This article was downloaded by:

On: 30 April 2011

Access details: Access Details: Free Access
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Studies in Continuing Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713445357

Transformative learning in managerial role transitions

Ulpukka Isopahkala-Boureta
a
University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

To cite this Article Isopahkala-Bouret, Ulpukka(2008) 'Transformative learning in managerial role transitions', Studies in
Continuing Education, 30: 1, 69 — 84
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/01580370701841556
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01580370701841556

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Studies in Continuing Education
Vol. 30, No. 1, March 2008, 69
84

Transformative learning in managerial role transitions

Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret*

University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

The purpose of this study is to investigate the nature of learning in work

role transitions from specialist roles to managerial roles in a context of a large
international technology organisation. Prior theorisation of learning in role
transitions has been based on quantitative, psychologically-oriented studies
prescribing different role and personal attributes related to work adjustment.
Personal experiences have received only a superficial or instrumental part in most
of the preceding studies. Therefore, this study draws upon a transformative
learning theory to outline an interpretative framework and focuses on in-depth,
narrative analysis of a small number of role transition experiences. As a result, the
study reveals how first-time project managers and team leaders wonder about
their abilities and actions; compare ‘self’ with role models; and become aware of
the power aspect of managerial roles. Such reflection eventually leads to a
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

perspective transformation regarding ‘self’ and new roles. However, it also

involves adaptation to the prevailing organisational norms, values, and leadership
ideals. The study will add to our understanding of learning in transitions and
inform those working in the human resource development or otherwise involved
in the organisational transfer processes. Moreover, it reminds that perspective
transformations should not be taken innocently as examples of ‘empowerment’,
but critically concern why transformative learning is encouraged at work
nowadays and what purposes it serves.
Keywords: leadership; managerial role transition; narrative analysis; perspective
transformation; transformative learning

Introduction
We all most probably have a need to make sense of our professional experiences. We
want to know what our work is about, to what and to whom we are related to, what
values do we serve through our occupation, and how our work connects with our
sense of identity. One specific case to think of one’s work is a transition from one
work role to another. According to Ashforth (2001) occupational roles (‘who am I in
this social context’) facilitate sense-making by providing a framework to locate
oneself and others at work. Roles refer here to more or less institutionalised positions
in a social structure, like in a work organisation. Understood as such, roles are not
fixed, but their meaning is negotiated within structural restrictions in different
sociocultural contexts.
This study is interested in particular kinds of role transitions, namely the ones in
which experienced professionals move from specialists’ role to managerial role within
an organisation, in a particular location. Intra-organisational promotions can range

*Email: ulpukka.isopahkala@helsinki.fi

ISSN 0158-037X print/ISSN 1470-126X online

# 2008 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/01580370701841556
http://www.informaworld.com
 70 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

from title changes involving only minor changes in the job content to major changes
requiring new competence such as managing groups of subordinates (Kramer and
Nolan 1999: 336). Transition to managerial duties can happen also without physical
relocation or job change and require re-orientation to a role already held (cf. Louis
1980; ‘intra-role transitions’). The study takes place in a large, international
technology enterprise, in early twenty-first century, in Finland.
The intention of this study, in general, is to know more about the nature of
learning involved in the transitions to managerial role. Specifically, the study is
looking at whether such learning involves self-reflection and self-transforming
experiences. The study draws mainly upon Mezirow’s (1990, 1991, 2000, 2003)
transformative learning theory to outline an interpretative framework for studying
this particular kind of learning. Such a theory assumes that critical reflection
potentially triggers perspective transformation regarding how self is positioned in a
new role. Furthermore, the study is interested in how a sociocultural context
influences self-reflections.
The individuals participating in the study are ‘experienced newcomers’
(Blenkinsopp and Dunczyk 2005: 363); they have already gone through several
occupational and organisational transitions. Therefore, the focus of learning is not so
much on how to practically orient in a new job, but on how to re-position self in a
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

familiar context and to re-establish social relations. At first glance readers may
wonder how leadership development plays a part of the process. Clearly it is an
essential aspect of the literature and must be figured in. On further reflection one will
see that the theme here in that analyses of role transition as a context for learning
provides a rich basis for discovering how people re-position themselves, whether into
leadership or not.

Role transitions as learning challenges

Work role transitions can be defined as a change in employment status, a move
between jobs, or a major alteration to the content of existing work duties and
activities, including major work reorganisations (Nicholson and West 1988: 48;
Nicholson 1984: 173). Thus, a physical movement between jobs is not necessary,
because changes in psychological conditions of a job are enough to make it a real
role transition experience (Ashforth 2001). Managerial role transitions may involve
employer, status, function and residence changes (West et al. 1987). Role transitions
are both voluntary and involuntary responses to growing professional opportunities
and uncertainty of career trajectories (Nicholson and West 1988: 6). Reasons for job
change are never simple and straightforward. Future-oriented motives to find
something more challenging and fulfilling are interconnected with circumstantial
changes and attempts to avoid what people dislike in their jobs (Nicholson and West
1988: 87). Different genders, age groups and social classes may enter different kinds
of transitions and in any case experience transitions differently (Nicholson and West
1988). The experiences differ also depending on whether the move is vertical, hori-
zontal, away from, or toward the organisational centre (Nicholson and West 1988).
Work role transitions have been studied in occupational and social psychology
(Ashforth 1995, 2001; Munton and West 1995; Nicholson 1984; Nicholson and West
1988; Stephens 1994), but not specifically in adult and continuing education. In most
cases, theorisation of learning in role transitions has been based on quantitative
 Studies in Continuing Education 71

studies prescribing different role and personal attributes. Adjustment to a new role
has been described with concepts, such as ‘personal change’ and ‘role innovation’
(Nicholson 1984; Nicholson and West 1988), which can be considered as learning if
we relate these concepts to adult education theories. Characteristics of different types
of managerial transitions have been specified in studies on promotions (Kramer and
Nolan 1999), relocations (Munton and West 1995), transitions to newly created jobs
(West et al. 1987), problematic inter-organisational transitions (Blenkinsopp and
Zdunczyk 2005), and radical change of direction in a career (Ibarra 2003). Despite of
the specificities of the different types of transitions it is possible to approach them all
from a learning point of view.
The transition cycle (Nicholson 1994; Nicholson and West 1988) provides a
starting point for thinking about role transitions and learning. First, there is a
preparation period when people anticipate the coming changes and wonder about
new tasks and how to deal with them successfully. Second, there is a stressful period
of encounter ‘shock’ when people, during their first days and weeks, are surprised by
dissimilarities between their old and new jobs. Third, there is a period of adjustment
when people alternatively change themselves to match the role, change the role
requirements to match their needs, or both. Fourth, there is a period of stabilisation
when there are no longer new things to learn and everyday routines are established.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

However, as many organisations are in a constant state of renewal, stabilisation never

really occurs, and the fourth state is a time for new preparation.
People being promoted experience similar changes as organisational newcomers
and transferees (Kramer and Nolan 1999: 337): pre-promotion phase involves
education or experience to be qualified for the promotion, application (or being
recruited) for the position, and perhaps, a gradual changing of current work
relationships. Shifting phase occurs as new titles and job requirements become
official, but the starting point may be ambiguous as some of the old job
characteristics may continue over some time. An adjustment phase involves gaining
of information, developing tasks and relationships, clarifying of role expectations,
and maintaining a positive image.
To learn how to occupy a new work role, one needs information on, for example,
how to complete tasks, what others expect from the role, and how the organisation is
structured and how it functions (cf., Morrison 1995). Since people being promoted
are already involved in their organisations, their information needs differ from those
of newcomers and focuses on new duties and procedures, organisational power-
relations, norms and expectations (Kramer and Nolan 1999: 343). Acquisition of
information from diverse sources enables uncovering of various perspectives,
conflicts, and contradictions (Ashforth 2001). Information needs to be personally
interpreted to find out what is relevant regarding one’s new role.
Moreover, according to Ashforth (2001): 67), identification with a certain role
means that we perceive ourselves as belonging to a certain socially defined category;
we assume the prototypical or exemplary characteristics of a certain role to
ourselves. Part of this kind of learning and adaptation is to experiment with images
about the kind of professional one might become (Ibarra 1999). That includes both
imitation of role models and construction of ‘future selves’ by narrating about how
the ongoing transition fits into our overall career history. As Ibarra (2003)
acknowledges, changes in our life can be used as occasions to rework our life stories
that link who we are and who we will become. Among new knowledge, skills and
 72 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

abilities, the outcomes of role learning are a clarification of what the new role is, a
better integration into the social networks, and, eventually, transformation of
professional identity (Ashforth 2001: 186). The new job demands set direction for
constructing a new work identity; although, people have usually already drifted
towards jobs that fit with their needs and self-conceptions (Nicholson and West
1988).

Learning that transforms the sense of self

The role transitions involve proactive framing of what constitutes a field of work and
what the problems one should act upon are. The diverse professional experiences
provide complex knowledge patterns for making reflective sense of new settings in
managerial role transitions (Schön 1983). Additionally, managerial role transitions
can be self-changing. A contemporary leadership development approach, called
transformational (or transformative) leadership (Bass 1985; Burns 1978), rests upon
the idea of enforcement of leadership effectiveness through personal growth and self-
transformation. According to such ideals, transformative leaders influence positive
social change, encourage new insights and inspire others without imposing
traditional managerial authority. They pay individualised attention to others’ needs
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

and professional growth. Such a way of doing requires re-thinking of what leadership
is and how managerial roles are enacted. One has to first experience personal
transformation in order to start leading through others (as opposite to leading upon
others), and eventually transfer the world itself (McGregor 2006). Leadership
development, therefore, begins with the development of a ‘new self’ (Quinn 1996)
and is fundamentally grounded in the notions of transformative learning (Kritskaya
and Dirkx 2000).
A theoretical frame of transformative learning (Mezirow 1990, 1991, 2000)
describes how adults learn in different life experiences that somehow question their
prior understanding and sense making habits. Such a learning theory enables us to
understand thoroughly the learning in potentially transformative managerial role
transitions. As we move to new positions at work we elaborate our existing habits
and assumptions and we may find out that we have to learn anew what the necessary
conditions for enacting a role are. As a consequence, we learn new viewpoints and
alter the existing ones (Mezirow 1990). Such learning involves reflections on
declarative and procedural knowledge (‘What is this and how does it work?’). It
may further involve critical reflection on premises, reasons and justifications of our
knowledge (‘Why do we believe in these principles and values?’). Consequently, via
such critical reflection, one’s perspective on things may change dramatically and
permanently. Eventually, it becomes more inclusive, distinguished, open, integrative
and reflective (Mezirow 1991). Perspective transformation, then, alters the way
people understand themselves, their relationship with others and with the world. It
changes cognitive, emotional, and behavioural routines of perceiving and interpret-
ing things. As a result, one is able to have new priorities and ways of thinking and
doing.
According to Mezirow (1991), learning that leads to a perspective transformation
has an inherent logic, ideal, and purpose. When people face a confusing situation or
problem that cannot be resolved based on their previous experience, they start
reflecting and asking critical questions about their own assumptions. Next, they see
 Studies in Continuing Education 73

