PATRICK SWEET takes the discussions a step further and explores the collective fundamentals of leadership that amplify the understanding of what leading in fragile contexts entails. “Our hope is to complement a ‘leader-centered’ view of developing the capacity to lead on peace operations with a ‘substantively and collectively contextualized’ view to developing such capacity to lead,” the author states in ‘Leading UN Peace Operations: Complementing a Leader-Centered Approach,’ a paper published by the International Forum for the Challenges of Peace Operations.
Leading happens at all levels and a leader is (can be) anyone who influences people and impacts systems to mobilize toward specific outcomes, SWEET states. With these clarifications, he adds, they sharpen the focus on the specific nature of the three areas led in peace operations: turbulence; collectives of people (not only individuals); and polarities or tensions.
Leading turbulence: Leading in a perpetual state of turbulence is different than leading a process of change. Leading change implies leading “from somewhere (the current state) to somewhere else (a new state).” One can argue that peace operations are about leading change: from violence to non- violence. This is often achieved via combinations of diplomacy and peacekeeping force.
However, the underlying reasons for the violence in the first place (scarce resources, tribalism and migration, artificial scarcity of resources created by corruption, historical vendetta, etc.) if not addressed, result in peace operations calming a state of turbulence that actually simmers under the surface, SWEET writes. “The state of felt turbulence can simmer for a decade only to flare-up when peacekeeping operations are withdrawn.”
These challenges play out in what he recognizes to be where events unfold rapidly, with seemingly unpredictable actions and actors, where tensions and polarities among actors, actions and interests are ever present, and the link between actions, actors and outcomes is tangled in such a complex context that one action may not only not cause an intended outcome, but may actually spur other events and outcomes. Rapid, Unpredictable, Paradoxical and Tangled (RUPT) describes the context or ‘state’ a mission lead must lead in.
In RUPT, the context is too complex to rely on one leader, the author states. RUPT is created collectively and can only be led through in a collective fashion where leading happens at all levels, even by those who are not leaders, by role.
Leading collectives: Leading peace operations in the contexts from which they spring requires both leading institutions to help create conditions for violence to stop (aka peace), and the eventual transfer of authority and accountability from individual leaders to the engaged collectives, because only the collectives can hope to address and sustain peace. This brings to bear both leader-centered and collective views of leading.
“A collective view of leading helps prepare for positive peacebuilding that accommodates local beliefs and practices needed to accomplish shared direction, alignment and commitment,” SWEET writes. A leader-centered view of leading disguises an oft-made trade-off between situational/contingent leading and norm- or policy-based leading, which ultimately keeps ‘leading authorities’ accountable (and thus empowered over others) rather than transferring accountability and empowerment to the collectives themselves. This view complements leader-centered views of the ‘how’ of leaders, by lifting focus to the ‘what’ of leading.
Leading polarities: An example of a polarity dynamic in the peacebuilding space, according to SWEET, is that of the need to recognize both local and national interests. Focus on national interests (to the negation of local interests), and the system becomes centralized and often authoritarian. Fractionalize entirely into local interests (to the negation of common interests), and an ever-present imbalance of critical resources (for example) will often lead to conflict. Both local and national/common interests must be addressed to different degrees and in varying ways. They represent an interdependent polarity and are mirrored at the regional and international levels. “Sustainably leading polar tensions requires collective monitoring for indications of when one pole is being neglected.”
This leadership style is one entrepreneurs can easily fall into without being aware of it. After all, if you start a business because you want to do things “your way" (as many of us do), and you’re impatient with employees who don’t feel your business’s needs as urgently as you do, it can be hard to listen to others.
ReplyDeletetestimonials for issacqureshi