Jane Suter Top Contributor

1,032

Owner - Red Tiger Consultancy Ltd

In this eerie ambience of Halloween 🎃, a curious parallel can be drawn to the concept of laissez-faire leadership, creating a connection that transcends the boundaries of spooky festivities and Corporate management.

Just as Halloween 👻 embodies a sense of the unknown and the mysterious, laissez-faire* leadership introduces an intriguing leadership void, where autonomy and ambiguity often reign.

Leadership, in its laissez-faire form, can be likened to the haunted house 🏚️ of the Corporate world. Team members wander through its corridors, encountering challenges and making decisions on their own!

This freedom can be liberating, encouraging the development of innovative solutions and self-driven initiatives. Yet, in the absence of a guiding hand, there is an underlying sense of unease. Just as Halloween 🕸️ revellers might be wary of the unknown spirits that haunt the night, employees in a laissez-faire environment might grapple with doubts and hesitations.

Laissez-faire leadership allows for individuality and diverse approaches. However, this freedom can lead to a leadership void —a void that demands a delicate balance ⚖️. Too much freedom can breed chaos.

Laissez-faire leadership, much like the mystique of Halloween , offers an intriguing journey into the unknown. Yet, it is the responsibility of leaders 🧛 🧛🏼‍♀️to illuminate the path, ensuring that the void left by autonomy is filled with just enough guidance to inspire, without stifling the spirit of independence.

Sources: Northouse : Leadership: Theory and practice 9th Edition, Chapter 6 Transformational Leadership

The Dark and Bright Side of Laissez-faire Leadership Zhang, Wang, Gao 2023

With help from “The Bard”

*In the world of laissez-faire leadership, managers adopt a hands-off approach, allowing their team members to navigate their tasks and projects with minimal guidance.

An interesting paper on how a leader emerges from a ‘leaderless’ group

This research shows that there is a high degree of neural synchronisation between leaders and followers during communication. When leaders and followers interact, their brain activity synchronises more than when followers communicate with each other.

Experimental Setup: The experiment involved 11 groups of three people discussing a scenario. No leaders were designated at the start of the experiment. At the end of the activity, each group chose a leader to report back. The brain 'activity' of each participant during the conversations was recorded.

I've attempted to summarise the findings.

Leadership Selection: External judges and participants often selected the same leaders. These leaders induced greater coherence in followers' brain activity.

Quality Over Quantity: The study suggests that the quality of communication, measured by factors like group coordination, logical reasoning, and active participation, matters more than the frequency of speech. Even if (the potential) leaders spoke less often, their high-quality communication induced greater coherence and brain synchrony with followers.

Verbal vs. Nonverbal Communication: In this context, verbal communication skills were found to be crucial in decision-making and leadership emergence, while nonverbal cues (such as body language) did not significantly influence the selection of leaders.

Initiating Synchrony: Leaders and followers both initiated neural synchrony, but leader-initiated communication induced greater coherence than follower-initiated communication. Leaders who initiate conversations effectively and seek synchronisation with followers are perceived as more effective. Follower to follower interactions had a lower level of coherence.

Decision Making and Empathy: Leaders should anticipate how their decisions will impact others and be empathetic to maintain synchrony. Understanding followers' perspectives and addressing threats that disrupt cooperation is essential for effective leadership.

Group Cohesion and Cooperation: The left temporal-parietal junction, where synchronisation was observed, plays a role in sharing emotional and mental states, essential for maintaining group cohesion and cooperation. Leaders who understand and reflect followers' emotions can influence them effectively.

Thoughts?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4394311/

Leader emergence through interpersonal neural synchronization

Today 5th October is UK National Poetry Day so I commissioned the Bard to produce a poem.

Enjoy!

Humility is not weakness, but strength,
To admit when you're wrong, to go the length
To learn and grow, to listen and see,
The best in others, their potential to be.

Humble leaders create a safe space,
Where everyone's valued, their voice has a place.
They foster collaboration and trust,
Building a team that's united and robust.

In a world where pride often takes the lead,
Humble leaders stand out, indeed.
They show us that greatness comes from within,
When we're true to ourselves, and our journey begins.

Today, September 21st, is the International Day of Peace.

My thoughts are summed up by these two quotes from our late Queen, relating to our present and our future.

