522658
research-article2014
NSQXXX10.1177/0894318414522658Nursing Science QuarterlyCondon and Hegge
Teaching-Learning Processes
Honoring Silence and Valuing Community: Living Leadership in 21st Century Teaching-Learning
Nursing Science Quarterly 2014, Vol. 27(2) 111–116 © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0894318414522658 nsq.sagepub.com
Barbara Backer Condon, RN; PhD,1 and Margaret Hegge, RN; EdD; FAAN2
Abstract Leadership is a very personal concept. The methods implemented by leaders often reflect philosophical beliefs and theoretical underpinnings. This column, while recognizing that leadership styles are indeed personal, proffers living leadership in nursing education through two key leadership attitudes. These attitudes are honoring silence and valuing community. Honoring silence is discussed as recognizing the multiple dimensions of silence, and valuing community is presented in light of the humanbecoming community models change concepts: moving-initiating, anchoring-shifting, and pondering-shaping. Keywords community, leadership, nursing education, Parse, silence Philosophers highlight a shift from heroic leadership where a charismatic hero saves the day to distributed leadership, where everyone plays a role in creating a preferred future (Grint, 2010). Previous leaders, rising up in times of crisis, defeating enemies, conquering overwhelming forces, and fighting evil were predicated on assumptions of powerless followers, depending on a leader to protect them from society’s ravages. In this collaborative age everyone has access to information, every person’s ideas count, and leadership is decentralized, creating a collective community where consensus is the decision-making mode (Grint, 2010). Conventional inequality in decision-making is replaced by democratic accountability, whereby individuals cannot abdicate responsibility for mutual outcomes. Decentralized leadership removes the mystique of the leader, enhances individual contributions and flattens the hierarchy of decision-making. The role of the leader in such a structure is to mobilize followers, align their individual goals with strategic plans and usher them toward their attainment (Grint, 2010). Exchanges of power and privilege in today’s organizations have replaced the safety and security of heroic leaders of the past (Grint, 2010). Leadership is a very personal concept. Actions and beliefs of individual leaders are linked to implicit and explicit philosophical beliefs and theoretical underpinnings and are framed by experience. Personal histories color leadership styles as well as choices in attitudes, ideas, and values. Much of the writing on leadership touts characteristics such as having a vision, being accountable, listening, and recognizing talentto name a few. Boone and Makhani (2012) for example wrote of the five attitudes servant leader must adopt including:
•• Visioning isn’t everything, but it’s the beginning of everything; •• Listening is hard work requiring a major investment of personal time and effort- and it is worth every ounce of energy expended •• My job involves being a talent scout and committing to my staff’s success •• It is good to give away my power; and •• I am a community builder. (p. 87) Van den Berg (2006) on the other hand, wrote of the seven deadly sins of leadership including, “not having integrity, not having a vision, not being clear, not developing others, not listening, not being decisive, and not being flexible” (pp. 42-45), thus implying that avoiding these sins might make for a good leader. With the advances in technology, leadership from a distance is increasingly common. In nursing education it is not unusual for chairs or leaders to oversee not only the campus where they reside, but several satellite campuses as well. Are the traditionally viewed leadership skills effective in these situations? Kerfoot (2010) called this type of distance leadership, “virtual leadership” (p. 114) and noted that the key to 1
Professor of Nursing, Briar Cliff University Distinguished Professor, South Dakota State University
2
Contributing Editor: Barbara Backer Condon, RN, PhD, Professor of Nursing, Briar Cliff University, 3303 Rebecca Street, Sioux City, Iowa, 51104. Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
112
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
such leadership is what she termed, “listening to see” (p. 114). Since much communication takes place over the phone, in teleconferences, or via email a leader cannot visually see others. Listening to see involves complete attention to what is written or what is said. Meaning is often enhanced by what we see in face to face conversations. Conversing by phone or conference calls makes reading such cues impossible. Emails are even more difficult. Frequent communication is a must and speaking clearly with no hidden agenda is imperative. Kerfoot also suggested creating aliveness where a sense of community is encouraged with “divergent thinking and a sense of belonging to a larger community as well as the local group creates excitement” (p. 118). Finally, Wasonga and Murphy (2007) wrote of co-creating leadership dispositions citing seven dispositions as exemplars required of a leader in any effort to co-create with others. The exemplar dispositions include: “collaborating, active listening, cultural anthropology, egalitarianism, patience, humbleness, and trust and trustworthiness” (p. 23). The meaning of most of these seven exemplars is implied, with cultural anthropology involving studying, understanding, and using the cultural context of the school in working toward goals, while egalitarianism involves recognizing and building up the strengths of everyone. The question remains: What skills, attitudes, or dispositions would best enhance leadership in a teaching-learning environment involving both faculty and students in today’s educational arena? This column discusses living leadership utilizing two leadership attitudes believed to be reflective of strong leaders in today’s world: Honoring Silence and Valuing Community. While honoring silence is an interwoven construct of valuing community it is believed to be central enough to deserve its own separate discussion. Valuing community as a part of living leadership is presented in light of the humanbecoming community model (Parse, 2012).
Honoring Silence Today’s leaders need strong listening skills as power is shared, decision-making is mutual and ideas are melded into a coherent ideology of the future to which all can contribute. Followers are now co-leaders who share responsibility for collective challenges and successes. The role of the distributed leader is to quiet anxieties, to equip followers for this heightened responsibility and to hear their best ideas, while always moving toward mutual goals. This requires sensemaking, aligning individual goals with corporate directions and energizing all to take risks, assume greater responsibility and work together in harmony. The crucible in which such momentous challenges can be accomplished is architecture of earned trust through respectful conversations within a shared vision (Caranfa, 2010). A posture of silence sets the tone for these pivotal conversations. Merleau-Ponty (1973) concurred with this idea when writing, “Speech must be considered against the ground of silence which precedes it…We
should be sensitive to the thread of silence from which the tissue of speech is woven” (p. 45-46).
Setting the Stage Pivotal Conversations A good leader is on alert for those pivotal conversations that shift a learning environment in a new direction. These conversations are often deeply meaningful dialogues that explore shared values about their mutual mission. At times these conversations prompt further dialogue, creating a chain that has potential to reshape an organization. Pivotal conversations may happen spontaneously around moments of shared insight, or they may unfold gradually in sequential conversations over days or weeks. An authentic leader prepares for these conversations through reflection to create an intentional presence, a non-judgmental openness to what is about to unfold through this conversation (Bunkers, 2013; Akrivou, Bourantas, Mo & Papalois, 2011). Attuned to core values balanced with external expectations, the leader enters the relationship with authentic intention and integrity (Akrivou et al., 2011). The leader filters out professional contentions, pressure to conform, and irrelevant complexities to focus on clear vision and goals aligned with core values (Akrivou et al., 2011). This inspiring clarity of vision enables the leader to foster mutual sense-making in the conversation reaffirming a deep sense of shared purpose (Akrivou et al., 2011).
The Invitation to Dialogue A strong leader invites pivotal conversations, assuming a posture of listening that conveys trust and openness through relationships in motion. Silence is a powerful force in these listening moments. Creative use of silence requires discipline and focused attention (Benzel, 2008, p. 14). The invitation to engage in these breakthrough-dialogues carries risk, as they venture beyond the known into uncharted waters, exploring, speculating, and forecasting an unknown future. People vary in their risk-tolerance, so the leader perceives the level of risk that the speaker is ready to assume prior to initiating the conversation (Benzel, 2008). Preparation for these conversations is already underway, as the leader anticipates the rhythm of the person, adjusting the pace of the conversation to allow for processing thoughts and surfacing insights. Some are quicker to grasp essences, while others ponder awhile before insights emerge (Ferrari, 2010). Forthright people quickly state their purpose, while others mask their intent with tangential issues until their true purpose is exposed. The relational leader paces the conversation, allowing time for the speaker to come to a moment when revealing the intent is comfortable (Back, Baurer-Wu, Rushton, & Halifax, 2009). Conversations centered on problem-solving may too hastily arrive at an answer before openly exploring all factors, leading to errors of judgment.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
113
Condon and Hegge Waiting for insights requires moments of silence where ideas percolate leading to more informed and balanced judgments (Caranfa, 2010).
opportunity to move forward with mutual respect to co-create the unfolding future (Akrivou et al., 2011; Parse, 2013).
Futile Conversations
The Dark Side of Silence Distracted Listening Listening without attending to the speaker is empty. Such listening could even be toxic. Some leaders are distracted while listening, day-dreaming about something else while only marginally attending to the speaker. They check the clock, answer the phone, pace or otherwise disregard the speaker, creating a one-dimensional conversation (Back et al., 2009). Distracted silence derails a conversation before mutual insights emerge. A focused leader will finely tune listening skills, center attention and create a climate of intimacy to foster deep dialogue (Ferrari, 2010). Silent presence creates the nonjudgmental space of reverence where true intimacy can be attained (Bunkers, 2013; Back et al., 2009). Listening becomes a most powerful tool to generate mutual momentum toward a meaningful future.
The leader may have more specific information about budgets and resource constraints within the environment, so brings certain institutional limitations to these conversations. Silence conveying a closed purse can quickly squelch creative conversations. Silence conveying an open purse may stimulate creative thinking, but may generate false hope. A strategic leader balances constraints with creativity to listen with a posture of restrained possibilities (Ferrari, 2012). The timing of pivotal conversations is crucial. Listening with a preconceived agenda hinders open conversation, if decisions have already been made. Listening for divergent opinions at this point may be futile, too late to influence an initiative already in progress. To encourage divergence at this juncture may only provoke false hope and distrust as negotiations are no longer open. Conversely, listening with a completely blank slate is unrealistic, as the leader functions within parameters of institutional planning, shaping available options (Benzel, 2009).
The Silence of Preconception Leaders may enter conversations with preconceived notions regarding the speaker, conveying a prejudice that may shape the conversation. Those with a Pollyanna view anticipate only good ideas, while those with a dark image expect only poor ideas. Image blinders hinder open listening so the leader may miss crucial insights, bypass creative ideas or derail dreams (Ferrari, 2012). Stonewalling silence may shut down conversation with those for whom the leader carries an unfavorable view, conveying disdain and disapproval (Bunkers, 2013). Such disregard is a form of betrayal- a violation of human dignity (Bunkers, 2013; Parse, 2013). Halo silence may inflate egos of those speakers that the leader perceives favorably, conveying unwavering support for their ideas and initiatives, including those that are unrealistic or out of step with the strategic plan (Grint, 2010). A deep leader will challenge personal assumptions, cleanse preconceptions before initiating conversations, meeting the other with an open mind, respecting dignity and fostering trust (Bunkers, 2013). If a troublesome conversation is anticipated, the leader may find excuses to avoid the discomfort, delaying the inevitable or denying the conflict altogether. This denial only intensifies the problem, increasing anxiety for all involved. When the conversation finally does occur, layers of resentment and suspicion discolor the dialogue, making resolution even more difficult. Silence in this climate may convey betrayal of trust (Bunkers, 2013). An exceptional leader tackles a difficult conversation as soon as possible, in private with an honest appraisal of the situation, potential consequences and an open ear to listen to the person who has generated the situation. An even-handed approach offers an
Coercive Silence Some leaders listen with an angle, attempting to manipulate or increase their positional power. Status embellishment is their goal (Grint, 2010). Power dynamics in conversations create distance between leader and follower, generating resentment (Bunkers, 2013). Insatiable craving of power impairs ethical leadership, as self-interest dominates the agenda in a one way conversation (Akrivou et al., 2011). Coercive listening can be corrosive, undermining trust, eroding respect for the leader, giving rise to an impression of unfairness or disregard (Akrivou et al., 2011).
