Leadership on the Line

Leadership on the line has been inspired by a number of unique learning opportunities for me. The purpose of the article is to raise questions that many leaders may face in their working day.

The Line of the Psychological Contract

Setting expectations is one of the first aspects we emphasise on our leadership courses. The psychological contract sets the expectations of how people will work together. It is a way to establish the cultural values and accountability for better teamwork. This means clarifying boundaries of behaviour, otherwise the values are just words on a page.

1. Inappropriate Speech and Language

A key criteria of any successful presentation is that it is appropriate for its purpose and the audience. There is an expectation that speakers conduct themselves in a professional manner and not cause offence in a business setting. This requires a fine balancing act between maintaining freedom of speech and respecting people’s rights not to be offended.

A speech can be delivered to a very high technical standard, but can leave the audience feeling uncomfortable with the content.

Imagine if a design company employee decided to test the boundaries to demonstrate their creativity in a presentation to a potential client. They deliver an innovative and technically brilliant pitch, but the client takes offence.

Has the speaker made a misjudgement of what is an appropriate speech or was the audience too sensitive?

Is it just a case of differing values?

Should it be ignored or is it the leader’s role to consult and agree boundaries?

What would your response as a leader be?

There is also a question of how much swearing is appropriate. Swearing has become commonplace; including on TV. Different people and generations will tolerate varying degrees.  Swearing, which is part of the culture and not directed at anyone, is perhaps different to when it is made personal. Employees come to work and expect a safe environment, whether physical or emotional. There is an obligation for an organisation to provide that.

How much swearing is acceptable in a presentation or in the workplace in this modern liberal society?

Do we ignore the issue or agree expectations?

Some years ago, I did customer care training for an automotive parts company. The sales team, who were mainly women, were subjected to highly offensive personal remarks and language every day.

They felt they had to tolerate it as typical of the industry. One male delegate used the F word several times in the first half hour of the course, until I decided to call a halt under our training agreement. We discussed the situation and concluded that each person has a choice as to whether they allow themselves to be subjected to verbal abuse. Having the support of senior management is critical in this. South West Trains, for example, have sent a clear message.

 2. Banter to Bullying

Constructive feedback is a key part of developing people. Some repeated characteristics, such as timekeeping or speech mannerisms, can become a bit of a joke though. Banter can unintentionally cross the line and became something more hurtful.

When does banter become victimisation or bullying?

Is it a leader’s or an individual’s role to challenge this?

Delegates on an in-house supervisory course told me about severe bullying from a senior manager. Hardened men were reduced to tears at work. This was overlooked by the Board as this particular manager got results. However the costs were high for those he managed. There is a Health and Safety requirement to prevent bullying in the workplace, but do enough companies take it seriously?

How do you define and manage bullying?

3. Sexual and racist remarks

Those of us who remember TV shows like ‘Til Death Us Do Part’ will probably now cringe at what was acceptable in the sixties and seventies. Equality of race, gender, religion, etc; has advanced. The line of acceptable comments has moved dramatically. Even Andy Capp has had to reform.

For whatever reason, some people have a habit of making sexual innuendoes. You might say it’s just harmless fun and a bit of banter. However, one person’s joke can be offensive to someone else.

Where do you draw the line?

How do you make people aware of their impact?

At the other end of the spectrum; if the BBC and individual managers had drawn the line much sooner, would Jimmy Saville have got away with what he did?

Rod Liddell, in an interesting article in the Sunday Times, challenged the freedom of speech and gagging of opponents with different opinions. He raises the questions:

Is there a distinction between toleration and tolerance?

What are we defending, the freedom of speech or the rights of an audience not to feel intimidated or offended?

My belief is leadership on the line is a balancing act of defining appropriate and inappropriate behaviours. In a fast changing world, deciding where that line is can be fraught with difficulties. That should not stop us from trying.  Having agreed the line, it is about communicating it, having overt conversations about it; and holding yourself and others accountable. It is about calling ‘stop’ before it’s too late.

Do you agree?

I would welcome your comments and answers to the above questions.