My Leadership Journey: An Invitation
In the spirit of vulnerability that I have written about elsewhere, I invite you into a deeper insight of my leadership journey, which I have also written about (see From Manager to Leader).
Introduction
My path towards leadership cannot be understood unless I first describe my past, family dynamics, and cultural and ethnic background. Both of my parents were born in Matagalpa, Nicaragua. My father achieved an 11th grade high school education and my mother a 7th grade education. My father was a city boy while my mother grew up toiling the soil and tending to the family needs. She is the eldest of 11 children. In the late 1980s, my parents decided to pursue a better life in the U.S., especially after having gone through the gruesome experience of living through the country’s civil war.
Upon arriving in the U.S., my parents quickly sought work. Given her tailor and sewing skills and experience, my mother was the first to find work. For a time, she was the breadwinner. Once my father found work, my mother reverted to her traditional duties confined by the boundaries of the home. My father did not allow her to work nor did he allow my mother to learn English. I never asked why this was the case. My best guess would be that allowing my mother to learn English and work would challenge the cultural gender expectations. To this day, more than twenty years of living in the U.S., my mother does not speak English. My father, and my mother for a season, have only worked blue-collar jobs. They never cross the line of becoming white-collar workers.
Additionally, my two older brothers attended technical schools. One has worked, and continues to work, a blue-collar job. The other has held white-collar worker positions. I am the first in my family to pursue a degree from a four-year university, graduate with a Master’s degree, and pursue a doctoral degree. In a very real sense, I am a first-generation college student and a first-generation higher education professional – a white-collar worker. Needless to say, the journey of leadership has felt very lonely, ambiguous, and intimidating, to say the least.
“Work Hard, Mijo” Philosophy
My journey towards leadership has been facilitated by a “work hard, mijo” philosophy. “Work hard, mijo, and you will get far,” has been the philosophy inculcated by my mother’s words. This philosophy allowed me to excel in all areas of my life – personal, relational, spiritual, academic, and professional. I worked hard to be the best version of myself possible. I worked hard to build good, long lasting, and meaningful relationships with those around me. I worked hard to establish a strong spiritual life. I worked hard to achieve academic goals I set before me. I worked hard in every position I held, ranging from changing and patching tires in a mechanic shop to my current position at Biola University. However, all I knew was how to work hard. I did not know how to manage people or projects, let alone lead.
My father’s style of leading the family was very traditional and authoritarian. The majority of the influence he exercised was not a result of intentionality, personal effort, or loyalty gain through interactions. It was something our Latino culture gave to him freely. The father/husband is the head of the household. He is the natural leader. He is the one in charge – the ultimate form of authority. Seeing and experiencing this set the stage for how I would (ineffectively) manage teams and projects.
Leadership in Ministry
The first experiences I had with leadership were in ministry. I have been a self-motivated individual since a young age. This gift led me to be very involved with teaching, preaching, and evangelistic efforts. The first experiences of leadership dealt with these three areas. I was given the opportunity to lead a Sunday School class for kids and adolescents. During this season, I exercised leadership in the classroom setting by leading and influencing the minds of those kids and adolescents. Subsequently, I was given the opportunity to preach regularly during our weekly evangelistic services. I was able to exercise leadership through the influence of my sermons. Lastly, I led a team of youth on weekly and monthly evangelistic efforts that included door to door evangelism, passing out evangelistic tracts in the surrounding neighborhoods, and going to Ventura Correctional Facility to preach and evangelize.
In hindsight, this season of leadership in ministry was very much influenced by a Servant Leadership approach, which Northouse (2019) described as a “paradox” and “an approach on leadership that runs counter to common sense” (p. 225). He describes this approach in this manner partly because it questions the common conceptions of leadership that define the leader as someone who influences and a servant as someone who follows. Northouse (2019) writes, “Servant leadership emphasizes that leaders be attentive to the concerns of their followers, empathize with them, and nurture them” (p. 225). In the case of leadership in ministry, the followers can be defined as those I was serving, or leading to Christ, and those that I led to do the work in some of these initiatives. With the former, I was attentive to their concerns, often empathized with their stories and experiences, and nurtured their understanding of Christ. All was done and seen through a spiritual lens and experienced as a spiritual responsibility. With the latter, I did the same, though my approach and expectations were different. These were people I led to do a specific task and work. I attached a sense of success and failure based on their ability to complete the task or work well. Northouse (2019) described the characteristics of stewardship as “taking responsibility for the leadership role entrusted to the leader” (p. 230). Here, the emphasis was on the physical and tangible aspects of the responsibility pertaining to the performance and outcome of the followers.
