The eco mindset: “I am because We are”

“I am because We are” is an African concept called Ubuntu. It literally means that a person is a person through other people. Eco leaders find their identity in relationship with the collective instead of within the individual. The ‘I’ expands as it identifies itself with a bigger whole or ecosystem. Naess (1995)¹ refers to this as the ‘ecological self’. Martin Buber initially formalised this in his seminal book ‘Ich und Du’² (I and Thou) in 1923, “A human being becomes whole not in virtue of a relation to himself [only] but rather in virtue of an authentic relation to another human being(s)”. Eco intelligence is rooted in this expanded sense of identity.

An underlying driver in eco leadership is therefore the greater good and purpose of a bigger organisational ecosystem. An eco intelligent defining question for a leader might be, “do you feel a stronger resonance and identity with the entire organisational ecosystem (clients, stakeholders, the greater world) or with your personal needs for inclusion, recognition or status?” The answer is often both but they will be leaning in a particular direction. Another good question might be, “what does success look like for you?”

Understanding the organisation as a complex, living ecosystem

When leaders accept their organisations as complex, messy, living ecosystems they start to recognise the constantly changing dynamic as people from all levels adapt to prompts from each other and from their environment. This can be referred to as ‘living in the space of emergence’, where things are not always clearly defined up front, but emerge as you go along, calling on leaders to be tuned in and responsive.

The eco intelligent leader is curious to explore multiple perspectives and find mutually enriching standpoints.

As integrators, they often hold their own opinions lightly and are not the advocates or promoters of ideas, old or new. Rather, they play the role of the ‘inquirer’, bringing diverse opinions to the surface: not allowing them to be hidden away due to the fear of ridicule. Their focus is on the process of enquiry and exploration rather than the content, applying thinking tools such as matrix thinking, paradoxical or polarity thinking, divergence and convergence to facilitate the emergence of new ideas.

They do not seek that others should follow them personally but that they follow the common dream of the organisation and they desire that all staff should give expression to its purpose. They have a strong commitment to the growth of others and to building a sense of community. They encourage the different parts of the organisational ecosystem to self-organise and to freely express their unique ideas. They see their leadership role as ensuring that all the parts of the ecosystem are aligned towards a common purpose, and then to help conceptualise, integrate, share and communicate ideas so that all the parts can learn and grow. This is no easy feat. It requires a cultural context where people feel psychologically safe enough to express their diverse ideas, and where fear is replaced with curiosity.

Leveraging the value of diversity and inclusion

Eco intelligent leaders have an eye for diversity and practise the art of inclusion. They value diversity of thought and enjoy being challenged by people with different views. Eco intelligence is therefore essential when it comes to leveraging value from diversity and even opposition in the workplace.

As we see in so many reports of HR trends, diversity and inclusion remain one of the most important challenges in the workplace. There is overwhelming evidence highlighting the business case for diverse teams. They are more agile, more innovative and even more financially successful than their peers.

Eco intelligent leaders see diversity as an opportunity rather than a problem. In fact, they will actively search for value in diversity.

They create the psychological safety for all the demographic categories of diversity like gender, race, sexual orientation, religious and other cultural orientation to participate fully and to feel appreciated for their contribution.

Unfortunately, the diversity and inclusion debate is sometimes seen in companies as only a socio-demographic issue. Although issues like equal pay and discrimination are important, we open the horizon to include stakeholder diversity and diversity of thought (cognitive diversity). Whereas ego intelligent leaders strive for a common identity in teams, eco leaders are more interested in a growing or expanding identity as they continuously include more diverse perspectives. They seek to involve all the key stakeholders in a value chain, including clients and even artificial intelligence, as an intrinsic part of the ecosystem: often blurring the boundaries between suppliers, customers and the organisation. This process obviously opens up a far richer understanding of opportunities for innovation within the bigger organisational ecosystem.

The work of Michael Porter (1985)³ as far back as 1985 and many others who followed, brought attention to the importance of value chains in business. This approach brought a shift away from focusing solely on the shareholder perspective, to multiple stakeholder perspectives including customers, employees and suppliers. In the 2018 Deloitte Report on the ‘Rise of the Social Enterprise’⁴ it is mentioned as one of the major shifts in business in recent times. This finding supports the work of Hampden-Turner et al (2019)⁵ who point out that leaders who proactively value and leverage the different perspectives or interdependencies between the various stakeholders in their organisations, with a strong focus on common purpose, will out-perform their peers ten times over a 15 year timeframe.

