领导者发怒的艺术:看准时机 掌握火候

In a way, we are hard-wired to respect an angry leader, even if we don't admit it. In a 2001 study published by Stanford organizational behavior professor Larissa Tiedens, participants watched videos of Bill Clinton responding to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. One group viewed a video of a remorseful Clinton and the other saw a clip of the former president responding angrily. Then, researchers measured how the viewers rated Clinton's leadership ability. People who saw video clips of Clinton expressing anger rated him better fit to lead, Tiedens observed.
不论我们承认与否，对于愤怒的领导者，我们通常都会给予更多尊重。2001年，斯坦福大学（Stanford）组织行为学教授拉里萨?蒂登斯组织了一项研究，参与者分别观看了比尔?克林顿对莫妮卡?莱温斯基丑闻的反应。其中一组观看的是克林顿忏悔的视频，而另一组观看的视频则是这位美国前总统对此事大发雷霆。之后，研究人员要求参与者对克林顿的领导能力进行评分。结果蒂登斯发现，观看克林顿发怒视频的参与者对他的领导能力给予了更高的评价。

Of course, after you get people's attention or respect with an outburst, then comes the hard part: backing up what you say. Elop needs to deliver results after shifting strategy at Nokia, and a CEO making massive layoffs like Logue needs to actually turn the company around.
当然，作为领导者，通过发怒获得听众的关注或尊重之后所要做的事，才是最重要的：用行动为自己的话提供支持。埃洛普在调整诺基亚的策略之后，需要给大家一个交代；而像罗格那样的CEO，在宣布大规模裁员之后，则要真正让公司有所好转。

"In order to have dominance, there must be a tacit threat," says Robert Livingston, a professor of management at Northwestern's Kellogg management school. "If you're a bully and people don't think that you can beat them up, they're not going to give you the lunch money."
西北大学凯洛格管理学院（Northwestern's Kellogg management school）管理学教授罗伯特?利文斯顿表示：“要想获得支配地位，必然会面临隐性威胁。如果你是‘恶霸’，但人们认为你根本无力摆平他们，那你就别想从他们那里得到保护费。”