CICS Weblogs

Renaissance Times: Information and Communications Policy brings Controversy

I'm working on an Op-Ed piece on network neutrality policy.
This is also the issue of Internet metering.
This is also Quality of Service versus Class of Service.

It's an economic issue.
It's a technical issue.
It's also ideological when it comes to
information and communications policy.

The answers in this policy swamp
aren't always clear,
but that doesn't lessen
the vehemence of the arguments.

I write:

"Sensing impending regime change,
the market fundamentalists are turning into market jihadists."

This means that economic ideologues,
encountering the forces of real change,
are turning toward aggressive attack tactics
to overcome their opposition.

The times, they are changing.

These are renaissance times,
with clashing paradigms and perspectives.

Unified Communication

Unified communication is a technology that brings call features, messaging functions and multimedia under one roof.

May 27….Do you know where all your bloggers are?

I’m up trying to put together a few slides for a class that I help with occasionally, and I happened to stumble upon this CICS World site. Where’s everybody at?

"Attitude is (almost) Everything"--Steve Bell commencement speech

Veteran news anchorman and media professor Steve Bell
was awarded an honorary doctoral degree in May 2008 from Ball State University,
where he taught for many years.

In his commencement remarks (he said he threw away his prepared speech),
Bell offered some cogent advice to the assembled faculty and graduates of Ball State's
College of Communication, Information, and Media.

Here are four major points I took away:

Learning to be an Information Renaissance Leader

In reading Frydman, Wilson, & Wyer’s book, The Power of Collaborative Leadership, (2000, Butterworth-Heinemann), I had the following thoughts as I read the section on Seventh Learning: No Single Path in Chapter 9, Leadership: An Inquiry and contemplated its relevance to us as Information Renaissance Leaders.

The Information Renaissance Leader and the Knowers in a Process

The following are thoughts based on reflections on parts of Brown & Duguid’s book, The Social Life of Information (2002, Harvard Business School Press, pp. 120-129) and my own experience.

In business today I see an increasing emphasis on defining “business processes” as a knowledge capture method. While these business processes deal with how information is handled and used what I find is, and have even heard stated, the intent is to minimize the “human element” so things get done “right”. However, I think there is a fundamental flaw in this approach. I believe Brown & Duguid say it well when they note “focusing on processes draws attention away from people”. Also, when I think of Dr. Jay Gillette’s quote “Information is Knowledge in Motion” I want to add “only when it is moving through people”. As Information Renaissance leaders I believe we need to understand this and work to make our information processes embrace the “human element” by making them “people-focused” and “knowledge-focused”. Brown & Duguid indicate that by doing this the attention is turned away from the process and instead the focus becomes on the “knowers”; i.e., the people with knowledge. Also, as the business environment becomes more complex, both because of the increasing amount of information available and due to the quick and discontinuous changes that can occur in the business world, people are who adapt and not the process. If the process adapts this is because people gained the knowledge to know the process needed to be changed. This is because a business process is designed based on “know that” which is different from “know how” as Brown & Duguid point out. “Know how” is people practicing what they know and this is why focusing on just the process leads to potential problems in today’s dynamic business environment. Being able to recognize this and bring the focus to the “knowers” in the process is one of the challenges we have as Information Renaissance leaders of the 21st century.

LEADERSHIP THROUGH COMMITTEE

Leadership is all about HAVING A VISION and motivating people to share that vision and work towards achieving the goal set. But there should be only ONE VISION. The lack of a clear and a singular vision will most likely result in bad alignment, fragmented efforts, and personal agendas driving the organization, instead of the best interest of the customers and the organization. Having a recognized vision will encourage confidence and promote trust within the organization.

Combined Theories and Class Discussion (Leadership Versus Management Models)

ICS 655 Leadership Class
Transcribed on 1/16/2008
Combined Theories and Class Discussion

Leadership Versus Management By Characteristics And Models

Leadership Characteristics:
• Passionate
• Welcome Change
• Has Followers  Following beyond obligation
• Enlightening
• Praxis Oriented
• Inspirational
• Utilizes Conflict
• Proactive
• Visionary
• Long term/Preventative Problem Solvers
• Encourage
• Risk Takers

Management Characteristics:
• Tend to Avoid Conflict
• Has Subordinates  Following because they feel obligated or benefit personally
• Directs
• Organize
• Objective
• Acute Problem-Solving
• Welcome Stability
• Practice Oriented
• Active

Management/Leadership (L&M) Models Produced By Class Discussion

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

L-CI-SUI Solution: A Business Model Using Leadership, Competitive Intelligence, and Strategic Uses of Information

Abstract

L-CI-SUI is a bundled solution that can be used to enhance any business, or blossom a good idea into a successful company. Leadership (L), competitive intelligence (CI), and strategic uses of information (SUI) is a universal solution to any type of problem a business may face. This is like a universal cure for every illness in today’s world that anyone from a medical specialist to a sick child’s mother could use. This bundled resolution involves three main concepts that, when combined just right, can benefit an organization or business monetarily, structurally, and even enhance the workforce moral. My theory consists of two key elements, Leadership and Competitive Intelligence, merged together with an adhesive which is termed Strategic Uses of Information.

Introduction

Leadership, competitive intelligence (CI), and strategic uses of information are all key aspects involved in a universal business model. Leadership styles, methods, and processes are essential for any business or organization to prosper. Leadership in general is needed in just about any instance where there is more than one person working towards the same or a similar cause. Competitive intelligence is an all encompassing continual system that is needed for an organization to contend ethically and successfully with common market rivals. Using information strategically blends with the first two concepts in that both leadership and competitive intelligence will not function effectively or efficiently without using beneficial pieces of information tactfully. I will briefly describe each concept, and then describe further how they are interconnected with each other.

Leadership

Leadership is the foundation of any successful business. The majority of organizations and businesses today started with a vision. Normally it is an individual who starts an idea, and then he finds friends or family to help support his idea, goal, or intended outcome. In the beginning, people are not “following” him for the foreseen riches that laid ahead for them. There is some kind of positive energy, influence, charisma, or common vision between him and those who chose to follow his footsteps. Joshua Cox, a colleague of mine, believes that the real understanding behind a good leader is to concentrate on the followers. In his leadership theory, he focuses on the relationship between the followers and the leader, but mainly views the characteristics of the followers instead. Instead of what makes the leader lead, what makes the followers follow (Cox, 2008)?

