Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky suggest that they often observe leaders working to solve adaptive challenges with technical solutions – a potential mistake for leaders who often feel the pressure from constituents to solve the problem for them. Adaptive challenges have no easily identifiable solution. In fact they can be difficult to define. They are messy. It’s kind of like Einstein’s suggestion that “we can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” So how can we tell an adaptive challenge from a technical challenge? Here are a few clues…with technical challenges the problems can be clearly defined and solutions are clear as well. There is a fix. For instance, there is a technical solution for a flat tire. However, adaptive challenges require learning, and the solution often lies within the stakeholders. In addition, the work is experimental and as a result, may cause disequilibrium or work avoidance. What is work avoidance? This letter to the editor from the New York Times may exemplify one person’s opinion. Be aware though…technical and adaptive challenges can be bundled. For more on this topic, check out Leadership on the Line. – SJA

This week’s posts are dedicated to my time in Boston last week (see yesterday’s post for more information). One of our facilitators, Michael Johnstone (click on the link and scroll down for his bio), made a comment that had a great impact on my thinking about leadership.  Here goes…as many of us know, the concept of self awareness permeates the literature on leadership development.  However, Michael suggested that there are many levels of awareness.  For instance, awareness at a systems level is just as important for anyone in a leadership position. Simple enough…right? After all, the ability to observe system/group norms, patterns, values, power structures, etc. makes a lot of sense.  However, it is very difficult to do. We learned this first hand last week. Not only does a leader need to keep their own shop in order, s/he needs to be mindful and aware of dynamics at other levels. In the end, simply discussing “self-awareness” over-simplifies the complexities at play. Other than Heifetz, Linsky & Johnstone, I am not aware of individuals thinking about leadership and awareness at the self, group & systems levels. Do you know of anyone? – SJA

I am still reflecting on the amazing week I spent with 65 colleagues at Harvard University. It was one of the most powerful learning experiences I have had in a week-long learning format. Where to start? First, the case-in-point learning methodology was pretty amazing. For those of you who would like to learn more, check out Leadership Can Be Taught by Sharon Parks. The text highlights an interesting approach to teaching leadership. In addition to the learning methodology, we examined adaptive leadership theory – much of which can be found in the book Leadership on the Line. All week I will be highlighting a concept related to the two themes listed above. For now, check out the firm started by Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky – Cambridge Leadership Associates. If you are looking for a challenging, engaging, and transformative learing experience, pencil in The Art and Practice of Leadership Development for 2008. – SJA

I cannot tell you how excited I am right now! In a few hours, I jump on a plane and leave for The Art and Practice of Leadership Development. A week long executive education course put on by the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. As a result, I will not posting for about a week. However, if you are new to the CLD blog, scroll down and on the right hand side you will notice the “archives” header. Click on the dates below and you will find all kinds of cool resource and tools for anyone interested in leadership development. Have a great week everyone! – SJA

If you are looking for a quick clip to help you explain the concept of teamwork and/or continuous improvement this clip may be an option. Check out this Honda commercial. It really is amazing. According to the website, there is no CGI used and “it required 606 takes and cost $6 million to shoot and took 3 months to complete.” – SJA