[kitchencabinetforum] LEADERS AND OTHER STRANGERS

Strong leaders may also be worse managers a new study has found because they give off such an impression of power that their colleagues' opinions are stifled. While it is important for leaders to exude authority and competence, the evidence suggests that appearing too powerful will inhibit their team members from expressing an opinion. This harms the ability to make good decisions by excluding arguments and evidence from the decision-making process.

The study's authors, Connson Locke of the London School of Economics(LSE) and Cameron Anderson of the University of California, point out that to dominate the decision-making process may be damaging in a business world loaded with specialist and technical information where team members often know more about a specific subject than their leader and where participative decision-making is accepted as more effective.

The study, entitled The Downside of Looking Like a Leader, involved two laboratory experiments. In the first, participants were allocated roles as supervisors or subordinates and worked in matching pairs to make a decision. Observers measured and analysed their behaviour to see to what extent the supervisor used the body-language of command and how much the subordinate contributed to their discussion. The results showed that the more the supervisor adopted a powerful demeanour, the smaller the subordinate's contribution. The results were the same regardless of the gender of the two participants.

In the second experiment, a researcher played the role of leader, working with subordinates in a joint exercise to pick one of three candidates for a job based on a written profile of each one. The researcher would always argue for the least-qualified candidate for the role, to see if the subordinate (who was unaware of the leader's role as part of the research team) would agree with the decision to choose the least-qualified candidate. When the researcher adopted a powerful demeanour, 69 per cent of subordinates agreed. When he did not, only 42 per cent agreed.

However the research also suggested that the reluctance of subordinates to disagree was based not on fear but on an assumption of competence on the part of their leader.

Locke points out there is a clear downside to appearing too much of a leader because it inhibits employee voice in participative decision-making. Even when a leader invites his or her team to speak up they may still hesitate because they react to nonverbal expressions of power such as posture, frequent eye-contact and a louder voice –behaviours which leaders are encouraged to use because they contribute to an image of competence and confidence.

Locke notes that in practical terms, leaders need to know that simply asking their team members for input may not be enough to get it. Because executive training often teaches the importance of a powerful demeanour, managers may not be aware that there is also a drawback to behaving in this way.

Locke's results are obvious in many European political parties with strong leaders. Most members of these parties never voice their opinions. Basil Venitis points out two roommates at Amherst College of Massachusetts, Anthony Samaras and George Papandreou, lead the two most corrupt political mafias on Earth, Nea Democratia and Pasok. Papandreou is the premier of Greece, and Samaras is the leader of opposition. Papandreou participated in the kleptocratic government of Simitis, and Samaras participated in the kleptocratic government of Caramanlis. They are very good friends, but in public it's their job to accuse each other. Love in private, hate in public, and omerta galore!

Venitis muses that Papandreou is a Don Quixote who is tilting at the windmills of speculators. Papaconstantinou is a Sancho Panza who helps Papandreou to attack imaginary kallikantzaroi. The quixotic adventures of Papandreou lead nowhere, because he is surrounded by Graecokleptocrats who play farces on him. The cruel practical jokes eventually will lead Don Quixote to a great melancholy.

Rabblerouser Evangelos Venizelos is the brain of Graecokleptocracy. Venizelos has introduced many unfair stupid laws which protect Graecokleptocrats from everything. The most stupid law is that all electronic recordings of Graecokleptocrat crimes are illegal! If a journalist broadcasts proof of kickbacks, the journalist goes to jail, but the Graecokleptocrat who received the kickbacks is completely unaffected, enjoying complete immunity!

Graecokleptocrats continue to spend like there is no tomorrow. Premier George Papandreou is the neplusultra of spending! He is a junket junky, staying at the presidential suites of the most expensive hotels that cost 10,000 euros per day. He has a cabinet of fifty ministers, and has thirty personal consultants. For such a small country, Papandreou does not need more than five ministers and one personal consultant. He definitely does not care about the taxpayers' hard-earned money.

Venitis muses that Greek Ministry of Economy is George Orwells' Ministry of Plenty or Miniplenty in Newspeak. Miniplenty imposes heavy taxation, especially VAT, overregualtion, heavy antitrust, and controls prices, salaries, and domestic production. Miniplenty publishes false claims of having raised the standard of living in dystopia, when it has, in fact, reduced production and increased misery. Miniplenty's concocted-statistics are Trojan horses sent to Brussels, in order to get bailouts and avoid penalties.