Leadership Theoretical Analysis

Running Head: LEADERSHIP THEORETICAL ANALYSIS 1

Leadership Theoretical Analysis

Hector Solis-Ortiz

Loyola University Chicago

LEADERSHIP THEORETICAL ANALYSIS 2

Introduction

When tasked at finding an individual to interview for this theoretical analysis I

thought it would be beneficial to find someone who has been at this institution for quite

some time and whose held many different positions. Rabia Khan Harvey has been at

Loyola University Chicago for 15 years, and in that time she has worn many different

hats in which she has had to showcase her leadership skills. Khan Harvey started out at

Loyola as a Resident Director then became Assistant to the Vice President of the Division

of Student Development and most recently serves as the Title IX Deputy Coordinator for

the university. It is easy to see the trajectory that her career has taken within her time

here at the university and because of that she had expressed the challenges and changes

that she had to endure in all these different sectors of student affairs at Loyola. I was

very interested to see if there was a difference in how she shows up in each setting

especially as she moves up in the administration.

Leadership is such a subjective term in that it takes going through different

experiences and reflecting through those moments to gain an opinion of what it means to

each individual. In this case I believe that Khan Harvey has seen many things during her

time here and that was clearly evident in how open she was in sharing her views about

what she thinks of leadership she states, “Leadership is a choice that someone makes.

You don’t have to be in a position of power. The best kind of leadership comes from

someone who has good intentions and makes the decision that they can step up into the

role” (Khan Harvey, 2014). Through our conversation I hope to point out how much of

an impact she has made in her time here and how she has adopted a transformative


leadership style over time. Based off all of these changes I plan to highlight how she

stays authentic while continually showing up and making the choice to lead others.

Authentic Leadership

It is really easy to say that one is authentic in every aspect of leadership, but is it

really that easy to be authentic at all times? Khan Harvey seems to believe she shows up

authentic in all facets of her life. Having interacted with her I would have to say that she

has a great reputation that precedes her and that most would agree and see her as a

valuable asset for the Division of Student Development. “I work hard to be an authentic

person because that allows others to feel comfortable working with me and seek me out

when they need assistance” (Khan Harvey, 2014). This is one way she believes

authenticity plays a part in her everyday work. Though I do believe this is just one aspect

of authenticity that is displayed it does not count for the overall definition of what it

means to be an authentic leader.

In The Handbook for Student Leadership Development they delve a little deeper

into how this type of leadership affects leaders and followers. “Authentic leadership is

essentially a process of both the leader and associates (i.e., followers) engaging in mutual

development focused on increasing self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviors

in the context of complex organizational environments” (Komives et. al, 2011, p. 42).

Due to this it was interesting to see how Khan Harvey felt she was truly authentic with

her interactions with her supervisors and how she leads others. Even though this is a

complex theory and fairly new as of now there seems to be three different viewpoints in


which it is grounded in. The three different parts are the interpersonal perspective,

interpersonal process and developmental process. Khan Harvey adds,

“Authentic leadership is probably more salient with me it’s about showing up as

you are in a personal and professional setting. There really isn’t too much a

deviance as how you see me as being a friendly person with a welcoming

demeanor is very much so how I supervise others. Sometimes people think that I

can’t make critical or give tough feedback because I am the way I am and that’s

frustrating at times” (Khan Harvey, 2014).

Khan Harvey brought a great point that I would have never thought about in that just

because one is nice and friendly does that negate or impact how others view them when it

comes down to making really hard decisions. In other words, do subordinates look to

these type of people to give them unbiased hard hitting feedback when they need it most?

I believe that I might truly affect someone’s leadership style. In this case it seems to be

something that Khan Harvey continues to think about.

Northouse (2012) described the intrapersonal approach as exhibiting genuine

leadership in that the individual tends to lead from conviction and are originals while

leading from their own personal convictions. The interpersonal process suggests that it is

more relational aspect that exists throughout the leaders and it’s followers. If you look

closer into it it’s considered to be more of a reciprocal process in that you can’t have one

without the other and not be successful. Lastly, the developmental part of this approach

speaks to how authenticity is something that can be nurtured and developed within a

leader.


