Character Deficit: Navigating the Flaws of Our 'Leaders'

Recently, I listened to an enlightening episode of 'The Art of Manliness' podcast featuring David Brooks. His reflections on "Social Skills as a Road to Character" deeply resonated with me. Coincidentally, I had been ‘analysing’ some university staff surveys which unveiled concerning trends of incivility, bullying, and blatant unfairness at disturbingly high levels. As Brooks' insights swirled in my mind, I instinctively started to align them with Patrick Lencioni's acclaimed pyramid on team dysfunctions. The synergy of these two frameworks began to paint a comprehensive picture of the challenges and potential solutions in workplace dynamics and the pivotal role of leadership.

?

I haven't yet had the chance to fully read David Brooks's "The Road to Character." However, from the information I've gathered, it's evident that Brooks presents a compelling case for the importance of character virtues in personal development. These insights, especially those related to humility, commitment, and self-sacrifice, can be directly applied to leadership. A leader informed by these principles is not only guided by moral integrity but is also better equipped to foster a positive and effective team environment. This framework is essential when considering the dynamics of trust, communication, and understanding within a team or organisation.

A leader excessively anchored in dogma can risk appearing more as a follower than a genuine leader. Brooks has spoken about the pitfalls of leaning too heavily on ideology or dogma. He doesn't straightforwardly equate dogmatic tendencies with lacking moral values. Instead, he stresses the significance of self-examination, understanding oneself, and the development of inner virtues for principled leadership. However, in a toxic environment or one governed by a culture of fear, leaders that reinforce dogma, suppress debate and conflict, largely to shield themselves at the expense of others, exhibit an undeniable moral character flaw.

?

?

?

Communication Breakdown in Leadership

In "The Road to Character", David Brooks discusses the concept of delving deep into one's inner self to understand character and virtue. Transposing this principle to a professional landscape, it becomes a pertinent commentary on the profound impact of effective communication in leadership. A pivotal component of leadership is the ability to 'see' and understand one's team on a deeper, more intrinsic level. Brooks's emphasis on "seeing others deeply" underscores the idea that understanding the motivations, aspirations, and concerns of team members is fundamental. However, when leaders fail in this aspect, it creates a chasm, obstructing the flow of clear communication and often resulting in a cascade of misunderstandings. The inability of a ‘leader’ to truly 'see' the essence of their team can cripple the very foundation of team dynamics and potentially destroy the team.

The Quintessence of Trust

Trust, as Brooks says in "How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen", is far more than mere reliance. It is an intricate tapestry woven from threads of deep understanding, mutual respect, and genuine acknowledgment. In a team setting, this trust is the bedrock on which collaboration and cohesion are built. Brooks's narrative of knowing a person deeply resonates with the idea that when team members feel their thoughts and feelings are truly understood and valued by their leaders, it fosters a robust trust environment. This trust goes beyond task delegation or meeting targets; it's about establishing a bond that signals to every team member that they are seen, heard, and, most importantly, valued.

The Leadership Lens

Effective leadership isn't just about directing a team towards a goal; it's about understanding the intricate human web within that team. The art of seeing deeply, as Brooks posits, is a clarion call for leaders to be empathetic, intuitive, and perceptive. It’s about discerning the unspoken concerns, the hidden aspirations, and the latent potential within each team member. When leaders don the lens of deep understanding, they are better equipped to guide their teams with clarity and purpose.

Erosion of Trust: The Silent Team Disruptor

While the absence of trust might not immediately manifest in overt team disruptions, its erosion can silently undercut team morale and efficacy. Drawing from Brooks's emphasis on the profound depth of human connections, one can discern that a lack of trust is often rooted in the feeling of being unseen or misunderstood. For a team, this can translate to a feeling of disconnect from leadership, a sentiment that their contributions are unnoticed, or a nagging doubt about their value within the team. Such undercurrents of mistrust can be the silent disruptors, slowly but steadily chipping away at the team's cohesion and effectiveness.

