Being a “conscious” leader: Three foundational commitments

By Gemma Jiang and Jeni Cross.

As a leader, are you prone to defensiveness, blame and avoidance? Is your team trapped in a similar pattern? What is the alternative and how to get there?

The Conscious Leadership framework’s 15 commitments (Dethmer, Chapman and Klemp, 2014) offer powerful tools for addressing these questions. Central to this framework is the distinction between operating “above the line,” which involves openness, curiosity, and a commitment to growth, and “below the line,” characterized by defensiveness, blame, and avoidance. The first three commitments—taking radical responsibility, learning through curiosity, and feeling all feelings—serve as foundational steps for leaders and teams to maintain an “above the line” mindset. This post explores these commitments and the associated tools to empower leaders in guiding their teams from below to above the line.

Commitment 1: Taking Radical Responsibility

The first commitment is: I commit to taking full responsibility for the circumstances of my life and my physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual well-being. I commit to supporting others to take full responsibility for their lives. Its “below the line” counterpart is: I commit to blaming others and myself for what is wrong in the world (Dethmer et al, 2014, p. 20).

In cross-disciplinary teams, differing scientific perspectives can lead to misunderstandings. For example, scientists from different fields might disagree on data processing methods. If they blame each other for “not understanding” or think that the other person “doesn’t respect my expertise,” these views of conflict create tension and hinder progress.

Conscious leadership tools like the Drama Triangle (Karpman, 1968) and the Empowerment Triangle (Emerald, 2009) can help leaders guide teams from blaming to taking responsibility. The Drama Triangle includes roles like Victim, Villain, and Hero, which perpetuate conflict, while the Empowerment Triangle features Creator, Challenger, and Coach, which encourage growth and responsibility. By introducing these concepts, leaders can help team members shift from destructive behaviors to constructive actions. The table below contrasts the Drama Triangle with the Empowerment Triangle:

Commitment 2: Learning Through Curiosity

The second commitment is: I commit to growing in self-awareness. I commit to regarding every interaction as an opportunity to learn. I commit to curiosity as a path to rapid learning. The “below the line” version is: I commit to being right and seeing this situation as something happening to me (Dethmer et al, 2014, p. 40).

In cross-disciplinary collaborations, expertise differences can trigger defensiveness. For instance, a physicist might feel threatened by a biologist’s qualitative methods. A leader committed to curiosity helps team members pause and reflect. Instead of insisting on being right, the team can explore the differences with curiosity, recognizing that diverse perspectives lead to innovative solutions.

Leaders can utilize tools like “The Argument” to help teams learn from differences (see the i2Insights contribution by Gemma Jiang, ‘A tool for transforming resistance to insights in decision-making‘). In this approach, each team member can present their perspective on both sides of an issue. Together, the team then uncovers new insights that were previously unavailable. Rather than defending opposing views, team members collaborate to pursue a larger, shared understanding.

Commitment 3: Feeling All Feelings

The third commitment is: I commit to feeling my feelings all the way through to completion. Its “below the line” counterpart is: I commit to resisting, judging, and apologizing for my feelings. I repress, avoid, and withhold them (Dethmer et al, 2014, p. 60).

In scientific teams, where logic often prevails, emotions are frequently dismissed or suppressed. For example, a team member who feels undervalued might suppress their anger, which can later manifest as passive-aggressive behavior or disengagement. There are also longer-term consequences, such as feeling unfulfilled or alienated from the team. Leaders who make space for emotions—both their own and those of others—create a culture where team members can fully express themselves. This contributes to psychological safety and deeper connections within the team.

To cultivate emotional intelligence, the Conscious Leadership framework offers the following steps:

1. Name the Feeling: Identify the emotion you are experiencing (eg., sadness, fear, anger, joy).
2. Locate the Feeling in the Body: Notice where the emotion manifests physically.
3. Describe the Sensation: Use descriptive words ending in “-ing” (eg., clenching, tingling).
4. Embody the Sensation: Breathe into the sensation, move, or use non-verbal sound until the feeling shifts.
5. Listen for the Wisdom of the Emotion: Each emotion carries a message (eg., sadness may indicate something that needs to be mourned; anger may signal the need for change).

By committing to fully experiencing and expressing emotions, team members cultivate belonging, prevent conflicts from unexpressed emotions, and build the vulnerability necessary for psychological safety. As the second author experienced during graduate school, the lack of opportunity to express emotions or be seen as a whole person led her to question her fit within academia. This highlights the critical role that leadership plays in creating environments where individuals feel valued not just for their intellectual contributions, but for their full humanity. In teams, especially in high-stakes settings, leaders who value emotional expression foster a sense of inclusion and trust, which in turn prevents disengagement and helps team members feel fully integrated into the group. When people feel seen and heard, their commitment and contribution to the team’s success are significantly enhanced.

Conclusion

Leaders are crucial in embedding these commitments within their teams. Their openness to practicing these principles can transform the team’s collaborative approach. Leaders can coach team members in consistently honoring these commitments until they become part of the team culture. This enhances team resilience, creativity, and results in more impactful collaborative outcomes.

In what ways have you seen teams honor these three commitments? What roles have team leaders played in embedding them?

Reference:

Dethmer, J., Chapman, D., and Klemp, K.W. (2014). The 15 commitments of conscious leadership: A new paradigm for sustainable success. Booknook.biz: Arizona, United States of America.

Emerald, D. (2009). The power of TED: The empowerment dynamic. Polaris Publishing: Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Karpman, S. (1968). Fairy tales and script drama analysis. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 7, 26: 39-43.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Statement: Generative artificial intelligence was not used in the development of this i2Insights contribution. (For i2Insights policy on generative artificial intelligence please see https://i2insights.org/contributing-to-i2insights/guidelines-for-authors/#artificial-intelligence.)

Biography: Gemma Jiang PhD is senior team scientist at the Institute for Research in the Social Sciences (IRISS) at Colorado State University in Fort Collins, Colorado, USA. She applies complexity leadership theory, social network analysis, and a suite of facilitation and coaching methods to enable cross-disciplinary science teams to converge upon solutions for challenges of societal importance.

Biography: Jeni Cross, PhD is the Director of the Institute for Research in the Social Sciences (IRISS) at Colorado State University in Fort Collins, USA. She has been developing professional trainings and interventions for science teams since 2015.

Funding Acknowledgement: This publication was supported, in part, by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Grant Number UM1TR004548. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.