Based off of these three different viewpoints I would say the theme that came out

most is the fact that Khan Harvey tends to lead with conviction and really makes

decisions based on her values and whether they align with certain initiatives. A great

example of this is when she had to sit on committees that range from sexual assault

caseloads that she manages with her colleagues. There was one particular incident in

where she saw that an employee did not properly handle the situation. In part due to their

lack of awareness of the scope of the isolated incident and as a result caused the student

from getting the adequate resources that they needed at the time. “I rarely hide my

feelings without putting the burden on my staffs. I’m sharing that I’m upset because these

are feelings that resonate with me at the time, but do it in a way that is productive is

important” (Khan Harvey, 2014). Authenticity is something is very valued in her opinion

and that is pivotal in making others feel comfortable to share parts of themselves with her

as well. The issues come about when there is a need to constantly code switch and I

would argue that if one continually has to do that are they are truly being their most

authentic self.

Transformational Leadership

Northouse (2012) describes transformational leadership as being, “a process

whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of

motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower. Khan Harvey whole-

heartedly believes that, “knowing who you work with is pivotal in creating an inviting

environment and fostering a place that breeds productivity” (Khan Harvey, 2014). Khan

Harvey mentions how early on her career especially as she moved from working in

residence life to transitioning into the VP office she had mentors that would continually


want to hear about her story and what she had to offer, but sometimes needed some

inspirational motivation to give her that extra push that she needed. By that I want to

emphasize that by needing that it does not mean that she lacked the capabilities of

performing sometimes she just needed that extra motivation. I was very pleased to hear

she adopted inspirational motivation from one of her previous supervisors at Loyola,

which was Dr. Robert Kelly.

There would be instances where she would go to VP meetings and would

continually ask for feedback or suggestions from her. At first she was very willing to, but

it seems as though she needed some reassurance that what she had to offer was valuable.

In the beginning of her career this motivation was important in building her efficacy is a

whole other thing entirely, but knew that this type of transformational leadership was

something that she quickly learned to adapt because it was so successful for her. “Dr.

Kelly has instilled this part of my professional identity in because he was able to build

my confidence and I see value in doing that for others” (Khan Harvey, 2014).

Transformational leadership is a partnership within people that is important to develop

and foster others growth in how they see themselves as leaders.

This can be a great asset in some ways, but because there are so many factors that

are a part of this theory I believe it to be somewhat more situational. It would really have

to depend on the follower in this case, and seeing what works best for them and how you

make others thrive in certain situations. This can be particularly hard in the beginning of

one’s identity as a leader because you have to first establish what you have seen as good

leader and delve into that realization to know how you want to lead in the future. I

constantly go back to that saying that “you lead by example” which can be problematic


yet true in that you look to people for validation and even role model others behaviors as

you start out as a professional. I say this because in order to be fully successful in this

theory there has to be some sort of baseline knowing who you are in the system and at

your core on how you want to lead.

This transformational approach can be quite impactful especially when learning

about another person’s story and how much weight that has into how they view their

respective worlds and work. Knowing the people you work for and with is important to

moving forward in the work that you do day to day and that’s something that both Khan

Harvey and I agree with wholeheartedly. Through this observation of how

transformational leadership has affected her there seemed to be this theme of leadership

self-efficacy that continually came up or lack there of which is definitely important to

highlight.

Leadership Self Efficacy

“I think an important trait for every leader to have is the ability to believe in one’s

self and know that they are capable” (Khan Harvey, 2014). Throughout the conversation

there was an emerging theme of lack of self-efficacy. This was displayed more in the

beginning of her career at Loyola and was more prominent as she moved up into the

administration. “LSE is a leader’s confidence judgment in his or her ability to effectively

carry out the behaviors that comprise the leadership role” (Paglis, 2010, p. 772). As we

spoke of this lack of self-efficacy she was quite honest by saying that it was real and that

even though she knew she was more than qualified for the position that nagging feeling


of not being good enough at times did exist. Part of that lack of self-efficacy stemmed

from her identity and how that played a part in the atmosphere in the office.