We take this argument further in Chapter 7 when we discuss cultural eco intelligence.

Who provides the energy?

One major difference between eco leadership and its counterparts, ego and intuitive leadership is the energy source. Is the leader ‘driving’ with their own energy or ‘releasing’ other peoples energy? Ego and intuitive leaders rely largely on their own strength and energy to shape the future and then to make things happen. Because eco leaders recognise the power of informal distributed networks, they work with the energy of others within the organisational ecosystem. They have the ability to sense into the natural, self-formed social networks and to help unlock their energy.

Instead of exercising control from the outside-in, eco leadership inspires a maturation of ideas, attitudes and skills from the inside-out, readying their teams for much higher levels of ownership and freedom to act.

They naturally prefer a more decentralised structure, where teams are empowered to make decisions and self-organise.

For this to work there needs to be a change in how teams work together (take on roles, make decisions, communicate, etc.) and what they expect from their leader. Decision making is devolved to lower levels, people are empowered so there is less need for formal hierarchy, reporting levels and seeking of approval for decisions. This enables them to respond quickly to emerging opportunities and take swift corrective action if something is going wrong. Some eco leaders even devolve activities such as recruitment of new members and performance review conversations to the teams themselves. New technology enables devolved decision-making and software systems provide access to information previously only available to managers. Getting this right leads to greater collaboration and organisational agility.

Eco leaders (when complemented by ego and intuitive intelligence) are key players in honing agile organisations that are responsive and dynamic.

One of the keys to unlock the energy from within the organisation is the subtle shift from ‘getting buy-in’ to ‘creating ownership’.

Ownership versus buy-in

Many managers believe that ‘telling and selling’ their vision or ideas and getting buy-in is enough. We argue that it is not. Managers often think they can get people to buy-in by giving bonuses, recognition, and many live with the illusion that if people comply, they have ‘bought in’. Even if people do buy-in, they will still blame management or HR when things go wrong. If, however, people feel they have ownership, they will take responsibility for success, look to overcome difficulties, solve problems and succeed against the odds.

Because eco intelligent leaders are keen to build connections and involve stakeholders in thinking and deciding with them, there is an automatic process of ownership.

They feel part of the organisation or team and have a deep commitment to its success. Hult Ashridge research into team engagement⁶ found that in highly engaged teams, ‘team members talked about feeling trusted and empowered by their managers and being given autonomy and flexibility to manage their own time, performance and results.’ This approach very much reflects eco leadership intelligence at work.

Eco intelligence requires knowledge sharing

To avoid chaos as hierarchy and controls are reduced, eco leaders often hold individuals and teams accountable for results (the what) while empowering them in terms of how they get there. With higher self-organisation, knowledge sharing to inform and inspire each other across regional or functional boundaries becomes an imperative. These leaders motivate their teams to realise the importance of sharing their knowledge and skills with others across the organisational boundaries.

As eco leaders have understood that an ecosystem flourishes if it is provided with encouragement and support, they see developing people as an opportunity and a responsibility. They feel rewarded by achieving success for and through others.

Eco leaders enjoy acting as coaches and mentors, as facilitators and enablers. They will often have a reputation for helping people get promoted and build their careers.

The groundbreaking work of Peter Senge (1990)⁷ highlighted the importance of continuous learning. He quotes Arie De Gues from Royal Dutch Shell as saying that learning faster than one’s competitors is perhaps one’s greatest competitive advantage. And as the world becomes more interconnected, complex and dynamic, work must become more ‘learningful’. This theme is still very much part of the vocabulary of eco intelligence.

Some organisations or teams have introduced learning or knowledge sharing days or sessions as a regular part of their calendar. The sharing of ideas and skills and cross-boundary teamwork is publicly recognised and some reported that it attracts talent to the organisation. A few teams we met rotate the responsibility to various team members to facilitate these learning days or sessions, offering something to stimulate thinking, thereby ensuring rich conversations. One of these teams had adapted a process they called ‘each one teach one’ where every team member committed to sharing knowledge or skills with at least one other each week.

In a 2017 article in the CNBC online magazine ‘Make It’⁸ Jonathan Ive, Chief Design Officer at Apple, talks about how Apple encourages communication and knowledge sharing. He is referring to the new Apple campus in Cupertino, California. Known as Apple Park, this giant ring-shaped building has been designed to be, “a building where so many people can connect and collaborate and walk and talk.” The article goes on to explain how every detail has been carefully scrutinised, creating an end product that Apple hopes will foster even greater innovation. Responding to the challenge of fitting 12,000 employees into one building the article continues:

…it is a logistical hurdle that Apple believes will encourage collaboration between workers and between departments… workers will be more likely to build relationships with those outside of their team, share ideas with co-workers with different specialties and learn about opportunities to collaborate.

Learning through face-to-face gatherings is now being challenged by COVID-19. It is wonderful to see the innovative new ways of connecting that are emerging. A new learning paradigm is appearing that is challenging the methods of traditional education institutions. Organisations are being called towards higher levels of flexibility.

Eco intelligence encourages organisational flexibility

A characteristic of organisational ecosystems is flexibility in structures, processes and policies. Eco leaders strive to know the unique interests and strengths of each person in their team and find ways to flex role descriptions around these strengths for the benefit of the person and the team.

In other words, a move from ‘people to fit jobs’ to a ‘jobs to fit people’ where possible.

Project-based work has become popular in eco orientated cultures, where individuals volunteer to step into a project role for a fixed period to reach a specific team objective, rather than follow a job description.

From an employee perspective, this way of working requires commitment, maturity and ownership – but most importantly, a common purpose that rallies and holds team members together. The common purpose should be something that motivates them intrinsically because they find a sense of vocation or meaning through it: for example, creating a specific customer experience, educating a certain target population or changing mindsets about something.

A different lens on change and transformation

Change and transformation are urgent priorities for leaders in turbulent times. Ego leadership leans towards a more linear process where the leader defines the vision, the outcome and the steps to get there. They mobilise resources and people using the mechanisms of ‘buy-in’ as described above. But what happens when the outcome is not clearly definable? Clear ‘end states’ become quickly outdated in a complex and dynamic environment. It is known that more than 70% of large change projects fail due to poor planning, lack of proper training, and change fatigue offered as an explanation Forbes (2017)⁹. However, our experience is that it has a lot to do with the complex and fast changing environment. Change management consultants spend months working to determine the ‘end state’ and the ‘blueprint’ and how to get there. But when the change goes ‘live’ or is ‘rolled out’, the customer needs or the outside world has changed and the solution is no longer fit for purpose.

Eco intelligent leaders embrace non-linear change where transformation is a more emergent process involving the coming together of many smaller initiatives that emerge from teams at all levels, influenced by the informal leaders.

As definable initiatives emerge from the organisational ecosystem, eco intelligent leaders need to draw on their linear thinking and ego intelligence to ensure convergence and implementation. Agile project management frameworks like Scrum offer great processes to engage this balance between divergence and convergence as an iterative process.

Another reason for the failure of top down change programmes is that they often ignore or do not know how to deal with opposing standpoints. This brings us to one of the most important characteristics of eco intelligent leaders, the way that they deal with opposition.

Dealing with polarity and opposites

Eco intelligent leaders do not shy away from dealing with opposing views or paradox. They see these as opportunities for growth and they attempt to take the sting out of conflict. They are usually attuned to the underlying polarities and bring the opposing points of view to the surface.

One definition of eco intelligence includes the ‘ability to deal with incompatibility’.

The acceptance of polarity is far from a recent phenomenon. Chinese philosophy uses the yin yang symbol to suggest that opposites may be part of the same thing or a bigger whole. In the Roman empire the Janus face looking in opposite directions illustrated the same point: that looking in opposite directions, rather than thinking ‘either-or’ may create new ideas. When we think ‘either-or’ we create blind spots and miss out on opportunities.

Eco intelligence can help to unlock the energy from opposing standpoints through adopting a ‘both-and’ mindset. This can be likened to two poles of a battery sparking when they come into contact with each other, until someone puts a lightbulb between the two opposing poles and gets the light to shine!

For example, Roche pharmaceuticals describe how they discovered their corporate agility in the interplay between stability and flexibility when they traded their ‘either-or’ thinking for ‘both-and’ thinking.

Many leaders tend to oversimplify complexity, reducing issues to: empowerment versus control, quality versus quantity, individuals versus teams, stability versus change or competition versus collaboration. While this kind of thinking has its advantages, it leaves us feeling that we have to make a choice. There is a risk that we either create artificial clarity or sub-optimise decision making – as exemplified by the expression, “any decision is better than no decision.” Is it really?

Sometimes a decision not to decide is exactly what is required.

Eco intelligent leaders recognise the inevitability of polarities, many of which are paradoxical as part of life – including organisational life – and work with them constructively.

