Knowledge and Leadership: The Power of Sharing

We have all heard the saying that people do not care how much you know until they know how much you care.? Once people (especially students) recognize that you do care, then the needle of interest moves over to how much you know.? Beyond establishing that you care enough and know enough, the needle moves again to your communication style effectiveness and your leadership qualities including exuberance – an output expression and measure of your internal enthusiasm for a topic or trend. So how do we improve both our knowledge and the leadership skills we need to express and share our knowledge and inspire younger baton carriers for peace, wisdom, and planetary survival?

Leadership Achievement Factors

?Connelly et al. (2000) explore the relationship between knowledge and leadership performance. They analyze problem-solving skills, social judgment, and “leader knowledge” as factors that affect leader achievement (p. 81). Connelly et al. compare their study with a similar study of Army civilian leadership published by the Management Research Institute (MRI) of Maryland in 1997. This MRI study of Army civilians noted that “personality and motivation” are critical success factors (p. 84). Van Hoose (1999) cites several indications that the U.S. Army has become increasingly reliant upon technology and civilian knowledge and leadership but needs to recognize and react to this change in a fair and equitable manner with balanced attention paid to soldiers and to civilian workers. Van Hoose describes several improvements in the Army’s inclusion of civilians in the view of organizational leadership such as the renaming of Army Field Manual 22-100 in August 1999 to “Army Leadership” instead of “Military Leadership” (p. 42).

Interestingly, the March 2011 Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC) final report specifically mentions that the “civilian workforce” was not within the scope of their study (Military Leadership Diversity Commission, 2011). The literature about Army leadership does not consistently include the civilian factor in the equation. Another group that is often excluded in the military and governmental realms is the contractor workforce element, which is in general growing in size and influence but often excluded in programs such as mentoring interns (often a shortage of mentors) or reviewing documents that might be perceived as potentially crossing boundaries such as conflicts of interest (despite Non-Disclosure agreements and other controls).? Paradoxically, the report does mention the “illusion of inclusion.”

Tacit Knowledge

Hedland et al. (1998) identify and explore a construct they call “tacit knowledge for military leaders” in a collaborative report written for the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (an Army Research Institute – ARI report). The Hedland team tested over 500 officers on three leadership levels: platoon, company, and battalion command for their 1998 report. Hedland et al. (2002) explored tacit knowledge in a second collaborative ARI report by connecting tacit cognition with practical experience while examining how leaders acquire expertise from experience. Hedlund et al. (2003) in an article for ScienceDirect’s Leadership Quarterly explore tacit knowledge further in a subsequent ARI study with an analysis of how the construct influences effectiveness. These tacit knowledge studies and other Army Research Institute studies probe the functioning and leadership development of Army officers at increasing levels of command with progressively larger groups of subordinates. Comparable studies of civilian (or contract) leaders in the U.S. Army are not easily located. Perigo (2008) examines the challenges of a second career for workers, primarily executives, over age 50. Perigo focuses on the baby boomer generation. Her study has relevant applicability for civilian workers in the U.S. Army as many are former military leaders who find a second career in the same Army organization, but without the uniforms, salutes, physical fitness requirements, and in most cases without the overseas deployments or even the long-term training requirements or opportunities. Baby boomers populate both the military and civilian groups in the hybrid Army community with high percentages of retirement eligibility (Dohm, 2000). According to Dohm, by 2018 “all but the youngest baby boomers” will be eligible for retirement (pp. 24-25). Now in 2023, as we look backward and forward, many of the baby boomers leading the Army and other organizations in the first two decades of the 21st century have retired or have well known or well-hidden plans to retire soon.?

Sadly, COVID and other life hurdles have ended many baby boomer careers without the anticipated idle years out to pasture or out to the nearest or farthest away golf course.? The “elephant in the room” question is how well or how poorly have the baby boomers been training and imparting knowledge to younger generations.? Exacerbating and extending this question is to ask how well have large organizations such as the military organizations and Government agencies recruiting and retaining a younger workforce.? On a positive note, “retirement eligibility” does not necessarily mean imminent retirement.? Unlike the military “up or out” pyramidal structure for military officers and similar “high-year tenure” programs for enlisted members, the civilian workforce is generally self-directed regarding longevity and transitions to retirement. Contractors similarly can navigate from one contract to another when possible based on their performance and their contract company.

Learning at the Heart of Any Organization

Building on the ARI studies and the Perigo study, our mid-level leader analysis explores knowledge leadership and the civilian generational gap in the U.S. Army (generalizable to other organizations). Sadler-Smith (2006) emphasizes that “learning is at the heart of organizations” and that learning leads to power to change an existing context and to “create new contexts” (p. 2). Sadler-Smith also focuses on the relationships between leadership and learning, education and training, and the lifelong quest for ever-increasing knowledge. Perhaps of most significance, Eugene Sadler-Smith explores the concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) – a model of learning that emphasizes the collective and collaborative aspects of education. The Army Civilian Training, Education, and Development System (ACTEDS) provides for a career progression from intern to specialist to supervisor to manager to executive, but research participants (for my dissertation) consistently commented on problems with the execution of this career progression. For a discussion of training gaps and limitations, see Chapter 4, Data Analysis and Results of Piellusch (2011).? Now, in 2023, ACTEDS seems to be performing at a higher ZPD level but lessons learned are worth revisiting.

