aiesec leadership strengths research - david j. pollay - publication aiesec

©2006 David J. Pollay

85 SE Fourth Avenue I Delray Beach, FL 33483 VOICE 561.265.1165 I FAX 561.265.1995 [email protected]

Strengths Profiles of Leaders

Strengths Profiles of Leaders in Organizations

A study conducted with the Member Committee Presidents of

David J. Pollay The University of Pennsylvania

and

Research Paper Presented at the International Positive Psychology Summit

In Washington, D.C. October, 2006

2

2006 David J. Pollay 85 SE Fourth Avenue I Delray Beach, FL 33483 VOICE 561.265.1165 I FAX 561.265.1995 [email protected]


Abstract

Do the leaders of an organization have a distinct character strengths profile compared to

people of the same age, and background? Will certain strengths predictably appear in the leadership

strengths profile? This study attempts to answer these questions by administering the Values In

Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) to sixty-two national presidents of AIESEC, the largest student

organization in the world. The VIA-IS scores of the AIESEC sample were compared to people of the

same age and education. The results of the study demonstrate that the AIESEC leadership does

have a distinct leadership strengths profile. Hope, curiosity, perseverance, leadership, teamwork,

and fairness were successfully predicted to be represented in the leadership profile. Four additional

strengths were not predicted, but emerged: zest, bravery, perspective, and forgiveness. Finally, love

was predicted, but did not prove uniquely strong among AIESEC leaders. Our study suggests that

the VIA-IS may be an important tool for organizations which are interested in understanding the

strengths profile of their leaders.

3



Character Strengths Profiles in Organizations

AIESEC Leaders and Strengths

In 1948 university students from 7 European nations formed the Association Internationale des

Etudiants en Sciences Economiques et Commerciales, known by its French acronym AIESEC.

AIESEC is run by student leaders in almost 900 universities located in 95 countries. The United

Nations recognizes AIESEC as the largest student organization in the world. Each AIESEC member

country is led by a president who is elected by the general membership of that country. The

president also represents his or her country internationally, participating as a voting member in

AIESEC International’s planning, programming, and budgeting processes.

AIESEC is unique in part for its ability to thrive for almost 60 years in spite of the fact that all

levels of the leadership ranks in the organization turn over every year. How is success possible given

this constant change? Who are these leaders? Is there something unique about them that makes

their success possible?

In this study I focus my investigation on the strengths of these national leaders.

Strengths

We believe that character strengths are the bedrock of the human condition and that strength-

congruent activity represents an important route to the psychological good life.

(Peterson & Seligman, 2004, p. 4)

The Gallup Organization defined individual strengths to be the working result of a person’s

talents matched to her skills, knowledge and experience. It is worthy of note that Gallup placed the

4


Strengths Profiles of Leaders emphasis of its work on discovering people’s innate talent. “Gallup has discovered that our talents –

defined as our naturally recurring patterns of thought, feeling, or behavior that can be productively

applied – are our greatest opportunities for success” (Clifton & Harter, p. 111). While Gallup is best

known for its focus on talents applied in the workplace, it has also applied its findings to faith-based

communities, to parenting, and to education. In fact, more than 200,000 university students have

been through the Gallup StrengthsQuest program (Rath, 2006).

Peterson and Seligman believed that the identification and deployment of our strengths apply

across all domains in our lives. These researchers predominantly used ten criteria to determine if a

strength was worthy of inclusion in their classification of strengths; Table 1 reviews the criteria they

established (Peterson, & Seligman, pp.16-28). While Peterson and Seligman encouraged us to

develop our top strengths, they also believed that strengths are malleable and can be developed with

concentrated effort.

Gallup joined Peterson and Seligman in referring to one’s top strengths as “signature”

strengths; this term was first introduced by Stone (Seligman, 2002). Signature strengths are those

that an individual authentically feels capture what is unique about himself; he is intrinsically motivated

to use them and enjoy activities that call upon them (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Peterson and

Seligman wrote that people who use their top strengths are more likely to experience higher levels of

well-being (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Clifton and Harter reminded us that, “The strengths-based

organization does not ignore weaknesses, but rather achieves optimization, where talents are

focused and built upon and weaknesses are understood and managed” (Clifton & Harter, 2003, p.

112).

5



Focusing on Strengths

In this study I chose to focus on strengths for three principle reasons. First, The Gallup

Organization has conducted extensive research that demonstrates the power of employees using

their top strengths while at work. Corporations which have “a higher proportion of employees

indicating they ‘have the opportunity to do what they do best every day’ are more productive, have

higher customer loyalty, and have lower turnover” (Clifton & Harter, 2003, p. 119). AIESEC relies on

a motivated and engaged membership; increasing the use of member strengths in the execution of

AIESEC responsibilities has the potential to significantly improve organizational performance.

Second, strengths-focused leaders have a powerful impact on their employees. “In a recent

poll (Gallup Organization, 2002), we found that employees’ perceptions of their organizational leaders

and the future of the organization was significantly more positive if the employees felt ‘the leadership

of the organization focuses on the strengths of each person.’ Developing sustainable positive

momentum in an organization is, in part, a function of developing systems that increase the

opportunity for talent identification and strengths development for each individual” (Clifton & Harter,

2003, p. 121). AIESEC presidents have the opportunity to be strengths-focused leaders.

Third, Seligman in his book Authentic Happiness (2002) presented a tripartite approach to

happiness. He writes that a life filled with positive emotion, meaning, and the opportunity to engage

your top strengths is a happy one. AIESEC presidents will benefit from any activity that brings out

their strengths more fully.

