Grace Edwards

LDRS 450
October 2, 2022
Leadership Interview

Shortly before the beginning of the semester, I received an email from the DICE

(Diversity, Inclusion, Community, & Equity) department at Gonzaga that included short

biographies of two new hires in their offices. One of these hires was Jamie Bartlett, the new

director of the Lincoln LGBTQ Resource Center. I noticed that Jamie’s background was unique

and seemed to overlap with some of my interests, even though I do not think I am interested in

going into a profession in student affairs. I also noticed that Jamie moved to Spokane from

Minnesota, which she said she “loved but does not claim to be from.” I happen to feel the exact

same way about Minnesota and the Twin Cities specifically, because I was born there but did not

live there long enough to be from there. This minor commonality between us and Jamie’s unique

background caused me to think of her first when given the assignment to interview a leader.

Jamie Bartlett is a scientist by training, having received a doctorate in Integrative

Physiology from the University of Colorado. This led her to a career in the Navy as a Medical

Service Corps Officer. She has never stayed in one place for too long, so she moved on

eventually to work as a university lecturer and a product developer in sports nutrition. She then

went back to school to receive an MBA focusing on sustainability and social enterprise. Before

moving to Spokane, she helped lead a STEM education company and was the program

coordinator of Minnesota Cup, a startup competition that provided mentorship and funding to

Minnesotans with startup ideas that would positively impact the state. During the pandemic,

Jamie had extra time and the GI Bill from her time in the military, so she went back to school yet

again for a degree in Nonprofit Management. When not working, Jamie spends time with her

wife, an ER doctor, and her daughter, a college senior.

 While I have some idea of what I want to do after college, I’m open to exploring

industries and opportunities that are unfamiliar to me. The wide variety in Jamie’s career path

was intriguing to me, and I was interested to learn from another queer woman who is in a

position where her identity is very relevant. Mentoring and providing resources for LGBTQ+

students at a Jesuit university seems like an interesting position for someone with her

background, and it is a brand new position at the university. I was curious to hear how she is

navigating this position since it is different from everything else she has done. She was

enthusiastic when I reached out to meet with her, and we set a time to discuss leadership. I sent a

few questions in advance and met her in her office on a Wednesday afternoon.

The interview was structured loosely into three main sections: early experiences with

leadership, notable leadership moments in her career, and thoughts on leadership theories. First,

we spoke briefly about her career, my career aspirations, and the things we have in common.

Then, I asked what her definition of leadership was. It was clear that her idea of leadership is

very relational; she stated that “being a leader… means I’m not by myself. If I’m leading it

means in some way I’m part of a team and, theoretically, I’m in charge.” She also described that

her goal as a leader is to bring out the best in whatever individuals are on her team, knowing that

she cannot be the best at everything. A key part of leadership, she said, is putting a team together

in a way that the sum is greater than the individual parts. I think this definition is simple and

accurate. It reminded me of the concept of “giving the work back” in the “Intervene Skillfully”

section of Your Leadership Edge. Ed O’Malley and Amanda Cebula (2015) clearly differentiate

between “giving the work back” and delegating, saying that “both are important, but delegation

is an act of authority. Giving the work back is an act of leadership” (p. 171). After hearing
Jamie’s stories about leadership, I think she exercises both by playing to people’s strengths but

also sharing responsibility.

Jamie’s definition of leadership seems to line up with the Kansas Leadership Center’s

definition that we have talked about in class: “Adaptive leadership is the practice of mobilizing

people to tackle tough challenges and thrive” (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 2). However, when I asked

her about this definition later in the interview, Jamie thought that it might not always be accurate.

She added that not all work is difficult, and to go into every situation expecting work to be

difficult is counterproductive. We did not take much time to distinguish between adaptive

challenges and technical problems, but it is possible that Jamie would have agreed with the

definition more if she knew that it referred mostly to leading through adaptive challenges.

