Running head: THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 1

Theoretical Analysis: Interpretive Interview

Dana M. Gramuglia

Loyola University Chicago

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 2

Each individual on this Earth is comprised of different perspectives, life experiences,

values, ethics, and stocks of knowledge. Due to these differences, leadership and the leader

behind each style is as unique as each individual descending snowflake from the winter sky. The

multiple styles cause dissonance between those who do not understand the leadership approach

of others. This dissonance can also be attributed to the values, ethics, and viewpoints of the

individual within the leadership position. These differences can be both positive and negative,

but can serve as a learning tool either way. The key is if the effort is put in place to further

understand the most beneficial type of leadership in any situation one may face.

Part of this content will be focused on these different leadership approaches; these will be

identified based on the interview with a professional staff member within the field of higher

education. The other piece of this paper will connect, deconstruct, and reconstruct theoretical

constructs of leadership. Outside sources and quotes from the interview will be used to

contextually ground the claims in the reconstruction phase of the the leadership theory in

question.

The Leader and her Leadership Style

Emelia Dunston, Associate Dean of Students for Student and Family Engagement at the

University of Tennessee, was interviewed for the purpose of this assignment. The interview of

this individual revealed a frame of context to the why behind the type of leader Dunston believes

herself to portray. This served as an added layer of a point of view for myself having been an

individual impacted by Dunstons leadership style. Dunston, during her time at Bellarmine

University (my undergrad institution) did not hold as a high of a position of authority, but
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 3
explained how her leadership perspective and style has not changed due to her advancement in

the student affairs field. The perspectives and theories Dunston holds in regards to leadership

will be woven into the framework of this paper.

Throughout the semester a common theme has been positional authority and the

responsibility attached to the title one holds. There are individuals in a position of authority who

do not recognize the weight in which this responsibility creates. Emelia Dunston is an individual

who not only recognizes this weight, but embraces and welcomes the responsibility. With the

current position Dunston holds there is a feeling of responsibility to the students, both through

decision making and the day-to-day interactions. Dunston is an impactful individual through her

dynamics and the intentional way she exercises leadership- both through the positional authority

she holds and in informal interactions. There is a belief Dunston operates off of- no matter what

leadership hat one is wearing there is an opportunity for impact to be made through an

interaction- it is up to the individual what type of impact is made.

Leadership and Conceptual Approaches

The interview provided a common theme of, Do not sacrifice good to produce good for

yourself and others (E. Dunston, personal communication, October 10, 2016). Dunston touches

on how this mindset can lead to the depletion of resources a leader and how it can affect their

overall impact on others. Servant leadership- as discussed by Northouse (2015)- focuses on the

phenomena of leaders sacrificing their own mental health in hopes of impacting others in a

positive way.

The need for adaptability with those in leadership positions and positions of authority

was also a concern brought up within the interview. Emelia Dunston stressed the need for those

in positions of authority to adapt their skill sets to others; there is no one size fits all approach to
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 4
leadership, adapt skill sets to those around you. While they may look the same on the outside,

their learning and leadership style may be different (E. Dunston, personal communication,

October 10, 2016). This concept brought forth by Dunston is a concept woven through the

Situational Approach, also discussed within Northouse (2015).

Servant Leadership

Greenleaf created the servant leader concept due to being intrigued by issues of power

and authority and how individuals in organizations could creatively support each other

advocated using communication to build consensus in groups (Northouse, 2015, 227). Dunston

believed there was an expectation on the leader to support the group, rather than what Greenleaf

seems to be suggesting here: the group supports one another. The concern was the rate of

burnout due to the current expectations perceived as true underneath the practice of servant

leadership. This rate of burnout due to the the idea of giving all themselves into others is

concerning, Individuals cannot be their truly best selves and produce good when they are

sacrificing themselves in the process (E. Dunston, personal communication, October 10, 2016).

Dunston saw leadership functioning in a different way, Leaders can be successful when they

recognize their limitations. (E. Dunston, personal communication, October 10, 2016).

Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership embodies this concept and, stresses that leadership is constructed

of both a directive and a supportive dimension, and that each has to be applied appropriately in a

given situation (Northouse, 2015, 93). Northouse (2015) sums up the situational concept:

The essence of the situational approach demands that leaders match their style to the

competence and commitment of the followers. Effective leaders are those who can

recognize what followers need and then adapt their own style to meet those needs
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 5
(p. 94).

