In the realm of leadership, there’s a pervasive misconception that being agreeable and accommodating to everyone is a sure path to success. This tendency to prioritize others’ needs over one’s own, known as people-pleasing, is often glorified, especially when it comes to women in leadership roles. However, a deeper examination reveals that people-pleasing is fundamentally incompatible with effective leadership, particularly for women striving to break through the glass ceiling.
What is People-Pleasing?
People-pleasing is a behaviour characterized by an excessive need for approval and a fear of rejection or conflict. It involves prioritizing the desires and expectations of others over one’s own needs and desires. While it may seem like a harmless trait, especially in a society that values harmony and cooperation, it can have detrimental effects, particularly in leadership positions. In many ways it is written in our DNA: In anthropological terms, it was necessary for women to be useful to a tribe in a way that men were not, so people pleasing was a sure fire way to keep in with the tribe !
Both people-pleasing and perfectionism stem from a fear of inadequacy and rejection, perpetuating a cycle of striving for acceptance through constant achievement and perfection. This leads to a never-ending pursuit where no amount of effort seems enough. The focus on pleasing others creates a divide between one’s true self and the persona presented to the world, resulting in a loss of authenticity and self-awareness. The approval gained from pleasing others fails to alleviate internal doubts and anxieties, as it is based on a false representation. Consequently, individuals lose touch with their genuine preferences, beliefs, and values, as they prioritize meeting external expectations. People-pleasing and perfectionism act as shields, obscuring the true self and hindering personal growth and fulfillment. Breaking free from these patterns requires embracing authenticity and prioritizing self-awareness over external validation.
In the context of female leadership, the pressure to be likable and accommodating is often magnified. Women in leadership roles are frequently expected to navigate a delicate balance between assertiveness and nurturing, all while contending with societal stereotypes and biases. As a result, many women succumb to the temptation to prioritize harmony over confrontation, leading them down the slippery slope of people-pleasing.
Why People-Pleasing is Incompatible with Good Leadership
At first glance, people-pleasing may appear to foster positive relationships and teamwork. However, beneath the surface lies a host of problems that can undermine effective leadership for example:
Loss of Authenticity: Constantly seeking approval from others can erode a leader’s sense of self and authenticity. By prioritizing others’ expectations over their own values and principles, leaders risk losing sight of who they truly are and what they stand for.
Inability to Make Tough Decisions: Effective leadership often requires making difficult decisions that may not be popular with everyone. People-pleasers, fearing backlash or disapproval, may shy away from making these tough calls, leading to indecision and stagnation within the organization.
Undermined Authority: Leaders who constantly seek validation from their team members may struggle to command respect and authority. Employees may perceive them as weak or indecisive, undermining their ability to lead effectively.
Stifled Innovation: Innovation thrives in environments where diverse perspectives are encouraged and dissenting opinions are welcomed. However, a culture of people-pleasing stifles creativity and innovation by discouraging constructive criticism and honest feedback.
Burnout and Resentment: Being a female leader and a people-pleaser can have significant consequences for wellbeing. Constantly striving to meet others’ expectations while neglecting one’s own needs can lead to heightened stress, anxiety, and burnout. Female leaders may find themselves caught in a cycle of overwork as they attempt to juggle the demands of leadership with the desire to please everyone. This relentless pursuit of approval can take a toll on both mental and physical health, leading to exhaustion, sleep disturbances, and decreased resilience. Moreover, the pressure to maintain a façade of perfection can exacerbate feelings of impostor syndrome and undermine self-confidence. Additionally, the internal conflict between authenticity and conformity can create a sense of dissonance, leaving female leaders feeling disconnected from their true selves. This lack of alignment with one’s values and beliefs can erode self-esteem and contribute to feelings of emptiness or dissatisfaction. In the long term, the negative impact on wellbeing can extend beyond the individual to affect relationships, job performance, and overall quality of life. It’s essential for female leaders to prioritize self-care, set boundaries, and seek support to mitigate the harmful effects of people-pleasing on their wellbeing.
