system dynamics and leadership
system dynamics and leadership
is it possible to use system dynamics to study the impact of leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction
Leadership
Hi
Nobody will forbid you to use SD on any subject.
What you mean is probably 'is it useful?'.
First question: are you a modeler, the owner of the problem or both, or more a modeler or more the owner?
My answer would vary depending on your answer.
Regards.
JJ
Nobody will forbid you to use SD on any subject.
What you mean is probably 'is it useful?'.
First question: are you a modeler, the owner of the problem or both, or more a modeler or more the owner?
My answer would vary depending on your answer.
Regards.
JJ
>is it possible to use system dynamics to study the impact of leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction
I will tell you how I would make a simple one, but so many OTHER factors effect commitment BESIDES leadership, that it would be a wrong assumption to say that a good leader would make people committed. Other factors might include environmental factors and whether the product is a good product. However, as a conversation piece, maybe you could start with one converter called Leadership..and then link several other converters to it in a circle like "knowledge", "integrity", "productive", good listener" and other qualities that might make people want to work for that person....and make each equal to one...and when they're linked to leadership....If the totality of these qualities would make a good leader..then in the center "leadership" converter, just multiply all of the 1s so that 1x1x1x1x1 = 1 good leader.
Then do something similar with commitment.
Then, if any of the converters have circular paths....for example...a good listener might also have more integrity, then put in a flow to make a circular path.
Now, your model has some insights. It can show a link between "listening" and "commitment".
You can show that EVEN IF leadership is at a high, people STILL may not be committed, because of other NON-Leadership factors (like environmental influence or conflicting values).
You could even include the factor that people follow others who validate their own ways of thinking...that happy people follow happy people, optimists follow optimists, and ethical people follow ethical people...and that a "difference' between values between leadership and followers may have something to do with commitment. All of these values can be graphed, and you can then run scenerios....and you could include delays between things like integrity, ethics, customer satisfaction, and ultimately moral. When you run the model, you may even look at the graphs for those other facts..since these may also be important to you...in addition to "committment". Again, it would just be a conversation piece, but you can see how it can also provide insights. In other words, it could help people to move past assumptions: Like "good leadership leads to committment" or "people follow good leaders" (Leaders are proud of asking if "Hitler was a good Leader"..NO!!!, but bigots follow bigots) etc. Moving past assumptions is just a starting point for Dialogues, and Dialogue is stopped by simple "answers". Ideally though, the group would contribute to the model building.
[Edited on 6-13-2010 by Barry]
[Edited on 6-13-2010 by Barry]
I will tell you how I would make a simple one, but so many OTHER factors effect commitment BESIDES leadership, that it would be a wrong assumption to say that a good leader would make people committed. Other factors might include environmental factors and whether the product is a good product. However, as a conversation piece, maybe you could start with one converter called Leadership..and then link several other converters to it in a circle like "knowledge", "integrity", "productive", good listener" and other qualities that might make people want to work for that person....and make each equal to one...and when they're linked to leadership....If the totality of these qualities would make a good leader..then in the center "leadership" converter, just multiply all of the 1s so that 1x1x1x1x1 = 1 good leader.
Then do something similar with commitment.
Then, if any of the converters have circular paths....for example...a good listener might also have more integrity, then put in a flow to make a circular path.
Now, your model has some insights. It can show a link between "listening" and "commitment".
You can show that EVEN IF leadership is at a high, people STILL may not be committed, because of other NON-Leadership factors (like environmental influence or conflicting values).
You could even include the factor that people follow others who validate their own ways of thinking...that happy people follow happy people, optimists follow optimists, and ethical people follow ethical people...and that a "difference' between values between leadership and followers may have something to do with commitment. All of these values can be graphed, and you can then run scenerios....and you could include delays between things like integrity, ethics, customer satisfaction, and ultimately moral. When you run the model, you may even look at the graphs for those other facts..since these may also be important to you...in addition to "committment". Again, it would just be a conversation piece, but you can see how it can also provide insights. In other words, it could help people to move past assumptions: Like "good leadership leads to committment" or "people follow good leaders" (Leaders are proud of asking if "Hitler was a good Leader"..NO!!!, but bigots follow bigots) etc. Moving past assumptions is just a starting point for Dialogues, and Dialogue is stopped by simple "answers". Ideally though, the group would contribute to the model building.
[Edited on 6-13-2010 by Barry]
[Edited on 6-13-2010 by Barry]