Embracing Responsible Transparency
By Kim Fox and Emme Nelson Baxter
3-minute read
You’re in front of the mirror, debating whether your pants are too this or that and you ask your spouse, “Do I look…uhm…bad in these?” It’s a test of trust. But let’s be real: While honesty is a virtue, radical transparency can end badly. At home or in the office.
For years, and fueled by social media’s culture of oversharing, radical transparency has swept through boardrooms and startups. The tell-all communications style has been viewed as a panacea for everything from miscommunication to poor morale.
Truth be told, radical transparency doesn’t always end well. Some things need to be held close to the vest. Think about personnel issues. Unbaked strategy. All the blow-by-blows of, say, a merger or a sale.
Reality TV goes corporate?
Imagine everything revealed and nothing off-limits. Radical transparency devotees believe everyone in an organization should have access to all information and share their honest opinions, no matter how uncomfortable.
Meanwhile, secrets and well-considered omissions are the scourge of productivity and authenticity.
The intention is noble. You can win greater trust, faster innovation and so much more.
CEOs acclaimed for success with this approach – championing it through sharing financials, challenges, wins and losses with both employees and the public – include Salesforce’s Marc Benioff push for total openness. Less effective was former Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, who instilled a culture of radical transparency which went as far as to allow execs to explain publicly why people got fired. “To many Netflixers, the culture, at its worst, can also be ruthless, demoralizing and transparent to the point of dysfunctional,” the WSJ wrote.
So, on the plus side, radical transparency has some mighty powerful benefits. It can help daylight issues before they become big problems. Boost culture and empower employees who might otherwise stay silent. Encourage accountability. And certainly, stifle the rumor mill – internally and externally.
But there is a cost. After all, people are people. Relationships are tricky. And if weaponized, transparency without discretion or context can lead to oversharing, injured feelings, information overload, anxiety and a toxic atmosphere where people are afraid to speak up. Top those off with PR disasters on the public front.
“Here’s the paradox: For all that transparency does to drive out wasteful practices and promote collaboration and shared learning, too much of it can trigger distortions of fact and counterproductive inhibitions,” writes Ethan Bernstein in the Harvard Business Review article “The Transparency Trap.”
Sometimes, transparency with mere facts can be a distortion of the larger truth.
In healthcare, the stakes are even higher. Imagine a data incident or a clinical error. Being “fully transparent” might tempt a leader to share every gritty, overwhelming detail. But a responsible response requires pausing to ask: Will this disclosure harm someone? Is it even factual yet? Is this information overload that erodes clarity? Am I sharing this for my audience’s benefit or for my own sense of openness?
Responsible transparency: saying what matters most
In sum, honesty is the best policy…even if some information needs to be honestly withheld.
Embrace the sweet spot of “responsible transparency.” That involves balancing transparency about goals, strategy and feedback with empathy and timing. Edit your expression to what matters most.
Ideally, responsible transparency is proactive, not reactive. It’s about consistent, clear, and empathetic communication to your stakeholders – internal and external.
Truth be told, most people expect you to be responsible with the information you have. Of some matters you can (and should) reasonably say, “I can’t share that today and here’s why.”
It’s the work of leadership to bring meaning and context information. You’re a shaper and a filter, not a funnel.
The most effective leaders gain trust when they align actions with words, acknowledge both good and bad news and create space for honest dialogue. They also provide:
- Context before content. Frame communication with the what, the why and next steps.
- Forward thinking. When sharing unwelcome news, pair it with what’s being done to address it.
- Smart sharing. Make sure your communication is relevant to your audience. That means delivering it to the right people, at the right time using the right messenger. Cascade throughout leadership levels so they can be prepared and supportive.
- Appropriate discretion. In a fast breaking, high-stakes crisis, “We don’t know yet,” is perfectly okay.
A leader’s look-in-the-mirror checklist
The mantra “First, do no harm,” goes for your words as well as your actions. Communicate with intention. Before addressing employees, media, or the public, ask yourself:
- Is this information confidential, or does it involve someone else’s privacy?
- Could sharing this disrupt operations or cause panic?
- Am I speculating? Or do I have all the facts?
- Have I filtered this message so that the audience can absorb it?
- Set aside what I want to say. What does my audience need or want to know?
- Why am I sharing this information – to inform, reassure or prompt action?
- Will this build trust—or erode it?
And about those pants?
“Honestly, your blue ones are my favorite – go with those.”
Now that’s responsible transparency.
Contributors:David Jarrard
Image credit: Shannon Threadgill
