A500.5.1.RB_VoreDan

Critical Thinking – How Am I Doing?

The questions posed were as follows: Take some time to reflect on the current state of your critical thinking competencies. Consider your thinking processes when you started the course. Have they changed at all? Have you been able to internalize any of the techniques and concepts you have learned? What will it take to make lasting, positive changes in the way you think?

My answers follow: When Critical Thinking was introduced through the reading of Learning to Think Things Through, by Gerald Nosich (Pearson, 4^th edition, 2012), it became almost immediately obvious that the ideas and methods presented constituted necessary practice on the part of any aspiring or actual leader.  We also reflected on the notion of Intellectual Perseverance early on in this course and so learned that this quality is an “intellectual virtue”.  By extension, I would say that Critical Thinking ranks among Leadership Virtues.

What I discovered as I began reading Nosich was new territory for me intellectually.  I had always fancied myself as a competent, logical thinker and problem solver, but I had never received training in critical thinking nor had I been introduced to it as a discipline in and of itself.  As a scientist and engineer by training, I had learned the scientific method, to question assumptions, experimental or actual conditions that might affect outcome, to avoid overgeneralization, etc.  In my first MS degree program, I had learned about research questions, methods, data gathering, statistical analysis, and the like.  But I had never before read an explicit treatment of critical thinking, so if anyone had asked me what critical thinking was, I would have been hard pressed to say anything with much validity.

After reading Nosich, my awareness has certainly shifted and I now recognize the criticality of this Leadership Virtue.  I also at least now have a good source to consult regarding the finer points of the practice and the techniques employed.  What I lack is enough familiarity and practice to have the elements and the standards (for example) ingrained in both memory and practice.  What I do know is that I now at least slow down and recognize the need to apply critical thinking to both the continued assignments of this course and also to challenges encountered at work.

I am working on internalizing the concepts of critical thinking; but I still must consult Nosich on a regular basis to properly conduct the complete analysis of my thinking that is required to qualify as critical thinking.  I firmly believe that the knowledge of the requirement for critical thinking is ingrained in my mind.  I also have a good, and growing, general sense of the elements.  And I have internalized the concept of point of view, context, and alternatives.  But, further practice of the application of the techniques described by Nosich is yet required to make the complete practice “second nature” as it were.

A500.4.3.RB_VoreDan

Reflections On the Art of Choosing

Born and raised in the United States, I never thought about Dr. Iyengar’s topic, or the points that she made in her TED video about choosing and our cultural bias. (http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sheena_iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing.html)

As Dr. Iyengar conveyed, Americans have been taught for their entire lives that choices, preferably choices that we make and the more choices that we have the better, are part of everyday living.  Indeed, if Americans were denied choices, they would feel offended or cheated in some way.  It would be “un-American” to say no to having choices.

As I watched the presentation, I had difficulty remaining focused because examples from my own life and my own perspective kept cropping up and, in the context of Dr. Iyengar’s message I quickly began to find humor and even a little embarrassment concerning how I perceived choice as a “requirement” in many scenarios.  For example, I remember buying my motorcycle a few years ago.  There were two of the model that I wanted that were exactly alike on the showroom floor.  I spent quite some time looking over each one for any minor differences or flaws and finally made my choice based upon the one that I considered to be the “best” of the two.  Or, when a local department store that had an extensive men’s clothing department used to be nearby and I would shop there, I always preferred when I found a shirt or a pair of pants that I wanted to buy that there be at least two exactly alike so that I could choose the best one.  Whereas if there was only one, I went over it with a fine-toothed comb to make absolutely certain that there were no flaws or imperfections.  Just recently, I bought a new car from a local dealer and I was mildly put off that they only had one of the particular model and color that I wanted.  I would have preferred two, so I could choose!

Reflecting on my own, heretofore largely unnoticed predilection for choice, and hearing Dr. Iyengar talk about eastern Europeans, the Japanese, or other cultures that perceive choice differently, I could only shake my head at what now seem like my rather peculiar and perhaps even misguided feelings about always needing to have a choice.  And since early childhood, if I chose to do something and then did it, things were fine in my world.  But if I chose to do something and then someone (like my parents) told me to do it, I resented it and drug my feet because in retrospect my “choice” had been changed into a direct order.  I’m beginning to wonder if I need therapy.

