Bulletin

Dear Colleagues,

Time for a discussion about intimacy. Not the “I” word I hear some gasping! But did you know that the word 'intimacy' stems from the Latin word "Intermatis” meaning to make something known to someone else. In its original meaning, intimacy did not mean emotional closeness, but the willingness to pass on honest information.

Paradoxically, people who understand each other intimately exert less effort in the relationship because ‘honesty’ is accepted, even expected. The ‘flow’ of togetherness is liquid because communication and understanding is easier. This does not give license to avoid empathy of course.

What about intimacy and leadership?

One camp of theorists holds that leadership is all about behaviour and that if you want to excel, you should learn and replicate the key behaviours of good leaders. The other camp holds that leadership is all about character, values and authenticity, and companies that adhere to this view focus on transmitting company values and orienting leaders to the right way to do things.

Both approaches are valid but incomplete.

Consider that in recent years the leadership development industry has exploded. With the increase in training programs and knowledge about this subject, logic dictates that we should be doing a better job of meeting the organisational demand for talent. But something appears to be missing. Leaders who do not succeed tend to be people who lack self-awareness or intimacy (honesty) with themselves. Daniel Goleman has made this basic truth clear by describing the importance of emotional intelligence as an important component of effective leadership.

High-performing leaders are aware of their strengths and their weaknesses; they 'talk' and think about their limitations and failures and try to learn from them. They see themselves as continuously learning, adapting and responding to both positive and negative circumstances. Most important, they are highly conscious of their feelings and behaviors as they move through life, including personal and professional experiences: losing a job, being promoted, changing companies, mourning the death of a loved one, dealing with a divorce, and others. This does not mean excessive self-disclosure. Nothing is more odious. Rather, it involves a real and appropriate expression of challenges and vulnerabilities. This endows the experience of the leader (by others) with a sense of realism and connection.

The above-mentioned experiences have an impact on leaders, just as they do on all of us. If you negotiate them with your eyes and your mind closed, you diminish your own development. If you go through them consciously and are open to the lessons they hold, and can share them, you dramatically increase the effectiveness of your leadership.

Most organisations, of course, do not look at leadership development from the perspective of experiences. Because of intense competition and the need to build a pipeline of leadership talent, many companies have recently begun to recognise the value of coaching and of conducting 360-degree assessments, as well as other self-awareness-building tools. But companies are still intensely results-driven. Leadership development tends to focus on outcomes, behaviours, competencies, cases and skills. The reality of leadership is denied, including its self-questioning, its self-doubt, even its vulnerability. Every day, we encounter messages equating strong leadership with certainty, firmness, and the absence of self-reflection.

The following excerpts from CEO Refresher validates this viewpoint about leadership.

Explicitly or implicitly, most companies discourage people from talking about their problems or seeking help as they navigate some of the most important circumstances that affect their lives as individuals and as leaders. People may talk to their boss or coworker about the demands of work, company politics, conflict, unmet expectations, or inadequate performance. Or they may discuss specific issues that were pointed out during a performance review. But the discussions usually stay focused on action rather than feeling on how they can solve the problem rather than face the underlying issues with which they're wrestling.

Similarly, in the senior ranks of most large companies today, discussion of significant personal experience remains a taboo. People experience all types of traumas in their lives that shape their outlook as well as their character and commitment. And they are expected to suppress discussion of these events at work. Only through coaching senior executives have we discovered how significant these personal passages can be and how much they affect, actually even shape, leadership behaviour. The result is that people sit on their feelings and separate their leadership role from their private self. Invariably, this chasm is projected into the work environment, creating a perception of in authenticity and even distrust.

Working through the significant passages of life and career requires time and space for reflection, and companies generally don't allow people this time and space. Consequently, they persevere through these passages oblivious to their impact. If they fail at work, they deny culpability. If they feel terribly sad, they force themselves to be relentlessly upbeat, optimistic, and confident.

Although this may look like effective leadership, it comes with significant costs. When leaders aren't in touch with who they are and what they feel, they are ineffective as leaders. They do not convey passion, power, or persuasion. They may reject feedback, fail to see the negative consequences of their actions, respond poorly to stress, or miss important relationship signals from others. Perhaps most significantly, they don't deal well with change. Only when people know themselves, acknowledge their experiences and feelings, and confront their humanity do they demonstrate resilience and the capacity to adapt.

(excerpts from CEO Refresher)

Many thanks for your continual feedback on this E-Zine. Keep it coming!