Mark van Vugt, Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Kent, thinks that leadership is genetic. His theory, published in the journal “Personality and Social Psychology Review”, states that leadership is the product of human evolutionary history and, as such, played a crucial role in the success of humans and is now deeply embedded in our genes; so much so that the human brain possesses a hardwired leadership prototype, a fixed idea of how a leader should behave and what they should look like, that is innate and difficult to change.

A few thoughts from his theory:

• For millions of years there was no formal leadership in human groups. Essentially, it was the best hunter or the fiercest warrior that emerged as leader. In present times, we still evaluate leaders in that way. The most admired leaders are the ones that help us defeat an enemy group – or unite various factions.

• Living for millions of years in small groups with close personal contacts between leaders and followers has ensured that what we are looking for in leadership is an intimate personal touch. Ideally we would like our leaders to know us personally and take an active interest in our lives. Successful leaders are still the ones that make people feel special.

• Leaders who try to dominate followers are particularly disliked. In ancestral times, overbearing and selfish leaders were simply ignored, ridiculed or sometimes even killed. This egalitarian ethos is still visible in modern society.

Lee Strasberg, the famous acting coach, said, "I can train you in anything except that for which you have no talent." Everyone has areas of lesser and greater talents, and while it can be helpful to acknowledge weaknesses and seek guidance or training to develop those areas, there is nothing more frustrating than to strive vainly to excel in areas of endeavor where one has little or no natural ability.

We know intuitively that Mr. Strasberg's reasoning is sound, but leaders seldom apply it in the workplace. Instead, most workers report that they are singled out for notice only when there is a problem with their performance. Here is a question I often ask my audiences: If your boss told you that she noticed something about your performance and wanted you to come to her office to discuss it, would you assume that she had noticed an area of your special competence and wanted to bring it to your attention? Among the majority of audience members who respond with nervous laughter, only a few hands raise.
Bosses tend to notice and comment on weaknesses and mistakes more than they comment on talents and strengths. While continuous learning and self-improvement are valid concepts for future success, focusing solely on what is lacking leads to an unbalanced evaluation of employees' worth and potential. It is no wonder then that most workers have problems taking risks and confronting uncertain situations.

Certainly, if you manage people or lead a team, a powerful change-management strategy is to help people focus on their strengths and find ways to build on them that is congruent with the direction the organization is taking. It’s the same thing in dealing with organizational change. Approaches (such as Appreciate Inquiry) that look at what an organization already does well - and builds on those accomplishments to be even better - energizes and stimulates people to change because it is based on talents already possessed.

Just back from Vancouver and the IABC conference. My speech (“I heard it Through the Grapevine”) was based on research that I recently completed comparing the grapevine with formal communications channels.

Here are a few highlights from that presentation:

The Grapevine is the informal, but powerful communication medium in every organization. The grapevine is pervasive and, according to my research, highly persuasive.

We can’t stop the grapevine. And we can’t outrun it. Word spreads like wildfire from person to person. And now blogs have become the “grapevine on steroids.”

While formal communications are important and effective, the grapevine should not be ignored. Understood and optimized, the grapevine can be a powerful vehicle to align the company around important messages.

The grapevine accelerates
• When there is a lack of formal communication.
• Anytime there is an ambiguous or uncertain situation
• When there are no sanctioned channels for venting
• When change is impending, and
• When there are heavy-handed efforts to shut it down.

There is a perception gap between senior and lower management. Lower managers are more likely to recognize the existence, the conditions under which the rumor mill accelerates, and the benefits of tapping into the grapevine.

Managers can influence the grapevine by
• Understanding the conditions that increase grapevine activity
• Respecting employees desire to know
• Increasing participation and influence
• Sharing the bad news as well as the good,
• Monitoring the grapevine, and
• Acting promptly to correct mis-information.

The grapevine may in fact be beneficial for an organization
• There is some information that people can only get from the grapevine. “If you want to see what insurance coverage is offered, check the brochure or intranet. But if you want to know what it really takes to be successful around here, ask the grapevine.”
• People can spot problems early and prepare/compare reactions.
• Individuals can seize opportunities.
• One can build a reputation by positioning yourself as a “hub” in the grapevine network.
• Bond with co-workers. “Gossip greases the social wheel.”
• Weed out cheaters and liars. The grapevine exposes “free riders” – those individuals who don’t contribute, but benefit from the group’s efforts.
• Let off steam.
• Gain power and control. People who are connected to the grapevine know more about what’s going on their companies that people who don’t gossip.

One study found that people receive 70% of their information from informal networks vs. only 30% from formal communications. Yet, most employee communications programs focus almost exclusively on the formal communications, ignoring the informal networks. Look at the grapevine not as a problem, but as an additional communication channel to be monitored and harnessed.

The law of the few: If you want effective, sustainable communication in any organization, you must reach a small number of people who are responsible for most communication.

How do you find the small number of employees who are really influencers?
• Volunteers: Pitney Bowes (PB Voice)
• Nomination: Disney’s Communication Ambassadors
• Identification: Social Network Analysis

Social network analysis starts with a survey of people in a network, asking whom they rely on for information – whom they find the most credible and trustworthy. This information is then used to identify the key influencers.

To influence the influencers,
• Find out what they think, feel and are currently saying about the organization.
• Train them to maximize their communication skills
• Inform them upfront about the back story (what got us to this place)
• Solicit their opinions, ask their advice and utilize their feedback.
• Influencing the conversation: “You must encapsulate the spirit of your organization, package it in strategic statements and then emphasize those statements repeatedly – so the message becomes part of the conversation.” Paul Danos, Dean, Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business.