Breaking the Zero-Sum Game

Transforming Societies Through Inclusive Leadership

Aldo Boitano, Raúl Lagomarsino Dutra, H. Eric Schockman, Aldo Boitano, Raúl Lagomarsino Dutra, H. Eric Schockman

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781787431867
• eBook ISBN: 9781787432376
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Human Resource Management
• Index: Business

In a world plagued by wicked problems, escaping the win-lose dynamics of zero-sum game approaches is crucial for finding integrated, inclusive solutions to complex issues. In this book, the reader will uncover real-life examples of inclusive leaders that have broken the zero-sum game. From Ivy League colleges to African villages, from the very top of the Catholic Church to anarchist conferences and meetings, inclusive leadership can be applied – and the protagonists will tell you how.
As the examples in the book demonstrate, inclusive leadership is not the privilege of a few gifted individuals with extraordinary human qualities. Inclusive leaders are not necessarily charismatic (like Nelson Mandela, Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, Jr). The vast majority of inclusive leaders are just regular everyday people. They only differ — and what a difference it makes! — in being able to turn what seem to be zero-sum problems into opportunities for inclusiveness.
Including a foreword from Edwin Hollander, a pioneering visionary of inclusive leadership, you will find concrete examples and tools in this book that you can start using from day one (and in your own way) as an inclusive leader.

PART 1
Pushing the Boundaries of Inclusiveness

Introduction

The authors of these chapters show us how the boundaries of inclusive leadership have been expanded past their previous confines — not only in geographic or demographic terms but also in terms of the core ideas and beliefs of what inclusiveness means.

The notions of democratizing leadership and of servant leadership are both tied to inclusiveness and are explored along with examples of the results of their application around the world. The idea of inclusive leadership starting first within a geographic community and then evolving with different views and perspectives into more of a regional and global movement that shares values, a common background, and world view is just one example of how, in the times we live in, ideas and social movements can start anywhere and also reach everyone.

CHAPTER
1

Breaking the Zero-Sum Game: Transforming Societies through Inclusive Leadership

Ebere Morgan

Keywords: Leadership; inclusive leadership; diversity; inclusion; outcomes; benefits

‘Beyond the horizon of time is a changed world, very different from today’s world. Some people see beyond that horizon and into the future. They believe that dreams can become reality. They open our eyes and lift our spirits. They build trust and strengthen our relationships. They stand firm against the wind of resistance and give us the courage to continue the quest. We call these people leaders’

Kouzes and Posner (1995, p. 317)

In contemporary times, rapidly changing demographics due to increase in women and ethnic minorities joining the workforce has incited changes in how organizations address and tackle with diversity and its frameshift processes. Other drivers of diversity across organizational workforce include disability, age, sexual orientation and race. These combine together in creating the need to appreciate both the diversity of our workplace and the world at large, especially in response to the globalization trends in the recent times (Salib, 2014).

Contemporaneously, there exists a strong shift in global economic power from industrialized Western nations to the developing East, along with the increasing population and diversity in countries like Canada, which has created complex social environments. This also has mounted much pressure on leaders to meet their respective organizational goals — while fostering the effective achievement and advancing the development of their constituents at the individual level (Bishop & Mahoney, 2009; Lugg & Shoho, 2006; Salib, 2014).

Scientific researchers and practitioners continue to debate and deliberate on the most effective means of dealing with these resultant changes on all fronts and levels. These range from the macro to the micro social consequences, such as the definition of the terms ‘inclusion’, ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusive leadership’. This chapter attempts to examine theories, models and mechanisms of inclusion and inclusive leadership (IL), as well as the effective implementation processes by which they can be made practical and applicable in organizations.

According to Langdon, McMenamin, and Krolik (2002), labour force projections that predict of greater numbers of women and minorities moving into the workforce, both nationally and globally, have prompted organizations to begin focusing their efforts on managing the effects of this demographic shift.