Cox has a very democratic view on leadership. This style of leadership involves leaders that are chosen by the people for the people. Thomas E. Cronin, a former White House Fellow, however believes passionately that not only should the followers have the say in who the leader is, but that a leader and the followers both can have qualities of a leader. What is a leader without followers? Also a leader could potentially rise up out of the “follower” group to emerge and lead his or her own movement of followers. Cronin thought that followers should be referred to as citizen-leaders which he believed wasn’t as demeaning as the term “follower” (Wren, pg 306).

Steve Lunsford, another colleague of mine, concentrates on organizational leadership. He believed that culture was the key to leadership. Everyone has a common goal, but they also seem to have similar or even the same cultural values (Lunsford, 2008).

It is a fact that we have dealt with historical influences, as well as cultural changes that directly affect leadership models that are now considered to be outdated. These theories are referred to as “contingency” theories, which need to be more dynamic in nature to deal with the constant change of the world’s society today (Wren, pg 246).
I believe that leadership theorists should concentrate on behavioral studies as well. Analyze leadership from every angle you can, and that is when you can really start to capture the essence of leadership. A leader, to even be considered a leader, has to be viewed in a specific light by the followers.

What type of characteristics or qualities account for this consideration by a potential follower. According to Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard , leader- behavioral theorists, the term “”Consideration” refers to “behavior indicative of friendship, mutual trust, respect, and warmth in the relationship between the leader and the members of his staff”” (Wren, 1995, p. 145).

My theory on leadership concentrates on influence. A leader influences others in some way, shape or form. If someone can manifest a decision in someone else’s head, that person is some sort of leader, or has magical powers, which is highly unlikely.

Competitive Intelligence

Competitive Intelligence (CI) is a continually evolving system that involves gaining foreknowledge on competitor’s potential marketing schemes before they have a chance to pitch them. In essence, a business can use this information to their advantage by not only deploying this possibly winning sales pitch first, but also if time prevails, add value to the marketing plan converting the competition into minor rivals. This is just my personal take on the concept after researching it. There is a lot more to it than that, but for all purposes in combining three incredibly important ideas to form a powerful conceptual entity capable of turning a good business into a flourishing business (Blenkhorn & Fleisher, 2005).

It was described in short the best when Arik Johnson stated that “CI is the purposeful and coordinated monitoring of your competitor(s)” (Johnson, 2000).

CI is an entire network of competitive observations done in marketing, planning, and R&D functions of an organization or business (Prescott & Miller, 2001, p. 4).

This is a perfect solution for any business, but especially those who are just starting and want to create an elite business plan. The elite business plan is the combined efforts of CI, Leadership, and Strategic Uses of Information.

Strategic Uses of Information

If it has not already been made present, the article material on leadership and CI promote the act of using information strategically. Information that is not used tactfully is poorly managed knowledge. So, in order to use information effectively, there needs to be some sort of knowledge management present. The actual conceptual view of leadership and CI already uses information in an intelligent and constructive manner; however there is an extra concept that could be included in the bundled set to ensure an elite business plan called knowledge management. Jay Edwin Gillette, a CICS (Center for Information and Communication Science) doctorial professor, states that information is knowledge in motion (Gillette 2000).

Knowledge management is an intricate part of leadership and competitive intelligence when pertaining to my personal theory on a universal business model. Since knowledge management is equivalent to information used strategically (as mentioned earlier), then strategic use of information would already be present inside the first two concepts, which means the third concept is a binding agent that makes the entire model work.

Conclusion

In conclusion, leadership is the first key to a successful business or organizational model.
There needs to be guidance, motivation, influence, and discipline within starting a company. Once a company is established, or even before it is, it is essential to have competitive intelligence. Leadership is consistently essential, but this is the aspect of the bundled model that is normally the stepping stone to a business. Sink or Swim….Float with Leadership. Both leadership and CI will fail without the strategic use of information. This is constant within the two funtions. There is not a timeline for the third concept, but instead a timeless entity that is always present only when referring to the other two concepts. Using information strategically is what binds Leadership with Competitive Intelligence to produce something greater than a business plan or company model. These concepts are bundled fibers of success when used in connection with each other towards a perceived outcome or common goal.

References:

David L. Blenkhorn and Craig S. Fleisher, eds. (2005). Competitive Intelligence and Global
Business. Oxford: Praeger Publishers Greenwood Publishing Group.

Jay Edwin Gillette. (2000). “Information is Knowledge in Motion’: A Practical Framework for
Understanding Knowledge Management.” Unpublished. Center for Information and Communication Sciences.

Arik R. Johnson. (2000). What is Competitive Intelligence?. Retrieved April 2, 2008,
from http://www.aurorawdc.com/whatisci.htm

John E. Prescott and Stephen H. Miller. (2001). Proven Strategies in Competitive Intelligence:
Lessons from the Trenches. Washington, D. C.: Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 36: The Historical and Contemporary Contexts of Leadership:
A Conceptual Model. New York: Free Press.

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 41: Leadership and Demoacracy. New York: Free Press.

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 25: Behavioral Theories of Leadership. New York: Free Press.

Joshua Cox. (February 28, 2008). Leadership Theory. Retrieved April 2, 2008,
from http://www.cicsworld.org

Stephen Lunsford. (March 5, 2008). Organizational Leadership: Group Accomplishment through
Outstanding Culture. Retrieved April 2, 2008,
from http://www.cicsworld.org

Computer Dox Business Model: My Personal Combination of Competitive Intelligence, Leadership, and Use of Information in a Strategic Fashion

Introduction

I have been fixing computers since the eighth grade, and continued building my technical knowledge from then on. I have also devoted myself to the development of professional communication skills. Until recently, I didn’t realize the importance of combining technical skills with the art of communication. Leadership, competitive intelligence, and strategic uses of information are the key to success for any upcoming entrepreneur. By using these three important facets, I was able to develop a successful business model. Through personal experience, and acquired knowledge, I will explain how each of these concepts proved to be useful when taking a risky plunge into the technical consulting industry.