Jamie did not think about leadership for much of her career because she was in an

“academic bubble.” When she started to work in the Navy, however, she began to think about

leadership more often because it is so highly emphasized in the military. At this point, she began

to reflect on previous leaders who influenced her as a leader today. Jamie’s PhD mentor was the

most important influence on her idea of leadership. Before he was her mentor, she had had

another mentor with whom she had a lot in common; both were gay women and relatively

young. However, they were not compatible and Jamie found more success with her mentor who

was an old, straight, white man. Jamie realized once she was learning about leadership in the

Navy that he had been a phenomenal leader and had subconsciously shaped her beliefs about

leadership. This was an important lesson for her about how good leadership is not tied to any

single demographic, and looking similar to someone on paper does not mean you will work well

with them. I, too, have a tendency to seek out people with whom I have things in common, but

this story was a reminder that sometimes the most useful perspectives come from unexpected
places. This story reminded me of the “Engage Unusual Voices” section of Your Leadership

Edge (2015), which argues that leaders should seek voices outside of their normal groups, which

may include “the people in your department, your most trusted volunteer board member, or the

colleague from another department who thinks like you” (O’Malley & Cebula, p. 104). Even

though an older white man is not a traditionally marginalized or silenced voice, he was not

Jamie’s first choice to work with because he was not the type of person with whom she was most

comfortable.

I was surprised that most of Jamie’s thoughts on leadership had to do with her time in the

Navy, but it was yet another experience we had in common. My dad was in the Air Force for

most of my life, so I knew what she meant when she said that the military spends a lot of time

telling you what leadership means. I have no plans to enter the military, but I have seen firsthand

how the military can produce great leaders. Jamie entered the Navy as a Lieutenant because of

her education, which meant that she had a higher rank than most without having any experience.

When I asked Jamie what she thought about adaptive leadership and the idea that leadership is a

practice, not a position, she said she completely agreed. Her time in the Navy made this clear

because the military is deeply hierarchical, and her rank automatically required that her

subordinates respect her to some extent. However, there is a common saying in the military,

which is “I’ll salute the rank, but not the person.” She might have had authority, but she was not

a leader until she earned the respect of her followers.

In The Practice of Adaptive Leadership (2009), the authors carefully distinguish between

authority and leadership. According to them, adaptive leadership is not only different from

having a position of authority. It is also different from being really good at your job. Adaptive

leadership is “not about meeting or exceeding your authorizers' expectations; it is about

challenging some of those expectations, finding a way to disappoint people without pushing

them completely over the edge” (Heifetz et al., p. 14). After my conversation with Jamie, I am

not sure if she has practiced adaptive leadership as described here. I think it may have been

difficult because most of her formal leadership has been within the military, where challenging

expectations and pushing limits often has consequences. On the other hand, Jamie’s personality

leads me to believe that she does what she wants and is not afraid to call out when something is

not done right. If she was met with an adaptive challenge while in a leadership role, I think she

would boldly face it head-on.

One of my biggest takeaways from the interview is that leadership in practice is often

detached from theory. Jamie told a story about how, early in her Navy career, she yelled at a

subordinate who was “being annoying” and disrupting the rest of the group. She felt terrible

immediately and was counseled by a colleague that she should refrain from reprimanding people

in public areas. She never forgot how awful she felt after embarrassing that man in front of his

peers, and she now lives by the adage “punish in private, praise in public.” This is not something

I’ve read about in CLP, but it seems compatible with some of the ideas we have discussed related

to lifting up followers and giving them positive and negative feedback. I looked up this phrase

after she told me about it and I found an article about it in the Harvard Business Review. To my

surprise, Roger Schwarz (2013) of the HBR argues that the adage of “praise in public, criticize in

private,” as he phrased it, undermines a team’s success and reduces accountability. This makes

sense to me, but I can also understand why Jamie has chosen to lead by this rule. It would take

extraordinary tact to criticize someone in front of their peers without damaging one’s reputation

or the reputation of the person being criticized. In reality, there is probably a balance to be struck

between yelling at a team member in public and keeping all criticism to private settings.
 My conversation with Jamie gave me things to think about leadership that I had never

considered. I admire her flexibility and strong principles, and I am excited to see what she does

as she settles into her new role at the Lincoln Center. Only two months into the job, she has

barely begun leading at Gonzaga, but I’m confident that she will excel and become a great part

of our community.
 References

Heifetz, R. A., Linsky, M., & Grashow, A. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools

and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Cambridge Leadership

Associates.

O’Malley, E. & Cebula, A. (2015). Your leadership edge: Lead anytime, anywhere. KLC Press.

Schwarz, R. (2013, March 25). How criticizing in private undermines your team. Harvard

Business Review. https://hbr.org/2013/03/how-criticizing-in-private-und.