University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A study of manager reflective practice

(USC Thesis Other)

A study of manager reflective practice

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 1

A Study of Manager Reflective Practice

By

Durand Duin

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2019

Copyright 2019 Durand Duin
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 2

Abstract

In an effort to increase the efficacy of people managers at a global financial services technology
firm, this study evaluates the degree to which managers at the organization employ a reflective
practice to inform their management approach. The research questions treated the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences that may support or restrict managers in adopting a
reflective practice. Using a mixed methods research design, all people managers at the
organization received a survey, and 28% of the manager population completed it. After the
survey closed, I interviewed thirteen managers in a semi-structured format to learn more about
their practices around reflection and triangulate with the descriptive statistics from the survey
responses. The results indicate that managers at the firm value reflection but would benefit from
more specific educational scaffolding and organizational support.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 3
Table of Contents

Abstract 2

List of Tables 5

List of Figures 6

Introduction to the Problem of Practice 7

Organizational Context and Mission 7

Importance of Addressing the Problem 9

Organizational Performance Goal 10

Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal 11

Purpose of the Project and Questions 11

Review of the Literature 12
Defining Reflective Practice 12
Reflection as a Critical Management and Organizational Skill 13
Prerequisites to Reflective Practice 17
Barriers and Challenges 18

Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 22
Knowledge Influences 23
Motivation Influences 25
Organizational Influences 29

Interactive Conceptual Framework 31

Data Collection 33
Survey Protocols 33
Survey Participants 34
Interviews 36
Interview Participants 37

Data Analysis 38
Quantitative Analysis 38
Qualitative Analysis 38

Results and Findings 39
Knowledge Influences 39
Motivation Influences 49
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 4
Organization Influences 55

Recommendations for Practice 68
Educational Scaffolding and Community in Reflection and its Practice 69
Nudging the Cultural System 73

Limitations and Delimitations 75

Recommendations for Future Research 76

Conclusion 76

References 78

Appendices 87
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria for Interview, Survey,
and Observation 87
Appendix B: Protocols 90
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness 95
Appendix D: Validity and Reliability 98
Appendix E: Ethics 99
Appendix F: Implementation and Evaluation 100
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 5

List of Tables

Table 1. Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences on Managers Using
Reflective Practice 31

Table 2. Demographic Data of 87 GlobalPayments Survey Respondents 35

Table 3. Analysis of Knowledge Influence Survey Items (N=87) 40

Table 4. Analysis of Motivation Influence Survey Items (N=87) 50

Table 5. Analysis of Organizational Influence Survey Items (N=87) 56

Table 6. Review of Recommendations by KMO Influence 68

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 6

List of Figures

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for manager reflective practice 32

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 7
Introduction to the Problem of Practice
This study will address the success of people managers and how that success relates to
effectively employing a reflective practice. Specifically, it will investigate managers’
relationships with reflective practices as a critical managerial instrument within a rapidly
growing financial services company. Schön (1987) defines reflection as a process of inquiry that
can take place before, during, or after an experience. The researcher frames the importance of
reflection against the increasingly rapid rate of change and within systems that harbor dynamic
challenges out of reach from static problem-solving styles (Schön, 1987). Within this context,
people managers require access to reflection to build sustainable solutions within chaotic
organizational complexities. Employees who are new to the role of managing others often do not
have the skills or experience to effectively lead teams and their related business objectives. From
the process of manager selection (Fleming, 2008) to manager evaluation (Sillett, 2015),
organizations are frequently not providing the correct environment to produce successful
business outcomes, creating systemic failure points. Hogan (2015) suggests that upwards of
two-thirds of all people managers are failing in the role, resulting in significant engagement
deficits and economic losses (Beck & Harter, 2015).
Organizational Context and Mission
Current internet commerce represents a single digit percentage of the world’s current
economy. GlobalPayments’ mission is to increase the economic output of the internet. The
company aims to support global entrepreneurialism, create economic access, and broaden and
deepen the rate of internet commerce. I will use “GlobalPayments” as a pseudonym throughout
this study to protect the identity of the organization. As a business-to-business product that
facilitates online payments for businesses, the company targets emerging, global entrepreneurs in
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 8
many of its sales and marketing efforts. The strategy is to create a global network of websites
that all use the product, resulting in a varied portfolio across geographies and industries.
GlobalPayments vies to grow with those companies, offering them the infrastructure they need to
successfully scale.
From a talent landscape perspective, GlobalPayments invests heavily in growing its
global engineering teams, with the understanding that it is engineers who will build the products
users will need to be successful. From a diversity standpoint, the majority of employees are
white, heterosexual males who have college degrees and are in their late twenties. The manager
population follows the diversity trends of the company's composition. To prevent unhealthy
competition for title or level and emphasize a collaborative environment, the company only uses
baseline titles (e.g., manager), and employee levels are not public. The company has six levels,
and there are three manager levels there within.
The organization has three main structures: (1) technical (including engineering and
product management teams), (2) business (including sales, customer support, and user safety
teams), and (3) core (including human resources, accounting, and legal). Team get work done
through highly cross-functional, matrixed relationships. The organization values transparency,
and documentation on team goals, metrics, and day-to-day e-mail communications are open for
consumption by anyone in the organization. Employees report valuing such a high degree of
transparency but also report a sense of overwhelm in not knowing which materials they should
be consuming.
At the time of this research, there are 304 people managers within the organization.
While the people manager role did not formally exist in the early days of the company, the
organization currently values the role as critical to the organization’s success. Of any employee
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 9
segment, they receive the most investment in formal learning and development programs. There
is also an annual manager offsite to recognize their work and further inspire them to elevate their
teams’ contributions to the mission. The role is difficult in that managers play multiple roles.
They do not just manage team performance; they are also responsible for individually
contributing to several workstreams. Measurement of their efficacy takes place through two
formal bi-annual programs: an employee engagement survey (PaymentSat) and a performance
process that captures feedback from employees, the managers themselves, and their managers.
In PaymentSat, a set of manager questions helps to characterize how managers are performing
against specific behaviors. When the survey first launched, scores were quite low, because the
role and responsibilities of a manager lacked definition and scaffolding. The total favorability of
manager performance has increased over time, but scores around providing helpful feedback
continue to lag. Also, there is a sentiment within the organization that the questions may not be
exactly the right questions to ask. There may be an opportunity to inquire into reflection and
reflective practice as it relates to successful management. Coming out of the twice a year
performance process, managers receive a performance rating, which may range from not meeting
expectations to greatly exceeding them.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
It is important to solve the problem of low manager success rates, because higher quality
managers will help GlobalPayments employees further engage with their work and drive more
successful business outcomes. Across United Kingdom industries alone, underperforming
managers are costing the economy billions of pounds per year (Garwood, 2012). Solving this
problem would also provide credibility to the learning and development industry. Beer,
Finnström, and Schrader (2016) report that American companies spend $160 billion in
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 10
educational interventions, yet they are largely ineffective. These interventions tend to leave
managers in a continued skill deficit and executives displeased with their learning teams.
Researchers describe the importance of reflection in leadership and management development
(Hill, 2004; Schön, 1987; Senge, 1990). Many organizations, however, are unable to create
practices of reflection given deep cultural assumptions that lock individuals into inflexible
patterns of behavior (Schein, 2010). The consequence of not solving this problem is that new
managers will continue to fall behind expectations, unnecessarily driving down global employee
engagement and business outcomes (Garwood, 2012). Managers need to be able to access
reflective practice to better meet business challenges that do not have obvious or easy answers
(Schön, 1987; Senge, 1990). To not engage in reflection places managers at risk of relying on
crystalline assumptions about work and relationships, stymying their growth and ability to
flexibly maneuver within increasingly complex systems (Senge, 1990). This danger of rigidity
places employee engagement in peril, as reflection is necessary for managers to be able to
quickly and appropriately diagnose and respond to the situations around them. Through
reflection and a critical review of their behaviors, they may be better able to gain choice in how
they manage, shifting their style to better match the situation at hand.
Organizational Performance Goal
The performance goal is for GlobalPayments managers to receive a 90% positive score in
the employee engagement survey (PaymentSat) by April 2020. This goal is important, because
managers have an outsized impact on the quality of the employee experience of those they
manage (Beck & Harter, 2015) and business outcomes (Garwood, 2012). If managers are not
able to meet this goal, it may slow the company’s velocity and ability to capture global business
opportunities.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 11
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal

The stakeholder group for this study are the people managers of GlobalPayments. There
are currently 304 managers in the company, most of whom are managing for the first time in
their careers. This stakeholder group is a critical population within the organization because of
the expectation that they are driving both employee engagement and performance. As such,
increases in their efficacy stand to directly improve business outcomes (Hill, 2004). With
reflection tied to the efficacy of leadership (Schön, 1987), managers actively using a reflective
practice may contribute to the manager favorability score. The stakeholder goal is to have 100%
of GlobalPayments people managers incorporating reflective practice into their management
approach.
Reflection can take place in community (Raelin, 2001). The current programs that
support reflection reside in group and executive coaching. Groups of managers may come
together to deconstruct a challenge through open dialogue. Similarly, all global people managers
have access to executive coaches to work through challenges. The organization, however, has
not invested in teaching managers frameworks for individual reflection. The hypothesis is that
few managers hold a formal, structured reflective practice. The organization does not survey
managers against this skill, so there is no existing baseline data on managers using reflective
practice. Success against the goal will mean that all managers either actively engage with
coaching offerings or report using a formal approach to reflection.
Purpose of the Project and Questions

The purpose of this study is to address the following research questions related to people
managers’ abilities to engage with a reflective practice in their management approach as one
critical element of being a successful in the role. Several researchers place reflective practice as a
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 12
cornerstone of managerial efficacy (Blöser, Schöpf, & Willaschek, 2010; Smith, 2001; Sumison,
2000).
1. What is the GlobalPayments manager knowledge related to incorporating a reflective
practice and contributing to the organizational goal of a 90% favorable manager score?
2. How motivated are GlobalPayments managers to incorporate reflective practices?
3. What is the interaction between GlobalPayments’ organizational culture and context and
managers' knowledge and motivation when it comes to reflective practice?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources as they relate to attaining the goal of a 90%
favorable PaymentSat manager score?
Review of the Literature

This section will review the relevant literature as it relates to this problem of practice.

