Many years ago, my state’s chief officer management curriculum incorporated a student exercise on the effects of labeling individuals. The premise of the exercise was to illustrate that when you classify someone and treat them accordingly, their behavior can change as a result. They can, in fact, “grow into” the role, consciously or unconsciously.
You might recognize the exercise: The students were broken into groups of five to seven individuals. Each student would receive a headband with something written on the front of it. A facilitator would place the labeled headband on each of the participants, but would not share with them what it said. So you could read everyone’s headband but your own.
The exercise would start with each group reading a short case study, after which participants would brainstorm possible solutions. During this activity, they were instructed to treat each member according to what was written on their headband, regardless of the importance of their contributions or what they said. The labels were as follows:
- I’m funny! Laugh at me when I say something.
- I’m very intelligent.
- Defer to me; I’m an expert.
- Ignore me.
- I’m a class clown.
- I am Mr. Boring.
Once the case study was read, the real fun began. As the groups started brainstorming, members quickly realized that their labels predicated their role in the group. After time, those participants who felt minimized and/or ignored would shut down, recognizing that they could not get past what was written on their headbands. Others just simply quit out of frustration, sometimes very upset because no one would listen.
After that portion of the exercise was completed, the workgroups were broken up, and the individuals with the same labels were grouped together. They shared their experience with the rest of the class, which included their thoughts and emotions about the label. Here’s an interesting observation: Most participants were still trying to make their point regarding the case study. They didn’t focus as much on their label as they did on not being able to get their point across.
It was a very powerful exercise, but not a pleasant one (there’s a reason this exercise is not part of the curriculum today!)–and I’m not sure it was entirely effective, either. Most of the participants didn’t forget the exercise, but I was never sure whether they transferred the lessons learned to the workplace. I came away with the impression that they just internalized them, only remembering their individual label and the effect it had on them.
Still, the lesson does bring up some important questions about leadership. How many people who are negatively labeled shut down when they’re ignored or shunned? How many carry the scars and internalize negative feelings, based on the comments of their co-workers and supervisors? How many never get past their labels?
Living up to the Label
Let’s look at the concept of labeling from an academic perspective. In a classic study, Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson told teachers at an elementary school that some of their students had scored in the top 20% on a test designed to identify “academic bloomers”–students who were expected to enter a period of intense intellectual development over the following year. In fact, the students were selected randomly, and they performed no differently from their unselected peers on a genuine academic test.
One year after convincing the teachers that some of their students were due to bloom, Rosenthal and Jacobson returned to the school and administered the same test. The results were astonishing: The “bloomers,” who were no different from their peers a year previously, now outperformed their unselected peers by 10—15 IQ points. The teachers had fostered the intellectual development of the bloomers, producing a self-fulfilling prophesy.
As this study shows, the long-term consequences of labeling a child “smart” or “slow” are profound. The same is true of your co-workers and in particular, your subordinates. Our role as supervisors is to make our members feel strong, valued and important. By doing anything else you undermine the individual as well as the whole team.
At this point you may be thinking, don’t we have to make some judgments about firefighters’ capabilities in order to lead effectively? Don’t we, in a sense, have to classify them? It’s true that humans’ capability to recognize like things and predict events/behavior accordingly is essential, but we must make every effort to distinguish between identifying specific characteristics or shortcomings and painting with broad brush. Rather than “slow,” maybe your rookie firefighter has a specific learning style that requires adjustments to your regular instructional material. Rather than “scary smart,” maybe your pump operator has an excellent feel for hydraulics. By drilling down to the specifics, you’re not only more accurate, but you’re also leaving open the possibility for the firefighter to surprise you.
In the Firehouse …
Labels are even more powerful when you share them with others. Be honest: Have you ever sat around the kitchen table, making judgments about other members? Even if this is done in fun or jest, it can have long-term consequences. The insidious effect can last a career.
Labels signal expectations: He’s slow; her star is rising; he thinks tactically, not strategically; he always sees the big picture; he is very trustworthy; she is not a team player. How many sons of firefighters had to fight to overcome some stigma of their fathers? How many just capitulated to it, “like father, like son”? It’s important to recognize that the people we label as smarter, slower or whatever term we use, may become just that.
As an Officer …
In fact, this shouldn’t be a surprise. We’ve long understood that children can be dramatically influenced by the expectations their parents place on them. The child who repeatedly hears, “You can grow up to be anything you want to be” will often turn out very different that the one who is told, “You’ll never amount to anything.” Some people (very few!) will say the latter comment is a form of motivation, urging the child overcome something and rise above the criticism; however, most never do.
It’s no different when you’re an officer, in charge of supervising the development of your crew. Labeling and expectations can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy for your members. If you tell someone repeatedly that they don’t, or even that they do, have the skills to do something, potentially they will internalize your assessment and begin living that role. Think about what you say: “You have the potential to become a very good chief officer,” vs. “He’ll be lucky to make lieutenant.”
Robert Merton, a 20th-century sociologist, actually coined the term “self-fulfilling prophecy.” His assessment of a self-fulfilling prophecy is the tendency for expectations to foster behavior that is consistent with those expectations. In its simplest form, if you think you’ll have a good day, you probably will. In some ways, you wish it or will it to occur. Here is how it works: Our actions toward others impact how others see us, which causes them to act in a certain way toward us, which in turn reinforces our belief about ourselves, which then influences our actions … and on and on.
This concept can be applied on the larger level as well. A well-known management theory created by Douglas McGregor describes two contrasting models of workforce motivation:
- Theory X–in which management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they can, and that they inherently dislike work.
- Theory Y–in which management assumes employees may be ambitious and self-motivated and exercise self-control. It’s believed that employees enjoy their mental and physical work duties.
Not surprisingly, managers who subscribe to Theory X generally have employees who are much less productive and motivated
James Rhem, executive editor for , rNational Teaching and Learning Forumeinforces McGregor’s work with the following comments: “When teachers expect students to do well and show intellectual growth, they do; when teachers do not have such expectations, performance and growth are not so encouraged and may in fact be discouraged in a variety of ways. How we believe the world is and what we honestly think it can become have powerful effects on how things will turn out.”
Regarding expectations, consider the following from Stephanie Madon, an Iowa State University psychologist, who investigated parents’ expectations about their children’s alcohol use. She discovered that when both parents believe that a child will abuse alcohol, the child is likely to drink more than expected. This holds true even when signs, such as past alcohol use and friends’ behavior, suggest a teenager is at low risk for alcohol abuse. The findings support the social theory that prophecies are especially self-fulfilling for stereotyped groups.
The Power of Positive Expectations
Every supervisor has expectations of their people, and these are communicated consciously and unconsciously. Furthermore, firefighters can easily interpret unspoken expectations, and they will perform in ways that are consistent with the expectations. Your expectations of employees and their expectations of themselves are the key factors in how well they perform at work.
The good news: This means we can influence our employees to do better by avoiding negative labels. As leaders, we understand the power of visioning, leading our organizations or ourselves to be what we want to be. But do we positively envision what others can become? Imagine how performance will improve if you and your fellow officers openly communicate positive expectations. Furthermore, what if you actually believe that every employee has the ability to make a positive contribution, and openly share that conviction?
When people believe they can succeed and contribute, their performance rises to the level of their own expectations. Their self-talk escalates to the level of your expectations, especially with positive reinforcement. In other words, if our members think they can, and their supervisor thinks they can–and expects it–new possibilities are achievable. Henry Ford said it best 100 years ago: “Whether you think you can or whether you think you can’t, you’re right.”
