ILLUMINATIONS Blog

I’ve been thinking this week about how language, tone and non-verbals work - or don’t work - for us.  One leader moves quickly, accomplishes a lot, and asserts her positions directly and clearly; she gets feedback that she leaves people feeling a little bruised.  Another leader involves as many people as he can in making decisions, is careful not to push his agenda on to others, and doesn’t promise more than he knows he can deliver; he’s told that he needs to be much more assertive.  As a leader who wants to be effective, this can seem like a balancing act.  Come on too strong and people feel you’re walking over them; not strong enough and there’s no leadership.  How can I get it just right? 

Dealing this week with coaching situations that showed both ends of the continuum drove me to my bookshelf.  Among other books, I looked anew at Power Talk; Using Language to Build Authority and Influence by Sarah Myers McGinty.  McGinty identifies two ways of communicating.  What she refers to as “language from the center” is direct and authoritative while “language from the edge” is collaborative and responsive.  The important point the author makes is that both are effective; leaders need to be able to use both modes and know when to use each. 

Of course that makes perfect sense.  And it’s not that easy.  We often default to a preferred mode that we feel comfortable with and we can be pretty judgmental about our non-preferred mode.  “I want people to be direct with me and let me know if they have a problem with me.  It’s so patronizing to beat around the bush.”  “Making bold promises is about bluster over substance.  I don’t want to be like that.”  So it seems that the first challenge that we have is to let go of our “stories” and find the “effective” in alternative modes of communication.  Then the challenge becomes to determine which mode might better suit the situation. 

Richard Strozzi Heckler, a gifted somatic teacher, is fond of two questions: “What’s too much?  What’s not enough?”  He posits that it’s not as if you take a stand that works for every situation.  You need to continually get feedback and calibrate your stance.  That approach makes a lot of sense to me in light of this discussion.  What ideas and thoughts does this bring up for you? 

I was planning to move on to another topic this week but your comments about listening pushed my thinking a bit.  I want to suggest that “hearing the words” is important but not sufficient.  Increased opportunities for building relationships, for opening to new ideas, for aligning for action come from listening between and around the words. 

You may be aware of a study by Albert Mehrabian that showed non-verbals were particularly important in conversations conveying feelings and attitude.  Mehrabian found that three elements account differently for our liking of an individual: words account for 7%; tone, 38%; and body language, 55%.  (This explains why when words and body language don’t align, we trust the body language!  And it certainly has a lot to say about how people are observing and interpreting our leadership.  Perhaps that’s a future conversation.)

When we are fully listening, we note the tone, we observe the non-verbals and we get curious when we sense that they are not aligned with the words we’re hearing.  When we are fully listening, we observe what’s not being said and wonder why.  We notice that pace and tenor of the conversation.  I’m not suggesting that we do this in an analytical, judgmental way.  Rather, I’m suggesting that we listen with a strong desire to understand more fully.

In discussing how our brain works, Thomas Lewis, MD, notes that our limbic brain specializes in detecting and analyzing the internal state of others and adjusting our physiology to match the situation.  ”The limbic activity of those around us draws our emotions into almost immediate congruency.”  This explains a lot about the excitement of live concerts - or the contagious anger of a mob.  But in the context of our discussion on one-to-one listening, limbic resonance suggests that we can ”listen” to the feelings of others by considering how their feelings are reflecting in us.

As I consider listening between the words, it’s pretty clear to me that this is a focused, open, fully-present, single-task activity where I intentionally decide to set my own stories and egoic needs aside for the purpose of trying to understand what’s important to another person.  I wonder what possibilities might emerge in that space….

Throughout my career, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how I speak. Is my message clear? Do I speak up too often? Not enough? Am I showing that “executive presence” that’s so important to a successful career? And yet I’ve become increasingly convinced that I’ve spent far too little time reflecting on how I listen. I’m slowly learning the power of listening.

In a peer coaching session, we refrain from giving advice and let the manager who’s speaking talk through her challenge. And in the end, she realizes the steps she must take to make a change. In a community dialogue, we listen respectfully as someone who seems so different from us tells his story. And in the end, we realize that we have a lot in common with him after all. As a friend speaks, I long to solve the problem that she presents, but I cannot. And so I listen and she says that she feels better for having spoken about her pain. My daughter tells me that she’s frustrated with a situation. And I offer a solution. OOPS! Now she’s annoyed at me. Why do I need to keep learning the lesson: that when I can be fully present and openly listening, I’m often serving far more effectively than when I try to take over and offer suggestions from my “vast” experience.

I find that listening is particularly challenging for many of the leaders with whom I work. As managers, they’re learned to quickly assess the situation and then solve the problem. Time is wasting; get on to the next issue. And yet as leaders we can help others hone their skills, improve their confidence, and explore creative opportunities when we listen to them. And when we listen to others, they feel respected and valued.

Listening takes time; the pace is definitely different. Listening doesn’t fit with multi-tasking. You can’t manage real listening while talking to someone else on the phone, checking your e-mail and making a list of what to buy on your way home from the office. And when we listen, the questions we ask are different. We don’t ask to show how much we know; we ask out of genuine curiosity.

What might happen to your relationships if you listened more? I think I’d better stop here; I’ve got some listening to catch up on.