Interview with Edina Dóci
Associate professor at the School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Idealizing leadership prevents sustainable development
Could you tell us about yourself and what drives you?
My academic background lies in sociology and psychology and my current research focuses on inequalities in organizations. Specifically, I explore the psychological dimension of inequalities and how they are reproduced over time. I obtained my PhD in leadership psychology. Apart from that, I’ve been involved in the sustainability work at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam for the past five years, working on integrating sustainability and climate education in study programs across the university. As part of these efforts, I founded the Sustainability Leadership Hub, which is a center for sustainability education and advocacy. Over the past years I’ve organized many workshops and trainings for teachers on sustainability in education and educational leadership in the climate crisis.
I’m deeply concerned about the climate crisis, this is what drives me. Even though this is not my original field of study, I believe it’s impossible to be alive at this time and age of climate crisis and not take action. That’s also what interests me in my research; what activates people? What allows people to engage and persevere in the struggle? Connected to that, I study psychological resources such as hope, optimism, self-efficacy and resilience and have been mostly focusing on structural inequalities in people’s access to these resources. Recently, I became interested in the role of these resources in the climate crisis era; how can people maintain their psychological resources, while being active in combating the climate crisis?
My studies have made me question the prevailing paradigm in psychology. Traditionally, mental health and psychological resources have been examined on the individual level. This perspective presupposes that attributes such as confidence, optimism, resilience and hope are solely the individual’s merit, implying that it is up to the individual to think in the right manner, interpret situations positively and act constructively. I find this very individualistic and completely flawed in terms of the complexities of our mental states.
Instead, I believe it’s more important to examine these phenomena on a social, relational and communal level. Let’s consider people’s psychological experiences in the context of the climate crisis. On one hand, we cannot cope with climate distress individually – this is not an individual psychological problem that can be reframed or coped with individually, but a collective predicament that requires collective solutions. Similarly, one cannot effectively engage with the climate struggle on their own. We need one another to effectively tackle these complex, wicked problems. And we also need the psychological resources that emerge from positive relationships of mutual support and communal engagement to stay mentally healthy while being active in this field.
Leadership is a controversial topic. Global political polarization shows how different people feel about it. With a PhD in leadership psychology and actively working in that field, how do you define leadership?
At the end of a guest lecture about climate leadership where we challenged all common assumptions on leadership, a student asked me how I would define leadership. There was a quote on one of the slides: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” I pointed at it and said; if anything, that is my definition. I don’t believe in the individualistic idea of leadership. I’m very sensitive to inequalities in power and generally very critical of authorities and our inclination to permit some individuals to wield power over others. I think the concept of leadership is often used to legitimize social hierarchies. Moreover, in this era of climate crisis, the conventional, individualistic idea of leadership is simply not working. The notion that individual leaders have the capacity to solve these problems is very ineffective and hinders our progress.
However, this does not imply that individuals do lack agency and cannot step up as leaders! But we have this essentialist idea of leaders, where only some individuals possess an innate essence and required capacities to be leaders. I disagree. We all have the capacity to take responsibility and leadership in the crisis. Our political leaders are failing and we cannot wait for them to show us the way.
When teaching leadership, my aim is to convey to my students that leadership in itself is a hollow concept. We need to give it substance. Leading for what and towards what? I value individuals who take leadership when they find something worthwhile. They take responsibility and assert their agency. That, to me, is true leadership. But since leadership is socially constructed, I don’t think there is an objective definition of it. It emerges through our relationships with others.
Through my work with Scientist Rebellion, a climate movement of academics, I got to experience shared leadership in action. People take turns leading based on whether a particular theme resonates with their expertise, or having the time and resources at a given moment. Thereby, leadership is always in flux, making it a very appealing and healthy experience. But from that experience, I find it very hard to accept why anyone would feel entitled to label themselves a leader? Leadership is a process, not a title.
If you could change one thing in the education of leadership, what would that be?
As teachers, we often face the general expectation that we’re supposed to offer objective and neutral education, sticking to our topic and sharing objective, factual knowledge with our students. I believe that’s just not enough. The knowledge that we transmit from generation to generation in the university encompasses the very processes and practices that created this society, economy and the problems and multiple crises we face today. This holds particularly true in economics and related disciplines such as management science, which is my field. Simultaneously, this knowledge disguises itself as objective, devoid of any assumptions and ideologies. That means we’re not willing to confront the ideologies that underpin the knowledge that we are reproducing and teaching. This does not benefit our students, as we fail to equip them with skills for deep critical reflection about society and the economy.
To initiate change, it is crucial to first understand the dominant mental models in society, and the dominant societal structures and processes resulting from those models and causing the climate and ecological crisis. We need to do this to be able to change our trajectory as a society, to discover a way out. I believe that this is one of our tasks, as educators.
If we want to take our societal role as educators seriously, merely transferring knowledge is not enough – we need to teach students how to engage with and critically reflect on the knowledge we are transferring. This means scrutinizing our dominant paradigms, questioning social practices that have been taken for granted. Why is society the way it is and how could it be different? It is important to recognise that objective and impartial knowledge doesn’t truly exist, at least in social sciences and humanities. Sustainability itself is likewise a value, there’s nothing objective about it – it’s a very strong view of the world we want to create. To me, this is leadership in education: offering a vision and being honest and clear about the values that underpin this vision. It is not about enforcing it, but inviting students to reflect on their own values and vision, and how they can contribute to a better society.
This reflection is dearly needed if we are to be effective in our collective efforts towards a livable future. It is one way in which we can take leadership as teachers. And of course by sharing how our respective disciplines can be aligned with the sustainability framework and how the specific skills and knowledge in those areas can contribute to finding solutions. Ultimately, it comes down to taking responsibility for the future of our students and the generations to come.
What is one last tip you want to give our readers?
Self care in climate work is important and, admittedly, it can be hard! In this era, if you feel like a responsible person, you will often feel like you are falling short – there is always more to do. Therefore, it is super important to establish healthy boundaries. Your health and wellbeing are essential resources for being effective in any pursuit. In my experience, nature can play a significant role. It can provide a moment of space for reflection but also a visual reminder of hope and connectivity. Being outside literally grounds me and recharges my energy. I’d like to share this quote from a book about the Holocaust, describing someone’s connection with a tree in a concentration camp, that captures something fundamental about trees that I couldn’t articulate in my own words:
“There is little to tell and it may sound as if I had invented it; but to me it seems like a poem.
This young woman knew that she would die in the next few days. But when I talked to her she was cheerful in spite of this knowledge. “I am grateful that fate has hit me so hard,” she told me. “In my former life I was spoiled and did not take spiritual accomplishments seriously.” Pointing through the window of the hut, she said,”This tree here is the only friend I have in my loneliness.” Through that window she could see just one branch of a chestnut tree and on the branch were two blossoms. “I often talk to this tree,” she said to me. I was startled and didn’t quite know how to take her words. Was she delirious? Did she have occasional hallucinations? Anxiously I asked her if the tree replied. “Yes.” What did it say to her? She answered,” It said to me,’ I am here — I am here — I am life, eternal life.'”
– Viktor E. Frankl, from “Man’s Search for Meaning”
