What is Self-Action Leadership?

 

Chapter 3

What is Self-Action Leadership 

In BOOK the FIRST, Chapter One, Self-Action Leadership (SAL) was loosely defined as: "taking complete personal responsibility for your thoughts, speech, and actions—and any consequences engendered thereby."

This chapter expands upon this definition by providing additional contour and nuance to the holistic nature of SAL as a comprehensive personal leadership paradigm and toolbox. It further illuminates the potential SAL has to transform your life when properly learned and applied. 

Self-Action Leadership is a new theory of personal leadership development. As the previous chapter discussed, SAL is hewn out of the ore of existing academic and philosophical theories (i.e. self-leadership, action research, existentialism, and autoethnography). 

Dr. JJ at age 7
circa 1987

SAL was constructed over a period of nearly 40 years by virtue of an extended analytic autoethnographic study. I began this study at age seven (7), when I first began journaling and learning about goal setting, values clarification, and other, related personal development principles and practices. From this tender age onward, I have been deeply interested in and fascinated by all of the subjects that have played a role in this comprehensive self-study (i.e. personal development, leadership, literature, history, philosophy, theology and religion, etc.).

Conceptually speaking, Self-Action Leadership (SAL) is substantively analogous to self-leadership (S-L) theory, which was pioneered in the early 1980s by Charles C. Manz. Despite these substance similarities, SAL introduces original theoretical constructs in the form of a theory and a model that are both unique from S-L theory. In addition, SAL invokes a moral imperative that S-L implies, but does not explicitly mandate. 

With this in mind, SAL is defined more specifically as: morally informed self-leadership that is action-oriented, focused on long-term results, and aimed at a continual rise in the Existential Growth of self and others. 

SELF-ACTION LEADERSHIP  (SAL)

Morally informed self-leadership that is action-oriented, focused on long-term results,

and aimed at a continual rise in the Existential Growth of self and others.

Existential Growth will be defined in greater detail later in this book. For now, I invite you to reflect back upon the its basic definition from BOOK the FIRST, Chapter One, which is: the growth, progress, and maturation of one's holistic potential. 

While the ultimate goal of self-leadership may be to succeed, or to win (whatever the cost), the ultimate goal of Self-Action Leadership is to do the right thing at the right time for the right reasons with the understanding that in the end, right makes might, (1) not the other way around. Unlike S-L, SAL explicitly requires that one's actions bring about the best long-term benefits and results for everyone involved in a situation—even if a measure of pain must be suffered in the short run to bring about noble ends. In the words of a former U.S. Congressman and member of the House of Representatives from the State of South Carolina:

"Jesus lost a voice vote to a guy named Barabbus. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated. Dietrich Bonhoffer was put to death. Abraham Lincoln lost more races than he won. How you conduct yourself matters. We [live] in a society, in a culture, that values winning ... [including] cheating to win [and] getting away with committing penalties. ... [That is the wrong approach because] the way we do things matters. ... Winning is [not] the ultimate objective. ... The ultimate objective is to lead an honorable life." (2) 

SAL is designed to assist us in leading honorable lives. As human beings, we are imperfect, and that's okay—as long as we are striving to gradually and steadily improve over time and do our best to avoid hurting other people in the process. Sadly, however, some self-leaders are genuinely evil people who intentionally do bad things and commit terrible atrocities for selfish and self-serving purposes. 

Truth be told, some of the most effective self-leaders throughout history have also been some of the worst human beings on the planet. Adolf Hitler is perhaps the most classic and cliché historical example of this nefarious phenomenon. As an unusually talented, disciplined, and remarkably capable self-leader and influencer of others, the fiendish führer of the Third Reich successfully employed a variety of self-leadership-oriented "cognitive and behavioral strategies" (3) in pursuit of his ambitious and aggressive military and geopolitical objectives.

The problem with Hilter was, of course, that his actions were self-centered, immoral, and ruthlessly violent. The result of this extraordinary, yet utterly evil, self-leadership practice was the bloodiest war and the deadliest genocide in human history. 

Simply stated, SAL provides the moral compass that S-L theory alone lacks. Thus, SAL empowers you to not just permanently succeed, but to benefit others and help them to permanently succeed in the process. Then, when your time in this world is up—a reality we all face eventually—you can leave behind a lasting legacy that will make those who knew you proud. Such a legacy will continue to positively impact whomever you leave behind. 

S-L can help you to do great (or terrible) things.

        SAL, on the other hand, can empower you to become great by doing good. 

Sam Houston
1793-1863

"I have but one maxim:

do right and risk the consequences."

—Sam Houston

Contrasting the Lives of Hitler and Mandela

To better illustrate the difference between morally-neutral self-leadership and morally-informed Self-Action Leadership, it is illustrative to compare and contrast the lives and political careers of Adolf Hitler and Nelson Mandela. Ironically and surprisingly, these two men's dramatically divergent journeys through life actually resembled each other in several significant ways in their earlier years. To wit: both men felt ostracized and marginalized as young men. Both held personal and political grudges for real or perceived injustices inflicted on them by other people and groups. Both were intelligent, capable, and highly driven men who were passionate about their respective countries' potential for greatness. Both worked assiduously and fought bravely and passionately in an effort to bring about national changes. Then, to top it all off, both men were imprisoned for violently fomenting civil unrest. 

The profound moral divergence that ultimately separated these two historical figures lasting legacies began to unfold during the time they spent serving their respective prison sentences. Hitler used his time in jail to let his bitterness fester and ferment, leading him to write a book—Mein Kampf ("My Struggle")—wherein he outlined his philosophy of Aryan racial supremacy, anti-Semitism, and German nationalism, power, expansionism, and global domination.

Mandela, who served a much longer prison sentence than Hitler, allowed his heart to soften during the nearly three decades he spent behind bars. Guided by the principles of self-reliance and personal power championed in William Ernest Henley's classic poem—Invictus, which is a Latin term that means "unconquered," "unsubdued," or "invincible"—Mandela charted a whole new course for his life that he pursued with integrity and nobility for the remainder of his days.

"It matters not how strait the gate,
   How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
   I am the captain of my soul." (4)

South African flag painted on a wall

The moral and dispositional transformation Nelson allowed his heart, mind, and soul to undergo in prison prefaced his steadily growing influence and popularity, which led to his election as president of South Africa less than five years after being released from prison. Today, Mandela is credited (in part) with bringing about a formal end to the racist practices of apartheid. 

Make no mistake about it; both Mandela and Hitler were remarkable self-leaders in terms of their overall achievements and influence. However, of the two men, only Mandela qualifies as a self-action leader because of the moral and ethical components involved.

