INTRODUCTION

    Change is "just not what it used to be." In many states, Cooperative Extension has experienced radical change over the past few years. This kind of crisis-induced change can be painful. Unfortunately for many public institutions, painful change in response to crisis is all too common. Management consultant Peter Drucker reminds us in Innovation and Entrepreneurship; Practice and Principles, that "...most innovations in public-service institutions are imposed on them either by outsiders or by catastrophe." This seems to have been the case for the Cooperative Extension System.

    The second theme is leadership. Leadership and management are not the same thing. Managers focus on internal conditions. Leaders understand internal conditions -- but focus on the external environment. Managers are advocates for the organization, hence they tend to support the status quo. Leaders are catalysts of the organization, hence they tend to be enemies of the status quo. Managers are efficient -- leaders are effective.

    The third theme is vision. Richard Bawden, former Dean of Hawkesbury Agricultural College, University of Western Sydney in New South Wales, Australia, has written extensively on how systems science can help us understand complex organizations (like universities). Dr. Bawden explains; "the way we see the world, determines what we do." That is -- vision determines what we accept as legitimate action. Peter Senge's "fifth discipline" of systems science and systems thinking can give us a new "window on the world," to help create a shared vision of the Cooperative Extension System as a learning organization.

CHANGE

    Let's start with change. Organizations like the Cooperative Extension System are conceived, born, nurtured into maturity, live and are productive. At some point they either become weak, senile, and die (or may be put out of business by outside forces like state legislatures), or perhaps, if they are able to change, they may be reborn. Robert Bellah in The Good Society explored the changing role of public and private institutions in America. He wrote: "it is hardly surprising that institutions established at different times and under different conditions might need to be reformed from time to time."

     Institutions should change in response to changing conditions. Continual rebirth, however, requires letting go of old and outmoded ways of thinking and doing -- even those that may have been successful in the past. Peter Drucker writes in The New Realities: "some of the toughest problems we face are those created by the successes of the past. Some of the greatest impediments to effectiveness are the slogans, the commitments, the issues of yesterday."

    In the rapidly changing world in which we live, we can't afford to be merely a product of our past -- we must be a cause of our own future. Of course, we can't create a desired future entirely divorced from either our past or the environment in which we presently exist. One of the critical activities for the strategic thinker is an exploration of the social environment within which the organization exists. A useful exercise is to try to see yourself and organization through the eyes of "outsiders" - but, not just any outsider will do. Strategic thinkers view the organization through the eyes of the "customer." Bob Waterman wrote in The Renewal Factor that failure to understand the viewpoint of the customer results in crisis for the organization. Waterman writes: "crisis- generated change...is very hard on everyone affected by it. Still it is very common."

    Like Drucker, Waterman recognizes that the seeds of organizational renewal can often be traced to a crisis, or a potential crisis. Both authors attribute this to a failure to "listen to the customer." Waterman suggests that one of the keys to constant renewal is to view yourself through a "different mirror," the customer's eyes. He states, excellent organizations: "...seek a different mirror, something that tells them that the world has changed and that, in the harsh light of the new reality, they aren't as beautiful as they once were. The mirror also tells them that unless they change, they're in for a crisis."

    Strategic thinking can help the organization evolve in response to new opportunities. The basis of strategic thinking is an understanding of the past, an analysis of the present, and a focus on the future. Change, in response to constantly evolving external constraints, challenges and opportunities, becomes the norm for organizations that practice strategic thinking. Organizations wherethe love of change is an institutional value will thrive through continual rebirth. Tom Peters' book Thriving on Chaos, reminds us that: "today, loving change, even chaos is prerequisite for survival, let alone success."

     The "defender of status quo" will quickly claim that this is all well and good for business, but public institutions are different. And of course, they are -- but many of the same principles apply. A new book that applies many of these ideas to public institutions by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler is titled, Reinventing Government: or How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector from Schoolhouse to Statehouse, City Hall to the Pentagon. These authors observe that: "American corporations have spent the last decade making revolutionary changes: de centralizing authority, flattening hierarchies, focusing on quality, getting close to their customers - all in an effort to remain competitive in the new global marketplace."

    Osborne and Gaebler describe how public institutions like local school districts, county planning boards, and even a few colleges have made innovation and change an institutional value. They write: "Today, the world of government is in great flux. The emergence of a postindustrial, knowledge-based, global economy has undermined old realities throughout the world, creating wonderful opportunities and frightening problems."