I am fascinated by Dr. Iyengar’s findings, especially her second and third “assumptions” that Americans make: more options lead to better choices, and never say no to choice.  As I think further on the purchasing examples that I have observed in myself, I would have to admit that there have been times when having “too many” choices left me feeling frustrated and sometimes unable to make any choice at all.  In fact, depending upon my mood and stress level, there were times when I was glad that there was only one of something on the rack or on the showroom floor because then I didn’t end up second-guessing myself later on.

The example of premature babies on life support and the difference in how the French decide to remove a child from life support, versus how Americans make that same decision was incredibly poignant.  Even though American parents are the ones asked to make the choice, and insist upon it, they suffer the most in the end.  Parents are not the ones who make the decision in France; rather it is the Doctor who decides when to remove life support.  The French parents recover far more quickly from the pain of losing a child this way, and even gain perspective on life and its meaning.  When I listened to this, the thought that came to mind was of our own, individual death.  Mostly, we know neither the time nor the place of our death.  In the movie, The Bucket List (2007), when Morgan Freeman’s character reflects on his knowing the approximate time of his death he says that he thought he would find it “liberating”, but as he found out, it is not.  I have often heard people say that they are glad that they don’t know how long they have left to live.  In essence, they are saying “no” to a very personal and a very critical choice.  We gain peace in not having a choice in the matter.  I find it hard to fathom how those who are given a terminal diagnosis deal with knowing.  I hope to never find out.

But let me emerge from the dramatic, or even the morbid, and address whether or not I “agree” with Dr. Iyengar and what may be the implication of her comments on leadership.  I do agree that Dr. Iyengar’s three assumptions are generally true of American culture.  How often have I heard, especially from the gurus of late, that indeed “Happiness is a choice”?  More importantly, so we are told, we each must make that choice for ourselves.  Make your own choices, but be prepared to accept the consequences of those choices.  Americans thrive on having the most choices that they can have, and not only do we never say “no” to choice, we aggressively insist on choice.

Then Dr. Iyengar closes with a most interesting thought: maybe listening to more perspectives, or from other cultures, on the importance and even the authenticity of choice would serve us well.  Perhaps Americans need to stop and think about whether our view (the three assumptions) is always the optimal approach.  In fact, limiting our choices through informed dialogue with others, sharing opinions on the matter, may benefit not only the choice that we may make, but benefit other aspects of our lives as it benefited the French parents to not be the ones who chose when to take their premature baby off life support.  I had to chuckle a bit when I had the fleeting thought that in a way Dr. Iyengar was suggesting that we should consult an increased number of choices about having a choice, but I’m sure that wasn’t her actual intent.

So too as leaders, perhaps we need to be much more conscious about situations involving choices.  Maybe we need to reason our way through whether we actually enable choices (and how many choices) for those in our charge.  At very least, we should help to ensure that if we offer choices, our employees are well equipped to make an informed choice.  I would say that the same holds for our peers and even our bosses.  Sometimes it may indeed prove best to limit choice.  If you go to your boss with a laundry list of choices, rather than two or three “good” choices or options, then perhaps you haven’t done your job.  Likewise, if you don’t intelligently narrow the choices, but instead throw everything on the table for your employees, maybe you haven’t served them well either.  I’m not suggesting that we as leaders stack the deck.  What I am suggesting is that our construct of choices must be meaningful and actionable, and that true discernment is possible among what we offer to those whom we serve.  We need to ensure that there really is a need for both “ballet slippers” and “adorable”, or if anyone can really tell them apart.  We need to base our choice, indeed our value judgements, less on the illusion of choices and more on the authenticity of what we view as choice.  Thank you Dr. Iyengar for opening our eyes to a vital issue not only in our culture but also our pursuit of learning about real leadership skills.