Roger Martin (2017)¹⁰ refers to this capability as integrative thinking, which he refers to as ‘the way that twenty-first century leaders think’. He quotes F. Scott Fitzgerald as saying:

“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.”

He gives examples of leaders like Isador Sharp from Four Seasons Hotels, A.G. Lafley from Procter & Gamble and Bob Young from Red Hat software; whose success lay in their ability to extract value from opposing views and form something new, instead of falling into the trap of either-or thinking.

Against this background of the mindset and views of eco intelligent leaders, we consider the gifts and capabilities.

The gifts and capabilities of eco intelligence

Concepts like collaboration, co-creation, inclusion, polarity management and generative dialogue are becoming well known in the new world of work. We have contemplated and researched these concepts for many years and have engaged in numerous interventions globally to apply these in organisations and communities. We have worked extensively with trade unions and management, facilitating this shift from an either-or to both-and mindset. In essence, this work has involved helping opposing parties to (literally) step into the others’ world with an open mind, seeking to understand and engage in a more generative dialogue, resulting in often surprising initiatives from both sides. We have seen how the principles of eco intelligence are as applicable to large multinationals as they are to individuals and small teams.

We share some of our experiences under the capabilities of the eco intelligent leader. These are by no means exhaustive, but will hopefully provide a lens to reflect on your own leadership capabilities. We again use the framework of head (the way eco intelligent leaders think), heart (the way they deal with emotions) and hands (what they do).

Head: the way eco intelligent leaders think

The integrative capability of eco leaders is enabled by a distinctive way of thinking about issues. Here are a few of their thinking capabilities.

Divergent, convergent and emergent thinking

As explained by the spiral diagram in the beginning of this chapter, divergence, convergence and emergence are some of the thinking tools of eco intelligence.

By integrating, synthesising and exploring, they manage the movement of energy from divergence (opening up spaces for intuitive insights and other ideas) to convergence (allowing ego intelligence to shape and form them). Emergence (of new thinking and ideas) is the result of a good integration between divergent and convergent thinking.

The role of the eco leader is therefore not necessarily to provide new ideas but to facilitate a process where new ideas can emerge.

Their skills help to tease ideas out, paraphrase and consolidate for the sake of progress. As we have seen in Chapter 4, intuition needs a divergent space: an invitation to think out of the box. Eco intelligent leaders create that space because they are curious to hear and cultivate fresh, different ideas. It is at this stage that ego intelligence (theirs and others) needs to be drawn on, to shape new thinking and ideas and drive them towards implementation.

But how does eco intelligence deal with diverse ideas? Another capability of eco intelligent leader is matrix thinking.

Matrix thinking

This is the ability to look at a problem or opportunity from different perspectives with an open mind. Matrix thinking therefore underpins ecosystemic thinking and the notion of leveraging interdependencies. Geneticists have located this as a genetic capability which enables humans to evolve faster than other mammals in our evolutionary journey¹¹. As opposed to linear thinkers, matrix thinkers look at a problem from different angles, invite different perspectives and ideas and ask, ‘What if…?’

We are all acquainted with matrix structures in organisations. One common form is to position the operational departments on one axis with support functions like marketing and sales, finance, HR, IT etc. on the other. Or to have global product divisions on one axis and geographies (countries or regions) on the other. The underlying positive principle of the matrix (whatever the axes) is that it drives discussion, exploration of different views and subsequent agreement at the intersection points. This way of thinking brings a different understanding and application of the interdependencies in an organisation. However, people looking for clear reporting lines and a single boss, struggle with matrix structures due to the polarities and competing priorities they need to manage.

When facilitating a conversation between line management and HR we find it helpful to talk about the importance of focusing on people and tasks simultaneously. Ignoring either fails to recognise the inherent interdependency. Competence (skill and knowledge to complete the task) and engagement (the motivation to complete it as well as possible) are both essential to success.

Matrix thinking requires leaders to have the maturity and skills to hold challenging yet constructive conversations to leverage the value of the interdependencies between positions on the matrix.

When these different positions are opposing each other, things become a lot more challenging, and this is where the next capability is needed.

Integrative thinking and polarity management

As said above, the ability to deal with incompatibility is one of the key capabilities of eco intelligent leaders. Leaders who cannot see the underlying polarities when faced with challenges and problems miss out on opportunities for transformation and find themselves chasing their own tail. Eco intelligent leaders have eyes for and invite opposition or opposing arguments because they know how to deal with them. This involves both a thinking process – integrative thinking (Roger Martin) – as well as facilitated processes between stakeholders called polarity management (Barry Johnson). We share an example of an organisation we worked with as consultants.

