Personal Vision and Purpose

     It seems to be a whole lot easier to imagine a far off future (think twenty, thirty years) than to think about any sort of immediate future - even if I'm just imagining, even if it's three years from now. It is easier, though, because that far off future is more fantasy; the closer to the present, the more real the decisions: the more real the to-do list. When I imagine my future, and when I follow Senge's initial steps to imagining, I have just one image, like a snapshot, of myself at a cafe surrounded by dazzling sunlight with a pen and paper. It's just a snapshot: I know I'm writing, but what am I writing? Where is this cafe? France, Ireland, New York, Bozeman? It doesn't get less specific, more fanciful than this image. When I try, then, to apply specifics, my relaxed brain seems to resist, my fight or flight kicks in immediately: because as soon as I try to apply specifics to this image, I am implying and envisioning the decisions that got me there - the decisions I have to make from now until then that will get me to my dream.
     The element of Senge's experiment that fascinated me the most is in Step 4, "Assume I have it now. What does it bring me?" In my vision, I have absolutely no worries. I am free to spend my time doing whatever it is that I want to do (to write) wherever it is I want to do it; I have zero ounces of stress and nothing urgent on my to-do list. My life is about bettering myself, living in Quadrant II.
     It's easy to fantasize, to just imagine, but dreams don't get you anywhere; decisions move you; choices and actions further you. I have issue with the Umair Haque article in that he claims that if you live your life in a certain way, your purpose will find you. But that's far too passive. That's not how the world works. It's true that if you live in a Big Love way, in the manner of goodness and honor, you will eventually have reached some sort of destination - probably a decent one, but if you live in a manner of little love you will too. You can live life in Big Love, and I think that is an excellent idea - but you can't think passively: you can't expect to run into your purpose one day on the streets. It is much more important to live your life in David Allen's "What's the next action?" mindset. But then again, that's only if you ever want to get anything done.
     I'm an artist and a writer so believe me when I say I entirely understand the desire to live with Big Love in mind - with only the big, beautiful picture of the world. It's a curse, really, to envision the world like this by nature and by practice (practice being the art and the writing) but you can't live solely like this, especially if you have goals which you strive to accomplish in reality.

Stephen Corey and David Allen

Stephen Corey had one specific line in "First Things First" that jumped out at me immediately: "It's easy to think because something is urgent, it's important." This is a common miscalculation; but an equally important one - and one that I struggle with personally - is defining true urgency. Often times - especially as of late - when I am extremely busy and it feels like I must constantly be doing something, I mistakenly view certain tasks as urgent when they are not (though they may be important). When I have an overwhelming to-do list I sometimes tend to choose any task just so I can say I accomplished something. Now, when you're entirely too overwhelmed with anything it is usually a good idea to take a slight break with some of your more menial tasks, but it's important that I don't allow myself to fall into that habit every time I have a lot to do. Later on, Corey also says, "They're not urgent. They aren't pressing. They don't act on you. You have to act on them." Meaning that those tasks that I tend to jump to because they're easy - while I have to realize that they are not equally as urgent as some others - I have to realize that they do still have to get done. It comes to David Allen's statement, "We are all accountable to define what, if anything, we are committed to make happen as we engage with ourselves and with others."

Kouzes, Ch. 3

     When Kouzes, in his exercises, asked me to recall a few meaningful moments of leadership and relate why they were meaningful, I found a persistent and recurring theme. The first, was as soccer captain when we were able to celebrate our successes (which we did at the end of each season whether it was a good one or a bad one). Another was as a vision and hearing tester for elementary age children; there was a boy going into kindergarten who didn't know his alphabet yet. I got there late and my colleague had given up on him; the boy looked miserable. I got on a computer and printed out a new vision chart that used directions instead of letters and asked him if we could try again. As he moved further and further down the chart, he got this huge smile on his face and he and his mom left happy. But the most meaningful, at the time that I was filling out the chart, was something that had just happened an hour before. Last night, a freshman from Chi Alpha Kappa called me and explained to me how stressed she is with the club and with her other friends and her family; she wanted to quit. Luckily for me, my Freshman Council President has a freshman meeting scheduled for tonight and we had just met to discuss the most important points she was going to bring up - pertaining to club unity, sisterhood, bonding, less drama. I told Courtney that I completely understood where she was coming from; I told her that I'd heard from a lot of other girls who were struggling with these same issues; I asked her if she could do me the favor of going to her President's meeting and hearing what she had to say and then call me afterward. Regardless of whether or not she does quit, I celebrated that moment. I was able to calm her down, make her feel better, convince her that we didn't want to lose her as a sister, and, ultimately, to take a moment to breathe and think thoroughly.
     This instance was the one that helped me most in choosing my values from the given list: Happiness, Family, Achievement, Organization, Patience. Family, though, not in the specific sense, but rather in a feeling of community; and Patience last, but not least: more of an overarching concept for the whole leadership process. I'm excited to have these in my mind consciously so I can further develop them as skills and put these values into action.

