University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

(USC Thesis Other)

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content LEADER SELF-REFLECTION IN THE WORKPLACE 1
The Case for Leader Self-Reflection in the Workplace
by
Jennifer Sparks Taylor
A Dissertation Proposal Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2024
© Copyright 2024 Jennifer Sparks Taylor

2
Acknowledgments
I want to acknowledge my husband, Toper Taylor, who set out on this journey with me
while also doing a Ph.D. at the USC Price School of Public Policy. I am grateful for his love,
support, humor, confidence, encouragement and unwavering fortitude and perseverance in all
that we do in our lives together.
I am forever grateful to our study group including Dave Bushnell, Liz Lance, Courtney
Nall, and Shawn Sieu. Three components of motivation consist of choice, persistence, and
mental effort. This team made the choice to obtain doctoral degrees in Organizational Change
and Leadership and the commitment to each other's success kept me committed to the process.
Thank you.
I also want to thank Dr. Sarah LaSaulle, a therapist who I met in a difficult time in my
life, in my 20s, after losing my mother to pancreatic cancer. Sarah taught me about selfreflection, internal and external self-awareness, active listening, and self-efficacy. She has
supported and encouraged me throughout my adult life and her voice is one that I carried with
me throughout the dissertation process and a voice I will carry forever.
I want to acknowledge the leaders within a publicly traded organization that started this
journey with me but decided to pivot. As a researcher and passionate human with a desire to
advance a practice, I jumped in and discovered a blind spot. This experience provided a selfreflection experience that I am grateful for. My hope is for this research to open a new pathway
for other researchers to explore self-reflection practices in the workplace to advance the human
experience, connection, communication, and innovation among diverse teams.
I want to acknowledge my family. First, my mother and father (the first doctor I met)
who inspired me to continuously learn and apply learnings in the world. My sisters taught me

3
about hierarchy, diversity, and standing for oneself and others. And thank you to my nieces,
nephew, and my stepchildren who continue to show me that anything is possible.
Finally, to my chair and committee, thank you for your support and belief in pursuing this
research. Dr. Esther Kim, your vulnerability, confidence, reassurance, and expertise guided me
through a challenging pivot. Our work together set the upward path to becoming an
accomplished researcher. Your guidance and leadership throughout the process influenced my
passion for bridging research and practice for organizations in the future. Thank you.

4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
Table of Contents 4
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 9
Context and Background of the Problem 10
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions 12
Overview of the Theoretical Framework and Methodology 13
Definitions 14
Organization of the Dissertation 17
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 19
Impact of Poor Leadership Behaviors 19
Leadership Theories 22
Transformational Leadership 23
Authentic Leadership 24
Inclusive Leadership 25
Self-Reflection
Approaches to Self-Reflection
27
27
Self-Reflective Practices 32
Conceptual Framework 34
Summary 36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 37
Research Questions 37
Overview of Design 37
Research Setting 38
The Researcher 38
Data Sources and Methodology 39
Credibility and Transferability 42
Ethics 42
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 44
Participating Stakeholders 45
Leader Background and Positionality 48
Hindsight is 20/20 - Early Career Experiences 48
Recognizing Positionality 50
Defining Self-Reflection 52
Leader Behaviors 54
Factors that Spark Self-Reflection 54
Environment Impacts Behavior 60
Organizational Culture 60
Team Dynamics 62
Opportunities and Outcomes 64

5
Accountability and Adaptability 64
Improved Communication, Trust, and Empathy 65
The Power of the Pause 65
The Case for Leader Self-Reflection 68
Summary 68
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 70
Discussion of Findings 70
Lack of Factual and Conceptual Knowledge of Self-Reflection in Early Career 71
Procedural Knowledge is Present but Not Inherent in the Culture 71
Leadership Development Programs Must Adapt for Skills Required Today 72
Opportunity to Incorporate Self-Reflection with Organizational Values 73
Recommendations for Practice 74
Recommendation 1: Develop a Common Definition of Self-Reflection 74
Recommendation 2: Establish a Learning Organization Mindset 74
Recommendation 3: Establish Psychological Safety 75
Recommendation 4: Provide New Types of Learning & Development Resources 75
Recommendation 5: Apply Evidence-Based Framework and Measure the Change 76
Limitations and Delimitations 79
Recommendations for Future Research 80
Conclusion 82
References 83
Appendix A: Recruitment Email 101
Appendix B: Recruitment LinkedIn Post 102
Appendix C: Email Confirmation and Scheduling 103
Appendix D: Interview Protocol 104
Appendix E: Information Sheet for Exempt Studies 109
Appendix F: Informed Consent Form 111
Appendix G: Participant Ratings of Themselves and Other Leaders 114

6
List of Tables
Table 1: Participating Stakeholders 45
Table 2: Participants' Definitions of Self-Reflection 52

7
List of Figures
Figure 1: Triadic Reciprocity Theoretical Framework - person, environment behavior 14
Figure 2: Leader Reflexivity Practice Conceptual Framework 35
Figure 3: Transformational Change Model - Galbraith Star ModelTM 77
Figure 4: Transformational Change Model - McKinsey 7S Model 78

8
Abstract
This qualitative study investigates leaders' perspectives on the influence of self-reflection on
leadership behaviors, team behaviors, and the overall organization within the context of leading
diverse teams. Seventeen senior leaders representing various industries and leadership positions
participated in semi-structured interviews aimed at understanding the situations that spark the
need for self-reflection and the influence of self-reflection on leader behaviors, team behaviors,
and their organizations. Thematic analysis revealed that self-reflective practices among leaders
promote self-awareness, empathy, and inclusivity, shaping team behaviors and fostering a culture
of trust and collaboration. Despite challenges such as time constraints and performance
pressures, participants recognized the value of self-reflection in driving team performance and
improved communication. The study offers practical insights, including recommendations for
organizational action. These recommendations include developing a common definition of selfreflection, establishing a learning organization mindset, fostering psychological safety, providing
new types of learning and development resources, and applying evidence-based frameworks to
measure change. By implementing these recommendations, organizations can enhance leadership
effectiveness, promote diversity and inclusion, and cultivate environments conducive to
continuous learning and growth.
Keywords: Self-Reflection, Leadership, Communication, Organizational Effectiveness,
Inclusion

9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
Organizations are becoming more diverse with globalization, and as we move to greater
diversity within organizations, cultural differences increase the complexity of the work process
and team engagement (Aritz & Walker, 2010). In addition to cultural differences, organizations
deal with volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Johansen,
2017). With these complexities, how do leaders communicate and create an environment that
enables employees to thrive? Leadership theories have developed over centuries, and
organizations have invested billions of dollars in leadership development programs. However,
we are still searching for leaders who can create culture, drive organizational effectiveness and
profitability, meet shareholder demands, and serve the needs of all stakeholders, including
employees and the planet. How organizations manage, train, evaluate, and treat teams impacts
employee effectiveness and retention (Gerhart & Feng, 2021; Gowan, 2022).
Following the events of 2020, including a global pandemic and the killing of George
Floyd, the rate of hiring for Chief Diversity Officers tripled the rate of hires in the prior 16
months, and 53% of Fortune 500 companies now have a Chief Diversity Officer role (Goldstein
et al., 2022). Organizations escalated the need to focus on addressing the needs of diverse
employees while improving diversity metrics within their organizations. Many studies have
proven the benefits of diversity and its impact on creativity, innovation, and performance
outcomes. However, the question remains: How do we advance leadership and team capabilities
at all levels of an organization to effectively lead in a complex, diverse, and ever-changing
environment?
In September 2021, the United States witnessed the “Great Resignation” (Tessema et al.,
2022, p. 162) when 4.4 million American workers quit their jobs, which is the largest employee

10
resignation spike in history (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021). Although multiple factors
influenced the great resignation, this shift has allowed employees to re-evaluate their careers and
the environment and team in which they work (Geisler, 2021). Organizations and the leaders
within them have an opportunity to transform how people treat one another and to create a
thriving workplace.
Context and Background of the Problem
This dissertation addresses the problem of leader awareness of their positionality and its
effect on their communication within global organizations. Villaverde (2008) describes
positionality as “how one is situated through the intersection of power and the politics of gender,
race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, and other social factors” (p. 10). Researchers
reveal that miscommunication between supervisors and subordinates is more likely to result in
task or process conflicts among culturally diverse groups (Korovyakovskaya & Chong, 2015).
Grossman (2016) reported poor communication between employees’ costs and U.S. and U.K.
organizations of over 100,000 employees, with an average loss of $62.4 million annually. Casse
and Weisz (2014) state that team miscommunication impacts attitude, trust, inclusivity, and
business performance. They write, “We hear what we want to hear and do not explore further or
check our understanding of what the other party means” (Casse & Weisz, 2014, p. 40).
Moreover, individuals create judgments about reality very quickly, particularly when the
judgments are related to oneself, their emotions (Unzueta & Binning, 2012), personality (Liao et
al., 2008), and demographic characteristics (Chattopadhyay, 1999). These judgments can create
separation and discourse. Alternatively, research suggests that employees who feel they belong
in a group show positive behaviors toward the group (Chattopadhyay, 1999; Chattopadhyay et
al., 2004; Tsui et al., 1992).

11
As we move to increased diversity within organizations, it is important to explore tools and
resources that leaders and teams can use to improve communication and effectiveness. For this
study, diverse is defined as “differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the
perception that another person is different from the self” (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004, p.
1008). Researchers emphasize that leader self-awareness impacts individuals and organizational
outcomes and is a critical leadership skill, regardless of industry or organization (Atwater &
Yammarino, 1992, 1997; Northouse, 2022). How leaders communicate and interpret
communication impacts performance, employee engagement, and overall organizational
outcomes (Grossman, 2016; Korovyakovskaya & Chong, 2015; Porath et al., 2015; Porath &
Pearson, 2013; Ray, 1987). Almengor (2018) expresses the need for critical reflection and selfawareness to understand one’s positionality in context and to consider how one has the
possibility to disentangle pre-established norms and power relationships to mediate conflict. This
evidence highlights the need for leaders to self-reflect or use critical reflection practices to
understand how one’s background, positionality, and cultural differences impact others.
People may also interpret communication and behavior as signs of respect for one
another. Research conducted by Porath et al. (2015) has shown that respect from a leader and
others results in 55% higher employee engagement, 92% greater focus, and 56% greater health.
Furthermore, higher employee engagement yields a 21% increase in profitability, 20% greater
sales, and 17% higher productivity (Porath et al., 2015). Words used within communication can
fuel a team to thrive or shut the team down. Research has shown that when someone perceives
rudeness or an insensitive delivery style, it halts strategic thinking and problem-solving,
ultimately decreasing performance (Edmondson, 2019; Porath & Pearson, 2013). When people
feel overwhelmed or stressed, the lack of awareness of how one communicates and how it lands

12
on another person’s listening may be absent under stress (Porath et al., 2015). The interpretation
of the listener may bring their past to the present and result in misinterpretation, conflict, and
physical or neurological response to fight, flee, or freeze (Canon, 1929). This problem is
important to essential for improving team communication and building more inclusive
organizations.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The study aims to understand how leaders perceive how self-reflection affects their
leadership behaviors while leading diverse teams. For this qualitative research study, we define a
leader as anyone within an organization who leads a team of at least five diverse individuals.
Diverse is defined as “differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the
perception that one person is different from another” (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004, p. 1008).
The following research questions guided the study:
1. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects leader behavior?
2. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects team behaviors?
3. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects the overall environment of the organization?
Importance of the Study
Leader self-reflection and the effect on communication and behavior are important, as
team miscommunication impacts attitude, trust, inclusivity, and business performance (Casse &
Weisz, 2014). As we move to increased diversity of teams within organizations,
miscommunication is more likely to result in conflicts (Korovyakovskaya & Chong, 2015),
thereby impacting organizational effectiveness, retention, and well-being. Grossman (2016)
reported poor communication between employees’ costs and U.S. and U.K. organizations of over
100,000 employees, with an average loss of $62.4 million annually. This problem is important to

13
address to improve team communication, build more inclusive organizations, improve innovation
and collaboration, and help those impacted by traditional power relationships advance in their
careers more effectively, thereby achieving economic gain.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical framework used to address this problem of practice is social cognitive
theory. Social cognitive theory is a behavioral theory that focuses on triadic reciprocity, the
interrelated nature between the person, environment, and behavior of an individual’s thoughts
and actions and how they influence one another (Bandura, 1986; Schunk & Usher, 2019).
Individuals learn from their environment, which informs knowledge, beliefs, and behavioral
expectations based on beliefs (Bandura, 1986, 1991; Schunk & Usher, 2019). Bandura expressed
that social cognitive theory and self-efficacy beliefs are impacted by a team leader’s personal
views and the team’s collective beliefs, which impact the interactive dynamics, group behavior,
and performance outcomes (Bandura, 1986, 1991). Bandura states that perceived collective selfefficacy fosters groups’ motivational commitment to their missions, resilience to adversity, and
performance accomplishments (Bandura, 2000). Social cognitive theory can be applied to
examine the leader’s identity, values, goals, motivation, behaviors, self-efficacy, cultural norms
(Bandura, 1986, 1991, 2000), and social comparisons (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Understanding
the effect on perceived team effectiveness provides an opportunity to reduce conflict among
culturally diverse groups. Figure 1 displays the theoretical framework, providing a lens to
examine the intersection of the leader’s self-identity, communication behavior, and professional
environment, informing the triadic relationship and impact on how each influences an
individual’s thoughts and actions (Bandura 1986, 1991, 2000; Staples & Webster, 2007).

14
Figure 1
Triadic reciprocity theoretical framework – person, environment, behavior
Note. Adapted from “Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory,” by A.
Bandura, 1986, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Definitions
This section provides definitions of key terms associated with the research. The following
chapter will further explore some of the terms within the context of the broader literature.
Critical Reflection
White et al. (2006) define critical reflection as “the process by which adults identify the
assumptions governing their actions, locate the historical and cultural origins of the assumptions,
question the meaning of the assumptions, and develop alternative ways of acting” (p. 12). For
example, a leader may pause to understand how their background influences them to think a
certain way and critical reflection can guide them in considering an alternative approach.

15
Diversity
Diversity includes an individual’s entire spectrum of dimensions, including Race,
Ethnicity, Gender, Age, Religion, Disability, Sexual orientation, communication style, work
style, organizational role/level, economic status, and geographic origin (Diversity Task Force,
2001). Each individual has unique attributes and qualities. Diversity includes “all characteristics
and experiences that define each of us as individuals” (Diversity Task Force, 2001, p. 7). Diverse
is defined as “differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception
that another person is different from the self” (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004, p. 1008).
Empathy
Hodges and Meyers (2007) define empathy as “understanding another person’s
experience by imagining oneself in that other person’s situation: One understands the other
person’s experience as if it were being experienced by the self, but without the self actually
experiencing it” (p. 297). Empathy can be shown through behaviors such as listening to
understand, acknowledging feelings, and letting go of bias.
Emotional Intelligence
Salovey and Mayer (1990) define emotional intelligence as skills that include awareness
of self and others and the ability to manage emotions and relationships. Leaders with high
emotional intelligence can accurately perceive and understand other people’s feelings, which
enables them to have more flexibility, higher social awareness, self-control, authenticity,
adaptability, relationship management, manage conflict, and inspire others in an ever-changing
environment (Cherniss, 2000; Goleman et al., 2004; Salovey et al., 1999).

16
Incivility
Andersson and Pearson (1999) define incivility as a range of behaviors “from breaches of
etiquette to professional misconduct, from general civil unrest to moral decay” (p. 455).
Workplace incivility is based on small acts of rudeness that violate basic organizational
standards of respect, such as norm violation, ambiguous intent, and isolated uncivil behaviors,
which add up over time (Porath & Pearson, 2009).
Reflection
Dewey (1933) conducted seminal research on reflection, which he defined as an “active,
persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of
the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (p. 118). Reflection is
the consideration of one’s past and current experiences to inform ways to behave more
effectively in the future (Daudelin, 1996; Kolb, 1984).
Reflection-in-Action
Schön (1992) defined reflection-on-action as reflecting on how practice can be
developed, improved, or changed after a situation occurs. Schön (1992) took reflection a step
further calling the second level or reflection reflection-on-action which is having the capability
to consciously think about what one’s actions or behavior while doing it or in the moment.
Reflexivity
Cunliffe (2016) defines reflexivity as “questioning what we, and others, might be taking
for granted – what is being said and not said – and examining the impact this has or might have”
(p. 741). Reflexivity is the practice of examining our assumptions, decisions, communication,
and actions to examine policies and practices and their intended or unintended consequences
(Cunliffe, 2016). Cunliffe (2016) defines two levels of reflexivity: self-reflexivity about our

17
beliefs and values and critical reflexivity about organizational policies, structures, and
knowledge bases. Being reflexive is not a technique but a way of being in relationships with
others (Cunliffe, 2016).
Self-awareness
Self-awareness is defined as the conscious awareness of one’s internal feelings and
interactions or impact on others (Goleman et al., 2002; Trapnell & Campbell, 1999). A leader
demonstrates self-awareness by being aware of how others receive their behavior and
communication and by adapting to the environment.
Sensemaking
Gephart et al. (2010) define sensemaking as “an ongoing process that creates an
intersubjective sense of shared meanings through conversation and non-verbal behavior in faceto-face settings where people seek to/produce, negotiate, and maintain a shared sense of
meaning” (p. 284–285). Sensemaking is a “collaborative activity used to create legitimate and
sustainable organizational practices or leadership roles” (Cunliffe & Coupland, 2012, p. 65) and
is a process in which people create meaning through the interpretation of themselves and their
environment around them (Whittle & Mueller, 2012).
Organization of the Dissertation
In this dissertation, the researcher organized a traditional five-chapter model. Chapter
One introduces the problem in practice in global organizations and describes the purposeful
sample of senior leaders leading diverse teams within organizations to understand leader
perceptions on how leader self-reflection impacted the behavior of the individuals, teams, and
the organization. Chapter Two reviews existing literature on leadership theories that emphasize
the importance of self-awareness and self-reflection. It then delves deeper into the role of self-

18
reflection, tracing its significance from seminal research dating back to 1933 to more
contemporary perspectives today. Chapter two ends with an outline of the theoretical and
conceptual framework that guided the research. Chapter Three outlines the research methodology
for qualitative data collection and analysis of the study. Chapter Four includes the findings of the
research analysis. Chapter Five provides considered solutions related to the study findings and
implications for future research.