6



Choosing AIESEC

AIESEC is present on almost 900 university campuses in 95 countries. AIESEC is the world's

largest student organization (AIESEC International [AI], 2006). It is unequaled in the leadership

experience it provides its members each year.

University students have the annual opportunity to attend more than 350 leadership

conferences, to participate in one of more than 4,000 work-abroad opportunities, and to be one of

AIESEC’s 5,000 elected leaders. AIESEC is dedicated to helping more than 20,000 student

members per year develop their leadership capacity. AIESEC helps young people to

…answer fundamental questions such as “What is important to me?” and “How do I want to

contribute to the world?” AIESEC supports young people in clarifying and expanding their

ambitions through mentorship, personal vision exercises, an inspiring environment, and

providing intense experiences that challenge their view of the world and their role within

it…AIESEC “shakes up” the way young people see the world. A stronger and more holistic

view of the world enables them to more easily incorporate new perspectives, see

interdependencies, and identify ways to positively impact any given situation (AI, 2006).

The vision of AIESEC is, “Peace and fulfillment of humankind’s potential.” AIESEC sees its

“role” in this way, “our international platform enables young people to discover and develop their

potential to provide leadership for a positive impact on society” (AI, 2006). It is my belief that

identifying, understanding, and developing young people’s strengths will play a significant role in the

development of their potential.

7



Choosing a Strengths Assessment

In order to carry out our assessment of the strengths of AIESEC leaders, I had to first decide

which strengths assessment I would administer to the AIESEC presidents. I chose the VIA-IS over

the Gallup Organization’s Clifton StrengthsFinder. I will first review the Clifton StrengthsFinder,

followed by a discussion of the VIA-IS.

The Clifton StrengthsFinder

Gallup has conducted research with hundreds of companies, thousands of managers and

leaders, and millions of employees. Their multi-year studies have resulted in the discovery that there

are 34 talent themes that all of us have to some degree in the workplace (Buckingham & Clifton,

2001). “Situational themes are the specific habits that lead people to manifest given character

strengths in given situations” (Peterson & Seligman, 2004, p. 14).

The question is which of these themes are our “signature” ones? When do we really shine?

Gallup called on neurological studies to make their case that most of our talents are set in place early

in life. Gallup likened our signature talents to eight lane highways; we can get a lot done through

them. On the other hand, our non-talents are like dirt paths; one rainstorm and we’re stuck in the

mud. Gallup’s conclusion is that we have significantly more power and potential when we leverage

our strengths, rather than venturing on a weakness-fixing mission.

The StrengthsFinder works in any organization because the talent themes are not value laden.

They can be used to support whichever value-set a company has. If you want your sales people to

be “competitive,” you can hire for this talent and develop it further when they’re on board. If you want

your leaders to share their opinions without hesitation no matter the subject, you might hire people

8


Strengths Profiles of Leaders with the “command” talent. If you want to hire customer service representatives who greet all

customers with a smile, you might hire people with “positivity.”

Gallup has a powerful language of strengths built into their assessment. In order to get the

most out of the talent language, you must travel beyond the name of the strength and seek its

meaning. Talents with names like connectedness, context, ideation, input, intellection, maximizer,

positivity, restorative, significance, and woo need to be explained for most audiences. Once you

understand what they mean, the power of their application is great.

The VIA - Inventory of Strengths

The VIA - Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) was introduced just a few years ago, yet it has

already been taken by more than 600,000 people around the world (Peterson, 2006). Peterson and

Seligman developed the VIA-IS.

Peterson and Seligman engaged in extensive research to determine a classification of

character strengths and virtues ubiquitously valued around the world. The premise of their research

was that there are certain character strengths that are important and appreciated no matter in which

context they are displayed. These strengths are celebrated at work, at home, in school, at the

grocery story, and on the soccer field.

It is worth considering that the VIA-IS measures “morally valued” strengths. This is important

for a company to consider. If a company strives to be listed in Fortune Magazine’s Top 100 Places to

Work, the VIA-IS is a powerful tool to use. Park, Peterson, and Seligman found in their research that

the more a person owns and uses her strengths, the greater life satisfaction she reports (Park,

Peterson, & Seligman, 2004). Seligman and his colleagues also discovered that people were

9


Strengths Profiles of Leaders lastingly happier when they learned about and found new ways to use their VIA-IS strengths

(Seligman, et al., 2005). “The virtues are at once conducive to the betterment of ‘me’ and the ‘we’ –

bringing happiness, productivity, and harmony to both the individual and the society more generally”

(McCullough & Snyder, p.3).

If a company is interested only in short-term profits, without concern for how people reach their

financial goals, they should use the VIA-IS with caution. The VIA-IS would likely draw attention to the

divide between the cut-throat actions of the business and the character strengths that are admired

and celebrated ubiquitously around the world.

The VIA-IS has an advantage over the Clifton StrengthsFinder because the VIA-IS strengths

are largely understood at face value. On the other hand, many of the Gallup strengths are not

commonly understood. The additional challenge for Gallup is translating their unique nomenclature

into other languages.

The VIA-IS has an additional benefit; it was designed to be context independent. I am

interested in learning about the strengths leaders display in all environments. I believe the character

strengths outlined in the VIA-IS are the most valuable to us because they are available to us at all

times; we can call upon them at any time, any place, and with anyone.

In terms of personal development, the VIA-IS allows people to leverage all of their life activities

in the service of further developing their strengths. Furthermore, the many roles people fulfill in their

lives benefit from character strengths development; all their efforts are aligned. People’s strengths

are not domain limited; they do not need to worry about which strengths to turn on and which ones to

turn off. Character strengths travel with you wherever you go.

