Quantum Leadership: Short Paper 1

Patricia L. Garansuay

Wayland Baptist University

QUANTUM LEADERSHIP: SHORT PAPER 11

With the rapid shift into the technological age, today’s leadersmust adapt and accommodate to new and innovative ways of thinking. No longer is the traditional linear process the guiding algorithm for systems management. Quantum theory and quantum leaders must now look at today’s world through the lens of relational and whole systems models (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) Excelling in the midst of major social transformation requires leaders to embrace the fact that changes are inevitable and unavoidable. Key principles in the quantum age include knowing that structure is about wholes not parts, work is only valuable in the context of fulfilling its purpose, technology has forever changed the landscape of the work environment, and leaders must be adaptable and flexible. New skills and insight can, in fact, be learned and quantum leaders will need to be able to feel the excitement of change and catalyze others to rally behind them in the journey of discovery and advancement (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.)

Although there are several guiding principles for quantum leaders in this new age, one in particular stands out as it applies to the healthcare setting. That is, that all health care is local. “Point of service drives about 90 percent of the decision making in a healthy and effective system” (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011, p. 52.) Healthcare is a service setting in which the structure of the system should be closely evaluated to make sure that there is no more structure in place than that which is minimally needed. If there is too much structure, resources are taken to sustain that structure and not the services being provided. One way to allow for this reduction in structure is to allow more decision making at the level of care. By allowing staff at the service level to have joint decision making authority, partnership, accountability, equity and ownership are established. Research has also shown that establishing professional development programs within an organization, opportunities for genuine collaboration can provide the skills neededto share leadership and accountability effectively (Chrispeels, 2004.) Point of service workers, in turn, have an obligation to ensure that their activities and decisions are congruent and support the goals and purpose of the system within which they function. Resultingly, there will be a symbiotic relationship established that fulfills the systems purpose and makes a positive benefit to the lives of those served (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.)

Healthcare being local is just one of several principles that guide leaders in the quantum age. However, when this principle is evaluated in depth, it is easy to see many other key principles and how they are all inter-related. The idea that the whole is made up of parts and that adding value to a part adds value to a whole is clearly illustrated by allowing decision making at the service level. Employees who actually perform the day to day tasks within an organization may, many times, feel like their small part does not matter. However, it is quite the opposite. By including these employees in the decision making processes within their organizational structure, they become empowered and this feeling of value positively impacts the entire system. Recognizing and embracing diversity, understanding that systems thrive when all of their functions intersect and interact, and adapting to the lessons learned from making mistakes are also integral principles of quantum leadership (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.)

Utilizing these principles healthcare leaders will be better able to consider, compile, synthesize, and evaluate multiple factors within the healthcare setting. There has been a focus on best practices in businesses over the past years, however, it is important to note that just because things work well in one place does not been they will work equally well in another (Anderson & McDaniel, 2000.) Quantum leaders must recognize that organizations will need to customize their individual models of healthcare delivery in order to meet their organizational goals. Cost, cost shifting, demand without accountability, evidence utilization, and avoidance of ambiguous evidence all need to be taken under consideration (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) Tackling issues associated with a complex health care system requires a strategy. Fraser and Greenhalgh (2001) suggest non-linear ways to evaluate these complexities such as role-playing, case studies, and simulations that will encourage those within the organization to consider which factors impede or facilitate growth. Another useful strategy in this endeavor is taking advantage of the value of teamwork. According to Porter O’Grady & Malloch (2011) collaborative, expertly functioning, interdisciplinary teams are critical and yet difficult to monitor and quantify. Additionally, and as outlined in the previous principle of healthcare being local and point of service decision making being a critical component of success, Kiel (1994) further elaborates that small well-focused actions should be at the core of every plan. He further states that this plan should begin at the point of service, not the boardroom. Opportunities for unit driven activities to improve processes are numerous given the ever present issues in healthcare management of patient safety, team work, interdisciplinary collaboration, and retention of competent staff (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) Developing innovative valuation models for healthcare delivery systems is challenging and needs quantum leaders who are ready to look at new and effective ways to tackle usolved problems within the healthcare system.

It is true innovation, in fact, that will mark the success of today’s quantum leaders in healthcare. Innovation is sometimes felt to be an elusive concept. In order to understand it, one must grasp the contextual framework of innovation. Innovation, as so aptly noted by our authors, “…is no longer an option to the success of healthcare organizations and systems” (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011, p. 105.) To create a culture of innovation, it must be acknowledged that the elements and requisites necessary far differ from those in the healthcare setting of the last 100 years and yet some of the past negatives still permeate the system today. Greater strides need to be taken in areas of interdisciplinary collaboration, overlap of educational pathways, and the lifting of social, cultural, and professional barriers(Hall, 1993.) Equity must also be considered when establishing a culture of innovation. Equity denotes that there is value not only within disciplines but between them, that relationships are horizontal, and that there is the characterization of equality and shared accountability/ownership (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) By understanding some of these key principles, innovative ideas are given an environment in which they can thrive.

