Sorry for the delay! I spent a whole day in Brooklyn, was a little too overexcited in orchestra, and realized it was 4 am when I was done with the day's research...
How have the workshops and discussions on leadership this week changed your understanding of what leadership means?
Leadership is not about having a specific "leadership quality" but about using one's quality in such a way that can lead others (and oneself). One being a "Driver" doesn't make one a better leader than one being an "Expressive" —it is about how one uses those styles.
How might you imagine applying one model of leadership during your Laidlaw summer on campus—either within the Laidlaw cohort or beyond this community? While we often associate leadership and leaders with seniority, how might leadership be modeled among individuals who are among the youngest people on campus (i.e. you!)?
I'm an analyst with somewhat strong driver influence but incredibly low amiable and expressive, which I think are reasonably close to my self-assessment. As stated, I think that leadership is about using one's quality in the most suitable way. As a result, one could definitely be a leader even when one is a junior (rather in age, in hierarchy, experience, expertise, etc.)-- one just have to know what is the right moment and what is the right action. For the purpose of my research, my goal is to show how leadership succeeds and fail precisely at these given constraints and moments.