10


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 2 reviews the character strengths that make up the VIA-IS. Character strengths are

“routes” to the “six ubiquitous virtues”: wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and

transcendence (Seligman, 2002, p. 137). “A strength is a trait, a psychological characteristic that can

be seen across different situations over time” (Seligman, 2002, p. 137); “valued in its own right”

(Seligman, 2002, p. 137), and “measurable and acquirable” (Seligman, 2002, p. 137), and contributes

to “good feeling and gratification” (Seligman, 2002, p. 9). A technical review of the VIA-IS measure

itself can be found in the Measures section of this paper.

A final point worth noting about the VIA-IS is that its science is also transparent and available

for review and analysis. Gallup’s StrengthsFinder is proprietary, and much of the research behind it is

not available for public review.

Leadership Strengths Profile

In a lecture to students participating in the Master’s in Applied Positive Psychology Program at

the University of Pennsylvania, Peterson revealed that no study has yet been published that has

described how the VIA-IS was administered to an organization’s leaders in order to determine their

leadership strengths profile (Peterson, 2006). Peterson did review a preliminary study that measured

the character strengths of West Point cadets. A strengths profile was discovered that differs from the

general population (Peterson, 2006). It is clear that the study that I have completed with AIESEC is

the first to focus on the top leaders of a multinational organization.

11



Predicting and Discovering AIESEC Strengths

I have first-hand knowledge of AIESEC. I am a former AIESEC national president of the

United States, a former member of the AIESEC United States’ National Board of Directors, and a

member of AIESEC’s International Alumni Hall of Fame. In addition, I led a leadership development

workshop at the 2006 International President’s Meeting in The Netherlands. I also analyzed annual

reports, marketing documents, and the website of AIESEC International.

Before the administration of the VIA-IS to the presidents of AIESEC, I predicted which

character strengths I believed would surface as uniquely strong in comparison to other young adults

of the same age and educational background. I expected that hope, curiosity, perseverance,

leadership, teamwork, love, and fairness would score particularly high. The results of this study are

presented in the next two sections. Peterson significantly contributed to this study with his analysis

and interpretation of the VIA-IS results for the AIESEC presidents.

Method

Research Participants

Study participants were young adult volunteers from the AIESEC organization. All participants

were national presidents of AIESEC, or their recently elected successors; each was elected by the

general membership of his or her country to serve for one year. He or she is responsible for national

operations, and for representing his or her country in the planning, programming, and budgeting

processes of AIESEC internationally. 62 presidents took the VIA-IS on-line and reported

demographic data: 32 males and 30 females, all young adults, most with a college degree (48).

12


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Measure

Below is a description of the Values In Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) by Peterson and

Seligman.

Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005). The VIA-IS is a

240-item self-report questionnaire that uses a 5-point Likert scale to measure the degree to

which respondents endorse strength-relevant statements about themselves. There are a total

of 24 strengths of character in the VIA classification, and the VIA-IS includes 10 items per

strength. Responses are averaged within scales, all of which have satisfactory internal

consistency measured by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α > .70) and substantial test-retest

correlations over a four-month period (r ~ .70). Scale scores are negatively skewed (X ranges

from 3.5 to 4.0) but variable (SD ranges from .5 to .9). There are a small number of

demographic correlates of specific character strengths, usually gender, where females scored

higher than males on interpersonal character strengths like social intelligence, kindness, and

love, but these never exceed r = .20.

Procedure

Invitations to the presidents to participate in the study were communicated by Brodie Boland,

AIESEC International President 2005-2006. Participants were directed to take the VIA-IS online at

the AIESEC Strengths Research website (http://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/AIESEC/).

The presidents first provided demographic data during a brief registration process, and then were

directed to complete the VIA-IS. Upon completion of the VIA-IS, the presidents were each provided

individualized reports that present and discuss their top five character strengths.

13


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Results

The VIA-IS scores of the AIESEC presidents were compared to those of a very large sample

(N = 17800) of United States respondents of comparable age and education who had taken the

questionnaire on-line at the Authentic Happiness (AH) website. Mean scores were compared with t-

tests. There were differences between the two samples, but they were neither across-the-board nor in

the same direction, which suggests that the differences that were found might be valid ones.

There were no differences in VIA-IS strengths as a function of demographic characteristics, not

surprising in the case of age or education because these scarcely varied. More notable was the case

of gender because women usually score higher than do men on strengths of humanity.

Specifically, young adults in general reported greater appreciation of beauty than did the

AIESEC participants. The AIESEC participants in turn had higher scores for bravery, teamwork,

curiosity, fairness, forgiveness, hope, perseverance, leadership, perspective, and zest.

In terms of signature strengths, what is notable about the AIESEC sample is that the justice

strengths of teamwork and leadership were high, as were the temperance strength of perseverance,

and the emotional strengths of hope and zest. See Table 3 and Table 4 for a review of the results.

AIESEC Strengths Predicted Versus Results

Table 5 reviews the results of the study versus my predictions. Below I will first review the

strengths predictions I successfully made, the strength prediction that did not prove correct, and

additional strengths that emerged which I had not predicted.

14



Strengths Successfully Predicted

Hope

We act in a way that is sustainable for our organisation and society. Our decisions take into

account the needs of future generations.

- AIESEC International

AIESEC was founded on hope. Students from 7 European nations came together in 1946 to

forge a new path of understanding and cooperation among countries worldwide. Having lived through

the horror of World War II, these students saw that a better world was possible through forging

positive relationships among a new generation of leaders.

