Leadership and Neuroscience: today effective leadership is in debt of theories and findings of researches in many sciences. Neuroscience researches as an interdisciplinary emerging science is going to be an important fundamental for applied disciplines such as leadership and organizational behavior. How can we asses the relation between Leadership and Neuroscience?
Study of organization behavior and interaction between the people in levels of group, community and organization is influenced by findings of neuroscience. Breakthroughs in brain research explain how to make organizational transformation succeed and how leadership would be effective. Interaction between the leader and followers is one of the topics in neuroscience and brain study. What can be done in mindset and brain when followers obey the leaders in group, organization as well as community? The coronavirus is rattling markets and whipping communities into a frenzy. We can determine the impact of crisis on management or leadership and neuroscience. Especially in time of crisis such as Corona era, it’s important for leaders to stay cool under pressure, make the right decisions for all stakeholders, and then execute those decisions effectively. But uncertainty lies at the heart of this crisis, so what exactly are leaders to do? So let`s see examples and cases in below:
Coronavirus INFODEMIC and its influence on people`s behaviors and irrational beliefs about COVID-19 therapy and Vaccination
In an articlePredrag Teovanović and colleagues (Nov, 2020) indicated that with the coronavirus pandemic, societies are forced to introduce new measures to curb the infection rate. This means that ordinary people are asked to adopt enhanced protective health behaviors, such as physical distancing and frequent handwashing. However, along with these official recommendations, people are exposed to “infodemic,” means pseudoscientific information and unverified content pertaining to COVID‐19, which have proliferated rapidly through social media (Depoux et al., 2020; Kouzy et al., 2020; Mian & Khan, 2020; Zarocostas, 2020) In the coronavirus “infodemic,” people are exposed to official recommendations but also to potentially dangerous pseudoscientific advice claimed to protect against COVID‐19. Neuroscientists study on how irrational beliefs predict adherence to COVID‐19 guidelines as well as susceptibility to such misinformation. Irrational beliefs were indexed by belief in COVID‐19 conspiracy theories, COVID‐19 knowledge overestimation, type I error cognitive biases, and cognitive intuition. In fact, scientists are “not just fighting an epidemic; they’re fighting an infodemic. Fake news spreads faster and more easily than this virus, and is just as dangerous” (WHO, 2020). Cognitive biases, as systematic departures from what is normatively defined rational behavior, can be viewed as a relatively broad category of irrational beliefs. Taking into account that the cognitive biases space is considerably heterogeneous (see, for example, Kahneman & Frederick, 2005; Pohl, 2004; Stanovich, 2009; Teovanović et al., 2015). A starting point for social and behavioral sciences to mitigate the effects of global pandemics (Van Bavel et al., 2020) is to understand the psychological underpinnings of health behaviors during the course of the crisis. Neuroscience findings show that irrational beliefs are an important factor to consider when tailoring behavioral health policies, especially in a global health crisis. So you can see the impact of study Leadership and Neuroscience in both examples.
Bruce L. Miller, MD, mentioned in JAMA paper that the US public health response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been dismal, characterized by antimask behavior, antivaccine beliefs, conspiracy theories about the origins of COVID-19, and vocal support by elected officials for unproven therapies. Less than half of the people in the US heed health recommendations to wear a mask when out in public.
So you can see arising some questions about Covid-19 treatments and vaccinations such as:
– Can a COVID-19 vaccine make me sick with COVID-19?
-After getting a COVID-19 vaccine, will I test positive for COVID-19 on a viral test?
-How do I know which sources of COVID-19 vaccine information are accurate?
It can be difficult to know which sources of information you can trust. But now there are authorized and recommended COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, accurate vaccine information is critical. CDC had to try for answering questions about COVID_19 Vaccinations.
