This blog is intended for the course IT Governance (with service-learning component) which aims to integrate business and IT concepts into actual scenarios in education, business, and government.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Leadership in the Information Age (May 30 to June 1, 2013)
Please feel free to post anything about the topic for this week. Don't forget to properly cite using APA format.
Mackenzie's article on Leadership in the Information Age is a big challenge among traditional decision-makers of any organization be it profit or non-profit oriented. I was actually glad after reading the article because it is very much in line with the course that I currently teach... that is "System Theory of Organizations and Innovation." In this particular course, we expose students to different organizational theory with emphasis on environmental scanning and eventually leading to change management and innovation to address the various external and internal factors.
I agree that change is inevitable because it is one of the permanent things in this world apart from death and taxes. Organizational leaders have a powerful position to influence members in embracing change as long as it would bring better outcome. I always believe in the top-down approach on influencing people. If leaders themselves are open to a culture of change, this would eventually trickle down from the highest level of management until the rank and file.
Mackenzie mentioned that "a corporate culture that values continuous change can be reinforced by a culture of learning. As employees learn, the collective organizational state of knowledge will change. The change is no longer disruptive and intrusive, but a welcomed outcome of employee learning. The learning culture transcends the defined work group." I agree on this particular idea because the perspective now is to look at organizations as an open system of learning. Organizations should now be referred to as "Learning Organizations," which encourages adaptability and participation among its members.
The article is solid in its stance with regard to the demands of leading the information age. The challenges Mackenzie presented are a depiction of the price we have to pay for the dynamism we always wanted in the guise of innovation. A leader of the information age could take either or both the roles of a change enabler and/or change victim. The decision lies primarily on how this leader will let the tide of continuous change affect him or her.
Leading the information age means being conscious of the culture of continuous change, whether this change comes from an external or internal force. Most often, change is something we attribute to risks; and we just hate risks. This is the reason why we would always want to attach the term “calculated” every time we talk about risk. We, then, begin to become obsessed with attributing “calculated” to change giving “calculated risks” and “calculated changes” analogous meanings.
The leaders of the information age, for me, now become more particular in managing technological change more than ever. For them, which I agree with, the human elements in the vastness of these changes have to be given more importance. Yes, change is inevitable, but preparing someone for the change, more importantly preparing the people you are governing for they expect a level of predictability and order, is something that leaders of the information age often neglect. They are very much particular and busy with leading and managing change that they tend to forget the most important part of the equation, the human capital.
For this reason, managing change is just a matter of preparing each one to face and welcome the change as a community of innovators not afraid of the “colors of the peacocks” and not too comfortable with the “blacks and whites” of the penguins.
Even government leaders have to be more mindful and cautious now...
NATO takes up cyber-defense as threat grows By Jerome Rivet June 2, 2013 10:23am http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/311094/scitech/technology/nato-takes-up-cyber-defense-as-threat-grows
BRUSSELS — Defense ministers from NATO's 28 member states meet on Tuesday with cyber-defense top of the agenda, amid concerns about the threat posed by increasing cyber-attacks, many blamed on China.
"The challenge evolves all the time, probably (much faster) than any other type of threat we face at the moment," said one senior NATO official who asked not to be named.
"We have to make certain that NATO keeps pace with the threat," the official added, looking ahead to the meeting Tuesday and Wednesday.
Newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who will be attending his first NATO meeting since taking office, has made the issue a priority.
In Singapore on Saturday he accused China of waging cyber-espionage against the US after a US report found evidence of a broad Chinese spying campaign against top US defense contractors and government agencies.
"The United States has expressed our concerns about the growing threat of cyber intrusions, some of which appear to be tied to the Chinese government and military," he told an annual conference known as the Shangri-La Dialogue.
Hagel pressed Beijing to adhere to "international norms of responsible behavior in cyberspace", while acknowledging that the establishment of a joint cyber security working group was a positive step in fostering dialogue.
NATO head Anders Fogh Rasmussen made clear earlier this year that cyber-security is a key issue.
The US-led military alliance had been forced to upgrade its defenses after several attacks, among them by Anonymous, the hacker group, he said.
Early hacker attacks by Serbs during NATO's campaign in Kosovo at the end of the 1990s alerted the alliance to a danger which has only got more serious since then.
In 2008, NATO set up a cyber-defense center in Tallin, Estonia, one of the most connected countries in the world and which itself had come under attack the previous year.