The Question of Leadership

Leadership has been under intense and rigorous study for the past few decades. Its importance and significance are difficult to overstate. Nevertheless, researchers and authorities do not seem any closer to an agreement on the essential underpinnings and substantive nature of leadership (MacLean, 2008). The nature of both work and the workplace, as well as people and places, has changed drastically (Billett, 2006). The recent state of corporate scandals (Wong, 2002), the increasing diversity of the workforce and the quickening pace of social and technological change require a fundamental rethinking in leadership research (Wong, 2007).

In recent years, leading researchers have dealt on the subject of leadership in various dimensions. For example, Northouse (2007) contends that leadership is ‘a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal’ (p. 3). Bolman and Deal (2008) propose that good leaders have a clear vision, make their expectations known and direct organizations towards attaining desired goals; they must be goal-focused and keep their staff on track, despite distractions that may occur. Although a scholarly consensus on the definition of leadership has proven challenging due to its complexity, researchers, however, conclude that ‘leadership is the ability to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members’ (McShane, 2004, p. 400).

Conversely, Drucker (1993) believed that the quality of product/service and performance of managers are deciding factors of organizational success. Bass (1990), in a study, concluded that 45% to 65% of the total factors that cause success or failure of an organization are decided by leaders. Thus, it is important to note that the leadership style, theory, framework or model adopted by a leader has the key relationship with the success of an organization.

Legends and myths about the characteristic distinctions between ‘great leaders’ and ‘commoners’ have always had a huge magnetic attraction to people and societies. Bass (1990) notes: ‘The study of leadership rivals in age the emergence of civilization, which shaped its leaders, as much as it was shaped by them. From its infancy, the study of history has been the study of leaders — “what they did and why they did it”’ (p. 3). Leadership still fascinates scholars, as well as the general public. However, the term ‘leadership’ means different things to different people. Definitions of leadership vary in terms of emphasis on leader abilities, personality traits, influence relationships, cognitive versus emotional orientation, individual versus group orientation, and appeal to self- versus collective interests (Den Hartog & Koopman, 2001, p. 166). Definitions also vary in whether they are primarily descriptive or normative in nature, as well as in their relative emphasis on behavioural styles (Den Hartog & Koopman, 2001; Den Hartog et al., 1997). For example, leadership is described as the process of influencing the activities of an organized group towards goal achievement (Rauch & Behling, 1984), the influence processes affecting the interpretation of events for followers, the choice of objectives for the group or organization, the organization of work activities to accomplish the objectives, the motivation of followers to achieve the objectives, the maintenance of cooperative relationships and teamwork and the enlistment of support and cooperation from people outside the group or organization (Yukl, 1994, 1998); and in terms of a process of social influence whereby a leader steers members of a group towards a goal (Bryman, 1992).

Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, and Johnson (2011) observe that it is not uncommon for both leadership practitioners and academics to lament the range of definitions that are typically used in the literature to describe leadership. The differences in how leadership has been defined have resulted in disparate approaches to conceptualizing, measuring, investigating and critiquing leadership. For example, some authors have focused solely on the leader to explain leadership, whereas others have examined leadership from a relational, group or follower-centred perspective. To add to the differentiation that has emerged in the leadership literature, other authors have focused on examining leader traits versus behaviours, while still others have drawn from the cognition and affect literatures to explicate leadership and its effects (p. 1165).

Summarily, influence, people, group, goal and objectives are the underlying recurrent themes and concepts that reverberate in leadership theory and research studies (Bryman, 1992; Parry & Bryman, 2006). Nonetheless, far too many leading scholars recognize the reality that the concept of leadership remains in its growing stages and lacks a grand, unifying theory to provide general direction to thinkers and researchers (Burns, 2003, p. 2).

