Leadership training programs “deficit based” or “constructionist based” approach?

Change Management Leadership

Frank Dieters Transitionist | Manager | Team Rallier | Momentum Manager| Frankdieters.Com Selfkant, Germany

Many leadership training programs (or projects for that matter) are based on a “deficit based” approach ( problem, analysis, solution, planning, execution). I personally believe (backed up by research) that a “constructionist based” approach to change ( discovery, dreaming, designing and creating has shown more sustainable results. I find however that the deficit based approach is still the dominant factor amongst PM’s. Does anybody recognize this paradox and who would like to share their experiences on this matter?

Posted: Apr 10, 2016 12:22 PM

Sort By:

< 1 2 >

Frank Dieters Transitionist | Manager | Team Rallier | Momentum Manager| Frankdieters.Com Selfkant, Germany

Apr 12, 2016 12:06 AM

Replying to Vincent Guerard

...

I agree that ideal is balance approach.

The deficit-based is interesting for a rapid change, or that is often where I have see it use.

I think that enterprise view are too short term for the constructionist-based approach.

Hello Vincent, Interesting point you bring to the table. I hear it this often, when discussing this topic with colleagues. I think this has mainly to do with the fact that the latter is often seen as the “soft” approach. But, indeed, the balancing the pro- and cons of both should get the best results. Slowly, but surely, I see a shift towards this in the Enterprise environment. The drive for sustainable change and ditto added value calls for a more fluid approach, or so it seems. Enterprises have been seen doing pilots with great results.

Posted: Apr 12, 2016 11:35 AM

Thomas Walenta Global Project Economy Expert Hackenheim, Germany

Hi Frank, interesting question. Yin-Yang.

To my understanding,

- “deficit based” can be seen as re-active but efficient approach to problems, events - which is a necessary capability for leaders and PMs. It triggers a defensive attitude and tries to establish stability, it looks at risks as threats, is evolutionary, tries to build on/extend an existing system - is more the attitude of a project manager

- “constructionist based” can be seen as pro-active, visionary approach, maybe represented by concepts like design thinking, is open to innovation, disruption, can be revolutionary, does not consider existent solution in the first place. looks at risks as opportunities - is more the attitude of a program manager

Posted: Apr 13, 2016 3:53 AM

< 1 2 >

Please login or join to reply

Leadership training programs “deficit based” or “constructionist based” approach?

Sponsors

Vendor Events

Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data

Newsletters