Leadership Starts the Business Building Process: Tech Time

Leadership is essential to starting any business idea or model. This is the foundation of all businesses, because it is method of taking a vision, and capitalizing on it. In order to be a leader, others (those who wish to follow) must share a common goal or idea.

I have enjoyed simply helping family and friends, and I have developed a passion for learning everything there is to know about computers. I was intrigued by how they not only aide everyone who comes into contact with them, but how they network information. Unfortunately, they do not provide aide for everyone at all time due to occasional malfunctions. This is true for any electronic device, and if all computers worked the way they were supposed to, then there would be no basis for a business to cater to the problems created by computers themselves.

I truly started gaining knowledge in information technology when I had to take a business class in high school. We were required to participate in a mentorship of any field of our choosing. I chose computers since it was a hobby of mine. I studied under a man by the name of Jim Swift, who was the network administrator for Yorktown High School. He taught me how to talk to people on a technical level, but still speak the same “language.” This is critical to any computer repair or technical consulting company. It doesn’t matter how much you know if you cannot relay that knowledge to anyone else because you constantly talk “over their head.” A client or customer will believe you are very knowledgeable if they can understand what you actually did in order to fix their problem. Otherwise, once their computer is repaired, they won’t have any idea what you did to fix it. They also won’t know if you actually did anything that was remotely difficult or required research. The more a technician discusses, explains, or even teaches a client while at the same providing a solution to their problem, only then can a professional, yet still somewhat personal, relationship can be built. If client feels as if the technician actually cares about their issues, the client will be more inclined to recommend that technician to someone else, and become a returning customer.

These characteristics hold true for a successful businessman, but they also pertain to a good leader. A leader needs to be understanding, respectful, and at the same time devoted to better standards for followers as well as customer satisfaction. A leader needs to be influential, yet not overly demanding so that the follower has a choice in following, and the leader is still in charge, but not a tyrant. There needs to be a happy medium in every aspect of leadership. Everything needs to be within moderation, which will not only yield a successful leadership style, but a booming business plan as well.

When it came to computers, I had a simple vision of helping people who needed it. When I took my existing knowledge to Ball State, and continued in a major which would further my technical expertise. I then started working at a computer consulting service for students titled Tech Time. It started out with just two technicians, and I was one of them. We worked out of a student lab in the Robert Bell building, and had to provide our own tools, and we were very limited on what we could and couldn’t do for the very few students that knew about the service. I quickly moved up the ranks, while pushing for better advertising, a budget in order to purchase tools and hire/train technicians, strategic use of the Microsoft agreement Ball State had for the students, and Tech Time over time became incredibly popular. I became supervisor, and because of the work I had done for University of Computing Services (UCS), a graduate assistantship position was created in order to keep me working there (Tech Time could be thought of as a subsidiary of UCS).

I brought on technicians who were not originally technicians. The art of leadership in Tech Time involved recruiting individuals who had personality and excellent communication skills, and then teaching them the technical aspect. Personality can’t be taught, but technical skills can. In short, Tech Time became a hotbed for upcoming computer solutions for end-users (a.k.a. students). This service was also free, which made the work very gratifying for both the technicians and the students that were receiving the help.

I met with important UCS officials and pushed for further hardware and software support that wasn’t originally available for Tech Time clients. This not only made Tech Time prosper as a business, but also gave Tech Time recognition by the UCS executive professionals in terms of great professional service that could be provided by Ball State.

Tech Time has now grown over 700% in clients, technicians, budgets, and a service within a couple of years. The important aspect of this is that if I could use my leadership and business building skills for Ball State, I could more than likely put together my own business using the same techniques that made Tech Time so popular.

Because of the leadership I displayed, my professionally trained senior technicians wanted to do more outside of Tech Time. They wanted to continue learning, and this made it possible to create what is now known as Computer Dox.

These technicians saw my personal vision, and quickly jumped on the band wagon. I had been doing computer repair work for years, but one man cannot serve the increasing clientele that I had acquired through years of the same type of technical/customer service style that was exemplified through Tech Time. I now could use the same technicians that I had trained, and have them help me outside of a student-only service.

Competitive Intelligence Became Present After The Initial Leadership: Computer Dox

I have now briefly described how Tech Time grew into a booming business, even though it was free for students. Now I will concentrate how this technology driven service turned into a prospering business outside of the college atmosphere.

B.J. Deering, author of KM (Knowledge Management) for competitive advantage: mining diverse source for marketing intelligence, believed that data gathering from competitors could be used in strategic decision making and that any type of data gathered could be used to better understand the customer and competitive activities used in making a business prosper (Bellaver & Lusa, 2001).

While working in Tech Time, my trained technicians and I were able to hear horror stories where competitors such as Best Buy, Circuit City, and Computer Renaissance were over charging for the same service, and not actually fixing the problems in a satisfactory manner for the students. Not only did they not resolve the issue, but they did not seem to care about the client. If a customer feels as if they are actually cared for, they are more inclined to believe in the service itself as a whole. Tech Time fixed the computer directly in front of the client so that they could see exactly what we did. We were in constant communication with the client so if they wanted something done, it could be done immediately. This is quite different than when a client leaves their computer with Best Buy, because once the computer goes to the back room, there is no telling what the technicians are doing with the computer or the sensitive data that is contained the customer’s computer. Tech Time worked with the client first hand, and explained what they were doing to the client’s machine while they were doing it. This teaches the client about their problem, and at the same time that particular problem is getting fixed. The client can also ask questions at any point in time which builds a personal, yet still professional relationship which is essential to the business.

This is a great example of identifying competitor’s mistakes within their service, and what we, as a similar business could improve upon those errors in the system. From that we could yield a richer service. This is part of the competitive intelligence process. We were already improving the service, but now we can go farther than before using competitive strategizing.

With all of this acquired knowledge, I took the technicians that were now already trained, and made them a part of my personal business outside of Tech Time, utilizing the business and leadership styles that made Tech Time so successful. Since I was the one who essentially developed Tech, it was easy for me to continue the process strategically for my own use. This business has become known as Computer Dox (compdox@gmail.com).

