LEADERSHIP

What Is the Action Logic Concept of Leadership?

An article about a key leadership metric

According to Rooke and Torbert, there are seven leadership Action Logics, and steps as to how leaders can transform from one stage to another.

So let’s talk about Action Logic.

Are you ready? … Well, read on.

Leadership Action Logic

Some observers differentiate leaders in accordance with their leadership philosophy, personality, traits, and style.

David and William (2005) emphasized that “Action Logic” is a highly important factor to distinguish leadership effectiveness.

What is Action Logic?

In simple terms, it’s a leaders’ “expression or reaction in response to a power challenge.” However, few leaders are skilled with “the ability to deploy Action Logic” effectively (David et al, 2005).

If a leader understands their own ‘logic of action’, they can improve their performance — leadership effectiveness. But first, they must know what type of leader they are, to begin with.

Rooke and Torbert broke down leadership styles into seven general categories based on their action logic theory. This was determined using a sentence-completion survey, called the Leadership Development Profile.

The sample audience was a selection of leaders, managers, and professionals, between the ages of 25-55, at American and European companies.

The hypothesis proposed that by asking participants to complete a survey, each could be evaluated, and categorized into one of seven Action Logics, as follows:

1. Opportunist
2. Diplomat
3. Expert
4. Achiever
5. Individualist
6. Strategist
7. Alchemist (Rooke et al, 2005)

Rooke and Torbert expanded on each label, summarised as follows:

1. The Opportunist leader Asks “How can I survive?” — Their focus is on a personal win. They see the world as opportunities to be exploited.
2. The Diplomat leader: Asks “Do I belong?” — They can be tactful, loyal, respectful, but may find it difficult to deal with conflict.
3. The Expert leader: Asks “Who am I?” — They lead through controlling the world around them through the quality of their knowledge, intellect, and expert ability.
4. The Achiever leader: Asks “Am I successful?” — Seek to manage people efficiently and effectively to achieve work goals.
5. The Individualist leader: Asks “Who am I really?” — They have an empathetic and people-focused style of leadership.
6. The Strategist leader: Asks: “What can we contribute together to make a difference?” — They are clear about their gifts and are seeking to discover how to integrate them with the needs of their organization and society.
7. The Alchemist leader: Asks “What does the planet need?” — They and their organization lead the way by creating a sustainable future for humanity and the planet. (Rooke et al, 2005)

With leaders in mind, how they can transform or evolve from one action logic action style to another?

Leadership Growth

Thanks to the research undertaken by Rooke and Torbert, three personal development roadmaps were defined:

№1 — Expert leader to achiever

Focus more on “delivering results than perfecting your knowledge”. Manage people for results and “emphasize getting results through flexible strategies” rather than using one method.

For example, practice new conversational strategies such as “You may be right, but I’d like to understand what leads you to believe that.” (Rooke et al, 2005)

№2 — Achiever to individualist leader

Reflect on “the worth of the goals themselves”, with the aim of “improving future goals” of self and the organization. (Rooke et al, 2005)

№3 — Individualist to strategist leader

Engage in “peer-to-peer development.” (Rooke et al, 2005)

Establish mutual mentoring with stakeholders (board members, managers, employees, and industry leaders) who “challenge your assumptions and practices”, as well as “those of your company” and industry. (Rooke et al, 2005)

Leadership — Organizational and Team Culture

Categories of “Action Logic” leadership styles can be extended to describe the impact on teams and organizations.

1. In the long term, Strategist culture teams are the most effective.
2. Achiever teams have limited success due to a) impatience by slowing down to reflect and b) apt to dismiss questions about goals and assumptions as “endless philosophy.” These leaders typically respond with hostile humor to creative exercises.
3. Expert teams are worse off — Team leaders see themselves as chiefs of their “team”, information reporting facilitators. No shared problem solving or strategy formulation is shared with status differences, norms, and carefully staged ritual “court” ceremonies being commonplace.
4. Individualist teams are often rare but found in creative, consulting, and non-profit organizations. The downside is slow decision making due to excessive time on reviewing goals, assumptions, and work practices.

Critique and Final Thoughts

Leadership transformation is beneficial in helping leaders to understand where they’re at on their journey and what they should expect during the next stage of their development.

David and William found that leadership effectiveness was least at the Opportunist level and most at the Alchemist level.

Criticism

Transformational leadership makes use of impression management, as such lends itself to amoral self-promotion. This is difficult to teach and learn because of the combination of leadership theories involved.

In some instances, followers can be manipulated by leaders (charismatic), so organizations can lose more than they gain.

Implications of Transformational Leadership

The current economic environment characterized by uncertainty, global turbulence, and organizational instability calls for transformational leadership at all levels of business and government.

Followers of developing leaders exhibit high levels of job satisfaction like:

• Organizational commitment, and
• Better engagement in organizational citizenship behavior

If the impact of action logic is a devoted workforce, it’s recommended to develop transformational leadership.

Transformational leaders are similar to charismatic leaders but team-oriented.

Transformational leaders achieve change by motivating followers on individual interests in parallel with group goals.

Beware of charismatic leaders

A charismatic leader appears similar to a transformational leadership style, insofar as the leader injects a dose of enthusiasm into his or her team to inspire others. However, charismatic leaders tend to be more invested in themselves than their people.

This creates risk on a project or an entire organization.

In the eyes of charismatic followers, success is tied to the presence of their charismatic leader — followers are condition as such.

Conclusion

Leaders are made, not born.

Those who are willing to work on developing themselves to become more self-aware can certainly evolve into truly transformational leaders in time.