Defining Reflective Practice
As with many social and psychological phenomena, it is important to understand the
array of existing interpretations to frame reflective practice. Keevers and Treleaven (2011) use
the metaphor of a mirror, suggesting that reflection includes a review of the situation with
separation and distance. This separation also allows for an individual to assume a personal
objectivity in thinking about the situation at hand (Boud, Keogh, & Walker, 1985). Barge (2004)
describes how the separation has a likeness to a text upon which one could apply various frames,
interpretations, and metaphors. Schmidt-Wilk (2009) used the Webster’s Dictionary definition of
reflection, which denotes the ability to replay and consider ideas about any subject matter.
Schön (1987) builds on this definition in a temporal way, indicating that reflection can happen
before, during, or after a practitioner executes his or her tasks. The researcher’s seminal work on
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 13
reflection focuses on the extemporaneous quality of reflection in action, and how an individual
can continually use new data to inform his or her behaviors in the moment, through a type of
contemporaneous conversation with a situation as it unfolds (Schön, 1987). This method of
working creates a reflexive reciprocity to work. Porte (1996) provides a metaphor for this active
engagement with reflection as it meets practice in describing a game of tennis. The ball
represents new, inbound information, and each tennis stroke represents a new action in light of
the ball’s unique placement in space. Porte adds to the definition by offering that reflection
includes the ability to reflect upon experience in meaningful personal and environmental levels
of analysis. Sumsion and Fleet (1996) and Rodgers (2002) offer that investigating experiences
help a person further make meaning and understand those experiences and the surrounding
environment. Boud et al. (1985) describe reflection as a proactive and intentional practice that
explores the experiences rendered in thought and emotion as a means of revelation and,
ultimately, learning.
Reflection as a Critical Management and Organizational Skill
Managers and leaders stand to benefit substantially from reflective practices. Raelin
(2001) asserts that reflection is core to the learning process and informs future actions. If leaders
are unable or unwilling to learn more about their own strengths and weaknesses, they may only
be able to achieve superficial success at best (Smith, 2001). Sumsion (2000) describes how
reflective practice enables leaders to react to the complexity and ambiguity that describe the
work of today’s world. Dewey (1933) describes that reflective practitioners are open-mindedn to
various perspectives, take accountability for their actions, and more readily navigate complexity.
Reflection allows for a spontaneous reciprocity between the managers and their environments, in
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 14
which they are open and able to modify their behaviors to best suit situations as they progress
(Keevers & Treleaven, 2011).
From the perspective of management learning, adopting a reflective practice within a
challenging work experience yields better results than a course (Seibert, 1999). With the
increasing rate of organizational complexity and change, this leadership inquiry and
responsiveness becomes a critical skill in leading effective, forward moving, and engaged teams
(Daudelin, 1996; Senge, 1990). Barge (2004) describes how the advancement of globalization
makes the manager’s context and role more difficult and that singular sets of assumptions about
organizational life cannot be true. Similarly, the objective of management education cannot be to
simply frame challenges in a technical and tightly scoped way. To do so is insufficient given the
critical role managers play within society (Alvesson & Willmott, 1992). Their role should
include a continual questioning of an organization’s underlying structures and processes and
what is being taken for granted contextual and historically. As such, managers must be critical of
the knowledge they espouse to successfully lead within the surrounding chaos (Barge, 2004).
The author also contends that, in the absence of fluid responsiveness to the environment,
managers will merely work to simply minimize damage, lacking the ability to create openness in
a situation’s possibility and potential. Vince and Reynolds (2009) put forth that reflection is not
merely a skill one learns and then casually applies; rather, it is an elemental ingredient to being a
manager. Miller (2012) agrees, citing how reflection leads to an understanding of self and an
understanding of others. The author suggests that this evaluation of the acceptance of the self and
having a security of acceptance is critical to leading, because it allows leaders to understand how
their actions impact those around them.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 15
In addition to building a reflexive capacity, leaders stand to gain more autonomy and
agency through reflection in being able to define the thoughts that guide action (Blöser et al.,
2010). The writers suggest that the ability to reflect critically is primary in any context of
autonomy. Similarly, critical self-evaluation reflective practice provides an emancipation from
the constraints of societal pressures, yet with a recognition of interconnectedness and the
individual’s responsibilities there within (Gray, 2007). Reflection is not merely about
comprehending a set of data (Gray, 2007); it extends to scrutinizing one’s assumptions to gain
access to broader perspectives and change aspects that are not helpful (Kayes, 2002; Vince &
Reynolds, 2009). This skill then leads to a flexibility in leadership actions and reactions (Raelin,
2001), as well as the ability to actively question the relationships between power, justice, and
knowledge to transform them (Vince & Reynolds, 2009). Managers who successfully engage in
reflexivity also report feeling excitement and at ease and with less stress and anxiety, with the
ability to communicate clearly within ever-shifting organizational landscapes (Barge, 2004).
Rather than feeling blocked or constrained, they possess a sense of forward momentum and
agency through their ability to actively choose their actions.
Researchers consistently relate reflective practice to the ability of companies to foster
value and sustainability by becoming learning organizations (Senge, 1990). Within a learning
organization, Senge suggests that leaders are able to activate reflection in ways that will healthily
challenge assumptions, creatively reframe challenges, and successfully hold the tension between
the desirable future state of the organization and the current reality. The researcher suggests that
organizations are able to differentiate themselves by increasing the quality and rate of learning.
Senge (1990) summarizes that incredible performance necessitates incredible learning. Pedler
(1991) defined a learning organization as one in which all employees are engaged with learning,
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 16
creating a continual transformation of the organization. Blöser et al. (2010) put forth that
reflective practice allows organizations the ability to keep up with pace of change. With the rate
of technology increasing and global markets increasingly flattening, the ability of reflective
practice to afford healthy responsiveness to change may be a sustaining feature of an
organization.
As a constraint, Jordan (2010) outlines how the Western centrality on the individual in
his or her reflection has obfuscated the importance of the surrounding cultural and organizational
contexts, which are inextricably linked to the individual. In embracing reflection in a communal
context, organizations stand to attain clearer insight into and accountability for their actions
across economic, societal, and environmental planes because of the visibility into shared
behaviors and interdependencies (Keevers & Treleaven, 2011). Seibert (1999) posits that
managers must be able to identify how their surrounding organizational context is shaping their
sensemaking process, and that it is not possible to separate self from that context. This sentiment
aligns with Lewin’s (1946) theoretical framework that behavior is a function of an individual’s
personality and their surrounding environment.
Reflection is not merely an intellectual pursuit. It is also a dialectic process between
managers and their surrounding colleagues (Barge, 2004). It is not an individual process but a
relational one. When organizations can accomplish reflection in a collective manner, the impact
multiplies by allowing for a transformational scrutiny of irrationality, inequity, and the illusory
mechanics that are working to maintain and guard the status quo, which is not in service of their
goals and aspirations (Kemmis, 1985). In bringing managers together to share and collect their
ideas and experiences, they will create better outcomes than they would individually (Smith,
2001). This inescapable web between managers and their environments renders the separation
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 17
and distance aspects of reflection’s definitions as problematic, in that managers must at once
stand back from the situation at hand but never forget that they are directly implicated in crafting
that situation (Barge, 2004). Critical theory may provide a helpful frame in discussing how
society shapes constructs of the self and that those social workings are available for change
(Alvesson & Willlmott, 1992).
Prerequisites to Reflective Practice
The literature outlines several potential prerequisites for building a reflective practice.
Smith (2001) and Schön (1987) outline the need for a psychologically safety and the ability to
simulate an active working environment that allows for experiences to unfold. Seibert (1999)
describes five necessary environmental phenomena that support reflection. They include
autonomy (the ability to construct one’s own work), feedback (information that provides raw
data for reflection), interaction with other people (including those who are skilled in specific
domains and at least one close personal relationship), pressure (significant demands upon one’s
abilities), and solitude (the ability step back from the work to analyze incoming information).
Taking a more critical lens, Markham (1999) suggests three calls to action in building reflection:
(1) addressing the friction some individuals bear with regard to reflection, (2) organizations
recognizing how they purposefully impede reflection as a protective device, and (3) the
underdeveloped reflective concepts and programming in many developmental courses.
Experiential learning environments are important foundational platforms for building
reflective practice. Senge (1990) discusses how leaders can use experiential learning to get in
touch with their emotions as sources of data, better identify interrelationships and processes,
elicit and name tensions at hand, and see the errors and inconsistencies in their thinking. In
defining reflection, Vince and Reynolds (2009) maintain that experience can include emotions,
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 18
beliefs, and behaviors. Schmidt-Wilk (2009) and Blöser et al. (2010) describe the need for new
experiences that allow leaders to access new perspectives and thoughts. They contend that
thought or anticipation alone are insufficient. An ongoing play between action and reflection that
continually surfaces and questions assumptions, beliefs, and approaches is at the center of
building high quality managers (Gray, 2007; Seibert, 1999; Vince & Reynolds, 2009). Smith
(2001) asserts that no amount of training can equip a manager for the first time they must let an
employee go, are facing a political block in getting work done, or are speaking with an angry
customer. Much of the work around reflective practice stems from Dewey’s (1933) seminal work
on the topic, in which the philosopher unquestionably asserts the importance of experience in the
process of reflection and the excavation of a perplexing state. Dewey’s aspiration for the learning
process went far beyond problem solving, moving from a form of reflection upon experience that
would lead to better individual understanding of societal relationships and power in a way that
would advance democratic principles and participation (Vince & Reynolds, 2009).
Barriers and Challenges
Several barriers and challenges surround the successful creation of reflective practice. For
example, reflection is difficult to measure. Given that reflection is often intrapsychic and
therefore hidden, it is easy to understand why there is little consistency or agreement with regard
to the ability to effectively and credibly measure the behavior (Sumsion & Fleet, 1996). As one
result, it is sometimes unclear how successful programs aimed at building reflective practice are
(Sumsion & Fleet, 1996). Van Manen (1977) describes the importance of probing pieces of work
product to understand the world view and orientation of the creators. Such an analysis helps the
researcher understand the learner’s epistemological, axiological, and ontological orientations
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 19
toward the world and how those phenomena change through reflection and the introduction to
other orientations.
Priddis and Rogers (2018) describe the importance of valid measures with regard to
reflective practice but admit that the current literature base is lacking. The studies evaluating
reflective practice are few and typically include findings that may not be of generalizable use
(Priddis & Rogers, 2018). The researchers built their own instrument to measure reflective
practice and support that it is relevant across industries. Mann, Gordon, and MacLeod (2009) cite
the rise in reflective practice with regard to education but also the scant research to back its
popularity. Of a pool of 600 papers treating reflection in the body of literature from 1995 to
2005, only 29 of them included a critical analysis of reflective practice and its outcomes. Most of
the 29 studies were in a healthcare setting. The researchers found that there are successful
approaches in measuring reflection, with several using scales or questionnaires (Mann et al.,
2009). That said, the current state of reflection remains largely theoretical given the low number
of studies supporting its effectiveness (Mann et al., 2009).
Another challenge exists in that individuals can reject reflection because of the
discomfort it can create. Miller (2012) suggests that reflection is amongst a manager’s least
favorite behaviors. Sumsion (2000) describes how epistemological differences in knowledge and
transfer can prevent adoption. Similarly, a leader having an externalized view of learning and
development, as if they do not have agency in their growth, can prevent taking up reflective
practice (Sumsion, 2000). Gray (2007) offers that across the ages, leadership development has
had too much focus at the individual level. The researcher proposes that inquiry, reflection, and
learning take place within groups who are able to unearth their collective beliefs, assumptions,
language, and approaches with rigor and courage; only a radical paradigm shift to a social means
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 20
of reflection can create a shared sense of empowerment. To accomplish these goals, Gray (2007)
suggests a shift away from Western individualism and toward the shared experience of the
group. Senge (1990) describes how leaders can operate with such deep hidden assumptions that
they are simply unable to see themselves as they really are. The author wrote that many operate
in a ‘Model I’ form of work, in which they define the goal of a situation through their own terms,
act with the sole expression of success, suppress feelings of the self and others, and underline the
intellectual while minimizing the emotional factors of a problem space.
Similarly, leaders can work to actively reject information that causes discomfort and
anxiety or creates an overwhelming dissonance against a current mental model (Gray, 2007). To
reflect and learn from that reflection may require a difficult process of disbelieving information,
mental schemas, and worldviews that one has relied upon as true (Weick, 2002), resulting in
distressing emotional and cognitive phenomena and a loss of identity (Alvesson & Willmott,
1992). Vince and Reynolds (2009) offer that this tension between wanting to inquire and change
and the paralysis it can generate is at the crux of the examination of power and authority within
an organization's context. From a generational perspective, Myers and Sadaghiani (2010) found
that millennials prefer teamwork, in part, because it allows them to escape the potential risks
individual thinking generates.
Just as individuals can reject reflection due to unease, organizations can actively work to
undo reflection’s implementation and success. In a personal reflection, Smith (2001) describes
shock at how organizations resist reflection at all of its levels. One of the first organizational
challenges lies in the consequences of the increasingly quick clip of work. Raelin (2002) asserts
that organizations are moving so quickly that they leave little to no space for reflective practice.
Senge (1990) describes how managers also tend to focus on singular events instead of systems,
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 21
and fall prey to the seduction of moving quickly at all costs, leaving reflection in the wake of
continual forward movement, or, as Vince (2002) describes, an immediate grasping at the first
reasonable rationale that comes to mind. Daudelin (1996) furthers this argument in suggesting
that managers perennially choose action over taking the time for reflection. A fast thinking
reactivity will typically not yield the same quality of results as those coming from a slower,
careful approach (Weick, 2006). Smith (2001) adds to the concept of speed by suggesting that
managers already have more on their proverbial plates than they can handle.
Organizations can also work to minimize reflection to occlude flawed systems of power,
inequity, and authority. Vince and Reynolds (2009) describe how organizations often place the
onus of reflection on the individual instead of creating structures of shared, public reflection.
One reason for this focus on the individual can be to protect the organization, or some of its
members, from the consequences communal reflection would generate. Because reflection stands
to call into question an organization’s norms, leadership approaches, decisions, and authority
mechanisms, organizations may subvert any work to build reflective capabilities (Vince &
Reynolds, 2009). Argyris (2000) describes a covert process of building norms upon norms upon
norms to camouflage and limit or prevent reflection. Smith (2001) writes that a common
denominator amongst failing organizations is their lack of willingness to adopt reflection.
Finally, building a reflective practice is not a naturally biologically occurring process,
requiring facilitation, discipline, experience, and practice. Reflection is not necessarily a normal
or easy process for a manager to adopt (Smith, 2001), and Jay and Johnson (2002) note that it is
exceedingly difficult to teach given its complexity. The researchers note that the literature on
teaching reflection holds a wide variety of approaches. Schmidt-Wilk (2009) describes how
reflection requires explicit attention, while Siebert (1999) denotes that the discipline involved in
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 22
a reflective practice is one of the most challenging components. Managers, for example, report
how difficult it is to maintain an orientation toward their role as an actor while simultaneously
assuming the role of an observer (Barge, 2004).
Additionally, managers simply may not see the value in reflective practice (Schmidt-
Wilk, 2009). Several researchers state that reflection requires explicit teaching and facilitation
(Dewey, 1933; Gray, 2007; Ollila, 2000; Raelin, 2004). Sumison (2000) cites that the facilitation
of rigorous reflective practices can be very difficult to teach. Jay and Johnson (2002) describe the
complexity of reflection as one of the main difficulties in its teaching, and that its practice cannot
be summed by the introduction of a series of steps. Tremmel (1993) describes reflection not as a
managerial strategy but as a way of life. Gray (2007) describes a danger in keeping reflection in
a theoretical frame, requiring a grounding in practical applications. In this vein, the merits and
benefits of reflective practice are often inaccessible across industries and populations due to
misuse and misunderstanding of its underlying theory and approaches (Boud & Walker, 1998;
Rolfe, 2014). Barge (2004) also warns that individuals and organizations could easily weaponize
reflexivity against a workforce through manipulation and coercion, and that any teaching should
include an ethical framework to create respectful boundaries.
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences

Clark and Estes (2008) provide a framework to address organizational challenges. Using
a gap analysis approach, the researchers call on practitioners to understand specific stakeholder
goals and how they link to higher order organizational goals. The researchers promote an
evaluation of knowledge, motivational, and organizational (KMO) influences that may be
contributing to performance issues in reaching those goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 23
Knowledge Influences
This portion of the dissertation will provide a literature review of the knowledge-related
influences in GlobalPayments managers' abilities to build and employ reflective practices. Clark,
Estes, Middlebrook, and Palchesko (2004) describe knowledge as representing core tools that
employees need to effectively support organizational goals. Understanding knowledge aspects,
then, is critical in meeting the stakeholder goal of all GlobalPayments managers expressing an
ability to engage with reflective practices. Rueda (2011) describes four types of knowledge: (1)
factual, (2) procedural, (3) conceptual, and (4) metacognitive. This section will briefly define
each type of knowledge and then apply them to the stakeholder goal. Factual knowledge
represents the discrete facts about a particular topic (the what), while conceptual knowledge
describes principles and connection points. Procedural knowledge describes the steps a learner
would take to successfully demonstrate a particular piece of knowledge (the how). Metacognitive
knowledge represents a learner's ability to place him or herself inside the learning to determine
personal strengths and areas of development; it is thinking about thinking.
Placing oneself inside reflection. First, GlobalPayments managers need to be able to
understand how they are able to engage with a reflective practice, which represents
metacognitive knowledge. Hill (2004) suggests that the most successful managers and leaders
will be those who are willing to investigate and build upon their senses self-awareness, strengths,
blind spots, and deficiencies. Hill has studied global managers around the world to understand
what leads to success in the role. Sosik and Megerian (1999) surveyed 98 managers and 294 of
their reportees and found that self-awareness links to benefits like transformational leadership.
The researchers drew upon the work of Bass (1984), who defined transformational leadership as
the ability to build emotional ties between managers and employees.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 24
How to reflect. In addition to managers understanding the benefits of building reflective
practices, they must also know how to approach building the skill (procedural knowledge).
Reflection, while a natural human activity, is not a passive, easy skill. Rather, it requires focus,
deliberation, and time (Daudelin, 1996). With managers often balancing multiple priorities
simultaneously and attending to short-term goals and incentives, it can be easy to lose sight of
reflection as a key management and leadership skill (Daudelin, 1996). While reflective practices
can be easy to deprioritize or avoid for the sake of these short-term goals, the literature provides
schemas through which managers can build a deliberate reflective practice.
To begin, Schön (1987) offers a temporal lens through which managers might approach
reflection by offering that individuals can reflect before, during, or after an action. Hedberg
(2009) describes effective strategies for building reflection into classroom learning experiences.
The researcher juxtaposes different reflection strategies by intermixing the focus of the reflection
(the subject matter, intrapsychic review, or critical synthesis of the material) with the level of
reflection (small group, collective, or after the experience). Third, coaching provides a form of
reflection in partnership (Deresiewicz, 2010; Jones, Morgan, & Harris, 2012). GlobalPayments is
investing in coaching by building individual manager coaching skills, introducing peer-to-peer
coaching interventions, and offering professional coaching that sometimes also includes a multi-
rater review of an individual evaluating him or herself and then receiving feedback from peers
and his or her manager.
The final form of procedural knowledge I will explore is the learning and application of
reflective leadership theory. Introducing and reinforcing adaptive leadership diagnostic
reflection, for example, may assist in building reflective practice, as the theory invites learners to
deliberately leave the flurry of day-to-day actions and fire drills to gain a critical and broad view
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 25
of the system at play (Northouse, 2015). Engaging in this kind of critical reflective practice
would also demonstrate what Argyris (2000) describes as double loop learning. There are several
strategies to bridge learners into procedural knowledge. However, motivational challenges may
stand in the way of sustained practice. Table 1 provides a set of GlobalPayment's goals and the
types of knowledge managers need to possess in building reflective practices.
Motivation Influences
While reflection is a natural human process, many managers can lose sight of its
importance given the several short-term, competing demands upon their time (Hedberg, 2009).
While the requisite knowledge for reflection is seemingly innate, the motivation to actively
reflect requires individual motivation. Clark et al. (2004) describe motivational factors as
composing upwards of half of organizational challenges. This portion of the study will review
the literature regarding motivation as it relates to managers successfully exhibiting reflective
practices. To begin, researchers have helped define motivation by discussing the capacity to
initiate a task, the requisite perseverance to work through the task, and, finally, the ability to
complete the task (Mayer, 2011). From there, several motivational theories help researchers
understand what propels and hinders behavior and performance. With regard to all
GlobalPayments managers demonstrating reflective practices, this section will review the
literature regarding self-efficacy theory and expectancy-value theory.
Self-efficacy. Self-efficacy theory offers that an individual's perceptions of his or her
skills and abilities matter and influence performance outcomes. The inner narrative a person
holds around performance will often dictate the behavior with which an individual engages
(Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). With this in mind, self-efficacy theory has become one of the truest
indications of behavioral outcomes across the motivation literature (Pajares, 2006). As an
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 26
extension, self-efficacy relates to how successfully an individual will begin, sustain, and
complete a piece of work. Germane to managers successfully engaging in reflective practice,
self-efficacy closely relates to self-regulation and a person's ability to self-correct in behavior
and perspective. Paglis and Green (2002) studied 191 managers in two organizations and found
that having high leadership self-efficacy (LSE) contributes to several positive outcomes,
including the willingness and ability to engage with leadership attempts. A leadership attempt
includes diagnosing a group's dynamic versus its task and supporting movement toward positive
outcomes (Paglis & Green, 2002). Succeeding in these actions requires a dynamic reflective
practice.
Self-efficacy narratives rely on four primary activities for their construction and
continuation: (1) experiences in which a person successfully demonstrates mastery, (2) observing
others, (3) the messages individuals receive, and (4) psychological states or mood. Further,
experiences of demonstrating mastery appear to have an outsized impact in building or
decreasing self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006). These inner narratives around competency stand to
impact manager reflective practices, as they directly relate to individual agency and the ability
for a person to believe that he or she has control within his or her environment (Pajares, 2006).
As such, if a manager suffers from low self-efficacy, it may be likely that he or she will also
encounter artificial limitations in engaging in reflective practices. For example, managers with
low self-efficacy may not see a full scope of possibility in how they can interact with or respond
to a situation. Likewise, they may not be willing to engage in reflection at all if they believe a
narrative around not being a critical thinker.
Given that work at GlobalPayments happens through cross-functional collaboration, it
may also be important to recognize the collective efficacy of groups of interdependent managers.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 27
The collective agency of a group of managers may directly impact their cumulative reflective
capabilities. If the individuals of the group suffer from low self-efficacy, the collective, likewise,
may not have access to the highest quality reflective outcomes. Bandura (2000) describes how
collective self-efficacy can support or detract from the group's success. From a diagnostic
perspective, evaluating levels of analysis that include the individual, but also the group and
organization are important, representing what Wells (1985) describes as levels of analysis.
Expectancy-value theory. Eccles (2006) defines expectancy-value theory through two
axes: (1) an individual believing that he or she can accomplish the task and (2) that he or she
finds value in completing the task. An individual believing that he or she can complete a task
may encourage the individual to take on more complex tasks over time, and the value an
individual places on a task relates to four phenomena: (1) the personal satisfaction level the task
provides (intrinsic interest), (2) the degree to which the task aligns to an individual's sense of
identity (attainment value), (3) the value of the task in relationship to accomplishing one's long
term goals (utility value), and (4) the various costs the individual must expend to fulfill the task
(cost value) (Eccles, 2006). It is important to understand how these values intersect with
managers' motivation in building and exercising a reflective practice.
The four drivers that contribute to valuing a task are helpful in evaluating how
GlobalPayments managers may perceive reflection. To begin, managers may perceive little
intrinsic interest in taking up reflective practices. Mintzberg (2005) describes reflection as a
battle. Daudelin (1996) describes a high motivational demand to engage in reflection, replete
with having to take time and energy to synthesize phenomena, identify patterns, and locate
oneself within a given situation. Kahneman (2011) furthers this thread by describing how the
brain prefers to not have to work too hard to get to answers in order to increase efficiency and
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 28
minimize mental exertion. Not only is deliberate reflection at risk of not being enjoyable, it may
also conflict with individuals' attainment value.
Pekrun's (2011) control-value model, which is related to the expectancy-value model,
illustrates how individuals visualize certain expectations coming out of a task interaction. Many
managers may not perceive value in reflection, because a tangible, positive outcome is not
necessarily inherent in the practice (Wigfield & Cambria, 2010). Managers may engage with
reflection but not be closer to a solution after having spent time and energy in the activity.
Reflection without a predictable, tangible result could result in managers devaluing the activity.
Not only does this potential loss of outcome relate to cost, but it also relates to identity and
reward. One of GlobalPayment's operating values is to move with urgency and focus, and
employees, by and large, receive rewards based on their actions and impact within the
organization. To take the time for reflection may be in direct conflict with individual identities as
go-getters. A lack of guaranteed outcome may also impinge the efficacy of utility value. In
managers not necessarily seeing a direct output in reflection, they may not understand how it
could contribute to longer term goals. While this identity of action is palpable, the organization
also has an operating principle of thinking rigorously, which may support building a reflective
practice.
From a cost perspective, managers may not see enough value in building and employing
reflective practices given the cost of time they would need to dedicate to the task without the
assurance of a concrete benefit. Likewise, reflection implicates the manager in the system, and it
may be difficult to come to terms with identifying real skill limitations or personality blind spots
(Hogan, 2007). With these four value parameters facing potential challenges with regard to
managers exhibiting reflective practice, the need for addressing motivation within the
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 29
stakeholder goal is clear. Table 1 provides an outline of the motivational components of this
study.
Organizational Influences
This section of the paper will address cultural theory that is helpful in defining and
grounding organizational influences. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) offer a construct to help
practitioners evaluate organizational culture. With the goal of ameliorating non-majority student
performance and bridging researchers focusing on school improvement and non-majority student
performance, the researchers define and outline the differences between cultural settings and
cultural models. They describe cultural settings as the contexts in which two or more people
come together to accomplish a particular task. Settings hold a tangible quality which include
traditions, behavior, and norms. Cultural models, on the other hand, represent a hidden but
shared sense of how work gets done (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Schein (2010)
complements this framework by suggesting that culture is a product of how employees complete
work, which includes artifacts, values employees assume, and hidden assumptions that act as an
invisible organizational rudder.
Cultural settings. From a cultural setting perspective, the organization has published
operating and management principles. The principle that most aligns to reflective practice is
“think rigorously.” Because entering the role of people management is not intuitive for most
(Hill, 2004), these explicit principles may help managers clearly understand the expectations of
the role. While thinking rigorously is an overt value of the organization, there are no clear
measurements for evaluating the degree to which managers are engaging with thinking or
reflective practice. The performance evaluation system currently evaluates managers'
performance largely upon what they accomplished in individual contributor style work rather
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 30
than the overall efficacy and output of their teams. Schein (2010) enumerates the importance of
having a reward and evaluation system that maps to the values and assumptions the organization
strives to emphasize.
A developmental program, Leadership in Practice, places people managers into cohorts
for a 12-week immersive learning experience that includes modules like adaptive leadership
(Heifitz, 1994), the GROW model of coaching (Whitmore, 2010), and stereotype threat (Steele,
2011). A primary goal of the program is to help managers build their reflective practice and, in
turn, become more self-aware and flexible in their management styles. This program may be one
avenue through which the organization could measure the teaching and transfer of reflective
practice.
Cultural models. While the GlobalPayments cultural settings support a rich environment
for developing new people managers, the cultural models may detract from the success of the
setting. The urgency of tasks at hand have the power to override the of ambiguities of reflective
practice. It can be difficult for managers to prioritize learning against other business needs. It is
common for some managers to not show up for courses, stating that they have too many other
priorities to which to attend, for example. While executives can enumerate the importance of
having high performing people managers, they are not immune from restricting managers from
attending Leadership in Practice if they believe there are higher priorities in play. For reflective
practice to take hold, the organization must be willing to purposefully sanction the time and
space for it. Table 1 provides a summary of the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
influences.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 31
Table 1
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences on Managers Using Reflective Practice
Influence Influence Type
Managers need to know what reflective
practice is.
Knowledge: Conceptual
Managers need to understand how to build a
reflective practice.
Knowledge: Procedural
Managers need to be able to assess their
ability to engage with reflective practice.
Knowledge: Metacognitive
Managers need to see the value in building
and using a reflective practice.
Motivation: Self-Efficacy
Managers need to have confidence that they
can successfully engage with reflective
practice.
Motivation: Expectancy-Value
The organization needs to agree upon how it
will evaluate the success of managers
engaging with reflective practice.
Organization: Cultural Setting
The organization must be willing to teach
managers how to successfully adopt a
reflective practice.
Organization: Cultural Setting
The organization needs to be able to set a
work environment that supports the adoption
of reflective practice.
Organization: Cultural Model

