April 23, 2024
by Stephen T. Messenger
A popular phrase in the military is, “Words matter.” You’ll usually hear this phrase when an ambiguous or undefined phrase is uttered to a higher-ranking person who doesn’t like what was just said. They’ll invariably glare at the speaker and remind the source with those dreaded two words that they’re disappointed in the other’s lack of proper language, inferring they’d never make such a careless mistake in their life (yeah, right?).
The phrase “words matter” often echoes in my mind when someone in a leadership position uses the word “I.” While “I” is not bad in itself, when talking about teams and groups, it’s best we use it sparingly. Unless we’re taking the blame for something, “I” should be avoided. “We” is the inclusive language of leaders and one we should use often.
The Power of Words
Words have tremendous power. They can evict emotion, translate meaning, influence others, and improve or degrade relationships. James in the Bible compares the power of words to a small rudder that can turn a large ship or a tiny spark with the ability to start a raging forest fire.
Shared positive language can shape organizational culture. Let’s imagine two different bosses. One uses the word “I” around the office. “I need 50 more widgets before the end of the day,” or “I need those reports finished in two hours.” This boss comes off as demanding, authoritative, and imbuing a sense of urgency, leaving “you” to succeed or fail by yourself.
A second boss sounds like this: “We need to make 50 more widgets before the end of the day,” and “We need to finish those reports in two hours.” Suddenly, the looming, stressful deadline that’s on your shoulders is a shared responsibility, with the boss invested in “our” success. It’s a nuanced change, but one with great psychological impact.
Using “we” over “I” increases feelings of teamwork, cooperation, and shared experience. Niklas Steffens and S. Alexander Haslam conducted a study of all Australian Prime Minister candidates since 1901 comparing their use of “I” versus “we.”
They found election winners used more collective pronouns than the losers 80% of the time. They used “we” or “us” every 79 words while the losers used them every 136. The researchers concluded that political victories are influenced by inclusive language and the ability to connect and engage with those their constituents.
In a second study, the authors along with Martin Fladerer and Dieter Frey observed the language of CEOs and their letters to stakeholders. The CEOs who used inclusive language and “we” more often had higher financial returns and average sales per employee. These politicians and CEOs who used inclusive language generated better results.
We Shall Fight on the Beaches
The war in Brittain was going poorly on June 4th, 1940. Germany had systematically occupied the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France in May. German airplanes were sporadically bombing London. At the Port of Dunkirk in France, 400,000 English and French soldiers were pinned down on the beach and forced to retreat across the English Channel in an embarrassing military disaster. Only with the help of civilian ships ferrying soldiers from France to England were they able avoid decimation.
Winston Churchill had been Prime Minister for 25 days and had to inspire his people to fight back. Many in Britain did not feel this was their war and their morale was described by the local paper as “zero.” Yet Churchill knew the only solution, and only option, was for Britain to stand strong in the face of adversity.
In what is widely considered his best public moment, Churchill spoke to the House of Commons and gave his “We Shall Fight on the Beaches” speech.
I have, myself, full confidence that if all do their duty, if nothing is neglected, and if the best arrangements are made, as they are being made, we shall prove ourselves once again able to defend our Island home, to ride out the storm of war, and to outlive the menace of tyranny, if necessary for years, if necessary alone…
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail.
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France,
we shall fight on the seas and oceans,
we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”
Churchill used the inclusive language of “we” to mobilize his people, and ultimately the United States. It was not “his” desire, wishes, or commands. They were collectively fighting an enemy and together suffering hardships to win back their freedoms. For the next four years, Britain did indeed fight everywhere Churchill said, and they fought it together.
The Power of “We”
The word “we” is powerful. It implies group commitment, teamwork, and collective labor for the greater good. It does not assess blame or praise on any one person, but instead brings groups together to celebrate the wins or understand the challenges.
“We” allows leaders to mobilize the masses to a common goal and have everyone rowing together in the same direction. Winston Churchill knew the power of “we,” and his language may have saved a Nation through that one speech. Great leaders know the power of “we” and gain forward momentum from multiple people. And followers know the power of “we” by perceiving the burden of success does not fall upon them but upon the team writ large.
Words matter—use “we” and reap the benefits.
Subscribe at this link above to The Maximum Standard. This platform is a free, no-ad site designed to help others live up to their full potential as a leader. Thank you for committing to something greater than yourself. Your leadership matters.
We are also looking for authors. You will reap the benefits by having an idea, putting it down on paper, wrestling with it a little, and publishing it for others to see. I encourage you to take this bold journey with us. We have editors standing by to help you.
This website is a personal blog and all writings, podcasts, opinions, and posts are the authors’ own and do not represent the views of the United States Army nor any other organization. Podcast music credit in this audio file is to: “Alex Productions – Legends” is under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 3.0). / @alexproductionsnocopyright
Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: • 🌆 Royalty Free Epic Cinematic Music -…
Fladerer, M. P., Haslam, S. A., Steffens, N. K., & Frey, D. (2021). The value of speaking for “Us”: The relationship between CEOs’ use of I- and we-referencing language and subsequent organizational performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(2), 299-313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09677-0
Steffens, N. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2013). Power through ‘us’: Leaders’ use of we-referencing language predicts election victory. PloS One, 8(10), e77952-e77952. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077952
The Maximum Standard 