A500.3.3.RB.VoreDan

Organizational Leadership as a System

When one thinks of Organizational Leadership, or any subject that one might study, as a system of thinking, and not just a body of information, then Organizational Leadership becomes a rich collection of well-ordered and cascading concepts that allow one to critically think through an Organizational Leadership question, challenge, or situation to derive a well-reasoned conclusion.  In other words, approaching Organizational Leadership as a system of thinking causes one to internalize the deep and essential concepts that comprise the discipline in order that one might then apply these concepts to any scenario involving the leadership of an organization.  When I was a graduate student many years ago, my statistics professor worked with us to draw a detailed diagram (a concept map, actually) of the fundamental concepts of statistics that included the different types of distributions, statistical tests, and conditions under which one might go down one branch or path of the diagram, and in so doing this exercise as the class progressed, when we were done, we could see the entire field of statistics in one picture – a roadmap – and we also knew how each different area could be applied to problems that we might encounter in the future where we needed to draw upon statistical analysis.  But just as importantly, with this diagram, we could see the relationships among the parts, and we knew how to think about statistical problems in such a manner that we could then diagnose a particular problem, think through the right technique to apply, and then go dig into the depths of that application to solve the problem correctly.  Also, with this type of knowledge, we could communicate these concepts to others and help them to understand what we were doing for example when we established a detailed system of statistical process control on a complex manufacturing line that was at the heart of the acquisition program I was assigned to after graduation.  I should note that the statistics course structured, and the concept map was based, on a great book entitled Learning How to Learn, by Novak, Gowin, and Kahle (September 28, 1984).  It was the first time that I had ever encountered this teaching method and also the first time that I had a true grasp – a complete picture and thorough understanding – of a complex subject that I had studied in school.  When I came away from that treatment of the subject of statistics, I truly knew about statistics and I could reason my way through any situation that required its application.

Contrast this with treating the topic of Organizational Leadership, or any subject, as merely a body of knowledge.  Treating subjects as merely bodies of knowledge was, in fact, the way that my entire academic career had progressed until that statistics class.  You learn rote facts, you study for the tests, you regurgitate these rote facts when prompted, and then not only do you promptly forget those facts, when someone asks you about the subject you find that you really don’t know the first thing about it.  How incredibly frustrating it was, for example, to work my way through an entire four-year degree in chemical engineering and then discover that I really couldn’t remember much of anything that I had learned.  I couldn’t answer questions or analyze problems.  In fact, in retrospect, I had not learned about chemical engineering at all.  I crammed my head full of numbers and facts so that I could pass the exams but I came away without a picture of what chemical engineering was, or how to solve chemical engineering problems.  So too with treating Organizational Leadership as a mere body of knowledge.  And as a leader, one will not succeed if all you have at the end of your MS in Leadership degree program is a perishable collection of disparate facts.  Leaders, of all people, must be able to think through problems, understand the fundamental and key concepts, use these concepts to diagnose an organizational issue, and know where to go if necessary – what specifically to reach for – to solve the problem.  As I continue to approach my learning as part of this MS in Leadership program, I will seek to understand the key concepts – the fundamental and powerful concepts as Nosich puts it – and apply the appropriate concepts (just as I would apply the right statistical technique to a statistical problem) to the questions that each assignment poses and the overall questions that the course as a whole generates.  I would be empowered to do this because I truly learned about Organizational Leadership.  So when I’m done, I won’t walk away with a bunch of facts – let’s call them trivia – that I quickly forget and just go back to my old ways of approaching the topic.  Instead, I’ll have a roadmap that allows me to engage my newly earned knowledge and to discuss and explain, and to reason so that others within the organization and those above me will understand and agree with my diagnoses and recommendations.  In so doing I will be well equipped to apply my MS in Leadership to my work to enable better outcomes.

A500.2.3.RB.VoreDan

Tell Your Story

In Learning to Think Things Through (Nosich, page 162) the author asks, “What are some standards that are most important in your life?”  He also asks, “How did you acquire those standards? [and] How have they changed over the years?”  I will first focus on some general standards that I try to live up to in my life; I will then discuss the Critical Thinking Standards in the text and comment on the extent that I hold these important in my life (and work).

