The Importance of Crisis Communication Skills for Police Chiefs & Command Staffs

Edward Brown, M.S., of Core Edge Police Professional Development (A subsidiary of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute) provides answers to questions about the necessity for law enforcement leaders to develop stellar crisis communication skills.

Q: How do you define crisis communication?

Brown: Businessdictionary.com defines Crisis Communication as, the effort taken by a company to communicate with the public and stockholders when an unexpected event occurs that could have a negative impact on the company's reputation. This can also refer to the efforts of business or governmental entities to inform employees or the public of a potential hazard such as an impending storm, which could have a catastrophic impact.

As it relates to law enforcement, it is the proper response to any event that can potentially demoralize a department like officer injuries, deaths, budget cuts or employee furloughs.

Q: Is it your contention that departmental spokespersons should not be left to handle crisis communications?

Brown: the chief of police should handle critical events that affect the morale and productivity of a police department. The basic ones I described earlier such as officer injuries and deaths are the worst events within a police department. These incidents keep chiefs up at night.  When an officer goes down, no one but the chief should communicate to the department and the public about the impact, sorrow, and future direction of the department.  Additionally, budget cuts and employee furloughs cut into quality of life concerns within a police department. Although these situations may be out of the control of a police chief, the chief should be the one to deliver the news, its impact, and the period of the condition.

Q: What trends have you observed that make crisis communication so important?

Brown: The world has changed drastically within the last twenty-five years. When I joined the Atlanta Police Department in 1988, we took orders without questions as long as they were lawful. The new breed of police officers is different. The Millennial Generation requires more answers and explanations.  I have even heard of instances of a young officer being on a cell phone while talking with a citizen on an emergency call.  This mindset requires a different level of inspiration and communication.  In addition, departmental loyalty has diminished. The loyalty among law enforcement members, once held, is no longer the case.  Individualism has become a cancer within police departments.  Chiefs of police and command staffs have to step up and become better mouthpieces to these changes.

Q: The challenges that you outline do not seem unique. Aren’t all corporate and public sectors in society dealing with similar challenges?

Brown: Yes, but it’s more dire and extreme when the protectors of civilization shirk their responsibilities. If you get bad customer service at a restaurant or retail store, you merely go to another store. Where do you go when your police department does not provide you adequate service? How do you feel when you believe crime is rampant and no one cares? Your last recourse is uprooting your family and relocating somewhere else.  When you feel your police department is inadequate, it shakes up your entire world.

Q: What would you say are the components of crisis communication?  

Brown: The ability to articulate the frustrations of your employees and the public and provide tangible solutions. If there are no immediate remedies available, you need the ability to inspire hope.  Have you seen the typical police interview or press conference? They are unemotional, full of facts, and robotic. If you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all. Police chiefs and command staffs have to become a cross between psychologists and ministers. They have to be able to dissect the emotional impact of a problem, speak to it, and resolve it.   All in a way that provides the same reassurance parishioners receive when they go to church on Sunday.  It’s a big challenge for police chiefs and command staffs, but one they can master.

Q: What advice would you give police chiefs and command staffs to improve their crisis communication skills?

Brown: First, embrace the notion that being an effective leader requires stellar communication skills in all situations. Second, become more adept at quickly establishing rapport with people, one-on-one and in groups. Third, control media messages by setting the stage to fit departmental needs; not the needs of the media. Finally, become a master at dissecting the psychological needs of constituents when advanced communication skills are necessary. Become an expert in human nature. Walk into the lion’s den and take a seat.  When you know the motivations, pains, and fears of the people around you, you are in a better position to control outcomes.

For more information or to register for the workshop, “Officer Down: How to Develop Effective Crisis Communication Skills for Law Enforcement Leaders,” visit: http://policerecruitmentandselection.core-edge.com/events

How Using the Best Practices of Charismatic Leaders Can Help HR Managers Inspire Employee Productivity in a Competitive Market

Edward Brown, M.S., of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute provides questions and answers about the impact of charismatic leadership on employee development.

Q: Based on your research on charismatic leadership, what is the single most important trait that charismatic leaders exhibit that can help HR managers inspire employee productivity?