Again, a recurrent theme that leaders must take note of is the idea that innovation is birthed at the point of service. Organizations, though complex, are simply the sum of their parts. Although this statement sounds contradictory, it is important to understand that it is the cumulative contributions of individuals within the whole that drive actions and results (Anderson & Willson, 2008.) Wise leaders of innovation recognize this and actively seek ways to garner innovative ideas from their points of service (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) By doing so, freedom, ownership, and investment within the organization occurs. This creates excitement and energy within the system which works as a positive feedback loop which perpetuates forward growth. This is innovation through the context of alignment. Ultimately, however, all innovation must be balanced with value. It is one thing to cultivate an open and environment that is conducive to innovative thinking but it is important that focus is maintained on the organizational goals and interests (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) There is a continual focus on keeping costs down and revenues up. In value-driven times it is imperative to keep tabs on the differences that are being made within the health care system and how those differences are offering impact and value.

This is where innovation leadership comes into play. Today’s quantum leaders need to understand the rationale, expectations, organizational structures and strategies that advance the integration of cost effective innovation. The explosion of information availability via the internet has truly been a driving force behind innovation in healthcare. The resources and ideas for creative integration of innovative ideas are vast and innumerable (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) The technological advances in areas of care delivery, biotechnology, nanotechnology, genomics, diagnostics, record keeping, information integration and so on are mind boggling. Healthcare organizations must now find ways to meet the growing needs and demands of their patient populations in ways that support and encourage the integration of new ideas. The quantum leader will be able to find ways to create an infrastructure within their organization to do exactly that. Taking the initiative to change instead of holding onto the routines of the past is a hallmark of a quantum leader. To do so involves taking risks. Possible failure, avoidance of mediocrity, and not retreating from challenges requires strategy.

There are several strategies available to include the integration of mission, vision, values, and innovation (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) Statements should be clear and define the organizations purpose and plan, taking into consideration the unmet needs within the communities they serve. Assessment of team innovation skills and organizational structure is also imperative. Innovation needs nurturing and guidance along with restraints. Understanding the natural tensions within organizations and systems is also of great importance. Lack of time and high pressure to produce creative ways to grow that are also cost effective requires leaders that emphasize that balance. These organizations can be termed “ambidextrous organizations” (O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004) because of their ability to manage the tension between stability and the ever present need for innovative change. Other strategies that are useful are supporting evidence-based innovative processes, democratizing innovation by valuing multiple intelligences, and providing adequate time for reflection and idea generation (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.) As noted previously there is a large element of risk associated with being an innovative leader. Therefore, there needs to be developed a capacity for rational risk taking. Traditionally, risk and failures have been viewed in a negative light. However, a true quantum leader can see the lessons learned and formulate new plans to enhance the organization. Forming new partnership is also a strategy that can create value that an organization cannot provide on its own. This too includes risks (Ardner, 2006.) Innovative leadership encompasses the assessment of current processes, identification of how the work is currently being accomplished, and evaluation of whether these processes enable or inhibit innovation (Porter-O’Grady & Malloch, 2011.)

In summary, quantum leaders are living in challenging times. With the driving forces of the technological age thrusting them forward, these leaders are faced with huge challenges as well as huge rewards. Understanding the underlying foundation of quantum leadership, applying those key principles, compiling, synthesizing, and evaluating multiple factors within the modern healthcare system, and understanding the theoretical and practical implications of innovation in the workplace are all skills that need to be developed and exploited to their maximum potential.. Placing a high degree of value on the point of service concept and involving all members of the organization to share a common vision with enthusiasm and energy is the key to success for the quantum leader.

References

Anderson, J., & Willson, P. (2008). Clinical decision support systems in nursing: Synthesis of the science for evidence-based practice. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 26(3), 151-158.

Anderson, R. A., & McDaniel, R. R. (2000). Managing healthcare organizations: Where professionalism meets complexity science. Health Care Management Review, 25(1), 83-92.

Ardner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Journal, 83(4), 98-116. from

Chrispeels, J. H. (2004). Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fraser, S., & Greenhalgh, T. (2001). Coping with complexity: Education for capability. British Medical Journal, 323(), 799-803.

Hall, B. (1993). Time to nurse: Musings of an aging nurse radical. Nursing Outlook, 41(6), 250-252.

O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization.Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74-81.

Porter-O’Grady, T., & Malloch, K. (2011).Quantum leadership: Advancing innovation, transforming healthcare (3rd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.