When we think about leadership, what often comes to mind? For many, it’s about getting people to take action through rewards or penalties—motivating through incentives and disincentives. But is this truly effective leadership? While the use of carrots and sticks may get immediate results, it’s far from a strategic approach. In fact, it often leads to what can be called “liquid interaction”—shallow, unproductive engagement that fails to deliver solid, long-term results. To achieve meaningful, strategic leadership, we need something more. We need a common frame of reference—a shared vision that unites people around clear goals.
The Pitfalls of Simple Motivation: Can Incentives Really Drive Long-Term Success?
Even when we share the same language or come from similar cultural backgrounds, the meaning behind words can vary drastically. This is particularly true when we consider different departments or teams within an organization. Take, for instance, the tension between IT and information security teams in an enterprise. While IT’s focus may be on keeping systems running smoothly, the information security team is tasked with ensuring those same systems are not exploited. In this dynamic, words like “risk” carry entirely different meanings for each group. Establishing a common understanding of these terms—along with the broader goals—can help bridge the gap and align efforts.
Without this groundwork, internal biases thrive, creating friction and confusion between teams that should be collaborating. So, how do we get past these obstacles? How do we align people toward a common objective?
The Balance Between Immediate Action and Long-Term Vision
Consider the continuum between acute problems and chronic issues. In an enterprise or manufacturing setting, daily tasks need to be completed—often immediately. However, there’s also the need to look beyond the present moment and anticipate how today’s actions will impact tomorrow’s outcomes. This foresight is what distinguishes a strategic leader from a day-to-day manager.
Imagine a manufacturing example: what happens when a worker takes one less turn on a screw? On the surface, it might save time, increasing throughput. But, if this shortcut leads to more defects due to improper loading of the screw, the results are less straightforward. This same phenomenon can be observed in information security and compliance efforts, where shortcuts in assessments can lead to unintended consequences down the road. A strategic leader understands the causal links between actions and results and communicates them effectively.
What’s the True Value of a Suggestion?
Would you reward someone who identifies a potential problem in the manufacturing process? What if addressing that issue increased throughput by 30% but also doubled the defect rate? For industrial engineers, these are the kinds of questions that demand careful statistical analysis—input, output, and measurable results. But do you, as a strategic leader, need to focus only on the numbers? Or do you need to consider a broader perspective?
As a strategic leader, you must be able to apply context that transcends the operational mindset of bean counting. You should be focused on how the issue aligns with your mission and vision—not just the immediate numbers. How you answer questions like this one reveals whether you are truly thinking strategically. It’s not just about the stakeholders who hold the purse strings—they already have a strategic view. It’s about connecting with your employees, ensuring they understand the bigger picture, and bringing their cognitive, intellectual, and emotional support into the fold.
The Power of Human Interaction in Leadership
It’s essential to understand that leadership is fundamentally about human interaction. The way you communicate can drastically impact the outcome of any situation. Whether through email, blog posts, vlogs, or face-to-face meetings, the medium you choose changes the message—and the result. Leadership demands human connection; without it, there’s an unpredictable element that can derail progress.
In today’s world, we are seeing the effects of a growing absence of human interaction. With the rise of digital communication and remote work, organizational flow has been disrupted. Teams struggle to collaborate effectively without meaningful face-to-face exchanges. Leadership, at its core, requires human connection—because human interaction is what drives clarity, understanding, and results.
Why Human Interaction is the Key to Strategic Leadership
As we continue to navigate a world that increasingly relies on digital communication, we must remember that strategy and leadership are not just about the ideas themselves—they are about how those ideas are communicated. Human interaction isn’t just a nice-to-have component; it’s a necessity. When you, as a leader, engage directly with your team, you create the space for understanding, trust, and, ultimately, better outcomes.
Leadership demands more than simple management. It demands a deep understanding of how each decision, each communication, and each action fits into a larger vision. To achieve this, we must lean into the power of human interaction, ensuring that every step we take is grounded in shared understanding, not just transactional exchanges.
In the end, strategic leadership is about more than motivating with rewards and punishments. It’s about building relationships, fostering a shared vision, and ensuring that every action taken moves the organization closer to its mission. It’s time to shift our focus—leadership is not just about getting people to do things; it’s about creating the environment where they want to act, before you even ask them to.
A great book recommendation based on this article is “Leaders Eat Last” by Simon Sinek. This book explores how great leaders build trust, foster collaboration, and create an environment where people are motivated not by rewards and punishments but by a shared sense of purpose. It aligns well with the article’s emphasis on human interaction, shared vision, and strategic leadership that goes beyond simple incentives.
