Part 3: The most effective leaders spend time with their future selves

To get in touch with ones ‘true self’ might sound like good advice for leaders, however, it can turn out to be anything but. In complex and dynamic environments, problems arise when tried-and-tested ‘templates’ – including a ‘true self’ template – are used in a context-insensitive manner.

I’ve studied what makes leaders effective in novel and unpredictable conditions. One of my key findings points to an ability called ‘conative’ intelligence.?Conative intelligence measures our intentionality [how we strive in the world] and it forms a huge part of how leaders interact with their environment.?Simply put, conation has three parts to it.?Motivation?– the goals we commit to.?Volition?– the effort and energy to get to those goals.?Reflexivity?– our willingness to evaluate how we are doing.?

In comparing the lived experiences of leaders operating from so-called “conventional” leadership mindsets [as measured using an instrument to determine leadership development level (LDL)] with those confirmed to be operating from a “post-conventional” mindset or LDL, reflexivity emerged in my PhD study as a feature of leadership which really only comes on stream at the post-conventional tier of development.

Hence, in this final article in my mini-series of three, I want to focus on reflexivity and examine why it is so key to leading more effectively in highly complex, ever-changing environments.

So what is reflexivity?

Reflexivity involves, firstly, a willingness to carefully scrutinize one's intentions, motives, decisions, actions and impact. ?But reflexivity goes beyond self-assessment.?It also entails conscious effort to avoid cultural conventions, dominant narratives or institutionalized ‘truths’. It is among post-conventional leaders that the propensity for self-scrutiny expands into a capacity for ‘perspective awareness’ in order to discern the wisest option for a given context. Reflexivity loosens the grip on controlling tendencies, and instead places a premium on noticing and embracing the actual nature of the emergent processes of complex change. Hence, reflexivity has been shown to be a gateway to higher-order thinking about thinking, or meta-cognition.?

Leading-through-reflexivity takes practice and it takes time.

Leaders from a range of diverse sectors who took part in my PhD study shared rich and layered examples of how investing time to get better at the practice of reflexivity paid off. Let’s look at two such stories here.

One leader who was engaged in collaborating on a pioneering yet controversial piece of legislation described how he was able to actively manage his own self-awareness to detach from strongly-held personal views on the matter to take a broader perspective. He also intentionally created dialogue opportunities for other stakeholders to take a fresh look at their prior-stated positions.?This approach ensured that although the legislation was ‘not a popular move’ it resulted in optimal outcomes for the common good across society.?The leader has since been internationally praised and recognised for his role (despite being widely vilified at the time).

Another leader of an NGO operating abroad described in almost filmic terms how her practice of reflexivity kicked in when her unit became caught in a dangerous conflict situation.?She recalls that she immediately had to be willing to switch her own definition of what her role was as a leader in this context. Then, she had to consciously consider a range of new lens on the situation so as to access alternative problem definitions and thereby novel solutions.?In the end, it was a very ‘playful‘ approach - singing songs of peace (not at all a conventional tool in a war-zone!) - that allowed her and her staff to eventually walk free to safety that day.

The pay-off of spending time in reflexive practice is that it extends the repertoire of a leader. Reflexivity especially enables leaders to experiment, learn and adapt their way through the ‘here and now’ messiness and intricacy of complexity, rather than deploying pre-baked strategies for handling complexity that just don’t work, given the nature of the circumstances.

Among each of the post-conventional tier leaders I interviewed they emphasized that despite everyday life, with its myriad tasks and micro situations, they had created a routine to consciously improve their reflexivity over time.

While several mentioned mindfulness and meditation practices others worked on their reflexivity while travelling to and from work, while jogging or out walking, while relaxing at evenings or weekends, or, through activities such as martial arts training or sailing. Being reflexive takes time but, in the long-run, may save time.

So what do post-conventional tier leaders ‘do’ with the space they create for reflexivity?