19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The research aimed to understand whether there is a connection between a leader’s use of
self-reflection and its perceived effect on the leader’s communication within a diverse
workplace. Leaders, in this context, include senior leaders leading diverse teams. Self-reflection
in the workplace may provide an opportunity to reduce toxicity in organizations, increase
retention, reduce burnout, and provide an opportunity for organizations to build inclusive
cultures. As a society, we are moving from the organization not only serving as a place of work
but as an environment that supports the employee in more ways than traditionally expected. This
dissertation looks at a slice in time based on key events that triggered the need to evolve how
leaders effectively lead their organizations and engage their followers, explicitly focusing on
leadership theories that highlight the need for leader self-awareness and self-reflective practices.
The following literature review begins with the impact of poor leadership behaviors on
organizations. It then explores transformational leadership, authentic leadership, and inclusive
leadership theories, which all incorporate elements of self-awareness (Northouse, 2022). Next,
this chapter includes a deep dive into the role of self-reflection dating back to seminal research
from 1933 to more current perspectives today. The chapter ends with discussing the study’s
conceptual framework and theory that guided the research.
Impact of Poor Leadership Behaviors
In February 2022, the Pew Research American Trends Panel (ATP) reported that 57% of
U.S. adults who resigned from positions in the workplace reported feelings of disrespect
influencing their decision to resign. Sull et al. (2022) report that a toxic organizational culture
was the strongest predictor of turnover, exceeding compensation by ten times. Employees
expressed toxic organizational culture as feeling disrespected, observing unethical behavior

20
within the organization, or experiencing a lack of promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion
(Sull et al., 2022). How we treat each other as supervisors, peers, or subordinates impacts
employee effectiveness and retention (Gerhart & Feng, 2021; Gowan, 2022). Small acts of
rudeness that violate basic organizational standards of respect, including norm violation,
ambiguous intent, and isolated uncivil behaviors, impact organizational outcomes (Porath &
Pearson, 2009).
How leaders communicate and behave and how the communication is interpreted impacts
performance, employee engagement, and overall organizational outcomes (Grossman, 2016;
Korovyakovskaya & Chong, 2015; Porath et al., 2015; Porath & Pearson, 2013; Ray & Miller,
1991). Cultural differences increase the complexity of work processes and team engagement
(Aritz & Walker, 2010), and miscommunication between supervisors and subordinates is more
likely to result in conflicts among culturally diverse groups (Korovyakovskaya & Chong, 2015).
Grossman (2016) reported that poor communication between employees costs U.S. and U.K.
organizations over 100,000 employees, an average loss of $62.4 million annually.
Words used within communication can fuel a team to thrive or shut the team down.
Research has shown that when someone perceives rudeness or an insensitive delivery style, it
triggers them and halts strategic thinking and problem-solving and ultimately decreases
performance (Edmondson, 2019; Porath & Pearson, 2013). When people feel overwhelmed or
stressed, the lack of awareness of how one communicates and how it lands on another person’s
listening may be absent under stress (Porath et al., 2015). The interpretation of the listener may
bring their past to the present and result in misinterpretation, conflict, and a neurological
response to fight, flee, or freeze (Canon,1929).

21
Additionally, leadership and team communication can also contribute to burnout.
Maslach and Leiter (2022) define burnout as a three-dimensional concept characterized by
emotional exhaustion, a shift in negativity towards others, and a decreased sense of personal
accomplishment. Workplace stressors include not only workload and role uncertainties (Miller et
al., 1989) but also communication characteristics such as social support from supervisors and
team members (Ray & Miller, 1991) and inclusion in decision-making (Maslach & Jackson,
1987). Bringing teams together to discuss problems, clarify goals, and encourage decisionmaking on policies has been demonstrated to reduce burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 2022).
Effective communication also requires a level of leader self-awareness as the leader’s
self-awareness directly impacts employee attitudes and performance (Moshavi et al., 2003).
Factors influencing employee retention include taking into account the individual’s needs,
encouragement in participating in team activities, encouragement to generate ideas, goal setting,
conveying a vision, and demonstrating trust, interest, and effective communication (Bass, 1985;
Tian et al., 2020).
Porath and Pearson (2013) collected data from over 20,000 employees worldwide and
found that employees worldwide requested their companies to treat them with respect as their
number one priority. Respect was more important than recognition and appreciation, useful
feedback, and learning opportunities (Porath & Pearson, 2013). An essential part of creating a
thriving culture is respect, and that respect from a leader results in 55% higher employee
engagement, 92% greater focus, and 56% greater health (Porath et al., 2015). And higher
employee engagement results in 21% greater profitability, 20% greater sales, and 17% greater
productivity (Porath et al., 2015). Small acts of thanking people, sharing credit, listening

22
attentively, humbly asking questions, acknowledging others, and smiling impact feelings of
respect (Porath et al., 2015).
Leadership Theories
Leadership is a social influence process in which the leader seeks to influence a team to
achieve the organization’s goals (Maamari & Saheb, 2018; Northouse, 2022). Numerous
leadership theories exist, and organizations apply different theories in a business context based
on the organization’s leadership and its specific needs. Researchers posit that leadership theories
do not exist independently of one another and do not exist separately from challenges facing
organizations (Megheirkouni & Mejheirkouni, 2020). The emergence of moral approaches to
leadership and the need for leadership to serve the common good were introduced in the 21st
Century (Fry & Whittington, 2005; Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Northouse, 2022). For example, the
popularity of transformational leadership theory increased following societal upheaval and
uncertainty with the 9/11 attacks in 2001 (Northouse, 2022). Authentic leadership became a
focus following corporate scandals and the subprime mortgage crisis in 2007 (Northouse, 2022).
Moreover, a deadly pandemic and a global movement for racial justice in 2020
influenced leaders to turn to inclusive leadership theory (Northouse, 2022). These significant
events further emphasized the need for inclusive approaches and the importance of leader selfawareness, critical reflection, and a focus on behaviors between leaders and followers
(Northouse, 2022). Leadership theorists discuss components of self-awareness and self-reflection
differently across theories; however, each informs the underpinnings of reflexive and reflective
practices. The following section reviews transformational, authentic, and inclusive leadership in
the context of self-awareness and self-reflection.

23
Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership is the practice of leaders creating a connection that increases
the motivation and morality for both the leader and follower, whereby the leader helps the
follower to reach their fullest potential (Burns, 2010). Researchers posit that transformational
leaders create trust within their organizations and teams, have clear values and a shared vision,
challenge the process, embrace mistakes, enable others to contribute, listen, encourage diverse
points of view, treat people with respect, and acknowledge the team’s contribution and
accomplishments (Bass, 2005; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Burns, 1978; Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Trust and vision create reliability and predictability in an uncertain environment (Bass, 1985;
Bennis & Nanus, 2007). In building trust, leaders must create a psychologically safe environment
for everyone on a team, and, thereby, understanding oneself as a leader and the team being led is
a critical factor (Edmondson, 2019). Transformational leaders can engage in 360-degree
assessments, which measure how a leader perceives themselves and whether this perception
aligns with peers, direct reports, and team members. First developed by Marshall Goldsmith in
the 1950s, 360-degree assessments or multi-rater feedback was designed to identify strengths and
as a developmental tool to identify areas for improvement (Fulmer & Goldsmith, 2001). Today,
360-degree assessment has become a norm for business (Ulrich et al., 2012) despite various
viewpoints on effectiveness. Research has shown that negative feedback is seen to be less
accurate and useful and can generate negative reactions, depending on the goal orientation of the
receiver and that the receiver sees positive feedback to be most accurate because it aligns with
the individual’s opinion of themselves (Brett & Atwater, 2001). Today, organizations are
investing in using 360-feedback tools; however, individuals receiving feedback confidentially
hold the data and are not required to share it with others in the organization (Conger, personal

24
communication, May 2, 2023). It is up to the leader to engage in the participation of results of a
360-assessment for developmental purposes, and organizations are pairing 360-assessment
results with executive coaching, yet data on the impact of the results is limited (Conger, personal
communication, May 2, 2023).
Authentic Leadership
With the rise of political and societal pressures in 2020, authentic leadership emerges as
people seek transparent, moral grounding and responsiveness to their needs and values
(Northouse, 2022). Authentic leadership theory is a complex process that reinforces the
development of qualities to be perceived as trustworthy by followers, and there are multiple
definitions written from different viewpoints (Northouse, 2022). For example, Shamir and Eilam
(2005) emphasize the importance of the leaders’ life experiences and the meaning one attaches to
their background as what defines an authentic leader, whereas Eagly (2005) defines authentic
leadership as an interpersonal process between interactions of the leader and the follower and
their impact on one another. Avolio et al. (2014) emphasize that positive and negative events can
trigger the development of authentic leadership over a lifetime. Furthermore, George (2003)
focuses on five characteristics, including a strong sense of purpose and passion for their work,
strong values influencing behaviors, the ability to establish trusting relationships and
connections, demonstration of self-discipline, and acting on their values that create consistency.
They are empathetic and compassionate of others. All the researchers incorporate components of
experiences, values, meaning, and connection.
In 2008, Walumbwa et al. developed another model and identified four authentic
leadership components: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and
relational transparency. Self-awareness includes reflecting on one’s core values, identity,

25
emotions, motives, and goals (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Internalized moral perspective or selfregulatory behavior reflects alignment with one’s values to guide behaviors (Walumbwa et al.,
2008). Balanced processing is the ability to explore diverse points of view before making a
decision (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Relational transparency refers to communicating openly and
being authentic in relationships (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Although multiple scholars have
different ways in which they view authentic leadership, a common aspect incorporates reflecting
on past and present events and encourages leaders to understand the meaning and the impact on
others to create an improved environment (Northouse, 2022). Reflection provides an opportunity
to pause and consider observation, experience, interpretation, and meaning to learn and inform
mindset and action (Porter, 2017).
Inclusive Leadership
Inclusive leadership theory has yet to be extensively researched or organized around a
common framework, and inclusion has varying definitions. Prior theories date back to 1958
when Shutz expressed the need to fulfill a basic human need of being included. Rather than
having an active voice in asking to be included, Shore and Chung (2022) define inclusion as
whether an individual perceives they are included based on how they are treated and whether it
satisfies their feelings of belonging. Varying feelings of belonging also intersect with differing
levels of feelings of uniqueness, which impact whether an individual feels excluded, included,
seen for who they are, or having to adapt and assimilate to cultural norms (Shore & Chung,
2022). When researchers discussed fulfilling a basic human need 40 years prior, Mor Barak and
Cherin (1998) defined inclusion based on individuals having access to information and resources
and a voice in the decision-making process.

26
Communication, cognizance, awareness of bias, courage, commitment, perception of
inclusion, having a sense of belonging, having a voice in the decision process, curiosity, cultural
intelligence, and recognizing uniqueness are inclusive characteristics shared among researchers
(Dillon & Bourke, 2016; Homan, 2020; Randel et al., 2018).
Inclusive leadership has three components: antecedent conditions, behaviors, and
outcomes (Randel et al., 2018). Antecedent conditions include the leader’s ability to see and
analyze situations differently, value individual identities, encourage various viewpoints, skills,
and abilities, incorporate others’ contributions to the decision process, and hold pro-diversity
beliefs (Randel et al., 2018). Additionally, the ability of the group to hold differences in
perspectives, experiences, values, and ways of working enhances the group (van Knippenberg et
al., 2013). Moreover, the psychological climate for diversity, which is the perception of the
organization’s values, policies, and practices, influences inclusion (Kossek & Zonia, 1993).
Edmondson (1996, 1999, 2004, 2019) emphasized the importance of leaders creating a
psychologically safe environment to encourage individuals within diverse groups to share their
points of view without negative consequences.
Additionally, leaders who are physically and psychologically available and accessible
create a sense of approachability (Edmondson, 2004). Homan et al. (2020) posit that diversityrelated leadership competencies, including a cognitive understanding of diversity, social
perceptiveness, and behavioral flexibility within situations, influence how leaders diagnose and
functionally match their behavior to individuals and a team. Although the leadership behaviors
above are important to creating an inclusive environment, the reviewed inclusive leadership
models do not specifically identify self-reflection or reflexivity. It appears that self-reflection
behaviors may be assumed within other characteristics; however, none of the studies focus on a

27
holistic definition of reflection, what it looks like in practice, and the criticality of reflection in
today’s complex workplace environments.
Self-Reflection
One of an organization’s most significant challenges is “how to develop a new breed of
senior managers that have the knowledge, the sensitivity, and the abilities necessary to lead
organizations throughout the uncertain times ahead” (Ghoshal et al., 1992, p. 50). With
uncertainty, researchers posit the importance of leaders having the ability to integrate three metaskills, including the ability to manage emotional reactions, practice self-reflection, and engage in
self-regulatory processes (Nesbit, 2012). The literature review specifically focuses on the
practice of self-reflection as demonstrated in the works of Dewey (1910, 1933), Foucault (1985),
Schön (1992) Cayir (2022), Eurich (2018), and Solomon (2017, 2021).
Approaches to Self-Reflection
The six self-reflection approaches explored are connecting thinking to experience,
uncovering assumptions, understanding positionality and impact on outcomes, reflection-inaction, self-awareness, and applying a psychotherapy relationship model to the workplace.
Cultivating Thinking to Connect to Experience
John Dewey (1859-1952) was one of America’s leading philosophers and founder of the
progressive school movement, applying original theories of learning based on pragmatism
(Dewey, 1997). In his 1910 publication titled How We Think, Dewey stated that our thoughts are
not based on the truth but are shortcuts informed by society and past experiences, obtained from
obscure sources, and unconsciously become a part of who we are (Dewey, 1910). Dewey (1910,
1933) focused on cultivating thinking to uncover the connections between our actions and their
consequences. Dewey (1933) defined reflection as follows:

28
Active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge
in the light of the grounds that support it and further conclusions to which it leads … It
includes a conscious and voluntary effort to establish belief upon a firm basis of evidence
and rationality (p. 9).
According to Dewey, a reflective experience includes various phases, including confusion or
doubt, presumption or conjecture, observation of the situation, formulation of a tentative
hypothesis or cognitive thinking about influence, and developing a plan of action (Dewey, 1933).
Critical reflection provides the conditions to understand the context and why we believe what we
believe. Dewey (1910) argues that to dismiss experiences and ideas due to assumptions or
shortcuts in thinking due to lack of reflection is a failure of human freedom. “Genuine freedom is
trained power of thought… and if man’s actions are not guided by thoughtful conclusions, then
they are guided by inconsiderate impulse, unbalanced appetite, or circumstances of the moment”
(Dewey, 1910, p. 43). Examples of behaviors today that coincide with Dewey’s observations
include stereotyping, affinity bias, gender, socioeconomic status, race, age, weight, culture, and
other biases.
Uncovering Assumptions
Paul-Michel Foucault (1926-1984) was a French historian and philosopher whose
theories addressed the relationship between power and knowledge (Gutting & Oksala, 2022).
Foucault (1985) saw the need for critical reflection based on a perspective that thought is
influenced by social and historical power relations, which infuse culture with norms, values, and
bias, which impacts communication. Critical reflection focuses on uncovering assumptions and
biases that have developed based on one’s past influences and reflecting on what might be silent
cognitive acts that govern one’s behavior. Critical theorists attribute to critical reflection the task

29
of uncovering hegemonic assumptions that influence society to interrupt systems of class, race,
and gender oppression (Giroux & McLaren, 1989; Kanpol, 1999; Lather, 1991). Examples of
tools that organizations are using today to uncover assumptions include unconscious bias training
and social identity mapping (Jacobson & Mustafa, 2019).
Reflection-in-Action
Reflection-in-action is a process where an individual engages in “on-the-spot” (Schön,
1992, p.241) reflection and experimentation on one’s own actions and decision making triggered
by uncertainty, surprise, or conflicting values. Schön (1992) evaluated this theory across multiple
professional fields and found that it requires individuals to draw from their knowledge and adapt
it to the situation. An example that Schön (1992) presents using a product development team
case demonstrates that the team seeks to protect themselves, control the task and territory and
win credit for their work. The differences in how people see their roles affects the knowledge
they think is important and how they think about their actions (Schön, 1992). These differences
in how people approach their work affect how they reflect and respond in situations. This can
either be collaborative with the team or create additional conflict without reciprocal reflection-inpractice (Schön, 1992). Schön states the following in his 1992 book:
Both client and professional bring to their encounter a body of understandings which they
can only very partially communicate to one another and much of which they cannot describe
to themselves. Hence the process of communication which is supposed to lead to a fuller
grasp of one another’s meanings and, on the client’s part, to an acceptance of the manifest
evidence of the professional’s authority can only begin with nonunderstanding and
nonacceptance— but with a willing suspension of disbelief…The recognition of error, with

30
its resulting uncertainty, can become a source of discovery rather than an occasion for selfdefense.
Schön’s (1992) work points to the importance of awareness of positionality and openness to
other points of view to influence effective communication and collaboration.
Understanding Positionality and Impact on Outcomes
Positionality is shaped by an individual’s socioeconomic status, gender, race, ethnicity,
nationality, education, and life experiences (Dill & Kohlman, 2012; Mao et al., 2016; Milner,
2007). In research, one must understand one’s positionality as positionality influences a
researcher’s interactions with participants and interpretations of participants’ experiences (Mao
et al., 2016). The understanding of positionality becomes a launch pad for thinking about
ourselves in relation to the context of a situation. Probst (2015) found that one of the leading
personal challenges of reflexivity is the emotional response to people and others. Incorporating a
lens to one’s own lived experiences to locate oneself within the inquiry and share with others
was perceived as difficult (Cayir et al., 2022). Thinking about ourselves in context to a situation
occurring at the moment requires us to pause, go within, question, and explore our emotional and
physical reactions before responding. Cayir et al. (2022) demonstrated the impact of conducting
reflexivity practices with a multicultural team of researchers with diverse backgrounds, resulting
in an opening of new perspectives, creativity, alternate decision-making, and new insights about
oneself.
Self-Awareness
Research suggests that when we are aware of ourselves, we make better decisions, build
stronger relationships, and communicate more effectively (Eurich, 2018). Although researchers
have used different definitions of self-awareness, Eurich (2018) discovered that characteristics of

