 |
|
|
|||||
There we were: two experienced professionals, each standing on the iconic red dot of our own TEDx stages, ready to deliver what we hoped would be the most impactful talks of our careers. For Jamie, her meticulously rehearsed opening linethe one she practiced 327 times in the shower, in the mirror, and in front of a very patient partnerevaporated the moment the spotlight hit. Hundreds of expectant eyes waited as the silence stretched . . . and stretched. Oh @*#%, she whisperedinto the mic. What was meant to be a private moment of panic turned into a public announcement. But instead of recoiling, the audience leaned in. Scott was one minute and fifty seconds into his carefully choreographed talk when he realized the slide clickerhis lifelinewasnt in his hand. It was backstage. As his partner began to talk, he edged off the red dot, sliding sideways like what he now calls a nervous crab doing the walk of shame under a spotlight. What could have been a disaster became an unexpected moment of relatability. What should have been our most cringeworthy professional moments instead became our most powerful points of connection. Who gets to make mistakes After Jamies talk, someone approached her saying, “That moment when you paused made your message so human. I was rooting for you! “When you had to edge off the stage,” an executive told Scott afterward, “I immediately felt I could relate to you. It was like watching a high-stakes version of that dream where you show up to work without pants.” The revelation hit us both like a thunderbolt: Our supposed failures weren’t failures at all. They were our strongest connection points. All those hours spent practicing perfect delivery? Not wasted time at all, because we were able to recover. But the unplanned human moments? Pure gold. It’s worth acknowledging, however, that our positive experiences with vulnerability came from positions of established credibility. As seasoned professionals with certain privileges, we could afford these momentary lapses without severe consequences. But we also know that vulnerability’s impact varies dramatically depending on who you are and the context in which you’re operating. The Paradox of Leadership We’re often taught that leadership means projecting flawless competence, credibility, and charisma. However, what social psychologists call the pratfall effecta phenomenon documented by Elliot Aronson in 1966shows that competent people become more likable when they make small mistakes. In other words, the occasional face-plant makes you more relatable. But there’s a critical caveat that Aronson himself emphasized: This effect primarily works for those already perceived as highly competent. For those still establishing credibilityparticularly women, people of color, and others from underrepresented groupsthe same “charming” mistake can reinforce negative stereotypes and undermine authority. As TED speakers, we had the freedom to make mistakes, which actually increased our likability and connection with the audience without compromising our credibility. In our work with executives, weve seen this paradox play out repeatedly. We’ve seen repeatedly that established leaders who initially resist showing any vulnerability find their influence dramatically increases after sharing natural imperfections. Yet for emerging leaders or those from marginalized backgrounds, the calculus is far more complex. It’s essential to acknowledge that the luxury of vulnerability isn’t equally distributed. For women in male-dominated fields, research shows that displays of emotion or uncertainty can trigger harsher judgment than for their male counterparts. For people of color, vulnerability can collide with pernicious stereotypes, reinforcing biases rather than building connection. And for those earlier in their careers or from less privileged backgrounds, the margin for error is often vanishingly small. Alison Fragale’s recent research in her book Likable Badass reveals that leaders face a fundamental paradox: They need to be both respected for competence and liked for warmth. The most effective leaderswhom she calls likable badassesstrategically reveal vulnerabilities while maintaining clear boundaries, creating what she terms “approachable authority.” Yet Fragale also acknowledges that women and people of color often face a much narrower band of acceptable behavior, where too much warmth can undermine perceptions of competence, and too much assertiveness can trigger backlash. The path to becoming a “likable badass” is riddled with structural inequities that demand recognition. Which is why we believe vulnerabilitytailored to contexthas the potential to be a leadership superpower. The Vulnerability Sweet Spot: A Framework for the Perfectly Imperfect Leader Through trial, error, and sometimes painfully awkward experience, we’ve developed a framework for authentic, courageous leadership that we now share with executives who are tired of the exhausting perfectionism treadmill. But we emphasize that this framework must be applied with careful attention to context, power dynamics, and the unique challenges faced by those with marginalized identities: 1. Create intentional vulnerability loops Ed Catmull, Jamies former boss and cofounder and former president of Pixar Animation, would often say in meetings “I’m wrong more than half the time. That simple phrase created what Harvard professor Jeff Polzer calls a “vulnerability loopinviting reciprocal openness that builds trust faster than a box of free donuts in the break room. By modeling approachable authority, he cultivated psychological safety that fueled Pixar’s creative engine. But we’ve observed that this same approach can backfire for leaders without Catmull’s established positional power and reputation. For a woman leading a male-dominated team or a person of color in a predominantly white organization, admitting uncertainty might inadvertently reinforce harmful stereotypes about competence. The lesson? Sometimes the most powerful thing a well-established leader can say is “I have no idea what I’m doing right now.” But for others, strategic vulnerability requires careful calibration. 