Strategically Using Information For Beneficial Growth: Computer Dox

Now that I have enough technicians to serve to my established clientele/client base, Computer Dox can bloom much like Tech Time did over the past few years. This experiential process uses the knowledge I gained through my college studies. UCS had already implemented an organized way of keeping up with professors and staff through the use of service tickets. Tech Time concentrated on students, but Compdox needed a way to organize and delegate consulting service requests.

I took UCS’s ticket system, and incorporated it into the Compdox business model. We created a Gmail account (A email account provided by Google that contained a large amount of space, 6 Gigabytes). Ball State’s email accounts at most for staff maxes out at 100 megabytes, and gmail was providing 6000 megabytes. This was perfect for not only acting as a service contact via email, but also big enough to contain client status documentation and act as a collaborative community or knowledge base.

Gmail has a label system so that emails can be tagged and separated based on categorical labels. We created different labels such as “New Jobs,” “Forums,” “Pending Jobs,” “Completed Jobs,” and “Knowledge Base.”

UCS’s ticket system worked differently than an email system. For example, a professor would call the Help Desk, another part of UCS, and complain about their computer not working. A ticket would be generated with the professor’s name, contact information, problem, and comment section. This ticket could then be viewed by any UCS employee, and when updated, the original ticket information stayed, and with the updated status added. This process continued until the ticket would be closed or completed.

I discovered that this wasn’t any different than emailing your own email account and replying to your sent-to-yourself email. This may sound confusing, but allow me to break it down. A client sends a service request to compdox@gmail.com. We first tag this email under the categorical label “Original Service Requests.” They, by using the ‘compose’ feature on gmail (compose a new email) we create a profile email with a brief description of the problem and what the client wants to have done. This email includes, in a organizational format, the client’s name, contact information, the problem, a possible proposed solution, status, and the name of the technician working on it. This composed email has the original email copied and pasted into it, but this is not necessary in the beginning. The email is then sent to compdox@gmail.com. We sent an email to ourselves! If multiple technicians have access to the account, then every technician can see the job request in a neatly put together format. The email is then tagged under the label “New Jobs.” We are essentially using the ticket system.

Once one of my technicians/consultants go out to the job site, and perform repairs, scans, or diagnostics, afterwards, the email created under the categorical label “New Jobs” is updated. The update process is rather simple, and yet ingenious. The technician replies to the email which immediately creates a copy of the original email, and provides a space to add a update. It is a simple reply. The only difference is that instead of replying to someone else, we are replying to ourselves, and the email is sent to use with the updated information. We then delete the original “New Job” email, and tag the replied email under the catergorical label “Pending Job.”

Once this process is continued, we have timestamped status updates that are accessable by all the technicians. If a client calls, and as an inquiry on their status, we actually can look up their status, see what was done to it over time because of the replies, and tell them when the email was updated, and what is going to be done next. This is the ticket system that UCS uses, only it is jerry rigged, and free. No crazy programming is involved to create this system. Instead by strategically using the information in front of us, Compdox can do the same thing at a cheaper cost and still maintain the same functionality that made UCS’s ticket system so great. I would say this is Strategic Competitive Intelligence which is a combination of the last two concepts (Leadership, Competitive Intelligence, Strategic Uses of Information).

Conclusion

This is a simplified business model, but more can be added obviously. If Computer Dox, the birth child of Tech Time, continues to use effective leadership styles, competitive knowledge to gain advantage in a common market, and tactfully utilize information provided by a multitude of sources, then there is no telling where Computer Dox will be in ten years. Since I am founder and Senior Technical Consultant, I hope it will be the next Dell, or even better. One example where these concepts were used in this essay would be the process of taking a simple email account, and using a reply function to create a fully functional collaborative community that has secure access which restricts the community to Comp Dox technicians only. This is just one small part where these three concepts have been used in real life to create a already growing business. I took from what I learned in my advanced graduate studies, and applied it to my own endeavors. I can honestly say that I am taking the graduate mentality, and approaching my obstacles and goals with a professional outlook, and it has proven to be not only successful, but rewarding at a personal level as well.

References:

Bellaver, R. F., Lusa, J. M. (2001). KM For Competitive Advantage: Mining Diverse Sources
for Marketing Intelligence. In Knowledge Management Strategy and Technology. (181 –
199). Norwood, MA: Artech House.

Competitive Intelligence: Beneficial Foreknowledge Obtained Through Tactical Information Collection & Analysis

Introduction

Competitive Intelligence is a continuously evolving process which gives businesses an advantage in today’s dynamic marketplace. What is Competitive Intelligence? This term is actually difficult to explain in one sentence, but can rather be explained through actual and perceptual meanings, past business successes, and personal experience using the CI system. Everyone during their business and/or personal lives has used some aspect of competitive intelligence. It could be as simple as a mother seeing an opened can of pop sitting at the top of a railing next to where the cat plays. Another example could be a Walgreens being constructed directly across the street from a CVS. Remember that these are all factors, not the complete CI system which would explain any confusion linking the two situations. When used, instead of competitive intelligence, someone might have termed it commonsense, competitive edge, knowledge management, or cut throat sales. These are all small parts of the overall process of CI. We might eventually realize that it was simply a way of life that could not be articulated until now (Blenkhorn & Fleisher, 2005).

Venture for Definition: What is Competitive Intelligence?

What is competitive intelligence? Well for starters, it is not just one thing, but a bundled conceptual entity that facilitates an overall system of foreseeing competitor’s strategic marketing plans before they can even develop a semi-intelligent sales scheme. That is one attempt at defining this term in one sentence. AuroraWDC, a CI consulting firm, says that competitive intelligence “is the purposeful and coordinated monitoring of your competitor(s), wherever and whoever they may be, within a specific marketplace” (Johnson, 2000).

Aurora goes on to say that it is essential to know what your rival businesses are going to do before they do it. This gives every business a competitive edge. Its hard to perfectly look into the future, but it is not hard to realize foreshadowing evidence to predict certain future events. Any good analyst can see future prospects with the right research involved. This concept connects the two scenarios mentioned earlier. Combining the commonsense idea that the half drank can of pop could potentially be knocked off the railing by the cat with the actuality of a direct competitor moving in across the street who shares a common market could lead to a new smart system of competition, i.e., competitive intelligence.

