When they're about to graduate, I like to ask our principal candidates, "What's the most important lesson you've learned about leadership?" Almost every time, they mention how important it is to build positive relationships. In my own experience, it really does seem to be the key ingredient in effective school leadership—not the only ingredient, certainly, but an essential one.
In a previous post, I argued that a foundational component in understanding how to navigate conflict was to make sure to view the other person as a person and not an object. In this post I want to develop this idea further with something I learned this weekend reading Arthur Brook's excellent book Love Your Enemies. In it, Brooks draws upon Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics to outline three levels of friendship.
A level one friendship is based on utility. Aristotle argues that this is both the lowest form of friendship and most shallow because it is subject to changing needs and conditions. As soon as the benefits in the relationship end, so too does the relationship.
A level two friendship is based on pleasure. This type of relationship is built upon some shared characteristic or quality, such as a common interest, similar humor, or attractive appearance. For example, we might be friends because we both like to run, or you laugh at my jokes, or you're beautiful. Though deeper than a level one relationship, it can also be rather shallow and subject to changing conditions.
A level three friendship is based on goodness or virtue. In contrast to the first two levels, level three relationships are defined by a focus on recognizing the good in the other person. And, while these relationships often provide benefits (level one) and pleasure (level two), they are not dependent on them. Rather, level three relationships are deep and resilient. Major disagreements over anything—even polarizing issues related to politics or religion—never become contentious because each person knows and values the fundamental goodness of the other.
As I read these three levels, it became clear to me:
Levels one and two relationships describe ways in which we convert people into objects.
In both cases our relationship is defined by our own personal benefit or pleasure. Instead of seeing people as individuals with goals, desires, dreams, hopes, and needs as real as our own, levels one and two relationships convert people into objects in our own story.
So what does this mean for school leaders?
Well, if we are committed to seeing people as people and not objects, and if we can agree that building positive relationships is a critical component of effective school leadership, then we have to ask ourselves if we are building relationships because of their utility or pleasure, or are we building relationships because we try to see the humanity and goodness in others. Now, I'm not suggesting that school leaders need to have deep, meaningful relationships with everyone in their school and community. Clearly that's impossible. But I am saying that the way they view others matters. And if we approach everyone with a level three attitude—that is, by recognizing their core goodness—then we will be better able to address the conflicts that inevitably arise in pluralistic societies.