Conceptual Framework

Goal 1:  As part of the Doctoral Studies learning community, students will use multiple theoretical frameworks to better understand themselves and to facilitate their personal development.   Self-knowledge is the first requirement of a leader.
 
Self-knowledge is a lifelong quest for knowing the truth about oneself and a prerequisite to discovering truth in the world.  A variety of traditions differ in their paths to this goal, and no two individuals pursue identical paths to knowing themselves over a lifetime.

One aspect of self-knowledge is the ability to identify one’s own leadership strengths and weaknesses.  This skill requires self-reflection and personal honesty, the presence of honest and nurturing feedback, the ability and willingness to act on such feedback, and confidence which comes from this continuing learning process.  Bennis and Nanus (1985) see this self-diagnosis as composing the “raw ingredients” of leadership, necessary not only to a leader’s success, but also necessary to encouraging the same process in others.

An important aspect of self-knowledge focuses on values.  Briskin (1996) contends that the ability of the leader to be in touch with her soul is critical to making organizations places which nurture the souls of all they touch.  Briskin calls this aspect of self-knowledge soul making, defining it as “an odyssey of self-discovery that connects us to the world and to our duties in this life” (p. 11).  Palmer (1983) believes that this way of knowing is based on self-knowledge of one’s whole person -- not only on reason, but on intuition, beliefs, and actions as well.  This quest for self-truth requires a leader to become vulnerable and to share herself with others.

To know in truth is to become betrothed, to engage the known with
one’s whole self, an engagement one enters with attentiveness, care,
and good will.  To know in truth is to allow one’s self to be known as
well, to be vulnerable to the challenges and changes any true
relationship brings.  To know in truth is to enter into the life of that
which we know and to allow it to enter into ours.  (Palmer, 1983, p. 31)

The constant learning necessary to knowing oneself over a lifetime is also necessary to leading learning organizations.  Senge (1990) calls this continued learning personal mastery:

Personal mastery goes beyond competence and skills, though it
is grounded in competence and skills.  It goes beyond spiritual
unfolding or opening, although it requires spiritual growth.  It means
approaching one’s life as a creative work, living life from a creative
as opposed to reactive viewpoint.  (p. 141)

Program Response:  In order to provide our students with opportunities to learn several models for self-understanding and reflection, we offer the following courses:

Leadership Theory
Leadership and Psychology
Leadership and Ethics
Research sequence

Mental models  are deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, and images that influence how we understand the world and how we behave within it (Senge, 1990).  Critical competencies for contemporary leaders are the ability to make one’s dominant mental models explicit, to widen one’s repertoire of mental models, and to engage in dialogue with others about shared mental models.  Several authors call this set of competencies reframing (e.g., Bolman & Deal, 1991; Carlson, 1996; Fairhurst & Sarr, 1996); metaphor fluency  (e.g., Morgan, 1986); or the critical ability to utilize multiple organizational perspectives (Ancona, Kochan, Schully, VanMaanen, & Westney, 1996).

Leaders, by definition, operate within the context of a setting.  The abilities to diagnose one’s setting, to define its critical issues collaboratively with others, to understand basic methodologies for exploring issues, and to work for continuing improvement are critical leadership competencies.  However, most people are comfortable with only one or two “lenses” through which to view the world.  Such limited paradigms are no longer sufficient when institutions are characterized by accelerating change and increasing diversity.  Therefore, fluency in several paradigmatic mental models is a basic skill of 21st century leaders.

Mastering the ability to diagnose a situation from multiple perspectives is the first step in helping others to do so.  Morgan (1986) contends that leaders

. . . have to become skilled in the art of “reading” the situations
that they are attempting to organize or manage.  This skill. . . often
occurs at an almost subconscious level.  For this reason it is often
believed that effective managers and problem solvers are born
rather than made, and have a kind of magical power to understand
and transform the situations that they encounter.