Moreover, because Hitler chose to pursue an evil pathway, his achievements had a relatively short shelf-life; the thousand-year reign he promised lasted only twelve years, half of which proved hellish for many (if not most) of his countrymen, to say nothing of the worldwide fear, pain, death, destruction, and terror experienced by hundreds of millions of others because of the horrendous wrath his malevolent actions unleashed. Along the way, six million Jews and approximately 75 million other soldiers and civilians lost their lives at a financial cost of trillions of dollars. By the time Hitler committed suicide on April 30, 1945, much of Europe and Southeast Asia lay in ruins.

It was the most colossal disaster in human history. 

Despite the relative similarities between Hitler and Mandela's earlier days, the two individuals could not have ended their lives more differently. Hitler died ignominiously in the extreme at age 56 by his own cowardly hand, after which his body was doused with gasoline and ingloriously torched by Joseph Goebbels—his equally nefarious minister of propaganda—who, in turn, joined his own wife in suicide after poisoning their seven children. 

Nations from throughout the British
Commonwealth and the rest of the world paused
to pay their respects to the internationally admired,
renowned, and respected Nelson Mandela.

Mandela, on the other hand, who had become an international hero—even a legend—passed away peacefully of natural causes incident to old age in 2013 at age 95. After his body lay honorably in State for two days, he was given an official State Funeral attended by representatives from nearly a hundred nations, including Prime Ministers David Cameron, Stephen Harper, and Tony Abbot of the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, respectively, President Barack Obama of the United States, and former U.S. Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.  

What markedly divergent legacies Hitler and Mandela left behind for us to observe, study, and reflect upon! This dramatic historical duality underscores in bold colors and stark tones the importance of the moral and ethical components of self-leadership, and therefore the absolute need for self-action leadership.

While self-leadership alone is often hijacked by those who seek to swindle and subjugate, SAL is the domain of those who views are morally monolithic and therefore aimed at thinking, saying, and doing what is right, with the potential long-term consequences of one's thoughts, speech, and actions always in the forefront of their compassionate, empathetic, and tolerant minds and hearts. Thus, self-action leaders seek to ever reverberate that righteous refrain of freedom: 

"Do what is right; let the consequence follow.

Battle for freedom in spirit and might;

And with stout hearts look ye forth till tomorrow.

God will protect you; then do what is right!" (5)

The effective exercise of self-leadership will usually empower external successes in the short-run. But only SAL will ensure long-term successes that are mutually beneficial to both YOU and those that you influence. 

Right and Wrong are Real

Given the essential nature of the moral and ethical components of SAL, it bears defining "Right" and "Wrong" in as objective a sense as is humanly possible. Of all the aims of this comprehensive Life Leadership textbook, this one is the most important of all; for it is the firm foundation upon which all the other aims either rise or fall.

At present, we live in a world where many people adhere to the notion that there really is no real right and wrong or absolute truth. These people believe that each individual is entitled to "their own truth," which, like a flexible acrobat can be conveniently contorted to condone whatever behavior or lifestyle one seeks to pursue—no matter how arbitrary, whimsical, or even nonsensical.

While it is certainly true that each individual has the liberty to believe in this notion of moral relativity, it is just as true that long-term consequences inevitably demonstrate over time that some behaviors and lifestyles are unquestionably more beneficial and prosperous in nature than are others.

That's just the way things are!

Given this objective reality, it bears offering up what my research has uncovered concerning the reality of absolute truth and the accompanying definitions of right and wrong in an objective sense. Simply stated, RIGHT choices result in positive and constructive long-term consequences for self and others, while WRONG choices do the exact opposite, resulting in negative and destructive long-term consequences for self and others.        

RIGHT Choices

Thoughts, speech, and actions that result in positive and

constructive long-term consequences for self and others.

WRONG Choices

Thoughts, speech, and actions that result in negative and

destructive long-term consequences for self and others.

The operative word in these two definitions is "Long-Term." There are many choices that may seem to be right in the moment, but over time prove themselves to be quite wrong. This is especially true when it comes to human appetites, and perhaps sexual behavior in particular. For example, whenever you are sexually titillated or tempted, it may seem sensible enough to go ahead and gratify your natural desires and lusts. In the heat of the moment, doing so might not only feel right, but will usually feel good—at least in a sentient sense. Does this mean it is right to indulge your sexuality whenever and with whomever (or whatever) you feel like?

For a variety of obvious reasons, the answer to this question is clearly "No." 

On the other hand, there are also many choices that may seem wrong in the moment, but over time may prove themselves to be quite right. A classic example of this is the exercise of "tough love." As a parent, teacher, or leader, it might seem wrong (or at the very least, unpleasant) to reprove or otherwise discipline a child, student, or subordinate on the alter of long-term growth and progress when moral wisdom dictates the necessity of such a course. But despite any and all difficulty in making said decisions, they usually prove to be correct in the end. I know this from personal experience. While I never liked being corrected, reproved, or disciplined, I was always grateful later on for those parents, teachers, and leaders who wisely took the path of greater resistance in a sincere effort to help me in the long run.  

Some consequences quickly follow a word or deed. Other consequences take years, decades, a lifetime, or even centuries or millennia to fully flower (or decay) into easily recognizable "Right" (or "Wrong") choices.

This is just ONE reason why it is so important to study HISTORY!

History is full of examples of those who have tried to operate their lives under alternative and erroneous principles and the dangerous practices that accompany them. In virtually every case, any positive results accrued therefrom were either short-lived, fragmentary, or camouflaged in the end.  

So many justify wrong behavior on the promise of obtaining pleasurable and rewarding short-term consequences and preferred temporary arrangements; while so relatively few take the road less traveled and embrace the promise of long-term benefits and blessings!

The bottom line—and the absolute fact of nature and the universe—is that there really is a real and objective "Right" and a real and objective "Wrong." Moreover, I believe that deep down everyone knows it—although not everyone is sufficiently wise, mature, and secure to recognize and acknowledge it.

The truth of this fact was eloquently articulated and made plain by none other than William James nearly a century-and-a-half ago, when he wrote:  

"What interest, zest, or excitement can there be in achieving the right way, unless we are enabled to feel that the wrong way is also a possible and a natural way, — nay, more, a menacing and an imminent way? And what sense can there be in condemning ourselves for taking the wrong way, unless we need have done nothing of the sort, unless the right way was open to us as well? I cannot understand the willingness to act, no matter how we feel, without the belief that acts are really good and bad." (6)

A fundamental difference between human beings and animals is our cranial possession of a prefrontal cortex and our metaphysical capacity to develop a morally and ethically-operative conscience. While we can't scientifically prove the anatomical existence of a conscience, nor can we empirically delineate exactly what a conscience is and how it operates, it is doubtful that any human being ever lived who has not experienced vestiges of its visceral insights, intuition, nudgings, and promptings.