The Bright Side of Silence Strategic Silence A leader who invites conversations within the context of a larger picture, longer range view of institutional progress, professional trends and succession planning, can expand thinking while inviting deeper more strategic conversations. The listening that occurs within these parameters is sharper, more focused. Contrast this type of listening with that of narrow leaders who shape conversations within a minimalist view of potential, constrained by inconsequential goals, and colored by anxiety and pessimism. Silence is never neutral as a strong leader balances blue sky vision with stark realities of institutional life. The strategic leader has the capacity to capture prevalent ideas of the group and accurately represent them in organizational documents and external conversations, giving expression to the community values and
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
114
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
intentions (Back, et al. 2009). A strategic leader listens to alternate views and contrary perspectives, acknowledging the speaker’s ideas while aligning individual ideologies to those mutual visions of the group. The surfacing of mutual visions is further enhanced with the strategic leader censoring those that stray off course through role modeling. Some leaders evoke consensus, while others provoke dissension. A silence shaped by a common vision and mutual respect moves ideas forward in unity, while a silence preceded by a criticism may foster conflict. A strong leader leans toward consensus, while attending to personal dissension, minimizing its impact on respectful collegiality. An astute leader is always on alert for valuable insights, even in the most unlikely places (Ferrari, 2012). A silence that fosters synergy is ideal. Silence allows mutual wisdom to emerge (Back et al., 2009). A strategic leader will ensure that these shared ideologies of the group are deeply embedded in all documents and conversations, reminding colleagues of their mutual consensus around core values (Akrivou et al., 2011). At times, organizations experience crises requiring immediate responses. Conversations in these turbulent times carry urgency that colors spoken and unspoken communication. Rather than clinging to a façade of stability, a strategic leader faces these situations directly as soon as possible. Silence in these times provides space for consideration of all confounding factors, their weight and potential outcomes. Strategic leaders acknowledge uncertainties and their accompanying anxieties, while moving toward a considered, mindful response that reflects the core values of the group. Such crises may hold within them turning points of opportunity that move the group beyond the status quo. A strategic leader welcomes them, leveraging their ability to mobilize energy toward new goals, unleashing latent potential to grow in new directions (Benzel, 2008).
Validating Silence Moments of deep conversations are intricate with multi-faceted dialogues emanating from mutual values. A leader who assumes a posture of validating silence framed by a mutual vision of a preferred future fosters a dynamic flow of ideas that can energize collegiality and unity. Caranfa (2010) wrote, “Silence reveals the very truth of what we are, it is a silence that allows desires, truth, the good, justice, beauty, and love to constantly grow in the absence of arrogant talking, chattering, quick responses, and idle talk or empty words” (p. 585). Thoughtful, reflective listening in reverential presence generates a transformational culture in which a rich future can arise (Caranfa, 2010; Back et al., 2009) with a non-judgmental attention to acceptance of all that is expressed.
Valuing Community Many of the cited references about leadership spoke of the importance of a leader’s ability to build community among
the members of an organization. However, from a humanbecoming ontological perspective, “Inasmuch as each human is a humanuniverse cocreation, the individual is community, and the group is community” (Parse, 2012, p. 44). Thus community already always is, so instead of building community, as some authors on leadership suggest, it is proposed that leaders in teaching-learning nursing environments will encourage the valuing of the always present community in cocreating the emerging now. Valuing community then is discussed here in light of the humanbecoming community model change concepts: moving-initiating, anchoring-shifting, and pondering-shaping (Parse, 2013).
Moving-initiating in Valuing Community In the ever-evolving teaching-learning setting, change is unavoidable. Leaders in these environments realize such change may be comprised of something as minor as changing a time for a clinical experience, to revising an entire curriculum. Each however involves removing or deconstructing something while building something new all-at-once. As Parse (2013) explained, “In moving-initiating change, community [individual or group] is discarding-creating with the emerging now” (p. 45). In living these change processes individual values and ways of being surface with calm-turbulent patterns as diversity among group members becomes evident. Explicit-tacit knowings emerge as community members share. Leaders, during this time must recognize and honor each unique and diverse quality with non-judgmental openness and acceptance. Failure to recognize the importance of everyone’s opinions in the unfolding moment may surface in a metaphorical stale-mate where the change that actually occurs is a division of community members (or faculty members in this case). Non-judgmental openness and acceptance of others values, on the other hand, could facilitate the cocreation of “a shifting of value priorities” (Parse, 2012, p. 45). While these cocreated value priorities may be laced with certainty-uncertainty of the unknown, the challenges involved in conforming-not conforming with personal and with others’ expectations may be eased. While moving-initiating change in teaching learning a leader must remain open, careful not to bring to the table preconceived ideas and expectations resulting in navigation of the process without consideration of other values. In addition, if all of a leader’s cards are exposed upfront, it is likely that conflict will ensue. Once conflict arises, getting consensus regarding what was originally the plan of the leader becomes nearly impossible. A leader is better to keep cards close to their chests while community group members explore explicit-tacit knowing of what is. Free-flowing dialogue must be encouraged as group members reveal and conceal limitless options. As new options surface and are explicated the process continues until accepted options are woven into a new way of being in the emerging now that involves a cohesive shift in value priorities in the moment. These value priorities often reflect thoughts held by the leader, but they may allow for choices by all members of the
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
115
Condon and Hegge group community and that strengthens the bonds of the members enhancing conformity regarding personal and others expectations.
Anchoring-Shifting in Valuing Community Nursing is steeped in tradition. Beginning with the teachings of Nightingale, nursing has built and transformed into a profession unto itself, while clinging to rich traditions involving caring, honoring others, and being present. Education is also steeped in tradition. In educational beginnings the teacher poured information into the proverbial open head of the student. Students were mostly passive. Post-secondary education has moved almost entirely from a teacher-centered to a learner-centered model while still holding to the traditional notion of teacher as expert in given areas. Blending the two disciplines while balancing traditional and conventional ideologies requires a leader not only attuned to, but demonstrative of the value in the anchoring-shifting of community change. According to Parse (2012) “anchoring shifting change, community [individual and group] is persisting-diversifying with the emerging now” (p. 46). Persisting-diversifying, Parse explained is “anchoring with tradition and shifting with new experiences, and it is what ongoing change means” (p. 46). In further discussing Parse’s thoughts on anchoringshifting as they relate to leadership in nursing education, there arises a transparent need for leaders in teaching-learning environments to recognize an implicit need of many members of the group community to anchor with some tradition. Too often the old is discarded simply to give the impression of being on the cutting edge. Yet it has been proven repeatedly that because something is old does not mean it is outdated or useless. Traditional values surfacing during community dialogue should be honored and considered by all, beginning with the leader. Nurse educators and leaders may agree to try to keep some aspects of nursing constant but since the emerging now is limitless this constant will never be repeated exactly the same. Change amid the constant arises with opportunities and restrictions. Opportunities arise as individual or group communities present their ideas for changes from traditional ways, yet with these ideas comes the certainty-uncertainty of what will be kept and what will be discarded. Leaders during these times must make known the mutual respect for both the novel as well as original and must demonstrate willingness to sacrifice to some degree their own strongly held values (traditional or otherwise) in order to create a more liberating community change in the teachinglearning environment. With pushing-resisting of each community member, anchoring-shifting takes place. What is kept and what is sacrificed during times of change should reflect a community pattern of accepted values that demonstrate respect “of the predecessors, contemporaries, and successors alive with the personal histories of the constituents” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Agreeing to lift anchor and shift to a
new space may surface in feelings of unsteadiness with certainty-uncertainly abounding. During anchoring-shifting change, leaders will need to remain supportive when each constituent presents thoughts and ideas, while taking care to forge on with non-judgmental acceptance.
