Leadership Philosophy
I define leadership as the opportunity to affect change at the institutional, departmental, group or individual level. I embrace the opportunity to lead whenever possible because I believe it offers the chance to build upon and improve what others have started before and will continue once I am gone. It’s a contribution to a legacy. Since this process is the foundation of how science evolves, it is a natural progression for a scientist to become a leader.
Why I lead
I believe that I want to lead because I want to inspire other to accomplish great things. I want to provide the skills, opportunities, and resources so we can accomplish more together than we can as individuals. I believe the difference between managers and leaders is their scope of vision. I want to evolve from managing to leading. That is, I want to move beyond problem solving of current issues to synthesis and creation of new concepts (innovative and strategic thinking). One of the best examples of why I want to lead is my success as a graduate student. Because I belonged to a larger research group, I was able to graduate with 13 publications when the average graduate student in my program graduated with 3-4 manuscripts. This is because my mentor had vision and was a leader. He inspired us as a team to work together. Jointly we were able to be more productive and successful than any one of us would have been on our own. There is a benefit to thinking beyond one’s own contribution to a single project versus their contribution to the group as a whole.
My leadership style and goals
My goal is to develop a leadership style that is dynamic, fluidly switching between the four most effective styles describe by Goleman (authoritative, affiliative, democratic, and coaching) (Goleman, 2000). My primary style of leadership is authoritative/affiliative but I would like to develop my democratic/coaching styles. In mentoring relationship, I employ an authoritative/coaching style but with peers and superiors, I use a democratic/affiliative approach. Coaching is my weakest leadership skill mostly because I expect others to ask for help rather than implying they need help. Since some individuals don’t want to admit they need help, I will work on this disconnect and improve accordingly.
I would like to lead a team that is transformational in nature as described by Bernard Bass (Bass, 1990). This is the type of leadership that works best in academia because I can delegate leadership roles to team members so as to empower them to move beyond their own self-interest to an understanding of what is best for the group. This reciprocal relationship is best when decisions affect both my team members and myself, a dynamic this is common in mentoring and collaborative team based systems. A good example of transformational leadership/coaching style is our school’s Dean. When he finds a new strategy he thinks will work great and that he wants to implement he invites everyone to a reception where he present the new idea in brief and fun way. He aligns the ideas to something personal before he leads into saying something like “Wouldn’t it be great if we could apply this to our teaching”, or “imagine what this would do for our productivity?” By this way he encourages his teams to take ownership of “imagining” how the new idea can transform their own teams.
I would like to lead a team that is transformational in nature as described by Bernard Bass (Bass, 1990). This is the type of leadership that works best in academia because I can delegate leadership roles to team members so as to empower them to move beyond their own self-interest to an understanding of what is best for the group. This reciprocal relationship is best when decisions affect both my team members and myself, a dynamic this is common in mentoring and collaborative team based systems. A good example of transformational leadership/coaching style is our school’s Dean. When he finds a new strategy he thinks will work great and that he wants to implement he invites everyone to a reception where he present the new idea in brief and fun way. He aligns the ideas to something personal before he leads into saying something like “Wouldn’t it be great if we could apply this to our teaching”, or “imagine what this would do for our productivity?” By this way he encourages his teams to take ownership of “imagining” how the new idea can transform their own teams.
How I manage conflict
Conflict is inevitable in team-based working relationships. If managed effectively, it can add to the productivity of the group. My approach to managing conflict is to employ Franklin Covey’s seek first to understand, then to be understood (Covey, 1989). The source issue is often clouded by emotional overtones. I like to employ a pragmatic leadership style, seeking to remove the personal aspect to focus on the core issue (Mumford, 2006). This style is supported by effective use of emotional intelligence and employing active listening before attempting to formulate a solution or strategy (Goleman, 1995).
I often use all five types of conflict styles described by Thomas-Kilmann’s Conflict Mode Instrument (Thomas & Kilmann, 1974) but I most often employ the collaborating style to find a solution that works best for the team. A very good tool that I have utilized in the past when conflict has arisen is to recommend that the members in conflict learn about each other’s personality types by completing either the Myers & Brigs Test or DiSC Assessment. Alternately they can take a training course on diversity or the multigenerational workforce. By understanding our differences and learning how to approach someone who sees things differently, we can move past the conflict to mutual understanding or agree to respectfully disagree.
I often use all five types of conflict styles described by Thomas-Kilmann’s Conflict Mode Instrument (Thomas & Kilmann, 1974) but I most often employ the collaborating style to find a solution that works best for the team. A very good tool that I have utilized in the past when conflict has arisen is to recommend that the members in conflict learn about each other’s personality types by completing either the Myers & Brigs Test or DiSC Assessment. Alternately they can take a training course on diversity or the multigenerational workforce. By understanding our differences and learning how to approach someone who sees things differently, we can move past the conflict to mutual understanding or agree to respectfully disagree.
Reflective leadership
I believe self-awareness in a leader is an essential leadership quality. How can I adequately judge what is the best course of action for others if I cannot do this within myself first? Accurately self-assessing one’s strengths and weaknesses ultimately lead to personal growth. In a leader, it means building better teams to guide others since it establishes a model that others can emulate. This presents a unified front of leaders at all level of leadership, which is absolutely critical to managing a large team or company. Self-reflection to me means acknowledging those individuals that best complement and supplement my strengths and weaknesses. I believe that it also demonstrates an open and adaptive leadership style. For instance, my employees or peers might think, “My ideas will be heard, considered and weighed, even if she doesn’t agree with me. I will have a considered voice in the issue.”
The concept of “flexing” as described by Hyun and Lee support the idea of an adaptive leadership style (Hyun & Lee, 2014). For me, flexing is about wearing different hats to effectively manage different circumstances. In particular, this comes into play as a leader of diversity in my teams. I really want everyone to become as invested in a project as I am. This means I have to provide enough information and resources to inspire and motivate my team to see the goals of my visions as I see them across a myriad of personality and culture types. Using such an approach says I am highly invested in those I lead. Your success is our success.
I especially like employing the idea of “onboarding”. My first laboratory job was with a company that was very invested in employee satisfaction. Before I was allowed to touch the bench, I was told that the company’s average cost of retention for an employee in my position was about $30,000 to hire and train. This made me realize the investment they were making in me and why they took such great care to train me in detail. I, in turn, became a far more committed and attentive trainee. This reciprocal investment should be communicated from the beginning of any working relationship, as I believe it builds team synergy.
The concept of “flexing” as described by Hyun and Lee support the idea of an adaptive leadership style (Hyun & Lee, 2014). For me, flexing is about wearing different hats to effectively manage different circumstances. In particular, this comes into play as a leader of diversity in my teams. I really want everyone to become as invested in a project as I am. This means I have to provide enough information and resources to inspire and motivate my team to see the goals of my visions as I see them across a myriad of personality and culture types. Using such an approach says I am highly invested in those I lead. Your success is our success.
I especially like employing the idea of “onboarding”. My first laboratory job was with a company that was very invested in employee satisfaction. Before I was allowed to touch the bench, I was told that the company’s average cost of retention for an employee in my position was about $30,000 to hire and train. This made me realize the investment they were making in me and why they took such great care to train me in detail. I, in turn, became a far more committed and attentive trainee. This reciprocal investment should be communicated from the beginning of any working relationship, as I believe it builds team synergy.
Future leadership goals
In a leadership interview with my mentor, he mentioned the concept of taking 10,000 hours to become a proficient expert (Gladwell, 2008). Basically we are not born great leaders but learn how to lead through repeated practice and experience. Like most things in life it is a process, or a journey, not a final destination. I will continue to pursue every leadership opportunity open to me; I will continue to invest in leadership through self-reflection and a growth mindset; I will remember we (those who came before and come after) are all climbing a ladder of success that can support us all; and we must reach back and bring the next generation of leaders with us.
References
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learngin to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.
Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Simon & Schuster.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success: Little, Brown and Company.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York, New York: Bantam Dell.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.
Hyun, J., & Lee, A. S. (2014). Flex: The New Playbook for Managing Across Differences. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological and pragmatic leaders. Mahwah, New Jersey: Psychology Press.
Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Mountain View, CA: Xicom, a subsidiary of CPP, Inc.
Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Simon & Schuster.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success: Little, Brown and Company.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York, New York: Bantam Dell.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.
Hyun, J., & Lee, A. S. (2014). Flex: The New Playbook for Managing Across Differences. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological and pragmatic leaders. Mahwah, New Jersey: Psychology Press.
Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Mountain View, CA: Xicom, a subsidiary of CPP, Inc.