Moving Towards Authentic Leadership
Authentic leadership for women involves aligning actions with personal values, fostering genuine connections, and embracing vulnerability (Northouse, 2015). It emphasizes transparency, self-awareness, and integrity, allowing female leaders to inspire trust and loyalty (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). By embracing authenticity, women leaders cultivate a supportive and inclusive work culture, where individuals feel empowered to express themselves and contribute fully (Gardner et al., 2011). This approach fosters collaboration, innovation, and employee engagement, leading to improved organizational performance and greater job satisfaction (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Ultimately, authentic leadership enables women to lead with confidence and make a meaningful impact on their teams and organizations.
Breaking free from the people-pleasing trap requires a conscious effort to cultivate authenticity, assertiveness, and self-confidence. Female leaders, in particular, must challenge societal norms and stereotypes, embracing their unique strengths and leadership styles. By prioritizing open communication, fostering a culture of accountability, and leading by example, women can redefine leadership on their own terms.
So… while the temptation to people-please may be strong, particularly for women in leadership roles, it ultimately undermines the very essence of effective leadership. By embracing authenticity, assertiveness, and self-confidence, female leaders can chart a new course towards more inclusive, innovative, and sustainable leadership practices.
10 Ways to Stop being a people pleasing leader
Set Boundaries: Clearly define your limits and communicate them assertively to your team. Be firm in saying no to requests or tasks that don’t align with your priorities or values.
Practice Self-Reflection: Take time to reflect on your motivations and behaviors. Identify instances where you’ve prioritized others’ needs over your own and explore alternative responses.
Develop Assertiveness Skills: Learn to express your thoughts, opinions, and needs confidently and respectfully. Practice assertive communication techniques to assert your boundaries and preferences without being overly aggressive or passive.
Delegate Responsibility: Trust your team members to take on tasks and make decisions independently. Delegating responsibilities not only empowers your team but also frees up time for you to focus on strategic priorities.
Focus on Impact: Shift your focus from seeking approval to making a positive impact. Prioritize actions and decisions based on their potential to benefit the organization and stakeholders rather than solely seeking validation.
Embrace Constructive Feedback: Welcome feedback from others, even if it’s critical. Use feedback as an opportunity for growth and learning rather than taking it personally or feeling the need to defend yourself.
Practice Self-Care: Prioritize your well-being by taking care of your physical, mental, and emotional health. Schedule regular breaks, engage in activities you enjoy, and seek support from friends, family, or a mentor.
Cultivate Authentic Relationships: Foster genuine connections with your team based on trust, respect, and mutual understanding. Authentic relationships encourage open communication and collaboration, reducing the need for people-pleasing behaviors.
Stay True to Your Values: Align your actions with your core values and principles. Make decisions that reflect your beliefs, even if they may not be popular or well-received by everyone.
Seek Professional Development: Invest in leadership development programs or coaching to enhance your leadership skills and confidence. Surround yourself with supportive peers and mentors who can provide guidance and encouragement as you navigate away from people-pleasing tendencies
References:
Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2010). Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances. Springer Science & Business Media.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62-71.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491.
Morin, A. (2015). 13 Things Mentally Strong People Don’t Do: Take Back Your Power, Embrace Change, Face Your Fears, and Train Your Brain for Happiness and Success. William Morrow Paperbacks
Micromanagement, leadership approach characterized by excessive control and supervision, has long been a subject of concern in organizations worldwide. This article delves into the reasons behind leaders’ inclination to micromanage, the detrimental effects it has on both employees and the work environment, and provides some steps employees can take to address the issue.
The 5 Key reasons why Leaders micromanage:
Trust and Control: Some leaders may struggle with trust issues or fear of failure, leading them to micromanage as a means of maintaining control over outcomes.
Perfectionism: A desire for perfection and attention to detail can push leaders to micromanage, believing that their input is crucial for achieving flawless results.
Lack of Confidence: Insecure leaders may feel the need to be involved in every decision and task, fearing that relinquishing control could expose their weaknesses.
Communication Gaps: Insufficient clarity or lack of effective communication within teams can drive leaders to micromanage to ensure tasks are executed as intended.
Personal Attachment: Leaders who have poured substantial effort into a project or task may find it difficult to delegate, resulting in micromanagement tendencies.
The Consequences of Micromanagement:
The consequences of micromanagement can be severe: employee demoralization-when constant monitoring and interference erodes employees’ motivation, job satisfaction, and self-confidence. This leads them to feel undervalued, leading to stress and burnout; Stifled creativity and innovation-micromanagement-this restricts staff autonomy and stifles their ability to think creatively or explore alternative solutions, hampering innovation within the organization, hindering growth and skill development: Lack of ownership -employees are deprived of the opportunity to take ownership of their work and develop new skills, hampering professional growth and limiting their potential; Reduced productivity- micromanagement consumes significant time and energy, diverting focus away from critical tasks, and employees become disengaged, leading to decreased productivity and compromised organizational performance: High turnover and talent loss-the negative impact of micromanagement often drives talented employees to seek more empowering work environments, leading to increased turnover rates and the loss of valuable human capital.
What can you do if you are being micromanaged ?
There are 5 key actions you can take if you are being micromanaged:
Engage in open dialogue with the micromanaging leader, expressing concerns and requesting more autonomy and trust. Constructive feedback can help raise awareness about the impact of their behaviour.
Establish Boundaries: Clearly define roles, responsibilities, and expectations. Proactively communicate progress, plans, and milestones to ensure transparency and minimize micromanagement tendencies.
Demonstrate Competence: Prove your capabilities and competence through high-quality work, meeting deadlines, and taking ownership of assigned tasks. Building trust and confidence can gradually reduce the need for micromanagement.
Seek Feedback: Actively seek feedback and guidance from the micromanaging leader. By demonstrating a commitment to learning and improvement, you can foster a collaborative environment and potentially mitigate micromanagement.
Suggest Alternatives: Propose alternative approaches to demonstrate your ability to think critically and provide valuable insights. This can help shift the focus from constant monitoring to shared decision-making
Micromanagement can have far-reaching consequences for both employees and organizations and understanding the underlying causes of micromanagement is crucial for employees to navigate and address this issue effectively. By fostering open communication, setting boundaries, and showcasing competence, you can strive to reduce micromanagement tendencies, foster a healthier work environment, and unleash you full potential.
Allan, J., & Rogelberg, S. (2017). Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. SAGE Publications.
Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2018). A Comprehensive Literature Review of Micro-Managers and Micromanagement. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 62-75.
Kaur, R., & Mathur, A. (2017). Effects of Micromanagement on Employee Engagement: The Mediating Role of Psychological Ownership. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(2), 219-232.
All faculties employ individuals who have made the move from practitioner, to academic: Whether teacher, business leader, lawyer, social worker or nurse, very often these individuals have attained seniority in their professional lives. Yet the literature on this transition illustrates that it is rarely straightforward. The move has implications for values and purpose whilst prior assumptions on academia can create a great deal of cognitive dissonance for the individual.
Pedagogical research or the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is now a feature of the higher educational landscape, brought about in no small measure by policies that place a premium on evidence-based practice and knowledge exchange. Having employed SoTL as a mechanism to craft my own professional identity I discuss how SoTL can aid practitioner/academic transition, helping individuals make sense of their work and feel part of valued communities of practice.
Hankering for the past when the present doesn’t satisfy
Concepts and beliefs about professional identity are wide ranging – from the arguments that identities are relatively fixed, to those that regard them as work in progress, malleable and adaptive. My own work over the past 15 years on this adopts the narrative perspective,(Connelly, 1990) in which individuals make sense of their environment by carrying out identity work and creating and re-creating a rhetorical history that suits their purpose (Suddaby et al., 2016; Taylor, 2005). This approach also considers the field of organisational identity creation and the ways that individuals establish credibility within a field or role (Baxter, 2010, 2011; Baxter, 2012; Baxter, 2013).
Transitions in HE are further complicated, due to the fact that there are so many ways to become and be, an academic – many practitioners even chafing at the term ‘academic’ as being a role that is divorced from the ‘real world’. In addition, we all enter HE complete with assumptions about what it means to be an academic. Once in post the challenges are myriad, ranging from the adaptation of value systems and norms (rarely explicit) to different status, authority, and accountability to that experienced in former roles. Bruce Macfarlane’s recent paper, offers a tongue in cheek account of some of the drivers and beliefs underpinning academic identities (Macfarlane, 2022). His diagram (figure 1 page, ), illustrates islands of practice on which the academic may find themselves, and the numerous different priorities and beliefs that drive and shape this nebulous role.