Estonia accused Russia, NATO's old Cold War foe, of being behind the attacks on its official sites and information networks.
The senior NATO official said the alliance would from this year fix cyber-defense benchmarks for member countries.
The exercise is aimed at protecting information networks, the electronic nervous system at the heart of modern warfare, the official said.
There is no intention to develop "offensive capacities," the official said, adding that of NATO's 28 members, 23 have already signed up to exchange information and help in the event of a cyber-attack.
One diplomat noted that NATO had a special problem because, just as in conventional warfare, some member "states absolutely do not have the same capabilities as others."
Some have minimal defenses while others, including the United States, commit major resources to the problem -- but may not always be ready to share their expertise, the diplomat said.
Defense ministers will also discuss Afghanistan, where NATO is progressively handing combat duties over to local forces as it prepares to withdraw in 2014.
A key question is how many troops will be kept in Kabul to run a training and advisory mission post-2014. US officials have mooted a figure of 8,000 to 12,000.
On Friday, a former NATO commander in Afghanistan suggested in a report that the US might need to keep a larger force than initially planned after 2014 to help Afghans build up their military.
Retired four-star general John Allen oversaw NATO operations there for more than a year and a half.
Change is an inevitable truth, a necessary evil, an element of life and progress. The advent of information technology, truly brought forth substantial innovations among organizations. Organizations that refuse to adapt may eventually become left out, disintegrate, perish and become extinct. Still an indication of “Social Darwinism” of organizations and vivid component of “Population Ecology” is the Technological Change brought about by the “Suprasystem”.
However, change is not a simple event but a continuous process. Organization viewed as “organism” illustrates responsiveness to changes in the environment. In order to adapt to changes outside, inherent novelty must be practiced to cope with trends and external forces. Mackenzie (2007) discusses continual change vis-à-vis external forces must be equipped with a competent leadership perception the environment through signals (no matter how weak) must interpreted leading to quick adaptation to fit the mega-environment.
Organizational learning is likely important in order cope with the external Suprasystem. How an organization adapts to external forces is confronted with internal threats within the organization. Here, resistance to change may hamper organizational learning. In addition, learning may be direct or could be tacit. Some elements within the organization could easily adapt, while others might not be able to cope. Mackenzie (2007) views adaptive change less threatening than innovative change which is anxiety driven. Accordingly, resistance exists in different levels of the hierarchy with numerous competing interests coming from employees, shareholders, embedded culture, and dictated by senior leaders’ perceived “safety haven” or comfort zone.
The author speaks of positive change but may initially take the form of a threat that engenders fear of the possible adverse consequences. This is a normal initial reaction. It is therefore the responsibility of the leader, or a senior leader, to emphasize that the change is necessary and for the ultimate good of everyone. Every organization has it own culture that has already been molded by external, internal, and technological forces into one seemingly impregnable wall enclosing a particular comfort zone. Any change to this culture is usually met with suspicion, if not downright aggression. The author states: "A culture of continuous change requires that leaders prepare employees, frontline managers and mid-level managers for the change that the organization and the environment will demand to survive."
I agree with the couple of insights Ms. Mckenzie has put across. These are: (1) Senior leaders fully accept their role as change enablers; (2) A hero (or a champion) be positioned in charge of the change process; (3) The traditional model of change whose culture is mandated should give way to non-linear and non-hierarchically driven where culture is constantly emerging from within the inner workings of the organization.
Finally, I pose this question: What will the senior leader do if majority of the employees are resistant to a particular change?
Change is here to stay! MacKenzies’ article posts a challenge to all leaders to be effective and to evolve themselves into change agents. Leaders from both public and private sectors must contend in this so called information age or knowledge-based economy where rapid technological advancements can be used to create new or enhance existing products, to deliver efficient services, and to provide customized feedback to both internal and external stakeholders and remain competitive.
As emphasized by Mackenzie, in a culture of continuous changes, leaders play a key role in preparing its employees for the change the organization and the environment demands for it to survive. Leaders are thus responsible in steering their organizations to success given any kind of situation and as such must develop the acumen on change leadership.
In a recent Leadership seminar that I attended, Change Leadership was defined as the ability to influence people’s behaviors so that they willingly and enthusiastically work towards achieving common objectives amidst the challenges of rapid changes.
Mackenzies’ call for leaders to embrace and to properly manage change in the workplace is very fitting in this digital age we live in.
