Program Background

The purpose of Leaders for Life (LFL) is to engage with and develop the leadership abilities of emerging, diverse underclassman leaders at the University of Michigan. Specifically, the program seeks to foster the next generation of leadership at Michigan by connecting a group of 100 exceptional sophomore and junior leaders to one another and to accomplished members of the University community.

The program was initiated in 2009 with the express purpose of bringing relevant leadership insights, tools and techniques for student leaders. The format features seasoned leaders to share their experiences and advice on specific topics other student leaders valued, based on research. Past speakers include University President Mark S. Schlissel, former football Coach Lloyd Carr, Athletic Director David Brandon (2010 - 2014), Regent Denise Ilitch and many others.

Original Concept: Initially, the approach was created on a very simple premise — asking proven Michigan leaders from a variety of fields — one question:

Knowing what you know now, what advice would you give student leaders?

The results were thoughtful, sometimes counterintuitive, and often very insightful.  They encouraged rich discussions and plenty of food for thought. The advice covered a wide range of situations and organizations, and sometimes opinions seemed in conflict.

Research Background

The Leaders for Life team sought an even more exhaustive path — quantitative research.  With the help and guidance of a former Partner with McKinsey & Co, in collaboration partnership with Student Life, ‘Effective Leadership’ was deeply researched by studying fellow U of M student leaders and recent graduates.   

In 2012, over 1,200 student leaders, from a representative cross section of student organizations, took part in an in-depth survey. The study was considered a landmark achievement as nothing had been done on that scale nationally. The results were published in 2014 (and available here [link]). Then in 2016, a second survey was conducted among 8,000 recent UM graduates to determine if what makes an effective student leader is relevant once someone graduated. The results mirrored the original study!

The Drivers

Based on empirically studying U of M students (2012) and alumni (2016), the leadership research is quite clear on what really matters, as demonstrated to the right through pathway modeling.

• Empathy is the first and foundational component to understanding what makes an organization effective in delivering its mission. An equally strong counterpart is consensus building, based on the correlation data. These both converge with strong problem solving. For student organizations, empathy typically starts one-to-one or in a smaller group setting. Empathy requires listening, reflecting and acknowledging. Also important is to be able to feel or experience another’s situation, context and/or philosophy. Another important aspect is be non-judgmental.

  ○. Sava Farah (restauranteur) speaks about empathy as foundational her company’s ethos (0:58)

  ○ Sava Farah speaks about creating space for empathetic environments (0:55)

  ○. Click here for Sava Farah’s full talk on empathy (38:35)

• Building Consensus is a critical element of aligning an organization. Establishing trust is an important outcome. To achieve trust, individuals need an environment where all can clearly express their opinions and rationale. Differences must be recognized and respected. Ideally common ground should the goal. Conflict resolution may be required, including how to manage difficult people. Getting alignment and collaboration are important so you can achieve outcomes even if all are not in full agreement.

• Problem Solving is the most important component in understanding what makes an organization effective in delivering its mission. The foundational elements of Empathy and Building Consensus are highly correlated and are precursors, based on the data. Problem-solving’s critical qualities include understanding the complexities of the problem before drawing conclusions and implications; creating and experimenting with new concepts and ideas; and providing relevant feedback and making real-time refinements. These elements are highly associated with effective leaders.

  
  ○. Robby Hogle (finance guru) addresses the topic of problem definition (0:50)

  ○ Robby Hogle addresses the topic of buy-in (1:18)

  ○ A deep dive into Robby Hogle’s 4 step system for problem solving: {Seek, Listen, Achieve, Brand} (20:37)

Research Findings

What is “effective leadership” for student leaders?  How is it defined?  What are the characteristics?  What really matters?

The original intent was to empirically understand ‘effective leadership’ and the basis to deliver significant, positive, and sustaining impact regardless of the student organization. This exploration was guided by a desire to define and advance the ‘what counts’ factors within student leadership and organization success, building Michigan’s knowledge base to validate what really makes a difference in developing effective leaders. Insights should not only improve interactions with student leaders, but also lay the groundwork for cultivating a lifetime of leadership.

The survey findings clearly define a leadership model for understanding an effective leader, and interpreting both what and how really makes a difference.  Advancing this is truly a relevant topic: 1 in 5 UM students originally surveyed defined their leadership role as their most important experience on campus.  The three primary drivers and their supporting characteristics:

Key Dimensions: Problem Solving

1. Problem Definition

   • Define the variables though facts, analysis and insights

   •. Assess the complexities of a situation before drawing conclusions

2. Creative Solutions

   •. Experiment with new concepts and ideas

   •. Visualize or describe desired outcomes

3. Buy-in

   •. Manage dissenting opinions and difficult people

   •. Get others to work on outcomes even if they did not agree to the decision

4. Ownership & Accountability 

   •. Hold others accountable for assigned responsibility

   •. Instill a sense of ownership of outcomes

Key Dimensions: Building Consensus

1. Gain full engagement

   •. Ensure all voices and points of view are shared

   •. Respect differences and address misunderstanding and misinformation

2. Frame possible options

   •. Refine problem, narrow to solve part of the problem

   •. Explore creative or alternative solutions/outcomes

3. Collectively pursue an outcome

   •. Find common ground, even if all are not in full agreement

   •. Bring resolution to openly expressed differences

4. Bring alignment with other initiatives

   •. Communicate priorities and direction

   •. Continue to motivate, showing common benefits

Key Dimensions: Empathy

1. Expressing

   •. Must be a safe environment for all to speak freely and candidly

   • All must share their thoughts and perspectives

2. Listening

   • Be open minded, not judgmental, to various viewpoints

   •. Carefully differentiate between the facts and conclusions versus opinions & speculation

3. Reflecting

   •. Try to discern the what and why of each voice

   •. Seek commonalities and differences across the themes, possible connections

4. Acknowledging

   •. Be grateful and respectful of the divergent views

   •. Play back the key points resonating to you and why

Leadership Topics of Interest - Speaker Highlights

Personal Mission: An Approach from Jeff Domagala

Key Questions

• What are the things that matter to you, that you daydream about, get energy from, wish you had more time for?

• If you had no limits — money, family obligations, work — what would you spend the rest of your life working toward?

• What has your life uniquely prepared you to do? What does your life until now tell you about the direction you’re heading?

• What is a purpose you’d be excited to commit to that extends across all parts of your life?

• What would you be proud to display on your tombstone?

Click here to view the complete Leading With Purpose session.