Situational leadership demands an awareness of those who the leader is interacting with in the

current moment. Without this awareness, the necessary adaptation cannot occur. This approach

asks the leader to become a chameleon to the surrounding environment, and blend into what the

majority is expressing as needs. Dunston expressed, as a leader, You not only have an

accountability to yourself, but to others as well (E. Dunston, personal communication, October

10, 2016). There is a sense of awareness and accountability to those who the leader is

surrounded by, and based on those individuals the leader is then held to a standard to adapt.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction

Servant Leadership: Deconstruction

There is something to be said about how the naming of a specific concept can

influence what is perceived at face value, and "creates semantic noise that diminishes the

potential value of the approach (Northouse, 2015, 240). This is true with servant leadership-

based on the title there are underlying connotations as to how the leader is perceived and what

the individual's main functions are expected to be under this model. Servant leadership allows

for all of the power to flow from the leader- if the leader is not the one providing the knowledge,

then the perception is the power structure is not operating as it should. The leader is being

placed at the top-holding all of the knowledge and power while the followers benefit from the

leader; a mutually beneficial relationship does not exist. There is no room for a mutually

beneficial relationship with how the current structure of servant leadership stands; this approach

was built on the normative structure of leadership. Leadership is not supposed to be mutually

beneficial- there is a power structure and the leader sits at the top, allowing those who sit below

in the power structure to benefit from the leader (Dugan, 2017). These underlying connotations
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 6
can be dangerous as some leaders may adapt to this leadership style without fully comprehending

the intention of the approach.

Within the interview Dunston challenged those who continually practice the servant

leadership approach, Want to succeed, but in wanting to do goodness we are leading to burnout;

we are not teaching them [students] the tangible skills to balance that (E. Dunston, personal

communication, October 10, 2016). Theories such as servant leadership are a contributing factor

to this type of mindset- that ones followers are not being served if the leaders resources are

not completely tapped out. The longevity of a leader and ability to function in a capacity that still

benefits others makes it imperative to learn when to take a step back, Do not sacrifice yourself

to produce good for others (E. Dunston, personal communication, October 10, 2016).

Servant Leadership: Reconstruction

Rebranding is a concept one-as a consumer of products- sees in action everyday with the

culture of the ever-changing market. There are many cases where rebranding of a product or

business has proved beneficial to shaping the views of the consumer. Creating a positive spin is

only the first step to re-branding- it is imperative that the framework is also reconstructed. This

same practice can be applied to academia and how certain theories, approaches and models are

labeled. The rebranding of servant leadership should begin with the name, societys concept of

what a servants role is feeds into the perception and utilization of this leadership approach.

The restructured approach needs to focus on creating a focus for the tangible skills-

Dunston pointed out in her interview- to make this idea of self-care possible. Within the servant

leadership model there are behaviors a leader under this approach should embody; this is where

the tangible skills can be structured into the model. (Northouse, 2015). Student affairs
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 7
professionals preach self-care, but having a conceptual framework will allow them to envision

how this abstract idea can be a part of their leadership style. The framework within the model

will not be enough though, there will have to be those who teach the concept to others through

practice of their own leadership style. Conversations with students can also help recreate the

norm of what the boundaries are of serving others and best practices to make this new model

sustainable.

The other component of the restructure also needs to focus on the distribution of power.

As the model exists now there are two pieces which can be rephrased to help influence this idea

of a new power structure. The idea of putting followers first is the main component influencing

the issues discussed in the deconstruction section (Northouse, 2015). There is another

component in the model just listed as: Empowering- which can be a little ambiguous as it stands

now. With the two components fused together to make a new one there can be another tangible

skill created to help create the goal of a mutual relationship between leaders and others.

Empowering others to help one another, balances the power distribution while still keeping the

main thread of the original servant leadership- creating a positive impact for others.