Lack of Recognition

Effective leadership hinges on the profound understanding and recognition of individual efforts. In "The Social Animal," David Brooks highlights the intrinsic human need to be "seen deeply" and recognised for one's unique contributions. Such recognition is not a mere act but a testament to a leader's social acumen and moral character. However, a leader deficient in these pivotal social skills tends to exhibit not just ignorance, but often bias.

A leadership that actively favours and supports those who align with their views, and dismisses or undermines those who present alternative perspectives, introduces a detrimental layer of unfairness. This preferential treatment stifles open dialogue and hinders the growth of a diverse and inclusive team culture. Employees who dare to challenge or question the status quo often find themselves marginalised, their contributions minimised or overlooked entirely. This creates a toxic environment where not only is effort unrewarded, but conformity is celebrated.

?

In such a skewed dynamic, unfairness becomes a recurring theme, as noted in many workplace surveys. Employees begin to perceive a hierarchy not based on merit or effort but on alignment with the leader's views. Such blatant unfairness erodes trust, diminishes morale, and fosters feelings of resentment and invisibility among those who feel undervalued. The overarching sentiment in such environments is not just about being unseen but being unequally seen, where recognition becomes a selective act, rather than an inclusive one.

?

Feeling Undervalued in the Shadow of a Dogmatic Leader:

Feeling undervalued is a corrosive sentiment, with the potential to undermine the foundational pillars of employee contentment and drive. In "How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen," David Brooks underscores the quintessential role of leaders in genuinely understanding and resonating with the unique facets of their team members. However, a leader lacking these pivotal social skills might not just misinterpret the varied personalities and life stages within their ranks but could impose their own dogmatic views as a veil, clouding genuine recognition.

?

A dogmatic leader tends to foster an environment where only those who mirror their views, or at the very least refrain from questioning them, feel valued. This creates a dynamic where employees feel the pressure to conform to the leader's rigid beliefs or risk being sidelined. Consequently, those who dare to think differently, challenge, or bring forth innovative ideas outside this dogmatic spectrum often find themselves feeling undervalued. Their potential and contributions, regardless of merit, are overshadowed by the leader's bias towards sycophancy over genuine talent and effort. In such an atmosphere, not only is the morale of the team compromised, but the very essence of diversity, growth, and innovation is stifled, leading to a culture where conformity is prized over character.

?

?

The Breeding Ground of Bullying: A Lack of Empathy and Tolerance of Poor Behaviour:

The Erosion of Empathy: David Brooks, in "The Road to Character," underscores the intrinsic value of empathy in understanding and connecting with others on a profound level. It's the ability to walk a mile in someone else's shoes, to grasp their fears, joys, and struggles. Empathy acts as an antidote to behaviours that alienate and harm. In its absence, leaders and teams can stray into patterns that closely resemble bullying. The absence of empathy manifests as a disconnect, a blind spot to the feelings and experiences of others. When leaders fail to embrace and encourage empathy, they unknowingly lay the groundwork for an environment rife with misunderstandings, hostility, and, at its extreme, bullying.

?

The Inner Circle of Dilettantes: When a leader surrounds themselves with a select group that echoes their views and fails to challenge or provide diverse perspectives, it perpetuates a culture where only the 'inner circle' is valued. These dilettantes, often more interested in personal gain than genuine team progress, become the unspoken yardstick of success and acceptance within the team. Those outside this circle can often feel marginalised, their contributions undervalued or outright ignored. Such a setup becomes fertile ground for bullying, where those not in the 'favoured' group are easy targets.

?

Tolerance of Poor Behaviour: Drawing insights from "The Second Mountain: The Quest for a Moral Life," Brooks comments on the societal shift away from moral formation, a drift that has consequential ripple effects. Within the confines of a workplace, this plays out as a tacit acceptance of subpar behaviour. When leaders turn a blind eye or, worse, indulge in such actions, it sends a powerful message: that such behaviour is permissible, even rewarded. This not only emboldens the perpetrators but leaves the victims feeling helpless, further entrenching a culture of bullying.

?

The Perils of a Culture of Fear: In an atmosphere governed by dogmatic leaders and underpinned by a pervasive culture of fear, employees often feel they are walking on eggshells. They are less likely to speak out, challenge, or even engage meaningfully for fear of retribution. This stifling environment, where open dialogue is suppressed and dissenting voices are silenced, provides the perfect cover for bullies. In the shadows of such a culture, bullying thrives, unchecked and unchallenged, eroding trust, and decimating team cohesion.