Snyder’s extensive research pointed to hope as “the process of thinking about one’s goals,

along with the motivation to move towards those goals (agency) and the ways to achieve those goals

(pathways)” (Snyder, 1995, p. 355, as cited in Snyder et al., 2002). When you note that AIESEC has

grown from seven European nations to ninety-five countries spread across five continents, the “hope”

factor continues to drive and differentiate AIESEC. Further consider that AIESEC’s 5,000 leadership

positions turn over every year; the belief that “the best is yet to come” is a motivational driver for the

membership. AIESEC believes it can and does make a difference; it embodies hope as a strength.

The research that demonstrates the power and implications of hope was summed up in a

paper by Choong, Conley, Park, and Stratigakis (2006).

High hope individuals take an approach coping strategy (Michael, 2000; Snyder & Pulvers,

2001; as cited in Snyder, 2002). They have positive views about interpersonal relationships

and form close bonds (Kwon, 2002; Rieger, 1993; Sympson, 1999; as cited in Snyder, 2002),

are more socially competent (Snyder et al., 1997; as cited in Snyder, 2002), perceive more

15



social support (Barnum et al., 1998; as cited in Snyder, 2002), are more forgiving of friends

and tolerant of others (Tierney, 1995; as cited in Snyder, 2002), and people generally gravitate

towards them (Cheavens et al., 2000; as cited in Snyder, 2002).

Curiosity

We seek to learn from the different ways of life and opinions represented in our multicultural environment. We respect and actively encourage the contribution of every individual.


AIESEC by definition is curiosity in action. Consider how AIESEC defines its “nature.”

AIESEC is a global, non-political, independent, not-for-profit organisation run by students and

recent graduates of institutions of higher education. Its members are interested in world issues,

leadership and management. AIESEC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color,

gender, sexual orientation, creed, religion, national, ethnic or social origin (AI, 2006).

Consider AIESEC’s international internship program. For almost sixty years AIESEC has been

exchanging students in companies worldwide. These internships serve to open students’ eyes to

other cultures, business practices, and economies. Complementing the intern work experience,

AIESEC provides a reception program (housing, entertainment, and a culture learning program) to all

interns. AIESEC attracts and develops curious people.

Turning to the research on curiosity, we can see the potential benefits. Experiencing curiosity evokes positive affect, motivating individuals to see new

experiences and reinforcing their exploration (Ainley, 1998; Kashdan & Roberts, 2002,

in press). Feelings of competence and control resulting from integrating novel

experiences engender further positive affect (Ryan & Frederick, 1997). (Peterson &

Seligman, 2004, p. 130)

16


Strengths Profiles of Leaders AIESEC amplifies curiosity in the organization by highlighting and celebrating publicly the experience

its members have while abroad. Intern stories are captured and told during new member recruitment

drives, at conferences, and on countless websites.

Perseverance

The way we run a global organization with such an impressive scale of programs and almost 100% turnover is through an incredible commitment from our membership. AIESEC members invest between 15-30 hours a week in the organization while also managing university, part-time jobs, family, and friends. They learn how to manage their time, set priorities, and multi-task.


I believe AIESEC is a model for Bandura’s concept of “self-efficacy.” Bandura defined self-

efficacy as “people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that

exercise influence over events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1994). The impact of a person’s self-

efficacy beliefs on her performance was reviewed in a paper by Maymin, Nicholson, Pollay, and Rath

(2006).

Albert Bandura explains how a person’s self-efficacy beliefs can influence how they feel, think,

behave, and motivate themselves (Bandura, 1994, p. 71). Students with high self-efficacy are

more likely to “approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered,” and an efficacious

outlook “fosters intrinsic interest and deep engrossment in activities,” as well as “produces

personal accomplishments, reduces stress and lowers vulnerability to depression ” (Bandura,

1994, p. 71). Bandura explains three effective ways to create a strong sense of efficacy

(Bandura, 1994, p. 72): mastery experiences, living vicariously through the experience of

others who are similar to oneself, and using social persuasion to help people believe in their

capabilities.

17


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Bandura went on to write in a Harvard Mental Health Letter, “self-efficacy beliefs determine the goals

people set for themselves, how much effort they expend, how long they persevere, and how resilient

they are in the face of failures and setbacks” (Bandura, 1997).

AIESEC leaders persevere each year to ensure that the organization thrives despite economic

downturns, global conflicts, and outright war. The AIESEC membership knows that its success is

determined in large part by its ability to recruit perseverant members year in and year out.

Leadership

We lead by example and inspire leadership through action and results. We take full

responsibility for our role in developing the potential of people.


AIESEC is a leadership development engine. Consider the responsibilities of anyone serving

as a student leader on the national and international level.

• Manages AIESEC on the campuses of 4 to 100 different universities.

• Develops the agenda and delivers training at conferences with up to 1,000 people.

• Sells and manages major partnerships with companies and organizations, such as Yahoo!,

Hewlett Packard, DHL, UBS, and PWC.

• Represents their country at AIESEC conferences internationally.

• Leads the development of a national strategic long-term plan.

• Leads the development of national operational strategies for different functional areas.

• Communicates with governments to secure the necessary work visas for each intern.

• Speaks at hundreds of meetings and tens of conferences to audiences as large as 1,000

people.

18


Strengths Profiles of Leaders AIESEC’s focus on developing leaders to “their full potential” aligns with the theory of Authentic

Leadership posited by Avolio.

…authentic leadership development involves ongoing processes whereby leaders and

followers gain self-awareness and establish open, transparent, trusting and genuine

relationships, which in part may be shaped and impacted by planned interventions such as

training (Avolio, 2005). (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 322)

We turn to AIESEC’s view of its “core work” in order to gain insight into its focus on leadership.

“AIESEC provides its members with an integrated development experience comprised of leadership

opportunities, international internships and participation in a global learning environment (AI, 2006).”

