Actions Speak Louder Than Words

One of the more interesting observations I’ve made in delivering diversity training occurs in the discussion around “shared influence.” We talk about collaborative leadership and how that can foster more ownership and buy-in, as well as more ideas, which in turn makes for a stronger, more productive team. I ask whether employees are more engaged and more willing to go the extra mile when the manager simply assigns a task, or when the manager asks for input, and then asks that employee to implement her idea. The class inevitably chooses Scenario Two. It seems like such an obvious answer, yet how often do leaders actually do this?

Some participants have asked why the employer is teaching collaboration yet consistently uses a command-and-control model.

A good question, and one that points to a disconnect between what the employer says it wants to happen and what actually is happening in the organization. Interestingly, although the employees are asked to complete a survey at the end of the workshop, offering suggestions as to how the curriculum could be improved, few respond. Often, that will lead managers to say (in frustration), “We ask for their input, they don’t give it, and then they complain that we don’t listen to them!”

The next question, then, is, “Why aren’t the employees offering suggestions?” Although I don’t know the answer in this specific situation, it can sometimes occur when the employer has a history or a reputation of not listening to the employees. Employees give up, stop offering ideas, and don’t believe the employer when it says it “values their opinions.” When it gets to this point, the employer is really going to have a difficult time convincing the employees that it has changed its ways, and truly does want the employee to contribute.

Actions consistent with stated positions will build trust and encourage collaboration. If the two are not consistent, people will always believe actions over words.

Helping Girls Become Strong Women

In the last post, I talked about raising strong girls/women, noting that we don’t have to ban “girly” things to raise strong women, anymore than we have to ban “manly” things to raise nurturing boys. Today, I’ll talk about what that has to do with women’s leadership.

When women first began assuming leadership roles in Corporate America, they tried to be like men, even to the point of wearing a suit and tie (albeit a modified one). However, the “command and control” model wasn’t really working for women, because that’s not how women typically work. Not that women never use that model, and not that they can’t; it’s just that when you analyze women’s leadership style over a large population, that’s not the model that stands out.

Women tend to be more collaborative, and have what is now referred to as a more transformative style of leadership. The interesting thing is, research is showing that this type of leadership can, in many cases, be more successful than the traditional command-and-control model. Strength of leadership is demonstrated most clearly in successful leadership.

All of this leads to the conclusion that if we allow girls to develop their natural strengths and interests (whether that means playing Barbies or baseball), while encouraging them to try new things, we will help them to naturally develop into strong leaders. Trying to force them into a model that does not suit them creates only weakness.

So relax. Introduce your daughter to a wide variety of experiences, and then let her take the lead in developing her interests and gifts.