First and foremost, I attempt to live my life in accordance with Christian morals and standards as I have learned growing up, and in my adult life through attendance at church, various classes, reading The Bible, and hard-won experience.  Before going any further, let me state for the record that I understand Christians have not cornered the market on standards.  In fact, many self-professed Christians appear to abide by questionable standards and morals, while others who do not profess to be Christian live exemplary lives.  Also, let me point out that I’m not talking about The Old Testament (except for the Ten Commandments) and all of the Laws of Moses when I refer to Christian standards.  Instead, I try to live my life according to The New Testament.  Among these Christian standards are honesty, kindness to others, loving one’s neighbor as yourself, loving God will all of your heart, mind, soul, and strength, not judging lest you also be judged, forgiveness, and the overall words and teachings of Christ as contained within the Scriptures.  I grew up in a Christian home, where these values were taught; I attended church with my parents and these standards simply became the context for living life.  But as a child and a young adult, I don’t believe that I truly understood the criticality of these values, nor did I make it a priority to live in accordance with them as I have come to later in life.  I believed that these standards were important in my younger years, but I often “pushed the envelope” in day-to-day life.  It wasn’t until I suffered the consequences of violating some of these standards, and learned from my mistakes a few times, that I truly came to understand how vital living up to them is if you want to be at peace with yourself, others, and your life in general.  In a sense, I had to start all over in learning about these standards and their direct application to my living once I had begun to understand the mess your life can become by not living according to them.  As such, I have gained a much greater appreciation of these Christian standards as I have gotten older; they are not just “rules” or words, or concepts, or good suggestions, but truly are important instructions for living one’s life.

Before I get into Critical Thinking Standards, I want to mention three additional standard of sorts that I also learned from my parents and grandparents that have served me well both in my military career and in life after the military.  I call this first standard the “work ethic”, and I believe it is related to the Christian standards that I discussed above.  At an early age, from watching my parents (my father, especially) and my grandparents, and through my own assignment of daily chores around the house, I learned to work hard and to give it your all in everything that you do, or strive to accomplish.  Many of the old sayings come to mind with this one, such as “If someone asks you to go a mile, go two.”  Implicit in this work ethic is respect for authority, which is also related to Christian values.  I don’t mean any “authority”; what I mean is what I would call “legitimate” authority, starting with God but also including your parents, your elders, your instructors, and your boss.  Clearly, when working at any job, if your boss is asking you to do something dishonest, illegal, or unethical, you have the right (even the obligation) to refuse.  In the military, there is the concept of a “lawful order”, which means that your boss cannot order you to do something illegal (in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Laws of Armed Conflict).  If your boss does give an order that is illegal, it is your duty to respectfully decline.  But that is a subject for a whole other paper.  In general, one is to work hard and in accordance with the boss’s instructions whether you are putting in an eight-hour day, or whether you are asked to work nights and weekends on an important project.  I have always maintained a strict, high work ethic, though this is becoming more difficult with age; I simply don’t have the energy or the stamina that I once did.

Energy and stamina bring me to the next two standards by which, although you couldn’t necessarily tell by looking at me these days, I try to live life.  These two standards are health and fitness.  I attempt, through diet, exercise, and good sleep habits, to maintain a high level of health and fitness in life.  This was relatively easy when I was young, and I had much more energy, stamina, and inner drive.  And it was especially easy to eat properly when I still lived at home with my parents until the end of high school.  As an aside, many things seemed easier until I left home and began living on my own through college and even up through present day.  My parents provided the boundaries, kept good food on the table, and generally made life much easier to live according to the standards that I have mentioned thus far.  Once on my own, essentially free to live life as I chose, many aspects of my life became less organized and I realize in looking back that I just thought that I would automatically live life on my own as I had with my parents.  But that didn’t happen.  Maintaining standards require focus and work.  I would come to learn this later in life; although it may seem obvious now, it was not obvious in my twenties and thirties.  Now age 54, having had three back surgeries, and also having developed Type II Diabetes, eating the proper foods and maintaining good and consistent exercise habits has become much more critical.  Like much of life, there is no “destination” when it comes to standards of health and fitness.  It remains a journey and keeping those standards in mind as I live each day of life is incredibly important.  Let me turn my attention now to Critical Thinking standards.