Brown: Based on my research, charismatic leaders have a preternatural ability for understanding human nature. I was in a meeting once where managers were trying to persuade an employee to consider their perspective on a policy change. A senior manager who had been quietly listening all along tapped into the employee’s concerns. He essentially asked, “If you were in the shoes of the people most impacted, how would you feel and what aspects of the policy would you change?” Those two questions changed the dynamics of the meeting. The senior manager channeled into what the employee was feeling, which is the reason she was asked to attend the meeting in the first place. Charismatic leaders are adept at getting to the core of a problem by uncovering the nuance of nonverbal communication.

Q: So, do HR managers need to listen more to the nonverbal cues of employees?

Brown: Active listening is part of it, but it is broader than that. HR managers could benefit from a paradigmatic shift that suggests that self-interested, motivated employees will either make or break corporate productivity. The “Inside Game” in today’s economy is all about tying the self-interests of employees to corporate missions. Psychological contracts between managers and employees have to be formed during the hiring process with benchmarks along the way.

Q: In this context, how is “Psychological Contracts” being defined?

Brown: A psychological contract is a mental agreement that addresses the self-interests and expectations between parties within the scope of the relationship.

Q: Why is this doctrine important for HR managers?

Brown: It is important because during the hiring process, the manager carries all the power. The best way to wield power is acting like it doesn’t exist. By tapping into the self-interests of employees as they enter the company, you make it about the rewards for specific performance. As a superpower on the world’s stage, the U.S. does it all the time. In reality, the U.S. can forcefully persuade most countries to act according to U.S. interests. However, the U.S. has learned that gentle persuasion is a more effective way of influencing foreign policy, particularly when the rest of the world is watching what we do. The same is true at the micro level. The HR manager has hiring power, but can persuade a prospective employee that his or her self-interest is served in conjunction with the mission of the company.

Q: So, by emulating the persuasiveness of charismatic leaders in cultivating employee self-interest, HR managers can inspire employee loyalty and productivity?

Brown: Yes. By understanding that the game of corporate life is about getting people to do what they sometimes do not want to do, employee productivity increases as well as earned rewards for all parties involved. Not through corporate good will, but shared self-interests.

For more information on how to keep motivated employees from becoming demotivated, visit:
http://coreedgehrworkforcesolutions.core-edge.com

Creating Loyalty within Employees & Followers through Charismatic Leadership

Researchers on the charismatic leadership model often lambast charismatic leaders for being selfish, self-absorbed, and narcissistic in their dealings with followers. The same researchers criticize followers for being, helpless, mindless sycophants who exhibit codependent traits that rob them of their self-identity. However, very few, if any, researchers have embraced the mutually beneficial and symbiotic relationship between charismatic leaders and followers. Philosopher Thomas Carlyle postulated that individuals seem to be hard-wired for hero worshipping. In other words, if there were no demigods to worship, individuals would somehow create their own. Cicero and Pierro (2007) hypothesized that charismatic leadership is positively associated with followers’ work effort, job involvement, job satisfaction, and performance, and negatively associated with turnovers. Cicero and Pierro’s finding agreed with past researchers that charismatic leadership was positively related to work group identification. Also there was a correlation between charismatic leadership and organizational outcomes. Cicero and Pierro results seem to suggest that there is a direct connection between charismatic leadership and employee performance in that employees have a greater proclivity to work optimistically and productively when a charismatic leader is at the helm. De Hoogh et al. (2004) drew a correlation between charismatic leadership and subordinates’ positive work attitudes. Employees had a greater willingness to invest in efforts to achieving organizational goals.

Galvin, Balkundi, and Waldman (2010) discussed the ability of charismatic leaders to develop disciples or surrogates within an organization. The authors said these surrogates promote, defend, and model behavior after the charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders identify and train surrogates, either formally or informally, which allows charismatic leaders to have influence in distant areas within an organization. Surrogates create networks, social processes, and flow information within the organization. These networks serve as means for the charismatic leader to influence an organization by dispersing information. Although a rouge surrogate could harm a networked system by sending information oppositional to the goals of the charismatic leader, the authors note that surrogates are selected to occupy their positions based on the supportive behavior they exhibit in line with the desires of the charismatic leader.

In many respects, narcissism is the fuel that prompts charismatics to go farther than the average individual in achieving goals within and without crisis situations. Eminent psychologist Alfred Adler described this aspect of narcissism as the “Superiority Complex.” Maniacci (2007) asserts:

They see others from the vantage point of who is above—or below—whom. If they are not on top, they feel grossly inferior. Others tend to feel inadequate around them. They are overly responsible, too involved, and far too controlling. When confronted with the possibility of not being superior, these people blame, attack, and criticize others. They may be wrong, but others are more wrong than they are. They hate the notion of not having a purpose in life, and they often work too hard and far too long. Winning is everything, and they are willing to cut corners, cheat, or even hurt others if they perceive themselves as losing. Winning is not the only thing: It is everything. They are excessively concerned with their appearance, and while they often take care of their outward appearance through dressing well and superb hygiene, they often neglect their inner health, both emotionally and physically. They are far too busy achieving to be worried about such things, and after all, they are special, so they don't have to worry about diets, sleep, and their health—nothing could ever happen to them (p.138-139).

When these characteristics are exemplified within charismatics, it is often seen as “missionary zeal” and “the love and concern” for people. In actuality, people are mere pleasantries utilized to implement and bring to fruition an ultimate goal. “In advance of performance, narcissists seem to care most about attaining desirable rewards associated with meeting or exceeding performance goals, and they typically show less concern about the prospect of failing to achieve the desired goal” (Wallace, et al, 2009. P. 79). It is important to note that these vainglorious acts are cultivated by an enabling culture. Western culture, which relishes and embraces its Judeo-Christian leanings, inherently support the narcissism of individuals generally and charismatics, specifically. A tenet which espouses man being created in the image of an omnipotent God-head, by definition relegates man to a superior position. If everything is created by a superior being than how did man become the inheritor of this largesse? Man’s self-importance, through scriptural edict or ethnic domination, saw fit to find self-defining roles to pit his esteem against real or perceived adversaries. “Throughout history, the pretense of masculine superiority has had to be continually reinforced by patriarchal laws, religion, and cultural rituals and ceremonies that elevated men and made woman subservient, all too often through the application of brute power and violence. The appearance of harmony between the genders was more often the experience of subjugation by fear, male dominance followed by the submissive acts of women who had been stripped of power and status in the world” (Bitter, 2008, p.271).

Essentially, the symbiotic relationship between charismatic leaders and followers is based on the need of charismatic leaders to be adored by followers and the need of followers to adore charismatic leaders. In this sense, both parties are getting their needs met. Researchers who denigrate this notion rely on an over-idealistic, extremely sanguine reality of human nature. To deny the personality, experiences, and environmental influences of charismatic leaders is disavowing the evolutionary process that brings these individuals into existence. In addition, the inherent need of followers to achieve hope and certainty in their lives via religious affiliation or charismatic leadership is also disavowed by researchers who attempt to intellectually disconnect an emotional connection.

Instead of researchers attempting to divide the needs of charismatic leaders and followers as a means of establishing some utopic idealism, it would be better to allow the intellectual and emotional relationship to exist between charismatic leaders and followers. In short, allow the charismatic leader to be loved by adoring followers and followers to find encouragement, inspiration, and hope within the ideals of the charismatic leader. Invariably, researchers cannot have it both ways---organizational development, social cohesion, and collectivism at the behest of rugged individualism, hopelessness, and barbarism. The idea of the fully-contained individual devoid of the need for external support, emotional attachment, and unadulterated self-confidence is illusory. Such understanding by researchers suggests a naiveté and myopia about human nature and the world that is counterproductive to social progress.



References


Bitter. J. (2008 Fall). Reconsidering narcissism: An Adlerian-feminist response to the article in the special section of the journal of individual psychology. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 64(3), 270-279.


Cicero, L., and Pierro, A. (2007 Oct.) Charismatic leadership and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of employees’ work-group identification. International Journal of Psychology, 42(5), 297-306.

De Hoogh, A., den Hartog, D., Koopman, P., Thierry, H., van den Berg P., van der Weide, J., and Wilderom, C. (2004 Dec.). Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 13(4), 447-471.

Galvin, B., Balkundi, P., and Waldman, D.A. (2010 Jul.). Spreading the word: The role of surrogates in charismatic leadership. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 477-494.

Maniacci, M.P. (2007 Summer). His majesty the baby: Narcissism through the lens of individual psychology. Journal of Individual Psychology, 63(2), 136-145.

Wallace. H.M., Ready, C.B. , and Weitenhagen, E. (2009 Jan-Mar.). Narcissism and task persistence. Self & Identity, 8(1), 78-93.

For more information, visit: Charisma