Maggie Walker begins each year with an onslaught of club elections.  We are annually bombarded with hastily written speeches extolling the candidates’ deep passion for whatever club they intend to lead, and we roll our eyes with the understanding that to them, it is simply another bullet point on a resumé.  But as a school of overachievers, bullet points on a resumé matter to us, perhaps more than they should, and our competitive spirit takes over. We tear down posters, resort to light-hearted bribery, and cast aspersions on peers we are nearly identical to. Competition for leadership is a stain on Maggie Walker’s culture of mutual support and desire to create a community of learning, and a thorough consideration of the way we structure extracurricular organizations is necessary to fulfill our school’s mission.

The consequences of overcompetition have led some to question the value of extracurricular activities altogether. In one report issued by the U.S. Department of Education, researchers suggest that competition, especially over leadership, can compromise moral development as it disrupts the cooperation and friendship that is necessary to build strong personal connections, which as psychologists like Piaget and Kohlberg have observed, is foundational to personal and educational success.  Other scholars have suggested that the devaluation of academics that can accompany an extracurricular focus renders such programs meaningless, leading some to advocate for their complete removal from schools.

Though some criticize them, extracurricular activities still have a clear place in schools. Luther B. Otto, an American research sociologist and author, famously called extracurricular activities the “third curriculum,” supplementing required courses and electives. Additionally, a study from the Journal of Educational Research demonstrated that extracurricular activities lower dropout rates by strengthening the community and student engagement of an educational institution. GPA junkies will be delighted to know that this increase in student involvement, in a comprehensive research review by the American Research Education Association, was directly correlated with an increase in academic performance. In essence, extracurricular activities are vital because at their best, not only do they provide a unique mechanism for student engagement transcending the classroom, they also supplement academics by fostering a more involved community of students.

If extracurricular activities are vital, yet the extent of the competition they manifest is detrimental, it may seem like a Catch-22. One solution is collective leadership, defined by Harvard Business School research associate Katherine Shonk as a system where “a group of people with diverse skills and experience come together to work toward goals that they develop jointly.” Essentially, collective leadership differentiates itself from traditional leadership in the fact that, while both utilize a division of responsibilities, at the end of the day in traditional leadership the president (or co-president) has final say. Collective leadership has no presidents. Instead, decisions are made by the collective. The obvious counter to collective leadership is “what happens when people disagree.” When disputes arise, consensus building and conflict resolution (two systems of compromise) are used to arrive at a final solution. 

According to Shonk, collective leadership is on the rise, with more and more companies viewing it as a preferable alternative to traditional models. This is because collective leadership operates on two assumptions that are beneficial to the organization. First, everybody can and should lead. Second, skilled practitioners can perform without the need for constant supervision. The first assumption is beneficial because leadership can enhance almost any sector; it is never a bad thing to have. The second assumption greatly benefits the organization by redirecting the supervisor (who is often incredibly skilled) from menial supervision to work that can make use of their specific talents. A fortunate byproduct of this collective leadership, and one that resonates with the message of Maggie Walker, is that it brings in diverse perspectives and voices. This variety of perspectives creates a more equitable environment where everyone can succeed. Even still, some may disparage collective leadership by saying it has never been tried and proven in a school. And yet, it has. For instance, in Maggie Walker’s Quiz Bowl team, everybody is president. Even though people are split into categories based on their specialization, nobody is the totalitarian leader. Their results are a cornucopia of trophies exceeding perhaps any other extracurricular, so numerous that they have their own room. 

Of course, Maggie Walker’s infestation of title-hungry overachievers desperate to fill the leadership section of their college applications makes this solution difficult.  We are addicted to our special distinctions—to the feeling of being better-than.  Like any addiction, quitting is difficult, but overcoming the fear of letting go is necessary to see what’s possible on the other side.  Collective leadership offers us a new future, one where student organizations are recognized for the value of the group, rather than the ambition of an individual. Clubs are meant to be the lifeblood of student life, a place to celebrate shared interests, do something meaningful, or just have fun.  We’ve lost that, buried it under heaps of greed and pride, but by clearing away our ambition, maybe we can uncover it again.

Information retrieved from The High school Journal, International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, and The Program of Negotiation.