The job of your conscience is to guide you toward RIGHT thoughts, words, and deeds and steer you away from WRONG actions, speech, and musings. 

Jiminy Cricket!

        As unsophisticated as it might sound, it really is that simple!

We can't prove it scientifically; but I'd stake my life on the veracity of this basic truth. At Freedom Focused, we believe all human beings are born with a conscience, which is either sharpened or dulled over time in more-or-less direct proportion to the heed or disregard that YOU and I choose to afford it. We define "conscience" as: a metaphysical light and compass within that viscerally guides, directs, and prompts your mind, heart, and soul to think about, say, and do what is right, good, and constructive, while avoiding what is wrong, evil, and destructive.  

CONSCIENCE

A metaphysical light and compass within that viscerally guides, directs, and prompts your mind, heart, and soul to think about, say, and do what is right, good, and constructive while avoiding what is wrong, evil, and destructive.  

Your conscience is sharpened by thoughts, speech, and acts rooted in honesty, kindness, selflessness, sincerity, and TRUTH. Your conscience is dulled by thoughts, speech, and acts rooted in dishonesty, meanness, selfishness, insincerity, and ERROR. 

How then, are TRUTH and ERROR defined? 

We define truth as: the way things really are, were, and will be—as delineated by the continuous interplay of Universal Laws and natural consequences over time, and error as: Anything that deviates in any way from the TRUTH.  

TRUTH

The way things really were, are, and will be—as delineated by the

continuous interplay of Universal Laws and natural consequences over time.

ERROR

Anything that deviates in any way from the TRUTH.  

Sir Winston Churchill
1874-1965

Perhaps it was our pal, Sir Winston Churchill, who said it best when he once quipped that: the truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but in the end, there it is!

"The truth is incontrovertible.

Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it;

But in the end...  there it is."

—Winston Churchill

 

The reality of truth—and the existence of right and wrong—is indeed an incontrovertible fact. It is also an inconvenient reality that is perennially out of style with much of humanity. This is why countless human beings—including all of us to some extent—seek incessantly, albeit fruitlessly, to escape its penetrating presence throughout our culture, society, world, and universe.

You don't have to embrace a specific ideology or vote a certain party line to recognize the existence of physical and metaphysical truisms that transcend politics and philosophy. Nor do you have to belong to a certain religious faith or attend a specific church to accede the existence of a categorical moral dichotomy differentiating right from wrong. What you do have to do is listen to your Conscience, which can serve as an existential guide pointing the way to TRUTH to all who are willing to listen. Then, when you know what is good, right, and true, you can choose to think about, say, and do what is right while eschewing what is wrong to the best of your finite ability and capacity. 

The goal, therefore, is not PERFECTION; perfection is not possible. Instead of perfection, the aim is to exhibit a real intent to pay close attention to whatever your Conscience is commanding you to do and then seek to carry out those commands to the very best of your imperfect ability. And when you fall short, or choose to disregard your Conscience, which we all do to varying degrees, you must be willing to rectify the deleterious consequences of your speech or actions to the best of your ability and then continually strive to improve upon your past performances. 

If you follow this course, your Conscience will become sharper over time and YOU will gradually become a better person as a result. If you abandon this course, your conscience will become progressively duller until it becomes muted, and YOUR moral and ethical capacity will gradually deteriorate as a result.

If right and wrong are real, then good and evil also exist as real forces and polar opposites of each other. If this is true, what exactly are "GOOD" and "EVIL," and how do you define them? 

According to Dr. M. Scott Peck, M.D., evil is a form of mental illness. In fact, he refers to evil as the "ultimate disease." (7) We agree with Peck; however, we believe that evil is more than a mere malaise of the mind that originates ultimately as a malevolent metaphysical manifestation in one's heart and soul.

EVIL drives thoughts, speech, and actions designed to purposely deceive, discourage, debase, damage, or destroy oneself or others. In its darkest shades, evil is akin an existential black hole, where all light (i.e. truth, goodness, kindness, honesty, etc.) is unable to escape.

GOODNESS, on the other hand, is marked by truth, light, transparency, and an accurate conception of oneself, others, and the world and universe beyond. It is further flagged by compassion and consideration, equality, fairness, kindness, and respect.

Good actions are an outgrowth of the Golden Rule—treat others as you would want to be treated—and where appropriate/relevant, the Platinum Rule—treat others as they would want to be treated. (8)

Peck points out further that, "a mark of the [existentially] advanced is their awareness of their own laziness [and other weaknesses]." (9) In other words, the more goodness a person possesses, the more they will be able to recognize and acknowledge their own imperfections and shortcomings. It is a person's goodness that empowers him or her to detect and recognize whatever badness exists inside oneself. For this reason, it is the very best people (those possessing the most goodness and humility) who most clearly comprehend their own fallibility and foibles. They are also the quickest and sincerest in admitting this fact in both private and public. 

Conversely, the more badness a person develops, the less attuned they become to their own badness. It is therefore goodness and its concomitant humility that detects, recognizes, and acknowledge badness in itself. 

That is why people like Hitler rarely see themselves as being evil. 

Badness leads to deception—and particularly self-deception—which leads one to deceive oneself that he or she is good, or at least not too bad, when in reality, they may have developed a lifestyle marked by debasement, deceit, and debauchery. The deeper and more entrenched one's evil, the more one will be blinded to one's own badness. Conversely, the purer one's goodness, the clearer one will be attuned to one's own imperfection. 

Another way to contrast good and evil is to consider the difference between clarity and convolution. According to Peck, evil harbors a perpetual "desire to confuse," or otherwise obscure reality (10). Rightness or goodness, on the other hand, continuously seeks to clarify and illuminate things as they really were in the past, are in the present, and will be in the future. 

Everyone in the world
needs SAL & Serendipity

Every human being that has ever lived on Planet Earth has thought, said, and done things that are wrong. No one is perfect! However, that does not mean that everyone is evil. Making a mistake or screwing up doesn't make you evil; after all, to err is truly human. Folly itself does not equate with evil, nor does it always lead to evil. 

Evil begins to sprout when you follow up folly with intentional aims to deceive, discourage, debase, damage, or destroy yourself or others. (11) Anyone willing to accept responsibility for one's own thoughts, speech, actions, and the consequences engendered thereby can avoid evil, regardless of the errors of one's past.  

