stock photo Pixabay
Linus Torvolds who founded Linux 25 years ago, a successful open source software organization, admits to being a jerk of a leader. Google, PayPal, and Amazon are among its clients, so most of us in some way use his product every day. Despite Linux being “open source,” he’s the one who decides whether any new lines of software code meet his standards. In this article, he admits he’s been a jerk and is giving himself a leave of absence to learn new leadership behavior. The leader sets the tone for culture and respect, and in describing thousands of abusive posts he sent, up to this point Torvolds’ behavior fostered an environment where abuse spread. While he is proud of his product, he goes on to say that he is not proud of his communication with others.
As an executive coach, I commend the changes that can come of this self-awareness. I think people can change. What can we learn from this? Why would leaders behave in a way that demeans and abuses others?
Tovardes mistook professionalism for insincere and ineffective communication, apparently believing that brutally expressed opinions were an effective feedback tool. Somewhere along the way, he fused professionalism with fake communication with lying.
False Equivalents
You do not have to choose between lying and being respectful.
One source of his confusion is mistaking one idea for another, that is, making a false equivalent. Not having interviewed him, I am responding only to his own quoted words. He apparently believed that being professional is equivalent to “fake politeness, back stabbing and lying.” Perhaps that old belief will be revisited during his self-imposed leave. Whenever we confuse one action with a guaranteed other outcome, it’s a clue that there is black and white thinking. This is already an alarm, because that exaggerates the problem and limits the possible solutions. “Equivalence equations” defy the reality of nuance and alternative conclusions. It seems to Torvolds that there is not a way to be professional and at the same time honest.
Confusing or fusing respectfulness with lying is a distortion which limits leadership options. It limits leaders’ ability to parse the differences and of course blinds him to other more emotionally intelligent opportunities.
Understanding these stances as two ends of a spectrum helps. Let’s explore one end: It is possible to overdo professionalism and politeness. Imagine that at that end is an insincerely, obsequious, sycophant style of politeness. In that scenario, niceness matters more than truth, more than effectiveness, more than quality. On the other end of the polarity is a scenario where uncensored unedited demeaning and harshly delivered judgment masquerades as fact. No leader is justified in telling anyone else that they are worthless, produce garbage, (as he admits to doing). In the most self-interested way, abuse does not promote his own goals. Generally, abusive behavior is not motivating, and does not produce a higher quality result.
These false equivalents if unexamined, can interfere with your actual goal.
Here are ways to examine mistaken conclusions taken as truth. Executive coaching helps this self-reflection:
• If I fuse A with B, what won’t (might not) happen?
o If I fuse professionalism with lying I won’t act professionally because that makes me a liar
• If I fuse A with B, what will happen?
o If I fuse professionalism with lying, I will be an unprofessional jerk thinking that’s honesty
• If I don’t fuse A with B, what won’t happen?
o If I don’t fuse professionalism with lying, I won’t be afraid to be respectfully critical
• If I don’t fuse A with B, what will happen?
o If I don’t fuse professionalism with lying I will be respectful which will result in a productive culture which attracts and retains talent
Values Hierarchy
Another issue at play, we can speculate, is confusion about a hierarchy of values. Or maybe an entrenchment about hierarchy of values. Either way, it’s worth reflecting on how something as potentially clarifying as values can lead one into confusion. A simple example: you may value order, but place respectful relationship above order, thus you may not scream at someone whose office is a mess. That hierarchy of values may inform your decisions not to berate someone whose organizing system seems chaotic. However, if we are not aware of the values impacting an interaction, the results can leave one in a state of confusion. Recently a client was puzzled at his own reaction to an infraction at work. Generally considerate and kind, he found himself intolerant and unyielding with a staff member. This was not his normal behavior, so he paused to examine his own reaction. He realized it was due to a lack of integrity by that person. For him in that case, lack of integrity trumped his normal relationship-connecting behavior. Being able to see that helped him understand his own reaction better, and helped him understand his values hierarchy. It also enabled him to create an effective approach.
The more we know about our values hierarchy, the more we can either test it, to be sure it applies to a given situation, and test it to make sure it is appropriate for our current maturity. For example, one client was raised to be seen and not heard, and carried that as a top value into her professional life. This reluctance to speak up, for fear of not being supported or being contradicted with hostility, greatly limited her options until she could see that that reaction was outmoded, and no longer fit her adult leadership role. It took that level of awareness, and a willingness to test and experiment in small ways, for her to move out of that automatic reaction.
We all have well-worn paths of behavior created by values hierarchy, which may be visible or invisible. Fusing or confusing one belief with another limits options, for example, “if I am understanding with staff, I will be taken advantage of.” Or, even seemingly positive values, “if I am loyal I will always be protected.”
Identity
A third source of potential confusion to self-awareness is about identity. For example, Torvolds’s sense of himself as an entrepreneurial leader who clawed his way up may have been seared into him. The ways we identify: as an engineer, physician, police officer, political party, can take hold at a deep level as well. I have had clients who most resonate with the identity of being a rebel, or a creative thinker who won’t follow rules. Another whose identity was about being a neat and reliable accountant; another a pioneer for advancement of an ethnic group. “I am a warrior who wins at any cost,” is another identity which may or may not support one’s goals. These unexamined identities may warrant a fresh look. The identity may subsequently remain in place, with even greater commitment, or may benefit from revision based on new values or purpose which matters more.
Examination and self-reflection improves effectiveness. That’s really the point. Of course, Tovardes is not the only self-proclaimed jerk manager. Previously he was blinded to the options. But apparently he sees that there was a cost, and that there are new ways he can learn to communicate.
Summary
• Explore and test comparisons that have been fused
• Name your own values hierarchy
• Examine and update roles which have comprised your identity