Running head: PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 1

My Leadership Philosophy: People and a Higher Purpose

Paola Carrera

Loyola University Chicago

PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 2

“Knowledge is a necessary first step, but by itself it is not sufficient for changing

leadership behavior. The new knowledge must be put into action. Skills encompass the action

domain of learning” (McDonald-Mann, 1998, p. 107). There are several theories and pieces of

literature that shape my personal leadership philosophy and by learning and implementing these

theories in my everyday practice, I am more easily understanding them and their impact.

Throughout this course, I have noted the importance of knowing myself and my own philosophy

before I empower the students I work with. Northouse (2015) described “Authentic leaders

understand their own values and behave toward others based on these values” (p. 198) and while

they only address authentic leadership, this is true for my overall philosophy. Reflecting on

myself, my practice in student affairs, and leadership journey, the theories that have guided my

own leadership philosophy are authentic leadership, servant leadership, and transformational

leadership. As we continue to learn and navigate leadership, I have noted how different aspects

are informing my own leadership philosophy and the importance of understanding them before

trying to bring out the leaders in students and other people in my life.

My leadership philosophy is group centered amongst a variety of groups such as the

programming board (Department of Programming) and the chapter officers of Alpha Delta Pi

that I advise as a volunteer for the sorority. Out-group members are explained within the

Leader-Member Exchange theory (LMX) which moves leadership to have “bidirectional

relationships between leaders and each of their subordinates” (Dugan, 2017, p. 152). In regards

to the out-group members, Dugan (2017) described that “the theory never calls for out-group to

be treated poorly, but they are also not treated equitably” (p. 153). Seeing the way that out-

groups are positioned within LMX relationships and that this group is seen by leadership as less

motivated and receive low quality exchanges, is troubling. Unfortunately, this is a realistic
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 3

perspective of how organizations operate in order to be efficient but in my own leadership, I

strive to remember the larger groups we are serving even if it is a challenge or difficult for

students to remember the greater group of students within the Loyola community or the

sorority’s chapter members.

Authentic Leadership

There is no single definition practiced by professionals that encompasses what authentic

leadership is and how to be authentic in our work but, as George (2003, as cited in Northouse,

2015) explained, those who exemplify authentic leadership have a sense of purpose. “In addition

to knowing their purpose, authentic leaders are inspired and intrinsically motivated about their

goals. They are passionate individuals who have a deep-seated interest in what they are doing

and truly care about their work.” (George, 2003, as cited in Northouse, 2015, p. 197). When I

was applying to colleges to start my undergraduate degree, I thought the purpose in applying was

to complete a degree and have a brighter future than my parents were able to have. In reality, the

real purpose of that academic journey was to understand the process of applying to schools,

figuring out how to navigate college, and finding resources on campus to help me succeed in

order to help me serve my brother in his college process. As I have been able to reflect on my

experience, the purpose of enduring the college process was to help guide him to a strong

academic career and a bright future.

In my student affairs experience, it has been nearly impossible to show up in spaces not

exhibiting my true self. Before beginning my graduate program, I worked at a small, private

institution in an affluent suburb in student activities. I was excited at this opportunity because it

was going to help solidify if a graduate degree in this field was the best choice for me. The

morning of my first day, I recall my mom wishing my luck in my new job and offered some
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 4

advice that I should keep things ot myself, maybe not share so much of my personal life. I was

nervous starting a new role and did not give much thought to her advice but in the first days,

weeks, and even months, I remember trying to act professional and limiting what I would share

with colleagues, my supervisor, and students. I was not being my full self and holding back from

sharing who I was and it was not until a conversation with a friend, who was completing a higher

education graduate program at the time, that I saw how detrimental this authenticity was to

building relationships with colleagues and the students. Northouse (2015) explained:

Authentic leaders have the capacity to open themselves up and establish a connection

with others. They are willing to share their own story with others and listen to others’

stories. Through mutual disclosure, leaders and followers develop a sense of trust and

closeness (p. 199)

Building relationships with other staff members and students is essential to my leadership

philosophy. If the people who rely on me to complete projects and fulfill my role, look to me for

guidance and feedback, do not trust me or have built a foundation to which to work off, then I

cannot be a good leader. “Leaders who are inauthentic act in ways they believe others expect

them to act rather than being true to who they already are” (Komives & Wagner, 2016, p. 79).

This experience has helped me feel confident in who I already am and willing to show up in that

congruent manner in any space I enter; I would rather be my most authentic self and see that it is

not a good fit than have a different persona who misses out on incredible connections and

opportunities with other people.

Looking back, I have seen the importance of showing up authentically in all spaces, even

those where I hold a formal role, in order to connect with people in a more organic and true

manner. Kiersch and Peters (2017) discussed, “Students tend to focus on the formal power
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 5

aspects of leadership (authority, influence, decision making) and underestimate the importance

of the relational aspect (support, collaboration, development of followers, etc.)” (p. 153). The

purpose in my graduate assistantship role is to help advise the student directors and contribute to

their development as leaders in the organization and on campus. While I have shared many

times that I do not have expectations of all eight of the student directors being best friends, there

has to be a cohesive feel to the group and the directors have should build a positive working

relationship with one another in order to provide critical feedback on programming and support

one another. Because I have tasked them with creating this environment, I must model similar

behavior and engage with the students beyond the tasks or programs that we are working on. To

make a shift from being task driven and showing up more authentically with these students, I

created over 200 question slips for myself and the students to choose and answer at the beginning

of every one on one. This helps us both get to know each other by answering a variety of

questions, not related to programming, and build a foundation of authenticity and trust on which

to work from. “In their relationships with others, authentic leaders are transparent about their

intentions, values, and priorities” (Komives et al., 2011, p. 78).

Expecting students to show up authentically is not realistic and since it is a complex

process (Northouse, 2015), it may require time and reflection to explain to others what exactly

authentic leadership means. A limitation of this leadership approach is that every person will

have their own definition of what it means to show up authentically, similarly to transformational

leadership, and it is important to collectively decide what it means to the group to show up

authentically in their space and to decipher how they show up authentically in their leadership

roles. If students do not feel like they can be themselves in a given space, it is up to student
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 6

affairs professionals to work to foster an environment that is welcoming to students as they

choose to be in order to aid in their development as a student and leader.

Servant Leadership

One theory that has weighs heavily in my leadership philosophy is servant leadership.

Before this course, the biggest influence of servant leadership was through my undergraduate

education at Loyola University Chicago where servant leadership was present through the course

requirements and co-curricular activities at Loyola. Greenleaf’s (1977) philosophy on servant

leadership is explained as:

It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious

choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is

leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire

material possessions (p. 27).

The characteristics that both Dugan (2017) and Northouse (2015) explained really resonated with

how I want to be a leader. In reflecting on the leadership roles from my undergraduate career

and comparing those to the roles I am involved in now, my leadership has shifted from putting

others first to being extremely task oriented in my current roles. One characteristic that both

authors name are healing. Northouse (2015) explained, “Servant leaders care about the personal

well-being of their followers. They support followers by helping them overcome personal

problems...the process of healing is a two-way street- in helping followers become whole,

servant leaders themselves are healed” (p. 228). By helping students heal, they in turn will be

able to model this behavior for their committee members and I, in a selfish way, am able to help

myself in the process of being a leader for them.

PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 7

Feeling motivated to move back towards a philosophy encompassing of servant

leadership, Kiersch and Peters’s work connecting both servant and authentic leadership really

energized my spirits. “Authentic and servant leadership theories complement the principles of

behavioral ethics, emphasizing integrity and ethical decision-making as key tenets of effective

leadership while acknowledging both internal and external influences on both leadership and

ethical behavior” (Kiersch & Peters, 2017, p. 153). This philosophy will help ground students,

and myself, beyond the daily tasks and focus on other tenants that are important in order to be a

leader for others. The coupling of servant and authentic leadership has moved my understanding

of leadership further because it challenges me to find ways to have students reflect on their own

values in order to process their internal leadership and have an understanding of how to account

external forces that relate to their leadership.

This being my sixth year at a Jesuit affiliated institution, I strongly believe in the power

and worth of students who are able to connect and challenge the Jesuit principles as laid before

us by St. Ignatius of Loyola. Whether students come from a religious background or have

spiritual guidance in their life, the deeper meaning of the Ignatian spirituality are to be “persons

for others” (Value of a Jesuit Education, 2017). This alignment of being ethical, leading with

integrity, and focusing on “follower’s growth and empowerment” (Kiersch & Peters, 2017, p.

149) coincides also with the LID model that is broken down into six stages. The fifth stage,

generativity, is where students recognize the higher meaning and purpose in their work as leaders

and also turn their focus and attention towards others (Komives et al., 2011). Students, and

professionals, can only reach this stage after they have done their own internal work through

self-reflections, becoming self aware, and exploring various philosophies or theories in their own

leadership.
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 8

Transformational Leadership

Dugan (2017) mentioned, “Burns also believed transforming leadership developed ‘a

relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may

convert leaders into moral agents...the type of leadership that can produce social change’”

(p. 191). Students, and ourselves as student affairs professionals, must encourage others to take

on challenges and opportunities in order to grow in their own leadership. By converting the

“followers into leaders”, as Burns (1978) stated, we can provide encouragement to other

members of a student organization, sorority or fraternity group, or even a high schooler who is

looking to apply to colleges. Students who have not yet had these opportunities need validation

from their peers or someone who has experienced those opportunities before, to be reassured that

these opportunities are something they can achieve. “Students who were validated developed

confidence in their ability to learn, experienced enhanced feelings of self-worth, and believed

they had something to offer the academic community” (Patton et al., 2016, p. 41).

As a sorority volunteer advisor, we begin thinking about succession planning in

September for the following election cycle, which takes place in late November/early December.

The positions on the Executive Board are large positions that seem overwhelming to chapter

members who have not had any leadership in the sorority before, which is valid based on the

amount of time and energy that goes into planning events like the chapter’s recruitment efforts,

social, and sisterhood retreats. Rooted in transformational leadership, advisors and the national

organization invests in these new leaders through time and resources, like leadership

conferences, to ensure that women are prepared and supported in their officer roles. By

providing these resources, the chapter officers, and the chapter in which they oversee, are able to

propel the individual chapter and national organization forward in their membership efforts.
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 9

One of the limitations I see in transformational leadership is that it can sway its focus

away from service to others and more so to the advancement of the organization, which is in

direct contrast to servant leadership. I resonate my leadership philosophy more with developing

the followers and their leadership, whether it be in a formal role or informal contributions to the

organization. This tenet of transformational leadership challenges me to consider how, in order

to have successful organizations, whether institutions, sororities, departments, individuals must

work to advance the organization (Dugan, 2017). Lastly, the term transformational is broad in

its definition and means differently for folks based on their organization’s desired outcomes and,

just as authentic leadership, it is difficult to find supporting evidence that “transformational

leaders cause transformation in organizations and followers. Although causal links could be

theorized, up to this point, we have seen no empirical evidence to make that deduction”

(Antonakis and House, 2002, p. 27).

Because transformational leadership is rooted in moral values and “emphasize[s] the

concurrent importance of people, process, and purpose, examining the role of individuals and

collectives in shaping how leadership positively influences systems” (Dugan, 2017, p. 189), I

find it relevant to my own philosophy around leadership. In order to keep a student organization

or sorority strong, it is important to think ahead about how they can flourish and devote energy,

resources, and finances, if necessary, to general members or followers to give them the

confidence and skills to advance in their own leadership journeys in the organizations. Without a

mutual morality of leaders and followers, the organization would not be able to work towards

developing its future and investing in their current organization. Transformational leadership’s

focus on purpose relates back to Chickering’s seven vectors in that these interactions, advising a

student group or supporting a sorority chapter officer, are what is giving me a sense of purpose in
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 10

relation to the sixth vector. Having this as part of my leadership philosophy will always guide

me in my work and ensuring that I am intentional in the opportunities that will give me a

meaningful experience in helping invest in students and their developments.

Conclusion

The main purpose of my leadership philosophy is focused on others and this is largely

fueled by both of my educational journeys at Loyola and the attention to Ignatian spirituality in

the Jesuit ideals. While it is important to recognize that not all students will model the same

religious values as the institution, the core of the values related back to the work of authentic,

servant, and transformational leadership are transferable to any institution. Not all students I

work with will be going into a field that puts others first; some will enter corporate settings with

a strong sales focus or a numbers driven mentality. While I recognize that field is not my ideal

work environment, I still can model and encourage folks to be a person for others and take time

to empower the team they will oversee or co-workers within any setting. Kiersch & Peters

(2017) supported this approach by stating that “Both [authentic and servant leadership] represent

a more inclusive and humanized approaches to leadership and seem useful for guiding student

leadership development” (p. 149). There is a need to have leaders with ethical behaviors, sound

minds, clear in their actions and communication, built on trust (Kiersch & Peters, 2017) and as a

future student affairs professional, I want to share how focusing on others can bring satisfaction

in a role and give a higher purpose and meaning in the field of student affairs.
PEOPLE AND A HIGHER PURPOSE 11

References

Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2002). An analysis of the full-range leadership theory: The way

forward. In B.J. Avolio & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Transformational and charismatic

leadership: The road ahead (pp.3-34). Amsterdam: JAI.

Dugan, J. (2017). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and

greatness. New York: Paulist Press.

Kiersch, C., Peters, J. (2017). Leadership from the inside out: Student leadership development

within authentic leadership and servant leadership frameworks. Journal of Leadership

Education, doi: 1012806/V16/I1/T4

Komives, S. R., Dugan, J. P., Owen, J. E., Wagner, W., Slack, C., & Associates. (2011).

Handbook for student leadership development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Komives, S., Wagner, W. (2016). Leadership for a better world, 2nd Edition. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass

Northouse, P. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice, 7th edition. CA: Sage.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Q. (2016). Student Development in College:

Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons

Value of a Jesuit Education. (2017). Retrieved from

https://www.luc.edu/undergrad/valueofajesuiteducation/overview/