Millersville University Matthew J.

Monahan
EDLD 610 September 24, 2014

Reflection 2- Mary Parker Follett and Forming My Vision

Mary Parker Follett matters. Since arriving as a new teacher at Central York High

School last year our administration, from the Superintendent to the Assistant Principals, have

preached and practiced the importance of the human element. Unbeknownst to me until this

semester, many of the ideas associated with the human element, or what Nel Noddings calls the

relational approach, seem to have deep roots in Folletts philosophy.1 It would seem to me that I

should have come across Mary Parker Folletts name during my years teaching the Progressive

Era as an American History teacher, or in my studies as a graduate history student, but I did not

until reading and discussing her ideas in this course.2 Folletts ideas matter because our study of

her work has led me to examine some of the ways in which I view collaboration, conflict, power

and education. I am pleasantly surprised at how this study has helped form my vision for

leadership.

As a Progressive, Follett lived in an America that had been industrializing in earnest

since the conclusion of the Civil War, a few years before her birth. Americas Gilded Age had

seen the rise of fabulously wealthy industrialists, who associated power with production and

profit. They considered workers, in many ways, to be part of the machinery of industry and

concerned themselves with the rights and needs of the individual only when they could not

1
Nell Noddings, Caring in Education, infed.org, August 26, 2014 http://infed.org/mobi/caring-in-education/.
2
Robert H. Weibe, The Search for Order 1877-1920 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1967). This was the central text of
a graduate class that I took at Villanova University entitled The Gilded Age and Progressive Era. In Weibes nine
page, two-columned index of the era there is no mention of Follett. Commentators on Follett are explicitly aware
that her ideas, while extremely important to the study of leadership, had been overlooked.

1

avoid him.3 Like other Progressives, Follett sought to remedy some of the negative effects of

industrialization on American society.

She focused on leadership and her ideas are particularly useful to educators, as a current

theme in education seems to be a shift from the industrial model of education, focused on

production, to a model focused on the inspiration of lifelong learning.4 Education should be a

meaningful experience rather than a series of accomplished tasks. School leaders who heed

Folletts insight will find a valuable framework through which to facilitate a meaningful, and

relational, educational experience with colleagues, students and parents.

One of our recent class discussions addressed the democratic nature of Folletts ideas.

The gist of the conversation was that people place value on following rules that they have had a

part in creating. I turned to a classmate and said aloud, Thats Rousseau! 5 The conversation

expanded my thinking on Follett to the relationship between modern democracy, its roots in the

Enlightenment, and its refocus during the Progressive Era. Each of these concepts, which have

shaped American thought, government and history, share critical notions about power.

Concentrated power held by few people is dangerous. However, power shared by interested and

active participants can produce amazing results. The industrial model of education features a

hierarchy of administrators, teachers and students geared toward the production of schooling. Its

focus is on efficiency. It would appear that to embrace Folletts democratic ideas, ingrained in

the heart of modern Western philosophy, is to challenge the industrial model of education as less

than democratic.

3
Ibid., 134.
4
Steve Denning, The Single Best Idea for Reforming K-12 Education, forbes.com, September 9, 2014
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/09/01/the-single-best-idea-for-reforming-k-12-education/
5
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, A Discourse on Inequality (London: Penguin Books, 1984), 60, 111-123. Rousseau
believed that people, although inherently good, were motivated by self-interest and that societies evolved out of
human necessity. It was crucial for him that processes not get bogged down for the purpose of establishing or
keeping power. He was a champion of the notion that people should have a role in creating the laws that will govern
them.

2

 Follett explicitly challenges industrial notions of power and control, which had gained

wide acceptance by the early 20th century. Rather than leadership and management as exercises

in gaining power and control over people, she argued, it is possible to develop the conception

of power-with, a jointly developed power, a co-active, not a coercive power. 6 This is a

democratic sentiment. We should muster our energy, gifts, talents and varied experiences toward

solving problems during negotiations. When we focus on problems, rather than struggles for

dominance or defense of positions, we can achieve results that satisfy the needs of interested

parties. Roger Fisher and William Ury have coined the term principled negotiation to discuss

this concept.7

I find these concepts to be very encouraging as I contemplate my potential future as a

school building leader. It is daunting to think of the responsibility involved in decision making

at the administrative level. I am confident in myself as a leader, but like many other people, do

not look forward to conflict. As a school building leader people would misconstrue my

intentions, question my motivations, and I would make mistakes. Folletts assertion that conflict

is merely difference is hopeful. Differences can be overcome; fights produce winners, losers and

more fighting. Along with urging managers to depersonalize orders, she also seems to encourage

the depersonalization of conflict. Reminding myself not to take conflict personally, or react

personally to others during an argument, would be grounding. Folletts philosophy, coupled with

Fisher and Urys game plan, provide a rational and relational structure for working with fellow

human beings. An approach to leadership and management that is hard on the problem, [and]

soft on people would be invaluable as a school building leader.

6
Mary Parker Follett, Prophet of Management: A Celebration of Writings From the 1920s, ed. Pauline Graham
(Washington, D.C.: Beard Books), 103.
7
Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (New York: Penguin
Books, 2011), 10-15.

3

 Perhaps the democracy of Folletts ideas is most clear to me through her discussion of

shared decision-making. She believed, When the accomplishmentis the result of joint

responsibilitythat accomplishment is likely to be of a higher grade.8 With this approach,

interested parties focus conversation on the work at hand rather than wasteful or

counterproductive matters. With the support of those involved, based on a process that includes

their ideas and criticisms, the parties are more likely to develop a satisfactory solution. One who

invests in a process is meaningfully attached to its result. Fisher and Ury contest that, If

[people] are not involved in the process, they are unlikely to approve the product.9 A leadership

style that approaches decision-making and problem solving as Follett suggests is desirable

because people will appreciate their role in a democratic process.

In many instances, a school building leader is required to make decisions quickly and

decisively. No management philosophy will change that. When possible to employ, a power-

with approach to leadership is productive because it welcomes stakeholders into conversations

about the educational process. Rather than showing a lack of leadership or control, this

relational approach is democratic in the best sense of the word. This approach strives to put the

human element into decisions that will affect stakeholders in a school by giving people

ownership in the lifelong learning process. Limiting discussions and decisions to a principal or

small group of administrators risks wasting valuable energy, gifts, talents and experiences. Mary

Parker Folletts writing, and our discussions of those writings in this course, have helped shape

my vision of leadership and modern education as democratic, as opposed to a less democratic

industrial model.

8
Follett, 127.
9
Fisher and Ury, 29.