Perspectives of Leadership — A Comprehensive Review

According to Boyce (2006), the quest to classify, catalogue, sort and understand the breadth of leadership scholarship and practice is not new. The works of Stogdill (1981), Kellerman (1984), Bass (1990) and Northouse (2001) represent well-known writings that provide a broad perspective on the theory and practice of leadership, and are frequently cited in leadership literature reviews (p. 71).

St-Hilaire (2008) points out that among the copious literature on leadership theory, several overarching trends can be distinguished, sifted and differentiated. He argues that there is no agreed upon classification among researchers. However, he suggests drawing up a picture of the major trends: An early period, consisting of such well-known theories as Traits Theory, Behaviour Theory and Contingency/Situational Theory; a second period, consisting of Multilevel Approaches; the New Leadership period, which emerged in the 1980s and included both Transformational and Charismatic theories; and finally, Post-Charismatic and Post-Transformational Leadership Approaches, which emerged in reaction to New Leadership theories. St-Hilaire also contends that although the above mentioned approaches are presented chronologically, some approaches (e.g. Leader-Member Exchange, one of the Multilevel Approaches) are still relevant to current empirical and theoretical works (p. 5).

Den Hartog and Koopman (2001, p. 167) suggested that another way to view leadership is in terms of the different domains which leadership encompasses. Most approaches to leadership have been leader-centred. They also observe that one can distinguish between the leader, follower and relationship domain of leadership (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). In all three domains, different levels of analysis (i.e. individual, dyad, group or larger collectivities) can be the focus of investigation in leadership research (e.g. Yammarino & Bass, 1991).

Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) propose that leader behaviour, characteristics and their effects are the primary issues of concern in the leader-based (leader-centric) domain. A follower-based (follower-centric) approach would lead to hypotheses focusing on follower issues such as follower characteristics, behaviours, and perceptions or topics such as empowerment (Hollander, 1992a, 1992b; Meindl, 1990). Further, a relationship-based model takes the relationship between leader and follower as the starting point for research and theory building. Issues of concern are reciprocal influence and the development and maintenance of effective relationships (e.g. Bryman, 1992; Den Hartog & Koopman, 2001; Graen & Scandura, 1987, p. 167).

Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity has become a topical research theme in the recent past. Initially, it was dominated by a focus on the ‘problems’ associated with diversity, such as discrimination, bias, affirmative action and tokenism (Shore et al., 2009, 2011). Nevertheless, this research area has and continues to spawn numerous significant and insightful body of knowledge through empirical research undertakings (Jackson & Joshi, 2011). Interestingly, as the diversity field of study continues to evolve, researchers have adaptively poised themselves and focused on ways in which diversity may enhance work processes and organizational mechanisms that promote the potential value in diversity (Gonzalez & DeNisi, 2009; Homan et al., 2008; Shore et al., 2011). As set forth by Cox (1991) and his views on the multicultural organization, there exists a strong measure of consistency with scholars and their bid in researching ways to incorporate and integrate diverse individuals in organizations (Thomas & Ely, 1996). One of such emerging research efforts is directed towards creating work environments where people of diverse backgrounds feel included in social and organizational settings (Bilimoria, Joy, & Liang, 2008; Roberson, 2006; Shore et al., 2011).

According to Roberson (2006), the concept of inclusion has been nascent in the organizational literature for the past decade, with comparable avenues of research occurring earlier in areas such as social work and social psychology. However, while this concept has recently gained mounting recognition, as yet, inclusion remains a fairly new concept without consensus on the nature of this construct or its theoretical underpinnings. This crucial lack of consensus hampers the utility of inclusion, both theoretically and practically (Shore et al., 2011, p. 1263).

As earlier indicated, research on diversity and its extensions has concentrated on understanding both positive and negative outcomes associated with ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Part 1 Pushing the Boundaries of Inclusiveness
• Part 2 Trials of Breaking the Zero-Sum Game
• Part 3 Spiritual Inclusiveness
• Part 4 Inclusiveness and Diversity in Higher Education
• Part 5 Inclusiveness in the Field
• About the Authors
• Index