese d im ensio ns.

In h er d is serta tio n, M arjo le in L ip s-W ie rs m a ( L ip s-W ie rs m a & M orris , 2 011) in tr o duced th e c oncept o f th e M ap o f M eanin g w hic h is a 2 x 2 s tr u ctu re w hic h pro vid es a p ossib le h olis tic fr a m ew ork to c aptu re th e e le m ents o f a tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am h ola rc hy. L ip s-W ie rs m a a nd M orris ( 2 011) d efin e fo ur d eve lo pm enta l conta in ers a lo ng th e tw o in te gra l d im ensio ns o f in te rn al- e xte rn al a nd in div id ual- colle ctiv e . T hese c onta in ers a re : 1 ) d eve lo pin g th e in ner-s elf , 2 ) u nit y w it h o th ers , 3 ) exp re ssin g fu ll p ote ntia l, a nd 4 ) s erv ic e o th ers . T he a uth ors p erfo rm ed a n e xte nsiv e va lid atio n o f th eir fr a m ew ork a t a v a rie ty o f o rg aniz atio ns a nd w it h in div id uals a t dif fe re nt le ve ls o f le aders hip . T heir a ppro ach w as to m easure th e le ve l o f m eanin gfu ln ess, in clu din g p ers onal d eve lo pm ent a ssocia te d w it h th e in te gra l exp re ssio n o f a ll fo ur q uadra nts b y th eir s ubje cts . In th eir fin din gs, a p ers on w it h a str o ng s ense o f in ner s elf - d eve lo pm ent, c onnectio n w it h o th ers , fin din g r e aliz atio n in th eir a ctiv it ie s, a nd h avin g a s tr o ng s ense o f s erv ic e w ould e xp erie nce th e h ig hest le ve l o f m eanin gfu ln ess. It is th is a uth or’s v ie w th at th ese fo ur s ta te s o f m eanin gfu ln ess c orre spond to T orb ert’s p ost- c onve ntio nal a ttr ib ute s o f th e p ost- conve ntio n le ve ls o f le aders hip : th e In div id ualis t, S tr a te gis t a nd A lc hem is t.

Lip s-W ie rs m a a nd M orris ( 2 011), d escrib e th eir m odel a s h avin g fo ur p ath w ays h eld in te nsio n a lo ng e ach d im ensio n o f th e q uadra nt. O ne p ath w ay c ounte rs th e n eeds of s elf w it h th e n eeds o f o th ers w hile th e o th er tu gs b etw een b ein g ( re fle ctio n) a nd doin g ( a ctio n). T hese p ath w ays a re c ongru ent w it h th e in te gra l d im ensio ns o f in te rn al- e xte rn al ( b ein g a nd d oin g) a nd in div id ual c olle ctiv e ( s elf a nd o th ers ). F ig ure 4 s how s th e r e sult in g h olo n fr o m th e M ap o f M eanin g ( L ip s-W ie rs m a & M orris , 2011).

F ig ure 4 . M ap o f M eanin g h olo n. T his is a n a dapta tio n fr o m th e M ap o f M eanin g d escrib ed in L ip s-W ie rs m a and M orris ( 2 011). T hese a uth ors d o n ot u se W ilb er’s A Q AL fo rm at b ut th e r e pre senta tio n o f th eir m ap c an easily b e a dapte d to th is q uadra nt s tr u ctu re . In F ig ure 4 , in ner s elf - d evelo pm ent r e sult s fr o m th e m eanin gfu ln ess th at c om es fr o m a ctiv e in vo lv e m ent w it h th e p ers on w e a re b ecom in g a s a r e sult o f b ein g engaged in o ur lif e a nd w ork — fr o m b ein g a g ood p ers on to b ein g th e b est w e c an possib ly b e. T he unit y w it h o th ers q uadra nt r e fe rs to th e m eanin gfu ln ess o f liv in g to geth er w it h o th er h um an b ein gs. T his d oes n ot m ean u nif o rm it y . It p rim arily in vo lv e s fin din g u nit y in d iv e rs it y . Expre ssin g fu ll p ote ntia l r e fe rs to th e m eanin gfu ln ess o f m akin g o ur m ark in th e u niv e rs e. It is a ctiv e a nd o utw ard ly fo cused. T his q uadra nt is b ased o n th e c oncept th at w e a re a ll u niq ue, a nd th at w e are r e sponsib le fo r b rin gin g o ur u niq ue g if ts a nd ta le nts in to th e w orld . T he serv ic e to o th ers q uadra nt is a bout th e h um an n eed to m ake c ontr ib utio ns to th e w ellb ein g of o th ers , fr o m h elp in g a n in div id ual to m akin g a d if fe re nce in th e w id er w orld .

A pply in g th e M ap o f M eanin g h olo n to T orb ert’s s eve n le aders hip s ta ges, w e e nd u p w it h s eve n h olo ns, w hic h c an fo rm a h ola rc hy fo r th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange te am .

F ig ure 5 s how s a r e pre senta tio n o f th is h ola rc hy. T he s hadin g o f th e q uadra nts in th is fig ure r e pre sents th e le ve l o f fo cus fo r e ach o f th e le aders hip s ta ges. F ocus in th is c onte xt m eans a h ig h d egre e o f a w are ness o f th e le ader in th e p artic ula r quadra nt. T here a re tw o d egre es o f fo cus b ein g r e pre sente d, p rim ary a nd secondary . P rim ary fo cus p ro vid es th e d riv in g fo rc e fo r th e a ctio ns o f th e le ader w hile th e s econdary fo cus c om ple m ents th em . F or in sta nce, th e A chie ve r h as a str o ng fo cus o n th e a pplic atio n o f le aders hip in th e s erv ic e o f o th ers a nd a secondary fo cus o n e xp re ssin g fu ll p ote ntia l. T he s tr a te gis t is fo cused in a ll o f th e quadra nts e xc ept fo r u nit y w it h o th ers . N on-s haded q uadra nts d o n ot n ecessarily m ean a bsence o f a ctiv it y in th at lo catio n o f th e h olo n. It s im ply m eans n ot e nough activ it y to b e c onsequentia l in th e c urre nt m eanin g-m akin g o f th e in div id ual a s a le ader. A s a n e xa m ple , th e D ip lo m at a ppears to b e to ta lly fo cused in th e s erv ic e to oth ers q uadra nt. T his in div id ual w ill e ngage w it h o th ers a nd to s om e d egre e w ork to exp re ss fu ll p ote ntia l. H ow eve r, b ased o n R ooke & T orb ert ( 2 005), th e D ip lo m at a s a le ader s eeks to m ain ta in th e s ta tu s q uo, w hic h c orre sponds to b ein g in a lm ost b lin d serv ic e to th e o th er le aders a nd th e o rg aniz atio n w it h w hom th is ty p e o f le ader is engaged.

F ig ure 5 . T ra nsfo rm atio nal te am le aders hip fo cus.

G iv e n th e M ap o f M eanin g h olo n a nd th e d ir e ctio n p ro vid ed b y C acio ppe a nd E dw ard s ( 2 005b) o n a n in te gra l le aders hip s ta ge m odel, a h olis tic tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am h olo n c an b e s pecif ie d. T he o bje ctiv e o f th is s pecif ic atio n is to h ave a b lu eprin t fo r th e le aders in a tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am s o th at m em bers hip c an b e m ade conscio usly a nd n ot r a ndom ly . T he g oal in b uild in g a tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am s hould conceptu ally b e a h ola rc hy in w hic h th e in div id ual h olo ns b rin g th e r ig ht a nd com ple te fo cus fo r it to b e tr a nsfo rm atio nal. In e ssence, th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal hola rc hy s hould h ave c om ple te fo cus in e ach q uadra nt p ro vid ed b y o ne o r m ore o f it s h olo ns. T here s hould n ot b e a ny q uadra nts w it h a n a bsence o f fo cus.

C ase S tu dy C ase S tu dy S ubje ct M edcab ( n ot it s r e al n am e), a p ublic m edic al d evic es c om pany th at w as th e s ubje ct of th e c ase s tu dy, is h eadquarte re d in th e S an F ra ncis co B ay A re a. T his is a m ediu m s iz e c om pany th at e xp erie nced r a pid g ro w th o ve r th e la st te n y e ars . T his pre cip it a te d th e n eed fo r tr a nsfo rm atio n b oth in it s p ro ducts a nd s erv ic es, a nd a ls o in it s in te rn al p ro cesses. T he c om pany is p rim arily fo cused o n th e U S m ark e t a nd has a d is tr ib ute d w ork fo rc e w it h a bout a th ousand e m plo ye es. C om pany y e arly re ve nues a re a ro und $ 330 m illio n.

