Can Leaders reclaim their natural kindness?

Kindness is an innate and universal value that helps individuals grow personally and professionally, as well as communicate more strongly and effectively.

Yet it is often overlooked in professional circles.

This is unfortunate, as kindness is a crucial component of the fully empowered cooperation that forms the foundation of transformational leadership. Every organization should strive to cultivate this value.

This context led me to explore and understand whether natural kindness is an impediment to becoming a strong and respected leader, or whether it represents a key point of strength that should be nurtured.

The Leader-Follower equation

Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care.????????????????? Theodore Roosevelt

The Leader-Follower relationships shows that important affective components are involved and leaders often function as attachment figures, whose role includes guiding, directing, taking charge and care of others, serving as a secure base and a safe haven.

When interacting with sensitive and available caregivers, individuals internalize a model of themselves as worthy of love and protection and a model of others as sensitive, reliable and protective.

Research conducted with a large sample of Managers shows that leaders are compared with parents, saying that close, affectionate relationships with caregivers and low psychological control by the latter, were associated with transformational leadership characterized by vision, inspiration, consideration for others and intellectual stimulation.

A major factor in the ability to lead and followers’ perceptions lies in the manner in which these leaders developed their care-giving systems, and the motivations to assume such leadership roles.

Capacities to Lead

Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves. ?????Carl Jung

The attachment theory developed by Bowlby and Ainsworth assumes that, from infancy onward, children form an internal working model which includes internalization and representations of major aspects of their attachment relationships with their first caregivers. ?

Based on this idea, three attachment styles were identified ??

1.??Secure/safe attachment

2.??Insecure ambivalent/anxious

3.??Insecure/avoidant

Secure individuals show a basic trust in their caregiver, and confidence that he/she will be available, responsive and helpful when needed. With this assurance, they are bold in their explorations of the world, and able to both rely on themselves as well as turn to others when in need.

The ambivalent/anxious pattern is characterized by uncertainty as to whether the caregiver will be available, responsive or helpful when called upon.

Insecure /avoidant is a pattern in which individuals have no confidence that they will receive care when they seek it; on the contrary, they expect to be rebuffed.

The theory claims that people with a secure attachment style are more capable of intimacy and closeness in relations than those with insecure styles and they have suggested that because the attachment theory deals with the quality of relationships, it could also be applied to leadership.

?Since effective leaders are likely to be available and responsive to their followers’ needs, provide advice, guidance as well as emotional and instrumental support, to help followers develop their autonomy and build their sense of self-worth, competence and mastery.

An interesting factor analysis carried out in various studies helps in explaining individual differences in attachment, avoidance and anxiety:

???The anxiety dimension is characterized by constant worry over relationships, fear of loneliness and abandonment (leading to unbalanced over-reliance on kindness?)

???The avoidance dimension is characterized by a feeling of discomfort with closeness and dependence, as well as the avoidance of expressing one’s emotions and reliance on others (leading to an imbalance and reduction in kindness?)

???Data shows that secure individuals, when assuming the role of parents, romantic partners or community volunteers, can focus more on other people’s needs, without feeling deflected by personal distress or a lack of empathy.

Must we add, without feeling the anxiety to suppress their natural empathy and kindness?

Leaders as attachment figures

He, who wishes to secure the good of others, has already secured his own.??Confucius

The attachment theory may be applied to any adult relationship, as long as it fulfills the following three criteria:

1.??Maintenance of proximity: Prefers to be close by in times of stress/need

2.??Provision of a safe haven: Relieves distress and provides support/comfort

3.??Provision of a secure base: Sustains exploration, risk-taking and self-development

The need for a strong leader arises in times of personal and collective crisis, trauma and uncertainty. But what exactly characterizes a strong leader? Should one go back to Gandi’s statement about muscles versus love? Is it the calm, parental, wise figure who inspires followers with their quiet strength, or is it the impetuous, domineering leader?

Sensitive, responsive leaders are able to initiate in followers a series, or cascade of mental processes that facilitate personal growth and adjustment, including feelings of esteem and acceptance, increased confidence in one’s coping and interpersonal skills, in addition to increased devotion to mental resources towards creative exploration and skill acquisition. The opposite seems to hold as well: leaders’ inability or unwillingness to respond sensitively to followers’ needs may foster a sense of insecurity and low morale, triggering psychological defenses that strongly interfere with performance and growth.

The leaders’ attachment style influences the likelihood of building a transactional or a transformational relationship with their followers:

???Transactional leaders encourage followers to perform assigned tasks, by way of offering immediate rewards for positive performance

???Transformational leaders are interested in empowering followers and promoting their personal growth and development

Individuals with differing attachment styles also have varying objectives when engaging in social interaction:

???Individuals who have high attachment anxiety levels are expected to seek the role of leaders, as a means to satisfy a frustrated need for attention and acceptance.

???Individuals who have an avoidant attachment style are expected to maintain their distance from followers and view leadership as an opportunity to demonstrate strength, toughness and independence.

Both types have difficulty organizing and enacting sensitive responsive care of others.

Theoretically, leaders with a secure attachment style should feel more confident and skillful in occupying the role of the stronger and wiser caregiver, promoting a sense of competence in their followers, and contributing to better functioning and adjustment.

How secure are we v/s our own natural kindness?

Is Kindness a favor linked to a set of values or a requirement to improve performance?

Can it be embraced in a business context where culture is about competition and financial success?

An interesting insight came from the wrap-up sessions which I had to conduct for several coaching alliances, with a couple of peculiar cases about managers who wanted to work on their aggressive and sometimes abrasive conduct with their teams.

Upon doing their strength surveys, these executives had identified, to their surprise, “kindness” as a key strength they had.

And then, as we ventured further into our discussions, they made a conscientious observation that it wasn’t much of a surprise, as they somehow admitted their fear of having their natural kindness being too visible and taken advantage of by their peers and colleagues.

Thus, their desire to build a defense mechanism in the form of a visible shell of aggressiveness and even, rudeness.

This raised the question of “why would someone worry about expressing kindness in a business environment?”

While we are familiar with the relationship between traditional followers and traditional leaders, we have yet to better understand what cements transformational leaders with their followers. What is the main drive? Is it will, vision, resilience, or indirect covert manipulation? Is it a pure, emotional bond akin to a parental relationship, whereby parents want their child to get the best to the point of even surpassing them in terms of qualities and success?

Or can it be a positive, respectful connection built on caring and kindness?

One theory could be that it all depends on the context, the environment, the social evolution of people around the leader, and the latter’s stage of economic and intellectual development.

From a leadership perspective, the stages of evolution in a society of followers can be simplified according to the following “pyramid of needs”:

???Stage 1: People are in survival mode, they want to be defended and protected. That situation calls for traditional leadership. A chief

???Stage 2: People are in an “expand and conquer” mode, a “they want” stage that calls for controlling leadership. A manager

???Stage 3: People are on a rise, shine and join mode, a “they need” stage calls for a transformational leader: A teacher

In this last stage, in which people need to find the best in themselves, nurture it and claim it (v/s the part others would like to see), where they need to be freed of their chains, to create room for improvement, would kindness and caring be key characteristics for a leader?

Can they be a clear substitute for the criteria of traditional leadership?

What would it need to be balanced with, to result in efficient, fruitful guidance?

Detailed field research on the topic revealed that while the majority of Leaders clearly state they consistently resort to kindness intending to empower their followers, they are more comfortable and efficient when they use it with people whom they perceive are appreciating it.

But the initial attitude is a preference to underplay it, to avert the risk of seeing followers take advantage of it and perceive it as softness.

In short, the notion of kindness in leadership, while claimed as an unconditional strength, is only applied contextually, with three major warning signals:

1.?Short-term kindness may be harmful in the long run, if it is used simply to gain the positive perception and effect of followers.

2.?? It can be a serious hindrance if it becomes a way of accepting things and taking alternatives other than the firmer decision – that would mean being in trouble as a leader.

3.??It needs to be downplayed and replaced with signs of a “strong personality” when it is abused.

They consider kindness and empathy as a way to attract, retain, build trust, open up, anticipate and avoid conflict with direct subordinates, peers or line managers. Through their answers, they appeared convinced that the lack of confidence in followers’ capacities is often misplaced, and bad leaders constrain their colleagues and weaken resources to a large degree, whilst every human being needs to feel your kindness in the balance, and if you’re there for them, they will never try to cross the limit.

So, they aim to use their kindness all the time and with everybody, unless it becomes disabling or if the receiving party seems indifferent. ?

