A lot of times when new leaders are assigned to oversee a team, they are naturally drawn to a style of fear based leadership. This is mainly because they suspect they may not be able to establish a hard boundary with the team if they come in too soft or friendly. Some people can make this style of leading work, while it is just an act for others.
A leader must lead with true authenticity in order to have the most effectiveness. [Tweet it!]
I fell into the same trap myself a while back. As a young leader, with little to no experience, I was tasked with leading a small team that the organization relied on to complete huge goals. Because of my lack of knowledge in this area, I was naturally drawn to implementing a fear based leadership style. I quickly figured out that what I was doing was not going to work. The best one can do at that point is to wipe the slate clean and start over, but it is easier said than done.
4 Drawbacks of Fear Based Leadership
1. The leader loses all credibility
If a leader has to default to a fear based leadership style, the team will quickly make their judgments. Leaders that have to rely on fear to lead a team are seen as incompetent. This is because the act of imposing fear to lead is seen as a way of hiding insecurities.
2. The team is afraid to act
Survival is a direct outcome of fear. Even if they were to come up with great ideas, they know from past experience their ideas are about to get shot down before they even had a chance. They will be afraid to speak up and innovation stalls.
3. The leader loses trust
Trust is a finite, unstable resource the successful leader holds. It can be hard to build and once lost, is very hard to get back. Once a leader develops an environment saturated with fear, it can be hard for them to build their trust with the team again.
4. The team retaliates
Nobody ever really falls for the fear act. In the beginning, compliance comes from trying to please for fear of rejection or dismissal. The act gets old quick, and the team will stop delivering. This only fuels the fear based ways of this type of leader. It is a vicious cycle.
As you can see, a collaborative leader is much more likely to get greater results than from creating a culture based on fear. It is imperative that as a leader, you develop your stance early on, but be real and authentic.
Have you ever been in an environment created by fear based leadership? If so, what was it like?
Photo Credit: Facing North East via Compfight cc
I have been in an environment where it was fear based leadership. It is created when the leader loves having that power over people and when they think people will do more for them out of fear than relationship. When fear is the driver, communication is the main thing that dies and in return the culture. Nobody wants to talk to a person that leads out of fear. I mean, who would want to?
I can’t think of a worse situation for any team member to be stuck in. It’s not a fun place to be in.
In the Marines, that was almost every “leader”, one who tried to get submission through fear. I hated it. It made me see that when I became a leader, I wanted to be the exact opposite of my former leaders and lead by example with respect. That mentality really helped me when I was finally put into a leadership position. Great post and insight. I just read a book called “Loving Our Kids On Purpose” and it presented some great ideas for leadership not only as a parent, but as a leader in general.
Vincent, I thought the exact same thing when I read this. Back in the Corps that was EVERY person with some rank, but I too learned quickly that it was a load of crap that didn’t really work. Once I got some rank I strived to be effective and assertive but genuine at the same time. I’m a bit abrasive by nature, but when I actually try to be “hard” it just comes off weird. When I am true to myself I am able to lead effectively and have the support of my team. Great post Leo.
Amazing what we can learn just by the mistakes of others. I’ll have to check that book out, it sounds interesting.
I like what you have said Adam. I am grateful the “fear-based” concept is getting the attention it deserves, and I am also somewhat critical of how we don’t nuance it often enough. The article I just published is entitled: “The Problem with Defining the Concept of ‘Fear’-based'” (free pdf go to http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3 and scroll down for document). I am looking to have more dialogue on this topic. Here is the full Abstract:
Abstract: Over the past 25 years of systematic research on fear and fearlessness, the author has found an ever-increasing use of the term “fear-based” by many and diverse authors, teachers, professionals and citizens-at-large. Particularly in the last decade the term, much like “culture of fear,” has become popular across disciplines and is reflective of an interest, by diverse peoples, in human motivation at this deepest core “emotional” level. Most every writer-critic, in a binary (polarized) way of thinking, believes (or argues) that “fear-based” is negative and destructive, if not the source of all conflict, evil, and pathology—it appears a universal knowledge and “truth” that this is so. Love-based is usually held up as the opposite (i.e., binary stance). Although the author (a fearologist) has also taken that binary positioning for many years, upon recent philosophical reflection and some research, this is less than a satisfactory position, especially without nuancing its validity more systematically and without having the critical dialogues required to ferret out what we are talking about. He concludes, typically, this increase of usage of the “fear-based” label, important as it is, has not been very enlightening but rather repetitive, moralistically judgmental and cliché, because of little to no conceptual defining, theoretical critiques, specific measurable assessments, or critical thinking of what to do with the term “fear-based” when it is opposed (for example) to “love-based” in real life situations, with real actors and organizations coming from either fear-based or love-based paradigms. The many (and increasing) critics of anything “fear-based” always implicitly or explicitly identify as not fear-based (i.e., more or less, love-based) and morally superior. Without more critical analysis of the concept and its uses, the author feels the labeling starts to become embedded in ideology, secular and religious, turning at worst into extreme violent ideologism—an oppressive way to think. This introductory paper, a philosophical reflection based on fearlessness (and a critical integral approach), offers an initial discussion of these problems of using the label “fear-based” and offers some recommendations of how to improve our methodologies, claims of truth, and teaching (i.e., education about, for example, fear and love as root motivational constructs).
-R. Michael Fisher, Ph.D.
Fearologist
Hey Mike, thank you for stopping by and commenting. I appreciate your research as a “Fearologist”. It’s apparent you’re passionate about this topic and welcome your input.
Great Leo, and I realized I addressed Adam in my response and meant you. Keep up the good work and may future dialogues unfold.