SILENCE AND FEAR IN ORGANIZATIONS

When you ask that why people choose silence in organizations one answer which you get quite often is: fear.  This is the answer in which has emerged in numerous personal discussions in different contexts. I also made a Linkedin poll where I offered two options that why people choose silence. The first option was fear and the other was that speaking does not seem to provide results.  The poll got 9 answers which came from all over the world, therefore the result is not based on anything larger, but nevertheless the result was indicative - a fear was a clear winner with 8 votes (feels somewhat awkward to write that fear was a winner, but in this polling context it was).

Apparently fear is one of those words which you seem to know with certainty, but when you try to define it you may notice that the concept of fear is very, very elusive. Defining fear is not at all simple task. Therefore let us look first how Wikipedia defines fear and after that we will examine different ways of approaching fear in organizational context:

Wikipedia starts its fear entry as follows:

Fear is an emotion induced by a perceived threat which causes entities to quickly pull away from it and usually hide. It is a basic survival mechanism occurring in response to a specific stimulus, such as pain or the threat of danger. In short, fear is the ability to recognize danger leading to an urge to confront it or flee from it (also known as the fight-or-flight response) but in extreme cases of fear (horror and terror) a freeze or paralysis response is possible.

In organizational context fear which leads to silence is a phenomenon of its own. In this text I will approach that specific phenomenon from two angles:

1)      Fear which relates to you

2)      Fear which relates to others

Clearly this discussion is tentative and thought provoking by its nature. The point here is to suggest that because a silence is a very important organizational factor which may play a crucial role in determining whether the organization succeeds or not, we must pause to examine that what actually causes silence. One explanation is certainly fear, perhaps based on real things or perhaps mainly imagined, however fear must be one factor which relates to silence in organizations.

Therefore understanding the roots of fear, and through that understanding being able to reduce silence and increasing communication can be seen a most important managerial task for every executive. But what actually is fear in organizational context, how it can be approached and discussed?  The purpose here is to find new openings which might give new ideas for executives and for each of us how to tackle these issues in the working environment.

1.       Fears which relates to you (or to me, or to any individual personally)

1a. Fear of making fool of yourself

Certainly there might be situations where you choose silence because you are afraid that you would make fool of your selves. Perhaps you may feel that you do not know enough of the topic under discussion.  Or perhaps you may feel (know, anticipate) that your position in your organization is such that in those discursive practices which prevail in your organization your effort to participate would result in difficult and embarrassing  consequences.

 

 1b. Fear of getting more tasks

Age old truth in army is that motion reveals. Unfortunately something similar may be true in organizational life. Consequently, there seems to be a tendency that a person who opens her/his mouth about something also gets that task on her/his task list.                   

 

2.       Fears which relate to others

2a. Fear of ruining positive atmosphere

Apparently we all wish to work in a pleasant environment, in a nice atmosphere with collaborative colleagues. And certainly nice and supporting atmosphere can be a success factor of its own right, it nurtures creativity, innovation, it energizes and it provides many other positive things to all involved and to whole organization.

In this setting you may fear that taking up certain matters might for some reason drastically harm the positive general atmosphere. Therefore you may decide to avoid taking up certain matters.

2b) Fear that the others do something negative - fear of negative consequences

Evidently a person may fear that bringing something up might result in negative reactions and actions by others. In practice there is a huge variety of possible negative consequences which might take place. In case you anticipate that raising up certain issues might cause negative actions towards you in the future you certainly may resort to silence on those occasions.

2c) Fear that you cause a mess in organization

Also it is thinkable that person predicts in her/his mind that bringing something up might cause a mess in her/his organization. We all know that organizations are pretty delicate creatures on what comes to trust and sharing between people. Hence, some issues may cause that the focus of organizational activity become lost and that may harm the success of the organization.

 

In sum

Unavoidably silence and fear are both organizational phenomena which are always present to some extent. These phenomena on their part affect to the success of an organization. Certainly these phenomena also affect to the general atmosphere and what it is to work in certain organization. Hence these are phenomena which also belong to the management agenda.

Could it be that silence is the next hot topic on the arena of management thinking? What are the most effective ways to reduce silence and thus increase discussion and sharing in your organizational context?

 

A leader is not a human being

 

In case my memory serves, philosopher Martin Heidegger used to ponder the question of being. He asked: what it is to be?  He proposed that this kind of question is very important, although it is just the kind of question which we fail to ask, partly because we do not notice that there would anything to ask in the first place. The question of being is such that kind of an elementary question which evades our attention. Yet, perhaps this odd sounding question is very fundamental:  actually what it is to be.

Sometimes in executive education I have wanted to make participants to really think what a leader actually IS. In moment of high excitement I may have even said that leader is not a human being, he IS something else.  At this point people may have asked that what is the point in my apparent provocation.  They have commented that do I mean that a leader IS perhaps less or maybe more than a human being. Good question, in particular if the point would be to deride leaders or to praise leaders.

 

However, the point here is not a mean derision, not even a good tempered praise. The point is simply to tell how things are in real world, and what a leader actually IS. And we start to search the true existence of a leader our quest starts to point to a direction that a leader is not just a human being, s/he is also something else.

(for another quest, please check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUmYX-hUyN8 )

 One way to approach the true existence of a leader would be to claim that sometimes s/he is 13 % of the whole organization, sometimes s/he is 8 %, or some other percentage of whole totality which is an organization. What does this kind of odd sounding and far-fetched claims try to say? It is proposed here that a leader is a part of the organizational structure, part of a vastly complex net of all kinds of things which form the organization. Perhaps we could say that a leader is not just a human being, s/he is also an organizational-being.

This analysis of the true nature of the existence of a leader is interesting discussion in itself but it not just speculation, it also immediately yields to ideas and observations which provide practical ramifications and suggestions. For instance, in a most common change situation where the aim is to develop a new way of doing, there is typically a forceful tendency to return to old habits, practices and old ways of doing things, ways of working with customers, etc.  To make the change happen, we need here a leader who is an organizational-being. By being there s/he makes it clear that when s/he is part of the organization’s existence, the things are done in a certain way. Hence, a leader is intrinsically linked into fabric of an organization, s/he is part of an organization in a very special way. By being there in any given situation with a certain way, a leader gives an impetus for whole organization to be and act in a certain way.

Of course this does not mean that a leader would always be the one who makes things better. Unfortunately, it is sometimes possible that a leader as an organizational-being on her/his part maintains old habits, or s/he allows to happen something in the daily life of his/her organization which may not serve the best interest of individuals working in the organization, neither the best interest of the whole organization.

 

In sum, perhaps we should not think too straight forwardly that we know what a leader IS. Perhaps we need to open to explore how a leader is an organizational-being who is intrinsically woven into very fabric of organization. Thus a leader on her/his part forms the entity which we call an organization. This perspective certainly enhances the importance of a leader. At the same time this perspective also stresses the responsibility of a leader.  So, may I reconsider the title is this blog - a leader is a human being, but at the same s/he is also an organizational being.