I recently asked a male colleague for his thoughts on why so few women are included in the multitude of leadership guru/expert lists.*
Our fascinating exchange…
“Most women don’t write solely about leadership. They throw in other stuff that keeps them off those lists or doesn’t make them top of mind.”
So where do they go wrong in your view?
“I’m going to use you as an example. When you write about leadership, you throw in that phrase about using your heart to lead. That’s getting outside the parameters of leadership.”
How so?
“Leaders — and remember, Jane, this is just my opinion — set direction and define the vision. They create alignment. They play the devil’s advocate and identify problems. Leaders manage change. They motivate people and develop other leaders.”
Nothing here I disagree with except how clinical all those items are. Wouldn’t using one’s heart come into play with most or all of those items? Maybe we could show love and compassion as we set the direction?
“Not really.”
It seems to me there’s lots of room for caring, and dare I say, love, in executing those responsibilities.
“That’s where you and most of the other women, and even some men, go wrong when you write and consult about leadership. You have to leave love out of it. I know you’re not talking about romantic love, but you are talking about affection and fondness. Leadership is about business, about economics, about getting the job done. People who focus on those things are the ones who get included in the lists you asked about.”
That’s an interesting perspective. So what about kindness and compassion. Is there room for that in leadership in your view?
“You know I don’t advocate or support abusing people or being mean to them. No good leader stands for that happening.”
Of course.
“I’m just saying that no one’s performance gets evaluated on kindness or compassion.”
True, but don’t you think it’s time for some of that to change?
“Jane, I’m just telling you the way it is, which I know isn’t the way you want it to be. Enough said?”
Enough said.
Wow!
Today is Valentine’s Day, so I’m inviting all leaders — especially those with big job titles and formal organizational chart power — to bring a little kindness and compassion (and dare I say love) into your interactions today (and tomorrow). Focusing on both task and relationship, rather than focusing on one over the other, pays big dividends in lots of ways both large and small. Dare to show love to a colleague today!
Deal?
_______________________
*This list certainly isn’t scientific nor representative of scads of exhaustive research! It’s what popped out in a quick Google search:
– 1 out of 25 on World’s Top 25 Leadership Gurus.
– 4 out of 50 on October 2011 Top 50 Leadership Experts to Follow on Twitter.
– 18 out of 100 on NeverMind Awards 2011 – Top 100.
– 5 out of 12 pickers in selecting the top leader of 2011 on the Washington Post.
Image source before quote: morgueFile.com
Jane, it’s amazing how men tend to concentrate on using one part of their brain. In actuality, playing devil’s advocate works against the emotional attachment needed to build buy-in to move a vision forward. Kindness goes much further as you point out so well!
Robyn —
In leadership, as well as with most things in life, there’s a time and place for everything. Sometimes what is needed is the contrarian rather than the conformist, and vice versa. The same with intellect and emotion, or task or relationship focus. Where things go awry is when we don’t appreciate the value of the other end of the spectrum…stuck in that certain part of the brain!
Glad to have a “caring catalyst” for making room for kindness in leadership.
Thanks for sharing!
I so agree that desperately need opposing views. When presented with good tone, it makes a lot of difference.
Robyn – my experience is that usually the “good tone” part gets lost as folks get all caught up in making themselves look right and you wrong!
Hi Jane
A first time visitor to your blog – and I can’t say enough about how effective this post is in capturing an entire mindset that in my opinion – and experience – keeps the workplace in emotional lockdown. It limits everyone’s expression – and potential.
What is so sad is that many, if not most, status quo leaders believe this. They are the product of a harsh cultural mandate that dictates that we cannot be who and what we really are in business. It’s old school thinking that is completely underminded by what we are learning from neuroscience about our whole brain and how it functions.
Beautifully done.
Best,
Louise
Hi Louise —
Delighted that you stopped by and added richness to the discussion. Thanks so much!
I agree with your position. Research shows us that systems (the status quo) protect themselves. For the most part, women didn’t create the status quo in business/leadership. So it’s natural that what I call the “fabric of leadership” has been woven with traits typically associated with men, such as dominant, competitive and task-oriented.
So now it’s time to reweave the fabric of leadership, injecting some threads of kindness and compassion!
I also find it interesting that the side of the brain, the left side, the “logic” side, has been shown to be the side most uncomfortable with “uncertainty”. Yet, especially in today’s rapidly changing world, this characteristic will limit one’s ability to effectively lead, especially if one is not strongly self-aware with high EQ….and that is certain!
Valencia — great point that dealing with uncertainty is a “must have” skill in today’s ever-changing world. Being logical has its place, yet handling ambiguity really brings interpersonal skills and intellect into play…using both sides of the brain. Thanks for adding to a rich discussion!
Hi Jane
I thought of a recent study when I saw this post. The study provided a hiring committee composed of men and women with letters of reference for different job candidates. The candidates’ identifying information was hidden, and their resumes showed equivalent qualifications.
