by DAN CALLOWAY
Published 24 July 2010
Member of the ACM
WEAVERVILLE, NC - Three quantitative attributes or variables that I consider essential in representing what should be considered an effective leadership style in the professional area of Information Technology especially as it relates to my former local government organization are based, to a large degree, on model 1 of servant leadership as outlined in Russel and Stone (2002, figure 1, p. 147). These attributes are also referred to as the functional attributes or dependent variables of the model, and I have selected among them the three quantitative attributes of: vision, honesty & integrity, and credibility.
The central role of an effective IT leader is one of vision. By vision, I mean the ability to establish a strategic view of the business and the role that IT plays in that strategic viewpoint. A good IT leader is one who has the ability to foresee the future of the organization and to virtually know the unknowable (Russel & Stone, 2002, p. 147). Another important attribute of effective leadership that I believe is essential in any IT organization is that of honesty and integrity. Both honesty and integrity are integral parts of any effective leader and are essential if the followers in the organization are going to buy into what the leader proposes. The honesty and integrity of the leader is representative of his/her overall character and this attribute is critical to establishing the credibility of that leader (Russel & Stone, pp. 147-148). And, last but certainly not least, a third attribute of an effective IT leader whether it is in a local government organization or the corporate private sector is credibility. Credibility is defined by The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (1992) as “the quality, capability, or power to elicit belief” (Russel & Stone, p. 148). Both honesty and integrity facilitate interpersonal credibility; is an essential ingredient in good leadership; and, as Russel and Stone state in citing Kouzes and Posner (1995) is “how leaders earn the trust and confidence of their constituents” (p. xvii).
These functional attributes or dependent variables of servant leadership, which I have enumerated as being essential in the development of an effective IT leader are related to one another and stem from the accompanying attributes or moderating variables of communications, competence, stewardship, visibility, influence, and encouragement, just to name a few (Russel & Stone, 2002, p. 154). Furthermore, these accompanying attributes are related to the independent variables of servant leadership known as values, core beliefs, and principles (Russel & Stone, p. 154).
Within the IT department of the local government organization for which I once worked, the IT director’s values, core beliefs, and principles laid the foundation for the accompanying attributes or variables representing his communication skills, competence in leading his people, stewardship for the organization and for the County citizens whom he served, his visibility, influence and encouragement both within and without the organization that set the precedent for effective leadership and guidance of the IT director’s subordinates and the constituents with whom he worked. The IT director’s vision, honesty and integrity, and credibility allowed him to effectively lead his department to be successful in reaching the goals he had set for his department and for County government..
References
(The) American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 3rd ed., (1992). Redmond, WA: Houghton Mifflin Company, electronic version licensed from Intersoft International, Contained in Bookshelf, 1995/Office professional version 7.0.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Russel, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(3/4), 145-157. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.library.capella.edu/pqdweb?index=0&did=265994061&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1279742744&clientId=62763.
Dan Calloway
WEAVERVILLE, NC - Reich and Benbasat (2000) argue that the establishment of a strong long-term alignment between IT and organizational objectives received its greatest influence from shared domain knowledge between the two factions. Here, shared domain knowledge is defined by Reich and Benbasat (2000) “as the ability of IT and business executives, at a deep level, to understand and be able to participate in others’ key processes and to respect each other’s unique contribution and challenges” (p. 86). Research conducted years later by Luftman and Kempaiah (2007) appeared to modify the findings of Reich and Benbasat (2000) by indicating that there are three reasons why attaining IT-business alignment has been so elusive: (1) the definition of alignment is frequently focused only on how IT aligns with the business organization; (2) organizations have often looked for a silver bullet wherein mature alignment cannot be attained without effective and efficient execution and a demonstration of value, but this is not sufficient; and (3) there has not been an effective tool with which to measure the maturity of IT-business alignment—one that can provide a descriptive assessment and a prescription on how to improve. Luftman and Kempaiah (2007) went on to identify six components of alignment maturity: (1) communications, (2) value, (3) governance, (4) partnership, (5) scope and architecture, and (6) skills. Furthermore, they identified five levels of alignment maturity within organizations: (1) Level One – initial or ad-hoc processes, (2) Level Two – committed processes, (3) Level Three – established focused processes, (4) Level Four – Improved managed processes, and (5) Level Five – optimized processes. They determined through their research that the majority of organizations are at Level Three on their alignment maturity scale.
Recent Comments