Here I ponder how one could move beyond the management and leadership concept of learning in a non-hierarchical organisational setting such as networks or MOOC. John Spencer says in this post I don’t want to manage my class:
Leadership is messy. It takes longer. It is often more confusing, more painful and more counterintuitive than management.
I shared John’s belief, and that leadership relates principally to relationship, and how one could influence the others through a combination of powers, affection, touch of feelings and understanding of emotions, through empathy and resonance.
I have posted the following quotes with comments in the post:
1. Leaders must exemplify the expected standards of behavior – wow, that is the tribal approach, sure! The tribal leader would determine what standards of behavior would be praised, rewarded, amplified, or show as an exemplary to all followers, or would declare such behaviors as the heroic action in the tribal manifestation. Magnificent motto!
2. We must engage emotionally with students in their world – wow! Are leaders emotional counselors or “manipulators” of their students? Of course students are emotional humans, just like their teachers. So what is the role of the teacher in their students’ emotional journey?
3. Teachers and principals themselves are sometimes actors. What sort of actors? Why? How to act?
To me, the whole of education leadership lies with the building and sustaining of relationship in between agents, actors, entities, networks and communities. This would take connections and connectivity to new dimensions – which would relate to people psychologically, mentally, and may be spiritually. This stems from ideas shared among the agents (leader – followers, or everyone being a leader and follower), where information and knowledge are remixed and shaped by each individual to make sense of the interaction and ideas shared.
Leadership in essence is coming into understanding or co-forming of certain beliefs that would reinforce one’s existing experience (both leaders and followers), or leading each others to new and novel experiences in life.
This sort of leadership is emergent in nature, in that it evolves out of the interaction, based on deep reflection of one’s rooted beliefs, and challenges one to re-think about the philosophy often adopted towards certain fundamental concepts. Jenny’s post discussing about the philosophy of MOOC is a great example illustrating the importance of emergent leadership, when open educational practice is practiced by the “leaders” in a course of network.
I will continue to explore this in Part 2 of a series on management and leadership.
Stephen provides a wonderfully crafted post where I would like to re-post it below:
|Management||Leadership||That something else better that isn’t management or leadership|
|Authority||Based upon title||Based upon earned trust||None; offers an example which may be followed or not|
|Questions||Questions are viewed as a threat to authority||Encourages questions to develop an ethical understanding||Asked frequently|
|The Framework||Procedural||Relational||Engaged and connected|
|Rules / Boundaries||Based upon conformity||Based upon an ethical, philosophical concept||Based on respect for others|
|Procedures||Standardized||Personalized||Adapted as needed|
|Innovation||Discouraged if it challenges the status quo||Provides a vision that inspires others||Secondary to creativity, freedom and exploration|
|Submission||Forced: based upon a fear||Voluntarily: submitting to another’s strengths to protect one’s weaknesses||There is no submission; exchanges are mutual and of mutual value|
|The Results||Behave externally but rebel internally (or when no one is looking)||Empathetic, ethical thinkers who want to do what is right||Cooperative environment populated by creative and expressive individuals who see respect for and service to others as the highest good|