Leaders who suppress discontent are setting the stage for the next eruption. Look at France.

Shopkeepers are boarding up their shops. People are taking to the streets again. The government is mobilising tens of thousands of police officers. Protests are taking place across France, in Paris and many other cities. There are also demonstrations and clashes elsewhere in Europe.

Meanwhile, almost every statement I hear from those in power seems to be about preventing further disorder. The mainstream media are also full of images of destruction, looting and clashes. What those rioters are doing is disgusting. Crack down harder. Restore order.

But is the story really that simple?

I condemn theft, violence and vandalism. Absolutely. But I refuse to believe that naming those things means we have identified the problem. I believe there is a much bigger problem underneath: leadership. Let’s finally name the elephant in the room.

Where are the leaders who tell us what they got wrong? Which warning signs did they ignore? Which consequences of their decisions did others have to bear? What are they going to change themselves?

As long as their answer mainly describes how other people should behave, they keep themselves out of the firing line.

Confusing Calm with Trust

On 22 October, Emmanuel Macron said, in translation: “The general recommendation is that no demonstrations take place in the coming days.”

Gatherings called by organisers who, according to him, had no legitimacy were to be banned. Alternative routes would be considered for trade union demonstrations.

That is a clear message. The government wants calm.

But what is someone supposed to do with their frustration when they no longer believe that the same government is listening? Where can they turn with their concerns about purchasing power, housing, safety or immigration policy? What is left when they keep hearing that their concerns are understood, but experience no improvement?

That frustration does not disappear because a street is closed off. It goes home with them. It is discussed around the kitchen table, at work and among friends. And when the next promise comes, they think: here we go again.

Macron has once again acknowledged concerns and announced talks. That is in his full speech. But that is only the starting point for assessing his leadership. What will those talks change? Because repeating that promise without delivering change only makes things worse! Which decisions will be reconsidered? Where will people be able to point to something and say that their concerns have actually been acted on?

Anyone who confuses calm with trust has not understood what is broken.

Take Responsibility Now

This behaviour does not stop at the French border.

In Amsterdam, at the press conference about the horrific death of Hajar, whose body was found in a suitcase in the water, Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema said the following about the debate surrounding the background of the suspect, a 23-year-old Somali man: “This is neither the place nor the moment for that.” AT5

Then when?

After the horrific murder of 17-year-old Lisa, another young woman has had her life violently taken from her. Lisa was cycling home after a night out. She was attacked, called 112 herself and was stabbed to death.

The man who confessed to her murder was staying at an asylum reception centre. He also confessed to the violent rape of another woman, five days before Lisa’s murder. That woman was beaten, suffered a broken jaw and, according to reports, was raped for an hour. He also confessed to an earlier attempted rape. AT5

That is disgusting. People are furious, women feel unsafe, and questions remain about the suspects’ backgrounds, missed warning signs and the responsibility of the authorities. Those questions do not disappear because a public official postpones the conversation.

This is precisely the moment to take responsibility.

Stand up. Answer for your actions. Explain which warning signs were missed, which decisions were wrong and what you are going to do today to protect women better. Examine your own role with the same determination you bring to judging other people’s behaviour. And if it turns out that you have seriously failed, accept the consequences. Even if that means resigning.

A real leader takes action, shows what is changing and remains accountable for the results. They do not wait for the outrage to blow over and the next press conference to come along.

When you keep telling people that their questions must wait, you allow their anger and distrust to grow. A public official who evades responsibility fuels the very unrest they claim to want to prevent.

So take responsibility. Take action. Show results. And anyone unwilling to carry that responsibility needs to get the hell out.

What infuriates me about reactions like these is how easily the focus shifts to those who cause disruption, use the wrong words or ask unwelcome questions. Other people’s behaviour is discussed at length. The leader’s own role will have to wait. Until eventually it is never discussed at all.

Toxic Leadership in the Workplace

We see examples of this in the workplace too.

You tell your manager that the workload is unsustainable. He thinks you need to plan better. You point out that agreements keep being broken. He asks for flexibility. You challenge the way he treats people. Suddenly, your tone is the problem.

Before you know it, you are having a conversation about your development, when you came to explain what is going wrong under his leadership.

That is toxic.