SAL is NOT a RELIGION

It bears noting here that the purpose of this Life Leadership textbook is not to declare and proclaim what is right and wrong in every minute particular. Aside from the practical impossibility of such an attempt, we explicitly make no attempt to do so. Declarations and proclamations of moral and ethical rule-based behaviors is the purview of true religion and the integrity of individual minds. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once put it: nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind. (12)

A young Ralph Waldo Emerson
1803-1882

"Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."

—Ralph Waldo Emerson

This book is not designed to dictate the particulars of every thought, word, or deed you could or should execute throughout your life and career; that is YOUR job! This book merely affirms that a real RIGHT and WRONG does in fact exist. We therefore encourages individuals everywhere to listen to their consciences for their own sakes and the sakes of everyone else whom they might impact or influence. As some colleagues and I wrote in an academic journal article, Dr. JJ and Freedom Focused always intend to:

"Leave precise policy questions to politicians, specific legal questions to lawyers and judges, technical queries concerning ethics and morals to ethicists and philosophers, and detailed "thou shalts" and "thou shalt nots" to prophets, pastors, and pontiffs. Our goal is NOT ... to dictate detailed directives in every arena of choice. Our seminal intention is to teach correct principles—generally speaking—and then encourage (and hopefully inspire) wise self-governance among an extremely diverse audience of individuals and organizations as they move forward to confront the multifarious moral and practical decisions and dilemmas that continually creep into their everyday lives and organizations." (13)

SAL Mantra

Right is right and wrong is wrong and never the twain shall meet.

Simply stated, right choices lead to freedom, growth, happiness, success, and inner peace. They also promote the development of character, capacity, and integrity. 

Wrong choices lead to bondage, moral atrophy, misery, failure, and anxiety. They also promote the decay of character, capacity, and integrity.  

Do you want your personal humanity to flourish or diminish? The choice is yours, but you cannot wish away the existence of right and wrong any more than you could wish away your own existence or the presence of Universal Laws in the world, solar system, or galaxy. Similarly, you cannot circumvent the consequences of your decisions any more than you can wish away the presence and reality of gravity, inertia, or motion. 

When the bells of conscience toll in your life, you owe it to yourself and your fellow human beings to think, speak, and act in ways that will contribute to the long-term well being of all whose lives may be affected by your decisions. In the words of Michael Faraday, that great nineteenth century English scientist: I will simply express my strong belief, that that point of self-education, which consists in teaching the mind to resist its desires and inclinations, until they are proved to be right, is the most important of all, not only in things of natural philosophy, but in every department of daily life.

Michael Faraday
1791-1867

"I will simply express my strong belief, that that point of self-education, which consists in teaching the mind to resist its desires and inclinations, until they are proved to be right, is the most important of all, not only in things of natural philosophy, but in every department of daily life."

—Michael Faraday

A sure way to distinguish between right and wrong choices is to observe the measure of their impact on your Existential Growth over time. Self-action leaders are not merely interested in getting better grades, improving their relationships, or making more money. Self-action leaders seek a comprehensive philosophy and an accompanying toolkit that addresses the full spectrum of human concerns, challenges, problems, and questions. 

Self-action leaders don't just want to get something; they want to become something.

They seek holistic change and comprehensive growth that elevates, transforms, and transmutes their very existence—their very being—into something better and greater than it was before they embraced SAL; and they are willing to pay any price and exert any effort to achieve the difficult and elusive, yet unspeakably magnificent rewards that await.  

In Your Journal

• How have you defined truth in the past?

• Have the ideas in this chapter altered or otherwise influenced your previous conceptions of right, wrong, and truth? If so, how so?

• What past experiences have you had with your conscience?

• What do you believe your conscience is?

• What is something you could do TODAY to sharpen your conscience for the future. 

—Dr. JJ

Wednesday, April 17, 2024

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, USA

Author's Note: This is the 384th Blog Post Published by Freedom Focused LLC since November 2013 and the 195th consecutive weekly blog published since August 31, 2020.   

Click HERE for a compete listing of the other 383 FF Blog Articles 

Click HERE for a complete listing of Freedom Focused SAL QUOTES  

Click HERE for a complete listing of Freedom Focused SAL POEMS   

Click HERE to access the FULL TEXT of Dr. JJ's Psalms of Life: A Poetry Collection

Click HERE for a complete listing of Self-Action Leadership Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Fitness, Heath, & Wellness Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Biographical & Historical Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Current Events, Cultural, Philosophical, & Miscellaneous Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Dr. JJ's Autobiographical Articles

.........................

Tune in NEXT Wednesday for another article on a Self-Action Leadership related topic.  

And if you liked this blog post, please share it with your family, friends, colleagues, and students—and encourage them to sign up to receive future articles for FREE every Wednesday.

To sign up, please email freedomfocused@gmail.com and say SUBSCRIBE, or just YES, and we will ensure you receive a link to each new blog article every Wednesday.  

Click HERE to buy the SAL Textbooks    

Chapter 3 Notes:

1.  Lincoln, A. (1860). Cooper Union Address. February 27, 1860.

2.  FoxNews. (2018). Martha MaCallum. The Story with Martha MacCallum. Interview of Trey Gowdy. February 6, 2018.

3.  Neck, C.P. & Houghton, J.D. (2006). Two Decades of Self-Leadership Theory and Research: Past Developments, Present Trends, and Future Possibilities. Journal of Managerial Psychology. Volume 21, Issue 4, p. 270-295. DOI 10.1108/02683940610663097. Page 270.

4.  Invictus by William Ernest Henley. In Cook, R. J. (1958/1997). One Hundred and One Famous Poems: With a Prose Supplement (Revised Edition). Lincolnwood, IL: Contemporary Books. Page 95.

5.  From Hymn #237, “Do What is Right.” Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. 1985. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Company.

6.  From James’ work, The Dilemma of Determinism (1884).

7.  Peck, M.S. (1983). People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil. New York, NY: Touchstone. Page 264.

8.  An extension of the Golden Rule, the Platinum Rule is an idea developed by personality expert Tony Alessandra. The Platinum Rule involves “treating others the way they want to be treated.” The Platinum Rule takes into account personality and other individual differences and preferences, which thereby prompt us to treat others in ways that are not only kind and compassionate (Golden Rule), but also considerate of another person’s individual styles and preferences. See Alessandra’s New Edition Relationship Strategies: Using the Platinum Rule to Create Instant Rapport. (Audio CDs). Nightingale Conant. 

9.  Peck, M.S. (1983). People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil. New York, NY: Touchstone. Page 264.

10.  Ibid. Page 179. 

11.  See BOOK the FOURTH, Chapter 15 for more information on the Five D’s of the Dark Shadow—Deception, Discouragement, Debasement, Damage, and Destruction.

