Before my Leadership in Action experience, I had a simple understanding of leadership. I associated leadership with having a clear vision, making the right decisions, and motivating people to achieve a goal. I still believe in those qualities and their importance, but my experience in Madagascar forced me to develop a more complicated understanding. I learned that leadership is not always about being the person in charge or having the authority to implement an idea. Sometimes leadership means adapting when a plan falls apart, listening to people whose experiences differ from your own, recognizing the limits of your influence, and continuing to search for ways to create change even when others are unwilling to listen.
My Leadership in Action project took place at the Madagascar Research and Conservation Institute on Nosy Komba, Madagascar. I worked primarily with the Forest department, participating in biodiversity surveys, wildlife monitoring, habitat restoration, and work in a native plant nursery. Our work included identifying and monitoring reptiles, lemurs, and birds, as well as collecting ecological data during both day and night surveys. We also maintained plants that would eventually be used in reforestation projects.
However, the experience became much more than a conservation project. I encountered organizational challenges, illness, unfamiliar cultural environments, and the frustration of attempting to improve a system without having the authority to change it. These experiences shaped my understanding of my own strengths and weaknesses. Through my strengths of Woo, Communication, Adaptability, Activator, and Includer, I discovered that my natural leadership style is highly people and action oriented. At the same time, I learned that effective leadership requires more than enthusiasm and good ideas. It requires patience, cultural awareness, humility, and the ability to understand the systems and people that determine whether change is actually possible.
Strengths-Based Leadership emphasizes that effective leadership does not require every leader to possess the same characteristics. Instead, leaders can become more effective by understanding and developing their natural talents while also recognizing the strengths that other people bring to the team. Rath and Conchie argue that leadership involves investing in individual strengths, building effective teams, and understanding what people need from those who lead them (Rath and Conchie).
My strongest theme is Woo, or Winning Others Over. I enjoy meeting new people, breaking the ice, and building connections. This strength became particularly important in Madagascar, where I entered an entirely unfamiliar environment and had to establish relationships with people from different countries, backgrounds, and cultures. Initially, I was a stranger entering an established community. My ability to approach people, start conversations, and build relationships helped me become more comfortable and allowed me to learn from both other volunteers and Malagasy staff.
My second strength, Communication, also shaped my experience. I naturally enjoy discussing ideas and putting thoughts into words. During the project, this strength became particularly visible when I began discussing the state of the research data with a member of the research staff named Oriel. I had arrived expecting to contribute primarily to ecological research, but I quickly discovered that years of research had not been consistently organized into usable datasets. This made long-term monitoring and the identification of ecological trends much more difficult.
Oriel shared my concerns, and together we began discussing ways that the data collection and organization process could be standardized. My Communication strength helped me articulate why I believed this problem mattered and explore possible solutions with someone who had greater knowledge of the organization. At the same time, this experience taught me that communication alone is not enough. A good idea still needs support, trust, and organizational commitment before it can become meaningful change.
My third strength, Adaptability, may have been the most important during my LiA experience. Very little about the project went exactly as I expected. I became seriously ill, limiting my ability to participate at a time when I wanted to make the most of the experience. There was also a fire at camp, and the departure of Oriel meant that the person who had supported the data standardization initiative was no longer present.
These events forced me to confront the difference between having a plan and being able to follow it. Before traveling to Madagascar, I imagined my experience would follow a relatively straightforward path: I would contribute to research, gain practical experience, and return home with a clearer understanding of conservation. Instead, I had to repeatedly adjust my expectations. Adaptability allowed me to continue learning even when the circumstances were frustrating or unpredictable. I learned that leadership in uncertain environments requires flexibility because problems rarely appear according to schedule.
My Activator strength connects closely to this experience as well. I am naturally drawn toward turning ideas into action. When I recognized the problems with the research data, my instinct was not simply to complain about the situation but to begin thinking about how it could actually be improved. This was one of the most frustrating parts of my experience because the idea did not disappear; rather, the leadership at camp was completely unwilling to listen or provide the support necessary to move it forward. As a volunteer, I could identify problems and suggest solutions, but I did not have the formal authority to implement changes myself.
This became one of my most important leadership lessons. Leadership and authority are not necessarily the same thing. Research on adaptive leadership similarly emphasizes that leadership can be exercised independently of formal authority and that individuals without senior positions can still contribute to addressing difficult challenges. My experience showed me both the potential and the limitations of leadership without authority. I could influence conversations, identify opportunities, and advocate for change, but I could not force the organization to adopt my recommendations.
