For a very long time I have admired Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon for having very many crucial conversations on their trendsetting sports television show called Pardon the Interruption. I am not naive enough to think that most of the show isn’t preprogrammed or scripted, but I have completely witnessed legitimate conversations between the two that sparked into uncomfortable moments on television. When topics of negative racial relations in sports would come into play, and Kornheiser (Caucasian male) would give his opinion, and Wilbon (African American male) would have a similar but slightly different opinion, the debates would often become tense. When the two gentlemen would have completely different opinions, the debates would become outright awkward, but necessary.
Crucial conversations are not designed for the faint of heart. Emotions can often get involved and lead to silence or violence. (Patterson et al., 2011) When these two friends would have these tense conversations, it always felt as though it ended with a mutual understanding that would move forward, but not a winner. Crucial conversations are the necessary, pivotal moments that have the ability to create a mutual in-depth understanding between parties that have the capacity to move conversation into action.
Understanding the idea of being a differentiated leader means that I may have to encounter some very legitimate conversations that may be tense or awkward. These conversations, if managed well, will lead to organizational change in my school. Leadership is not always about being the loudest or having the last word. It is an understanding of how to listen and get input from others, have pure intentions, create a safe space for conversation, controlling my own emotions when faced with backlash or differing opinions, and compiling all of the information in order to move towards the actions of real purposeful change.
A differentiated learner must understand that crucial conversations that will lead to evoking change can potentially be met with harsh resistance. Passive resistance (silence)
and aggressive resistance (verbal violence) can both be a struggle that will be obstacles that would need to be resolved before ideas can move forward into action.
When having crucial conversations that would lead to organizational change are taking place, and a leader is met with silence or violence, it is imperative to make the conversation space safe again by re-establishing what the mutual purpose is, which will be a reminder of mutual respect. (Patterson et al., 2011)
My goal is to create a system of classes that students will complete during their given advisory periods. These classes will give the students an opportunity to earn lost credit, be a remedial source of information, test out of classes, or gain college credit. The initial fear is that the teachers will front load the workload by creating classes online through our online program in place. Once the classes are created, the students will do the bulk of the work. Teachers would only then be used during the advisory periods to guide students in the right direction. It appears to be more work for the teachers during the advisory period, therefore resistance and potential “viruses” could emerge. Understanding that this crucial conversation is necessary and may be tense or awkward, will demonstrate that my differentiated leadership is prepared for what is to come. The students have everything to gain once the classes are created once the teachers understand my “why”. Implementing this strategy would be an arduous process, but a process that is necessary. Being prepared for the crucial conversations will benefit the students tremendously for years to come and eventually create a culture of academic encouragement compared to academic apathy.
References
Patterson, K., Grenny, J., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2012). Crucial conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high. New York: McGraw-Hill
Comments