Kristine Bundschuh
ProSem
April 7, 2014
Industry Research Report:
Proposing a Language-Focused Leadership Development Program
Choosing the Field: My Interests and Experience
My interest in exploring the connections between language and leadership began in
college, where as a House President I interacted with fellow student leaders and realized that
how we communicated was an integral part of what made us leaders. In graduate school, I now
research and analyze how leaders construct their leader identities through their language use. My
current research is giving me an academic knowledge on leadership discourse, and after
graduating I would like to work in a field where I can apply my research skills and knowledge of
the role of language in a leader’s identity.
According to my Strong Interest Inventory profile, my career interests can be best
categorized in three themes: Social, Enterprising, and Artistic. Within those themes are interests
which resonate strongly with me, like the interest in people, helping, business, leadership,
communication, and culture. In searching for an industry to explore, I wanted one which would
not only benefit from someone with my research experience, but also one that would allow me to
help others. Thus, I decided to explore the industry of leadership development.
In working with leadership development teams, I could apply my research to help people
better understand the impact of their language-use as well as teach them how to adapt their
communication in order to reach their leadership goals. Through conducing informational
interviews with people with experience in leadership development, attending local leadershipdevelopment lectures and analyzing the websites of a few local leadership development
1
consulting companies, I have engaged with the community to learn about the field as a whole as
well as the role of language and communication within various programs. Leadership
development is a field which not only would allow me to apply my research experience when
working with leaders, but it is also a field that would benefit from having a stronger focus on
how people should use language to enact their leadership goals. As a linguist, I have the research
experience to help leadership development groups integrate language-based trainings and
coaching into their programs. For the purpose of this Industry Research Report, I have detailed
my engagement with the field and my understanding of the role of communication in various
types of leadership development programs. Using this knowledge, I have then proposed a
language-focused leadership development program.
Leadership Development Approaches
Before discussing the process of exploring the field, I first must explain what the field of
leadership development entails. ‘Leadership development’ is a term used to refer to a program
which is aimed at teaching leaders how to grow and succeed. Leadership development can be
approached from two perspectives—from the company who has the employees for whom they
want to offer leadership development, and from a consulting company that offers leadership
development services. Some larger companies, like Booz Allen Hamilton or Goldman Sachs,
have internal leadership development programs, where they employ people to design group
trainings and coach leaders one-on-one. These companies engage outside experts on certain
topics, often for a lecture or another one-time event, but they develop the rest of their programs
internally. Other companies hire leadership consulting firms to design and customize their
leadership development training programs or to give individual leadership coaching sessions.
2
Some consulting firms focus solely on individual leadership coaching, while others offer
a variety of services including analyzing and re-developing the entire leadership structure of
companies. Leadership development includes both individual- and organization-based programs,
as well as both external consulting programs and internal departments focused on the
development of its company’s employees. For the purpose of exploring this field to the fullest
extent possible, I chose to learn about both internal leadership development programs and
external programs, as well as both one-on-one coaching and larger group trainings.
Engaging with the Field
Throughout this semester I have gained insight into the field of leadership development
through speaking with people in the field, attending events, and conducting research on various
consulting companies. My aim was to better understand the significance of communication and
language-use in leadership development programs, so that I could then consider what I, as a
linguist who researches leadership discourse, can contribute to the field.
Through conducting informational interviews with people affiliated with leadership
consulting in different ways, I learned more about the role of language in leadership
development programs. I first spoke with Sonia Checchia, a former member of the Women’s
Development Initiative team at Booz Allen. She designed the curriculum for webcasts about
various development topics, incorporating outside leadership development experts with highlevel leaders at Booz Allen as the guests for the monthly webcasts. According to Sonia, the
webcasts with topics relating to communication—like talking to a manager about career or
negotiation—always had the most viewers. These employees were clearly interested in
3
communication issues in leadership development, which suggests that a program with a stronger
emphasis on the nuances of language could be an important addition to this field.
I also spoke with Kim Shepard, who works in a leadership development team at Goldman
Sachs which concentrates specifically on the development of managing directors and partners.
From Kim I learned that leadership development programs must consider each leader’s level of
leadership within a company’s hierarchy. Leadership development programs for lower-level
managers should be designed differently from those made for upper-level executives. Her team
hires outside experts to speak to their managing directors and partners at events, but the internal
team has its own leadership coaches for one-on-one training. This interview made me understand
that high-level leaders have likely already participated in both group and individual leadership
development programs as they rose in the ranks in their organizations. Given the multitude of
programs available, I suggest that a program with a unique angle—like learning about leadership
development through language-use—could be a popular alternative for leaders seeking a
program with a new framework.
