Steve Lunsford

This paper discusses theory on leadership, competitive intelligence and knowledge management. Next the importance of vision as it relates to leadership is taken into account along with the impact that effective organizational philosophies can make. The differences between the roles of manager and leader are considered and dissected. Jay Gillette’s theories on knowledge management are then examined along with those of B.J. Deering. All these things are combined to paint a broad picture of what these theories all have in common and why they matter in today’s business world.

Introduction: Leadership, Competitive Information, and Knowledge Management

Leadership is a complicated concept to explain, but my concept of it involves two main components: the vision that a leader must have, and the organizational philosophies that they use. Another important element is how the manager differs from the leader, and this is an important distinction to make. All of these elements of leadership will be addressed along with making the differentiation between what it means to be a leader and what it means to be a manager.

The other two parts that will be addressed will be competitive intelligence and knowledge management, which play key roles in the evolving role of the leader in our changing world. Competitive intelligence is simply the use of
information that is gathered about what you rivals may be doing on virtually any scale, ranging from a local to global level. This is an important consideration when it comes to the way that information is gathered. Knowledge management is how that information is utilized and put to work for the good of the organization which is being lead.
Leadership: Vision for the Long Run

Marshall Sashkin wrote an essay titled, “Visionary Leadership” that, in my opinion does a outstanding job of outlining one of the primary traits of a leader. A leader has one particular trait that seems to almost always make him stand out in that role in my perspective. Vision is that trait and in order for a leader to succeed he or she really needs to have a good thought towards where the group is being lead. (Sashkin, 1989, pp. 402-403)

One of Sashkin’s major ideas is “Visioning,” involves a constant consideration the long term strategy of any initiative of which they are in charge of. For the visionary leader, there are four primary skills: expressing, explaining, extending, and expanding the vision in order to generate the results for the long term goal.
The second component is the “Implementing the Vision Organizationally:” leaders guiding and tailoring the culture of the group to accomplish the task that they seek. This can be accomplished through a number of tactics, but must reiterate the vision that the leader has for the organization and provide reason behind goals and policies that might be implemented along the way to the vision. (Sashkin, 1989, p.406)

The Importance of Culture: Organizational Leadership

Results Based Leadership by Dave Ulrich, examines the role of the leader in shaping the organizational culture of an organization. The culture of an organization plays a crucial role in the success of an organization, and it is essential that the leadership takes measures to address this important portion. One of the key points that stand out in the chapter, “Organizational Leadership” is the idea that the ultimate gauge of success of a leader is fostering a culture that allows the individuals to perform as a group to produce results that exceed the sum of their parts. Ulrich examines four major capabilities that are important to organizational culture in an organization: Learning, Speed, Boundarylessness, and Accountability. (Ulrich, 1999, p. 82)

These major capabilities that foster healthy organizational culture are all four important, but the ones that most stand out are the Boundarylessness and Accountability portions. Boundarylessness means that people are not simply bound to the areas for which they were originally hired or for the role they were assigned to. This concept means that these individuals are able to have impact and use the skills that they might have to be useful in other areas. This not only allows the organizational culture to thrive through the full use of people’s skill sets, but allows the company to grow in both culture and productivity. This occurs when people are given the capacity to do what they are talented in. Accountability stands out because it extends beyond the reach of just the normal hierarchy, but people regardless of their rank, offer support through accountability in order to help everyone be more productive.

Differentiating the Leader from the Manager

In my view, leadership first involves the differentiation between the ideas of management and leadership. At first glance, these two may appear to be the same, but in all actuality are quite different. In the table pictured below, several of the differences as I view them are outlined for the sake of comparison.

Leadership Management
Vision-Driven Task-Driven
Followers Inspired by Vision Followers inspired by Obligation
Focused on Long Term Focused on Short Term
Leads People Accomplishes Tasks

Moving on from the concept of what differentiates the leader from the manager; next let’s take a look at a model that examines how the two apply to each other, situations and the people who might fill one or both of these roles. Refer to the following figure that illustrates how a person’s personal set of skills might vary or overlap based on a situation.

Each circle can vary in size and location based on the situation which each might be used. The circles might also be larger or smaller based on the individual that the graph might represent. In most situations, the circles are not the same size as the capabilities and personality traits of a leader are not very similar to those of a manager. In some situations and individuals, the circles will overlap where both the different skills are used together to both guide a situation and accomplish a task; one may overshadow the other depending upon the person or circumstances. In situations or people where the circles do not overlap or one of the circles may hardly exist, progress may become stunted should the role of either manager or leader be complemented by a person with the opposite set of skills.