Finally, my Includer strength shaped how I viewed the people around me. One of the most important lessons I learned in Madagascar was that conservation is not simply about wildlife. It is also about people. The Malagasy staff were responsible for much of the day-to-day work that kept the project operating, including maintaining the nursery, restoring forest, supporting research teams, and maintaining the facilities. Their knowledge and commitment to their island was clear.
My experience made me more conscious of the importance of listening to people who are directly connected to the communities and environments where change is taking place. As someone entering Madagascar for the first time, I could not assume that I understood the community, its challenges, or its priorities simply because I had studied conservation. Inclusion means more than inviting everyone into a conversation. It requires recognizing whose voices have traditionally been ignored and making a genuine effort to understand perspectives different from one's own.
One of the most significant moments in my leadership development occurred when I realized that the research data standardization project I had been working on with Oriel might not continue after he left. At first, I viewed the situation primarily as an organizational problem. I could see that the lack of standardized and organized datasets limited the value of long term ecological monitoring. My immediate reaction, consistent with my Activator strength, was to try to fix it. Working with Oriel gave me confidence that the problem could be addressed. However, when he left and camp leadership showed little interest in continuing the work, I became increasingly frustrated.
The situation forced me to think about what I actually believed leadership meant. My first instinct was that if I could identify a problem and develop a reasonable solution, the next step should be to implement it. When that did not happen, I initially felt that my efforts had been wasted. Looking at the situation more carefully, however, I realized that the experience was teaching me something much more important about leadership.
The critical moment was recognizing that being correct about a problem does not automatically give someone the ability to solve it.
My initial perspective was focused almost entirely on the technical issue. The data needed to be standardized because better data would support better research and conservation decisions. However, leadership required me to look beyond the technical problem and consider the human and organizational dimensions. Why was the existing system still in place after so many years? Were staff overwhelmed by other responsibilities? Did they see the problem differently? Was there resistance to changing established practices? Did I have enough understanding of the organization to propose a solution that could realistically be sustained?
These questions did not necessarily change my belief that the research system could be improved. Instead, they changed my understanding of how change happens. I learned that observing, listening, interpreting, and analyzing a situation are just as important as immediately taking action.
This experience also showed me the importance of understanding my own strengths. My Activator strength pushes me toward action, which can be extremely valuable when a problem requires someone to take the first step. However, that same strength can become a weakness if I become so focused on acting that I do not spend enough time understanding why a problem exists or whether the people around me are prepared to act on a proposed solution. My goal as a leader is therefore not to become less action-oriented, but to combine my instinct to act with greater patience and listening.
This moment also pushed me toward greater humility. I had entered an unfamiliar environment with ideas about how things could be improved. While some of those ideas may have had merit, I was still an outsider and a temporary volunteer. I did not fully understand every historical, cultural, or organizational factor influencing decision-making. An important aspect of leadership is knowing when to speak confidently and when to listen more carefully.
At the same time, humility does not mean remaining silent when something appears to be wrong. I believe a leader should still raise concerns and advocate for improvement. My goal moving forward is to become better at balancing these two responsibilities: having the courage to challenge ineffective systems while also taking the time to understand the people and context surrounding them.
Living and working on Nosy Komba required me to develop skills that would have been difficult to learn in a classroom. I had to listen, observe, interpret unfamiliar situations, communicate across cultural differences, and adapt to a new environment.
One of the greatest lessons of being immersed in an unfamiliar community was recognizing how quickly assumptions can form. Before arriving, I had imagined a conservation organization where research, habitat restoration, and wildlife protection were clearly organized priorities. The reality was considerably more complicated. I encountered passionate individuals and meaningful conservation work, but I also observed challenges involving scientific organization, resources, management, and transparency.
This experience helped me develop what I consider to be a more ethno-relative perspective. Instead of judging an unfamiliar environment entirely according to my expectations, I learned to recognize complexity. Organizations are shaped by history, culture, resources, relationships, and competing priorities. The ability to understand another environment requires more than simply gathering facts about it. It requires empathy and a willingness to accept that one's own perspective is incomplete.
Adaptive leadership is particularly relevant to this lesson because it focuses on responding to complex challenges rather than assuming that every problem has a simple technical solution. My LiA experience repeatedly required this approach. Whether dealing with illness, unexpected disruptions, organizational resistance, or cultural differences, I could not simply follow a predetermined plan. I had to reassess the situation and determine what I could realistically contribute.
