A key theme at this roundtable session was that leadership entails not only managing the present but also imagining and building the “future”. However, a series of obstacles is often encountered within this complex process, including an “antagonistic” attitude that is quite widespread in political – but also other – spheres, and a hollow rhetoric of the future steeped in words such as innovation, research, quality and merit that are often advocated but rarely given substance through effective decisions. The final intractable difficulty is that the so-called “external impetus”, ever-present in the past and based on ideals, passion and strategic vision, has run out of steam. In building the future, it was emphasized that leaders must not forget that Italian society has for decades continued to operate on the basis of regularly recurring models, creating a sort of “carbon copy society” which for the most part is static and set in its ways, is beset by chronic unresolved problems and falls short of the requisites of innovation that the age of globalization now demands.
The exercise of leadership in the knowledge society does not allow for inertia and entrenched interests, but rather requires embarking on innovative and creative processes. The participants thus focused much of their attention on examining what innovation means and what are the necessary characteristics of an innovator. Some maintained that innovators must, first and foremost, be transgressors, who break the mould and challenge ingrained ways of thinking, as occurs especially in the areas of research, medicine and science in general. The defining qualities of centers of research excellence are not resting on one’s laurels and inaction but intellectual intuition, not mere observance of established and repetitive codes of conduct but the capacity for study and analysis.
Other participants felt that whilst innovation does require a certain degree of transgression, it is also true that, without a steady accumulation of knowledge, the innovator could easily become a mere “eccentric”. Being an innovating leader – whether in the field of research or in business or politics – primarily means possessing a continuity of knowledge that is the product of years of work, which acts as a springboard for innovation. A responsible leader is particularly aware of how much the process of “building the future” owes to and could depend on knowledge and managing the process in the here and now.
There were, however, participants who disagreed that there is a need to “build the future”, arguing that the future unfolds at times anarchically and sometimes more coherently, but in a constantly evolving and unregulated manner. Indeed, it is shocks and altered circumstances that trigger processes of change which true leaders are capable of managing precisely as they arise. A leader is, in any case, certainly not judged according to the criterion of age, but according to his/her merit and ability to intuit and manage change.
Hence, it was argued that “post-crisis” leaders will need to be able to manage processes of renewal. On the institutional front, some participants called for a review of the Italian Constitution, a move away from the bicameral system and the restoration of balance between the various powers of the State. In terms of the economy, it was felt that the recent serious financial crisis threatens to accentuate the divide in Italy between a rich and prosperous North and a South lagging behind in modernization. This therefore calls for a strategy which ensures that the gap is bridged rather than exacerbated. The crisis has also resulted in a reversion to traditional socio-economic models, including the family, local community, locally-based banking services and so on. On the surface, this may appear to be a return to the past but it is not strictly the case. Hence, the participants concluded that what is needed is an ability to interpret the processes underway which takes into account the changes brought about by globalization and its consequences.