T ra n sfo rm atio nal C han ge In it ia tiv es M edcab h as h ad a fe w tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s o ve r th e la st fiv e y e ars . A m ong th em a re tw o w hic h a re th e b asis fo r th e c ase s tu dy. P ro je ct 1 w as a b ro ad p ro cess re engin eerin g in it ia tiv e a ffe ctin g th e e ntir e c om pany fr o m q uotin g p ro ducts a nd serv ic es to c lo sin g th e fin ancia l b ooks . T he c hange e ffo rts fo r th is p ro je ct s ta rte d in Ja nuary o f 2 008 w it h th e in tr o ductio n o f th e fir s t s et o f c hanges a y e ar la te r. T w o addit io nal y e ars w ere r e quir e d to c om ple te th e tr a nsfo rm atio n. A lt h ough th e r e sult s of th e o ve ra ll tr a nsfo rm atio n h ave b een p osit iv e fo r th e c om pany, th e in it ia l r e sult s o f P ro je ct 1 e xp erie nced d urin g m ost o f 2 009 w ere c halle ngin g b y a ll a ccounts . T hese re sult s c orre la te to tw o th ir d s o f a ll tr a nsfo rm atio nal p ro cesses th at a re c halle nged or fa il ( M eaney & P ung, 2 008).

P ro je ct 2 e ncom passed th e d eve lo pm ent, m anufa ctu rin g a nd m ark e t a va ila bilit y o f ele ve n n ew p ro ducts th at tr a nsfo rm ed th e c om pany’s p ro duct o ffe rin g in r e cord - settin g tim e. T his p ro je ct la unched in M arc h o f 2 010 w it h th e fo rm atio n o f p ro je ct te am s a nd th e d ir e ctio n fr o m th e C EO to c om ple te a ll p ro ducts b y th e fo llo w in g M ay. H is to ric ally , M edcab h ad d if fic ult y e xe cutin g m ult ip le p ro ducts in p ara lle l a nd th e a ve ra ge tim e fo r e ach fa r e xc eeded th e g oal o f la unchin g a ll e le ve n p ro ducts in th at tim efr a m e. N ew d eve lo pm ent p ro cesses a nd a d if fe re nt m eth od o f c ro ss- fu nctio nal c olla bora tio n w ere n eeded to a ccom plis h th e o bje ctiv e s, b oth r e quir in g tr a nsfo rm atio n. T he o utc om e o f P ro je ct 2 w as e xc eptio nal w it h a ll e le ve n p ro ducts bein g la unched in M ay o f 2 011 w it h im media te a va ila bilit y . T his tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e fa lls in th e o ne th ir d o f th e p opula tio n o f s uccessfu l c hange in it ia tiv e s.

P artic ip an ts a n d T heir Q ualif ic atio ns T he c ase s tu dy s ponsor w as th e V ic e P re sid ent o f H um an R esourc es a t M edcab.

S he p ro vid ed th e b ackg ro und o n th e tw o s ele cte d in it ia tiv e s a nd o th ers th at w ere consid ere d. T he c rit e ria in a ppendix B w ere u tiliz ed to s ele ct th e tw o c ase s tu die s to com pare a nd c ontr a st v ia th is c ase s tu dy. F iv e in div id uals w ere id entif ie d b y th e sponsor to p artic ip ate in th e in te rv ie w p ro cess fo r th e c ase s tu dy. T hey a ll m et th e crit e ria id entif ie d in a ppendix C . T his r e searc her w as m ost p artic ula r a bout th e d ual m em bers hip o f th e p artic ip ants : a ) th ey a ll h ad to b e le aders in b oth c hange in it ia tiv e s a nd b ) b e in flu entia l in th eir o utc om es. T he d riv e r fo r th ese r e quir e m ents w as to e nsure a c om mon e xp erie nce a nd p ers pectiv e b y th e c ase s tu dy partic ip ants . A ppendix D d efin es th e c urre nt r o le s o f th e p artic ip ants a t M edcab a nd th eir r o le s in b oth p ro je cts P ro je ct H ola rc h ie s F ig ure 6 s how s th e g ove rn ance s tr u ctu re fo r b oth p ro je cts . In th is fig ure w e c an s ee th at b oth in it ia tiv e s h ad a th re e la ye r le aders hip s tr u ctu re . F or P ro je ct 1 th e fir s t la ye r w as c om posed o f m em bers o f M edcab’s S enio r S ta ff ( e xe cutiv e v ic e p re sid ents ) and th e fu nctio nal v ic e p re sid ents a ffe cte d b y th e p ro je ct’s c hanges. T heir m is sio n w as th at o f o ve rs ig ht. T he s econd g ove rn ance la ye r fo r th is p ro je ct w as th e C ore T eam . It w as c om posed o f fu nctio nal e xp erts a t s enio r m anager a nd d ir e cto r le ve ls w it h th e m is sio n o f le adin g a nd m anagin g th e d ay-to -d ay a ctiv it ie s o f th e c hange in it ia tiv e . T he in te rv ie w fin din gs o bserv e d th at n ot a ll M edcab fu nctio ns w ere re pre sente d in th e C ore T eam a nd th at it s m em bers h ad th eir o w n s pecif ic agendas.

In P ro je ct 1 , th e th ir d la ye r w as c om pris ed o f th e le aders o f e ach fu nctio n a ffe cte d by th e in it ia tiv e . T hese fu nctio nal le aders w ere e xp ecte d to d riv e th e c hange fo r th eir fu nctio n. H ow eve r, th ere is lit tle e vid ence th at th is a ctu ally to ok p la ce. T he c ase stu dy p artic ip ants in dic ate d th at th e fu nctio nal le aders in P ro je ct 1 ( la ye r 3 ) re lin quis hed th is r e sponsib ilit y to in div id ual c ontr ib uto rs a nd m ore ju nio r p ers onnel.

In a ddit io n, th e th ir d la ye r o f P ro je ct 1 ’s g ove rn ance h ola rc hy d id n ot fe el r e sponsib le fo r th e c hange, th us e xp ectin g th e C ore T eam to d riv e th e c hange d eta ils a nd perfo rm th e a ctu al w ork .

F ig ure 6 . T he g ove rn ance h ola rc hy fo r th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s a t M edcab.

In c ontr a st to P ro je ct 1 , th e fir s t g ove rn ance la ye r o f P ro je ct 2 w as fo rm ed p ure ly w it h m em bers o f M edcab’s e xe cutiv e te am , S enio r S ta ff. T his g ove rn ance la ye r acte d c ohere ntly a nd p ro vid ed th e o ve ra ll g ove rn ance a nd d ir e ctio n fo r th e p ro gra m .

T he s econd la ye r o f P ro je ct 2 d id n ot e xis t u ntil fo ur m onth s b efo re th e la unch o f th e ele ve n n ew p ro ducts . E ach p ro duct te am ( th e th ir d la ye r) h ad it s o w n c ore o r m anagem ent te am a nd r e porte d it s p ro gre ss d ir e ctly to S enio r S ta ff ( fir s t gove rn ance la ye r). A s P ro je ct 2 p ro ceeded a nd e ncounte re d th e u nkn ow ns o f th e fu nctio nal in te gra tio n r e quir e d b y th e m assiv e p ro duct la unch, S enio r S ta ff d ecid ed to fo rm th e L eaders hip T eam , th e s econd la ye r o f th e g ove rn ance s tr u ctu re fo r P ro je ct 2 . T his te am w as c om posed o f v ic e p re sid ents a nd d ir e cto rs o f m ost fu nctio ns in th e c om pany. T he L eaders hip T eam b ecam e r e sponsib le fo r th e exe cutio n o f th e p ro duct la unch a cro ss a ll fu nctio nal d is cip lin es ( s im ila r c harte r to P ro je ct 1 ’s C ore T eam ).

T he s tr u ctu re , m is sio n a nd a ttit u de o f th e th ir d le ve l in th e g ove rn ance s tr u ctu re fo r P ro je ct 2 w ere c om ple te ly d if fe re nt fr o m it s c ounte rp art. In ste ad o f th e te am s a t th e th ir d la ye r b ein g c om posed o f in div id ual fu nctio ns, th e P ro je ct 2 te am s a t th e th ir d gove rn ance le ve l w ere p ro duct o rie nte d, e ncapsula tin g th e r e quir e d fu nctio nal m em bers fo r e ach p ro duct. T he c halle nge o f th ese te am s w as th eir u neve n fu nctio nal r e pre senta tio n a nd th e la ck o f k n ow -h ow to c oord in ate a m assiv e p ro duct la unch.

M ap o f M ean in g A naly sis F ro m a M ap o f M eanin g h olo n p ers pectiv e , th e p artic ip ants p ro vid ed th eir in sig ht, w hic h a re c om pile d in a ppendix E . T his a ppendix s how s a s um mary o f th e re sponses fr o m th e in te rv ie w q uestio ns a rra nged b y e ach o f th e d im ensio ns in th e M ap o f M eanin g: In ner D eve lo pm ent, U nit y w it h O th ers , E xp re ssin g F ull P ote ntia l, and S erv ic e O th ers . T able 2 p ro vid es a r a tin g fo r e ach d im ensio n b ased o n th e fe edback p ro vid ed b y th e p artic ip ants .

T able 2 . M ap o f M eanin g r a tin gs. T he r a tin gs s pecif y : 1 – n o e vid ence o f a ny deve lo pm ent d urin g th e p ro je ct; 2 – a bout 2 5 p erc ent d eve lo pm ent; 3 – a bout 5 0 perc ent d eve lo pm ent; 4 – a bout 7 5 p erc ent d eve lo pm ent; a nd 5 – fu ll e vid ence o f a deve lo ped d im ensio n.