Competitive Intelligence: Proactive Adjustment to the Changing Business Landscape

The challenge of globalization and competitive intelligence plays an integral role in the adjustment that must be made in businesses worldwide in order to transition to the worldwide marketplace. Challenges abound, and to not embrace this trend and address it directly, is an unsound way (to say the least), to handle the changes that a business that wishes to engage in the emerging and increasingly prevalent global marketplace. (Fleshier, 2005, pp. 45-46)
Five primary reasons that global competitive intelligence is important are addressed in this chapter of Fleshier’s book. The first, “Sensitivity,” addresses the fact that when dealing with the global marketplace, a business must be aware and cater to the various norms that might be faced in other cultures, such as economics, and various policy or law issues that may pose problems in various other questions. The second, “Frustration,” addresses the fact that many businesses will be immobilized by the sheer magnitude of the task of gathering the competitive intelligence. “Preparedness” deals with the level of readiness that businesses have to deal with the challenges that intelligence on a global scale presents. The fourth, “Unfamiliarity,” states that businesses have a hesitancy to deal with international business, particularly when they have lack of familiarity that exists in these situations. The final reason challenge that competitive intelligence presents in the global marketplace is “Resource Investment,” and this addresses the hesitation that companies have to put funds into securing the intelligence that they need to be competitive in that situation. Addressing these various hesitancies that businesses might face when dealing with globalization can make the difference between success and failure internationally. (Fleshier, 2005, p. 5)

Knowledge Management: Utilizing Informational Assets Effectively

The essay “Information is Knowledge in Motion”: Practical Framework for Understanding Knowledge Management by Jay Gillette deals with the topic of knowledge management. This essay deals with the use of knowledge and how it is transferred and utilized. (Gillette, 1999)

Gillette goes into detail on the topic of Knowledge Management, addressing the topic thoroughly, but the most useful part of this essay, in the context of culture, and leadership, is the model, “Information in a Scale of Knowledge” found in Table 2. This model describes a hierarchy of the stages of knowledge, how it comes to be starting from phenomena, and evolving through various stages on its way to wisdom. (Gillette, 1999, p. Table 2)

Gillette begins with phenomena, which is a representation of something that we see or “perceive”: essentially an observation of something that we may not have previously been aware of. Moving to the next level, facts, we take these phenomena and bring them to actual information in the form of an actual statement of the fact which we have observed. Facts are translated into data which essentially are the collecting and recording of the factual information related to the phenomena. Information is, in turn, the data transformed and understood, to form a useful idea. That information is then translated into understanding which basically means that one understands the information and is thereby able to apply this to a situation. Finally, the understanding can be transformed to wisdom; Gillette states, “Wisdom guides understanding. Understanding informs wisdom.” (Gillette, 1999, pp. 6-8)
Dr. B.J. Deering provides another look at knowledge management as it specifically relates to gathering of competitive intelligence and the concept of planning a longer term strategy for compiling knowledge and drawing conclusions from it.
Plans for the long term must build around intelligence and knowledge that has been gathered. In the case of a newer business, data must be gained from a number of informal sources as they do not have an existing base of knowledge from running a business. While it is not as useful as information gathered from actually doing business, it is clearly a better strategy than moving forward with no research. Existing businesses have the advantage of experience when it comes to the use of information as it is gathered through actual experience providing a history that might indicate trends over the long term that could be anticipated. (Deering, 2001, pp. 183-184)
What this means to the leader is that age in which they lead is key to their success in their role. To not consider the value of knowledge and how it is used, in our era, in the information age, is to fail as a leader.

Conclusion: Leading the Way with Knowledge

Ultimately, the question must be asked, “what does leadership, competitive intelligence, and knowledge management have to do with each other and how are they interrelated?” Leadership is what governs the direction of today’s business world, they will ultimately determine how the outcome of those organizations which they lead. In order to be effective, they must embrace the value of knowledge and how it is gathered (competitive intelligence) and how it is utilized (knowledge management). The combination of these three concepts can have a major influence on the success of a leader and will, by default, determine the resulting success of the organization which he leads.

In conclusion, Leif Edvinsson said, “Of central importance is the changing nature of competitive advantage – not based on market position, size, and power as in times past, but on the incorporation of knowledge into all of an organizations activities.” (Edvinsson, 2002)These words could not be truer in today’s marketplace, and underscore the importance that knowledge has in today’s business world.

