We
are all encouraged as leaders to become self-aware, to understand our
individual style and how it impacts on those you lead. But in many organisations,
you are likely to be part of a leadership team – and, as employees see it, one
entity, ‘the leadership’
.
And
just as the actions of a single leader set the tone for their team, the underlying
mood and spark of the organisation is determined by how ‘the leadership’ is
perceived.
Self-awareness
at
this level takes on a new perspective. It is easy for senior leadership to
become so absorbed in their circles to not even realise the impression they are
creating. But they are being watched, understandably – people want to be
confident in those their security depends on. From where employees sit, every
word and deed, or absence of word and deed, counts.
There
can be little appetite for engagement if people believe the leadership is
working in its own world while on the front-line, they plough on; where they
sense there is discussion, but they are not part of it.
That
is not to say people need or want to know everything, but it is about mutuality;
they are generating information that is fed into the leadership, so something
must be happening with it.
The
leadership may of course believe there is plenty of communication, but there
will be limited connection if employees feel they are only brought in once the
decision has been made, or
if they see no evidence that anything they
say gets worked into the decision making, or
if word from the top is
consistently out of touch with their issues, concerns or mood in the workspace.
Effective
communication in an organisation normalises links between the leadership and
front-line, allowing expertise and insights from each end to merge and ensuring
the clarity and direction that enables those at the front to best deliver. The
effect is almost sub-conscious when atmospherics as seen from the top are part
of a natural cascade through the management chain and provide routine orientation;
it signals teamwork
and opens channels for engagement
.
Because
the will to engage comes down to whether people feel they are viewed as part of
the machinery or part of the team, and the confidence to speak comes from whether
they feel they sit at the end of a communications process, or feel they are part
of a genuine dialogue. It is about when
and how
people are spoken
to.
Actions
are as telling as words when it comes to sending a message and promoting cohesion
.
Employees
are quick to detect cracks or inconsistencies in the leadership, and so are
outsiders.
Conversely,
the whole organisation buzzes when the leadership are seen to be acting as a
strong team, conversant with the picture, in each other’s minds and as one
.
Ultimately,
the image people form of their leadership
crosses into their perception
of the organisation’s culture; it reflects what they are experiencing and
living, it trumps stated values, and it transcends the actions of individuals
within the leadership team. That image may be quite different to what the
leadership intended or how they believe things are, but a disconnect could be creating
barriers rather than unity.
Understanding
how those disconnects can occur comes down to collective self-awareness, as a
leadership team, and recognising the ideals you portray through your communications
and interaction. It makes the difference between a workforce that is detached,
or one that is thinking with you and engaged
.
