Risk No. 1: We declare our conversational partner a “non-person.”
This can happen because e.g. we talk in a bored tone or intentionally talk too
fast (“How can I quickly get rid of this person?”), do other things during the
conversation (e.g. writing something) or use a file folder to demonstratively put
up a “wall” between ourselves and the other person.
Risk No. 2: We seek to dominate our conversational partner.
To emphasize our dominant status we get very close to the other person, lift our
chin, lean forward and speak in a loud voice.
In both cases, the effect is that the interlocutor builds up resistance. At first
there is a non-verbal confrontation, which sooner or later may be escalates in
a verbal confrontation.
Risk No. 3: We seek to make our conversational partner feel mercy.
Assuming a bent-over posture, speaking in a soft voice, lowering our gaze and
making a very modest general appearance signal our willingness to be
subjugated. In situations where we are in a weak position, such conduct may
evoke the good will of our counterpart. But if we overdo it, we weaken our
position. We will not be taken seriously; we encourage the other to be dominant
and will be treated accordingly.
3.2.4.6 Shared Knowledge Means Twice the Benefit
As we have seen communication serves two major purposes: conveying knowledge
and information on the factual level and creating and maintaining relationships on
the emotional level. Therefore, the leader also acts as a knowledge manager.
Like someone operating a floodgate, he or she has to filter the truly important
pieces out of the constantly increasing flow of information. He or she has to reduce
the complexity because too much information paralyzes the decision-making pro-
cess and creates uncertainties and communication problems. The leader has to be
able to evaluate information, to weigh it, to set priorities and to channel it.
This knowledge management is not censorship, because the leader is not holding
back important information consciously in order to increase their influence. Instead,
managers work to ensure that all information reaches everybody within the com-
pany who might need it, and help to keep worthless information from stealing
employees’ time and energy. Especially in turbulent times it is the leader’s job to
distil new, value-generating information.
In the past networks were deemed “gossip factories.” Today successful leaders
know that networks make specialist knowledge visible and available to the entire
organization – knowledge that would otherwise remain locked up in desk drawers,
on hard drives and in employees’ heads. “Social networks that share knowledge –
with or without computer support – are a module of the learning infrastructure that
is characteristic of organizations capable of change” (Kanter 1998, p. 29 ff.)
In the age of globalization and virtual networks the difficulty for managers is to
dance with completely different partners without stepping on anyone’s feet. This
metaphor by Rosabeth Moss Kanter aptly describes the problem faced by many
3.2 Leading with Your Head and Heart 145