Map o f M ean in g Dim en sio n Ratin g f o r P ro je ct 1 Ratin g f o r Pro je ct 2 In ner D eve lo pm ent 1 3 Unit y w it h O th ers 2 4 Exp re ssin g F ull Pote ntia l 3 4 Serv ic e O th ers 2 3 T able 2 in dic ate s th at p artic ip ants in P ro je ct 1 d id n ot e xp erie nce a ny d is cern ib le pers onal g ro w th . In th is p ro je ct, th e C ore T eam a nd th e in div id ual fu nctio ns c ould not fo rm a c ohere nt w hole . In div id uals k e pt to th eir a gendas a nd th eir o w n id eas.

Learn in g w as lim it e d to te chnic al m atte rs a nd n ot to th e s ubje ct o f h ow to w ork to geth er fo r a c om mon g oal. P ro je ct 2 s how s th at in div id uals c hanged a nd em bra ced th e d em ands o f th eir r o le . T he in clu sio n o f th e L eaders hip T eam ( la ye r 2 ) by S enio r S ta ff in fu sed th e s ense o f r e sponsib ilit y a cro ss th e b oard . M em bers o f a ll te am s in th e h ola rc hy c onnecte d w it h th eir o w n s ense o f p urp ose a nd b ecam e aw are o f th eir im pact.

In th e U nit y w it h O th ers d im ensio n, P ro je ct 1 a ls o s how s a lo w s core . T his c am e fr o m th e in te rv ie w q uestio nnair e d ata th at p oin te d to a s et o f in div id uals w ho re cogniz ed th e im porta nce o f th e p ro je ct b ut c ould n ot le ave th eir o w n id eas a nd th eir fu nctio nal m em bers hip b ehin d to c om e to geth er a s a c ohesiv e c olle ctiv e . T he le aders hip te am in P ro je ct 1 c ould n ot a gre e o n a ny s hare d v a lu es a nd b elo ngin g to th e te am w as n ot v ie w ed a s im porta nt, p artic ula rly b y th e th ir d la ye r o f th e h ola rc hy.

In c ontr a st, P ro je ct 2 s how s a h ig her s core fo r th e U nit y w it h O th ers d im ensio n. A s pre vio usly s ta te d, a ll la ye rs fo r th is p ro je ct c am e to geth er w it h a c om mon p urp ose and d eve lo ped th e s hare d v a lu e o f a ccounta bilit y . N o o ne w ante d to le t o th ers d ow n, partic ula rly w it h S enio r S ta ff a nd th e C EO fu lly e ngaged. T he u nit y e xh ib it e d b y th e hola rc hy in P ro je ct 2 a ppeare d to b e o ne o f p urp ose a nd n ot o f id entit y .

B oth p ro je cts r e ceiv e d m ediu m to h ig h s core s in th e E xp re ssin g F ull P ote ntia l dim ensio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g. M edcab, b ein g a h ig h-te ch c om pany, fo cusin g o n deliv e ra ble s r a th er th an r e la tio nship s is n atu ra l fo r th e c om pany. P ro je ct 2 o bta in ed a s lig htly h ig her s core th an P ro je ct 1 fo r th is d im ensio n. A s a ll o f th e in te rv ie w ees note d, d eve lo pin g p ro ducts is in M edcab’s D NA. In c ontr a st, s eve ra l o f th e in te rv ie w ees o bserv e d th at p ro cess r e engin eerin g, th e m ain o bje ctiv e o f P ro je ct 1 , did n ot c om e n atu ra lly . T he fin al d im ensio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g is S erv ic e O th ers . T his is a d im ensio n th at g oes o uts id e o f th e c om pany a nd p osit io ns th e o rg aniz atio n to w ork fo r th e gre ate r g ood. N eit h er c hange in it ia tiv e in th e c ase s tu dy h ad e le m ents o f g oin g outs id e th e c om pany. P ro je ct 1 w as a n in w ard ly fo cused p ro je ct w hile P ro je ct 2 , a t it s c ore , h ad th e o bje ctiv e o f r e va m pin g th e c om pany’s p ro duct o ffe rin g. In th e r a tin g, P ro je ct 2 r e ceiv e d a s lig htly h ig her s core b ecause th ere w as th ought a bout th e im pact to o th ers a nd h ow th e n ew p ro ducts c ould p osit iv e ly a ffe ct th e liv e s o f M edcab’s c usto m ers a nd th eir c usto m ers . In P ro je ct 1 te am m em bers w ere a w are of th e c om pany’s g re ate r g ood a nd c ould s ee it in th e h oriz on. H ow eve r, th ey w ere not a ble to tr a nsla te th is g re ate r b enefit in te rm s o f th eir o w n e ngagem ent.

L ead ers h ip S ta g e D evelo pm en t A naly sis A s et o f th e q uestio ns fo r th e p artic ip ants in th e c ase s tu dy a im ed a t u ncove rin g w hat le aders hip s ta ges, a s d efin ed b y T orb ert a nd h is c olle agues, w ere p re sent in th e le aders hip te am s o f th e tw o tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s ( T orb ert & A ssocia te s, 2004; R ooke & T orb ert, 2 005). O nly fo ur o f th e s eve n le aders hip s ta ges w ere b ein g in ve stig ate d in th is c ase s tu dy. It is th e o pin io n o f th is r e searc her th at th e chara cte ris tic s o f th e O pportu nis t a nd D ip lo m at d o n ot m ap to r o le s th at w ould b e im pera tiv e in a tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders hip te am . T he p re sence o f th e A lc hem is t w as a ls o e xc lu ded g iv e n th at th is s ta ge o f le aders hip is p re sent in o nly o ne p erc ent of le aders a nd th e lik e lih ood th at a n A lc hem is t w as p re sent in th e M edcab in it ia tiv e s and c ould b e r e cogniz ed a s s uch w as lo w . T he a ctio ns o f a n a lc hem is t w ould m ost lik e ly b e in te rp re te d a s a n In div id ualis t o r S tr a te gis t ( T orb ert & A ssocia te s, 2 004).

T able 3 s how s th e r e sult s o f th e a nsw ers a bout le aders hip s ta ges p ro vid ed b y th e M edcab p artic ip ants ( s ee A ppendix F fo r a s um mary o f th e a nsw ers ). F ro m th ese answ ers , it is c le ar th at P ro je ct 1 d id n ot h ave a ll o f th e E xp erts a va ila ble d urin g th e pro je ct. T his fe edback b y th e p artic ip ants w as u nanim ous. T he la ck o f c rit ic al exp ertis e in th is in it ia tiv e w as e vid ent in b oth th e in te rn al r e sourc es a nd th e consult a nts th at w ere e ngaged in P ro je ct 1 . In c ontr a st, P ro je ct 2 in clu ded a ll o f th e exp erts n ecessary to a chie ve it s o bje ctiv e s. A s m entio ned e arlie r, th e c om pany h as deep e xp ertis e in p ro duct d eve lo pm ent a nd fe lt c om fo rta ble in s tr e tc hin g to im pro ve it s a bilit y to h andle p ara lle l p ro duct d eve lo pm ent a nd in im pro vin g it s tim e to m ark e t cyc le tim e.

T able 3 . P re sence o r a bsence o f th e le aders hip s ta ges fo r e ach tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e a t M edcab. T his ta ble p ro vid es a r a tin g o f th e fin din gs fo r th e le aders hip sta ges fo r e ach in it ia tiv e . A r a tin g o f 1 in dic ate s th e to ta l a bsence o f th e le aders hip sta ge c hara cte ris tic s b ased o n th e in put p ro vid ed b y th e p artic ip ants to th e questio ns r e la te d to e ach s ta ge. A r a tin g o f 2 s pecif ie s a bout a 2 5 p erc ent p re sence of th e le aders hip s ta ge. A 3 in th e r a tin g c olu m ns in dic ate a bout 5 0 p erc ent pre sence, w hile a 4 c orre sponds to 7 5 p erc ent. A r a tin g o f 5 s ta te s th at fu ll pre sence ( 1 00 p erc ent) o f th e le aders hip s ta ge w as d ete rm in ed d urin g th e in te rv ie w s.

Lead ers h ip S ta g e Ratin g f o r P ro je ct 1 Ratin g f o r Pro je ct 2 Exp erts 2 5 Achie ve rs 3 5 In div id ualis ts (A rc hit e cts ) 1 3 Str a te gis ts 3 4 T able 3 s how s th at P ro je ct 1 d id h ave e nough A chie ve rs to d riv e th e p ro je ct to com ple tio n. H ow eve r, th ese A chie ve rs w ere n ot a ble to c re ate a c om mon unders ta ndin g o f th e p rio rit ie s a nd d riv e rs fo r th e p ro je ct. F urth er, s eve ra l o f th e in te rv ie w ees s ta te d th at p eople in th e p ro je ct b elie ve d th at th e d ate s in th e p ro je ct w ere n ot r e al a nd th at th ey c ould s lip . P ro je ct 2 h ad a m ark e dly d if fe re nt A chie ve r re sult . T he h ead A chie ve r in th e p ro je ct w as th e C EO . H e m ade c le ar th at e ve ry o ne kn ew w hat w as a t s ta ke a nd w hat n eeded to b e d one a nd b y w hen. T here w ere n o doubts fr o m th e le aders hip te am o n w hat w as e xp ecte d.

