Chapter Two: Resonant Leadership

This chapter just digs a little deeper into the defining characteristics and effects of resonance and dissonance in leadership. Resonance, it explains, comes from the notion of sound or music. When frequencies are in aligned there is harmony. Dissonance represents a state where there is a lot of "signal noise." These two states have a marked effect on the way people perform at work. The authors talk about the vital importance of people's ability to connect with others at work. Everyone likes to be part of something bigger than themselves, so it a good feeling when a team project comes together well and the various people involved (assuming they feel a connection to each other) can celebrate and feel good about it together. These positive feelings of connection drive people to achieve more together. On the other hand, if the leader creates an environment of dissonance, people will simply go "through the motions of their work...doing merely a good enough job rather than giving their best." This statement resonated with me (no pun intended) as it is very similar to the notion I shared in the opening post about my leadership style being linked to principles of positive and negative reinforcement in animal training.The former has no ceiling to the heights people (or animals) will go to achieve more. The latter works well and quickly, but it typically results in people doing just what they need to do to avoid the punishment, so there is a limit to the heights they can achieve.

As the chapter began to dive into dissonant leadership, I was surprised to read of a study of more than a thousand US workers which found that 42 percent reported cases of yelling and other types of verbal abuse in the work place. 30 percent of the people studied admitted to having yelled at co-workers themselves. The company I work for is quite large and has it's share of challenges but we have an organizational culture that simply does not allow for such behavior. I've been working there in one capacity or another, for 16 years so it's hard for me to imagine that kind of behavior happening at work. The authors discuss the toxicity this causes and how it can pervade a person's work space, as well as their home since they can't just shake it off at 5pm. The results are employees who are burned out, dispirited, and looking for another job. Or worse, staying in a job they hate and adding to the organizational dissonance. The authors compare these types of leaders to the "dementors" in the Harry Potter books who drain all the peace, joy, and hope from people. I found that to be a fun diversion in an otherwise stoic book (so far).

The remainder of the chapter talks about the important balance between the emotions and intellect in leadership. Often intellect it touted as a key predictor of success or failure in leadership. While a leader must have certain knowledge, skills, and intellect to run a team, a big brain is simply not enough. They talk about the fact that thinking brain (frontal cortex) evolved from the emotional brain (limbic system). During times of emergency, the emotional centers of the brain always get control of a situation. If there's a fire, we sense the threat and jump into action to get ourselves and perhaps others out of harms way. However, the leader never learned or can't remember the safety protocols in a fire, then their emotional drive to act has no direction. The most successful leaders, they say, are the ones who most perfectly balance these two parts of the brain. I know I've seen this in action and I'm sure most others have too. You want a leader who knows more than you and can teach you, or a leader who is great at what they do and can perform at a very high level. But you also want a leader who is in touch with you and your needs as well as those of the overall department. Too much intellect and high performance in a leader who burns every bridge they cross is not good. Too much affiliation and emotional support from a leader who cannot get their job done effectively is similarly, not a good thing. The person who balances these two and makes good choices with both ends of the spectrum in mind is a successful and well-respected leader.