Leading systemically

Dr. Orthey, "systemic" means what and stands for?

Systemic thinking and acting stands for a holistic understanding and acting in relation to different types of systems: persons, groups, teams or social relationships and organisations. To think and act systemically means to respect these "systems" in their own logic, to explore them, to use their energies and resources and to work with them in a targeted way. And it also means understanding these systems in their interconnectedness.

Can you be more specific?

It is important, for example, to look at the connections between an employee's behavior (recognizable, for example, by a drop in performance), the relationships of this employee in the team, and the organizational conditions. In order to make this multi-layered, interwoven holism manageable, I offer the model "Leading in Pentagons", which makes it possible to look very practically at which aspects of the people involved, their relationships, the factual tasks, the organization and the culture play a role in each situation under certain environmental conditions. This way of thinking and acting is guided by the interest in and respect for the systems at stake and the references, i.e. contexts, in which they are embedded.

Are "systemic" and "systematic" congruent terms?

No! In everyday language, "systematic" is usually used in the sense of an "if-then logic". If this and that, firstly, secondly, thirdly, is done, then a certain predictable and previously calculable result can be expected with a high degree of probability. In contrast, the term "systemic" refers to psychological, social, or organizational systems. For example, what triggers a fruitful learning process in one person will forever deter another. Systemic thinking and acting means,

Respect for the inherent logic of systems

to accept, understand and use the respective inherent logic. In contrast to systematic, standardizable solutions, this then leads to special, customized approaches that cannot be standardized.

And why is systemic thinking and action becoming increasingly important?

Because today it is important to deal productively with uncertain, highly complex, i.e. multi-layered, mutually influencing and therefore surprising and unpredictable situations. Because, to put it bluntly, today things usually turn out differently than was thought in advance. In this respect, the question is posed: What to do when the outcome is different than intended? This question of the practitioners meets the system theoretically founded considerations of the systemicists. They have meanwhile developed quite useful tools for handling the increasingly confusing practice. What they have to offer is no guarantee for lasting success and perpetual success, but it is a more promising approach than the if-then thinking and acting that no longer really fits the times. Systemic thinking and acting thus responds to complexity with complex solutions. This is why it is becoming increasingly important, indeed indispensable, in the practice of corporate management when it comes to improving the ability of companies to adapt and survive.

What are the advantages of systemic leadership?

Systemic leadership is "more energy-efficient" in a figurative sense. This is because it works with and not against the respective systems and their energies. I could also say because it is more empathetic and therefore more effective, because it respects, respects and genuinely involves the intervened system, first and foremost the employees, the group, the team. This increases the acceptance and effectiveness of what is done, because systemic leadership consistently takes into account the dimensions of the leadership pentagon: the people involved, their relationship networks, the factual tasks at stake, the specificity of the respective organization and its culture under very specific environmental conditions. The advantage or perhaps better

Proceed with empathy

The benefit of systemic leadership is to do better justice to the diversity and complexity of what is at stake. That is, to grasp it more reliably and to use it.

Please say a little more about the difference between habitual and systemic leadership!

Gladly, but now it becomes a little "amazing". Another important difference is that systemic leadership asks about the differences that make a difference. This is not a play on words, but the system-theoretical definition of "difference", which is "a difference that makes a difference". Systemic leadership is grounded in difference theory. And in practical terms, this means that the question of differences, for example of new products, structures, processes, etc. that make a difference, is frequently asked. In this way, the system, people, teams, and even entire organizations are stimulated to develop and control themselves more appropriately in their autonomy.

To what extent do managers have to break away from their usual understanding of leadership in order to lead systemically?

Let me put it this way: systemic leadership is a matter of attitude. Leaders who lead in an attentive, mindful and appreciative manner in coherent contact with their people can certainly integrate systemic elements into their work and benefit from them. In any case, I experience many such leaders who thereby also experience a strengthening of what they are already doing and tend to feel confirmed and better equipped. Only those who see people and social relationships with a machine or if-then logic and have corresponding output expectations have to say goodbye to very basic things.

Put another way, what is most important to actually lead more effectively systemically?

Ultimately, success will only materialize if what comes out of leadership - no matter what it is called - is emotionally acceptable. This is, of course, very demanding with large leadership spans - which, by the way, practically speaking, argues for strengthening the first and second levels of management. But that's what matters, not fancy glossy project exposés, meeting marathons, highly complex bar and chart systems, intensive travel or thoroughly styled controlling tools. It is much more a matter of the emotional acceptance of what is happening. And this stands or falls with the person of the manager, his visibility and tangibility, his inner and outer coherence, his interest, his attentiveness and appreciation towards those who are being managed. And towards themselves, of course

How can this higher efficiency be recognized?

In my experience, happier, healthier people, more stable and resilient relationships, improved task performance, and a more "fit" and sustainable corporate culture that can create effective commonality out of inevitable differences. And

Emotionalacceptance

all of this in a coherent relationship to the respective environmental, i.e. market and competitive conditions. Those who constantly review what is happening ensure dynamism. Systemic leadership sets and keeps forces in motion, and is therefore extremely innovation-friendly in a respect that is becoming more and more important today!