When we speak to leaders, or when you are spoken to as a leader by one of your team, there will inevitably be a level of deference in what is being said and the manner in which it is said. This type of deference is often called ‘Mitigated Speech’. When someone is using mitigated speech they will avoid giving a direct instruction or voicing a strong opinion and will instead make suggestions or hints without conviction.
Mitigated speech is a term which was popularised by the author Malcolm Gladwell in his book Outliers. In the book Gladwell describes how examples of mitigated speech can be heard in cockpit voice recordings of several air crashes involving Korean air crews during the 1990’s. Gladwell explains how the First Officers in the crews were highly deferential to the Captains, even in the face of an impending crash the First Officers were unable to give their Captain strong instruction to take evasive action. The tragic accidents which unfolded left behind voice recorders which revealed that the accidents may likely have been avoidable if the First Officers had been able to clearly and strongly voice concerns. Rather than seeking to blame individuals we need to recognise that these tragic circumstances are an example of highly mitigated speech which in turn was created by a complex mix of factors including cultural backgrounds, training, industry procedures and personal experiences.
When there is a high level of mitigated speech within any team it is reasonable to assume that concerns are going unspoken and that the team is not operating as safely as it could. As observers, being able to recognise when a team is using mitigated speech can therefore alert us to potential issues within the team or organisation. As leaders, being aware of mitigated speech can assist us to be self-aware and to realise when our team dynamic is not quite right.
When we start to hear heavily mitigated speech there is a need to think about the structure of the team or meeting and to identify how we can create an environment where the team members are comfortable to openly raise serious concerns. Improving leadership skills, changing how we ask questions, developing safety tools which open the door for team-wide discussion or restructuring meetings can all assist in clearing the way for open communications.
The statements numbered 1-7 below are examples of mitigated speech. Once hints are being used to communicate serious safety concerns we have have definitely entered the territory of very heavily mitigated speech.
- Command – “Strategy X is going to be implemented”
- Team Obligation Statement – “We need to try strategy X”
- Team Suggestion – “Why don’t we try strategy X?”
- Query – “Do you think strategy X would help us in this situation?”
- Preference – “Perhaps we should take a look at one of these Y alternatives”
- Hint – “I wonder if we could run into any roadblocks on our current course”
- Say nothing