T he c hara cte ris tic s o f th e In div id ualis t a re h ard er to p in d ow n in a s et o f q uestio ns.

F or in sta nce, h ow d o p eople u nders ta nd a nd r e cogniz e r e la tiv is m ? T o c la rif y m atte rs , th is r e searc her e ncapsula te d th e tr a it s o f a n In div id ualis t in th e r o le o f a solu tio ns a rc hit e ct. T his ty p e o f in div id ual e xe m plif ie s th e a ttr ib ute s o f a n In div id ualis t le ader. A s olu tio ns a rc hit e ct h as to b e a ble to c onsid er m ult ip le p oin ts o f v ie w , b e consult a tiv e , a ppro ach s it u atio ns s ys te m atic ally a nd b e a ble to b rin g e ve ry o ne to geth er in a c ohesiv e a ppro ach. T his ty p e o f r o le h as to b e a ble to s ee th e goodness a nd th e r is ks in th e v ie w s o f o th ers w it h out a lie natin g a nyo ne.

F ro m th e in te rv ie w r e sponses, it b ecam e c le ar th at P ro je ct 1 d id n ot h ave a F ro m th e in te rv ie w r e sponses, it b ecam e c le ar th at P ro je ct 1 d id n ot h ave a solu tio ns a rc hit e ct. N o o ne in th e le aders hip te am c ould s ee th e b ig p ic tu re o r c ould assem ble th e n ecessary d eta ils to a rtic ula te a p ath fo r e ve ry o ne. C onsequently , P ro je ct 1 e xp erie nced m ult ip le p ath s, m ult ip le s olu tio ns a nd a fa ir a m ount o f contr o ve rs y. T he r e sult s o f P ro je ct 1 w ere d eeply im pacte d b y th e la ck o f th is le aders hip s ta ge.

U sin g th e s am e lin e o f in quir y , th e r e searc her w as a ble to u ncove r th at P ro je ct 2 d id not h ave a n a rc hit e ct to b rin g th e m ult i- p ro duct la unch to geth er e it h er. W hen S enio r S ta ff c re ate d th e m is sin g s econd la ye r w it h th e L eaders hip T eam , it w as th is te am th at w as a ble to a rc hit e ct th e g lo bal la unch s olu tio n. T here w as n ot a s in gle a rc hit e ct but a n um ber o f th em c olla bora tin g in a n a chie va ble s olu tio n.

F ro m th e S tr a te gis t s ta ge p ers pectiv e , b oth p ro je cts h ad v is io n a nd s tr a te gie s th at w ere c om munic ate d a nd m ain ta in ed th ro ughout th eir e xe cutio n. P ro je ct 1 w as m ore com plic ate d th an P ro je ct 2 a nd r e quir e d th e tr a nsla tio n o f th e s tr a te gy in to d ig estib le chunks . M any o f th e P ro je ct 1 p artic ip ants g ot lo st in th e d eta ils a nd c ould n ot r e la te to th e o ve ra ll s tr a te gy. S eve ra l o f th e c ase s tu dy p artic ip ants s ta te d th at a t le ast h alf of th e p eople d id n ot k n ow w hat th ey a nd th eir fu nctio ns w ere g ettin g o ut o f th e pro je ct. In P ro je ct 2 , th e s ubje ct m atte r w as k n ow n to a ll p artic ip ants . T he v is io n and s tr a te gy o f th is in it ia tiv e w as c om munic ate d b y th e C EO a nd h is S enio r S ta ff ofte n. In te rv ie w ees c om mente d th at e ve ry o ne w as o n b oard a nd th at th ere w ere n o doubts in e ve ry o ne’s m in d a s to w hat w as a t s ta ke . F ro m th e r e sponses o f th e c ase stu dy q uestio nnair e , b oth p ro je cts m is sed u nders ta ndin g th e n eeds o f th e p eople in th e p ro je cts . T his la ck o f u nders ta ndin g w as d eeper in P ro je ct 1 , b ut th e P ro je ct 2 le aders d id n ot s ee th e le ve l o f s tr e ss th at th e te am m em bers w ere u nder. O ne o f th e c om ments w as th at a t tim es P ro je ct 2 fe lt lik e b ein g a t th e d entis t: “ y o u k n ow it is g ood fo r y o u b ut y o u c an’t w ait fo r it to b e o ve r.” C onclu sio n T his r e searc h a im ed a t a nsw erin g tw o q uestio ns: a ) h ow le aders hip s ta ge deve lo pm ent c orre la te s to th e s uccess o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s, a nd b ) how th e m ake -u p o f a c hange le aders hip te am a ffe cts o utc om e in th e a bsence o f le aders hip s ta ge d eve lo pm ent a w are ness. T he c ase s tu dy a t M edcab d ealt w it h tw o tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s w it h d if fe re nt o utc om es. P ro je ct 1 a nd 2 a t M edcab share d k e y s im ila rit ie s in clu din g th eir im porta nce to th e c om pany, p ro per fu ndin g and s upport fr o m th eir e xe cutiv e te am . A s e xp lo re d in th e a naly s is s ectio ns o f th is docum ent, th e p ro je cts w ere d is sim ila r in th eir M ap o f M eanin g a nd th eir le aders hip sta ges. T hese tw o le nses w ere u sed in th e c ase s tu dy to a ddre ss th e q uestio ns posed b y th e r e searc h.

U sin g F ig ure 4 a s a r e fe re nce, P ro je ct 1 ’s M ap o f M eanin g s how s a w eak B ein g dim ensio n. B oth , th e In ner D eve lo pm ent a nd U nit y w it h O th ers q uadra nts r e ceiv e d lo w r a tin gs b ased o n th e a nsw ers fr o m th e p artic ip ants . T his o ve ra ll w eakn ess m anif e ste d in to lo w a w are ness, in div id ual a gendas, in abilit y to c om e to geth er, m in im al to n o a bilit y to g ro w , a nd lim it e d le arn in g. In p artic ula r, P ro je ct 1 h ad a lo w score in th e In ner D eve lo pm ent q uadra nt. T his p re ve nte d th is in it ia tiv e fr o m deve lo pin g a n id entit y th at te am m em bers c ould r e la te to a nd to w hic h th ey w ante d to b elo ng. T he d im ensio n o f D oin g in P ro je ct 1 ’s M ap o f M eanin g s how ed s om e str e ngth , p artic ula rly in th e E xp re ssin g F ull P ote ntia l q uadra nt. T his s tr e ngth e nable d th e p ro je ct to d eve lo p it s w ork p ro ducts a nd c om ple te th em b y a g iv e n d ue d ate . A s docum ente d in th e a naly s is s ectio n, th e w ork p ro ducts a nd te am r e adin ess fo r th is in it ia tiv e h ad is sues th at r e sult e d in m ajo r c halle nges r ig ht a fte r th e n ew s ys te m a nd pro cesses w ent in to e ffe ct.

F ro m th e le aders hip s ta ges p ers pectiv e , P ro je ct 1 d id n ot h ave a ll o f th e E xp erts it needed. It a ppears th at it h ad e nough A chie ve rs b ut th ey w ere n ot e ffe ctiv e in convin cin g te am m em bers w hat to a ccom plis h a nd b y w hen. T his d if fic ult y c ould have b een r o ote d in th e c om pany’s c ult u re b ut it a ppears th at A chie ve rs in th e le aders hip te am w ere n ot c olla bora tin g o r a im in g fo r th e s am e g oals . It w as n ote d in th e a naly s is th at In div id ualis ts a s in carn ate d in o ne o r m ore s olu tio ns a rc hit e ct w ere to ta lly a bsent fr o m P ro je ct 1 . T his v o id p re ve nte d th is in it ia tiv e fr o m h avin g a h olis tic solu tio n th at d ro ve w ork p ro ducts a nd te am e ngagem ent. F in ally , th ere is e vid ence of th e p re sence o f S tr a te gis ts in P ro je ct 1 fr o m th e e sta blis hed v is io n a nd th e o ve ra ll str a te gy fo r th is in it ia tiv e . H ow eve r, th is le aders hip s ta ge w as n ot a ble to c re ate a cohesiv e c olle ctiv e .

In te gra tin g th e M ap o f M eanin g a nd le aders hip s ta ge le nses, w e c an c onclu de th at th e d eve lo pm ent o f th e B ein g d im ensio n in P ro je ct 1 w as a ffe cte d b y th e a bsence o f th e In div id ualis t s ta ge a nd b y th e in effe ctiv e ness o f th e S tr a te gis ts o n th e te am to cre ate a c ohesiv e c olle ctiv e . T he D oin g d im ensio n fo r th is in it ia tiv e w as m ore deve lo ped d ue to th e a va ila bilit y o f s om e E xp erts a nd a n um ber o f A chie ve rs . T his allo w ed P ro je ct 1 to d eliv e r w ork p ro ducts b ut w it h lim it e d c om ple te ness a nd accura cy. T his w as d ue to th e e m phasis in th e In div id ual d im ensio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g o ve r th e C olle ctiv e . T he fa ct th at th e le aders hip te am fo r th is in it ia tiv e c ould not g et it s C olle ctiv e d im ensio n e ngaged, u lt im ate ly tr a nsla te d in to th e d im in is hed capabilit ie s o f th e n ew s ys te m a nd p ro cesses b ein g p ut in p la ce.

