Do managers need to learn ‘elephant speak’ when working with their employees?

In Dalton Kehoe’s view, managers rely on analytical and controlling styles in their interactions with employees. His premise is that employee engagement can be enhanced by drawing on neuroscience learning related to 1) the emotional, unconscious, behavioural self (the elephant) that governs day-to-day behaviour and 2) the rational, conscious, controlling self (the rider) who looks at the present and future in an analytical way, considering options, and evaluating their consequences. 

If managers can tap into employee needs for connectivity, compliments, consideration from others, and choice, then that should lead to employees being more open and trusting, less fearful and resistant, and less reliant on rote responses.

So, what about managers and the “elephant” mind that drives them? What is their engagement in the management process? Do managers need to just learn “elephant speak” when working with employees, or is there more at stake?

Managers tend to conform to the traditional role of controlling work. Regardless of training, reading or coaching, managers have a tendency to describe their role in terms of accountabilities, deliverables and other rational metrics.

They believe those above them expect it but, more importantly, employees have been conditioned to expect controlling behaviour from managers, even if it makes them uncomfortable or resistant. Managers tell and employees do as told.

Connectivity for managers is two-fold. Managers are a conduit and part of both the broader organization and, at the same time, their own team. They need to feel connected to both.

Their behavioural responses must be broad enough to establish a connection and affinity with peers and those up the organization, as well as with their team. If the connection to either is broken, they feel a loss. They need to believe they are a part of both realms.

Managers look for affirmation of their value just as other employees do. Traditionally, affirmation of value has been seen as recognition from peers and, more importantly, superiors in the organization structure. This limits the reward options.

If managers are able to engage with employees on the team in a way that feels both genuinely valued and mutually supporting, then they can boost their self-esteem beyond the top-down or formal rewards systems.

Managers need to be able to make choices. Having this freedom provides managers with the ability to reduce risk in their particular situation. It serves to focus the conscious, analytical mind.

Choice reinforces engaged ownership and accountability. Where choice is not available, the manager may unconsciously become passive in performance of their role — a “not my job” attitude.

Managers, regardless of experience or natural style, will conform. No manager wants to stick out too much, even in good ways. They will think that not being like others, especially superiors, is akin to putting themselves at risk. The tendency towards conformity is part of trying to maintain connectivity with other parts of the organization.

This tendency underlines the need to have a cultural environment attuned to the emotional as well as rational operation of the organization.

Without cultural underpinning, employee engagement simply will not stick.

Engagement is not just something managers do. Engagement is something that emerges in an environment that recognizes the “elephant brain” — feelings and behaviours really in charge of day-to-day activity.

Creating an environment supportive of engagement is as important for managers as for any other employees.

For an organization to truly make this cultural shift is no small task.

Behaviours and beliefs are not formed by reason but grow from experience, and they must be influenced by new experiences and processes over time that create and maintain recognition of a common bond, a desire to add value, and a sense of security in dealing with both the current and expected future situations.