BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//Public Space - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://publicspace.nl X-WR-CALDESC:Evenementen voor Public Space REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H X-Robots-Tag:noindex X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/Amsterdam BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20180325T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20181028T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20190331T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20191027T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20200329T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20201025T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20210328T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20211031T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20220327T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20221030T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:20230326T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:20231029T010000 END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20221015 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20221016 DTSTAMP:20260415T055429 CREATED:20220706T135810Z LAST-MODIFIED:20230928T130434Z UID:10000378-1665792000-1665878399@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:Presentation at ILA (International Leadership Association) Global Conference 2022 in Washington DESCRIPTION:The Battle for Wisdom in Leaders\nPresentation and start of Round Table Discussion by Steven P.M. de Waal at the 24th ILA (International Leadership Association) Global Conference ‘Wisdom in times of crises’ in Washington D.C. USA. \nThis is the third year in a row that De Waal initiates a round table discussion at the annual ILA global conference. \nThe first time was in Ottawa\, Canada (2019) about his last book\, ‘Civil Leadership as the Future of Leadership. Harnessing the disruptive power of citizens’ (Amazon\, 2018). Following this book his main topic for the debate was the influence of the new media- and ICT- technologies on the public arena and so on public leadership. His main thesis for discussion there was: ‘Do you agree that at this point most leaders\, both political and private\, deny and ignore this new power of citizens and so make the same mistake as we saw in disruption of markets?’. \nThe second time was in Geneva\, Switzerland (2021)\, due to the covid19 pandemic in a hybrid fashion\, both physical and virtual. Fortunately he could have a physical round table with a lot of attendees. Here his main question was if in this new public arena rhetorics are more dominant in success of public leaders than character or values or purpose. His main – publicly known – examples for the discussion were Donald Trump\, Boris Johnson\, Greta Thunberg and Jacinda Ardern. \nIn this upcoming conference\, in Washington DC (2022)\, he initiates a discussion\, following the main theme of the conference\, in the first place about the philosophical concept of ‘wisdom in leaders’ and then about the question if (enough) followers will recognize and support some wisdom (and\, given the philosophical history\, what kind of wisdom do they prefer?) in their leaders? The philosophical questions are coming from a century old search for ‘wisdom’ and are here especially aimed at the best way to define\, research and develop wisdom in future leaders. The second element in the discussion is again connected to the new battle for public authority and leadership in the new public arena\, as analyzed in the book. Wisdom in leaders is defined and accepted by followers\, not academics\, especially so in this new public arena with much more power of citizens (in democracies that is). So the main question for the discussion will be: Will (future) followers\, who define and show their spontaneous support for and ultimately follow their leaders\, really reward wisdom in their leaders? \nPaper submitted by Steven P.M. de Waal for the upcoming edition of the ILA Gobal Conference:\nWill ‘wise persons’ be chosen\, accepted\, or recognised as our future leaders?\nThe invitation to the 2022 ILA annual conference has a short description of what is meant by wisdom in leaders. This shows ‘wisdom’ mainly as a moral approach\, as well as a well intended and values-based attitude aimed at bringing people and societies to a ‘better future.’ It even talks about system change\, creative and generative futures of ‘all systems\, all peoples and all nature.’ Probably no one will be against this hopeful vision. The main question then is whether there is enough support out there for this vision of future leaders. \nIn my view\, this short introduction puts (too much of) an emphasis on personal character and attitude as being the reasons why ‘wise’ persons should be our future leaders. This looks like the promotion of Plato of ‘philosopher kings’ [Ebenstein&Ebenstein 2000]\, which is close to benevolent dictatorship or soft despotism [De Tocqueville\, 2002]. The main question then is: Will these ‘wise persons’ be chosen\, accepted\, or recognised as our future leaders? That means that (enough) followers\, who define and recognise their leaders\, must have the same definition and appreciation of wisdom in their leaders as these members of the International Leadership Association.