Nosich (Learning How to Think Things Through, Fourth Edition, 2012) lists seven Standards of Critical Thinking: clearness, accuracy, importance/relevance, sufficiency, depth, breadth, and precision.  Not all are as familiar to me, nor do I practice them, as much as I should.  Clearness and accuracy I have always strived for in both my spoken and written communications.  This started early on in grade school and continues through present day as I write various documents, reports, and letters, and prepare briefings for senior leadership in the acquisition program office where I work.  During my three and one-half years in The Pentagon when I was on active duty, I “went to school” on clearness and accuracy as I dealt routinely with general officers.  Generals have no time or patience for information that is not presented to them in a clear and accurate (and concise) manner.  Importance and relevance I have also attempted to work hard at through the years; these two standards (or one combined standard in our text) are really an element of “logic” for me.  If something is not important/relevant, I immediately question its value in conversation or writing.  Again, my military background and experiences also emphasized important/relevant when providing information and in making recommendations or decisions.  Depth is something that I learned about through school and my undergraduate work, but graduate school and writing my Master’s Thesis really brought it home.  Not just the literature review section of my Thesis, but also the mathematical modeling and results section required significant depth of research and writing.  Breadth is something that I’m more likely to forget in my reasoning or writing.  For topics that I know well, breadth comes more naturally because I understand how many things are interrelated.  However, if I’m dealing with a topic that I know little about, breadth is not necessarily something that I remember to consider.  Precision, closely related to accuracy, is something that I value highly, probably (or especially) as a result of my military training and career.  The ability to say or to report exactly what happened, what you mean, what you observed, or what needs to happen is critical to decision making.  This is not to say that the other six standards are not, but precision to me is the hallmark of good, critical thinking.  As a chemical engineering undergraduate, I spent four years learning the fine art of precision (trust me).  But precision with words is as important as precision with numbers.  On the whole, I’d like to think that I already employ these standards in my thinking and writing, but as I read Nosich, and as I work through the assigned writings in this course, I am either discovering or re-remembering how to actively apply them and (hopefully) apply them well.  I believe such to be a lifelong work in process.  I also see the necessity of mastering these standards for excellence in leadership.

A500.1.5.RB.VoreDan

Intellectual Perseverance

In my experience in leadership positions, from what I have learned in leadership courses, and in watching good leaders in action, I have seen that leaders must develop and possess certain, key traits and knowledge.  Among the more important traits are integrity, character, humility, moral courage, and perseverance.  Through use and development of the intellect, leaders acquire knowledge across a vast array of topics, such as effective oral and written communications, interpersonal relationships, technical and business expertise, planning and strategy, time management, and a sense of where to focus their attention to achieve optimal results.  The article (Winners Never Quit (Except When They Do): Reflections on Intellectual Perseverance, http://cct.biola.edu/blog/winners-never-quit/) puts it this way: “Intellectual perseverance is an intellectual virtue.  Such virtues are the intellectual character traits of excellent thinkers.  Such virtues include intellectual humility, intellectual courage, open-mindedness, fair mindedness, perseverance, and so on.”  The author also goes on to state that: “Perseverance is a better predictor of academic success than standard indicators like raw intelligence.”  In my own life, especially in my first Master’s degree program, I found this to prove true: I harbor no illusions about my own raw intelligence but my learned ability to persevere led ultimately to my success.

For those who would occupy leadership positions, the development of these key traits and attainment of the knowledge to perform well require intellectual perseverance.  The Foundation for Critical Thinking defines Intellectual Perseverance as:  “Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insight and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations: firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight” (Foundation For Critical Thinking, The Critical Thinking Community, Valuable Intellectual Traits, http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/valuable-intellectual-traits/528).

Nothing truly worthwhile ever comes easy.  I have certainly experienced obstacles and frustrations just in the completion of this assignment.  But, perseverance is the ability to move forward, to make progress toward a goal, or to continue one’s chosen course even in the face of harsh difficulties, resistance, frustration, or fatigue.  Merriam-Webster makes a noteworthy point in their definition of perseverance:  "Perseverance is required to perfect just about any skill." (Merriam-Webster Dictionary application)

The knowledge that leaders require comes about through continuous development of the intellect.  In other words, the leader must remain in a state of continuous learning throughout his career.  Intellect is “the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters” (Oxford Dictionaries, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/).  The word Intellect imparts a notion of sound knowledge, critical thinking, the ability to comprehend complex concepts, and the ability to apply such concepts to the practice of leadership.

In the movie Patton (1970), we see a General who not only practiced perseverance, we also see a man who devoted a great deal of his time to the study of history, particularly the historical details of great military battles fought through the ages.  Patton was an intellectual, particularly in the study of his craft.  At the Battle of El Guettar, where Patton’s troops defeat the Germans, we hear George C. Scott, as Patton, exclaim, “Rommel…I read your book!”  Through intellectual perseverance, General George S. Patton gained a host of knowledge about military strategy and tactics; he also became intimately familiar with the minds and the ideas of his adversaries to became one of the most successful military leaders in World War II.

