would propose a transformational model of leadership, which is informed by the scriptures andinsights from complexity science. In this paper I will be using McCloskey’s 4-R Model of leadership as a framework for my study.
The Failure of Classical Models
Before we turn to McCloskey’s model, let us examine why classic leadership models arefailing. According Angelique Keene, “The dominant organizational paradigm remains wedded toscientific management theories which reflect a philosophy that remains committed to a need for control and prediction.”
Control and prediction however, assume a very linear and mechanisticconcept of the world, where simple cause-and-effect solutions are expected to describe natural processes – but in actuality cannot.
Scientists are now beginning to realize that most of the world isnonlinear and organic, characterized by uncertainty and unpredictability
Informing therevolution in scientific inquiry is Complexity Theory, a new science, which studies the relational phenomena of chaos and emergence in dynamic systems. Chaos, generally speaking, describes theunpredictable nature of complex systems (like weather patterns, the stock market, etc.). Emergenceon the other hand, describes the phenomena of how complex patterns “emerge” (in a seeminglyspontaneous way) out of relatively simple systems under certain conditions.Regine and Lewin, note several
surrounding the concept of leadership which growout of the linear/mechanistic world view: The myths of Autonomy, Control, and Omniscience.Much of the failure of historic models of leadership can be attributed to instances where one actson these presuppositions, and fails to achieve the desired results, or where one expects outcomes based on these assumptions which are unrealistic.
Keene, Angelique, “Complexity Theory: The Changing Role of Leadership” Industrial and Commercial Training Vol. 32, Number 1 •2000 © iMCB University Press • p. 15
Regine, p 6