To learn about leadership development from the perspective of an outside consultant, I
talked with Jen Lancaster, a consultant at Gap International. Gap International is hired as a
consulting company to help businesses with management development, and one of their services
offered is leadership development coaching. According to Jen, Gap International’s methodology
has a strong focus on language, and they employ linguists in their research and development
team. This shows that some leadership development companies, especially those rooted in
research, understand the role and impact of language in leaders’ professional development.
While my informational interviews gave me insight into leadership development from the
corporate perspective—both from internal leadership development programs and external
4
consultants—I gained ‘inside’ experience through attending two presentations from current
leadership development consultants. Listening to these two speakers was a similar experience to
that of employees in companies like Goldman Sachs and Booz Allen when attending their
leadership development team’s lecture featuring an outside expert. When listening to these talks,
I considered how I could integrate my linguistic knowledge into their programs.
The first presentation I attended was a talk by Denise Brosseau on her new book, Ready
to be a Thought Leader? Brosseau is the CEO of Though Leadership Lab, and her book teaches
people how to be a ‘thought leader,’ meaning a person with significant social influence. From
both reading her book and attending the event, I discovered that Brosseau offered steps to take
and told stories about successful thought leaders, but she did not emphasize the ways in which
people could implement these steps. I acknowledge that her book and speech were aimed at a
large audience and therefore needed a level of generality, but from my perspective, people need
to consider not only the big picture and the framework they need to become influential leaders,
but they also need guidance on how to carry out the framework—which often is done through
language.
The second talk I attended was Maria Gamb’s session entitled “What Do You Mean You
Can’t Hear Me? Deciphering the Gender Code,” presented at the Women’s Center’s 28th Annual
Leadership Conference. Gamb taught the audience about how men and women speak and listen
differently, specifically using the example of when women nod their heads and say ‘yes’ in a
business meeting to express ‘we are listening’ and men interpret that as ‘we agree.’ Gamb
offered useful take-away messages to be clear in expectations and to understand that people do
not always interpret each other’s communication in the intended manner. Both Brossau and
Gamb’s speeches gave me an ethnographic experience from the perspective of a person receiving
5
leadership development training. This experience helped inform my proposed approach to
integrate linguistics into the field of leadership development.
Language-Focused Leadership Development Program
From engaging with the leadership development industry this semester, I have learned
that many programs lack the nuanced, research-based approach to leaders’ language-use that I
could offer. I believe all current leadership development programs could benefit from the
expertise of a linguist. If I were to join a leadership development department in a large corporate
company or a current leadership development consulting company, I would help these
established programs consider the role of language in their methodological approach to
leadership development. I would suggest that they offer more trainings focused on
communication, and I would translate and adapt my scholarly knowledge of leadership discourse
to integrate it into the existing programs. All programs would benefit from a stronger emphasis
on how leaders use language, because language is how they do leadership. Holmes, Schnurr,
Chan and Chiles (2003) define ‘doing leadership’ in terms of how leaders use language, calling it
a “competent communicative performance which, by influencing others, results in acceptable
outcomes for the organisation [sic] (transactional/task-oriented goal), and which maintains
harmony within the team or community of practice (relational/people-oriented goal)” (p. 32) (my
own emphasis). Every leadership development program I studied integrated these concepts of
task management and behavior management, yet did not explain it using the concept of language
as the tool in which to enact these goals.
While I could help any program better their methodology on conducting trainings and
coaching sessions, such work would include applying research in broad, understandable terms.
6
Instead, for the purpose of this IRR, I propose a unique alternative to those programs, a
leadership development program specifically designed for people interested in learning how to
use the way they communicate as a tool in developing themselves as leaders. I acknowledge that
most leaders do not want to learn to cue-into language and would prefer a less scholarly-based
approach, but I believe there is a place in the field of leadership development for a program
focused on teaching leaders how to use language to lead. Below, I offer my suggestions for
creating a language-focused leadership development program which both introduces participants
to basic linguistic theory and analysis and teaches them how to apply that knowledge to their
own unique leadership interactions. Given that group trainings and one-on-one coaching sessions
require different methodologies, I have offered ways to infuse linguistic knowledge into each
type of development program.
For large-scale trainings, like lectures, webcasts and presentation, the leadership
development program must stay broad in order to interest and be applicable to a diverse
audience. Rather than offer vague generalities or specific advice that is not applicable to all
audience members, which is what I experienced through attending two leadership development
talks, I suggest that such a setting would be best suited for teaching people a framework: Think
about how you communicate in a new way.
I would first want to teach leaders about the significance of social and cultural factors in
any interaction. By understanding that language is, according to Baxter (2012), “dynamic,
interactive, fluid and resourceful,” participants could realize the power of how and what they say
in presenting themselves as leaders. I would then introduce the idea of style. There could be talks
focused on different types of style, like gender discourse styles (Holmes 2006) and
conversational styles (Tannen 2005). By teaching people about different language styles, they
7
can understand that they have the ability to purposefully speak in a manner which would help
them reach their leadership goals. According to Baxter (2010), the “ability to use a repertoire of
linguistic strategies to enact authority shows that a leader can be flexible, versatile, multi-skilled
and highly sensitive to context or community of practice” (p. 150). In such group settings,
teaching people ‘how to talk like a leader’ is impossible. However, teaching leaders how the way
people speak creates their leadership identity as well as introducing them to a new framework to
analyze the way they talk—using style—would equip them with the tools to leave that session
with the ability to self-reflect on their own language use and that of people around them.
Another focus of a leadership development presentation could be to connect Holmes’
(2006) concept of a transformational and a transactional leader with gender discourse styles.
Current leadership development programs that talk about gender do not always explain the
benefits of women’s discourse styles. By understanding that women’s discourse style is often
associated with a transformational, behavior-management related leadership style, people can
then consider when and why to use different styles. Such a training would give participants the
opportunity to reflect on their own language use and understand how it affects their professional
self-presentation.
Group leadership development trainings are not the place to give leaders specific advice
like ‘speak in a more direct manner’ or ‘stop hedging.’ These ‘take-away’ messages are too
specific to offer to a whole audience. Rather, such a setting would be an excellent way to teach
leaders about frameworks and terminology that they can apply after the presentation has ended. I
suggest that in a language-focused leadership development program, the group trainings would
act more as miniature sociolinguistic lectures, teaching these leaders how to reflect on their
language use and to listen to language differently.
8
One-on-one coaching would offer the opportunity for linguistically-trained coaches to
include a much more nuanced analysis of the leader’s language use. I suggest that a coaching
experience that includes ethnographic research done by the consultant would allow the
consultant to determine any miscommunication issues and also explain to the leader how his or
her language use constructs an identity. Such settings would allow a coach with a linguistic
background to both teach the leader how he or she speaks and also offer advice on how to adapt
his or her language to reach a goal. For example, if the leader would like to manage a meeting
better, a linguist could record a meeting, analyze the transcript, and offer an analysis on how that
leader negotiated his or her identity through language-use. If a leader is interested in being wellliked, the consulting linguist could offer ways to establish rapport. This one-on-one setting can
allow for intricate analyses which yield specific advice on adapting linguistic features which
would be impossible in a large setting. It is in these one-on-one interactions that a background in
linguistics could allow the consultant to tailor the analysis to the specific person’s needs in
leadership development. Thus, with a language-focused leadership development program, a oneon-one coaching session could teach the leaders how adapting the way they speak could help
them reach their leadership goals.
Conclusion
A language-focused leadership development program, like the group and individual
programs proposed above, could be a useful sub-field within leadership development. Certainly
all programs could benefit from a larger emphasis on language, as that is the main vehicle
through which the leaders can enact a change. However, a new leadership development program
which focuses on teaching leaders how to understand the role of communication in their
9
leadership development as well as how to adapt their style to reach their goals would be a
valuable addition to the field. With so many leadership development programs available, a
language-focused leadership development program, which could be marketed as rooted in
linguistic research, could be a unique program to equip leaders with the tools to communicate
more effectively and use language to reach their professional goals.
10
References
Baxter, J. (2010). The language of female leadership. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Baxter, J. (2012). Women of the corporation: A sociolinguistic perspective of senior women's
leadership language in the u.k. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(1), 81-107.
Holmes, J. (2006). Gendered talk at work: Constructing gender identity through workplace
discourse. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Holmes, J., Schnurr, S., Chan, A., & Chiles, T. (2003). The discourse of leadership. Te Reo, 46,
31-46.
Tannen, D. (2005). Conversational Style. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11