Dear Alfredo,
Thank you for your letter. At first I thought it was addressed to me, but since you've addressed the whole list, I'll respond generally as well. If my notes have been "long and tedious" (litany) my apologies. The model I use in Level Three Leadership originally came out of the work of Ed Schein and others on cultural analysis: visible artifacts stem from intangible rituals stem from underlying assumptions and beliefs. Levels One, Two, and Three. I do believe that groups of people develop collective habits which we can call cultures or traditions or "the way we do things." Csikszentmihalyi's analysis of this in The Evolving Self was, I thought, brilliant, perhaps the best book I've ever read. So my thinking clearly stands on the shoulders of many others. I'm (simply?) extending and applying in business situations.
I see these patterns arising at several levels (from broad to narrow): human, global region, nation, national region, city, neighborhood, family, and individual. In my experience people most want to emphasize and spend their time in the mid ranges discussing and arguing and fighting about how they are different from them. I believe that if we'd spend more time talking at the extremes about how we are all alike as humans and all unique as individuals the level of conflict in the world would decline. The odds of that happening on a wide spread scale are admittedly low, and I choose to spend my life and career working on that with my students and clients.
I believe also that executives have VABEs (values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations about the way the world is or should be) that dominate and shape their behavior. Some of these are based in global regional or national cultures. Some are based in corporate cultures. If the underlying assumption is that only people like us, no matter where they come from, know how to run a good business, then yes, you'll get multi-nationals hiring locals that look like them. It's a natural thing, research shows, to choose who are similar to you.
I also see a limited few ways to get people to change their behavior. I cluster these into three main groups: Level One Techniques, Level Two Techniques, and Level Three Techniques. Historically, Level One Techniques have been the most popular among politicians, militants, and managers. The Renaissance encouraged us all to use more Level Two Techniques-rational thought, reason, data, logic, etc. Level Three Techniques, including visioning, have tended to be the style of modern religious leaders and I say more enlightened business leaders. We all use all three clusters of influence tools, but in different proportions. In my experience, Level Three Techniques have tended to be the most powerful. Many if not most executives eschew Level Three Techniques for a variety of reasons.
SO, it seems to me that underlying, semi-conscious, usually unexamined VABEs are the basis for most managerial behavior. I try very hard to get my students and clients to bring up to consciousness and then to re-examine their underlying VABEs and to begin to consider discarding the dysfunctional ones. Most people are unwilling to do this. They, habitually, prefer to continue believing what they believe. Again, Csikszentmihalyi's question, "will you ever be anything more than a vessel transmitting the genes and memes (VABEs) of previous generations on to the next?" is the key question. THE key question. Most managers and executives reinforced by their new positions of authority and responsibility carry on as they have. Hiring locals that look like themselves. The challenge for all of us therefore is to help people learn to examine their underlying VABEs when they are no longer defenseless children. That is the essence of mature adulthood, I'd say. Otherwise, tribal warfare and executive exploitation will abound around the world. The rare few transcenders (Csiskszentmihalyi's term) are the true leaders in the world. All of this draws on Csikszentmihalyi, Schein, Glasser, Ellis, Object-Relations Theory, Anthropology, Psychological development, management, evolutionary psychology, organizational behavior, and other related fields plus my experience and observation.
Does this help? Forgive me if it's too long and tedious.
Jim
James G. S. Clawson
Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business Administration
Darden GSB, University of Virginia
Box 6550, Charlottesville, VA 22906
100 Darden Boulevard, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA
Tel: 434 924 7488 Fax: 434 243 7680
Web: http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj
From: Organizational Behavior Division Listserv [mailto:OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Behrens
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 8:34 AM
To: OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
Subject: Re: self-assessments / A DIFFERENT VIEW
Dear Jim,
I have been reading with interest your courageous litany on habitual thinking. By your choice of geographic areas in turmoil (Indian subcontinent, Ireland, etc.) it looks like you would go as far as stating that not only individuals but whole societies may fall into an unconscious, habitual, behavior. You may be right and that may be why stereotypes arise.
Furthermore, the sharing of codes that habit breeds should make locals more effective leaders of their own flock. If this were so, expatriates or headquarter appointed bosses at subsidiaries would tend to make poorer leaders at subsidiaries than locals would.
If this were are rule why would multinationals continue to incur into the same costly error of choosing local bosses that behave like headquarters ones, when local ones should be more effective leaders of locals? Would habit explain all we need to know for an answer?
