Core Competencies Analysis

Running Head: Core Competencies 1

Core Competencies: Dr. Ana Vazquez

Lynette Henderson

Loyola University Chicago


Leadership literature produced within the context of higher education is unique in it its

diverse application. It recognizes the increasing diversity of the world at large, and higher

education institutions as microcosms of the aforementioned diversity (Fried, 2003). Leaders’

response to this diversity shapes the campus climate as well as that of the office or department in

which we work (Northouse, 2010; Kellerman, 2004). My enrollment in the ELPS419 Leadership

in Higher Education course has made clear the importance of recognizing the lens through which

one sees social justice enacted in the world surrounding them. This means that in order to be

most holistically effective, there must be an acknowledgement of one’s self that includes gender,

culture, sexual orientation, and even inventory of critical incidents—events that have lessened or

increased efficacy.

Race, gender, and ethnicity played a large role in my selection of an interviewee. Another

key factor was divergence from the North American societally normative image of a leader as

being Caucasian and male. Additionally, to avoid any propensity toward bias, I made the effort

to find an exemplary leader outside my race. Dr. Ana Vazquez, an exemplary leader who

happened to be an alumna of Loyola University Chicago and the current Director of the Office of

Multicultural Student Affairs at the University of Chicago (OMSA), fit all aforementioned

qualities and agreed to speak with me about her leadership experience. This paper will detail and

analyze our conversation in light of theory, ethics, social justice, and cross-cultural leadership.

Theory

When asked if there are any particular theories of leadership she uses in practice or that

are evident in her leadership style, Dr. Vazquez specifically mentioned servant, collaborative and

shared leadership. It appears that she also utilizes aspects of authentic leadership model.


Servant leadership

Servant leadership has an explicit moral dimension that allows leaders to be both

attentive and empathetic toward their followers (Northouse, 2010). The theory, developed by

Robert Greenleaf, states that leadership emergence depends largely upon a person’s ability to

become a servant (Greenleaf, 2007, as cited by Northouse, 2010). Leadership emergence is

defined as the establishment of a group member as a leader regardless of title, but Greenleaf’s

work encourages positional leaders to serve in order to achieve the desired outcomes (Komives

& Dugan, 2010; Northouse, 2010). When asked during the interview how she would define the

term leadership, Dr. Vazquez stated that it is willingness to do the “A-Z” of work. She stated that

leadership is not positional and requires a get-it-done attitude—it is a process, not a position. Her

professional life is categorized by accepting positions in organizations during moments when

change needs to be accomplished. When stabilization is accomplished, she often takes her

expertise to other areas that are in need. In certain contexts, this movement could be viewed as

self-seeking. However, she is drawn to the role of positive change agent, which is strongly

related to service.

Positive communication and social responsibility are also evidenced in Dr. Vazquez’s

style by her mention of group articulation and willingness to listen to the voices and concerns

that emerge during the leadership process (interview). Those characteristics are fundamental to

the application of this leadership style and allow leaders to facilitate instead of control

(Northouse, 2010; Komives & Dugan, 2010). This allows followers to hold a stake in the

leadership process. Dr. Vazquez’s style as being servant first and leader second allows her to

easily share positional power and collaborate with followers and stakeholders. While she leads as

a servant, she concurrently applies collaborative and shared leadership styles.


Collaborative/shared leadership

Collaborative and shared leadership are remarkably relational and belong to a family of

leadership models that have similar characteristics. This leadership type is shaped by reciprocity,

a mutual benefit among leaders, followers and the organization, and collaboration, group work

toward a common goal (Astin, 1996; Komives & Dugan, 2010). According to Komives &

Dugan (2010), reciprocity and collaboration are significant within small groups, organizations

and especially between and among leaders and followers. In response to questions about the

effect of her personal identity on her leadership style, Dr. Vazquez mentioned how she desires to

know a lot about her staff and be attuned to them as individuals as well as employees (interview).