?

Navigating the Quagmire of the Toxic Workspace:

?

Stress and Burnout: A Frayed Social Fabric The bedrock of any productive work environment is its social fabric, the intricate web of relationships, understanding, and camaraderie that binds team members together. David Brooks, in "The Social Animal," throws light on the pivotal role leaders play in cultivating this fabric. When they falter, overlooking the value of deep connections and mutual respect, the consequences can be dire. Employees, devoid of the nurturing environment they need, begin to feel alienated, and the weight of this isolation manifests as stress. Over time, the persistent weight of such stress, combined with the lack of meaningful social ties, spirals into burnout. Dejected and defeated, workers find themselves trapped in an environment that drains rather than fuels them.

?

High Turnover Rates: The Cost of Anonymity

The sentiment of "being seen" delves deeper than mere acknowledgment; it's about being genuinely understood and valued. Brooks, in his work "How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen," elaborates on this fundamental human need. In the modern workplace, however, this need is often overlooked. Employees become cogs in a vast machine, their individuality blurred, their aspirations unacknowledged. Such an environment is antithetical to loyalty and commitment. Disenchanted employees begin to question their place in such organisations, and the answer often lies outside its boundaries. High attrition rates, then, are not just about employees leaving jobs; they're about individuals departing from environments where they feel like mere shadows. In certain sectors or during challenging employment markets, the option to leave might not be feasible. Institutions like universities, especially in niche areas of specialisation, can be such environments where the victims may feel truly trapped.

?

However, reality paints a more complex picture. In specific sectors, industries, or during challenging economic climates, the freedom to transition or abandon a toxic workplace is not always feasible. Take, for instance, universities, especially in niche areas of specialisation. Here, opportunities are limited, and the competitive landscape means that many find themselves ensnared in their roles, regardless of the adverse conditions. The implications of this are profound. Victims, particularly in these specialised fields, often find themselves ensnared, with no tangible escape route in sight. The consequence isn't just high turnover rates; for many, it's a grim sense of entrapment within environments that belittle their worth.

?

Lack of Collaboration: Stifling the Spirit of Innovation. Innovation, at its heart, is a collaborative effort. It thrives when diverse minds come together, each contributing its unique perspective to craft something novel. Brooks's exploration of social connections in "The Social Animal" serves as a stark reminder of how toxic environments can choke this spirit of collaboration. In atmospheres rife with mistrust, where every idea is met with scepticism and every effort goes unappreciated, true collaboration becomes a distant dream. Employees, wary of stepping on toes or facing criticism, retreat into their shells, robbing the team of the rich interplay of ideas essential for ground-breaking work. The result? A stagnant environment, where innovation is a mere buzzword, devoid of life and energy.

?

I can't help but think about Patrick Lencioni's renowned pyramid, detailing the five dysfunctions of a team. Lencioni's model is a hierarchical depiction of the potential pitfalls teams face, starting from the foundation and moving up: absence of trust, fear of conflict, lack of commitment, avoidance of accountability, and inattention to results.

In this context, Lencioni's pyramid offers an insightful parallel. The base, which signifies the absence of trust, can be likened to the absence of a shared vision or understanding of the project's goals among stakeholders. When there's a lack of alignment or understanding, it naturally leads to subsequent dysfunctions. The fear of conflict might manifest as stakeholders avoiding critical discussions about the project's direction, leading to a lack of commitment to decisions. This can further lead to an avoidance of accountability, where no one takes responsibility for the project's failures. Finally, the peak of the pyramid - inattention to results - might see stakeholders prioritising their personal agendas over the project's success. Recognising and addressing these dysfunctions at the outset can be the key to ensuring a project's success and sustainability.

?

Whilst Lencioni provides a fantastic framework and Brooks illuminates many of the issues and character types, offering solutions and guidance in the process, the pessimist in me wonders: even when equipped with all this knowledge, insight, leadership guidance, and countless self-help books, can a leopard change its spots?