Let’s explore this idea of integrative thinking with a triangle and a circle. And let’s apply it to this example of the trade unions as a circle and management as a triangle.

How would you bring these two shapes together?

Linear thinking would drive the ego leaders to hold strongly onto what they believe to be ‘right’, e.g., the union saying, “I believe in creating and keeping jobs (circle view) so I will persuade you, management (triangle) to fit into my circle, or the other way around.

Autocratic leaders tend to try to persuade or convince people to ‘buy-in’, or they may pull rank and use their institutional power to get the result they want. This was how things happened in that particular industry. We noticed a strong top down, command and control culture. On the other side, the unions used the threat of a strike to get management to ‘fit-in’ with their needs. Many organisations operate like this. It is a process of negotiation, threats and compromise, or rank pulling. In this ‘fit in’ mindset, there is always pressure to accommodate each other or to compromise. Sometimes the compromise is not satisfactory but the parties accept it ‘for now’.

The following diagrams illustrate various options: For example, get the other to ‘fit in with my way’ (circle or triangle fitting in to each other), or to compromise by finding areas of common ground (overlapping circle or triangle).

On the other hand, eco intelligent leaders attempt to integrate diverse ideas in a different way. They create opportunities for people with diverse ideas to understand the pros and cons of each, and then ask them to take distance and to explore new solutions that can integrate both. To extract value from opposing ideas and to create something new – a third thing that encapsulates the best of both. The circle and the triangle come together to create a cone. It is no longer a circle or a triangle, yet we can still recognise both in the cone.

Often these moments of integrative thinking feel like a eureka moment as stakeholders see new possibilities that contain both-and. They have shifted their thinking to a third dimension.

This is what happened in the example we referred to above. We facilitated a process of generative dialogue between the two stakeholder groups, union and management. During our deliberations we realised that there were big gaps in understanding how the business works and why certain actions were necessary, especially on the side of the unions. We had various separate sessions with the stakeholder groupings to create common understanding and vocabulary about how the business works, the financial implications of not doing the work correctly as well as some technicalities of certain operations and the working conditions of the union members. This process took about two months before they were ready to enter into the next stage of the process which entailed us taking a smaller group of the union leaders, general managers and the engineering team off site for a few days and facilitating a process of ‘generative dialogue and co-creating’ the way forward. They openly shared information and together hammered out a new operations plan which kept the branch open. A £500,000 loss turned into £1 million profit after four months and no jobs were lost. They were all ‘in the kitchen (vs in the dining room)’ and had high ownership of the plan.

The downsides (shadows) of eco intelligence

Eco leadership is not a panacea. Nor is it a magical solution for leading in the twenty-first century. It is hard work, and on some occasions eco leadership is simply not appropriate, or there is risk of overusing it at the expense of the other styles. These are the moments when eco intelligence may slip into its shadows.

Developing your eco intelligence

The table below is a summary of suggestions shared by participants in workshops and discussions during our research:

A deeper dive

Eco Intelligence and Spiritual Intelligence

Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall bring together insights from neuroscience, philosophy and quantum physics. They define IQ as the brain’s ‘serial thinking’ capability, which enables linear, logical and cause-effect reasoning. It is finite, works within boundaries and is useful when we need to scan new horizons and the unexpected: this relates to what we called ‘ego intelligence’. They go further to relate EQ, or Emotional Intelligence to the associative thinking ability of the brain. These neural networks draw links (associations) between emotions, bodily experiences and concepts. This is the basis of classical conditioning as in the experiments of the Russian scientist Pavlov with dogs. For instance, one learns certain skills like driving a car through repetition and association and cannot necessarily explain the rules, you just do it. These associative networks can lead to what we call ‘stuckness’ which we have discussed in the ‘downside of the ego’ section and in our discussion of human instincts in Chapter 4 on intuitive intelligence.

They introduce Spiritual Intelligence as that special capability of the human brain, when neurons oscillate around 40 Hz, to contextualise and give meaning, and most importantly, it gives us the ability for what they call ‘unitive thinking’ or seeing the bigger picture. They base their argument on the work of neurologist Wolf Singer and Charles Grey (2006)¹² from Frankfurt. SQ gives us our ability of self-awareness and transcendence and gives us our transformative ability or our ability to rewire our brain. Danah Zohar (1994)¹³ applied these concepts in the business world in her work ‘Rewiring the Corporate Brain’. Zohar (2016)¹⁴ takes these ideas further in the ‘Quantum Leader: using new science to rethink how we structure and lead organisations.’