Leadership in the Corporate World
There have been many circumstances where I unofficially stepped into leadership roles, such as leading initiatives, conversations, and taking responsibilities to influence my peers and their performance. I will, however, focus on one official leadership role for the sake of brevity. This first official opportunity to lead in the corporate world came with the title of Operation Training Manager at a global organization called Teletrac Navman, Inc. The nature of the role and the company were very technical in nature.
The performance metrics for this role were determined by productivity, performance, and output rather than influence and/or relationship. Northouse’s (2019) description of the skills necessary at the level of middle management accurately represent those skills leadership in the organization expected of me – a balanced blend of technical, human, and conceptual skills (p. 45). The fact that my performance was based on productivity, performance, and output heavily influenced my approach to leadership. I exceled in the area of technical skills, which Northouse (2019) describes as the skills of having the “knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work or activity” (p. 44). In my case, it was developing and facilitating online and instructor-led training. However, the human skills, which are those abilities “that help a leader to work effectively with followers, peers, and superiors to accomplish the organization’s goals” (Northouse, 2019, p. 44) were lousy, to say the least. My focus on productivity left no room to be relational, or to exercise the human skills, with my direct reports. On one specific occasion, I recall asking one of my direct reports to explain why she was late for work even though she had travelled from the Kentucky to California that very day. It was not until this experience that I began to evaluate my leadership approach while in this role. My deep desire to excel in this role by any means necessary neglected any need to include the human skills necessary to exercise middle management responsibilities.
After being confronted by my direct report, and seeing the detrimental results of my leadership philosophy, I made a shift towards an approach that closely resembles the Leader-Member Exchange Theory described by Northouse (2019). He describes this approach as one that does not focus on the leader’s or follower’s perspective, but an approach “centered on the interactions between leaders and followers” (Northouse, 2019, p. 137). I spent more time considering the dyadic relationship with my staff, acknowledged the unique characteristics of each member, and began to lead differently. In a sense, I went through the three phases Northouse (2019) describes about the Leader-Member Leadership Exchange theory – being a stranger, moving to an acquaintance, and ending as a partner (p. 145). This approach, while painfully gradual, allowed me to create trust and mutuality with my direct reports.
Leadership in Higher Education
The experiences described above led to one of the most formative lessons concerning leadership – the recognition of the difference between managing and leading. I began by managing the team towards performance and productivity, which was detrimental to the leader-follower relationship, and ended my leadership experience at Teletrac Navman, Inc. by leading my team through intentional and tailored interactions, which also produced positive performance and productivity outcomes. Consequently, I stepped into my current leadership role in Higher Education with a very distinct leadership philosophy from that of the previous leadership experience. If I could describe it, it would be a blend of the Authentic Leadership and Transformational Leadership approach.
Northouse (2019) describes the Authentic Leadership approach as one that “focuses on whether leadership is genuine and ‘real’” (p. 195). Furthermore, Otaghsara and Hamzehzadeh (2017) posit that authentic leadership “concentrates on leader and followers’ self-control and self-awareness, positive psychological capital, and the role of positive organizational moderator” (p. 1129). This approach can be seen and defined in various ways, such as an approach that includes an intrapersonal perspective, as an interpersonal process, or be defined from a developmental perspective (Northouse, 2019). Transformational Leadership, on the other hand, “gives more attention to the charismatic and affective elements of leadership” (Northouse, 2019 p. 163). Additionally, Breevart and Bakker (2018) posit that “[w]ith their charisma and attentiveness to subordinates’ needs and opportunities for personal development, transformational leaders can have a significant impact on the functioning of their subordinates” (p. 338). Furthermore, Northouse (2019) argues, and I agree, that Transformational Leadership “fits the needs of today’s work groups, who want to be inspired and empowered to succeed in times of uncertainty” (p. 163). For these reasons, I claim to have a blend of the two in my current approach of leadership in Higher Education.
I stepped into my current role with an understanding that my leadership reach would extend past the tasks outlined for my office. I knew my role at the university would include opportunities to influence those in the broader community. This, combined with my passion to mentor people, quickly led me to get involved on initiatives that required me to exercise leadership influence beyond the scope of my office. I understand my role at the university as encompassing two major facets. The first is dictated by the responsibilities described in my job description. The second surges from the personal belief that I am called to influence those around me.
As I lead my team and others across the university, I can identify at least two aspect of the Authentic Leadership approach I have been intentional in developing – self-awareness and relational transparency. Northouse (2019) defines self-awareness as a “process in which individuals understand themselves, including their strengths and weaknesses, and the impact they have on others” (p. 203). Relational transparency “refers to being open and honest in presenting one’s true self to others” (Northouse, 2019 p. 204). I am intentional with my efforts to become more self-aware in order to lead more effectively. One of the strategies I have used to accomplish this is to complete assessments, such as StrengthsFinder, the Enneagram, and the DiSC assessment, which helped bring awareness to my behaviors, strengths, and weaknesses. The results from these assessments have informed my approach to leadership and the manner with which I relate to others. For example, I learned to lead through my top five strengths from StrenghtsFinder. I also began to learn how to more intentionally collaborate with others and their respective strengths. Additionally, the Enneagram test helped provide a balanced view of my skills and the possible pitfalls that come with my behaviors.
Additionally, I have also found that having relational transparency effectively creates and secures followership and collaboration. In leading my team through relational transparency, I have found that their support and loyalty remains intact and, at times, grows. I believe I have earned much of the trust my team has for me by allowing them to experiences me as a leader willing to be transparent and vulnerable with them. The challenge I have found with this approach is trying to balance transparency and vulnerability with perception of competence. I often ask myself, how much transparency and vulnerability is enough? Or, when is it too much? There is a fear I face of being too transparent and vulnerable and that being the reason why my competence as a leader is rejected or challenged.
The other aspect of my leadership approach appeals to the process of changing and transforming people, which is the definition of transformational leadership (Northouse, 2019, p. 163). This leadership approach includes a significant dose of charisma on behalf of the leader, which Northouse (2019) defines as a “special gift that certain individuals possess that gives them the capacity to do extraordinary things” (p. 165). The constructive side of such charisma is the ability to bring about change and transformation in people’s lives. The possible destructive side is the possibility of being perceived as arrogant, inauthentic, and ego-centric. My charisma has been perceived in both manners in my current position. To the latter, one person once commented that part of the reason some may be skeptical about collaborating with me is given the charisma I have when I speak to people. This charisma was perceived as devious and inauthentic, creating a hurdle in the effectiveness of my cross-cultural communication.
So, What’s Next?
There are many areas with room for growth in my leadership approach. For one, I am continually learning how to lead authentically, especially as it relates to leading authentically through my cultural and ethnic identity. This is especially a challenge as I recognize my workplace being an environment where I am the minority. Very often, leaders in a similar context and role as mine are persuaded by the institutional culture to assimilate. I hope to gain further understanding of what it means to lead authentically through my cultural and ethnic identity by exploring other leader’s experience, within and outside of my institution.
A second area for growth is in the sphere of relationships. As I continue to seek further opportunities to exercise my leadership and influence across the university, I am quickly seeing the need to build authentic relationships. Northouse (2019) explains that authentic leaders “have the capacity to open themselves up and establish a connection with others” (p. 200). The gap for me is on establishing these relationships with other leaders, especially leaders above me. The power dynamic has always been a challenge for me to get past. I am intimidated, often fearful of being seen as incompetent or to be seen as overly driven and ambitious.
Thirdly, the authentic leadership model encompasses other factors I have yet to explore deeply, such as balanced processing and internalized moral perspective. Therefore, part of my development plan includes diving deeper into these areas of authentic leadership and gain further understanding and awareness. Duncan et al. (2017) describe a tool that might be helpful for this effort called the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). I will spend some time getting familiar with this tool and evaluating whether or not it will be helpful in bringing about further awareness in these and other areas of the authentic leadership model.
The fourth point of development pertains to the transformational leadership model. I am pretty familiar with the topic of charisma. I am not, however, well versed in the other characteristics of transformational leadership such as the differences between personality characteristics versus behaviors. In order for me to more fully step into and utilize this leadership approach, I will have to become much more familiar with these two aspects of the model and their effects on the followers.
Lastly, I want to include a task of engaging further research on the transformational research model, especially as it relates to the balance between this approach and transactional leadership. Given my history with the transactional leadership approach (i.e. the management position at Teletrac Navman, Inc.), I would like to ensure this ineffective approach does not create issues or hurdles in the future.
Each of these five points could take a significant amount of time to research and put to practice. However, outlining these as part of a development plan is with the intention that I could begin to research and learn more about before fully implementing them into my leadership approach.
What do you Think?
My hope with sharing my leadership journey with you is that you either find yourself in one of these phases or can resonate with my overall experience. If either of this is the case, let’s connect! Comment on this article and let’s engage.
References
Breevaart, K., & Bakker, A. B. (2018). Daily job demands and employee work engagement: The role of daily transformational leadership behavior. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23(3), 338–349.
Duncan, P., Green, M., Gergen, E., & Ecung, W. (2017). Authentic leadership – is it more than emotional intelligence? Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice & Research, 7(2), 11–22.
Northouse, P. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Otaghsara, S. M. T., & Hamzehzadeh, H. (2017). The Effect of Authentic Leadership and Organizational Atmosphere on Positive Organizational Behavior. International Journal of Management, Accounting & Economics, 4(11), 1122–1135