I read a good book, Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a New Era by G. R. Hickman. For all its thickness, this book is a surprisingly quick read, largely due to its compelling content. It’s striking how humans continue to make remarkable advancements both on macro and micro levels while simultaneously facing increasing dangers brought on by our own actions. Scientific and technological advancements are progressing at an unprecedented rate, yet our ethical frameworks fail to evolve at the same pace, and may even be regressing.
This duality highlights a mixed outcome of progress intertwined with a propensity for harm universally. As Glenn, Gordon, and Florescu (2016) articulate, “the acceleration of scientific and technological change seems to grow beyond conventional means of ethical evaluation. Is it ethical to clone ourselves…” (p. 13). The ethical dilemmas we face are becoming far more complex than determining how to fit more data onto smaller chips or ensuring that self-driving cars can effectively utilize advanced Google Earth satellite information. While these innovations are impressive, they do not inherently mean they are the right choices.
This concept resonates deeply with the themes in much of science fiction, particularly the notion that just because we can do something, it doesn’t always follow that we should. I am not advocating for a halt to progress; rather, it’s evident that ethical considerations have historically lagged behind technological advancements. The timeless nature of this dilemma is reflected in the enduring relevance of science fiction, as exemplified by Frank Herbert’s Dune (1965), which presents a geopolitically intricate narrative that warns us about the corruption of power amidst dwindling resources and advancing intelligence.
As we navigate our future, it’s an emotional roller coaster — generating feelings of both hope and fear simultaneously. Central to this duality is the responsibility of organizations and their leaders to enact change, steering us toward a unified, positive future. Goldman (2016) poses a pressing inquiry: what kind of long-term future do we desire for the “grandchildren of our grandchildren’s grandchildren” (p. 56)?
Beyond the technological and ethical complexities, the stark reality presented in the textbook is about our dwindling water resources. The alarming trajectory regarding the environment, including global warming, is further underscored by recent updates on the global water crisis from unwater.com:
“Water scarcity can mean scarcity in availability due to physical shortage, or scarcity in access due to the failure of institutions to ensure a regular supply or due to a lack of adequate infrastructure” (UN-Water, 2020).
This statement not only confirms existing water shortages but also emphasizes that the issue extends beyond mere availability; it encompasses the infrastructure and institutional frameworks necessary to ensure access for those in need, which presents a significant problem in itself.
The key takeaway here is that leading organizations in the future must embody dynamism, flexibility, creativity, and long-term vision. It is crucial not only for their sustainability but also for the well-being of the environment and the local and global communities. The text emphasizes the need for shared leadership in organizations, focusing on mission, vision, ethics, change, and the capacity for development (Hickman, 2016, p. 1).
It may be time for today’s leaders to craft mission statements informed by the perspectives of those who will be born 500 years from now, reflecting on their favorite six-hundred-year-old science fiction novels.
Yet, it’s essential to acknowledge our tendency towards short-term thinking. As Goleman (2016) succinctly puts it, “most of us lean toward short-term success” (p. 57). I can personally relate to this, as I often prioritize immediate results over long-term gains. Even my academic journey is marked by a focus on completing courses, often at the expense of working on my dissertation. The same pattern applies to my environmental choices, where the convenience of paper plates often takes precedence over sustainable practices.
References
Glenn, J. C., Gordon, T. J., & Florescu, E. (2016). The millennium project: 2013-2014 state of the future. In G. R. Hickman (Ed.), Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a new era (3rd ed.). Sage Publication.
Goleman, D. (2016). Leading for the long future. In G. R. Hickman (Ed.), Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a new era (3rd ed.). Sage Publication.
UN-Water. (2020). Scarcity: UN-Water. Retrieved from https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/scarcity/Links to an external site.
Hickman, G. R. (2016). Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Jordan Tate 