Makaron (2006) explores a hierarchy of needs similar to Maslow’s hierarchy (Maslow, 1968, 1999). Makaron points out that humans have the potential to develop beyond the drives for food, sex, and family to the driving needs for “riches, fame, power, and knowledge” and to the highest level need of less self-centered “spiritual desire” (p. 282). Makaron describes the reception of knowledge in terms of the hierarchical levels. In other words, if one is motivated in life primarily for acquiring monetary wealth, then the acquisition of knowledge will focus on and basically remain at this monetary level where the individual acquires the knowledge necessary to achieve monetary ends. Makaron describes the highest level of knowledge acquisition as philosophical, spiritual, or Kabbalistic. Most observers agree that members of the military profession, uniformed or civilian or contractor, pursue their profession based on motives beyond the monetary and believe in lifelong learning. This observation is reinforced by the Army Field Manual on Leadership (FM 6-22), which specifies a dedication to “lifelong learning” as one of the recommended ways to master the “core leader competencies”; this includes preparing the “self” with knowledge and psychological readiness for leadership roles (U.S. Army Headquarters, 2006).

Knowledge Management

Pauleen et al. (2007) explore the role of knowledge management in 21st century organizations along with the related trend of virtual teams – teams linked by project management requirements across geographic distances. The trend of working on virtual teams was gaining traction pre-pandemic.? During the COVID-19 pandemic virtual teamwork became a need to have rather than a nice to have and virtual teamwork is now the new normal in the post-pandemic days.? Retired General Dennis Reimer (1996) succinctly states the importance of a leader to not only know his or her job, “but to strive to be the best” in his or her respective field,” (p. 5).? The very term “knowledge management” is fairly new but one can even get certified as a Knowledge Manager. According to RealKM.com, the concept was basically created in the early 1970s, but like many business concepts and social trends, the concept took a few decades to catch on and gain traction (surging around the turn of the century).

Hatten and Rosenthal (2001) wrote one of the early books on the topic entitled Reaching for the Knowledge Edge: How the Knowing Corporation Seeks, Shares & Uses Knowledge for Strategic Advantage (published by AMACOM). Hatten and Rosenthal make the business case for Knowledge Management sometimes simply called KM with terms such as “knowledge edge,” the “knowing corporation,” and “strategic advantage” as prominent key words in their title.? Similar terms with parallel development have been “knowledge worker” and information management.

Practical Applications

One of the most notable intersections between knowledge research and application can be found at the more than 20 Kellogg Research Centers.? Hatten and Rosenthal (2001) focus on the business applications of KM and as noted above emphasize the competitive and strategic advantages of knowledge acquisition. They actually focus on various convergent aspects of KM such as geographic and cultural as well as fields of discipline such as technical, marketing, and product development. Academia and industry have been at polar positions on the career continuum in earlier decades and centuries; however, terms such as the scholar soldier and Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO) have elevated the KM concept while also emphasizing the inherent complexities and potential contradictions and related paradoxes.

Related to KM are the thinking skills needed for practical effectiveness.? Jones (1998) has written a classic book entitled The Thinker’s Toolkit: 14 Powerful Techniques for Problem Solving. All fourteen methods are beyond the scope of this mini-essay, but two techniques stand out as relevant to the KM discussion: Divergent/Convergent Thinking and the Utility Matrix. Before diving into a discussion of the 14 thinking skills, Jones provides a background discussion entitled “Why We Go Astray”; essentially, we rarely analyze how we think and often neglect to examine our biases and our knowledge gaps; we also rarely analyze how we solve problems.? The Divergent/Convergent Thinking technique involves genuine divergent brainstorming (without jumping in to nix creative ideas and creativity) and then a convergent process of winnowing and clustering the collected ideas.? This process when pursued correctly reminds me of the favored Army War College approach of VUCA ? recognizing and embracing the Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity in many situations and crises.? A related Navy War College focus has been on the fractals, exponents, and logistics of Chaos Theory (James, 1998). The utility matrix is another familiar technique within Army and industrial organizations.? The matrix can be 2x2, 3x3, 4x4, or even more complex.? The 2x2 SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis is a well-known and very useful example. Jones (1998) ends with a discussion of "Where Do We Go From Here."