“I have some identities that can be targeted ones especially being a minority

woman in a higher level position that is often dominated by white individuals

particularly white men. How I show up is something I’m always mindful of

particularly when I go into meetings. It sometimes limits my contributions

because I’m always accessing whether my contributions are valued or listened to.

Because of this I have to work two to three times harder than others to be taken

seriously” (Khan Harvey, 2014).

I was honestly surprised that she was so honest to say that she was not

comfortable and that she did lack belief in herself because at times leaders that hold that

much influence at times might not want to be seen as vulnerable or weak. On the

contrary, it made me respect her more because she said things that rang true to me and in

my discernment of what it means to be a man of color in this field. I constantly think that

I have to work harder than most to be taken seriously as some others who hold power and

privilege or just to seem competent.

The way that I supervise and mentor students are just other examples of myself

thinking of times where my identity at times stunted me in not having efficacy in

knowing that I’m capable of doing my job. This realization is something that I

continually struggle with, but it seems as though most if not all leaders have this lack of

self-efficacy at some point in their professional career. In Khan Harvey’s case self-

efficacy is something that is developed over time especially as you get more comfortable


with your role. The greatest thing that I got out of the conversation is knowing that

everyone goes through it even though it seems that I might be the only one dealing with

this problem. All these leadership theories that were discussed throughout would not be

successfully implemented without leadership self-efficacy. If one does not believe they

can then that effects how they view the world and how they move forward in their work.

Critique

Having had this conversation of how leadership has impacted her work and how

she works with others in the division. My biggest critique that I had about this

conversation is when it came to authentic leadership. I have interacted and know Khan

Harvey pretty well and I always believe that she puts her best foot forward and is

authentic in wanting to help and interact with others. Though she has said that she

closely identifies with this theory and applies it to her every day life as a professional

there were times where she admitted that she does code switch in meetings. There are

times that she chooses not to divulge or not share as much as she would like to based on

who’s on the table.

Knowing this, how are you truly being authentic at all times? I believe that you

can be authentic with the interactions that you have with co-workers, but to be truly

authentic would mean that it does not matter the situation, who is in the meeting what the

subject is if you have an opinion to share and you truly believe that it is available then

you can’t censor yourself in those instances. I believe that authentic leadership needs to

be redefined in some ways in not being an end all be all and that there is room to code

switch in order to survive in the organization not even to survive in it, but to thrive.


Even though authentic leadership is problematic in more than one way the ability

to be authentic is hard in itself and if someone is able to do that it’s definitely Khan

Harvey.

The other critique that I had with transformational leadership is that even though I

believe it’s highly useful and I would love to adapt it in my leadership style. I think it’s

hard to stay complacent in the way that you go about in adapting the theory. As time

passes one might continually do what they’ve been doing in the past and motivating

others and all, but not everyone needs that or values it. Knowing this as a professional

you have to make sure to continually ask what your “followers” need from you to be

successful in the work place. After doing that just make sure that you know that and

what you can do to be an effective leader and supervisor. These critiques are things that I

think to myself in that not all theories are valid at times because one changes from day to

day and with that your leadership style or values change. This is why I don’t hold myself

too rigidly to one particular theory to another.

Conclusion

Looking through Khan Harvey’s extensive career it is easy to see that she has had

to go through various tests and challenges, but throughout that has adapted to the

different leadership structures that have been created at the university. Not only have I

found Khan Harvey to be an exceedingly great person, but I have gained a better

perspective of how to navigate the world of higher education depending on how you

interact with the people that are around you especially when you serve in a supervisory

role. I believed what I learned most from Khan Harvey was how she was able to


continually reflect on how she saw herself and whether or not she is living it up to the

expectations that she has set for herself. “Constantly reflect on who you are as a leader.

Are you being true to yourself? Continue to move forward and make sure that you

always look to your core values to lead you when making decisions” (Khan Harvey,

2012).


References

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

The handbook for student leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, P.G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.

Paglis, L.L. (2010). Leadership self-efficacy: research findings and practical

applications. Journal of Management Development, Vol. 29 Iss; 9, pp. 771-782.

Documents

Leadership Theoretical Analysis