As I struggled to fill a role on a team working in a rural town in Louisiana after the hurricanes, I became brutally aware that the cultural climate was something I had never experienced before. Folks were not motivated by time; instruction sheets for building projects were not important; my witty approach to solving problems was not accepted with a smile.
Working in an environment which appears culturally similar but in all actuality operated by completely different norms changed the way I view leadership - my leadership style, to be more specific.
I have never accepted the notion that a singular model for leadership exists - I feel there are so many ways folks can be effective as leaders that fall out of the normal models. That being said, I not only think it is impossible for a model to accompany a culturally pluralistic environment, rather a model cannot adequately encompass different types of leaders - too many variables exist. Even vague, value-based frameworks are inadequate in adjusting for the values of different cultures, folks from different walks of life, or the various types of leaders necessary to make a group function well.
In Louisiana, the goal-oriented approach that guides my leadership style crumbled beneath my work. As I readjusted to the cultural climate that valued relationships, stories, and slow-but-steady work ethics, I dropped the model for leading that was engrained into my persynality. I had to consider the culture before following the leadership suit.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Jenn vs. SLPI
There is always an internal struggle I fight when completing surveys like the SLPI – they are rarely indicative of how I perceive myself. In so many different situations and under different circumstances, I am such a drastically different individual and feel that I embody what is ‘grey’ about the world , never black of white.
I ranked highest in Inspire a Shared Vision on the SLPI, and usually feel this is my worst attribute. When I am a leader, I usually have a concrete picture of how I think things should get done, and am often very excited about getting it done that I fail to communicate the vision. Although the SLPI did not recognize this as a problem area in my leadership style, I have recognized this persynal flaw and now am intentional about sitting down before a big project and discussing the collective vision – this is essential in a productive group.
The SLPI noticed my inability to Encourage the Heart as a leader. In some respects, I feel this is completely accurate – when given a task and an objective, I have the tendency to disregard ‘feelings’ or ‘emotions,’ especially if they are unrelated to the given goals. There are definitely times, however, when I notice the strain on a group because of an emotional problem with a member, and really enjoy talking those things out –there are many times when I feel like the middle ground of conflict because both parties find comfort in explaining their problems. In the former situation, I really have become more in tune with the needs of the humyns (because sometimes I forget that we’re not robots designed for a specific task) in my group and make an effort to ask questions about their lives outside of the project, ensuring that we are engaging in something more than what is in front of us – I want to be involved the lives of people, not projects.
I ranked highest in Inspire a Shared Vision on the SLPI, and usually feel this is my worst attribute. When I am a leader, I usually have a concrete picture of how I think things should get done, and am often very excited about getting it done that I fail to communicate the vision. Although the SLPI did not recognize this as a problem area in my leadership style, I have recognized this persynal flaw and now am intentional about sitting down before a big project and discussing the collective vision – this is essential in a productive group.
The SLPI noticed my inability to Encourage the Heart as a leader. In some respects, I feel this is completely accurate – when given a task and an objective, I have the tendency to disregard ‘feelings’ or ‘emotions,’ especially if they are unrelated to the given goals. There are definitely times, however, when I notice the strain on a group because of an emotional problem with a member, and really enjoy talking those things out –there are many times when I feel like the middle ground of conflict because both parties find comfort in explaining their problems. In the former situation, I really have become more in tune with the needs of the humyns (because sometimes I forget that we’re not robots designed for a specific task) in my group and make an effort to ask questions about their lives outside of the project, ensuring that we are engaging in something more than what is in front of us – I want to be involved the lives of people, not projects.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Stroking Egos
I find that natural leaders have a problem conceding power or authority to a designated leader in a group, disrupting the group dynamic. This can be tragic. My leadership experiences incorporate those times when I wore the “Leader Badge” and those when I was encouraged to follow. The latter requires an acquired sense of balancing.
There are two different types of potentially awkward situations that can result from a leader trying to follow: those times when the designated leader is incapable of doing the job and those times when they are. I have generally found success in following those who are competent and capable of leading the group, but my natural tendency to take over when something is failing can create friction with the designated inept leader.
Providing leadership in these positions is always dependent on the persynality of the designated leader. I tend to ‘buddy-up’ to the leader, becoming their friend and confidant who is able to push tips or suggestions under the theoretical door. This way, I don’t feel like I am attacking their capabilities in any way but still overriding their bad decisions. I may even develop a new friendship in the process. My approach is founded in the inherent understanding that people need to have their egos stroked a little before being criticized in any way – especially those given a position of power.
