Sheena Iyengar studies how we make choices — and how we feel about the choices we make. At TEDGlobal, she talks about both trivial choices (Coke v. Pepsi) and profound ones, and shares her groundbreaking research that has uncovered some surprising attitudes about our decisions.
In times of crisis people always look for inspirational leaders. What makes for inspiration is subjective, but there is one common element when speaking about leaders who inspire: they have a strong leadership presence.
By presence we mean “earned authority.” That is, people follow your leadership because you are a proven quantity, whose credibility rests on your having gotten things done. Every leader must aspire to demonstrate presence in order to inspire; this is a theme I explore in my new book, 12 Steps to Power Presence: How Leaders Assert their Authority to Lead. Let me outline a few key points:
Know the score. Executives who talk a good game may appear to have presence but what they really have is a silver tongue. If you seek to inspire, you need a deep knowledge of the situation. Communication that directs people to strive for big goals must be reinforced with a process and with information that support achieving those goals, otherwise it is just empty rhetoric. Leaders with presence know their business.
Radiate command. A leader with presence wears authority like a well-tailored suit. Others notice the good fit and feel comfortable in her presence. A leader who cannot radiate authority is one that will struggle to create followership. Authority stems from strong self-awareness; leaders with command presence are confident because they know what they are capable of achieving by themselves and through others.
Be humble. Exuding authority doesn’t mean overlooking personal limitations. Good leaders are those who know their flaws. A sense of humility affects inspiration in one very direct way: the leader acknowledges that he will succeed only with the help of others. A humble leader draws people to him not because he has all the answers, but because he recognizes that others have good answers, too.
Provide hope. When people seek inspiration, they are often really seeking hope. Leaders need to deliver it to them. With hope there’s a sense of possibility — that if we do what the leader asks, we will succeed. At the same time, hope must be reinforced with a sense of reality: having the right resources used by the right people at the right time. It is a leader’s job to deliver on both sides of that equation by providing what employees need when they need it.
Let me draw a distinction between presence and charisma. Charisma is the aura leader projects; very often it succeeds people see reflections of themselves in that sheen and therefore are more disposed follow the charismatic person. They are following their own intentions, if you will. Charisma enhances one’s presence but it is not essential.
Presence, as noted, is earned authority, or “street cred.” For leaders to inspire, they need such presence; it transcends looks and words and reflects not simply intention, but action. Leaders with effective presence are men and women who use their authority to effect good things for the organization.
” We are better than we know. If we can be made to see it, perhaps for the rest of our lives we will be unwilling to settle for less. ” NN
Abuse of Trust: Anatomy of a Breakdown
From this blogpost’s title, you’re probably assuming this is about the BP oil spill, or the SEC’s settlement with Goldman Sachs, the recent financial legislation, or a new perspective on Bernie Madoff.
Instead, I want to shine a flashlight on l’affaire Sherrod. From a trust perspective.
For those of you outside the US, the bare narrative is this: Fox News played a videotape of a speech by a federal government employee, which appeared to be racist, and called for her resignation. In very short order, the government did indeed fire her, without checking on the facts.
The Shirley Sherrod Case
Those of you in the US, I’m not going to link here to any more background. The newspapers are full of it.
What I do want to suggest is to offer a case example of how trust breaks down, in the only terms that matter: yours.
Here is a link to the original Fox video; the first 45 seconds are about this story.
Here is the foxnews.com coverage of the video, on July 20—a quick read.
Now: most of you know what came next. But you almost certainly know it from secondary sources. Rarely, these days, do we actually get to make up our own minds from primary material.
We have an opportunity here to contrast punditry with original source material. Ask yourself what you know of the Army-McCarthy hearings in the 1950s. Google it a bit if you want. Then compare it with the actual video, here.
In the same vein, may I strongly suggest that all of you seize this opportunity to view Ms. Sherrod’s original video in its entirety. It’s not a light request: the entire video lasts 43 minutes, and the ‘hot stuff’ is scattered throughout the middle section.
I still suggest you look at it. This is a teachable moment. But don’t be taught by what you hear from the Wall Street Journal, or the New York Times, or the NAACP, or pundits of the right or of the left–the signal-to-noise ratio is huge. Instead, seize this opportunity to teach yourself.
I won’t say anymore just now; I’ll add my own comments in a few days.
There is a ton of learning to be had by each of us watching the original source material—at roughly the same time the opinion makers are all ossifying the official learnings.
There is to be had here learning about how we come to trust, who we trust, how much power we grant to those we trust, and the benefits and risks of trusting others.
So–if you can find time to watch the original, please share with us what you learned from it.
When in doubt, ask: ‘What would love do here?’ Then do it! ~ Gini Gentry
There is no exercise better for the heart than reaching down and
lifting people up.
— John Andrew Holmes
Conductors do not know how the oboe does its work, but they know what the oboe should contribute.
Peter F. Drucker