A week from Sunday, I’m off to attend the Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education. It’s been a minute since I’ve immersed myself in such intense thinking and learning. The pre-program work alone has my mind racing with ideas. Others I know who’ve attended have found it worthwhile and I’m really looking forward to the experience.
One of those pre-program assignments is to write my leadership story. The framework for this story is “embodied authentic leadership practice”, in particular how this leadership theory fits with my own understanding and beliefs of leadership in academic libraries. I’ll fully admit that all I know of authentic leadership practice so far is what I took from the assigned readings (see bibliography). I don’t doubt that I’ll learn more during the week of the in-person Institute, but for now, here’s where and how I think it fits for me:
It’s an interesting assignment in that I don’t particularly embrace the idea of embodied authentic leadership. In our pre-readings, I resonated with the thoughts and arguments of Mats Alvesson and Katja Einola in their discourse with William Gardner and Elizabeth Karam (Authentic leadership theory: The case for and against). I found it quite telling of myself and my beliefs that before I read the article I noted where the authors were each from and thought to myself, “Hmm, Texas and Sweden.” This immediately made me wonder about a North American bias to the concept of embodied authentic leadership and I was pleasantly surprised when this idea was indeed presented by the authors in the “against” column.
No doubt my beliefs and feelings on the topic arise from my background. Associating authentic leadership with the concepts of “servant leadership” and spiritual leadership (Ladkin & Taylor) takes me back to my first semester of seminary in 1986 when I read Henri Nouwen’s “The Wounded Healer”, a book that at the time was already 15+ years old. I get a bit put off by theorists who imply that there is something new about expressing one’s true self in leadership. The idea has been around for centuries. But more, I don’t believe that it fits as a theory or construct, per se, for how to practice leadership. At least not in libraries. In my opinion, having a vocational calling in the spiritual sense is altogether different than assuming a leadership role in a library. The former certainly comes with the expectation of giving all of oneself to that “higher calling”, the latter, I argue, not so much.
I do believe the proponents of authentic leadership are correct in stating that it is a journey, something one aspires towards, to put in the hard work that’s needed to really come to know and accept and utilize one’s “true self” in leadership. It seems to me that the goal of authentic leadership that’s proposed is merging work selves and non-work selves (and any other selves) into one “Self” – this one truly authentic expression of who you are. I find such to be wholly appropriate in psychology, in therapy, in practices that are rooted in helping an individual develop in a positive manner (as they have defined it). But the troubles with bringing these ideas to the practice of leadership, in my opinion, are multiple.
First, the expectation exists that everyone in leadership will wish to be on this journey, that they’ll want to put in the work, that it’s some innate aspect of effective leaders that they’ve bought into this. And I don’t. I believe more in the philosophy of Annie Savoy in the film, Bull Durham, i.e., “The world is made for people who aren’t cursed with self-awareness.” It’s a nice idea – a nice ideal – to believe that the world is bent towards those who think deeply, who dig deeply into themselves and others, always seeking something abstractly defined as “the best.” But reality seems more like Annie’s world, to me. By and large, I believe people seem fairly happy not knowing themselves at that level. Maybe that’s a bit cynical on my part, but I feel it’s much more rooted in the reality of human nature and less in what strikes me as akin to pop psychology.
Secondly, authentic leadership seems to assume morality – a system of judging what’s right and wrong when it comes to authentic. “Authentic” is implied as better. As pointed out in the readings and in any observation of life, the world is full of some authentic bad apples. But claiming someone is a “bad apple” is, in and of itself, a judgement. I could be an authentic jerk (as noted in one reading). If I lead out of this authentic self, is that best?
Finally, I am not trained as a therapist. At least not when it comes to being a library leader. I fear that espousing the authentic self, as I understand it from the readings, steps on what can become some treacherous ground. I do not always want those that I lead to see me in such a vulnerable state, NOT because I don’t mind being vulnerable but because it opens up the idea that it’s okay to be fully open and honest – to be one’s full self – at all times at work. I do not believe this is best, nor do I wish to work in such a setting. I don’t particularly care for the blurring of all lines. I prefer boundaries. And I know from experience that my staff appreciate boundaries, too. I have respect for that.
(As an aside, I think the idea of Hillary Clinton’s tears making her authentic is really a glaring example of sexism in our society, particularly as it relates to women in leadership. Ladkin & Taylor article.)
In reflecting on how COVID reshaped work, I feel there are many positives that DO align with some of what’s sought in the authentic leadership model. I think we recognize and value flexibility more than ever before. I think we have greater trust in one another, at least in the sense that we are accountable without always being physically seen as much. I know that working in a medical school, I have a greater understanding of health disparities, thanks to the experience of watching library workers be among the last on campus to get vaccinated. Each of these have made me more patient, more aware, and more empathetic. (Though in all honesty, I like to believe I’ve always been a pretty empathetic person, hence that career as a clergyperson.)
Last thoughts regarding inclusive leadership: I believe that everyone has a voice and that everyone has an expectation to share their voice, if they wish to fully partake in a community, in this case a library staff. I believe it is upon the leadership to ensure that we develop, maintain, and promote an environment in which everyone feels safe to use their voice. To be included. That said, I believe their also needs to be an understanding and awareness that everyone’s voice is not always equal. I think it’s the tension that rises from this last point that we struggle with most as we work towards building inclusive workplaces. There is a hierarchy in an academic library and in a medical school. It’s naïve to operate as if there isn’t. The fact that we can be heard while also accepting that being heard won’t always mean we get our way … that’s something we all must work through. And it doesn’t necessarily mean that a workplace isn’t inclusive, just because it doesn’t work the way we wish that it would.
One last, unrelated (but not) aspect about me that I’m sure informs my beliefs and actions regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion is that I grew up in an integrated south in the 1960s and 70s. I had teachers of color throughout elementary school, junior high, high school. I had principals – people in leadership roles, people of authority – who were black and brown. I played sports and participated in clubs side-by-side with white and black and brown classmates. I was not blind to aspects of segregation that were in my town (swim clubs, neighborhoods, churches), but my experiences in school heightened my awareness – more my questioning – of why things were the way they were. It never made sense. I struggle with this still today. I truly struggle with wondering how we seem to have gone so far backwards – moving ever faster in that direction today when it comes to women’s’ rights and the LGBTQ community. I know that all of this filters into how I choose to lead and how I think about leadership, not only at work but in other areas of my life.
I appreciated this assignment very much and I look forward to learning more soon.
Bibliography
Boekhorst, J. A. (2015). The Role of Authentic Leadership in Fostering Workplace Inclusion: A Social Information Processing Perspective. Human Resources Management, 54(2), 241-264. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21669
Gardner, W. L., Karam, E. P., Alvesson, M., & Einola, K. (2021). Authentic leadership theory: The case for and against. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(6), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101495
Ladkin, D., & Taylor, S. (2010). Enacting the ‘true self’: Towards a theory of embodied authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.005
A Librarian by Any Other Name 
Insightful, as usual. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and yourself. 🙂
I’m probably oversimplifying, but the thing that occurs to me is that if you are authentic it’s a lot easier to be consistent. My work self and my non-work self are the same, warts and all.