Situational Leadership: Deconstruction

There are a few criticisms with the situational leadership approach. Northouse (2015),

points of the lack of research is a cause for pause, There is ambiguity regarding how the

approach conceptualizes certain aspects of leadership (p. 112). This ambiguity allows for holes

within the approach, and may cause individuals to fill in the gaps as they see fit. While some

may argue this allows for agency to be generated- giving opportunity for agency is only

responsible when these individuals have the full picture to make their own contextualization.
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 8
Situational approach allows for the leader to tailor to the individual or situation at hand,

but does not explicitly state how to handle potential reactions to this approach. There is potential

for individuals to have a trust issue with the leader because this adaptability could be seen as not

having a firm stance or viewpoint on certain issues. The individuals may see the leader and

recognize they hold authority due to the position they hold, but the power they hold over this

individual may be diminished. If the individual did not previously have positional authority and

power as a result- those who saw the individual as a leader due to their positional authority will

now no longer have a reason to perceive this person as a leader (Dugan, 2017).

This is also another weakness-as pointed out by Northouse (2015)- where there are no

clear guidelines on how to apply the situational approach to a group dynamic- especially when

also dealing with individuals within the group. This weakness can be exposed when the leader is

handling one-on-one situations which also affect the large group or whole. When others are not

privy to the whole situation they are not given the full picture as to why the leader may have

chosen this solution to the task at hand. The unknowing can create a divide or tension within the

group.

Situational Leadership: Reconstruction

This excerpt from the interview with Dunston expresses the need for reconstruction and

why this reconstruction process is necessary:

With leadership you need to be able to adapt...to those around you and their skills; these

[leadership skills] may look the same on the outside, but it is not. What you have used

before may not apply in this situation. (E. Dunston, personal communication, October

10, 2016)
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 9
The points brought forward by Dunston are important to consider when discussing the criticisms

reflected on in the deconstruction process. The ability to adapt needs to be a skill leaders possess

and have efficacy in; this approach could establish more concrete best practices to build this

efficacy. The ability to name the differences in individuals is important and the ability to act on

these differences and apply the best leadership approach.

This is not to say through utilizing the situational leadership framework (which will be

created through reconstruction) the leader will be infallible to making a judgement call which is

not successful. The framework will be able to give insights into how to best handle the

situations. With this framework it is important to express this is not an end all be all fix such as

Dunston expressed often times is the case. As practitioners our responsibility lies in creating a

space for conversations and reflections on after a student experiences a judgement call which did

not work out as planned.

The last piece which is important to focus on is how to apply situational leadership

without making it appear as if the leader has flip flopping views. This can arguably be the

most difficult piece of the reconstruction due to each individuals different lived experiences and

stocks of knowledge which shapes the reaction (Dugan, 2017). Through practice it is imperative

to have these conversations with the students who are in the leadership positions to make them

aware, and to prevent the individual from being blindsided in a hostile group setting. This

reconstruction will be a work in progress and adapted through feedback of those individuals in

the leadership position. With repeated exposure to situations through simulations, conversations,

and real life situations their efficacy will increase as well as the knowledge around the most

effective way to shape this learning experience around situational leadership.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 10
Throughout the course of this paper there have been several key points discussed; all of

which came from themes of the interview with Emelia Dunston, Associate Dean of Students for

Student and Family Engagement at the University of Tennessee. These themes were then

correlated with concepts or approaches discussed so far this semester. The two approaches or

models discussed throughout the course of this paper were: Servant and Situational Leadership.

These were deconstructed and several criticisms were given for each leadership approach.

Through the deconstruction process the potential room for growth was identified. Both of the

approaches were then reconstructed utilizing concepts from the interview and tied to how this

could be utilized within the field of higher education. The takeaway from this is each approach

can continually be deconstructed and each time something new will be learned or uncovered- it

is apart of the continual learning process. Equally as important is the process of reconstruction

and providing ways to utilize these approaches moving forward. This process is crucial to the

continual growth of the profession and of leaders everywhere.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS: INTERPRETIVE INTERVIEW 11

References

Blanchard, K.H. (1985). SLII: A situational approach to managing people. Escondido, CA:
Blanchard Training and Development.

Blanchard, K. Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. Leadership and the one minute manager: Increasing
effectiveness through Situational Leadership II. New York: William Morrow.

Dugan, J.P. (in press). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Hale, J.R., & Fields, D.L. (2007). Exploring servant leadership across cultures: A study of
Followers in Ghana and the USA. Leadership, 3, 397-417.

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H. (1969a.) Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development
Journal, 23, 26-34.

Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.