Professional Development Choices: An Individual Level of Analysis

My Unlikely Choice to Return to Graduate School

There are many sound reasons why I should not return to graduate school at this point in my life.

First, I have little time to commit to the enterprise. My first priority - my family - keeps me busy. My wife is starting a new job and needs my support. My five-year-old is entering kindergarten, throwing another element into the family schedule. My two-year-old is asserting her will in the world, often taxing my deepest reserves of energy and patience. When I add a full-time job, wellness commitments and folding laundry into the schedule, my most creative calculation leaves exactly one hour per day - from 6:00am to 7:00am - for graduate study.

Second, I already have a master’s degree and, related, a great job.

Third, I am an emotional train wreck at the moment. A month ago, we lost my mother to depression. Her untimely death, compounded by its traumatic circumstances, has been absolutely crushing and disorienting. I struggle to sleep, to focus, and to motivate. Most days, it takes a Herculean effort just to show up.

Facing these countervailing circumstances, I nevertheless chose - with a great deal of intention and clarity - to start the Master of Business Administration in Leadership and Change at The College of St. Scholastica. The question is: Why?

Generating a Composite Explanation

A wide diversity of theoretical lenses addresses my professional development choices. A survey of different theories leads to a two-part analysis. First, how does a particular theoretical lens explain my professional development choices? Second, how does a particular theoretical explanation resonate with my lived experience and self-understanding?

To begin, hierarchy of needs theory posits that the psychological drive to satisfy pre-potent basic needs energizes and sustains human behavior. Maslow (1943) outlined the five basic human needs as physiological, safety, love, esteem and self-actualization. McGregor (1957) took Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and applied it to the organizational context. Further developing the theoretical lens, Alderfer (1969) recategorized the basic needs as existence, relatedness and growth. As pre-potent, the lower-level needs monopolize consciousness until they are satiated. However, the hierarchy of needs is not completely rigid and fixed. For example, Maslow (1943) described needs satisfaction as a percentage and Alderfer (1969) stated that the specific objectives of each need are unique to the individual.

Within the hierarchy of needs framework, the notion of pre-potency highlights that I am currently healthy, secure, connected and confident; therefore, my lower-level needs are sufficiently met and I am able to turn my energy toward the higher-level needs of self-actualization, self-realization and growth. Of note, Alderfer (1969) wrote, “Satisfaction of growth needs depends on a person’s being able to find ways to utilize his [or her] capabilities to utilize his [or her] talents and to develop new talents” (127). Looking at my lived experience this way, my return to graduate school is a way to harness my potential and find new challenges. The current satisfaction of my physiological, safety, social and esteem needs engenders this opportunity.

Also, the notion of non-rigidity illuminates the continuous shift of my needs satisfaction along a spectrum. While my lower-level needs are generally satisfied, inevitably “life happens” occasionally, and my lower-level needs plummet. Yet, I possess sufficient resiliency to maintain motivation in the face of momentary stressors until my needs satisfaction returns to a sufficient level. For example, when I experience the physiological strain of a hectic schedule or the social strain of loss, I am able to weather these storms and persevere in my drive toward growth.

To continue, vocational choice theory posits that individuals seek congruence between their personality and their work environment. Holland (1997) stated that individuals pursue career opportunities that permit them to “exercise their skills and abilities, express their attitudes and values, and take on agreeable problems and roles” (p. 4). Accordingly, Holland (1997) proposed six vocational types in his RIASEC model. Expanding on the concept of vocational choice, the theory of strengths-based development states that individuals are most satisfied and fulfilled in work environments that build and employ their greatest talents. Clifton, Anderson and Schreiner (2006) defined talent as a naturally-recurring pattern of thoughts, feelings and behaviors that empower an individual to do something very well. A talent developed with knowledge and skill becomes a strength. Clifton, Anderson and Schreiner (2006) outlined 34 CliftonStrengths Themes. Related to vocational choice theory, the Big Five Personality Model proposes five basic dimensions of personality that predict how individuals behave within a work environment (Robbins and Judge, 2017).

A brief analysis of my assessment results across these three personality models yields further insight into my professional development choices. Notably, my RIASEC categorization is investigative-artistic; my top three CliftonStrengths Themes are learner, ideation and intellection; and openness to experience is my strongest predictor of workplace behavior, according to the Big Five Model. While I am extremely reluctant to reduce my personality to a one-dimensional analysis of these results, a common thread between these “top areas” highlights a relevant aspect of my professional development choices. That is, a cross-model sampling of my “top areas” describes my personality as: inquisitive, abstract, complex, wide-ranging, unconventional, non-conforming, imaginative, continually learning, musing, pondering, pattern-seeking, integrating of disparate phenomena, free-thinking, creative, adventurous, and self-expressive in unusual ways (Holland, 1997; Clifton, Anderson & Schreiner, 2006; Robbins & Judge, 2017). Thereby, enrolling in another wide-scope interdisciplinary master’s degree program (as opposed to another option: the deep, narrow and much-respected doctorate degree) represents a congruence between my wide-ranging, free-thinking, non-conforming personality and my professional development choices.

Next, self-determination theory asserts that self-agency increases intrinsic motivation and guides human behavior. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), intrinsic motivation enlivens human potential to seek challenges, exercise capacities, explore and learn. They identified three interdependent psychological needs - competency, autonomy and relatedness - as essential for intrinsic motivation to thrive. As an outgrowth of self-determination theory, self-concordance theory examines the degree of integration between an individual’s sense of self, behavior, interests and core values (Sheldon and Elliot, 1999; Robbins and Judge, 2018). Proactive and self-generated goals that concord with an integrated self lead to intrinsic motivation and meaningful work (Bono and Judge, 2003). As another extension of self-determination theory, self-authorship theory states that inner wisdom cultivated through self-awareness and lived experience strengthens internal commitments to act (Magolda, 2008). As trust in an inner voice grows, an individual becomes increasingly open to reconstructing their inner foundation through the dynamic process of living a self-authored life.

Within the self-determination framework, the notion of internally-directed goals aligned with an integrated self speaks to my utilitarian treatment of norms and conventions around professional development. If a professional development opportunity resonates with me, I will pursue it. If not, I will move on. My current program of graduate study provides me creative space to strengthen and expand my professional capacities in meaningful ways as I see fit. Therefore, I am enrolled.

In addition, the notion of trusting my inner voice highlights how increased self-awareness and lived experience propels me toward my leading edge of growth. While I neither require another graduate degree to maintain the great job I already have nor do I possess an interest in “moving up the ladder” anytime soon, my inner voice beckons me to further expand into my professional mission. While I cannot discern exactly where this professional development path leads, I nevertheless trust my inner wisdom to take me where I need to go. It is important to note that I am a committed and long-time rationalist; to follow my intuition in such a way is to lean into discomfort. Nevertheless, as Magolda (2008) described, I am becoming increasingly open to deconstruction and rebirth as I self-author my unfolding life.

Although it exceeds the scope of this essay, I would be disingenuous if I failed to briefly mention contemplative practice in this analysis. Ultimately, contemplative practice clarifies my motivation and activates my behavior around important life choices. According to Stone (2011), “Unity or Yoga is not a metaphysical principle but attunement to the flow of life through us, as us” (p. 16). Through yoga, I generate courage to trust myself fearlessly (see Mishler, 2017). Through meditation, I tune into the energetics of manifestation, choosing what to let go and what to gravitate toward (see Gandelman, 2019). Unsurprisingly, after early morning practice, in a fit of inspired focus, I sat down, finalized my decision and hammered out my entire graduate school application. Beginning to end, this took two hours.

In sum, different theoretical explanations of my professional development choices resonate with different aspects of my lived experience and self-understanding. The situational, multifaceted and evolving nature of my own motivation belies the effectiveness of an analysis that integrates a diversity of theoretical lenses into a more robust composite explanation. In short, such an analysis reveals that I gravitate toward growth-oriented, idea-generating and self-determined professional development choices. While internal and external countervailing forces may exist, opportunities with these qualities enliven a powerful intrinsic motivation to engage. Contemplative practice lights the fire.

Maintaining Motivation to Persist and Energy to Thrive

A composite understanding of my diverse sources of motivation provides context for moving forward with my professional development choices in an intentional, self-aligned way. Three specific strategies authentically engage my propensities and capacities, thereby enlivening my human potential.

Attend to body, mind and spirit every single day. Self-actualization requires my full attention to holistic well-being. In my self-understanding and lived experience, basic needs are not pre-potent; basic needs are integral. I must tend to the full vibrancy of my integrated body, mind and spirit in order to achieve my growth potential. That is, every single day I must eat a healthy diet, drink plenty of water, get adequate sleep, exercise, meditate and spend quality time with loved ones. This is a challenging ideal to meet, but it must be a priority if I am to persist and thrive in my professional development choices.

Uninhibit the energy flow of ideas. Deep saturation in diverse insights and perspectives - both my own and other’s - charges my wide-ranging, free-thinking, and non-conforming capacity to generate ideas. Like a river swelling with spring rains, my energy flow of ideas builds and builds in strength, at its most powerful becoming an unbounded, roiling, and creative torrent. Therefore, I must avoid artificial parameters that “box me in” to set ways of thinking or doing. I must follow a free-ranging spirit of inquiry that leads me to new ways of seeing, uninhibited by deadened rules, conventions, templates and thought patterns.

Craft and trust my own authentic journey. A part of me wants to “rein it in” and not follow where the energy flows because the energy often flows toward action that is non-conforming, emergent, untested and risky. That is too far out there, a part of me says. But that part of me is the fearful, doubting self. In contrast, a different part of me says, trust yourself fearlessly. This is the enlightened, inspired self. I must trust the light inside of me and let it shine; I must listen to the unbounded, roiling and creative torrent. As Parker Palmer (2009) proclaimed, “Let your life speak” (p. 2).

References

Alderfer, C. (1969). Existence, relatedness and growth model. In Natemeyer, W. E., & Hersey, P. (Eds.) (2011). Classics of organizational behavior (4th ed., pp. 117-127). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 554–571.

Clifton, D. O., Anderson, E., & Schreiner, L. A. (2006). StrengthsQuest: Discover and develop your strengths in academics, career, and beyond. New York: Gallup Press.

Gandelman, D. (2019). The energetics of success and manifestation. Podcast retrieved from https://insighttimer.com/meditation-courses/course_the-energetics-of-success-and-manifestation

Holland, J. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.

Magolda, M. B. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4), 269–284.

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. In Natemeyer, W. E., & Hersey, P. (Eds.) (2011). Classics of organizational behavior (4th ed., pp. 76-93). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

McGregor. D. (1957). The human side of enterprise. In Natemeyer, W. E., & Hersey, P. (Eds.) (2011). Classics of organizational behavior (4th ed., pp. 63-72). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Mishler, A. (2017, January 14). Revolution - day 15 - fearless practice - Yoga With Adriene [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtWUYGfbwtM
Palmer, P. (2009). Let your life speak: Listening for the voice of vocation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2018). Essentials of organizational behavior (14th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

Stone, M. (2011). Awake in the world: Teachings from Yoga and Buddhism for living an engaged life. Shambhala: London.

Sheldon, K. M., & Elliott, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482–497.

The Intelligence of Emotion

Last night, my two-year old daughter flailed on the floor of her bedroom, legs kicking, full on roaring. I had stated that our book reading for the night was concluded and it was now time to lay down in bed. "No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!" And so it went for 20 minutes.

