34 Strategic Leadership
a loosely coupled administrative system, decisions and actions in various units are
often quite independent of one another. Self-regulation can usually accomplish its
purposes because it does not affect the total system. One key role for leadership
is to make sure that the monitoring systems are effective. Leaders need to make
sure as well that a good communications system is in place so that signals about
problems get to the right people, especially if issues in one area have a ripple effect
on other units (Birnbaum 1988).
At times, leaders may need to intervene more dramatically in the system.
Processes may have to be shocked or reengineered to come back into balance.
Nonetheless, it is always advisable to exercise caution in disturbing a cybernetic
system too drastically. “Good cybernetic leaders are modest.... They adopt three
laws of medicine. ‘If it’s working, keep doing it. If it’s not working, stop doing it.
If you don’t know what to do, don’t do anything’ ” (Konner, quoted in Birnbaum
1988, 21).
The Limits of the Cybernetic Model
Does the cybernetic model offer an integrative approach to leadership, as it
proposes to do? After a fashion it does, but not with the type of interpenetration
or systematic relationship of the frames that one might expect. “The objective of
the bureaucratic administrator is rationality. The collegial administrator searches
for consensus, the political administrator for peace, and the symbolic adminis-
trator for sense. But the major aim of the cybernetic administrator is balance”
(Birnbaum 1988, 226).
This is leadership as oversight. Cybernetic leadership does not involve an inter-
nal restructuring or reorganization of the four cognitive frames, for they continue
to function as discreet systems. Integration produces an equilibrium in which
the frames have a proportionate influence. They operate as a series of separate
approaches triggered by a control mechanism that balances their activity without
a content of its own. So, the integration of cybernetic leadership is a passive one,
if we can speak of integration at all.
As Birnbaum claims in several places, cybernetic leadership is modest. Except
under special conditions such as a crisis, or in smaller colleges, or when there is ripe-
ness for long-deferred change to take place, leaders should not delude themselves
by expecting transforming change (Birnbaum 1988). Since cybernetic leadership
responds to signals of operational problems, it does not have the capacity to cre-
ate and implement “disruptive” new possibilities, or to motivate others to set new
directions in response to change. It provides cognitive insights and wise counsel
about methods of administration and management, not processes of leadership.
A Story: From Cybernetics to Strategy
These final points can be made through a simple story. Take the example of the
thermostat as a self-regulating device. No matter where one sets the temperature,