Respectfully yours,
Alfredo Behrens
IBMEC São Paulo
On Feb 10, 2008 8:00 PM, Clawson, Jim <ClawsonJ@darden.virginia.edu> wrote:
Dear Charles and Ivan,
My experience has been dramatically different from yours. In my six decades it seems that people are largely creatures of habit. I've explored this question with over 1,200 managers worldwide and the by far dominant perception among managers is that people tend to be habitual (unthinkingly repetitive) at the 75% level at Level One (visible behavior), 85% level at Level Two (conscious thought), and 95+% level at Level Three (semi-conscious values, assumptions, beliefs and expectations about the way the world is or should be). Clearly some things change in our lives, and our some of our values may adjust or migrate... I assert that there are these more superficial changes like waves on the surface and then the more enduring patterns like the Gulf Stream underneath. Genetic identicalness is not the issue-the development of enduring patterns is. Developmental psychology asserts, I believe, that many if not most patterns are in place by age 6-10. There is ample evidence for this in the world-the number of conflicts, for example, that continue generation after generation without any underlying broad rationale. Pick your place: Ireland, Yugoslavia, Central Africa, Indian sub-continent, China, Japan, US, Central America, anywhere... these patterns/memes keep getting passed down from generation to generation. They dominate the global stage today.
Additional data to support the notion of human habituality lie in the number former students who took the original Self Assessment and Career Development course (or its variations) in which the concept of Life Themes was introduced (and won awards), who 2, 5, 10, and 15 or 20 years later report that their themes lists are largely (mostly) unchanged. The problem lies in over-interpretation, over reliance on too few instruments, and an inability to think inductively to recognize patterns. All of these things are pitfalls for managers, by the way, so we believe that teaching students to find patterns in a multitude of data sets and make high stakes decisions based on them is perhaps the best preparation they can get in business school. A related problem is that more and more in the video game world, students don't want to/won't invest in a more careful self analysis. This is of concern to me.
I'm pretty clear/convinced that after taking all of these instruments and more, and decades of therapy off and on, and thousands of students/clients of various ages and regions and backgrounds, that people tend to be habitual. I see this in myself as well despite living in several places abroad, learning different languages, changing religions, and moving across the nation several times. Csikszentmihalyi's challenge, will you ever be anything more than a vessel transmitting the memes and genes of previous generations on to the next? seems to me to the single most important question in life. In his estimation and I agree, the answer for the vast majority is no.
What could be more important for any individual regardless of occupation or intent than to learn with some rigor and depth some time before they die who they are what therefore they might be well suited for? This seems to me to be the single most important question MBA/EMBA students and frankly client participants face and struggle with.
Respectfully,
Jim
James G. S. Clawson
Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business Administration
Darden GSB, University of Virginia
Box 6550, Charlottesville, VA 22906
100 Darden Boulevard, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA
Tel: 434 924 7488 Fax: 434 243 7680
Web: http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj
I'd like to add to Ivan Blanco's very perceptive statement. What we need to keep in mind is that of all the billions of people that have lived or continue to live on this planet no two people have ever been genetically identical. Even identical twins are not completely identical. Therefore, no individual can look at the same social context (or anything else for that matter) and see it exactly the same way as another individual. Thus, assessments "pigeon hole" people which makes them so dangerous.
Cheers,
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: self-assessments
Dear Colleagues,
Our abilities and capabilities change over time. What we are today may not be what we are tomorrow. Education, experiences, maturity, and other processes change us over time. What is the true benefit of these self-assessment tools? I have been put through t-training, marriage counseling, the Myers Briggs and others during the last 30 plus years, and I still don't know what those things had done for me. Do they really help the students? Or, do we want to believe they do? Do we know how many students we might have driven away from many good things in their lives with these self-assessment tests? What if we do more harm than good? I am convinced that most of those assessment tools are even dangerous in the hands of highly trained professionals. Honestly, what good do they do if we have the students for only one semester and cannot do any type of follow on what happens to them in the long-term? (No sales pitch, please!) Is it our responsibility to expose them to professional or technical know-how or to engage ourselves directly in their emotional development as individuals?
In my more than 40 years of involvement with organizations (as employee/manager, student of organizations and as a teacher) I have learned that not everyone can be "saved" and that in many situations we are not well equipped to do so.
Sincerely,
Ivan
Dr. R. Ivan Blanco
Department of Management
McCoy College of Business Administration
Texas State University - San Marcos
San Marcos, TX 78666
Phone (512) 245-1842
Fax (512) 245-2850
rb39@txstate.edu
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The trouble with other cultures is that the people don't behave the way they're supposed to, that is, like us. The solution to this difficulty is not to expect them to." Craig Storti, The Art of Crossing Cultures (1990).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Las naciones marchan al termino de su grandeza con el mismo paso que camina su educacion.
