A Viable Alternative to Top-Down Dysfunction

Introduction

In prior articles, I have often referenced monarchy-based management models and their inherent dysfunction, which cascades down into the organization despite the employees' best intentions and efforts to work collaboratively for the overall good of the organization. We also see recent evidence of this dysfunction with whistleblower news accounts regarding ‘management’ and the compromises made in safety for higher margins.

However, we have also witnessed the triumph of a remarkably effective alternative. My alma mater, the University of South Carolina Lady Gamecocks, recently concluded a flawless season, clinching the NCAA Division One National Women’s Basketball Championship. This victory is a testament to the power of circular leadership principles, consistently demonstrated by Coach Dawn Staley and her team (Lady Gamecocks).

Circular leadership emphasizes equality, interconnectedness, shared responsibility, and accountability toward a common goal. It is just that: a circle amongst peer team members who all have a role to play in achieving an overall goal for the benefit of all. Circular leadership is a communal approach, a more holistic and inclusive decision-making process.

In contrast, monarchy leadership models are hierarchical and individualistic, focusing on growing silos of power, position compensation, incentives, and rewards as one moves up the hierarchy. This model often eliminates people who can be great team members and leaders because they value who they are and desire to continue to grow and develop, but not at a price it may place upon their integrity.

A circular model is the best organizational and leadership model for our best future. In my experience, the circular leadership model works in multiple beneficial ways.

Circular Leadership

Don Coyhis of White Bison gave me my first official introduction to the circular leadership model in the mid-1990s when we both participated in a Native American leadership conference. Don taught that Native Americans envision life as one great, interconnected web.

The connections between various parts make a top-down structure seem inappropriate. All team members must recognize how their cultural belief in the world's interconnectedness affects their leadership.

The circular leadership model can be divided into four interdependent areas. The first is the character, a good person's moral compass and ideals. The moral compass and ideals have four core traits: respect, integrity, responsibility, and humility.

The second area is identifying and knowing one’s purpose. One’s purpose can change and evolve based on one's character's core values. The third area is community, which requires communication, transparency, and unity to reach a common goal. A critical part of communication is active empathic listening, which requires continual practice.

The fourth area of the circular model is excellence. Excellence in this area refers to assessing our character, purpose, commitment to the community, and the community’s well-being. Excellence is also having the insight, wisdom, and humility to seek advice or help when needed because none of us are as smart as all.

I identified with this successful leadership model because I played team sports throughout my youth and into college. A good team is an interconnected web of players who all have position assignments, know their purpose, and value the community that is the team. Yet, each player is also willing to step up and become what is needed when it is required for the benefit of the team. The introduction of this leadership model early in my career became my reference model for building consulting practices and delivery teams.

The biggest challenge for organizations and leaders adopting a circular leadership model is recognizing that what they perceive as power has been only a force through organizational and individual manipulation.

Power Versus Force

Psychiatrist and consciousness researcher Dr. David R. Hawkins authored a radical, thought-provoking book called Power vs. Force. It is one of my favorite reads and provides practical approaches for tapping into our creative genius, mastering emotions, surrendering gracefully, and leading with authentic power rather than force.

Leading with authentic power emphasizes that one is rooted in genuine influence, integrity, and empathy rather than coercion or manipulation. Authentic power is derived from the four interdependent areas of circular leadership and the resilience to remain steadfast in those areas when facing adversity.

Adversity can take many forms and be handled in different ways. In the article “An Example of Top-Down Dysfunction,” I provided a real example of how top-down monarch-based models can corrupt well-intentioned individuals. In this example, the managing partner also criticized me for valuing my integrity too much. I was unsure how to respond to such a critique other than to have compassion for their conditioned critique. They were conditioned to lead by force, which relied on positional authority, coercion, manipulation, and fear.

We see that same fear-based coercion now with multiple whistleblowers exposing safety issues resulting from leaders whose individual incentives and measurements do not align with the organization's and their customers' overall health and well-being. Consider the opportunity cost of losing revenue and new customer orders due to coercing management to cut corners, personnel, etc., for higher quarterly profit margins for shareholders. That is leading by force.

Conclusion

Shifting from a top-down, force-based leadership model to one that is circular is not that challenging from an organizational structure perspective. A circular leadership model can reduce layers of management and overhead costs. The biggest challenge in shifting to a circular model of leadership is culture.

Shifting this culture, where the position has a higher value than the mission, becomes even more critical the higher up the organizational structure one goes. The criticality is that those leaders have been conditioned by years of force-based models imposed by education, majority stockholders (including investment firms), stock analysts, and board members often appointed by the majority shareholders.

Moving to a circular-based model requires courage to step outside the conditioned paradigm we were all educated within. According to a circular leadership model, courage requires authenticity, empowering others, innovation, advocacy for fairness, and ethical decision-making, even when faced with pressure to compromise (amongst other traits).

Initially, courageous circular leadership requires little energy but much faith. However, acting with this faith has a positive rippling impact that inspires others to act with integrity, empathy, purpose, and courage for the overall well-being of the team, the organization, and the community. As this rippling impact occurs, it has been my experience that faith transmutes to knowing and the results are organizationally and financially rewarding.

Knowing how powerful this circular model is has helped me help client organizations succeed in their transformation efforts (when and where they have allowed it). This is an introduction; follow-on articles will provide real examples of circular leadership.

I would like to know your own experience with this type of model. Please remember that none of us are as smart as all of us. Thank you