The results? Both the men and the women rated candidates with letters that emphasized action (agency) over emotions (socio-emotional behaviour). So whether or not we like it, most of us prefer people of action over people of emotion.
Most interestingly, what the study found was that men with emotional behaviours were ranked similarly to women with those behaviours. It’s just that far fewer men typically receive letters of reference that focused on socio-emotional behaviour.
Unfortunately, whether or not love or compassion are good things, it appears that we don’t value them as an aspect of leadership to the same degree that we value other things. I don’t like it, but that is the way it is.
Hi, Colleen —
Having spent 20 years working as a Fortune 100 company exec, I saw up close and personal just what you describe, e.g. that compassion takes a back seat in business, that agentic qualities out-trump communal ones. And all the studies that affirm the same, that rude people are believed to be more powerful than polite ones, and on and on.
So, in my second act of life, I’m working to be the change I want to see. I’m looking to stir the pot, be the burr under the saddle, the fly in the ointment, etc., seeking to spur reflection and action as to why we’re settling for that kind of status quo.
Thanks for adding to the richness of the discussion!
Hi Jane,
So far it looks like I’m the lonely male voice in response to your exchange with Mr. X, whose perspective on leadership I don’t share. Among the services we offer at our company, I’ve been leading public seminars for an international training company on communication, management and leadership for over 15 years. In this role i come into contact with managers and leaders from organizations in the US, Europe, Africa and the Middle East, etc. They represent a broad range of industries and positional responsibilities. One of the joys of this work is when I’m leading a program, which for reasons beyond my control, where the attendees are only men. Interesting things happen in the room when the discussion turns to emotional intelligence and it’s place in leadership.First of all, it’s shockingly surprising how many managers have not heard of emotional intelligence. Secondly, how delightfully surprising it is when they express their desire to want to know more about it and see it’s place in a new vision of what it means to be a leader in the 21st century.
They awaken to the reality that business transactions are done through people, not robots. That people are not only motivated by how they think, but more so, by how they feel. In other words, their emotional states. They realize that being smart or having the cognitive skills, while necessary, go only so far in being a leader. It’s their ability to inspire others, to be authentic, to be self-reflective, to be empathic that really raises the leadership bar. Someone once said that the hardest thing to change are beliefs. I’m encouraged to see that the more visionary leaders recognize the need to re-wire themselves and override old, unproductive habits of leadership.
George –
I was watching to see if a fellow would weigh in, and so was delighted to see that you took the plunge…kudos!
Warning: I’m going to play the contrarian here.
I worked for 15 years as a vp in Fortune 100 companies where leadership development occurred regularly. (Of course, I never participated in a male-only session!) Classic hard skill topics would be addressed in some of those mixed gender offsites as would topics like humility (Collins’ level 5 work), emotional intelligence, tough empathy (work of Robert Goffee and Gareth Jones).
I always left the sessions about “soft skills” (really dislike that terminology!) so proud of the leadership team for their breakthrough moments and so hopeful that things in the workplace would reflect those revelations.
Never happened.
Why? For the very same reasons my colleagues noted above…no one got a better bonus or a promotion for demonstrating humility, compassion, etc. Bottom line results and cash were king.
So it’s my sincere hope that the organizations sending folks to your sessions are showing tough empathy and expecting attendees to use those newfound skills back on the job!
Hi Jane,
I’ve managed a group of 15 engineers for five years. During that time I’ve discovered that I can do a LOT of things WITH those people – manage, define, direct, develop. But I can’t LEAD them unless they know I care about them.
To paraphrase Wally Bock – “People, with their skills and relationships, are the only competitive advantage you have.”
I don’t think it matters what product you deliver – we’re all in the people business to some degree.
“My people” have to know I care about their challenges raising their kids, their health emergencies and their family struggles – not just what they deliver for the company. My support of their success outside the office provides a foundation for growth, commitment and success at the office.
Hi Dave,
Big kudos to you for having mastered the art and science of managing both task completion and employee engagement/relationship! Your team is lucky to have you.
I couldn’t agree more with Wally — all work gets done by and through people, so human capital is really a firm’s biggest internal asset.
We need to clone you!
Jane, I’m late to the post, but my sense of what is right was so askew by the time I completed reading the post. I join you in recognizing that this is “old world” hierarchy style leadership from the paternalistic / warring history of humankind. In my mind it’s like somebody said, “You must defeat to win.”
Thank you for picking up the desire to be the change. Thank you for helping leaders see that the human beings who work for them don’t check their emotions at the door.
Athletic coaches have known for years that caring, coupled with truth, coupled with focus and dedication can yield strong ties.
The issues described here are (in part) why I would rather work for myself.
Cheryl – I recently read that nearly 70% of employees are either actively disengaged or somewhat disengaged at work. I think a large measure of this is that business rewards conformity and consistency…a rather mechinistic approach that makes us feel like cogs in a wheel rather than valued individuals. Love your observations and thanks much for sharing!