\nIn this question for discussion\, I make a connection with the modern public arena\, revolutionary changed due to the new information- and mediatechnologies\, and the battle for (public) leadership in that arena. That public battle shows the dominant view about what people recognise as leadership. Leadership is recognised\, criticized and even chosen (in democracies that is) in the public arena\, so the dominant vision on leadership can be observed there. We could call it a social constructivist vision on leadership. This same vision applies to the concept of ‘wisdom.’ This point of discussion\, rests on an Aristotelian view on ‘practical wisdom’ (phronesis) [Aristotle’s Nichomean Ethics\, 2011\, Den Uijl\, 2022] as a wisdom to come to choices and decisions that address all kinds of questions\, both morally and aimed at ‘a flourishing life for all’ (eudaimonia)\, but balancing this with all kinds of strategic\, financial and human elements. Ultimately these choices and decisions are in connection with ‘governance’ as description of the relevant context of most executives in public and private organisations. As a consequence\, this same vision on and definition of leadership often applies to leadership in private circles\, like corporations\, public and civil society organizations. \nThe problem to discuss arises along the following lines of reasoning: \n\nLeadership is defined (and recognised) by followers\, not by academics. The followers now have\, thanks to the technological revolution in information and media [De Waal\, 2018] the (still increasing) power of collective opinion making\, bottom-up organising and data collection\, exchange and knowledge (some speak\, very appropriately here\, of ‘the wisdom of the crowds’)[Surowiecki\, 2005]. This is influencing how they view and define leadership and also on what grounds leaders are competing for their attention and approval. The most obvious place to observe this is in the new public arena\, ranging from examples like Donald Trump to Jacinda Ardern and from Boris Johnson to Greta Thunberg. This more public battle for leadership and public authority is influencing people’s idea of what leadership is and what the best kind of leadership is for themselves and for their company or their country. This modern battle for public authority also applies to academic authority! Academia can define leadership for its own scientific purposes\, but its authority is not great enough to automatically dominate the more general and public view and definition of leadership that many people use.\nThis leads to the next question: Will ‘wisdom’ be one of the main characteristics these followers will reward in their acceptance and admiration of leaders? This has two sides. On the one hand\, do the followers see and acknowledge that they need more ‘wisdom’ in their leaders? On the other hand\, do persons in (potential) leadership positions who try to get people’s attention and approval embrace this attitude of ‘wisdom’?\nIn the end\, this leads to the question about other characteristics. Than only ‘wisdom’ people search for in their leaders. This is about the boundaries of ‘good character’ and ‘right values’ in getting acceptance as a leader from these modern followers. You need more than just good intentions and a good attitude\, you must also have skills and (other) personality traits that enable you to get the ‘right’ results. Skills and traits you need to have are ‘focus and determination on reaching results\,’ ‘knowing how to play forces of power and use your position’ and ‘having rhetorical skills to convince relevant audiences’. Don’t wise leaders need some ‘bad’ skills and attitudes\, to succeed in getting this recognition as leaders? It is what Barbara Kellerman called the question of ‘whether the end justifies the means’ [Kellerman\, 2004]. It is the centuries old discussion about the theories of Machiavelli [Antony Jay\, 1967]. Machiavelli himself was nuanced about the relation between (political) power and virtue\, like ‘prudence\,’ which comes close to ‘wisdom’ [Niccolò Machiavelli\, 1996]. We now see that kind of perception on leadership when people can choose their leaders\, although this is of course often not the case in companies. Although the new public arena certainly has increased the influence of followers on the term in office of (some) executives\, as can be seen in the impact of #MeToo cases worldwide. In the case of democracies we see that people not necessarily choose the most competent\, honest\, or ‘wise’ leader. It even seems\, as we discussed at the 2021 ILA conference in Geneva\, that the modern public arena mainly promotes the rhetorical skills in leaders over what is here called ‘wisdom’.\n\nThe purpose of initiating this discussion is:\n– to further the debate about ‘wise leadership’\n– to make it more societally and politically relevant\n– to influence leadership development programs that aim to further develop ‘wisdom in leaders.’ \n  \nReferences \n\nEbenstein & Ebenstein ‘Great Political Thinkers. Plato to the Present’\, Chapter 3\, Wadworth Boston 2000\nDe Tocqueville ‘Democracy in America’\, Chapter 6\, University of Chicago Press\, Chicago 2002\nAristotle ‘Nichomean Ethics’\, Translated by Bartlett & Collins\, University of Chicago Press\, Chicago 2011\nDen Uijl ‘Practical Wisdom in Governance’\, The Netherlands School of Public Administration\, The Hague 2022\nDe Waal ‘Civil Leadership as the Future of Leadership. Harnessing the disruptive power of citizens’\, Warden Press\, Amsterdam 2018\nSurowiecki ‘The Wisdom of Crowds’\, Random House\, New York 2005\nKellerman ‘Bad leadership: What It Is\, How It Happens\, Why It Matters’\, Harvard Business School Press\, Boston 2004\nJay ‘Management and Machiavelli’\, Business Books\, London 1967\nMachiavelli ‘Discourses on Livy’\, University of Chicago Press\, Chicago 1996 URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/presentation-at-ila-international-leadership-association-global-conference-2022-in-washington/ LOCATION:Grand Hyatt Hotel\, Washington\, Verenigde Staten CATEGORIES:Toegankelijk voor deelnemers ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/dawn-from-netherlands-cotillion-washington-dc-scaled.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20211021T122000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20211021T130000 DTSTAMP:20260415T055429 CREATED:20211001T142126Z LAST-MODIFIED:20211015T142152Z UID:10000353-1634818800-1634821200@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:Presentation at ILA (International Leadership Association) Global Conference 2021 in Geneva DESCRIPTION:Does the New Digital Media Landscape provoke Good or Bad Public Leadership?\nPresentation by Steven P.M. de Waal at the 23rd ILA (International Leadership Association) Annual Global Conference in Geneva. \nThe internet technologies are giving increasing power to citizens. We are now in the midst of the digital civil revolution. This new civil power requires a different style of leadership as ‘one-of-us’- citizens\, combined with rhetorical skills and aimed at the common good. That is one vision\, still a hypothesis. The other one is that this new civil power will be misused by bad leadership: threatening\, divisive\, rhetorical skills aimed at conceiling the leader’s own interest (demagogue)\, provocative for riots. \nWhat will be the outcome in this new battle for public authority? What to do about it in leadership development? \nDisruption in markets and marketstrategies has its roots in the new internet technologies. They gave us platforms\, apps\, websites and social media. This last one changed fundamentally the media landscape\, by adding a third mediachannel of\, by and to citizens themselves. It is directly aimed at them\, filled with their own productions and opinions and a powerful tool for their bottom-up organization of public protest and opinion (‘swarm behaviour’ and ‘permanent public grandstand’). It now also leads to disruption of democracy\, politics and public services\, because it gives new power of information\, data\, exchange and self organization to citizens. It’s no longer just about technology\, but about power\, institutional change and so\, also in changes in the necessary public authority and leadership. It can be analyzed as a ‘digital civil revolution’\, because it is not just a new phase in an ongoing industrial revolution\, but a totally new phase that changes not just industry or economy\, but also societies\, worldwide humanity\, institutions and politics. \n“… not just a new phase in an ongoing industrial revolution\, but a totally new phase that changes not just industry or economy\, but also societies\, worldwide humanity\, institutions and politics.” \nOf course\, because these revolutions take time to make their big effects\, we are now in the middle of experiencing and observing its nature and impact. At this moment we can only come up with hypotheses about the new kind of public leadership\, that is necessary or more fitting or gaining dominance in this fundamentally new strategic context (which of course will influence other kinds of leadership). \nCharacter and Values\nAt the ILA conference in Ottawa in 2019 I discussed if these disruptions will lead to the dominance of civil leadership. In this Round Table many agreed certainly with the strategic analysis of the ‘digital civil revolution’. At the same time there was much doubt if it was not too naive and optimistic about civil leadership as the most fitting new leadership\, missing the bad leadership that was using these same channels to convince citizens or spreading fake news or gaining followership for wrong intentions. Beneath this there was of course a discussion about the influence of the ownership by the commercial providers of the internet industry: yes\, it is a new media channel to citizens\, but they don’t have the ownership of it\, neither on the selection of what they are seeing! The participants at the Round Table thought I was right in describing that the new leadership should have an attitude and style of ‘one-of-us’- citizens\, but