This morning, my five-year old daughter sat in her bedroom closet, halfway between undressed and dressed, tears streaming as she protested, "I don't want to go to kindergarten! I don't want to wear my uniform! I'm cold! I just want to go back to bed!"

As any parent can attest, guiding your children through their experience of strong emotions is a challenging undertaking.

Not that doing so with colleagues at work is any easier. Flailing about on the floor with screaming tears of rage may be less common in the office. That said, it can be all the more difficult to engage a colleague's emotional experience emerging through layers of historical workplace trauma, office politics, power dynamics and stifling organizational norms. The "outbursts" may be silent, but the negative behaviors may be all the more virulent and destructive.

"The central idea behind emotional regulation is to identify and modify the emotions you feel," writes Stephen Robbins and Timothy Judge (2018).

The approach of emotional regulation separates mind, body and emotion.  Intelligence is centered in the mind. The mind regulates body and emotion - or at least it "should."

"Our practice teaches us how to open to anger or any other strong feelings and not take immediate action. We learn to wait and see. And in this waiting we become deeply engaged with what is showing up," asserts Michael Stone (2011). 

In contrast, the approach of emotional processing integrates mind, body and emotion. Intelligence is distributed equally. Mind, body and emotion each provide a subjective way to know and understand the human experience.

The key difference between emotional regulation and emotional processing boils down to this question: Is emotion a source of irrationality to be managed  or is emotion a source of intelligence to be listened to?

Consider feeling angry.

In the view of emotional regulation, feeling angry is generally a negative thing. "Settle down. Don't do anything crazy!" Negative emotions should be managed or controlled in order to not derail the situation.

In the view of emotional processing, feeling angry is neither positive or negative. How we engage, learn from and respond to our experience of anger is what matters.

Many of us are accustomed to the idea of regulating our emotions. We "keep it together" and "stay calm and collected." We trust leaders who do the same. 

We are - perhaps - less accustomed to the idea of processing our emotions, especially in the context of the workplace. If we are angry, what does that look like? 

First, we take a deep breath, then recognize and sit with our anger without judgement. "This is how I feel. It is neither good nor bad." This opens us to a deeper, more reflective space, sometimes called the mindfulness gap.

Second, we listen to and discern the causes and effects of our anger. What is our anger revealing to us about our inner and outer experience? Perhaps we see our anger reflecting an inner need that is not being met. Perhaps we see our anger pointing out unhelpful habits, patterns and beliefs that we should evolve. Perhaps we see our anger clarifying our deep passion and a call to act. Perhaps we see our anger tuning us into petty grievances and annoyances that a part of us still clings to. 

In my view, the possibility of what we may learn through the intelligence of our emotion is infinite. Anger, hope, fear, satisfaction, security, joy, apathy...they all have something to teach us. There are neither positive nor negative emotions that must be regulated. Rather, there is intelligence to be discerned through a positive process of emotional engagement.

As a parent, I find it much more difficult to engage in emotional processing when I am exhausted at the end of the day and my toddler is throwing an inconsolable tantrum that even the most well-reasoned arguments cannot dissuade. Some days I inevitably resort to emotional regulation: "Stop. You just need to stop crying and get into bed. Stop." 

That doesn't usually work. 

So I pause, take a deep breath, and do my darndest to better discern the intelligence of our emotions. She is overtired so her ability to be flexible is overwhelmed. She wants to assert her growing independence over her behavior and her environment. She loves to be with her dad and just wants to read one more book together. 

Generating a little empathy and compassion, I strike a compromise. We keep the lights out but I tell her a story as we sit in the storytelling chair. She slowly calms down. Suddenly - as if a switch has flipped - she crawls out of the chair into her bed and pulls up her covers. "I wuv you daddy-troy. Goodnight!"

Funny how that works sometimes. 

Running on fumes, I crawl into my own bed and fall asleep before my head hits the pillow. Such is life. It has much to teach us. 


--
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2018). Essentials of organizational behavior. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.

