Leadership Is a Conversation
by Boris Groysberg and Michael Slind
Artwork: Adam Ekberg, Arrangement #1, 2009, ink-jet print
The command-and-control approach to
management has in recent years become less and less viable.
Globalization, new technologies, and changes in how companies create
value and interact with customers have sharply reduced the efficacy of a
purely directive, top-down model of leadership. What will take the
place of that model? Part of the answer lies in how leaders manage
communication within their organizations—that is, how they handle the
flow of information to, from, and among their employees. Traditional
corporate communication must give way to a process that is more dynamic
and more sophisticated. Most important, that process must be conversational.
We
arrived at that conclusion while conducting a recent research project
that focused on the state of organizational communication in the 21st
century. Over more than two years we interviewed professional
communicators as well as top leaders at a variety of organizations—large
and small, blue chip and start-up, for-profit and nonprofit, U.S. and
international. To date we have spoken with nearly 150 people at more
than 100 companies. Both implicitly and explicitly, participants in our
research mentioned their efforts to “have a conversation” with their
people or their ambition to “advance the conversation” within their
companies. Building upon the insights and examples gleaned from this
research, we have developed a model of leadership that we call
“organizational conversation.”
Smart
leaders today, we have found, engage with employees in a way that
resembles an ordinary person-to-person conversation more than it does a
series of commands from on high. Furthermore, they initiate practices
and foster cultural norms that instill a conversational sensibility
throughout their organizations. Chief among the benefits of this
approach is that it allows a large or growing company to function like a
small one. By talking with employees, rather than simply issuing
orders, leaders can retain or recapture some of the
qualities—operational flexibility, high levels of employee engagement,
tight strategic alignment—that enable start-ups to outperform
better-established rivals.
In
developing our model, we have identified four elements of
organizational conversation that reflect the essential attributes of
interpersonal conversation: intimacy, interactivity, inclusion, and
intentionality. Leaders who power their organizations through
conversation-based practices need not (so to speak) dot all four of
these i’s. However, as we’ve discovered in our research, these elements
tend to reinforce one another. In the end, they coalesce to form a
single integrated process.
Intimacy: Getting Close
Personal
conversation flourishes to the degree that the participants stay close
to each other, figuratively as well as literally. Organizational
conversation, similarly, requires leaders to minimize the
distances—institutional, attitudinal, and sometimes spatial—that
typically separate them from their employees. Where conversational
intimacy prevails, those with decision-making authority seek and earn
the trust (and hence the careful attention) of those who work under that
authority. They do so by cultivating the art of listening to people at
all levels of the organization and by learning to speak with employees
directly and authentically. Physical proximity between leaders and
employees isn’t always feasible. Nor is it essential. What is
essential is mental or emotional proximity. Conversationally adept
leaders step down from their corporate perches and then step up to the
challenge of communicating personally and transparently with their
people.
This intimacy
distinguishes organizational conversation from long-standard forms of
corporate communication. It shifts the focus from a top-down
distribution of information to a bottom-up exchange of ideas. It’s less
corporate in tone and more casual. And it’s less about issuing and
taking orders than about asking and answering questions.
Conversational intimacy can become manifest in various ways—among them gaining trust, listening well, and getting personal.
Gaining trust.
Where there is no trust, there can be no intimacy. For all practical
purposes, the reverse is true as well. No one will dive into a heartfelt
exchange of views with someone who seems to have a hidden agenda or a
hostile manner, and any discussion that does unfold between two people
will be rewarding and substantive only to the extent that each person
can take the other at face value.
http://www.linkedin.com
Comments
Post a Comment