Mackenzie's article on Leadership in the Information Age is a big challenge among traditional decision-makers of any organization be it profit or non-profit oriented. I was actually glad after reading the article because it is very much in line with the course that I currently teach... that is "System Theory of Organizations and Innovation." In this particular course, we expose students to different organizational theory with emphasis on environmental scanning and eventually leading to change management and innovation to address the various external and internal factors.
ReplyDeleteI agree that change is inevitable because it is one of the permanent things in this world apart from death and taxes. Organizational leaders have a powerful position to influence members in embracing change as long as it would bring better outcome. I always believe in the top-down approach on influencing people. If leaders themselves are open to a culture of change, this would eventually trickle down from the highest level of management until the rank and file.
Mackenzie mentioned that "a corporate culture that values continuous change can be reinforced by a culture of learning. As employees learn, the collective organizational state of knowledge will change. The change is no longer disruptive and intrusive, but a welcomed outcome of employee learning. The learning culture transcends the defined work group." I agree on this particular idea because the perspective now is to look at organizations as an open system of learning. Organizations should now be referred to as "Learning Organizations," which encourages adaptability and participation among its members.
Thank you!
DeleteThe article is solid in its stance with regard to the demands of leading the information age. The challenges Mackenzie presented are a depiction of the price we have to pay for the dynamism we always wanted in the guise of innovation. A leader of the information age could take either or both the roles of a change enabler and/or change victim. The decision lies primarily on how this leader will let the tide of continuous change affect him or her.
ReplyDeleteLeading the information age means being conscious of the culture of continuous change, whether this change comes from an external or internal force. Most often, change is something we attribute to risks; and we just hate risks. This is the reason why we would always want to attach the term “calculated” every time we talk about risk. We, then, begin to become obsessed with attributing “calculated” to change giving “calculated risks” and “calculated changes” analogous meanings.
The leaders of the information age, for me, now become more particular in managing technological change more than ever. For them, which I agree with, the human elements in the vastness of these changes have to be given more importance. Yes, change is inevitable, but preparing someone for the change, more importantly preparing the people you are governing for they expect a level of predictability and order, is something that leaders of the information age often neglect. They are very much particular and busy with leading and managing change that they tend to forget the most important part of the equation, the human capital.
For this reason, managing change is just a matter of preparing each one to face and welcome the change as a community of innovators not afraid of the “colors of the peacocks” and not too comfortable with the “blacks and whites” of the penguins.
Please feel free to add more comments until tomorrow evening.
ReplyDeleteEven government leaders have to be more mindful and cautious now...
ReplyDeleteNATO takes up cyber-defense as threat grows
By Jerome Rivet June 2, 2013 10:23am
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/311094/scitech/technology/nato-takes-up-cyber-defense-as-threat-grows
BRUSSELS — Defense ministers from NATO's 28 member states meet on Tuesday with cyber-defense top of the agenda, amid concerns about the threat posed by increasing cyber-attacks, many blamed on China.
"The challenge evolves all the time, probably (much faster) than any other type of threat we face at the moment," said one senior NATO official who asked not to be named.
"We have to make certain that NATO keeps pace with the threat," the official added, looking ahead to the meeting Tuesday and Wednesday.
Newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who will be attending his first NATO meeting since taking office, has made the issue a priority.
In Singapore on Saturday he accused China of waging cyber-espionage against the US after a US report found evidence of a broad Chinese spying campaign against top US defense contractors and government agencies.
"The United States has expressed our concerns about the growing threat of cyber intrusions, some of which appear to be tied to the Chinese government and military," he told an annual conference known as the Shangri-La Dialogue.
Hagel pressed Beijing to adhere to "international norms of responsible behavior in cyberspace", while acknowledging that the establishment of a joint cyber security working group was a positive step in fostering dialogue.
NATO head Anders Fogh Rasmussen made clear earlier this year that cyber-security is a key issue.
The US-led military alliance had been forced to upgrade its defenses after several attacks, among them by Anonymous, the hacker group, he said.
Early hacker attacks by Serbs during NATO's campaign in Kosovo at the end of the 1990s alerted the alliance to a danger which has only got more serious since then.
In 2008, NATO set up a cyber-defense center in Tallin, Estonia, one of the most connected countries in the world and which itself had come under attack the previous year.
Estonia accused Russia, NATO's old Cold War foe, of being behind the attacks on its official sites and information networks.
