I am not going to skirt the cold, hard facts: I was abysmally apprehensive to review my original Leadership Philosophy paper from ORGL 600 in 2022. I feel extremely fortunate to be presently cognizant of the transformative process that my time in the ORGL program has afforded me via new ideologies and concepts. What has been even more satisfying is the opportunity to test these teachings out real time via various professional experiences, projects, and change initiatives. Those insights have been especially meaningful in affording me a much richer understanding of the practice of leadership. Or at least, the type of leadership that I would like to intentionally model in my career and life. Suffice it to say, I didn’t have high hopes for my leadership philosophy of yesteryear and was not looking forward to making this failure the topic of today’s paper.

Much to my surprise, however, the original Leadership Philosophy paper was not quite as awful as I had anticipated. In fact, I found the yearnings and backbone of my burgeoning leadership philosophy of present struggling to swim the surface -- albeit stifled by embedded systems thinking and a historically systematic use of the oppressive practices warned of by Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed (and, if I’m being honest, more clearly realized by the expressive performance of 1970’s Sally Field in Norma Rae).
 

It was a really surprising revelation that I was subconsciously drawn to the necessary teachings, concepts, and mentors who would help me unlock the leader I knew I wanted to be but just couldn’t quite get there without the knowledge, confidence, and conviction that the last year and half has helped cultivate. As a result of my course material, I can now more concisely and unequivocally give voice to my core beliefs as a leader. They are based in fostering wholeness, equity, mutual respect, dialogic development, and the power of a unified community. This must be accomplished within the confines of a clearly defined ethics-based navigation and on-going intentional development of foresight, listening, service, and awareness.
 

This leadership philosophy began to organically develop after I made a very important realization about my ability to lead and yield generative power from the middle courtesy of Chris Crosby’s Strategic Organizational Alignment: Authority, Power, Results: “Many discount their potential to positively impact the organization, out of lack of clarity and understanding of their power” (Crosby, 2017, p. 71).  The LPI survey ranked Model the Way as my lowest self and individual observer goal. Two quotes that I chose to highlight in the 2022 paper were oddly telling: “You can only be authentic when you lead by the principles that matter to you most” (Kouzes, 2022, p. 50) and “Being clear about your values helps you perform better in difficult circumstances” (p. 54). In retrospect, this makes total sense. Since I was unable to properly visualize and articulate the inklings of my desired leadership style, I was largely ineffective in leading by example and modeling for others the benefits of my leadership philosophy. By adopting tenets of Listening, Servant Leadership, Community, and demonstrating Dialogic Organizational Development during change initiatives at my organization, I was able to begin almost immediately to correct this deficit.

Specific and intentional change followed swiftly via an especially powerful passage from Community: The Structure of Belonging: “Problem solving leads to an alternative future only when it is embedded in a restorative context, one based on relatedness, generosity, and a focus on gifts. These are the conditions for a new possibility and a shift to shared accountability, and this is what creates a chance for authentic communal transformation” (Block, 2009, p. 80). This passage was almost like a calling to address a culture in which problem solving was a prescriptive, uninformed, and often times toxic exercise in futility and punitive action. Simply by shifting the tone and focus of problem-solving exercises a change was felt quickly. By strengthening relationships and changing the definition of success to learning something of value, we almost immediately were able to claim clarity and cross-departmental understanding. By aligning in this way, the issue at hand was solved despite the initial problem taking a back seat to forging a sense of community and understanding.

Another evolution occurred in the type of leadership I feel most drawn to today. Initially, it was clear that I was motivated by transformative and servant leadership models. One of the realizations that has resonated strongly with me comes via my work in the change leadership concentration, the constantly evolving scope of healthcare in America, and the many specific cultural norms of my organization. As a result, I have embraced a call to adaptive leadership with the understanding that my industry will constantly be in flux while my organization continues to organically change and evolve. Leadership: Theory and Practice frames adaptive leadership in this way: “Although people often think of adaptive leadership as being leader centered, t is actually more follower centered. It focuses primarily on how leaders help others do the work they need to do, to adapt to the challenges they face. Generally, adaptive leadership is concerned with how people change and adjust to new circumstances” (Northouse, 2022, p. 286).

Horror films? Heights? Roller Coasters? Spiders? Nope, I’m okay with all of those. If you want my definition of true terror, it’s the fact that what may work just fine today is not guaranteed to work tomorrow.  The realization that systems are constantly evolving allowed me to reconcile that change was something I found frightening. As a result, change leadership has certainly pushed me out of my comfort zone as I have honed my skills as a Change Agent,  and participated in SATA (Sponsor/Agent/Target/Advocate) during change initiatives and new product roll outs at my organization.
If I was serious about the ORGL program, it was best to lean into this deficit and own it – and I am so glad that I did. I am not going to lie and say it’s been easy, but I feel like I have the skill set and protocols in place to ensure I am actively auditing changes and adapting as needed.

In conclusion, Dialogic Organizational Development and Change Leadership have become driving forces. It puts the individual before the whole and in doing so serves both in a much more responsible, ethical, and equitable manner. After much reflection, I recently came to this conclusion: Change is hard and who better to help thoughtfully usher in its inevitable presence than someone who all too well understands the anxiety and distress associated with its arrival?

 

 

References:
Block, P. (2008). Community: the structure of belonging. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Crosby, C. (2017). Strategic organizational alignment: Authority, power, results. Business Expert Press
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York. Continuum
Kouzes J. M. & Poser, B. Z. (2017). The leadership challenge (6th Edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Northouse, P.G. (2022). Leadership: theory and practice. (9th Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Stavros, J. M., & Torres, C. (2022). Conversations worth having: Using Appreciative Inquiry to fuel productive and meaningful engagement (2nd ed). Berrett-Koehler Publishers