Compassion Over Confidence: A Call For Leadership Change

Confidence, in and of itself, is something we require from our leaders. It’s a big reason why we need them - to guide us when, we - ourselves, are unsure or unable to see the bigger picture. We entrust and exchange our permission in order for them to make decisions on our behalf.

There has been an unfortunate downside to confidence led leadership and that has been the embellishment of confidence in order to try to get oneself ahead by feigning competence. This leadership caricature has become recognizable as the ‘hero type’. The “smart guys that have all the answers”, or the “tough guy that can handle anything” has become what we recognize as the norm.

The problem with what we know as leadership today does not end with confidence, but what we associate with overconfidence. Which is either a blindness caused by arrogance and self-importance which corrupts the decision making process. Or the overbellishment of nonexistent, subsequently worse than overcompensation, talent.

 This is the problem with leadership today.

Unfortunately, soft-skills like modesty or humbleness, are hard to pinpoint or test due to them being less desirable and harder to evaluate. Not to mention the lack of cultural investment in these areas.

This imbalance in leadership skills is what restricts organizations and in some cases deteriorates their ability to flourish. There has been a number of scientific studies that show that compassionate leaders are effective enablers and connectors, which results in healthier, happier, and more productive organizational structures.

That said, as much as we all would like our leaders to convey compassion, humility, and empathy, when we're truly honest with ourselves, the real reason why we have so little compassionate leaders, is that they are perceived as being weak or indecisive.

But why is that?

I believe we are easily swayed and seduced by other characteristics. We would rather take the easier less taxing route than to spend time evaluating leadership.

It is because of these five pitfalls we rarely end up with compassionate leaders.

The Five Pitfalls

1. Confidence

In business there is a tendency to select leaders on the basis of their confidence. Confidence, more often than not, overshadows competence. For this reason overconfidence, or arrogance, is far more common in leaders than compassion.

However, it is the least competent individuals that tend to overcompensate their competence (read about the psychological phenomenon: Dunning-Kruger effect).

When a leader becomes unchallenged, unaided, and ceases to learn their ego is left unchecked. These individuals fall to bravado, and fail to effectively judge their skills, knowledge or have the humility to make accurate evaluations.

Leaders that lack knowledge and skill in any given area will ultimately face two issues. First, they’ll make mistakes and reach poor decisions. And second, those same knowledge gaps will also prevent them from catching their errors. In other words, incompetent leaders lack the very expertise needed to recognize how badly they’re doing.

Whereas a compassionate leader knows how competent they are and how their skills stack up to others, or what is required from the task at hand. Compassionate leaders are capable of deciding when they are required to make a decision, when advice is needed, or when colleagues can move ahead with their knowledge and instinct.

Leaders, at the very least, need to be aware of just how knowledgeable they are. To be self-aware to the level that they know enough to know that there’s a lot they don’t know.

But when our main requisites for appointing leaders is how good they think they are, we will inevitably end up with lots of leaders who are not very good, except in their own mind.

There’s a way to prevent an unchecked ego and any inaccurate self-perception: First, is regular feedback where leaders actively listen to their peers, even when it’s hard to hear, consider it, then draw up actionable steps to move forward. Second, is that they should always be open to learning and asking questions. The more knowledgeable leaders become, the less likely they are to have gaps in their competence.

2. Charisma

We are also seduced by charisma.

Leaders that are all style and no substance, in today's world, will get further ahead than a no style and all substance approach.

We naturally gravitate towards leaders that entertain: who are funny and charming. These skills disarm us. Charisma is a disguise for someone that is charming and socially skilled to the point of manipulation.

That’s not to say that finding charisma enchanting is a problem, it’s not, but we confuse it with leadership talent.

Charisma is a social tool that amplifies both competent and incompetent leaders alike. The outcome is somewhat different, as charisma makes competent leaders better and the incompetent more destructive.

3. Lazy

‘Humans are lazy by nature’, it’s true, we are biologically wired to be lazy. I guess that is one of nature's jokes on us.

So we want what's easy, what is familiar, and in front of us. So someone that is willing to show up consistently, who is confident, arrogant and displays other destructive traits that we associate with strength and masculinity will get our vote, in today's norm.

And as we acquire ever more sophisticated and complex technologies which demand higher-function skills to operate - the required skills we indicate as talent will inevitably become harder to judge. 

Our skills have progressed significantly from the easily observable physical traits (e.g., body strength, motor dexterity, and speed, etc), to intellectual skills (e.g., qualifications, expertise, experience, etc.), and finally the most recent focus resides on soft skills or emotional intelligence (e.g., curiosity, EQ, IQ, humility, etc).

As we mentioned earlier (i.e. Dunning-Kruger effect) unless you yourself are an expert you probably wouldn't know how to detect the expertise of others.

4. Arrogance

It is generally misread as strength when arrogance is displayed. It sounds daft when you read it like that but it’s the truth.

Unlike determining if a leader has a positive view of themselves - arrogance is often difficult to detect. That is, unless, one is a topic expert but that still leaves room for error. Just because someone can talk-the-talk can they actually walk-the-talk - carry out actions and deliver results?

And even when we uncover the disingenuity we are either impressed or intimidated. We either see leaders as strong and competent enough to try to bluff their way through or we are disgusted by their inflated ego. 

The only way to realize if people are not as good as they think, is to establish how good they are.

We need to stop celebrating arrogance altogether.

5. Humility

If we really valued humility, more leaders would have this skill. But here's the thing, our perception for this soft skill has been tainted by toxic masculinity, we not only see this attribute as feminine but associate humility, with negative connotations.

One of the biggest issues with leadership today stems from our perception of humility. Both women and men that display humility are seen as “unfit” because this does not align with the other masculine traits commonly linked to leadership today: overconfident bravado, recklessness, ego-centric stubbornness.

Humility is not appreciated so why would it be desired by leaders today?

I mean can you imagine a leader advising something like this to you: “you don’t always have to be right, we all make mistakes”, “don’t talk, just listen and respond in your own time”, or “don’t boast about your achievements, share one positive thing about your colleague”. It’s not what you would expect to hear.

These are the five pitfalls of leadership today.

A Call For Change

Everyone in principle agrees that a new leadership style is needed and that a new generation of future leaders are well and truly on the way. That a ‘new norm’ is dawning and we all have a say in what we now need from leadership more than ever.

 But that isn't here just yet.

Instead, the reality today is somewhat flustered. We have an assortment of leaders that typically fall into two camps 1) a large portion still sit within the archetypal leader persona where others 2) a much smaller group are demonstrating elements of what we need, humbleness, acting charitable, etc. However, their promises never seem to go beyond the empty assurances as they fall at the last hurdles of trust and action.

The trust teams bestow upon their leaders becomes a one-way street. Leaders like to take but struggle to give anything in return.

This is a far cry from compassionate leaders being the norm.

Societal restrictions brought about by Covid-19 and the accelerated digital transformations - organizations are beginning to embrace discussions for change.

Just as we are beginning to discuss the need for this new type of leader, to take us into the ‘new norm’, we cannot just magically make them appear.

So, if you, like me, wish to see a change in leadership then we should start by addressing these five leadership pitfalls.

We can begin by reviewing potential leaders characteristics - taking a deep look at what we need of them and how we can test for that. Focus less on confidence and more on competence; de-emphasize the importance of charisma; develop the right expertise, and make the right effort to evaluate individuals actual rather than self-perceived talent; and accept the reality that leadership is not hyper-masculine.