Pondering-Shaping in Valuing Community No decision should be made in haste. According to Gracian (1647/2007), haste is a fool’s passion while reflection in acting for extended periods may breed delay, which can also be problematic. A balance between the two is needed. For this balance in making decisions and putting them to action, Gracian recommended the following motto, “make haste slowly” (p. 22). This recommendation, while being an oxymoron, should be heeded by leaders. Leaders must take care to move at a steady pace, but never at such a pace where group community members feel rushed and uninformed. Valuing community by demonstrating an understanding and appreciation for the pondering-shaping component of community change may actually decrease delays and will definitely lessen a leader’s chance of playing the fool. Leaders of nursing faculty groups must realize the importance of giving members time to digest and ponder ideas brought to the table. Expecting immediate action on items that involve a shift in group dynamics or activity without allowing member’s time in reflective-prereflective thought could ultimately surface in acts of nonconformity. Parse (2012) described pondering-shaping as “contemplating-configuring with the emerging now” (p. 47). She explained, “contemplating and at once configuring is with the imaged possibles present with the communities’ illimitable experiences” (p. 47). As connecting-separating takes place in group communities, members reveal-conceal value priorities. As group leader, every value priority must be given equal consideration and respect as all are reflective of individual histories. None therefore will be exactly the same and time must be allowed to reflect on implicit differences. Leaders must ask the group to consider how each shared value priority might shift personal space in the emerging now. Considering-composing is part of pondering-shaping and involves “deliberately ruminating about others, ideas, objects, and events that are important” while “carving possibles with the innovative imaginings that surface with different meanings” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Again, a leader who comes to the table with a preconceived agenda with wishes to reach a rapid consensus is not valuing community. Such a leader is demonstrating self-serving agendas that are often for something other than the good of the university or other organization as a whole. Such a leader also deliberately erases the group members ability to ponder-shape in creating anew with the becoming visible-invisible becoming of the emerging now (Parse, 2012), thereby eradicating any chance of co-creating emerging value priorities. Faculty members often feel disjointed with a decreased sense of belonging.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
116
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
It is in this change concept for community where honoring silence also surfaces as part of dialoguing-listening. Dialoguing-listening involves honoring silence and is described by Parse (2012) as “unconditional witnessing with all-at-once speaking-being silent and moving-being still” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Honoring silence, as determined by the authors is one of the two essential traits of a 21st century leader and was explored here in detail. In addition to honoring silence, personal histories emerge as significant in dialoguing-listening for better understanding of another’s meaning, all the while aware that “to experience understanding is to simultaneously experience misunderstanding” (Condon, 2010, p. 313). Is it any wonder then that time must be set aside for pondering-shaping change in community? In all moments of pondering-shaping, leaders must demonstrate unconditional presence through loving patience and nonjudgmental witnessing as community understanding unfolds. Decisions should not be made, nor should leaders expect such decisions to be made until enough time is given for persons to ponder-shape with shared ideas and options.
Conclusion The new wave of teaching-learning in nursing awakens a need for reevaluating necessary ways of living leadership. Knowing when to speak-be silent is essential. Honoring silence requires leaders to be cognizant of when and how to utilize silence involving the many features discussed here. Change in nursing education can, at times, be very difficult. It is something that cannot be completed alone, and leaders in these change processes must recognize the importance of valuing community as change ensues. Since change, by its very definition, cannot be stagnant, and since nursing education is always in the process of change, leaders may find value in becoming familiar with the change concepts within the humanbecoming community model. If a leader fails to demonstrate the value of group community within nursing education institutions, then ongoing changes within that overall institution may be viewed as forced, surfacing with divergence and disharmony among community group members. Such toxic environments cannot sustain. Honoring silence while valuing community therefore is essential in leading community change in nursing education. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this editorial.
Funding The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this editorial.
References Akrivou, K., Bourantas, D., Mo, S., Papalois, E. (2011). The sound of silence-a space for morality? The role of solitude for ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 119-133 Back, A., Baurer-Wu, S., Rushton, C., Halifax, J. (2009). Compassionate silence in the patient-clinician encounter: A contemplative approach. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 12 (12), 1113-1117. Benzel, D. (2008). Lead through listening. Supervision, 69(6), 14-15. Boone, L. W. (2012). Five necessary attitudes of a servant leader. Review of Business, 33(1), 83-96. Bunkers, S. (2013) Slience: A double-edged sword. Nursing Science Quarterly, 26, 7-11. Caranfa, A. (2010). Contemplative instruction and the gifts of beauty, love, and silence. Educational Theory, 60, 561-585. Condon, B. B. (2010). Understanding-misunderstanding: A philosophical and theoretical exploration. Nursing Science Quarterly, 23, 306-314. Ferrari, B. (2012). Power listening: mastering the most critical business skill of all. London England: Penguin Books, Ltd. Gracian, B. (2007). The art of worldly wisdom (M. Fisher, Trans.). New York, NY: Barnes & Nobles. (Original work published 1647). Grint, K. (2010). The sacred in leadership: separation, sacrifice and silence. Organizational Studies, 31(01), 89-107. Kerfoot, K. M. (2010). Listening to see: The key to virtual leadership. Nursing Economic, 28(2), 114-118. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1973). The prose of the world, ed. Claude Lefort, trans. John O’Neill. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 45-46. Parse, R. R. (2012). New humanbecoming conceptualizations and the humanbecoming community model: expansions with sciencing and living the art. Nursing Science Quarterly, 25, 44-52. Parse, R. R. (2013) Living quality: A humanbecoming phenomenon. Nursing Science Quarterly, 26, 111-115. Van den Berg, Z. (2006). Leadership. The seven deadly sins. New Zealand Management, 53(7), 40-43. Wasonga, T. A., & Murphy, J. F. (2007). Co-creating leadership dispositions. International Studies in Educational Administration, 35(2), 20-30.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
research-article2014
NSQXXX10.1177/0894318414522658Nursing Science QuarterlyCondon and Hegge
Teaching-Learning Processes
Honoring Silence and Valuing Community: Living Leadership in 21st Century Teaching-Learning
Nursing Science Quarterly 2014, Vol. 27(2) 111–116 © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0894318414522658 nsq.sagepub.com
Barbara Backer Condon, RN; PhD,1 and Margaret Hegge, RN; EdD; FAAN2
