The decision to head south
Written during the Homeward Bound Antarctica Expedition 2018
I’m starting to learn what I came here to learn.
When I set off to Antarctica as part of the Faculty of Homeward Bound 2018, I was curious and hopeful for what I might learn about leadership. How is leadership demonstrated by women? How does it differ, and how does it resemble leadership demonstrated by men? What I have learned thus far is that while there is much similarity, there are some important differences in both how and why women lead.
Antarctica is a world of ice at a scale unimaginable for anyone who hasn’t seen it firsthand. Ice sheets extend hundreds of kilometres out into the ocean all around the continent during winter. Icebergs tower 50 metres above your Zodiac inflatable boat and you can stare down into the crystal clear water and see them reach hundreds of metres more below the surface, down into the blue depths. As you go further south, you see the Antarctic plateau extend out over the horizon, a whole continent buried beneath ice; 70% of the worlds fresh water stored in a crust of ice two to three Kilometres thick.
Homeward Bound is an experiential leadership program, and unsurprisingly some of the greatest learnings come from how we live and work together over three weeks at sea in this most inhospitable and isolated place.
One such opportunity occurred after crossing the Antarctic circle. We approached a sheltered inlet to within 75 Km of the British Research base Rothera on Adelaide Island, only to find wind and waves had blown icebergs into a narrow navigable passage named “The Gullet” blocking our way south. This meant a difficult decision had to be made – whether or not to go to Rothera. To go we would need to double back, head into open ocean and sail round Adelaide Island, a potentially difficult 24-hour return detour. This would likely to lead to a further bout of sea sickness for a significant proportion of the expeditioners. The other option was to stay and explore the calm protected waters of Crystal Sound.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the discussion of options was inclusive and supportive, with care taken to hear all views. The ultimate decision was not to press on South and miss the visit to Rothera. This was not a decision made lightly – visits to Rothera are a rare privilege offered to only two ships per year.
In the following morning’s open frame discussion, many women took the initiative to explore the experience. They articulated and captured the personal insights and leadership learnings they experienced as a result, which included:
How different leadership decisions required different styles, more directive based on expertise and authority or more consultative, based on shared purpose and consensus
How we move from simple critique based on judgement of others to a learning approach, based on increasing shared knowledge and understanding
Using journaling and other reflection techniques to help make sense of the experience
How prior experience, fears, wants and values play out in our evaluation of a situation and how to broaden this perspective to include others
When a willingness to embrace discomfort may be a precondition to discovering something about yourself
How our thinking before, during and after the discussion could move from purely our own wants and needs (1st person) to thinking about others’ needs (2nd person), understanding how the experience was a chance to observe our own and others’ reactions and learn from it (3rd person) and how we could take that lesson out and share it with others (4th person).
Heady stuff!
This reflected a level of insight and a leadership perspective; a willingness to examine motives and methods of leadership that while common sense is not, in my experience as a leadership coach, common practice. It was rewarded by a morning spent cruising in Zodiacs around icebergs while a pod of Orcas criss-crossed the bay in search of prey. As fate would have it, a change in wind and ice during the day meant that we were ultimately able to reach Rothera. This was a rare opportunity, the furthest south even our experienced crew had ventured. Even better, a change in wind direction later mostly cleared the Gullet of icebergs. This meant that we took this ‘short cut’ for the return voyage, using the ice-strengthened hull of the ship to cut a path through moving sheets of sea ice.
I’m not surprised at the leadership abilities I’m seeing on Homeward Bound. According to one of the most widely used 360-degree leadership diagnostic tools in the world (the Human Synergistics Lifestyles Inventory – LSI) this group of women on average, measured in the top 10% of leaders for constructive (as compared to defensive) leadership styles. That was measured before they arrived to commence the core of the Homeward Bound program i.e. these were women who were already better than most, seeking to become even better.
Homeward Bound represents and supports a very specific cohort, women in STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics & Medicine). These are disciplines in which leadership is, in the great majority of cases, in the hands of men. As we traverse the Antarctic Peninsula working through the on-board program, I’m watching the women of Homeward Bound examine how they can help address some of the greatest existential challenges facing humanity.
The question I am left with is at what cost are we excluding this critical cohort of passionate, intelligent people from decision-making tables? How long before we recognise the limitations of a male-only view in science, on the future we aspire to and how it can best be achieved?
When will we realise that women leading in equal measure in STEMM is not just an equity issue but perhaps the single most important thing we can do to ensure the sustainability of our species?