Posted by: maddieroseholmes | March 13, 2018

Changing the World

Hello everyone! After reading the Meyerson and Fletcher article, I had a couple of thoughts about how organizations have to change for women and minorities to succeed. For example, instead of a thirty minute interview, an investment instituted a forty-five minute interview process. They also changed the topics of conversation from listing former accreditation to what the candidate would like to do with the job in the future. They reported seeing a change in the people they hired, and the company also developed a positive reputation. This seems good to me: the company changed the interview format, and more people were able to succeed. Formerly, only those who could make a good impression in a short period of time were hired, and other candidates were disregarded.

The articles that we read for this week emphasized the power of small change. Tempered radicals “find room to be authentic and make room for small wins” (Meyerson & Scully 3). They have to moderate their actions to keep others from rejecting them. One of the consequences of tempered radicals is that their actions can often be missed. On Monday in class, my group was having a difficult time coming up with explicit examples of tempered radicalism. Is this that we understand the concept, but can’t often see examples of tempered radicalism unless it happens right next to us? And, if you don’t ever see examples of tempered radicalism, how would you be inspired to act?

I think there are more people who would prefer immediate change to evolutionary change. This is understandable, particularly if a group has suffered injustices in the past. Why should they have to wait any longer for justice? My thought is therefore that if a group wants change, should the leader of that group encourage them to try a more tempered approach? The strategies for tempered radicalism include experimenting with small wins, keeping a momentum, engaging in local authentic action, and strategic alliance building. Would a group that wants drastic change be satisfied by a small wins? I think that for some instances, tempered radicalism wouldn’t work. For example, if you aren’t a part of the group that has the power to change a certain issue, you would need to either join the group or work against it from the outside (the topic coming to mind right now is the student activists from Parkland, Florida confronting politicians on firearm issues).

My roundabout question is: how do we as a generation emphasize the long-term benefits of tempered radicalism? How does this become part of everyone’s agenda? Is it a matter of education children about not only the amazing people in history that made great changes, but also those who have made strides in everyday life? I think that maybe this would help make leadership/achieving change seem more approachable to the everyday person.



  1. I like the idea of changing topics of conversations during the interview process for a higher chance of success in a company. History has shown that females have not had the ability to gain access to as many high and powerful positions in the workforce as males. Having interviews based on former accreditation is not fair to females. In a job, people don’t talk about your past. The people at work care about what you will make better.
    You make a great point. Tempered radicalism is an easy term to understand, so why was it hard to realize examples in our daily lives? I believe that evolutionary changes and drastic changes are both necessary, depending on the situation. If a situation needs to be changed immediately due to wrong behavior, then drastic change would be accepted. If a situation is ingrained with the norms of an organization, then it may be harder for employees to accept a drastic change.
    In education, children learn about a very narrow scope of influential leaders. I wish we would have learned about the leaders behind the scenes. The quiet leaders who influenced the better-known leaders. I always believe that education has room for improvement. Should the study of leadership be introduced earlier in education? Should it be a required subject for graduating a university?

  2. Tempered radicalism and the idea of small wins reminds me of the saying “Rome wasn’t built in a day.” In school, we learn about the big events and leaders that changed the world. We do not spend on time on leaders that changed the world in smaller ways or helped other leaders. Additionally, today with all the technology available, we have been conditioned to instant gratification. Most millenials and other generations have been fortuante to be raised in a time where we can achieve our goals quickly with a few storkes of our keyboard. However, this has positive and negative consequences.

    We want things to be taken care of quickly. Most people do not like to wait for things anymore. Our persepctive of long-term and short-term has changed. In this way, it is easy to see why our generation does not value the long-term effects/benefits of tempered radicalism because we do not have a future focused mind. For tempered radicalism to be more successful and to implement it more, we need to educate young students and change our own perspectives.

    People are conditioned to act out of their own self-interest like in the popular show “Suits” where all the lawyers do what they need to in order to close the deals. However, they do not think of the effects their actions will have on the other partners at the firm. However, Donna, one of the main characters, is loyal to the named partner, Harvey. She thinks about what her actions could mean for Harvey and herself, even the smallest things like giving gifts to others that closed a big deal and keeping the peace in the office. Her hardwork has payed off, because now, seven seasons later both she and Harvey have moved up the corporate ladder. Her actions were only successful becasue she was selfless and had the long-term perspective that is needed with tempered radicalism.

  3. The idea of small wins should be a concept that people take with them into everyday life. It is a concept that I never realized before witnessing and hearing my dad talk to me about it. he would tell me that not everything you desire can be accomplished at once, you need to work for it and that the “small wins” are the things that keep you going. Kids should be taught this concept or a concept similar to it in their education because they need to know that they don’t have to be perfect in every aspect of their lives. Young women especially, since they already are pressured with the idea that everything they do needs to be perfect. I myself even though I am not female have felt the pressures of needing to be perfect. This is not expected as much by parents or society but it has always been something that I expect of myself. The idea of small wins help me to feel like I am at least getting closer to this goal even though perfection is a never ending quest. Whether it is getting slightly faster, stronger or writing a paper/ blog post in less than an hour, all the “small wins” help to keep me on track. What I am getting at is that children should have “small wins” implemented into their learning at a young age as well as leadership classes should be offered at a younger age so that those that I realize they are good leaders have more time to develop.

  4. Great job interacting with the class material! I am all for tempered radicalism, especially since I am an introvert. We have been emphasizing the “small wins” approach in class, but I still believe completely radical change can be good too. More radical situations require faster paced change. For example, Nazi Germany required a war to bring them down, not a slow process of working them on the inside. I do agree with you that people need to emphasize the small, everyday changes various people make through tempered radicalism. As a country so into needing everything instantaneously, it is difficult for us to admire and report instances of “small wins.” We need to slow down and have patience. I believe most change happens incrementally, so we need to recognize and grasp the importance of tempered radicalism. When we focus on just making our goal one step at a time, we don’t get overwhelmed and we can continue more effectively. Both types of change are good depending on the situation.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: