Chicago Booth Review Podcast Why Leaders Should Show Vulnerability

Christine Carpenter: Say, "You know, I actually made a mistake here. Let's talk about what we want to do going forward from that." That's vulnerable to say. If you can't own making a mistake, you're communicating mistakes are not okay so your team isn't going to come to you with mistakes they've made, which then of course that compounds into bigger problems.

Hal Weitzman: Vulnerability is typically perceived as a weakness in professional settings. Chicago Booth's Christine Carpenter wants us to think of it as a strength when it comes to leadership. So, when is it appropriate to be vulnerable? Welcome to the Chicago Booth Review Podcast, where we bring you groundbreaking insights in a clear and straightforward way. I'm Hal Weitzman. Today, Christine Carpenter talks to us about the benefits of showing vulnerability. So, how can you show vulnerability without coming across as out of your depth or incompetent? Christine Carpenter, welcome to the Chicago Booth Review Podcast.

Christine Carpenter: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

Hal Weitzman: Well, we're delighted to have you and we brought you here to talk about vulnerability and why vulnerability is not necessarily a bad thing, but a good thing. And I know that a lot of our MBA students here at Chicago Booth think of vulnerability and emotions and as they think of them as weaknesses in a professional setting. Why do you think there's such a kind of big push in our business culture for leaders to have this kind of flawless competence? What's driving that?

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. Well, I think it comes from a lot of different sources. I think that we are very socialized to present as kind of perfect, especially in academia, especially in the business world, flawless as you said. And then I mean, how far back do you want to go? I think a lot of it has roots in cultural messaging, gendered messaging. Vulnerability tends to be a more feminine trait. And so, if feminine traits are not valued, vulnerability is not going to be valued. And you're right, I think it's seen a lot as weakness. The thing about vulnerability though is that the opposite of it isn't strength. It's usually defensiveness. And so, it's hard to be vulnerable. It feels-

Hal Weitzman: Or arrogance.

Christine Carpenter: Or arrogance. Yeah. Right. Arrogance is very protective because you don't have to disclose anything. You don't have to touch into your own felt sense of insecurity. So, arrogance feels great, but it's not very useful when you're trying to build relationships and building relationships is very useful in leadership.

Hal Weitzman: Right. So, I was going to ask you, what is the cost of maintaining this facade that you never do anything wrong and you're never vulnerable?

Christine Carpenter: So, if you're a leader and you want to have open dialogue in your teams, if you want people to bring issues to you early on before they become big problems, if you want to improve yourself as a leader and be open to feedback, then all of that is vulnerable. So, you can kind of be safe and walled off and flawless and tough, competent, confident, all of the things, or you can be in relationship with people who you're leading and trying to get to do something for you.

Hal Weitzman: That's interesting. So, you're drawing a contrast between confidence and being in relationship with people.

Christine Carpenter: Well, I think that you can be confident and be in relationship with people, but I also think you can hide behind a facade of confidence. In this setting too, I think it's really rewarded to project confidence. It's rewarded to be a high achiever and check in all the boxes, but in the relationship realm, it's not very approachable. I know I have mess. I know that I'm not perfect. I have flaws. And so, if I'm trying to connect with someone and they're not letting me see any of that in them, A, I'm not going to feel very comfortable showing my full self in that relationship. I'm going to assume there's no room for my mess if they aren't messy.

And I'm also not going to really trust that person because I know it's probably not real because we all have mess. We all have insecurities.

Hal Weitzman: Mess. I like that. So, there's benefits to showing the mess or to indicating that there's mess there.

Christine Carpenter: Definitely.

Hal Weitzman: So, what are the benefits of showing your vulnerability in a professional setting?

Christine Carpenter: So, it makes you approachable. It builds trust. So, if you're willing to be vulnerable with me, then that makes me trust you. I feel a little bit of a sense of honor that you've felt safe enough with me, comfortable enough with me to get vulnerable. So, that builds relationship connection. And if I feel like I'm in something with you, then if you're my manager, I'm going to be a lot more motivated to work for you, to support you, to engage with you around things that I think are important for the work.

Hal Weitzman: What are the kind of things you're talking about when you talk about showing vulnerability like what?

