Leadership and Strategic Change under Ambiguity

Abstract

This paper draws on a case study of a large public hospital to examine the processes of leadership and strategic change in organizations where goals are unclear and authority is fluid and ambiguous. The case history describes the evolution of leadership roles during a period of radical change in which a general hospital acquires a university affiliation while moving towards a more integrated form of management. The study traces the tactics used by members of the leadership group to stimulate change, and the corresponding impact of these tactics on both the progress of change and on leadership roles themselves. It is suggested that strategic change in these organizations requires collaborat ive leadership involving constellations of actors playing distinct but tightly-knit roles. Yet, collaborative leadership is fragile and can easily disintegrate due to intemal conflict or to discreditation associated with more unpopular (although potentially effective) change tactics. Thus, under ambiguity, radical trans formations may tend to occur in a cyclical non-linear pattern with periods of substantive change alternating with periods of political realignment. The paper concludes with a series of five propositions concerning the collaborative, cyc lical, interpretative, and entropic nature of leadership and strategic change pro cesses under ambiguity.

Leadership, Service Reform, and Public-Service Networks: The Case of Cancer-Genetics Pilots in the English NHS

“…In theory, leadership and networks should complement each other, with the looser organization and less hierarchical ordering logic of the network allowing leadership of change, distributed among network members rather than led from a single organizational apex, to flourish. This would affirm the findings of Denis et al (1996) on the potential of distributed leadership in complex organizations with plural, ambiguous aims (cf. Bryson and Kelley 1978).…”

“…The widely noted ambiguity of objectives, power and accountability that characterizes the public sector as compared to the private sector (Heifetz 1994;Denis et al 1996; is compounded, as we have seen, by the network. This suggests a need for the distribution of leadership across individuals in collaborating organizations.…”

“…These contours of distributed leadership-in particular, its relation to traditional top-down authority, and its potential concentration in new nodes of power-are important to acknowledge in an understanding of the role of leadership in networks. As with transformational leadership, distributed leadership is seen in the literature as having the potential to improve organizational performance (Rainey and Steinbauer 1999;Denis et al 1996;Pearce and Conger 2003).…”

Change Leadership: Oxymoron and Myths

“…Leaders are not interchangeable parts. It takes considerable time and effort to develop a sufficient level of behavioural integration for a leadership team to be effective Leading change (Denis et al, 2001;Denis, Langley, & Cazale, 1996).…”

Ambiguity in the Identity Transformation of Public Health Organizations

“…Ambiguity is linked to complex hierarchical relationships, imprecise goals, confusing result assessments, and unstable political support from authorities. The emergence of such phenomena is more intense in service organizations, public hospitals, universities, professional groups, government advisories, and businesses that make an intensive use of knowledge (Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2003;Denis, Langley, & Cazale, 1996;Gioia & Chittipeddi, 1991;Feldman, 1991;Meyerson, 1991;McCabe, 2009). Ambiguity often leads to amplifying conflicts and resistance, since the lack of clarity in the diverse interpretations causes people to feel disoriented, manipulated and distrustful (Feldman, 1991;Hoggett, 2006;Martin, 1992;Meyerson, 1991).…”