It is useful to be at risk – but please choose your moments

Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Crying consultant. The Prime Minister speaks frankly about the great pressure in his job. It is difficult to think of another time when two of the leading leaders in the State of G7 exposed their character’s fragility in the way Rachel Reeves and Kiir Starmer did in the United Kingdom this week.

Reeves unintentionally did, in the painful glow of the House of Commons, where she struggled to contain all of them on a very clear cuturation on something that still, at the time of writing this report, is a mystery.

Starmer was more controlled, Saying Weekend newspaper Interviews His last tips came from political chaos while he was facing his family’s home fires in London, Iranian missile strikes and holding a group 7 in Canada within days of the NATO summit in The Hague.

Both cases say much about our complex and contradictory responses to the leader who shows weakness.

Traditional wisdom has always been that a president is ready to reveal fear, uncertainty, or other form of uselessness.

They are believed to be more confident and respectful, especially by younger employees who are said to be eager to “originality”, and therefore it is more valuable to the organization.

It is useful that some of the best well -known companies in the world have supported this idea. “I think one of the most valuable driving properties is weakness and asked for help,” former Starbucks coach, Howard Schultz, He said One of the interviews in 2017.

When the former CEO of Expedia, Dara Joshroshi, left the travel group to operate Uber, he was praised to inform Expedia employees that he was “sacred” About this step.

There is already research This indicates that it is pushed to transfer internal fluctuation. However, if it is really clear, why does the evidence indicate a relatively few leaders are ready to have any form of weakness?

When the author Jacob Morgan surveyed 14,000 employees worldwide 2023 booksand Performed with weaknessHe asked about the number of their presidents who showed the characteristics of a weak leader.

only 16 percent Their leaders said anything like seeking help, admitting to falling or revealing real feelings.

I think this is that, as with a lot in practical life, the context is everything.

There are times when the leader who reveals any form of weakness will be punished, as it was Starmer this week.

As the British Broadcasting Corporation Request the interview One of the Prime Minister’s allies on Wednesday, “Don’t you think it will weaken terribly?”

The problem of timing Starmer was.

Signs of weakness can look like damage to damage, or excuse, if they come after the leader is really a problem and not before.

CEOs who ignore this lesson are the risk of being less attractive to investors, according to another paper By academics in the United States.

They had a series of experiments to find out how people’s reaction was after reading an interview with an executive president of fictional technology before profit expectations.

In some interviews, the CEO said that although he was good in rhetoric, “When he gave a speech, I feel nervously – dry my mouth, and he gave sweat.”

In others, he said: “I am good at talking to the audience, and when I give a speech, I never feel nervous.”

It turns out that if the most vulnerable version of the CEO issued good financial news, people were more inclined to find credible expectations and the company’s evaluation of an attractive investment.

If he had bad news, it would have decreased badly. But the response was reduced if the CEO appears more at risk.

It is important that this is the most soft reaction that came only when the president showed signs of weakness before Bad news, not after that.

This is logical, and I think it explains at least part of the reaction to Starmer this week.

Things are more complicated when it comes to Reeves, not just because there is actual Selling the market after Starmer initially failed to support its tear consultant, prompting investor concerns that it will be dismissed.

Its narrow presentation came after the bad news about the party’s rebellion against the reforms that it strongly supported. But no one is witnessing the horrific pictures of her generosity can imagine that she was unrealistic. We live in an era when emotional honesty is rare and valuable, even if it is Reeves, as Refiz has shown, you may be possible to see.