executive leadership in loosely coupled organizations
TRANSCRIPT
EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP IN
LOOSELY COUPLED
ORGANIZATIONS
Mimi L. Zemmelman, Ph.D.
Purpose of the study
Espoused beliefs of leaders in 4 courts and 4 hospitals:
What it takes to form and sustain an effective leadership coalition
What their organizations can do to support the leadership team’s success.
Considered through lenses of organizational theory and organizational systems theories
Why does this inquiry matter to court and hospital leaders?
1. The public wants fair and user-friendly access to justice and healthcare
2. The public wants trustworthy, cost effective, and transparent institutions
3. Social and economic climates are extremely dynamic
4. Few LCO leaders have training or experience in coalition leadership
5. Core professionals struggle most to collaborate across disciplines
6. Leadership coalition members enter and exit at different times
Definitions:
Tightly coupled organization
Loosely coupled organization
Multiple hierarchies
Core professionals
Leadership coalition
If there is responsiveness without distinctiveness, the system is tightly coupled.
If there is distinctiveness without responsiveness, the system is decoupled.
If there is both distinctiveness and responsiveness, the system is loosely coupled.
(Orton and Weick, 1990, p. 205)
Hierarchies are brilliant systems inventions, not only because they
give a system stability and resilience, but also because they reduce
the amount of information that any part of the system has to keep
track of.
In hierarchical systems relationships within each subsystem are
denser and stronger than relationships between subsystems.
Everything is still connected to everything else, but not equally
strongly.
(Meadows, 2008, p. 83)
Administrative, professional & support staff
CEO
Tightly coupled organization
Presiding Judge, Chief Medical Officer
Court Executive Officer, Chief Medical Officer
Administrative, professional & support staff
Leadership coalition
Loosely coupled organization
Loosely coupled organizations are densely networked & permeable
Success of leadership coalition is predicated on a partnership within the
“heterarchy of hierarchies” (Stephenson, 2009, p. 3)
Interdependent, semi-autonomous hierarchies (neither can deliver signature services without cooperation of the other)
Core professionals often identify more with profession than with host organization
Core professionals’ ability to perform job can only be assessed by similarly trained professionals
Strengths of loosely coupled organizations:
Adapt to a knowledge-based economy
Foster creativity and experimentation with change
Resilient in the face of rapid change
Support increasing specialization among the professions
Dampen the impact of failed initiatives launched in one part of the organization
Allow subordinate groups to maintain hierarchies headed by those with similar skills
(Banathy, 1996)
Weaknesses of loosely coupled organizations:
Difficult to navigate
The organization has reduced ability to exert influence or control over its subordinate units (especially core professionals)
Inherent tension between the core professionals’ drive to convene and deliver organizational resources one case, customer, or patient at a time and the administrator’s need to achieve economies of scale as a way to maximize limited resources
(Fusarelli, 2002)
Leaders’ perceived challenges:
The existence of strong ties and allegiances outside of the organization
The different and disparate skills and abilities of individuals in different subordinate groups
The existence of multiple hierarchies within the organization
Prevailing tensions between achievement of economies of scale and customization of services to match individual needs
Findings based on participant responses:
Leaders know their organizations are loosely coupled
Alignment within leadership coalitions and organization is critical
Critical to value each other’s role, responsibilities, and skills
Core professionals need lots of help to understand administrative issues
CEOs (more than core professionals) cannot favor any constituency
Core professionals must view their work as part of a larger whole
Recommendations from organizational theory:
Develop and focus on shared goals
Help subordinate groups value each others’ contribution
Expedite the integration of core professionals in administrative issues
Build power-sharing and collaborative decision making skills
Implement leadership succession planning initiatives
Increase ways consumers can help maximize organizational goals
Strengthen core professionals’ “investment” in the organization
Recommendations from organizational systems theory:
Vary the strength of organizational coupling
Strengthen internal networks
Integrate external networks productively
Embed learning organization principles (Senge, 1990)
Construct fractal leadership models (Wheatley, 1999) throughout
Tightly Coupled Organizations Loosely Coupled Organizations
Governance
Organizational and resource allocation decision made by a single individual (may or may not be subject to ratification by a board)
Regardless of qualifications of named figurehead, governance resembles a coalition of leaders from distinct and semiautonomous subordinate groups
Leadership Structure
Single hierarchy reporting to a single career CEO
At least two identifiable, semiautonomous subordinate divisions, each with its own hierarchy: core professionals rotate leadership by peer election every year or two; administrative and operational services are appointed to career positions
Decision-Making
Single individual with full authority over all decisions (may or may not be subject to ratification by a board)
Single individual with substantial input and cooperation of leadership coalition (may or may not be subject to ratification by a board)
Accountability
Most organizational employees are accountable only to the CEO and host organization (as long as those required to maintain a license do so)
Core professionals are accountable to their host organization as well as to their licensing boards or professional association and whatever external appointing authority (legislatures, governors, voters) may exist
Conclusions:
The differences between loosely coupled and tightly coupled organizations are significant, so leadership mindset and strategies must be adjusted
Many, if not most, leaders in loosely coupled organizations have had little preparation for coalition leadership
Core professionals find it hardest to “work across the professional divide”
Leaders need not bear full responsibility for their coalition’s success, organizational structures can and should be arranged to help
References: Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York, NY,
Plenum Press. Fusarelli, L. D. (2002). Tightly coupled policy in loosely coupled systems: Institutional
capacity and organizational change. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(6), 561–575.
Meadows, D. (2009). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Solutions for a sustainable and desirable future, 1(1), 41–49. Retrieved from http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/419
Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203–223.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
Stephenson, K. (2009). Neither hierarchy nor network: An argument for heterarchy. People and Strategy, 32(1), 3–7.
Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Kohler.