31
internal self-awareness (how one sees their values, fit with the environment, reactions, and
impact on others) are different from external self-awareness or understanding how other people
or employees view their leaders and peers which enables the ability to build trusting
relationships. Although most people believe they are self-aware, a large-scale scientific study
found that only 10-15% of people are self-aware (Eurich, 2018), as defined by having both
internal and external self-awareness. Individuals with internal self-awareness had higher job
satisfaction and higher satisfaction with relationships. Individuals with external self-awareness
were skilled at showing empathy and considering others’ perspectives. Employees felt they had
better relationships with leaders and saw the leaders as more effective. Yet, internal and external
self-awareness is not correlational, as someone can have one or the other. However, when
someone has both internal and external, Eurich (2018) considers them highly self-aware.
Applying the Psychotherapy Relationship Model to the Workplace
Solomon (2017) developed an approach called Relational Self-Awareness based on over
20 years of serving diverse students who bring disparate needs, identities, and experiences into a
classroom—informed by Integrative Systemic Therapy (Pinsof et al., 2018), a model of
psychotherapy that identifies action, meaning, and emotion as dimensions that influence client
outcomes and operate as important change entry points for integrative therapists (Pinsof et al.,
2018). Although relational self-awareness stems from psychology, the researcher suggests
foundational elements for organizational leadership development. Relational Self-Awareness is a
“meta-skill that strengthens an individual’s intrapsychic foundation, enabling them to approach
love, sex, and commitment with a growth mindset, viewing an intimate relationship as a
classroom” (Solomon, 2017, p. 34). Solomon’s research found that when young adults practice
relational self-awareness, they view relationships differently and have improved communication,

32
increased maturity, and resilience (Solomon, 2017). Relational Self-Awareness includes five
pillars that address action, meaning, and emotion to help young adults improve how they behave,
think, and feel in their relationships. The five pillars include self-reflection, integrating cultural
identities, nurturing sexual maturity, navigating conflict and expression, and cultivating
resilience (Solomon, 2017). In an organizational work setting, one could consider all these
pillars, but adapting the practice of self-reflection to a business context involves addressing
cultural identity within the organization, nurturing work experiences, navigating conflict and
expression in the workplace, and cultivating resilience in a complex organizational environment.
Self-Reflective Practices
Research reveals that thinking, writing, and talking about experiences to make sense of
them impact behavior (Gray, 2007; Moon, 2004; Osmond & Darlington, 2005). Situations that
bring attention to self-truths, which Eurich (2018) calls “alarm clock events,” help to inform
internal self-awareness. Eurich (2018) defines alarm clock events as an “earthquake” or a
significant event that disrupts one’s life, such as a death, illness, divorce, or setback, or an
“everyday insight” from a mundane situation when one suddenly sees their behavior in a new
light. Eurich’s (2018) research uncovered that triggers for self-reflection are not limited to
significant upsets but can be found in everyday occurrences, and the ability to imagine or take
perspective on what other people are thinking and feeling is a self-reflective practice.
Daudelin (1996) explored three approaches to practice, including reflecting alone,
reflecting with one other person, and reflecting in a group. Daudlin (1996) studied which type of
reflective practice was most effective with managers after they had experienced a challenging
work experience. The groups were divided into self-reflect alone, reflecting with one other
person, or reflecting within the group. Daudelin’s (1996) research found that individual and dyad

33
approaches were superior to groups based on the number of learning outcomes from a postreflection survey. Group reflection was also beneficial and yielded interpersonal learning, such
as recognizing cultural dynamics, respect for diversity among teams, and insights into the
organizational context (Daudlin, 1996). Grant et al. (2002) posit that there are two types of selfreflective practices: productive problem-solving to reach a goal and emotion-focused selfreflection, including reflection on thoughts and behavior. Some individuals’ process of selfreflection may be automatic, and for others, self-reflection may require a conscious effort
(Ekman, 1992; Mansell, 2000). Mansell (2000) found that individuals who are susceptible to
anxiety tend to apply conscious effort. Grant et al. (2002) compared individuals who kept a
journal to write about their thoughts against those who did not and found that journal keeping did
not lead to higher levels of insight, perhaps because it was automatic.
In contrast, individuals who kept journals could be keeping them to record thoughts,
feelings, and emotions but not to gain insight and a change plan (Burt, 1994). Reflective
processing through writing, thinking, and discussion may or may not help leaders make sense of
events, provide insight into areas for improvement, and help shape leadership development
strategies (Nesbit, 2012).
Although leadership theories and frameworks provide models for leaders and
organizations, there are complexities within each model, and models do not provide “how to”
instructions on how to apply principles in practice effectively. In researching transformational
leadership, authentic leadership, and inclusive leadership theory (Northouse, 2022), each theory
contains the importance of self-awareness and reflection; however, there is an opportunity to
understand how the use of self-reflection practices impacts a leader, their communication, and
how they impact how a leader leads diverse teams. Researchers have posited that all leaders can

34
be developed, yet the research literature lacks sufficient guidance on how leaders develop selfawareness and self-reflection practices while leading diverse teams in a complex environment.
This study is important to understand the impact of self-reflection in improving leader and team
communication and how reflective leadership practices can build more inclusive organizations.
Conceptual Framework
Maxell (2013) defines a conceptual framework as a graphical representation of prior
research findings and theories used to address a problem in practice. The conceptual
framework’s purpose is to further support the study’s design by helping the researcher connect
elements in the research process and clarify the study’s rationale (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
conceptual framework also helps to depict the researchers’ philosophical worldviews and
methodology to frame the study (Saunders, 2019). The researcher’s philosophical worldview
reveals the researcher’s ontological (nature of reality), epistemological (knowledge), and
axiological (values, ethics) assumptions (Saunders, 2019). A constructivist philosophical
paradigm is associated with this study as the researcher aimed to understand the impact of selfreflection of the leader’s experiencing it and how they interpret and attribute meaning to their
experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The conceptual framework for this paper applies the reflective practice developed by
Cayir et al. (2022) with a modification for leaders to apply while working in diverse teams.
Reflexivity is primarily a term used in research. Cayir et al. (2022) developed a framework for
researchers to conduct reflective practice, as researchers may be subject to assumptions, personal
biases, and interpretations not grounded in data. From the research context, reflexivity within
interdisciplinary research teams enables teams to process differing perspectives, allows for new

35
approaches to the surface, and provides an opportunity to develop a shared understanding (Cayir
et al., 2022). Figure 2 illustrates the adaptation of the reflexivity practice and guide for leaders.
Figure 2
Leader reflexivity practice conceptual framework
Note. Adapted from “Discovering New Connections: Insights from individual and collective
reflexivity in a mixed methods study,” by Cayir et al. 2022, International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 21, 1-14. Sage Publications.
The framework guides leaders to consider assumptions, personal biases, and
interpretations that may be surfacing in an interaction. The framework could also extend beyond
the leader, including team members and individuals. From the workplace context, reflexivity
within leadership behaviors and teams may enable individuals and teams to process differing

36
perspectives, see new approaches, and open possibilities to foster collaboration, respect, and
shared understanding. The leader is at the center of the framework with three branches extended,
including a self-led practice, an approach to address reflection, and a relational reflection
process. The self-led practice (Cayir et al., 2022) includes situating oneself and examining one’s
positionality, including power, gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, socioeconomic status, geography, family structure, and other social factors (Villaverde, 2008). The
approach to address self-reflection includes providing a rationale for decisions in different
workplace moments (Cayir et al., 2022), and the relational reflection process includes examining
interactions between different perspectives within a team (Cayir et al., 2022). The conceptual
framework also aligns with the theoretical framework to examine the individual (self-led), the
behavior (approach), and the environment (relational). The conceptual framework will guide the
qualitative case study interviews to examine the leader’s reflexivity practice associated with selfled behaviors, approaches to team communication, and the environment in which the team
works. Chapter three will provide an in-depth description of the methods used for the study.
Summary
In this chapter, the researcher reviewed a body of literature emphasizing the need to
understand the impact of self-awareness and self-reflection in the workplace. The researcher
identified the opportunity to expand upon how transformational, authentic, and inclusive
leadership theories incorporate self-reflection. Throughout the literature review, the researcher
outlined self-reflection constructs that align with the Leader Reflexivity practice conceptual
framework to mitigate assumptions, personal biases, and interpretations when working with
others (Cayir et al., 2022). The researcher conducted the literature review to inform the current

37
research study and understand the individual, behavior, and environmental influences of a selfreflective practice on one’s communication and behavior in leading diverse teams.

38
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
A qualitative study focuses on “understanding the meaning people have
constructed…how people make sense of their world and the experiences they have in the world”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 15). This qualitative study aimed to understand perceptions of how
self-reflection affects leader self-awareness, leader communication and behavior, their team, and
the organization.
Research Questions
The qualitative study was conducted with senior leaders leading diverse teams from
various industries, including entertainment, government, healthcare, higher education,
hospitality, real estate, and technology. The study aimed to understand how senior leaders
perceive self-reflection practices affect their work and their experience of their organization as
individuals and as leaders of diverse teams. The research questions that guided the study
included:
1. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects leader behavior?
2. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects team behaviors?
0.3.How leaders perceive self-reflection affects the overall environment of the organization?
Overview of Design
The research design used qualitative interviews to capture lived experiences about the
individual, their behavior, and their environment (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) and the perceived
perceptions about self-reflection. A qualitative study interview approach was selected based on a
constructivist philosophical worldview of inquiry (Creswell & Creswell, 2018), where
participants construct subjective, contextual-based meaning, and the researcher centered the
perspectives of senior leaders participating in the study.

39
Research Setting
The research setting included the physical environment where the participant chose to
participate in an online, recorded interview via Zoom. Online interviews were selected to
accommodate the participant's location and eliminate the need for travel. Participants participated
from locations throughout the U.S. The researcher explored the perceived impact of selfreflection with 17 senior leaders aged 38-60. Participants’ titles, levels within the organization,
and demographics were collected during the interview process.
The Researcher
I am interested in this study based on my career experience working in large
organizations as a marketing executive and witnessing a lack of self-awareness in leadership,
limiting behaviors, incivility, and burnout, particularly within diverse teams. In understanding
the problem of practice and the need for critical reflection and self-awareness to understand one's
positionality in context and to consider how one can disentangle pre-established norms and
power relationships to mediate conflict, I look to my upbringing and thirty years of experience in
business development and marketing leadership roles within Fortune 500 organizations, where it
has been important to understand the rational and emotional needs of consumers and their
mindset. Additionally, I look to my experience and education in self-awareness, selfdevelopment, and organizational change. Considering power structures, my intersectionality, and
positionality, I am a White, cis-gendered, straight, educated, upper-income, married woman who
works well with teams. My research interest stems from the experiences I have had with senior
executives and my experience as the youngest daughter in a family of four women. I have
observed different corporate culture environments and the intersection of employees, managers,
and leaders within a corporate context. As a child, my parents prioritized education and etiquette,

40
a customary code of polite behavior in society or accepted behaviors that follow the norms
among members of a particular profession or group (Oxford Dictionary, n.d.). The intersection of
my etiquette experience, power structures with siblings, and interaction with senior leaders led to
my interest in how leaders' expectations, according to their background or cultural norms, may
hinder team effectiveness, thereby restricting the advancement of diverse team members. As we
achieve greater diversity in managerial and leadership roles, leaders can help create a
psychologically safe environment, encourage teams to bring their backgrounds and identities to
the conversation, and improve communication. This improvement may help break down power
structures and mitigate social and economic inequities in the workplace.
Although my background includes experiencing inequitable leadership in diverse teams, I
am aware of my assumptions and biases and used social cognitive theory to uncover the actual
experiences of senior leaders leading diverse teams. Understanding that qualitative research is
interpretive research, I explicitly identified potential biases, values, and personal background
factors that may shape the interpretations and coding of the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Additionally, I designed the questions to understand the participants' experience and setting and
did not include statements about my experience that could bias the participants (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018).
Data Source and Methodology
One primary data collection method was chosen for this study, including online Zoom
interviews from November 2023 to January 2024. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were
used to understand how the participants perceive self-reflection affects their work and their
experience of their organization as leaders and as members of teams and the organization.

41
Participants
Qualitative interviews were conducted from November 8, 2023, through January 19,
2024, using purposeful sampling of senior leaders leading diverse teams within the researcher's
network. Levels included director, executive director, vice-president, senior vice-president, heads
of, and chief positions. The participants were full-time employees who had been with their
organization for at least three years and led a minimum of five people on their team. Twenty
leaders were invited to participate, and the study included 17 completed interviews.
Instrumentation and Data Collection Procedure
Before data collection, the research underwent an epoch process to explore experiences
and become aware of personal prejudices, viewpoints, and assumptions (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The epoch process allowed the researcher to set aside “everyday understandings,
judgments, and knowings” (Moustakas, 1964, p. 33) and actively listen to each participant.
The researcher used a semi-structured interview guide containing 14 open-ended
interview questions to guide the conversation while also providing space for the participant to
share their experiences and have a fluid exchange of information (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Two 10-point Likert scale questions were asked to capture perceived ratings of individuals and
organizational capability to do self-reflection. Three demographic questions were asked at the
end of the interview. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted online, using Zoom
video conferencing, depending on the geographic location and availability of the participant.
Each interview was conducted for 60 minutes, and the researcher asked permission to transcribe
the interview using Otter AI, a digital transcription tool. The researcher took handwritten notes
on a pad of paper throughout the interview process to supplement the data collection and capture
key statements. These notes also served as a backup should any recording errors occur

42
(Cresswell & Creswell, 2018). All audio, video, and handwritten notes were kept in a secure file
and only visible to the researcher. Participants were notified within the interview protocol and
release form process that all files would be erased upon completion of the study. A priori codes
were developed before the interviews as a guide for the researcher. Open coding was conducted
immediately after each interview and further refined with axial codes. Questions were designed
based on the social cognitive theory framework, looking at the person, behavior, and
environment as they relate to informing perceptions about self-reflection on the individual, the
individual's leadership behaviors in leading a team, the team's behavior, and the individuals’
perception of the impact on the organization {RQ1, RQ2, RQ3}. See Appendix D for the
interview protocol.
Data Analysis
Interview transcripts were exported from the video text tract (VTT) files from the Zoom
recordings and converted to Word with assigned line numbering to organize the data captured.
Pseudonyms and participant numbers were assigned to each participant to protect and anonymize
the participants' data and support non-biased coding by the researcher. Transcripts and video
files were stored in a University of Southern California dual-factor encryption passwordprotected file. Interview data was coded and organized into themes using Google Sheets
organized by interview question and the associated research question. The Google sheet was
organized into columns, which included the participant number, line number, answer, A priori,
open codes, axial codes, and researcher comments. Coding enabled the researcher to form
patterns, categories, and themes across the data. The researcher used a phenomenological
reduction process to derive the inner structure or meaning (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
phenomenological reduction process includes continually returning to the essence of the

43
participants’ experience to document meaning and to bring together a “composite description
that presents the ‘essence’ of the phenomenon” (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 82). All
information, including interview transcripts, videos, notes, and reflective memos, was organized
into a research database (Yin, 2014).
The researcher used horizontalization, which is an “interweaving of a person, conscious
experience, and phenomenon…qualities are recognized and described; every perception is
granted equal value, non-repetitive constituents of experience are linked thematically, and a full
description is derived” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 96). Additionally, the researcher used imaginative
variation, viewing the data from multiple perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Credibility and Transferability
Criteria for qualitative research to be accountable include credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability (Hinga, 2022). The study was rigorously conducted using
qualitative research best practices to accurately reflect the lived experiences investigated
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The qualitative semi-structured interview guide was designed to have
consistent questions and to help mitigate fundamental biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
Five core tenets of ethics in qualitative research include informed consent, voluntary
participation, doing no harm, confidentiality, anonymity, and only including relevant data
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The research purpose and voluntary, anonymous, and confidential
participation were communicated during recruitment through email and within the
documentation provided to each participant. Participants were asked to sign a document
confirming voluntary participation and permission to use the data captured within the semistructured interview process. All participants completed confidentiality documentation, and

44
comments were aggregated for analysis and not personally identifiable. The research study was
submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California to
assure, in advance, that appropriate steps are taken to protect the rights and welfare of
individuals participating as subjects in the research (Chenail, 2010). The author of the research
study conducted semi-structured interviews. Although the conversation was between the
researcher and the research participant, if the conversation included negative perspectives and
bias about members within the team being led, only relevant information specific to the research
purpose was included (Agwar & Osho, 2017). Each party acknowledged that during the research
relationship, the researcher received information from the participant that is regarded as
confidential and proprietary, including the company’s products and all other information
disclosed by either party to the other party verbally or in writing. Neither party shall disclose,
provide, or otherwise make available to any third party any confidential information of the other
party. Each party agreed that it would protect the other party's confidential information by
exercising no less protection and care than it customarily uses to safeguard its proprietary
information, which it desires to retain in confidence and no event less than reasonable care.