They offer some examples in their book and extract principles which reinforce the message of many of the best business management strategists. However, innovation and change seem to be difficult for public institutions. Peter Drucker, in Innovation and Entrepreneurship, describes three obstacles to innovation in public institutions. Drucker writes:

    1. Public institutions don't have clearly defined measures of success upon which to base proposed changes. Since they aren't being paid for a product, success is evaluated by the size of the budget or staff, rather than on results. Therefore it is difficult to stop doing anything voluntarily that diminishes the size of the operation.

    2. A public-service institution is dependent on a multitude of constituents, not just a well-defined group of buyers. Therefore, they have to satisfy all groups, and can't afford to alienate any special interest group.

    3. Public-service institutions exist to "do-good," therefore it is difficult to determine which activities are better than others. How do you prioritize when everybody is doing good things?    

    To overcome these obstacles to change, Drucker recommends that public-service institutions begin with a clear definition of mission. In his book Managing the Nonprofit Organization he advises us that in order to prioritizeamong many competing good things we must maintain our focus on mission. Strategic planning and strategic thinking help an organization to explore its historical mission and evaluate it in light of the current environment. Drucker states that there are three "musts" for a successful mission -- opportunity, competence, and commitment. He explains:

    1. Look outside the organization for opportunity. Drucker writes; "Non-profits are prone to become inward-looking. People are so convinced that they are doing the right thing, and are so committed to their cause, that they see the institution as an end in itself."

    Of all of the colleges in the land grant university, colleges of food and agriculture are generally the most outwardly focused because of their historical extension function. However we must do better. Even private universities recognize the need to focus outwardly. In an April 8, 1992 article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Derek Bok, President Emeritus of Harvard University, wrote: "We must associate ourselves more prominently with solving problems that concern Americans the most." We must focus our programs on the highest socially relevant priorities our competencies allow. The next component of a successful mission is competence.

    2. Do better what you do well -- that's competence. Bok again seems to agree when he wrote in Beyond the Ivory Tower; Social Responsibilities of the Modern University that: "...universities have an obligation to serve society by making the contributions they are uniquely able to provide."

    Universities can provide a unique service when our strengths in research and education are integrated with the service mission. Derek Bok states that: "...one must ask in every case whether the service to be rendered actually requires those special qualities that set research universities apart..." Bok discourages universities from tackling social problems that other agencies are better equipped to handle.

    Drucker's final attribute of a mission is commitment. He explains;

    3. Do what you really believe in -- that's commitment. Bok agrees when he writes: "... a closely related, principle is that new projects should not normally be approved unless they can first be shown to command the enthusiasm and active support of existing members of the faculty."

    To build a commitment to change -- a love of change -- we've got to create an environment in which individuals are encouraged to try new ideas without fear of punishment. This means that accountability measures, rewardsand evaluation criteria are fair, open and reinforce the mission. To build this environment, everyone must recognize the uniqueness of the individual and value each other's different skills and abilities, backgrounds, hopes, and fears. A diverse workforce, given the freedom to explore new opportunities, will help the organization evolve and grow. An organization in which differences are respected is more likely to be creative in the face of adversity or opportunity. Effective leadership is needed to help create an environment that encourages innovation and change.

LEADERSHIP

    Many public organizations are overly managed and under led. Daily routines are handled, but no one questions whether the routine should be done at all. Over time, the institution may find itself humming along efficiently, but not terribly effectively. "Customers" begin to question the need for the organization. When the organization stops focusing on its mission, when there is no sense of a shared vision, leadership is to blame.

    Dr. Robert Terry, Director of the Reflective Leadership Program at the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute for Public Affairs of the University of Minnesota, presents six common views of leadership -- and then adds a seventh.

    The six common views of leadership are;

1. trait
2. situationalpower
3. organizational
4. powers
5. visionary
6. ethical assessment

    The first is called the trait theory. There are "born leaders" -- like John Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and perhaps Bill Clinton.

    The second type of leadership is called situational. Leaders respond to the situation -- the war years "created" George Washington, Winston Churchill and FDR. The "times create the man or woman."

    The next leadership theory is called organizational. In this view, leadership is a function of position or rank in a hierarchical structure. This type of leadership is functional in many corporations, and of course the military.