The senior NATO official said the alliance would from this year fix cyber-defense benchmarks for member countries.
The exercise is aimed at protecting information networks, the electronic nervous system at the heart of modern warfare, the official said.
There is no intention to develop "offensive capacities," the official said, adding that of NATO's 28 members, 23 have already signed up to exchange information and help in the event of a cyber-attack.
One diplomat noted that NATO had a special problem because, just as in conventional warfare, some member "states absolutely do not have the same capabilities as others."
Some have minimal defenses while others, including the United States, commit major resources to the problem -- but may not always be ready to share their expertise, the diplomat said.
Defense ministers will also discuss Afghanistan, where NATO is progressively handing combat duties over to local forces as it prepares to withdraw in 2014.
A key question is how many troops will be kept in Kabul to run a training and advisory mission post-2014. US officials have mooted a figure of 8,000 to 12,000.
On Friday, a former NATO commander in Afghanistan suggested in a report that the US might need to keep a larger force than initially planned after 2014 to help Afghans build up their military.
Retired four-star general John Allen oversaw NATO operations there for more than a year and a half.
Change is an inevitable truth, a necessary evil, an element of life and progress. The advent of information technology, truly brought forth substantial innovations among organizations. Organizations that refuse to adapt may eventually become left out, disintegrate, perish and become extinct. Still an indication of “Social Darwinism” of organizations and vivid component of “Population Ecology” is the Technological Change brought about by the “Suprasystem”.
ReplyDeleteHowever, change is not a simple event but a continuous process. Organization viewed as “organism” illustrates responsiveness to changes in the environment. In order to adapt to changes outside, inherent novelty must be practiced to cope with trends and external forces. Mackenzie (2007) discusses continual change vis-à-vis external forces must be equipped with a competent leadership perception the environment through signals (no matter how weak) must interpreted leading to quick adaptation to fit the mega-environment.
Organizational learning is likely important in order cope with the external Suprasystem. How an organization adapts to external forces is confronted with internal threats within the organization. Here, resistance to change may hamper organizational learning. In addition, learning may be direct or could be tacit. Some elements within the organization could easily adapt, while others might not be able to cope. Mackenzie (2007) views adaptive change less threatening than innovative change which is anxiety driven. Accordingly, resistance exists in different levels of the hierarchy with numerous competing interests coming from employees, shareholders, embedded culture, and dictated by senior leaders’ perceived “safety haven” or comfort zone.
Thank you!
DeleteThe author speaks of positive change but may initially take the form of a threat that engenders fear of the possible adverse consequences. This is a normal initial reaction. It is therefore the responsibility of the leader, or a senior leader, to emphasize that the change is necessary and for the ultimate good of everyone. Every organization has it own culture that has already been molded by external, internal, and technological forces into one seemingly impregnable wall enclosing a particular comfort zone. Any change to this culture is usually met with suspicion, if not downright aggression. The author states: "A culture of continuous change requires that leaders prepare employees, frontline managers and mid-level managers for the change that the organization and the environment will demand to survive."
ReplyDeleteI agree with the couple of insights Ms. Mckenzie has put across. These are: (1) Senior leaders fully accept their role as change enablers; (2) A hero (or a champion) be positioned in charge of the change process; (3) The traditional model of change whose culture is mandated should give way to non-linear and non-hierarchically driven where culture is constantly emerging from within the inner workings of the organization.
Finally, I pose this question: What will the senior leader do if majority of the employees are resistant to a particular change?
Thank you!
DeleteChange is here to stay! MacKenzies’ article posts a challenge to all leaders to be effective and to evolve themselves into change agents. Leaders from both public and private sectors must contend in this so called information age or knowledge-based economy where rapid technological advancements can be used to create new or enhance existing products, to deliver efficient services, and to provide customized feedback to both internal and external stakeholders and remain competitive.
ReplyDeleteAs emphasized by Mackenzie, in a culture of continuous changes, leaders play a key role in preparing its employees for the change the organization and the environment demands for it to survive. Leaders are thus responsible in steering their organizations to success given any kind of situation and as such must develop the acumen on change leadership.
In a recent Leadership seminar that I attended, Change Leadership was defined as the ability to influence people’s behaviors so that they willingly and enthusiastically work towards achieving common objectives amidst the challenges of rapid changes.
Mackenzies’ call for leaders to embrace and to properly manage change in the workplace is very fitting in this digital age we live in.