The Internet Teaches Society about Leadership - Essay Example

How does the Internet teach society about leadership? Introduction Mankind for the first time is passing through an era of knowledge based economy and society. Subsequent to the Age of Enlightenment mostly witnessed in the continent of Europe in the 16th century gone are the days of industrial capitalism, the pervasive predominance of ideologies, promulgated by the world order and world views more known as meta-narratives, and the control based leadership style of the manufacturing era seen in the early half of the twentieth century. All of them had their own compelling reasons for their ground breaking genesis and an inevitable nemesis to oblivion by their own making, all perpetrated by evolution of mankind and the response of the evolving leadership style and the outcome of its committed enforcement. Science and innovation is no more under the dedicated and circumscribed ambit of control comprising exclusively of academicians, erudite professors, university and the scientists. Today there is a new paradigm to the spirit, purpose, utility and generation of innovation and its aftermath. Scientific or technological barriers are no more a bigger complexity to innovation than are social, community and infrastructural complexities for improved and peaceful co-existence of mankind. The Post-Modern era, which spanned the first distinct stage from 1950-1990 signifying the end of cold war era and then followed by the second stage wherein myriad technological innovations boomed such as the cable television, the internet and also marked the end of cold war itself, is witnessing a new paradigm to leadership as well. There is no more that age old testimonial of an outlasting or unified truth concept. Today truth is seen the way it is perceived by different individuals thanks to digital technology which has articulated well the tool of “deconstruction” to impart multiple connotations to the previously unified analogue interpretation of reality by disassembling its internal divisive constructions and reassembling it to the artistic personal taste of the consumer. There is no more one single reality which has now become absolutely meaningless and invalid, being heavily debated and challenged even in school education. Digital communications in the post modern era has ascertained its capability of delivering the emotional, artistic, cultural and community experiences of individuals who seek out such an experience from the digital media. The Internet and the World Wide Web together are probably the key differentiators and a delivery mechanism for not only teaching the society about leadership but also regulating and evolving the style of leadership into the future under the prevailing knowledge based economy. Let us delve deeper into why leadership is so important, the crises it faces today and what actually constitutes some of the effective past and present styles of leadership while also examining in depth how internet can and in fact is already playing an underpinning role in teaching the society about leadership. Significance of Leadership From time immemorial mankind has been led to evolution thus far by a leader who has been existent either as virtual or real. For some time in the pre-historic period man was under the leadership of nature and its dictates. He / She went by what best the nature present to him / her and life revolved completely around it. Subsequently invading kings and rulers became the leaders of the day and ran kingdoms, monarchy, fiefdoms and what not. Then slowly with traditional monarchs and kings fading away there was the birth of revolutionary social icons and architects of modern nations. Different systems of governments were formed to rule nations and countries far and wide all headed by a leader for successful governance of the progress of the nation. Today we see that a leader is required for every small group or association of people, be it in government, an organization, a community, a social chapter or a religious body. Though there are effective and ineffective leaders the concept of leadership has become inseparable for the efficient and productive living of mankind. Of course leaders in this post modern era have to negotiate the extremely complex nature of individuals leading them towards a common goal, purpose, cause or objective set before them. The individuals have all the ways and means today to perceive and interpret reality from their own perspectives. A capable and potential leader has to bring all these ramifications in thoughts and perceptions into oneness of thought and purpose steering all of them towards a common goal. For this the leader needs a strong vision and mission to be communicated to the team members, make them clearly understand the purpose and intent behind it and then effectively co-ordinate their actions towards achieving set objectives be it a government department, a private entrepreneur, a voluntary service organization, a hospitality dispensing establishment or even a military endeavor. More particularly in the creative arts segment a leader has to have strong passionate belief in himself / herself and in his / her style of functioning which should be uniformly and actively permeated among the followers considering the fact that the world views today are multiple and varied and there is no more one truth. Adequate financial resources have to back up clearly spelt out mission objectives to drive home today’s consumer oriented society. Leadership crises faced today According to modernist, Jean Baudillard, today culture in this consumer capitalistic society is facing an impending inward destruction and an ultimate inevitable collapse. This is more due to an attempt made towards mass consumption of culture in a curiosity to know more about it which devalues the culture itself. This he fears might finally lead to the destruction and debasement of the whole social fabric which is underpinned by the culture prevailing in the society. Quoting some typical examples he says that the preference of mass production media like audio CDs over the enchantment associated with a live concert performance of an art is symbolic of the grave mistake being committed in the artificial disguise of knowing more about culture leading to the debasement and total annihilation of the culture itself since the associated human achievement value to be upheld with the highest regard is lost altogether. The digital media today can manipulate and disseminate any culture change or cause culture shock, so to say, with an irredeemable impact on the destiny of the culture itself. Today even soup cans enjoy the value, admiration and followership that can parallel an art of Mona Lisa. The society or the mass wants to follow multiple false ideologies and not just one truth which is permanent. This complicates the mission and vision of the leader and the functioning style of the leadership which has to constantly and consistently cater to this differing and multiple expectations of ideologies by the society, as elaborated by Baudillard, which simply refuses to be pivoted along by a single common truth. With more and more commercialization of art and the simultaneous abandonment of a unified real view of the world by the masses the leadership of today face a stunning crises and have to surmount this tough situation which is only getting compounded with each day. Social Robustness Shaping Role of Leadership in 21st century The inseparable impact of science and technology on the economic and political scenario today and the view of 21st century about significance of science in the development of society have taken a new dimension under the current context of freedom of expression gained by people having multiple standpoints. According to (Nowotny, 1999) “there are three shifts in the altered relationship between science and society: the role played by science and technology in the political and economic arena; the public expectations of science; and the pervasive role played by scientific and technological expertise”. Science, here, is referred to by the author as the modernist or traditional view of the objective truth. It is not just the society which is gravitating towards this concept of multiple truths but even organizations have begun to embrace them. The author further suggests that reliable knowledge stops short of being defined as a universalistic view in this post modern era with the continuation of societal contextualization of knowledge and ultimately will end up as tied to a specific context. According to (Nowotny 2000) more and more will be demanded of science in the 21st century and a decisive shift in decision towards an extended notion of scientific knowledge will be adopted paving the way for a socially robust knowledge which is more context sensitive. Quoting the typical example of internet where individuals perform the dual role of producers and consumers of knowledge, Nowotny notes that the distinct layer between the expert and lay public is very quickly getting blurred if not faced. This according to him augurs well for the future unlike the view of Baudrillard who considers multiple truths as a divisive and debasing factor of culture. Nowotny goes on to describe the ancient Greek methodology of following an open democracy where participation was encouraged to usurp the otherwise secretive nature of knowledge sharing for the benefit of the public through the public forum. As more and more individuals become aware of their multiple roles in this knowledge based economy there would be a democratically evolving response to the scientific and technological developments that spur innovation. Socially robust knowledge today involves the use of alternate opinion of the experts and surveys in a public debate conducted by voluntary and social organizations all pointing towards a lack of trust in scientific knowledge (Nowotny 2003). It is quite imperative for the arts administrators to understand that the knowledge industries led by arts administrators will have to face heated debates and arguments where the context or media speaks back (Fredriksen and Hansson 2002). According to Stephen Covey, people’s values are influenced social norms such as emotional, subjective and open arguments. If a leader wishes to effect a change he / she should start from himself / herself, listen to feedback from those around them and then being working on those changes. Only this can help them bring about change in others. Trust-worthiness is the foundation for anything to be built over and above it. One finds Stephen Covey’s