Self and Other Awareness

Most behaviors emanate from the subconscious. The human mind stores all episodes, events and experiences in our lives in something similar to a “filing cabinet” and automatically retrieves this “data” as specific events unfold; thus, responses are often formulated based on historical experience. This is done almost instantaneously and is automatic. Automatic responses can be quite helpful so that one does not need to consciously think about everything that happens. For example, if we are sitting in our office and see smoke, we don’t want to stop, analyze, formulate hypotheses and then act. Instead, we just exit the building; experience tells us where there is smoke, there is fire. 

However useful automatic behaviors can be, it is rarely useful for a leader. Instead, as noted in previous publications, leading others must be a deliberate process and leaders need to be fully conscious of the potential consequences of their behaviors. For example, a leader can choose to be solely task-focused and demand effort toward a certain goal. This choice will lead to a corresponding reaction from the worker. Alternatively, a leader might focus on relationships ahead of the task; this is likely to cause a different reaction. A third alternative is for the leader not to apply any deliberateness to his/her behaviors and act in accordance with what feels comfortable (i.e. one’s automatic behaviors); in this instance, the leader is turning the outcome of the situation over to chance. 

Usually leaders have one of two “automatic” leadership orientations: they lean toward either a task orientation or a relationship orientation (described in earlier publications). If a leader allows one orientation to dominate, his/her behavior will only fit situations that match the need for that approach.  

It is important for a leader’s behavior to match the situation and the followers. That is, a professional leader works to align his or her approach to the presenting situation and follower(s) and the less-skilled leader behaves according to what he or she finds "easy" (automatic behaviors).  When there is alignment, expected outcomes are more likely to result. Previous publications have described Situational Leadership Theory; it offers clues of what behaviors to display based on the preparedness (e.g. confidence, willingness, ability) of the followers.¹

 

Automatic behaviors (e.g. task or relationship orientation) put the leader at risk of using the wrong approach at the wrong time. Leaders behave out of automatic behaviors unless action is taken to adapt; being self-aware is a way to increase one's ability to control behaviors. A sign that one has a greater degree of self-awareness is when there is a match between what people say the leader does with what he/she says he does.

Lack of alignment is a common problem. Studies have demonstrated that how leaders perceive themselves to be frequently differs from how workers describe the leader.² For example, a leader may think he or she is good at keeping the workers informed and is also caring, but when the workers are questioned, their view may differ. This may surprise the leader until he or she is confronted with overwhelming data to the contrary. Leadership development organizations have perfected the process of gathering and presenting such information and helping the leader gain valuable insights that can be acted upon. Of course, this process can be completed without outside assistance (see the AOR model described in a previous publication).⁴  

One way for a leader to receive good information about his or her leadership and increase awareness is through an effectively delivered 360-degree feedback mechanism² (gathers information from those surrounding the leader). A 360-degree process is becoming more prevalent as a tool for supervisors and managers to learn about themselves and assist in reducing harmful habits that get in the way of effective influence.  

During a 360, leaders may be discovering information that does not appear to match reality. Consider John, a senior leader in an organization, who hears that his followers all think he focuses on personal gain rather than promoting business objectives. Upon hearing the news, John might go ballistic thinking how unfair the whole process is (“they just don’t understand”).  John might retaliate against a few of his direct reports if he can pinpoint the possible “traitor(s).” John is forgetting that leading is not about being right but instead is about effectuating an outcome that is desirable for the organization.  John’s goal then is to understand what is generating the perception and finding clues that can help repair the image; being more self-aware can help John increase his openness and willingness to learn.

In other words, self-awareness is about learning about one’s leadership through the eyes of the people whom the leader is trying to influence. It is important that the leader learn about perceptions of his workers and address misperceptions, not by retaliation, but by trying to figure out what he/she is doing that causes the perception; the leader can then put into place a development or personal change strategy. One book I would recommend to help is Daft's The Executive and the Elephant, which offers ideas on self-awareness and leadership development.³

So how is this related to a leader’s orientation, i.e. task versus relationship?  It relates to the automatic favoring of one approach over the other. Many leaders find it easier to be task-related because it is easier to measure. While learning about preferences, the leader might find he/she has a strong need to achieve outcomes; a task orientation provides a means to meet that objective. Alternatively, John might discover he prefers to be liked and, therefore, favors the relationship orientation. There is nothing wrong with either orientation; when a leader realizes the prevalence of the behavior, he or she has a greater chance of adjusting it for a given circumstance and worker, thus increasing her/his effectiveness.

The reason that a leader would make the change is because one’s orientation may not always fit a certain situation and follower; with awareness, leaders have a greater opportunity to make a choice between using the automatic responses versus adapting to the environment. Today’s leaders cannot afford to be one way all of the time. Self-awareness is one path to help a leader understand what she/he prefers and then, where possible, adjust as needed.

Please feel free to make comments.

References

¹ Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K.H. (1995). Situational Leadership. J.T. Wren (Ed.), Leaders' Companion: Insights on Leadership Through the Ages (pp. 207 - 211). New York: Free Press.

² Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

³ Daft, R.L. (2010). The Executive and the Elephant: A Leader's Guide to Building Inner Excellence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

⁴ Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., & Curphy, G.J. (2009). Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Irwin.