12.  Ziff, L., Ed. (1985) Ralph Waldo Emerson: Selected Essays. New York, NY: Penguin Classics. A reference to a quote in his essay, Self-Reliance: "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind." Page 178.

13.  Jensen, Beaulieu, and Neck (2018). “The Self-Action Leadership Model: A Qualitative, Nomological Expansion of Self-Leadership Theory Rooted in Action Research.” Journal of Leadership and Management. 11(2018). Pgs. 10-30. ISSN: 2391-6087. Page 23.

Academic and Philosophical Roots of SAL

 

Chapter 2

Academic and Philosophical Roots of SAL 

Where did Self-Action Leadership come from?

The short answer is that SAL is the result of a holistic, ongoing action research project I have been conducting in my life over the past 40 years. The long answer is that it was creatively and systematically hewn out of other, already existing academic and philosophical fields.

These topics include:

• Self-Leadership (S-L)
• Action Research (AR)
• Existentialism
• Autoethnography

This chapter provides background information on these four separate and distinct fields of scholarly inquiry by explaining their connection to SAL and the role each topic played in its creation.

Self-Leadership

Self-Action Leadership is closely related to self-leadership (S-L) theory, which is a derivative of leadership theory. Leadership is defined in many different ways by many different leaders, scholars, and organizations. At Freedom Focused, we like the definition given by leadership guru, John Maxwell, who has stated that, "leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less." (1)

While our definition is a little more technical and nuanced, it remains rooted in Maxwell's idea of influence and more specifically references those thoughts, words, and actions intentionally undertaken to influence specific, correlated, and desired thoughts, speech, and actions in others.

LEADERSHIP

Thoughts, words, and actions intentionally undertaken to influence

specific, correlated, and desired thoughts, speech, and actions in others.

In essence, LEADERSHIP is the art of influencing others to willingly do what you want them to do. In framing it this way, however, it is vital to note the keys words: "influence," and "willingly." Any attempts to compel others to follow one's lead by means of bullying, coercion, manipulation, or threats are not true leaders.

Though he never held elected office, Gandhi's
leadership influence changed the course of his country.

Why?

Because while bullying, coercion, manipulation, or threats may work in the short run, these same methods always fail in the long run. 

What causes this inevitable long-term failure? 

In the long-run, you cannot control another person's mind, heart, or will. You may be able to temporarily coerce someone's speech or actions to your liking; but in the long-run, no one can ever force another human being to think, feel, or believe something that goes against their mind, heart, or will.

It is IMPOSSIBLE.   

The authentic exercise of real leadership takes place only when someone is influenced to willingly follow a leader's advice, counsel, or direction by virtue of something the leader said or did.  

Whereas leadership is the influence you exert on other people, self-leadership is the influence you exert on YOURSELF. Self-leadership is a prerequisite to leadership in the same way that followership is a prerequisite to leadership. We define followership (2) as the consistent, devoted, and willing adherence to the directions, instructions, and tenets of a leader.

FOLLOWERSHIP

The consistent, devoted, and willing adherence to the directions, instructions, and tenets of a leader. 

Good followers are not merely mindless automatons that obey a leader. Rather, they are wise and independent free thinkers who willingly extend their advocacy, loyalty, and support to leaders they believe in and seek to emulate.  

Self-leadership experts in academe emphasize that: "if we ever hope to be effective leaders of others, we need first to be able to lead ourselves effectively." (3) At Freedom Focused, we completely agree, and add to this premise a parallel corollary as it relates to followership; namely, "if we ever hope to be effective leaders of others, we need first to be effective followers of principle-centered leaders who consistently exhibit sound moral character."   

Self-leadership is all about the leadership (or influence) you exert upon YOURSELF. More specifically, we defined it as: cognitive and behavioral strategies intentionally utilized to accomplish something. 

SELF-LEADERSHIP (S-L)

Cognitive and behavioral strategies intentionally utilized to accomplish something. 

All human beings are self-leaders—whether they know it, like it, and want to be, or not. This includes YOU and me. If you are a member of the human race, the question is not whether or not you are a self-leader; YOU are. The question is always: what kind of self-leader are you? And how effective are you at leading yourself to accomplish tasks, goals, and objectives in your life and/or career?

Self-leadership in academe was pioneered primarily by Charles C. Manz of the University of Massachusetts. Manz is the father of the field and its most prolific author. Many others have assisted him in these pioneering efforts, foremost of whom are: Christopher P. Neck of Arizona State University (and formerly Virginia Tech), and Jeffery D. Houghton of West Virginia University.   

Action Research

Action research (AR) is an organized means of putting research into action. It involves a process whereby a person or group intentionally and strategically studies a problem in an effort to find solutions, obtain results, and otherwise improve the quality of life for those involved. AR is a cyclical research process that involves four (4) different steps.  

ACTION RESEARCH (AR)

A 4-step cyclical process of identifying problems and then seeking to strategically solve them. 

According to action research scholars Gary W. Kuhne and B. Allan Quigley, the Four Core Processes of Action Research include: Planning, Acting, Observing, and Reflecting.

PROCESS 1. PLANNING:  Developing a plan to study and then address a problem.

PROCESS 2. ACTING:  Implementing your plan.

PROCESS 3. OBSERVING:  Paying attention to results and recording relevant data.

PROCESS 4. REFLECTING:  Analyzing outcomes and then revising plans for a new cycle of action. (4)

The Four (cyclical) Core Processes of Action Research

In addition to these Four Core Processes, additional sub-steps and other data-gathering techniques are employed. 

According to AR scholar, Rodney Beaulieu, there are "various ways action research is defined and applied." For example, it can "be accomplished through a collaborative process ... [or] done alone as an independent process." (5)

Self-Action Leadership utilizes the latter, independent process. This does not mean, however, that SAL initiatives or action research never involve people; they often do. It merely means that the research initiative is typically engaged by and for an individual as opposed to a group. This unique brand of action research—where S-L meets AR—is called Self-Action Research, and is defined as: action research applied by, to, and for the self to gain self-awareness, aid self-improvement, solve personal problems, and nurture growth and freedom.

SELF-ACTION RESEARCH (SAR)

Action research applied by, to, and for the self to gain self-awareness,

aid self-improvement, solve personal problems, and nurture one's growth and freedom.

SAL assists us in effectively and meaningfully engaging SAR. Moreover, the SAL Model, which will be introduced in BOOK the FIFTH, strategically mirrors the cyclical processes of AR.

Existentialism

Existentialism, also referred to as Existential Philosophy, can be defined in various ways—depending on what elements of the philosophy are being emphasized. For the purposes of this Life Leadership textbook, we have defined it as a: philosophical method that values and consults human experience—in conjunction with scientific reasoning and rational thought—in the process of constructing meaning about reality. 

EXISTENTIALISM

A philosophical method that values and consults human experience—in conjunction with scientific reasoning and rational thought—in the process of constructing meaning about reality. 

We live in a world where science and so-called objective reality are typically valued above all other forms of knowledge. This is particularly the case in academe. To a large extent, this is a good thing. We can, after all, thank the Italian Renaissance (1300-1600), the Age of Enlightenment (1685-1815), the Industrial Revolution (1760-1840) and subsequent Era of Industry (1840-1995), followed by the Information Age (1994-present) for extricating the Western World from the Dark Ages and propelling us into an age of modern medicine, science, safety, sanitation, housing, technology, transportation, agriculture, commerce, communications, civil discourse, democracy, etc. 

Suffice it to say, we owe a lot to scientific discovery and other quantum advancements in abstract and rational thought. However, this fact does not—nor will it ever—negate the vital roles that personal experience, visceral intuition, spirituality, and Serendipity play in our interpretation and understanding of reality. Such metaphysical phenomena demonstrate that "life is bigger than logic." (6)

In his book, Existentialism: For and Against, Paul Roubiczek describes existentialism as being a rejection of all purely abstract thinking, of a purely logical or scientific philosophy; in short, a rejection of the absoluteness of reason." (7)

This is not to say that existential philosophers reject science or reason out-of-hand; Roubiczek certainly does not. He merely rejects the idea that science and human reasoning alone captures a holistic panorama of truth and reality. In other words, science and rationality remain vital parts of the broad panorama of reality; they just don't make up the whole picture.

Any honest and educated person with significant life experience knows full well there is more to truth and reality than what we can sentiently detect and ascertain. After all, many realities indiscernible to our five senses can, in fact, be scientifically measured, managed, and manipulated; for example: cellular waves, gamma rays, microwaves, radio waves, x-rays, etc.

To an existentialist, these realities barely scratch the surface of the cornucopia of experiential phenomena and other metaphysical realities that exist beyond the immediate purview of our sentient selves. Accessing this rich storehouse of truth and reality is fully attainable and discernable only through real life experiences. 

In the words of Roubiczek:  

"We rarely pay enough attention to the deeper meaning of our personal experience and of our feelings; we disregard inner knowledge, but we are beginning to feel, I believe, that this emphasis on abstract thought is impoverishing or even endangering the human world. The whole world seems to lose significance, and man is estranged from himself. Our domination over nature is becoming more and more complete; man can make use of the most minute particles and, perhaps soon, of outer space; he is encroaching on the very structure of the universe and, by means of new medical techniques and new drugs, on human character. Yet while the enigmas of nature are solved one by one, each man becomes to himself a greater enigma, and there is more and more chaos in our own inner lives and in human affairs." (8)

As Roubiczek makes clear, there are many metaphysical elements of life and reality that human beings know to be real, authentic, and true—not because we can sentiently detect them, scientifically access them, or empirically prove them; but simply because we experience them in the living laboratory of real life. From our varied uses of unseen medical and technological powers to profound and powerful emotional and spiritual experiences of the mind, heart, and viscera, our lives are greatly enriched on a daily (if not hourly) basis due to elements and realities that exist beyond the detection of our relatively paltry five senses alone. 

One of the most compelling examples of this metaphysical truism is found in the reality and occurrence of human love. Anyone who has ever authentically loved another person, be it in a familial, platonic, or romantic sense, knows that LOVE is real—that it exists—because of one's authentic experience of the phenomena. Our inability to scientifically or sentiently capture its essence does not diminish its reality and authenticity. The experience of love is sufficient to prove its existence.

Even if it were possible to somehow scientifically capture and gauge the metaphysical essence of love, one would not need a calculator, computer, or other technological device to empirically validate its existence. One knows that love is real because of one's pure experience of the phenomena.  

The idea that personal experience serves as a key variable in our understanding of truth and reality is a basic premise of existentialism. According to Roubiczek, existential philosophy "came to be developed ... [because] science, being impersonal, cannot [always] help us when we want to deal with personal experience," (9) and since our human "reason has limitations," (10) "we have to admit experience as evidence." (11) 

As with anything, some existentialists take this premise to extremes; but not Roubiczek. His goal was to access a proper balance between reason and experience in order to "find a basis for an equilibrium, a way out of [the] violent interplay of action and reaction which has always driven [Western] thought into one-sidedness." (12)

Roubiczek points out that the Age of Reason was an appropriate reaction against the scientific infancy of the Medieval Period, but that our own age has demonstrated "that a purely logical, rational, scientific way of thinking illuminates only a strictly limited sector of reality," (13) and therefore limits our holistic conceptions of reality when exclusively applied. In other words, during the modern and postmodern eras, the pendulum has swung too far the other way to disproportionately favor sterile rationalities over viscerally-attuned insights or experiential-based wisdom.  

One of the consequences of this imbalance has been our inability as a collective culture to "discover basic truth[s] ... [and] find firm [moral] ground to stand upon." (14) As a result, "morality appears as the mere product of social, national, [and] historical conditions, changing like fashions." (15) To which Roubiczek then poses a particularly piercing question: "Are we still able to solve moral problems ... outside the scope of science?" (16)

At Freedom Focused, we answer this question with a resounding YES! But only if we allow experience and metaphysical laws of nature a place at the table of discussion. Roubiczek likewise answers this question in the affirmative, but adds that "we cannot begin to grasp their true meaning as long as we rely on abstract thought alone." (17). 

He then points out that: 

"There is meaning in many of our experiences, of nature and of human nature, in works of art, in books of literature or wisdom or religion; thus the urge to find meaning is so strong that it is part of our make-up, an undeniable experience. ... [Thus] we have to conclude that reason is not absolute, but limited, that belief in an absolute reason is unreasonable—and that we should find a way of thinking which could help us to deal with [life's] hauntingly real experiences ... experiences [which] demand the acceptance of something which goes beyond reason—the acceptance of the limits set by our human nature, of the absolute values which can be neither derived in a rational nor proved in a scientific way, of a transcendental reality which, by definition, must transcend reason immeasurably. In short, reason must not dominate, but serve. (18) ... Philosophy, therefore, should start from one's own experience, one's own inner knowledge, and it is inner knowledge which should be qualified, enlarged, and in this way enriched. One's own experience must be admitted as evidence. Reason ... can serve this approach, but it must never [exclusively] dictate." (19)

The purported value of this Life Leadership textbook is rooted, in large part, in Roubiczek's compelling existentialist argument. The Self-Action Leadership Philosophy, Theory, and Model are products of self-leadership oriented, existentialist-imbued, action research conducted, and then autoethnographically analyzed over an extended (40 year) period of time. While I gathered and analyzed empirical data throughout the process, my academic constructions are only partially scientific. The rest is rooted in the "hauntingly real experiences" (20) of my own life and career—and the lives and careers of others.