Teamwork Everything AIESEC does is a result of teamwork. 99% of all AIESEC members do not receive

compensation for their work in the organization (international and national staff members receive

modest salaries or stipends).

Consider AIESEC’s work abroad program. It is reliant on the volunteer effort of thousands of

AIESEC members in more than 90 countries. AIESEC members are responsible for matching interns

to available work opportunities in sponsoring companies all around the world. AIESEC does not have

a permanent staff to keep things running; it calls upon and demands the good work from all its

members.

19



Fairness

We are consistent and transparent in our decisions and actions. We fulfill our commitments

and conduct ourselves in a way that is true to our identity. - AIESEC International A look at AIESEC’s Learning Networks Program provides insight into how it programmatically

prioritizes issues of fairness. AIESEC invites students on an annual basis to participate in

organization-wide conversations on issues of global importance. AIESEC focuses on important

issues that often seem insurmountable. This year’s Learning Networks are focused on corporate

responsibility, energy, education, HIV/AIDS, and finance (AI, 2006). AIESEC looks for solutions that

benefit everyone, not just one group of nations. Consider again AIESEC’s Nature.

AIESEC is an international, non-political, non-profit, student-run, independent, educational

foundation. It is comprised of students and recent graduates of institutions of higher education

who are interested in economics and management. AIESEC does not discriminate on the

basis of race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, creed, religion, national or ethnic origin (AI,

2006).

Strength Predicted, But Not Found Love

The strength of love in the AIESEC leadership sample did not significantly differ from the

comparison group. I speculate that the outwardly displayed behavioral combination of the other

strengths found in this study approximate the appearance of love.

20



Strengths Not Predicted, Yet Discovered

Zest

We create a dynamic environment by active and enthusiastic participation of individuals. We enjoy being involved in AIESEC.

- AIESEC International Zest seems to be a natural strength for AIESEC leaders. Simply consider the many

commitments students must keep in AIESEC, coupled with the demands of a university education

and related extracurricular activities.

A visit to a typical AIESEC leadership conference should convince anyone of the zest of

AIESEC’s membership. Meetings typically run from 8:00a.m. to 10:00p.m. or later, followed by

cultural celebration parties that last until 3:00a.m. Here’s how AIESEC describes what happens at

typical AIESEC conferences.

Cool Things About Conferences (AI, 2006):

• Develop strategies • Get training • Be an ambassador of your country • Meet people from all over the world • Be a trainer or facilitator • Work all day and dance all night • Be inspired to do something great • Learn AIESEC songs and dances

21


Strengths Profiles of Leaders A research question worthy of consideration is whether zest helps drive the other strengths in

this profile, or zest arises as a result of the demands inherent in AIESEC’s roles and responsibilities.

AIESEC as an institution celebrates and promotes zest.

Bravery

The leadership that you provide must be that which values both the history and culture of your

own country, while neither rejecting nor blindly accepting the perspectives, innovations, and

values from outside your boundaries.

- Brodie Boland, President of AIESEC International, 2005-2006

Boland made this powerful call to action at the Future Leaders Conference organized by

AIESEC in Afghanistan at Kabul University in April, 2006. Since its inception AIESEC has stood up to

bigotry, protectionism, xenophobia, and war.

Consider the members of AIESEC in Israel and Egypt who established relations before

Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat reached their historical peace agreement. Even today in the

United States and across Europe, there is a contentious political debate over immigration; AIESEC

thrives despite the continuous call by many to limit all work opportunities to its own citizens.

In a less dramatic fashion, you only have to look at the 18 to 22 year old AIESEC students who

find the nerve to ask corporation presidents to agree to hire AIESEC international interns.

Perspective

When you compare AIESEC members to people of the same age and education, it is easy to

understand how AIESEC members might possess more of the strength of perspective and wisdom.

The AIESEC experience thrusts young people into international environments, multi-person

22


Strengths Profiles of Leaders management roles, and organizational leadership responsibilities. Schwartz and Sharpe wrote that,

“Aristotle suggested, and we agree, that wisdom is the product of experience. One becomes wise by

confronting difficult and ambiguous situations, using one’s judgment to decide what to do, doing it,

and getting feedback. One becomes a wise practitioner by practicing being wise.” (Schwartz, and

Sharpe, 2005, p.14)

Forgiveness

The founding of AIESEC was built upon forgiveness. The essence of AIESEC is its passion

for international understanding, not retribution. Every year AIESEC leaders maintain this

commitment. As alumni, these leaders then carry forward the activation of this strength in the work

they do in corporations and organizations around the world.

Implications

Every year for almost 60 years AIESEC has asked the question, “Who should we recruit into

the organization?” AIESEC must find members who will actively contribute to the organization, will

assume leadership roles, and will remain with the organization throughout their university experience.

This study may open up a powerful pathway to a more efficient recruiting strategy for the

organization: Recruit for strengths; appeal to people who have strengths similarly held by the most

successful leaders in AIESEC. A conclusion of this sort would direct AIESEC to potentially modify its

recruitment drives, advertising campaigns, and organizational materials.

These findings have the potential to be meaningful to organizations beyond AIESEC. Other

international organizations could apply the strengths identification plan outlined in this study to their

23


Strengths Profiles of Leaders own membership. Consider the application of this study to the United Nations, Non-Governmental

Organizations (NGOs), and multinational corporations. Our use of the VIA-IS as a measure of

strengths, and our roll out of the ADAPT Model of Strengths Development (described in

“Interventions” section) could serve as a useful example for these organizations.

The study of in-country leadership profiles could lead to the finding that countries within

AIESEC differ in their strengths profile composition. We might again have the opportunity to see how

strengths profiles influence performance.

