OK, so I just read an article this morning that is a prime example of followers losing trust in their leaders because of their "spinning" and oddly enough (well not really) it happened in my own backyard.
Yahoo Sports posted an article last night that stated one of the main reasons why Brett Favre did not want to come back to play and had to have 3 players convince him was due to his lack of trust in Brad Childress.
Case in point, on Tuesday of this week Darrell Bevel (Offensive Coordinator for the Minnesota Vikings) stated to the media that Jared Allen, Steve Hutchinson, and Ryan Longwell were inside the Winter Park facility. As we now know this was not the case. It was found out a day later that Darrell Bevel was told by Brad Childress that Jared Allen, Steve Hutchinson, and Ryan Longwell were inside the Winter Park facility.
Nice leadership coach! BE HONEST!!!!
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Losing Trust in Leadership? Part 2 of 3
When people or “followers” start losing or simply never trust their leadership or leaders, it creates and fosters a tenuous situation which can lead to a series of significantly undesirable outcomes for both parties. In Part 1 of this 3-part blog series, I started outlining three (3) simple reasons as to why it is so hard for some people to trust their leadership. This post covers reason #2.
Reason #2: Leaders Spin Too Much
Let’s be honest, everyone spins or practices the art of doublespeak in some form or fashion when they communicate. Coaches spin. Managers spin. Executives spin. Politicians spin (actually politicians have a PHD in it!). Just a quick note for those that don’t know what doublespeak means, it is defined by Merriam-Webster’s dictionary as “language used to deceive usually through concealment or misrepresentation of truth”. Now that may be a harsh definition, but it does practically describe what happens.
So, the question is why all the spinning? In my observations, conversations, experiences, etc… I have heard a myriad of reasons and a lot of them fall into the category of either “This is not spin” or “We don’t want to create a panic”. Let’s briefly dive into each.
In the minds and thought processes of most leaders they are absolutely right in saying and feeling that what they are communicating (whether it is a vision, strategy, progress, results, etc…) is not spin. Given the fact most people believe that being positive and a motivator are common attributes of great leaders which inevitably results in their “calculated guidance” to their followers, one should expect the positive spin. To leaders this is how they rally the troops, let their followers know that is exactly what they expected to happen, our glass is half full, there is light at the end of our tunnel, blah, blah, blah. To them, this is just who they are and how they are wired which again ties back to the very human element of leadership.
The problem with it is when that is always the message given, regardless of how good or bad a situation is. To me, this causes leaders and leadership to plunge into the clairvoyance trap. What I mean by this is that leaders start to believe that their followers automatically understand the intent when they themselves aren’t sure what it is. When they aren’t sure themselves they simply conceal their uncertainty with ambiguous communication or spin. This simply should not happen and there is an easy solution: Know your audience, tailor your communications to your audience, and BE HONEST!
As for the other school of thought that leaders don’t want to create a panic, this obviously only applies when communications or news is not positive. The thought is if leaders communicate things that are perceived as negative or performance is not what was envisioned or planned, then the followers are simply going to make a mass exodus. This is simply not true. Obviously, there are always going to be those that go follow someone else and there is nothing that can be done in that scenario. But the more and more leaders consistently communicate the positive or spin even the negative into a positive followers quickly know something is not right and will draw their own conclusions. Usually these are not positive. Do leaders really want this outcome?
Again leaders need to be honest, tell both sides of the story, and simply state the facts as they are. Followers need to know what their leaders really are thinking, but more importantly they want to know that leaders have a plan (without a personal agenda) and associated actions to match the “words” of that plan (i.e. Walk the Walk). This becomes even more paramount when dealing in difficult times like the ones we are experiencing today.
Ben Horowitz, who is the cofounder and General Partner of the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, wrote a recent blog post on “CEOs Should Tell It Like It Is”. The post is geared toward CEOs, but upon reading it I found a lot of what he said can easily be abstracted to the concepts and theories of leadership. If you have the time, I highly recommend reading it.
In the end it comes down to leaders instilling confidence, keeping people relaxed, and being aware of the personalities amongst those that follow them. What leaders a lot times forget is that reality resides in what followers perceive and what they are experiencing / feeling. Spinning doesn’t remedy these perceptions or feelings, only honesty does.
Thoughts?
Next Week: Leaders Don’t Admit Their Mistakes
Reason #2: Leaders Spin Too Much
Let’s be honest, everyone spins or practices the art of doublespeak in some form or fashion when they communicate. Coaches spin. Managers spin. Executives spin. Politicians spin (actually politicians have a PHD in it!). Just a quick note for those that don’t know what doublespeak means, it is defined by Merriam-Webster’s dictionary as “language used to deceive usually through concealment or misrepresentation of truth”. Now that may be a harsh definition, but it does practically describe what happens.
So, the question is why all the spinning? In my observations, conversations, experiences, etc… I have heard a myriad of reasons and a lot of them fall into the category of either “This is not spin” or “We don’t want to create a panic”. Let’s briefly dive into each.
In the minds and thought processes of most leaders they are absolutely right in saying and feeling that what they are communicating (whether it is a vision, strategy, progress, results, etc…) is not spin. Given the fact most people believe that being positive and a motivator are common attributes of great leaders which inevitably results in their “calculated guidance” to their followers, one should expect the positive spin. To leaders this is how they rally the troops, let their followers know that is exactly what they expected to happen, our glass is half full, there is light at the end of our tunnel, blah, blah, blah. To them, this is just who they are and how they are wired which again ties back to the very human element of leadership.
The problem with it is when that is always the message given, regardless of how good or bad a situation is. To me, this causes leaders and leadership to plunge into the clairvoyance trap. What I mean by this is that leaders start to believe that their followers automatically understand the intent when they themselves aren’t sure what it is. When they aren’t sure themselves they simply conceal their uncertainty with ambiguous communication or spin. This simply should not happen and there is an easy solution: Know your audience, tailor your communications to your audience, and BE HONEST!
As for the other school of thought that leaders don’t want to create a panic, this obviously only applies when communications or news is not positive. The thought is if leaders communicate things that are perceived as negative or performance is not what was envisioned or planned, then the followers are simply going to make a mass exodus. This is simply not true. Obviously, there are always going to be those that go follow someone else and there is nothing that can be done in that scenario. But the more and more leaders consistently communicate the positive or spin even the negative into a positive followers quickly know something is not right and will draw their own conclusions. Usually these are not positive. Do leaders really want this outcome?
Again leaders need to be honest, tell both sides of the story, and simply state the facts as they are. Followers need to know what their leaders really are thinking, but more importantly they want to know that leaders have a plan (without a personal agenda) and associated actions to match the “words” of that plan (i.e. Walk the Walk). This becomes even more paramount when dealing in difficult times like the ones we are experiencing today.
Ben Horowitz, who is the cofounder and General Partner of the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, wrote a recent blog post on “CEOs Should Tell It Like It Is”. The post is geared toward CEOs, but upon reading it I found a lot of what he said can easily be abstracted to the concepts and theories of leadership. If you have the time, I highly recommend reading it.
In the end it comes down to leaders instilling confidence, keeping people relaxed, and being aware of the personalities amongst those that follow them. What leaders a lot times forget is that reality resides in what followers perceive and what they are experiencing / feeling. Spinning doesn’t remedy these perceptions or feelings, only honesty does.
Thoughts?
Next Week: Leaders Don’t Admit Their Mistakes
Friday, August 13, 2010
Losing Trust in Leadership? Part 1 of 3
I recently stumbled across a 2009 CNBC news story that talked about trust in leadership. Specifically, it talked about how 40% of senior managers worldwide don't trust corporate leadership to navigate them out of the economic crisis and 46% of these same senior managers were unsure of their leaders ability to carry out a plan. These alarming statistics got me to thinking about trust in leadership in general and why it is so hard for some people (a.k.a. followers) to trust their leadership or leaders.
