Running Head: LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL

Philosophy Evolved: Leadership Frame, Identity, and Practice Elia Grenier EDAD 570-01 Seattle University

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL Philosophy Evolved: Leadership Frame, Identity, and Practice Leadership is influencing others through relationships. (Fr. Stephen Sundborg, as cited by T. Wilson, personal communication, January 16, 2013). Throughout the quarter, this quote by Fr. Steve has guided me in developing my leadership philosophy. It covers relationships for the human resource view, influence in the political view, and it is a quote by a Jesuit who in many ways embodies the symbolic view of leadership. It has led me to believe that the best leadership frame is not one over the other, but the both/and approach, a mlange of them all. Certain styles are more comfortable for different

kinds of leaders and make more or less sense depending on the situation, but being adept at each frame provides the best recipe for success. I know my history helped shape me into the leader I am today, but I also know that it does not define my capacity to develop skills in each of these frames. Through practice and concerted effort, I can become the sort of leader I aspire to be. It is a testament to Fr. Sundborgs years of leadership that he is able to distill the essence of leadership down to a six-word sentence. My iterations of definitions ended up unnecessarily complex: Inspiring, organizing, and supporting others in collaboration toward a goal, cause, or change; Leadership means effectively navigating complex systems and relationships with vulnerability, authenticity, integrity, empathy and humility to lead others in service of positive change. I still think there are key elements buried in my verbose definitions, and it helpful to recognize that at the core, both definitions capture relationships with others in service to something larger (the influence piece). These concepts have also appeared in several of the readings, which gives me confidence that these definitions resonate with others. Parks (2005) argues Leadership is about mobilizing people to make progress on the hardest of problems (p.

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL 26), and the relational leadership model defines leadership as a relational process of people together attempting to accomplish change or make a difference to benefit the common good (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 1998, as cited in Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, & Mainella, 2005, p. 594).

It is clear to me while reflecting on all these definitions that there is an important element in leadership around working for change. It is the key in HERIs (1996) social change model for leadership, and what Parks (2005) calls adaptive challenges that require changes of the heart and mindthe transformation of long standing habits and deeply held assumptions and values (p. 12). I may be collaborating with others, discussing ideas and contemplating how to influence a situation, but leadership requires the movement toward change; simply solving complex problems that maintain the status quo cannot truly be classified as leadership. It is easy to think of the person at the head as the leader, and when I was taking my what is leadership photo, it definitely crossed my mind to walk downstairs and take a picture of Fr. Sundborgs door. After reading more about his philosophy of leadership, I certainly could have argued I took that picture for the relational leadership qualities he exemplifies. But at that moment, I would have been taking the photo because president = leader, and because it is an easier image to conceptualize than the intricacies of leadership. None of the definitions discussed reference being in a position of authority as any sort of requisite for leadership. In fact, it is an important stage in leadership identity development to recognize leadership as distinct from position: I can be a leader even when not being the leader (Komives et al., 2005, p. 605). Parks (2005) also explicitly distinguishes authority as a separate scaleit is the informal authorization and power others give that allows a one to lead (p. 39). It is important to recognize that people often do give authorization, either formally or

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL informally, to people at the top. But it is infinitely easier and more effective to lead those who

want to follow, with a sense of mutual respect and purpose. Leadership by force of personality or by virtue of organizational position looks vastly different than leadership by permission. This conclusion naturally leads to the questions of how to get others to want to follow, and I find the most compelling argument in leading with your heart. I have practiced heady leadership for far too long, leading from a position of authority with varying degrees of success. I want to reframe leadership, both for myself and for larger society as so much more than formally authorized power. Leading with the heart is having passion for your work, compassion for the people you serve, empathy for the people you work with, and the courage to make difficult decisions (George & Will, 2007, p. xxxii). If we all kept these tenets in mind when going about our daily tasks, the professional landscape would shift and everyone would be happier, more productive, and more fulfilled. These characteristics are also key elements of emotional intelligence (EQ), which is another aspect of leading with the heart. EQ determines in many ways how successful we are in relationships in business and our personal lives (Bohan, Lux, Kiner, & Weis, 2012, p. 7). Again, relationships emerge at the core of leadership. The four main quadrants of emotional intelligence are self awareness, self management, social awareness, and relationship management. These quadrants capture so many qualities of effective leaders, and helped inform my defining nouns (vulnerability, authenticity, integrity, empathy and humility) in the second definition iteration. If someone leads by following his or her passion while holding on to humility and integrity, then he or she will be able to effect positive change in the organization or in society as a whole. Another way to think about leading from the heart is through servant leadership. A leader must always remember who he or she serves in order to lead morally and effectively. To be a servant leader,

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL one must involve others in decision making, base decisions on ethical and caring behavior, and

enhance the personal growth of workers while improving the caring and quality of organizational life. (Spears, as cited in Schuh, 2002, p. 213) With all those empowering definitions of leadership, do I consider myself a leader? Am I capable of leading and collaborating from the heart while being humble, vulnerable, and ethical? Well, lets say Im a work in progress. I analyzed myself using Komives et al.s (2005) leadership identity stages, and feel like I reached stage 6 (Integration/Synthesis) during high school by internalizing leadership into my self-concept. While I did hold many leadership positions, it was more about how I approached my involvement than about the titles. I helped found a teen center and a recycling club, hosted an AM talk radio show, and coedited a literary magazine. I felt empowered to be a leader, and ready to mentor others to work together for positive change in our community. I was recognized as a Sam Walton Community Scholar and a Presidential Leadership Scholar as a high school senior, which is how I paid for college. I had leadership potential written all over me. I feel like I have been backsliding since then. It is not that I havent gotten involved or engaged with my community since high school. I participated in many activities during college and even did an AmeriCorps year of service after graduation. However, I have never found myself identifying as a leader in quite the same way I did in high school. Currently, I am in a support role professionally and not especially immersed in my extracurricular activities. I struggle to find myself at that core intersection of relationship and influence, let alone leading for positive change. Much of my leadership identity has been tied up in being a young leader, doing so much for one so young, so I question what my leadership looks like if I am no longer young and leadership achievements are more expected than exceptional.

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL

I am experiencing somewhat of a crisis in my leadership. I am no longer young enough to be considered a young leader, and as I lose that identity, I have struggled to find my new niche. In reflecting on my leadership style, I have become increasingly convinced that I was never a particularly good leader in the first place. I was demanding and controlling, expecting nothing but the best from my team and myself. If I trusted someone to accomplish something and they failed, it took a very long time for me to trust them again. I gave corrections and feedback with little regard for how it would make people feel or for their preferences on processing things. In short, I was frequently an authoritarian, negative leader. That is disappointing to admit, but it is a part of practicing reflection and developing self-awareness, which is absolutely essential to improving myself as a leader. I recently attended a talk by Chris Lowney, a Jesuit seminarian turned Managing Director at J. P. Morgan Chase, and some of the things he spoke about really resonated with me as someone in search of a new leadership identity. Lowney said that many very smart people quickly learn how to do school, but they never really experience how to do life (personal communication, February 25, 2013). He referenced a study done with CEOs that found most had experienced some sort of crisis, and this reexamination of who they were and what they wanted helped to explain their ultimate success. American culture teaches us to be ashamed of those difficult moments, even though they are often defining moments that allow us to reflect on what is important and how we want to relate to others and to the world. I had my own difficult defining moment when my mother passed away when I was twelve. Growing up, I hated admitting I was wrong, and it is a running joke in my family that they never heard me apologize until I was in middle school. When my mom passed, I grew up in many ways instantaneously, but dont think I was old enough to embrace that growth as a reflective experience on what is

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL truly important. Instead, I tried to increase my control of everything around me and strove to be perfect so I, illogically, would never experience that kind of loss again.

In contrast to my attempts at control, Lowney spoke of the importance of learning how to fail gracefully. Bolman and Gallos also connect this behavior to leadership: Leadership requires resilience: the ability to adapt and strengthen in the face of challenge trauma or stress (2011, p. 197). Discovering resilience in the face of failure is an especially applicable concept for the Millenial generation, myself included. Many Millenials have gone through life being generally successful, doing well in school and easily making friends, all while being told we were special and unique and never really failing. As a result, we are terrified of failure and are obsessed with not making mistakes. Perfectionism, instead of helping us, hampers success and often is a road to life-paralysisthe opportunities we miss because we are afraid of putting anything out into the world that could be imperfect (Brown, 2010). We need to learn how to fail and cultivate resilience. Lowney advocates that todays teachers and mangers take their students or promising young staff members and put them in a safe crisis. By supporting them through something that is difficult and not all that comfortable, it helps them realize that it is okay to be less than perfect, and anyway, team success is not all about them (personal communication, February 25, 2013). Hopefully, the idea of creating safe crises spreads, as this will continue to be an issue with developing leaders from the Millenial generation. This practice resonates with the concept that the best leaders take risks to be open and vulnerable with their constituents, and this develops greater interpersonal trust and stronger working relationships (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). I relate to this idea by thinking back on my favorite, or least favorite, coworkers and managers. Those that were genuine, open and willing to admit when they were struggling or made a mistake were much easier to work with than those

