Seven Problems That Can Only Be Solved Through Quiet Leadership
This is the second of a two-part blog focusing on the concept and practice of quiet leadership. The first blog addressed ‘the secret science of quiet leadership: seven lessons of the characteristics’.
The predicate of quiet leadership is that it is unassuming and non-threatening. Quiet leaders are quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to anger. This is an important premise because, as you will see further on, when leaders are perceived as non [or less] threatening they are more likely to be seen as approachable, inspire confidence and deemed trustworthy. This is important because, in the grander scheme of problem-solving, both confidence and trust are pre-requisites for influence and persuasion. Therefore the premise is that in situations requiring influence and persuasion, quiet leaders are most likely to excel.
With the context now set, described below are: ‘seven problems that can only be solved through quiet leadership’.
1. The personality conflict
The office environment can be fraught with personality conflicts. In many instances, colleagues will take it upon themselves to resolve contentious issues that arise within the group. However, that is not always the case. Dealing with conflict is one of the most challenging tasks that any leader performs. Amid such tension, people need to know that their leader isn’t just a person of character but is of the right character to command their respect. Due to their amicable disposition and thoughtful approach, quiet leaders are often best placed to communicate difficult messages, even when they need to take a side.
2. The conflict of interests
The way in which a leader deals with conflicts of interests will reveal much about them. This dilemma is exemplified by the extent to which a leader can trusted with other people’s vulnerability. Where conflicts of interest arise, people should not fear that those who hold information about them, will use it against them or surreptitiously engineer positions of advantage for themselves. Absent a quiet leader’s modest bearing and track record for seeking the best for others over personal gain, people may fear that they can trust the least those they should trust the most.
3. The requirement for neutrality
There are occasions where leaders must navigate the complexities of a neutral path. This is common when managing multiple stakeholder interests, where big ideas can co-mingle with bigger egos and even greater expectations. In this type of environment, the last thing you want are leaders given to irascible or excitable temperament. Instead, those best suited to lead are individuals with high levels of patience, diplomacy and tact. The predicate here is that the skills and capabilities of quiet leaders are not just necessary to bring people together, but more importantly for keeping them together.
4. The non-mandatory dilemma
Quiet leaders communicate powerfully through example setting and consistent behaviours. It is this inherent predictability that gives them considerable sway when they need to exercise influence. As a case in point, in many places of employment, the requirement to work extra hours cannot be directed or mandated. Faced with such a situation, a quiet leader’s most powerful appeal for support, is the model of their own behaviour, not the sound of their voice. Given the choice, employees are more likely to respond favourably to the expectation, when leaders set the example.
5. The dangers of deadlock
There are occasions when the familiarity and similarity of individuals can breed mutual contempt. Such a scenario could arise where those most deeply involved in trying to find a solution, are simply too alike to appreciate the need for diverse perspectives or nuance. As a case in point, in a room full of people who may be inclined to talk over one another, the presence and facilitation of a quiet leader, can encourage them to listen more and speak less. Here, quiet leadership provides the solution by offering something that is different, not more of the same.
6. The impending crisis
It is easy to think of crisis on a scale that is driven by urgency and increased escalation levels. So, what role can quiet leadership possibly play in amplifying a sense of urgency? To better understand this, let’s go back to first principles and deconstruct the escalation continuum. A crisis often starts as a concern, that if left unattended graduates to chaos and matures into a catastrophe. However, where quiet leadership makes the difference is through the demonstration of ‘calm’. In simple terms, you cannot take control of a situation or expect others to have confidence in you, if you lack control of yourself.
7. The loss of confidence
When leaders have made mistakes, employees expect them to show humility, contrition and genuine accountability. They desire those who are prepared to hear difficult messages and accept uncomfortable truths. This type of posture demands leaders with the ability to ‘read the room’, whose first instinct is the willingness to listen, not a compulsion to explain. Quiet leaders recognise that when confidence has been eroded, rebuilding it requires self-reflection and painstaking effort. When leaders commit to putting others first, they must put themselves last.
In dealing with these situations, the instruments of a quiet leader are not blunt-edged implements, but rather precision tools that require calm nerves, a steady hand and an eye for detail. While some adopt quiet leadership as a default style, others flit in and out of the approach, depending on the exigencies and demands of each situation. Therefore, in conclusion, even if you typically use other leadership styles, adopting quiet leadership in these contexts is essential for success.
Paul Aladenika is host of the 11th Thing Podcast
