How the leader proceeds in the face of negativity and complaints says far more about the leader than the constituents.
I recently had cause to reflect on something a good friend of mine said a few years ago: “When disagreeing, the negative opinion can seem to be more informed than the positive opinion. We should be careful with that.”
In the ensuing years and in various contexts, I heard my friend’s voice in my ear on more than one occasion and I have not only come to believe that what he said is true, I also believe that how an educational leader (or any leader for that matter) addresses responds to negative opinions, especially in the realm of decision making, says much about how that leader leads overall.
Leaders must contend with the reactions of those being led – both the positive and the negative reactions. Part of leadership is to put the positive in perspective while engaging the negative and sorting through both to discern a direction or to uncover truth.
Upon which kind of reaction does a leader spend the most time?
Upon which should a leader spend the most time?
There is a reason – and it is a bad one – that the old adage “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” is shared with such regularity: because it is true. Those who complain often and loudly get an audience, get recognition, get traction. Those who boisterously and repeatedly make arguments find themselves in administrators’ offices, whether to be heard or to be reprimanded. Most saliently, it seems to me that those who express the negative are too frequently regarded among the intelligentsia of faculties and staff.
Negative opinions are not the most informed, but they often seem that way.
Why is that? Why do negative opinions seem to be the smart opinions?
The responsibility for this challenge, while it is a shared one, falls more squarely upon the leader than upon the complainer. How the leader addresses and repairs the squeaky wheel is critical. How the leader proceeds in the face of negativity and complaints says far more about the leader than the constituents.
If the leader gives equal weight to each complaint with limited discernment about what is actually central and informed and what is not, that does not speak well of her leadership. If the leader gives too little weight or cannot distinguish what should be handled and what should be turfed, that, too, is a significant problem.
But the leaders who feel that every negative opinion must be addressed, countered, taken on and confronted because there is a sneaking suspicion that the rationale behind complaints is somehow better reasoned and, therefore, has more validity that other thoughts are just wrong minded.
It can feel as though negativity is sharper, smarter, and better developed than positivity, but that simply is not the case. How a leader deals with the predilection in himself and others to jump to this conclusion can make or break the leader in critical moments and at critical times because complaints can underscore crisis. The leaders’ response to them can promote crisis.
Watch leaders you admire handle negativity. Watch leaders around you address complaint. They will be confronted by both. What they do when confronted tells a story about their leadership and it is an important one.