Abstract Leadership is a very personal concept. The methods implemented by leaders often reflect philosophical beliefs and theoretical underpinnings. This column, while recognizing that leadership styles are indeed personal, proffers living leadership in nursing education through two key leadership attitudes. These attitudes are honoring silence and valuing community. Honoring silence is discussed as recognizing the multiple dimensions of silence, and valuing community is presented in light of the humanbecoming community models change concepts: moving-initiating, anchoring-shifting, and pondering-shaping. Keywords community, leadership, nursing education, Parse, silence Philosophers highlight a shift from heroic leadership where a charismatic hero saves the day to distributed leadership, where everyone plays a role in creating a preferred future (Grint, 2010). Previous leaders, rising up in times of crisis, defeating enemies, conquering overwhelming forces, and fighting evil were predicated on assumptions of powerless followers, depending on a leader to protect them from society’s ravages. In this collaborative age everyone has access to information, every person’s ideas count, and leadership is decentralized, creating a collective community where consensus is the decision-making mode (Grint, 2010). Conventional inequality in decision-making is replaced by democratic accountability, whereby individuals cannot abdicate responsibility for mutual outcomes. Decentralized leadership removes the mystique of the leader, enhances individual contributions and flattens the hierarchy of decision-making. The role of the leader in such a structure is to mobilize followers, align their individual goals with strategic plans and usher them toward their attainment (Grint, 2010). Exchanges of power and privilege in today’s organizations have replaced the safety and security of heroic leaders of the past (Grint, 2010). Leadership is a very personal concept. Actions and beliefs of individual leaders are linked to implicit and explicit philosophical beliefs and theoretical underpinnings and are framed by experience. Personal histories color leadership styles as well as choices in attitudes, ideas, and values. Much of the writing on leadership touts characteristics such as having a vision, being accountable, listening, and recognizing talentto name a few. Boone and Makhani (2012) for example wrote of the five attitudes servant leader must adopt including:
•• Visioning isn’t everything, but it’s the beginning of everything; •• Listening is hard work requiring a major investment of personal time and effort- and it is worth every ounce of energy expended •• My job involves being a talent scout and committing to my staff’s success •• It is good to give away my power; and •• I am a community builder. (p. 87) Van den Berg (2006) on the other hand, wrote of the seven deadly sins of leadership including, “not having integrity, not having a vision, not being clear, not developing others, not listening, not being decisive, and not being flexible” (pp. 42-45), thus implying that avoiding these sins might make for a good leader. With the advances in technology, leadership from a distance is increasingly common. In nursing education it is not unusual for chairs or leaders to oversee not only the campus where they reside, but several satellite campuses as well. Are the traditionally viewed leadership skills effective in these situations? Kerfoot (2010) called this type of distance leadership, “virtual leadership” (p. 114) and noted that the key to 1
Professor of Nursing, Briar Cliff University Distinguished Professor, South Dakota State University
2
Contributing Editor: Barbara Backer Condon, RN, PhD, Professor of Nursing, Briar Cliff University, 3303 Rebecca Street, Sioux City, Iowa, 51104. Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
112
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
such leadership is what she termed, “listening to see” (p. 114). Since much communication takes place over the phone, in teleconferences, or via email a leader cannot visually see others. Listening to see involves complete attention to what is written or what is said. Meaning is often enhanced by what we see in face to face conversations. Conversing by phone or conference calls makes reading such cues impossible. Emails are even more difficult. Frequent communication is a must and speaking clearly with no hidden agenda is imperative. Kerfoot also suggested creating aliveness where a sense of community is encouraged with “divergent thinking and a sense of belonging to a larger community as well as the local group creates excitement” (p. 118). Finally, Wasonga and Murphy (2007) wrote of co-creating leadership dispositions citing seven dispositions as exemplars required of a leader in any effort to co-create with others. The exemplar dispositions include: “collaborating, active listening, cultural anthropology, egalitarianism, patience, humbleness, and trust and trustworthiness” (p. 23). The meaning of most of these seven exemplars is implied, with cultural anthropology involving studying, understanding, and using the cultural context of the school in working toward goals, while egalitarianism involves recognizing and building up the strengths of everyone. The question remains: What skills, attitudes, or dispositions would best enhance leadership in a teaching-learning environment involving both faculty and students in today’s educational arena? This column discusses living leadership utilizing two leadership attitudes believed to be reflective of strong leaders in today’s world: Honoring Silence and Valuing Community. While honoring silence is an interwoven construct of valuing community it is believed to be central enough to deserve its own separate discussion. Valuing community as a part of living leadership is presented in light of the humanbecoming community model (Parse, 2012).
Honoring Silence Today’s leaders need strong listening skills as power is shared, decision-making is mutual and ideas are melded into a coherent ideology of the future to which all can contribute. Followers are now co-leaders who share responsibility for collective challenges and successes. The role of the distributed leader is to quiet anxieties, to equip followers for this heightened responsibility and to hear their best ideas, while always moving toward mutual goals. This requires sensemaking, aligning individual goals with corporate directions and energizing all to take risks, assume greater responsibility and work together in harmony. The crucible in which such momentous challenges can be accomplished is architecture of earned trust through respectful conversations within a shared vision (Caranfa, 2010). A posture of silence sets the tone for these pivotal conversations. Merleau-Ponty (1973) concurred with this idea when writing, “Speech must be considered against the ground of silence which precedes it…We
should be sensitive to the thread of silence from which the tissue of speech is woven” (p. 45-46).
Setting the Stage Pivotal Conversations A good leader is on alert for those pivotal conversations that shift a learning environment in a new direction. These conversations are often deeply meaningful dialogues that explore shared values about their mutual mission. At times these conversations prompt further dialogue, creating a chain that has potential to reshape an organization. Pivotal conversations may happen spontaneously around moments of shared insight, or they may unfold gradually in sequential conversations over days or weeks. An authentic leader prepares for these conversations through reflection to create an intentional presence, a non-judgmental openness to what is about to unfold through this conversation (Bunkers, 2013; Akrivou, Bourantas, Mo & Papalois, 2011). Attuned to core values balanced with external expectations, the leader enters the relationship with authentic intention and integrity (Akrivou et al., 2011). The leader filters out professional contentions, pressure to conform, and irrelevant complexities to focus on clear vision and goals aligned with core values (Akrivou et al., 2011). This inspiring clarity of vision enables the leader to foster mutual sense-making in the conversation reaffirming a deep sense of shared purpose (Akrivou et al., 2011).