If we take a closer look at the processes used, however, we find
that this kind of mystique and power is often based on an ability
to develop deep appreciation of the situations being addressed.
Skilled readers develop the knack of reading situations with various
scenarios in mind, and of forging actions that seem appropriate to
the readings thus obtained.

They have a capacity to remain open and flexible, suspending
immediate judgments whenever possible, until a more comprehensive
view of the situation emerges.  They are aware of the fact that new
insights often arise as one reads a situation from “new angles,” and
that a wide and varied reading can create a wide and varied range
of action possibilities.  Less effective managers and problem solvers,
on the other hand, seem to interpret everything from a fixed
standpoint.  As a result, they frequently hit blocks that they can’t
get around.  (pp. 11-12)

. . . how different parts of the organization interact, how different
situations parallel one another because of common underlying
structures, how local actions have longer-term and broader  impacts
than local actors often realize, and why certain operating policies
are needed for the system as a whole.  (p. 353)

The more you know about the world, the easier it is to approach it
with assurance.  Thus, you should seek to learn as much as possible
about the forces that affect the organization, be they political,
economic, social, moral, or artistic.   (p. 299)

Program Response:  In order to provide our students with these basic diagnostic competencies, the Doctoral Studies Program offers students the following courses:

Leadership Theory
Organizational Theory
Policy Analysis
Organizational Change and Reform
Advanced Organizational Change and Reform
Research sequence

Leadership and Psychology
Leadership and Ethics
Leadership and Sociology
Leadership and History
Leadership and Philosophy
Leadership and Religious Studies
Leadership and Communication
Leadership and Political Science
Leadership and Law
Leadership and Literature
Leadership and Economics
Leadership and Diversity
Leadership and Technology
 

Goal 3:  As part of the Doctoral Studies learning community, students will understand the change process at the individual, organizational, and global levels.

Quinn (1996) describes two major types of change which can occur at any system level:

When most of us talk about change, we typically mean incremental
change.  Incremental change is usually the result of a rational
analysis and planning process.  There is a desired goal with a specific
set of steps for reaching it.  Incremental change is usually limited
in scope and is often reversible.  If the change does not work out, we
can always return to the old way.  Incremental change usually does
not disrupt our past patterns -- it is an extension of the past.  Most
important, during incremental change, we feel we are in control. . . .

Deep change differs from incremental change in that it requires new
ways of thinking and behaving.  It is change that is major in scope,
discontinuous with the past and generally irreversible. . . . deep
change. . . distorts existing patterns of action and involves taking
risks.  Deep change means surrendering control.  (p. 3)

Heifetz (1994) suggests that traditional leadership theories which hold leaders solely accountable for knowing the answers to increasingly complex issues which accompany deep change are obsolete.  He contends that more inclusive definitions of leadership behaviors -- which he calls adaptive leadership -- must be distributed widely within the population.  Adaptive leadership not only assumes increasing change, but also increasing diversity, both of which require new leadership competencies.

Instead of looking for saviors, we should be calling for leadership
that will challenge us to face problems for which there are no
simple, painless solutions -- problems that require us to learn new
ways.  (Heifetz, 1994, p. 2)

Program Response:  In order to provide our students with these competencies, the Doctoral Studies Program offers students the following courses:

Leadership Theory
Leadership and Sociology
Organizational Change and Reform
Advanced Organizational Change and Reform

Greater diversity everywhere asks us as individuals and as members of organizations and societies to operate differently.  Understanding this diversity and its implications constitutes another competency of the new leader.  Mindell describes the situation:

Often the organization's declared vision, structure and model are
almost irrelevant compared to its ability to incorporate differences
of opinion and diverse styles of communication.  If a group succeeds
at diversity, it is a successful community and will work.  If it cannot
do this, it fails at the deepest spiritual level of community, becomes
unsustainable within itself and does little good for the world around it.
(p. 20)

Conflict is a by-product of diversity.  Although many think of conflict as something to avoid, its constructive uses make it imperative for organizational effectiveness and learning.  Leaders must understand how to keep conflict constructive; they must know how to prevent destructive conflict; they must know how to resolve and manage conflict that results from diverse styles and values; and they must develop the capacity to “sit in the fire” of the conflict necessary to build true community (Mindell, 1995).