Kathy Castania, Peter F Drucker, and Dave Meldahl

Simply by coincidence, I read these articles in the order that I liked them - or liked their message - from least to greatest. Starting with "The Evolving Language of Diversity," I was biased going in. In my Literature class this semester we are discussing how sexuality came to be defined in the Victorian Era; it was done mostly through the control and enforcement of language and discourse. So while Castania might think she is breaking through boundaries and walls of suppression with these language ideas, I am led to believe that she is doing exactly what the suppressors want her to do. Extreme, I know, but my Literature class basically ruined this article for me, because the following passage on page one exactly relates to the ideas we have discussed:

"We need to know how to name what is all around us and to do it in ways that will keep everyone involved. Having an understanding of the overall dynamics of a dominator society with a history of racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, adultism, etc. allows us to engage each other in what to do about it. Using words that describe groups more accurately is a part of this process." 

In the Victorian Era, discourse on all of these "Others" was encouraged because it made them into "Others."
     But I'm getting off topic. What I really wanted to emphasize was the highlight of inner difficulties and strife that all of these articles discussed. Castania supports an idea that will require us all to delve deep and decide how we have been using language and how we can consciously change it; Peter Drucker encourages us to, "waste as little effort as possible on improving areas of low competence" (4), which would be hard for a majority of people - to basically disregard those areas and accept that there can be no major improvement.
Drucker's idea is a relatively easy one to grasp, but very difficult to apply: "Do not try to change yourself....But work hard to improve the way you perform" (5). And especially, "The person who has learned that he or she does not perform well in a big organization should have learned to say no to a position in one" (7).
     Then, Dave Meldahl's article delves even deeper into the personal as it explains that we must not get defensive when confronted with our weaknesses, "Your approach needs to be listening-focused and non-defensive." This is an idea that I know I have a problem with and I know many others to struggle with.
     All three of these pieces encourage us to do things that will be difficult and that we will have to actively enforce within ourselves.

Convocation and The Master Class with Yann Martel

     As a volunteer for Freshman Convocation, I was able to attend the Master Class with Yann Martel immediately preceding the event. Decked out in my volunteer t-shirt, I felt a bit underdressed; I knew from last year that a lot of attendees dressed up for this event and I was worried I might not belong. However, I soon found more volunteers in their shirts, made quick friends, and was a bit more comfortable. Then, as soon as Yann showed up and started answering questions I was so wrapped up in his answers that all of my self-consciousness and slight worriedness dissipated. I hadn’t taken my notebook out of my backpack and knew that if I tried to at that moment the zipper and the shuffling would be too much; I settled for typing notes into my phone (which created a new self-consciousness problem, but more on that later). Thinking back, and reading the notes in my phone, they seem all to create a theme despite all of them stemming from different questions. “Man’s inhumanity to man does not surprise anyone;” “Make a leap of faith and be the better for it;” “Being able to create presence and then to live with it;” “It’s great to have a car, but you need to know why you’re going from A to B.” All of these together seem to speak to the idea of finding a purpose; one needs to first realize and understand the world around oneself, consciously make an effort to achieve something, and ultimately to understand why it matters—why you’re doing it in the first place. This entire theme is one that is found inside of a good leader; and as I realized that, I realized that an exceptional leader must first and foremost be an exceptional person. Being a leader is not something you can do separately from yourself; you cannot perform leadership. You have to be leadership.

     In Mr. Martel’s Convocation address he furthered this idea with a few more choice phrases, “Your future would come no matter what you did, but you made a choice.” However, in essence, in my interpretation, he grew a bit more personal. He spoke more often about art, painting, reading, writing—all of it. He said, “If you’re excessively reasonable, art suffers;” “Art was what gave us an understanding of who we were, why we were here;” “It doesn’t matter where you get your stories….In a sense you know less if you’ve read; it shows you how uncertain life is.” This seemingly separate tangent struck me on a personal level; I am both a writer and a painter so I understood these statements deeply. They resonated. But then again, as I look back I see that even these elements speak to leadership; they speak to an understanding of the world and especially of an understanding of oneself—of myself. And I further realize that every single element of every single day affects and is structured by the elements of leadership. Your understanding and your reaction either advances or undermines your own leadership development. It will happen in any case, but is all determined by your choice.

Managing With the Brain in Mind, David Rock

     "Studies now show that the brain equates social needs with survival; for example, being hungry and being ostracized activate similar neural responses" (3). Perhaps, since society has changed from a purely survival environment to a socially focused environment, the brain has evolved along side: realizing, now, that the most important part of survival in the current culture is social interaction. "Because human brains evolved in response to stressors over thousands of years, they are constantly attuned, usually at a subconscious level, to the ways in which social encounters threaten or support the capacity for choice" (5). The idea that the human brain has evolved in order to set social interaction and social standing as a main survival factor is interesting. It certainly supports those who seemingly overreact and over-analyze social encounters.
     One of the passages in Rock's article that struck me the most reads as follows:

"If you are an executive leader, the more practiced you are at reading yourself, the more effective you will be. For example, if you understand that micromanaging threatens status and autonomy, you will resist your own impulse to gain certainty by dictating every detail. Instead, you’ll seek to disarm people by giving them latitude to make their own mistakes. If you have felt the hairs on the back of your own neck rise when someone says, “Can I offer you some feedback?” you will know it’s best to create opportunities for people to do the hard work of self-assessment rather than insisting they depend on performance reviews" (8).

This first struck me because it described me and situations I have been in and reacted to so acutely. Then I reread it once again as an Earth personality and it resonated even further: uncomfortable with criticism or disagreements, desire for detailed order, tendency to micromanage. In fact, so much of this article seemed to nod to Earth personalities - "When perceived uncertainty gets out of hand, people panic and make bad decisions" (5) - and it made me further realize that every person has a tendency toward each personality, especially situationally. The article made me understand the Earth personality better, simply because it got me thinking about it; and because I am now striving to better understand not only the Earth personality, but all personalities, I am learning to better understand myself. According to Rock, "the more practiced you are at reading yourself, the more effective you will be."
Sabrina

The Way of Conflict, Part 1

     According to "The Way of Conflict Style Inventory" I am an Earth personality. However, the differences were very small; I tallied 18 A's, 15 B's, 12 C's, and 15 D's. As I read the Earth description, I have no scruples and am comfortable identifying myself this way - overall, it is pretty accurate. But I can also see myself in each of the other descriptions, which brings me to the sentence on page 27, "We cannot judge a person's elemental conflict personality by how they are currently acting," and a similar statement on page 41, "No one can be put into a box, let alone ever be fully summarized in a table." I hold stock in the idea of elemental personalities, but it is rife to say that any person is all and only one of them. I am an Earth personality, but almost equally a Water and an Air personality with a very close comparison to Fire. After all, doesn't everyone want questions to be asked of them, humility shown to them, acknowledgement, and honesty in life let alone in a transformer?
     After reading through the entirety of Part 1 I can agree that identifying personalities is an important part of conflict resolution, but it becomes muddled in terms of the individual; it's not as easy as Amy is Air, Blaze is Fire, Gene is Water, and Edina is Earth. Every individual is different amounts of each element and no individual is all one. In terms of team identification though, elemental personalities function much better and more easy to identify. I structured my answers in "Way of Conflict Team Personality Inventory" off of the Sophomore Council of my social club, Chi Alpha Kappa. When I read the description of a Fire Team to my fellow council members we all laughed; it was hilariously accurate. It seems that as a team we can better find a balance and agree on a definition; ironically, it is more difficult to find balance as an individual.

We don't accomplish anything in this world alone...

and whatever happens is the result of the whole tapestry of one's life

and all the weavings of individual threads from one

to another that creates something.

-Sandra Day O'Connor, quoted in Chapter 2 "Identifying the Team's Personality"