There are two different types of potentially awkward situations that can result from a leader trying to follow: those times when the designated leader is incapable of doing the job and those times when they are. I have generally found success in following those who are competent and capable of leading the group, but my natural tendency to take over when something is failing can create friction with the designated inept leader.
Providing leadership in these positions is always dependent on the persynality of the designated leader. I tend to ‘buddy-up’ to the leader, becoming their friend and confidant who is able to push tips or suggestions under the theoretical door. This way, I don’t feel like I am attacking their capabilities in any way but still overriding their bad decisions. I may even develop a new friendship in the process. My approach is founded in the inherent understanding that people need to have their egos stroked a little before being criticized in any way – especially those given a position of power.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Policy v. Value
Examining the different policy intentions of presidential candidates seems counterproductive in trying to predict what higher education would look like under their leadership. It is such a rare occasion when a president can come into office and begin passing legislation that they communicated on the campaign trail. Instead, we should examine the values reflected in their intended policies.
Of the three remaining contenders, Clinton has the most extensive experience working for education reform. During her time as First Lady, she indicated her commitment to education through establishing programs like Early Head Start and providing incentives to teachers working in high-needs areas. During her time as Senator, Clinton has been adament about pushing education legislation which increases the Pell Grant and improves access for students with disabilities.
Though Obama has spent less time passing legislation, his voting record indicates he would adamently work to afford access to education for more Americans. He recently voted for legislation to grant 'illegal aliens' permanent status if they met certain critiera, one of which is that they were under 16 when they first entered the US. He also voted to increase the maximum Pell Grant (for affordable education) and appears to desire easy access through eliminating the FASFA.
Both have similar policies; both have similar voting records. It is impossible for me to choose one or the other based on higher education intentions. Obama values things like bipartisan cooperation, transparency in politics, and supporting the lower class. One of the only differences between the two appears to be their involvement in politics - Clinton has led a life extensively involved in the game, moving from one venue to the next. Obama took time off of the legal track to organize poor communities in Chicago - a red flag for his commitment to people, and thus higher education.
Of the three remaining contenders, Clinton has the most extensive experience working for education reform. During her time as First Lady, she indicated her commitment to education through establishing programs like Early Head Start and providing incentives to teachers working in high-needs areas. During her time as Senator, Clinton has been adament about pushing education legislation which increases the Pell Grant and improves access for students with disabilities.
Though Obama has spent less time passing legislation, his voting record indicates he would adamently work to afford access to education for more Americans. He recently voted for legislation to grant 'illegal aliens' permanent status if they met certain critiera, one of which is that they were under 16 when they first entered the US. He also voted to increase the maximum Pell Grant (for affordable education) and appears to desire easy access through eliminating the FASFA.
Both have similar policies; both have similar voting records. It is impossible for me to choose one or the other based on higher education intentions. Obama values things like bipartisan cooperation, transparency in politics, and supporting the lower class. One of the only differences between the two appears to be their involvement in politics - Clinton has led a life extensively involved in the game, moving from one venue to the next. Obama took time off of the legal track to organize poor communities in Chicago - a red flag for his commitment to people, and thus higher education.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
A World of Values
Creating a new university from scratch cannot be fully explained in a few paragraphs, but there are a few core aspects which I find critical in any institution. My logistical preferences include a small (student body < 4,000) liberal arts womyn’s college built into a residential area amidst a larger city.
Considering the increasing interdependence of the world community, I feel like it is imperative that the core of this institution revolve around international diversity and development – not only will students travel abroad and enjoy emersion into a different culture, but the curriculum will intensely focus on aspects of world significance. The university will have a stellar language program and be known for its study abroad experiences. Finding students from all over the world and from all different economic classes is important to integrate what we do in a classroom to how we live as a community of people.
The university will uphold a strong set of values like intellectual integrity, honesty, equality, and above all, respect. A campus-wide honor code will be upheld at all costs and guide the actions of our community on and off of campus – we will treat our workers with respect through fair wages and healthcare; student concerns will be considered by individual boards with a variety of representatives; parents and alums will be directly involved in the happenings of the community by whatever means available; participating in the larger city will be of upmost importance, incorporating neighboring colleges, high schools, and non-profit organizations.
I feel like I can talk about this for hours – there is so much to consider when developing a new university, but one of the most important considerations in developing an institution is transparent values. Understanding that finding similar values for a large group of people is difficult, there will need to be a representative community voice to monitor the actions of the changing, evolving university.