Although the relationship can be scene, it takes a lot of work and time to make this process actually work and become possible. There are countless books on the subject now that this concept has had time to bloom over the years. John E. Prescott, A doctorial professor at Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, located at the University of Pittsburgh, believes that there are specific situations that determine the role of a CI program. He suggested that “CI programs are primarily located in marketing, planning, and R&D functions in organizations, the role of a CI program is driven by business needs that are often rooted in underperforming aspects, and a defined role is important, but an entire administrative structure needs to be developed to successfully implement the chosen focus” (Prescott & Miller, 2001, p. 4).

This conclusion made perfect sense. Where would competitive foreknowledge always be valuable? The answer to that question is research and development, planning, and marketing departments within an organization or business. Those departments are used specifically for promotional, informational, and profitable growth. This is where the competitive intelligence practice is implemented.

Also, where is the business having the biggest difficulties? What is keeping this organization in question from taking off, or what changes or additions could take their profession to another level? (Prescott & Miller, 2001, p1).

Furthermore, once the problem is identified, and a solution is devised, documentation is essential to the continuation of competitive intelligence. It is impossible to go forward without having knowledge of where you have been. The writing process of a paper or essay can only be started once, but it can be revised an infinite amount of times.

Shell Services International Takes a Shot at the CI system

Shell Services International (SSI) benefited from the use of competitive intelligence in combination with knowledge management. Knowledge management is where databases, technical walkthroughs, and electronic libraries are heading in today’s technological environment. Jay Gillette believes knowledge management consists of the networking of information, or in other words “the movement and use of information” (Gillette, 2000)

This is great way to use information fused with strategy. Competitive Intelligence could be seen as a way to possibly control, to an extent, the flow of information, or enhance the knowledge management process.
When Bret Breeding joined up with SSI, he noticed that they had an “environment where there were no existing standards or methods in place for examining the competition” (Prescott & Miller). He brought CI efforts to the organization, which would be quite profitable monetarily as well as systematically to the company.
By implementing CI not only at the business development level, but actually making these efforts a set of core corporate principals and disciplinary processes, Shell Services would become a powerful competing entity in the market.

The next step was taking these principals and processes and sharing it with the entire work force of the company. Now, how would the company, as a whole, manage that type of communication of essential information between workers in all areas of the world? A combination of competitive intelligence and knowledge management would be needed.

This idea began the development of the Competitive Intelligence Knowledge house which provided electronic modules available privately and publicly along the SSI network. Certain areas/modules were restricted depending on the competitively compromising level of information that were present. This was an excellent way to have all of the work force interact with one another as well as a community knowledge pool where everyone could increase their knowledge about their role and maybe someone else’s role in the company. When a workforce feels more like a community or family, then trust and relationships can be built in order to provide a richer, more productive, effective, and efficient environment. These concepts and ideals yield a strong business presence with expansion capabilities in a growing global market place.

Conclusion

In today’s society, there are many buzz words and terms that are popular to convention, motivational, and promotional type of presentations/seminars. The importance behind the buzz word is the key information that it provides, or a new way of analyzing concepts. ‘Troubleshooting’ and ‘software’ are good examples of words, that although now graciously accepted by Webster and society in general, were strange to the common man when they first came about years ago. The actual practices, actions, and understandings behind these new age terms and phrases that are beneficial to society is what is really important. Competitive Intelligence, and well as Knowledge Management are just new ways of enhancing the legacy systems that did work well, but can yield much better results with the right tinkering.

References:

David L. Blenkhorn and Craig S. Fleisher, eds. (2005). Competitive Intelligence and Global
Business. Oxford: Praeger Publishers Greenwood Publishing Group.

Jay Edwin Gillette. (2000). “Information is Knowledge in Motion’: A Practical Framework for
Understanding Knowledge Management.” Unpublished. Center for Information and Communication Sciences.

Arik R. Johnson. (2000). What is Competitive Intelligence?. Retrieved April 2, 2008,
from http://www.aurorawdc.com/whatisci.htm

John E. Prescott and Stephen H. Miller. (2001). Proven Strategies in Competitive Intelligence:
Lessons from the Trenches. Washington, D. C.: Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals

Leaders/Followers: A Behavioral and Influential Look at the Relationship Between the Two

Introduction

There are many different takes on leadership, and throughout this seminar I have covered quite a few. I will be discussing two articles. The first is an article titled Behavioral Theories of Leadership written by Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard. This article took a look at the difference between a leader’s overall task/goal and the relationship between the leader and the followers. The second article is pulled from the book The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership written by John C. Maxwell. The piece used from this book is titled “Law 2 – The Law of Influence” which indicates that the true measure of leadership is influence. I will begin by briefly summarize the two theoretical writings, and then take a look at the relationship between the two articles themselves.

Behavioral Theories of Leadership

Hersey and Blanchard recognize both task and relationships when it comes to leadership. They believe that these are the two most important dimensions of leader behavior. The dimensions “task” and “relationships” have been termed differently from past authors. They have been “labeled “autocratic” and “democratic;” “authoritarian” and “equiltarian;” “employee-oriented” and “production oriented;” “goal achievement” and “group maintenance;” “taskability” and likability;” “instrumental and expressive;” “efficiency and effectiveness”” (Wren, 1995, p. 144).

These concepts or dimensions have been around, although titled differently, for a long time. Basically, when discussing leadership theories, there is concern for both the overall goal of the leader/followers and the actual relationship between the leader and followers. This may seem like common sense, but it can get a little complicated at times.

The leadership studies done at the Bureau of Business Research at Ohio State University date all the way back to 1945. The studies “questioned whether leader behavior could be depicted on a single continuum” (Wren, 1995, p. 145).

The OSU researchers were trying to take these two dimensions and see if they could provide a graphical representation that would display and measure leadership behavior involving “task” and “relationships.”

The OSU researchers, just like past leadership researchers, renamed “task” and “relationships” to “Initiating Structure” and “Consideration.” They also provided detailed definitions. ““Initiating Structure” refers to “the leader’s behavior in delineating the relationship between himself and members of the work-group and in endeavoring to establish well-defined patterns of organization, channels of communication, and methods of procedure”” (Wren, 1995, p. 145).

