Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2334 96381202057M PDF
2334 96381202057M PDF
2334 96381202057M PDF
Maša MAGZAN
Zagreb School of Economics and Management, 10000 Zagreb, Jordanovac 110, Republic of Croatia
E-mail: masa.magzan@zsem.hr
This paper focuses on the link between mental models and leadership effectiveness. Reporting from
different examples of mental models representing barriers for change, strategic implementation
and organizational learning, the paper emphasizes the fact that mental models affect both
leadership effectiveness and overall organizational development. Starting from the question what
are mental models and why they represent a relevant management issue, the study focuses on the
role and meaning of mental models in terms of their influence on organizational outcomes rather
than the actions or decisions being made. Within descriptive mode of analysis, the study
investigates how mental models affect organizational conversations through mechanisms such as
theories in use and espoused theories. The goal of the paper is to demonstrate the need to move
from the old paradigm and make a shift toward new mental models because they offer more valid
and useful ways to effectively deal with the complex challenges in an increasingly competitive
business environment.
Key words: mental models, espoused theory, theories in use, leadership effectiveness, organizational
learning.
ISSN 2217-8147
©2012 University of Novi Sad, Technical faculty “Mihajlo Pupin” in Zrenjanin, Republic of Serbia
Available online at http://www.tfzr.uns.ac.rs/jemc
58 Magzan
used for the purpose of this study suggest that suggests, results are determined by actions that
mental models have much more influence over the leaders take (Figure 1).
organizational outcomes than the actions or
decisions being made. For this reason, most leadership and organizational
development courses or trainings focus on activities
This is because mental models provide a framework such as goals setting, motivating and inspiring
for the interpretation of ideas and activities, assist in people, coping with conflicts etc. Although
restructuring existing information and aid in the possessing these skills is necessary, it is certainly not
inculcation of new information, (Stevenson and sufficient for leadership effectiveness. Great
Warn, online resource). Despite the fact that there is leadership requires that leaders challenge their own
a direct link between leadership effectiveness and mental models, and that is the assumptions, beliefs,
mental models, a vast majority of leadership values and perceptions because both, our decision
development opportunities still focus on individuals making and actions are determined and guided by
supporting them to “develop critical skills that make our mental models. Also, great leaders understand
them more effective leaders in their organizations." that their mental models have much more influence
(Meehan and Reinelt, 2010). This is because leaders over the outcomes than their actions or decisions
are generally held responsible for providing results, being made.
and as Thinking-Action-Outcomes Model below
In other words, using the Thinking-Action- world is a world of things, mechanics, hierarchies,
Outcomes Model to explain the importance of and rigid organizations (Wheatley, 1992, 2005). We
mental models for leadership effectiveness: the way have learned to believe that the world is stable,
we see our world (mental models) affects our linear and predictable. We believe that fixed
thinking and experience of the world and therefore structures provide clarity and order, but the fact is
determines our actions. When the way we see our that they typically function only within the finite
world changes (our mental models are challenged contexts for which they were designed. When new
and changed), we can then change our actions and conditions arise, such as highly complex challenge
get very different results. Unlike reacting which of globalization or global financial crisis, they can
occurs when we respond to a new condition by easily fail because they fail to adapt to the rapidly
doing what we have always done, Senge and other changing and complex external environment. Due to
thought leaders (Argyris,1990, 1993; Scharmer, commonly rooted ways of viewing the world,
2009; Wheatley, 1992, 2005) suggest that we should organizations frequently see solutions to their
respond to change by questioning our mental problems limited only by resources, whether time,
models. In this process called Reframing (Scharmer, personnel, or money.
2009), our deeply held assumptions and governing
variables are examined. Only after the underlying Although the term ‘mental model’ was first
assumptions are known and questioned, we can open mentioned in 1940’s, in the book „The nature of
ourselves to new ways of seeing. explanations” by Scottish psychologist Kenneth
Craik who believed that the mind constructs “small-
MENTAL MODELS AS BARRIERS TO scale models” of reality that it uses to anticipate
CHANGE events, to reason, and to underlie explanation, the
idea of mental model is not new. Much earlier in
“Insanity is continuing to do the same thing over history, in his well-known dialogue The Republic,
and over and expecting different results.” Greek philosopher Plato tells a Parable of the Cave
Albert Einstein in which he concludes that we are all misguided
cave dwellers, operating under incomplete or
Up to this time, all our organizations have been distorted perceptions of reality. The point of the
constructed on notions derived from 17th century story is that humans are very resistant to challenge
Newtonian physics and on assumptions that our and change their own perceptions of reality. In other
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT AND COMPETITIVENESS (JEMC) 59
words, what Plato is pointing out is that due to our MENTAL MODELS AS ORGANIZATIONAL
mental models, we refuse to change. LEARNING BARRIERS
Since our social conditioning provides us with a “Today knowledge has power. It controls access to
stable environment, mental models function as opportunity and advancement.”
