Rethinking Leadership.
We live in a post-linear world. The simple hierarchies and order that made sense when access to people and information was limited by geography and social strata have long gone - even though we are stuck with the much of the language and baggage of that ancient order.
In the same way that printed books allowed information to escape the grasp of the church and aristocracy, the internet has made infinite connections possible to, conceivably, every person on the planet. Information was once seen as a source of power ('Knowledge is power') and it was metered out by those 'in the know' - or the cognoscenti.
Today everyone can be in the know - instantly through a constant stream of social media reporting or networks of amateurs curating, testing and sharing data about the human genome or mapping distant galaxies. There is more than enough data to go round - in fact we are swamped with information.
One of the consequences is that even the most expert or experienced individual can no longer be considered 'the smartest guy in the room' when the room is filled with smart phones and connected individuals. A kind of 'father knows best' or paternalistic approach was the model for leadership in business, science and academia. Our society developed a cult of personality around people like GE's Jack Welch or Steve Jobs from Apple and Pixar - visionary leaders who channelled some divinity. The industrial model was a variation of the feudal model. To marshall the resources needed to manufacture massive power generation plants or mass produce electronic goods society made way for the titans.
There have been radical shifts in the last decade. Organisations like AirBnB and Über have grown at stupendous, exponential rates - not only in their customer reach but in their financial value - not based on traditional methods - they don't have armies of people engaged in the manufacture and distribution of complex products. Their non-linear growth has come from the power of networks and the capacity of the organisation to parse the data obtained from transactions to continually improve their capacity for efficiently serving and anticipating their customers needs. Machine learning, deep learning and artificial intelligence are far smarter than any visionary leader descending from the mountain-top with the rules carved in stone. The model is constantly iterated and reiterated in real-time based on what works, what doesn't work and what might work. 'The smartest guy in the room is the room'.
In terms of personal leadership, engaging teams of people to meet a corporate goal even the most traditional hierarchical cultures has learned the value of distributing the load, rather than concentrating authority on an individual with the highest rank.
In the same way that printed books allowed information to escape the grasp of the church and aristocracy, the internet has made infinite connections possible to, conceivably, every person on the planet. Information was once seen as a source of power ('Knowledge is power') and it was metered out by those 'in the know' - or the cognoscenti.
Today everyone can be in the know - instantly through a constant stream of social media reporting or networks of amateurs curating, testing and sharing data about the human genome or mapping distant galaxies. There is more than enough data to go round - in fact we are swamped with information.
One of the consequences is that even the most expert or experienced individual can no longer be considered 'the smartest guy in the room' when the room is filled with smart phones and connected individuals. A kind of 'father knows best' or paternalistic approach was the model for leadership in business, science and academia. Our society developed a cult of personality around people like GE's Jack Welch or Steve Jobs from Apple and Pixar - visionary leaders who channelled some divinity. The industrial model was a variation of the feudal model. To marshall the resources needed to manufacture massive power generation plants or mass produce electronic goods society made way for the titans.
There have been radical shifts in the last decade. Organisations like AirBnB and Über have grown at stupendous, exponential rates - not only in their customer reach but in their financial value - not based on traditional methods - they don't have armies of people engaged in the manufacture and distribution of complex products. Their non-linear growth has come from the power of networks and the capacity of the organisation to parse the data obtained from transactions to continually improve their capacity for efficiently serving and anticipating their customers needs. Machine learning, deep learning and artificial intelligence are far smarter than any visionary leader descending from the mountain-top with the rules carved in stone. The model is constantly iterated and reiterated in real-time based on what works, what doesn't work and what might work. 'The smartest guy in the room is the room'.
In terms of personal leadership, engaging teams of people to meet a corporate goal even the most traditional hierarchical cultures has learned the value of distributing the load, rather than concentrating authority on an individual with the highest rank.
|
“The successful unit—the one best able to accomplish its objective—consists of soldiers who not only have a broad range of skills but know how to learn quickly and respond creatively. Each soldier takes the initiative, every soldier collaborates. While the soldiers will of course obey orders that come down from the hierarchy, the group as a whole has to have the characteristics that enable it to succeed in an environment that changes faster than the hierarchy can respond. Application to marketing. Authority and brand leadership depended on access to the media - when newspapers or TV (owned media) were the main channels for distributing information about brands the cost of distribution made the message scarce and, therefore more valuable. 'Power' resided with the marketer. It gave them leverage over stores - a retailer would be crazy to ignore the opportunity to satisfy the demand stimulated by advertising. The model was inherently top-down. Since the 1990s it has been fashionable in marketing to say that 'the consumer owns the brand'. Of course that notion refers to the perception of the brand. In spite of the brand management's best intentions people will perceive and adapt the meaning of the brand to match their experience of the world. Today's brands are far more reliant on their utility - how they integrate into people's lives. With no control over media - a person looking for a new dishwasher can read product reviews from all around the world to help them choose - means that brands which harness the idea that leadership is an infusion - something separate from the leader - that helps the group to achieve its goals. Consumers who have positive experiences of brands will lead other people to share their choice, they will make blog posts and post videos about their experiences with little tangible reward. They will connect with their social networks. A brand can lose control of the narrative if it clings to the antiquated idea of 'control'. The leadership role of the brand, aside from creating useful, valuable products is to facilitate better experiences for its customers - helping them to achieve their goals - whether it is cooking an affordable, nutritious meal for their family or selecting a new car whose manufacturer's intentions align with theirs about sustainability. In the networked economy people are collectively smarter than any individual or brand. We can't un-ring that bell. But we can shake loose the hubris and vanity of wanting to be the smartest person in the room. It has never been more true that great leaders are dedicated the service of others - Nelson Mandela never sought 'power'. |
Excerpt From: David Weinberger. “Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren't the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the room is the room'
“We now travel through abundance as knowingly as we can, which is to say always within a context and from a standpoint, always with others, always with the amount of care we judge is required, always fallibly. Knowledge has become a network with the characteristics—for better and for worse—of the Net.”
|