The
world is complex and so are the environments that leaders navigate. New
environments require leaders to be adaptive and adjust their behaviors to
overcome multiple demands. At present, the literature is weak on understanding
the theoretical implications of complex leadership styles. The researchers Thatcher,
et. al (2013), discuss a model of association between the leader’s self-concepts
(the mind) and the neuro-scientific basis of this complexity (the brain). They
found that complexity of thought, effectiveness, and brain differentiation work
together.
Because
of the increasing ambiguity of world factors, a number of scientists have begun
to discuss the adaptive complexity that leaders display in order to make
effective decisions (Denison,
et. al., 1995). The nature of that complexity of thought is mixed integrally
with adaptive decision-making. In this case, adaptation “refers to the process by which an individual achieves some degree of
fit between his or her behaviors and the new work demands created by the novel
and often ill-defined problems resulting from changing and uncertain work situations.
(Chan, 2000, pg. 4)”
The ability to think through the
varying scenarios and situations to come to proper conclusions is based upon
the meta-cognitive deep-seated abilities of the leaders that influence their
self-concepts. Over time, these skills integrate to create complex mental
constructs that are integrated with concepts of self to make it easier for such
leaders to make decisions that are more effective and thought out (Lord et al.,
2011). It is a process of experiencing that allows deep perception to
differentiate key aspects of the environment and then integrate them into a
complex and information laden framework. Some may call this the conceptual
blend of environmental stimuli.
Adaptive decision-making is a
process of self-awareness that allows individuals to see various situations and
social influences that weigh on any particular decision (Endsley, 1995). It
comes from a development of the concept of self
that understands the underlining themes of various cultures and how this self fits within those cultures. It can
traverse the complexities of culture and its various aspects to adjust behavior
when the times call for it. It is not a surface skill that’s learned by the
majority of the population, as it requires an ability to see self in time and space and have the
following characteristics (Endsley, 1995):
1.) Perceive changes that are occurring
in the environment,
2.) Interpret environmental
information and integrate it into goals while understanding the implications of
those changes on self.
3.) Make predictions of future
events and the systems that develop under the new context.
The researcher’s model argues that
the leader develops a battery of selves
they can access in any given situation. Those who are not complex will simply
not comprehend many aspects of a situation and rely on a single or few concepts
of self to interpret their
environment. The ability to think complexly with multiple
self-constructs is based in the neuro-connections of the brain. Research has
indicated that complex concepts do not map themselves to one spot within the
brain but to multiple areas (Cacioppo, et. al, 2008). Therefore, those that can
draw from multiple areas can think at level deeper and richer levels when
compared to others.
It is believed that these processes
of the brain create effective leadership. The prefrontal lobes are responsible
for executive control and behavior (Chow & Cummings, 1999). It is this part
of the brain that regulates the internal states as a response to environmental
stimuli. Those that function well processing emotion, stimuli, goal directed
behavior, and social awareness are able to succeed in other leadership
possibilities.
As the brain processes information
its complexity will determine what types of memories it can access based upon
its neural wiring. These memories and experiences direct behavior. Complex
thinkers have complex brains that are able to access multiple parts of their
brains, adjust which processes they are using, and find alternative strategies
to achieve their objectives. Such brains are seen as the highest form of
leadership and human functioning (Smith et al., 1997).
Thatcher,
et. al (2013), conducted a study in which 103 military members were used to
study the psychological neurological aspects of decision-making. They used an EEG
system to determine neural activities within the brain. Participants were given a military scenario
in which they would have to create adaptive thinking to make it through
appropriately. They found that leaders that are more complex demonstrated greater
adaptive thinking, decisiveness, and positive actions as they interacted with
task demands in response to evolving four-part scenarios that escalated
throughout the trials. The EEG machine showed that such leaders had
differentiated activities throughout the brain when solving complex problems
and responding to events making them more accurate and effective.
The
report furthers the concept that leadership is partly hardwired into the brain
and that experience and skill can be used as a method to draw out such
leadership. The nature vs. nurture debate becomes more defined as basic
neurological adaptability processes match with experience and skills to
create effectiveness in responding to environmental stimuli. The study of the
brain and its ability adds to the possibility of selecting those students with
the highest possibilities for leadership.
Cacioppo, J. et. al. (2008).
Neuroimaging as a new tool in the toolbox of psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
17, 62–67.
Chow, T., & Cummings, J. L.
(1999). Frontal-subcortical circuits. In
B. L. Miller & J. L. Cummings (Eds.), The human frontal lobes: Functions and
disorders (pp. 3–26). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Chan, D. (2000). Understanding
adaptation to changes in the work environment: Integrating individual difference
and learning perspectives. Research in
Personnel and Human Resources Management, 18, 1–42.
Denison, D. (1995). Paradox and performance:
Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6,524–540
Endsley, M. (1995b). Toward a theory
of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human
Factors, 37, 32–64.
Lord, et. al. (2011). A framework
for understanding leadership and individual requisite complexity. Organizational Psychology Review, 1,104–127.
Smith, et. al. (1997). Building adaptive expertise: Implications
for training design strategies. In M. A. Quinones & A. Ehrenstein
(Eds.), Training for a rapidly changing workplace (pp.89–118). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10260-004
Thatcher,
et. al. (2013). The psychological and neurological bases of leader
self-complexity and effects on adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (3).
