The Language Police
How Appropriate Is To Swear As a Leader
Hey, fellow Leader 🚀,
I am Artur, and welcome to my weekly newsletter. I am focusing on topics like Project Management, Innovation, Leadership, and a bit of Entrepreneurship. I am always open to suggestions for new topics. Feel free to reach out to me and share my newsletter if it helps you in any way.
Interestingly enough, this is a topic growing in popularity in some conversations about leadership. The discussion always revolves around how acceptable it is for a leader to use "inappropriate" language while leading. This can be a tricky topic to delve into, as there's no single correct answer, and it's highly dependent on the leader's environment. However, I would like to provide some general guidelines.
The Risk of Losing Credibility.
More often than not, the use of swear words in a leadership position can erode the leader's credibility and overall image. If used too frequently, this erosion will accelerate, making it more difficult for the leader to establish themselves as a subject matter expert. It may also demonstrate a lack of capacity for explaining difficult or stressful situations or topics, and could indicate a certain weakness.
For example, if a stressful moment for the project is approaching and the leader uses swear words while making a call to action or giving directions, it can, if done incorrectly, indicate that the leader also feels pressured. This undermines the image of someone who has control over their emotional intelligence and can think clearly in stressful or complex situations. However, one "F" word isn't a crowd of "F" words.
Whether we like it or not, agree with it or not, there's an incredible amount of credibility associated with looks and language. This may or may not be linked to reality, but the biases are undeniably present, and it can take time to deconstruct them or prove them wrong. I personally dislike wearing a suit and avoid using ties at all costs. However, sometimes I need to wear a suit to convey a particular message or to project a certain degree of authority and credibility. Language is an integral part of the process of building credibility.
For example, I'm biased against people wearing hats indoors. In some cultures, this is perfectly acceptable, but to me, it makes the person look like a clown. However, when I'm watching an interview or a podcast, some experts offer valuable insights using language and attire that I might initially disagree with. My judgment, at that point, is based solely on a first impression. If the person then demonstrates authority and credibility in the subject matter, I no longer care about their attire. They can wear the most ridiculous hat imaginable and swear as much as they need to; what truly matters to me is their grasp of the subject matter. Conversely, if that first impression falters and flaws are identified in their understanding of the topic, that person has lost credibility with me and will find it difficult to regain it.
One example of this was a Joe Rogan podcast debate between Graham Hancock and Flint Dibble. The debate's subject matter (archaeology) isn't particularly relevant to this discussion. My point here is that we had two distinct communicators: Graham Hancock, who was very precise in his wordings and clear in his message, and Mr. Dibble, who seemingly was never taught to remove his hat indoors and maintained a more relaxed tone of conversation. Initially, Graham was perceived as an outsider asking questions and fighting for credibility, while Mr. Dibble was seen as the expert and authority in the subject matter.
Long story short, I later learned that Mr. Dibble lied in the debate with Graham Hancock, and unfortunately, he wasn't fact-checked during the debate. This means that every time I see that hat appearing on TV, I simply fast-forward. It's due to my biases, and also because he was later caught lying, that his credibility was completely shattered for me. In the context of leadership, a leader should be careful about first impressions and the language used in those interactions: we never know when a second chance might arise or if one will even happen.
We Are All Humans
It's normal for an undesirable word to slip out from time to time. This often stems from the pressure or frustration of a given situation, and it simply shows our humanity. If it's just an occasional word, it can even be a funny moment that doesn't erode credibility. It was likely related to a specific case, and it just slipped away. It happens to all of us.
I have a story about a frustrating day with my internet. I was on back-to-back calls, and my Wi-Fi was awful, but I couldn't spare two minutes to restart the router. As an active participant in all my projects, I talk a lot. During one particular vendor call, my connection froze for long enough that I let slip a very typical Portuguese "F" word, and no, it wasn't "Fastel de Nata".
When the call resumed, the vendor looked surprised and asked what went wrong. For me, the call had hung, but for them, nothing had happened. When I explained my ongoing internet frustration and my inability to simply restart the router, we both laughed. For a brief moment, we weren't engaged in "corporate talk"; we were just human beings laughing at an everyday work-from-home situation. There was no erosion of credibility, no diminished confidence. Just a one-off expression of frustration that ended with a laugh.
It Really Depends On The Target Audience
The reason there's no clear "yes" or "no" answer to whether it's appropriate to swear stems from the audience. In IT, engineering teams generally operate at similar levels of politeness, though this can vary by geography and other factors. For instance, if you're working with a consulting firm, their employees often aren't even permitted to speak freely, making a swear word so blatantly out of place that even a slip could be detrimental to one's image.
However, if a leader is working with COBOL programmers, where the youngest team member might be a decade older than them, you might hear a lot of "F" and "S" words tossed around. In such environments, not using a certain degree of those words could actually erode the team's respect for the leader. It's not about being popular, but a leader should make an effort to blend in with the team and speak their language to effectively convey messages.
If a team perceives a leader as a "buttercup" or too "smooth", it can signal a lack of credibility, potentially causing challenges when trying to guide the team through difficult situations. In extreme cases, the team might even feel comfortable trying to manipulate a leader due to this perceived lack of strength. The point isn't to start swearing like some online trend of people wearing caps indoors on podcasts, but rather for the leader to be perceived as part of the "gang". Otherwise, they may fail to convey instructions due to a pure lack of authority and credibility.
That’s it. If you find this post useful, please share it with your friends or colleagues who might be interested in this topic. If you would like to see a different angle, suggest it in the comments or send me a message.
Cheers,
Artur