In a Seminar given by Dr. W. Edwards Deming’s that I attended in 1991 in Minneapolis-St. Paul, I heard Dr. Deming talk about “continuous improvement”.  At one point in the proceedings, Dr. Deming stated, in reference to his Book Out of the Crisis (Deming, January 1, 1982), “a book is never finished, for there is always more to be said and better ways of saying it”.  Dr. Deming was certainly an intellectual who persevered in teaching right up until his death in in December, 1993.  He was also an extremely accomplished leader and advisor who helped to re-build Japanese manufacturing following World War II, using statistical process control techniques that American manufacturers rejected at the time.  Dr. Deming persevered in the face of obstacles, resistance, frustration, and certainly what proved to be irrational opposition in this Country, to the point where America’s manufacturing firms embraced his techniques in the 1980s and those same practices persist today.

In the final analysis, leaders require a well-developed intellect because all leaders must make decisions.  Only through study, experience, and perseverance can a leader acquire the mental faculties to make good decisions.  How else can you obtain the knowledge, and develop the criteria for decision-making if not through diligent study, experience (even failure), and practice; wrestling with difficult concepts to gain mastery of the skills required of a leader?  Intellectual perseverance is indeed a fundamental requirement in the development of one’s leadership ability.  Albert Einstein once said “It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with the problem longer”.  One more observation about perseverance that I want to emphasize: the words “struggle”, “frustration” and “confusion”; and the notion of overcoming these things.  Good leaders struggle, they are often frustrated, they can encounter confusion, and they are frequently under stress when making decisions.  Intellectual perseverance necessitates practice dealing with stress, frustration, confusion, and to experience struggle.  Through intellectual perseverance, one becomes accustomed to the emotions that accompany these conditions and how to rise above them.

When I was a relatively junior Air Force Officer, I was responsible for the acquisition of a specialized, largely hand-built single-seat aircraft.  Occasionally we had to acquire a variant with a back seat to use as a training aircraft.  One of these training aircraft was built under my watch and as it proceeded through final assembly, we discovered a noticeable and unsightly gap between the edge of the canopy and the cockpit sill.  This was not a safety or even a performance issue, it just looked bad and reflected poor quality workmanship.  There was concern that the operational users of this aircraft would not accept this flaw.  But to fix the issue would take literally thousands of man-hours and cost the manufacturer a great deal of money.  I flew to Palmdale, California, where the aircraft was being assembled, and had a look.  I talked with company management.  I gathered as much data as I could, and I came home to discuss the issue with my boss (a former pilot of this particular aircraft).  In the end, my boss told me, “Dan, it’s up to you; you make the call.”  I weighed the potential outcomes of the choice that I had to make.  It was not easy picking up the phone, calling the company’s senior program manager, and telling him that they must re-work this canopy to fix the problem.  But after I announced my decision, that same senior program manager said, “Dan, it’s the right call.  We don’t want to deliver an inferior product, and we’ll get to work on it right away.”  The thing that I learned that day is that people want a leader who will make the difficult decisions, even (and especially) when the consequences are significant.  People generally understand at least some of the stress associated with leadership; and people will not respect an indecisive leader.  Many times during my career, I have had people pull me aside and say, “Thank you for making a decision and providing direction; we don’t like not knowing which way we are supposed to go.”

In closing, I would suggest that to truly understand a subject, you must teach it.  Superior leaders don’t simply lead; they also mentor their junior people.  This benefits not only the mentoree, but it also further sharpens the leader’s skill.  Teaching is probably the best, and most accurate indicator of mastery of a given skill or topic.  Mentoring then, can also be seen as part of a leader’s intellectual perseverance.  As students enrolled in Embry Riddle’s Master of Science in Leadership program, we are leadership mentorees.  We will undoubtedly wrestle with difficult concepts and find frustration as we strive to learn new material, encounter opposition (most often within our own minds) in completing the work, and the questions that we are asked to answer may remain unsettled within our minds for protracted periods.  We will experience stress due to time and other constraints, and maybe even self-doubt as we examine our own leadership ideas, have those ideas challenged, and expand our knowledge.  But we cannot quit.  The experience and practice of intellectual perseverance, developing this intellectual virtue, is critical to our becoming lifelong leaders.