Meta-leadership

Meta-leadership is an overarching leadership framework for strategically linking the efforts of different organizations or organizational units to “provide guidance, direction, and momentum across organizational lines that develop into a shared course of action and commonality of purpose among people and agencies that are doing what may appear to be very different work.”^[1]

The framework was developed by Dr. Leonard J. Marcus and Dr. Barry Dorn of the National Preparedness Leadership Initiative (NPLI), a joint program of the Harvard School of Public Health and Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, Colonel (Ret.) Dr. Isaac Ashkenazi formerly Surgeon General of the Israel Defense Forces Home Front Command and now a professor of international disaster management and the Director of Urban Terrorism Preparedness at the NPLI, and Joseph M. Henderson Chief of Staff at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. It is “derived through observation and analysis of leaders in crisis circumstances”^[2] starting with the September 11 attacks in the U.S. It has subsequently been distilled for more general application.

The Difference Between Leadership and Meta-Leadership

Meta-leadership incorporates insights from the research of Warren Bennis, Daniel Goleman, Ronald Heifetz, Robert Thomas, and others but is distinct in that it is focused on cross-cutting leadership that generates connectivity among disparate stakeholders. “Leadership refers to the recognized or expected span of authority that a person has in his or her formal role.”^[3] Meta-leadership is leadership employing influence over authority. “Meta-leaders…seek to influence and activate change well above and beyond established lines of their decision-making and control. These leaders are driven by a purpose broader than that prescribed by their formal roles, and are therefore motivated and capable of acting in ways that transcend usual organizational confines.”^[4]

The Five Dimensions of Meta-Leadership

There are five dimensions of the meta-leadership framework:

1. The Person of the Meta-Leader
2. The Situation
3. Leading the Silo
4. Leading Up
5. Leading Connectivity

The Person of the Meta-Leader

This first component of meta-leadership requires self-awareness and self-regulation so that one is leading intentionally with balance, discipline, and direction. One looks at one's individual strengths, weaknesses, and biases with an emphasis on emotional intelligence.

The Situation

The meta-leader must form an accurate picture of the situation to include the nature of the problem, the culture, the context, and what is occurring -- and articulate this to those involved.

Leading the Silo

The leader must enable his or her individual silo to achieve maximum effectiveness. One does this by empowering those within and giving them the tools to become more effective.

Leading Up

One must understand the expectations and priorities of one’s superiors and deliver against them appropriately. This may mean influencing that superior toward an appropriate solution or resolution of the situation.

Leading Connectivity

One must be able to step out of their silo and effectively engage other silos -- either within one's own organization or in others -- in seeing the overall mission and working together to accomplish it.

Meta-Leadership in Practice

Meta-leadership is particularly valuable in situations where the leader must rely on more influence than authority and where one must lead beyond traditional organizational boundaries. It is the core of the curriculum of the NPLI, a program for senior government leaders responsible for emergency preparedness and response. It has been widely adopted in public health agencies such as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention as well as by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the White House Homeland Security Council to best meet the leadership challenges of unexpected or fast-changing situations.

Invited by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to look at government’s response to Hurricane Katrina, Marcus described the need for meta-leadership in any large-scale crisis, “Going forward, better communication and coordination among all levels of government, or ‘connectivity,’ will prove crucial. That means not just harnessing electronic technology to forge links among agencies, but also building relationships between people--transforming a culture that champions independent decision making into one that values cooperation.”^[5]

“As we have observed adoption of meta-leadership across complex public and private organizational systems and networks, we note three important advantages: 1)A conceptual framework and vocabulary that describes intentional networking and cohesion to connect the purposes and work of different or even disparate stakeholders; 2) A strategy of action designed to advance coordinated planning and activity; and 3) A purpose and rallying cry for both leaders and followers that inspires, guides, and instructs, setting a higher standard and expectation for performance and impact.”^[6]

References

1. ^ Leonard J. Marcus, Barry C. Dorn, and Joseph M. Henderson (2006). Meta-Leadership and National Emergency Preparedness: A Model to Build Government Connectivity. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science, Volume 4, Number 2, 128
2. ^ Marcus, L.J., Ashkenazi, I., Dorn, B., and Henderson, J. (Spring/Summer 2008). Meta-Leadership: Expanding the Scope and Scale of Public Health. Leadership in Public Health, 8 (1&2)
3. ^ Marcus, L.J., Ashkenazi, I.,, Dorn, B., and Henderson, J. (Spring/Summer 2008).Meta-Leadership: Expanding the Scope and Scale of Public Health. Leadership in Public Health, 8 (1&2)
4. ^ Marcus, L.J., Ashkenazi, I.,, Dorn, B., and Henderson, J. (Spring/Summer 2008).Meta-Leadership: Expanding the Scope and Scale of Public Health. Leadership in Public Health, 8 (1&2)
5. ^ Karin Kiewra, The Eye of the Storm. Harvard Public Health Review, Winter 2006
6. ^ Marcus, L.J., Ashkenazi, I., Dorn, B., and Henderson, J. (Spring/Summer 2008). Meta-Leadership: Expanding the Scope and Scale of Public Health. Leadership in Public Health, 8 (1&2)