2.4 Facilitating effective LED
2.4.2 Leading LED facilitation in complex environments
41 strategic partners, namely: the private sector, the municipality, academia and the local community within that specific geographic area. This partnership creates an opportunity for innovation, constructive discussion and the exploitation of resources and comparative advantage among the local partners involved (Coetzee, 2014). The author notes that LED occurs in complex environments, and as such, the success of these spatial cross-sectional partnerships can tend to encounter problems, which, the author believes, can be overshadowed by the possible benefits of collaborative determination (Coetzee, 2014).
Likewise, Hardman (2011:41) used a systems thinking approach to understand the role of cross-sector partnerships in LED and found that “the systemic partnership approach recognises the interconnected, complex nature of problem situations and the potential richness of the complementary nature of different organisational constructs, resources and competencies”. This is thus believed to promote collective effort, collaboration and participative involvement of all key actors and resource strengths to achieve LED. Khambule (2014) augments this, arguing that the institutionalization of a social dialogue at local government level is of key importance in fostering these partnerships. The author further stresses the importance of including informal business within this dialogue on LED matters, emphasising that this will enable inclusive dialogue and attempt to foster pro-poor development planning. Therefore, to see this through, regionalism and regional economic development proves to better at fostering partnerships with numerous scholars and practitioners having started shifting their planning towards regionalism and regional economic development as a means to promote successful LED implementation (Van Niekerk & Bunding-Venter, 2015).
42 interactions as opposed to the components that are contained within. The author goes on to highlight the application of complexity in different organizations and finds that the theory of complexity has significant implications for the general framework required to understand complex organizations.
To understand this, one would have to understand complexity theory and its origins.
Complexity theory is not a single theory but rather an ensemble of ideas, concepts and metaphors drawn primarily from the physical and natural sciences that are considered to be applicable to all sorts of complex systems. Research on complexity theory originated at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico and was presented as the study of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) (Chan, 2001). CAS, as defined, is various components within a system that has many interactions and interdependencies, characterized by complex behaviour emerging as a result of non- linearity (Anderson, 1999; Boal & Schultz, 2007; Chan, 2001; Cilliers, 2000;
Goodwin, 2000; Maxfield, 1998; Pina e Cunha & Vieira da Cunha, 2006; Plowman, Solansky, Beck, Baker, Kulkarni & Travis, 2007; Price, 2004). As noted, LED facilitation and implementation occurs in complex environments and is found in itself to be a complex process. Thus, complexity theory studies attempt to explain the behaviour of complex adaptive systems and have major implications for organizations operating in this complex environment. Cilliers (2000) highlights a number of these key implications, including:
the element of relationships which the author believes to be fundamental in complex organizations;
stating that complex organizations are open systems whereby boundaries are not clearly defined;
with the history of the organization considered important as it co-determine its nature;
unpredictable characteristics that may emerge from an organization;
where the nonlinearity of interactions may cause small changes to have huge impacts (where the reverse holds true);
self-organization can occur within organizations and within complex systems;
43
asserting that too much central control can lead to complex organizations not thriving; and
that complex organizations tend to work best in shallow structures.
Consequently, LED is an emergent property of interaction within and amongst business, civil society and government (Hardman, 2011). Lawson (2012), in assessing LED systems within municipalities, found four dominant challenges as hindrances to the success of LED, including how LED practice and performance is to be measured, data gathered, feedback given to municipal leadership and how learning can be better facilitated for improvement. The author emphasizes how organizational behaviours prominent in municipalities are key in the assessment of LED systems including the “leadership style, power struggles, levels of co-operation and who makes the final decision” (Lawson, 2012:69). Thus, Schoburgh (2014) argues that to successfully realise local government‟s full capacity, high quality leadership is required. The author further notes that developmental local government is hindered by organizational strategies that are still built on values that are no longer suited to modern-day leadership and management skills and development standards.
Local leadership is crucial for successful LED facilitation (Meyer, 2014). Thus, Nel and Rogerson (2005), highlight the leadership role as an important factor in the development process, stressing that, there is a need for municipalities to become more strategic, visionary and influential in their operations to drive economic development. Moyo (2007) shares these sentiments, arguing that visionary leadership is required within municipal spaces to help drive transformational LED within local municipalities. Thus, Ingle (2014:479) identifies leadership as one of the important factors for LED, stressing it as “a critical ingredient for successful LED”.