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. So, probably when you say the word vulnerability, everybody has a thing that pops to mind. So, is it like fetal position on the floor sobbing or is it-

Hal Weitzman: Which that's how I manage my team usually.

Christine Carpenter: Yeah, right.

Hal Weitzman: Usually crying.

Christine Carpenter: It helps. But it's a continuum, right? So, I could say, "I actually made a mistake here. Let's talk about what we want to do going forward from that." That's vulnerable to say. If you can't own making a mistake, you're communicating mistakes are not okay. So, your team isn't going to come to you with mistakes they've made, which then of course that compounds into bigger problems. I talk to my students about it being scalable. You can language it in a way based on the setting you're in, based on the person you're talking to. You can kind of scale it up or down, but if you're communicating openness, if you're communicating, you're kind of modeling it actually.

You're modeling, here's how I'm going to be with you and that makes it okay for you to be that way with me.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. So, admitting mistakes that you've made and focusing on the future would be one way.

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. That's one way.

Hal Weitzman: Give me another example or two please.

Christine Carpenter: So, saying that you don't know the answer, right? Again, knowing, being an expert, never getting it wrong is really rewarded in these settings and in our society in general, I think, but if you can say, "I actually don't know. How do we problem solve that collaboratively?"

Hal Weitzman: I guess I can imagine that somebody listening to this will think, "So, that's fine to admit that I made a mistake." When you start talking about, "I don't know," then I can appear incompetent, right? There's a danger that I get found. A lot of people have imposter syndrome. They're worried about getting found out. They're worried that if they say, "I don't know, it means I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. I really shouldn't be in this position. I don't deserve this." And then they start spiraling. So, what's the line between sort of being vulnerably honest and transparent versus being unqualified?

Christine Carpenter: Well, there's a huge gap between those two things. I think one of the things, I'm glad you brought it up because I think what underlies a lot of these assumptions or mental models about vulnerability is it's either on or off or it's present or not present. And same thing with knowing. You either know or you don't know. And there's a huge gray area between knowing everything and being incompetent. And so, most of us fall in this vast middle range. So, saying, "You know what? I'm not sure what to do about this problem is going to register as authentic and real and that builds trust."

If I say, "Oh no, I know all the answers and even if I don't and I try to project that facade," it's not really believable because nobody can have all the answers. If all I talk about is all the things I don't know and I'm not sure how to do my job and then I'm kind of in the territory where I'm not really building confidence in my leadership.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. Yeah. I mean, it strikes me that if people are very concerned about showing vulnerability, but that's not completely illegitimate, that there is something to that, there might be times when you shouldn't show vulnerability or admit that you don't know. Talk about that. You can't just have a blanket rule, right? It changes to pay on the circumstances.

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. Which makes a great leader, is to be able to be flexible about those kinds of things and make those judgment calls about when, how much, with whom. I mean, I wouldn't say that in an interview, don't be vulnerable. Don't admit that you don't know something. And I actually have a great example of that because one of my students, I know my former students, we had lunch after a class was over and she told me a story where she interviewed for a summer internship with a company that she really was inspired by the founder's story and really loved the mission of the organization, but she didn't have any of the experience in doing that work.

And so, she went and she got an interview and she said, "In the interview, I don't have any experience in this kind of work, but here's what makes me want to work for you." And she got the internship and she said she would've never, ever, ever shared that without having the class and having taken those risks to show the things that you're certain are just going to completely discredit you. She had actually practiced it and learned that a different outcome. So, she took a risk and it paid off.

Hal Weitzman: Mm-hmm. That's almost like planning to be vulnerable, right? That you could say, "I don't know," but then it was an interesting structure that you used where you said, "But here's what I do know, I'm comfortable. Yeah, I want to learn or whatever. I'm enthusiastic." So, is that the way maybe to handle it in certain circumstances?

Christine Carpenter: Yeah, I think you can use it strategically, but I think what I heard from her was that she was just being authentic. And so, I think that when it's authentic, when you're showing your true self, there's something that connects people in that piece. If she really didn't have anything to offer, she probably would've been hired for the internship. So, I'm certain that there were other factors, but she was just naming that that was a risk she took that paid off.