Case of pharmaceutical company CEO
Mike is the CEO of a multinational pharmaceutical company, and he’s in trouble. With the patents on several key drugs due to expire soon, his business desperately needs to become more entrepreneurial, particularly in its ability to form internal and external partnerships to reduce time-to-market. Yet his organization has a silo mentality, with highly competitive teams secretly working against one another. How can Mike change the way thousands of people at his company think and behave every day?
Some people and businesses everywhere face this kind of problem: Success isn’t possible without changing the day-to-day behavior of people throughout the company. But changing behavior is hard, even for individuals, and even when new habits can mean the difference between life and death. In many studies of patients who have undergone coronary bypass surgery, only one in nine people, on average, adopts healthier day-to-day habits. The others’ lives are at significantly greater risk unless they exercise and lose weight, and they clearly see the value of changing their behavior. But they don’t follow through. So what about changing the way a whole organization behaves? The consistently poor track record in this area tells us it’s a challenging aspiration at best. During the last two decades, scientists have gained a new, far more accurate view of human nature and behavior change because of the integration of psychology (the study of the human mind and human behavior) and neuroscience (the study of the anatomy and physiology of the brain).
The implications of this new research are particularly relevant for organizational leaders. It is now clear that human behavior in the workplace doesn’t work the way many executives think it does. That in turn helps explain why many leadership efforts and organizational change initiatives fall flat. And it also helps explain the success of companies like Toyota and Springfield Remanufacturing Corporation, whose shop-floor or meeting-room practices resonate deeply with the innate predispositions of the human brain. Managers who understand the recent breakthroughs in cognitive science can lead and influence mindful change: organizational transformation that takes into account the physiological nature of the brain, and the ways in which it predisposes people to resist some forms of leadership and accept others. This does not imply that management — of change or anything else — is a science. There is a great deal of art and craft in it. But several conclusions about organizational change can be drawn that make the art and craft far more effective (https://www.strategy-business.com/article/06207?gko=f1af3). The future is inherently uncertain—and the brain loathes uncertainty. For our brains, the experience of uncertainty is both cognitively taxing and subjectively aversive. In fact, processing uncertainty is so unpleasant that it affects decision making, mental risk assessment, and even our ability to learn.
David Rock and Jeffrey Schwartz mentioned that Managers who understand the recent breakthroughs in cognitive science can lead and influence mindful change: organizational transformation that takes into account the physiological nature of the brain, and the ways in which it predisposes people to resist some forms of leadership and accept others. This does not imply that management — of change or anything else — is a science. There is a great deal of art and craft in it. But several conclusions about organizational change can be drawn that make the art and craft far more effective. These conclusions would have been considered counterintuitive or downright wrong only a few years ago. For example:
- Change is pain. Organizational change is unexpectedly difficult because it provokes sensations of physiological discomfort.
- Behaviorism doesn’t work. Change efforts based on incentive and threat (the carrot and the stick) rarely succeed in the long run.
- Humanism is overrated. In practice, the conventional empathic approach of connection and persuasion doesn’t sufficiently engage people.
- Focus is power. The act of paying attention creates chemical and physical changes in the brain.
- Expectation shapes reality. People’s preconceptions have a significant impact on what they perceive.
- Attention density shapes identity. Repeated, purposeful, and focused attention can lead to long-lasting personal evolution.
World Business Institute at the United States (WBIUS) provides a strong platform for fulfilling your business needs and expectations, academically and professionally. All you can do is just contact to the institute at www.wbius.com and get assistant from the institute.
As Peter F. Drucker said, “We now accept the fact that learning is a lifelong process of keeping abreast of change. And the most pressing task is to teach people how to learn.” In the knowledge economy, where people are being paid to think, and with constant change, there is more pressure than ever to improve how we learn. Perhaps these findings about the brain can start to pull back the curtain on a new world of productivity improvement: in our ability to bring about positive, lasting change in ourselves, in our families, in our workplaces, and in society itself (https://www.strategy-business.com/article/06207?gko=f1af3 ).