approach is very humane and sometimes he thinks certain people will never fit into a group situation and nothing can be done to make them fit also and hence have to be completely disregarded from the system. But he goes further as if warning the society that these outcasts might polarize to form another social group in this knowledge-centric multiple ideology loving post modern era. Relevance of Internet as the media of Social Robust knowledge It is highly debatable that whether the transition of the post modern era towards social robust knowledge has undermined the reliable nature of scientific knowledge. Not to worry as per (Gibbons 1999) who emphasizes that reliable knowledge cannot just be compromised by a shift towards social robust knowledge. Only the frontiers of reliability have to be reinterpreted and renegotiated by expanding the scientific realms which was so far acting as the delimiting boundaries to also include the agora (the Greek word for public space or participative democracy). This is to acknowledge and assimilate the fact that knowledge is no more confined to the controlled environment of academic or scientific peers. It can be no longer be vouched for or validation by conventional rules of traditional disciplines. A much broader range of social implications should be guiding and abetting knowledge production (Gibbons 1999). This translates to the most welcome fact that knowledge production, or innovation, has now moved away from the hitherto traditional bastions involving the government, academy, industry and universities to a broader spectrum of agora where any interested individual can undertake full and active participation in it. As rightly reflected upon by Gibbons the agora has become the public space where science meets the public as well as the public ‘speaks back’ to science. This agora or medium is in fact envisaged to be none other than the cyberspace or the internet or variously called as the World Wide Web too. In fact even the broadcasting and printing media can play a major role too. Once the knowledge platform is elevated to the internet there can be an open exchange of knowledge. Problems can be aired and solutions generated on the internet rendering it to be even amoral and without conscience thus placing knowledge outside of language, history or culture. The global role of internet in articulating the social robust knowledge is very important since it protect investments in new production facilities, equipment and innovative products by assuring social or consumer relevance. Articles on the internet impart valuable lessons which can improve the advancement of earlier models. The vast reach and widespread commercialization that is possible on the internet leads to an overall improvement in technical standards, economic performance and productivity. In total social robust knowledge through the medium of internet can help eradicate and resolve all kinds of social and environmental issues and provide leadership guidance in the respective areas. Whereas the manufacturing economy of the twentieth century was primarily centered on production, distribution and use of goods, the knowledge based economy of the 21st century aided ably at the forefront by the internet has entailed the production, distribution and use of knowledge and information (Drucker 2001). Mode-1 and Mode-2 Society Tremendous upheaval of the society in the last quarter of the twentieth century and the first decade of the 21st century have introduced a sea-change in the role of the new leader as compared to the earlier manufacturing era. In this context the role of contingency leadership in the manufacturing era or the Mode-1 society and the creative knowledge economy or the Mode-2 society has to be closely examined. Also there is a noticeable shift in the expectation and acceptance by the Mode-2 society of the knowledge production. Mode-1 society is surrounded by the bygone modernist era connotations of scientism depicting “big projects, great narratives, universalism and unification, of big problems and big solutions” (Nowotny et al 2001). The reducing influence of academic or scientific control over knowledge production is a prime feature of Mode-2 society. In Mode-2 society social robustness abounds unlike the regulation of science by homogenous academic knowledge producers of the Mode-1 society. Knowledge in Mode-2 society is publicly debated and involves conflicting participants allowing the context to “speak back” to science in the public space or agora. The Mode-2 society marks the transition of western capitalist economy from the Keynesian welfare model pervasive in the manufacturing era spanning the period 1940 to 1990 (the Mode-1 society) to Schumpeterian entrepreneurial competition. The latter is the driving force of knowledge capitalism where entrepreneurs spur change in society rather than governments. Continuous innovation which has been rendered systemic in the design of goods and services drive the entrepreneurial competition and sustain continuous innovation. Knowledge is the additional third intrinsic component for the economic production of knowledge capitalism in addition to the principal commodities of labour and capital, which had generated wealth for the bygone manufacturing capitalism. Drivers of Mode-1 and Mode-2 Society / Transition to Mode-2 Mode-1 society signified the economic order of a Keynesian Welfare State which shifted later to Mode-2 society which upholds the Schumpeterian Workfare State. A transition from Mode-1 society of Nation-State Knowledge control to Mode-2 society of Global Knowledge Democracy involving the reduction of influence of nation state control to knowledge production in Mode-2 society. The Mode-1 society assumed without any due regards, an environmental equilibrium which is product-time oriented whereas a transition to Mode-2 society saw the birth of real-time orientation which took into account the entrepreneurial dynamic of “winds of destruction”. Mode-2 society heralded the consideration of complexity by focusing on the links between nodes of a network rather than merely the nodes of a network as witnessed by a linear based Mode-1 society. From a stifling entrepreneurial dynamic of Mode-1 control managed society the transition was to an enhanced entrepreneurial dynamic signified by the emergence management of Mode-2 society. The modernism as seen by Mode-1 society was subjected to a marked shift to post modernism as seen by Mode-2 society which translated the attitude of possibility in search of a newer space. The Mode-2 society knowledge worker adopted higher standards by working with possibles rather than probables as exemplified by Mode-1 society. A radical shift from a risk immunized welfare state of Mode-1 society to a rational state trading capital risk adopted by the Mode-2 society. Mode-2 society as opposed to Mode-1 society signifies knowledge production characterized by transgressiveness, arising in multiple places and involving multiple disciplines and workers. A transition from competence based Mode-1 society to a capability based Mode-2 society while including complex dimensions of socio-economic factors and the work structure thereof. Transiting from a mere use of knowledge by Mode-1 society to one of knowledge creation by the Mode-2 society. Last but not the least instead of a conjuring act of maximization purported by the Mode-1 society a welcome transition to Mode-2 society characterized by Optimization which underlies the impending economic imperative to create opportunities by continuous innovation rather than staying tethered to an equilibrium state. Conclusion Considering all the outlined expert subject matter so far on the nature, style and significance of leadership in this post modern era together with the role, advantages and prominence of internet in the present Mode-2 society when contrasted with that of the Mode-1 society, it is very easy for us to comprehend the fact that internet is the only natural medium which can supplement and complement the role of teaching responsible leadership to society. Being the utopian contextual agora or the public space for any kind of knowledge sharing and public debate together with the quality of an inexhaustible and ever expanding resource and platform for the knowledge production and consumption the internet is but an invaluable asset to today’s knowledge-centric economy serving ably and aptly the needs of teaching leadership to the society. References Baudrillard, Jean, (2001): Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings, USA, Stanford University Press; ISBN: 0804742731 Bennis, Warren (1999): The Leadership Advantage, Leader to Leader, No. 12 Spring Bennis, Warren G., and Nanus, Burt, (2007): Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge, Collins; ISBN-10: 0060559543 ISBN-13: 978-0060559540 Drucker, Peter, (2001): The New Workforce, The Economist. Excerpted From Peter Drucker's Survey On "The Near Future," The Economist. Graham, Clive, (2003): The Transition From Mode-1 To Mode-2 Society: The Implications For Education, Immelt, Jeff, (2004): Things Leaders Do, Fast Company Issue 81 April Maxwell, John C., (2007): The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader: Becoming the Person Others Will Want to Follow, Thomas Nelson ISBN-10: 0785289046 ISBN-13: 978-0785289043 Mullins, L.J. (2002) Management and Organizational Behaviour, 7th edition, Essex UK Financial Times Prentice Hall. Northouse, Peter G., (2006): Leadership: Theory and Practice: Sage Publications, ISBN-10: 141294161X ISBN-13: 978-1412941617 Nowotny, Helga (1999): The Need for Socially Robust Knowledge, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Abridged version of “The Place of People in our Knowledge”, European Review, Vol. 7, No.2, 247-262 (1999). Nowotny, Helga (2000): Democratizing Expertise and Socially Robust Knowledge, Science and Public Policy, volume 30, number 3, June 2003, pp. 151-156. Nowotny, Helga, Scott, Peter and Gibbons, Michael (2001): Re-Thinking Science, Polity, USA. Nowotny, Helga, Scott, Peter and Gibbons, Michael (2001): Rethinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in the Age of Uncertainty. Polity Press. ISBN 0745626084 Nowotny, Helga (2003): The Production of Socially Robust Knowledge, Extract from “The Potential of Transdisciplinarity”, Pugh, Derek (1997): Organization Theory: Selected Readings, UK, Penguin. Shelton, Ken, (2000): A New Paradigm of Leadership, USA, Executive Excellence Publishing. Stephen Covey (2000): The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, USA, Fireside (Simon and Schuster). Read More