Extensive knowledge of history and the outside world only
increases your awareness of competing values systems, of
the many principles by which individuals, organizations, and
states can choose to function.  You cannot lead others until
you have first led yourself through a struggle with opposing
values.  (Kouzes & Posner, 1990, p. 301)

Finally, true community, in Peck’s (1993) opinion, can only result if a group is willing to face its conflicts and work through them in a civil manner.  Peck maintains that the courage to work through conflict and the ethic of civility constitute the only true formula for building communities in the future.  He predicts that organizations will eventually come to this recognition because leaders will see that community is the only viable social institution in a diverse society, and once experienced, leaves other forms of organizing lacking.

As it becomes more obvious that issues faced by leaders and their organizations do not observe national boundaries, the notion of community clearly extends itself globally as well.  One of the important benefits from increasing focus on diversity is best realized from actively seeking out and learning from the experiences of the international community.  Collaborative, multinational approaches based on cross-cultural sensitivity and communication skills will be critical for leaders in an increasingly interdependent world.

Program Response:  The Doctoral Studies Program works to include an increasingly diverse curriculum and instructional strategies to reflect this goal.  Active recruitment of international students and their contribution to the program are integral to the global consideration of leadership and organizational change.  In addition, specific courses deal with issues related to diversity and global approaches:
 

Policy Analysis
Leadership Theory
Leadership and Political Science
Leadership and Diversity
Organizational Change and Reform
Advanced Organizational Change and Reform
Research sequence

When leaders know themselves and are surrounded by others with diverse attributes, behaviors, and values, a cycle of reflectiveness becomes a personal discipline.  However, such reflection is based upon a knowledge of ethics and possession of values regarding individual worth and dignity, social justice, and accountability for oneself and the global community.

You can resolve the conflicts and contradictions of leadership
only if you establish for yourself an ethical set of standards
on which to base all your actions. . . . All of your individual
complexities are held together by a fundamental set of values
and beliefs.  Developing yourself as a leader begins with those
key convictions.  It begins with your value system.  Clarifying
your own values and visions is a highly personal matter.  No
one else can do it for you.  (Kouzes & Posner, 1990, p. 300)

As children, we learn what our limitations are.  Children are rightfully
taught limitations essential to their survival.  But too often this
learning is generalized.  We are constantly told we can't have or can't
do certain things, and we may come to assume that we (always) have
an inability to have what we want.  (Fritz, 1989, p. 156)

Program Response:   In order that our students develop both the discipline of reflection and increasingly moral reasoning and behavior, many class assignments and discussions stress these practices.  In addition, the following courses address this goal specifically:

Leadership Theory
Leadership and Diversity
Leadership and Ethics
Leadership and Psychology

Gardner (1987) suggests that there are four moral goals of leadership:  1) releasing human potential; 2) balancing the needs of the individual and the community; 3) defending the fundamental values of the community; and 4) instilling in individuals a sense of initiative and responsibility.  These goals are applicable to all social institutions, from families to work organizations, businesses to governments, villages to international entities.  More humane social institutions begin with more humane individuals capable of creating more humane relationships.  Such an endeavor involves “the reconciliation of people with one another” (Ely, 1980) through a critical understanding of both justice and forgiveness (Enright, Eastin, Golden, Sarinopoulos, & Freedman, 1982).

Senge (1990), in his description of the learning organization, expands his description in such a way that the learning organization is not an end in itself, but rather a means to a more compassionate world.  Toward this end, leaders must

. . . work relentlessly to foster a climate in which the principles
of personal mastery are practiced in daily life.  That means
building an organization where it is safe for people to create
visions, where inquiry and commitment to the truth are the
norm, and where challenging the status quo is expected.  (p.
172)

Program Response:   The following courses specifically address the goal of creating more humane and just social institutions:

Leadership Theory
Policy Analysis
Organizational Theory
Leadership and Ethics
Leadership and Diversity
Organizational Change and Reform
Advanced Organizational Change and Reform

 
Goal 7:  As participants in the Doctoral Studies learning community, students will develop research competencies  that are founded on practices of  rigorous scholarship and based on the “habit of truth.”