Considering the increasing interdependence of the world community, I feel like it is imperative that the core of this institution revolve around international diversity and development – not only will students travel abroad and enjoy emersion into a different culture, but the curriculum will intensely focus on aspects of world significance. The university will have a stellar language program and be known for its study abroad experiences. Finding students from all over the world and from all different economic classes is important to integrate what we do in a classroom to how we live as a community of people.
The university will uphold a strong set of values like intellectual integrity, honesty, equality, and above all, respect. A campus-wide honor code will be upheld at all costs and guide the actions of our community on and off of campus – we will treat our workers with respect through fair wages and healthcare; student concerns will be considered by individual boards with a variety of representatives; parents and alums will be directly involved in the happenings of the community by whatever means available; participating in the larger city will be of upmost importance, incorporating neighboring colleges, high schools, and non-profit organizations.
I feel like I can talk about this for hours – there is so much to consider when developing a new university, but one of the most important considerations in developing an institution is transparent values. Understanding that finding similar values for a large group of people is difficult, there will need to be a representative community voice to monitor the actions of the changing, evolving university.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
The Juicy Details
I've been staring at this reflection prompt for awhile now, and it is probably the hardest one I will have to answer. When it asks about the 'unrealistic expectations' that are placed on RAs, it eludes to an expectation being impossible, and I think that as a group of leaders, we live in this place of eternalism and invincibleness so nothing really seems unrealistic. But if I had to choose…
I think residents and administrators both want the same thing from an RA: complete transparency and disclosure. While I am a huge fan on honesty and being open and real, I understand that this job (and others like it) demands a large amount of confidentiality, and that works both ways. Not only am I uncomfortable spilling house issues to my residents/friends, I am equally unlikely to spill all for administrator-types who simply don’t need to know.
There are a few reasons why this ‘expectation’ exists, especially at Chatham. First of all, I feel like a sad humyn instinct is a desire to ‘be in the know,’ so both of these parties want to be in control of this environment and know all the juicy details. More so at Chatham, we are just a small community that can, if it chooses, thrive on drama, but I don’t intend on making that part of my job.
Resisting this gossipy temptation can be difficult in this environment especially as an RA who has access to information and resident-friends who want let in on the details. I think an understanding of the importance of confidentiality and keeping ‘backstage matters backstage’ really helps to live up to the trust of residents and administrators. And, I think it feels amazing to ‘keep secrets’ or know things that nobody else does! Who still has a childhood secret and has yet to tell?!
I think residents and administrators both want the same thing from an RA: complete transparency and disclosure. While I am a huge fan on honesty and being open and real, I understand that this job (and others like it) demands a large amount of confidentiality, and that works both ways. Not only am I uncomfortable spilling house issues to my residents/friends, I am equally unlikely to spill all for administrator-types who simply don’t need to know.
There are a few reasons why this ‘expectation’ exists, especially at Chatham. First of all, I feel like a sad humyn instinct is a desire to ‘be in the know,’ so both of these parties want to be in control of this environment and know all the juicy details. More so at Chatham, we are just a small community that can, if it chooses, thrive on drama, but I don’t intend on making that part of my job.
Resisting this gossipy temptation can be difficult in this environment especially as an RA who has access to information and resident-friends who want let in on the details. I think an understanding of the importance of confidentiality and keeping ‘backstage matters backstage’ really helps to live up to the trust of residents and administrators. And, I think it feels amazing to ‘keep secrets’ or know things that nobody else does! Who still has a childhood secret and has yet to tell?!
Friday, January 18, 2008
The Art of Giving
I've been dwelling on this issue of asking for money as a volunteer experience for a few days now and have not come up with anything revolutionary, but: I think that when you donate time to help folks without asking for monetary compensation, you are, by definition, volunteering. So when you 'ask for money' to donate, you are volunteering time.
But let's look at this in terms of the larger social implications: if we say that satisfying our need/desire to volunteer is satisfied by giving money, then we justify the 'writing a check once a month' donation that makes it impersynal. Are there reasons why our society still needs so much volunteer-type work? Maybe this monetary giving has yet to pay off? I think we should look at the idea of altruism, which has some interesting things to say about monetary giving and ask if these concepts are reflected when we 'write the check.'
But let's look at this in terms of the larger social implications: if we say that satisfying our need/desire to volunteer is satisfied by giving money, then we justify the 'writing a check once a month' donation that makes it impersynal. Are there reasons why our society still needs so much volunteer-type work? Maybe this monetary giving has yet to pay off? I think we should look at the idea of altruism, which has some interesting things to say about monetary giving and ask if these concepts are reflected when we 'write the check.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