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL

who claimed to never mess up and went around with a better than attitude. This is an important lesson for me to remember, because I am sure I have fallen into the latter category for some coworkers more than one once. If Millenials, myself included, never learn to risk openness, then we will continue to miss out on building those genuine relationships of trust. These relationships are also the foundation of successfully navigating the political dimensions of any organization, a key aspect of practicing leadership. So after all those thoughts about best practice, how do I prefer to exercise leadership? Honestly, I am not sure I know. Lowney (2005) writes, Only the person who knows what he or she wants can pursue it energetically and inspire others to do so. Only those who have pinpointed their weaknesses can conquer them (p. 27). I am still very much in the middle of that process, something that has become painfully aware to me this quarter in the class Leading with Emotional Intelligence. Inspired by the work of that course, I decided to reread The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think Youre Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are by Bren Brown, which I started a couple years ago but never finished. The lessons in the book are all about embracing vulnerability and imperfection and finding courage, compassion, and connection. This has been helpful as I work to move from a place of self-doubt and come to genuinely believe I am imperfect and vulnerable and sometimes afraid, but that doesnt change the truth that I am also brave and worthy of love and belonging (Brown, 2010, p. 125). As I pinpoint my weaknesses, I also learn to embrace my strengths. The symbolic view requires vision to inspire others, and the human resources view requires the ability to care deeply for others, which starts with being able to care deeply and authentically for myself. I am passionate and logical, and I take pride my work. In my somewhat limited experience hiring others, I have usually chosen good team members. I think I can find successful ways to build

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL

environments of empowerment, support, and open communication and become a better leader in the human resource mold. As I keep reiterating, leadership occurs in relationship leaders care for individuals and support their growth and development (Bolman & Gallos, 2011). Not surprisingly, college campuses are a prime arena to develop leadership skills and grow professionally. One of my most significant leadership experiences occurred three years ago when I served as the program coordinator for the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) program at Montana State University. I had assisted on this program two years prior and felt a great sense of accomplishment in being asked to come back and coordinate. In my coordinator position I reported to the director of the program and helped supervise four staff members who were in college or recent graduates and one high school intern. This was one of the only positions I have held supervising paid staff, so it seemed like an appropriate experience through which to examine my leadership frames and approach. The MEPI student leaders program is a state-department funded summer program that brings bright college students from all over the Arab world to participate in academic coursework, leadership development, and study tours, hosted concurrently by six universities across the United States. It is a really unique program, and not surprisingly, full of leaders. For example, one of the students in my 2008 program became one of the youngest lawyers in Israel and is now a Fulbright scholar obtaining her J.S.D. at Columbia University. Being in a leadership role for this program was certainly an opportunity to lead leaders. It also meant that there were strong personalities to manage while navigating cultural differences. In this context, however, I would like to focus on the experiences with my program staff, as I think it more successfully illuminates my leadership style and pitfalls.

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL

10

Reflecting on this experience has made me question many of the ways I led, particularly in the context of encouraging the heart. I know we hosted a final farewell/thank you dinner, but I am not sure I did a very good job recognizing my staff for their contributions. Bolman and Gallos (2011) write that leaders leverage the power in ceremonies to strengthen bonds of loyalty and affection. I am not sure that my staff or the students felt particularly affectionate toward me. This was in sharp contrast to my experience as a program assistant in 2008, where I felt loved and appreciated by the students, my coworkers, and my supervisors. However, when I became the leader, I emphasized control over process, and did not empower these natural leaders to be self-directed and create their own solutions. We appointed a rotating selection of weekly leaders, but they were more in place to help herd crowds and get us places on time than truly exercise leadership. I cannot think of an instance where I asked for constructive feedback from my staff to help me grow and improve and let them know I valued their opinion. I have never been very good at being vulnerable, even though vulnerability makes us more human and more trusted (Kouzes & Posner, 2003, p. 82). It is something I am actively working on now, but barely had language available to discuss it three years ago. I also realize that I judged very early on which staff I felt were competent and trustworthy and which were not. I basically set those staff up to fail, as people tend to live up or down to our expectations of them (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). I still have a hard time trusting people who I feel have let me down, but I now know a lot of that stems from my fear of letting others down and not being liked and accepted if I am not perfect. Yet again, I must discover my secure and grounded sense of self to be able to lead successfully and withstand triggers that cause insecurity, angst and burnout (Bolman & Gallos, 2011, p. 129).