The term “”Consideration” refers to “behavior indicative of friendship, mutual trust, respect, and warmth in the relationship between the leader and the members of his staff”” (Wren, 1995, p. 145).

These once again were different ways of saying what the leader and followers work together to achieve versus the integrity of the relationship between the two.

Figure 1 on page 146 displays the Ohio State Leadership Quadrants. This model consisted of four quadrants: High Consideration (1), High Structure and Consideration (2), High Structure (3), and Low Structure and Consideration (4).

| (1.) | (2.) |
| (4.) | (3.) |

These quadrants were two axes. The horizontal axes running left to right creating a higher value of Initiating Structure, and a vertical axes running upward creating a higher value of Consideration. Ultimately the “best” style of leadership would be in the second quadrant (High Structure and Consideration). This is difficult to achieve, and was later mentioned in the article that in some situations, maybe not the best.

This article ended by discussing how leadership styles would differ depending on the situation. This means that anywhere on the quadrant might be optimal, depending on what is going on at the time. This argument leads to the beginning of “situational leadership,” leadership style based on surrounding factors.

The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership: Law 2 – The Law of Influence

“If you don’t have influence, you will never be able to lead others” (Maxwell, 1998, p. 11).

This is the basis of this particular chapter. Every leader is somewhat influential, or he/she wouldn’t have any followers. Maxwell begins to question the reader how to go about measuring a leader’s influencing capabilities. Then he answers with a story that is well known. Princess Diana and Mother Teresa died less than a week apart of each other. Maxwell brings up a good point that both of these women were very different from one another, however in a “1996 poll published by the London Daily Mail, Princess Diana and Mother Teresa were voted in first and second places as the world’s two most caring people” (Maxwell, 1998, p. 11).

This is a perfect example of how they were influentially measured. Maxwell continued to explain that someone like Diana could be regarded the same way as Mother Teresa because Diana was able to demonstrate the power of the Law of Influence.

Maxwell also covered the misconceptions about leadership within this section. Maxwell explains how a manager and leader is not the same thing. A main difference between the two, according to Maxwell, is that “leadership is about influencing people to follow, while management focuses on maintain systems and processes” (Maxwell, 1998, p.14)

This is a topic that has come up on multiple occasions within my leadership studies group. This particular view makes sense in the fact that a leader is concerned for his/her followers where as a manager might care more about the overall objective of his/her subordinates.

Maxwell goes on to say that when it comes to leadership, a knowledge myth exists. Basically he is saying that although knowledge might be power, but there is more required to produce an ability to lead. I have had some incredibly intelligent professors in the past, but as leaders, they need to have charisma and personality as well.

Pioneer myth is also discussed saying that the person that is physically in front of a group is automatically the leader. This is an interesting concept seeing as this type of sighting is the easiest to process for any common person. In actuality, there are those in the back that might be more motivating or caring than the person assigned the task of directing a crowd. Maxwell makes the same connection with myth of position as well (political officials, CEOs, etc. are not necessarily good leaders).

Maxwell says that “leadership is influence – nothing more, nothing less” (Maxwell, 1998, p. 17).
Therefore, it doesn’t matter what a person’s position, amount of leverage, knowledge, or physical location within a group is. All that matters is that person can get others to participate in a common goal through the power of influence.

The Law of Influence and Behavioral Theories of Leadership

These two theoretical pieces have a few things in common. One is that Maxwell’s idea that influence makes an optimal leader would fit in with Hersey’s and Blanchard’s idea of High Structure and High Consideration. In order to influence, a person would have to take the followers feelings into consideration, as well as have somewhat control over the task at hand. Both optimal points seem to equate in my eyes when it comes to the best type of leadership.

If I took the situational leadership idea, and compared it to a simple influential leadership, I would still find that in any given type of leadership situation, there will always be influencing factors in terms of the leader. The only difference is whether to concentrate more on the followers or the actual goal. Regardless, the influence is still there in essence.

Whether or not a leader is influential is based on the leader’s behaviors. By nature a leader is influential, but how they act depends on just how influential they are to their followers. Based on behavior, there is a direct relationship with influence, which could possibly be combined to create a further developed model representing multiple dimensions depicted on a single continuum.

Conclusion

Overall, both articles promote the same idea if thought of on a deeper theoretical layer. A person can’t become a leader if they cannot influence others. A leader cannot influence anyone if he or she does not show concern for the actual task at hand and/or the emotional & physical state of their followers. There are grounds for further theoretical developments involving these two leadership ideas brought forth by both Maxwell, and Hersey & Blanchard. There is an obvious connection between the different theories, and eventually a better theory can be produced to help facilitate other researchers with the overall goal to perfect the concept of leadership.

References:

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 25: Behavioral Theories of Leadership. New York: Free Press.

John C. Maxwell, ed. (1998). The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership. Law 2: The Law of
Influence. Maxwell Motivation, Inc.

Leaders/Followers: A Contextual and Democratic Look at the Relationship Between the Two

Abstract

What would happen if you take two scholarly pieces involving defining leadership composed by reputable leadership professors and compare and contrasted them? You would most likely find a deeper understanding of leadership analysis, observations, and concepts. One author takes a look at a Democratic view on leadership, while the other wants to expand the study of the relationship between leaders and their followers. This essay involves a breakdown of each author’s point of view through the eyes of an Information and Communication Scientist eager to extract valuable information to further his knowledge on “leadership”, an increasingly popularized term used to enhance management styles in today’s fast paced society.

Introduction

Leadership has become such a complex term/concept over the years, and as a result, many journalists, philosophers, professors, and students have different views on what makes a leader a good quality leader. Questions arise on how to actually analyze leadership. Is it based on the number of followers? How about the amount of tasks an individual has accomplished within an allotted amount of time? It turns out that there is a lot more to it than basic questions and answers. In this essay, I shall summarize two essays: The Historical and Contemporary Contexts of Leadership: A Conceptual Model written by J. Thomas Wren and Marc J. Swatez and Leadership and Democracy written by Thomas E. Cronin. After the summarization of the two, I will see what these two looks at leadership have in common, as well as, where these authors differ perceptively. Either way, there is no such thing as the “perfect” definition of leadership. There is only professional reasoning based on a great deal of research.