Obliteration of power differentials encourages streamlined communication and encourages

positive change, trust and integrity (Komives & Dugan, 2010). Typical of collaborative and

shared leadership is lost value of individuality—the group’s goals now outweigh any personal

stake in the project at hand (Komives & Dugan, 2010). Dr. Vazquez’s leadership embodies this

attitude. As a leader, she expects to sometimes set the direction for a project but she seems to

measure her leadership ability by the buy-in and collective growth of her team.

Noting the definition of relational leadership, individuality is not the key to success. This

attitude is unusual for American culture but may be at least partially informed by her rich Puerto-

Rican heritage (Northouse, 2010). This insight will be revisited in depth when considering cross-

cultural leadership, but does add a dimension to the authenticity of Dr. Vazquez’s leadership.

Her ability to serve is intertwined with collaboration and a sharing of leadership responsibilities.

At the center of this triad is her authentic self—she exhibits self-awareness in action.


Authentic leadership

Authentic leadership has at its root the assertion that authenticity is the principle upon

which the leadership process is built (Komives & Dugan, 2010). Authenticity is defined as self-

awareness, unbiased processing, relational authenticity, and authentic behavior or action (Kernis,

2003 as cited in Komives & Dugan, 2010; Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Self-awareness is the

conscious understanding of one’s own feelings, motives, thoughts, and desires (Kernis, 2003).

This affects one cognitively by causing unbiased processing and the analysis of self-relevant

information—objectivity in one’s personal experiences and private knowledge (Kernis, 2003).

Colloquially, we often refer to this aspect as our lens—the shade through which we view the

world in which we live, therefore shaping our leadership ability. Once this lens has been

recognized, relational authenticity can be attempted. This authenticity, firstly to self, then to

others, is the ability to become vulnerable by building true relationship in leadership. To be

authentic in relationship means to allow others, both followers and other positional leaders, to

see the real you (Kernis, 2003). Authentic behavior involves whether one’s action is a reflection

of their true self (Kernis, 2003). Each of these three steps appears to build upon successful

completion of the former. Quite difficult would be the undertaking of authentic action if

relational authenticity was not first accomplished. Also, relational authenticity cannot occur if

one has failed to achieve unbiased processing and self-awareness.

Dr. Vazquez’s leadership style seems to fit seamlessly into self-awareness and relational

authenticity. She mentions her gender and culture as being incredibly influential to her work. Bi-

lingual, female, a first-generation college graduate and accepting of the African influences within

her culture, she sees her work through the lens of strong personal identity. It would be difficult to

assess the degree to which Dr. Vazquez processes personal and private information, but it is clear


that her self-understanding is well-developed. In discussing her professional life, it was clear that

Dr. Vazquez takes time to reflect on her movements and that she consciously decides to be

introspective and honest with herself which leads to authentic behavior. Her application of

authentic leadership is divergent, however, in its application of authentic behavior. By definition

the theory is individualistic, while Dr. Vazquez’s responses to the interview questions supported

a group-orientation rather than that of the individual. I am not sure she would agree that effective

leadership can be accomplished while she acts in accord with her own personal needs and values

(Kernis, 2003). It is likely that she would see this as counter to her social justice orientation.

Ethics and Social Justice

Social justice and ethics are complementary ideals that embody the practice of good

leadership (Astin, 1996; Kellerman, 2004; Komives & Dugan, 2010). Dr. Vazquez defined bad

leadership as carelessness, recklessness and fiscal irresponsibility (interview). Conversely, she

stated that good leadership is characterized by maintaining appropriate relationships with

students by upholding proper boundaries (interview). Dr. Vazquez’s leadership is built upon

ethics and social justice. The two concepts are the context within which she builds her

professional goals. Educational equity and access are her passions. This greatly informs her work

and adds a needed dimension to her concept of being socially just. She never claims to be an

expert but strives to hear all voices at the table—meaning that she seeks to realize the social

impact that her leadership, and that of her department, have on others (interview).

When asked how ethics factors into her leadership approach, Dr. Vazquez spoke of

constantly being faced with challenges when students have been harmed (interview). She

recognizes her own bias and strives to remain professional. In her position as director of OMSA,


she serves as a bridge between students and the institution. Ethical decision-making for her is

characterized by one’s ability to compromise (interview).

