The first question that I was asked during the interview was, "how do you define leadership?" Now for the past few years, I've been reading up on leadership, leadership types, and how best groups of scientists work together. Scientists are an odd bunch. I think we like to believe that we are more rational than the average person given our scientific training. I think we often forget that we are still human. We have egos (some more than others), and we still are often irrational. So while it is fantastic to see books and studies focused on how best scientists work together, we can learn a lot from management books. So I've read a bunch of books and peer-reviewed research on the science of team science. I've checked out books on "servant leadership" and "inclusive leadership." I was surprised by how much I enjoyed and learned reading "The five dysfunctions of a team." Given all this research into leadership and how teams best work together, I wasn't sure I had a clear answer.
I found that in the past, I have used a combination of shared and inclusive leadership styles and that I still have a lot to learn. Specifically, I have a lot to learn about how to best lead a group of brilliant, outspoken, creative, and self-sufficient scientists. Knowing what styles of leadership I tend to gravitate towards is good to know, but it still doesn't really define what leadership is. Of course, we can go to the dictionary and find the official definition. But what does leadership mean to you - to lead people sure, but beyond that? What makes a good leader, what should a good leader be striving to achieve? I think I've found at least part of an answer. To me, a good leader should enable others to grow and reach their highest potential. A good leader should create an inclusive and safe environment where people can ask questions and be creative. A good leader should create new opportunities and new collaborations. A good leader should not be afraid of conflict, but strive to arrive at a consensus. A good leader should cultivate more good leaders. Now I hope that I can embody this definition - but I also know that I will likely fail from time to time. I hope that overall I can learn from those failures and continually grow into becoming a good leader.
Now - with everything going on in the world - there are a few other aspects I'm both excited and fearful of as I move into this new role. I'm tera-cited (terrified and excited) or perhaps ex-fear-ited? I'm sure there is a good German word for this. Our lab is somewhat diverse, but we could and should be a lot more. Our field is not at all diverse, and we have some real issues that we need to work on. Specifically, we need to work on being more welcoming and inclusive. We need to be better about making our field a place where all feel valued and respected. Most importantly, we need to make our field a place where everyone looks forward to spending 20 - 50+ years of their life.
Before this position, I have tried to work towards improving diversity through a few activities. Not everyone in the field is aware that there is a problem or that we should fix it. Now, women make up about 19% of space physics researchers, and other underrepresented groups make up a much smaller fraction. It may seem like the need for more diversity is an obvious point, and it should be. However, many people either don't notice, make an excuse, or don't feel secure in their position to speak out and make changes. Bringing this to the attention of the community through plenary sessions and union sessions at meetings was the first step. I have now led the AGU SPA Fellows Nomination Committee for the past 2 years. I have worked toward making sure we are aware of our own biases, both explicit and implicit, and put into practice mitigation processes. When choosing speakers and committee members, I try to make sure to have a diverse group. I have worked towards creating inclusive and safe environments for the teams I work with and lead. However, some have commented and stated how I have not done enough, not enough self-educating on the issues, nor enough to improve our field. They are right, and this leads to my tera-cited feeling about this new position.
I am now in a position of leadership, influence, and perceived power (I really have no power within the lab - at least not to start). I will have more opportunities than most to talk with higher-ups - those who can affect the way we do business. I will have some influence on how the lab is structured and how we interact. I can not make anyone hire more diverse interns or put pronouns in their email signature. I can encourage people to look beyond their typical networks for a more diverse set of postdocs and summer students. I can continue to educate our lab on how diversity improves science. And I can continue to learn what more I can do to improve our lab. I hope that I don't make too many mistakes and fail our lab.
I hope this post can be the start of a conversation. I think we are all learning this new language of leadership and what we can do to dismantle systemic structures that have held back the careers of many. I believe, like any language, there is only so much one can do by practicing alone. To become fluent, one needs to practice with others, talk with others, and interact with others. I feel like I've been practicing my French in the car, had a few conversations in high school French class, but now I'm heading to Paris.