45
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The qualitative study aimed to understand how leaders perceive self-reflection affects
their leadership behaviors, team behaviors, and the overall organization while leading diverse
teams. For this research study, a senior leader was defined as anyone within an organization who
holds the title of senior director, vice-president, senior vice-president, executive vice-president,
or chief position and leads a team (minimum of five team members) of diverse individuals.
Diverse is defined as differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the
perception that one person is different from another. The researcher provided a definition of selfreflection in the consent form. The definition of self-reflection is the process by which
individuals identify the assumptions governing their actions, ability to consider the origins of the
assumptions, question the meaning of the assumptions, and develop alternative ways of acting or
communicating. However, each participant articulated their own understanding of self-reflection
during the interview.
This dissertation sought to address the problem of leader awareness of their positionality
and its effect on their communication within diverse organizations. Specifically investigating if
self-reflection practices by senior leaders leading diverse teams affects communication and
behavior of the leader, the team, and the organization. The following research questions guided
the study:
RQ 1. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects leader behavior?
RQ 2. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects team behaviors?
RQ 3. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects the overall environment of the
organization?

46
This chapter presents data from 17 interview participants, and each was asked 19 semistructured questions. The interviews provided a narrative about each individual’s definition of
self-reflection, situations that triggered self-reflection, and leadership experiences leading
diverse teams. The researcher presents the data under common themes organized by leader
background and positionality, leadership behaviors, environmental challenges, and opportunities
and outcomes. We discuss each theme and provide direct quotations from the data analysis to
support evidence for the findings. The chapter concludes with a summary of the findings and
reflections on each research question.
Participating Stakeholders
Qualitative interviews were conducted online using Zoom video conferencing from
November 8, 2023, through January 19, 2024. Participants were organized based on their
industry listed in alphabetical order. Pseudonyms were assigned to the participants as indicated
in Table 1 (see below). These pseudonyms will be used to discuss the findings in this chapter.
Table 1 reflects a summary of the participant characteristics (N=17).
Table 1
Participant Characteristics (N=17)
Pseudonym Title Industry Gender Age Race
Size of
Team
Managed
Diversity
Characteristics of
the Team
Angela VicePresident Entertainment Female 54 LatinX 45
Age/generational,
Culture, Gender,
Geography, Race,
Religion, Work
Experience
Cathy Senior VicePresident Entertainment Female 60 White 30
Age/generational,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience

47
Pseudonym Title Industry Gender Age Race
Size of
Team
Managed
Diversity
Characteristics of
the Team
Kelly
Executive
VicePresident,
Planning and
Operations
Entertainment Female 56 White,
Armenian 100
Age/generational,
Culture, Gender,
Geography, Race,
Work Experience
Phyllis VP Global
Marketing Entertainment Female 60 White 10
Age/generational,
Gender, Race,
Work experience
Michael Senior VicePresident
Financial
Services Male 38 White 45
Age/generational,
Education,
Gender,
Geography, Work
Experience
Zeik Senior
Director Government Male 52 White 7
Age/generational,
Education,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience
Dwight
Chief
Operating
Officer
Healthcare Male 52 White 12
Age/generational,
Gender, Work
Experience
Will
Chief
Diversity
Officer
Healthcare Male 53 LatinX 5
Age/generational,
Culture,
Education,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience
Pam
Head of
Human
Resources
Higher
Education Female 51 Black 6
Age/generational,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience
Nora
Head of
Human
Resources
Hospitality Female 38 Hispanic 310
Age/generational,
Culture, Gender,
Race, Work
Experience
Samantha Head of
Agency Non-Profit Female 54 White 50
Age/generational,
Culture, Educ,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience

48
Note: Data in the table above was gathered through interviews and LinkedIn profiles. The race
category is represented using the participant’s wording in the interview. Diversity characteristics
of the team were collected based on the perceptions of the leader defining their team. Dwight,
COO of a healthcare organization, reported diversity characteristics of the executive leadership
team, yet also oversees the entire organization of 65,000 employees.
Pseudonym Title Industry Gender Age Race
Size of
Team
Managed
Diversity
Characteristics of
the Team
Stanley Executive
Director Real Estate Male 38 Black 91
Age/generational,
Culture,
Education,
Gender, Race,
Work Experience
Andy Senior
Director Technology Male 37 LatinX 10
Age/generational,
Education,
Gender,
Geography, Race,
Work Experience
Howard Senior VicePresident Technology Male 60 White 170
Age/generational,
Education,
Culture, Gender,
Geography, Race,
Work Experience
Jim
Chief
Alliance
Officer
Technology Male 58 White 17
Age/generational,
Culture, Gender,
Race, Work
Experience
Meredith
Chief
Operating
Officer
Technology Female 60 White 1,000
Age/generational,
Education,
Geography, Race,
Work Experience
Robert Senior VicePresident Technology Male 55 White 50
Age/generational,
Culture, Gender,
Geography, Race,
Work Experience

49
Seventeen participants reported diversity characteristics of their teams, including
geographic location, country, culture, race, professional experience, tenure, gender, age, or
generational differences. Industries reflected within the leadership sample include entertainment,
government, higher education, financial services, hospitality, non-profit, real estate, and
technology. Forty-seven percent of participants (n=8) identified as female, and 53% (n=9)
identified as male. Participants’ ages ranged from 38 to 60 years old. Sixty-five percent of the
participants (n=11) identified as White, 23% of participants (n=4) identified as LatinX or
Hispanic, and 12% of participants identified (n=2) as Black.
Leader Background and Positionality
The study used Social Cognitive Theory as the theoretical framework to guide the study,
reflecting the notion that self-reflection is a cognitive process influenced by personal factors,
behavior, and the environment. Leaders actively engage in learning, through self-reflection,
shaping their behavior based on observations, evaluations, and the dynamic interplay between
the self, the team, and contextual factors. This section begins by examining the leader’s personal
factors, including background and their positionality. Leaders participating in the study
recognized how their early career experiences influenced their leadership values and how they
have developed their abilities to self-reflect. They expressed that self-reflection was not inherent,
but rather a learned behavior that evolved and continues to develop throughout their leadership
journey. As these leaders developed, they expressed more self-awareness about their background
and positionality, which began to influence their behavior.
Hindsight is 20/20 - Early Career Experiences
All 17 leaders expressed moments of failure early in their careers where they assumed
they knew what to do, were moving fast, trying their best, and were not able to see beyond

50
themselves. The leaders that participated in this study were between the ages of 38 and 60, and
all 17 participants were in senior leadership positions leading diverse teams. The phrase
“hindsight is 20/20” is derived from the idea that our vision is usually better when looking back
than forward. Each leader was able to investigate their past experiences and identify one or
several moments of failure where they had the confidence, courage, and grit to make the
decisions they did, yet the reaction that occurred gave them pause to question their behavior.
Stanley, the youngest in the participant population, shared the following:
At a certain point in your life, you are celebrated for becoming fearless, right? And that
comes from youth. You can do a lot without really ever thinking about it, because you’re
kind of doing what you think comes naturally to you. And at some point, you get older…
you’re responsible for more things. So your missteps, and your challenges become more
expensive. Your responsibilities are now to other people, not just to yourself. Whether
that’d be your family…or that’d be the people who work for you. As the stage gets bigger
the stakes get higher. And I think that gets bigger over the arc of a career.
As the interviews progressed, each participant shared their missteps from mid-career moments.
“I wanted to prove that I was a good leader.” Nora shared that when she was early in her career,
she stepped up and made a decision that negatively impacted the entire organization. At the
time, she thought she was doing the right thing. Pam said, “I used to make snap decisions and
snap judgments...I got my hand slapped…from that day on…I learned to stop and think about
what is my motivation and what am I trying to accomplish.” Phyllis shared, “I had such a strong
point of view as a very young manager…I wanted to be right, and be the right person with the
right ideas…I realized this was never going to work if I was going to manage a group of
people.” Sixteen of the 17 leaders shared the need to respect different points of view, welcome

51
new ideas, and be able to have ideas that were different from their own. As these leaders worked
their way up in their careers, they recognized that their actions created reactions and that the
need to self-reflect became imperative to lead effectively.
Recognizing Positionality
Leaders who reflected on their backgrounds, early career experiences, and setbacks
developed awareness and accountability about themselves and their leadership positions.
Seventy-one percent of leaders (n=12) interviewed had advanced degrees, and all leaders (n=17)
had an undergraduate degree from a four-year university. Leaders expressed that their education,
work experience, organizational title, gender, and race were characteristics that influenced how
leaders communicate with their teams. Michael, a senior vice-president with an MBA in business
and engineering, recognized that he was surrounded by people like himself in business school.
Upon entering the banking industry, he found his peers to come from various backgrounds,
cultures, and educational levels, ranging from a high school diploma, some college,
undergraduate degree, or trade school. He recognized the need to consider other people’s skills,
cultural heritage, education, and work experience. Michael perceived that his ability to
acknowledge hierarchy and differences enabled him to build more trusted relationships with his
teams. Samantha is a cis-gender White woman who holds a Ph.D. in psychology, is at the top of
her organization, and leading a team with a variety of educational and cultural backgrounds
shared, “I recognize my privilege, and rather than just be direct, I’m trying to be disarming, selfdeprecating at times purposely but to just kind of bring it down a notch.” Stanley, who holds an
MBA and leads a diverse team, shared, “The most important thing is to understand the core
message that needs to be delivered, and then I reverse engineer the way I communicate based on
the audience.”

52
All leaders were aware of positionality based on their senior-level titles. Seventy-six
percent of leaders (n=13) expressed how they recognized the assumed position of power as a
senior leader. Angela recognized that she needed to be conscious and think about her position of
power and impact on others in the way she set goals, set expectations, and communicated with
her team. “I am the leader who has just set a mountain to take, and I need to recognize my
position of power and how much they’re dedicated to me and striving to succeed,” shared
Angela. Leaders expressed the need to be aware of their tone and expression and the impact on
trust, psychological safety, and collaboration because of their influence and position as senior
leaders. Dwight acknowledged that his natural disposition was to come across with intensity and
can be perceived as interrogating. Daniel recognized he was more rational than emotional and
often perceived as being too direct. Kelly, who identifies as an Armenian, White, educated
female, and first-generation college student, recognized her Senior Vice-President title and MBA
education. However, she expressed that “people just assume I’m white and privileged… I’m
more or less a minority as a woman, as a foreigner, as a child of an immigrant family, but
nobody sees that I’ve had a lot of my own challenges.” Kelly was aware of her background but
expressed that she didn’t reveal her background in a work context. Kelly shared that maybe she
should talk about it as her perception was that maybe her diverse team would have a better
relationship with her if they understood what challenges she had been through to reach her level
in her career. Leaders recognized their positionality, influence, the differences amongst their
teams, and the need to be conscious of how they occur with others.

53
Defining Self-Reflection
Each leader was asked what self-reflection means to them in a work context. A preview
of the themes within each leader’s response included personal accountability for spoken and
unspoken behavior, awareness of other points of view, ability to look externally and internally,
and humility to ask oneself and get input from others on what could be done differently. Table 2
summarizes the participants’ definitions of self-reflection in a work context (N=17).
Table 2
Participant Definitions of Self-Reflection in a Work Context (N=17)
Pseudonym Definition of self-reflection in a work context
Phyllis
“When I thought I was trying my hardest and had the right thing in mind, and
you know just didn’t end up the right way…I had to look outside myself and
understand others.”
Cathy “It’s a level of flexibility, nimbleness, and openness to be able to look at
something and make a pivot…or see someone else’s perspective.”
Kelly “Active listening, being accountable…acknowledging your message in the way
you intended it to be, how it is coming across, and repeating back to the other
person what they say…being present.”
Angela “Two practices…reflecting on roadmap and my team to create pathways for
growth…recognizing other perspectives so that they know that I see them and
hear them.”
Michael “Cleaning up your actions and the impact…and that you’re open to get and
accept feedback….and to mirror with peers and direct reports.”
Zeik “…carving out time to think…consciously take walks to do thinking,
reflect…my mind needs a break.”
Dwight “It’s living in the present, being hyper-aware of verbal and nonverbal, replaying
what happened, what worked and didn’t.”
Will “Let me look inward and what I could do better and how do I interact with
others…is there difference here between us that I need to be a little more
sensitive to?”
Pam “Looking through the lens of somebody else…and asking, how would somebody
else see the situation?”

54
Pseudonym Definition of self-reflection in a work context
Nora “Putting myself in their shoes.”
Samantha
“It means awareness. It means the ability to understand myself, know my own
implicit biases, have my own awareness of where I come from and my areas of
weakness. Self-reflection also has to do with taking an interest, a legitimate
interest, in how others perceive me, and how others take in what I say and how I
present to them. So I have to take an interest in what I’m saying and how it
lands on you. In a very non-defensive, open, curious, and wondering manner.”
Stanley “Personal accountability for spoken and unspoken behavior and how specific
situations are handled.”
Jim “Being able to acknowledge your impact and talk through difficult conversations
and the experience for the other person.”
Meredith “Slowing down long enough to be thoughtful with regard to my part in how
something succeeds or fails.”
Andy “Being able to oscillate between being on the dance floor and then suspending
attention and being on the balcony…unpacking dynamics…sense
making…holding up a mirror.”
Howard “Having humility to ask myself what I can do differently and getting input from
others…deeply listening to what’s happening around me and around other
people…inviting constructive feedback and criticism.”
Robert “Understanding my own impact and understanding where the other person is
coming from.

55
Pam, head of HR in higher education shared, “Self-reflection is looking through the lens of
somebody else, especially in unfamiliar territory.” And Samantha, head of a non-profit agency
and the only self-reflective trained practitioner in the study, shared the following:
It means awareness. It means the ability to understand myself, know my own implicit
biases, have my own awareness of where I come from and my areas of weakness. Selfreflection also has to do with taking an interest, a legitimate interest, in how others
perceive me, and how others take in what I say and how I present to them. So I have to
take an interest in what I’m saying and how it lands on you. In a very non-defensive,
open, curious, and wondering manner.
Fourteen leaders had not explicitly identified self-reflection as a word to describe their behaviors.
Yet, all leaders formally or informally practiced or had practiced self-reflection based on
situational influences within the work environment.
Leader Behaviors
As previously discussed, leaders engage in the learning process, shaping their behavior
based on observations, evaluations, and the dynamic interplay between the self, the team, and
contextual factors. This section looks at contextual factors that spark leaders to conduct selfreflective behavior, including unmet expectations, misunderstanding of words and actions, past
experiences, and a need for a new approach.
Factors that Spark Self-Reflection
Three factors that influenced leaders to self-reflect were revealed, including unmet
expectations, misunderstandings of words and actions, and situations in which the leader used
their past experiences to inform decision-making.

56
Unmet Expectations
Each leader shared how their position as the leader in setting goals and expectations
influenced perceived team behavior. With senior responsibilities, these leaders know that they set
the standards but need to be conscious of their behaviors, such as goal setting, tone of voice,
verbal and non-verbal cues, and the energy they express. Particularly when standards and goals
are unmet, and expression is shared with a diverse team of individuals.
The researcher asked interview participants to share a scenario that influenced them to
self-reflect. Moments of discourse where the team failed to meet previously set expectations,
triggered direct conversations, disagreement, changes in tone of voice, and intensity that spread
throughout the organization. Eighty-eight percent of leaders (n= 15) shared experiences where
their expectations of the situation differed from the outcome, requiring each leader to reflect on
the situation and context, their own behavior, and their perception of how the team interpreted
the leader’s behavior. The common themes surrounding unmet expectations included missed
goals and deadlines and perceived expectations from the team in how the leader communicates
and behaves.
Goals and Deadlines. All leaders recognized the importance of being aware of their
emotions and expression with the team; however, missed goals and deadlines triggered an
emotional reaction in 35% of the leaders interviewed (n=6). Each leader shared that they are
conscious of their energy, direct expression, and impact. Leaders acknowledged the need to
preface the reason for their communication. For example, asking questions to improve their
understanding of a situation or calling a team meeting to understand reasons behind missed goals
and using it as a teachable or learning moment, not a moment of interrogation, which is how the
leader perceived how the team interpreted the communication. When goals and deadlines were

57
missed, leaders perceived that their teams did not feel safe or lacked the experience to share why
the goals and deadlines were missed. Reflecting on the experience, which caused the need to
self-reflect, each leader shared their frustration and recognized that they expressed emotions and
energy without a preface. Dwight, a chief operating officer of a healthcare organization,
expressed that his high intensity in being surprised by goals not being met with his leadership
team of 12 people who oversaw 65,000 teammates escalated anxiety across the organization.
Our leadership team channeled my intensity to the entire organization and put the entire
organization on a hyper cortisol spike…We went from a large organization that has a
great culture to everybody going into their weekend with high stress and anxiety…I have
to breathe, and manage my own emotions before communicating…otherwise it’s a
disaster.
Dwight acknowledged that the surprise of unmet expectations of goals influenced his intensity
and emotional reaction. He expressed the need to pause, breathe, and preface a discussion with
clarity about his tone. Dwight explained his intensity was due to his passion for the team and the
organization’s success. His intention to collaborate as a team to uncover the reasons for not being
able to meet their numbers was paramount. Yet, some of Dwight’s senior leadership team
misinterpreted Dwight’s energy and tone, and by the following Monday, they had assumed they
would be fired.
Kelly, an executive vice president in entertainment technology, acknowledged she “lost
it” when her team could not explain why they could not complete a high-profile project on time.
The project was explicitly mapped based on a timeline that the team agreed upon. These leaders
perceived their behavior affected the team and that unmet expectations were factors that sparked