The AIESEC sample is a useful one because the opportunity for replication exists annually,

following the yearly transition from one country leadership team to another. There are few

organizations that provide such clean comparison groups year after year.

Another important implication of this study is that the country presidents might more effectively

enlist each other’s strengths in the design, discussion, and deployment of international organizational

plans and programs. Given the one-year term that most AIESEC presidents serve, any opportunity to

increase the effectiveness of international leadership coordination could have a powerful impact on

productivity.

The other interesting research opportunity would be to track new members longitudinally

through their career in AIESEC, measuring their strengths profile at the start of their AIESEC

experience and measuring it again at the point they leave AIESEC. The research question is, “Does

AIESEC attract certain leaders, does it develop them, or does it do both, and to what degree?”

Again, this question is of importance to organizations beyond AIESEC. Organizations should

know who they are recruiting, who most often succeeds, and how they can develop the members

they have. Furthermore, if an organization could couple a strategic strengths-focused recruiting

24


Strengths Profiles of Leaders strategy with a strengths development program when an employee enters their organization, it is

possible that the results for the company would be greater employee engagement, greater

productivity, and greater retention of its employees. If you follow Gallup’s line of research that higher

levels of engagement lead to better business performance results, as measured by revenue, profit,

and stock price (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999), the successful deployment of this two-fold strategy

could have a significant impact on the success of the business.

In addition to the implications noted above, this study reminds us of the importance of further

developing existing member’s strengths. While we cannot reconstitute someone’s strengths, we can

help develop her strengths in the service of the outcomes expected of her in AIESEC. A discussion

of the opportunity to introduce interventions follows in the next section.

25



Interventions

Intervention Currently Underway Subsequent to the administration of the VIA-IS and the strengths data collection for the

national AIESEC presidents, I led a strengths development program for all national presidents,

including their recently elected successors, at the AIESEC International Presidents Meeting (IPM) in

The Netherlands this year.

The Momentum Project’s ADAPT Model of Strengths Development was used during the

session; the presidents were made aware of their strengths, participated in exercises to develop

them, looked for applications to use their strengths in their roles, partnered with others to learn how to

amplify their top strengths and to work around their lesser strengths, and made plans to apply this

same approach to their team members back home. Presidents reported discoveries about

themselves and others that they had never before experienced. Each was committed to carrying the

benefits of their learning experience to their national teams.

Your session above all else, taught me that knowing and admitting to myself what my

strengths are, is the key to my happiness. Also I am equally capable of admitting what my

weaknesses are! - President of AIESEC In Ireland

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to discover myself. - President of AIESEC in Morocco I must say that so far I have been using your advice. I am pushing my teams to capitalize on our strengths. - President of AIESEC in Finland

26


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Presidents who participated in the program are continuing to apply the lessons learned to their

organizations. The potential power of a strengths-based program for an organization of 20,000

leaders is noteworthy.

Future Interventions

Two dozen AIESEC national presidents, representing Asia, North America, Latin America,

Europe, and Africa, have requested that I conduct an in-depth analysis of the leadership profiles at all

levels of leadership in each of their countries. We would be interested in discovering whether

strengths profiles vary at each level, and if so, in what way. We would also review the similarities and

the differences among these countries, including comparing them to the sample of international

presidents included in this study. We are interested in knowing if teams with certain strengths profiles

outperform others. Are some strengths more prevalent in teams who perform at the highest levels?

We will follow the VIA-IS administration with workshops based on the ADAPT Model for Strengths

Development.

The AIESEC alumni network could give us access to a large and rich pool of leaders. AIESEC

counts 1,000,000 worldwide leaders among its alumni. Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan, President

Cavacao Silva of Portugal, and immediate past President Kwaszniewski of Poland are just a few of

the best known leaders in AIESEC’s alumni ranks. AIESEC alumni hold important positions in

corporations around the globe. “Our alumni are leaders within these organizations and their

communities – using the experience, skills, and increased vision that AIESEC gave them to be agents

of positive change” (AI, 2006).

27


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Peterson and Seligman discovered in their research with over 600,000 people from almost

every country and territory worldwide that the strengths of love, gratitude, hope, zest, and curiosity

correlate most with happiness. There is a wealth of research that demonstrates how happy

individuals are more successful across a number of dimensions. The AIESEC organization provides

us with a significant multinational opportunity to test the power of a number of positive psychology

interventions that target the development of these character strengths.

The Language of Strengths

In 1990 there were approximately three thousand multinational corporations in operation. In

2003 there were over 63,000. “Along with their 821,000 subsidiaries spread all over the world, these

multinational corporations directly employ 90 million people (of whom some 20 million in the

developing countries) and produce 25 percent of the world’s gross product. The top 1,000 of these

multinationals account for 80 percent of the world’s industrial output” (Chanda, 2003, p. 2).

Consider another trend in business: outsourcing. Corporations worldwide are selecting other

companies located around the world to perform functions that they once completed themselves. No

longer are the days when people work only with people who look, talk, pray, and conduct business as

they do.

The challenge of communication across borders is made complex by the many languages,

cultures, and business practices of the employees in these multinational corporations. Consider the

executive team that runs AIESEC International. As an example, the 2004-2005 leadership team was

comprised of 18 individuals from 13 different countries (AI, 2006). How do the multinational teams

successfully coordinate with each other? Clifton and Harter pointed out that, “It is easy for us to

28


Strengths Profiles of Leaders notice how people are different from us and then to focus on what they lack…However, another

alternative may be to understand the differences and position people so they use more of who they

are (their talents) ” (Clifton & Harter, 2003, p.113). How do these teams bring out the best in each of

its members? It is my belief that the common language of character strengths may be the answer.