    The forth view is the power theory, which suggests that position in a hierarchy isn't as important as the ability to stimulate action. We all know people who passively occupy positions of authority, while people without impressive titles make things happen.

    Terry's fifth type is called visionary. Leadership understands the past, scans current trends and helps point people toward a meaningful future. The visionary leader always asks the question "where are we going?"

    The sixth view, the ethical assessment theory, is also visionary, but it is a vision that involves ethical reflection. This leader not only asks "where are we going?," but also asks "why are we going there?"

    Terry believes that each of these six views of leadership is important, but incomplete. He proposes a seventh view that is a combination of all the others, which he calls the theory of fulfillment. In Terry's view, leadership is exercised when people organize to engage and fulfill the needs of the people in the institution, while serving the mission and working toward a shared vision.

    Terry's seventh view is that "leadership is a particular kind of social and ethical practice. It emerges when persons in community, grounded in hope, are grasped by unauthentic situations, and courageously act in concert with followers, to make those situations authentic."

    I'll restate the seventh view with some explanations in parentheses; "...leadership is a particular kind of social ( we are people in communities) and ethical ( thinking and acting for the sake of others) practice ( leadership is doing). It emerges when persons in community ( together), grounded in hope ( things can get better), are grasped ( see and called forth) by unauthentic situations, ( something is wrong), and courageously ( it won't always be popular) act in concert with followers ( together), to make those situations authentic ( right).

    Leaders are visionaries, dreamers, idealists -- with their feet firmly planted on the ground. Effective leaders nurture a shared vision within the organization. They do this by constantly acting on their vision.

    I'll conclude this section with two examples of visionary leadership. On the day that A. Bartlett Giamatti assumed the presidency of Yale University (July 1, 1978), he sent the following memo to the Yale faculty:

*********************************************************

    TO:         The Members of the University Community

    FROM:     A. Bartlett Giamatti, President

    SUBJECT:    New Policy

    In order to repair what Milton called the ruin of our grand parents, I wish to announce that henceforth, as a matter of University policy, evil is abolished and paradise is restored.

    I trust all of us will do whatever possible to achieve this policy objective.

*********************************************************

    Now "the abolition of evil and restoration of paradise" is indeed a worthy vision. The only problem is that it wasn't shared. The Yale faculty were shocked and upset by their new President's lack of decorum. Personally I think we need to be reminded of another Druckerism: "leaders take their roles seriously, not themselves." Giamatti had a sense of humor. But the other lesson is that leaders must recognize the "boundaries" of institutional vision. Warren Bennis wrote in Leaders: "...vision should be projected in time and space beyond the boundaries of ordinary planning activities - but not be so far distant as to be beyond the ability of incumbents in the organization to realize." Bennis suggests that: "boundaries are set by the values of the people in the organization." Sometimes leaders don't recognize the boundaries until they are crossed. Giamatti crossed the line his first day on the job.

    The second example of a vision is truly a shared vision. When the Roman General Crassus told the rebel army of slaves if they turn over their leader, Spartacus, they would not be punished (remember the movie with Kirk Douglas), each of the former slaves stood up, stepped forward and claimed to be Spartacus.

    Now that was a shared vision.

VISION AND SYSTEMS THINKING

    One of the roles of leadership is to help an organization assemble a clearly articulated shared vision of the future that is simple, easily understood, and energizing. Leaders not only help an organization assemble the vision, but they communicate the vision by consistently acting on it and personifying it. They are the symbol that many outsiders see. Our leaders will reflect inwardly and project outwardly our vision of the Cooperative Extension System in the 21st Century.     

    An organizational vision should be future focused, designed to respond to today's constraints and opportunities, and rooted in a common past. Shared vision is empowering when internal culture and outward focus are congruent. Warren Bennis wrote in Leaders: "when the organization has a clear sense of its purpose, direction, and desired future state and when this image is widelyshared, individuals are able to find their own roles both in the organization and in the larger society." But it takes more than a visionary leader to implement change. The entire organization must be hungry to learn, future focused, and customer oriented. For me this describes the "learning organization" of the 21st century.

    Peter Senge described the learning organization in The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. He wrote, learning organizations are: "...organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together."

    Senge makes a case for systems thinking as the discipline we all must learn in order to have a better understanding of our complex world. Systems thinking can provide a new "window on the world" -- one we should develop in Extension. Senge writes: "from a very early age, we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden, enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to a larger whole."