58
the need for reflection and repair. Leaders perceived their teams had begun to withdraw and
became less trusting of the exchange between the leader, the individual, and the team.
Expectations from the Team. Leaders managing teams also manage the expectations of
the team. Thirty-five percent of leaders interviewed (n=6) shared what they perceived as
expectations from their team to promote an individual or achieve a different outcome for the
team, which sparked leaders to self-reflect on the situation and evaluate what could have been
done differently.
Three of the leaders expressed the need for self-reflection on handling promotion
expectations. Phyllis, a Senior Vice-President of Global Marketing for an entertainment
organization, shared her experience with how the length of experience can indicate who should
be promoted next; however, she had a team member who was outperforming another more senior
(based on years of experience) individual, and the leadership team was planning to promote the
high performer or less experienced individual. The individual with more experience exhibited
behavior such as eavesdropping on conversations and provoking the senior leader in meetings in
front of the entire team because the expectation was that the manager with more experience
would be promoted. Phyllis reflected on her behavior during a team meeting. “She goaded me,
and I lost it. I got very upset in front of the entire team and acted like an emotional kid that was
dealing with another spoiled kid.” In this situation, the leader perceived that their emotional
behavior shut the rest of the team down. Phyllis perceived that the team became withdrawn and
had an inability to engage in collaborative conversations to move the work forward.
Eighteen percent of leaders interviewed (n=3) expressed the need for self-reflection on
how they handled communication of policies and expectations. Leaders expressed that they
perceived their teams wanted a different outcome from the leader. These expectations were tied

59
to remote work and return-to-office organizational policies. Rather than meeting one-on-one, a
policy was set without understanding everyone’s situation. The perceived disappointment from
the team influenced the leader’s behavior. Balancing the leader’s understanding of each team
member and their situation with how the new policy was shared sparked self-reflection in the
leader. Pam, head of human resources in higher education shared, “I didn’t give enough time to
actually see it from their perspective…and not just make assumptions and make decisions off the
shelf.” Balancing the leadership responsibilities to the business outcomes and the “humans”
within the business ignited self-reflection for the leader.
Misunderstanding of Words or Actions
Fifty-two percent of leaders interviewed (n=9) shared situations where team members
misinterpreted words used in communication. These situations sparked the leader to self-reflect
about what was said verbally or nonverbally, which was perceived to influence the team to
behave differently. For example, Andy, Senior Director of Organization Development for a
technology organization, was facilitating a large group organizational development workshop,
and the group misunderstood the words being spoken. Since Andy played a role in organizational
development, he embedded the tools for self-reflection within the situation. Another facilitator in
the room asked Andy’s permission to collect some feedback. Andy shared, “I turned my seat
around, and then everyone in the room started unpacking what they heard…which is not what I
meant.” Andy was working to communicate positively to bring the teams together to collaborate.
Still, something he shared caused multiple people to believe he was coming from a place where
the team was deficient.
Robert, Senior Vice-President of a technology organization founded in India, reflected
on his experience. His prior experience in Silicon Valley landed him the position; however,

60
regardless of having specific skills, Robert shared the complexities and triggers for
misunderstanding words and actions when your team has cultural differences, varying levels of
industry experience, and remote work. Robert perceived that his team, based in India and has
been with the founding company in India for over 15 years, sees him as a “middle-aged White
guy from Silicon Valley” who is opinionated and emphasizes direct communication,
commitment, and follow through. Robert’s actions of exhibiting direct behavior with other
leaders was misunderstood. Regardless of trying to explain why he was sharing what was
shared, Robert’s HR Director provided feedback stating, “Your peers still think that you are
crapping on their work.” Robert further expressed that “it made us highly dysfunctional.” In
both scenarios, words and actions sparked the need for self-reflection and a new approach.
Past Experiences and the Need for a New Approach
As leaders developed in their careers and moved up in positions, they recognized the
importance of adapting their experiences with new individuals and teams. Rather than taking
their prior leadership experience to a new team, they recognized the need to “read the room” and
“tailor your message and create certain foundations,” shared Robert. Regardless of Robert’s
extensive experience in technology, he had to take the time to understand each individual on the
team that had been doing a process over the last 25 years to establish a relationship and common
ground before any shift could be applied. “I have to understand where the other person is coming
from…it takes a balance of, you know, obsessive execution, which can be counter to being
reflective, but you also need to be reflective to learn and adjust,” shared Robert.
Pam, head of HR in higher education, recognized that she focused solely on
accountability early in her career. Still, her experience enabled her to look at new approaches to
consider the needs of individual team members. “Now I lead along with my team, yes, getting

61
them there…but my motivation is to get there harmoniously, with better communication,” Pam
reflected. Howard emphasized the need to have situational awareness through observation of
others to determine new approaches, to witness what types of communication work differently
with team members, and to “not letting ego block you from hearing from others.” As a senior
leader, you are expected to drive performance for your team and the organization, and leaders
recognize that time must be invested to build relationships.
Environment Impacts Behavior
Leaders recognized the impact of the environment on their behavior, including the culture
of the organization and team dynamics. The reciprocal nature between the leader’s values,
beliefs, behaviors, and the organizational environment can either support or conflict with the
ability to self-reflect.
Organizational Culture
Fifty-nine percent of leaders (n=10) within their organization work in a high-performance
and fast-paced environment, and they perceive that they must balance accountability around high
performance and business goals while nurturing relationships with the team. Leaders within
innovation and results-oriented cultures demonstrated within technology, entertainment,
healthcare, and real estate organizations expressed the implications of high pressure to drive
results, speed of the work, and sacrificing time for self-reflection.
Ten of the 17 leaders who worked within technology, entertainment, healthcare, and real
estate discussed their pressure to meet quarterly goals. They are often reflecting on the big
picture strategic plan and aligning their team’s responsibilities yet see where it is still important
to see each team member individually. Andy shared, “There is not as much spaciousness in
interactions. Focus is on the work that needs to get done versus the being nature and quality of

62
the team…also thinking about what’s valued and expected in the culture.” Will shared, “The
biggest challenge as a leader is wanting to solve things in the moment… It’s like an
addiction…and sometimes I need to pull myself back…and listen to understand.” In situations
where the environment and culture of the organization are results-driven, leaders expressed that
in moments of high pressure, they need to be intentional and hyper-aware of their emotions,
listening versus solving, and the overall impact of their behavior and communication on the
team.
With the need to meet quarterly goals and a performance-driven culture, pressure is felt,
and leaders are not taking the time at that moment to self-reflect. Reflection about the actions
was occurring, but reflection-in-action, as discussed in the literature review, was not taking place
(. Robert shared, “I’m moving faster…the environment is all about action, which limits the
amount of time and space for deep thinking and reflection…We have the tools, but it’s like boltons because it’s not inherent when we are moving fast.” Leaders shared that they perceived a
lack of time in the moment to reflect on the situation, which resulted in communication missteps,
emotional outbreaks, and setbacks. Leaders perceived that their behavior impacted the
effectiveness of the team.
Team Dynamics
Diversity was defined as “differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead
to the perception that another person is different from the self” (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004, p.
1008). All 17 senior leaders led diverse teams, including diversity dimensions associated with
cultural background, geographic location, education, socio-economic status, gender, age,
ethnicity, work experience, and tenure. Leaders expressed the factors that impacted team
dynamics, including the team’s diversity, tenure, ego, and siloed behaviors.

63
Team Diversity
Leaders emphasized the nature of their organizations being diverse and the benefits of
having the diversity of backgrounds, cultures, and knowledge, yet recognized that having diverse
teams requires people to be able to learn from one another when conflicts arise. Meredith, Chief
Operating Officer in health technology, said, “Everybody is different and hears things
differently…you have to realize that culture, first and foremost, is going to shift with the amount
of the different people in the environment.” Ninety-four percent of the leaders (n=16) recognized
the importance of developing relationships with each individual to understand their background,
motivation, and needs. Phyllis shared her experience in working in entertainment, “we are a team
of strategists, we have to disrupt, and figure out a way to disagree and still respect one another.”
With a diverse team environment, it was important for each leader to balance the relationship
development with the organizational culture of high performance and business results.
Tenure and Ego
One of the diversity dimensions among the organizations was tenure, where leaders and
team members have been with the organization for more than five years. This perspective
occurred in technology, entertainment, and real estate. Andy, a senior leader in technology,
shared, “We have big egos taking a lot of space at the detriment of others feeling psychologically
safe… they’ve been around so long they have a more informed point of view.” There is a sense
of knowing this is a problem, but no one is talking about it in technology and real estate. In real
estate, leaders have been successful with their approach to business so they don’t see why there
may be alternatives to bring people along. Stanley, Executive Director of a commercial real
estate firm, shared, “There’s always a few at the top…Their story is so protected and so fortified
that things can’t penetrate…When this energy becomes a big thing, it’s very difficult to work

64
around it in the organizational structure.” Experience sharing is important to the organization and
teams. However, big egos in an industry can also impact the overall culture, psychological
safety, and organizational effectiveness. Leaders expressed that the amount of tenure and ego
impacted team dynamics and the environment.
Siloed Behaviors
As organizations increase in size, it’s important to have consistency in learning and
development and a common language across individuals, teams, and the organization. A lack of
common language and behaviors can result in siloed behavior within organizations. Robert
shared, “Just like anything, how it’s interpreted and applied is going to vary depending on the
leader.” The practice of self-reflection may be happening in teams but is not widespread across
the organization. Jim, Chief Alliance Officer, shared, “I think self-reflection, in some
departments, is done really well. Unfortunately, leaders create silos.” Phyllis shared, “If you
don’t have mid-level managers that are really strong and you’re not helping them develop, like
my mentor did, it hurts the organization as a whole. And I would say, we’re not really great at
that.” The leaders who participated in the study contemplated the behaviors impacting the overall
organizational environment within their organizations, which informed potential opportunities
and outcomes.
Opportunities and Outcomes
Leaders expressed opportunities and perceived outcomes from the influence of selfreflection on their behaviors, their teams, and the environment. Across the interviews, senior
leaders emphasized the critical role of self-reflection in enhancing leadership effectiveness.
When evaluating the situational factors that spark self-reflection, leaders acknowledged having

65
more accountability, adaptability, empathy, and the importance of pausing to self-reflect to be
more inclusive leaders.
Accountability and Adaptability
Leaders reflected on their challenges and setbacks and perceived they developed higher
accountability and adaptability. They view obstacles or conflicts as opportunities for learning
and growth. With an increase in self-awareness internally and externally, they are able to reflect
on strengths and weaknesses and adapt to the environment and context. Andy, whose situation
was previously discussed while facilitating an organization development workshop and the group
misunderstood the words that were being spoken, was able to hear the feedback. He was able to
be accountable and adapt.
And then the third piece of feedback came in later in the day, so I was like, alright, now
there’s three pieces of feedback. So now I’m hyper alert and like alright! It’s me. How do
I reframe the conversation? There were multiple signals that came in from different
people, that to me, held up a mirror. Which caused a different level of listening. I didn’t
over-intellectualize it. I just took accountability and started to reframe the narrative.
Dwight shared his accountability and adaptability with his energy. Dwight expressed, “I
naturally come across with intensity. I am highly curious, so I ask a lot of questions which can be
perceived as interrogation, so I have to start the conversation with my intention…and be
conscious of my energy.” These leaders have developed a heightened sense of responsibility for
their actions. Through introspection, they’ve become more aware of the consequences of their
behavior on the team and the organization.

66
Improved Communication, Trust, and Empathy
Leaders recognized that early in their careers, it was about the content of what to do, but
their experiences, increased self-awareness, and reflection reinforced the need to be accountable,
develop relationships, and communicate at the individual and the team level. When coupled with
self-reflection, accountability helped these leaders build trust and communicate more effectively
with their teams. “There is a level of mindfulness that ties into understanding the audience to
make the communication more meaningful to them, based on the role that they play in the
organization.” In situations where the leader had made a mistake, they took ownership of their
actions and could repair the situation. Andy’s ability to be accountable and adapt in the scenario
he described when working with his team resulted in improved engagement, collaboration, and
communication. “They softened. Initially they had dodgy eye contact and they softened in their
gaze and had more connection and engagement during the breaks.” These leaders perceived that
their ability to self-reflect and change their behavior impacted the overall team communication
and effectiveness.
The Power of the Pause
Understanding that many of these leaders work in a fast-paced environment with resultsoriented organizations, 100 percent of leaders recognized the importance of taking time to reflect
not only on organizational results and performance goals but also on their own behaviors and the
observed team behaviors. Leaders acknowledged that this was difficult within a fast-paced
culture focuses on results and outcomes. For the leaders that did take the time to pause, even in
instances after work hours, these leaders expressed the ability to have improved decision-making
and reduced burnout, and they perceived their teams felt psychologically safe.

67
Improved Decision Making
Eighty-eight percent of leaders (n=15) expressed that self-reflection helped them to make
better decisions. Being intentional, pausing, thinking about situations, and reflecting upon what
was said or how something occurred is important to leaders so that they can take different actions
in the future. Self-reflection prompted leaders to reassess their decision-making processes. In
taking time to pause, leaders perceived they became more open to adapting their approaches
based on feedback, changing circumstances, and the evolving needs of the team and
organization.
Reduced Burnout
Individuals have the capacity to regulate their own behavior through self-monitoring,
self-evaluation, and self-reinforcement. Self-reflection serves as a mechanism for leaders to selfregulate their behavior. By critically evaluating their actions and decisions, leaders can adjust
their approaches, set new goals, and reinforce positive behaviors. It helps them become more
intentional and proactive in shaping their leadership style. Angela, a senior executive in
entertainment technology, recognized that the team wanted to deliver on expectations and that
she was setting the bar high. Angela recognized that people were starting to burn out and that she
needed to reset expectations and meet people where they were. “I was so conscious of not
breaking people, but I wasn’t putting the power of their own health in their hands.” Angela
encouraged her team to talk with her. “When you are going to pop, you need to tell me…please
take time for yourself.” The performance expectations were high, and Angela recognized that
permission and context needed to be communicated for her team to feel they could take a break.

68
Improved Psychological Safety
Psychological safety refers to a shared belief among team members that they can take
interpersonal risks, share ideas, and express themselves without fear of negative consequences.
Upon reflecting on situations that sparked self-reflection, leaders emphasized the opportunity and
importance of open communication to improve collaboration and teamwork while recognizing
everyone’s individual needs. Angela’s accountability for her behavior in setting and resetting
expectations with her team increased team communication. “They’re coming to me a little more
frequently…I see them poking holes for each other.”
Leaders owned their mistakes, demonstrated vulnerability, and took responsibility.
Leaders perceived their acknowledgment and ability to use the situation as a learning moment
reduced fear and anxiety. By openly acknowledging areas for improvement and actively
engaging in personal and professional growth, these leaders set an example for their team
members. This behavior encourages a culture where learning is valued and seen as an ongoing
process. “If we’re not learning from our mistakes, we’re not learning. If we’re not learning from
our triumphs, we’re not learning,” shared Jim. Leaders encouraged communication and
knowledge sharing and reinforced that learning is a collaborative and iterative process.
When leaders demonstrate empathy and understanding, team members feel understood
and valued. This contributed to a sense of safety, as team members believed their concerns and
emotions were acknowledged and considered. Nora shared, “I’ve been in their role over my
career, and so I can relate to what they might be feeling or experiencing and therefore more
empathetic in my communication.”
The opportunity to pause and reflect was perceived to enable improved decision-making,
reduced burnout, and improved psychological safety. In summary, greater self-awareness,

69
developed through failure, experience, and development opportunities, enabled these leaders to
recognize their strengths, weaknesses, and triggers, which influenced future actions. This
awareness empowers them to make conscious choices about their behaviors, aligning their
actions with their values and goals when leading diverse teams effectively.
The Case for Leader Self-Reflection
The researcher asked interview participants to rate their level of self-awareness and
ability to engage in self-reflection, as well as their perception of other leaders in the organization
regarding their self-reflection abilities. The self-rating question was, on a scale of 1-10, with 10
representing high self-awareness/ability to self-reflect, how would you rate your level of selfawareness in understanding your own emotions and recognizing other people’s emotions? The
range reflected a score of 7 to 9, with an average of all 17 participants being an 8. In rating other
leaders in the organization, their ability to do self-reflection ranged from a score of 4 to 8. The
average rating was 6.3 for other leaders within the organization that can self-reflect. Robert
shared, “We probably don’t have enough self-reflection organizationally to make an impact on
overall organizational outcomes.” Appendix G details participant ratings. The findings regarding
siloed behaviors and differences in self-rating and organizational rating highlight an opportunity
to align definitions, behaviors, and processes in the organization and to start measuring
outcomes.

70
Summary
This section presented findings from the qualitative interviews to answer the study’s
research questions. This qualitative study used Bandura’s social cognitive theory to understand
how senior leaders perceive how self-reflection affects their leadership behaviors while leading
diverse teams. Leaders expressed an increase in their own self-awareness, which impacted their
abilities to be more intentional, listen to understand, and focus on their team’s understanding.
Leaders perceived that their own behaviors had consequences on the team and shared that they
became more accountable while also adapting to the context and the environment. And lastly,
leaders perceived the impact of culture expectations, and being able to take time to self-reflect
may not be favored in the culture. Yet, leaders perceived that self-reflection would be positive
for the overall organization. The data confirmed that leaders perceive that self-reflection
influences leader and team behaviors, as well as the overall environment of the organization.

