How Smart Leaders Talk About Time

A 1973 experiment demonstrates how much a leader’s communication about time influences people’s behavior in powerful and often unexpected ways.

Social psychologists John M. Darley and C. Daniel Batson went to a seminary and explained to a group of seminarians that they were there to verify their skills to give an impromptu speech. An assistant waited for the seminarians in another building in order to record them as they were giving the speech. As the seminarians walked to the building, they ran into a man in desperate straits (an actor on the researchers’ payroll): he was alone, leaning on the wall, complaining as violent coughs shook him.

The question was: would the seminarians stop to help the poor man? Who will actually stop?

The researchers introduced three variables: first, using a questionnaire, they measured the motivations at the root of their subjects’ religious feelings. Second, they split the seminarians into two groups: the first was assigned a speech on the value the experience in seminary could have in professions other than the religious ministry. The second group was asked to comment on the parable of the Good Samaritan (a story Jesus told about a man who stopped to help a wounded person on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho.) No statistically meaningful correlation was found between either of the two variables (motivation and subject of the speech) and whether or not the seminarists stopped to succor the man.

Now for the third variable. When the seminarians were about to reach the building of the speech, one group was told they still had a few minutes before the speech, a second one they were exactly on time, and a third was told they were late and had to hurry.

Darley and Batson found out the choice whether or not to succor the man (and therefore his fate) was determined by a time factor: in general, those who thought they had enough time at hand stopped and helped; those who were late did not.

Now ask yourself: how would my employees react in that scenario?

It is not possible to talk about leadership without taking into account the messages a leader conveys about time management and the risks carried by a dysfunctional relationship with time. To make the most of her employees’ time, a leader must:

1) Establish a shared language that distinguishes between the “pressure on time” and “impact on goals” factors.

Team leaders often fail to make this distinction clear. Tasks are transmitted without specifying if the emphasis on such task is due to:

1. the fact the task has a remarkable impact on the individual or group’s goals;
2. the restricted timeframe within which the task must be completed;
3. a combination of the above mentioned two factors

It is essential to clearly distinguish these factors. For example, the term “urgency” may be used to denote the degree of pressure with respect to time, “importance” to denote the degree of impact a certain activity has on the achievement of goals, using Stephen Covey’s distinction. Thus, urgency and importance become two separate attributes of a task, which can be present at the same time or not. But it’s the leaders job to make explicit what, to her, “urgent” and “important” mean, and which tasks are which.

2) Reduce those activities that, despite being important, must be performed under pressure.

These activities, by definition, must be performed at the highest level. Yet the time pressure — the urgency — has a negative impact on the quality of the outcome.

Teresa Amabile‘s research clearly demonstrates how pressure over time is not food for creativity at all — a necessary quality to perform high-impact activities in a great way. Creative ideas need some sort of incubation period which allows them to emerge. Oftentimes, pressure over time (especially if accompanied by frequent distractions) negatively influences such process of internalization and creation of new solutions.

A successful leader reduces “urgent and important” activities to a minimum, by monitoring:

1. How tasks are planned and delegated.
2. How “urgent and important” activities can be reduced.
3. How much free-of-distraction time people have for high-impact activities.

If a leader does not monitor these principles carefully, she may find herself leading a team of deeply motivated people busily working away at tasks that are not a priority — like the seminarians who, though they were motivated by their religious beliefs and about to give a sermon on the parable of the Good Samaritan, did not stop to succor someone in need.

Luca Baiguini is Professor of Organizational Behaviour and Personal Development at MIP – Politecnico di Milano, and co-founder of Mindpoint, an international training company. His research interests include: persuasion strategies, public speaking, the relation between communication about time and team performance, communication about occupational hazard. Follow Luca on Twitter: twitter.com/lucabaiguini