Leadership balance in agile organisations

Dr Denise Fleming addresses some of the challenges faced in establishing an agile workplace in mature organisations

Leadership balance in agile organisations
Dr Denise Fleming addresses some of the challenges faced in establishing an agile workplace in mature organisations

How do we adapt? Changes in the nature of work are causing organisations to consider changing the way in which they are structured and the way in which work is managed.
  • Structures – should they be delayered?
  • Silos – should they be eliminated?
  • Should the existing processes be adapted or removed?
  • Should the culture of the organisation itself be modified?
Why adapt?
The focus of agility models being established across the globe by product services companies such as ING is to replicate the success of technology companies such as Google, Spotify, Netflix and Facebook. All were spectacular start-ups when they began their organisations and they are now global behemoths.

Start-ups vs mature organisations
Mature organisations adopting an ‘agile’ organisation strategy face a very different organisational challenge than those that were start-ups. For mature organisations to establish ‘agile’ they need to unravel existing structures and processes and simultaneously build new ones. These changed activities also influence the remuneration, status and number of employees. To be successful, implementation strategies need to take into account the current context, the history of the organisation and the industry, together with the speed with which technology is continuing to change and be adopted by consumers and other businesses.

Leadership teams in mature organisations are adopting an ‘agile, flexible and adaptive’ focus. This aims to increase customer focus and responsiveness, with greater efficiency and effectiveness in making use of new technologies and adapting to the change in the nature of work.

Enormity of the change
Mature organisations may have a long history of great success, with strong market growth and profitability, powerful reputations, respect and customer loyalty. These organisations may have been:
  • structured into divisions
  • operating autonomously
  • part of conglomerates
  • operating in silos
  • fully integrated
  • operating in a global or national matrix
Mature organisations may be well governed, with tight controls over all elements of the supply and value chains, deep human and physical resource capability, and shareholders expecting success and growth to continue unabated.

Applicability
However, Spotify, Netflix and Google were spectacular start-ups, raising the question of how applicable their organisational and work models might be for mature organisations that face significant changes in order to transition into similar agile, flexible and adaptive structures and work habits to those of the tech giants.

When mature corporations are considering implementation strategies to deliver ‘agile’ with changes to the nature of work, they may need to consider alternative and different strategies to those of the behemoths. 

Inherent challenges for leaders
It is possible to explore an agile model from two perspectives: the organisation’s, and that of its leaders. What might leaders need to consider when changing their leadership style to one that is agile, flexible and adaptive?

When the nature of work changes with fast technology and then changes again completely with artificial intelligence and quantum computing, such unknowns will need leaders to be as agile, flexible and adaptive as their technology-driven organisations and customers. Inherent in those changes are significant risks.
  • Agile Quick and light in movement, active, lively, an agile mind (Macquarie Dictionary)
The opposite of agile could be seen as ‘sound and stable’. When applied to governance, values and integrity, leadership needs to be ‘sound and stable’. Soundness and stability can also be helpful in providing clarity – the outcomes of AI and quantum computing may need to be sound and stable too, to enable them to be adopted. An agile leader may be seen to be inconsistent – not a sought-after leadership style or quality.
  • Flexible Easily bent, willing to yield (Macquarie Dictionary)
Again, structures and processes may need to be flexible as new products and services are designed and emerge in industries disrupted by their very emergence. One perception of flexibility can be indecision. So what would happen if the perceptions of a leader shifted from being flexible, in making a new environment, to being seen as indecisive? It is very hard for people to follow an indecisive leader – followers become frustrated and eventually stop following until, in their minds, the leader’s mind is made up. New strategy implementation can falter.
  • AdaptiveAdapt to make suitable to requirements; adjust fittingly (Macquarie Dictionary) 
In periods of great change, history has shown that only those organisations that adapt to the new environment survive. But what happens when leaders who are able to adapt quickly also adapt frequently and are seen as unstable – as markets, changing quickly, need new responses? Can a leader who is perceived as unstable motivate and empower followers – or will followers divert, or block new ideas and decisions, waiting for stability to return?

So which is it to be? How to find the balance?
  • Agile or inconsistent?
  • Flexible or indecisive?
  • Adaptive or unstable?
Implementation will need leaders to be balanced
Many highly successful companies are well managed and controlled; structures are aligned and fixed to clear supply chains and distribution channels, which customers and the community understand. In moving to agile, flexible and adaptive organisational products, structures and processes, balance will be needed to ensure the leadership is not seen as indecisive, inconsistent and unstable.

Why it feels different
It is not as easy to take a mature, successful organisation to an adopted ‘agile’ model as it is for a start-up to do things that new and different technology enables it to do.

Start-ups’ products, systems and processes can be tried and developed further as new technology emerges, or stopped and something different tried if they fail. ‘Try, fail and fail fast’ is the mantra of a start-up. That’s much easier to do if there is no existing market, customer base, suppliers, partners, and balance sheet of assets to be written off. A start-up evolves as it finds its direction, niche and vision – people don’t stay if they don’t fit. Start-ups are funded as high-risk.

Leaders of mature organisations have to take established shareholders and investors on the journey to a new model; their shareholders have expectations of capital and earnings returns to be maintained.

Leadership style key to success
As mature organisations adopt a start-up’s model of ‘agile, flexible and adaptive’ in order to maintain their success, their leaders need to balance their own leadership styles to avoid being seen as inconsistent, indecisive and unstable, particularly by their followers and their organisations’ shareholders.

Only balanced leaders will succeed on this risky, exciting but challenging organisational transformational journey in which the nature of work has changed.

Foresight’s Global Coaching provides executive coaching to the most senior corporate executives across Australia. FGC’s distinguished and highly experienced coaches are supported by a robust coaching model.

Recent articles & video

Ai Group seeks 2.8% minimum wage hike in 2024

Australia's job vacancies fall 6.2% in February

Love and business: Can a break-up lead to unjust dismissal?

Worker claims unfair demotion after temporary supervisor role ended

Most Read Articles

Employer shoots down worker's request for 'mutual separation'

Payroll officer charged for stealing over $1 million from employer: reports

Fair Work: 'Workplace trauma' didn't lead to forced resignation