The Invitation to Dialogue A strong leader invites pivotal conversations, assuming a posture of listening that conveys trust and openness through relationships in motion. Silence is a powerful force in these listening moments. Creative use of silence requires discipline and focused attention (Benzel, 2008, p. 14). The invitation to engage in these breakthrough-dialogues carries risk, as they venture beyond the known into uncharted waters, exploring, speculating, and forecasting an unknown future. People vary in their risk-tolerance, so the leader perceives the level of risk that the speaker is ready to assume prior to initiating the conversation (Benzel, 2008). Preparation for these conversations is already underway, as the leader anticipates the rhythm of the person, adjusting the pace of the conversation to allow for processing thoughts and surfacing insights. Some are quicker to grasp essences, while others ponder awhile before insights emerge (Ferrari, 2010). Forthright people quickly state their purpose, while others mask their intent with tangential issues until their true purpose is exposed. The relational leader paces the conversation, allowing time for the speaker to come to a moment when revealing the intent is comfortable (Back, Baurer-Wu, Rushton, & Halifax, 2009). Conversations centered on problem-solving may too hastily arrive at an answer before openly exploring all factors, leading to errors of judgment.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
113
Condon and Hegge Waiting for insights requires moments of silence where ideas percolate leading to more informed and balanced judgments (Caranfa, 2010).
opportunity to move forward with mutual respect to co-create the unfolding future (Akrivou et al., 2011; Parse, 2013).
Futile Conversations
The Dark Side of Silence Distracted Listening Listening without attending to the speaker is empty. Such listening could even be toxic. Some leaders are distracted while listening, day-dreaming about something else while only marginally attending to the speaker. They check the clock, answer the phone, pace or otherwise disregard the speaker, creating a one-dimensional conversation (Back et al., 2009). Distracted silence derails a conversation before mutual insights emerge. A focused leader will finely tune listening skills, center attention and create a climate of intimacy to foster deep dialogue (Ferrari, 2010). Silent presence creates the nonjudgmental space of reverence where true intimacy can be attained (Bunkers, 2013; Back et al., 2009). Listening becomes a most powerful tool to generate mutual momentum toward a meaningful future.
The leader may have more specific information about budgets and resource constraints within the environment, so brings certain institutional limitations to these conversations. Silence conveying a closed purse can quickly squelch creative conversations. Silence conveying an open purse may stimulate creative thinking, but may generate false hope. A strategic leader balances constraints with creativity to listen with a posture of restrained possibilities (Ferrari, 2012). The timing of pivotal conversations is crucial. Listening with a preconceived agenda hinders open conversation, if decisions have already been made. Listening for divergent opinions at this point may be futile, too late to influence an initiative already in progress. To encourage divergence at this juncture may only provoke false hope and distrust as negotiations are no longer open. Conversely, listening with a completely blank slate is unrealistic, as the leader functions within parameters of institutional planning, shaping available options (Benzel, 2009).
The Silence of Preconception Leaders may enter conversations with preconceived notions regarding the speaker, conveying a prejudice that may shape the conversation. Those with a Pollyanna view anticipate only good ideas, while those with a dark image expect only poor ideas. Image blinders hinder open listening so the leader may miss crucial insights, bypass creative ideas or derail dreams (Ferrari, 2012). Stonewalling silence may shut down conversation with those for whom the leader carries an unfavorable view, conveying disdain and disapproval (Bunkers, 2013). Such disregard is a form of betrayal- a violation of human dignity (Bunkers, 2013; Parse, 2013). Halo silence may inflate egos of those speakers that the leader perceives favorably, conveying unwavering support for their ideas and initiatives, including those that are unrealistic or out of step with the strategic plan (Grint, 2010). A deep leader will challenge personal assumptions, cleanse preconceptions before initiating conversations, meeting the other with an open mind, respecting dignity and fostering trust (Bunkers, 2013). If a troublesome conversation is anticipated, the leader may find excuses to avoid the discomfort, delaying the inevitable or denying the conflict altogether. This denial only intensifies the problem, increasing anxiety for all involved. When the conversation finally does occur, layers of resentment and suspicion discolor the dialogue, making resolution even more difficult. Silence in this climate may convey betrayal of trust (Bunkers, 2013). An exceptional leader tackles a difficult conversation as soon as possible, in private with an honest appraisal of the situation, potential consequences and an open ear to listen to the person who has generated the situation. An even-handed approach offers an
Coercive Silence Some leaders listen with an angle, attempting to manipulate or increase their positional power. Status embellishment is their goal (Grint, 2010). Power dynamics in conversations create distance between leader and follower, generating resentment (Bunkers, 2013). Insatiable craving of power impairs ethical leadership, as self-interest dominates the agenda in a one way conversation (Akrivou et al., 2011). Coercive listening can be corrosive, undermining trust, eroding respect for the leader, giving rise to an impression of unfairness or disregard (Akrivou et al., 2011).