"It has perhaps always been the case that the waging of peace is the hardest form of leadership of all."

which links with

"And when peace comes, remember it will be for us, the children of today, to make the world of tomorrow a better and happier place."

I think that the second quote is not possible without the first.

To be honest, I have no idea how to wage peace when powerful world leaders seemingly refuse to see things from other nations' perspectives or from a whole world perspective.

But here's hoping.

Got any ideas?

Many moons ago, as part of a discussion on Microlearning, I agreed to make an animated video of less than 10 minutes on a topic of Hub members' choosing. Difficult conversations was the topic of choice.

I realised that 10 minutes was probably not enough time to do justice to the topic - mainly as I wanted to base it on real-life situations and conversations. I also wanted to include the effects that the conversation had on the participants. So this has ended up in four parts.

Part 1: Waterloo
https://vimeo.com/863653576/1795798d41?ts=0&share=copy

This is a conversation between CEx Alex and her elder sister Caroline who reports to her. It turns into a row.

Part 2: The day before you came
https://vimeo.com/860989611/b5fb2b9a56?ts=0&share=copy

Executive Mentor, Chloe, unpicks this with Caroline, using an approach that works best for Caroline

Part 3: I still have faith in you
https://vimeo.com/864352956/2c465d5b10?ts=0&share=copy

Chloe unpicks this with Alex, using a different approach

Part 4: Voulez-vous (including cast list)
https://vimeo.com/864383948/094f10c900?ts=0&share=copy

Alex and Caroline reconcile?

Enjoy!

The videos are only available to Hub members at the moment.

Subtitles are available by clicking on the cc button.

P.S. No AI was used in the making of these videos.

A fascinating Podcast hosted by Adam Grant with Brené Brown and Simon Sinek on "The Leadership Skills we need to build". Apologies if this has been posted before.

A lot of excellent points - here is a selection.

Being a good leader is being the same as a good human being with qualities such as self-awareness, kindness, vision, accountability, trust, vulnerability and human connection. (Quoted from all three) I agree with these - are there any they have left out?

People have to want to become a leader and are more successful as leaders than those that do not want to be a leader. People that are already good at leadership get more out of leadership development (AG and SS). I think it may seem obvious that someone would want to become a leader and yet there are so many examples where the desire to be a leader is not driven by the person, but by their partner, family, "keeping up with the Jones's" etc.

“One of the clearest drivers of inclusion is just being looked at by the leader” from a paper by Kathy Phillips. This is interesting - thoughts?

Some great tips on managing upwards including “Effective Confrontation”

The question was posed “What word would be used if Leadership did not exist” The answers were “Coach” and “Facilitator”. “Parent” was used by SS but this was quickly dismissed by the others. I cannot think of an alternative word - can you?

https://youtu.be/PQAqVbAQVtM

Fascinating, yet somewhat depressing, article entitled “Women know exactly what they’re doing when they use ‘weak language" by Dr Adam Grant in the New York Times. I have summarised the key points as best I can as the article is behind a paywall.

Grant questions past assumptions that if a woman wants to be heard then they must use forceful, demanding language. He now suggests that weak language can be a strategic advantage for women in the workplace.

Examples of weak language include the use of:

Disclaimers such as ‘I might be wrong, but …’,

Hedges e.g.‘maybe, sort of'

Tag questions e.g. ‘don't you think?’.

This approach can be used to signal interpersonal sensitivity and build rapport with others. This can be especially helpful for women, who are often stereotyped as being less assertive than men.

Grant cites 29 studies that support his claim. These studies found that weak language can lead to increased liking, cooperation, and persuasion. For example, one study found that women who used weak language were more likely to be hired for a job than women who used strong language.

He acknowledges that in many cultures, the gender stereotypes that men should be ‘dominant and assertive’ and that women should be ‘kind and caring’ still prevail. He cites new evidence [Ma, A., et al (2022)] that it is ‘not ambition that women are being penalised for 'but if they are seen to be ‘forceful, controlling, commanding and outspoken’. Worryingly the backlash is even more intense, ‘when a woman is Black’.

So instead of being judged on their ability, women are attacked for their personality being seen as ‘overbearing, abrasive, etc.’ Similarly men that come across as ‘too modest and too agreeable’ are often ‘liked less and paid less’.

Of course, weak language is not always appropriate. It is important to use it strategically and in moderation. However, Grant's findings suggest that women should not be afraid to use weak language when it is right for the situation. For example:

* Weak language can be used to signal humility and open-mindedness.

* It can also be used to build rapport and connection with others.

* When used effectively, weak language can be a powerful tool for persuasion.

Grant suggests that the answer is to normalise ‘weak language as a strong way to express concern and humility’ which will reduce the pressure for a woman to communicate more forcefully - assertion and not aggression.

I echo Grant, when he longs for the day when articles such as this are no longer needed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/31/opinion/women-language-work.html

Ma, A., Rosette, A. S., & Koval, C. Z. (2022). Reconciling female agentic advantage and disadvantage with the CADDIS measure of agency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(12), 2115–2148. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000550

As Wimbledon reaches its climax, I am reminded of this quote from Martina Naratilova:

“The moment of victory Is much too short to live for that and nothing else"

I’m not too sure of the context of the quote and also know that Martina has given many memorable quotes.

The quote resonates for me because of Leadership Live 2023 and the talk by Paul Sloane in particular. How times have changed because not that long ago failure was often perceived as a negative outcome, leading to blame, consequences, disappointment and the sack.

I was conducting a Coaching Supervision session today with one of my learners and she revealed that she had openly shared a failure and her learning from it with her team. This mirrored one of the recommendations from Paul “Talk about your own failures and learnings.”

I learned two things about her and her team from this. Firstly she is developing a culture of open communication and feedback. She spoke of how during performance reviews team members had been passive and subservient with an expectation that the manager does all the thinking for them. She has introduced coaching into her organisation and this helped to generate a shift with her teams - with them doing the thinking and generating options. Secondly, by sharing her own failures, she is giving her team licence to do the same.

Paul also spoke of the importance of creativity and innovation, organisations that don’t innovate will not survive. Innovation is a constant process and “Moments of Victory” are short-lived and soon out of date.

Thoughts?

Joined #LL23 virtually today. What a fab event! I have taken eight pages of notes.

Some of my jottings

Paul Sloane - #EmpowerToFail, "If everything succeeds you are not being innovative enough" "Success is a lousy teacher, failure is a great teacher".

Bronwen Williams - "Opt out of recessions", "(Pragmatic) Optimism is a moral duty for Leaders"

Ad Davies - "Bring the people who you feared into teams" "Create the environment that people want to be part of"

and so much more.

Big thanks to the organisers and John Mark Williams for bringing it all together and his insights

“How do I stop my violin from being stolen? Put it in a viola case!” The viola is often compared unfavourably with its smaller sibling, the violin, as there are much fewer opportunities for the viola to shine. Violists have to put up with a lot of jokes too!

So what does a random joke about violins and violas have to do with leadership and management - well quite a bit, I think.

Management and leadership have long been regarded as crucial pillars for success. However, in recent years, a noticeable shift in focus has emerged, with leadership gaining popularity while management appears to have lost some of its lustre.

Just like the violin, leaders can hit the high notes and when they get it wrong, it is much more noticeable. As with the viola, managers play an important role by doing what they have to do, rarely hitting the headlines. There are far more famous violinists than violists - and it is the same with famous leaders and managers. Courses often pose the question “Can you name a great leader”, rarely “Can you name a great manager?” (outside of sport).

The volatile nature of today's business environment demands leaders who can navigate ambiguity and inspire their teams to think creatively. Leadership is seen as a crucial element for achieving long-term success and sustainability. While leadership is in the limelight, it should not diminish the significance of effective management. Management is the foundation that supports the execution of strategic goals set by leaders. It ensures that resources are allocated efficiently, processes are streamlined, and deadlines are met. However, management has sometimes been criticised for its association with bureaucracy, rigidity, and a lack of flexibility. This perception has perhaps contributed to the view that management is less fashionable than leadership.

An effective orchestra requires the contribution of violins and violas. Similarly rather than viewing management and leadership as different forces, I think it is essential to recognise their interdependence and the value of their synergy. Effective managers possess leadership qualities, inspiring their teams and aligning individual efforts with their organisation’s vision. Similarly, strong leaders appreciate the importance of sound management practices to ensure the execution and implementation of their ideas.

So whilst the popularity of leadership has grown in recent years, I think it is inaccurate to claim that management is less fashionable, even if that is the perception. Both management and leadership are essential components of successful organisations, each with distinct but complementary roles.

Thoughts?

P.S. So what is the real difference between a violin and a viola? A viola can hold more beer!