Donald Trump’s European-visit coverage focused less on the politics and more on the imperious communication and body language that stood out throughout the trip — there was the iron grip handshake with French President Macron; the pushing aside of the Montenegro Prime Minister to get to the front; and the lecturing tone used for NATO allies, while talking about spending more on defence.
The most important way a leader lives her leadership is through her communication, her conversations. In fact, it could be argued that her leadership is her conversations. Some verbal, some written and some through our actions — when we are leading, we are always communicating. So it pays to get this skill right.
This column and the next few articles will focus on how we, as leaders, can get our communication and conversations to be effective, impactful and transformational. For now, let us explore the typical styles of communication. Without getting lost in the details and getting down to the basics, there are mainly three styles of communication.
Aggressive
This is what most people mistake to be the de rigueur communication style of leaders. Donald Trump clearly belongs in this camp. If he is not haranguing, belittling, or accusing someone, he feels like he isn’t being much of a leader.
This style usually afflicts leaders who have low self-esteem and insecurity issues. They feel the need to communicate aggressively, perhaps to mask an inadequacy, some incompetence or plain fear.
Let’s look at some of the beliefs behind this style of communication.
~ I must win and you must lose
~ I need to dominate
~ You are not good enough
~ I am better than you
~ I want control
~ I need to confront
~ I will openly fight
These leaders often speak of going to war, killing the competition, destroying a colleague — basically, use the language and tone that spew aggression. Sometimes, this does bring about short-term results, as the team reacts in fear and blind obedience. But most often, it leads to disaster, as the idol is exposed to have feet of clay.
Steve Ballmer, the ex-Chairman of Microsoft, was an example of an aggressive-style communicator. His successor, Satya Nadella eschews the ruthless language and is a great example of the third style of communication (outlined below).
Passive
The passive style is used by leaders who crave popularity over impact. They prefer to please rather than to lead. They choose the path of least resistance. They use phrases like ‘let’s not rock the boat’ or ‘let sleeping dogs lie’, since their goal is to avoid conflict even at the risk of compromising the goals of the organisation or the team they lead.
The beliefs behind this communication style include:
~ I want to avoid losing
~ I need to be secure and safe
~ I’m not good enough
~ You’re better than me
~ I want assurance
~ I’ll avoid getting involved
~ I will secretly retaliate
These beliefs lead to an inept and lukewarm style of leadership that is rudderless and lacks the drive that will help a team achieve the organisation’s goals.
When one style meets the other
A meeting between an aggressive-style leader and another aggressive-style leader leads to friction and sometimes, the stronger party snuffs out the other.
When an aggressive-style leader meets a passive-style leader, the relationship often becomes abusive or toxic, with the aggressive leader constantly seeking to dominate the passive one. The passive-style leader often complies in the beginning and there is a point where there a semblance of things getting done. But the passive-style person often hits back through sabotage and secrecy.
Positive
The positive style of communicating is the win-win path. Here, the leader seeks to be assertive, not aggressive, friendly, yet firm. Her communication is thought through and measured, not driven by impulse or emotion but by reason — seeking the greater good.
This style is more ‘for’ things than ‘against’ things. As leaders, we need a fair measure of self-security and confidence to be able to practise this style and make it a habit.
The beliefs behind this style are very different from those behind the aggressive and passive styles.
~ I win, you win
~ Seeking equality
~ We both are good
~ We can both become better
~ Wants collaboration
~ Enjoys teamwork
~ Openly cooperates
Barack Obama personified this style — assertive, yet always seeking to reach out, to break new ground. Pope Francis is another great example of a leader with this style of communication. From the business world, Indra Nooyi and Paul Polman demonstrate the impact and effectiveness of this style.
We can start by observing our own communication style. How do we react in different situations? Are we aggressive, are we passive or are we creative in embracing the positive style and making a true leadership difference?