The sustainability of my LiA project's impact should also be understood in this context. The reforestation and biodiversity work itself is ongoing, supported by the continued work of staff and volunteers. The native plants maintained in the nursery are intended for habitat restoration, and the ecological monitoring contributes to understanding the biodiversity of Nosy Komba. My attempt to improve research data management did not become an official institutional change, but the experience remains important because it identified a continuing need. I learned that sustainability depends not only on creating a good idea but also on building ownership among the people who will remain after a temporary leader or volunteer leaves.
A leader who strongly connects with my own developing values is Wangari Maathai. As the founder of the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, Maathai connected environmental protection with community empowerment. Her leadership demonstrates that environmental challenges cannot always be separated from social and economic challenges.
What I find particularly valuable about Maathai's example is her ability to connect action with a larger purpose. Tree planting was not simply an environmental activity. It became connected to livelihoods, empowerment, participation, and long-term change. Her leadership demonstrates that environmental problems require people-centered solutions.
Maathai also provides an example of persistence in the face of resistance. My own experience in Madagascar was obviously far smaller in scale, but I can relate to the frustration of recognizing a problem and discovering that people in positions of authority are unwilling to support a proposed solution. Maathai's example reminds me that leadership often involves continuing to work toward a goal even when immediate success is impossible.
However, the most important lesson I take from her leadership is that environmental leadership should not treat communities as obstacles to conservation. Communities must be participants and leaders in the process. This is particularly relevant to my own future. If I work in environmental technology, climate change, or global development, I want to remember that the best technological solution is not necessarily the best solution if the people affected by it have no voice in its development or implementation.
I am currently pursuing a double major in Global Development and Biological Engineering. Although I do not yet know exactly what career I want to pursue, I know that I want my work to involve the environment, combating climate change, and developing technologies that can contribute to meaningful solutions.
This combination of interests connects strongly with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 13: Climate Action, SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, and SDG 15: Life on Land. My experience in Madagascar helped me see that these goals cannot be treated as completely separate categories. Technology, environmental conservation, development, and community well-being are deeply connected.
My vision is to become a leader capable of working across these different fields. Biological engineering can provide the technical skills needed to develop new solutions, while global development provides a framework for understanding how those solutions affect different communities and societies. I do not want to develop technology simply because it is innovative. I want to contribute to technologies and systems that are practical, accessible, sustainable, and responsive to the needs of the people who will use them.
My leadership strengths provide a foundation for this goal. Woo and Communication can help me build relationships across disciplines and cultures. Adaptability will help me navigate the uncertainty that comes with complex global problems. Activator will push me to turn ideas into action. Includer will remind me to consider who is missing from the conversation and whose knowledge should be included.
At the same time, my LiA experience showed me the areas where I still need to grow. I need to become more patient. I need to improve my ability to build influence without formal authority. I need to become a better listener, particularly when working in communities and cultures different from my own. Most importantly, I need to remember that good intentions and technical knowledge are not enough to create sustainable change.
My experience in Madagascar did not unfold according to my original expectations. I encountered incredible biodiversity and participated in meaningful conservation work, but I also experienced frustration, organizational challenges, and the disappointment of seeing an opportunity for improvement that I could not personally implement. Yet these difficulties became some of the most valuable parts of the experience.
I arrived in Madagascar thinking that conservation leadership was primarily about protecting ecosystems and wildlife. I left with a much broader understanding. Effective environmental leadership requires reliable science, honest management, adaptability, strong relationships, and a commitment to the people responsible for creating change.
As I move forward, I do not expect to have every answer about my future career or the problems I hope to address. Climate change and environmental degradation are complex challenges, and no individual leader will solve them alone. My goal instead is to continue developing the ability to connect people, communicate ideas, adapt to unfamiliar circumstances, and transform ideas into action.
The greatest leadership lesson I learned from my LiA experience is that leadership is not measured only by whether every idea succeeds. Sometimes leadership means recognizing a problem, attempting to address it, learning why change is difficult, and allowing that experience to make you a more thoughtful and capable leader. Madagascar taught me that protecting the environment requires more than passion for nature. It requires the ability to work with people, navigate complexity, challenge ineffective systems, and continue learning when the path forward is uncertain. Those are the values I intend to carry with me as I work toward becoming a global change leader.
Works Cited
Maathai, Wangari. Unbowed: A Memoir. Alfred A. Knopf, 2006.
Rath, Tom, and Barry Conchie. Strengths Based Leadership: Great Leaders, Teams, and Why People Follow. Gallup Press, 2008.
Sharma, Prashant, et al. “Leadership Is Distinct from Authority: Authority-Level Differences in Adaptive Leadership Behavior.” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 47, no. 3, 2026, pp. 618–637.