The Bright Side of Silence Strategic Silence A leader who invites conversations within the context of a larger picture, longer range view of institutional progress, professional trends and succession planning, can expand thinking while inviting deeper more strategic conversations. The listening that occurs within these parameters is sharper, more focused. Contrast this type of listening with that of narrow leaders who shape conversations within a minimalist view of potential, constrained by inconsequential goals, and colored by anxiety and pessimism. Silence is never neutral as a strong leader balances blue sky vision with stark realities of institutional life. The strategic leader has the capacity to capture prevalent ideas of the group and accurately represent them in organizational documents and external conversations, giving expression to the community values and
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
114
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
intentions (Back, et al. 2009). A strategic leader listens to alternate views and contrary perspectives, acknowledging the speaker’s ideas while aligning individual ideologies to those mutual visions of the group. The surfacing of mutual visions is further enhanced with the strategic leader censoring those that stray off course through role modeling. Some leaders evoke consensus, while others provoke dissension. A silence shaped by a common vision and mutual respect moves ideas forward in unity, while a silence preceded by a criticism may foster conflict. A strong leader leans toward consensus, while attending to personal dissension, minimizing its impact on respectful collegiality. An astute leader is always on alert for valuable insights, even in the most unlikely places (Ferrari, 2012). A silence that fosters synergy is ideal. Silence allows mutual wisdom to emerge (Back et al., 2009). A strategic leader will ensure that these shared ideologies of the group are deeply embedded in all documents and conversations, reminding colleagues of their mutual consensus around core values (Akrivou et al., 2011). At times, organizations experience crises requiring immediate responses. Conversations in these turbulent times carry urgency that colors spoken and unspoken communication. Rather than clinging to a façade of stability, a strategic leader faces these situations directly as soon as possible. Silence in these times provides space for consideration of all confounding factors, their weight and potential outcomes. Strategic leaders acknowledge uncertainties and their accompanying anxieties, while moving toward a considered, mindful response that reflects the core values of the group. Such crises may hold within them turning points of opportunity that move the group beyond the status quo. A strategic leader welcomes them, leveraging their ability to mobilize energy toward new goals, unleashing latent potential to grow in new directions (Benzel, 2008).
Validating Silence Moments of deep conversations are intricate with multi-faceted dialogues emanating from mutual values. A leader who assumes a posture of validating silence framed by a mutual vision of a preferred future fosters a dynamic flow of ideas that can energize collegiality and unity. Caranfa (2010) wrote, “Silence reveals the very truth of what we are, it is a silence that allows desires, truth, the good, justice, beauty, and love to constantly grow in the absence of arrogant talking, chattering, quick responses, and idle talk or empty words” (p. 585). Thoughtful, reflective listening in reverential presence generates a transformational culture in which a rich future can arise (Caranfa, 2010; Back et al., 2009) with a non-judgmental attention to acceptance of all that is expressed.
Valuing Community Many of the cited references about leadership spoke of the importance of a leader’s ability to build community among
the members of an organization. However, from a humanbecoming ontological perspective, “Inasmuch as each human is a humanuniverse cocreation, the individual is community, and the group is community” (Parse, 2012, p. 44). Thus community already always is, so instead of building community, as some authors on leadership suggest, it is proposed that leaders in teaching-learning nursing environments will encourage the valuing of the always present community in cocreating the emerging now. Valuing community then is discussed here in light of the humanbecoming community model change concepts: moving-initiating, anchoring-shifting, and pondering-shaping (Parse, 2013).
Moving-initiating in Valuing Community In the ever-evolving teaching-learning setting, change is unavoidable. Leaders in these environments realize such change may be comprised of something as minor as changing a time for a clinical experience, to revising an entire curriculum. Each however involves removing or deconstructing something while building something new all-at-once. As Parse (2013) explained, “In moving-initiating change, community [individual or group] is discarding-creating with the emerging now” (p. 45). In living these change processes individual values and ways of being surface with calm-turbulent patterns as diversity among group members becomes evident. Explicit-tacit knowings emerge as community members share. Leaders, during this time must recognize and honor each unique and diverse quality with non-judgmental openness and acceptance. Failure to recognize the importance of everyone’s opinions in the unfolding moment may surface in a metaphorical stale-mate where the change that actually occurs is a division of community members (or faculty members in this case). Non-judgmental openness and acceptance of others values, on the other hand, could facilitate the cocreation of “a shifting of value priorities” (Parse, 2012, p. 45). While these cocreated value priorities may be laced with certainty-uncertainty of the unknown, the challenges involved in conforming-not conforming with personal and with others’ expectations may be eased. While moving-initiating change in teaching learning a leader must remain open, careful not to bring to the table preconceived ideas and expectations resulting in navigation of the process without consideration of other values. In addition, if all of a leader’s cards are exposed upfront, it is likely that conflict will ensue. Once conflict arises, getting consensus regarding what was originally the plan of the leader becomes nearly impossible. A leader is better to keep cards close to their chests while community group members explore explicit-tacit knowing of what is. Free-flowing dialogue must be encouraged as group members reveal and conceal limitless options. As new options surface and are explicated the process continues until accepted options are woven into a new way of being in the emerging now that involves a cohesive shift in value priorities in the moment. These value priorities often reflect thoughts held by the leader, but they may allow for choices by all members of the
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
115
Condon and Hegge group community and that strengthens the bonds of the members enhancing conformity regarding personal and others expectations.
Anchoring-Shifting in Valuing Community Nursing is steeped in tradition. Beginning with the teachings of Nightingale, nursing has built and transformed into a profession unto itself, while clinging to rich traditions involving caring, honoring others, and being present. Education is also steeped in tradition. In educational beginnings the teacher poured information into the proverbial open head of the student. Students were mostly passive. Post-secondary education has moved almost entirely from a teacher-centered to a learner-centered model while still holding to the traditional notion of teacher as expert in given areas. Blending the two disciplines while balancing traditional and conventional ideologies requires a leader not only attuned to, but demonstrative of the value in the anchoring-shifting of community change. According to Parse (2012) “anchoring shifting change, community [individual and group] is persisting-diversifying with the emerging now” (p. 46). Persisting-diversifying, Parse explained is “anchoring with tradition and shifting with new experiences, and it is what ongoing change means” (p. 46). In further discussing Parse’s thoughts on anchoringshifting as they relate to leadership in nursing education, there arises a transparent need for leaders in teaching-learning environments to recognize an implicit need of many members of the group community to anchor with some tradition. Too often the old is discarded simply to give the impression of being on the cutting edge. Yet it has been proven repeatedly that because something is old does not mean it is outdated or useless. Traditional values surfacing during community dialogue should be honored and considered by all, beginning with the leader. Nurse educators and leaders may agree to try to keep some aspects of nursing constant but since the emerging now is limitless this constant will never be repeated exactly the same. Change amid the constant arises with opportunities and restrictions. Opportunities arise as individual or group communities present their ideas for changes from traditional ways, yet with these ideas comes the certainty-uncertainty of what will be kept and what will be discarded. Leaders during these times must make known the mutual respect for both the novel as well as original and must demonstrate willingness to sacrifice to some degree their own strongly held values (traditional or otherwise) in order to create a more liberating community change in the teachinglearning environment. With pushing-resisting of each community member, anchoring-shifting takes place. What is kept and what is sacrificed during times of change should reflect a community pattern of accepted values that demonstrate respect “of the predecessors, contemporaries, and successors alive with the personal histories of the constituents” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Agreeing to lift anchor and shift to a
new space may surface in feelings of unsteadiness with certainty-uncertainly abounding. During anchoring-shifting change, leaders will need to remain supportive when each constituent presents thoughts and ideas, while taking care to forge on with non-judgmental acceptance.