The Historical and Contemporary Contexts of Leadership: A Conceptual Model

J. Thomas Wren and March J. Swatez wrote this piece on how leadership is an extremely complex phenomenon that is difficult for anyone (followers, leaders, students, etc.) who has attempted to participate in, observe, or analyze the process. Wren and Swatez used this essay to stress the “context of leadership,” and did so using real world examples, conceptual models, personal experiences, and researched materials (Wren, pg 245).

These authors begin by talking about how in the past, “contingency” theories and models have been use to describe the leadership process, but have failed to fully capture leadership since these theories and models didn’t address the “the long-term historical forces and the influence of cultural values upon leadership” (Wren, pg 246).

They went on to discuss how during the twentieth century, most of the leadership studies that were done were restricted to the just the leader. For example, the distinctive characteristics of the leader or the actions of the leader. This type of research was very simplistic in nature and didn’t really grasp the essence of leadership. A better, and more advanced way of looking at leadership is to concentrate on the followers as well. By looking at the followers, leaders, and the relationship between the two yields a far more all-encompassing conception of leadership. For instance, they mention Fiedler’s contingency theory that pertains to such factors as “leader-member relations, task structure, and leader position power in determinging the appropriate style of leader behavior, while path-goal theory considers task and environment characteristics as well as the needs and expectations of the followers” (Wren, pg 246).

There is an already noticeable difference between the simplistic concentrations on the leader and the combined leader-member relationship with the incorporation of follower/member needs and collaborative tasks. This newer take on leadership starts to take a look at “macro” contextual factors. This means that the previous studies zoned in on smaller groups/organizations which is considered to be “micro” contextual factors while newer/advanced theories and models tend to point towards larger leader-member groups which relates better to today’s work force.

Wren and Swatez developed a model to combine both macro and micro contextual factors titled “A Model of Leadership Contexts” (Wren, Figure 1, pg 248).

This model consisted of overlapping contextual categories illustrated by concentric circles. Basically there are two joint circles in the middle that are titled “Leader” and “Follower.” Surrounding these two circles are three outer circles. The one closest to the leader and follower are “The Immediate Context of Leadership.” This inner circle contains aspects such as Structure and “Goals”, “Culture”, and “Task Characteristics.” This type of context describes the “micro” side of leadership groups. The circle outside of that is titled “The Contemporary Context of Leadership.” This pertains to “Social Values”, “Cultural Mores”, and “Subcultural Norms”. These contextual facets can be considered to be sub-external. This means that there are some factors that affect leadership that don’t have to necessarily include the followers and leaders directly, but still affect the leadership process nonetheless. These are things like “norms, values, and customs of the surrounding society – in short, the impact of cultural mores” (Wren, pg 249).

The third and most outer circle represents “The Historical Context of Leadership.” Leadership cannot be fully analyzed without having to look at the history of past leaders or past leadership theories and models. The authors discuss how “any contemporary situation is at least partially a product of what has gone on before” (Wren, pg 247).

It common sense to see where the history of leadership would play a major role in the examination, observation, and study of leadership styles, concepts, and roles.
By creating an innovative model, these authors hope to achieve a more rational leadership process which would make the mutual goals of both leaders and followers easier to achieve.

Leadership and Democracy

Thomas E. Cronin wrote an essay describing how democracy and leadership seems to have a direct relationship. He starts out by explaining how in many respects, leadership is in opposition towards democracy. Since leadership is defined as “the process whereby an individual or a few select individuals are in a position to provide the vision and make things happen,” that democracy would in fact argue this since in a democratic society, the “followers” would have the power and provide the vision (Wren, pg 304).

This creates conflict between the terms “leader” and “follower.” Cronin believes a true democracy would seek ways to reconcile these two concepts. Throughout history, governments have not been of and by the people, but instead ran by elites. Unfortunately, history also points out these supposed elites created more harm than good for the masses. In this sense, leaders would be considered to be untrusting, and corrupted by power.
The strangely ironic battle occurs within America between leaders and followers. Americans tend to admire power, yet consequently fear it. We as Americans (follower side) “may love to unload our civic responsibilities on our leaders, yet we dislike – intensely dislike – being bossed around” (Wren, pg 305).

Cronin then goes on to further promote our (as followers) dislike for power through famous sayings such as “A friend in power is a friend lost,” and “Power is ever stealing from the many for the few.”
A gap obviously exists between our perception of the typical politician and the ideal statesperson. Cronin believes this gap exists because of the follower’s (us as Americans) unrealistic expectations. When an official is elected, they are chosen by the people to be perfect when this is never the case. They don’t have all the answers as we the followers might hope. Because of this unrealistic view, warring concepts between leaders and followers tend to happen which illustrates the point of leaders opposing democracy.

Cronin believes in order to solve this “war,” we must redefine leader and follower through actual definitions, as well as, behavioral and attitudinal changes between the two. “The very word “followers” is a negative and demeaning word and ought, if possible, to be discarded or at least greatly modified” (Wren, pg 306).

This is the main point to Cronin’s overall leadership theory. He believes that “followers” should instead be referred to as citizen-leaders which would indicate that the “followers” actually contain leadership-like qualities. The citizen-leaders need to be willing to lead as well as follow. This citizen-leader recognizes that power wielded justly today might be wielded corruptly tomorrow. A citizen-leader, in Cronin’s eyes, sees democracy resting solidly upon a varied view of human nature. These new types of followers will enhance democracy in that although we has a nation prize majority rule, we need to be skeptical enough to ask whether a majority is always the correct method.
Cronin finishes his essay by saying that democracy demands competing leaders. He explains how the leaders and citizen-leaders are one in the same. Both make mistakes, and both need to learn from them and rectify the situation. Citizen-leaders should never be satisfied thus yielding better elections in a sense that the bar continues to raise creating a better society for all. Leader competition illustrates the idea that the ideal politician is fictitious, and therefore conflict will always reside causing a need for problem solving within a diverse nation. Since American liberties invite diversity, the nation as whole consequently invites conflict. For this there will be contending ideas for the nation, which will create a need for competitive leaders.

