1. Leadership within Emergent Events in Complex Systems: Jim Hazy & Joyce Silberstang Adelphi University Micro-Enactments and the Mechanisms of Organizational Learning and Change

2. Complex Systems Leadership Definition Leadership emerges from events when expectations are changed with respect to future interactions – Hazy, Goldstein & Lichtenstein, 2007 How does this emergence happen?

3. Posited emergence mechanism Definitions Micro-enactments –individual communicative acts Social Interaction Grammars – Patterns of micro-enactments that convey meaning Programs of Action (PoA) –Provides “collective meaning” for agents regarding responses to stimuli in the environment –Short, medium and long term cooperation strategies with respect to choices, behaviors and norms

4. Table 1. Definition, Properties and Potential Outcomes of Micro-Enactments Name DefinitionExamplePropertiesOutcome Individual Micro-Enactments InitiateSpecific idea, action, or position put forward Communicate idea Advocate action Begin to assert power ActiveOnset of micro- enactment(s) –Idea, action or position begins or is advanced AcceptAccede to others idea, action, or position Receive and/or give information Accept action Validate power Can be active or passive (adaptive learning) Idea, action or position continues as is without resistance Micro-Enactments

5. Posited emergence mechanism Early consensus (no synthesis) i a r n s i a a a a a a Threshold PoA Grammar i i a i a a a a

6. Table 1. Definition, Properties and Potential Outcomes of Micro-Enactments (continued) Name DefinitionExamplePropertiesOutcome Individual Micro-Enactments NegotiateQuestion idea, action, or position Challenge idea Change action Share power Active (generative learning) Direction or outcome of idea, action or position shifts Question/ Synthesize Combine ideas, actions, or positions Innovate idea Redirect action Change/challenge in power Active (transformation al learning) Qualitatively different outcome or direction emerges RejectRebuff idea, action, or position Disagree with idea Refute action Reject assertion of power ActiveIdea, action or position is not accepted Micro-Enactments

7. Table 1. Definition, Properties and Potential Outcomes of Micro-Enactments Name DefinitionExamplePropertiesOutcome Individual / Group Micro-Enactments Recognize/ Imitate Accept/adapt ideas, actions or positions Discuss ideas Imitate actions Accept power shifts ActiveIdeas / actions of others adapted – Group norms & cohesion build Ignore/ Defect Reject ideas, actions, or positions Disagree with ideas Thwart action PassiveIdeas / actions of others rejected – Group schism emerges Micro-Enactments

8. Proposition 1a: Leadership emerges within an identifiable series of discrete micro-enactments, namely it emergences through specific combinations of: initiate, accept, negotiate, synthesize, reject, recognize/imitate and ignore/defect among group members Proposition 1b: Various patterns of micro-enactments form identifiable leadership events; group members attribute the experience of leadership in these events to certain individuals who are associated with the chosen program of action, and they call these people leaders. Propositions Leadership as emergent events

9. i a r n s i a a a a a a Threshold PoA Grammar i i a i Posited emergence mechanism Discussion and synthesis s i a n a s iaaa a r na

10. Posited emergence mechanism Possible nonlinear emergence dynamics at singularities Cusp Catastrophe Swallowtail Catastrophe 2 control parameters3 control parameters

11. Propositions 2a: Leadership events with a greater proportion of initiate, negotiate and synthesize rather than other micro-enactments lead to better, more creative ideas and novel approaches. Propositions 2b: Leadership events with a greater proportion and a higher rate of initiate, accept and recognize/imitate rather than other micro-enactments, relates to more efficient execution. Propositions Exploration vs Exploitation

12. Proposition 3a: A greater proportion of negotiate and synthesize micro-enactments vs. accept & recognize/imitate micro-enactments is more likely to result in higher quality team decisions and enhanced group learning. Proposition 3b: As the number of team members providing negotiate & synthesize micro-enactments increases, the likelihood of obtaining higher quality team decisions & enhanced group learning increases. Conversely, a preponderance of accept and recognize/imitate micro- enactments is likely to lead to lower quality decisions and limit group creativity and innovation. Propositions Group Learning & Decisions

13. Proposition 4a: Emergent leadership, comprised of sequences of the seven micro-enactments, forms the building blocks of group norms and culture which together form a special generalized class of programs of action. Proposition 4b: The greater the number of initiate, accept and recognize/imitate micro-enactments during the early phases of the micro-enactment cycle, the greater the likelihood that group norms that enable organized action and change will develop. Propositions Culture & Norms

14. Coding Observation Data

15. Figure 1. Illustrative graphical representation of a pilot team arriving at consensus at time step number 6 with one defector. Consensus formed around the third program of action (POA 3) that emerged in time step 3. In follow-up questioning to determine attributed leadership, 8 group members indicated that Agent 5 was the “Leader,” 2 identified agent 8, 1 said agent 10 and one did not identify a leader.

16. REFERENCES Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Berkeley CA: University of California Press. Guastello, S. J. (2007). Nonlinear dynamics and leadership emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 357-369. Hazy, J. K. (2007a). Computer models of leadership: Foundation for a new discipline or meaningless diversion? The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 391-410. Hazy, J. K. (2008c). Toward a complexity context for leadership: How a complex systems perspective changes where leaders focus attention and what they do (No. 200801001). Garden City, NY: Adelphi University. Hazy, J. K. (2008). Toward a theory of leadership in complex systems: Computational modeling explorations. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences 12(3) 281- 310. Hazy, J. K., Goldstein, J. A., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (Eds.). (2007). Complex systems leadership theory: New perspectives from complexity science on social and organizational effectiveness. Mansfield, MA: ISCE Publishing Company. Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., et al. (2006). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations (1st ed.). New York: Backwell Publishing.

17. REFERENCES Lichtenstein, B. B., & Plowman, D. A. (2007, Oct 14). The leadership of emergence: Meso-level leadership. Paper presented at the Festschrift for Jerry Hunt, Texas Tech, Lubbock Texas. Marion, R., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2001). Leadership in complex organizations. Leadership Quarterly, 12(4), 389. Panzar, C., Hazy, J. K., McKelvey, B., & Schwandt, D. R. (2007). The paradox of complex organizations: Leadership as integrative influence. In J. K. Hazy, J. Goldstein & B. B. Lichtenstein (Eds.), Complex Systems Leadership Theory (pp. 345-370). Mansfield, MA: ISCE Publishing Company. Surie, G., & Hazy, J. K. (2006). Generative leadership: Nurturing innovation in complex systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization (E:CO), 8(4), 13-26. Uhl-Bien, M., & Marion, R. (Eds.). (2008). Complexity and Leadership Part I: Conceptual foundations. Charlotte, NC: Information Publishing Associates. Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298-310.