I learned…that gold in its native state is but dull, unornamental stuff, and that only lowborn metals excite the admiration of the ignorant with an ostentatious glitter. However, like the rest of the world, I still go on underrating men of gold and glorifying men of mica.
An enterprise needs leaders at all levels. Discovering and developing these people is one of the primary tasks of an executive. Discovery is easy when the leader-candidate is, well, noisy about his or her qualities. But noise alone is not a reliable predictor of leadership qualities. Too often, executives settle for the in-your-face candidate. Their reasoning seems to be that standing out from the crowd is what leadership is about. Isn’t it? No, not exactly. To use Mark Twain’s metaphor, if you settle for ostentatious glitter, you might get the lowborn metal. One wants to accept the true potential leader and reject the false. In the case of the relatively quiet employee, this can be a challenge. This posting offers reflections that one can be both quiet and a leader (quiet leadership is not an oxymoron) and that the development of quiet leaders requires special attention.
Here’s an example. An executive I know grouses about a subordinate who is a quiet type of person. The subordinate tends to speak late in meetings and often changes the course of discussion in surprising ways—sometimes synthesizing disparate points of view, other times opposing the unanimity of the meeting up to that point. On more than a couple of occasions, he has helped to avert disastrous decisions. The subordinate is a classic introvert ((Carol Bainbridge says that introverts are more concerned with the inner world of the mind. Being around people drains their energy. This seems familiar: many academicians are introverts. Bainbridge says, “Introverts make up about 60% of the gifted population but only about 25-40% of the general population.”)); he takes a while to process conversation and thinks before speaking.
You can see a problem coming when I tell you that the executive is a classic noisy leader. An extrovert, he works crowds exceptionally well, sends a torrent of email each day that manages to connect in some personal way (a political observation here, a family tip there, and a dirty joke elsewhere). He chatters buoyantly, thinking out loud, and sometimes derails a group discussion. The executive has a largevoice,exuding confidence and power. He can wade into a noisy sales convention, annual shareholder meeting, or cocktail reception and get attention. The executive wants the subordinate to be like him, to change his ways, and to speak up sooner in meetings. What should the executive do?
The executive is inclined to give the subordinate the message at the next annual evaluation—speak up or there is no upward mobility for you. He reasons that leadership depends on communicating effectively, with impact and influence. Therefore, leadership development should entail coaching the subordinate to be more like the executive. It’s the boss’s job to frame the desired behaviors. Why not here? The fundamental error of the executive is that he supposes that all leaders are the same…like him.
The subordinate has a problem too. As long as he aspires to rise, he must demonstrate his leadership qualities. What should the subordinate do?
**Choose the arena wisely. Don’t get lost in a big crowd. Bill Clinton and Silvio Berlusconi can galvanize thousands in a mass meeting. The quiet subordinate probably won’t. Quiet leaders will have the most impact in smaller groups and in organized discussions rather than large free-for-alls. It amazes me when quiet leaders apply to MBA programs with very large classes—such is not their natural arena and won’t afford the kind of venue that allows them to grow their strengths.
**Create a safe zone. The reason some leaders grow quiet is that they may face discounting, ridicule, or verbal assault. Women, minorities, and the foreign-born feel this acutely. Some corporations have a culture of discussion that is confrontational and disrespectful. If so, find friends. Look at them as you talk. Perhaps pre-test your message on a sympathetic ear.
**Learn to get attention. Raise your hand assertively. Stand up or climb on a chair if you have to. Abraham Lincoln learned to use humor to draw the interest of an audience: everyone leans forward to hear the punch line. Mahatma Gandhi was the master of the nonviolent demonstration. Mother Theresa brought photos of the people in her care.
**Speak up early in a meeting. This is the single most effective advice for quiet leaders—whether in the classroom or business. It seems to me that speaking early breaks the ice and creates a sense of psychological investment in the discussion that helps the quiet leader to be more alert to opportunities to have an impact.
**Shape expectations. The quiet leader may need to remind the executive where he made an impact in meetings in the past and where he is most likely to do so again in the future. “Give me some slack; I’ll deliver for you!”
**Give it time. As a leader, one gets respect the old-fashioned way: one earns it. This takes some accumulated experience. The subordinate simply needs to work patiently toward a goal of demonstrated leadership.
The executive should give it time also. He seems a little pushy. He should also consider the benefits of diversity. A room full of shouting extroverts doesn’t necessarily deliver better outcomes. As a practical matter, accepting diversity means adapting one’s leadership style. This probably means listening more carefully and creating space for everyone to be heard. Is the executive really soliciting contributions from everyone? He should also show some respect. The business world has plenty of charismatic people. The problem is that, viewed from the eyes of the charismatic, the rest of humanity can look like schlubs. This is hubris, the inability to step into the shoes of the other person and see the world from that place.
A “leader” can be defined in terms of attributes such as intelligence, vision, high integrity, skills of influencing and communication, social awareness, emotional intelligence, and a bias for action. One can also define a leader in terms of outcomes. Are you a leader? The classic test is to turn around and see if anyone is following you. Defined either way, attributes or outcomes, there is no reason why extroversion and noisiness are critical to leadership. Nor does the title, “leader,” necessarily fall to the chair of the meeting or big cheese in the room. ((For more on this point, I recommend Howard Gardner’s book, Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership. )) “Quiet leader” isn’t an oxymoron. Aung San Suu Kyi, Rosa Parks, Albert Schweitzer, and Warren Buffett, strike me as modern examples. Joseph Badaracco, the author of a book on quiet leadership, said, “They’re often not at the top of organizations. They don’t have the spotlight and publicity on them. They think of themselves modestly; they often don’t even think of themselves as leaders. But they are acting quietly, effectively, with political astuteness, to basically make things somewhat better, sometimes much better than they would otherwise be.”
Teaching in the case method classroom poses the challenge of developing the quiet leader. ((In most of Darden’s courses, class participation accounts for perhaps half of the course grade. We give this much weight to participation for several reasons. First, it can be an indicator of mastery—you probably know your stuff if you can impart it to others. Second, class discussion strengthens one to participate in the world of business, where interpersonal engagement is the fuel for business progress. Debate, persuasion, negotiation, selling, the use of humor, facts, and rhetorical devices are vital skills to be mastered for success—the case classroom exercises these skills. Third, the learning is powerful: feedback is immediate and richer than with a quiz or test. The self-discovery about your strengths and weaknesses vastly exceeds the nominal lesson in the case. Fourth, it’s fun.)) The task for the teacher is to draw out all students into the discussion. Some leap into it without prompting. Others require gentle encouragement. A few need stronger inducements. How should one manage across a group that contains noisy and quiet people? Our approach at Darden is to start where the student is—we are “student-centered” in our teaching. One size does not fit all. Different students should be drawn out and developed in different ways.
Mark Twain had it right: it is easy to be drawn to “ostentatious glitter.” We should value the student or subordinate employee of gold, aiming to help him or her to achieve the deserved luster.
Posted by Robert Bruner at 06/19/2008 12:31:47 AM