5 ms·

Is it really hurting them? Seems like both she and the people she sees succeeding as leaders act that way. Being indomitable and regulating your emotions seems

Is it really hurting them? Seems like both she and the people she sees succeeding as leaders act that way. Being indomitable and regulating your emotions seems to be part of the formula for effective leadership; why would we expect otherwise?

belorn 6y ago
Pretending that physical and mental health problems does not exist is a problem. It is sad aspect of human life that we reward social status and monetary rewards to those who are successful at hiding it, and punish those that either refuse or fail. It seems worth to ask if there is a better way. It also seems that in a time where we care about inclusivity and diversity we need to let go of the perception that only people with perfect health should be allowed to lead.
- dpoochieni 6y ago
  I think it is even innate to look up to those kind of leaders. Obviously there are exceptions but they inspire confidence (at least in me, n=1)
  - jbay808 6y ago
    For what it's worth as a counterexample, many people attribute Dr. Bonnie Henry's display of emotional honesty and vulnerability at a live press conference as a masterclass in communication, an excellent example of leadership, and as having played an important role in British Columbia's (so far) successful coronavirus response. (Citations for the above are easy to find but I'm on mobile so I don't feel like digging up the links).
- logarhythmic 6y ago
  Maybe it's unfortunate, but nobody said being a leader is easy. It's why most (including myself) are not capable of such a role
  - pm90 6y ago
    Could be, but I assume leadership roles are hard not for keeping up appearances but for the actual work involved in being a leader. That we see hiding emotions as a defining/filtering attribute seems something arbitrary that society decided was an attribute leaders should have.
    - antepodius 6y ago
      I don't think it's arbitrary at all. You want to pick strong, resilient leaders/trade partners/partners/employees. If you had some magical way to order people based on actual strength/resilience/grit, most people would (rightly) pick those highest on that scale. Unfortunately, the only thing we have to go on is apparent strength. So everyone learns to pretend, to whatever degree they think is necessary. Those who actually are that strong/resilient (for example, psychopaths monofocused on profit and power who don't care about working 80+ hour weeks) don't have to pretend so much. People who are more human (a euphemism for 'weaker', because everyone's terrified of the idea of someone actually being better than them) have to pretend more. But you see how the solution here can't just be to lower the bar of apparent strength- or even how it's not clear how you could possibly do that? Everyone still innately prefers to work with the more confident person, all else being equal! And for good reason! It's an okay heuristic! Even if you socially decree that 'it's okay to be weaker sometimes :) #behuman', people will just nod along and then go and reveal their preferences by who they choose to associate with anyway. And are they wrong? Do we want to rig things up so we select for CEOs who publicly show their weakness? I encourage you to try!

belorn 6y ago

Pretending that physical and mental health problems does not exist is a problem. It is sad aspect of human life that we reward social status and monetary rewards to those who are successful at hiding it, and punish those that either refuse or fail. It seems worth to ask if there is a better way. It also seems that in a time where we care about inclusivity and diversity we need to let go of the perception that only people with perfect health should be allowed to lead.

dpoochieni 6y ago
I think it is even innate to look up to those kind of leaders. Obviously there are exceptions but they inspire confidence (at least in me, n=1)
- jbay808 6y ago
  For what it's worth as a counterexample, many people attribute Dr. Bonnie Henry's display of emotional honesty and vulnerability at a live press conference as a masterclass in communication, an excellent example of leadership, and as having played an important role in British Columbia's (so far) successful coronavirus response. (Citations for the above are easy to find but I'm on mobile so I don't feel like digging up the links).
logarhythmic 6y ago
Maybe it's unfortunate, but nobody said being a leader is easy. It's why most (including myself) are not capable of such a role
- pm90 6y ago
  Could be, but I assume leadership roles are hard not for keeping up appearances but for the actual work involved in being a leader. That we see hiding emotions as a defining/filtering attribute seems something arbitrary that society decided was an attribute leaders should have.
  - antepodius 6y ago
    I don't think it's arbitrary at all. You want to pick strong, resilient leaders/trade partners/partners/employees. If you had some magical way to order people based on actual strength/resilience/grit, most people would (rightly) pick those highest on that scale. Unfortunately, the only thing we have to go on is apparent strength. So everyone learns to pretend, to whatever degree they think is necessary. Those who actually are that strong/resilient (for example, psychopaths monofocused on profit and power who don't care about working 80+ hour weeks) don't have to pretend so much. People who are more human (a euphemism for 'weaker', because everyone's terrified of the idea of someone actually being better than them) have to pretend more. But you see how the solution here can't just be to lower the bar of apparent strength- or even how it's not clear how you could possibly do that? Everyone still innately prefers to work with the more confident person, all else being equal! And for good reason! It's an okay heuristic! Even if you socially decree that 'it's okay to be weaker sometimes :) #behuman', people will just nod along and then go and reveal their preferences by who they choose to associate with anyway. And are they wrong? Do we want to rig things up so we select for CEOs who publicly show their weakness? I encourage you to try!