Effective Communication for Leaders

How choosing your words and actions impact culture

The main ingredient of stardom is the rest of the team.”—John Wooden

To read the full article, members please log in here. To subscribe please click here.

Successful leaders spend time and effort developing team players. They do this by developing a culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity not just between themselves and their subordinates, but also amongst the subordinates themselves.

Words are metaphors, providing a filter, causing a profound effect on the meaning the vocabulary provides. Without thought or analysis, vocabulary a leader may choose can so easily be counterproductive to what he or she is hoping to achieve. As is so often the case, it is the little things we say or do as a leader that matter. Even deciding which pronoun is used can create either an adversarial or a collaborative culture.

Examine the left-hand diagram. The leader here is being adversarial: “You have a problem,” contains the emotional baggage that it is not my issue but your problem instead. You, the subordinate, have a problem. Further it is your responsibility to fix it, not mine. Underlying this is the top down, command and control leadership style where the focus is on the needs of whoever is superior in the hierarchy. In this instance, the hierarchy, (the boss) is reducing what they need to do by passing the buck as to whose problem it is. This is further compounded when it becomes “your staff.” In this mindset, a culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity is not just absent but completely  outlawed.

Now examine the right-hand column. The problem is the same. However, by choosing the pronoun, we, as in, “We have a problem,” responsibility is shared and the team member knows that help is on the way. Blame is removed. Distributive leadership surfaces, bringing with it a culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity that ensures that collaborative team effort takes over the situation. The Japanese proverb, “None of us is as smart as all of us,” becomes authentic and real.

Note also that the right-hand box specifically identifies the problem at hand in more detail. By being specific, focus is sharpened and possible misconceptions are avoided.

Words (in this case the right pronoun) are only part of the package. Of at least equal  importance: what actions are associated. The right pronoun is the key, but it will be hard for it to stand on its own: impossible if physical and other actions are not compatible with it.

When actions do not match the words that have been stated, there is a gap between  hat
Argyris and Schoon call the ‘espoused theory’ and the ‘theory in action.’ In the example
above, use of ‘we,’ promises the collegial culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity, which is the espoused theory. The theory in action, or what actions follow the promises,
will either support or destroy the espoused theory.

The theory in action of staying behind a desk makes the desk become a barrier, a ‘them and us’ action. It is the antithesis of a culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity  promised by using the pronoun ‘we.’ Theory in action is then seen by all subordinates, and all others, as being the  real belief of the leader. What is said may be only partially understood: what is actually done communicates loud and clear. Actions are noticed more than the words used! To quote John Ruskin, “What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is what we do.”

Robert Fulghum wrote this warning for teachers: “Worry that they are always watching you. It is not something that is grown out of as age increases. They, whoever they are, will be watching.”

A further crucial action for a leader is paraphrasing. Paraphrasing is a straight forward  summary of the basic message that the incoming speaker believes the previous speaker intended to give. Such a summary ensures that the listener has understood what the speaker has said, and, if not, gives an immediate opportunity for the previous speaker to make any correction. Likewise, it gives the listener an option to request more detail if needed. Paraphrasing maintains a culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity by signalling clearly to the speaker that they have been listened to, understood and taken seriously. Paraphrasing requires active listening on all party’s parts: for instance, the next speaker must paraphrase what the person before them stated before beginning their own message. This forces them to stayed focused, and not zone out on their own thoughts.

Requesting more detail is best done following a positive indicator, such as, “I like your idea about… Can you please give me more detail about…” This allows focused feedback by indicating exactly where the specific extra detail is required. To smooth over the  issue by being vague confuses people, and can lead to only getting part of the message, resulting in encounters that  end with people talking past each other, as understanding goes out the door.

Communication, whether one-on-one or within in a group, is always either enhanced or inhibited by the process used. If that process is interrupted, or distorted away from commonality, discord can so easily happen and cliques may develop. Thus, the overall organisational climate or culture: the way we behave here, must be seamlessly extended so that all persons are aware of and able to avoid the gap between the espoused theory and the theory in practice in their daily communication. The norm is to use these techniques, these processes, both vertically up and down the hierarchical chain, and horizontally with peers and workmates. When this is done, the desired culture of  rapport, camaraderie, and affinity is continually reinforced.

This common approach must be made to happen: It won’t just happen naturally. If these actions are only practiced by some, such as those in leadership positions, or small groups, it will not be part of an overall culture, but rather a de facto them and me, or them and us. It is the leader’s responsibility to ensure that this does not happen. Therefore, specific, ongoing individual and group coaching, aimed at developing and maintaining a common culture of rapport, camaraderie, and affinity as detailed above becomes a central role of leadership.

An opportunity is lost if this is merely feedback. In keeping with the organisational culture of developing rapport, camaraderie, and affinity, this coaching needs to include self-reflection by all participants, and even beyond individual to group reflection.
Such reflection starts by examining how successful the process is, before examining how it can be improved. Avoid being seduced by a good result. Jim Collins, a decade and a half ago, taught us that good was the enemy of great. The focus is on how to be better, rather than how good we are. Focus must be on continuous improvement.

Eventually that will mean going beyond the basic strategies outlined here. However, there must be a starting point.

Related Posts

Navigating Challenging Conversations

Navigating Challenging Conversations

Rise and Fall of Organisations

Rise and Fall of Organisations

When Teachers Talk Less, Students Learn More

When Teachers Talk Less, Students Learn More

RiEducation Leadership Keys for 2024

RiEducation Leadership Keys for 2024

Alan Cooper


Alan Cooper is an educational consultant based in New Zealand. As a principal, he was known for his leadership role in thinking skills, including Habits of Mind, learning styles and multiple intelligences, information technology, and the development of the school as a learning community. Alan can be reached at: 82napawine@gmail.com