2. Transform mistakes into growth narratives Scott had prepared meticulously for his courage workshop with a large government leadership teambut within minutes, he realized hed misread the room. His agenda assumed participants would willingly engage, but the energy was brittle. The stress was high, morale was low, and the silence hung heavy. Then something unexpectedand unscriptedhappened. The chief elected official chose to speak first. But instead of safe, ceremonial words, he paused, and shared a specific fear he was facing in that moment as a leader. The room shifted. ilence held for a beat. Then, one by one, others began to speaknaming real fears, deeper commitments, and the tensions theyd been carrying alone. That moment of unrehearsed vulnerability didnt fix everything. But it disrupted the silence, reset the tone of leadership, and sparked the psychological safety needed for meaningful change to begin. 3. Create structural support for imperfection Pixar holds rigorous postproduction reviews that deliberately focus on uncovering mistakesdespite the very human tendency to celebrate victories and immediately start stressing about the next project. The process norms prevent individual blame, instead promoting shared responsibility for both successes and improvements. At its heart, the process embraces the principle that imperfection, continuous learning, and growth form the foundation of great filmmaking. By creating formal structures to examine what didn’t work, the studio transforms potential failures into catalysts for innovation. When failure analysis becomes collective rather than personal, it creates safer spaces for those who might otherwise face disproportionate consequences for acknowledging mistakes. 4. Create equitable spaces for vulnerability At Pixar, Jamie codesigned a Mutual Mentorship Program specifically designed to address power imbalances. Over six months, senior mentors and junior mentees built relationships by exchanging responses to questions like, “Share a pivotal time that created anxiety but informs who you are today.” This structured approach produced two remarkable outcomes. First, mentors gained genuine insight into the dramatically different experiences of those with less organizational power. Many left the program as vocal advocates for their mentees, having seen firsthand the additional barriers they navigated. Second, mentees formed a powerful coalition where they could practice speaking up authentically. Through monthly discussions about power dynamics and calculated risk-taking, they developed both individual confidence and collective strengthtransforming vulnerability from a personal liability into a shared asset. 5. Know your audience Before revealing vulnerability, assess the terrain carefully. Do your colleagues and superiors already view you as competent? Do they genuinely care about your success? While it’s ultimately leaders’ responsibility to make workplaces safe for authenticity, we must acknowledge that not all environments offer this security. For those still establishing credibilityespecially individuals from underrepresented backgroundsthe most courageous act might be a carefully timed truth or a question that invites others in. Even micro-moments, like asking a powerful question for honest feedback in a team setting or naming a challenge with curiosity rather than certainty, can plant the seeds of strategic vulnerability. These moments may not be headline-worthy, but over time, they build trust, credibility, and voice. If you determine that sharing vulnerably carries too much risk in your current position, remember that choosing to strategically present yourself isn’t “fakeit’s a legitimate form of self-protection. The calculation is intensely personal: What are the costs of being real versus the costs of maintaining a more guarded professional persona? There’s no universal right answer, only the one that serves your well-being and advancement in your specific context. The Real Leadership Superpower Our TED experiences taught us that leadership impact doesn’t come from flawless performance, but from authentic human connection. The moments that feel most vulnerablewhen your mind goes blank during a presentation or when you have to admit you have no idea how to solve a problemare precisely where your most meaningful leadership happens. The next time you feel that urge to appear perfect, remember: Your most authentic moment might be waiting on the other side of what feels like failure. In a world increasingly dominated by curated personas and polished images, authentic vulnerability can be a powerful differentiator, but also a risk that varies dramatically depending on who you are. After all, nobody roots for the superhero who never breaks a sweat. We root for the one who gets knocked down, mutters something slightly inappropriate, and then gets back up again with a knowing smile. But we must also work toward a world where all leaders, regardless of their identity, have the freedom to be imperfectly human without disproportionate penalties.
Category:
E-Commerce
Across the United States, there is a long history of communities of color being underservedif not outright oppressedby the dominant modes of urban planning and development. But for the past 10 years, a collective of architects, designers, artists, and urban planners called BlackSpace has been rethinking how communities of color get designed and built. Now, the group is trying to build up the ranks of practitioners working alongside communities of color in the built environment to make sure their needs are no longer overlooked or ignored. To spread this work through young and emerging firms, BlackSpace has launched Studio KIN (Kinfolx Imagining Neighborhoods), a business accelerator focused on bringing resources, funding, and community to Black-founded ventures that produce services and products focused on the built environment. The incubator’s first cohort has just been announced. “When we think about spatial justice, we think a lot about how it’s realized through having the folks that are planning, designing, and building neighborhoods that reflect the places that they’re serving,” says Kenyatta McLean, co-managing director of BlackSpace. “We developed Studio KIN to be a home for those urbanists that are working to meet communities where they’re at.” Members of BlackSpace’s Studio KIN cohort include an urban planning studio in Indianapolis, a community design firm in Oklahoma City, and a bookstore and community space in Brooklyn. The focus of the accelerator is “interdisciplinary urbanist solutions that strengthen majority Black and majority multiracial neighborhoods,” says Emma Osore, co-managing director of BlackSpace. The hole to fill is wide. There are roughly 1,000 zip codes across the U.S. that have majority Black populations, but fewer than 2% of them are considered prosperous. Osore says the goal of the accelerator is to help support the growth of locally based organizations that use place-based practices to increase prosperity for Black communities, particularly within Oklahoma City, Chicago, Indianapolis, and New York City. “There’s rapid change in Black places in all of these cities, and there are very few people locally who understand urbanism from this people-centered, culturally rooted, and ethical point of view,” Osore says. Having locally based design firms, for example, can help ensure projects are developed in ways that serve their communities over the long term. McLean notes that it’s not uncommon for a big national firm to come in to work on a well-meaning project in a Black neighborhood, only to leave once the contract is over. “What does that mean for the sustainability of that project? What does it mean for the communities that surround that neighborhood?” she says. “That’s another reason why we’re so interested and continue to be interested in folks that are locally rooted, because they will stay through the storms and also be there for the moments of sunshine that are happening.” BlackSpace’s Studio KIN will operate like a typical business incubator, offering support and resources to organizations as they grow and mature. The first cohort is made up of small firms that are between three and five years old, and the accelerator will help them do things like build capacity for new work or help raise capital, as well as more mundane things like assisting with bookkeeping. Members of Studio KIN’s cohort reflect the need for this kind of hyper-specific business incubator. For example, Open Design Collective is the first and only Black woman-led nonprofit design firm in Oklahoma, with a focus on architecture, planning, and cultural preservation. In Indianapolis, Rokh Research & Design Studio focuses on cultural equity by partnering with researchers, practitioners, and community members to understand lived experiences and introduce new policies and strategies for urban design. The accelerator will run for 12 months, and BlackSpace’s program director Gabriella Malavé says the collective plans to have at least three cohorts over the next few years. The shape of the accelerator may shift as the organization gets to understand what members of its first cohort really need to grow and thrive. But the overall goal of the program is to help Black communities by establishing a wider network of urbanist practitioners focused specifically on their unique needs. “Our mission has always been to have opportunities for urbanists to co-create spatial change in partnership with Black communities and to strengthen Black communities,” Osore says. “So this is really a sort of a renaissance for BlackSpace.”
Category:
E-Commerce
At a recent academic conference, I noticed a familiar unease ripple through conversations about soft skills. Many participants winced at the term. They recognized the inadequacy of the term, yet struggled to agree on a better alternative. People floated around suggestions like human skills, essential skills, or power skills, but none seemed to stick. This persistent terminology problem reflects a deeper tension in our educational system. Theres a long-standing bias that elevates hard technical competencies over the nuanced, deeply human capabilities that actually define long-term professional success. Historically, hard skills emerged from the natural sciencesquantitative, measurable, and increasingly automatable. Soft skills, on the other hand, draw from the liberal arts, humanities, and social sciences. These disciplines help us understand human behavior, expression, and interaction. These qualities are notoriously difficult to quantify and even harder to teach. In business analytics, the field I teach, technical fluency is the price of entry. But what propels careers isnt just knowing which model to run. Its being able to explain it to a client, manage a team under pressure, adapt when the data shifts, and negotiate conflicting priorities. The multiplier is the human element. If we want studentsand professionalsto thrive in the age of artificial intelligence, we need to stop treating soft skills like fluff. Theyre complex, teachable, and foundational to success. And they need a better framework. Reframing the spectrum of soft skills The term soft skills has served as a catchall for too long. It flattens a vast range of human capabilities into a vague, undervalued category. Lets unpack what it typically refers to: Character traits: These are innate or deeply ingrained qualitiescuriosity, empathy, resilience, integrity. They are difficult to measure and even harder to teach, but they can be reinforced through self-awareness and mentorship. Behavioral habits: This includes punctuality, follow-through, and active listening. These are habits that form the scaffolding of daily effectiveness. Unlike traits, habits are trainable through repetition, reflection, and reinforcement. Teachable skills: Think negotiation, critical thinking, presentation, and conflict resolution. These are skills that we can structure, improve, and break down. Contextual competencies Some soft skills shift with the situation, like cross-cultural communication, executive presence, or stakeholder management. Mastering these skills requires knowledge, as well as adaptability and emotional intelligence. This structure isnt just an academic exercise. It provides a road map for how higher education can teach, assess, and elevate these skills with the rigor they deserve. Why the liberal arts are more relevant than ever This entire frameworktraits, habits, teachable skills, and contextual competenciesrests on a liberal arts foundation. Yet many continue to undervalue liberal arts education in the race to produce technically skilled graduates. Thats a mistake. The liberal arts cultivate intellectual agility, ethical reasoning, and cultural literacy. Rhetoric and composition shape communication. Philosophy and history sharpen critical thinking. Literature and anthropology nurture empathy and emotional intelligence. Ethics and moral philosophy develop character. These are not extrasthey are essential human capabilities, which humans have forged across centuries of thought and reflection. Even in the case of STEM education depends on these soft capacities for its practitioners to thrive in real-world scenarios. The traditional liberal arts saw this clearly. To build capable and thoughtful citizens, you need people who understand science and the humanities. The two disciplines complement one another. The technology paradox Enter artificial intelligence. As AI grows capable of executing routine cognitive tasks and even mimicking creative ones, the gap between human and machine narrows in some areasbut not in others. AI can analyze data, but it cant coach a team through a moral crisis. It can summarize a policy, but it cant build consensus across ideologically opposed stakeholders. It can write a headline, but it cant lead a classroom, negotiate a truce, or inspire trust. The more technical our world becomes, the more vital our human capabilities become. The paradox of progress is that it puts a premium on precisely those soft skills many continue to dismiss. Reclaiming the term Perhaps the answer isnt to replace the term soft skills, but reclaim it. Lets reframe soft not as easy or secondary, but as sophisticated, subtle, and distinctively human. These are the skills that make teams functional, leaders inspiring, and organizations resilient. Theyre not antithetical to technical skill, theyre actually the multiplier. We do our students a disservice when we teach them how to code but not how to communicate, or how to calculate but not how to collaborate. We handicap their potential when we separate technical and human education into silos. And we shortchange society when we undervalue the disciplines that teach us how to be human together. The future doesnt belong to those who can merely execute technical tasks. It belongs to those who bring the full spectrum of human capability to our most complex challenges. So yes, soft skills may be the hardest to master. But theyre also the ones that matter most.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||