Hal Weitzman: And it does strike me that often it must be a product of confidence, that the more confident I am in myself and more confident I'm in my position, I'm more comfortable saying, "I don't know. I have no idea."

Christine Carpenter: But how do you get the confidence?

Hal Weitzman: Right.

Christine Carpenter: So, I think that the confidence comes after you do the hard things. I don't think you get to be confident first and then you're comfortable going forward and taking the risks. I think you have to... We talk to our students all the time, set an experiment, treat this as an experiment. You have an idea of something that's going to happen. So, run an experiment, get the data, refine it, rerun it, get more data. And so, if people can find one thing that they would never do on a small scale, a small scale risk and they can challenge themselves to take the risk, study the result, see what happens. Did it create more closeness?

Did it create more distance, more trust, less trust? Did you lose credibility or not? Opportunities to practice are everywhere.

Hal Weitzman: So, I want to get to that talking about the experiments you run with your students, but I'm still wondering, is there a time not to be vulnerable?

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. So, I would say there are certain people or certain situations where it is not going to be safe or good for you to be vulnerable. I try to tell my students all the time, interpersonal dynamics is not telling you, be 100% vulnerable all the time. This is that all or nothing mindset they tend to come in with. It's about being able to choose who, when, why, know why you're doing it. In a business context, you're probably going to be picking an intention that benefits both parties. But if you have experience with someone that is just not open or is hostile or abusive or threatening to... If there's some impact to your career, certainly don't be vulnerable.

There are times when it is better to be protected, protective and not let your guard down. So, it's not a universal invitation.

Hal Weitzman: Carry the Two is the show that pulls back the curtain to reveal the mathematical and statistical gears that turn the world. Co-hosts, Katie Witkowski and Ian Martin bring unique perspectives from the fields of mathematics and statistics to convey how mathematical research drives the world around us. With each episode tackling a different topic, subscribe to Carry the Two, part of the award-winning University of Chicago Podcast Network.

Christine Carpenter, in the first half, we talked about vulnerability and you mentioned how you encourage your students in your classes at Chicago Booth to be vulnerable and to think about how they're going to use that, what their perception, what their preconceptions are, and then test those preconceptions or assumptions and then gather some information about what they learn. So, tell us more about those experiments. What kind of thing do you encourage people to do and what do they learn from doing them?

Christine Carpenter: So, we really encourage people to say, "What is true for you right now in this moment?" So, we are always trying to get them to engage in what we call level five conversation. So, it's the deepest level of conversation where I'm having a feeling toward you in this moment right now. It is the least practiced way to communicate. We're usually up at like, "How are you? How was the weekend? What'd you do over spring break?" Or more transactional kinds of stuff or historical pieces. Sometimes, I'll tell you about my background, but to say, "Here's how I'm feeling about you right now, or this is how that affected me right now," is really, really hard. It feels really risky.

And so, an experiment is let's say someone just frustrated you and you could never say that because what if they get angry? What if it ruins the relationship? So, when you feel frustrated, make sure you say something and see how it landed with them. And most of the time what they will hear is, "Wow, I'm really glad that you told me that because now it's interpersonal. Now if you're distancing from me or you're making choices about our relationship because you're frustrated with me and I don't know about it, then it affects something that's important to me and I don't get a vote in it. So, if you tell me you're frustrated, I can try to understand it better.

We can get clarity and move forward without this kind of baggage in the middle of our relationship."

Hal Weitzman: Interesting. So, in that case, a vulnerability might actually lead to a, I would say confrontation, but lead to a tensic or the sort of exchange you would normally avoid.

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. Well, yeah, but why do we normally avoid it? The cost of avoiding difficult conversations is enormous, both in emotional wellbeing, but even in bottom lines in the corporate world, because unspoken conflict, unspoken tension, nobody's naming the thing that everybody knows is very costly.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. So, you said you encourage the students to do these experiments. Tell us about some of the more memorable results that you've had over the years.

Christine Carpenter: A lot of times, there is huge transformation around connecting across difference where people feel so different from each other or they'll have an interaction in, we call it T group, training group, which is the experiential part of interpersonal dynamics, that there's a huge misunderstanding and we're not trying to get to who's right. There's no right and there's no wrong because we're only talking about our own experience. We're not talking about ideas or opinions or academic type conversations. So, if I tell you that hurt my feelings, you can't say, "No, it didn't." It's not debatable really.

And so, if two people are in a conversation and they misunderstand each other, then the tendency is like to withdraw and to protect up and to kind of distance. But ID encourages them to keep coming back, keep coming back, keep coming back, get more data, learn about what's going on on the other person's side of the equation because in the absence of that actual information, we just make up our own stories about it. And so, it's not necessarily that what happened, what was said is causing the feeling, it's what I think about what was said or what I'm assuming it means. And so, if you keep talking, keep talking, keep talking, those assumptions get cleared up and then-

Hal Weitzman: And without your intervention, people just what they typically would avoid those kinds of conversations?

Christine Carpenter: Yeah.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. So, a lot of it has to do, it sounds like with avoiding avoidance or challenge, whatever, whatever the opposite is. Yeah. Going to the thing that you really don't want to do. Okay. So, it's both a vulnerability of showing vulnerability, but also kind of admitting your own weaknesses and sort of confronting them. Fascinating. All right. I know that many people will be listening to this and thinking, "Okay, so you did it with students. What do you advise me to do?"

What are some ways that people can, a small, low risk way that people can begin practicing, being more vulnerable, being more transparent and noticing the benefits? And maybe we can all do an experiment like you're talking about, do people actually write down what they expect will happen? How do they do the hypothesis and that kind of thing?

Christine Carpenter: Well, I don't know that they write it down. Well, in the class, they write it down because it's all their homework and they write a journal after every class and they have a journal coach that's telling them, "What do you think about this and what do you want to do with that next T group?" So, it's very structured in that way. But for you or anybody listening, it's really about risk. Do you go through your day most of the time just kind of feeling comfortable doing things on automatic pilot? If you want to challenge yourself, look for opportunities to say a thing that you wouldn't normally say, say a feeling word in a reaction that you wouldn't normally insert and just test it out.

Feelings are by definition vulnerable. So, you can say, "That makes me feel close to you." That is a vulnerable statement. So, even positive feelings can feel vulnerable because it opens you up in a way. So, you could start with the positive ones if you're not sure. It's like toes in the water a little bit, but you could start saying things like... And if the feeling words feel too big or too taboo in whatever setting or with whatever person, you can say that kind of didn't sit well with me, or you can code it a little bit. But if you know what the feeling is, your feelings point to your needs and they will guide the choices you make next.

So, if you're aware of the actual emotion, whether it's hurt, fear, anger, it's very useful to know. And then you can choose to respond from that place or do something different whether you actually name the feeling to the other person or not.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. So, it sounds like a basic thing is to start using more these feeling words and the introductory phase, positive ones, second phase is more negative ones.

Christine Carpenter: Yeah. I mean, negative in the sense that anger, frustration, irritation tend to be characterized as negative emotions, but all emotions are good. There is no such thing as a bad emotion.

Hal Weitzman: Okay. So, we should be just as happy to say, "I'm happy," just as we should be to say, "I'm furious."

Christine Carpenter: I don't think you have to feel any way about saying whatever you're saying. It doesn't have to be easy to say it or you don't have a like saying it, but test it out and see what happens. It will build your relationships. Okay.

Hal Weitzman: Well, Christine, I'm happy that you came on the Chicago Booth Review Podcast. I feel happy that you came on.

Christine Carpenter: I feel happy too-

Hal Weitzman: Okay, good.

Christine Carpenter: ... and I feel flattered to be invited. Thank you.

Hal Weitzman: Wonderful. Thanks very much for coming on the CBR podcast.

Christine Carpenter: Thanks for having me.

Hal Weitzman: That's it for this episode of the Chicago Booth Review Podcast, part of the University of Chicago Podcast Network. For more research, analysis and insights, visit our website, chicagobooth.edu/review. When you're there, sign up for our weekly newsletter so you never miss the latest in business-focused academic research. This episode was produced by Josh Stunkel. If you enjoyed it, please subscribe and please do leave us a five-star review. Until next time, I'm Hal Weitzman. Thanks for listening.