Our concepts of intuitive and eco intelligence draw on Zohar’s concepts of Spiritual Intelligence and Quantum Leadership.

Eco leadership – the fourth discourse

We build on the work of Simon Western who describes eco leadership as the fourth discourse in leadership for the twenty-first century after the Controller (1900s Scientific Management), the Therapist (1960s Humans Relations – EQ) and the Messiah (1980s – Transformational culture control). He suggests that the prefix ‘eco’ signifies how progressive leaders conceptualise organisations as ecosystems and networks rather than closed systems. He clarifies that an ecosystem requires nurturing, not control. “Eco leadership recognises that within an organisation there are interdependent parts which make up a whole, this goes for all stakeholder relationships, and in ever widening circles that eventually reach the air that we breathe. It is about connectivity, interdependence and sustainability underpinned by an ethical and socially responsible stance”¹⁵.

Ego system awareness vs. ego system reality

Our initial inspiration for coining ‘ego and eco intelligence’ comes from the influential work of Otto Scharmer and Katrin Kaufer (2013.)¹⁶ They argue that there is a strong link between thought and social reality. They point to the disconnect between the way the ego thinks (ego awareness) and the (eco) reality of the world out there. It works like an ecosystem; economic, political, socio-cultural and environmental systems are intertwined, uncertain and highly complex. This disconnect of approaching a complex ecosystemic reality with an ego mindset is one of the major problems facing leaders today.

They refer to the problems of the EU in this regard and argue that many of its problems are the result of this disconnect. For example, the narrow ego awareness of each country (national interests focus) prevents leaders from really harvesting the benefits that come from creating value from a more integrated common good, or in our terms, applying eco intelligence.

Theory U, Scharmer (2009)¹⁷ presents a good ‘eco intelligent’ process where leaders can overcome their blind spots based on past experience and open the horizon for something new to emerge. Some of the qualities that are critical to what we call eco intelligence are embedded in the three concepts he uses: an open mind, an open heart and an open will. This process is widely used to facilitate generative dialogue in teams and we highly recommend it for those who want to apply their eco intelligence in complex environments.

Notes

1. 1 Naess, A. (1995) Self-realization. An ecological approach to being in the world. In G. Sessions (ed), Deep Ecology for the 21st Century. Readings on the Philosophy and Practice of the New Environmentalism. Shambala, Boston, MA, pp. 225–239.

2. 2 Buber, M. (1923) Ich und Du, Insel-Verlag, Leipzig.

3. 3 Porter, M. (1985) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Simon and Schuster, New York.

4. 4 https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/at/Documents/human-capital/at-deloitte-insights-the-rise-of-the-social-enterprise.pdf

5. 5 Hampden-Turner, C., O’Riordan, L., and Trompenaars, F., (2019) Capitalism in Crisis, Filament Publishing, Croydon.

6. 6 Armstrong, A., Olivier, S., and Wilkinson, S. (2018) Shades of Grey: An Exploratory Study of Engagement in Work Teams, Hult Ashridge Executive Education, Berkhamsted.

7. 7 Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Inc., New York.

8. 8 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/13/the-science-and-design-behind-apples-innovation-obsessed-new-workspace.html

9. 9 https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentgleeson/2017/07/25/1-reason-why-most-change-management-efforts-fail/#13b91a37546b

10. 10 Martin, R. (2017) Creating Great Choices: A Leader’s Guide to Integrative Thinking, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, MA.

11. 11 Uhlhaas, P. J. and Singer, W. (2006) Neural synchrony in brain disorders: Relevance for cognitive dysfunctions and pathophysiology. Neuron 52: 155–168.

12. 12 Zohar, D. (1994) Rewiring the Corporate Brain, Berrett-Koehler, Oakland, CA.

13. 13 Zohar, D. (2016) The Quantum Leader, Prometheus Books, New York.

14. 14 Western, S. (2008) Leadership: A Critical Text, Sage Publishing, London.

15. 15 Scharmer, O. and Kaufer, K., (2013) Leading from the Emerging Future. Berrett-Koehler Publisher, San Francisco, CA.

16. 16 Scharmer, C. O. (2009) Theory U, Leading from the Future as It Emerges. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA.