Jennifer O’Looney
December 4, 2005

            A few weeks ago, my husband and I were having a conversation about where we would like to see ourselves in the next few years.  After talking about career advancement, salary, and the possibility of having children, my husband looked over at me and asked, “How do you define yourself?”  At the time, I didn’t realize how profound of an impact this seeming innocuous question would have on the way I have recently begun to examine my core beliefs as not only an individual but also as a novice leader.  My husband is an engineer and a manager, however he fundamentally defines himself as a musician, his true passion.  But what is my passion?  How do I define myself? 

For years I have personally and professionally attempted to “define” my role in the world, as a “student,” a “psychologist,” a “wife,” but still hadn’t come to what I felt was a satisfactory description of who I am as a person.  Before starting the education program at George Mason University, “leader” would not have gotten a passing glance for placement on the list of possible choices. However after spending a semester reflecting on the theories of leadership, I realize that my view of what constitutes a leader plays a direct role in the way I approach my professional and personal life. 

            In her book Finding Our Way, Meg Wheatley quotes the following lines from Rachel Remen:  I’ve spent many years learning how to fix life, only to discover at the end of the day that life is not broken.   These words struck me as a reflection of how I often react to my life and of how I believe some leaders approach their role in organizations.  Michael Fullan, Meg Wheatley, and Peter Senge, prominent theorists in the area of leadership, all discuss the importance that leaders understand the idea that the way a person perceives a situation is his/her reality.  In systems theory, this is referred to as recognizing “mental models.”  Mental models are individual ideas about the way things work.  They can inhibit both leaders and group members from embracing new theories and can define how they view the world and those around them.  It is important for leaders to recognize the mental models of colleagues and to be respectful of the need to bring the members of the organization to the next level instead of trying to “fix” what he or she may view as ineffective practices. 

After reading Senge’s chapter, I realized that I have an abundance of mental models, particularly regarding my opinions about education and the field of school psychology.  For example, in my field, a paradigm shift is taking place in the way psychologists identify and assess learning disabilities.  Every month in the periodical for the national organization, professionals banter back and forth about the downfalls of the current and proposed methods of evaluation.  I had not become too involved in this debate until the county where I practice decided to change their policy to the newly proposed method.  I realized that I had strong mental models about assessment and the role of a school psychologist that did not match the occurring shift.  However, after reading about the ideas of “leaps of abstraction” and exposing the “left-hand column,” I have become more aware of managing these thoughts and trying to use them to help me redefine my role in my profession.  I now realize that my profession is not “broken” and I don’t need to “fix” my views, but I do need to take ownership of my thoughts and use my critical thinking skills to determine how I can define myself as a leader in helping myself and others become more comfortable with the changes in my field. 

Howard Gardner, in his book, Leading Minds, discusses both direct and indirect leaders.  Direct leaders use their knowledge and influence to reach groups of individuals outside of their field, while indirect leaders use their expertise within groups of professionals similar to themselves.  The paradigm shift in school psychology has helped me to realize that at this point in my career I prefer to function as an indirect leader.  As an indirect leader, I have insight into the core problems that other professionals in my field may be facing.  Because of understanding the situation from a practicioner view, I can address basic concerns regarding the changes.  With research and self-study, I can develop my skill set so that I am able to help myself and other professionals move smoothly into the newly defined role of a school psychologist.  Throughout this semester I have had opportunities to function as an administrative designee in one of my elementary schools.  Acting in this capacity, I have learned that at this point in time I am more comfortable with being a leader in an indirect manner, for example, being an “expert” consultant about the special education process, rather than working in a direct administrative situation where I am asked to sort out situations such as conflicts between parents and the educational system. 

Working to move colleagues smoothly into a new role does not necessarily mean that conflict is not to be confronted by the indirect leader.  Wheatley discusses that organizations often feel stuck and frustrated by problems that they cannot solve immediately.  Once members feel stuck, it becomes more difficult for individuals to look at both sides of an issue and objectively try to determine a response.  This seems to be especially true when working with a group of experienced professionals who are used to conducting business in a certain manner.  Wheatley suggests using a form of problem solving that is similar to techniques utilized in family systems therapy.  First, she advocates that the group of professionals should look at their individual views of the proposed changes.  The idea then is that all group members should be able to comfortably make their opinions known and that others in the group should have an opportunity to ask questions regarding their concerns.  Wheatley uses changes in physical positioning in the room to help the group listen to all sides of the topic as they move through the process.  She advocates also that using problem-solving skills in a system that people are familiar with will help limit aggression and lead to a better use of the group’s energy.  While Wheatley’s process for addressing conflict may not always be a practical method for addressing issues within a large group, her theory brings up the importance of helping teams systematically work through the underlying anger and aggression that comes with the uncertainty of a change or fundamental paradigm shift. 

When reading the literature for this course, I found it interesting that only Wheatley addressed the topic of conflict.  As a leader, either direct or indirect, it is inevitable that one will experience a situation where conflict with leadership will arise.  Historically this has been an area ignored by research, however we know that especially in a systems approach, the way a leader addresses conflict can have ripple effects throughout the organization.  I have attempted to shy away from conflict in both my personal and professional capacities.  Without having much guidance in conflict resolution skills, I have tended to “pass the buck,” blaming undesirable requests on “the law or the administration” to name a few.  After listening to my classmates describe their leadership roles, I realize that in order to continue my development as a leader, I need to begin to embrace involvement in situations where conflict may occur.  In the past I have looked to leaders during conflicts to use a Machiavellian-type approach to problem solving by giving the parties involved a direct response to the disagreement.  I think now that a fundamental part of being an effective leader is helping those you lead take ownership for their participation in tasks and problem solving.  By using Wheatley’s model as a leader and listening to all sides of the conflict and guiding staff to develop their own responses, I hope to embrace the opportunity to work through conflict instead of shying away from the situation as I have in the past. 

After contemplating what I consider to be leadership qualities that are important to my personal and professional life, I am still not sure if I have an answer to my husband’s question.  How do I define myself?  I realize after a semester of the doctoral program in education that I am a leader and this does influence the way I view my reality.  However, according to many leadership theorists, including Gardner, Wheatley, and Senge, leadership is a continual process that changes with the particulars of each situation and relationship addressed.  Wheatley’s essay Dreaming World tied together the aspects of defining yourself personally and professional for me by reminding me that each action we engage in affects the world as a greater whole.  I may define myself as a suburban wife who drinks Starbucks coffee, but this action could be helping a farmer in a coffee-producing country to define his role as a provider for his family.  Our realities and “mental models” may be very different, but they still remain interconnected.  Leaders are charged with the responsibility of understanding this interconnectedness and working to help others understand that all of our actions have an impact on society. 

 So again, how do I define myself?  I may not have a complete answer, because like leadership, personal definition changes with place and circumstances of life, but I define myself regardless of the situation, as a leader.  Whether direct or indirect, able to deal with conflict or not, I am comfortable in the role as an advocate for change.  Until studying this semester, I had not realized how intertwined leadership was with the way I view my personal and professional life, however I am beginning to understand that being a leader is a core aspect of my personality.  I may not have yet discovered my “passion,” but I expect that as I move through the education program and life, I will one day look back on this essay and wonder how I could not have known.

Academic and Professional Growth Home

Portfolio Home