Crucially, reflexivity is not just reflection. Reflexivity involves the practice of active self-doubt and paradigm-questioning. This means investing energy to take a critical view of what one is doing and giving curious consideration to other possible approaches. Being willing and able to challenge the status quo in this manner is key. This doesn’t have to be done alone though. Formal after-action reviews or the practice of Circling were mentioned as group reflexivity options.

I have come to appreciate the topic of reflexivity as one which, ultimately, centres on a practice of ‘identity management’.?To conclude, I offer three habits-of-mind for ‘identity management’ which I found to be common to leaders who consciously practice reflexivity as a tool for managing complexity more effectively.

1. Self-coach through time:?The phrase “Know Thyself!” is certainly a core leadership mantra in terms of appreciating and understanding formative experiences, core values and ‘shadow’ tendencies. However, post-conventional leaders practice ways of “unknowing” themselves. This involves imagination. A useful exercise can be to self-coach through time. This means firstly looking back a few years and recognising aspects of your leadership that have since changed. Then self-assess your leadership today. Then project outwards in time to imagine: “Who could I be next?”. This creative practice takes a rare mix of self-compassion, humility and playfulness. Playing with notions of future-selves is an effective way of dampening down the ego-identity in order to unlock the capacity to show-up as the leader our context calls us to be, rather than how we’ve learned we ought to be. ‘Playing’ with Developmental Action Logic cards is a particularly illuminating option.

2. Problematize assumptions:?As well as exploring potential future-selves, post-conventional leaders practice systematically adopting more pluralistic worldviews. This means working with – considering and problematizing – assumptions and counter-assumptions.?In other words, not just focusing on a specific problem but more broadly engaging in meta-reflection around patterns and paradigms in our operating environment.?Some great questions to practice asking are: How have I been thinking about these issues? ?What may be problematic about my deepest convictions? What do I believe is impossible and how could I make it possible? What am I pretending not to know here? Practicing these perspective-bending questions ahead-of-time means when the context suddenly changes, as a leader, you have heightened learning agility.

3. Praxis: This was a very strong theme from my research. Praxis means moving back and forth in a critical way between reflecting and acting on the world. Instances were identified in each of the accounts of the post-conventional participants in my study i.e. leaders giving themselves permission, with compassion, to engage in the process-of-leadership through a cycle of wise action and reflexivity. This is a cycle of learning by doing, then, doing better through learning. The implications of praxis as an emergent ability among post-conventional leaders are important. Knowledge and contemplation without action is worth little in terms of leadership practice. And vice versa: formulaic action without the practice of reflexivity is mere repetition. An overall intentionality to foster a learning environment with the prospect of growth and flourishing for all is key as a back-drop to praxis. Post-conventional leaders ‘do’ leadership in order to ‘become’ more wise.

Reflexivity throws up a paradox we can all learn from.

Many leaders perceive self-development to be something which involves strengthening their ‘true’ identity. The process at post-conventional levels is much more one of giving spaciousness to an array of possible selves, in a context-sensitive manner. The prospect for organizations is the realization of leaders who can lead both strategically and sustainably.

This concludes my mini-series on conative intelligence.

In Part 1 of this series, I argued that less 'mature' leaders often lead from a motive derived from fear but we can all learn how to choose otherwise.

In Part 2 of this series, I noted that post-conventional leaders swap the concept of life-purpose for intentionality, in order to respond to what 'is' rather than what 'was'.

In this concluding article, I discussed how the leaders who are most effective in complex environments make time to practice perspective-taking.

In summary, the science suggests conative intelligence precedes cognitive reasoning and social-emotional intelligence. It's therefore important for leadership development that we tune into this higher-order system of monitoring, regulation and adaptation we call 'intentionality'.

For more on these topics you can read articles Part 1 and Part 2, linked below, or you can listen to the podcast episode I recorded recently with Associate Professors Scott J. Allen, Ph.D. and Jonathan Reams .