Works Cited
Deering, B. (2001). KM for comeptitive advantage: mining diverse sources for marketing intelligence. In R. B. and, Knowledge Management Strategy and Technology (pp. 182-199). Artech House Publishers.
Edvinsson, L. (2002). Corporate Logintiude: Discover Your True Position in the Knowlege Economy. Financial Times Pretence Hall.
Fleshier, D. L. (2005). Competitive Intelligence and Global Business. Conneticut: Praeger Publishers.
Gillette, J. (1999). Information is Knowlege in Motion: A Practical Framework for Understanding Knowlege Management. Muncie, IN.
Sashkin, M. (1989). Visionary Leadership. The Perspective from Education . New York, New York: The Westview Press.
Ulrich, D. (1999). Organization Results. In D. Ulrich, Results Based Leadership (pp. 83-105). Boston : Harvard Business School Press.

Posted by Stephen Lunsford at 09:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Justice Department has officially givem approval for the merger of the two major satilite radio rivals, XM and Sirius, which, combined would result in a 17 million subscriber “de facto” monopoly (Shendon, 2008)

The Jutice department, which is responsible, in this case, for evaluating any anti-trust implication that this merger could potentially pose, determined that the merger would not likely result in higher prices due to the elimination of competing companies in the satellite radio business. The reasoning behind this was that satellite is not the only competitor for providing programming due to MP3 players and HD Radio emerging as mobile audio alternatives. (Shendon, 2008)

Now that XM/Sirius has the blessing of the Justice Department, the merger only needs the approval of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in order to go through with the deal. The FCC has never turned down a deal that was approved by the Justice Department, but the final decision by the FCC is likely to take several weeks. (Leiberman, 2008)

Anti-trust head, David Barnett believes that customers will not be negatively affected, saying, “A price increase is not going to cause you tjump to the other service, so there’s just not competition to day that would be eliminated by the merger.” This merger would be enough to help both companies achieve sustainability, the stock prices of each company rose, as investors experienced increased hopes for both companies with the likelihood of the merger going through successfully looking increasingly more likely (Leiberman, 2008).

Sources:
Leiberman, D. (2008, March 25). Justice Dept. OKs Merger of XM, Sirius; Now it's up to FCC. USA Today , p. P. 03b.
Shenon, P. (2008, March 25). Justice Department Approves XM Merger with Sirius. New York Times , p. P. B5

Posted by Stephen Lunsford at 10:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Federal Communications Commission will be announcing a new national cell phone alert system, that will use text messages to notify United States residents in case of emergency. (Davidson, 2008)

The four major national cell phone providers, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, Verizon, and T-Mobile are all expressed intent to participate in the program if the advisory commissions plan for the national text message plan is adopted.

In the wake of disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, and the recent school shootings that have occurred, the system would be used primarily for three proposes: a national disaster, terrorist attack, or other threat, ongoing updates on potentially disastrous weather conditions, or child abductions. (CNN, 2008)

With the prevalence of cell phones today, Kevin Martin, FCC Chairman said, “It is essential that we support and advance new ways to share critical, time-sensitive information with them in times of crisis.”

Should the plan for the National Text Alert plan be put into place, it should be in place by 2010.

Sources:
Davidson, P. (2008, April 9). Nationwide Cellphone Alert System in the Works. USA Today , p. Pg. 01b.
CNN Money (2008, April 9). Cell Phone Alert System Proposed. Retrieved April 14, 2008, from CNN Money: http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/09/technology/fcc_cell_phone_alert/index.htm?section=money_latest

Posted by Stephen Lunsford at 08:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This paper discusses several views of leadership and effectively forms my theories of leadership. Second, the contextual ramifications of leadership are defined, followed by the Sashkin’s theory of vision as it relates to leadership. Next we get into my own personal views of leadership along with some of those of my peers. The role that culture plays in a leadership role is discussed, and is followed by Jay Gillettes theories on knowledge management. All these things are combined to paint a broad picture of leadership

Introduction:

Leadership is a complicated concept to explain, but my concept of it involves three main components: the context in which one leads, the vision that a leader must have, and the organizational philosophies that they use. Another important element is how the manager differs from the leader, and this is an important distinction to make. All of these elements of leadership will be addressed to help define my personal view on leadership.

The other two parts that will be addressed will be competitive intelligence and knowledge management, which play key roles in the evolving role of the leader in our changing world. Competitive intelligence is simply the use of information that is gathered about what you rivals may be doing on virtually any scale, ranging from a local to global level. This is an important consideration when it comes to the way that information is gathered. Knowledge management is how that information is utilized and put to work for the good of the organization which is being lead.