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL While rereading that hiring the right people is an essential part of the human resource view, I questioned whether some of my team members were right for the job. I moved back to

11

Bozeman from Seattle to take the position, and my team had already been hired months before. One of the staff, Harry, was the son of the director of the schools intensive English institute, with whom the international programs staff regularly interacted. As soon as Harry started doing things I perceived as untrustworthy, like showing up late to lead activities or forgetting the phone we had given him in his room, I further questioned if he had gotten the job on merit or on familial connection. This was reinforced when I learned he had applied for and not been offered a position the previous summer. But how much of his perceived incompetence was due him living down to my expectations? It is important for me to remember that I will continue to work with difficult, frustrating people who I may not see as qualified for a position, and that I must strive not to view them through a narrow, privileged lens of what qualified means. In Harrys case, I did attempt to clarify expectations, set standards and befriend the challenge. By the end of the program, I was able to look past his early actions and see some of the value he brought to the team in terms of creativity and artistic expression. These are not skills I naturally bring to a team, so it is important for me to keep in mind that the very people who I may have a hard time working with may be the ones who bring valuable diversity in skill set and perspective. Even though I am now trying to follow the essentials of encouraging the heart to set clear standards, expect the best, pay attention, and personalize recognition, I still struggle with how to communicate effectively when my expectations arent met. I want to communicate without shaming the team member, but still reinforce the standard and hold the person accountable. Shame becomes fear. Fear leads to risk aversion. Risk aversion kills innovation (Sheahan, as cited in Brown, 2012, p. 66). I dont want to kill innovation in my team, so I must find ways to

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL communicate expectations without shaming. I realize now how often I used shame and humiliation to try and bring a team member into compliance, and regret that I was not able to

12

communicate openly, vulnerably, and with care to create genuine connections and relationships. This role as program coordinator definitely gave me perspective on leading from the middle, since I was no longer one of the program assistants, but also was not the director who had ultimate responsibility. I remember feeling frustrated because the participants saw the program assistants as their friends and confidants, the director and instructors as wise mentors, and did not see and appreciate the work I did behind the scenes to make everything come together and function smoothly. I missed that sense of connection from being a program assistant, even if it meant late nights in the residence halls and daily trips to Target and Ross. I struggle with wanting to move up beyond roles of direct service, and feeling like I am missing out on the real interactions in positions with more responsibility. Remembering to find balance in the middle and focusing on the larger goal will help me adjust to new roles. I am capable of leadership now, as I am, and keeping my old habits is less rocky path, as it is what those around me have come to more or less expect. I could stay protected and guarded, not risking failure or visible imperfection, but that will not do me any favors in the long run. I want to emulate the human resource view of leadership, and to exhibit care as a servant, catalyst, and coach (Bolman & Gallos, 2011). However, I am still on the second from bottom tier on Kouzes and Posners (2003) Encouragement Index, so I know I have a long way to go. I need to make work fun and inspiring for the teams I lead, but in a way that is authentic for me. People like their leaders because of how they make them feel, so I am working on developing my empathetic listening skills. It is a useful skill for all my relationships, but people also work harder and more effectively for people they like, so it is a fundamental element of

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL being a good manager and successful leader. I will continue the practice, both personally and professionally of nurtur[ing] relationships with respect, empathy, and compassion toward self

13

and others (Bolman & Gallos, 2011, p. 214). It is indeed a practice, and not something that will ever be mastered, or finished. That is the new leadership identity I choose to embrace, the one I think will best help me face the challenges of a leader, both now and into the future.

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL References Bohan, L., Lux, G., Kiner, M., & Weis, W. (2012). EQ primer: An introduction to emotional intelligence (3rd ed.). Seattle, WA: Teams & Leaders. Bolman, L. G., & Gallos, J. V. (2011). Reframing academic leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

14

Brown, B. (2010). The gifts of imperfection: Let go of who you think youre supposed to be and embrace who you are. Center City, MN: Hazelden. Brown, B. (2012). Daring greatly: how the courage to be vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent, and lead. New York, NY: Gotham Books. George, B., & Sims, P. (2007). True north: Discover your authentic leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Higher Education Research Institute. (1996). A social change model of leadership development: Guidebook version III. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs. Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., & Mainella, F. C. (2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 593-611. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). Encouraging the heart: A leaders guide to rewarding and recognizing others. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lowney, C. (2005). Heroic leadership: Best practices from a 450-year-old company that changed the world. Chicago, IL: LoyolaPress. Parks, S. D. (2005). Leadership can be taught: A bold approach for a complex world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY FINAL Schuh, J. H. (2002). Lessons from leaders. NASPA Journal, 39(3), 204-216. !

15