untested attributions. A better alternative is to ask others what they mean, what they intend, or how they are thinking.
In Sarah's performance review with George, for example, she believed George was trying to deflect the conversation away from his performance by his comments on her junior status and comparative inexperience. Sarah never mentioned this to George, but she got angry and began to pound harder (and louder) on him. As an alternative, Sarah might have surfaced her assumption with something like, “George, do you want to discuss my performance or yours?” If George is playing a game, as Sarah believes, then her question alerts him. His defensive maneuvers may be so automatic and overlearned that the question might help him see what he is doing. George may want to discuss Sarah's performance, and a confident Sarah would want that feedback. She could ask, “Would you like to discuss your perceptions of me first?” That gives her a chance to model listening to someone else's perceptions and might increase George's perception that she is willing to listen. But it is not a substitute for George's annual review.
Testing assumptions in this way can lead to learning for both Sarah and George. Sarah might learn that she can handle difficult people without being controlled by their aggression or her fears. This is important for us all. It is essential for young professionals and for women and people of color who are more often the brunt of uncivil behavior in higher education classrooms (Goodyear, Reynolds, & Gragg, 2010; Schmidt, 2010a) and other campus work environments (Freyd & Johnson, 2010; Sadler, n.d.; Riger, n.d.; Twale & De Luca, 2008). George may be acting out gender politics or playing an age‐old intellectual game of self‐protection through deflection and sarcasm. He may be unaware that not everyone finds his style charming – and that others who view him as hard to handle might choose to exclude him from events and critical conversations. If no one calls George's game, he'll probably keep on playing it. Sarah's question might help George become more aware of his tactics and of their consequences. A more skilled and confident Sarah might also enable the conversation that she and George really need to have about what is happening for him and why he is not producing at the levels he once did.
Work on Balancing Advocacy and Inquiry
Some leaders advocate far more than they inquire. Others do the opposite. Paying attention to your patterns can help you assess the appropriate balance for your purposes. Effective academic leaders are versatile and skilled in both areas. But effectiveness is reflected not only in the amount of each but in the quality. Quantity is easier to assess – and focusing on balance is a good entry point for academic leaders new to these issues. Improving the quality of advocacy and of inquiry is a harder task. Good advocacy is complex. It is the ability to communicate clearly and persuasively. That means talking about your take on reality and the reasoning behind your diagnoses and decisions without discouraging others from doing the same. Inquiry involves skills in listening, reflecting what you hear to test accuracy, and crafting questions that enable you to learn the things you need to know. You won't get that from asking leading questions that manipulate the answer. Yes/no questions will get you a brief response but may reveal little about what others think, feel, or know. Good inquiry uses questions of how, what, and why to get people talking about things that matter.
Yo‐Yo Ma, the world's most beloved cellist, is best known for his virtuoso concert performances and his many collaborations with artists across the globe. A less well‐known secret is his gentle persistence in trying to learn from others. In the 1990s, for example, he collaborated with famed choreographer Mark Morris to marry dance with a Bach cello suite. Morris initially worried that Ma might turn out to be an arrogant diva. But during their work together, Ma continually and disarmingly asked for input and feedback from Morris. At one point he asked, “What are the chances, do you think, that if I hang around, I could learn what the choreography is, so that I could actually be influenced by the action on stage?” Or consider the following dialogue between the two:
MA:
Do you have any doubts about our doing this together?
MORRIS:
Well, absolutely, in the notion that we're laying new opinions onto what already exists. The liberating part is that we don't actually have to agree on everything. We don't have to agree on an exact point of view with this music. But if we're relatively honest, something may happen that's not a horrible crime.
MA:
That's the best thing that you hope for?
MORRIS:
That's the worst thing I would hope for.
MA:
(laughs) So what's the best thing that you would hope for?
MORRIS:
The best is an absolutely transcendent, transparent, you know, transmogrifying kind of situation where it gets bigger than all of that (Rhombus Media, 1997).
Yo‐Yo Ma's determination to keep learning and improving his craft is a model for us all.
Learn about Your Theories‐in‐Use
The Sarah and George case exemplifies a useful learning tool. Writing a two‐sided case in the same format that Sarah used is something you can do before or after an unusually tough situation.1 Take a piece of paper and divide it in half. Write a short dialogue that reflects what you said (or anticipate saying) and how others responded (or how you think they will) in the left‐hand column. Add what you were thinking but didn't (or wouldn't) say in the right. You may be surprised to see what you choose to say and not to say. Write these cases on different situations that you face over time, and you'll get new clarity about your strengths, comfort zones, and flat spots. Keep them as a record of your professional growth.
The two‐column case is one example of scenario building, discussed in Chapter 2. It's a low‐risk way to rehearse the future. You'll think more deeply about your intended strategies, how you want to talk with others, and the possible consequences. The case can also tell you how optimistic or pessimistic you are about the situation and reveal what you are reluctant to discuss or make public. Knowing that in advance can enable you to develop and practice new strategies – and build your confidence and communication skills. Remember: the undiscussable issues are often the keys for steering a difficult conversation in a positive direction.
If you use a case to reflect after the fact about what you might have done differently, enlist a trusted friend, coach, or colleague to help. The things we don't know about ourselves are hard for us to see without help from someone else. The writer of a personal case almost always struggles to see gaps and options that are transparent to others. Take heart! With practice and persistence, you'll improve the alignment of your actions with your purposes.
Summary
Leadership works when relationships work – and fails when they don't. Leaders’ self‐awareness and interpersonal skills are central to their effectiveness, but may be insufficient for the challenges of academic life. When relationships go awry, leaders often know what they intended, but not what they did to contribute to unsatisfactory outcomes. As a result, they often blame others instead of learning how to do things better. The best leaders are persistent and proactive in reflecting on their behavior and in learning from those around them. They seek feedback, test assumptions,