Leadership: The Contextual Element

In this essay, Wren and Swatez state that “an understanding of leadership requires careful attention to the contextual aspects of the process.” Throughout the writing, they refer to three major areas of context that determine the variables that may impact the leadership dynamics of any particular situation. These three contexts surround both the leader and the followers to define the dynamics of any situation that makes use of leadership.

The first of these areas is the historical context of leadership. The historical context deals primarily with the long-term ramifications of the situation that a leader may be presented with and fall into the categories of social, economic and political forces. These forces relate not to the future, but to past happenings that may place limitations on the options that a leader may have on any given situation. Wren and Swatez use the example of the concept of universal health insurance. Since the 1930’s, this issue had been perceived negatively by the powerful American middle-class and thus is still today heavily fought against based on this understanding of the matter. (Wren, 1995, pp. 247-249)

The second area is of contemporary context of leadership. This deals mainly with the social and cultural values that may influence the way that a leader would respond to the demands that are placed upon him. A leader is bound by the norms that the people of a society are accustomed to. The way that a leader may deal with the social and cultural aspects of his post in the United States would not be well received in many other parts of the world; ignoring the role that context plays in the way that his guidance as a leader is accepted can be detrimental. (Wren, 1995, pp. 249-250)

Leadership: Having a Vision

Marshall Sashkin wrote an essay titled, “Visionary Leadership” that, in my opinion does a outstanding job of outlining one of the major traits of a leader. A leader has one particular trait that seems to almost always make him stand out in that role in my perspective. Vision is that trait and in order for a leader to succeed he or she really needs to have a good thought towards where the group is being lead. (Sashkin, 1989, pp. 402-403)

One of Sashkin’s major ideas is “Visioning,” involves a constant consideration the long term strategy of any initiative of which they are in charge of. For the visionary leader, there are four primary skills: expressing, explaining, extending, and expanding the vision in order to generate the results for the long term goal. The second component is the “Implementing the Vision Organizationally:” leaders guiding and tailoring the culture of the group to accomplish the task that they seek. This can be accomplished through a number of tactics, but must reiterate the vision that the leader has for the organization and provide reason behind goals and policies that might be implemented along the way to the vision. (Sashkin, 1989, p.406)

The Importance of Culture: Organizational Leadership

Results Based Leadership by Dave Ulrich, examines the role of the leader in shaping the organizational culture of an organization. The culture of an organization plays a crucial role in the success of an organization, and it is essential that the leadership takes measures to address this important portion. One of the key points that stand out in the chapter, “Organizational Leadership” is the idea that the ultimate gauge of success of a leader is fostering a culture that allows the individuals to perform as a group to produce results that exceed the sum of their parts. Ulrich examines four major capabilities that are important to organizational culture in an organization: Learning, Speed, Boundarylessness, and Accountability. (Ulrich, 1999, p. 82)

These major capabilities that foster healthy organizational culture are all 4 important, but the ones that most stand out are the Boundarylessness and Accountability portions. Boundarylessness means that people are not simply bound to the areas for which they were originally hired or for the role they were assigned to. This concept means that these individuals are able to have impact and use the skills that they might have to be useful in other areas. This not only allows the organizational culture to thrive through the full use of people’s skill sets, but allows the company to grow in both culture and productivity. This occurs when people are given the capacity to do what they are talented in. Accountability stands out because it extends beyond the reach of just the normal hierarchy, but people regardless of their rank, offer support through accountability in order to help everyone be more productive.

My Personal View of Leadership

In my view, leadership first involves the differentiation between the ideas of management and leadership. At first glance, these two may appear to be the same, but in all actuality are quite different. In the table pictured below, several of the differences as I view them are outlined for the sake of comparison.

Leadership Management
Vision-Driven Task Driven
Followers inspired by vision Followers inspired by Obligation
Focused on Long Term Focused on Short Term
Leads People Accomplishes Tasks

Moving on from the concept of what differentiates the leader from the manager; next let’s take a look at a model that examines how the two apply to each other, situations and the people who might fill one or both of these roles. Refer to the following figure that illustrates how a person’s personal set of skills might vary or overlap based on a situation.

Each circle can vary in size and location based on the situation which each might be used. The circles might also be larger or smaller based on the individual that the graph might represent. In most situations, the circles are not the same size as the capabilities and personality traits of a leader are not very similar to those of a manager. In some situations and individuals, the circles will overlap where both the different skills are used together to both guide a situation and accomplish a task; one may overshadow the other depending upon the person or circumstances. In situations or people where the circles do not overlap or one of the circles may hardly exist, progress may become stunted should the role of either manager or leader be complemented by a person with the opposite set of skills.

