Responses Yhtomit ONLY

POST ONE

I absolutely agree with the authors grounds, reasoning, claims, and their recommendations on national emergency preparedness strategies to build an effective government connectivity. A strong reliable, and dedicated leadership has an upper hand not only establishing relations with coworkers, but building the foundation able to stand any type of obstacle or emergency issues that may arise unexpectedly. Meta-leadership as described in the readings demonstrate the effectiveness if coordination is considered a priority especially during unforeseen emergencies. The stories, videos of 911 terrorism attacks (2001) bring back memories, seating in our homes watching families affected, lose relatives is unexplainable, but even more so the confusion of what was happening was disturbing.

I believe we do a better job in an emergency at home whenever we see danger, we alert others, scream to get the neighbor’s attention to get away/out of danger, go above and beyond to make sure no one is left behind. Not so with organizations with leadership having “big egos” not realizing the importance of work done collectively has the better outcomes. It was so unfortunate how the fire fighters were not able to receive emergency communication when the situation at the World Trade Center was related to only police officers, firefighters continued to do what any American Hero would have done, save lives, and died while doing so (2002). Meta-leadership is the perfect example shows the importance on understanding the concept of people-to-people’s theory on how to cooperate agencies, in having open lines of communication especially with emergency responders. I believe protocols work best in a normal environment where responders are not required or without an emergency, policies are established to regulate and balance response activities in a non- emergency environment. Emergency responders have no time to waste or clash, they need a leadership that which will plan, communicate, offer guidance and have an effective preparedness for any emergency. Leadership allows confidence to workers, the general public then cause confusion in a chaos situation, joining forces eliminating distractions but rather call agencies in a collaborative manner. The author importance in reducing inter-agency friction (Phillips & Loy), shows the importance of planning, having an influence for organizations to listen and follow directions is the type of leadership with unique skills we need.

Marcus, L. J., Dorn, B. C., & Henderson, J. M. (2005). Meta-leadership and national emergency preparedness: strategies to build government connectivity. Cambridge, MA: Center for Public Leadership.

POST TWO

The reasoning in this paper is that despite great strides taken after 9/11 struck the United States, there remains a major disorganization within the critical infrastructure regarding information and how it is disseminated, especially during a crisis. It is further claimed that critical information pertaining to the public will conflict and result in greater casualty, which has the grounds for being a valid concern based on what information is being considered for public sharing.

Meta-leadership is where the authors argue that this problem can be effectively addressed regarding such a situation. The concept is based in that while organizational leadership can be slow to change and inflexible, individual leadership must step up, adapt and be quick to encourage collaboration and organization of information and policies (Marcus, Dorn & Henderson, 2005). In order for the critical infrastructure of the United States or even highly valued private sector businesses, adopting both the blend of formal, rigid organizational leadership with the fluid, almost informal method of approaching situations of the meta-leadership. Meta-leadership can provide better understanding over information spread throughout a critical infrastructure as it does not rely solely on formal authority for what is accepted.

While I agree that relying on organizational leadership leaves tremendous room for infrastructure vulnerability and casualty, the lack of overhead regarding meta-leadership that the authors press for is not a concept I agree with. This is especially important in the realm of cyber security, where while everyone plays a role in security, they do not all possess the same levels of authority both formal or informal, and do not have a say in how policies should be implemented (Deloitte-NASCIO, 2013). In cyber security, allowing insight and improvement is crucial to success, but the implementation must be taken care of by those who possess a greater understanding along with a controlled collaboration between the infrastructure and sectors.

It is not enough to simply have a driven or flexibility, as meta-leadership seems to imply. Everyone within an infrastructure plays a vital role in its safety, regardless of a formal or informal leadership position. As a result of this, it should be encouraged by governing bodies to assist in opening communication between the public sector, the private sector, and the actual public in order to achieve a stronger, more organized system for security (Moore at al., 2010).

References:

Deloitte-NASCIO (2013). Cybersecurity study state governments at risk: a call for collaboration and compliance.

Moore at al. (2010). Bridging the gap: developing a tool to support local civilian and military disaster preparedness. Santa Monica, CA: RAND (Chapters 4 & 5)

Marcus, L. J., Dorn, B. C. & Henderson, J.M. (2005). Meta-leadership and national emergency preparedness strategies to build government connectivity. Working Paper, Center for Public Leadership, Harvard University.

POST THREE

In their article Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson (2005), point out a core obstacle to national emergency preparedness against large scale terrorist attacks. That obstacle is traditions and rivalry that stymie necessary cooperation between government organizations(Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson , 2005, p. 42). The authors note that while strides have been made, " The country does not at present have the luxury to patiently wait while agencies take their time to adjust operating procedures and protocols" (Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson , 2005, p. 43). Their proposed solution is meta-leadership and individuals, meta-leaders, that embodied. Effectively, this is the idea of a model in which leadership transcends the confines of any given organizations role or functions, and normal ideas of job title derived authority. Putting leadership functions in a multi-organizational venture such as national preparedness outside of the fetters of the "silo effect" mentioned by The meta-leaders envisioned in this article would embody such traits as courage, out of the box thinking, an a extensive capacity for understanding and mediating multiple view-points, and the force of presence and ability to articulate goals necessary to bring others to working under a common banner among various other traits(Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson,2005, p. 45-56). A meta-leader is an individual who can and must work across deeply carved lines without hope of reward or the comfort that being part of an given group provides, and must be able to withstand the possibility of failure as well as becoming an outcast (Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson,2005, p. 45,56).

While I see the allure of the concept of meta-leadership, I do not see its being an approach whose purposeful implementation or pursuit is aligned with the reality or human nature, this is for two major reasons. First, In the context of national emergency preparedness, or even if applied in general, meta-leadership strikes me as being the social and organizational example of unobtainium. That is to say "A highly desirable material that is hypothetical, scientifically impossible, extremely rare, costly, or fictional, or has some of these properties in combination." (Oxford Dictionary, n.d.) . That is to say that while I do not discount the possibility of instances of meta-leadership or the presence of individuals with the qualities of a meta-leader in the population, neither seem as if they could be isolated, bottled, or mass-produced at will. The meta-leader and the concept that they embody have more in common with the mythical figure Panacea than with anything that can be relied upon as a solution to the almost tribal boundaries between cooperation between organizations. The second issue, I see is that meta-leadership seems to hinge upon a capacity to rise above human nature. Specifically, the thirst for and drive toward group membership and supremacy of one group that is noted by Edward O. Wilson(2012), the author of The Social Conquest of the Earth. This behavior, in the context of government organizations, is even noted by (Marcus, Dorn, and Henderson , 2005, p. 42).

Wilson, E. O. (2012, April 02). Biologist E.O. Wilson on why humans, like ants, need a tribe. Retrieved August 03, 2017, from http://www.newsweek.com/biologist-eo-wilson-why-humans-ants-need-tribe-64005

Oxford Dictionary. (n.d.). Unobtainium. Retrieved August 03, 2017, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/unobtainium