‘filters’ in our brain that allow only certain limited Peter Drucker
portion of the external stimuli to actually enter our
brain. This is useful in terms of filtering information Management of the 21st century is about change and
for our sanity and risk reasons, but the problem is learning. As technology and information continue to
that humans generally have a tendency to reject data reshape our lives, managers are becoming change
that does not support an already existing assumption. agents who guide everyone to find and embrace the
In other words, the trouble begins when we begin to best new practices. Also, as information becomes the
comprehend everything through categories that chief product of every business and as knowledge
worked for us in the past. For this reason, mental continues to explode, everyone has to be a learner
models are often the greatest barriers to and the manager's foremost task is to promote
implementing new ideas in organizations, but they learning. Peter Senge, Chris Argyris, Peter Drucker,
are also the area of organizational learning where Donald A. Schön and Ikujiro Nonaka are the main
organizations can make the most significant impact. contributors in the field of learning organization.
These are “organizations where people continually
For the same reasons, many good ideas in expand their capacity to create the results they truly
organization never go through because they simply desire, where new and expansive patterns of
do not match prevailing ideology or assumptions and thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is
beliefs. The examples of successful companies are set free, and where people are continually learning
those that are not afraid to introduce new models of how to learn together” (Senge, 1990).
thinking. Such examples are Apple’s innovation
strategy and design thinking or Dell Computer that A learning organization represents a great tool for
completely changed the idea of computer selling and managers because it helps employees to learn more
distribution. In this sense, mental models are about the products and processes within their
“equivalent to the concept of paradigm because both organizations and others in order to remain
paradigm and mental models represent an integrative competitive and answer the challenges in the
set of ideas and practices that shape the ways people contemporary fast-changing business environment.
view and interact with the world.” (Senge, online Since the greatest constant of modern times is
resource). change, companies today must learn faster than their
competitors in order to maintain ahead of the game.
Managers often get locked into a mindset due to A learning organization becomes imperative because
which they tend to filter out information that does it enables employees or members to continuously
not fit their current paradigm. In order to avoid this, share and obtain new knowledge while applying
managers have to break the old paradigm and step their new found knowledge in doing their work or
outside their preconceived mental models to keep making organizational decisions. According to Peter
pace with an ever changing reality. By becoming Senge (1990), an ensemble of disciplines must
“paradigm-busters” (Senge, online resource), converge in order to form a learning organization. It
managers are equipped to constantly challenge and is beyond the scope of this study to describe each
rebuild them in order to imagine 'new ways to one of these dimensions, so the focus will stay on
understand the world that do not logically follow the mental models as one of the basic components
from past beliefs' (De Wit and Meyer, 2004). If that create a learning organization.
mental models are left unchallenged, they will cause
us to see what we have always seen: the same Since mental models represent the assumptions held
results, the same needs and the same opportunities. by organizations and individuals which determine
Simply because we see what our mental models how an organization thinks and acts, they can be a
permit us to see, we can only do what our mental barrier for organizational learning. Affecting both,
models permit us to do. For this reason, we must decision making and implementing strategic
first discover what our internal assumptions are. And orientation, mental models can damage overall
then unlearn what we think we know. organizational development. It is important to
distinguish here between what Senge calls espoused
theories and theories-in-use. Espoused theory relates
to what we say we do while theory-in-use is what we
60 Magzan
actually do (based on our own mental models). For Leaders should facilitate this practice by regularly
instance, an organization or an individual may say asking people in a company about what is working
that teamwork and collaboration is a primary value and what is not. A company that enforces such
(this can even be included in company’s official conversations is a learning organization because
vision or mission statement). Here an espoused they have embraced the idea that being a learning
theory is that collaboration and teamwork are organization is a good thing so learning becomes a
beneficial, although in reality the same organization mental model in itself.
may create blocks for collaboration efforts and silo
information, only sharing part of the information Figure 2. shows 3 core learning capabilities of any
available. As the model below suggests, a good way organization and reflective conversation is one of
to shift from commonly held and not-so-useful these.
mental models is through reflective conversation.