that certainly didn’t mean they would have the right character or the right values that fitted the interests of citizens and ‘the common good’! They then pointed to such succesful leaders as Boris Johnson in the UK and Donald Trump in USA. \nPublic Authority\nSo\, in the digital ILA conference of 2020\, which was to be held at San Francisco\, I focused my topic on this next issue: What will ultimately win public authority in this battle for new leadership: rhetorical skills or character and values? Of course I tried to settle this debate on middle ground: The right kind of leadership in character and values will win public authority\, from the moment they have better rhetorical skills. So\, the battle is not between good and bad leadership\, but about rhetorical skills! At this moment many civil leaders are missing these skills\, which is then\, of course a temporary phenomenon! And maybe\, further to be investigated\, bad character leads to faster acquiring and performing rhetorical skills? Of course\, this was not fully accepted at that time in the discussion in several rounds. The discussion mainly focused on my underlying assumption that citizens know what is in their best interest and that they want to and can look beyond rhetorics to (the right) character and values! This is fundamentally a question about the value and sustainability of (representative) democracy\, a discussion that can be expected from this ongoing disruption of democracy! \nThis question as put in the title will be the next phase in this ongoing discussion about the impact of this new revolution in mankind on public leadership\, as a third round in the ongoing yearly ILA conferences. \n \n  URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/presentation-at-ila-international-leadership-association-global-conference-2021-in-geneva/ LOCATION:Geneva\, Zwitserland CATEGORIES:Toegankelijk voor deelnemers ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/ILA-2021-1.png END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20201105 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20201110 DTSTAMP:20260415T055429 CREATED:20201013T093437Z LAST-MODIFIED:20201202T114635Z UID:10000250-1604534400-1604966399@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:Roundtable at ILA (International Leadership Association) Virtual Global Conference 2020 DESCRIPTION:Steven de Waal will host a roundtable at the ILA (International Leadership Association)\, Virtual Global Conference\, 5-9 November 2020: \nThe Battle for New Public Leadership: Rhetorical Skills Versus Character and Values?\nThe new internet technologies have disrupted markets. They now also lead to disruption of democracy and public services\, giving increasing power to citizens. Level 1 in this disruption of democracy is classical as the disruption we now know from markets: persons from outside politics now win elections\, mostly by using the platforms and new media channels better than their opponents. Level 2 of this disruption of democracy is still more specific and fundamental: the rise of private persons\, while staying outside politics and even explicitly avoiding every connection with it\, winning public leadership in addressing specific public concerns or issues\, mostly better and more explicitly than the incumbent ‘professional’ politicians.\nThis leads to two major questions about public leadership (and the vision and expectations on leadership in general)\, that Dr. Steven P.M. de Waal will address in this roundtable session:\nQuestion A. Is the new public arena only rewarding rhetorical skills and not true character and right values?\nQuestion B: Is there (internationally) proof of this second level disruption: Are there now more examples of new private persons gaining public leadership from outside politics? \nDisruption in markets and marketstrategies has its roots in the new internet technologies. They gave us platforms\, apps\, websites and social media. This same technological revolution now also leads to disruption of democracy\, politics and public services\, because it gives new powers of information\, data\, exchange and self organization to citizens. It’s no longer just about technology\, but now about power\, institutional change and changes in the necessary public authority and leadership. \nTwo levels of this disruption can be analyzed. Level 1 is classical as in the markets: persons from outside politics suddenly win elections\, using the new technologies better and more systematic\, like Beppe Grillo in Italy\, Trump in USA and Johnson in UK. Level 2 is still more fundamental\, because it changes the battle ground as such: the political arena is no longer dominant\, we now see the rise of private persons\, without participating in the political arena and not even having any political ambition\, directly winning public authority and public leadership\, like Greta Thunberg and many informal leaders organizing bottom up now all kinds of public protests\, like in Hong Kong and Beirout. \nThis leads to two major questions about leadership.