Concluding Thoughts

The most valuable and efficacious leader may well be the humble servant leader who emulates an intangible and somewhat invisible brand of leadership, a selfless goal-oriented team member performing a mission larger than self. Humility is paradoxical, however; a caring leader needs cognitive skills and adequate and ever-increasing knowledge to recognize that he or she can always learn more; however, learning and teaching are companion activities for the genuine leader. The insecure individual in a leadership position is less likely to share knowledge as he or she might tend to hoard knowledge rather than harvest knowledge among team members. Leadership has both an internal reflection based on learning and an external expression based on a willingness and a desire to share learning and spread knowledge rather than stifle the natural process. The leader must desire to be influential and cultivate a presence, but not be consumed or corrupted by positional or personal power. The effective leader produces results based on values, skills, a love of learning, and an established trust based in part on a sharing of knowledge.

References

Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K. V., Marks, M. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2000). Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 65-86. https://www.sciencedirect.com/leaqua

Dohm, A. (2000). Gauging the labor force effects of retiring baby-boomers: MLR Superintendent of Documents. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2000/07/art2abs.htm

Hatten, K. J. & Rosenthal, S. R. (2001). Reaching for the knowledge edge: How the knowing corporation seeks, shares & uses knowledge for strategic advantage. AMACOM.

Hedlund, J., Horvath, J. A.; Forsythe, G. B., Snook, S., Williams, W. M., Bullis, R. C., Dennis, M., & Sternberg, R. (1998). Tacit knowledge in military leadership: Evidence of construct validity. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

Hedlund, J., Antonakis, J., & Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Tacit knowledge and practical intelligence: Understanding the lessons of experience. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Hedlund, J., Forsythe, G., Horvath, J., Williams, W., Snook, S., & Sternberg, R. (2003). Identifying and assessing tacit knowledge: Understanding the practical intelligence of military leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 14(2). 117-140 doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00006-7

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1048984303000067

James, G. E. (1998). Chaos Theory. The Newport Papers of the Naval War College.

Jones, M. D. (1998). The thinker’s toolkit: 14 powerful techniques for problem solving. Three Rivers Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=oYojFVG7UqgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Thinker%E2%80%99s+Toolkit:+14+Powerful+Techniques+for+Problem+Solving.&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwit4NG8wPOCAxXIGFkFHadMBFsQ6AF6BAgMEAI#v=onepage&q=The%20Thinker%E2%80%99s%20Toolkit%3A%2014%20Powerful%20Techniques%20for%20Problem%20Solving.&f=false

Makaron, L. (2006). Practical conditions for revealing Kabbalistic knowledge. World Futures: The Journal of General Evolution, 62(4), 282-290. doi:10.1080/02604020600637239

Maslow, A. H. (1968, 1999). Toward a psychology of being. John Wiley & Sons. https://books.google.com/books?id=jcKbDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Toward+a+psychology+of+being&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitzrfh-PGCAxXVFFkFHSduBRwQ6AF6BAgEEAI#v=onepage&q=Toward%20a%20psychology%20of%20being&f=false

Military Leadership Diversity Commission. (2011). From representation to inclusion: Diversity leadership for the 21st century military. Military Leadership Diversity Commission.

Pauleen, D. J., Corbitt, B., & Yoong, P. (2007). Discovering and articulating what is not yet known: Using action learning and grounded theory as a knowledge management strategy. The Learning Organization, 14(3), 222-240. doi:10.1108/09696470710739408 file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Discovering_and_articulating_what_is_not_yet_known.pdf

Perigo, J. (2008). Winners in the second half: A guide for executives at the top of their game. Jossey-Bass.

Piellusch, M. J. (2011). A Comparison of Leadership Styles for Mid-Level Uniformed and Civilian Leaders in Selected Offices of the U.S. Army [doctoral dissertation]. Argosy University. https://www.academia.edu/37396749/A_COMPARISON_OF_LEADERSHIP_STYLES_FOR_MID_LEVEL_UNIFORMED_AND_CIVILIAN_LEADERS_IN_SELECTED_OFFICES_OF_THE_U_S_ARMY

Reimer, D. J. (1996). Leadership for the 21st century: Empowerment, environment, and the golden rule. Military Review, 76(1), 5-9.

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military-review/Archives/English/75th-Anniversary/75th-PDF/75th-Reimer.pdf

Sadler-Smith, E. (2006). Learning and development for managers: Perspectives from research and practice. Blackwell Publishing https://www.google.com/books/edition/Learning_and_Development_for_Managers/

U.S. Army Headquarters. (2006). FM 6-22: Army Leadership: Competent, Confident, and Agile. U.S. Army Headquarters

Van Hoose, D. (1999). Army civilian leadership training ÷ past, present and future. Military Review, 79(3), 42-46. https://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/index.asp

Image of Knowledge Power from Insead (above)

Here's a link to a discussion of strategies for effective test taking (a KM skill):

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/test-taking-strategies-michael-j-piellusch-ma-ms-dba/?trackingId=dtbxQoHuSeG38X0L%2FDXKNA%3D%3D