Trust

Are the Mics on? What to Communicate

April 3 in Balance, Communication, Rumor, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

On March 26, 2012, US President Barack Obama was in South Korea and met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. As they were preparing to give remarks to reporters President Obama leaned over to President Medvedev and stated that he would “have more flexibility” in missile defense negotiations after his election.

This blunder is reminiscent of an off-the-cuff declaration by President Ronald Reagan on August 11, 1984 prior to his weekly radio address. Reagan announced, “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”

These comments bring to mind the issue of what to communicate to your team. As a leader you may frequently undertake exercises or explorations with radical negative team impacts. Since these exercises often have a very small chance of being executed and a release of an incomplete plan can install fear into team members, it is important that they stay within a small group of colleagues. While this may smack of clandestine and unsavory business dealings, it is the smart thing to do.

If you are negotiating with an external party this complicates matters further. You do not want to tip your hand to the other party, inadvertently providing them with an advantage. Negotiations can sometimes involve multiple individuals with specific roles, including “good cop/bad cop” duties, the technocrats, the diplomats, and so on. To share such details with your team is both unnecessary and a waste of time and energy.

When considering how much information to share broadly with your team, a litmus test I use is to consider:

  • Likelihood that the scenario will play out
  • Ramifications on the psyche of individual performers
  • Effect of a transmission of partial information or information taken out of context to other groups
  • The value of your team having the information vs. not having the information.

Whatever information you do share with your team, assume that it will be spread widely. I often chuckle at the comment, “Don’t tell anyone, but…” If everyone follows this common policy then everyone ends up knowing the information.

On a related note, I routinely have leaders confide to me that team members are talking behind their backs. Expect that. Accept the fact that everyone is talking about everyone and forget it. Move on to more important issues. People share thoughts and experiences to expand their knowledge and to attempt to bring certainty to uncertain situations. This is why rumors start.

As humans, we abhor uncertainty. Rumors are an effort to find certainty in uncertain circumstances. It is best to deal with rumors using frequent, clear, honest communication. In these communications it is acceptable and reasonable to say that you cannot divulge all information. A good example is potential layoffs. If rumors begin you may need to state that layoffs are being explored but that they are a last resort. You should also state what actions are being taken in order to avoid such an action.

Here’s a parting thought on what to communicate… Think about what you would tell an eight year old child of yours about a possible negative event. On one hand you want to prepare the child, on the other you don’t want to instill him or her with anxiety or fear. So remain thoughtful and diligent about what and how you communicate.

Concepts:

  • Communicate only what is valuable and necessary for your team
  • Assess the ramifications of what you are planning to share
  • It’s acceptable to state that you can’t share everything at the moment but that you will provide updates as more information becomes certain

Keywords: leadership, communication, rumor, negotiation

References:

  • Allport, F. H. (1924). Social Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (2006). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (1993). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

Leadership in the Aftermath of Greg Smith

March 27 in Authenticity, Communication, Mindfulness, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

On March 14, 2012 Greg Smith, a Vice President in the London office of Goldman Sachs, resigned from the firm. The same morning an op-ed piece from him with a public explanation for his resignation was posted on NYTimes.com. Mr. Smith stated that he could no longer work at Goldman given the shift, in his opinion, from a strong customer orientation to concern solely for Goldman’s profit.

Reflecting on how you might respond to a similar situation is a good leadership exercise. I believe there are two facets, or angles, from which to view this situation—internal and external to your organization.

As a leader, I feel it would be crucial to reach out to customers as quickly as possible with a message describing your values related to customer satisfaction and providing specific examples where customer benefits were put before your own corporate profitability. As I have written previously, trust is an essential element of leadership. This message can be delivered without a reference to the op-ed piece, thus keeping Mr. Smith’s negative view below the radar if it had not surfaced at any given customer.

The second facet is more difficult. An important question is the accuracy of Mr. Smith’s views. If his views are a faithful representation of your culture then it is time for some organizational reflection and soul-searching. It may be important to ask yourself what cultural values you wish to promulgate and then make a concerted effort to assess leader behavior.

Your behavior speaks louder than your words. Maintaining awareness of your own behavior is frequently difficult although training in mindfulness can pay great dividends. Using a third party to gather qualitative and quantitative views of your behavior is a good complementary method of assessment.

While it may be easy to dismiss Mr. Smith as simply a disgruntled employee, an authentic leader will have the desire to dig deep within himself and into the organization for any lessons that may be gleaned from this unfortunate situation.

Concepts:

  • Embrace and quickly respond to any customer concerns related to publicly aired negative views of your organization
  • Take any negative opinions of your leadership to heart
  • Use self-reflection and mindfulness to become more aware of your own behaviors
  • Use a third party to gather qualitative and quantitative views of your behavior

Keywords: leadership, trust, culture, mindfulness

References:

  • Hogan, R. J. (2007). Personality and the fate of organizations. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Hogan, R. J. (2008, April). Leadership is a Hygiene Factor. In R. B. Kaiser (Chair), Unconventional thinking about leadership. Symposium conducted at the meeting of Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference 2008, San Francisco, CA.
  • Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109–119.
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Is Your Leadership Energy in Balance?

March 20 in Balance, Energy, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

One of the angles from which I approach leadership and team development is that of energy. Viewing all interactions with others in an energetic sense is merely one of many views available. It is similar to wearing polarized sunglasses. When wearing glasses with polarized lenses, unless you turn your head at the right angle you cannot always see the electronic display on some instruments.

In an analogous fashion, if you work to attune your awareness you can begin to follow the flow of energy between you and your team members. I believe that it is important to balance the flow of energy in both directions—away from you and toward you.