Stone, M. (2011). Awake in the world: Teachings from Yoga and Buddhism for living an engaged life. Boson, MA: Shambhala Publications. 

The Human Side of Enterprise

In the 1957 article “The Human Side of Enterprise,” Douglas McGregor contrasted two approaches to managing the human resources of an organization. His analysis hinged on two different understandings of human nature and resulting employee behaviors.

According to McGregor, the conventional view, which he labeled as Theory X, operates under a negative or deficit-based view of human nature. This conventional view describes employee behavior as passive, irresponsible and unintelligent. On the other hand, the new theory of management, which McGregor labeled as Theory Y, operates under a positive or strengths-based view of human nature. This new view describes employee behavior as motivation-seeking, willing to engage and filled with potential for growth and development.

McGregor accepted the fact that the negative employee behaviors outlined by the conventional view may well exist within organizations. However, he posited that these negative employee behaviors result from misguided management practices. In short, the organization is at fault for creating a negative management environment that seeks to direct and control employee behavior.

From this point of departure, McGregor argued for a new view of management that addresses the higher-level needs of employees, including but exceeding physiological, safety and social needs. Positive employee behaviors result from a management environment that provides work-related opportunities for employees to meet their higher level egoistic and self-fulfillment needs.

McGregor offered a few cursory steps to more closely align management practices with higher-level employee needs. Strategies include decentralization, job enlargement, participatory approaches, self-guided performance appraisals and others. These strategies seek to cultivate - not mitigate - human nature, thereby aligning human potential with the achievement of management objectives. Such a shift toward a positive management environment, however, may be slow. McGregor concluded that progress toward a more positive approach to management requires ongoing exploration and creative imagination on the part of organizations.

The tenets outlined by Douglas McGregor in “The Human Side of Enterprise” provide a lens for analyzing my professional experience related to the performance management process.

Through the lens of Theory X, the performance management process focuses on top-down control of employee behavior. Such an approach assumes that employees must be regulated, rewarded and/or punished by an external manager or an external system in order to perform. Employees are “cogs in the machine” of enterprise to be externally controlled according to the achievement of organizational objectives.
I have personally experienced such an approach to the performance management process as degrading, ineffective and naive. Let’s take the example of pay for performance. In my experience, the organization sets an “objective” standard of performance, then “measures” the employee’s level of achievement. The organization then rewards different levels of achievement by different levels of pay.

However, the organizational logic behind pay for performance is self-defeating. If the organization assumes that an employee is primarily driven by pay for performance (i.e. lower level need), then a reasonable corollary is that the employee will use whatever means necessary to “demonstrate” achievement of the “objective” standards in order to attain the highest level of pay possible (i.e. meet safety needs).

In non-technical terms, two can play that game. An oversimplification of performance based on “objective” measures established by the organization in order to control employee behavior is easily manipulated by the savvy employee with any rudimentary knowledge of evaluation and interpersonal politics. Negative employee behavior, as engendered by the management environment, becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. As a result, the organization may incur the expense of greater pay for “performance” without making any meaningful gains in organizational effectiveness.

What if that same employee’s energy and savvy could be directed toward higher needs - such as self-fulfillment - that are skilfully and collaboratively aligned with organizational objectives?

Through the lens of Theory Y, the performance management process focuses on a collaborative approach to directing employee tasks and appraising their achievement. The performance management process provides employees a voice in the conversation and recognizes the limitations of any one perspective, including that of the organization. It operates under the assumption that “self-fulfillment” can only be achieved when directed by the self being fulfilled.

Aligning with the Theory Y approach, I personally adopted a different performance management strategy this past year. At the beginning of the performance cycle, I created an opportunity for employees to explore their own professional mission - the what, why and how behind their daily grind on the job. Through the use of an Ikigai Venn diagram, employees then explored the intersection of professional mission, organizational objectives, individual strengths, and challenging tasks. Working within the spaces of convergence, we then discussed and co-created employee goals or touchstones for the year. Each month, we conversed about progress and challenges related to those goals or touchstones. For the annual review, employees completed a written reflection to self-assess their level of “achievement,” whatever that looked like to them. I then used these self-reflections to guide open-ended questions and conversations about ongoing growth of both the employee and the organization.

Based on my experience, I recognize that an employee-driven approach to performance management based on the need for self-fulfillment comes with its own set of challenges. There is a level of fear and ambiguity in letting go of control as a manager and bringing additional voices into the process of organizational development. In addition, the notion of replacing an “objective” standard of performance with a subjective standard of employee experience can lack the hard edges needed to equitably compare employee performance. Creative and open-ended collaborative processes may meander and lead to the unexpected. A modus operandi of “efficiency” is replaced with one of “engagement.” In the short term, this may slow the production of goods or services. These challenges noted, I nevertheless experience a Theory Y approach to performance management to be superior in its ability to unearth human potential and direct it toward the long-term success of the organization.

Crushed

In the spirit of showing up as my authentic self at work, I write today - reluctantly - to share how I feel. 

A month ago, depression stole my mother's life through suicide. I was exceedingly close to my mom. Her untimely death, compounded by its circumstances, has been absolutely crushing and disorienting. Her experience of pain and suffering - so immense and difficult to comprehend yet heart-breaking to understand through the clarity of hindsight - must now be engaged by us survivors. There is an ever-so-faint glimmer of hope in healing how I relate to these scars, a hope residing ever-so-dimly on the horizon. The experience of depression and suicide is cruel and unyielding to all enshrouded in its relentless undertow, or so it seems to me.

And yet, here I am on the job, the first day of a new academic year. At work, this is a time of renewed excitement, jubilant orientations, planning and budgeting for a hopeful new year. A time of warm welcome and heart-felt smiles.  

I am here today. I made it to the office. This is my 9th day back at work since returning from leave. Most days, getting here is about the best I can do. It seems like I spend so much of my day sitting in my office, looking out the window, wiping away the tears. I've checked a few emails, made it to a few meetings. I've managed a few hellos and a couple of smiles. But this all feels so superficial. I don't want to be here at work. All I feel like doing is sitting in the Valley of Silence - doing a little reading, a little writing - but really just sitting in the woods. Then going home to be with my family. 

Work is doubly difficult for me these days because a part of me is an achiever. This part of me worries and feels guilty that I am performing so minimally (despite everyone at work saying not to worry). This part of me does not want to share my misery with others at work, because I don't want to be a distraction for them and their work. This part of me, and others, keeps me up at night. 

I struggle to sleep. I struggle to focus. I struggle to think clearly. I struggle to be motivated. I struggle to be a kind and patient parent of a rambunctious and spirited two-year old. I am so very far from my best self. 

And yet I am proud of what I have accomplished in this past month.  At times I have hewn closer to my best self than perhaps ever before in my life. I am proud of the way I have supported my dad and the rest of my family. I am proud of the way I have told my mother's story. I am proud of the hard work of healing that I have taken on through meditation, therapy, reading, writing, and sharing my experience and feelings. But all of this feels like a Herculean effort. I get to work, in the empty space of my office, and I have nothing left to give. 

It comes and goes. I think I will be able to rally this morning and get a few more things done. 

The love and support of my colleagues has been immense. This - more than anything - is what gives me the strength to come to work. Their kind words, flowers, trees, and prayers have sustained me. You don't need to know what to say, you just need to care. That is all that really matters, to let someone know that you care about them and their experience.

Today is a gray foggy morning. I look at flowers - given to me by colleagues - silhouetted against the dreariness. There is an easy metaphor here, a tidy way to tie this all together, and say that all shall be well. But that feels too simple, a facade, and I can't honestly say something so trite. Perhaps the most honest way to put it is this: I do look, and I do see, all that is before me. I see all who listen. I see all who offer me grace to mourn. I see the light and the dark. Namaste: the highest in me sees the highest in you.