71
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents a summary and conclusion of the findings to examine the impact of
self-reflection on leaders’ communication and behaviors while leading diverse teams. After
discussing the findings, this chapter provides five recommendations for organizations to consider
the incorporation of self-reflection into leadership and team practices to improve individual,
team, and organizational effectiveness. The recommendations provided were developed based on
the literature reviewed in Chapter Two, the findings discussed in Chapter Four, and the
alignment to social cognitive theory. Lastly, we discuss limitations and delimitations, followed
by recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
This study aimed to understand how leaders perceive self-reflection affects their
leadership behaviors, team behaviors, and the overall organization while leading diverse teams.
The study’s findings are informed by interview data collected and analyzed using a qualitative
research method, the literature reviewed, and the researcher’s knowledge. The themes outlined in
Chapter Four align with the literature reviewed in Chapter Two, the theoretical framework based
on Bandura’s social cognitive theory, and the conceptual framework adapted from Cayir et al.
(2022) to examine the affect of self-reflection on leadership behaviors while leading diverse
teams.
The leaders who participated in the study are conscious of working in a volatile,
uncertain, complex, and ambiguous world (VUCA) and are juggling the complexities of
expectations of the organization to meet goals while managing diverse teams and their personal
and professional lives. As culture, society, and organizations continue to advance, the research
suggests that self-reflection is a vital attribute emphasized in leadership theories and an

72
important habit to explore further and bridge research and practice for leadership development in
the future. The study’s findings highlight the following considerations.
Lack of Factual and Conceptual Knowledge of Self-Reflection in Early Career Experiences
The study’s qualitative data reviewed in Chapter 4 suggests the opportunity to leverage
situational factors that spark the need for self-reflection with developing leaders and senior
leaders. Leaders participating in the study reflected upon moments of early career failures that
caused them to pause, reflect, and take a different course of action with new behaviors. As
leaders advanced in their education, experience, and titles, they began to recognize their
positionality, influence, the differences amongst their teams, and the need to be conscious of how
they occur with others. This awareness increased for the leaders participating in the study;
however, they were not intentionally incorporating self-reflective practices at work. Selfreflection behaviors happened on a drive home while working out, cooking dinner, or walking.
Bringing clarity to the definition and intention behind a self-reflection practice may influence
behaviors to practice self-reflection.
Procedural Knowledge is Present but Not Inherent in the Culture
As noted in Chapter Two, Daudelin (1996) explored three approaches to self-reflection:
reflecting alone, reflecting with one other person, and reflecting in a group. Daudelin (1996)
revealed that individual and dyad approaches were superior to groups. Eighty-two percent of
leaders who participated in the study (n=14) used individual approaches to self-reflection outside
of the work environment. Eighteen percent of leaders who participated in the study (n=3) used
dyad approaches to reflect with another person. Leaders are using self-reflection, but only three
intentionally called it self-reflection. The literature review in Chapter Two also revealed three
types of self-reflective practices, including productive problem-solving to reach a goal, emotion-

73
focused self-reflection focused on thoughts and behavior (Grant et al., 2002), and reflection-inaction in the moment it is happening (Schön, 1983). The intersection of all types of selfreflection is perceived as necessary, particularly when reviewing the situations that sparked the
need for self-reflection presented among study participants. The literature review and the study’s
findings suggest that balancing both problem-solving and intentional behaviors, along with
reflection-in-action is an important skill or habit to develop, and it requires procedural
knowledge and metacognitive strategies to sustain the behavior. Yet, aligning self-reflective
behaviors with organizational culture and values is essential.
Leadership Development Programs Must Adapt for Skills Required Today
During the data collection process, the researcher discovered new research around
metacognition and neurology in January 2024, which suggests challenges associated with
balancing goal-directed tasks and people-focused functions. Rock and McEnroe (2023) posit that
for leaders to be successful, leaders must excel across three core domains, including being
future-focused, being good with people, and being able to drive results. However, our brains
evolve in ways that challenge the ability to do all three. Leadership development programs used
by larger organizations often fail to develop leaders across all three domains. Leaders must focus
on business strategy that drives successful outcomes while connecting with and motivating their
teams (Rock & Monroe, 2023). This same effect also happens when an individual’s power
increases; the brain’s goal orientation function becomes more dominant over the people focus
orientation (Rock & Monroe, 2023). This research indicates an opportunity to develop new
leadership development and training modalities.

74
Opportunity to Incorporate Self-Reflection with Organizational Values
As discussed in Chapter Two, leadership theorists discuss components of self-awareness
and self-reflection differently within the transformational, authentic, and inclusive leadership
theories; however, each theory informs the underpinnings of reflexive and reflective practices.
The leaders who participated in the study described their leadership style as authentic, inclusive,
and transformational. They also included leaders who described themselves as servant leaders,
situational leaders, adaptable leaders, and players or coaches. They practice a form of selfreflection with their teams, yet their organizational culture, structures, processes, and rewards do
not align with self-reflective behaviors.
Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of the study was to understand how leaders perceive self-reflection effects
leader behaviors, team behavior, and the overall organization. The recommendations for practice
have been developed based on the qualitative research findings with 17 senior leaders leading
diverse teams within global organizations. The findings are intended to be shared with senior
leadership officers of Fortune 500 organizations, including leaders with C-Suite positions such as
CEO’s, COO’s CFO’s, CMO’s, CHRO’s, and senior learning and development professionals
across organizations. The recommendations draw connections to the literature reviewed in
Chapter Two and are shaped by Bandura’s social cognitive theory (1991). Below, we outline five
recommendations based on the key findings from the qualitative study conducted between
November 2023 and January 2024.
Recommendation 1: Develop a Common Definition of Self-Reflection
Although the researcher defined self-reflection, each participant had a different
definition. Only three of the 17 participants used the word self-reflection to describe their process

75
in evaluating their behaviors, impact on others, and impact on the organization. Eighty-two
percent (n=14) of participants expressed that the interview with the researcher raised their
awareness of the importance of the self-reflection process to reflect on their positionality,
situational context, and overall team effectiveness. It is recommended that organizations consider
conceptual and procedural knowledge and provide clarity on what self-reflection is, why it
matters, how it happens, and what action steps can be taken when self-reflection occurs. Posner
and Han (2024) revealed the importance of value clarity and congruence and that personal and
organizational value clarity impacts commitment, performance, and motivation. Both personal
values congruence and organizational values clarity significantly positively impacted feelings of
commitment, motivation, and productivity (Posner & Han, 2024). When leaders and employees
value the opportunity to reflect on situations, clarity of what self-reflection is and how it is
valued in the organization may impact organizational outcomes.
Recommendation 2: Establish a Learning Organization Mindset
Senior leaders within the study learned how to self-reflect due to an early career
experience of failure. These failures demonstrated the leader’s vulnerability, connection, and
humanness and their ability to apply their past failures to current experiences leading diverse
teams. Applying a growth mindset, learning from experience, and humility are foundations for
leaders who contribute to learning organizations (Smerek, 2018). Organizations can start the
learning process by developing leaders and current senior leaders by establishing a learning
organization mindset coupled with clarity around the definition and improving conceptual and
procedural knowledge. Additionally, organizations can leverage prior knowledge of leaders and
interest in self-development based on their past failures and the importance of self-reflection.
Leaders can apply metacognitive strategies in planning, tuning, selecting, connecting, and

76
monitoring their behaviors and their team behaviors (Clark, 2005). Making time for reflexivity
(tuning and connecting) with the team and applying a framework, such as the Cayir et al. (2022)
framework, provides leaders and teams with a guide for learning about one another and
enhancing relationships.
Recommendation 3: Establish Psychological Safety
The ability of the group to hold differences in perspectives, experiences, values, and ways
of working enhances the group (van Knippenberg et al., 2013). To foster differing perspectives,
the organization must value and promote psychological safety (Edmondson, 2019).
Psychological safety is not about comfort but about “leaning in” to serve the purpose. It requires
three leadership behaviors: setting the stage to get aligned, inviting participation with genuine
interest, and listening and responding thoughtfully (Edmondson, 2019). Leaders expressed what
they learned from situations that sparked the need for self-reflection and to set the stage or
preface communication. Leaders were able to own their mistakes, be vulnerable, and be
physically and psychologically accessible, which created a sense of approachability and
psychological safety (Edmondson, 2004). Psychological safety and the ability to learn from
failure improves strategic thinking, problem-solving, innovation, and organizational growth
(Edmondson, 2019; Porath & Pearson, 2013).
Recommendation 4: Provide New Types of Learning & Development Resources
Leaders expressed the importance of continuous practice over their leadership journey,
influencing their ability to use self-reflection to improve communication and leadership skills.
Mentorship, individual and group therapy, and coaching exceeded mentions of attending a
learning and development workshop, which indicates a potential gap in learning and
development offerings by organizations associated with self-reflection. Furthermore, the

77
discovery of new literature on the neurological processing of goal-directed versus people tasks
suggests that new training needs to be developed. Organizations are transforming learning and
development roles to encourage the development of the Transformational Chief Learning Officer
(CLO). Transformer CLOs (Lundberg & Westerman, 2020) identify useful external content—
everything from university courses to blog posts to YouTube videos—and combine it with
internal content developed in consultation with the company’s subject-matter experts. Only one
of the interview participants, Samantha, a Ph.D. in clinical psychology and head of a non-profit
agency, was professionally trained in a reflexivity practice and was leveraging third-party
resources for training other leaders. The researcher recommends that corporate organizations
consider evaluating well-being and self-reflection practices from different industries, such as
non-profit or well-being-focused organizations, to learn from evidence-based practices in selfawareness and self-reflection that have effectively reduced burnout and improved collaboration,
communication, and effectiveness.
Recommendation 5: Apply an Evidence-Based Framework and Measure the Change
Understanding culture change is a complex process. Fast-paced and results-driven
organizations have an opportunity to leverage prior knowledge of leaders and interest in selfdevelopment based on their past failures and the importance of self-reflection. Yet, the
organization must incorporate systems, structure, and rewards to enable the change. The practical
application of a common definition, shift to a learning organization mindset, establishment of
psychological safety, and introduction of new types of learning and development will require a
cultural transformation for the organizations that participated in the study. The researcher
recommends evaluating and applying the requirements for change at the organizational level
using a transformational framework such as the Galbraith Star ModelTM or McKinsey 7S Model.

78
These models help to align business goals and objectives, the business strategy, structure,
processes, rewards, and people to influence effective behaviors that drive results. Leaders who
participated in the study indicated that their organizational culture rewarded speed and results,
which conflicts with the need to pause or take time to self-reflect; therefore, incorporating selfreflection into structure, process, and rewards, as well as overall cultural values, will help to
support the change.
The Galbraith Star ModelTM provides a framework for change to evaluate the
organizational strategy, structure, processes, rewards, and people. Given the complexity of all
transformational change and management style differences of using self-reflective practices
occurring in silos, the researcher recommends applying the model to a division or workgroup to
go through the change model, the process, and measurement before rolling out the change across
the organization. Figure 3 displays the Galbraith Star ModelTM.
Figure 3
Transformational Change Model - Galbraith Star ModelTM
Note: Developed by Jay R. Galbraith in 1973, the model provides a framework to sustain an
organization’s value proposition and effectiveness over time (Benjamin et al., 2012).

79
The McKinsey 7S Model is an adaptation of the Galbraith Star ModelTM and an alternative
model that incorporates seven factors, including a mix of hard elements around strategy,
structure, and systems plus soft elements based on shared values, skills, style, and staff. Figure 4
displays the McKinsey 7S Model.
Figure 4
Transformational Change Model - McKinsey 7S Model
Note: The McKinsey 7S Model was developed in the 1980s to add a different lens to t
Galbraith’s Star Model’s people dimension (Benjamin et al., 2012).
From the workplace context, reflexivity within leadership behaviors and teams may
enable individuals and teams to process differing perspectives, see new approaches, and open

80
possibilities to foster collaboration, respect, and shared understanding. These two frameworks
guide leaders to consider transformational change within the organization and change in
leadership and team behaviors.
Limitations and Delimitations
The study focused on understanding senior leader’s lived experiences and whether or not
leaders perceive self-reflection affects their communication and behavior while leading diverse
teams. Limitations arise from study deficiencies impacted by constraints outside the researcher’s
control, which include the leader’s understanding of self-reflection and exposure to selfreflection, the environment to limit distractions and ensure confidentiality where the participant
chose to do the interview or the participant’s perceptions of the researcher. Although participants
agreed to participate in the qualitative study, and I confirmed that data collection would be
confidential and not personally identifiable, participants may not have been comfortable sharing
opinions and may have shared what they believed I wanted to hear (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Delimitations are boundaries the research sets to focus and maintain the scope (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). The research questions sought to understand the affect of self-reflection on
the leader, their team, and the organization. Due to the limited timeframe for completion of the
study, the study only included interviews with senior leaders. It did not include interviews with
the leader’s team members or other individuals within their organizations. Additionally, the
study’s findings are based on qualitative interviews and are limited to the lived experiences of 17
senior leaders across different organizations. These delimitations and boundaries in the study
limit the findings and understanding of the magnitude of the problem in practice (Pazzaglia et al.,
2016). The qualitative research provides a slice of the perceived impact, within a point in time,

81
from the participants that choose to participate in the study. The researcher recommends further
research to validate the findings.
Recommendations for Future Research
Given the complexities of balancing accountability, individual communication and
behavior, diversity in teams, and the reinforcement of a learning organization, three
recommendations have been provided for future research.
Recommendation 1: Study an Organization with Dedicated Self-Reflection Practice and
Measure the Impact
The researcher recommends identifying an organization with a dedicated, collective selfreflection practice, including practices such as an all-company retreat, dedicated time to selfreflect during the day, or facilitated self-reflection practice. The researcher recommends studying
leaders and team members to understand both leader and team behaviors and their impact on one
another. We suggest measuring factors including individual, team, and organizational
measurement, such as perceptions of improved communication, inclusion, psychological safety,
growth mindset attributes, learning organization environment, and overall culture.
Recommendation 2: Study the Impact of New Leadership Development Training on the
Impact of Leaders and Teams
During the research process, the researcher found that the Neuroleadership Institute is
launching in March of 2024, a personalized 6-month habit activation platform that replaces hardto-scale in-person leadership training with a personalized digital learning journey which can be
customized to different levels of leaders, industries, or specific leadership models. The training
has been designed to address the seesaw effect described in the discussion of findings in Chapter
Five. It is designed around nine critical habits discovered for leaders to succeed in the current

82
VUCA environment. It is recommended that leaders and team members be studied to understand
both leader and team behaviors and their impact on one another.
Recommendation 3: Research the Impact of Technology on Leadership Behaviors and
Team Effectiveness
Understanding human brains has a seesaw effect when the goal orientation function
increases over the people-focused function and vice versa (Rock & Monroe, 2023). The research
suggests exploring how AI or wearable technology can augment leader communication while
bringing awareness and attention to leader behaviors. Is there an opportunity to leverage
technology to set aside time for reflection, nudging, or to bring awareness to the leader and the
environment to build cultural competence, encourage curiosity, develop new habits, and
influence new behaviors?
Conclusion
Embarking on this study has been a journey filled with learning and a test in resilience
but driven by an unwavering passion to understand the intersection of self-reflection and leader
behavior to ultimately improve leader and team communication. The average person will spend
over 80,000 hours of their life at work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021) and only 35% of
employees are engaged at work (Harter, 2023). Leaders, teams, and organizations can influence
this experience and improve the future of work. This qualitative research study provides a
snapshot of the perceptions of how self-reflection affects leader behaviors, their teams, and
organizations. The research opens an opportunity to change the future of humans within
organizations to connect with one another, collaborate, innovate, and change the future of work
to advance people, organizations, and society. The way one communicates and behaves with one
another can either build self-efficacy, motivation, and leadership for the future or shut someone

83
down. Self-reflection can enable individuals to see new perspectives, create new ideas, improve
team communication, and change the future for leaders, individuals, teams, and organizations.
This study was not just an academic pursuit, but a testament to a commitment to making a
meaningful impact on leadership development and society.

84
References
Agwor, T. C., & Osho, A. (2017). Ethical issues for consideration in conducting research in the
social and behavioural sciences. The International Journal of Humanities & Social
Studies. 12(5) 185-188.
Almengor, R. A. (2018). Reflective practice and mediator learning: A current review. Conflict
Resolution Quarterly, 36(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21219
Andersson, L., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the
workplace. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452–471.
https://doi.org/10.2307/259136
Aritz, J., & Walker, R. (2010). Cognitive organization and identity maintenance in multicultural
teams: A discourse analysis of decision-making meetings. Journal of Business
Communication, 47(1), 20-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943609340669
Ashley, G. C., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2012). Self-awareness and the evolution of leaders: The
need for a better measure of self-awareness. Journal of Behavioral and Applied
Management, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.21818/001c.17902
Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1992), Does self‐other agreement on leadership perceptions
moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions? Personnel Psychology,
45(1), 141‐64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb00848.x
Atwater, L. E., and Yammarino, F. J. (1997), Self‐other rating agreement: A review and model.
In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 15,
pp. 121‐74). Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

85
Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O. & Day, D. V. (2014). Authentic leadership theory, research and
practice: Steps taken and steps that remain. In D. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of
leadership and organizations (pp. 331-357). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199755615.013.017
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice
Hall.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-597 8(91) 90 0
22-L
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science: A journal of the American Psychological Society, 9(3), 75–78.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bass, B. M. (1985). Transformational leadership theory. Leadership Central.
https://www.leadership-central.com/bass-transformational-leadershiptheory.html# google
vignette
Benjamin, B. M., Naimi, L. L., & Lopez, J. P. (2012). Organizational change models in human
resource development. Leadership & Organizational Management Journal, 2012(2).
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge (2nd ed). Harper
& Row.
Brett, J. F., & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360° Feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of
usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930–942. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.86.5.930

86
Burns, J. M. (2010). Leadership (1st Harper perennial political classics ed.). Harper Perennial.
Burt, C. B. D. (1994). An analysis of self-initiated coping behavior: Diary keeping. Child Study
Journal, 24(3), 171-189. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-21244-001
Cannon, W. B. (1929). Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear and rage. Southern Medical Journal
(Birmingham, Ala.), 22(9), 171-189. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007611-192909000-00037
Carden, J., Jones, R. J., & Passmore, J. (2022). Defining self-awareness in the context of adult
development: A systematic literature review. Journal of Management Education, 46(1),
140–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562921990065
Casse, P., & Weisz, R. (2014). Malentendu: Facing everyday leadership challenges. Training
Journal, 4(5), 39-42.
Cayir, E., Felder, T. M., Nkwonta, C. A., Jackson, J. R., & Dawson, R. (2022). Discovering new
connections: Insights from individual and collective reflexivity in a mixed methods study.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 160940692211057.
https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221105707
Chattopadhyay, P. (1999). Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demographic
dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal,
42(3), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.2307/256919
Chattopadhyay, P., Tluchowska, M., & George, E. (2004). Identifying the ingroup: A closer look
at the influence of demographic dissimilarity on employee social identity. The Academy
of Management Review, 29(2), 180–202. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2004.12736071
Chenail, R. J. (2010). Getting specific about qualitative research generalizability. Journal of
Ethnograpic and Qualitative Research, 1(5), 1-11. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ906426

87
Cherniss, C. (2000). Emotional intelligence: What it is and why it matters (p. 15). New Jersey:
Rutgers University, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology.
https://www.eiconsortium.org/reports/what_is_emotional_intelligence.html
Clark, R. E. (2005). 5 Research-tested team motivation strategies. Performance Improvement
(International Society for Performance Improvement), 44(1), 13-16.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4140440107
Cordell, A., & Thompson, I. (2019). Mckinsey 7S framework. In A. Cordell & I, Thompson
(Eds.), The procurement models handbook (3rd ed., pp. 159–161). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351239509-48
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage.
Cunliffe A., & Coupland C. (2012) From hero to villain to hero: Making experience sensible
through embodied narrative sensemaking. Human Relations 65(1): 63–88.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726711424321
Cunliffe A. (2016). On becoming a critically reflexive practitioner: What does it mean to be
reflexive? Journal of Management Education, 40(6), 740–746.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916668919
Daudelin M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics,
24(3), 36-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(96)90004-2
Deardorff, D. K. (2009). The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (1st ed.). SAGE
Publications, Incorporated. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872987
Dewey. J. (1910). How we think. D.C. Heath & Co. Mass.
Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. Dover Publications.