Nations march toward their greatness at the same pace as their educational systems evolve. Simon Bolivar
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
________________________________
From: Organizational Behavior Division Listserv on behalf of eric larsen
Sent: Sat 2/9/2008 3:38 PM
To: OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
Subject: Re: self-assessments
Dear Those Interested:
My initial response on this matter was in part because I myself had once underestimated just how seriously some students can take these assessments. Upon some reflection, I would have expressed my initial e-mail in this thread differently. My, somewhat alarmist, response was in part meant to encourage further thought in the one or two future self-assessment users whom also might not appreciate the potential impact of these self-assessments and to encourage "our" caring and highly engaged involvement with our students through these processes.
Both James G. Clawson and Robert F. Hurley have demonstrated seriously focus in these matters. For my part, I consider these two individuals to be among those worth looking to for the lead in this matter.
Cordially,
Eric C., T. E., Larsen
________________________________
> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 18:59:14 -0500
> From: ClawsonJ@DARDEN.VIRGINIA.EDU
> Subject: Re: self-assessments
> To: OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
>
> I agree heartily w/ Eric's concern and that's the reason why we counsel our students (all FY MBA students did this for the last three years) that no single instrument is accurate enough or comprehensive enough to hang your hat on. Only when patterns recur in multiple data pools do we begin to "believe.". We also assert that the strength of each subsequent insight or life theme can be assesed by the volume of data, the number of instruments, the volume of disconfirming data (who has none?), and the quality of the logic relating each datum to the indeced theme label.
> Respectfully,
> Jim
> --------------------------
> James G. Clawson
> Sent using BlackBerry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Organizational Behavior Division Listserv <OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu>
> To: OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu>
> Sent: Fri Feb 08 17:16:28 2008
> Subject: Re: self-assessments
>
> Dear Those Interested:
>
> Not that anyone is not being sensitive enough, but because it is not known how people might take this thread, I offer the following:
>
> As a graduate student I got handed the enviable task of providing feedback on about 1,800 (yes 1,800) reflection papers based on self-assessments. The sample doing the reflecting was comprised of MBA students and this process took place over a four year period. Please beware the casual use of any self-assessment assignments, be they "off the shelf", "packaged for profit", or in some other way handled by technology that might not account for 100% of individual differences in classifying individuals (n.b., does not leave any tools I am aware of). Serious focus on what individual students are taking away from these self-assessment experiences is warranted. Academics are often undercompensated for their time, and while I thus understand the interest in leverage and scalability, please remember that these students are real people who have come to us for growth and in some cases help. I am not saying "do not use these tools." I am asking that you realize the potential of underestimating the power of these tools and take appropriate precautions as such.
>
> Cordially,
> Eric C., T. E., Larsen
>
>
> Scholar and Faculty
>
>
>
> Department of Management
>
> School of Business
>
> SUNY: University at Albany
>
>
>
> School of Business and Technology
>
> Endicott College
>
>
>
> Department of Management
>
> Bertolon School of Business
>
> SalemState College
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:32:55 -0500
> > From: aneil.mishra@MBA.WFU.EDU
> > Subject: Re: self-assessments
> > To: OB@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
> >
> > I haven't read all the postings on this thread, so I apologize if I'm
> > repeating material that others have suggested. I did have the time to read
> > Jim Clawsen's posting, and I wholeheartedly agree with trying to help
> > students find patterns across different assessments. I'm a big fan of MBTI,
> > use the StrengthsFinder 2.0 assessment (Gallup), FIRO-B, and the Competing
> > Values framework and assessment developed by my mentors Kim Cameron and Bob
> > Quinn at Michigan along with their colleagues. I've used all quite
> > successfully individually, but the real power (and validity I believe) comes
> > from finding intersections across these different instruments which are
> > based on theories or empiricism that are quite different from one another.
> >
> > I look forward to reading the rest of these postings on this thread.
> >
> > Aneil Mishra
> > Wake Forest U.
> > MBTI Type: ESTP
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now! <http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008>
________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Learn more. <http://biggestloser.msn.com/>
--
_______________________
Alfredo Behrens
www.alfredobehrens.com
+55 11 38280554
Melhor livro de negócios, confira:
http://epocanegocios.globo.com/Revista/Epocanegocios/0,,EDG80930-8378-11,00.html