\nQuestion A. Is the new public arena not only rewarding rhetorical skills to address this new permanent public grandstand and so\, are true character and the right values no longer important in winning positions of public leadership? Because this new public arena is so dominant and people now have the power of opinion\, public protest and massive organization all leadership\, not only formally public or political\, but also that of private companies and organizations\, must be willing and capable of addressing this new public arena. This will of course influence heavily the selection processses for all kinds of leaders everywhere. So this disruption of the public atmosphere can lead to a change towards a totally new kind of leadership\, and maybe not for the best.\nQuestion B: Do we see proof of this second level disruption (and maybe in terms of leadership this is more promising and hopeful than the first disruption?): Do we observe the rise in countries around the globe of these new private persons gaining public leadership? \nThe main purposes for Steven de Waal to initiate this meeting is:\n1. To discuss these findings and analyses with people from all kinds of backgrounds and countries and\n2. To investigate and collect data and examples from around the globe that might support or refute these issues. \nDownload a brief overview of his topic that Dr. De Waal’s used during the Interactive Roundtable Discussion. \nFind out more about the start of this international discussion with Dr. De Waal at ILA’s Global Conference in Ottawa in 2019. URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/roundtable-at-ila-international-leadership-association-virtual-global-conference-2020/ CATEGORIES:Toegankelijk voor deelnemers ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ILA-2020.png END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20201008T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20201008T183000 DTSTAMP:20260415T055429 CREATED:20201005T142127Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220107T133347Z UID:10000242-1602176400-1602181800@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:European Leadership Platform - Annual Conference 2020 DESCRIPTION:We are twenty years into the 21st century and the world is completely different from what it was at the turn of the century. The corona crisis has only underlined some of the deeper changes in society. The pendulum of history is in full swing. We are living in a change of age\, more than in an age of change. Not only because of corona but also because the collective thinking about many things is changing dramatically. \nSome examples: \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThere is a perceived need to address the vulnerabilities of the ways in which we live\, consume and produce;\nThere is a revaluation of the role of the state;\nNeoliberal capitalism is in the line of fire;\nBusiness leaders are more often required to balance the interests of shareholders and other stakeholders;\nInequality in wealth and income has become a major source of discontent.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAt this ELP Leadership Conference we will take time to reflect on where we are today\, how we got there and where we want to go from here.\n\nFollowing his latest book ‘Civil Leadership as the Future of Leadership. Harnessing the disruptive power of citizens’ (Amazon\, 2018) Steven de Waal will focus on the new public leadership that is necessary in the new public arena due to the digital power that is now given to ’the people’ or citizens in general. He lectured about this internationally in 2019 (pre-corona)\, including in Canada\, New Zealand\, USA and many countries in (Western) Europe. So partly his contribution will be about the Digital Civil Revolution that was already going on pre-corona (and this analysis was mainly proven in this crisis) and\, of course\, partly about what the corona crisis teaches us about our leadership. He reflects on this in his blog ‘The corona crisis and civil leadership’.\n\n\nBasically his main focus now is on evaluating the outcome of his PhD study into values of civil leaders versus the requirements this new public arena poses on leaders seeking public authority. He addresses this in the issue of strategy versus morality and will go into it shortly in his contribution.\n\n\n\n\n\nYou may also want to read a blog with the main conclusions based on his international lecturing\, which was of course pre-corona.