T he M ap o f M eanin g r a tin gs in T able 2 s how s a s tr o nger s et o f B ein g a nd D oin g dim ensio ns fo r P ro je ct 2 . T his is a ls o tr u e fo r th e In div id ual a nd C olle ctiv e dim ensio ns o f th is h olo n. T his in dic ate s th at th e le aders hip te am in th is in it ia tiv e h ad a s tr o ng s ense o f id entit y , w as a ble to a ccom plis h r e sult s a nd c ould w ork w ell w it h oth ers . T he r a tin g o f 3 fo r th e In ner D eve lo pm ent q uadra nt c orre sponds to a te am th at h ad e nough a w are ness to g uid e it s o w n c ours e a nd le arn a s it w ent a lo ng. T he str o ng r a tin g o f 4 a ssocia te d w it h th e U nit y w it h O th ers q uadra nt r e fle cts a te am th at w as e ffe ctiv e , s hare d c om mon v a lu es, a nd c ould p urs ue u nif ie d g oals . O n th e D oin g d im ensio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g, P ro je ct 2 s how s a s tr o ng E xp re ssin g F ull P ote ntia l q uadra nt th at c orre la te s to s olid e xe cutio n, c om ple te a nd a ccura te w ork pro ducts , a nd a ctiv e m anagem ent o f r is ks . A s s ta te d in th e a naly s is , th is in it ia tiv e alo ng w it h P ro je ct 1 d id n ot s core h ig h in th e S erv ic e O th ers q uadra nt g iv e n th eir te chnic al s copes. H ow eve r, P ro je ct 2 h ad e nough c olle ctiv e a w are ness o f th e e ach in div id ual’s im pact to th e w hole to s core h ig her th an it s p ro je ct c ounte rp art in th e case s tu dy.

F ro m th e le aders hip s ta ge p ers pectiv e a nd a s n ote d in th e a naly s is , P ro je ct 2 h ad all o f th e E xp erts it n eeded. T his s upply o f e xp ertis e c am e fr o m a ll th re e la ye rs o f th e le aders hip h ola rc hy, b ut, p rim arily th e s econd la ye r. T he a bundance o f E xp erts m ade th e d eliv e ra ble s o f P ro je ct 2 c om ple te ly r e aliz able . T he A chie ve r s ta ge w as als o w ell r e pre sente d in th is in it ia tiv e s ta rtin g w it h th e M edcab C EO w ho p artic ip ate d in th e d aily le aders hip m eetin gs. T his tr a nsla te d in to a fa st p aced e xe cutio n w it h w ell- d efin ed m ile sto nes. E ve n th ough th e In div id ualis t le ve l in P ro je ct 2 w as n ot m anif e ste d in to id entif ia ble s olu tio ns a rc hit e cts , th e m em bers o f la ye r 2 o f th e hola rc hy p ro vid ed th e In div id ualis t a ctio n lo gic a ple nty . T he r e sult s o f th is a bundant In div id ualis t e nerg y w ere c om ple te s olu tio ns, a fa ir a m ount o f in tr o spectio n a nd ove rw helm in g c rit iq ue fo r e ve ry o ne’s w ork . T he la st le aders hip s ta ge in ve stig ate d in th e c ase s tu dy, th e S tr a te gis t, w as w ell p ers onif ie d in th e s enio r te am m em bers o f P ro je ct 2 . V is io n a nd s tr a te gy w ere w ell d efin ed, c om munic ate d a nd g lo bally accepte d.

Lookin g in to th e in te rs ectio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g a nd th e le aders hip s ta ge deve lo pm ent le nses, w e c an c onclu de th at th e E xp erts a nd A chie ve rs in P ro je ct 2 pro vid ed a s tr o ng b ackb one fo r th e D oin g d im ensio n o f th e M ap o f M eanin g.

S im ila rly , th e te am -o rie nte d v e rs io n o f th e In div id ualis t s ta ge a nd th e e ffe ctiv e S tr a te gis ts in th is p ro je ct g ave w ay to a s olid B ein g d im ensio n o f th e h olo n. T he In div id ualis t e nerg y s upporte d th e d eve lo pm ent o f In ner D eve lo pm ent q uadra nt w hile th e S tr a te gis t le ve l c re ate d th e e nvir o nm ent fo r e ffe ctiv e c olle ctiv e a ctiv it ie s.

O n th e fir s t q uestio n o f th e r e searc h, w e c an c onclu de th at th e s ta ge d eve lo pm ent as a naly z ed th ro ugh th e M ap o f M eanin g a nd le aders hip s ta ge le nses a ffe cte d th e outc om e o f b oth in it ia tiv e s. P ro je ct 1 h ad m is sin g le aders hip s ta ges a nd underd eve lo ped M ap o f M eanin g q uadra nts b oth lim it in g h ow m uch th is in it ia tiv e accom plis hed a nd h ow c halle nged w as it s o utp ut. In c ontr a st, P ro je ct 2 d id n ot h ave any m is sin g le aders hip s ta ges a nd s how ed s tr e ngth a cro ss th re e o f th e M ap o f M eanin g q uadra nts . T his in it ia tiv e w as s uccessfu l a nd m et a ll o f it s o bje ctiv e s.

O n th e s econd q uestio n o f th e r e searc h, w e c an a ls o c onclu de th at th e le aders hip te am m ake -u p im pacte d th e o utc om e o f th e in it ia tiv e s. M edcab d id n ot h ave a ny aw are ness o f le aders hip s ta ges p rio r to th is c ase s tu dy. T he a ssem bly o f th e le aders hip te am s fo r b oth p ro je cts fo llo w ed c rit e ria th at d id n ot c onscio usly in clu de all le aders hip s ta ges. P ro je ct 1 s uffe re d th e e ffe cts o f m is sin g E xp erts a nd th e absence o f In div id ualis ts . O n th e o th er h and, P ro je ct 2 h ad th e b enefit o f th e M edcab S enio r S ta ff fo rm in g la ye r tw o o f it s te am h ola rc hy w it h a h ig hly q ualif ie d L eaders hip T eam . T his n ew le aders hip la ye r c am e to geth er o nly in th e la st fo ur m onth s p rio r to pro duct la unch b ut w as a ble to g uid e th e p ro je ct to s uccess. It a ppears th at a ll o f th e le aders hip s ta ges in P ro je ct 2 b ecam e p re sent th ro ugh th e c om bin atio n o f th e Leaders hip T eam m em bers a nd S enio r S ta ff.

T his r e searc h o pens th e d oor to fu rth er in ve stig atio n o n h ow to a ssem ble tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am h ola rc hie s th at h ave th e b est c hances fo r s uccess. F utu re re searc h c ould fo cus o n p ra ctic al m echanis m s to id entif y th e le aders hip s ta ges o f pote ntia l le aders in a tr a nsfo rm atio nal te am . A ddit io nally , th is r e searc h d id n ot pro vid e a ny g uid ance o n th e n um ber o r r o le s o f th e le aders a t th e v a rio us le aders hip sta ges. It is e asy to c onceiv e th at E xp erts in a ll o f th e d om ain s fo r a g iv e n s cope w ould b e r e quir e d in a le aders hip te am . H ow eve r, w hat is th e r ig ht n um ber o f A chie ve rs a nd w hat s hould th eir r o le s b e? T his a nd o th er im porta nt q uestio ns c ould guid e a ddit io nal r e searc h o n a to pic th at p ro m is es im pro vin g th e o utc om e o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hanges to a n um ber g re ate r th an o ne in th re e.

Refe re n ces A ik e n, C . & K elle r, S . ( 2 009). T he ir ra tio nal s id e o f c hange m anagem ent.

The M cK in sey Q uarte rly , ( 2 ), 1 -9 .

B ark e r, E . H . & T orb ert, W . R . ( 2 011). G enera tin g a nd m easurin g p ra ctic al dif fe re nces in le aders hip p erfo rm ance a t p ost- c onve ntio nal a ctio n-lo gic s. In P fa ffe nberg er, A ., M ark o , P ., & C om bs, A . ( E ds.) .

The p ost c onventio nal p ers onalit y :

A ssessin g, r e searc hin g, a nd th eoriz in g h ig her d evelo pm ent . A lb any, N Y: S uny P re ss.

B urk e , W . ( 2 011).

Org aniz a tio n Change T heory a nd P ra ctic e . T housand O aks :

S age.

C acio ppe, R . & E dw ard s, M . G . ( 2 005a). A dju stin g b lu rre d v is io ns: A ty p olo gy o f in te gra l a ppro aches to o rg anis atio ns.

Journ al o r O rg aniz a tio nal C hange M anagem ent , 18 (3 ), 2 30-2 46.

C acio ppe, R . & E dw ard s, M . G . ( 2 005b). S eekin g th e H oly G ra il o f o rg anis atio nal deve lo pm ent: A s yn th esis o f in te gra l th eory , s pir a l d yn am ic s, c orp ora te tr a nsfo rm atio n a nd a ctio n in quir y .

Leaders hip a nd O rg aniz a tio n D evelo pm ent Journ al , 26 (3 ), 8 6-1 05.