As I thought about it, I narrowed it down to three simple reasons which is the focus of this 3-part blog series.
Reason #1: Leaders Don’t “Walk the Walk”
How many times have you seen it, a so-called “leader” that over and over again inspires its followers through their personal passion, positivity, eloquent choices of words, phrases and language to describe what their vision is and how they intend to get to the promised land? It definitely can be exhilarating and make their followers stand up and cheer.
Unfortunately if a repeated lack of unyielding commitment and action doesn’t follow those awe inspiring words, that exhilaration is quickly lost and it becomes increasingly difficult to trust that leader going forward. A trusted leader simply cannot rely on their vision statement, personal passion, and inspiring words. Trust is not quantifiable; however, the actions of creating, preserving, and regaining trust require concrete processes.
In the end, a vision statement and all of those inspiring words are simply leaders trying to communicate to its legion of followers what they are trying to do.
To quote the almighty Yoda: “Do or Do Not. There is No Try."
Thoughts?
Next Week: Leaders Spin Too Much
As I thought about it, I narrowed it down to three simple reasons which is the focus of this 3-part blog series.
Reason #1: Leaders Don’t “Walk the Walk”
How many times have you seen it, a so-called “leader” that over and over again inspires its followers through their personal passion, positivity, eloquent choices of words, phrases and language to describe what their vision is and how they intend to get to the promised land? It definitely can be exhilarating and make their followers stand up and cheer.
Unfortunately if a repeated lack of unyielding commitment and action doesn’t follow those awe inspiring words, that exhilaration is quickly lost and it becomes increasingly difficult to trust that leader going forward. A trusted leader simply cannot rely on their vision statement, personal passion, and inspiring words. Trust is not quantifiable; however, the actions of creating, preserving, and regaining trust require concrete processes.
In the end, a vision statement and all of those inspiring words are simply leaders trying to communicate to its legion of followers what they are trying to do.
To quote the almighty Yoda: “Do or Do Not. There is No Try."
Thoughts?
Next Week: Leaders Spin Too Much
Friday, August 6, 2010
How does one define Leadership?
I know that as you are reading this post the first thought that's coming to your mind is not another blogger pontificating about leadership. However, being a pragmatist (OK, maybe a pessimist or a realist) I find myself fascinated by the multitude of definitions and so called theories that are out there which describe "Leadership". My goal is to simply provide my rudimentary view and explore the perspectives of others as I swim through these murky waters.
So, my question is: "how does one define leadership?" Seems like a simple question, but is it really? Considering that there are so many books, blogs, articles, people, etc... that claim to have leadership defined how do you know which is correct or which one you should prescribe to?
My feeling is there isn't one. There is such an overabundance of definitions / theories that it speaks directly to the very human element of leadership, thus leading to the complexities of its practices and a common definition. It is as varied as there are leaders and those that crave leadership.
We can certainly categorize the attributes that we feel comprise a great leader (i.e. visionary, motivator, positive, etc...) and the different styles or types of leadership (i.e. transformational, enforcer, serial entrepreneur, etc...), but at the end of the day isn't it simply one thing: "Leadership is calculated guidance".
Thoughts?
So, my question is: "how does one define leadership?" Seems like a simple question, but is it really? Considering that there are so many books, blogs, articles, people, etc... that claim to have leadership defined how do you know which is correct or which one you should prescribe to?
My feeling is there isn't one. There is such an overabundance of definitions / theories that it speaks directly to the very human element of leadership, thus leading to the complexities of its practices and a common definition. It is as varied as there are leaders and those that crave leadership.
We can certainly categorize the attributes that we feel comprise a great leader (i.e. visionary, motivator, positive, etc...) and the different styles or types of leadership (i.e. transformational, enforcer, serial entrepreneur, etc...), but at the end of the day isn't it simply one thing: "Leadership is calculated guidance".
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)