Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
Thanks for your opinion, when I start this thread I was guessing that would be controversial, nevertheless if you read with attention my settence and I quote "Strong Leadership STARTS in the Power of Communication" , starts is the key word I'm not say that's the only one , I'm saying that if you fail to communicate you not even probably have opportunity for negotiation for instance, dealing with people is all about communication and a few more.
Exists a study that emphasizes that 90% of the reasons why projects fail are due communication problems in it's every dimensions.
More PMI address this problem in document -
THE HIGH COST OF LOW PERFORMANCE:
THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF COMMUNICATIONS
Saying that one out of five projects is unsuccessful due to
Communication is a wide field and certainly a prerequisite of leadership.
How is a leader supposed to link with their followers? It is communication in all it forms (e.g. verbal, visual).
I do not think that in any case a strong leader has to communicate much, sometimes some words stick and convey a vision and the rest is history: 'I have a dream', 'embrace for impact', 'let's roll'.
Thank you for you opinion, I do agree with you, however if a strong leader has to communicate much or less I think it will depend of the needs of his followers, project, mission and of the environment .etc
While I do agree that being a good subject matter expert in a certain domain does not automatically qualify you for a leadership position, leading people from a certain line of work does require experience in that particular line of work. Imagine appointing as the head of a project management team someone that has never worked as a project manager.
In my opinion there is no such thing as generic leadership. Leadership exists in certain contexts and a good leader requires a good mixture of hard (technical) and soft skills.
Being a good communicator is an important skill the leader must have but equally important is the knowledge that enables the leader to speak in the technical language of his/her team.
Also the non-technical leader can't get the best out of his team because he doesn't really understand what are the technical challenge the team members are facing and as such he can't determine what are the strengths and the weakness of the team members.
Very interesting your question
Now that we are in the "toolbox" era, communication, in my opinion, is a leadership tool
I do not know if we are in the toolbox era , because we always had tools and toolboxes the only thing that changed between the past an now is that the tools are better, others are different, others were replaced but the toolbox still exits probably is bigger.
Thanks for your comment
We agree when you write: "the only thing that changed between the past an now is that the tools are better, others are different, others were replaced"
But, the essence of my answer to your question remains: it is important not to confuse concept (leadership) with tools used (communication)
Unfortunately I have witnessed, in recent times, this style of confusion
One could argue that communication is at least half the job of leaders.
It's not the whole job, obviously. One has to have critical thinking skills and be able to plan at the strategic and operational levels. But if you can't communicate your intent (the "Why"), then your people can't bring about your vision.
Toastmasters had identified ten competencies under its previous education program, beyond communications. I based the leadership skills assessment deliverable on those competencies.
Hello Alexandre: I followed your advice and thought about strong leaders I know. They all were excellent communicators - both written and verbal. They also were inspirational and motivational beyond being skilled at their industry. From my perspective, I do believe all strong leaders have to be excellent communicators.
Please login or join to reply