“Between stimulus and response, there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”  ~ Viktor Frankl

A few weeks ago, I wrote about The Contrarian Voice: Speaking Truth to Power and how contrarians can influence others. 

Today, I want to delve further into voice, specifically “leadership voice,” how we are perceived by others in our responses or reactions to events, and how we can be effective in our actions. 

Remember, Brené Brown defines a leader “as anyone who takes responsibility for finding the potential in people and processes, and who has the courage to develop that potential.” Often, how we exhibit that courage is through our leadership voice.

We’re often encouraged to find “our own voice,” to not copy others. Using our own voice indicates authenticity, which implies that we’re more likely to be heard.

Our voice does tie into our professional brand, or Leadership Narrative. Our voice, as perceived by others, shows who we are in professional (and personal) settings. 

Timbre and tone are important in using our leadership voice. They’re important because they require discipline and control. 

Respond vs. React

I know that when I react to circumstances, my voice tends to get higher. I talk faster. I don’t feel in control.

When I respond, my voice is more modulated — lower in tone. My speech (and my thinking) slow down. 

People pay more attention when I respond, as opposed to react. 

Respond and control are interesting partners. By control, I mean self-control, not necessarily controlling the situation or others in the conversation. 

Self-control enables me to focus more on the issue at hand. I can assess the context of the conversation and listen to the intention being expressed.

When I react, I exhibit little or no self-control. Reacting kicks in my feelings of “fight or flight”.”

More Head Than Heart?

As I think about response and self-control I was initially concerned that I was involving more “head” than “heart” — more thinking than feeling. That I wasn’t being authentic if I wasn’t leading with feelings. 

If I focused on responding, I was using my head — my brain — thinking about the situation and how to engage in it. 

If I reacted, I was leading with my heart, which expressed my true feelings. 

However, I don’t think this is true. Responding helps me slow down. Responding lets me be more aware of why things are happening. Moreover, responding makes me more self-aware — of how I’m being in the moment.

Reacting is none of that. It’s fight or flight. It’s purely instinctual. And, it’s all about me — my reaction — how I feel in the moment. Reacting can actually put me outside that moment if I run away.

So, response allows me to be more in the moment — more present. Responding enables me to better understand what is really happening and why. It enables me to provide a more authentic response. 

By consciously controlling the timbre of my voice — keeping it lower and more measured — I’m able to be more responsive to the situation. Thus, be more effective and authentic.

What About You?

So, this is me, but what about you? Does respond vs. react resonate with you? 

Are you aware of when you’re reacting to a situation vs. being responsive to it?

Can you control your leadership voice, slow down, think, and be more effective in the conversation? What tools do you use? Breathing, visualization?

Can you think of a time when you reacted to a situation and it didn’t go as you would of liked? 

How about when you responded? Did you feel more in control? Were you more effective?

Image copyright: andreiaskirka