The cost of identity failure
The cost of not being able to find a way to ‘be’ in HE is high, and can result in lack of team spirit, mental illness, and finally attrition, as individuals return to former comfort zones in order to retain their equilibrium and sense of ‘self’, and autonomy (Chen et al., 2022). This autonomy, or lack of agency is characterised by low motivation, and can easily overlap into an individual’s personal life and worldview. As Boyd and Harris put it, ‘new lecturers are seeking credibility through knowing and constructing their pedagogy, but they pursue this within a complex and confusing context that involves a considerable amount of boundary crossing and uncertainty’. So how can SoTL help with this identity work ?
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)
Individuals crossing over from any field, to academia often report they find it easier to create identities in relation to teaching and interface with students, this is particularly so for those on teaching contracts only who may come into academia without doctorates or much experience of research (Handley, 2005) Even if they have no research within their contracts, their natural curiosity can drive them to carry out SoTL research. So what can this offer them in relation to their professional , academic identities ?
SoTL explorations can range from investigations based on a ‘what works’ approach, straddling quality assurance/research, to theoretically robust scholarship which draws on theories and concepts of learning and engagement. For teachers, this allows them to investigate their own practices and concomitantly themselves, by exploring their area of interest in relation to other practices, other research accounts, other pedagogies and fields of thought.
Crafting and creating academic credibility
Teaching is a rewarding but sometimes frustrating occupation and despite our best efforts, students can and do disengage. Carrying out SoTL permits individuals to become more empowered by their research, engaging with others and creating narratives inherent within professional interest communities (Brown, 2006). This not only has the power to make them feel part of communities of practice, but moves them from the periphery to centrality, within these communities, a move known to contribute to both professional agency and expertise (Lave et al., 1991).
Sadly, in many HEIs this research is often thought of as somehow not as powerful or transformative as traditional research. In my view, institutions need to think more creatively about this research and how to incorporate it within their practice, or risk lack of professional job satisfaction and attrition amongst ex practitioners. In addition, in light of the recent policy agenda on impact, engagement and knowledge exchange, failure to do so threatens not only the academic community within the organisation, but the very organisation itself.
References:
Baxter, J. (2011). Public Sector Professional identities: etiolation or evolution; a review of the literature. . from http://oro.open.ac.uk/29793/
Baxter, J. (2012). The impact of professional learning on the online teaching identities of higher education lecturers:the role of resistance discourse European Journal of Open,Distance and E-Learning, 1(2).
Baxter, J. (2013). Professional inspector or inspecting professional? Teachers as inspectors in the new regulatory regime in England Cambridge Review of Education, 43(4), 467-487.
Brown, A. D. (2006). A narrative approach to collective identities. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 731-753.
Chen, Y., Currie, G., & McGivern, G. (2022). The role of professional identity in HRM implementation: Evidence from a case study of job redesign. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(2), 283-298.
Connelly, M. a. C., J. (1990). Stories of Experience and Narrative Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5 (Jun-Jul 1990)), 2-14.
Handley, D. M. (2005). The Best of Both Worlds: A Former Practitioner Transitions to Life as a Full‐Time Academic. Public Administration Review, 65(5), 624-627.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation: Cambridge university press.
Macfarlane, B. (2022). A voyage around the ideological islands of higher education research. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(1), 107-115.
Suddaby, R., Foster, W. M., & Trank, C. Q. (2016). Re-Membering. The Oxford handbook of organizational identity, 297.
Taylor, S. (2005). Self-narration as rehearsal: A discursive approach to the narrative formation of identity. Narrative Inquiry, 15(1), 45-50.
Following lockdowns in 2020 due to Covid-19, schools needed to find a way to ensure the education of their pupils. In order to do this, they engaged in digital learning, to varying extents. Innovations emanated from all school staff including for example: teachers, leaders, and teaching assistants. Some were already innovating in this area and brought forward and implemented, digital strategies, whilst others engaged with digital learning for the first time. While research is emerging about the effects of the pandemic restrictions on pupils and staff in relation to key issues such as mental health and educational attainment, very little is known about the impact on school leaders’ strategic planning processes. To address this gap, we launched a UKRI funded study adopting a strategy as learning approach to report on 50 qualitative interviews with school leaders to examine digital strategy in English secondary schools, before, during. and after July 2021, when restrictions were lifted in England. The project draws on strategy as learning literature to evaluate if schools have changed their strategic planning for digital learning, as a direct response to having learned and innovated during the pandemic. The study concludes that there is evidence that digital innovations during the pandemic have changed the ways in which leaders think about their digital strategy, thus supporting a strategy as learning approach. However it also concludes that although there is ample evidence that the pandemic has changed the way many schools view digital learning, that, for some schools, there remain persistent barriers to digital integration and planning. These emanate both from material and cultural considerations, as well as leader vision and belief in digital learning.