that others have gone through the same process of transformation and start
validating prior beliefs in collaborative dialogue. They look for alternative roles and
operative modes, which leads to action planning including finding of new
information, testing of new roles, agreeing on new relationships, and developing
new competencies and self-confidence. Finally, transformed perspectives are inte-
grated into everyday practices. Such a personal change is like a spiral in nature
it
includes variation of all the mentioned phases, but does not always follow
the exact sequence as presented earlier (Mezirow 2000). Completion of one stage
is not necessary before starting another one, and phases are repeated during the
transformation process (Mezirow 2000).
Perspective transformation requires energy, motivation, and volition to act
(Mezirow 1991: 188). Additionally, personal mindsets must become emotionally able
to change (Mezirow 2003). Presumably, much of the growing interest in transforma-
tional leadership is due to the interest in leader’s emotional resonance with and
impact on others (Hernez-Broome and Hughes 2004: 26). Theorisation of Boyd
(1991; Boyd and Myers 1988; Scott 1997) and Dirkx (1997, 2003a,b) have deepened
our understanding of emotional and spiritual dimensions of perspective transforma-
tion. Boyd and Dirkx rely most heavily on imagination and on the extra-rational,
whereas Mezirow’s theorisation emphasises the rational (Cranton and Roy 2003;
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

Dirkx et al. 2006; Imel 1998). Both incorporate, nevertheless, rationality, imagina-
tion, courage and feeling of power as a part of a creative transformation process.
Transformation is also characterised by social aspects, such as strong relationships
and compassion for others (Mezirow 2000).
However, neither Mezirow, Boyd or Dirkx include the sociocultural context that
shapes the personal experience and identity in their theories (Clark and Wilson
1991). They rely on a concept of ‘self’ that has individual agency to define who the
person is (Clark and Wilson 1991). However, ‘self’ can also be understood as a non-
unified, fragmented, and contested construction. The changing organisational
positions are socially agreed upon and that adds a cultural meaning to the
definitions of ‘self’. The meaning given to any organisational position is negotiated
within structural restrictions and can be defined as networks of relationships
involving both people and materials (Nicholson 1984). The role and its boundaries

what is included or excluded
are defined not only by the role occupant, but also by
external norms imposed by the various roles that are linked to the role (Ashforth
2001). Through negotiations one must co-create the institutional arrangements that
legitimise the new role (Schön 1983: 221). For example, a new project manager must
confirm project clients of his or her expertise by presenting accurate information in
the project plan and by demonstrating that he or she understands what the client
needs are. Thus, self-reflection is always content dependent, historically situated and
value-oriented (Clark and Wilson 1991).

Research methodology
Originally, nine experienced technology specialists from one international informa-
tion technology organisation volunteered to participate in the research process. The
participants had heterogeneous educational background, mostly business or
technical college degrees, and diverse working experiences (from 3 to 20 years,
which reflects the age difference of participants’ respectively). In this article, we will
 74 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

focus specifically on experiences of six of the participants (three women and three
men) who moved to team leader or project manager roles (the excluded participants
moved to other kinds of jobs). Team leader’s role here involved a line management
responsibility over a group of subordinates, which project managers did not have,
although some of them had a team working for the project, too. The overall role
transition narratives are reported elsewhere (Isopahkala-Bouret 2005) and here we
will specifically analyse reflections on participants’ new managerial roles.
The setting for the research data gathering was formed by informal, highly
interactive coaching sessions (focus groups really) that the researcher planned and
organised herself. The hope was that participants would gain something from the
experience, not merely provide data. Specifically, participants were invited to join
discussions on transformative job changes, which they did. In practice, the sessions
were a possibility to meet with other specialists who were in the same situation and to
discuss issues related to the role transition. The agenda came from participants; no
one provided instructions or training for any specific assignment. As a group,
everybody could act as a coach to another. The coaching did not apply any
predefined model on how to go through role transitions. Its structure was open and
participants could influence discussion topics. Similar sessions were not implemented
elsewhere in the organisation for any non-research-related purposes.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

The data gathering started with discursive interviews about each participant’s
background, current work situation, and evolvement of expertise. Then, after a
couple of days, participants conducted a self-assessment and got feedback from their
colleagues and supervisors about their learning skills and tactics (Lombardo and
Eichinger 2000). The results of assessments were not analysed as research material,
but participants reflected on their learning skills and tactics in the group discussions.
Participants met five times within a five-month period in focus groups and discussed
issues relevant to the ongoing transition. During the group discussions, the
researcher asked participants to form statements about what was problematic at
work, and, especially, in their ongoing role transition. Each member in the group
then offered justified arguments about why this statement was true or false, justified
or unjustified (cf. the idea of rational justifications of statements, Mezirow 1991).
However, as soon as somebody disclosed personal issues the tone of the discussion
became more emotionally laden and controversial. Eight moths after the first
interviews, the final interviews concluded the data gathering process. The partici-
pants were asked about their work role transition and personal change experiences.
Personal narratives were a recurrent part of interview accounts and group
discussions. The storied quality of these responses was preserved throughout the data
analysis and interpretation. According to the underpinning narrative methodology
(Mishler 1986; Riessman 1993, 2002), meaning is discursively produced through
interaction between researcher and participant(s). An interviewee is respondent and
narrator, and an interviewer is questioner and listener (Bell 1988). The researcher, in
the role of a listener, allows an interviewee to continue without interruption, and to
present himself or herself in a particular light (Mishler 1986: 36). The context of
telling essentially impacts the narratives that are produced (Mishler 1986: 44). All the
interviews and group discussions were tape recorded and transcripts were written
word-to-word. Most of the data collection was done in Finnish. The citations used
here in the manuscript were later translated in English by the researcher. However, all
 Studies in Continuing Education 75

