Leadership 4.0

Artley (2018) warns that we continue to underestimate the scale and speed of change leaders have to navigate and lead in in an integrated, positive, human and impactful way in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. (Schwab, 2016).

But, our oversimplified and fixed models of leadership do not acknowledge the inherent complexity of human behaviour and the context within which this behaviour occurs. (Singh, 2014). Pick up any of the popular books leadership today and you will still find a list of traits that are thought to be central to effective leadership. The main problem with using traits as a dominant approach is that it negates adult development and neuroplasticity research that believes people can develop further as leaders by supposing leaders are born with innate traits. The approach fixes effectiveness of leadership and limits the value of learning and teaching in regard to leadership. Innate personality traits may indeed not be as fixed or influential in leadership as the theory proposes. Furthermore, trait theory fails to take situations into account that different situations may require different behaviours from leaders namely when dealing with Tame, Wicked and Critical Problems (Grint, 2008).

Veldsman and Johnson (2016) describes the dilemma we find ourselves in as such:

“Leadership is in an overheating crucible of a reframed world in the throes of fundamental and radical transformation. The search is on for better and different leadership. Without any doubt leadership is the critical strategic capability of nations, communities and organisations, making them sustainably future-fit. To the best of our knowledge, no overall, systemic, integrated and holistic view of leadership exists, and few organisations adopt a systemic, integrated approach to leadership.“ (pp. 1, 2)

Kelly (2019) describes leadership in terms of Leadership 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0. Leadership 1.0 was charisma-led. This idea of the natural born leader was widespread in the mills and factories from the late eighteenth century through to the late nineteenth century where the military term ‘captains of industry’ was coined by Thomas Carlyle in his 1943 book, Past and Present. Leadership 2.0 was the era of scientific management. Commentators such as Herbert Spenser thought the great man theory was unscientific believing individuals to be shaped by their social environment.

Leadership 3.0 came about in the late 1970s, when various studies and discussions relating to transformational leadership called for a more engaged leadership where the leader builds a meaningful relationship with the follower. Until this point, behaviourism and many of the leadership development models and tools encouraged leaders to transact with followers but transaction was about exchange and control.

Gloor (2017) and Kelly (2019) describe Leadership 4.0 as Swarm Leadership - leadership that is adaptive, emergent, connected, responsive, and collaborative. He sees it as forming part of the collective theories of leadership but points out how it differs from shared and distributed leadership by being part of a self-organising complex adaptive system. He describes this type of leadership as responsive  - leaders responding to situations in an intentionally adaptive way.

King and Van Seters and Field (1990) propose this next era of leadership as more complex and integrated than any of the eras before calling it the Integrative Era. They believe new theories will be added at the same time that previous theories will be integrated and this has certainly been the case.

Veldsman and Johnson (2016) also propose an integrated future-fit model of leader capabilities in the context of the new world of work. They urge us to re-imagine at a deep level leadership in holistic, organic, integrated and dynamic way as whole person, in terms of ability, intelligence, maturity, ethics and authenticity, befitting his/ her eco-systemic relationships, all dynamically aligned simultaneously in real time to institutionalise virtuous cycles.

Leadership 4.0 is integrative, complex and multi-layered. There is a need for lifelong horizontal and vertical development journeys using adult development theory, virtuous cycles and neuroplasticity as core theories of continuous growth. Leadership needs to be scaled to enable work in new contexts of digital, virtual and flexible environments that are in constant flux with wicked problems that can only be solved collectively.

 Are your leaders ready?