However, Weberg (2012) argues that traditional leadership theories have not been able to adequately define the role of a leader in complex environments where change often emerges unexpectedly. Consequently, the role of leadership in complex adaptive systems as alluded to by Marion and Uhl-Bien (2001) cited by Plowman et al. (2007) is that in the context of emergent unexpected change, leaders need to act as enablers of change as opposed to the traditional views that expect leaders to direct and influence change.
44 While organisational studies on the leadership role and LED facilitation and implementation at local government are rather limited within the country, substantial research on leadership in the public sector exists. Various research has examined leadership across different contexts and countries (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Boal &
Schultz, 2007; Erkutlu, 2008; Guetterman & Mitchell, 2016; Ogbonna & Harris, 2000;
Ojokuku, Odetayo & Sajuyigbe, 2012; Olmedo, 2012; Plowman et al., 2007; Van Seters & Field, 1990; Van Wart, 2003; Weberg, 2012). Leadership theory has evolved over time with its intensification in the 20th century. Its history reveals multiple leadership eras that reflect upon its trail. In analysing these evolutionary eras and periods, the major leadership theories have been summarized providing a broad framework. Some of the significant leadership theories recognised consist of, the Great man theory (19th century), Trait theory (1930s – 1940s), Behavioural theories (1940s – 1950s), Contingency theory (1960s), Transactional theory (1970s) and Transformational theory (1970s - present) (Van Seters & Field, 1990; Van Wart, 2003).
The combination of all of these leadership theories and practices continues to play a key role in how leadership is perceived in today‟s world, with some dominating more than others. In analysing these eras, it became clear that through its evolution, leadership has moved away from being a one-dimensional process to being more multidimensional. In adapting to the ever-changing world, effective leadership plays a key role especially where change often emerges unexpectedly. Ojokuku et al.
(2012:202) define a leader as a “person who influences, directs, and motivates others to perform specific tasks and also inspire his subordinates for efficient performance towards the accomplishment of the stated corporate objectives”.
Consequently, leaders are strategically positioned to respond to these changes that emerge whilst the style of leadership then determines the organizations success or failure.
In its evolution, modern leadership theory has introduced five leadership styles which include: charismatic leadership, which is based on traits and the personality of the leader; transactional leadership, which involves implicit exchange between the leader and the follower; transformational leadership focused on developing followers and providing motivation, meaning and purpose; autocratic leadership as leaders who are inexperienced who got into leadership by position or assignment that
45 involves people management; bureaucratic leaders as policy driven, relying on policy to drive strategy, objectives and outcomes; and lastly democratic leadership where decision making is decentralized and shared (Ojokuku et al., 2012). Malefane (2009) states that, LED implementation within municipalities is bureaucratic and authoritative and as such limits LED implementation in municipalities. Whereby the decisions taken by management and leadership are of key importance as they directly affect overall organizational effectiveness of municipalities (Pretorius &
Schurink, 2007). As such, it needs to be recognized that leadership is a complex shared process that is not found solely in the leader, but can be found in dyadic, groups, individuals and organisations (Van Seters & Field, 1990).
However, in complex environments where change often happens unexpectedly, the role of a complex leader is put to question. Olmedo (2012) states that the roles of complex leaders should not be to create organizational systems that are able to adapt and survive in changing environments, but rather to continuously manage the balance between developing new ideas and concepts through inspiring a culture of innovation. This implies that the development of adaptive leadership is needed when operating in environments filled with uncertainty. Apenko and Chernobaeva (2016), argue that leaders need to be capable of self-organization and of adapting in complex situations, to improve business effectiveness. Numerous studies linking leadership to organizational performance have been done in different contexts, disciplines and organizations (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Ogbonna & Harris, 2000;
Olmedo, 2012; Ojokuku et al., 2012). Erkutlu (2008) in studying the impact of transformational leadership on organizational and leadership effectiveness in the hospitality industry found that effective leadership behaviour has a significant impact on both the effectiveness of the leader and the organization. Consequently, LED facilitation within municipalities requires strong leadership and complex adaptive leaders to drive its success.