Interactive Conceptual Framework
Applying a conceptual framework is helpful, because it facilitates defining and evaluating
the relationships between variables (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). Within a qualitative frame,
Creswell and Creswell (2017) suggest that this process also helps explain behavioral phenomena.
Ultimately, the conceptual framework provides a network of assertions, beliefs, and ideas that
provide a primary anchoring for the research (Maxwell, 2013). Using Clark and Estes' (2008)
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 32
KMO framework to render performance gap analyses, it is important to integrate these influences
and understand their relationships. Organizational dynamics and challenges are systemic in
nature (Burke & Litwin, 1992). As such, it is important to evaluate the KMO relationships to
address the research questions. Figure 1 presents a conceptual framework to illustrate these
interconnections that may support the goal of 100% of people managers adopting a reflective
practice.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for manager reflective practice.
The manager (stakeholder) circle, nests inside the organization circle, because the
organizational influences create a container for individual knowledge and motivation. The
organizational influences have a 360-degree impact in managers' access to learning and
motivational factors. The KMO influences are represented in circles, because both contain a
cyclical quality of ongoing change and a repetition of behaviors. The success of the KMO
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 33
influences working synergistically, and hence nested, will help support the goal. Because success
against the goal is not a given, however, it is separate from the circles. The arrow moving from
the circles to the goal helps illustrate that progress toward the goal will require deliberate,
thoughtful action. The whole system of the organization must move together to reach the goal.
Data Collection
With the literature suggesting that measuring reflective practice is difficult (Sumison,
2000), I employed a mixed method for this study. A mixed method study employs data collection
strategies from quantitative and qualitative arenas to broaden the understanding within the
problem of practice through triangulation (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). Employing a pragmatic
worldview and an explanatory sequential design (Creswell & Creswell, 2017), I first collected
survey data and then interviewed a subset of the population. First, I sent a short survey to all 304
GlobalPayments people managers. Eighty-seven managers (29% of the manager population)
responded to the survey. At the end of the survey, I asked for interview volunteers and provided
a separate link to demonstrate interest, hence retaining the confidentiality of their original survey
responses. I interviewed thirteen of the 32 managers who volunteered. This sampling approach
included elements of purpose and convenience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The next portion of
the paper will provide the sampling rationale and criteria for these methods.
Survey Protocols
To construct the survey instrument, I extracted elements from the Reflection
Questionnaire (RQ) from Priddis and Rogers (2018). The RQ has demonstrated validity and
reliability (Priddis & Rogers, 2018) and segments reflection into four categories: (1) habitual
action, (2) understanding, (3) reflection, and (4) critical reflection. The researchers built the RQ
upon the original work of Kember et al. (2000), which also demonstrated validity and reliability.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 34
Intended for health care educational purposes, I modified them to suit the corporate managerial
environment. The end of the survey also included demographic questions to support statistical
analysis. I constructed the survey using Google Forms, which is part of GlobalPayments already
existing and security reviewed productivity suite. I sent the survey through my GlobalPayments’
internal email account and provided a header that described the purpose of the study, how I
would use and protect the data, and a brief definition of reflection. One week before the launch
of the survey, I consulted with the internal human resources leadership team to let them know the
study would be launching, provide context in case any manager had a question or concern, and
verify that they themselves did not have concerns. The survey went out to all GlobalPayments
people managers and was open for one week. No manager raised a question or concern upon
receipt of the email. Once the survey closed, I cleaned the data by converting all answers into
numbers for statistical analysis. I left any question a participant did not answer as blank.
Appendix E includes a review of the recruitment strategy and ethical considerations.
Survey Participants
Twenty-nine percent (87) of the total 304 GlobalPayments managers completed the
survey. Each demographic item had at least one respondent who did not reply to that item. In
analyzing the data, the widest range was in the number of years managing people. While there
was a concentration in the one- to three-year range of experience, a healthy mix of more
experienced managers also responded. Those managers with 10 or more years of experience, for
example, represent 19% of the total respondents. In reviewing the age of the participants, 52%
were between 31 and 35 years old. Seventy-four percent of the population was between 31 and
40 years old. This tighter dispersion at a mid-career age makes sense given that GlobalPayments
requires work experience before placing someone in a managerial role.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 35
In reviewing the gender identities of the respondents, most respondents identified either
as cisgender male (55%) or cisgender female (43%). One person reported being genderqueer,
gender fluid, or non-binary, and one person reported not being represented by the available
choices. In reviewing the region of work, the majority of respondents responded that they work
in the Americas region (82%). The Asia-Pacific (APAC) and Europe, Middle East, and Africa
(EMEA) regions represented 6% and 13% of total respondents, respectively. This trend is in line
with GlobalPayments current talent composition given that the majority of people managers
currently live in the United States.
GlobalPayments organizes its employees into three larger functional areas: business,
core, and tech. As examples, the business function includes sales, user support, and marketing.
Core includes teams like human resources, legal, and finance. Tech includes engineering and
technical support teams. Forty-three percent of the respondents were from the business function,
36% from tech, and 21% from core. With core being the smallest function in the organization, it
follows that representation would be less in participation. Table 2 provides a demographic
review of the respondents, and with at least one person refrained from answering a question, I
provide a response rate for each item.
Table 2

Demographic Data of 87 GlobalPayments Survey Respondents
Survey Demographic Item n Percent of Total
Respondents
Number of years managing (N = 86)
1 year or less
2-3 years
4-5 years
6-7 years
8-9 years
10 years or more

17
21
15
14
3
16

20%
24%
17%
16%
3%
19%
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 36

Age (N = 83)
20-24 years old
25-30 years old
31-35 years old
36-40 years old
41-45 years old
46-50 years old
51-55 years old
56-60 years old
61+ years old

0
10
43
18
8
2
2
0
0

0%
12%
52%
22%
10%
2%
2%
0%
0%
Gender Identity (N = 84)
Agender
Genderqueer, Gender Fluid or Non-binary
Transgender
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Female
I’m not represented by the above choices

0
1
0
46
36
1

0%
1%
0%
55%
43%
1%
Region (N = 87)
Americas
Asia-Pacific (APAC)
Europe, Middle East, Africa (EMEA)

71
5
11

82%
6%
13%
Organizational Function (N = 86)
Business (e.g., sales, user support)
Core (e.g., legal, human resources)
Tech (e.g., engineering, technical support)

37
18
31

43%
21%
36%

Interviews
Interviews followed a semi-structured method, which included 15 open-ended questions
as core questions. I could then further explore each question. Open-ended questions are ideal to
help prevent researchers from clouding the line of inquiry with their own thinking and biases
(Patton, 2002). The standard questions investigated how managers used reflective practice, how
they learned about reflection, how much value they placed on reflective practice, and how the
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 37
organization supports or denies access to growing a reflective practice. These questions relate to
the conceptual framework of the study in that they directly tie to the organization’s influence in
the stakeholder group as well as the stakeholder group’s knowledge and motivation surrounding
reflective practices. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) describe the benefit of semi-structured
interviews through their ability to create a standardization in what the researcher is exploring but
with room for responsiveness to the data as it unfolds. Johnson and Christensen (2014) wrote
about how effective the use of probes are in being able to capture more information or create
clarity and further understanding in the data. Patton (2002) enumerated that semi-structured
interviews ensure that the researcher has focus in his or her approach and will use his or her
interview time meaningfully. The sampling criteria and rationale reside in Appendix A.
Interview Participants
The final question of the survey invited managers to participate in an interview and
provided a link to a separate survey to capture their contact information. Thirty-two managers
volunteered for interviews. Of the pool of volunteers, I selected 12 managers by using several
variables to generate diversity of response. The resulting volunteers included a wide range of
management experience (from one year to over 20 years), team representation (including all
three GlobalPayments functional groups), home office location (San Francisco, Dublin, New
York, and Singapore), and gender identity. This number of interviews reached a point of
saturation (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), and provided enough data for healthy coding practices. To
assure confidentiality of the participants, I coded the name of each participant with “Manager”
and a number of one through 13. The thirteenth manager was the Chief Operating Officer, who I
asked for an interview outside of the volunteer process. In the findings section, I used the gender
pronoun “they” so as not to assign specific gender identities.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 38
Data Analysis
Quantitative Analysis
I used descriptive statistics to create measures of central tendency and dispersion within
the data. I calculated the mean (M), median (Mdn), and standard deviation (SD) for each item.
The mean was the most relevant score in the study, given the impossibility of extreme responses
within the data set. Salkind (2016) denotes that the mean is generally a better measurement to
use in the absence of extreme data points. Only one KMO item, “GlobalPayments values
reflection as a people management practice,” did not receive full participation and lacked one
participant’s response. All other survey items received responses from all 87 participants. Using
a five-point Likert scale with a range from strongly agree to strongly disagree, I coded the
responses such that a strongly agree would be equal to a value of “5” and a strongly disagree
would be equal to a “1”, with the remaining three options as numbers in between the two poles.
Table 3 provides the mean and standard deviation of each KMO survey item.
Qualitative Analysis
Upon completing the final interview, I coded each discussion. In the first phase of
analysis, I employed open coding techniques, looking for empirical codes and applying a priori
codes from the conceptual framework. Then, I conducted a second phase of analysis wherein I
aggregated priori codes into axial codes. In the third phase of qualitative analysis, I identified
themes that emerged in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions. Each
resulting finding works to address one of the research questions, and each includes corroborating
data from a minimum of two interviews to maintain typicality. When possible, I used direct
quotations so as to maintain reflexivity in the analysis. Most filler words and sounds (e.g., “um”
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 39
and “like”) were removed for purposes of concision. I triangulated the interview results against
those of the survey to further put findings into a larger frame of understanding.
Results and Findings
The data from this study indicate that managers appear to lack knowledge around
reflective practices, lack efficacy in approaching reflection, and find themselves amidst
organizational influences that may deter successful reflective practice. While managers place
high value on reflection and indicate a readily available energy and motivation to engage in its
practice, they report finding themselves in a culture that does not actively support it and, in some
cases, prevents it. This section will evaluate the quantitative and qualitative data for each KMO
influence, beginning with the knowledge influences.
Knowledge Influences
The data demonstrate that GlobalPayments managers believe they understand what
reflection is and how to practice it, yet there appears to be areas of opportunity in bolstering
knowledge influences. In reviewing the knowledge influence survey items, the mean scores
demonstrated that managers agreed that they were able to actively use reflection during and after
team interactions. That said, the scores of 4.3 for each of those two survey items skewed closer
to that of “neutrality” than “strongly agree.” With a mean score of 3.8 for the survey item
surrounding the identification of improvements coming out of reflective practice, managers
appear to be unsure of the metacognitive knowledge surrounding reflection. Only those
managers who have been managing for at least eight years, are in the “core” business function, or
are between the ages of 51 and 55 expressed an average score of “agree” for this item. In looking
at data disaggregated by age, gender, location, and management experience, there was little
difference between any variable and the KMO influences. For example, cisgender men and
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 40
women responded similarly, as did those working in different regions and teams. Table 3
provides an outline of the mean and standard deviation for each of the knowledge influence
questions.
Table 3

Analysis of Knowledge Influence Survey Items (N=87)
Survey Items Related to Knowledge Influences M SD
I am able to identify improvement in my performance
in a particular task as a result of using reflective
practices.
3.8 .82
After interacting with my team, I think about what I
did well and what I could have done better.
4.3 .72
During interactions with my team, I consider how my
personal thoughts and feelings are influencing the
interaction
4.3 .78

Managers need to know what reflective practice is and understand how to build a
reflective practice. With two of the knowledge influences being close together in nature, I have
combined them for review against the data. GlobalPayments managers do not appear to
understand what reflective practice is or how to build a formal practice around it. In interviews,
managers reported understanding what reflective practice is, yet their definitions and approaches
lacked rigor and consistency.
Managers use diffuse thinking as a proxy for reflection. Nearly every manager
described both their definition and practice of reflection as having a diffuse, informal, and free-
flowing nature. They discussed reflective practice as what researcher Oakley (2014) describes as
diffuse thinking, in which a person is in a state of seeming mental downtime and suddenly has a
flash of new thinking on a subject because the brain is allowed access to larger swaths of
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 41
networks in working through problems. Rodgers (2012), in translating Dewey’s seminal work on
reflection, defines this thinking approach as stream of consciousness and clarifies that it is not a
form of reflection given its lack of discipline and focus. With such a pervasive sentiment across
the interviewees, it became clear that GlobalPayments managers lack the knowledge to define
and build a formal reflective practice. This quality of answer may also help describe why
managers’ responses to the survey items related to knowledge influences skewed closer toward
neutrality than strong agreement. In following a stream of consciousness approach to reflection,
and thus at the whim of whatever thought may arise, it would make sense for managers to hold
reservations in how strongly they believe they understand the underpinnings of reflection.
Nearly every manager described using stream of consciousness in their personal time as
their reflective practice. In discussing this approach, Manager 2 said, “I don't have a formulaic
meditative or reflective process. I think it is sort of an unconscious thing at this point.” Manager
3 continued the discussion on diffuse thinking by saying, “Specifically there are certain times in
my week that I kind of have more opportunity to think...I try to bike to and from work on Fridays
because I find biking a really great way to think about stuff.” Manager 3 also cited swimming
and taking showers as productive thinking time, with all three forms being informal and without
structure. When I asked Manager 3 if they had a formal approach to answering a challenge, they
said that they try to stay calm and then articulate the nature of the challenge, including the
timeframe, importance, and urgency to get to a solution, but even those steps are informal.
Manager 6 described how shower time becomes the best time for reflection because
competing inputs are typically dampened. In evaluating this approach, they said, “I guess both
down and upside is [that] it's not directed in any way, so I'll reflect on whatever effectively pops
into my head.” Manager 6 also came to the realization that shower reflection on work was also
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 42
effectively doing work during what should be personal time. They took a pause in their speech
after realizing this.
In the same vein, Manager 13 counts on personal activity outside of work to form some
of their best thinking, saying, “Running in particular for me is…this weird thing happens where
my mind frees, because my body is busy, and I often get my best ideas.” Similar to the other
managers, Manager 13 doesn’t engage in the activity with a problem in mind to solve. In some
ways, the nature of the down time has become its own framework for Manager 13, who went on
to say, “To me it's a combination of freeing mind from other task, distracting body, and then I
can think about if I can problem-solve.” Manager 10 continued the trend by saying, “I tend to do
a sauna almost every night, and you end up lying there sweating, not really doing anything...It's
whatever comes into mind. In fact, it's very unstructured.”
The passive form of thinking continued with Manager 1 describing how, in their morning
rote-style rituals, “Oh this thing will hit that's a really good idea. Why didn't I think of that
before?” Like most interviewees, Manager 1 disclosed not having a formal practice around
reflection. Manager 7 offered an approach that maintained fluidity but did offer more structure in
that they said they take several notes when they face a challenge and then begin a sense-making
process of them. They said, “I like to think through a situation in a fluid way, and then stack
things up and compartmentalize if I need to really regiment my thinking.” Manager 4 offered that
their practice is “definitely informal” and that they often find themselves managing their
emotions around reflection, especially the negative narratives that may arise. While managers
derive benefit from diffuse thinking and personal time outside of the core work with which they
engage, it is probable that managers are lacking critical knowledge in understanding what
reflection is and how to engage with it as a practice. When I asked managers for more formal
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 43
steps in how they approach problem solving, they often described self-assessment, scenario
planning, and considering other people involved in the challenge.
Assessment of self, the situation, and others as reflection. In probing into how managers
think about challenges once they do come into active mental view, they described processes of
taking perspective and assessing their impact on the situation as the path of reflection. Each
manager used different language to describe their process, indicating an opportunity for more
knowledge grounding, vocabulary, and common process around reflective practice.
Several managers described a self-assessment and reflection upon improvement as
critical elements of their reflection. Manager 11 said, “I guess reflection tends to be always what
I can do better versus how I can keep doing things that I'm already doing well.” The Manager
tied this approach to a continual drive to be better and improve areas of development. Similarly,
Manager 4 said [about reflection], “Yeah, it’s usually disappointment...I have an immediate,
automatic thought that's like, ‘Okay that didn't work out well, that's not worked out well before.
This is a thing that you do.’” They went on to describe how this process can include shame and
imposter syndrome, “Like you didn’t do your job.” Manager 12 reported thinking critically about
how their behavior influences situations, saying, “I go through the mental practice of reflecting
on what I think would have happened if I had done it differently and then piloting those different
responses the next time.”
Just like previous managers, Manager 5 said their reflection is also about their own
behaviors, citing, “I'll actually spend some time to review my performance as a communicator in
a meeting. Did I say too much? Did I say too little? Did I say the right things? Did I say them in
the right way?” Manager 1 described a process of evaluating emotional qualities when
uncomfortable situations arise, saying, “I will identify how I felt at that particular moment...or I'll
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 44
try to identify the reaction that someone had towards something I said and reinvestigate what I
said.” The manager will approach this process as a means of understanding how they could have
behaved differently to get to a different result. Manager 12, using reflection in a self-evaluative
mode, said:
My brain tends to work in a constant self-assessment mode. I'm constantly thinking in
any of my downtime, on my commute, laying in bed at night, waking up at two o'clock in
the morning, taking a shower. Thinking like assessing, assessing how I'm doing, how
things have gone, what could have gone better. I have what I will dub “the worst-case
scenario mental slideshow, where I'll be like, ‘All right, the way I handled the situation
doesn't sit well with me. What's the worst thing that could possibly happen?’
Similarly, Manager 8 discussed how they continually and passively ruminate upon the past
twelve hours. Manager 11 continued the theme of constant evaluation by saying, “I’m an
incredibly...self-assessing individual, and I would have probably begun management that way
and would apply those same skills to management.”
Other managers put their behavior in relationship to those they are managing. Manager
13, for example, approaches an interpersonal lens to reflection, saying, “Part of the framework is
I do an assessment on how confidently I understand what's going on with the person and that
they're going to trust whatever I try to do in this challenging situation.” Manager 13 went on to
describe how they would put that reflection into action, ranging from continuing to observe the
situation to giving feedback. The manager also recognized that their behavior may need to
change as a result. They said, “I try to do a reflection on what I could have done wrong, see if I
have time to course correct myself, see if I can run some experiments on my actions changing,
how I show up to one on ones, what I ask for.” They see the actions they take in response to a
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 45
challenge as being on a spectrum of risk, and they consider how much risk they can take given
their confidence level in understand the person and their motivations in addition to the amount of
interpersonal trust.
Manager 13 also mentioned that urgency plays into their approaches as they may take
more time to observe if they have the luxury to do so. Finally, the manager also described
running scenarios in their mind, saying, “I think about, ‘What if I said this? What would this
person do?’ Or, “What if I did this? What would this person do?’” Manager 2 reported that they
look for the “root cause” of a situation, but that differences in personality and culture can make
that process difficult. When a conversation does not go well at work, they may take time to stay
in the conference room and employ empathy, “Mostly just like sort of feeding the ability to put
myself in other people's shoes. I see a direct connection between reflective practice and
empathy.” Manager 2 went on to describe how empathy allows them to come back to the
situation with more compassion.
Some managers described a practice of creating space from a situation for reflection.
Manager 5 reported keeping track of observations, saying, “I tend to pay attention to people,
body language, language, to the ordering of how information is presented to me, or the velocity
of how that information is presented.” They then said that they’ll take note if something strikes
them as being out of the ordinary and reflect upon it later. Manager 7 described taking a step
back from the situation by saying, “Much earlier in my managing of people, I think I was very,
very, very quick to act, and now I'm very keen on taking a second.” During that pause, the
manager will gather information or speak to someone who may have seen a similar situation to
“ground their perspective.” Manager 12 mentioned that they begin “pattern matching” to
understand if they have seen the behavior before and what has worked or not worked in the past.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 46
Managers are essentially interacting with various levels of organizational analysis in these
approaches to reflection. Having a common approach and language to such reflection may
further serve their abilities and the quality of the resulting output.
Emotion, conflict, and triggers as prompts for reflection. Several managers described
how emotions or events of a specific triggering quality would act as a basis or prompt for
reflection. As neuroscientist Demasio (2006) states, emotions, feelings, and natural biology all
influence cognition, yet people are surrounded by incorrect assumptions that they must remove
emotion from rational thought. The researcher adds that removing emotion and feeling from a
situation can lead to irrationality akin to operating solely based on emotion without reason.
Several participants hold an ingrained sense of reflection via these emotional conduits
and either working with those emotions, observing them, or creating space enough from them so
as not to react solely with the direct emotion at hand. For example, Manager 10 said, “It's
important to create some space between the emotion and the actions. You don't always go with
your default behaviors...Stay with your emotions, let them play through.” Also, in the spirit of
stepping back from the stimulus, Manager 3 said, “I think step number one is just to stay calm
and listen and try to understand.” They went on to say that reminding themselves to stay calm
and present allows them to remember that a solution will come forth. Manager 4 aligned failure
to reflection and said, “It's sort of revisiting moments of either failure or just something that
didn't go as well as it could have in revisiting what I could have done differently while also
managing that conversation emotionally.” They described how they try to manage negative self-
talk in these moments and focus on how they may respond to a similar stimulus in the future to
create better outcomes.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 47
Pressing issues or conflicts may prompt reflection in a way that disrupts usual patterns.
Manager 12 said, “My sleep can get interrupted, and I can find myself in the middle of the night
thinking about it, because I'm worried, I'm actively worried about a person or a situation.” The
manager described how important it is to them to be able to then take a “step back” from the
situation to reflect on others’ reactions and work styles in relationship to their own. Manager 7
described how a challenge or conflict will spur reflection. They will take time to write notes
about what they could have done differently in the situation and what inputs created the situation
in the first place. They will then ask themselves questions like, “What have I been doing? Like
how big of a role can I as a manager actually play in correcting this thing?” They will then try to
address the situation differently to correct for the challenges.
Emotionally charged scenarios have the power to dampen executive, problem-solving
brain function in order to prepare the body for survival through fight, flight, or freeze (Goleman,
2006; Perry & Szalavitz, 2017). Being social creatures, threats to social standing (e.g., in
moment of interpersonal conflict or disappointment in performance) run parallel to threats to
physical survival (Goleman, 2006). The act of recognizing charged (or “loaded” as Manager 10
described them) quality of emotions may become an act of reflection in that managers report
being able to recognize them and consciously create space and time to work through their
meaning, simultaneously getting to a healthier state of problem-solving brain function.
Feedback as a vehicle for reflection. Several managers discussed their knowledge of
reflective practice within the context of interpersonal feedback. In receiving or giving feedback,
managers engage with reflection and how it relates to their performance and the performance of
those on their teams. Manager 2 described how they annotate notes throughout the company’s
performance process to have the ability to provide high quality feedback, saying, “Being more
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 48
intentional about noting performance wins and areas for concern in real time throughout [a] six-
month period has been something that I've started doing.” As a process, then, they are
continually reflecting upon the performance of their reportees as they are able to articulate a
narrative of strengths and areas of development that evolve over time.
In wanting to receive feedback on their own performance, Manager 3 said, “I make a
very regular practice of asking people for feedback, and those are often triggers for the things I'm
thinking about in the back of my mind.” The manager went on to say that they often ask for
feedback about specific contexts or behaviors to help the other person provide more textured
responses. Manager 9 described how important it was to receive feedback from others as a means
of reflection but that it is difficult to obtain. They said, “I think it's more useful and it's more
meaningful if this is coming from other people. Like whether from my manager or you know,
other team members or my team members.” In the spirit of receiving feedback from others,
Manager 11 said, “I've gotten this feedback that the tone that I use with others can feel too
critical.” They went on to describe how they also received the feedback in their personal life, so
it felt pervasive. They reported having spent quite a bit of time developing in the area and
considering how they may be improving. They went on to say, “I've had to arm myself with the
skills to move forward even given very, very tough feedback that normally would just send me
into a cycle of like deep reflection.” They ended the portion of the interview by saying that they
needed to figure out the answer and “just kind of move forward.” Manager 5 described a
feedback ritual a peer had set up, which involved regularly scheduled discussions to provide
mutual feedback and reflection. They said, “You would get the unvarnished raw, often jarringly
painful insights into things that you should stop doing, but it was incredibly helpful.” The
manager has gone on to implement this norm with their own team. In line with how
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 49
GlobalPayments managers discuss reflection in other facets, the discussion on feedback appears
to be a powerful form of reflective practice, yet managers do not share a common knowledge
base of how to best approach it.
Managers need to be able to assess their ability to engage with reflective practice.
While GlobalPayments managers demonstrate an awareness and knowledge of self-evaluation
and vie to improve their performance, they appear to lack metacognitive abilities in evaluating
how well they are using reflective practice as managers. Because most of their assessment of
reflection is in passive, diffuse thinking, there is little intentionality placed on the quality of
reflective approach. No manager during the interview process was able to articulate how they
reflect upon their reflection in a way that helped them. This phenomenon may be a derivative of
an inaccurate understanding of what reflection and reflective practice are. Because so many of
the managers reported diffuse thinking as their main reflective practice, they may simply not yet
have access to metacognitive knowledge.
GlobalPayments managers tend to rely on intuitive processes, diffuse thinking, emotion,
and feedback to engage with reflective practice. While they have approaches that are serving
them, there are opportunities to bolster GlobalPayments managers’ knowledge of deliberate
reflective practice techniques and approaches.
Motivation Influences
To access the desired outcomes of reflective practice, GlobalPayments managers need to
engender motivation. They must be able to demonstrate that they value reflection and that they
are confident in its practice through self-efficacy. Reviewing the survey data, the motivation
influences yielded amongst the highest mean scores. Respondents agreed that reflection is a
valuable use of time (mean of 4.5/5), and that its practice is critical to being a successful people
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 50
manager (mean of 4.4/5). The lower, neutral score in this area, centered around confidence in
reflection (3.6/5). The interview data helps add context to these scores, bolstering the
understanding of the knowledge influences and further providing a precursor to the
organizational influences. In analyzing confidence toward reflection (self-efficacy), only those
managers who had 10 or more years of experience, in the “core” business function, or at least 46
years of age scored an average of “agree.” All other groups had an average score in the neutral
range. It would appear, then, that the number of years of management experience, age, and/or
being in the “core” area of the business may support more skill in reflective self-assessment and
self-efficacy. Table 4 provides an outline of the quantitative data from the motivational
influences of the survey.
Table 4

Analysis of Motivation Influence Survey Items (N=87)
Survey Items Related to Motivational Influences M SD
I believe having a consistent practice around reflection
is a critical people management skill.
4.4 .78
I believe reflecting on my work experiences is a
valuable use of my time.
4.5 .61
I am confident in my ability to reflect on my
performance as a people manager.
3.6 .92