C apit a liz in g o n c om ple xit y : In sig hts fr o m th e g lo bal C hie f E xe cutiv e O ffic er s tu dy (2 010). IB M .

D oppelt , B . ( 2 003).

Leadin g c hange to w ard s s usta in abilit y : A c hange-m anagem ent guid e fo r b usin ess, g overn m ent a nd c iv il s ocie ty . S heffie ld , U K: G re enle af.

E dw ard s, M . G . ( 2 005). T he in te gra l h olo n: A h olo nom ic a ppro ach to o rg anis atio nal change a nd tr a nsfo rm atio n.

Journ al o r O rg aniz a tio nal C hange M anagem ent , 18 (3 ), 269-2 88.

E dw ard s, M . G . ( 2 009). S eein g in te gra l le aders hip th ro ugh th re e im porta nt le nses:

D eve lo pm enta l, e colo gic al a nd g ove rn ance.

In te gra l L eaders hip R evie w .

G am bre ll, K . M ., M atk in G . S . & B urb ach, M . E . ( 2 011). C ult iv a tin g le aders hip : T he need fo r r e nova tin g m odels to h ig her e pis te m ic c ognit io n. J o urn al o f L eaders hip & O rg aniz atio nal S tu die s, 1 8(3 ), 3 08-3 19.

H aru ng, H ., T ra vis , F ., B la nk, W ., & H eato n, D . ( 2 009). H ig her d eve lo pm ent, b ra in , in te gra tio n, a nd e xc elle nce in le aders hip .

Managem ent D ecis io n , 47 (6 ), 8 72-8 94 H enders on, G . M . ( 2 002). T ra nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g a s a c ondit io n fo r tr a nsfo rm atio nal change in o rg aniz atio ns.

Hum an R esourc e D evelo pm ent R evie w , 1 (2 ), 1 86-2 14 Is ern , J . & P ung, C . ( 2 007). D riv in g r a dic al c hange.

The M cK in sey Q uarte rly , (4 ), 1 - 9.

K egan, R . ( 2 000). W hat “ fo rm ” tr a nsfo rm s? A c onstr u ctiv e -d eve lo pm enta l a ppro ach to tr a nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g. In M ezir o w , J ., & A ssocia te s.

Learn in g a s tr a nsfo rm atio n:

C rit ic al p ers pectiv es o n a th eory in p ro gre ss . S an F ra ncis co: J o ssey-B ass.

K oestle r, A . ( 1 990).

The g host in th e m achin e . L ondon: P enguin .

K otte r, J . P . ( 2 006). L eadin g c hange: W hy tr a nsfo rm atio n e ffo rts fa il. Harv ard B usin ess R evie w , ( T he B est o f H BR e d.) .

Lic hte nste in , B . M . ( 1 997). G ra ce, m agic a nd m ir a cle s: A “ c haotic lo gic ” o f org aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n.

Journ al o f O rg aniz a tio nal C hange M anagem ent , 10 (5 ), 3 93-4 11.

Lip s-W ie rs m a, M . & M orris , L . ( 2 011).

The m ap o f m eanin g: A g uid e to s usta in in g our h um anit y in th e w orld o f w ork . S heffie ld , U K: G re enle af.

M eaney, M . & P ung, C . ( 2 008). C re atin g o rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio ns.

McK in sey G lo bal S urv ey R esult s . 1 -7 .

M ezir o w , J . ( 1 991).

Tra nsfo rm ativ e d im ensio ns o f a dult le arn in g ( 1 st e d.) . S an F ra ncis co: J o ssey-B ass.

M ezir o w , J . ( 2 000), L earn in g to th in k lik e a n a dult : C ore c oncepts o f a dult le arn in g th eory . In M ezir o w , J . ( E d.) , Learn in g a s tr a nsfo rm atio n: C rit ic al p ers pectiv es o n a th eory in p ro gre ss , J o ssey-B ass, S an F ra ncis co, C A. M ezir o w , J ., T aylo r, E . W ., & A ssocia te s. ( 2 009).

Tra nsfo rm ativ e le arn in g in pra ctic e: In sig hts fr o m c om munit y , w ork pla ce, a nd h ig her e ducatio n . S an F ra ncis co, C A: J o ssey-B ass.

N ailo n, D ., D ela haye , B . & B ro w nle e, J . ( 2 007). L earn in g a nd le adin g: H ow b elie fs about le arn in g c an b e u sed to p ro m ote e ffe ctiv e le aders hip .

Develo pm ent a nd Learn in g in O rg aniz a tio ns , 2 1 ( 4 ), 6 -9 .

P andey, A ., & G upta , R . K . ( 2 007). A p ers pectiv e o f c olle ctiv e c onscio usness o f busin ess o rg aniz atio ns.

Journ al o f B usin ess E th ic s , 80 , 8 89-8 98.

P ru zan, P . ( 2 001). T he q uestio n o f o rg aniz atio nal c onscio usness: C an org aniz atio ns h ave v a lu es, v ir tu es a nd v is io ns?

Journ al o f B usin ess E th ic s , 29 (3 ), 271-2 84.

R ooke , D . & T orb ert, W . R . ( 1 998). O rg aniz atio nal tr a nsfo rm atio n a s a fu nctio n o f C EO ’s d eve lo pm enta l s ta ge.

Org aniz a tio n D evelo pm ent J ourn al , 16 (1 ), 1 1-2 8.

R ooke , D . & T orb ert, W . R . ( 2 005). S eve n tr a nsfo rm atio ns o f le aders hip .

Harv ard B usin ess R evie w , April , 1 -1 2.

S arro s, J . C ., C ooper, B . K . & S anto ra , J . C . ( 2 008). B uild in g a c lim ate fo r in nova tio n th ro ugh tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders hip a nd o rg aniz atio nal c ult u re . J ourn al o f Leaders hip & O rg aniz a tio nal S tu die s , 1 5 ( 2 ), 1 45-1 58.

S chein , E . H . ( 2 010).

Org aniz a tio nal c ult u re a nd le aders hip : V ol. T he J ossey-B ass busin ess & m anagem ent s erie s ; ( 4 th e d.) . S an F ra ncis co: J o ssey-B ass.

S enge, P . ( 1 990). T he fif th d is cip lin e: T he a rt a nd p ra ctic e o f th e le arn in g org aniz atio n. N ew Y ork : D ouble day.

S im cox, J . ( 2 005).

Deta ile d d escrip tio ns o f th e d evelo pm enta l s ta ges o r a ctio n lo gic s o f th e le aders hip d evelo pm ent fr a m ew ork . P re sente d a t th e W . E dw ard s D em in g R esearc h In stit u te , E le ve nth A nnual R esearc h S em in ar, F ord ham U niv e rs it y G ra duate B usin ess S chool, L in coln C ente r, N ew Y ork C it y .

T orb ert, B . & A ssocia te s. ( 2 004).

Actio n in quir y : T he s ecre t o f tim ely a nd tr a nsfo rm in g le aders hip . S an F ra ncis co, C A: B erre tt- K oehle r.

T orb ert, W . R . & T aylo r, S . S . ( 2 008).

Actio n In quir y : In te rw eavin g M ult ip le Q ualit ie s of A tte ntio n fo r T im ely A ctio n . R etr ie ve d fr o m http ://w ww.h arth ill. c o.u k/a ssets /file s/A rtic le s/A ctio nIn quir y _ In te rw eavin gM ult ip le Q ualit ie s_ofA tte ntio n_T orb ert_ and_T aylo r_ 2008.p df V in son, M . & P ung, C . ( 2 006). O rg aniz in g fo r s uccessfu l c hange m anagem ent. A M cK in sey G lo bal S urv ey.

W ilb er, K . ( 2 000).

A th eory o f e very th in g: A n in te gra l v is io n fo r b usin ess, p olit ic s, scie nce, a nd s pir it u alit y . B osto n: S ham bhala .

Appen dix A – In te rv ie w Q uestio ns T he fo llo w in g a re th e q uestio ns w hic h w ere a ske d to e ach p artic ip ant d urin g th e o ne hour in te rv ie w s a lo ng w it h th e e stim ate d d ura tio n fo r e ach q uestio n g ro up:

P artic ip ant q ualif ic atio ns ( 5 m in ute s) What is y o ur r o le w it h th e o rg aniz atio n a nd h ow lo ng h ave y o u b een in th is ro le ?

How d o y o u d efin e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange a nd w hat m ake s it b e successfu l?

Where d o y o u s ee y o u c an c ontr ib ute th e m ost in a tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e and w hy?

As a le ader, w hat p ers onal a ttr ib ute s d o y o u b rin g to y o ur o rg aniz atio n?

T ra nsfo rm atio nal p ro je ct c hara cte ris tic s ( 3 0 m in ute s) – T he q uestio ns in th is g ro up w ere a ske d to th e r e searc h s ponsor a nd o nly tw o o f th e o th er p artic ip ants .

At a h ig h le ve l, d escrib e th e s cope o f th e tw o tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s in th e stu dy in te rm s o f lo catio ns, fu nctio ns, p ro cesses, s ys te m s a nd o rg aniz atio ns.

Were th e ta rg ete d tr a nsfo rm atio ns s uccessfu l; w hy o r w hy n ot?

What in te rv e ntio ns w ere r e quir e d to a ccom plis h th e g oals o f th e in it ia tiv e s, where d id th ey c om e fr o m , a nd h ow w ere th ey a pplie d?

C onte xt o f y o ur in vo lv e m ent ( 1 0 m in ute s) – T he q uestio ns in th is g ro up w ere a ske d fo r e ach in it ia tiv e . Describ e y o ur r o le in th e c hange in it ia tiv e .

What a re y o ur m ain o bserv a tio ns in h ow th e o rg aniz atio n a ppro ached it s tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange?

P ro je ct le aders hip s tr u ctu re ( 3 0 m in ute s) – T he q uestio ns in th is g ro up w ere a ske d to th e r e searc h s ponsor a nd tw o o f th e p artic ip ants fo r e ach o f th e in it ia tiv e s.

Govern ance le ns:

Describ e th e le aders hip te am o rg aniz atio n fo r th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e . S pecif y th e g ove rn ance la ye rs . D o y o u k n ow h ow th e te am m em bers o f th is le aders hip te am w ere s ele cte d? W hat w as m is sin g fr o m th is s tr u ctu re ?

Ecolo gic al le ns:

H ow w as th e in te ra ctio n b etw een th e la ye rs o f th e le aders hip te am ? H ow d id th e le aders hip te am in te ra ct w it h th e c om pany’s fu nctio nal a nd exe cutiv e le aders ? W hat a re th e h ig h-lig hts a nd lo w -lig hts o f th e le aders hip te am in te ra ctio n w it h it s e nvir o nm ent?

Learn in g le ns:

H ow d id th e le aders hip te am le arn ed? W as th ere a c oncerte d effo rt b y th e te am to le arn a nd if s o, h ow d id th is h appen? W hat a re th e m ain th in gs th e te am le arn ed? W hat d id th e te am m is sed le arn in g?

Leaders hip c hara cte ris tic s in th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal p ro je ct ( 4 5 m in ute s) – T he questio ns in th is g ro up w ere a ske d fo r e ach tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e .

In ner s elf - d evelo pm ent:

W hat w ere th e d riv in g fo rc es fo r th e le aders hip te am to a ccom plis h th e g oals o f th e in it ia tiv e ? W hat le ve l o f a w are ness d id th e le aders hip te am h ave o n th e n eeds o f it s c onstit u encie s? H ow w ere d ecis io ns made b y th e le aders hip te am ? W hat w as th e b ala nce b etw een th e n eeds o f th e p ro je ct a nd th e n eeds o f th e te am m em bers ?

Unit y w it h o th ers :

W hat d id th e le aders hip te am v a lu e th e m ost fr o m it s te am mem bers ? H ow d id th e le aders hip te am r e la te to “ o th ers ” in th e o rg aniz atio n?

How w ere o pin io ns a nd id eas fr o m d if fe re nt le ve ls o f th e o rg aniz atio n handle d? D id th e le aders hip te am c re ate a s ense o f c om munit y a nd if s o how ?

Expre ssin g fu ll p ote ntia l:

H ow d id th e le aders hip te am m anage it s o bje ctiv e s?

What w ork s ta ndard s d id th e le aders hip te am h eld it s elf a nd o th ers to ? H ow did th e le aders hip te am d eal w it h th e “ lo w ” p oin ts d urin g th e p ro je ct? W ere th ere h ig her le ve l c om pany g oals th e le aders hip te am fe lt c onnecte d to ?

Serv ic e o th ers :

W hat k in d o f r e sponsib ilit y d id th e le aders hip te am fe el it h ad wit h th e g lo bal o rg aniz atio n? W hat w as th e le aders hip te am ’s v ie w o f th e sys te m s a nd p ro cesses in th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal p ro je ct? T o w hat e xte nd d id th is te am w ork to in te gra te th eir w ork p ro ducts w it h th e r e st o f th e c om pany’s and e xte rn ally ?

Leader s ta ge d evelo pm ent:

How w as th e le aders hip te am s ta ffe d to h ave a ll th e e xp erts it n eeded to a ccom plis h it s o bje ctiv e s? W ho c re ate d th e s ense o f urg ency fo r th e in it ia tiv e a nd w ere th ese in div id uals e ffe ctiv e ? D id th e le aders hip te am h ave o ne o r m ore in div id uals id entif y in g p ote ntia l r is ks ? W as th eir e arly w arn in g a ccepte d a nd u sefu l? W ho p ro vid ed th e o ve ra ll s tr a te gy fo r th e in it ia tiv e a nd g uid ed it s jo urn ey? W hat w as e ffe ctiv e fr o m th ese in div id uals and w hat w as n ot?

A ppen dix B – C hara cte ris tic s o f T ra n sfo rm atio nal P ro je cts T he fo llo w in g s et o f c hara cte ris tic s w as u sed in d ete rm in in g th e le ve l o f tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in vo lv e d in th e p ro je cts th at w ere a ssessed a s p art o f th e partic ip ant in te rv ie w s. T hese c hara cte ris tic s a re b ased o n th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal change d efin it io ns fr o m B urk e ( 2 011), D oppelt ( 2 003), a nd K otte r ( 2 006).

1 .

Result s in tr a nsfo rm atio n o f th e o rg aniz atio nal c ult u re 2 .

In tr o duces fu ndam enta l c hange in th e o rg aniz atio n’s s tr a te gy 3 .

Result s in s ig nif ic ant c hanges in p ro cesses a nd s ys te m s 4 .

Affe cts o rg aniz atio n a s a w hole o r a s ig nif ic ant p ortio n 5 .

Change is in tr o duced o ve r a c onsid era ble p erio d o f tim e ( > 2 y e ars ) 6 .

Requir e s la rg e in ve stm ent o f p eople a nd p hys ic al r e sourc es 7 .

Benefit s o f c hange a re s ig nif ic ant 8 .

Consequence o f fa ilin g w it h th e c hange c ould b e d is astr o us 9 .

Outs id e e xp ertis e is r e quir e d to a ccom plis h th e c hange 10 .

Majo r d eve lo pm enta l o pportu nit y fo r th e o rg aniz atio n’s le aders A ppen dix C – P artic ip an t C rit e ria T he fo llo w in g is th e c rit e ria p ro vid ed to th e r e searc h s ponsor to fa cilit a te th e sele ctio n o f th e p artic ip ants : 1 .

Senio r r o le in th e o rg aniz atio n 2 .

Mem ber o f b oth o f th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s. A lt e rn ativ e ly , mem ber o f o ne o f th e in it ia tiv e s.

3 .

Held a le aders hip r o le in th e c hange in it ia tiv e (s ) a t le ve l o ne o r tw o o f th e le aders hip te am h ola rc hy.

4 .

In div id ual is k n ow n fo r b ein g in sig htfu l a nd c an e ffe ctiv e ly c om munic ate org aniz atio nal e xp erie nces.

A ppen dix D – P artic ip an t O rg an iz atio nal a n d C han ge In it ia tiv e R ole s C urre nt r o le s a nd r o le s in th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e s fo r th e fiv e p artic ip ants in th e c ase s tu dy.

Curre n t R ole Pro je ct 1 R ole Pro je ct 2 R ole Pers on 1 CFO Pro je ct S ponsor a nd Ste erin g C om mit te e Mem ber Sr. S ta ff M em ber Pers on 2 Exe cutiv e V ic e Pre sid ent, F ie ld Opera tio ns Ste erin g C om mit te e Mem ber Sr. S ta ff M em ber Pers on 3 Sr. D ir e cto r, In fo rm atio n Technolo gy ( IT ) Pro gra m D ir e cto r IT L eader o n Leaders hip T eam Pers on 4 Sr. D ir e cto r, F ie ld Opera tio ns Fie ld O pera tio ns Leader Fie ld O pera tio ns Leader o n Leaders hip T eam Pers on 5 Sr. M anager, C ost Accountin g Pro gra m Managem ent O ffic e, Fin ance Fin ance L eader o n Leaders hip T eam A ppen dix E – M ap o f M ean in g In te rv ie w S um mary M ap o f M eanin g s um mariz atio n fo r th e tr a nsfo rm atio nal c hange in it ia tiv e s a t M edcab alo ng w it h th e r a tin g o f h ow d eve lo ped e ach d im ensio n a ppears to b e b ased o n th e in put p ro vid ed b y th e p artic ip ants . T he r a tin gs s pecif y : 1 – n o e vid ence o f a ny deve lo pm ent d urin g th e p ro je ct; 2 – a bout 2 5 p erc ent d eve lo pm ent; 3 – a bout 5 0 perc ent d eve lo pm ent; 4 – a bout 7 5 p erc ent d eve lo pm ent; a nd 5 – fu ll e vid ence o f a deve lo ped d im ensio n.

M ap o f M ean in g D im en sio n Pro je ct 1 Ratin g Pro je ct 2 Ratin g In ner D eve lo pm ent The le aders hip te am was n ot fu lly a w are o f it s r o le a nd h ow to g o about d riv in g c hange fo r th e c om pany. M ult ip le agendas w ere p re sent and p ers onalit ie s dom in ate d conve rs atio ns. T here were m in im al to n o tr a nsfo rm atio ns th at to ok p la ce. T here w as som e te chnic al g ro w th .