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nClick here for a video recording of the plenary parts of this conversation with Steven P.M. de Waal URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/european-leadership-platform-annual-conference-2020/ LOCATION:Online\, Nederland CATEGORIES:Open inschrijving ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ELP-Conference.png END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20200211T103000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20200211T123000 DTSTAMP:20260415T055429 CREATED:20200204T152533Z LAST-MODIFIED:20200210T103341Z UID:10000308-1581417000-1581424200@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:Workshop over toezicht op cultuur en gedrag in zorgorganisatie: The (Public) Value(s) of Value Based Leadership DESCRIPTION:Op 11 februari 2020 verzorgt Steven de Waal een workshop over toezicht op cultuur en gedrag voor de Raad van Commissarissen van een grote\, grootstedelijke zorgorganisatie. \nKern van het onderwerp en zeer strategisch in de moderne governance: Hoe kunnen wij als toezichthouders stimuleren en erop toezien dat de organisatie de juiste cultuur en het juiste leiderschap krijgt en uitstraalt (#civilleadership) en dat juiste moet dan natuurlijk gedefinieerd zijn vanuit de missie en de gewenste public value als zorgorganisatie! \nDat begrip ‘public value’ zat ook als definitie onder het civil leadership in zijn proefschrift ‘The Value(s) of Civil Leaders’ (2014\, summary): de 33 onderzochte maatschappelijk leiders waren personen die op een zeer persoonlijke manier en met moed en leiderschap hun organisatie met succes dichterbij public value hadden gebracht\, zoals zij dat oprecht en persoonlijk zagen. Uiteraard leidde dat in het publieke debat tot veel discussie juist over die perceptie op public value! \nEr zijn nu in ieder geval 2 grote misverstanden in veel publiek debat en Nederlandse theorievorming (al zijn er nog veel meer): de wijze van gebruik van public value en de opvatting over ‘governance’. \n1. Het gaat niet om een standaard Public Value\, maar om een afweging van en strijd om Public ValueS \nMen denkt ‘public value’ te kunnen gebruiken als het volgende bureaucratische stuurmiddel\, dus na het betalen van uren en verrichtingen (klassieke output) komt men nu aan outcome\, maar nog steeds gedacht vanuit publieke financiering en dus op basis van standaard definities vanuit een ambtelijke ivoren toren. Terwijl het juist gaat om een strijd\, maatschappelijk en politiek\, om de juiste public values en de juiste afweging daartussen (dit is klassiek #Aristoteles: zie De Waal’s beschrijving bij eerdere leergangen voor Raden van Toezicht: Machiavelli\, Shakespeare en Aristoteles kunnen ons meer leren dan veel hedendaagse theoretici en beleidsmakers!). Er bestaat dus ook helemaal geen moreel kompas\, zoals de Amerikaanse literatuur rond leiderschap al lang doorheeft. \n2. Governance gaat niet alleen over structuur\, rollen en economische continuïteit\, maar om waarden\, missie en purpose \nMen denk te veel dat governance vooral gaat over de structuur in de top (one tier / two tier en rolvastheid volgens de eenmaal gekozen structuur) en toezicht op compliance en continuïteit. Dat is natuurlijk een enorm onderschatten van de rol van een RvT in de zorg\, die nu eenmaal veel meer missiegedreven en purpose gericht moet zijn. En dit wordt nog verder enorm uitvergroot doordat de aandeelhouders uit de klassieke RvC structuur van het bedrijfsleven ontbreken (zie artikel Steven de Waal in S&D van 2013 ‘De publieke sector verdient goed management‘) \nDe Waal gaat met de aanwezigen werken aan deze thema’s\, omdat dan pas de zeker relevante vraag aan de orde is of de organisatie het juiste maatschappelijk leiderschap heeft en uit. Alleen dan kan de RvC er mede aan bijdragen dat dat er ook komt! URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/workshop-voor-rvc-over-toezicht-op-cultuur-en-gedrag-in-een-zorgorganisatie/ CATEGORIES:Toegankelijk voor deelnemers ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Drupal-NEWS_Staten-Island-University-Hospital-names-new-chair-emergency-medicine.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20191129T140000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20191129T170000 DTSTAMP:20260415T055430 CREATED:20191128T111933Z LAST-MODIFIED:20191202T094807Z UID:10000306-1575036000-1575046800@publicspace.nl SUMMARY:Lezing over Ethiek en dus Civil Leadership voor bestuurders en toezichthouders DESCRIPTION:Op 29 november 2019 verzorgt Steven de Waal een lezing over zijn meest recente boek ‘Civil Leadership as the Future of Leadership’ voor een groep bestuurders en toezichthouders die met enige regelmaat reflecteren op het thema ‘European Leadership’ en als groep bij elkaar zijn gebleven na een Europese leergang. \nZe hebben als hoofdthema ethiek en morele keuzes genomen. Zowel het proefschrift van Steven de Waal (‘Value(s) of Civil Leaders’)\, als het hele concept van civil leadership\, zoals het ook in zijn laatste boek wordt behandeld en waarover hij nu veel internationale lezingen geeft\, passen daar volledig in: zo kwam deze groep ook bij hem uit. \nEr is gelukkig ook in boardrooms weer toenemend aandacht voor waarden\, ethiek en morele beslissingen. Het onderwerp dat voor Steven de Waal al sinds zijn introductie van ‘maatschappelijk ondernemerschap’ in 1994 een hoofdthema is: hoe nemen we meer maatschappelijke verantwoordelijkheid als we een organisatie leiden? \nDownload hier de presentatie van Steven de Waal URL:https://publicspace.nl/calendar/lezing-over-ethiek-en-dus-civil-leadership-voor-bestuurders-en-toezichthouders/ CATEGORIES:Toegankelijk voor deelnemers ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://publicspace.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AdobeStock_129986503-compressor-1024x683.jpeg END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR