Leadership Lessons from Naked & Afraid
4 Step Process to Navigate Confrontation While Recognizing a Person’s Positive Self-Image.
There is more to learn from Naked & Afraid than how to survive in an extreme environment with no clothes. All throughout this show, there are great (and not so great) examples of leadership and team work.
If you’re unaware, Naked & Afraid is a reality show on Discovery Channel. Two strangers (1 man, 1 woman) are paired up and must survive in the wilderness for 21 days with no clothing and 1 tool (i.e. a machete or pot for boiling water). The contestants search for water, hunt and gather their food, and build shelters. At the end of the 21 days, the survivalists must arrive at the designated extraction point. There is no cash prize given to participate in this challenge.
During the summer, Naked & Afraid goes XL and ups the difficulty of the challenge. In Naked and Afraid XL 12 contestants (6 females; 6 males) must survive for 40 days. In season 2 (airing now) the survivalists are in South Africa — a very extreme environment. There are lions on the prowl, legions of ticks crawling everywhere, and daily 100 degree temperatures. I’ve never seen contestants so scared and depleted.
In last week’s episode of XL, there was a conflict in the camp. The group hadn’t eaten in days. Darrin and Steven decided to leave camp on a hunting expedition. They promised to return in two days. Steven constructed a spear like weapon and Darrin took a bow and arrow (which was considered a communal item by the group). After two days, they failed to make a kill. Steven decided to keep hunting and demanded that Darrin leave the bow with him. Darrin (upset with Steven’s decision) returned to the group.
Darrin portrayed Steven as an untrustworthy rogue to the group. The group decided to leave camp, find Steven, confront him, and take back the bow. Jake, the emergent leader of the group, was commissioned to do the talking.
Steven was in the wrong. He put himself and the group at risk. However, the head-on confrontational approach resulted in a big fight, hurt feelings, and further damaged trust. All the while draining precious emotional resources from a group of people trying to survive in an extreme environment.
So what can we learn from this scenario?
Robert Snyder in The Social Cognitive Neuroscience of Leading Organizational Change, writes, “Most psychologists believe that people in every culture around the world have this fundamental drive to think favorably of themselves (rather than unfavorably) and that positive self-images are strongly and consistently associated with both psychological well-being and effective performance” (p. 23).
Jake and the group failed to be mindful of the “self-image maintenance or enhancement framework” (p. 24) when confronting Steven.
If you watch Steven’s reflection on his choice to stay and hunt you’ll hear him say, “I’m a provider, that’s who I am. I work hard to help people and ensure they’re OK.” Steven was trying to live into his positive self-image by caring for the group. In other words, he made a poor decision, but his heart was in the right place.
When the group labeled him as an untrustworthy rogue, Steven was deeply hurt. He said, “Don’t you guys know me? Don’t you see how hard I’m trying to help?”
How could Jake have led more effectively in this situation?
1. Invited Steven to talk first. Give Steven the chance to explain himself and express his intentions (i.e. his positive self-image).
2. Acknowledge Steven’s intentions and thank Steven for working hard to provide for the group.
3. Explain why the group is upset. It’s not because Steven is a bad person, but that his choice posed a significant risk to the group.
4. Focus on their shared goal and collaborate on the path forward. If they are going to last 40 days and make it out alive, they are going to have to work together.
We’ll find out next week if this conflict breaks anyone emotionally and leads to people dropping out. Or will they give each other the benefit of the doubt and work towards their common goal.