Here’s what’s important: these strengths are valued across the globe. We are living in an

increasingly global economy; people move freely among nations. We need a language of strengths

to help us pull together the best talent worldwide. The VIA - Inventory of Strengths is the international

strengths translator. Cooperrider and Sekerka said that the process of “inquiry” into what is great

about organizations and the individuals inside them leads to meaningful outcomes.

…to name and honor one another’s uniqueness and specialties increases, our theory suggests

that individuals experience specific positive emotions such as: admiration and appreciation;

interest, curiosity, and surprise; and humility. In group dynamic terms, the inquiry magnifies

the specialties of each (an in-depth valuing of diversities and multiplicities) and establishes a

climate of safety and rich inclusion and respect (Cooperrider & Sekerka, 2003, p.235-236).

The President of AIESEC in Ireland sums up the power of a language of strengths.

The exercise where we had to fill in the strengths chart was on a superficial level lots of fun,

but on a deeper level it meant that we were introducing ourselves by putting our best foot

forward! I guess that wasn't something I had really thought about until I sat at home on

Saturday looking at the chart and thinking of the people who had signed it. These were people

that I had worked, laughed, and had fun and tears with throughout the conference. There are

people that I had formed opinions on based on the things we all form opinions on, but sitting

reading the chart I reconsidered my thoughts on some people, reading their stories/reasons for

ranking their strength put their actions in a new light. I guess that was kind of a humbling

experience, realising that sometimes I judge people by my standards and values as opposed

to their own! It is definitely something that I have learned to take into consideration with my

team!

29



Acknowledgements

Christopher Peterson significantly contributed to this study with his analysis and interpretation

of the VIA-IS results for the AIESEC presidents. Karen Reivich offered important advice during the

entire process. Martin E.P. Seligman helped secure the necessary online resources for the study.

Jeff Levy of Reflective Learning, LLC, ensured that technical resources and assistance were provided

during the study. All of the above individuals, and James Pawelski and Debbie Swick of the

University of Pennsylvania, provided me with timely encouragement and support throughout my

research.

Brodie Boland, President of AIESEC International, 2005-2006, was an outstanding partner in

this research. The National Presidents of AIESEC and other country leaders were enthusiastic and

passionate contributors to this project.

Edyson David Dos Santos, President of AIESEC International, 2006-2007, and Gabriela

Albescu, AIESEC International Vice President – People Development, 2006-2007, continue to play an

important and supportive role in our ongoing research with AIESEC.

30



References

AIESEC International. Global Annual Report 2004 – 2005. Rotterdam, The Netherlands. AIESEC. The international platform for young people to discover and develop their potential. Retrieved July, 2006 from the World Wide Web: www.aiesec.org. Avolio, B.J., & Gardner, W.L., (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. Harvard Mental Health Letter, 13(9). Boland, B. (2006, April). Ethical Leadership. Lecture presented to Future Leaders Conference in Afghanistan, AIESEC in Afghanistan, Kabul University. Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D.O. (2001). Now Discover Your Strengths. The Free Press: New York. Buckingham, M., Coffman, C. (1999) First, Break All the Rules. Simon & Schuster: New York. Chanda, N. (2003). A review of Globalinc. An atlas of the multinational corporation by M. Gabel and H. Bruner. Yale Global Online Magazine, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization. Choong, S., Conley, A., Park, G., Stratigakis, D., (2006). Goal-setting, self-efficacy, resilience and hope: A review of the literature. Paper submitted to Masters in Applied Positive Psychology, Class 702, University of Pennsylvania. Clifton, D.O., & Harter, J.K. (2003). Investing in Strengths. In K.S. Cameron, J.E. Dutton, & R.E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive Organizational Scholarship (pp. 111-121). San Francisco: Berrrett- Koehler Publishers, Inc. Cooperrider, D.L., Sekerka, L.E. (2003), Toward a theory of positive organizational change. In K.S.

Cameron, J.E. Dutton, & R.E. Quinn (Eds.). Positive organizational scholarship (pp.225-240). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Maymin, S., Nicholson, G., Pollay, D., Rath, T., (2006). Strengthening the college student’s experience. Paper submitted to Masters in Applied Positive Psychology, Class 702, University of Pennsylvania. McCullough, M.E., & Snyder, C.R. (2000). Classical sources of human strength: Revisiting an old home and building a new one. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19 (1), 1-10.

31


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 23(5), 603-619. Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Greater strengths of character and recovery from illness. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(1), 17-26. Peterson, C. (2006, Spring). Values in action – Inventory of Strengths. Lecture presented to Masters in Applied Positive Psychology Class 701, University of Pennsylvania. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. (2004). Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification. New York: Oxford University Press. Rath, T. (July, 2006). The Gallup Organization. A conversation with David J. Pollay. Schwartz, B. & Sharpe, K.E., (2005). Practical wisdom: Aristotle meets positive psychology. Journal of Happiness Studies. In Press. Seligman, M., Steen, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive Psychology Progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410-421. Snyder, C. R. (1995). Conceptualizing, measuring, and nurturing hope. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73; 355-360.

Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 2002; Vol.13, 4; 249-275.

Snyder, C.R., Shorey, H. S., Cheavens, J., Pulvers, K. M., Adams III, V. H., & Wiklund, C. (2002). Hope and Academic Success in College. Journal of Educational Psychology; Dec.2002; 94, 4, pp 820-826. The Momemtum Project. Delray Beach, Florida.