Submitting to an education journal for the first time is a nervewracking business. Here are a few guidelines that you can use as a checklist before submitting. It is also always a good idea to get a colleague or supervisor to look over your paper. Better to correct early than to get rejected and have to start all over again ………..
Reviewer Evaluation Criteria and author checklist Developed by Professor Jacqueline Baxter Copyright J.A.Baxter 2018.
This checklist is not exhaustive, but rather intended to provide a set of guidelines for those submitting to a journal for the first time.
Abstract
Does the abstract sufficiently summarize the manuscript under review
Is the abstract within word count
Identification of Premise and Demonstration of Need
Does the article:
sufficiently identify the premise of the article.
Offer a clear rationale for the work within the field?
Use appropriate literature to identify the premise or demonstrate the need for the research?
Justify interest to international readership?
Literature
Does the article:
Link to current literature within the target journal and outside of it ?
Reflect engagement and understanding of relevant lit ??
Overlook any core literature in the field, for example Weick in the case of sensemaking ?
Overlook recent lit that may be useful ? (Last min scan is always useful)
Appropriateness of Methodology
Do the methods:
Link to the theoretical underpinning and lit review ?
Reflect reliable, valid and ethically sound data collection methods ?
Application of Analysis
Does the article:
Clearly articulate the processes of data collection and analysis
Provide a clear description of the results?
Do the results described in the manuscript respond to the research questions ?
Robust Discussion
Does the article:
Provide a thorough and measured discussion of the findings and connect this to the theoretical framework ?
Identify any implications for theory, practice and or further research?
Are the implications consistent with the discussion, findings, and conclusions of the paper?
Writing Mechanics
Is the article:
Written for an international audience?
Free of grammatical errors?
Express its case, measured against the technical language of the field of study and the expected knowledge of the journal’s readership?
Fall within word count ?
Does the author follow the referencing guidelines?
Strategic management of online learning during Covid and beyond.
Dr Jacqueline Baxter is Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management and Director for the Centre of Innovation in Online Business and Legal Education (SCILAB). She is Principal Fellow of The Higher Education Academy, Fellow of The Academy of Social Sciences and Elected Council Member of Belmas. She has been Editor in Chief of the Sage Journal Management in Education (MiE) for 4 years. Her current funded research projects examine the interrelationship between trust, accountability and capacity in improving learning outcomes; and the strategic management of online learning in secondary schools during and beyond Covid19. Dr Baxter is based in The department of Public Leadership and Social Enterprise at the Open University Business School. She tweets @drjacqueBaxter and her profile can be found at : http://www.open.ac.uk/people/jab899. Her latest book is: Trust, Accountability and Capacity in Education System Reform (Routledge, 2020).
Leading online learning: Out of crisis comes opportunity.
We are just entering the pilot stage of our research project which looks at how schools have strategically managed online learning during Covid, and if and how, new experiences during lockdown have created long term sustainable changes in relation to the way education is managed and delivered. One of our key research questions investigates whether changes and new ways of doing things, implemented during Covid, are going to have a long-term effect on schools’ vision of education to come.
It is undisputed, that Covid has had a massive impact on education and the way it is delivered, both in the UK and internationally. Whilst there have been a number of papers on the ways in which teachers have innovated during this time, and the impact this has had on their workload and mental health, there has been little on how school leaders and their senior teams have taken a strategic overview of online and blended learning.