It is clearly important that, as a leader, you are able to communicate your vision and provide guidance. This is energy flowing away from you. Similarly, it is important for you to listen and gather information and ideas from your team members as well as your superiors. This is energy flowing toward you.

Body language is an important part of our communication. You might consider trying to observe your body language as you interact with your team members. Do you appear open, or overbearing? Is your body language congruent with what you speak? When your body language indicates strength or force you are sending energy out, when your body appears open you are saying, in effect, that it is OK for the other person to speak and send energy your way.

Finally, where do your exchanges take place? Always in your office or a conference room? How often do you go to your team member’s desk? In general, your office will be perceived as a place of power, a place where the energy will flow from you. When you go to your team member’s office it is more a signal of energy flowing to you, although any actions on your part may thwart that flow and reverse it.

Balancing this flow of energy is difficult to maintain, particularly when leading virtual teams. As with most things, practice helps. Observe yourself as you interact with team members and superiors. After a while it will likely become second nature.

Observe energy flow:

  • During verbal exchanges
  • With team members and superiors
  • In different locations
  • With body language
  • Of information and ideas

Keywords: leadership, balance, energy, flow, trust

References:

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

How About Trust Intelligence?

February 14 in Authenticity, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

A few weeks ago the 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer results were announced. It was a sad day for CEOs and government leaders. Trust that business, government, and NGOs (non-government organizations) will “do what is right” all declined. The credibility of CEOs took a hit, moving from 50% in 2011 to 38% in 2012. Government officials or regulators also declined in credibility from 43% to 29%.

As you well know, trust is a big deal. Leaders frequently bemoan to me the lack of trust from their subordinates. I’ve had the conversation enough times that it has caused me ponder the notion of a “trust intelligence.” We’ve got emotional intelligence, why not trust intelligence? It flows both ways, as well. Subordinates may not trust their superiors and superiors may not trust their subordinates.

Trust is a significant factor in team performance and contains many facets. Let’s look at a list of the elements a leader needs in order to earn trust:

  • Social interaction, approachable
  • Enthusiastic
  • Takes initiative
  • Resolves uncertainty as much as possible
  • Consistent communication
  • Responsive
  • Calming
  • Putting the team before self
  • Fair
  • Respectful
  • Resolves conflict
  • Honest
  • Respects confidences
  • Inclusive
  • Focuses the effort
  • Develops procedures when necessary

With this many facets it is clear that an individual would have difficulty learning to build trust by rote. I believe that the ability and desire to earn trust needs to come from an individual’s soul, from deep within, otherwise it is easily perceived as false and self-serving. Some leaders feel that they can demand or dictate trust. I wish it were so easy.

As you peruse through this list it may be helpful to list times when you have behaved in alignment with these elements and also which elements you might want to work on.

Concepts:

  • Trust goes two ways—how much do you trust your team to get the job done and how much do they trust you to follow through on your commitments and remain authentic to them?
  • A desire to build trust must come from authenticity rather as a means to achieve a performance goal.

Keywords: leadership, emotional intelligence, trust

References:

  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571.
  • Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 606-632.
  • Hempel, P. S., Zhang, Z. X., & Tjosvold, D. (2008). Conflict management between and within teams for trusting relationships and performance in China. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.540
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
  • Lee, P., Gillespie, N., Mann, L., & Wearing, A. (2010). Leadership and trust: Their effect on knowledge sharing and team performance. Management Learning, 41(4), 473-491.
  • Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Simpson, J. A. (2007). Psychological Foundations of Trust. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(5), 264-268.
Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged

The Collaborative Leadership of Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren

January 31 in Collaborative Leadership, Communication, Trust by Joel DiGirolamo | No Comments

On January 20th U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren and incumbent Scott Brown signed a pledge intending to stop all PAC (Political Action Committee) spending on their campaigns. The pledge states that for every dollar a PAC spends on TV or Internet advertisement for them or against their opponent they will donate half that amount of money to a charity of the opponent’s choice.

I find this agreement a breath of fresh air, setting an example of political bipartisan leadership as well as collaborative leadership. This model should serve as an example for all politicians to follow. Collaboration is about building something together. It is about remaining open to new possibilities.

Collaborative leadership is both unifying and fluid. Think of an evolving organism, one that is highly dynamic as it adapts and wends its way toward its ever-changing goals. While this may seem amorphous, or even wishy-washy, it is the nature of the universe. Physicists speak of the dance when describing particle physics. Leadership and the nature of organizations is exactly the same.

Conversely, hardened positions such as signing a pledge for no new taxes (a la Taxpayer Protection Pledge) takes flexibility and adaptability off the table. Charles Darwin explained all too well for us what happens to species that are no longer able to adapt. Hardened ideological positions are fine for religions but are no way to stay ahead of the curve, whether leading a nation or a private organization.

It is difficult to lead collaboratively. It requires time, patience, and skill. All parties must be committed to the goal of creating something new and building trust. They must be willing to enter a meaningful dialog to come to an understanding of each other’s values and goals so that this new creation may emerge. Begin by building on small achievements together.

So ask yourself how well you’re working with other leaders and other teams…

Questions:

• What behaviors do you exhibit which build trust?
• How do you engage others in meaningful dialog?
• How do you get peers to buy into your vision and goals?
• What process do you use to understand everyone’s values, beliefs, and goals?
• What process do you use to build a common vision?
• How do you build upon early accomplishments?
• Are you willing to invest the time to lead collaboratively?
• Are you willing to invest the time and energy to upgrade your leadership skills if necessary?

Keywords: collaborative leadership, trust, dialog, commitment

References:

Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571.
Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E. (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mullen, C. A., & Kochan, F. K. (2000). Creating a collaborative leadership network: An organic view of change. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 3(3), 183-200.

Share on Facebook

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tagged