Locke, Spiduso, and Silverman (1993) suggest that the foundation for scholarship as a collective human enterprise is neither intellect nor technical skill, but simple honesty.  The Doctoral Studies Program believes that honesty is the point at which leadership and scholarship converge and that leaders and scholars must develop what Brownowski (1995) calls the “habit of truth.”  The rules for practicing the habit of truth are absolute with no compromises, no evasions, no shortcuts, and no excuses (Locke, Spiduso, & Silverman, 1993).  Both scholarship and leadership require attention to the difficult and profound questions of the meaning of truth, authority, and evidence.  These answers also affect the ways leaders interact with others, their public and private personae, their sense of control over events, their views on learning, and their conceptions of morality (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986).

Developing the habit of truth is the focus of the research component, including the dissertation requirement, of the Doctoral Studies Program.  Because rigorous scholarship based on this foundation demands sophisticated research competencies, the program is designed to provide solid grounding in research theory and the mastery of methodological techniques.  Attention is given to the use of research to provide voice to people who have been traditionally silenced.  Students are encouraged to know and to value both quantitative and qualitative methods, and to carefully consider the issues of validity from the perspective of those studied.  Research methodologies are regarded as providing tools that are as relevant to promoting social justice, understanding social systems, and leading organizational change as they are to the demonstration of scholarship represented by the completion of a dissertation.
 
The dissertation provides a critical culminating project where students combine theory and past research with their own exploration of a substantive issue in the area of leadership, change, and/or social justice.  The dissertation allows students to demonstrate the abilities to design a methodology for studying problems, collecting and analyzing results, drawing meaningful conclusions, and making recommendations for action based on their findings.

Program Response:  The following courses (the Research Sequence)  specifically address the goal of developing research competencies based on the “habit of truth”:

The Research Sequence

Principles of Research
Literature Review for the Dissertation
Qualitative Research Methods
Advanced Statistical Methods
Statistical Data Analysis
Advanced Qualitative Methods
Instrument Design
Proposal Seminar
Dissertation credits

This goal represents the culmination of all the others.  The overall mission of the Gonzaga University Doctoral Studies Program is to enhance the personal and professional development of leaders toward this end.  The most visionary of leadership theorists contend that past conceptions and practices of leaders must change in order to take on ever more complex, ambiguous, and dangerous problems.  Heifetz (1994) eloquently summarizes this need for what he calls adaptive leadership:

Because leadership affects many lives, the concept we use must
be spacious.  It has to allow for the values of various cultures and
organizations.  It cannot be imperialistic.  Yet we cannot beg the
issue altogether by saying that leadership is value-free and define
it simply in terms of its instruments (influence, formal powers,
prominence) or personal resources (skills, bearing, temperament).
Those who listen to us do more with what we say.  They turn
instruments and resources into values that orient their
professional lives. . . .

Tackling tough problems -- problems that often require an evolution
of values -- is the end of leadership; getting that work done is its
essence.

Our societies and organizations clearly need (this type of) leadership
. . . . We are facing major adaptive challenges.  We need a view of
leadership that provides a practical orientation so that we can
evaluate events and action in process, without waiting for outcomes.
We also need a governor on our tendencies to become arrogant and
grandiose in our visions, to flee from harsh realities and the dailyness
of leadership. . . . a strategy of leadership to accomplish adaptive work
accounts for several conditions and values that are consonant with the
demands of a democratic society.  In addition to reality testing, these
include respecting conflict, negotiation, and a diversity of views
within a community; increasing community cohesion; developing
norms of responsibility-taking, learning, and innovation; and keeping
social distress within a bearable range.

Clearly, we have a host of quite precious values -- liberty, equality,
human welfare, justice, and community -- for which we take risks,
and a concept of (leadership) applied to human organizations and
societies must account for these squarely.  (pp. 26-27)

Program Response:  The combination of courses, research (culminating in the dissertation), and community involvement that constitutes the Doctoral Studies Program is designed to provide students the opportunity for growth as adaptive leaders and to develop the personal, academic, and professional skills necessary to address complex, ambiguous, and potentially dangerous societal issues.

References

Ancona, D., Kochan, T., Schully, M., VanMaanen, J., & Westney, D.E.  (1996).  Managing for the future:  Organizational behavior and processes.  Cincinnati, OH:  South-Western College Publishing.

Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R., & Tarule, J.M.  (1986).  Women’s ways of knowing:  The development of self, voice, and mind.  New York:  Basic Books.

Bennis, W. & Nanus, B.  (1985).  Leaders:  The strategies for taking charge.  New York:  Harper & Row.

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T. E.  (1991).  Reframing organizations:  Artistry, choice, and leadership.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.

Briskin, A.  (1996).  The stirring of soul in the workplace.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.

Brownowski, J.  (1965).  Science and human values.  New York:  Harper & Row.

Burns, J.M.  (1978).  Leadership.  New York:  Harper & Row.

Carlson, R.V.  (1996).      Reframing and reform.  White Plains, NY:  Longman.
 
Drucker, P.F.  (1954, 1986).  The practice of management.  New York:  Harper & Row.

Ely, P., S.J. (1980)  The memory of justice:  Idea of a Jesuit university.  Spokane, WA:  Gonzaga University.

Enright, R.D.  (1994).  The moral development of forgiveness.  In B. Puka (Ed.), Moral development:  A compendium.  Vol. 7, pp. 219-248.  New York:  Garland.

Enright, R.D., Eastin, D.L., Golden, S., Sarinopoulous, I., & Freedman, S.  (1992).  Interpersonal forgiveness within the helping professions:  An attempt to resolve differences of opinion.  Counseling and Values, 36, 84-104.

Fairhurst, G.T. & Sarr, R.A.  (1996).  The art of framing:  Managing the language of leadership.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.

Fritz, R.  (1984).  The path of least resistance.  New York:  Fawcett Columbine.

Gardner, J.W.  (1987).  The moral aspect of leadership:  Leadership papers/5.  Washington, D.C.:  Independent Sector.

Greenleaf, R.S. (1973).  The servant as leader.  Peterborough, NH:  Center for Applied Sciences.

Heifetz, R.S.  (1994).  Leadership without easy answers.  Cambridge, MA:  Belknap Press.

Kleiner, A.  (1996).  The age of heretics.  New York:  Doubleday.

Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z.  (1990).  The leadership challenge:  How to get extraordinary things done in organizations.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.

Locke, L.F., Spirduso, W.W., & Silverman, S.J.  (1993).  Proposals that work:  A guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals.  Third Edition.  Newbury Park, CA:  Sage.

Mindell, A.  (1995).  Sitting in the fire:  Large group transformation using conflict and diversity.  Portland, OR:  Lao Tse Press.
 
Morgan, G.  (1986).  Images of organization.  Newbury Park, CA:  Sage.

Palmer, P.  (1983).  To know as we are known:  A spirituality of education.  San Francisco:  Harper San Francisco.

Peck, M.S.  (1993).  A world waiting to be born:  Civility rediscovered.  New York:  Bantam Books.

Quinn, R.E.  (1996).  Deep change:  Discovering the leader within.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.

Senge, P.M.  (1990).  The fifth discipline:  The art and practice of the learning organization.  New York:  Doubleday Currency.

Swenson, R. (1992).  Margin.  Colorado Springs:  Navpress.

Worthington, E.L. & Dibasio, F. (1990).  Promoting mutual forgiveness within the fractured relationship.  Psychotherapy, 27, 219-223.

Back to Top