Managers need to value building and using a reflective practice. Corroborating with
the quantitative data, all 13 manager interviewees placed a high value upon reflective practice,
naming that it acts as an antecedent to many positive personal, managerial, and organizational
outcomes.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 51
A critical management skill and a means to self-improvement as a manager. One of the
reasons managers report valuing reflection is because they see reflection as a pathway for
improvement and even as a critical management skill. For example, Manager 1 said, “I think that
self-reflection is a huge, huge value to every person everywhere, and I think that it's one of the
core mechanisms that we have for improving how we interact with others in the world.”
Employing a similar sentiment, Manager 11 described the value as, “Huge... It's the most
important work I do ultimately, because, when it's successful, it informs everything else I
do...When it works, it's like absolutely so rewarding.” Manager 3 went on to say, “I don't think
you could be a successful manager without some practice like that. I'm tremendously better as a
manager and I would attribute a lot of that to my own practices.” Manager 5 said, “I think it's
become increasingly evident to me the longer that I have been in my career, the more important
it is to reflect. I do believe it's incredibly important.” Manager 5 went on to describe how, in the
absence of reflection, a manager would “always react to situations and just work on instincts,”
implying that those instincts will not always be appropriate for the situation at hand. Manager 8
said they “assign a high value to it,” and related reflection to growth in their self and career. As
part of that type of growth, Manager 9 said, “I think it's really important...It helps you think
about where the blind spots are.”
In the same vein, Manager 10 said, “In my mind, understanding yourself, self-awareness
is probably one of the more important things for anyone sort of working anywhere really.
Because that is usually where a lot of the problems sit, right?” The sentiment of reflection
leading to greater self-assessment and performance aligns to how many of the managers
described their knowledge of reflection as being closely bound with self-assessment. They see
their own performance and improvement as intrinsically linked with reflection. With such a high
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 52
value on individual performance improvement, they value reflection as the primary means to get
there.
Reflection as a differentiator in experience. Managers also described the value of
reflection through a lens of differentiating interpersonal experiences, work product quality, and
perspectives. Manager 7 said, “I think it's really, really, really important, and I wish that I had
more tailored frameworks for this.” They described how reflection on experience of one’s
performance, team performance, and interactions with one’s manager are “essential.” They said,
“Without serious reflection, we can fall really short.” They then related it to negative behaviors
managers may take up in the absence of reflection, like being “short-sighted” or “hot-headed.”
Manager 2 described a similar relation to others by saying, “Reflection can be the thing that
separates out your opinion from someone else's or you're adding a perspective that wasn't
considered.” Manager 4 went so far as to describe reflection as a “perk,” saying, “I get to take
this thing that I already did and actually view it as something that I'm paid to do is cool...it's a
really key part of the job, so I value it a lot.” Manager 12 attributed their ability to remain at the
company for so long as an output of reflection, saying, “I think my work product degradation
would have been visible and ended my tenure here if I had not taken the time between weeks,
days, interactions to sit with what I had just done, think, ‘Could this have been better?’” They
went on to say that that rest period is like “exercise” and that, “It is so valuable to me to
constantly be improving or not assuming that everything I'm doing is working or try to be doing
things differently or in a novel way or like get weird and creative at the edges.”
Manager 6 identified a moment of personal dissonance in identifying a gap between their
value of reflection and the time they allocate toward it. They said, “The value I place on it does
not reflect the time or effort I put towards it, which is probably, I probably just learned a lesson
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 53
right there.” While they recognize that they are not in reflection as much as they would like to
be, they derive “great value” from it when they do. Finally, Manager 13 succinctly stated, “When
I do, I think I get value from it.” It’s clear that GlobalPayments managers see the value in
reflection and are able to assign its outcomes to positive performance and organizational
outcomes. Their self-efficacy vis-a-vis reflective practice, however, is not as strong.
Managers need to have confidence that they can successfully engage with reflective
practice. Just as the survey data suggested, managers had varying reports in how confident they
felt in their ability to engage with reflective practices. Some reported having high confidence,
while others questioned their abilities. Interestingly, many of those who reported having high
confidence initially in their discussion quickly backpedaled to begin questioning their abilities.
Confidence in reflection. A healthy number of managers described confidence in their
reflective practice but were not sure if they were actually approaching it correctly or as fully as
they could or should be. Manager 1 said, “I feel very confident about my level of reflection as a
manager...I am gaining more confidence in this area.” Manager 3 concurred, “I seem pretty
confident... I'm going to embrace the style [of reflection] that works for me, because then at least
I'm doing it.” Somewhat similarly, Manager 6 said, “With zero evidence it’s high, and I can’t
explain why.” Manager 7 recalled, “I'm very, very confident in my ability to reflect. I am not
100% confident in my proper reflection in the sense of, ‘Am I always thinking of the right
questions,’ because I'm not using a formal framework.” Manager 13 noted, “I am confident that,
when I am wrestling with something, that I can unstick, because I tend to be pretty action
oriented, and I tend to not stop reflecting until I have a plan.” First reporting that no one had ever
asked them questions about reflection, Manager 12 said, “I am confident that it is helpful to
me...I think without the way I interact with myself and my reflection, I would not be as good at
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 54
my job as I am.” The manager then described a desire to have reflection be “a thing that's
discussed as important or even like, possible as a part of a manager practice” to further build
confidence. It would appear that, while these managers report high self-efficacy, they lack
frameworks and other data that would help them more accurately assess their skill in reflection.
Uncertainty in confidence toward reflection. Many managers described uncertainty in
how they evaluate their confidence in approaching reflection. Manager 2 said, about their
confidence level, “Not sure. I mean, I'm confident that I'm not doubting that those moments each
week that I'm spending reflecting on the previous hour’s meeting or whatever it is.” In this, a
similar middle-of-the-road manner, Manager 4 stated, “I actually can't tell. I do think that it's a
strength of mine. I actually think I have a long way to go, meaning I would like to be fast at it.”
With so few managers having formal frameworks to use in reflection, it is easy to see why
confidence wavers.
Manager 8 described how their insecurity may play into their high frequency of
reflection. They continually assess how they performed or did not perform in scenarios. In
describing their confidence interval, they said, “I think I'm confident in the process of reflecting
and executing on that reflection. Do I do it 100% or do it well, I have no idea, but I've seen it pay
dividends over time in different instances.” They ascribe the reflection to a “lack of confidence,”
as they continually wonder what they may be missing about certain situations. Manager 10
revealed, “I think, over the years, I've gotten pretty good with it. I see it more as a strong point
than a weak point. I wouldn't say that I'm great at it, but you know, it's a work in progress.”
Doubt in considering reflective practice. Some managers described doubt or low
confidence in their approach to reflection. Manager 9 said, “On a scale of one to 10, probably
four or five, because I feel I haven't been doing it regularly for long enough, and I haven't really
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 55
derived any results from it.” They then questioned, “And then I don't know if I'm doing it right.
It’s not like there's like a handbook out there, or maybe there is.” At that point in the interview,
this manager reported not feeling confident enough to be part of the interview. I reiterated that
that goal was to simply learn about their experience and that it was okay to not feel confident.
We continued the interview. Also, on the low end of the spectrum, Manager 11 noted, “I would
describe my confidence level as very low most of the time, and I think that's part of why I spend
so much time on reflection. The manager then reported that they, “second guess [themselves]
quite a bit.”
Having spoken with managers about their confidence levels with reflection, it becomes
easy to see why the central tendency of the survey items landed into neutral territory. Because
reflection is intrapsychic, unspoken, and without more scaffolding in knowledge influences, it is
indeed quite easy to see how GlobalPayments managers would cover a spectrum of self-efficacy
with regard to reflection despite ascribing a high value toward it.
Organization Influences
This section evaluates how GlobalPayments managers interact with organizational
influences regarding reflection. On average, respondents to the survey disagreed that
GlobalPayments creates an environment that supports reflection, that the organization values
reflection, or that it provides resources to help managers grow in their ability to successfully
reflect. This trend crossed every demographic variable. No demographic (number of years of
managing experience, age, gender identity, region, or function) provided an average score of
higher than “neutral” for any of the three items. The organizational influence category is also
where the standard deviation demonstrated the widest variance in answers. Across each of the
three questions treating the organization, the mean response was “disagree.” Managers
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 56
articulated mixed reviews in how they esteem the organization’s support toward and value of
reflection. The need for urgency and speed juxtaposed against the caricature of slow reflection
creates a polarity that managers navigate with mixed results; yet, they are thankful for the
opportunities to reflect within the various communities GlobalPayments offers to foster
reflection. Table 5 outlines the survey data against the organization influence items.
Table 5

Analysis of Organizational Influence Survey Items (N=87)
Survey Items Related to Organizational Influences M SD
GlobalPayments creates a work environment that
supports reflection as a management practice.
2.6 1.15
GlobalPayments values reflection as a management
practice.
2.9 1.02
GlobalPayments provides resources to help managers
build reflective practice.
2.7 1.00

The organization needs to agree upon how it will evaluate the success of managers
engaging with reflective practice. Little data arose in interviews relating to the evaluation of
reflection for managers at GlobalPayments. I asked managers how they believed they were
evaluated against the operating principle of “think rigorously,” and managers tended to not see a
direct link between their evaluation and the operating principle. Manager 8 said of the operating
principle, “I’ve never really thought of that principle applied.” They then went on to discuss the
importance of rigor behind decisions and actions, like hiring. Manager 12 recalled, “I don't think
we give any space to it. Like we can't afford to. I think there would be very fast push back on it.
But I think we honestly can't afford not to.”
In speaking about recognition and driving results through teams, Manager 3 said, “But
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 57
what I don't think gets recognized is that this is a result of your thinking rigorously about the
practice of management of how you approach your team. I feel like that has been much less
recognized.” The manager mentioned wanting to see it be more actively recognized in the
organization and that it is not helpful when their manager seems to convey that they are just
“naturally good” at something when they actually felt like, “I work my ass off at being a good
manager and there is a lot of really invisible work that goes into that.”
Manager 12 also discussed the operating principle of “think rigorously,” saying, “I think
by ‘rigorously,’ we mean produce more and more cuts of data or produce very confident
sounding things that we will then react to one way or the other.” They then went on to describe a
lack of recognition and support for managers in reflection by saying:
You are not as a manager rewarded or encouraged to think expansively or in different
ways or in any way that doesn't fit the norm of, ‘You can put it on a metrics dashboard, or
you can show the results of this thing.’
The organization must be willing to teach managers how to successfully adopt a
reflective practice. The second organizational influence treats the necessity of GlobalPayments
to be able to teach managers knowledge about reflection and increase individual efficacy in its
practice. The data suggests that the current offerings are insufficient in attaining these goals.
Formal educational scaffolding around reflection is lacking for many. Many managers
mentioned that GlobalPayments had not provided direct support in understanding or practicing
reflection. Most mentions of instruction within a corporate setting were informal or distal. In
asking what access to reflection in education Manager 2 received, they replied, “I don't think so.
I mean probably some, there are probably some applicable frameworks from management
courses I've taken over the years.” Manager 7 added, “I have not ever had any training on that.”
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 58
They reported receiving management training around having healthy rapport and accountability
with reportees, but not in reflection itself. Similarly, Manager 12 said, “I don't think this is a
thing I was taught.” They relate their reflection to their own, natural and biological abilities,
referencing, ‘I am often in my own head.”
Manager 4 held a similar view. When asked if they had learned about reflection formally,
they said, “Not inside of a company.” They had taken courses outside of work that had helped
them see how they were part responsible in the challenges they were facing, which they cited as
a form of reflection. Manager 10 also referenced reflection outside of work. When asked about
reflective education, they recalled, “Not per se. I mean I've been doing therapy for 10 years,
which is sort of, you know, vocalizing your self-awareness.” When Manager 8 was asked about
how they had learned about reflective practice, they replied, “Not much, which is why I was
excited that you were kicking this off, because I don't think people really ever tell you to do
that.”
Some managers did describe educational resources that have been helpful to them.
Manager 9 was able to reference the helpfulness of a book they received during a
GlobalPayments management course, saying, “I really like the book that was given to us during
the manager training, Being the Boss, and I like they had a questionnaire at the beginning of each
chapter to let you self-reflect on what kind of manager are you.” The manager went on to say
that they revisit the book every six months to see if the answers to the questionnaires have
improved. Referencing self-evaluation and assessment, Manager 13 described how education has
helped them further assess behavior of themselves and others, saying, “How do I create
environments where I'm understanding them and they're understanding me given that we're
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 59
different humans?" Manager 2 mentioned that a managerial program at GlobalPayments had
helped inform their reflection, but that it was not teach reflection per se.
Manager 5 also picked up on organizational efforts, saying, “There are some practical
programs that the People team do. We do our periodic wellness and mindfulness sprints that
promote reflection as well.” Manager 8, in discussing an organizational program, noted, “That
was the beauty of [a leadership development program], right? Where we would have those
opportunities just get in a room, talk about what's current, what's going on, and in those
conversations actually reflect on yourself.” While theses managers demonstrate some helpful
tools around reflection, the examples lacked substance. Creating further, explicit educational
programming around reflection is worth further exploration.
The organization needs to be able to set a work environment that supports the
adoption of reflective practice. Not only is the evaluation of reflection tenuous and education
resources insufficient, the culture itself has few openings for reflective practice. While one
manager described taking moments of helpful reflection at the time of the bi-annual performance
process, most (including the same manager) describe a culture that lacks enough time, values
action over reflection, and may create hidden anxieties around the practice. The positive note is
that managers understand and have access to reflection in community. Perhaps they feel more
support in reflection if they are not left alone to face the competing pressures of the organization.
Time as an unforgiving barrier. There does not appear to be enough time in the day for
managers to prioritize reflection, and there are few guardrails in the organization to help
managers better support it. Most managers report reflecting during personal, non-business time.
Manager 1 said, “I have not been very good about setting aside time during the day...to actually
do self-reflection, so a lot of it ends up happening later, either in the early mornings, sometimes
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 60
on the train to or from work.” The manager then mentioned the importance of context switching
and how they are always playing “catch up.” In the same spirit, Manager 2 reported, “I have
days when there is no time for [reflection], and it just doesn't happen when there's no time for it.
You know, it's sort of dictated by my schedule to some degree.” The manager went on to
describe their sensations of guilt relative to reflection and the organizational context, saying that,
“There's a culture that's like go, go, go, go, go, and I'm sure that's influencing me. No one's
telling me explicitly to feel guilty for my time that's taken for reflection.” Manager 3 added,
“There's more things in the culture that block you, because like my calendar is full of a lot of
meetings. If I wanted a Monday afternoon to be able to reflect deeply about something, it would
be very hard to find.” Manager 5 continued the trend by offering that:
I think one of the things that reflection requires is space to reflect, and if my days are
back to back with meetings, I’m not spending sufficient time reflecting on the things that
I've done, asked other people to do, being asked to do. I think there's a missed
opportunity, not just from a personal development perspective, but what would that
personal development and reflection time actually mean as positive impact to the
business? I think we're missing that.
Manager 6 added to the sentiment of not having enough time by reflecting, “I'm going to
need to be better about making time at work. I should really be carving out times during the
workday to be able to do this and find a way of drowning out distractions.” They then went on to
describe that part of the role of a manager is to be “interruptible” in order to be available to one’s
team, making it difficult to reflect. Finally, Manager 11 added:
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 61
I find there's not a lot of time in the workday... I think that a lot of times we are aiming
for stuff that is more comfortable or is easier. When these things feel uncomfortable or
feel really hard, we tend not to do them unless we’re forced to see.
Manager 6, in discussing what it feels like to engage with reflection at GlobalPayments, said, “I
feel like it's not easy, but I just feel like it's not easy to be a manager at GlobalPayments.” They
then described that:
Juggling of a lot of things at once makes it difficult to be reflective. Remaining available
makes it difficult to be reflective, and often when I have a block of time, due to the fact
that you can never get everything done that is on your plate, especially as a manager,
you're always just deciding what you're going to like cut or let drop or slide because, I
don't think any human has all the time in their day to do all of the things. That does very
much generate this feeling that, when I do have an open block of time, I need to spend it
doing one of those things, and that might mean that I always deprioritize the like ‘Let’s
stop, reflect and look back and think,’ I will instead prioritize, get something done,
whatever that might be...I do think there are parts of our culture that possibly do dissuade
it.
Managers report having a high value on reflection, yet time and again, they report being unable
to proactively carve out personal work time to take up the task.
The tangibility of tasks tends to win over the seeming intangibility of reflection. One
reason managers may express reticence in allocating time toward reflection may be that the
organization rewards tangible action over reflection (which may or may not yield specific
outcomes). The act of reflection seems to reside in a hidden and undiscussable space. Manager
12 attached emotion to reflection within the cultural context, saying, “It feels anxiety-tinged. It
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 62
occasionally feels like, if I’m doing this during the day that I am like stealing time from other
things to do this like non-productive work.” The manager went on to describe the several
competing priorities they face and that any reflection can really only happen in personal time.
“There's just this never-ending list of stack-ranked priorities, and [reflection] does not ever
appear on it, so you are literally stealing time from other things that you know have to get done
to do it. There's no support.” Manager 13 agreed, adding:
I would say this is a pretty full-on environment...a company that likes to sign itself up for
more than it can do, by nature of its founders or culture. In any given day, in any given
week, there is what you go into that time period knowing you have to get done, knowing
what you should get done, and then a whole set of things that come up that are
completely unpredictable but then interrupt both of those other things.
Manager 8 described that the culture doesn’t “spend much time talking about reflecting.
We talk about how to execute the actions.” They then evaluated that employees do not actively
discuss reflection and posited, “I just wish that people would do more of it. I wish that the
company would encourage it. I wish there were some good guidance.” Manager 11 contributed a
similar sentiment, reporting that, “There's such an emphasis on delivery at GlobalPayments, you
know, like action oriented, tactical, delivery, that I do wonder if [reflection] would be seen as
valuable work.” Manager 7 recalled, “I do think that there are times where there's high emphasis
on moving things forward very fast when there would be value in taking that pause and then
pause and reflect.”
Some managers do report support in reflection. While the majority of managers
reported organizational friction vis-a-vis reflective practice, some believed that GlobalPayments
creates an active platform upon which reflection can thrive. Manager 7 offered that reflection
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 63
feels “on brand” given the value of operational value or rigorous thinking. They went on to add,
“I find [reflection] respected, and I think it helps us foster a better culture here. I think it feels
really good to [reflect] here.” Manager 13 described how important it is to be able to show data,
describe potential different outcomes, and think through mitigating risks. In the absence of broad
thinking, a suggestion probably “would not go well.” Given the level of rigor involved in this
approach, the manager said, “There's an undercurrent of paranoia, but I think that in this case
may be healthy.” Manager 13 also went on to describe that those who have” reasoned well
through a situation and articulated it mostly in writing...tend to get more praise.” The manager
then corrected themselves by suggesting that the organization does not give out much praise, but
that the person would receive more “trust.” This manager also went on to describe organizational
structures that support reflection like the quarterly business review, the annual employee
conference, and programs that help generate feedback and development.
In a note of support for the organization, Manager 4 said, “I find it very rewarding here,
because this is an organization that seems to really care about long term strategic thinking and
making decisions with a view towards how it will work out in the long term.” They reported
feeling that there is “a lot of air cover” to think about longer-term effects of decisions. Manager
10 also spoke favorably of the culture’s stance on reflection and opined, “I think that
GlobalPayments is actually very amenable to that. I mean people have not been shying away
from conversations around that.” While some managers see the organization as consistently
valuing reflection and the mechanisms through which reflection takes place (e.g., developmental
programs and quarterly business reviews), others report that the organization values speed and
action more.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 64
Managers would appreciate more sponsorship. Manager 1 described that some of the
cultural artifacts of the organization demonstrate reflection, but then said, “I don't think it's ever
been explicitly stated, so I actually have no idea how much [the executives] value it, but it does
seem to be something that is valued.” The manager went on to describe the importance of
reflection, yet “there's a lot of aggressive drive toward progress, and I think sometimes the self-
reflective part is de-emphasized in the pursuit of speed. I don't think that these actually have to
be decoupled.” The priorities and context switching tend to win the day in terms of how
managers spend their time.
In wanting more executive sponsorship, Manager 2 said, “It'd be helpful to have that
coming from the top.” They then described the challenge in the company wanting to move so
quickly and efficiently, and then difficulty in imagining what that could look like:
In a world where you have time, where you're carving out time for reflection. I think any
effort to sort of have that be a greater part of our culture should also come with it was a
tacit acknowledgement from leaderships that this is how we move with urgency and how
we do these other things.
Modeling reflection happens in informal pockets. Participants typically see reflection
modeled in the organization, but it tends to be organic. Managers would like to see more of it and
in more explicit mechanisms. For example, Manager 1 said that conversations in group life will
generate responses like, “‘Oh, I didn't think about it that way,’” indicating that Manager 1 had
reflected and learned from the conversations they are having. Manager 2, in describing their own
manager as a model of reflection also admitted that, “if you were to ask him if he had a
structured way of going about his reflection and he said yes, I'd be surprised.” Manager 4 also
sees senior manager modeling, offering, “I think senior leaders model it downwards, meaning I
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 65
feel like they model qualifying statements and reflection in public forums.” The manager then
tied the behavior to being vulnerable and the risk that is involved in that kind of openness. They
offered that that sort of reflection, “Makes me feel more connected to the organization and more
positive after I hear them.” Manager 5 found modeling to be rarer, saying, “It's not super
common actually...I think, people like [our founders] do this...very well. They have no problem
with silence. They...pause and wait and reflect and then give [an] answer.”
Manager 7 described their relationship with other managers as a source of inspiration and
growth through peer-to-peer helping. They said, “I've loved to see the way people are pausing to
reflect, like bringing up certain sets of questions, getting time to actually discuss and reflect on
the experience of something.” They mentioned that this kind of reflection has the ability to
“move a situation forward, change a situation, or just to be better, be aware.” Similar to Manager
5, they said, “I don't think I've seen tons and tons and tons of it, but I've certainly seen it and
really appreciate it.” Critiquing their direct manager regarding reflection, Manager 9 said, “I
don't think we'd talk about it that much.” The manager went on to describe a large reorganization
in their team and how, when they were trying to discuss the resulting challenges with their
manager, they said, “I feel he was doing his job as my manager of not sharing too much about
what his true reflection was, but just being, you know, ‘I think this is great. We're gonna, you
know, get there.’” The manager reported wishing for more from their manager, so they could
understand that their personal response was not in isolation. While many managers report seeing
models for reflective behaviors, those behaviors are relatively informal and in small bursts.
Managers understand and value how to reflect in partnership and community. One of
the cultural influences working in favor of reflection lies in the ability to reflect in partnership or
community. GlobalPayments managers find benefit and perspective in consulting with others
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 66
about their managerial challenges. As an assessment of their knowledge around reflection, it is
clear that many of them understand how to engage with people around them who may be able to
elevate or round out their thinking. Because managers are inextricably linked to their teams and
the organization, it is critical that they be able to reflect in a community that can further broaden
their lens, call out their bias, or amplify their thinking (Raelin, 2001). Manager 3 described
considering who from the organization may be able to help them in solving the challenge.
Manager 1 said, “I try to pull in mentors if it seems like it’s brand new, or I’m not quite certain if
what I’ve done has been the right direction.” The manager understands this kind of behavior as
its own type of reflection. Manager 3 continued the theme, stating, “I tend to think through
things by talking about them with people... I have embraced that I need other people to make my
thinking better.” Likewise, Manager 11 discussed how they have appreciated speaking with the
coach GlobalPayments offers. They recalled, “I use all of the time I can get with her. I tend to
bring to her my proposed solutions to the challenges that I've faced...She cuts to the core and is
direct.”
Manager 7 also values the human resource partners and coaches at GlobalPayments,
saying, “I don't have to have every answer, every solution, every perfect path to success with
everyone...We have great support, open-minded open-hearted support that's willing to listen.”
Manager 3 also described how helpful formal coaching is and how discussion with their spouse
will help spur reflection. In talking through their day, for example, the spouse may react to a
description of the manager’s behavior by saying, “‘That was kind of a jerk move, are you sure
you should have approached it that way?’" Manager 3 mentioned that this kind of feedback will
help them move into a reflective space about what their other options may have been in the
moment.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 67
Taking another position, Manager 4 described a reflective practice with their manager as
a means to create personal accountability. They said, “‘Oh, I said this weird thing, and here's
what I'm going to do next time if that happens,’ and getting feedback from him or even just
making him aware.” Manager 5 described a larger community reflection, pulling in those who
have attended key meetings and asking questions to make more sense of the situation and next
steps. In this vein, they said, “What do people feel was good, bad or challenging about that
interaction? What do we feel are the appropriate next things to do?”
Also discussing reflection in larger audiences, Manager 13 described how they value
taking time outside of the office with teams as a means of disrupting the everyday to take a step
back and consider the systems and behaviors at hand. They noted, “I value non-normal use of
working hours to try to get people's brains in a different mode, operating in a different speed...it
causes me to reflect on the bigger systems and also the individuals in the systems.” Pulling from
their personal knowledge that reflection is diffuse, stream of consciousness thinking, Manager 8
said, “Maybe there should be more manager offsites or, this is gonna sound silly, but send a
small group of like five, eight managers to a spa retreat for a day or two days.” While many
organizational influences lack structure and breadth, reflection in partnership appears to be
serving GlobalPayments managers in crafting access to reflection.
In summarizing the findings, the qualitative interview data supported the outcomes of the
survey responses with regard to each influence, with one reservation regarding knowledge. The
survey respondents reported having a high knowledge of reflection, yet the interviewees, for the
most part, only referenced passive, stream of consciousness style reflection. Philosopher John
Dewey would not consider this is a type of thinking true reflection; rather, they are musing
(Rodgers, 2002). As such, it would appear that perhaps respondents believe they understand how
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 68
to reflect yet are drawing upon incomplete or inaccurate schemas. Managers value reflection, yet
lack confidence and self-efficacy in approaching reflective practice. The organizational
influences, by and large, deter reflection by rewarding action and movement over the invisible
act of reflection. Managers are able to overcome this pressure, in part, by reflecting in
community.
Recommendations for Practice
This section provides recommendations for practice given the data analysis and review of
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational resulting from the data analysis. The findings
revealed that managers lack clear knowledge around what it means to have a reflective practice,
lack self-efficacy in their approach to reflection, and GlobalPayments’ organization settings and
models work in ways to prevent reflection from taking place. Several researchers place reflective
practice as a cornerstone of managerial efficacy (Blöser et al., 2010; Smith, 2001; Sumison,
2000). With managers expressing a high value on reflection, the organization’s learning and
development team can leverage that value to engage learners with the content. Schraw and
McCrudden (2006) found that connecting learning to individual interests supports the learning
process. Table 6 provides a brief outline of the recommendations.
Table 6
Review of Recommendations by KMO Influence
KMO Influence Recommendation
Managers need to understand how to build a
reflective practice (procedural and declarative
knowledge).
Define reflection and provide frameworks that
allow managers access to a shared vocabulary
and approaches to its practice (e.g., taking on
different perspectives vis-à-vis a problem
space).
Managers need to be able to assess their
ability to engage with reflective practice
Knowledge checks and peer to peer discussion
points will scaffold managers’ ability to
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 69
(metacognitive knowledge). accurately assess their abilities in reflection.
Managers need to see the value in building
and using a reflective practice (self-efficacy).
Provide worked examples and models to
managers to learn from. Provide and promote
several avenues for managers to reflect in
community (e.g., with a coach).
The organization needs to agree upon how it
will evaluate the success of managers
engaging with reflective practice.
Define and implement evaluative elements for
PaymentSat and the bi-annual performance
process.
The organization needs to be able to set a
work environment that supports the adoption
of reflective practice.
Promote the importance of reflection through
PaymentSat and the performance process.

Educational Scaffolding and Community in Reflection and its Practice
While managers report understanding how to reflect, most of that knowledge surrounds a
practice of diffuse, unstructured “shower time” thinking. The first recommendation is to provide
managers with more concrete frameworks and tools for how they can more formally approach
reflection. Mayer (2011) provides an account of the four critical types of knowledge that exist
within the process of learning. In assessing the knowledge influences of GlobalPayments
managers employing a reflective practice, the metacognitive, conceptual, and procedural forms
of knowledge became most relevant to explore. The recommendations for each type of
knowledge include infusing existing and future manager education with definitional and
procedural content and experiences around reflective practice such that the skill becomes part of
the manager’s style and the larger management ethos.
Increasing declarative knowledge. The research also demonstrates that managers do not
understand what a reflective practice is. A theory grounded in information processing theory
supports this influence. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) provide insight into how learners
organize information by building upon schemas. Helping managers build their understanding of
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 70
reflective practices may prove to be beneficial. Inserting specific information into manager
education to help managers understand what reflective practice is and is not will help build this
understanding. Because most managers believe that diffuse thinking is reflection, it will be
important to clarify what is and is not part of formal reflection. Rueda (2011) discusses
declarative knowledge through facts, language, or terminology that surround the piece of
knowledge at hand. Reflective practice is prone to losing definitional structure and clarity; it can
indeed be difficult to define and conceptualize (Sumsion & Fleet, 1996).
Additionally, Senge (1998) found that managers are notorious for operating under a host
of hidden and uninspected assumptions that may or may not be serving their goals. Helping
managers understand what reflective practice is stands to help them better perform in their roles
by allowing them to clearly identify what it means to reflect and the value they stand to gain
from reflection. Boud, Cressey, and Docherty (2006) provide an analysis of what reflection is
and is not. Using the term “productive reflection”, the researchers assert that reflection happens
in a collective environment, must be put into the context of work and the organization at hand,
includes and connects multiple organizational agents, has an organic, generative, open quality,
and has an aim toward development (Boud et al., 2006).
Increasing procedural knowledge. Third, the data indicates a gap in procedural
knowledge in how to engage with reflective practice. Sociocultural theory will help to support
this procedural gap. Scott and Palincsar (2013) describe the importance of helping learners gain
skill through the use of scaffolding. As such, managers may benefit from this type of learning
investment in building their skill. Manager development sessions will include practices and
procedures that influence this skill in and out of the classroom. Clark and Estes (2008) describe
how learners need to have access to models that clearly demonstrate how to accomplish a
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 71
specific task. Moon (2013) argues that it can be difficult to get learners to reflect beyond a
surface level and suggests exercises that allow the learner to stand back from themselves and the
system at hand to take on different perspectives. With several managers being quite hard on
themselves and reporting that they use reflection as a means of critiquing their behavior, I also
recommend pairing these concepts with precepts of growth mindset (see Dweck, 2008). Growth
mindset indicates that learners are willing and able to dedicate themselves to work and not
expect perfection at a first pass. Because managing people is a lifelong learning pursuit (Hill,
2004), employing this way of thinking may allow managers more spaciousness in how they
evaluate their performance and develop as a result.
Increasing metacognitive knowledge. The data indicate a gap in GlobalPayments
managers’ abilities in assessing the efficacy of their reflective practice. Schraw and McCrudden
(2006) describe the importance of learners organizing their knowledge, which aligns to the
metacognitive realm. Mayer (2011) states that learning interventions that include metacognitive
knowledge are helpful to the learning process. Rueda (2011) offers that metacognitive
knowledge is a primary element of effective problem-solving and strategic response.
Hill (2004) describes the critical importance of manager reflection in contemporary
organizational life. To invite managers to consider their skill in employing reflective practice
during manager development creates a link between the high pace of change and the skills that
are necessary to effectively meet it. Embedding questionnaires that help managers assess their
abilities within manager education provides a mechanism to accomplish this goal. A secondary
avenue will be for managers to discuss with one another how they approach reflection at the
beginning of a development course, thus creating a baseline for what managers believe reflection
is.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 72
The design will require a personal enmeshment with the immediate surrounding work
context such that managers experience a compelling reason to deeply engage with the work.
Boud et al. (2006) suggest that it is important to find the place between the organizational world
of the business and the human world of the managers. The researcher goes on to suggest that
merely scheduling time for reflection is insufficient and cliché. Rather, it is necessary to create a
shared language as managers are able to engage with reflection in the everyday, happenstance
collisions in which they find themselves (e.g., eating lunch with a peer). The sessions will
include instruction on how to engage with reflection and offer several worked examples that
scaffold the learners in creating their own practice. Clark and Estes (2008) also discuss the
importance of transferring knowledge to the core role at hand, so designing a portion of the
course in which managers identify how and when they will use reflective practice within their
roles will be critical.
Increasing self-efficacy through modeling and reflection in community. While
managers report placing a high value on reflection, they tend to lack confidence in their
approach. With reflective practice as an already difficult behavior to adopt (Senge, 1990; Smith,
2001), a lack of motivation may further pull managers away from the likelihood of engaging
with reflection. To support self-efficacy, manager education will include models and case studies
to help managers understand how they might engage successfully with the practice. Clark et al.
(2004) describe motivational challenges as the source of half of organizational challenges.
Paglis and Green (2002) studied 191 managers in two organizations to determine the effect of
self-efficacy upon their performance. The researchers found that high self-efficacy correlated
positively to managers more willingly and successfully diagnosing and effectively acting upon
team performance against a task. Self-efficacy may also lead to more complete senses of mastery
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 73
and autonomy (Pajares, 2006). Managers demonstrating efficacy in reflection may create a
stronger sense of control and optionality within their environments.
Many managers cited the importance and value of being able to partner with human
resource partners, coaches, peers, and their managers to engage in reflection. Emphasizing these
avenues of reflection may further allow managers visibility into the reflective process and learn
from the behaviors they observe. Some participants cited the benefit of current educational
programming, with one program including managers who come together to coach each other in a
“manager circle.” The context and content of the circles will change to further capture
recommendations from the literature. For example, each circle should include one person who
demonstrates advanced abilities in reflection, and the examples learners draw upon should come
from real and relevant work sources (Boud, 2006).
Nudging the Cultural System
Knowledge and self-efficacy aside, managers find themselves within a cultural context
that seemingly acts against the criteria of reflective practice by valuing action and moving so
quickly that managers cannot find the time to slow down enough to engage in reflection.
GlobalPayments managers currently face an onslaught of decisions, and the time in their days is
rarely sufficient against the set of tasks they need to accomplish. This is perhaps the largest
barrier when it comes to managers engaging with reflection. It is also unlikely that the
organization will overtly emphasize the need for every manager to take time to reflect given the
favorability toward action within the dynamic. That said, there may be methods that will help
shape and produce moments of reflection.
Valuing reflection through its measurement. Rueda (2011) discusses the importance of
cultural settings within the context of learner engagement and success. I will be working to
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 74
influence the sponsorship of activating reflective practice and the measurement thereof. In
meeting cultural settings that advocate the use of reflective practice and that are willing to
measure its use, stakeholders stand to feel more empowered to take up the practice. As such,
working with executives to help them become sponsors of reflective practice and partner with the
data analytics team to insert questions surrounding reflection into the company’s bi-annual
employee engagement survey may help. An example of a reflection question could be, “My
manager demonstrates that they think critically about challenges to come to the right outcomes.”
Clark and Estes (2008) discuss the importance of the organization’s role in supporting successful
organizational change. Leaders can find easy access to sponsoring the importance of reflection
because of the positive outcomes derived from creating a learning organization (Senge, 1990).
Rogers (2018) enumerates that validating reflection is an important step, and Mann et al. (2009)
found that there are successful ways to measure reflective practice through the use of surveys.
Additionally, Schein (2010) defines the importance of measuring success of behaviors as they
relate to organizational values. With assessment of reflection being so critical to its success, it is
clear that GlobalPayments stands to benefit from modifying its cultural setting to better include
it.
Building an environment for reflection. For reflective practice to find successful
footing at GlobalPayments, the organization will need to create a workplace that invites and
encourages the behavior. Senge (1990) defends the need for rigorous reflection, as it relates to
investigating hidden assumptions and complex processes that may be hindering work.
Stakeholders engaging with reflection may find the process difficult, because they may come
face-to-face with assumptions that create comfort, but that are not serving the organization. To
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 75
further support the work, I recommend embedding coaching and evaluation questions around
reflection into the performance review process.
Creating a cultural model that supports reflective practice may help an organization and
its members better keep pace with the rate of change (Blöser et al., 2010). That said, headwinds
abound with regard to managers successfully engaging with reflection. From managers carrying
varying epistemological views of the learning process (Sumsion, 2000), to deeply embedded yet
hidden assumptions driving behaviors (Senge, 1990), managers will need an environment that
supports and nurtures reflective practice as a core managerial behavior. To increase the rate of
reflection, GlobalPayments will want to actively identify how it can support practices through
the models and unspoken rules of work it reinforces. Promoting a shared language of reflection
may help, as well as creating dedicated space to discuss reflective practice within work
retrospectives, career conversations, and, importantly, performance evaluations. The
performance evaluation process may provide an exceptional platform to discuss and promote
reflection, as it aligns closely to what the organization expects to see in terms of behaviors and
capabilities. The Implementation and Evaluation plan in Appendix F provides more detail into
how to administer and assess these interventions. Using the impact framework Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick (2016) provide, the plan details specific organizational steps and resulting outcomes
that will denote success from these recommendations.
Limitations and Delimitations
Because the study only investigates reflection within a single organization and with one
sub-population there within, I cannot generalize its findings to a larger population of managers.
The findings may help GlobalPayments further build managers who are able to engage in
reflection in a way that supports positive organizational outcomes. I chose one singular site and
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 76
population of study for convenience purposes. Reflection is intrapsychic and hidden from view
(Sumsion, 2000), which makes it inherently difficult to study. While triangulation and member
checking provide validation support (Creswell & Creswell, 2017), there was always a possibility
that managers could report untruthful responses. Because of potential desires to be perceived as
high performing, managers may have been less willing to admit pitfalls or failures they face in
approaching reflective practice.
Recommendations for Future Research
A recommended future study would be to implement the study’s recommendations within
GlobalPayments and measure the degree to which its managers successfully take up reflective
practice. Moreover, it would be important to measure the organizational outcomes as they relate
to that practice. With the literature asserting that reflective practice generates more positive
outcomes, researchers could measure employee or customer retention and engagement before
and after the interventions take place. If the results were positive, it would potentially provide a
prototype for how organizations could further build successful managers who can generate
sustainable, lasting outcomes.
Conclusion
The need of great people managers is as great as it has ever been within the context of a
continually complex working landscape. This study aimed to understand how the managers of a
financial services firm could use reflection as a means to further increase efficacy as individuals
and as a community responsible for the continued success and scale of the organization. While
managers report having an orientation around reflection and a motivation to engage with it, they
find themselves in an inescapable trap of time and with few real reflective frameworks to draw
upon. Through more formal education around reflection, additional confidence in their skill, and
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 77
explicit programs that help positively work with time constraints, managers at GlobalPayments
stand to attain that much more reflection and, as a result, stronger employee engagement,
organizational results, and personal satisfaction and reward. At this point in the history of
organizational life and all its dynamics, one should no longer be at the whim of happenstance to
work with a good (let alone great) manager. Given what we know about the impact managers
have on the daily lives of those who work with them and an organization’s success, it should be a
human right to have a manager who seriously takes up the responsibility of actively thinking
about themselves and the environment in which they operate in order to become better by the
day.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 78
References
Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1992). On the idea of emancipation in management and
organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17(3), 432-464.
Argyris, C. (2000). Double‐loop learning. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Barge, J. K. (2004). Reflexivity and managerial practice. Communication Monographs, 71(1),
70-96.
Bass, B. M. (1984). Transformational leadership and performance beyond expectations. New
York: Free Press.
Beck, R., & Harter, J. (2015). Managers account for 70% of variance in employee engagement.
Gallup Business Journal, 1.
Beer, M., Finnström, M., & Schrader, D. (2016). Why leadership training fails—and what to do
about it. Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 50-57.
Blöser, C., Schöpf, A., & Willaschek, M. (2010). Autonomy, experience, and reflection. On
neglected aspect of personal autonomy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 13(3), 239-
253.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Boud, D., Cressey, P., & Docherty, P. (Eds.). (2006). Productive reflection at work: Learning for

changing organizations. Routledge.

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). What is reflection in learning. Reflection: Turning
Experience into Learning, 7-17.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 79
Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1998). Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of
context. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 191-206.
Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and
change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523-545
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results. Charlotte, NC: Information Age
Publishing.
Clark, R. E., Estes, F., Middlebrook, R. H., & Palchesko, A. (2004). Turning research into
results: A guide to selecting the right performance solutions. Performance Improvement,
43(1), 44-46.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Damasio, A. R. (2006). Descartes' error. New York: Random House.
Daudelin, M. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics,
24(3), 36.
Deresiewicz, W. (2010). Solitude and leadership: If you want others to follow, learn to be alone
with your thoughts. The American Scholar, 79(2), 20-31.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the
educative process. Lexington, MA: DC Heath and Company.
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Digital, Inc.

Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Fleming, R. S. (2008). Survival skills for the new manager. Business Renaissance Quarterly,
3(2), 127.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 80
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Garwood, R. (2012). Supporting the underperforming manager: Teaching the soft skills that can
make all the difference. Human Resource Management International Digest, 20(1), 39-
42.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Gray, D. E. (2007). Facilitating management learning: Developing critical reflection through
reflective tools. Management Learning, 38(5), 495-517.
Hedberg, P. R. (2009). Learning through reflective classroom practice: Applications to educate
the feflective manager. Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 10-36.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Hill, L. A. (2004). New manager development for the 21st century. The Academy of
Management Executive, 18(3), 121-126.
Hogan, R. (2007). Personality and the fate of organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hogan, R. (2015). Six lessons on leadership. People & Strategy, 38(1), 8-10.
Jay, J. K., & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for
teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73-85.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 81
Jones, R., Morgan, K., & Harris, K. (2012). Developing coaching pedagogy: Seeking a better
integration of theory and practice. Sport, Education and Society, 17(3), 313-329.
Jordan, S. (2010). Learning to be surprised: How to foster reflective practice in a high-reliability
context. Management Learning, 41(4), 391-413.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow (1st ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kayes, D. C. (2002). Experiential learning and its critics: Preserving the role of experience in
management learning and education. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
1(2), 137-149.
Keevers, L., & Treleaven, L. (2011). Organizing practices of reflection: A practice-based study.
Management Learning, 42(5), 505-520.
Kember, D., Leung, D. Y., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., & Yeung, E. (2000).
Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 381-395.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Lewin, K. (1946). Behavior and development as a function of the total situation. In L.
Carmichael (Ed.), Manual of child psychology (pp. 791-844). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
& Sons Inc.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health
professions education: a systematic review. Advances in Health Sciences Education,
14(4), 595.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 82
Markham, M. (1999). Through the looking glass: Reflective teaching through a Lacanian lens.
Curriculum Inquiry, 29(1), 55-76.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4
th
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, P. (2012). Self-reflection: The key to effective leadership. Today’s Manager.
Mintzberg, H. (2005). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and
management development. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Moon, J. A. (2013). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice.

Routledge.

Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication
perspective on millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 25(2), 225-238.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Oakley, B. A. (2014). A mind for numbers: How to excel at math and science (even if you
flunked algebra). New York: TarcherPerigee.
Ollila, S. (2000). Creativity and innovativeness through reflective project leadership. Creativity
and Innovation Management, 9(3), 195-200.
Paglis, L. L., & Green, S. G. (2002). Leadership self‐efficacy and managers' motivation for
leading change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(2), 215-235.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 83
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as drivers of learning and cognitive development. In New

perspectives on affect and learning technologies (pp. 23-39). Springer, New York, NY.

Perry, B. D., & Szalavitz, M. (2017). The boy who was raised as a dog: And other stories from a
child psychiatrist's notebook--What traumatized children can teach us about loss, love,
and healing. New York: Basic Books.
Porte, E. L. (1996). Teaching: Getting it right. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3), 361-366.
Priddis, L., & Rogers, S. L. (2018). Development of the reflective practice questionnaire:
Preliminary findings. Reflective Practice, 19(1), 89-104.
Raelin, J. A. (2001). Public reflection as the basis of learning. Management Learning, 32(1), 11-
30.
Raelin, J. A. (2002). 'I don't have time to think!' versus the art of reflective practice. Reflections,
4(1), 66-79.
Raelin, J. A. (2004). Don't bother putting leadership into people. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 18(3), 131-135.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-866.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 84
Rueda, R. (2011). The three dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Salkind, N. J. (2016). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Schmidt-Wilk, J. (2009). Reflection: A prerequisite for developing the “CEO” of the

brain. Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 3-7.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching
and learning in the professions (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2013). Sociocultural theory. Education. com.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach.
San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Seibert, K. W. (1999). Reflection-in-action: Tools for cultivating on-the-job learning conditions.
Organizational Dynamics, 27(3), 54-65.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The leader's new work: Building learning organization. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7-33.
Senge, P. M. (1998). The leader’s new work. Leading organizations, 1, 439-457.
Sillett, D. (2015). How to support and develop first-time managers? Industrial and
Commercial Training, 47(1),46-50.
Smith, P. A. (2001). Action learning and reflective practice in project environments that are
related to leadership development. Management Learning, 32(1), 31-48.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 85
Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, L. E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and
performance: The role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership
perceptions. Group & Organization Management, 24(3), 367-390.
Steele, C. M. (2011). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. New
York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Sumsion, J. (2000). Facilitating reflection: A cautionary account. Reflective Practice, 1(2), 199-
214.
Sumsion, J., & Fleet, A. (1996). Reflection: can we assess it? Should we assess it? Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(2), 121-130.
Tremmel, R. (1993). Zen and the art of reflective practice in teacher education. Harvard
Educational Review, 63(4), 434-459.
Weick, K. E. (2002). Puzzles in organizational learning: An exercise in disciplined imagination.
British Journal of Management, 13(S2), S7-S15.
Weick, K. E. (2006). Faith, evidence, and action: Better guesses in an unknowable world.
Organization Studies, 27(11), 1723-1736.
Weiss, R. S. (1995). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Wells, L. (1985). The group-as-a-whole perspective and its theoretical roots. Group Relations
Reader, 2, 22-34.
Whitmore, J. (2010). Coaching for performance: GROWing human potential and purpose - the
principles and practice of coaching and leadership. Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey
Publishing.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 86
Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Expectancy-value theory: Retrospective and prospective. In
Advances in Motivation and Achievement (pp. 35-70). Somerville, MA: Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum
Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228.
Vince, R., & Reynolds, M. (2009). Reflection, reflective practice and organizing reflection. In
The SAGE handbook of management learning, education and development (pp. 89-103).
Vince, R. (2002). Organizing reflection. Management Learning, 33(1), 63.
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 87
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria
for Interview, Survey and Observation

Participating Stakeholders
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
In building a study, it is important to qualify the parameters and criteria of the study
(Creswell & Creswell, 2017). First, I sent a survey to the 304 GlobalPayments people managers.
In sending the survey to only people managers, this was a purposeful selection. Johnson and
Christensen (2014) define a purposeful sample strategy as including criteria that help hone the
particular population of study.
Criterion 1. The only criterion for selection was that an individual be actively managing
other employees at GlobalPayments. This is important, because people managers represent the
stakeholder group of study.
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
There were 304 managers at GlobalPayments at the time of the study. Because all
employees work at the same company, I used a single stage sampling procedure (Creswell &
Creswell, 2017). This means I had access to the participants’ names and contact information and
could contact them directly. I first piloted the survey with five individuals from five different
teams; I asked for their feedback in improving the instrument’s clarity. Creswell and Creswell
(2017) recommend piloting surveys as a helpful step within quantitative procedures. I used
GlobalPayments’ secure Google forms survey software to build the online survey and capture the
anonymous participant feedback.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Only those managers who had been managing for at least six months in the organization
were eligible to participate in qualitative interviews. I used this criterion to ensure participants
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 88
had enough context within the role to be able to describe their relationship with reflective
practice within GlobalPayments’ cultural models and setting. The final question of the survey
requested volunteers for an interview.
Criterion 1. The only sampling criterion was that each participant be a people manager
who had at least six months in his or her role at GlobalPayments. This is a critical criterion given
that people managers represent the stakeholder group in question, and it is important to
understand how managers perceive GlobalPayments cultural context.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The final question of the survey asked participants if they would be willing to participate
in an interview. If so, they completed a separate survey so as to keep their initial data
confidential. I selected thirteen managers for interviews. The interviews took place in the spring
of 2019. I employed a purposeful selection process with elements of typical, unique, and
convenience sampling in identifying the interview participants. Typical sampling asks the
researcher to identify individuals who represent an average or standard experience within the
area of research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In practice, this meant selecting managers who
represent various teams and geographic locations within the organization. I selected one
interviewee through unique selection, with unique selection targeting individuals who have
atypical experiences within the stakeholder population (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this
instance, I interviewed the Chief Operating Officer, who was the only person in the organization
who holds that title.
In order to recruit participants, I emailed each participant with an invitation to participate
in the study, including the context for the study, the ability to work around the participant’s
schedule, and information about how I would use and protect their data. With Johnson and
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 89
Christensen (2014) underlining the importance of building trust in the interview relationship, I
described the confidentiality of the interviews alongside strict data safety protocols. Participants
did not know which other managers volunteered for the study. Finally, with Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) describing the importance of building rapport, I signaled gratitude for the interviewee’s
consideration of the work and time and that the outcomes may benefit other GlobalPayments
managers in the future. Interviews were either in-person, if they occurred in the San Francisco
office, or through Zoom video conferencing technology for those who were in a different global
location.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 90
Appendix B: Protocols

Survey
I sent a survey to the 304 GlobalPayments people managers, which included a cover
letter describing the purpose of the study, instructions for completing the survey, confidentiality
measures, and data protection protocols. In order to comply with the General Data Protection
Regulation (GDPR), all participants provided informed consent in participating in the study,
inclusive of providing demographic data. I did not collect names of the participating managers to
ensure anonymity, and the data was hosted on a password protected computer. Most survey items
used a five-point Likert scale, with the polls reading as “Definitely Agree” and “Definitely
Disagree.” The question surrounding the amount of time the respondent dedicated to reflection
per week offered a five-point interval scale of zero hours per week to 20 hours per week or more.
Table B1 outlines the survey items, some of which have been modified from the Priddis and
Rogers (2018) reflective questionnaire. Given that the researchers developed the scale for
clinical use, I modified each item to align to a corporate setting. The survey predominantly
focused on the motivation and organizational influences. I probed further into these areas and the
knowledge influences during the interviews that followed.
Table B1

Reflection Questionnaire (RQ) to Understand Manager Reflective Practice
KMO Influences Survey Items
Managers need to see the value in building
and using a reflective practice (motivation:
expectancy-value).
● I believe having a consistent practice
around reflection is a critical people
management skill.
● I believe reflecting on work
experiences is a valuable use of my
time.
● How much time per week do you
spend purposefully reflecting on
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 91
work? (open-ended)
Managers need to be able to assess their use
of reflection (knowledge: metacognitive).
● I am able to identify improvement in
my management performance as a
result of actively using reflection.
Managers need to understand how to build a
reflective practice (knowledge: procedural).
● During interactions with my team, I
consider how my personal thoughts
and feelings are influencing the
interaction.
● After interacting with my team, I
think about what I did well and what I
could have done better.
Managers need to have confidence that they
can successfully engage with reflective
practice (motivation: self-efficacy).
● I am confident in my ability to reflect
on my performance as a people
manager.
The organization needs to be able to set a
work environment that supports the adoption
of reflective practice (organization: cultural
model).
● GlobalPayments creates a work
environment that supports reflection
as a management practice.
● GlobalPayments values reflection as a
management practice.
The organization needs to agree upon how it
will evaluate the success of managers
engaging with reflective practice
(organization: cultural setting).
● GlobalPayments provides resources
to help managers build reflective
practice.
NA I have been managing people for x number of
years.
NA I work in the following region:
NA I work in the following function:
NA My gender is:
NA My age is:
NA I would be willing to participate in an
interview (links to a separate survey)

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 92
Interviews
I interviewed thirteen GlobalPayments people managers in the spring of 2019. Merriam
and Tisdell (2016) note that researchers should interview a set of individuals that will allow the
researcher to gain insight into the phenomenon at hand, and I believed that 13 discussions would
provide a rich landscape of the GlobalPayments people manager experience. Participants
volunteered for interviews from the initial KMO survey I distributed. To create a diverse pool of
interviewees, I selected volunteers from across geographies, teams, and gender identities. To
note, no one timeframe for the data collection was better than another. The business demands on
GlobalPayments people managers are consistent and on-going. I interviewed each manager one
time but asked for permission to follow up afterward for clarification, if necessary. I asked for
permission to record the conversation using both a mobile phone and computer to protect against
an error in recording. Bogdan and Biklen (1997) recommend asking permission before recording
as a best practice. Each interview took 60 minutes or less. Weiss (1995) suggests that most
qualitative interviews should last one hour or less. I reserved an additional 30 minutes after each
interview to document additional observational notes, ensure the interview recorded accurately,
and organize the interviews by participant name.
The beginning of each interview included general small talk and introductions. Bogdan
and Biklen (1997) suggest that small talk is a normal part of the interview process and a strategy
for building rapport with interviewees. I printed the interview questions on a piece of paper, and
I read each question verbatim, then probed into each subsequent answer. All interviews took
place at the GlobalPayments San Francisco office for convenience. Weiss (1995) argues the
importance of introducing dynamics of convenience within interviews given their time-intensive,
laborious nature. The total interview time, including the 30-minute post-interview period,
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 93
required approximately 19.5 hours. Table B2 provides a list of the 17 interview questions against
their respective KMO influence.
Table B2

Interview Questions Juxtaposed Against KMO Influences and Demographic or Icebreaker
Elements
Demographic / Icebreaker Interview Questions
Understanding the tenure of the manager as it
relates to the use of reflection.
● How long have you been a people
manager?
Understanding the extent to which managers
describe the importance or value of reflection
without an explicit prompt (knowledge:
metacognitive).
● What skills are necessary to be a
successful manager?
Understanding the extent to which managers
describe the use of reflective practice without
an explicit prompt (knowledge: procedural).
● What steps do you take when you
meet a managerial challenge?
Understanding the extent to which managers
describe the use of reflective practice without
an explicit prompt (knowledge: procedural).
● Describe your last team meeting.
Knowledge Influences Interview Questions
Managers need to understand what having a
reflective practice means (knowledge:
conceptual).
● How would you define having a
reflective practice?
Managers need to be able to assess their
ability to engage with reflective practice
(knowledge: metacognitive).
● Can you describe a recent managerial
event you were involved in and how
you used reflection either before,
during, or after?
● How do you consider your use of
reflective practice when you evaluate
your own performance?
Managers need to understand how to build a
reflective practice (knowledge: procedural).
● What kind of habits do you have
around reflection, if any?
● How have you learned about using
reflection as part of your role as a
manager?
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 94
● When you reflect upon a managerial
event or challenge, what factors do
you consider?
Motivational Influences Interview Questions
Managers need to understand the value of
having a reflective practice (expectancy-value
theory).
● What kind of value would you place
on taking time for reflection as a
manager?
● How has taking time for reflection
impacted your work outcomes, if at
all?
Managers need to believe they are able to
build a reflective practice (self-efficacy).
● How would you describe your
confidence level in how you use
reflection in your role as a manager?
● When you think about your ability to
use reflective practice successfully,
what comes to mind?
Organizational Influences Interview Questions
The organization needs to be able to set a
work environment that supports the adoption
of reflective practice (organization: cultural
model).
● How much have you been able to
observe others’ reflective practices at
GlobalPayments?
● What does it feel like to engage with
reflection in GlobalPayments’ work
environment?
● What, if anything, does
GlobalPayments do to create an
environment conducive to reflection?
The organization needs to agree upon how it
will evaluate the success of managers
engaging with reflective practice
(organization: cultural setting).
● How does GlobalPayments evaluate its
operating principle of 'think
rigorously' when it comes to manager
success?
● How would you describe how you
discuss reflection with your manager
and team?

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 95
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness
Johnson and Christensen (2014) describe the critical nature of building trust and rapport
within an interview relationship. First, I actively and comprehensively attended to the
surrounding logistics of the interview with each interviewee. Johnson and Christensen (2014)
suggest describing the purpose of the study and confidentiality measures as a means of building
trust. As such, in each interviewee email invitation and at the beginning of each interview, I
reviewed the purpose of the study, confirmed that all identities would be anonymous within the
writing, and that all identities would be kept confidential in perpetuity. I also described that their
responses had no bearing on any process that may affect them (e.g., their performance
evaluations) or their relationship with me as the Head of Education for the organization. I asked
each participant for informed consent to record the conversation for data analysis purposes.
Within the written consent form for recording, I stated that I would destroy all recordings by the
end of 2019. I stored all recordings in a password protected, cloud-based folder within the
company’s security structures. In addition to the recording, I took notes throughout each
interview to capture the general flow of the conversation and non-verbal data, like body
language. Patton (2002) offers that notes can support the invention of new questions and create a
map that may help the researcher go back for clarification or further discovery.
Next, I structured the interviews with appropriate measures to support the credibility and
trustworthiness of the data they yielded. For example, I only asked open-ended questions so as to
steer clear of the leading nature of dichotomous questions (Patton, 2002). Second, I worked with
each interviewee to establish an appropriate language to describe the phenomenon of reflection.
With “reflective practice” representing academic and somewhat out-of-reach language, I first
aligned with interviewees in how they describe reflective practice. Patton (2002) recommends
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 96
this strategy as a means of further connecting with the interviewee, but also to help create mutual
understanding and clarity in the discussion. Patton (2002) also warns of the dangers of
employing questions that begin with the word “why” given their tendency to place the
interviewee into a position of insufficiency. I limited the use of questions beginning with “why”
to a maximum of one instance per interview.
Third, I aligned to a protocol of behavior to generate the most accurate data possible.
Patton (2002) wrote about the importance of neutrality and rapport, with rapport being about a
relationship with the interviewee and neutrality about an indifference to the content that is
emerging in the interview. I intended to have a professional respect for both. Within each
interview, I attempted to remain reflexive and aware of body language, tone, and overall stance
within the room. A researcher must be aware of the bias they risk bringing into the research.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) ask that interviewers present themselves without judgment but with
sensitivity and respect. I intended to honor each interviewee and record their stories, perceptions,
beliefs, and thoughts as neutral data. Maxwell (2013) builds on the idea of reflexivity in how the
researcher responds to the environment and data. For example, it was critical not to engage in
leading questions that would unduly influence the interviewee’s responses or behaviors.
After each interview, I checked both recordings immediately to ensure that they
successfully registered the conversation. Patton (2002) recommends this technique as a best
practice. In each interview, at least one form of recording worked. As another post-interview
step, I noted reflections on how the interview went and processed the degree to which I had
received helpful data. Patton (2002) recommends this step as a means of making new
connections with the data and beginning to synthesize the meaning of the interview. Third, I
transcribed each interview, with Weiss (1995) asserting that this step places the data into a
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 97
format that is more apt for exploration. Having the comprehensive data available in written form
also helped minimize my potential biases (e.g., only considering the data which was mentally
available, recent, or pronounced). I sent thank you cards to each interviewee at the end of the
study.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 98
Appendix D: Validity and Reliability
Creswell and Creswell (2017) describe the importance of using validity and reliability
measures within quantitative research. As a base, I used concepts from a reflective practice scale
that has demonstrated validity and reliability (Priddis & Rogers, 2018), modifying the original
questions to suit the corporate manager environment. I piloted the survey with five participants
to gather feedback on clarity and understanding. Creswell and Creswell (2017) recommend
piloting survey content as a best practice in ensuring trustworthy results. In sending the survey to
all 304 people managers, I expected to gain a response rate that would allow for meaningful
analysis. I provided a contextual paragraph at the beginning of the survey to help participants
understand the purpose, instructions, and data protection.
The online instrument clearly described the scale for each item, and collecting the data
online decreased the likelihood of data entry errors. With non-respondents having the ability to
significantly change survey data (Creswell & Creswell, 2017), I used wave analysis to evaluate
the response rate after the initial invitation; I did not send reminder emails. All responses
included a timestamp, and I compared late responses to earlier submissions to check for stability
in the answers. If late respondents’ answers skewed sharply from those of other respondents, I
considered the former for elimination.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 99
Appendix E: Ethics
Rubin and Rubin (2012) describe the importance of researchers aspiring to make
improvements for study subjects rather than harm. The study only began once I had received
approval from the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB). Glesne
(2011) provides a robust outline for how researchers should approach involving humans in study.
In beginning the study, I provided a detailed document to all participants, which included the
intent, parameters, and processes of the study. To maximize the degree of beneficence,
participants were not forced to answer questions or disclose information for which they did not
want. Rubin and Rubin (2012) provide helpful guidance for researchers in qualifying questions
as optional if they seem too difficult to answer. Participants had the ability to leave the study for
any reason without consequence.
To lessen risks around justice, I reviewed the parameters of the study, including
confidentiality, with each interviewee and received verbal consent before beginning the
interview. I requested written permission for recording interviews. I hosted all survey and
interview data (written and verbal) on a secure, password-protected GlobalPayments server and
destroyed it by the end of 2019.
As the Head of Education for the organization, I viewed the participants within the study
as customers. I did not include any managers who reported to me in the study so as to avoid
conflicts of relational interest. I had no evaluative power over any of the participating employees.
I described my roles of being a doctoral candidate, employee, and researcher. I delineated how
this study may inform future GlobalPayments educational strategy surrounding manager
development.

MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 100
Appendix F: Implementation and Evaluation
I used the New World Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to evaluate
the success of the KMO initiatives I would place to increase manager reflective practice. Based
on four levels of evaluation and success, the Kirkpatrick model provides a framework for
practitioners to articulate business solutions. Beginning at Level 4, which treats the positive
organizational outcomes and results, practitioners can work backward from establishing the end
goal. Level 3 analysis captures sustained behavior change, Level 2 captures the degree to which
employees have learned and understand the content they need in order to succeed against the
goal, and Level 1 measures the degree to which learners appreciated the learning experience or
intervention in which they participated as part of the transformational process or program.
Beginning with the final stage of evaluation, I isolated outcomes that I would expect to be
true should the set of interventions be successful. Additionally, while GlobalPayments expresses
a desire to continually change for the better, it would be critical to frame recommendations
within GlobalPayments’ cultural settings and models. Successful language at the company tends
to be simple yet concise and descriptive. For example, employees may deem the terms
“reflection” and “reflective practice” as unnecessarily complex and academic. To be successful
in implementation, it will be critical to translate and align terms and frameworks into culturally
acceptable vocabulary (e.g., the organization’s operating principle of “think rigorously”).
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
If the set of KMO interventions is successful, the organization should see a few explicit
outcomes arise. From an external perspective, more people should want to work at the company,
and the job offer signing rate should increase. From an internal perspective, the success of
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 101
managers should result in an increase in employee engagement survey (PaymentSat) results, and
the organization should be better able to meet its goals. Table F1 outlines these outcomes.
Table F1

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcome
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. Sign-on rate increases, as
individuals want to work at
GlobalPayments in part for the quality
of their managers.
1a. 90% of candidates sign their
offer letter.
The recruiting team continues to
track and report upon candidate sign-
on rate vs. declines.
Internal Outcomes
2. Manager components of the bi-
annual employee engagement survey
(PaymentSat) increase.
2a. Manager score at 85%
favorable rating.
The People Team tracks manager
engagement score in the bi-annual
employee engagement survey. The
current manager score is 77%
favorable.
3. Employee retention increases due to
high quality management.
3a. Retention rate of regretted
attrition drops to <5% of total
employee base.
The People Team to track attrition
within the human resource
information system (HRIS) and tag
each case with “regretted” or
“unregretted.”

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. In order to achieve the organizational outcomes articulated in the
Level 4 analysis, managers will need to be able to consistently demonstrate specific behaviors
with regard to reflective practice. These critical behaviors will help to positively influence the
performance of the larger organization. In this instance, managers must be able to demonstrate
the ability to consistently engage with reflective practice. Table F2 provides an outline of this
behavior.
Table F2

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Managers demonstrate a 100% of managers The education team tracks The coaching
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 102
consistent use of reflective
practice.
have completed
coursework related to
reflection and are
part of either a
coaching circle or are
regular working with
a coach one-on-one.
attendance of all courses and
subsequent coaching events.
engagements will begin
in a scaled cadence in
Q2, 2020.

Required drivers. To drive the behavior of managers engaging with reflective practice,
they must understand the value of engaging with reflection and the successful mechanisms that
allow for its unfolding as a behavior. Similarly, the organization must be willing and able to
create conditions within which reflection is valued, recognized, and supported. In creating an
organizational system which reinforces, encourages, rewards, and monitors reflective practice,
GlobalPayments may be able to further unlock the benefits of managerial reflection. First,
reinforcement includes ongoing education to support ongoing practice. Second, encouragement
can take place through manager-on-manager support and encouragement. Third, the organization
can reward manager reflection during performance reviews. Finally, with regard to monitoring,
GlobalPayments can ask all employees questions around reflection during the bi-annual
employee engagement surveys. Table F3 provides an outline of these mechanisms.
Table F3
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide educational support
of reflective practice by
providing ongoing courses
and coaching engagements
that reinforce the desired
behaviors
Every six months after
transitioning to a manager role
Behavior 1
Encouraging
Reflection becomes a
managerial expectation, so
From the beginning of the
manager role
Behavior 1
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 103
managers of managers are
able to provide feedback and
encouragement around the
practice
Rewarding
The organization can provide
verbal recognition by
managers of managers
identifying and recognizing
the behavior
Ongoing Behavior 1
Monitoring
Include in the bi-annual
performance process
questions and employee
engagement questions that
relate to reflective practice
Two times a year Behavior 1

Organizational support. GlobalPayments will take several steps to create supportive
scaffolding for this behavioral transformation. It will provide the funds for course creation and
coaching interventions and consistent structures that help evaluate and recognize reflection as a
practice the organization values.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. GlobalPayments will work to accomplish three learning goals. From a
metacognitive perspective, managers should be able to demonstrate that they can evaluate their
capabilities in reflective practice. Second, managers should be able to incorporate reflective
practice into their management approach and style through the adoption of declarative and
procedural knowledge. Third, in increasing self-efficacy, managers should report having more
confidence in how they use reflection in their roles.
Program. To support the learning goals, GlobalPayments will use its existing Leadership
in Practice program to create conduits of transformation toward the adoption of reflective
practice. With goals around people managers in the organization understanding how to engage
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 104
with reflection, valuing it, and working within an organizational context and setting that supports
it, the program offers an ideal platform. Leadership in Practice targets all people managers in the
organization. It brings managers together from around the world for two non-consecutive,
intensive weeks of education, which include specific modules that treat reflection. In between the
two-week intensives, sub-groups meet for peer coaching and reflection in community. In order to
accomplish the learning goals, the program will formally introduce formal knowledge around
reflective practice and establish mechanisms that support ongoing adoption and reinforcement,
including peer coaching seminars, one-on-one coaching, and educational content that allows
managers to step back and take on multiple perspectives. Evaluative surveys will help
participants assess and integrate the knowledge, increasing motivation around reflective practice.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Table F4 provides an outline of how
Leadership in Practice incorporates methods and strategies that help support learning transfer.
The program managers of Leadership in Practice will use survey and participant feedback to
gauge how successfully they are meeting the learning goals and refine the interventions
accordingly.
Table F4
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Adaptive leadership teachings on reflection Week 1 of the program
Defining coaching skills and techniques Week 1 of the program
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Peer to peer discussions that describe how their
growth as a manager is developing throughout
the program
Throughout the program
Practicing coaching skills Week 1 of the program
Using perspective building skillsets Throughout the program
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 105
Articulating personal progress in the program At check ins across the program
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
T1 and T2 surveys will assess managerial
confidence in taking up reflective practices
At the beginning and end of the program
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Participants will discuss their commitment and
plans for integrating reflection in their roles
moving forward
End of the program

Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 evaluation measures the immediate reactions learners have to the learning
intervention (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). It is the level that is least critical to driving
organizational change given that it measures initial response and not actual learning transfer or
behavior change. Table F5 provides an outline of how I will evaluate Level 1 efficacy.
Table F5
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
A survey item asking learners how engaging
they felt the content was.
After the course.
Relevance
A survey item asking how relevant the content
of the course was to their learning needs.
After the course.
Customer Satisfaction
A survey item asking how satisfied they were
with the experience of the course.
After the course.

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Immediately following the
intervention, I will send a survey to all participants to gauge Level 1 and 2 success. Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick (2016) denote engagement, relevance, and satisfaction as Level 1 markers. Level
2 markers include knowledge, confidence, and commitment vis-a-vis the content (Kirkpatrick &
MANAGER REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 106
Kirkpatrick, 2016). I will send the survey through GlobalPayments’ learning management
system. As such, all data will remain within the security protocols of the organization. The
survey will not collect identifying information, so users may feel more comfortable sharing their
genuine responses. Survey items will use a five-point Likert scale, with five representing
“strongly agree” and one representing “strongly disagree.” Given the five-point scale,
participants will have the option to provide a neutral response. The survey will also include one
open-ended question to capture additional feedback from participants.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Six months after the course
completion, I will send a second survey to touch back on Level 1 and 2 topics but also extend
into Levels 3 and 4 of the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) evaluation framework. Level 3
evaluation investigates the critical behaviors learners need to be able to demonstrate, and Level 4
speaks to the organizational outcomes of success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Appendix B
provides a full review of the instrument.
Data analysis and reporting. Once I have collected data from the immediate and
delayed instruments, I will compile it for analysis and retrieval of key insights. I will display the
data by representing percentage rates of the Likert scales against the questions. Once the data
analysis is complete, I will send the resulting narrative and recommendations to stakeholders,
who include the full executive team and managers of managers. The output of this process is to
isolate optimizations of the educational programming. After aligning on the next steps, I will
make changes to the curriculum to further increase its efficacy. This process of data review to
improving the curriculum should take approximately three weeks.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

School connectedness and teacher reflective practices

PDF

An evaluative study on implementing customer relationship management software through the perspective of first level managers

PDF

Managers’ learning transfer from the leadership challenge training to work setting: an evaluation study

PDF

A field study of leadership evaluation and promotion practices in technology organizations

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Performance management in government: the importance of goal clarity

PDF

Implementing proactive safety strategies in place of reactive safety strategies at a manufacturing organization: an evaluation study

PDF

Growth of intrapreneurialship in mature knowledge-centric firms

PDF

Effective practices for managing staff performance in higher education: an exploratory study

PDF

Impressions of diversity: frontline fundraiser hiring in higher education

PDF

Leadership selection within public safety: an evaluation study

PDF

Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

PDF

The first-time manager journey: a study to inform a smoother leadership transition

PDF

Administrators' role in supporting teachers through feedback

PDF

Developing qualified workers to support individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in home and community settings: an evaluation study

PDF

Deckplate leadership: a promising practice study of chief petty officer development

PDF

The successful implementation of diversity and inclusion efforts: a study of promising practice

PDF

Adaptability characteristics: an evaluation study of a regional mortgage lender

PDF

Officer performance appraisal program management: an evaluative case study

PDF

Child welfare turnover: an evaluation study of work-life balance practices

Asset Metadata

Creator Duin, Durand (author)

Core Title A study of manager reflective practice

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 11/14/2019

Defense Date 09/09/2019

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

Tag managers,OAI-PMH Harvest,people managers,reflection,reflective practice

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair)

Creator Email dduin@usc.edu,durandd@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-233453

Unique identifier UC11674897

Identifier etd-DuinDurand-7924.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-233453 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-DuinDurand-7924.pdf

Dmrecord 233453

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Duin, Durand

Type texts

Source 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 a...

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