Some may criticize this approach as being only quasi-academic and ultimately unscientific. In response, I echo Roubiczek's existentialist argument: when confronting the profound complexity of real lives, careers, relationships, and experiences, a balanced approach—between rationalism and visceralism—is the best route to take because of the obvious limitations of science and empiricism alone. Accordingly, it made sense to approach this extensive and expansive study autoethnographically, for such is the scholarly tool that specifically deals with the research and analysis of PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

Speaking of which, it's now time to introduce this unique brand of personal ethnography.

Autoethnography

Autoethnography is a new-age, postmodern, qualitative research method utilized in the social sciences. It is an academic vehicle whereby scholars can conduct research on oneself, by oneself, and for the benefit and enlightenment of oneself and others.  

AUTOETHNOGRAPHY

Scholarly research conducted on oneself and by oneself

for the benefit and enlightenment of oneself and others.

In addition to this official Freedom Focused definition, the following statements about autoethnography from leading scholars in the field shed further light on exactly what autoethnography is and the purposes it aims to achieve.  

• "[Autoethnography is] an intriging and promising qualitative method that offers a way of giving voice to personal experience for the purpose of extending sociological understanding." (21)

• "[Autoethnography is] an emerging qualitative research method that allows the author to write in a highly personalized style, drawing on his or her experience to extend understanding about a societal phenomenon." (22)

        —Sarah Wall, University of Alberta

• "Autoethnographic approaches are flexible, reflexive, and reflective of life as lived; they do not follow a rigid list of rule-based procedures. Often, they are multivoiced and include interaction amongst researchers and participants in the research context, as well as stories participants bring to the project." (23)

• "Autoethnography offers the potential to expand scholarship about human experience. At the same time, it can assist us in our pursuit of happiness and living fully; provide companionship and coping strategies for dealing with personal disappointments, traumas, and losses; and help us understand, reframe, and live through collective natural and human-made disasters that increasingly seem to be part of our lives. ... Effective autoethnographies are not victim tales; on the contrary, writing autoethnography well produces survivor tales for the writer and for those who read them. Accomplished autoethnographers ... strive to open up a moral and ethical conversation with readers about the possibility of living life well." (24)

        —Carolyn Ellis, University of South Florida

Autoethnography is a relatively new topic of academic inquiry and vehicle for scholarly research. A qualitative research method, autoethnography is derived from ethnography (the study of individuals and groups within cultures). Ethnography, in turn, it hewn out of the broader field of anthropology (the study of cultures). 

Autoethnography is not without its critics. On the surface, it can come across as an academic excuse for narcissism, and if misused, can certainly become a instrument for scholarly self-absorption. According to Robert J. Nash, some "have grave doubts about the rigor of [autoethnographic scholarship]." (25) "Some have called it soft. Others think it is touchy-feely. Still others describe it as easy. A few think it is anti-intellectual. Some question its reliability and validity." (26)

Nash, however, remains a proponent of autoethnography and asserts that these "stereotypes are unfortunate." (27) The balance of his book (28) offers a cogent apology for the academic validity, scholarly legitimacy, and practical utility of autoethnography—or, as he calls it: "Scholarly Personal Narrative," or just "SPN" for short (29). At the forefront of Nash's advocacy lies his claim that autoethnography resonates with readers and is therefore more likely to be remembered, internalized, and utilized than traditional social science research. Nash's claim comes from his own experience reading autoethnographic material produced by his students over the decades.

"I have been a college professor for over three-and-a-half decades in a professional school. ... I've read tens of thousands of students' papers since I first started teaching in higher education. ... Truth be told, and not wanting to offend anyone, I remember almost nothing of what I've read, unless the work was done in the last few years; or, more honestly, in the last few months. ... Yet here's the vital exception: I do tend to remember the scholarly writing of my students that combines both narrative and personal elements. Did I just say that I remember it? That is too weak. I meant that I thrive on it. I can't imagine not reading personal narrative writing at this particular time in my career. ... [And] ironically, these creative papers were [also] the ones that pushed [the students] the hardest. ... Good teaching, good helping, and good leadership are, in one sense, all about storytelling and story-evoking. It is in the mutual exchange of stories that professionals and scholars are able to meet clients and students where they actually live their lives. It is in the mutual sharing of our personal stories, particularly in the willingness of professionals to listen to the stories of others, that we make the deepest connections with those we are serving." (30)

At Freedom Focused, we agree with Nash. When properly exercised, autoethnographic research and writing can assist us in making important and valuable academic contributions and discoveries that can translate into practical insights and benefits to self and others. Thus it was that Socrates—that great Greek of antiquity—wisely encouraged and invited us to Know Ourselves. Autoethnography provides an academic vehicle for accomplishing self-knowledge, which E.F. Schumacher argues has been wanting in the West for quite some time.

"Instruction on cultivating self-knowledge ... has been almost entirely lacking in the West for the last hundred years. This is why we cannot trust one another, why most people live in a state of continuous anxiety, why, despite all our technologies, communication becomes ever more difficult, and why we need ever more organized welfare to plaster over the gaping holes torn by the progressive disappearance of spontaneous social cohesion." (31) 

Autoethnography as a scholarly field is divided into two separate camps, namely: EVOCATIVE autoethnography and ANALYTIC autoethnography. The former camp is more aesthetic and artistic, while the latter is more traditional and scholarly. Thus, autoethnographic research can be presented through scholarly prose, artistic writing (including poetry), a combination of the two, or something else entirely (e.g. painting, music, performative art, etc.). 

EVOCATIVE autoethnography was pioneered by Carolyn Ellis and Albert Bochner, two scholars and colleagues from the University of South Florida. The purpose of evocative autoethnography is not so much to create new knowledge, but to evoke emotional responses in the reader by virtue of the "impact personal stories have" (32) in hopes of "open[ing] up a moral and ethical conversation with readers about the possibility of living life well." (33) Evocative autoethnography is rooted in postmodern philosophical premises and is therefore non-analytical in nature. It is also uninterested in didacticism. 

