Across cultures, people use two fundamental judgments to assess the quality of others: warmth and competence. People who express warmth are more likeable and comfortable to be around. We find more similarity, affinity, and positivity with those we experience as warm and caring.
On the other hand, those we perceive as highly competent will increase our confidence and our energy to get things done. We think more deeply, learn more quickly, and feel more resourceful when in the presence of a competent person. We prefer people who express both warmth and competence.
Fascinatingly, research shows there is a tendency for people to view warmth and competence as at odds with each other. Generally speaking, we don’t believe caring and expertise are complementary.
To the contrary, we see warmth as making it harder to project competence and view demonstrating competence as making it harder to be likeable. So, we have to make a choice. Which dimension do we establish first in a relationship?
In most relationships and social situations, people privilege warmth over competence. In order to be liked and seen positively, we are taught to be agreeable before being disagreeable and to establish affinity and likeability before demonstrating what we know and how expert we are.
The order of likeable-before-expert works well in most social situations because the primary goal of acceptance typically outweighs the desire to be viewed as smart. The consequences of being disliked in most relationships are far more severe than the outcomes of being perceived as inexpert. So, we go for warmth and likeability first.
But we hold leaders to a different standard. Leaders who work hard to be liked and to be seen as warm, relationally caring people are often seen as less competent. While we want to follow leaders who are both warm and competent, we value their expertise more highly.
If we have to accept a weaker dimension, we prefer leaders who are less likeable, as long as they are highly competent. Of course, good leaders strive to project both warmth and competence, but the order is important. Whereas everyday people benefit from being warm first and competent second, the opposite is true for leaders.
The leadership lesson here is clear: When engaging others, the best leaders demonstrate competence first and then show people they are warm and likeable. Leaders who have a desperate need to be liked violate this rule and are often seen as less competent as a result.
The natural tendency to be liked and to please others is a powerful need for all people, but is navigated differently for successful leaders. By demonstrating their competence first, they show people they are worth following. They give people the confidence they need to excel.
Warmth and caring seal the deal but don’t carry the day. For good leaders, competence comes first.
This is counterintuitive but true. I like the equation trust = character + competence from The Speed of Trust by Stephen Covey. The mistake I made early on as I transitioned into a CEO role was first emphasizing character and culture building, neglecting competence building. We're running a business, which, if operating well, represents job security for the livelihoods of the teams we're responsible for. Whether people are willing to admit it or not, confidence in producing results is the most important. While I don't regret the time I spent figuring out my leadership values and principles, I wish I had emphasized the skills I needed to run a business effectively. This is one of the fundamental dichotomies of leadership to hold in tension.
Wow, you went deep today. I love it. I wonder if the everyday need for warmth and caring first stems from our developmental psychology - a mother's love is one of the first things we experience and is important for establishing trust and relationship building skills. I find myself giving people more slack if they are smart/competent and lacking warmth or other interpersonal skills. I think we all want to be on the winning team and sometimes 'nice guys finish last'. One observation I've made over the years with very smart/competent leaders is they fall into two buckets: 1) I'm the smartest person in the room and I make sure everyone knows it; and 2) I'm the smartest person in the room, but I don't have to 'flex' all the time. People will follow both, but I think trust and commitment run deeper with #2 leaders.