WHY CHOOSE SILENCE

Why do you choose silence? When do you choose silence?  What might make you to change the way how to choose between silence and voice in different organizational settings?

The general view today seems to be that it would be most valuable for the very success of the organization if as many as possible would provide their genuine own views, ideas and observations for the general discussion. Let us take this as a starting point and let us ask why so many in so many situations still seem to choose silence?  I dare to propose that my question is not a senseless provocation - this is because so many discussions with so many people in so many occasions have convinced me that quite often people actually have chosen silence and surely people will choose silence in many situations in the future. Perhaps what we may have here is an intriguing oxymoron. You learn to know about silence when people tell about it (of course this happens in different situation than where the silence takes place). But surely you know this phenomenon and you must have also observed it in many occasions and you must have heard about it. Could the silence be the hot but quiet topic on the arena of management, control and leadership?

 

 

 

As such it would be a most interesting topic for in depth inquiry to examine how and why silence is selected in different organizations, in different business cultures, in different meetings, in different places and with different people.

Why people choose silence?  Let me start by outlining a list of obvious reasons. This is by no means an exhaustive list, it is mainly food for thought kind of list which could give each of us an idea how common phenomenon silence must actually be in any organizational reality. The list also shows immediately that people may certainly feel that they have many good reasons which may result in silence in different settings. So, why silence, what people may think when they choose silence:

1.       No reason to talk, nobody would really listen anyway

2.       Talk is idle, it has been tried, it will not change anything

3.       My ideas are not that important

4.       There might be negative consequences if I opened my mouth

5.       Talking (proposing new ideas) is work, and I have done my share

6.       I am not in a such position who speaks is situation like this

7.       We have two ears and one mouth, listening is gold and speaking something else

8.       …

Certainly the list could go on and on, and everybody could easily list numerous reasons why people may choose not to express their opinions in different settings. What is important here is to realize that silence is certainly an unavoidable part of organizational life. Different people in different settings choose silence. Also it is important to realize that mostly people choose silence because they think that it is wise thing to do. Probably silence is selected for personal reasons but also for organizational reasons. People may think that raising up certain topics might cause havoc in their organizations and therefore silence will actually benefit the organization.

 

In fact, it may not be so obvious that silence should be replaced with voice everywhere and always. These issues are truly very delicate and complex. I think that generally speaking people and organizations are doing today what they are capable of and what they consider possible. Hence in real world it is often impossible to make a quick and heroic move which would change black into white, or ineffectiveness into effectiveness, or silence into voice - and create only positive consequences.

The level of silence in any organization, and in any meeting, and actually anywhere where people encounter has been chosen by those wise people who are actors in that particular situation. At the same time most organizations would undoubtedly benefit a lot, if not enormously, if people would more openly share their observations and ideas. This is the setting where leadership in real world has to operate. How to decrease the level of silence in organizations so that consequences are desired for people and for the organization?

Business books and a reader - the interplay reconsiderd

Should the cover of a business book include warning signs in addition to those typical flaming praise given by famous people and successful CEOs?  Warning signs could be something like: in case you are such and such person this book may not be suitable for you, or in case you work in this kind of organization this book cannot really be recommended for you, or in case your attitude toward work is something like following you might do yourself a service in reconsidering some other activities instead of reading this book.

 

 

Should we take the connection between a reader and a book seriously? Should we take business books and their message seriously? Surely it is everybody’s right to read whatever they like.  And the point here is not to propose any kind of restrictions or limitations for free choice. The point here is more epistemological in its nature, which means that it may not be obvious that all kinds of business books are most useful to all kinds of executives and experts working in all kinds of organizations.

Well I admit that it is unfair to compare business books to those products which are required to put warning signs on their cover. Nevertheless could it actually be a good thing even for business books themselves and in particular to the reader-book experience if business books could include some kind of “how to use this book” part.  Apparently this part should be prepared by following by some kind of a  - generally accepted guidelines - for effective and fruitful reading

May I at this point leave it for later discussion which instance (organizational body) could create these “ generally accepted business book reading” - guidelines (probably later called as GABBR -guidelines) and who should write the instructions to each book, could it actually be the author herself  or some other person designed specifically for that task. I just want to suggest here that these guidelines could be prepared sensibly and they might not be a heavy burden to anyone involved. Instead the guidelines might help the reader to get most out of a book, and perhaps sometimes to consider how important it is to really consider what elements make it possible to apply the ideas of a book in is his own professional life and in his organization.

But what could these guidelines actually include? This is certainly a very difficult question. However, I think that key element would be the reader’s ability and willingness to make changes. Can we say that without the idea of making or at least considering a change,  the very reading of a business book is just entertainment and this may not be a best possible professional attitude for effective reading. Again, it is of course every ones right to read also business book for share pleasure and entertainment. However, from the epistemological perspective we are interested to examine those reading experiences which have also other goals, like deepening and broadening understanding which may create basis for change and improvement in professional activities.

 

Hence GABBR-guidelines - I thrust that you already remember this acronym, if not please check the text above - would most like help the reader to reflect at least following aspects: what actually is her position and freedom to make changes in her own professional life and also in her organization, what is her organizations true ability and possibility to change and really apply ideas touted in business book, and also she might be interested to check her own attitude and whether there really is willingness to reconsidering  her taken for granted every day truths which may have served very well so far.

In sum. Business books are excellent, sometimes. Readers are magnificent, always. How we all make it as likely as possible that that the crucial interplay between readers and books  provide best possible results?