ANALYTIC autoethnography, on the other hand, is the brainchild of Leon Anderson, an emeritus professor of sociology at Utah State University. His analytic approach evolved as a response to the evocative movement. It calls for autoethnographic studies to be conducted in more traditional, academic ways—in the spirit of more traditional ethnographic, anthropological, and sociological methods. 

According to Anderson, "the purpose of analytic [auto]ethnography is not simply to document personal experience, to provide an 'insider's perspective,' or to evoke emotional resonance with the reader, ... [but] to use empirical data to gain insight into some broader set of social phenomena than those provided by the data themselves." (34) As Anderson puts it, analytical autoethnographers maintain a "commitment to an analytic agenda" (35) throughout the process of exploratory research. 

Anderson identifies "five key features of analytic autoethnography," (36) as follows:

1.  Complete member researcher (CMR) status

2.  Analytic reflexivity

3.  Narrative visibility of the researcher's self

4.  Dialogue with informants beyond the self

5.  Commitment to a theoretical analysis (37)

Conscientious observers of the extensive autoethnographic research study contained in this comprehensive Life Leadership textbook will readily notice the creative, reflexive, and holistic application of these five features of analytic autoethnography in addition to the emotional evocation of the autobiographical stories themselves.  

Self-Action Leadership

Self-Action Leadership was forged at the nexus where self-leadership (S-L), action research (AR), autoethnography, and a balanced brand of existentialism meet and synergistically join forces. An illustration of this theoretical merger can be found below.  

Having introduced, defined, and explicated the four academic progenitors of Self-Action Leadership, the time has now arrived to introduce SAL itself. 

If you would like to learn more, then read on!

In Your Journal

• Define, explain, and provide an example of the following terms in your own words:
• Followership
• Leadership
• Self-leadership
• Action Research
• Self-Action Research
• Existentialism
• Autoethnography
• Self-Action Leadership (SAL)

• Why do you think Dr. JJ chose to hew SAL out of existing academic fields and constructs?

• Do you think there is value in studying the SELF in a systematic and academic manner? If so, why? Or why not?

—Dr. JJ

Wednesday, April 10, 2024

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, USA

Author's Note: This is the 383rd Blog Post Published by Freedom Focused LLC since November 2013 and the 194th consecutive weekly blog published since August 31, 2020.   

Click HERE for a compete listing of the other 382 FF Blog Articles 

Click HERE for a complete listing of Freedom Focused SAL QUOTES  

Click HERE for a complete listing of Freedom Focused SAL POEMS   

Click HERE to access the FULL TEXT of Dr. JJ's Psalms of Life: A Poetry Collection

Click HERE for a complete listing of Self-Action Leadership Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Fitness, Heath, & Wellness Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Biographical & Historical Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Current Events, Cultural, Philosophical, & Miscellaneous Articles

Click HERE for a complete listing of Dr. JJ's Autobiographical Articles

.........................

Tune in NEXT Wednesday for another article on a Self-Action Leadership related topic.  

And if you liked this blog post, please share it with your family, friends, colleagues, and students—and encourage them to sign up to receive future articles for FREE every Wednesday.

To sign up, please email freedomfocused@gmail.com and say SUBSCRIBE, or just YES, and we will ensure you receive a link to each new blog article every Wednesday.  

Click HERE to buy the SAL Textbooks    

Chapter 2 Notes:

1.  Maxwell, J. (2007). Leadership is Influence: Nothing More, Nothing Less: How to Overcome the Common Myths of Leadership. Online article in CTPastors. URL: https://www.christianitytoday.com/pastors/2007/july-online-only/090905.html

2.  For more information on the concept of FOLLOWERSHIP, see Wren, J. T. (Ed.). (1995). The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Through the Ages. New York, NY: Free Press. Chapters 29-31.

•   Gardner, J. W. (1995). Leaders and Followers (pp. 185-188).

•   Kelley, R. E. (1995). In Praise of Followers. (pp. 193-204).

•   Rost, J. C. (1995). Leaders and Followers are the People in this Relationship.

  (pp. 189-192).
  

3.  Neck, C. P., & Manz, C. C. (2010). Mastering Self-Leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Page 1.

4.  Kuhne, G. W., and B. A. Quigley, Understanding and Using Action Research in Practice Settings, in: A. B. Quigley, and G. W. Kuhne (eds.). (1997). Creating Practical Knowledge Through Action Research: Posing Problems, Solving Problems, and Improving Daily Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 23–40. Page 25.

5.  Beaulieu, R. B. (2013). “Action Research: Trends and Variations.” Canadian Journal of Action Research, 14(3), pp. 29–39. Page 29.

6.  Schumacher, E. F. (1977). A Guide for the Perplexed. New York, NY: Perennial. Page 123.

7.  Roubiczek, P. (1964). Existentialism: For and Against. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Page 10. 

8.  Ibid. Pages 11-12.

9.  Ibid. Page 4.

10.  Ibid.

11.  Ibid. Page 5.

12.  Ibid. Page 16.

13. Ibid. Page 1

14.  Ibid. Page 15

15.  Ibid.

16.  Ibid. Page 12.

17.  Ibid.  

18.  Ibid. Pages 6-7.

19.  Ibid.  Pages 10-11.  

20.  Ibid. Page 6.

21.  Wall, S. (2008). "Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography." International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Volume 7. Issue 1. Pages 38-53. Page 38.

22.  Wall, S. (2005). "An Autoethnography on Learning about Autoethnography." International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Volume 5. Issue 2. Pages 1-12. Page 1. 

23.  Ellis, C. (2009). Revision: Autoethnographic Reflections on Life and Work. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. Page 16. 

24.  Ibid. Pages 16-17. 

25.  Nash, R. J. (2004). Liberating Scholarly Writing: The Power of Personal Narrative. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Page 4.

26.  Ibid. 

27.  Ibid.  

28.  Nash, R. J. (2004). Liberating Scholarly Writing: The Power of Personal Narrative. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

29.  Ibid. Page 4.

30.  Ibid. Pages 1-2. 

31.  Schumacher, E. F. (1977). A Guide for the Perplexed. New York, NY: Perennial. Pages 133-134. 

32.  Ellis, C. S., & Bochner, A. P. (2006). "Analyzing analytic autoethnography: An Autopsy." Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. Volume 35. Issue 4. Pages 429-449. doi:10.1177/0891241606286979. Page 430.

33.  Ellis, C. (2009). Revision: Autoethnographic Reflections on Life and Work. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. Page 17.

34.  Anderson, L. (2006). “Analytic Autoethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Volume 35. Issue 4 (p. 373–395). Pages 386-387.

35.  Ibid. Page 386. 

36.  Ibid. Page 378.

37.  Ibid.