Dr. Vazquez’s ethical beliefs and leadership intersected in the case of a racially charged

campus incident. An event had been planned and its title had strongly racist undertones—as a

result, students of color were incredibly vocal and the media became involved. Many issues

began to unfold, and in the midst of all this, as a new hire, Dr. Vazquez was invited to speak to

prospective students of color. She felt disbelief at the institution and wondered how she could

satisfy the university’s request for help recruiting students to a place where, in light of the above-

mentioned events, they could end up being hurt. She struggled up until the very last minute,

seriously considering leaving her position and trying to offer alternatives to university

leadership. While working to come to a resolution, she advocated for students and attempted to

balance her commitment to the student body as well and administration. She ended up giving a

speech about the wonderful things the university had to offer. She emphasized the support

structures offered by the university and the amazing faculty of color. Dr. Vazquez found a way to

be honest even in such a doubtful moment.

Although she did not mention it, it appears that Dr. Vazquez used Rion’s six questions

for ethical decision-making:

1. Why is this bothering me?

2. Who else matters? Are there stakeholders in this situation?

3. Is it my problem? Have I caused the problem and am I responsible for resolving it?

4. What is the ethical concern?

5. What do others think? Would discussing this with a person who might disagree with me

help me think more clearly?


6. Am I being true to myself? What are my personal beliefs about this issue, beyond

consideration for the relevant ethical codes and guidelines? (Fried, 2003, p. 116-117)

This framework is well-supported by her leadership styles. As one who leads by serving,

it is natural for unethical circumstances to cause dissonance, or discomfort for her. This

dissonance initiates the questions for ethical decision-making. At the root of her leadership is

care and concern for others, making her strongly resistant to pseudotransformational, or self-

seeking, unethical leadership. She naturally moves to thought of others and possible causes as

well as solutions. Her ability to collaborate and share leadership make her sensitive to the ideas

of others and committed to a belief in their worth, prompting her to consider their thoughts and

use their input to inform her decisions. Authenticity within her leadership style causes her to

always seek self-truth. She compares her beliefs with what she knows to be ethically proper. Dr.

Vazquez’s decision-making process is social justice in action through ethics.

Social justice in leadership is defined by positive social change. It is enacted by

combining individual values, community values, group values—precisely illustrated by the

structure of the social change model of leadership development. Positive social change benefits

the community and is accomplished as a group effort. Although she did not name social justice

in our interview, her social justice orientation is obvious. In her own words, Dr. Vazquez

mentions “advocacy, socially just distribution of educational resources, students as valuable

human capital, the importance of diversity, and community outreach” (interview).

For Dr. Vazquez, social justice is the tool that should be used by graduate students to

advance their learning in administrative leadership. Her point was that leadership is not a place at

which one can arrive, but an ever-changing social and personal construct that must be


consistently augmented. Dr. Vazquez made clear the importance of cultural relevancy in every

setting and its effects on leadership (interview).

Dr. Vazquez did not speak in as great detail about her social justice framework as she did

ethics. I hope to one day continue my conversation with her to gain greater insight. It seems

likely that for her, social justice is bound to ethics even when not explicitly mentioned.

Cross-Cultural Leadership

Dr. Vazquez’s cross-cultural leadership is made possible in part by embracing her Puerto-

Rican heritage. To inform my view of her culture’s leadership attitudes, I referenced the Global

Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) study and found it to be

lacking of information about Puerto Rican culture (Northouse, 2010). As a United States

territory, it is not specifically mentioned under the umbrella of Latin America. A valid critique of

the study itself is its lack of acknowledgement of cultural differences within United States

territories. However, since Dr. Vazquez stated clearly that Latin American culture has influenced

her leadership style, one can say with certainty that this is the root of her group-oriented,

collectivist leadership style (interview; Northouse, 2010). She values her ethnic connection to

African-American culture and enjoys the flexibility that she can use when working with diverse

cultures. Her engagement in cross-cultural leadership has a great deal to do with flexibility. She

has made the conscious decision to embrace diversity by valuing the insights and qualities of

everyone with whom she comes into contact. For her employees, she has learned to objectively

judge talent and differentiate it from potential; however, her impression is result of their work,

not their cultural identities.

As an administrative leader in higher education who also happened to be a first-

generation college student, Dr. Vazquez pointed to the importance of cross-cultural leadership


and advocacy in work toward student access and retention. Also, she briefly discussed the

multidimensionality of culture—it encompasses that intersection of culture, gender, sexual

orientation (Ospina & Foldy, 2009; Hoppe, M.H., 1998). Dr. Vazquez seeks to understand

different cultural lenses through which culture is viewed in leadership and use differences to

learn rather than discount the experience.

Critical Skills Needed to Engage in Leadership with Diverse Students and Colleagues

The beauty of contemporary leadership practice is its lack of prescriptive qualities.

Theoretically, there was a paradigm shift which marked the beginning of more relational, learned

leadership ability (Northouse, 2010). The resulting literature produced leadership models

whereby one’s leadership style can be fluid and draw from the strengths of theory while

remaining autonomous with their personal, situational style. I believe that this flexibility is

critical when engaging in leadership with diverse students and colleagues. Effective leadership

means being patient enough to sometimes put tasks aside and tend to the process of leading.

Certainly, leadership studies support the idea of leadership as a process, not something that can

be attained. Leaders must be ready to revise their method at a moment’s notice. My teaching

experience adds great clarity to the process of leadership. In that example, learning outcomes

were the goal—students bought into that goal daily by attending class and being present in all the

ways needed to pass. However, they were each authorizers of my leadership. I could not

accomplish any task or in any way be productive without buy-in from them. My leadership was

not, and will never be, positional.

It is true that some assumptions are made when a person is placed in a position of power

—in many cases followers assume that they are well equipped with the skills and experience

needed to lead. Very rarely mentioned is the question of their ability to engage with diverse


students and colleagues, even when this ability is directly related to followers’ ability to grow

and produce results. As leaders, we must constantly reassess our actions and become intentional

about how we carry out our leadership process. We have to consider how our attitudes toward

followers may be impacting their efficacy. My firm belief, informed by this interview and the

readings of this course, is that leadership is an ever-evolving skill that is incredibly difficult to

measure.

Conclusion

Once one recognizes that leadership is a process, not something that can one day be

achieved, it becomes easier to realize the validity of leadership research and theory. No

leadership style can be the silver bullet for every organizational climate or situation. What is true

however, is that social justice, ethics and cross-cultural leadership skills are needed to operate as

an effective leader. Optimally, personal attention to ethics and social justice should be developed

before being placed in a position of leadership. For Dr. Vazquez, this came as result of her

personal experiences as well as prior positions in organizations with social justice orientations. In

speaking with her, it became clear that these experiences set the tone for her leadership and led to

a valiant attempt at cultural competency. Dr. Vazquez’s insights into leadership made theory

come to life. Her dynamic application of cross-cultural leadership within servant,

collaborative/shared and authentic leadership models is a great model of the flexibility of

leadership process.


References

Astin, H. S. (1996, July-August). Leadership for social change. About Campus, 4-10.

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the roots

of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

Fried, J. (2003). Ethical standards and principles. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodard, Jr., &

Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (pp. 107-127). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Greenleaf, R. K. (2007). The servant as leader. In R. P. Vecchio (Ed.), Leadership:

Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations (pp. 407-433).

Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.

Hoppe, M. H. (1998). Cross-cultural issues in leadership development. In C. D. McCauley, R.

S. Moxley & E. Van Velson (Eds.), Handbook of leadership development: Center for

creative leadership (pp. 336-378). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, and why it matters. Boston,

MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a Conceptualization of Optimal Self-Esteem. Psychological

inquiry: An international journal for the advancement of psychological theory, 14(1), 1-26.

Komives, S. R., & Dugan, J. P. (2010). Contemporary leadership theories. In R. A. Couto (Ed.),

Political and civic leadership: A reference handbook (pp. 109-125). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Northouse, P. G. (2009). Leadership: Theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Ospina, S., & Foldy, E. (2009). A critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature:

Surfacing context, power and the collective dimensions of leadership. Leadership

Quarterly, 20, 876-896.

Documents

Core Competencies Analysis