Another important part of reflective conversations is. Since teams must manage their relationships,
for organizational learning is the role of teams. culture and processes if they are to be effective,
Senge finds that “teams, not individuals, are the increasingly, there is an understanding that
fundamental learning unit in modern organizations.” leadership is a process grounded in relationships that
(Senge, 1990). He emphasizes that the dialogue are fluid dynamics, non-directive, and non-
among the members of the team increases the ability unilateral. This is a fundamental shift away from a
of the organization to grow and develop. Drawing on paradigm only advocating leadership as the skills,
conversations with David Bohm, Senge identifies qualities and behavior of an individual who exerts
three conditions which are necessary for dialogue: influence over others to take action or achieves a
participants must “suspend their assumptions;” they goal using their position and authority. (Meehan and
must “regard one another as colleagues;” and there Reinelt, 2010).
must be a facilitator to hold the context of the
dialogue (facilitator is needed at least until teams Furthermore, according Etienne Wenger, a social
develop dialogue skills).” Bohm claims that researcher and champion of communities of practice,
“hierarchy is antithetical to dialogue, and it is learning is best explained as “an interaction among
difficult to escape hierarchy in organizations” practitioners, rather than a process in which a
(Senge, 1990). producer provides knowledge to a consumer"
(Cross, online resource). Therefore, organizations
It is important to point out here that both hierarchy per se are not the reason employees learn, they are
and patterns of relationships are also derived from there to help them learn more effectively. In order to
people's mental models. Capitalizing on the synergy do that, Chris Argyris suggest that organizations
of the continuous group learning for optimal should ensure conditions in which people can
performance, organizational learning requires that continuously learn. Such conditions assume that
individuals in the organization must be ready and “people must feel secure about offering information,
willing to reveal their own individual mental meaning that organizations must be transformed into
models, compare them and discuss the differences in places where it is safe to tell the truth. When that
order to come to a unified perception of what really happens, managers can go about their real business,
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT AND COMPETITIVENESS (JEMC) 61
Block, P. (2008). Community: The Structure of 2012). Leadership for a New Era Series: A new
Belonging: Berrett-Koehler. leadership mindset for scaling social change.
Cross, J. Workflow Learning Gets Real. Retrieved from Retrieved from
http://metatime.blogspot.com/2005/02/workflow- http://www.philanthropynewyork.org/s_nyrag/bin.
learning-gets-real.html asp?CID=17439&DID=43967&DOC=FILE.PDF
De Wit, B., & Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Nonaka, I. (2007, July–August). The Knowledge-Creating
Content, Context. London: Thomson. Company. Harvard Business Review, 162-171.
DeBono, E. (1991). I Am Right, You Are Wrong: Penguin Otto, S. (2009). Theory U: Learning from the Future as it
Books. Emerges: Berret-Koehler Publishers.
Drucker, P. F. (1988, January-February). The Coming of Raelin, J. A. (2003). Creating Leaderful Organizations:
the New Organization. Harvard Business Review, How to Bring Out Leadership in Everyone. San
3-11. Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Ford, J. K., & Kraiger, K. (1995). The application of Schubert, V., & Baker, R. (Producer). (2008, June 2012).
cognitive constructs and principles to the Creating New Futures Through Community
instructional systems model of training: Conversation: An Interview with Peter Block.
implications for needs assessment, design, and Retrieved from
transfer. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), http://www.pegasuscom.com/levpoints/peterblocki
International Review of industrial and nt.html
organisational psychology (Vol. 10). West Sussex: Senge, P. (Producer). (March 2012). Learning to Alter
John Wiley & Sons. Mental Models. Retrieved from
Garvin, D. A. (1993, July). Building a Learning http://www.solonline.org/res/kr/mentmodel.html
Organization. Harvard Business Review, 47-80. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art &
Johnson, H. H. (2008). Mental models and transformative Practice of the Learning Organization. New York:
learning: The key to leadership development? Currency Doubleday.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19(1), Stevenson, E. J., & Warn, J. R. (Producer). (March 2012).
85-89. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.1227 Effective Leadership Development: creating better
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental Models: towards a mental models. Retrieved from
cognitive science of language, inference and http://www.defence.gov.au/ADC/cdclms/IMTA%2
consciousness. Massachusetts: Harvard University. 0Article.doc
Kohl, J. (2006). Mental Models That Block Strategic Plan Wheatley, M. J. (1992). Leadership and the New Science.
Implementation. Reflections: The SoL Journal on San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Knowledge, Learning and Change, 7(1), 30-42. Wheatley, M. J. (2005). Finding Our Way: Leadership for
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change: Harvard Business an Uncertain Time. San Francisco: Berrett-
Review Press. Koehler.
Meehan, D., & Reinelt, C. (Producer). (2010, March