Knowledge Management: Leadership in the Information Age

The essay “Information is Knowledge in Motion”: Practical Framework for Understanding Knowledge Management by Jay Gillette deals with the topic of knowledge management. This essay deals with the use of knowledge and how it is transferred and utilized. (Gillette, 1999)

Gillette goes into detail on the topic of Knowledge Management, addressing the topic thoroughly, but the most useful part of this essay, in the context of culture, and leadership, is the model, “Information in a Scale of Knowledge” found in Table 2. This model describes a hierarchy of the stages of knowledge, how it comes to be starting from phenomena, and evolving through various stages on its way to wisdom. (Gillette, 1999, p. Table 2)

Gillette begins with phenomena, which is a representation of something that we see or “perceive”: essentially an observation of something that we may not have previously been aware of. Moving to the next level, facts, we take these phenomena and bring them to actual information in the form of an actual statement of the fact which we have observed. Facts are translated into data which essentially are the collecting and recording of the factual information related to the phenomena. Information is, in turn, the data transformed and understood, to form a useful idea. That information is then translated into understanding which basically means that one understands the information and is thereby able to apply this to a situation. Finally, the understanding can be transformed to wisdom; Gillette states, “Wisdom guides understanding. Understanding informs wisdom.” (Gillette, 1999, pp. 6-8)

What this means to the leader is that age in which they lead is key to their success in their role. To not
consider the value of knowledge, in our era, in the information age, is to fail as a leader.

Conclusion

Over the course of these writings a number of different ideas of leadership are examined from early times through the present and the impact that this as we move into present day leadership. Times are changing and so are the ways that leadership must be implemented. Sound leadership depends on many different factors ranging from the context of the leadership, to the organizational philosophies, to the embracing of changes valuing knowledge, leadership will always be difficult to define based on an evolving culture.

Works Cited
Gillette, J. (1999). Information is Knowlege in Motion: A Practical Framework for Understanding Knowlege Management. Muncie, IN.
Sashkin, M. (1989). Visionary Leadership. The Perspective from Education . New York, New York: The Westview Press.
Ulrich, D. (1999). Organization Results. In D. Ulrich, Results Based Leadership (pp. 83-105). Boston : Harvard Business School Press.
Wray, J. Thomas, Swatez, Marc (1995). The Historical and Contemorary Contexts of Leadership: A Contextual Model. The Leader's Companion . New York, New York: The Free Press.

Posted by Stephen Lunsford at 09:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Congress has taken issue with the Federal Communications Commissions' relatively new ownership rules. Five house lawmakers have produced a “resolution of disapproval” in order to nullify recent loosening of ownership rules that allow the ownership of both newspaper and broadcast in the same market (Kaplan, 2008).

The 23 member Senate Commerce Committee will vote on Wednesday to repeal these rules which will give chairman Kevin Martin with his first rebuff on one of his decisions. The vote is likely to come out in favor of the repeal, but it will then be a matter of how far it will make it from that point (Tienowitz, 2008).

The adjustment to the ownership rules have faced significant opposition since it was narrowly passed by the FCC. Should the House of Representatives be successful in it’s attempt to nullify the rules, it would likely face a presidential veto, therefore it is unlikely that the rules would be repealed in 2008 (Teinowitz, 2008)

In December of 2008, the FCC adopted new media ownership rules with the explanation from Martin, Chair of the FCC, that it would help “forestall the erosion in local news coverage by enabling companies to share these local news gathering costs across multiple media platforms. Opponents of the rules argue that it would increase the cost of buying stations and cause smaller owners and minority owned stations more difficulty in attracting advertisers.
John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama are among the more recognizable names of those opposing the rules, who time of the rules going into effect, had stated that they would fight the new rules due to the potential negative effects that they might have on minority ownership (Jones, 2008)

Sources:
Jones, J. (2008, March). FCC Adopts New Media Ownership Rules. Black Enterprise , p. 8.
Kaplan, P. (2008 , March 13). House Lawmakers Take Aim at Media Ownership Rule. Retrieved 30 2008, March , from Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssTechMediaTelecomNews/idUSN1353329820080313
Teinowitz, I. (2008, March 30). Congress Takes Swing at Overturning FCC's Ownership Rules. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from TV Week: http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/03/

Posted by Stephen Lunsford at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)