of the participants did not have the same mother tongue and, therefore, part of the
data was collected in English, although none of the participants were native speakers.
The analysis proceeded by reading and rereading the accounts on role transitions
and by focusing on narrative elements: plots, turning points, characters and
evaluations. Furthermore, the collection of several stories allowed comparison of
experiences to each other (Polkinghorne 1995). However, the categorisation did not
produce explanation in the same manner as in natural science. Typologies in
narrative analysis are considered as statements of similar events that are shared by
various stories, not as descriptions of ‘species of stories’ (Polkinghorne 1988: 167).
Typologies did not provide the essential meaning of stories. They were useful only to
develop some abstract themes and concepts. In the following, the narrative analysis
of self-reflective learning in managerial work role transitions is presented around
three themes: reflections on own abilities and actions; reflections on role models; and
reflections on aspects of power in managerial roles. The analysis will be followed by a
discussion that links the narratives to the literature reviewed earlier in the paper.

Wondering how to enact the new role

Tim (pseudonyms used) had not considered a team leader’s job as a career choice,
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

but when his manager offered him the job, he accepted it. Tim started to lead the
same team in which he had been working as a senior system specialist. Tim ‘caught’
new responsibilities quickly, ‘started really to speed up, and . . . [had] a rough time’. It
was challenging to earn the respect and trust of prior colleagues, to consider other
managers as equals, to learn a new communication style, and to know how to handle
confidential information. In this case, enactment of team leader’s duties came first,
and then afterwards Tim reflected upon his experiences and how the new role had
changed him. Tim thought he now had a ‘totally different job description . . . [and] a
new kind of prominent position’. His newly adopted managerial perspective made
him understand that things that he complained about earlier were not ‘necessarily
easy to resolve’. He understood the ‘complexity’ of things. Moreover, Tim thought
he now had more ‘value in the employment market’. Nevertheless, Tim’s new
perspective did not radically change his prior way of working:
Team leader is still a kind of a person that should participate, to be involved with things.
It is a sort of, if I use the military terminology, a kind of corporal. He goes there with the
crew, and does not stay in any ‘command dugout’.

As Tim defined here, team leaders should ‘participate’, ‘be involved with things’
and be ‘with the crew’. Tim did not want to position himself as distant from other
team members. His reflections were influenced by his ability to contribute to the
technical tasks of his team. As suggested by the previous role transition studies
(Nicholson and West 1988; Morrison 1995), learning how to occupy a managerial
role initiated reflection on what one was supposed to be doing in such a role. The
definitions given to one’s role were influenced by the material circumstances and
other roles that were related to the new managerial role (cf., Asforth 2001). For
example, Tim’s new managerial role involved re-positioning of self within the line
hierarchy of the organisation. To find a comfortable way to be in a new kind of a
relationship with the old team members and new colleagues, and with things to do,
Tim had to personalise the new role (Nicholson and West 1988).
 76 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

Laura was a financial systems specialist and during the study she made her move
to an information technology organisation and to a concept specialist’s job, but was
soon after offered a project management job. Contrary to Tim, she explained that
her technical competence was minimal and that was why she felt natural to be in a
project management role. Mainly, project management for her was to ‘ensure that
there is always a resource to do every task and that [nobody] forgets anything’. It was
a kind of ‘coordination job’ and ‘management of things rather than people’. As
Laura described it, project managers needed to work hard to find resources, keep the
project in time, meet dead lines, and cooperate with different parts of the
organisation. Dealing with all the different stressors of time pressure, cost manage-
ment, and personal relations required toughness, even aggressiveness.
In a way, I express more clearly what I want . . . one [senior member] from our group has
named me a ‘lieutenant’ [laughs], just joking. But maybe it illustrates anyway that I
know what I want. . . . Providing a clear understanding of what is expected from
others. . . . I hope it doesn’t feel like commanding.
Here, similarly to Tim, Laura referred to a military position as she was describing
her role. With such an analogy, hierarchical power relations were intimated around
her talk. However, by laughing right after and stating that the analogy was ‘just a
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

joke’, she expressed that it was not proper to talk openly about power relations
at work. In her reflections Laura said that the new role had changed her behaviour.
She had become more assertive and surer in expressing what she wanted from
others. However, she wanted to state expectations in a frank, respectful and
non-commanding way.
Anne, an advanced application system’s specialist, also experienced an un-
expected transition as she was offered a team leader position in her current team. She
had not either considered moving to a managerial role, but thought that ‘even if it
was just a proposal (and not an exigency), it was better than to continue the same, to
follow the same line’ on a specialist track. In practice, the appointment process did
not proceed as planned. Anne’s organisation was restructured, her manager changed,
the number of her team members diminished, and, finally, she was never officially
appointed to the team leader’s job. However, she started to take care of some of the
team leader’s responsibilities. For example, she started running weekly team meetings
and provided induction to newcomers.
Even if there was never an official decision, I had to take such a role
it was a practical
necessity . . . since I was the oldest and I’d done these things for the longest period of
time, it was automatically [laughs] my role to advise new people. And in a way, I did a
team leader’s job there.
Here Anne defined a managerial role as requiring experience and maturity. She
was the oldest and the most experienced compared to her team members. A
managerial role, for her, was involving advisory relationship toward others. Anne
was intensively helping others to grow in their profession. Then, as her team
members gained more skills and were able to take independent responsibility, she was
able to delegate certain tasks to them and to assume the managerial role more
thoroughly. During the transition Anne wrote down her reflections, which helped her
to ‘take distance and observe activities from an external point of view and to think
about how things could possibly be . . . to start thinking about what my own
 Studies in Continuing Education 77

perspective is . . . to see things slightly differently’. Now, instead of having an

uncontrollable line of demands, things ‘coming and going’ and her reacting in a
‘panic-like’ mode, she had a feeling of ‘being in control’. She learned that she could
now ‘bring things forward like she wanted or according to her sort of perspective’
and she could influence on things, improve work processes and motivate people to
‘do things as planned’. Anne did not blindly follow orders anymore, but was able to
estimate, suggest and negotiate task priorities and schedules. She was also able to say
‘no’ when needed.
Now I dare to say that ‘I’m sorry, but we can’t do this thing for tomorrow. We have this
and this kinds of things to be done, you know, before we can take care of this case’. . . . I
take time to think about the case a bit longer and start acting only after that [laughs].
Some of the participants, like Anne, felt first uncomfortable with their new
managerial responsibilities and were not sure whether they had abilities to act in a
proper way. Therefore, for Anne, as for many others, the most meaningful thing
was that the transition to a new role brought ‘confidence or a kind of courage’.
Mezirow (2003) and Dirkx (2003a) are both referring to such strong, holi-
stic emotional experience and feeling of certainty as signifying a perspective
transformation.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

Measuring self up to managerial role models

Max was an application development specialist and during the study he moved to a
project management role. He was one of the youngest participants in the study and
his work experience was tightly bound to the field of work in a particular company.
Therefore, his managerial role models were strongly influenced by the company’s
prevailing leadership ideals. In the middle of the study, Max had a ‘revelation’, which
resolved a dilemma between his new managerial position and his discomfort toward
managing others. During the final interview the researcher provoked reflection by
asking: ‘Have you had this kind of a moment when... you have find something that
you were looking for and you had a kind of feeling like ‘ooh, that’s it’ As a response
Max told about his learning experience after a leadership course:
Max: I had this feeling about this [kind of] leadership and how to deal with
people. It really opened my eyes. And how . . . you need to adapt your
[leadership style]. That you’re here to . . . help people to do their work
in a proper way... you have different types of people who are in the
different stage of development in their work. And that you need to, to
really observe them and react accordingly. That was kind of a
discovery for me.
The researcher: You haven’t thought it like?
Max: No. . . . Of course some people are more ready than others [to be
leaders]. But you need also some training. And to be a leader doesn’t
mean to be a dictator that everybody will just follow. But you are just, I
mean, a team member like the others . . . helping when needed.
I think it kind of . . . made me feel more confident that I could be
a leader. Because that’s something that’s quite difficult for me to be,
you know, a tough and, you know, to tell people what to do and [so
on]. But it gave me a picture that actually it’s not [like that]. It’s not. So,
it made the leader more human [smiles], more . . . normal.
 78 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

The researcher: . . . more something that you could be?

Max: Mmm [agrees] . . . I was really like, in the first hours, even when I read
the training material, I was really like ‘Aah!’ So, it was really like a
revelation. [The trainer] was saying something like: ‘You hold the
precious life of [laughing] team members in your hands and you have
to preserve it’ and something like that. I was almost crying.
The researcher: Ooh! [Both are laughing].
Max: [Sighs and says quietly]. It
it was very good.
(Original in English)

As he described here, Max had thought about people management in very

traditional and authoritarian terms: leaders are born (‘some people are more ready’),
authoritarian (‘a dictator that everybody will just follow’), ‘tough’, and ‘telling
people what to do’. During the leadership training he realised that such a perspective
was too narrow. He learned that leaders must consider team members as individuals
with unique needs. Leaders must therefore guide and help team members according
to their special needs. They need to help others to grow and react according to their
team members’ ‘developmental stage’. Such a perspective transformation was
emotionally a strong experience for Max, and the positive charge came across to
the moment of telling (‘almost crying’, laughing, sighs and says silently, ‘very good’).
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

Max discovered that one could choose how to behave as a leader and that made him
feel more confident that he could be a leader too. As Ibarra (1999, 2003) mentioned,
transition to a new work role involves imagination about the possibilities one has for
self-actualisation in a new role. One needs to find balance between who they were
before moving to a new role and the role models provided by those who have earlier
enacted similar roles.
The transformative self-discovery made Max think about power and control in a
new way. Being in charge of things did not require ‘leaders to tell what to do’, but to
be aware of others’ needs and to behave accordingly. Leadership was achieved by
reflecting and regulating one’s own behaviour, and by learning how to behave
differently. It was attained by the same means whether you were a leader or just a
‘team member like the others’. His transformed perspective reflected the nature of a
managerial role similarly to how Tim, Laura and Anne defined their new roles;
leadership is participatory (team member like others), non-commanding (not a
tough dictator) and advisory (helping others). As a consequence, Max started to
observe more clearly how he acted in interaction with others. ‘I mean, you see
yourself behaving in a way instead of just behaving and not really thinking what you
are doing with the others’. Self-observation involved measuring self up to prevailing
role models and adaptation to the prevailing way of talking about managerial roles.
The question ‘who am I in this role’ was answered back in terms of the normative
discourse.
Self-transformation and adoption of the prevailing leadership ideal was not as
smooth and positive experience for all of the participants as it was for Max. Henry
had been an independent specialist almost 20 years before he became a project
manager. His specialist background formed his ideas about how he would like to
enact in a managerial role. In his self-reflections Henry made the dilemma of his role
transition explicit: ‘I am, in this emphasising of expertise, maybe too closely engaged
with my own old [specialist role]. . . . [It] can’t work as it used to work’.
 Studies in Continuing Education 79

I had to force myself to work in a very ‘pure action’ mode, for the period of time . . . I
was consciously thinking that I’m not actually, I’m not this kind of a person, but in this
situation I have to take the role and to be more ‘proactive’ than I am. And what helped
me in this situation was that I, I, I don’t have to change, actually. But I have to accept
the fact that in certain situations I have to change my behaviour or natural way of doing
things. And I can do it. (Original in English)

Here Henry defined that project managers have to be action-oriented and

proactive. By looking around how his colleagues were performing in a managerial
role, he could see that he must work in close collaboration with other people and
react fast. He was ‘forcing’ himself to behave according to these prevailing role
expectations. As he pointed here, he had learned to interpret his managerial role
from alternative perspectives, but was not ready to abandon completely his prior
understanding of what his role should be. Yet, he had accepted to change his
behaviour and altered his ‘natural way’ in favour of the prevailing role models. He
explained that he was actually ‘thinking all the time that maybe (his prior) notions
are actually wrong’. After all, it had been very meaningful to be an ‘actor’ and to
‘carry out the responsibility’ of the project, instead of being just a ‘passive
implementer’ of project tasks.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

The aspect of managerial power

Sara was a former application support specialist who became a project manager
during the study, due to organisational restructuring. In the beginning of her role
transition, Sara thought that a project management position would not develop her
expertise in her own area of specialisation, and, therefore, she had a ‘negative
attitude toward’ project management even if she understood that it could be seen as
a ‘natural progression’ for the job that she had done. The technical part of the project
management was not a problem. Sara had plans to learn the project management
methodology and ‘learn in depth especially the accounting side’. However, Sara felt
‘very unsure’ about how to lead others and that is why she ‘never wanted to even
think about’ a project management job. However, she started to run a project and, as
a consequence, her attitude changed.
In a way, it feels easier to do my job now that I’m acting as a project manager myself . . .
‘cause the [project] goal is like self-evident and I trust that we’ll handle this all the
way. . . . As a project member I had much more insecure feeling . . . if some plans started
to change direction . . . I started feeling that I’ve worked for nothing. . . . Now I feel so
different that I’m amazed . . . big difference in confidence.
Sara was emphasising here how she had changed along with the adoption of a
new managerial role. As a manager of the project, she knew better to where the
project was heading (‘goal is like self-evident’). Minor changes in project plans did
not make her feel insecure or disappointed (‘I’ve worked for nothing’) like before.
Now she was able to keep sight on the overall purpose of the project throughout its
duration and feel confident about it (‘we’ll manage this all the way’). Such a
perspective transformation regarding her own role made her feel emotionally very
different at work. Yet, the question that was concerning her was that ‘how can I now
share with the members of my own project this similar experience . . . this feeling of
confidence’. In line with the prevailing leadership ideals, she wanted to help her team
 80 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

members to grow as well. Furthermore, in her new role she could show her expertise
even better than before.
What I think is the most important thing, is that now I have [a voice]. Now people listen
to me differently. . . . Now they invite me to participate in meetings. And now my
opinion is asked for more often than before. So, only now I’ve been able to demonstrate
my expertise in this organisation. And I think, it is funny that people are so surprised
when they see my plans and results of my job
job. I have received systematically
surprising comments like: ‘Wow! Professional’!
Sara was implicitly referring here to prior work events in which she had not been
able to present results of her work in public, because her boss (in a higher position)
had represented her. So, although she had had professional competence prior to her
managerial role transition, she was only recognised after she moved to her new post.
Sara used irony to express how ‘funny’ it was that people in her organisation had not
known what she was capable of and were ‘so surprised’ now that she presented her
plans and results as a project manager. Before she had not been selected to important
assignments and her requests for information had not been taken seriously, because
she had not had enough status and authority in the organisation.
The managerial role was bringing along new possibilities for her to influence.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

Now that she had an official role of a project manager, people listened to her
differently, she upgraded easily her contact network within and outside the
organisation, and was ‘invited to participate’ and express her opinions. However,
Sara was amazed and astonished at ‘how much finally the official position in the
organisation impacts on things’. She always thought that it is more important what
gets done than who gets things done. She became aware of things that she had
ignored or had not been able to discuss. She became sensitive to structural
inequalities in her organisation. She was wondering how to accept a role that
privileged her compared to those in less powerful positions. From that point of view,
the attempt to find a more equalitarian relationship between oneself as a project
manager and others, as reflected by most of the participants, could be seen as a
justification for the usage of the inevitable organisational power that one had in a
managerial role.

Discussion
It can be argued that the managerial role transitions were self-transforming
experiences to the participants of this study. According to Mezirow (1990, 1991,
2000, 2003), a dilemmatic situation, such as a role transition, that questions the
adequacy of a prior meaning-making scheme can eventually lead to a transformative
perceptual change. Similar to the transformative learning process, which Mezirow
(1991) has described, the participants found it first difficult to enact their new roles
according to their prior perspectives. As a consequence, they started reflecting on
the role expectations and questioning their existing managerial role models. The
statements regarding the expectations in the new role were usually followed by the
reflections on whether one was able to do what he or she was supposed to do and on
role models in relation to the roles to be. In most cases, self-reflection and trying out
of new roles led eventually to a perspective transformation regarding what a
 Studies in Continuing Education 81

managerial role is; how to occupy a managerial role; how it feels to be in such a role;
and what managerial authority, power and influence mean.
Critical reflection on premises, reasons and justifications upon which the new
managerial roles were based (i.e., why-questions) happened during role transitions,
but not to the extent that Mezirow’s transformative learning theory might suggest.
Whilst this would seem to bear out the argument that perspective transformations
require critical reflection, it also gives us an insight that the transformative learning
in managerial role transition involves some other processes. It seems that perspective
transformation can be understood in terms of adaptation to the prevailing discourse
that defines how the managerial roles are properly enacted in a certain context.
This is not to state that role transitions were about simply copying habits from
role models. As Ashforth (2001: 202) has noted, usually experienced people are
highly motivated to frame the new roles toward their preferences and to adapt role
expectations to fit their sense of identity and who they want to become. That involves
breaking the constraining barriers of the role models. However, as part of the self-
reflection and reframing of the role, the participants were also internalising and
renewing the dominant culture. By comparing ‘self’ to the role expectations one was
also learning social norms, values and leadership ideals.
In the context of this study adoption of a dominant perspective meant learning
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

how to influence others via managing self. Equally to the ideals of transformational
leadership (Bass 1985; Burns 1978) one was supposed to be there for others and,
instead of using direct authority, to inspire, motivate and encourage others to do
what they needed to do. Whilst there was evidence that some of the participants were
struggling to act upon such expectations, it was the case that most reflected on their
role transition experiences as being transformative and as changing their perspective
toward more participatory, supportive, observatory and self-aware notions of how to
enact managerial roles.

Conclusions
Transformative learning theory adds to our understanding of learning in managerial
role transitions. It extends the theorisation of role learning from psychological
attributes to experiential perspective transformation. However, the transformative
role transition experiences during the entry to a managerial role were not innocent,
as we have seen. Work places are not value-free learning sites (Fenwick 2001; Wilson
and Cervero 2001) and as Yoong Ng and Cervero (2005) have stated, learning in any
business organisation is evidentially subjugated by interest of profit making and
power of ownership. Transformative learning takes place, in most cases, within
corporate core values and prescribed procedures and, as such, serves ultimately the
purposes of building human capital (Fenwick 2004: 200). Hence, the transformative
learning in work role transitions does not necessarily lead to a more inclusive and
reflective perspective as Mezirow (1991) has suggested, but brings the adoption of a
dominant perspective.
The adoption of the dominant perspective means that the one who learns how to
behave properly and transform one’s habits of mind in accordance to the new role
becomes subjected to a powerful organisational discourse that defines how one is
supposed to behave, think and feel in a managerial role. How individuals understand
themselves in work settings is shaped by language and culture, which serves the
 82 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

interest of those in power (Clark and Wilson 1991). Discourse that defines
managerial roles does more than simply provide language to think of project plans,
costs, resources, outputs and so on; it makes one give in to organisational value
systems, priorities and principles and to internalise self-disciplinary practices (e.g.,
observation of how one behaves in relation to others and adaptation to the most
influential way of getting others to do what they are ought to do). Therefore,
receiving a managerial promotion may place a person in a contested relationship to
much of the workplace practices and values to which he or she previously identified
(Billett and Somerville 2004).
The research theme of the adoption of the dominant perspective in managerial
transitions is a useful pathway for the future to uncover aspects of leadership and
career development. Instead of uncritically celebrating the self-discovery that newly
appointed project managers and team leaders reflect upon, it calls for attention to
sociocultural constraints that are discursively involved with reflections on ‘self’ and
managerial roles. Further theorisation is needed in order to relate individual
reflections to the socio-political aspects of learning in managerial role transitions
and other inter-organisational transfers.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

References
Ashforth, B. 1995. Work-role transitions: A longitudinal examination of the Nicholson model.
Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology 68, no. 2: 157
75.
***. 2001. Role transitions in organizational life: An identity-based perspective. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bass, B.M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bell, S. 1988. Becoming a political women: The reconstruction and interpretation of
experience through stories. In Gender and discourse: The power of talk, ed. A.D. Todd
and S. Fisher (pp. 97
123). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Billet, S., and M. Somerville. 2004. Transformations at work: Identity and learning. Studies in
Continuing Education 26, no. 2: 309
26.
Boyd, R. 1991. Personal transformations in small groups. London: Routledge.
Boyd, R., and G. Myers. 1988. Transformative education. International Journal of Lifelong
Education 7, no. 4: 261
84.
Blenkinsopp, J., and K. Zdunczyk. 2005. Making sense of mistakes in managerial careers.
Career Development International 10, no. 5: 359
74.
Burns, J.M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
Clark, M.C., and A.L. Wilson. 1991. Context and rationality of Mezirow’s theory of
transformative learning. Adult Education Quarterly 41, no. 2: 75
91.
Cranton, P., and M. Roy. 2003. When the bottom falls out of the bucket. Toward a holistic
perspective on transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education 1, no. 2: 86
98.
Dirkx, J. 1997. Nurturing soul in adult education. In Transformative learning in action: Insights
from practice. New directions for adult and continuing education, no. 74, ed. P. Cranton
(pp. 79
88). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
***. 2003a. Images, transformative learning and the work of soul. Adult Learning 12, no. 3:
15
6.
***. 2003b. ‘Being called awake’: The role of transformative learning in the lives of
environmental activists. Adult Education Quarterly 53, no. 2: 99
118.
Dirkx, J.M., J. Mezirow, and P. Cranton. 2006. Musings and reflections on the meaning,
context, and process of transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education 4, no.
2: 123
39.
 Studies in Continuing Education 83

Fenwick, T. 2001. Tides of change: new themes and questions in workplace learning. In
Sociocultural perspectives on learning through work. New directions for adult and continuing
education, no. 92, ed. T. Fenwick (pp. 243
59). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
***. 2004. Towards a critical HRD in theory and practice. Adult Education Quarterly 54,
no. 3: 193
209.
Ibarra, H. 1999. Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional
adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly 44, no. 4: 764
92.
***. 2003. Working identity: Unconventional strategies for reinventing your career. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Imel, S. 1998. Transformative learning in adulthood. ERIC Digest, No. 200. www.ericdigests.
org/1999-2/adulthood.htm.
Isopahkala-Bouret, U. 2005. Joy and struggle for renewal. A narrative inquiry into expertise in
job transitions. Helsinki: University of Helsinki Press.
Kramer, M.W., and T.L. Nolan. 1999. Communication during job promotions: A case of
ongoing assimilation. Journal of Applied Communication Research 27: 335
55.
Kritskaya, O.V., and J.M. Dirkx. 2000. Leadership development as transformative pedagogy.
In Proceedings of Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Raleigh
Durham,
North Carolina, March 8
12.
Lombardo, M.M., and R.W. Eichinger. 2000. High potentials as high learners. Human
Resource Management Journal 39, no. 4: 321
329.
Louis, M.R. 1980. Career transitions: Varieties and commonalities. Academy of Management
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011

Review 5: 329
40.
McGregor, S.L.T. 2006. Transformative Practice. New pathways to leadership. East Lansing,
MI: Kappa Omicron Nu.
Mezirow, J. 1990. How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. In Fostering critical
reflection in adulthood. A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning, ed. J. Mezirow
and Associates (pp. 1
20). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
***. 1991. Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
***. 2000. Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformative learning. In
Learning as transformation
critical perspectives on theory in progress, ed. J. Mezirow and
Associates (pp. 3
34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
***. 2003. Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education 1, no.
1: 58
62.
Mishler, E.G. 1986. Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Morrison, E.W. 1995. Information usefulness and acquisition during organizational encoun-
ter. Management Communication Quarterly 9, no. 2: 131
55.
Munton, A.G., and M.A. West. 1995. Innovations and personal change: Patterns of
adjustment to relocation. Journal of Organizational behavior 16, no. 4: 363
75.
Nicholson, N. 1984. A theory of role transitions. Administrative Science Quarterly 29: 172
91.
***. 1996. Career systems in crisis: Change and opportunity in the information age. The
Academy of Management Executive 10, no. 4: 40
52.
Nicholson, N., and M. West. 1988. Managerial job change. Men and women in transition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polkinghorne, D. 1988. Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
***. 1995. Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. In Life history and narrative, ed.
J.A. Hatch, and R. Wisniewski (pp. 5
24). London: The Falmer Press.
Quinn, R.E. 1996. Deep change: Discovering the leader within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Riessman, C.K. 1993. Narrative analysis. Newbury Park: Sage.
 84 U. Isopahkala-Bouret

Riessman, C.K. 2002. Analysis of personal narratives. In Handbook of interview research.

Context and method, ed. J.F. Gubrium, and J. A. Holstein (pp. 695
710). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Schön, D. 1983. The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. London: Maurice
Temple Smith.
Scott, S.M. 1997. The grieving soul in the transformative process. In Transformative learning
in action: Insights from practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, no. 74,
ed. P. Cranton (pp. 31
50). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stephens, G.K. 1994. Crossing internal career boundaries: The state of research on subjective
career transitions. Journal of Management 20, no. 2: 479
501.
Tennant, M. 2005. Transforming selves. Journal of Transformative Education 3, no. 2: 102
15.
Yoong Ng, K., and R.M. Cervero. 2005. Learning the boss way: Ownership, power and
learning in practice and in workplaces. International Journal of Lifelong Education 24, no. 6:
489
506.
West, M.A., N. Nicholson, and A. Rees. 1987. Transitions into newly created jobs. Journal of
Occupational Psychology 60: 97
113.
Wilson, A.L., and R.M. Cervero. 2001. Power in practice: A new foundation for adult
education. In Power in Practice: Adult education and the struggle for knowledge and power
in society, ed. R.M. Cervero, A.L. Wilson and Associates (pp. 267
88). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Downloaded At: 08:21 30 April 2011