Going into PL, my approach to leadership was relatively linear: if you know the right people and say the right things, you have the capacity to lead. Coming out of PL, I realize this barely even scratches the surface of how leadership really functions. Through both my coursework and real-world experiences, I see that there are very few objective, defining aspects to leadership. Yes, everybody always wants a strong, charismatic leader who knows exactly what to do when nobody else does. But in reality these attributes are expressed in different ways, creating more of a spectrum than an objective skill set required to be a leader.
Perhaps the most difficult lesson in the PL curriculum was realizing that not every leader can do everything. Rather, strong leaders are those who surround themselves with people who know how to do the things they don’t. This part of the curriculum was very intriguing to me was because it framed leadership as a whole in a way I never thought of: removing the “I” and replacing it with “we”. This was the first of many lessons that I saw leadership as much more about the people you lead rather than just your own position or how your decisions affect you. Even recently, while contemplating which board position to run for in my a cappella group, I have had to acknowledge the fact that while I want to run for a certain position, I would make much greater contributions in another position. Because at the end of the day, I am serving the group, not just myself.
What I learned in the classroom and through internship experiences culminate to the reinvention of my understanding of leadership. To illustrate this change I have attached the following artifacts.
Perhaps the most difficult lesson in the PL curriculum was realizing that not every leader can do everything. Rather, strong leaders are those who surround themselves with people who know how to do the things they don’t. This part of the curriculum was very intriguing to me was because it framed leadership as a whole in a way I never thought of: removing the “I” and replacing it with “we”. This was the first of many lessons that I saw leadership as much more about the people you lead rather than just your own position or how your decisions affect you. Even recently, while contemplating which board position to run for in my a cappella group, I have had to acknowledge the fact that while I want to run for a certain position, I would make much greater contributions in another position. Because at the end of the day, I am serving the group, not just myself.
What I learned in the classroom and through internship experiences culminate to the reinvention of my understanding of leadership. To illustrate this change I have attached the following artifacts.
|
1st Year Position Paper: An Analysis and Refutation of the Three Strikes Law. While I have written case studies and persuasive essays before, this paper was by far the most comprehensive analysis of a single topic and articulation of a formidable argument I have ever written. To write this paper, I needed to conduct meta-analysis of academic sources, formulate my own opinion, and then present this evidence in a comprehendible manner to a reader. I consider this a cornerstone of my academic development, as the completion of this paper taught me how to both analyze and defend a highly technical and controversial topic.
|
A Reflection on my Summer Internship. This past summer, I had the opportunity to shadow Mike Davis, the Vice President of Potomac Photonics, a micromanufacturing company in Baltimore. While shadowing Mr. Davis, I got to see how he runs the day-to-day operations of the company, maintains order, and communicates with his superiors and subordinates. What made these observations so beneficial is that they directly relate to leadership in my field. As I mentioned in my Statement of Purpose, leading in an engineering environment requires a very broad set of skills. Mr. Davis is a prime example of what it means to lead in a highly technical field. In this reflection, I detail what I learned from him and his impact on me during this experience.
|
|
|
My Personal Leadership Philosophy. The most recently written artifact, this paper summarizes what I have learned from the Public Leadership curriculum as well as my own experiences, and how I have applied them to my own leadership. I found this to be a very introspective exercise, as I have never had to actually articulate how I implement leadership. It made me think very deeply about what I have learned, what is my actual leadership style, and how I want people to perceive me as a leader.
|
How Have I Changed Over the Course of Scholars?
Now, at the end of my scholars experience, I can affirm my leadership style is very different from when I started PL in Fall of 2019. I pride myself on my ability to lead by example through soft power-- gaining the trust of others to believe in me as a leader. I find that this combination of selflessness forms an organic trust, allowing those around me to come to their own conclusion that I am fit for leadership, rather than thrusting myself into a position without their approval. While this is my preference, it does not mean that I am so passive and lackadaisical in my leadership that I lose authority. I still understand that it is incumbent upon me to be the voice of reason and the decision maker when others do not know what to do. In any organization--regardless of size or purpose-- those with authority move the organization forward. This dichotomy allows for a symbiosis that I thrive off of: having the trust of those around me while making sure everyone I am responsible for is taken care of.
If you want to see the kind of stuff I worked on at Potomac Photonics, go check out there website here.
|