Cronin ends by saying “we shall know we are making progress not when we discover or produce a handful of charismatic Mount Rushmore leaders, but when we can boast we are a nation no longer in need of those larger-than-life great leaders because we have become a nation of citizens who believe that one person can make a difference and every person should regularly try” (Wren, pg 309).

A Democratic Look at Contextual Leadership

The main similarity is that the essay involving leadership in terms of democracy really points towards “macro” contextual factors mentioned in the first essay. The nation is a very large group, and requires the two outside circles within the “Model of Leadership Contexts.” Also, research in this area would greatly fall on the newer type of contingency leadership theory meaning that concentration on just the leader would not help the advancement of a democratic nation. Wren truly wanted to design a model that would take into account a larger follower population, and Cronin was deeply concerned for a nationwide equality among leaders and citizen-leaders (followers).

Both essays recognized the importance of historical evidence to guide future leadership styles. Within Wren’s contextual model, the historic context of leadership was vital due to the fact that any contemporary situation is at least partially a product of what has already gone on before. Basically saying that any newly developed theories or concepts we have today are partially linked to past theories and concepts. Both essays also used historic examples to further illustrate the importance of past events when looking at leadership.

Differences Between Democratic and Contextual Leadership

One of the main differences between these essays was that Wren’s essay provided a all encompassing model that both incorporated small, medium, and large groups/organizations involving leaders and followers, while Cronin’s view on democratic societies concentrated on large nationwide groups when referring to leader and follower relationships.

Furthermore, Cronin believed that the term “follower” was incredibly demeaning, while Wren used the term follower in his final conceptual model. Cronin would not have agreed with Wren’s model simply due to his passionate opinions towards to actual words used to describe those who were part of the member-leader relationship.

Another example would be that Cronin worried more about how leaders and citizen-leaders would affect a Democratic America as a whole, rather than Wren’s concern for simply analyzing and studying the leadership process in general.

Conclusion

Both Essays were very interesting, and both held very valid points with discussing the relationship between leaders and followers. I can see where Cronin feels that the term follower has a negative connotation to it. We as Americans are encouraged during our upbringing to walk our own path and specialize in something that will make us important or unique. Standing out from the crowd is the exact opposite when thinking of the fall-in-line term “follower.”

The democratic look at leadership really hits home for me since I am immersed in a leader-member democratic society. Cronin really took a different view on the leader/follower relationship. He had a lot of good points when leaders sometimes need to become followers and followers in some situations need to be leaders. Normally when I think of leaders and followers, they are both in totally separate categories, but Cronin’s view seemed to point out that they are virtually the same when it comes to the heart of the matter.

The contextual model looked at, in my mind (from inside the circle, moving outward) , direct analysis of the leader/follower, sub-external analysis of the leader/follower, and overall historic view of past leaders, leadership processes, theories, and models to aide in the analysis directly and sub-externally. I learned a lot from these essays since I may have just come up with my own theory which would be a slightly modified model of leadership contexts.

References:

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 36: The Historical and Contemporary Contexts of Leadership:
A Conceptual Model. New York: Free Press.

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. Essay 41: Leadership and Demoacracy. New York: Free Press.

Management Versus Leadership: The Constant Struggle to Provide Effective and Efficient Organizational Direction

Can a manager be a leader? Is a leader necessarily a manager? These are two questions that come to mind when deciding on how to give direction to employees, colleagues, and organizations in general. The terms “leader” and “manager”, tend to get tossed around synonymously, although they clearly have two different meanings and even separate connotations depending on the situation.

Management normally includes subordinates that are located underneath the manager on a corporate hierarchy. These subordinates follow what the manager says due to fear of losing their job, monetary payment, or some other self-beneficial factors. Managers also have an objective or final outcome in mind, and are concentrated on getting the job done, regardless of how their subordinates view the overall scope of the job. Managers tend to avoid conflict because it causes a decrease the productivity of their workers. When managers are faced with a conflict, they devise a quick and sometimes temporary solution in order to continue progress towards their final result or outcome. This type of problem solving is acute, and can create more problems later on. Managers do teach, much like a leader would, but only teach based on guidelines set in place by their boss or the organization they work for. They will go that extra mile if asked to, or if a subordinate asked a question outside the scope of the organization.

Not every manager follows the generality listed above, but they normally always carry a few of those characteristics. This disclaimer goes for leaders as well. Leaders tend to have followers that follow of their own free will. Subordinates follow sometimes when realistically they don’t care to if they were given the option. Followers have a different agenda. They are motivated or captivated by the leader to where they believe in that person. They follow out of inspiration or because they have a similar vision that the leader does. A leader can be looked at as visionary, passionate, as encouraging. Leadership involves being pro-active and using preventative measures when a problem arrives. Leadership pertains to caring for those who follow as well as whatever goal or end result might be in mind. Leaders teach on a regular basis, and are open individuals that will enlighten their followers, as well as provide motivation which is the key to creating a positive and collaborative work environment for both the leader and followers.

Thomas Carlyle, a Scottish historian and essayist, believed that Kingship which embodied Heroism was to supreme type of rule. This is where loyalty and worship would guide people under the wing of a commander. This is more of a leadership quality where chivalry and heroism would make for an excellent king (a.k.a. leader) (Wren, 1995).
Management are practice oriented with theory from the organization to back up the practice where leaders in turn are praxis oriented and are continue to try and better themselves, their followers, and the work that they all do cooperatively.
There is no wrong way to direct people, and each situation calls for a different type of facilitation. There might be an instance where management is needed over leadership. Intense situation where military might be involved definitely calls for management. A situation where there needs to be strict fixed guidelines is a good example where managers are needed. For everyday business or company needs, leadership is the best way to go. When employees feel motivated to do more for the company because they feel as if they are a part of it, and not some machine that helps their boss get paid more, a business will prosper in a positive manner, and yield an efficient and effective working environment.

References:

J. Thomas Wren, ed. (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through
the Ages. New York: Free Press.

China Notes

These are some observations and thoughts I had during my visit to China during the month of March.