Leader Assertiveness: Just The Right Amount

Question: What would you say is the first key skill of a leader who hopes to balance over-assertive and under-assertive in order to  lead from between their two extremes?

That was posed by Dr. Ellen Weber some time ago in a  Brain-Based Business post. Ellen pointed to some research by Ames and Flynn who observed that when leaders walked somewhere between the lines of too much and two little assertiveness… they managed better … according to workers.

The same issue popped up again in a "talent" discussion with a client group this week, which prompted me to think it is a topic worth a post. So, here goes:

How Much Assertiveness is "Just Right?"

Ellen mentioned that some of her conversations about the topic tool place in Ireland. Since I've spent a lot of my life living and working in Europe, I've had to get used to the fact that when people there talk about management and related behavior they do it a lot more conversationally, using everyday language. Quite frankly, I find that the absence of behavioral jargon can make it a lot easier and more natural to discuss topics whose buzzwords can build tension.

In the U.S., there is a recent history of attempting to carefully delineate behaviors using very specific language. This is, in part, the result of approaching human behavior as a science. Since behavior is, indeed, quite situational, this approach serves at least three purposes that I can see:

1. It provides a common language that, when used appropriately and above board, highlights nuance and helps one understand how specific actions impact one's effectiveness.

2. It provides specific definition of attributes that can lead to promotion, rewards, or dismissal. Which means that it also makes dismissal more explainable. (Likewise, terminology can become great fodder for one's attorney in the event of a dismissal).

3. It lends a "scientific" aura to common-sense training and development which, while fully understood as desirable by most reasonable managers, can't be bought and paid for without the "proof" that comes from a smathering of statistics and a few 6-syllable words that prove how deeply meaningful those statistics must really be.

I believe the real issue is situational effectiveness.

For example, if I don't know what to do or how to do it, then my boss has to be very directive and explanatory. If my task is something that I've done well a million times, then I want to know what the deadline is and I'll deliver it. Nothing more. If I need something along the way, I want a manager who I can go to for advice or re-direction. In the first case, the manager manages me closely. In the second, the manager is my consultant.

The reason that Ames and Flynn saw what they did is really rather simple: Since most of us as workers are at least somewhat competent and, hopefully, somewhat mature, any behavior that operates at either extreme will be seen as:

1. Unnecessarily overbearing and somewhat demeaning

2. Unreasonably absent of relationship and connection, and therefore not engaged. Or overly focused on 'relationship and happiness' to the exclusion of completing the task successfully.

Anything in between will be close enough to respectfully  engage one's employees as well as create an atmosphere that invites questions and help, when needed.

Then What is Effective Leadership?

The desire and ability to meet other people where they are and then spend the right amount of time helping them get where they need to go.

Sometimes it's a long walk together. Other times a brief conversation and a nudge in the right direction.

What you need to do the right thing at the right time:

1. A high degree of self-awareness regarding one's innate tendencies toward one extreme or the other

2. The desire and ability to manage those tendencies in a way that serves the needs and performance of others

3. The humility to pause regularly and ask "How am I doing?"

4. The decency to listen to the answers.

5. The wisdom to make selfless changes as a result.

That's my take, minus the jargon.

What's yours?

Comments

[Katy]

Steve - I love this: "The desire and ability to meet other people where they are and then spend the right amount of time helping them get where they need to go. Sometimes it's a long walk together. Other times a brief conversation and a nudge in the right direction." It's so beautifully put and captures the essence of what all good leaders and managers hope to do. Very nicely said!

[Steve Roesler]

Katy,

Pleased to know that you found that line useful. Let's get the word out to leaders everywhere.

[Bay Jordan]

Steve

A well written piece with some useful and inspiring insights.

I do think we sometimes overcomplicate things. I went on a management training course 20+ years ago where I learned that there is no such thing as a prefect management style and that the key to being a good manager is adaptability; i.e. the ability to respond approporiately according to the situation. It was a simple lesson that has played a huge part in my own career, where I have melded it with that other simple life-lesson: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Bay

[Steve Roesler]

Hello, Bay, good to see you.

Well, I'm not sure how wrong managers could be if they combine good situation analysis with the Golden Rule.

What would happen to all of those books and workshops?:-)

[Mile High Pixie]

Well done, Steve! I teach a class on assertive communication for women, and in the class I delineate first off that assertiveness is different from aggressiveness. Assertiveness means that you can share your opinion when you disagree or speak up when you're being treated unfairly. meanwhile, aggressiveness means that you bully or intimidate others, or use shouting and threats to get your way.

It seems to me that what they're asking for here from their leaders is not assertiveness but just plain old fashioned direction. How much does this manager care about what I'm doing? Does he/she have a very specific way that it needs to be done? Or do they just need to give me a couple of hints and then I can decide the rest based on my professional experience and judgement? Or does this leader even know what I'm doing? In any case, a manager simply needs to be clear and direct without shaming me into thinking I'm a goober for even asking.

[Steve Roesler]

Mile High Pixie

Can I use the line "a manager simply needs to be clear and direct without shaming me into thinking I'm a goober for even asking" in my next book? It's priceless.

Attribution for the Pixie, of course.

[Business Bags]

I believe the real issue is situational effectiveness.
Well done, Steve! I teach a class on assertive communication for women, and in the class I delineate first off that assertiveness is different from aggressiveness. Assertiveness means that you can share your opinion when you disagree or speak up when you're being treated unfairly. meanwhile, aggressiveness means that you bully or intimidate others, or use shouting and threats to get your way.