Select Learning Organizations?

Introduction

To gain a pragmatic understanding of the practice of transformational leadership in an adult world, this study provides a link to transformational learning that involves a new way of knowing, or what Mezirow calls a new frame of reference which can be discomforting. According to Sill, Harward, and Cooper (2009), a disorienting dilemma is the first step in transformation and that transformation in any learning organization occurs at all levels. Literature suggests that there is an important connection between transformational learning and developing leadership. For example, Bellas investigated how transformational learning experiences affect leadership capacity and found a significant positive relationship between the two (Madsen, 2010). According to Mezirow, transformation leads to alliances with others of like mind to work toward effecting necessary changes in organizations and systems, each of which requires a different mode of praxis (as cited in Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007, p. 135). There are few periods in history that deserve the label of transforming eras and there are even fewer transformational leaders. Kanter (1983) describes a transformational era as a time that experiences significant change that warrants a major shift that is more extensive and more far-reaching in its implications that ever confronted before. This review of literature tells us that a transformational leader is one who defines what the future should look like, one who aligns people with that vision, and one who inspires to make it happen despite the obstacles (Kanter, 1983; Kotter, 1996).

This type of leader is one who understands that the transformational process involves crystallization of new action possibilities (new policies, new behaviors, new patterns, new methodologies, new products, new market ideas) based on re-conceptualized patterns in the organization (Kanter, 1983; Kotter, 1996). Transformational style of leadership behavior is constantly being studied in order to improve ideas and thoughts intertwining with situational, organizational and behavioral based theories. The problem is that most leaders have no history or legacy to guide them through the transformation process (Kotter, 1996). This paucity generates a disorienting dilemma that causes leaders to not act in change efforts within their organization; thus, no learning occurs. Therefore, this particular case study is a commitment to fill a void in the understanding of the execution of a transformation by “walking in the shoes” of two transformational leaders who epitomize such leadership.

The point of view of two transformational leaders examined for this study is that they openly communicated about the big dangers and the big opportunities involved in the transformation, and willingly acknowledged they had the responsibility to ensure people did not panic but rather willingly and enthusiastically become engaged in the process. The need to be creative in thought, disruptive, future-focused and experimental in nature is seen to be at odds with traditional notions of thinking; thus, a disorienting discomfort occurs.

Liedtka (1998) explains that strategic thinking is the ability to think in terms of a holistic view, focus on intent, think in time, and the ability to be intelligently opportunistic. That was exactly what the subjects in this study did – they integrated strategic thinking ability into their intentional purpose of moving their organization through the transformational process. Though these two leaders come from different backgrounds, different industries, and different leadership credentials, this study identified four competencies exhibited by both leaders: a) created a sense of urgency, b) envisioned a new vision, c) were the catalyst for a culture shift, and d) used strategic thinking throughout the process.