2. Purpose of the study
Espoused beliefs of leaders in 4 courts and 4 hospitals:
What it takes to form and sustain an effective leadership
coalition
What their organizations can do to support the leadership
team’s success.
Considered through lenses of organizational theory and
organizational systems theories
3. Why does this inquiry matter to court and hospital leaders?
1. The public wants fair and user-friendly access to justice and healthcare
2. The public wants trustworthy, cost effective, and transparent institutions
3. Social and economic climates are extremely dynamic
4. Few LCO leaders have training or experience in coalition leadership
5. Core professionals struggle most to collaborate across disciplines
6. Leadership coalition members enter and exit at different times
5. If there is responsiveness without distinctiveness, the
system is tightly coupled.
If there is distinctiveness without responsiveness, the
system is decoupled.
If there is both distinctiveness and responsiveness,
the system is loosely coupled.
(Orton and Weick, 1990, p. 205)
6. Hierarchies are brilliant systems inventions, not only because they
give a system stability and resilience, but also because they reduce
the amount of information that any part of the system has to keep
track of.
In hierarchical systems relationships within each subsystem are
denser and stronger than relationships between subsystems.
Everything is still connected to everything else, but not equally
strongly.
(Meadows, 2008, p. 83)
8. Presiding Judge,
Chief Medical Officer
Court Executive Officer,
Chief Medical Officer
Administrative, professional & support staff
Leadership coalition
Loosely coupled organization
9. Loosely coupled organizations are densely networked & permeable
Success of leadership coalition is predicated on a partnership within the
“heterarchy of hierarchies” (Stephenson, 2009, p. 3)
Interdependent, semi-autonomous hierarchies (neither can deliver
signature services without cooperation of the other)
Core professionals often identify more with profession than with host
organization
Core professionals’ ability to perform job can only be assessed by
similarly trained professionals
12. Strengths of loosely coupled organizations:
Adapt to a knowledge-based economy
Foster creativity and experimentation with change
Resilient in the face of rapid change
Support increasing specialization among the professions
Dampen the impact of failed initiatives launched in one part of the
organization
Allow subordinate groups to maintain hierarchies headed by those with
similar skills
(Banathy, 1996)
13. Weaknesses of loosely coupled organizations:
Difficult to navigate
The organization has reduced ability to exert influence or control over its
subordinate units (especially core professionals)
Inherent tension between the core professionals’ drive to convene and
deliver organizational resources one case, customer, or patient at a time
and the administrator’s need to achieve economies of scale as a way to
maximize limited resources
(Fusarelli, 2002)
14. Leaders’ perceived challenges:
The existence of strong ties and allegiances outside of the organization
The different and disparate skills and abilities of individuals in different
subordinate groups
The existence of multiple hierarchies within the organization
Prevailing tensions between achievement of economies of scale and
customization of services to match individual needs
15. Findings based on participant responses:
Leaders know their organizations are loosely coupled
Alignment within leadership coalitions and organization is critical
Critical to value each other’s role, responsibilities, and skills
Core professionals need lots of help to understand administrative issues
CEOs (more than core professionals) cannot favor any constituency
Core professionals must view their work as part of a larger whole
16. Recommendations from organizational theory:
Develop and focus on shared goals
Help subordinate groups value each others’ contribution
Expedite the integration of core professionals in administrative issues
Build power-sharing and collaborative decision making skills
Implement leadership succession planning initiatives
Increase ways consumers can help maximize organizational goals
Strengthen core professionals’ “investment” in the organization
17. Recommendations from organizational systems theory:
Vary the strength of organizational coupling
Strengthen internal networks
Integrate external networks productively
Embed learning organization principles (Senge, 1990)
Construct fractal leadership models (Wheatley, 1999) throughout
18. Tightly Coupled Organizations Loosely Coupled Organizations
Governance
Organizational and resource allocation
decision made by a single individual (may
or may not be subject to ratification by a
board)
Regardless of qualifications of named figurehead,
governance resembles a coalition of leaders from
distinct and semiautonomous subordinate groups
Leadership
Structure
Single hierarchy reporting to a single
career CEO
At least two identifiable, semiautonomous
subordinate divisions, each with its own hierarchy:
core professionals rotate leadership by peer election
every year or two; administrative and operational
services are appointed to career positions
Decision-Making
Single individual with full authority over all
decisions (may or may not be subject to
ratification by a board)
Single individual with substantial input and
cooperation of leadership coalition (may or may not
be subject to ratification by a board)
Accountability
Most organizational employees are
accountable only to the CEO and host
organization (as long as those required to
maintain a license do so)
Core professionals are accountable to their host
organization as well as to their licensing boards or
professional association and whatever external
appointing authority (legislatures, governors, voters)
may exist
19. Conclusions:
The differences between loosely coupled and tightly
coupled organizations are significant, so leadership mindset
and strategies must be adjusted
Many, if not most, leaders in loosely coupled organizations
have had little preparation for coalition leadership
Core professionals find it hardest to “work across the
professional divide”
Leaders need not bear full responsibility for their coalition’s
success, organizational structures can and should be
arranged to help
20. References:
Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York, NY,
Plenum Press.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2002). Tightly coupled policy in loosely coupled systems: Institutional
capacity and organizational change. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(6),
561–575.
Meadows, D. (2009). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Solutions for a
sustainable and desirable future, 1(1), 41–49. Retrieved from
http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/419
Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization.
Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203–223.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning
organization. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
Stephenson, K. (2009). Neither hierarchy nor network: An argument for heterarchy.
People and Strategy, 32(1), 3–7.
Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-
Kohler.