Especially when it becomes a pattern. When problems are repeatedly handed back to the person who raises them. When honesty is encouraged as long as nobody says anything that makes life difficult for the leadership.

In my article on recognising a toxic work environment, I describe issues including poor communication, leaders who do not listen, loss of motivation, absenteeism and people leaving. A director can recognise every one of those signs and still insist that the real problem is having hired the wrong people.

I Used to Be That Kind of Boss

I know, because I used to be that kind of boss myself.

My employees were calling in sick more often, losing motivation and leaving. I had plenty of explanations. It was winter. The market was tough. Clients were demanding. My people were young and wanted more money and recognition, but in my view they were not particularly willing to work for it.

It was not my fault. Hadn’t I built the business into what it was?

I hired a coach to solve their problems. Without telling me what was coming, the coach organised an evening of feedback where three groups of employees could explain what I was doing wrong.

There I sat, with all my convictions about them. Completely blindsided. And thank goodness for that.

One evening showed me how carefully I had kept myself out of the problem. I had judged my employees by their behaviour without really examining what my leadership was doing to them.

That insight has stayed with me. It is why I find it so hard to tolerate leaders who have someone else lined up to blame for every failure. I recognise that attitude. I know how convincing your own story sounds when you mainly listen to yourself.

Silence Is Not a Satisfaction Survey

Suppose two out of two hundred employees say that something is seriously wrong. A poor director counts two and finds that reassuring. After all, you do not hear from the other 198.

What a lazy conclusion.

He does not know who has tried speaking up before. Who is afraid of the consequences. Who is already looking at vacancies or has decided to do only what they are paid to do. Yet he uses their silence to dismiss those two employees’ complaint.

Those two are giving him information he needs. They are offering him a chance to intervene before the damage gets worse.

The same applies to social unrest. The people demonstrating are visible. Beyond them are others living with concerns, frustration and distrust. Counting only the participants tells you nothing about what is happening beneath the surface.

Silence is not a satisfaction survey.

A good leader wants to know what people have stopped telling him. A bad leader is mainly relieved that he does not have to hear it. And the very worst leaders, of whom there apparently are a great many in the world right now, send a unit of riot police after you. Even when, as happened today, you are peacefully playing in an orchestra in front of a monument and find yourself engulfed in tear gas.

That is not listening. That is tyranny!

Look at the Leader You Still Defend

It is easy to read this article and immediately think of the politician you despise or the director whose company you once left.

Take a look at the person you still defend, too.

Does he answer difficult questions? Does he acknowledge mistakes without immediately pointing at someone else? Does anything change when people show that his decisions are causing harm? What happens to the person who challenges him?

Perhaps he once built something extraordinary. Perhaps he represents your political beliefs. Perhaps you have spent years telling other people that he was the right person.

That does not oblige you to keep making excuses for his behaviour.

Someone who shares your ideas can still lie. Someone who once led well can now be mainly concerned with protecting his position. And your loyalty helps nobody when it shields him from accountability.

Withholding Information Misleads People

Anyone who deliberately withholds information misleads people. Look at the mainstream media’s coverage of the first protests in France: first students, later joined by taxi drivers and healthcare workers, while X.com and Facebook are full of footage of African looters emptying shops, with barely a white man or woman to be seen.

Anyone who keeps twisting criticism into a lack of loyalty makes problems harder to solve. Anyone who rewards agreement and punishes dissent creates their own ignorance.

There is no need to find gentler words for that.

Anyone who uses violence or loots bears responsibility for it. A leader must not hide behind that.

Restoring order is part of governing. Investigating why trust is disappearing is too. You cannot keep demanding that other people change their behaviour while keeping your own decisions out of the investigation.

Some Leaders Deserve a Mirror

That is why some leaders deserve a mirror. Make them stand in front of it for a week. Longer, if necessary. Until they dare to look at the warning signs they brushed aside, the people they belittled and the consequences they kept attributing to others.

Anyone who refuses must step aside.

I once thought my employees needed to change. I had even paid a coach to make it happen. Fortunately, that coach did not let me get away with my story.

If everyone under your leadership has to change except you, stay in front of that mirror a little longer.

So my question is: “When did you last seriously examine criticism of your leadership?”