88
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think, a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the
educative process. Heath & Co.
Dill, B. T., & Kohlman, M. .H. (2012). Intersectionality: A transformative paradigm in feminist
theory and social justice. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research:
Theory and praxis (pp. 154-174). Sage Publications.
Dillon, B., & Bourke, J. (2016). The six signature traits of inclusive leadership: Thriving in a
diverse new world. Deloitte University Press.
Diversity Task Force (2001), Best practices in achieving workforce diversity. US Department of
Commerce and Vice President Al Gore's National partnership for reinventing government
benchmarking study. http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/initiati/benchmk/workforcediversity.pdf
Duval, T. S., & Silvia, P. J. (2002). Self-awareness, probability of improvement, and the selfserving bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 49–61.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.49
Eagly. A. (2005). Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter? The
Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 459–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.007
Edmondson, A. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and
organizational influences on detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886396321001
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

89
Edmondson, A. (2004). Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: A group-level
lens. In R. M. Kramer & K. S. Cook (Eds.), Trust and distrust in organizations:
Dilemmas, and approaches (pp. 239-272). Russell Sage.
Edmondson, A. (2019). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the
workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Jhon Wiley & Sons.
Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3-4), 169-200.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208411068
Erceg, A., & Šuljug, A. (2016). How corporations motivate their employees - Hrvatski Telekom
example. Pravni Vjesnik, 32(2), 85–102. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1141-1919
Eurich, T. (2018, January 4). What self-awareness is (and how to cultivate it). Harvard Business
Review. https://membership.amavic.com.au/files/what%20self-awareness% 20is%20 and
%20how%20to%20cultivate%20it_hbr_2018.pdf
Formica, S., & Sfodera, F. (2022). The great resignation and quiet quitting paradigm shifts: An
overview of current situation and future research directions. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing & Management, 31(8), 899–907.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2022.2136601
Foucault, M. (1985). Discourse and truth the problematization of parrhesia. Northwestern
University Press.
Fox, A. (2014). Keep your top talent: The return of retention. HR Magazine, 59(4), 30–40.
https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/news/hr-magazine/keep-top-talent-return-retention

90
Fry, L. W., & Whittington, J. L. (2005). In search of authenticity: Spiritual leadership theory as a
source for future theory, research, and practice for leadership. In W. Gardner, B. J.
Avolio, & F. O. Walumbwa (Eds.), Authentic leadership theory and practice: Origins,
effects, and development (pp. 183-202). Elsevier Science.
Fulmer, R. M., & Goldsmith, M. (2001). The leadership investment: how the world’s best
organizations gain strategic advantage through leadership development. Amacom
Books.
Galbraith, J. R. (2014). Designing organizations: Strategy, structure, and process at the business
unit and enterprise levels (3rd ed). John Wiley & Sons.
Garung, P. (2022, December 13). What is bureaucratic leadership? Great Learning.
https://www.mygreatlearning.com/blog/what-is-bureaucratic-leadership/
Geisler, J. (2021). The great resignation: Reality or myth? Healthcare Financial Management,
75(7), 44–44. https://scirp.org/reference/referencespapers.aspx?referenceid=3204306
George, W. W. (2003). Authentic leadership: rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value
(1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Gerhart, B., & Feng, J. (2021). The Resource-based view of the firm, human resources, and
human capital: Progress and prospects. Journal of Management, 47, 1796-1819.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320978799
Goldstein, D., Grewal, M., Imose, R., & Williams, M. (2022, November 18). Unlocking the
potential of chief diversity officers. McKinsey & Company.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E., & McKee, A. (2004). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with
emotional intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.

91
Ghoshal, S., Arnzen, B., & Brownfield, S. (1992). A learning alliance between business and
business schools: Executive education as a platform for partnership. California
Management Review, 35(1), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166712
Giroux H., & McLaren, P. (1989). Critical pedagogy, the state, and cultural struggle. State
University of New York Press.
Gowan, M. (2022). Fundamentals of HR management for competitive advantage. Chicago
Business Press.
Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The self-reflection and insight scale: A new
measure of private self-consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality, 30(8), 821–835.
https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821
Gray D. E. (2007). Facilitating management learning: Developing critical reflection through
reflective tools. Management Learning, 38(5), 495-517.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507607083204
Grossman, D. (2016). The cost of poor communications. The Holmes report.
http://www.holmesreport.com/opinion-info/10645/the-cost-of-poor-communications.aspx
Gurdjian, P., Halbeisen, T., & Lane, K. (2014). Why leadership development programs fail.
McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/whyleadership-development-programs-fail#/
Gutting, G., & Oksala, J. (2022). "Michel Foucault", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(Fall 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.)
Harter, J. (2023, June 13). Globally, employees are more engaged and more stressed. Gallup.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/506798/globally-employees-engaged-stressed.aspx

92
Hicks, L. (2018). Protection of human subjects, 45 CFR § 46. Code of Federal Regulation.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-46
Hinga, B. (2019, June 23). Paradigms of inquiry for practice. Class Lecture. Rossier School of
Education. University of Southern California.
Hodges, S. D. & Myers, M. W. (2007). Encyclopedia of social psychology. Empathy definition.
SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412956253
Homan, A. C., Gündemir, S., Buengeler, C., & van Kleef, G. A., Eby, L.T., Chen, G. (2020).
Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1101–1128. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000482
Hynes, G. E. (2015). Get along, get it done, get ahead: interpersonal communication in the
diverse workplace (1st ed.). Business Expert Press.
Jacobson D., & Mustafa, N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit
positionality in critical qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
18(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919870075
Johansen, B. (2017). The new leadership literacies. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Jurow, S. (1998). Leadership practices inventory (LPI): A self-assessment and analysis. Science
in Scite.
Kanpol, B. (1999). Critical pedagogy. An introduction. Bergin & Garvey.
Kapoor, C., & Madera, J. M. (2011). Defining diversity: The evolution of diversity. Worldwide
Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 3(4), 284–293.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17554211111162408
Kingdon, C. (2005). Reflexivity: Not just a qualitative methodological research tool. British
Journal of Midwifery, 13(10), 622–627. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2005.13.10.19835

93
Kosek, E. E., & Zonia, S. C. (1993). Assessing diversity climate: A field study of reactions to
employer efforts to promote diversity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(1), 61-81.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140107
Korovyakovskaya, I., & Chong, H. (2015). An empirical study of the relationships between
miscommunication and conflict in culturally diverse work groups. Journal of
International Business Research, 14(3), 41–54.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/f9c1ce29b70f38af9db59e5600a14f44/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=38747
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Lather P. (1991). Getting smart. Routledge.
Liao, H., Chuang, A., & Joshi, A. (2008). Perceived deep-level dissimilarity: Personality
antecedents and impact on overall job attitude, helping, work withdrawal, and turnover.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 106, 106–124.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.01.002
Liu, S. (2012). Rethinking intercultural competence: Global and local nexus. Journal of
Multicultural Discourses, 7(3), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2012.693085
Leading Effectively Staff (2022, January 11). Inclusive leadership: Steps your organization
should take to get it right. Center for Creative Leadership.
https://www.ccl.org/articles/leading-effectively-articles/when-inclusive-leadership-goeswrong-and-how-to-get-it-right/
Lundberg, A., & Westerman, G. (2020, February 15). The Transformer CLO.
Newhorizonthinking. https://www.newhorizonthinking.com/wp-content/uploads /202 0
/01/The-Transformer-CLO.pdf

94
Luthens, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In K. S. Cameron, J. E.
Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241-258). BerrettKoehler.
Maamari, B. E., & Saheb, A. (2018). How organizational culture and leadership style affect
employees’ performance of genders. International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
26(4), 630-651. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2017-1151
Mansell, W. (2000). Conscious appraisal and the modification of automatic processes in anxiety.
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 28(2), 99-120.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465800001028
Mao L., Akram A. M., Chovanec D., & Underwood M. L. (2016). Embracing the spiral:
Researcher reflexivity in diverse critical methodologies. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 15(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916681005
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of
Occupational Behaviour, 2(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M.P. (2022). The burnout challenge: Managing people’s relationships
with their jobs. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674287297
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). SAGE.
McEnroe, C., & Rock, D. (2023, July 25). 3 ways our brains undermine our ability to be a good
leader. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/07/3-ways-our-brains-undermineour-ability-to-be-a-good-leader
Megheirkouni, M., & Mejheirkouni, A. (2020). Leadership development trends and challenges in
the twenty-first century: rethinking the priorities. The Journal of Management
Development, 39(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-04-2019-0114

95
Merriam, S .B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miller, K. I., Zook, E. G., & Ellis, B. H. (1989). Occupational differences in the influence of
communication on stress and burnout in the workplace. Management Communication
Quarterly, 3(2), 166–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318989003002002
Milner H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen,
unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309471
Moon J. A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice.
Routledge.
Mor-Barak, M. A., & Cherin, D. A. (1998). A tool to expand organizational understanding of
workforce diversity: Exploring a measure of inclusion-exclusion. Administration in
Social Work, 22(1), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1300/J147v22n01_04
Mortari, L. (2015). Reflectivity in research practice: An overview of different perspectives.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(5), 160940691561804.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915618045
Moshavi, D.; Brown, F. W., & Dodd, N. G. (2003). Leader self-awareness and its relationship to
subordinate attitudes and performance. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 24(7), 407–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730310498622
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.
Nesbit, P. L. (2012). The role of self-reflection, emotional management of feedback, and selfregulation processes in self-directed leadership development. Human Resource
Development Review, 11(2), 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484312439196

96
Northouse. (2022). Leadership: theory and practice (9th ed). SAGE.
Osmond, J., & Darlington, Y. (2005). Reflective analysis: Techniques for facilitating reflection.
Australian Social Work, 58(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0312-407X.2005.00179.x
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (Part 2 of 3) (REL 2016-160). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/
Pinsof, W. M., Breunlin, D. C., Russell, W. P., Lebow, J. L., Rampage, C., & Chambers, A. L.
(2018). Integrative systemic therapy: Metaframeworks for problem solving with
individuals, couples, and families. American Psychological Association.
Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2010). The cost of bad behavior. Organizational Dynamics, 39(1), 64-
71. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2009.10.006
Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2012). Emotional and behavioral responses to workplace incivility
and the impact of hierarchical status. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(S1),
E326-E357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01020.x
Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2013). The price of incivility. Harvard Business Review, 91(1-2), 114-
121. https://qualitymanagementinstitute.com/images/hrsolutions/hbr-thepriceofincivility
.pdf
Porath, C. (2018, October 24). Why being respectful to your coworkers is good for business
[Video file]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY1ERM-NIBY
Porath, C., Foulk, T., & Erez, A. (2015). How incivility hijacks performance: It robs cognitive
resources, increases dysfunctional behavior, and infects team dynamics and functioning.
Organizational Dynamics, 44(4), 258–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2015.09.002

97
Porter, J. (2017). Why you should make time for self-reflection (even if you hate doing it).
Harvard Business Review. www.hbsp.harvard.edu.
Posner, B., & Han, J. (2024). How values and value clarity still matter: An extended study of
global managers. The Journal of Values Based Leadership, 17(1), 34-46.
https://doi.org/10.22543/1948-0733.1489
Probst, B. (2015). The eye regards itself: Benefits and challenges of reflexivity in qualitative
social work research. Social Work Research, 39(1), 37–48.
https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svu028
Randel, A.E., Galvin, B.M., Shore, L.M., Ehrhart, K.H, Chung, B.G., Dean, M.A, & Kedharnath,
U. (2018). Inclusive leadership: realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and
being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review. 28(2), 190-203.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.07.002
Ray, E.B. & Miller, K.I. (1991). The influence of communication structure and social support on
job stress and burnout. Management Communication Quarterly, 4(4), 506–527.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318991004004005
Rock, D. (2024, February 9). LEAD: The neuroscience of effective management.
Neuroleadership. https://neuroleadership.com/solutions-for-organizations/lead
Salovey, P. & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition, and personality,
9(3), 185-211. https://doi.org/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG
Salovey, P., Bedell, B., Detweiler, J.B., & Mayer, J.D. (1999). Coping intelligently: Emotional
intelligence and the coping process. The Psychology of What Works, edited by C.R.
Snyder. New York: Oxford University Press.

98
Saunders, M. N. (2019). Understanding research philosophy and approaches to theory
development. In S. Greener (Ed.), Research methods for business students (pp. 129-171,
5th ed.). Pearson Education India.
Schunk, D. H. & Usher, D. H. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan
(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 11-26). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Schön, D.A. (1992). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (1st edition.).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473
Schutz, W. (1958). FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. Rinehart.
Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). “What’s your story?” A life-stories approach to authentic
leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 395–417.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.005
Shore, L. M., & Chung, B. G. (2022). Inclusive leadership: How leaders sustain or discourage
work group inclusion. Group & Organization Management, 47(4), 723–754.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10
Showry, S., & Manasa, K. V. L. (2014). Self-awareness—Key to effective leadership. IUP
Journal of Soft Skills, 8(1), 15-26. https://openurl.ebsco.com/contentitem/gcd:966690 53
?sid=ebsco:plink:scholar&id=ebsco:gcd:96669053&crl=c
Size of the Training Industry. (2021, March 29). Learning services and outsourcing size of
training industry. Trainingindustry.com. https://trainingindustry.com/wiki/learningservices-and-outsourcing/size-of-training-industry/
Solomon, A. H. (2017). Loving Bravely: 20 lessons of self-discovery to help you get the love you
want. New Harbinger.

99
Solomon, M. C. J., & Wren, J. E. (2021). Becoming what you are seeking: Building relational
self‐awareness in emerging adults. Family Process, 60(4), 1539–1554.
https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12697
Staples, D. S., & Webster, J. (2007). Exploring traditional and virtual team members’ “Best
Practices”: A social cognitive theory perspective. Small Group Research, 38(1), 60–97.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496406296961
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership; a survey of theory and research. Free Press.
Sull, D., Sull, C., & Zweig, B. (2022). Toxic culture is driving the great resignation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 63(2), 1–9. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/toxic-culture-isdriving-the-great-resignation/
Talks at Google. (2019, February 22). The social brain in the workplace presented by Matthew
Leiberman [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7UR9JwQEYk
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1984). Introduction to qualitative research methods (2nd ed.). Jhon
Wiley & Sons.
Tessema, M. T., Tesfom, G., Faircloth, M. A., Tesfagiorgis, M., & Teckle, P. (2022). The “great
resignation”: Causes, consequences, and creative HR management strategies. Journal of
Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 10(1), 161-171.
https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2022.101011
Tian, H., Iqbal, S., Akhtar, S., Qalati, S. A., Anwar, F., & Khan, M. A. S. (2020). The impact of
transformational leadership on employee Retention: Mediation and moderation through
organizational citizenship behavior and communication. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(1),
314–314. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00314

100
Trapnell, P. D., & Campbell, J .D. (1999). Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model
of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 76(2), 284–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.2.284
Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and
organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549–579.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2393472
Ulrich, D., Carter, L., & Goldsmith, M. (2012). Best practices in leadership development and
organization change: How the best companies ensure meaningful change and sustainable
leadership. Jhon Wiley & Sons.
Unzueta, M. M., & Binning, K. R. (2012). Diversity is in the eye of the beholder: How concern
for the in-group affects perceptions of racial diversity. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 38(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211418528
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). Job openings in January 2021: Little different from one
year earlier.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and
group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008
van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Homan, A. C. (2013). Diversity mindsets and the
performance of diverse teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
121(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.003
Villaverde, L. (2008). Feminist primer. Peter Lang.

101
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008).
Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of
Management, 34(1), 89-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913
Wasserman, I. C. (2014). Strengthening interpersonal awareness and fostering relational
eloquence. In M. B. Ferdman, & B. R. Dean (Eds.), Diversity at work: The practice of
inclusion (pp. 128-154). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118764282.ch4
Weick, K. E.(2012). Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work.
Human Relations, 65(1), 141–153. New York.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726711424235
Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2016). Developing management skills (9th ed.). Pearson.
White, S., Fook, J., & Gardner, F. (2006). Critical reflection in health and social care. Open
University Press.
Whittle, A., & Mueller, F. (2012) Bankers in the dock: Moral storytelling in action. Human
Relations 65(1): 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726711423442
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.

