My name is Mauro Bagnato and for over 15 years I have been leading tech organizations.
When I first stepped into leadership, I believed technical expertise was the key to being an effective leader. However, I quickly learned that organizations are living and complex systems and that leading them demands much more than just technical know-how. I believe that curiosity is at the heart of effective leadership. This is what fuels learning and experimentation, both crucial for continuous improvement. This blog aims to explore engineering leadership in all its aspects and to provide insights in a tangible and pragmatic manner. It will also be a space where I will share insights, reflections, and personal takeaways from books, podcasts, and articles that influenced and keep influencing my journey.
I just finished reading "Supercommunicator" by Charles Duhigg, and three insights from the book keep spinning in my mind.
A bit of context.
The core assumption of Supercommunicator is that different 3 types of conversations exist:
Successful communication requires recognizing which type of conversation you’re engaging in.
However, the lines between these types are often blurred, and it’s easy to shift from one to another without realizing it, leading to confusion and misunderstandings.
While each type of conversation is worth exploring in depth, this post focuses on the three insights from the book that I found particularly meaningful:
In decision-making, we often lean heavily on logic, data, and facts. However, people don’t always rely on rationality alone. Sometimes, decisions are driven by feelings, emotions, values, and beliefs.
When people start conversations with stories or narratives, it’s often a sign that their decision-making process is more emotional than practical. In such cases, responding with empathy and compassion is way more effective than presenting facts and figures
Conflicts often appear straightforward but are rarely as simple as they seem.
In any heated conversation, there are usually two conflicts going on at the same time.
Understanding the real source of the conflict is key to resolving it.
When you genuinely listen, you create a safe space for others to open up and share their feelings. This not only helps uncover the root cause of the conflict but also builds trust and mutual understanding.
A common mistake we often make is to define ourselves or others by a single identity (i.e. I am a man). However, the more we reflect, the more we realize that each of us carries on multiple identities (i.e. I am a man, a father, a brother, a friend, a colleague, a football player, etc.).
Stereotypes and prejudices often arise when we focus on just one aspect of someone’s identity, ignoring the rich complexity of who they are.
Surfacing shared identities is the best tool to overcome stereotypes and find a common ground.