Pondering-Shaping in Valuing Community No decision should be made in haste. According to Gracian (1647/2007), haste is a fool’s passion while reflection in acting for extended periods may breed delay, which can also be problematic. A balance between the two is needed. For this balance in making decisions and putting them to action, Gracian recommended the following motto, “make haste slowly” (p. 22). This recommendation, while being an oxymoron, should be heeded by leaders. Leaders must take care to move at a steady pace, but never at such a pace where group community members feel rushed and uninformed. Valuing community by demonstrating an understanding and appreciation for the pondering-shaping component of community change may actually decrease delays and will definitely lessen a leader’s chance of playing the fool. Leaders of nursing faculty groups must realize the importance of giving members time to digest and ponder ideas brought to the table. Expecting immediate action on items that involve a shift in group dynamics or activity without allowing member’s time in reflective-prereflective thought could ultimately surface in acts of nonconformity. Parse (2012) described pondering-shaping as “contemplating-configuring with the emerging now” (p. 47). She explained, “contemplating and at once configuring is with the imaged possibles present with the communities’ illimitable experiences” (p. 47). As connecting-separating takes place in group communities, members reveal-conceal value priorities. As group leader, every value priority must be given equal consideration and respect as all are reflective of individual histories. None therefore will be exactly the same and time must be allowed to reflect on implicit differences. Leaders must ask the group to consider how each shared value priority might shift personal space in the emerging now. Considering-composing is part of pondering-shaping and involves “deliberately ruminating about others, ideas, objects, and events that are important” while “carving possibles with the innovative imaginings that surface with different meanings” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Again, a leader who comes to the table with a preconceived agenda with wishes to reach a rapid consensus is not valuing community. Such a leader is demonstrating self-serving agendas that are often for something other than the good of the university or other organization as a whole. Such a leader also deliberately erases the group members ability to ponder-shape in creating anew with the becoming visible-invisible becoming of the emerging now (Parse, 2012), thereby eradicating any chance of co-creating emerging value priorities. Faculty members often feel disjointed with a decreased sense of belonging.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
116
Nursing Science Quarterly 27(2)
It is in this change concept for community where honoring silence also surfaces as part of dialoguing-listening. Dialoguing-listening involves honoring silence and is described by Parse (2012) as “unconditional witnessing with all-at-once speaking-being silent and moving-being still” (Parse, 2012, p. 47). Honoring silence, as determined by the authors is one of the two essential traits of a 21st century leader and was explored here in detail. In addition to honoring silence, personal histories emerge as significant in dialoguing-listening for better understanding of another’s meaning, all the while aware that “to experience understanding is to simultaneously experience misunderstanding” (Condon, 2010, p. 313). Is it any wonder then that time must be set aside for pondering-shaping change in community? In all moments of pondering-shaping, leaders must demonstrate unconditional presence through loving patience and nonjudgmental witnessing as community understanding unfolds. Decisions should not be made, nor should leaders expect such decisions to be made until enough time is given for persons to ponder-shape with shared ideas and options.
Conclusion The new wave of teaching-learning in nursing awakens a need for reevaluating necessary ways of living leadership. Knowing when to speak-be silent is essential. Honoring silence requires leaders to be cognizant of when and how to utilize silence involving the many features discussed here. Change in nursing education can, at times, be very difficult. It is something that cannot be completed alone, and leaders in these change processes must recognize the importance of valuing community as change ensues. Since change, by its very definition, cannot be stagnant, and since nursing education is always in the process of change, leaders may find value in becoming familiar with the change concepts within the humanbecoming community model. If a leader fails to demonstrate the value of group community within nursing education institutions, then ongoing changes within that overall institution may be viewed as forced, surfacing with divergence and disharmony among community group members. Such toxic environments cannot sustain. Honoring silence while valuing community therefore is essential in leading community change in nursing education. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this editorial.
Funding The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this editorial.
References Akrivou, K., Bourantas, D., Mo, S., Papalois, E. (2011). The sound of silence-a space for morality? The role of solitude for ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 119-133 Back, A., Baurer-Wu, S., Rushton, C., Halifax, J. (2009). Compassionate silence in the patient-clinician encounter: A contemplative approach. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 12 (12), 1113-1117. Benzel, D. (2008). Lead through listening. Supervision, 69(6), 14-15. Boone, L. W. (2012). Five necessary attitudes of a servant leader. Review of Business, 33(1), 83-96. Bunkers, S. (2013) Slience: A double-edged sword. Nursing Science Quarterly, 26, 7-11. Caranfa, A. (2010). Contemplative instruction and the gifts of beauty, love, and silence. Educational Theory, 60, 561-585. Condon, B. B. (2010). Understanding-misunderstanding: A philosophical and theoretical exploration. Nursing Science Quarterly, 23, 306-314. Ferrari, B. (2012). Power listening: mastering the most critical business skill of all. London England: Penguin Books, Ltd. Gracian, B. (2007). The art of worldly wisdom (M. Fisher, Trans.). New York, NY: Barnes & Nobles. (Original work published 1647). Grint, K. (2010). The sacred in leadership: separation, sacrifice and silence. Organizational Studies, 31(01), 89-107. Kerfoot, K. M. (2010). Listening to see: The key to virtual leadership. Nursing Economic, 28(2), 114-118. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1973). The prose of the world, ed. Claude Lefort, trans. John O’Neill. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 45-46. Parse, R. R. (2012). New humanbecoming conceptualizations and the humanbecoming community model: expansions with sciencing and living the art. Nursing Science Quarterly, 25, 44-52. Parse, R. R. (2013) Living quality: A humanbecoming phenomenon. Nursing Science Quarterly, 26, 111-115. Van den Berg, Z. (2006). Leadership. The seven deadly sins. New Zealand Management, 53(7), 40-43. Wasonga, T. A., & Murphy, J. F. (2007). Co-creating leadership dispositions. International Studies in Educational Administration, 35(2), 20-30.
Downloaded from nsq.sagepub.com at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on May 5, 2015