102
Appendix A: Recruitment Email
Recruitment Format: Email - The following email text will be emailed from the researcher
using a secure email managed by the University of Southern California:
Body Text:
Dear First Name,
I have spent my career in marketing, and I am currently pursuing a doctoral degree in
Organizational Change and Leadership at the University of Southern California,
Rossier School of Education. As a fellow leader in my network, I am inviting you to
voluntarily participate in a study to examine the use of active listening and selfreflection in the workplace and its impact on leading diverse teams. Your
participation in the study is completely voluntary and participant identities will not be
reported. The study includes voluntary interviews with global marketing leaders and
the 60-minute interview will take place online. If you are interested in participating in
this study, are leading a diverse team, and use active listening and self-reflection in
the workplace, please reply to my email sparksj@usc.edu and we can coordinate a
time.
I look forward to meeting with you and thank you for taking the time to participate in
this important study to advance leadership practices in the workplace.
Thank you,
Jennifer
Jennifer Sparks Taylor
Ed.D. Candidate, Organizational Change and Leadership
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

103
Appendix B: Recruitment LinkedIn Post
Recruitment Format: LinkedIn Post - Text, Image, and Request to Contact
Body Text:
Calling all Senior Leaders – Requesting your Input: I’m conducting important research
(as a part of my Organizational Change and leadership doctoral dissertation at USC) on
the impact of self-reflection in the workplace, specifically with leaders leading diverse
teams. I’m inviting you to voluntarily participate in a 45-minute online interview to share
your experiences with self-reflection, and the impact on leadership and team behaviors.
Please message me here or at sparksj@usc.edu to schedule a time to participate and to be
a part of this important work to advance leadership practices in the workplace.
#organizationalchange #research #leadershipbehavior #LeadershipResearch
Image:

104
Appendix C: Email Confirmation and Scheduling
Hi First name,
Thank you for reconnecting on LinkedIn this past week. As I mentioned, I’m working towards a
doctorate program in Organizational Change and Leadership at USC and in the process of
conducting my research. The purpose of the qualitative study is to understand how leaders
perceive how self-reflection affects their leadership behaviors while leading diverse teams.
Thank you for your interest in participating.
● For this study a leader is defined as a senior executive within an organization that leads a
diverse team
● Diverse is defined as differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the
perception that one person is different from another (background, cultural differences,
identity, etc.).
Participation is voluntary and all data will be anonymized; therefore not personally identifiable.
I’ll need approximately 45-minutes to one-hour and the interview will take place on Zoom and
recorded for note taking purposes only. I’ve included a link to my calendar to find a time for us,
or let me know if you have another time that is best for you.
https://calendly.com/ceoatusc/leadership-interview
Lastly, for purposes of the Internal Review Board (IRB) at USC, I have attached an information
sheet with background on the study, the discussion guide, and link to DocuSign release form for
signature. Again, the conversation will be anonymized and the recording will be deleted once the
study is complete in May 2024.
Thank you so much for being a part of this important research study. Very much appreciated.

105
Appendix D: Interview Protocol
The interview questions have been developed to understand how self-reflection affects
leaders’ leadership behaviors in leading diverse teams. For this research study, a leader is defined
as anyone who leads a team of diverse individuals within a company with 100 employees or
more, and uses self-reflection in the workplace and is over the age of 18. For this study, Diverse
is defined as differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception that
one person is different from another.
Research Questions
1. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects leader behavior?
2. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects team behavior?
3. How leaders perceive self-reflection affects the overall environment of the
organization?
Respondent Type:
Leaders’ who lead a minimum team of five diverse individuals within a company with 100
employees or more, use self-reflection in the workplace, and are over the age of 18.
Introduction to the Interview:
Thank you for taking the time today for our discussion. As I mentioned in my email, I am a
doctoral candidate working on a dissertation at the University of Southern California. The
subject is focused on understanding how self-reflection practices affect leaders' communication
styles and leadership behaviors, particularly when leading diverse teams. When I say ‘diverse,’
this is defined as differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception
that one person is different from another.
Before we get started, I wanted to make sure you had time to review the consent form I provided
in my email earlier this month. A key item I’d like to reiterate is that your personal information
will not be shared, and your name and organization will be changed within the study findings so
that it is not identifiable. For purposes of note taking, I’d like to record our conversation using
Zoom so that I can focus on our conversation and go back and listen to exactly what was said
versus an interpretation. The recording will only be used for notes and will be kept securely so
your identity remains anonymous. Do I have your permission to record our conversation? Thank
you so much. Do you have a preferred name that I should use in the report other than your real
name?
I’ve developed a discussion guide for our conversation today, which will be about an hour. I’ll
use the questions as a guiding point for our conversation, but please talk freely about your
experience. The purpose of the discussion today is about leader self reflection, which research
has shown to enable individuals and teams to see new approaches, have improved collaboration,
respect for each other, and a shared understanding. I’m curious to learn more about how you lead
your team and if self-reflection has had an affect on your leadership communication and
behavior and your team’s behavior.
Do you have any questions before we get started?

106
I’ll start the recording now.
Interview Question Potential Probes RQ
Addressed
Key Concept
Addressed
1. Please share what your
role is at your
company, your title,
and size of your team
you manage on a day
to day basis.
Roughly how long
have you been
leading teams?
N/A Background -
Person
2. How do you define your
diverse team
What is the mix of
characteristics of
your team?
N/A Background
3. How do you describe
your current leadership
style?
Tell me more about
what you mean by
“style”?
If I were to ask
someone on your
team, how would
they describe you?
RQ1 Self-identity as
a leader
4. Thinking about you as
an “word” leader, how
does your background
and position inform
how you communicate
with your team?
For example, I am a white
educated senior leader
leading a team which
includes people
younger than me and
from different cultures.
For you, does this require
you to communicate
RQ1 Self-identity

107
with your team
differently?
5. What does selfreflection mean to you
in a work context?
N/A Definition
6. Do you practice selfreflection?
In what ways do
you practice selfreflection? How
often?
RQ1 Behaviors
7. How did you learn to
do self-reflection?
RQ1 Behaviors
8. Does your organization
have resources or
provide ways to learn
about self-reflection in
the workplace?
RQ3 Environment
9. Can you describe a
scenario with your
team that influenced
you to self-reflect?
What was
happening? What
was it about this
scenario that
influenced you selfreflect?
RQ1, RQ2 Behaviors,
Self, Team
10. How, if at all, did
your behavior or
communication
change?
i.e. interactions
with team members,
changes in decision
making, different
points of view
RQ1 Self,
leadership
behaviors
11. How did you perceive
your team changed?
RQ2, RQ3 Behavior -
Team and
environment
12. How do you feel selfreflection has changed
you as a leader?
RQ1 Affect

108
13. Have you ever had a
lapse in your selfreflection practice?
What happened?
With you. What
happened with your
team?
RQ1, RQ2,
RQ3
Personal
experience,
team behavior,
environment
14. Are there other
situations that come up
where you see selfreflection is needed
with your team?
What types of
situations?
RQ1, RQ2 Personal
experience,
team behavior
15. How do you feel selfreflection affects your
organization?
16. How would you rate
the ability of other
leaders in your
organization to do selfreflection?
RQ3 Environment
17. Along your leadership
journey, have you
changed anything
about how you do selfreflection?
RQ1 Leader
behavior
18. On a scale of 1-10,
how would you rate
your level of self
awareness in
understanding your
own emotions and
recognizing other
people's emotions?
RQ1 Self
Awareness
19. Is there anything else
you’d like to add?
RQ1, RQ2,
RQ3
Individual,
team, and
environment
Additional Demographics Questions
● What year you were born

109
● What is your nationality?
● How do you identify/Pronouns?
Conclusion to the interview
Thank you for our conversation today and your time. Is there anything else you would like to
share? If I have any questions later, is it okay if I contact you for clarification? This concludes
the interview. Again, thank you for your time.

110
Appendix E: Information Sheet for Exempt Studies
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Organizational Change Leadership Program
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089
Research Information Sheet
Study Title: Leader Self-Reflection in the Workplace
Principle Investigator: Jennifer Sparks Taylor
Faculty Advisor: Esther C, Kim, PhD
______________________________________________________________________________
You are invited to participate in a research study, and your participation is voluntary. This
document explains information about this study. You should feel free to ask questions about
anything that is unclear to you.
PURPOSE
The study aims to understand how leaders perceive how a self-reflection practice affects their
leadership behaviors while leading diverse teams. For this research study, a leader is defined as
anyone within an organization that leads a team of diverse individuals. Diverse is defined as
differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception that one person
is different from another.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
The participants will include approximately 20 leaders who have participated in a self-reflection
practice. The purposeful sample will include leaders from a variety of organizations and
industries.
Interview participants will be asked to participate in a one-hour interview conducted via video
conferencing software, Zoom. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed using Zoom and Otter
AI, a transcription tool that can be used within the interview. Once transcribed and verified, the
transcription will be deleted. The participant can decline to be transcribed and still participate in
the interview.
If you decide to take part in the interview, you will be asked to
1. Participate in a sixty-minute interview, via video conferencing software, Zoom.
2. Provide feedback on initial findings and themes as representing the interviewee’s experience
(optional for the interviewee).
3. Sign an agreement to participate in the research

111
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There is no compensation or payment for participation in this study.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
No identifiable information will be used when the research results are published.
Any information obtained concerning this study that can be identified with the
participants will remain strictly confidential between the researcher and individual participants.
Confidentiality will be maintained by means of assigning pseudonyms and reviewing quotes for
personally identifiable language.
Only the principal researcher will know the identity of the participants and their organization and
will keep the information confidential in secure online storage provided by the University of
Southern California. Pseudonyms and composites will be used to protect confidentiality within
the dissertation. Participants will be able to review their own transcripts and check direct quotes.
The researcher will retain raw data for a maximum of three years. Audio/video recordings and
handwritten notes will only be accessible to the principal researcher and transcriber and will be
erased or destroyed upon completion of the study. The participant may request to review their
individual transcript.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Jennifer Sparks Taylor at
sparksj@usc.edu or Esther Kim at eh.kim@usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

112
Appendix F: Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California
USC Rossier School of Education
Research Overview & Consent Form
Fall 2023
Study Title: Leader Self-Reflection in the Workplace
Principal Investigator: Jennifer Sparks Taylor
Introduction
The study aims to understand how self-reflection practices affect leadership behaviors. Jennifer
Sparks Taylor, a doctoral student at the University of Southern California, Rossier School of
Education, is interested in self-reflection and whether it affects leadership communication and
behaviors in teams made up of diverse individuals. For this study, diverse is defined as
differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception that one person
is different from another.
The study will be confidential, and all information collected will not contain any personally
identifiable information for the individuals participating or the organization.
We invite you to take part in a research study because you are leading diverse teams and are over
the age of 18, and have used any form of self-reflection in the workplace. Please take as much
time as you need to read this document and the consent form. You will be asked to sign this form
if you decide to participate. A copy of the signed form will be provided to you for your records.
Purpose
The study aims to understand how leaders perceive how self-reflection affects their leadership
behaviors and communication while leading diverse teams. For this research study, a leader is
defined as anyone within an organization who leads a team of diverse individuals. Diverse is
defined as differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception that
one person is different from another. Self-reflection is defined as the process by which
individuals identify the assumptions governing their actions, be able to consider the origins of
the assumptions, question the meaning of the assumptions, and develop alternative ways of
acting or communicating.
Your participation in this study will include a 60-minute interview. Interviews will be
conducted either in-person or via zoom, depending on your location and the researcher’s
location. Approximately 20 leaders will participate in the interviews.
Participation in the study is voluntary and you will not be compensated for your participation in
this research. If at any time you choose to not participate in the study, you can voluntarily
withdraw from participation.

113
Interviews will be transcribed for note-taking purposes only. The researcher will store all
notes in a secure drive provided by the University of Southern California. Notes will only be
viewed by the researcher for interpreting findings from the interviews.
Qualification to Participate
Qualifications to participate in the study are as follows:
● Leading a team of five people made up of diverse individuals. Diverse is defined as
differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception that one
person is different from another.
● Must be over the age of 18
● Use some form of self-reflection in the workplace. Self-reflection/reflection is defined as
the process by which individuals identify the assumptions governing their actions, be able
to consider the origins of the assumptions, question the meaning of the assumptions, and
develop alternative ways of acting or communicating.
Risk and Discomforts
Interviews
The researcher has designed the interviews for you to share about your experience as a leader
and your experiences using reflection. If there are any questions that make you feel uneasy, you
can choose to skip or stop answering any questions you don’t want to.
Privacy/Confidentiality
The study will be confidential, and all information collected will not contain any personally
identifiable information for the individuals participating or the organization, as far as permitted
by law. The Certificate of Confidentiality DOES NOT stop reporting that federal, state, or local
laws require. Some examples are laws that require reporting of child or elder abuse, and threats
to harm yourself or others. However, if we are required to do so by law, we will disclose
confidential information about you. All information will be stored on a secure server provided by
the University of Southern California to protect all confidential information. We may publish the
findings of the study in a doctoral dissertation summary; however, all information will remove
any personally identifiable and confidential information.
The University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Human Subject’s
Protections Program (HSPP) may review your records.
This study will use Zoom recording and Otter AI for transcription only. The recording and
transcriptions will be used for notetaking only so that the researcher can accurately reflect your
experience in the research findings. To understand the privacy and confidentiality limitations
associated with using Otter AI we strongly advise you to familiarize yourself with the Otter AI
Pro privacy policy here. USC has no jurisdiction or oversight of how data are used or shared on
third party applications.

114
Voluntary Participation
It is your choice whether to participate. If you choose to participate, you may change your mind
and leave the study at any time. If you decide not to participate, or choose to end your
participation in this study, you will not be penalized. Contact Jennifer Sparks Taylor at
323.309.0039 or sparksj@usc.edu if you choose to withdraw from the study.
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints, please contact Jennifer Sparks Taylor at
323.309.0039 or sparksj@usc.edu.
This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
research participant or you have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at
(323) 442-0114 or by email at irb@usc.edu.
Statement of Consent
I have read (or someone has read to me) the information provided above. I have been given a
chance to ask questions. All my questions have been answered. By signing this form, I am
agreeing to take part in this study.
________________________ __________________ _________
Name of Research Participant Signature Date Signed
(and Time*)
Person Obtaining Consent
I have personally explained the research to the participant using non-technical language. I have
answered all the participant’s questions. I believe that the participant understands the information
described in this informed consent and freely consents to participate.
Jennifer Sparks Taylor
Name of Person Obtaining Signature Date Signed
Informed Consent (and Time*)

115
Appendix G: Participant's Ratings of Themselves and Other Leaders
On a Likert Scale of 1-10 with 1 representing a low level and 10 representing a high level,
participants were asked to rate their own level of self-awareness in understanding their own
emotions and recognizing other people's emotions for a self-rating in order to self-reflection
individually. And they were asked to rate the ability of other leaders in the organization to do
self-reflection. Self-ratings and ratings of other organizational leaders are as follows:
Pseudonym SelfRating
Other Leaders
within their
Organization
Phyllis 8.0 7.5
Cathy 7.0 8.0
Kelly 9.5 5.0
Angela 7.5 5.0
Michael 7.0 7.0
Zeik 7.0 5.0
Dwight 7.0 4.0
Will 9.0 6.0
Pam 8.0 6.0
Nora 9.0 6.0
Samantha 9.0 7.0
Stanley 9.0 7.0
Jim 8.0 6.0
Meredith 7.0 7.0
Andy 9.0 6.0
Howard 7.0 4.0
Robert 7.0 6.0
Average Rating 8.0 6.0

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study investigates leaders' perspectives on the influence of self-reflection on leadership behaviors, team behaviors, and the overall organization within the context of leading diverse teams. Seventeen senior leaders representing various industries and leadership positions participated in semi-structured interviews aimed at understanding the situations that spark the need for self-reflection and the influence of self-reflection on leader behaviors, team behaviors, and their organizations. Thematic analysis revealed that self-reflective practices among leaders promote self-awareness, empathy, and inclusivity, shaping team behaviors and fostering a culture of trust and collaboration. Despite challenges such as time constraints and performance pressures, participants recognized the value of self-reflection in driving team performance and improved communication. The study offers practical insights, including recommendations for organizational action. These recommendations include developing a common definition of self-reflection, establishing a learning organization mindset, fostering psychological safety, providing new types of learning and development resources, and applying evidence-based frameworks to measure change. By implementing these recommendations, organizations can enhance leadership effectiveness, promote diversity and inclusion, and cultivate environments conducive to continuous learning and growth.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Canaries in the mine: centering the voices of Black women DEI practitioners in a period of DEI resistance

PDF

Black leaders: the unicorns of the biopharmaceutical industry

PDF

The role of executives’ knowledge and motivation in enabling organizational supports for diversity, equity, and inclusion

PDF

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

PDF

Ambient anxiety within leadership teams and its impact on organizational efficiency in mental health organizations

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

Autistic people’s experiences during the employment process

PDF

Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory

PDF

Understanding barriers and resiliency: experiences from Latina leaders in local government

PDF

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

PDF

Improving graduation equity in community colleges: a study on California Assembly Bill 705 policy implementation

PDF

Beyond commitments: a qualitative examination of the persistent disparities faced by Black women in executive leadership roles post the 2020 crisis and beyond

PDF

Secrets from the C-suite: women leaders on the bridging gap

PDF

Understanding conditions for executive coaching success from the leader's point of view

PDF

Leading as outsiders within the C-suite: a phenomenological study of Black women C-suite executives’ perspectives on White allyship in corporate America

PDF

Leadership in turbulent times: a social cognitive study of responsible leaders

PDF

Promoting DEI to increase business performance: an evaluation of hiring practices

PDF

Collaboration, capacity, and communication: Leaders’ perceptions of innovative work behavior across hybrid and remote work environments

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women general officers in a U.S. military reserve component

PDF

Teacher diversity training: a qualitative study to examine novice teacher influences

Asset Metadata

Creator Taylor, Jennifer Sparks (author)

Core Title The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 04/30/2024

Defense Date 04/19/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Communication,global teams,inclusion,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational change,organizational effectiveness,self-reflection,transformation

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kim, Esther (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Moore, Ekaterina (committee member)

Creator Email jennifer@sparks-ideas.com,sparksj@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113912119

Unique identifier UC113912119

Identifier etd-TaylorJenn-12874.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-TaylorJenn-12874

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Taylor, Jennifer Sparks

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240503-usctheses-batch-1147 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu