Communication and relationships are informed by individual perceptions of the other.

It’s a very simple and basic, if not archaic, perception.

The question people within the communication or relationship will constantly ask themselves, most of the time unconsciously, is if the other belongs to one’s own group or is outside of it. It’s the question of whether the other is a friend who stands by one’s side or an enemy that requires some kind of fight-flight-freeze response.

Naturally, most situations we encounter don’t require a dramatic vocabulary of friend or foe. However, the archaic aspects of being human are based on our ability to quickly qualify a situation in these terms.

Beyond this basic interpretation of the situation is the habit or preference we’ve developed from this ability. This preference becomes the default way we think about relationships.

Knowing these preferences is essential for leaders, as an important part of their work is there to build a followership.

Depending on their preference, leaders may prefer to use their authority or to build trust. They will often notice how they fall back on these solutions whenever they feel they are losing control of the situation.

Whenever their default mode doesn’t correspond to the path they aspire to take, their teams will notice and rely on their understanding of the default mode. At the same time, they will question the path the leader aspires to.

Leaders who overcome these moments of being questioned can use it to practice and learn how to align both approaches or how to enhance the approach they prefer.

There is no right or wrong here.

The context will establish what works and what doesn’t work. This also means that it may take time to reach a context within which one’s preferred mode contributes to the team’s cohesion.