This is an important are to explore for several reasons: The first relates to the introduction of a more intensive regime of online teaching, one that has been forced on schools, unusually not by government, but by circumstance. The way that this has taken place, without preparation, training, or any sort of upgrade to school infrastructure, is in itself fascinating: not only in relation to the challenges that schools have faced and how they have dealt with them, but equally, the opportunity that such change presents. Schools are used to a raft of policy innovation: changes to their practices, procedures, and to the very nature of education: Policies imposed by successive governments, each more eager than the last to prove that they can close that elusive achievement gap, that for many years has proved intractable in the face of policy innovation, and inimical to social mobility, particularly in class dominated England (Weis and Dolby, 2012). The second, is in relation to the way that schools have worked with parents and carers to ensure provision during these the most testing times (Jewitt et al., 2021).
Since the Academy Act of 2010 schools have become increasingly distant from their communities (Baxter and Cornforth, 2019). This is particularly true of Multi-Academy trusts-groups of schools managed by boards and CEOs- that research has illustrated, are often remote and out of touch with school communities (Greany and Higham, 2018). Increasingly standardised practice of teaching, pedagogy and curriculum, imposed across what have become vast multilevel organisations, has created a new educational landscape within what is often termed, ‘the system less system of English education’(Lawn, 2013). The third reason why our approach potentially rich, is in relation to the long-term sustainability of good practices brought about by the pandemic. Certainly, one of its by products, is that it has revealed the stark reality of successive financial cuts to education that have been brought about by government, particularly since 2010 (Gray and Barford, 2018): Covid has brought this into the public eye, in such a way as to make it almost impossible for government to ignore. Shortages of hardware, weaknesses in school infrastructure, and last but by no means least, the chronic shortage of food experienced by many families living on and below the breadline, have been headline news since the pandemic began.
These factors have created a unique environment (all albeit a very testing one), for school leaders and their senior teams. Stripped bare of the usual rounds of consultation before introduction of new policies and practices, school leaders and their teams have had to innovate and create, in order to provide the impetus needed to steer schools and their learners through stormy waters.
It is said that the only real change in society emerges at times of crisis, According to the free market fundamentalist Milton freedman, ‘Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.’ Covid has and is, along with climate change, one of the most pressing issues of our time. It seems impossible to imagine that education can emerge from this to the ‘same old, same old.’ Our initial interviews with school leaders have started to reveal some of the new; certainly there is evidence of huge progress even in the short time between lockdown in early 2020, and the one in which we find ourselves at present. Echoing an ancient quote on action during crisis:
‘ You start by doing what is necessary; then do what’s possible; and suddenly you are doing the impossible.’ (St Francis of Assisi).
Similarly, our project will investigate the necessary, look at the innovations of the possible, and finally, point to how the seemingly impossible may profoundly change education and the way we deliver it.
Baxter JA and Cornforth C. (2019) Governing collaborations: how boards engage with their communities in multi-academy trusts in England. Public Management Review: 1-23.
Gray M and Barford A. (2018) The depths of the cuts: the uneven geography of local government austerity. Cambridge journal of regions, economy and society 11: 541-563.
Greany T and Higham R. (2018) Hierarchy, markets and networks: analysing the’self-improving school-led system’agenda in England and the implications for schools.
Jewitt K, Baxter J and Floyd A. (2021) Literature review on the use of online and blended learning during Covid 19 and Beyond. The Open University The Open University
Lawn M. (2013) A Systemless System. Forthcoming.
Weis L and Dolby N. (2012) Social class and education: Global perspectives: Routledge.
The last ten years have seen the rise of populist leaders, characterised by their extroverted ‘style before substance’ self-promotion approach.
Individuals such as Donald Trump; Boris Johnson and Jair Bolsonaro, promote the ideal of the pushy extroverted leader, who speaks without thinking, reacts rapidly and excitedly and changes tack frequently.
For some time now there has been a general perception that you are better off in the workplace, and as a leader, if you have extrovert tendencies: In other words, if you are ‘boastful and booming’ rather than ‘contemplative and calm’. But research on quiet more introverted styles of leadership has shown that introverts may be far better suited to today’s challenges.
Introversion Vs extroversion
The perception that extroverted individuals make better leaders, is influenced by the fact that there are more extroverts in leadership positions, combined with the fact that extroverts are much more likely to tell you how good they are. The traits of extroversion and introversion, first introduced by the famous psychologist Carl Jung, are generally characterised by garrulous outgoing and energetic behaviours in extroverts, whereas introverted characters are more likely to be calm, reflective and often prefer the written to the spoken medium.
In actual fact, according to most personality tests that set out to measure these tendencies, behaviours are more often placed on a continuum rather than being confined to one extreme or the other: Ambiversion-the ability to shift between introverted and extroverted behaviours, is very common, for example, salespeople that on one hand, need to listen deeply, on the other, talk enthusiastically about their products (Kahnweiler, 2009,p, 3). …studies found that extrovert’s positive outlook can make them more resilient to stress…
Some studies, such as one that looked at extroversion in the workplace from a multiple countries perspective, found that extroverts are more likely to rise to leadership positions due to a greater motivation to achieve external goals, such as a promotion or increased salary. These studies found that extrovert’s positive outlook can make them more resilient to stress and more likely to bounce back from failure, both recognized qualities of strong leaders (Ledesma, 2014).
But according to Susan Cain, author of the bestselling book ‘Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that can’t stop talking’, society as a whole undervalues introverts, particularly as leaders. She argues that without introverts we wouldn’t have leadership achievements such as The Apple computer, or theory of relativity – Steve Jobs and Albert Einstein were both introverts.Figure 1 Adapted from information in (Kahnweiler, 2009)
The power of the introverted quiet leader
So what do introverts bring to leadership positions and how can they overcome their key challenges?
Research shows that introverts can bring a great deal to the table in leadership positions: they are more likely to listen and process the ideas of their team; they consider ideas deeply before acting; they are humble and more likely to credit their team for ideas and performance; they express themselves and their ideas well in writing and because their motivation generally comes from within, are less likely to compromise performance in seeking rewards such as money or power.
For this reason, their judgement is less likely to be compromised through excitement or promise of rich rewards. However, there is a downside: Many western societies, including the US, have long favoured extroverted behaviours: Psychologist, Robert McCrae created a map of the world, showing the extent to which, different countries favour introverted or extroverted qualities (McCrae & Terracciano, 2005). Asian /oriental societies erred on the side of favouring introverted qualities whilst Western cultures revealed the opposite.
However, the Western predilection to favour extroversion has resulted in many leadership courses, such as MBAs being structured to favour extroverted activities such as; talking about achievements or large group presentations. These can leave introverted students feeling they lack the qualities necessary for ‘good leadership’.
So what are introverts key challenges and how do should they overcome them?
Jennifer Kahnweiler’s studies into leadership challenges for introverts revealed six key factors which can hold introverts back from rising to leadership postiions:
People exhaustion (draining of energy due to too many people contact)
Fast pace (leaving little time for reflection)
Interruptions (particularly difficult given our ‘always on’ world)
A pressure to self-promote
An emphasis on teamwork
An aversion towards negative impressions (introverts’ facial expression doesn’t often reveal their emotion as readily as extroverts)
She advocates a 4 Ps Process to overcome these challenges:
Preparation
Try to prepare in advance for people heavy situations such as meetings, create your questions when you have time to think about them
Presence
Show people, you are present by showing you are interested and aware through making eye contact or asking a question
Push
Push yourself out of your comfort zone as often as possible: more pain more gain!
Practice
Practice new behaviours such as telling stories, public speaking
Yet today’s world seems to demand extroverted qualities more than ever: leaders are expected to respond rapidly to increasingly complex scenarios; news travels faster than ever in an ‘always-on world,’ so why do we need more introverts in leadership positions?
Introverted leaders for the future
Introverted leaders have a great deal to offer in our complex and increasingly chaotic world: The creativity and staying power of introverts are vital to solving long term problems such as climate change or the increased possibility of worldwide viruses such as Covid19, which emerge due to complex social and ecological factors.
In addition, introverts recognize fellow introverts- introverts makeup 40-60% of the workforce if they are undervalued or not recognised, as is often the case if their leader is an extrovert, they are more likely to leave.
Finally, leaders cannot resolve complex problems without listening to their experts, failure to do so has been a leitmotif of populist leaders whose performance at controlling covid19 has been little short of catastrophic. Given these factors, it could well be the day of the populist extrovert is over and the time for the reflective quiet leader, is indeed upon us.
Recent media reports have stated that the government is looking to regain trust from the electorate by changing its approach, following the departure of Dominic Cummings and other leading advisors. Jacqueline Baxter argues that trust in government is influenced by a number of factors and that Whitehall’s desire to ‘reset’ may be far more difficult to achieve than they anticipate.
Since the start of the pandemic, the UK Government’s decision-making has tampered with the trust of the British people on numerous occasions, including by U-turning on decisions at the last minute; giving contracts to personal contacts without recourse to due process; and those contracts subsequently failing to deliver. The U-turns may not have been so inimical were they not done after categorical statements indicating the exact opposite of previous proclamations – for example, Boris Johnson, announcing on 5 January that schools would stay open and then, 24 hours later, announcing a month-long national lockdown.
Perhaps one of the most divisive and politically puzzling moves in recent political history, was the failure to sack Dominic Cummings, following his blatant and flagrant flouting of rules in the first lockdown. Following this, the government, purportedly realising that they had lost the trust of the electorate (based on media reports, polls, and advice from ‘senior Tories’) announced their intention to ‘reset’- to win back the trust of the electorate, assuming that they could wipe the national memory and initiate a ‘tabula rasa’ style reinvention in which the public would regain trust.
Good governance and accountability not only require trust, they also promote it, particularly in establishing generalised trust – an abstract trust attitude that is directed towards people in general, including strangers. Trustworthiness of the state is the most important condition for such generalised trust as it generates interpersonal trust and determines the amount of social and economic capital in a society. This, in turn, affects the state’s capacity to govern. In essence, trust is absolutely crucial to a government’s ability to govern effectively. Research into how systems function effectively and the converse highlights several factors that are key to undermining trust:
The first is corruption – real or perceived. Influential organisations such as Transparency International measure corruption by a perception index; the higher the perception of corruption within a society, the lower the trust. Put simply, citizens must have confidence that the state operates in a transparent and fair manner. The second element is the competence effect – if governments continually U-turn, or, as in the case of the British Government, issue proclamations of excellence that are then overturned by evidence indicating abject failure as in the case of the Test and Trace system, public trust is undermined. The third element is lack of accountability: in order for governance to function well, there must be effective checks and balances indicating that individuals and organisations, particularly those funded by the taxpayer, can be held accountable for their actions. As illustrated by the following examples, the government have failed spectacularly on all three counts.
Differentiating between corruption and nepotism is challenging, but both elements, particularly when they infuse societies at government level, undermine social capital and trust in government. When public positions are filled without due process, and contracts offered without having to tender, societal perceptions of corruption rise. When these public contracts are linked to private investments, perceptions of corruption and cronyism undermine trust that government is functioning effectively and with integrity. Added to this, some of these contracts in the context of the pandemic have resulted in spectacular failures, such as the Test and Trace system.
When an individual trusts another or an organisation, they take a risk that this trust will be betrayed. For example, if I pay my taxes because it is the law, I trust that everyone will do likewise: concomitantly, my trust soon diminishes if I find out that, in reality, I am one the only on in my circle that pays out. This, in turn, will lead to my lack of trust in the system of taxation, and to feelings that the system can easily be circumvented, after all – why should I pay if no one else does? This, in essence, is what happened when Cummings failed to abide by the rules set by the government. This breach of trust was all the more potent because it undermined it at both an interpersonal and system level: Cummings’s transgression became a metonym for the government’s ‘them and us’ attitude to rules. It was also a breach of procedural justice. The procedural lack of fairness of many government decisions since February 2020 has led to a lack of citizenship behaviours amongst the electorate – as Mark Warren points out, when people lose trust in government, they simply opt out. This has been noted in terms of the second lockdown, during which infections skyrocketed.
So, although the government would love to reset the collective memory of the electorate in order to win back their trust, research indicates that, once lost, trust is very difficult to regain; when trust has been breached in myriad ways, this renders it all the more so.
____________________
About the Author
Jacqueline Baxter (@drjacquebaxter) is Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management at Open University and Director for the Centre of Innovation in Online Business and Legal Education. Her latest book is: Trust, Accountability and Capacity in Education System Reform (Routledge, 2020).
Figure 1 Adapted from information in (Kahnweiler, 2009)
Professor Jacqueline Baxter EDd MA PGCE PFHEA CMBE Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences 