Communication is at the heart of every interaction between a leader and a constituency. Business, political, social, and religious leaders all understand the power of communication - many are moderate in this skill set, but some excel. And leadership research is clear - the better you are as a communicator, the more your leadership ability can move others to action.
But when you are in a leadership position and possess good, perhaps even exceptional, communication skills, your communication effectiveness can be strangled to silence by your own hand. Over the years I have researched this issue and have identified three primary leadership dimensions, that when compromised, mute your voice regardless the power of your communication ability.
The first, and most deadly, is credibility. This comes as no surprise to any, I'm sure. When a leader loses credibility with a group, you might as well be communicating to an empty room. Losing credibility, even the warranted suspicion of a credibility breach, wrecks havoc and many a leader has lost momentum, lost profits, or lost a job as a result. Consider the most common of the credibility cases for those holding political leadership roles. Both the Liberal and Conservative parties in Canada have been embroiled in financial issues of credibility in recent years that have thwarted their goals and slowed progress. "Sponsorgate, the misuse and misdirection of public funds for governmental advertising hurt the Liberal party and seemed to help the Conservatives efforts for gaining political power. Once in office the "In and Out scandal has tempered Conservatives' ability to be believed which has turned the microphone off for some of them and stirred distrust. While these kinds of issues seem to be part and parcel for politics everywhere, the effects can be devastating.
In Japan's recent history, former Prime Minister Noboru Takeshita resigned due to the Recruit Scandal, a stock scheme that inappropriately rewarded some politicians. Hosokawa Morihiro who was the first official of his level to declare World War II a mistaken war of aggression, resigned after only eight months due to misuse of personal funds.
On the opposite side of the Pacific Rim, Bill Clinton's two-terms in office were plagued by personal scandal involving Whitewater and Lewinsky. A large majority of individuals I have polled consider Clinton to possess significant communication skills, but during his term in office, his credibility issues muffled this ability. I have often asked, in an apolitical sense, how things might be different in the United States today if none of the scandals surrounding Bill Clinton had ever happened. Things might be better or worse, but they would surely be different, as Clinton's ability to communicate would have allowed him to have created more movement against his policies and goals.
The second way to lose your voice is to stay lost in the fog. There is an expectation that leaders have a plan for the future, a sense of direction through the mists of uncertainty. The inability to articulate and inspire confidence in a direction will mute a leader's voice over time. It may take longer than a credibility loss to be felt, but it will occur. And notice I said articulate and inspire - having a plan for the future is half the equation. The other half is being able to stoke hope and excitement that the bigger ideas that affect everyone are worthy and attainable goals. In 2006 the Australian Business Leadership survey interviewed 2,376 senior executives concerning a variety of subjects including vision. The survey found Australian business executives were lacking clear strategies and a vision for the future, focusing on short-term strategies, with government organizations fairing more poorly on this dimension. A 2005 study by the International Association of Business Communicators and Right Management Consultants showed that only one in three of 472 companies surveyed were successful in motivating employees to understand, be committed to, and carry out their employer's business strategy in their daily jobs. And a 2007 report by BlessingWhite indicated that among the most pressing problems for CEOs was their constituents feeling widespread change but not seeing the big picture why.
The third way to strangle usually takes longer and as a result it goes undiagnosed too long. A loss of credibility is seen and felt immediately. A lack of vision usually gets complaints pretty quickly, too. But lack of connection to a constituency is harder to measure and therefore harder to understand. These days we speak about emotional or social intelligence as important to leadership and it is. Insufficient levels of this interpersonal skill set will lower your volume that may go unnoticed too long. While many a political inspector has provided an analysis of Margaret Thatcher's rise to and fall from political power, it seems to me that she was generally regarded as a leader of integrity, a person who had a particular view of the future, and an able communicator. However, over time, her policy emphasis and increasing unwillingness to connect with and collaborate with others caused a rift in her own party that caused her to step down. Her overall loss of connection with her supporters muted her voice on issues and caused her political life to diminish.
You can lose your voice quickly through losing credibility. You can lose it as surely even though slightly more slowly through remaining lost in the fog. And you can lose it slowly and with long term problems through an eroding loss of connection to the constituents and followers you serve.
Ron Crossland is co-author of The Leader's Voice and is Chairman of Bluepoint Leadership Development and a Managing Director for Tom Peters Group, Ltd. He can be reached at roncrossland@bluepointleadership.com