32


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 1. Criteria for inclusion in the classification of strengths and virtues (Peterson & Seligman, pp.16-28)

Criterion 1: A strength contributes to various fulfillments that constitute the good life for oneself and

for others. Although strengths and virtues determine how an individual copes with

adversity, our focus is on how they fulfill an individual.

Criterion 2: Although strengths can and do produce desirable outcomes, each strength is

morally valued in its own right, even in the absence of obvious beneficial outcomes.

Criterion 3: The display of a strength by one person does not diminish other people in the vicinity.

Criterion 4: Being able to phrase the “opposite” of a putative strength in a felicitous way counts

against regarding it as a character strength.

Criterion 5: A strength needs to be manifest in the range of an individual’s behavior – thoughts,

feelings, and/or actions – in such a way that it can be assessed. It should be trait-like

in the sense of having a degree of generality across situations and stability.

Criterion 6: The strength is distinct from other positive traits in the classification and cannot be

decomposed into them.

Criterion 7: A character strength is embodied in consensual paragons.

Criterion 8: We do not believe this feature can be applied to all strengths, but an additional

criterion where sensible is the existence of prodigies with respect to the strength.

Criterion 9: Conversely, another criterion for a character strength is the existence of people who

show – selectively – the total absence of a given strength.

Criterion 10: As suggested by Erikson’s (1963) discussion of psychosocial stages and the virtues that

result from their satisfactory resolutions, the larger society provides institutions and

associated rituals for cultivating strengths and virtues and then for sustaining their

practice.

33


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 2. VIA classification of character strengths. (Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2006, p. 18)

1. Wisdom and knowledge: cognitive strengths that entail the acquisition and use of knowledge

• creativity: thinking of novel and productive ways to do things

• curiosity: taking an interest in all of ongoing experience

• open-mindedness: thinking things through and examining them from all sides

• love of learning: mastering new skills, topics, and bodies of knowledge

• perspective: being able to provide wise counsel to others

2. Courage: emotional strengths that involve the exercise of will to accomplish goals in the face

of opposition, external or internal

• authenticity: speaking the truth and presenting oneself in a genuine way

• bravery: not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain

• persistence: finishing what one starts

• zest: approaching life with excitement and energy

3. Humanity: interpersonal strengths that involve “tending and befriending” others

• kindness: doing favors and good deeds for others

• love: valuing close relations with others

• social intelligence: being aware of the motives and feelings of self and others

4. Justice: civic strengths that underlie healthy community life

• fairness: treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice

• leadership: organizing group activities and seeing that they happen

• teamwork: working well as a member of a group or team

5. Temperance: strengths that protect against excess

• forgiveness: forgiving those who have done wrong

• modesty: letting one’s accomplishments speak for themselves

• prudence: being careful about one’s choices; not saying or doing things that might later be

regretted

• self-regulation: regulating what one feels and does

34


Strengths Profiles of Leaders 6. Transcendence: strengths that forge connections to the larger universe and provide meaning

• appreciation of beauty and excellence: noticing and appreciating beauty, excellence, or skilled

performance in all domains of life

• gratitude: being aware of and thankful for the good things that happen

• hope: expecting the best and working to achieve it

• humor: liking to laugh and tease: bringing smiles to other people

• spirituality: having coherent beliefs about the higher purpose and meaning of life

35


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 3. Strengths scores for AIESEC presidents and Authentic Happiness (AH) sample

Virtue mean mean Strength AH AIESEC Differences (p < .05) Wisdom Creativity 3.72 3.86 Curiosity 3.92 4.24 AH < AIESEC Perspective 3.77 3.92 AH < AIESEC Judgment 4.00 4.06 Love of learning 3.87 3.78 Courage Honesty 3.91 3.97 Bravery 3.58 3.91 AH < AIESEC

Perseverance 3.59 4.00 AH < AIESEC Zest 3.48 4.07 AH < AIESEC Humanity Kindness 3.92 3.84 Love 3.92 3.91 Social intelligence 3.76 3.92 Justice Fairness 3.91 4.01 AH < AIESEC Leadership 3.69 3.98 AH < AIESEC Teamwork 3.64 4.08 AH < AIESEC Temperance Forgiveness 3.52 3.74 AH < AIESEC Modesty 3.30 3.30 Prudence 3.46 3.45 Self-control 3.24 3.35 Transcendence Beauty 3.76 3.52 AH > AIESEC Gratitude 3.87 3.75 Hope 3.61 4.09 AH < AIESEC Humor 3.80 3.91 Religiousness 3.39 3.49

36


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 4. Strengths Scores for AIESEC presidents and Authentic Happiness (AH) Sample

AIESEC Strengths Rank from 1 = Top through 24 = Bottom

(shown in parentheses is the rank for the AH sample)

1. Curiosity (2)

2. Hope (16)

3. Teamwork (15)

4. Zest (20)

5. Judgment (1)

6. Fairness (5)

7. Perseverance (17)

8. Leadership (14)

9. Honesty (6)

10. Social intelligence (11)

11. Perspective (10)

12. Humor (9)

13. Bravery (18)

14. Love (3)

15. Creativity (13)

16. Kindness (4)

17. Love of learning (7)

18. Gratitude (8)

19. Forgiveness (19)

20. Beauty (12)

21. Religiousness (22)

22. Prudence (21)

23. Self-control (24)

24. Modesty (23)

37


Strengths Profiles of Leaders Table 5. Strengths prediction versus results found

Predicted

• Hope

• Curiosity

• Perseverance

• Leadership

• Teamwork

• Fairness

Predicted, But Not Found

• Love

Not Predicted, Yet Discovered

• Zest

• Bravery

• Perspective

• Forgiveness

aiesec leadership strengths research - david j. pollay - publication aiesec

Documents