To cater to that, most interviewees rely on their insightfulness and perception of the follower, using their intuition as a compass to see things that are not easily perceived and make sure their kindness is not misinterpreted or misused.

At this point, we add the key concepts of compass and balance to decide, guide and adjust what appears to be a natural authentic asset, by the circumstances.

These exploratory and corrective faculties were seen to be crucial, to palliate for negative experiences when using kindness had downplayed them.

Most of the respondents confirmed that these negative experiences did not deter them, but rather helped them develop a finer intuition at identifying the right circumstances, as well as the proper context to be themselves and remain comfortable with it.

Backlashes experienced ranged from being betrayed, deceived or disappointed by followers who turned their back on them, to being perceived as non-confrontational by a superior or in a negotiation process; but the most serious threat was the potential negative impact it would have on their image as a leader.

In business, there is a ruthless attitude towards leaders; people tend to not forgive if leaders are perceived to have taken the wrong decision. In this case, that would be the worst spinoff of kindness.

So, on one side there is the need to protect, preserve and grow their momentum and credibility as leaders, and on the other, the openness and flexibility not to clam up as a consequence of negative experiences, so that they can still tap into their natural resources.

Interviewees unanimously maintained that they perceive this natural resource as a formidable agent for change, that can help leaders positively influence people around them. They agree that the most efficient way to integrate it into their leadership approach was through a tactful, humble manner that serves to build a lasting, trustful cooperation, whilst gaining the respect and support of their teams and helping everybody grow and develop in a common bid to reach new heights – heights that cannot be expected in a context of traditional leadership, let alone a transactional management.

Coaching builds its raison d’être on the strategy of supporting executives find their way of reframing their resistance, discovering new boundaries to be explored, and improving on their attachment status to make room for more awareness, progress and personal growth.

?

There is great hope, provided action is taken worthy of the opportunity.??Winston Churchill

LEADER-LED RELATIONSHIP MATRIX: THE NEW MULTIPLEX EQUATION

?

• In a nutshell, an avoidant attached leader needs to tap more into their natural kindness to balance firmness with followers needing a chief and expected fairness when they need a captain. Both relations are viewed respectively as a transactional organization for the first, and a regular corporation for the second.
• An anxious attached leader who over-displays kindness can be perceived as weak and lacking assertiveness in a context where followers need a chief, as lacking firmness when they want a captain / manager and as lacking direction when they are looking for a guide. As such, this type of leader needs to strengthen their firmness as a means of complementing and optimizing their natural kindness.
• Last but not least, a safe attached leader comfortable in displaying their authentic kindness can actually reach the “leadership Eldorado”: with followers looking for a guide to build Transformational cooperation.

? ?

?Business context and “kindness compass”

Waste no more time what a good man should be… Be one!??Marcus Aurelius

Upon being asked how they would use their kindness and with whom, Leaders’ answers were about:

1.???? Pre-empting the context: scan the grounds and see if they are compatible with their authentic selves thus allowing an unwarranted display of kindness.

2.???? Monitoring the reactivity: of the follower, and assess whether that kindness is well placed or taken advantage of.

3.???? Fine-tuning: To adjust the dynamics and make sure damages can be limited or advantages optimized.

?

All interviewees were adamant that kindness tailored to the development and wellbeing of followers is a leadership- enhancing strength. But it can only be optimal when equipped with the right information, and coupled with the proper intuition and attitude as to where, when and at whom it can be geared. The key findings here are balance and inner compass.

Someone once said that winds are always changing and you have to adjust your sails accordingly; in the case of kindness in leadership, the sails are there, authentic natural kindness the question remains: how can we unfold those sails and dare to make them visible, and central to our leadership while adjusting them to the environmental winds so that we keep a consistent course.

A major topic in all conversations about “modern” leadership qualities, Kindness remains underrated and over-looked.

In the future, and similar to the measurement tools that are available for resilience, grit, conceptual leadership or operational leadership, it could be useful to try and come up with a kindness scale or kindness-meter, that would help leaders benchmark themselves against that given context and their own capabilities, to evaluate the space for development and the efforts needed.

An art to practice and a science to explore, our inner leader and free will remain our main assets, along with the questions we try to answer about self-awareness, ingenuity, energizing ourselves and engaging others.

?