    And: "Systems thinking is a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools that has been developed over the past fifty years, to make the full patterns clearer, and to help us see how to change them effectively."

    Problems and opportunities are parts of complex systems. To fully explore opportunities or improve problematic situations, we have to understand underlying causes. Systems thinking allows us to see the feedback loops which are often the underlying causes of our greatest problems. The learning organization of the future will help us to see that we are often the cause of our own problems. For example, our desire for inexpensive food has resulted in the destruction of rural communities and environmental degradation. Our pursuit of private dollars to maintain our public universities, has resulted in a lack of public trust. Our own accountability structure, particularly for tenured faculty, has led us to undervalue our land grant mission of serving the public good. These are not simple, straightforward causes and effects, but the result of complex interrelationships.

    People who have learned to "see" relationships within complex systems will be able to lead the learning organization of the future. Leaders who attempt to push organizational change often find themselves faced with resistance that comes from people in the system trying to maintain some cultural value. Oftenthese values are implicit and therefore hidden. Leaders must be able help people examine their own personal and organizational assumptions, and focus on improvement of situations. This is not a simple task. The answer lies in a leader's profound commitment to learning; in trust and dialogue and openness within the organization; and in being able to face your fears as individuals and as an organization.

    Creating a new vision for the organization is the beginning of the change process. An institutional vision that is widely shared will give the system a clear sense of purpose. It will allow individuals to find their own place in the organization, thus providing a sense of personal security. This will result in an environment in which constant change in response to a changing world becomes possible.

    Systems thinking will help us to understand that we are often the ultimate cause of our own problems. We can change the world by changing our own vision of our world. We can no longer blame others for our own inability to change things that are not right. To change the world, we must start with ourselves. Richard Bach wrote in his book, Illusions: "remember where you came from, where you're going, and why you created the mess you got yourself into in the first place;" and he continued "...you're always free to change your mind and choose a different future."

    I believe that we have the opportunity to create our common future. But it is not enough to say "this is the way I want it to be." That is too passive. We must be active. We must say, "this is the way I choose for it to be." We must constantly re-evaluate who we are, what we are doing, and why we are doing it. In this way our extension organization can be more than a result of its past, it can be the cause of its own future.    

This document was developed to some share ideas on Cooperative Extension, the university, and public service. These thoughts were assembled using text from various writings and speeches I prepared between 1990-92. If the sections appear to be somewhat disjointed -- that's why. This is not a particularly scholarly publication, but a somewhat rambling account of personal opinions. Your reaction is appreciated.

Alinsky, S.D. 1971. Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Random House.

Bach, R. 1977. Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah. Delacorte     Press.

Bawden, R. 1989. Systems Agriculture: Learning to Deal with Complexity.     McMillan Publishing.

Bellah, R. et.al. 1985. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in     American Life. Harper and Row.

Bellah, R. et al. 1991. The Good Society. A.A. Knopf, Inc.

Bok, D. 1982. Beyond the Ivory Tower: Social Responsibilities of the Modern University. Harvard University Press.

Burkhardt, J. 1986. The Value measure in public agricultural research. IN:     The Agricultural Scientific Enterprise: A System in Transition. eds. Busch and Lacy. Westview Press.

Drucker, P.F. 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. Harper and Row.

Freire, P. 1973. Education for Critical Consciousness. Continuum Publishing     Company.

Osborne, D. and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector form Schoolhouse to Statehouse, City Hall to the Pentagon. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Peck, M.S. 1987. The Road Less Traveled: A New Psychology of Love, Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth. Simon & Schuster Co.

Peters, T.J. 1987. Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution. Harper and Row.

Reich, R.B. 1991. The Work of Nations. A. A. Knopf, Inc.

Schell, D.F. 1988. Explorers of transitions - organizations. IN: Proceedings of     the First International Conference on Biopolitics: The Bio-Environment. ed. Agni Vlavianos-Arvanitis. Athens, Greece, May 6-10, 1987.

Schumacher, E.F. 1979. Good Work. Harper and Row.

Senge, P.M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline; The Art & Practice of the Learning     Organization. Doubleday Publishing.

Terry, R. W. 1993. Authentic Leadership: Courage in Action. Josey-Bass     Publishers.

Waterman, R.H. 1987. The Renewal Factor: How the Best Get and Keep the     Competitive Edge. Bantam Books.