Substance vs. Static: A Crucial Distinction for Organizational Health

It occurred to me recently that my children—digital natives every one of them—have little familiarity with static. They’ve grown up in an age when everything is immediately available in high resolution and crystal clear definition. I’ll admit some nostalgia here, by the way. There’s something wonderful about the experience of turning the tuning dial on your car radio, trying to find the best signal you can. 

But outdated metaphors aside, the point remains: One of any leader’s vital responsibilities is to make sure to distinguish between static and substance. 

Parsing External Information

We are bombarded with a torrent of information, propelled at us in unrelenting velocity and volume. There is some gain in all of this, to be sure. But it also raises significant challenges within any organization. For one, there is the external flow of information. Stakeholders within the organization are, both as individuals and as a team, constantly receiving information about the world that in turn shape their sense of how the organization relates to the broader world. That’s an inevitable reality and one that brings with it real opportunities. Knowledge is a priceless resource for any organization. For example, the sales department of a car dealership would do well to be tracking how supply chain issues in steel may or may not affect the manufacturing timeline for new models coming off assembly lines. In fact, knowledge of those developments may not only protect them from strategic missteps but may actually give them a competitive advantage if they take the right steps.

But not everything “out there” actually carries that kind of benefit to an organization. Every leader and organization has to ask a series of questions about that external information. A failure to do so exponentially heightens the risk of miscalculation and severe morale issues. 

First, is this true? Leaders have to help team members discern what’s true and what’s not. The ubiquity of information has made this exponentially more difficult, as evidenced in much of our public life. But leaders serve their organizations well when they actually confront disinformation, propaganda, and paranoia head-on. If they don’t, no one should be surprised when an organization becomes captive to the most outlandish conspiracy of the day.

Second, does this actually matter? One of the most liberating discoveries a leader can make is to recognize that most of what passes through your social media channels, your cable news alerts, or newspaper headlines actually has little bearing on your organization and its mission. There are exceptions, of course. And sometimes those developments that seem initially insignificant can sneak up on us (how many leaders fully appreciated the global impact that a coronavirus outbreak in China would eventually have?!). But most of the time, a lot of what transpires “out there” is just static, with no immediate significance for your team. And yet, our organizations can be consumed with energy spent on this static. No leader can afford to stick their head in the sand, blissfully oblivious to reality. But leadership demands the ability to focus, to thoughtfully tune out the things that need to be set aside in a given moment. If you can’t control it or can’t change it, there’s little point in devoting mental capital or organizational energy to it. This is why leaders have to regularly communicate through multiple channels within their organization, constantly clarifying priorities and ensuring that there is alignment with core strategic objectives.

Internal Communication and Static

The distinction between substance and static also holds true for internal information. The larger and more complex the organization, the greater the likelihood that there will be static within the organization. On any given day, organizations have their own share of unanswered questions, intrigue, and perhaps a bit of drama. A leader will either help bring clarity and focus, or they will foment the chaos. Effective leaders know how to parse the internal feedback loop that can often characterize organizational culture and make sense of what they are hearing. That kind of skill requires pretty quickly being able to gauge whether the things consuming internal communication are actually meaningful and helpful, or whether they are diverting energies away from the mission in unhealthy ways. Fundamentally, leaders have to always make sure that the truth is told and that trust is strengthened. But I’ve seen far too many leaders get trapped by internal communication loops that contribute nothing to their organizational momentum and instead only drag them down. 

The irony is that these dynamics hold true in every direction on the organizational chart. There are situations in which the leader may be prone to go “off message” and to project all sorts of unhelpful communication, both externally and internally. CEOs who are erratic, unpredictable, or volatile can be the worst offenders. Unfortunately, they leave their teams in a state of disequilibrium, constantly unsure of what direction the leader will take or what things will take priority on any given day. On the other hand, senior leaders who are characterized by consistency and focus, who have the ability to maintain focus and communicate accordingly, have the ability to clarify the path forward for the rest of the organization. Unfortunately, if the senior leader gets caught up in the static, others within the organization will follow the example. When this happens, the results can be catastrophic, pulling an entire organization toward mission and message drift and deepening internal conflict and instability. This is especially tragic when it happens in a church. When pastors succumb to bombast and hand-wringing hysteria, their congregations inevitably drift off course. That’s because the mission of the church is unchanging and the power of the gospel is not up for debate. Those unchanging realities are the very anchor of substance—of truth and mission—for the church. One would think pastors would be the most adept at distinguishing static from substance. After all, they have been called to be undershepherds of the Great Shepherd. But not even they are immune from these pressures.

If You’re Having Trouble, Change the Dial

Sometimes we grow so accustomed to the static, that we don’t even recognize it. But it has a corrosive effect, debilitating our own ability to function and undermining organizational health. That can make it even harder to recognize.

Here are just a few questions that might help diagnose if you’re getting trapped in static rather than substance.

First, what voices am I listening to? The truth is that amplifying static is big business these days. From the bombast of cable news and talk radio to the targeted algorithms of social media, every leader has to periodically pause and do an audit on the voices that are shaping their outlook on reality. 

Second, what sources of information are actually trustworthy and reliable? This obviously builds off the first question, but it demands we drill a bit deeper. Of course, we are all prone to think that the voices that validate our own opinions are inherently trustworthy. That’s a delusion of epic proportions, one that can be lethal. The far better question is whether our information comes from sources that are truthful. 

Third, if I did not have access to this information, would it matter? This might actually be the most important and challenging for some. The spirit of the age is one that seems to impose an artificial moral demand that each of us must be concerned about everything. But the truth is that much of the information that passes through your newsfeed on any given day actually has relatively little significance for you. It may be time for you to simply tune out or unsubscribe. 

Effective leaders have an ability to cut through the static and bring clarity, highlighting substance and getting their organizations focused on what really matters. That work never stops, requires regular and consistent communication, and real self-discipline on the part of leaders. But it is absolutely essential work.