1 In it ia lly , th e le aders hip te am fo r th is p ro je ct d id not h ave fu ll a w are ness on h ow to s uccessfu lly com ple te th e obje ctiv e s. T he aw are ness o f th e Senio r M anagem ent te am c hanged th e le aders hip constit u ency, b rin gin g more a w are ness o f what it w ould ta ke to b e fu lly s uccessfu l. Gro w th in th e dim ensio n o f te am colla bora tio n w as evid ent. In div id ual gro w th w as lim it e d.

Som e le aders s te pped out fr o m th eir c om fo rt zone a nd e m bark e d o n re m ark a ble w ork .

3 Unit y w it h O th ers Team w as c onnecte d th ro ugh th e p ro je ct deliv e ra ble s. A lt h ough effo rt w as p la ced in build in g c om munit y , th is did n ot ta ke p la ce.

2 In it ia lly , th e c ore te am was n ot a w are o f th e needs o f o th ers a nd could n ot c re ate a cohesiv e w ork te am .

Senio r S ta ff a nd th e 4 People e spoused dif fe re nt v a lu es a nd aim ed fo r d if fe re nt goals . M ost te am mem bers d id n ot h ave a s ense o f b elo ngin g in th e p ro je ct te am . T his changed a fte r g o-liv e when te am m em bers spent 1 -y e ar to geth er solv in g th e p ro ble m s in tr o duced b y th e pro je ct.

la rg er le aders hip te am achie ve d w ork cohesiv e ness, a lt h ough it w as n ot a w ork com munit y . U nit y o f purp ose w as a chie ve d th ro ugh w ork p ro ducts and d aily m eetin gs.

Pers onal c om mit m ent was th e m ain s hare d va lu e a ll th e w ay fr o m th e C EO .

Exp re ssin g Full P ote ntia l A fa ir a m ount w as accom plis hed b y th e te am . H ow eve r, mis alig nm ent w it h th e obje ctiv e s m ade s om e of th e te am s u nder- perfo rm . S om e c rit ic al are as r e ceiv e d fo cus and c re ativ it y . O th ers were ig nore d a nd le ft fo r la te r. P ers onal agendas p re ve nte d cohere nt w ork a nd mutu al le ve ra ge.

3 Goals w ere c le ar, partic ula rly a fte r th e bro ader te am w as bro ught to geth er.

People w ork e d fo r th e com mon g oals . T eam s exe cute d a t th eir b est under m uch o f pre ssure . T im e com pre ssio n a nd th e need to s ucceed ( n ot fa il) c re ate d a fa ir am ount o f s tr e ss.

Pro ble m s olv in g re sult e d in a fa ir am ount o f c re ativ it y .

Dir e ctio n a nd in flu ence was p ro vid ed b y th e le aders hip te am a ctin g in u nis on.

4 Serv ic e O th ers Som e o f th e le aders hip te am h ad a s tr o ng sense o f th e c om mon purp ose a nd th e g lo bal benefit fo r th e com pany. H ow eve r, th is w as n ot a g lo bal vie w . A fa ir n um ber were c oncern ed o f w hat would h appen to th em when th e c hange occurre d. A ls o, s om e had th e e xp ecta tio n th at som eone w ould d eliv e r th e c hange fo r th em and th ere fo re th ey d id not n eed to b e e ngaged.

2 Afte r th e la rg er le aders hip te am w as engaged, e ve ry o ne unders to od th at th e com pany w ould b e posit iv e ly o r n egativ e ly im pacte d. T he le aders hip te am h ad a str o ng s ense th at th eir contr ib utio n m ade a dif fe re nce. E ve n th ough th e n ew pro ducts w ould contr ib ute to th e in dustr y , th ere w as a str o nger s ense o f w hat it m eant to th e com pany a s o pposed to H ealt h care .

3 A ppen dix F – L ead ers h ip S ta g e D evelo pm en t In te rv ie w S um mary P re sence o r a bsence o f th e le aders hip s ta ges fo r e ach tr a nsfo rm atio nal in it ia tiv e a t M edcab. T his ta ble p ro vid es a s um mary o f th e fin din gs fo r th e le aders hip s ta ges fo r each in it ia tiv e a lo ng w it h a r a tin g. A r a tin g o f 1 in dic ate s th e to ta l a bsence o f th e le aders hip s ta ge c hara cte ris tic s b ased o n th e in put p ro vid ed b y th e p artic ip ants to th e q uestio ns r e la te d to e ach s ta ge. A r a tin g o f 2 s pecif ie s a bout a 2 5 p erc ent pre sence o f th e le aders hip s ta ge. A 3 in th e r a tin g c olu m ns in dic ate a bout 5 0 perc ent p re sence, w hile a 4 c orre sponds to 7 5 p erc ent. A r a tin g o f 5 s ta te s th at fu ll pre sence ( 1 00 p erc ent) o f th e le aders hip s ta ge w as d ete rm in ed d urin g th e in te rv ie w s.

Lead ers h ip Sta g e Pro je ct 1 Ratin g Pro je ct 2 Ratin g Exp erts Mis sin g b usin ess exp ertis e in th e consult a nts . B usin ess 2 In th e fir s t p art o f th e pro je ct n ot a ll e xp erts were in vo lv e d. O nce 5 and IT d id n ot k n ow SAP . In te rs ectio n o f kn ow le dge d efic it cre ate d la rg e s olu tio n gaps. S olu tio ns c ould not b e c om ple te ly conve ye d.

Senio r M anagem ent becam e a d riv in g fo rc e, a ll th e e xp erts were e ngaged e it h er dir e ctly in th e le aders hip te am o r th ro ugh th e le aders in th e “ ro om .” T here were n o e xp ertis e gaps.

Achie ve rs Sense o f u rg ency a nd driv e w as in p la ce v ia th e g o-liv e d ate a nd pre ssure fr o m th e le aders hip . H ow eve r, th ere w ere m ult ip le in te rp re ta tio ns o f th e sense o f u rg ency a nd why th e p ro je ct w as bein g d one in th e fir s t pla ce. T his le d to mix e d le ve ls o f engagem ent a nd b ro ad pro cra stin atio n.

3 Urg ency a nd o ve ra ll driv e c am e a ll th e w ay fr o m th e C EO . S enio r Sta ff w as fu lly e ngaged and p ro vid ed th e fo rc in g fu nctio n fo r eve ry o ne’s s ense o f urg ency. T he b enefit s and th e r is ks to th e com pany w ere unders to od b y a ll a nd managed d aily .

5 In div id ualis ts (A rc hit e cts ) There w as n o s in gle arc hit e ct o r s olu tio n desig ner. T here w ere a n um ber o f contr ib uto rs , a ll o f whic h h ad th eir o w n id eas o n h ow th e solu tio n s hould w ork .

Ris ks w ere n ot w ell unders to od a nd unin te nded consequences w ere mostly h id den.

1 This p ro je ct a ls o la cke d a n o ve ra ll arc hit e ct o r s olu tio n desig ner. H ow eve r, once th e g lo bal le aders hip w as fo rm ed, th e s olu tio ns’ arc hit e cts fo r e ach are a w ere e ngaged.

This a llo w ed fo r a ll ris ks to b ecom e k n ow n and m anaged. T he la ck o f a c ohesiv e solu tio ns r e sult e d in second g uessin g th e exp erts .

3 Str a te gis ts There w as a n o ve ra ll str a te gy a nd v is io n.

Genera lly p eople unders to od th e v is io n but e ve ry o ne g ot lo st in th e d eta ils . T he v is io n and o ve ra ll s tr a te gy were n ot tr a nsla te d in to dig estib le “ c hunks ” th at th e o rg aniz atio n c ould unders ta nd a nd contr ib ute to .

3 The v is io n w as k n ow n to a ll. S om e c rit ic al str a te gie s w ere mis sin g u ntil th e g lo bal le aders hip c am e to geth er. S tr a te gie s were d eve lo ped “ liv e ” wit h th e le aders hip te am in th e d aily meetin gs. T his enable d g lo bal unders ta ndin g o f th e str a te gie s a nd th eir fu ll support.

4 A bout t h e A uth or Jo rg e T ab org a is th e V ic e P re sid ent o f M anufa ctu rin g, Q ualit y a nd IT a t O m nic ell, In c. H e h as a n e xte nsiv e b ackg ro und in c hange le aders hip , p ro duct d eve lo pm ent, m anagem ent c onsult in g, p ro cess r e engin eerin g a nd in fo rm atio n te chnolo gy. H is 2 9 ye ar w ork e xp erie nce in clu des c om panie s lik e R O LM S ys te m s, IB M , Q uantu m , B ay N etw ork s , 3 C om , a nd U TS ta rc om . J o rg e a ls o d eliv e re d o rg aniz atio nal d eve lo pm ent and m anagem ent c onsult in g s erv ic es to a n um ber o f c om panie s in th e S an F ra ncis co B ay A re a a nd C hin a. H e is c urre ntly p urs uin g a P h.D . in O rg aniz atio nal S ys te m s a t S ayb ro ok U niv e rs it y . Copyright of Integral Leadership Review is the property of Russ Volckmann, LeadCoach and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.