????奧巴馬總統(tǒng)上任三年以來(lái)，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)一直增長(zhǎng)乏力，美國(guó)民眾對(duì)此很是惱火。上周，在玫瑰花園就失業(yè)問(wèn)題和國(guó)家赤字問(wèn)題發(fā)表的演說(shuō)中，奧巴馬總統(tǒng)似乎也難以抑制自己的怒火。

????人們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在此次演說(shuō)中，奧巴馬總統(tǒng)一反常態(tài)，他的語(yǔ)氣聽(tīng)起來(lái)并不像往常一樣冷靜，反而顯得咄咄逼人。《郝芬頓郵報(bào)》（The Huffington Post）簡(jiǎn)要報(bào)道了此次演講，更是將報(bào)道的標(biāo)題命名為《奧巴馬終于成熟了》（Obama Finally Grows a Pair）。

????事實(shí)證明，對(duì)于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者而言，憤怒是一種非常有用的情緒。但在公開(kāi)演說(shuō)這樣的活動(dòng)中表達(dá)自己的憤怒，卻是一門“技術(shù)活”，一旦搞砸了，就會(huì)引火燒身。

????麻省理工學(xué)院斯隆商學(xué)院（MIT's Sloan School of Management）講師維吉尼亞?海利-湯尼表示，最糟糕的情況是，演講者改變了語(yǔ)氣，卻沒(méi)有得到相應(yīng)的回應(yīng)。言者怒火中燒，聽(tīng)者無(wú)動(dòng)于衷，沒(méi)有比這更令人沮喪的事了。

????強(qiáng)硬的措辭能夠起到警醒的作用。今年早些時(shí)候，諾基亞（Nokia）CEO史蒂芬?埃洛普坦言公司當(dāng)前所面臨的危機(jī)，成功喚回了外界對(duì)公司的關(guān)注。埃洛普稱，諾基亞公司就像一個(gè)人，站在熊熊燃燒的平臺(tái)上，為了自救，唯一的選擇就是跳進(jìn)刺骨的冰水中。

????海利?湯尼稱，有時(shí)候，身處危機(jī)中的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者需要通過(guò)傳達(dá)自己的憤怒或表現(xiàn)得咄咄逼人，讓自己看起來(lái)與聽(tīng)眾感同身受。她想起自己之前的老板、時(shí)任道富集團(tuán)（State Street）CEO的羅納德?羅格。當(dāng)時(shí)，道富集團(tuán)要進(jìn)行大規(guī)模裁員，羅格稱由于金融危機(jī)的影響，自己也是被逼無(wú)奈。他對(duì)當(dāng)時(shí)的情況憤怒不已，并且毫不掩飾自己的情緒。結(jié)果，海利?湯尼說(shuō)，雖然裁員并不是好消息，但員工對(duì)羅格的話卻反響很好。

????不論我們承認(rèn)與否，對(duì)于憤怒的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者，我們通常都會(huì)給予更多尊重。2001年，斯坦福大學(xué)（Stanford）組織行為學(xué)教授拉里薩?蒂登斯組織了一項(xiàng)研究，參與者分別觀看了比爾?克林頓對(duì)莫妮卡?萊溫斯基丑聞的反應(yīng)。其中一組觀看的是克林頓懺悔的視頻，而另一組觀看的視頻則是這位美國(guó)前總統(tǒng)對(duì)此事大發(fā)雷霆。之后，研究人員要求參與者對(duì)克林頓的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)能力進(jìn)行評(píng)分。結(jié)果蒂登斯發(fā)現(xiàn)，觀看克林頓發(fā)怒視頻的參與者對(duì)他的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)能力給予了更高的評(píng)價(jià)。

????當(dāng)然，作為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者，通過(guò)發(fā)怒獲得聽(tīng)眾的關(guān)注或尊重之后所要做的事，才是最重要的：用行動(dòng)為自己的話提供支持。埃洛普在調(diào)整諾基亞的策略之后，需要給大家一個(gè)交代；而像羅格那樣的CEO，在宣布大規(guī)模裁員之后，則要真正讓公司有所好轉(zhuǎn)。

????西北大學(xué)凱洛格管理學(xué)院（Northwestern's Kellogg management school）管理學(xué)教授羅伯特?利文斯頓表示：“要想獲得支配地位，必然會(huì)面臨隱性威脅。如果你是‘惡霸’，但人們認(rèn)為你根本無(wú)力擺平他們，那你就別想從他們那里得到保護(hù)費(fèi)。”

????此外，怒火保持太長(zhǎng)時(shí)間也存在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。海利?湯尼認(rèn)為，首先，人們只能消化一定數(shù)量的負(fù)面情緒。其次，當(dāng)聽(tīng)眾在聽(tīng)一位帶有情緒的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者演說(shuō)時(shí)，他們會(huì)把演說(shuō)中的信息解讀為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者個(gè)人的信息，更多的是關(guān)于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的自我意識(shí)，而不是他所面對(duì)的聽(tīng)眾。雖然激烈的話語(yǔ)能夠引起聽(tīng)眾的注意，但如果這被認(rèn)為是以自我為中心的表現(xiàn)，那就得不償失了。

????當(dāng)然，奧巴馬總統(tǒng)之所以改變演說(shuō)的語(yǔ)氣，是因?yàn)槟壳懊绹?guó)的政治局勢(shì)處于一種復(fù)雜的均勢(shì)之中。選舉季即將來(lái)臨，但奧巴馬總統(tǒng)卻一直受到國(guó)會(huì)掣肘。他的一舉一動(dòng)都經(jīng)過(guò)精心設(shè)計(jì)，此次突然變調(diào)也不例外。美國(guó)共和黨眾議院全國(guó)委員會(huì)（National Republican Congressional Committee）前任主席湯姆?戴維斯認(rèn)為，這次演講只不過(guò)是奧巴馬總統(tǒng)的一步棋而已，并且也在外界的意料之中。戴維斯表示，奧巴馬會(huì)兼顧莊重的、身為總統(tǒng)的自我與對(duì)各種問(wèn)題憤怒不已的政治家這兩種身份。“作為旁觀者，批評(píng)他很容易，但實(shí)際上，他也只是在‘照本宣科’。”

????奧巴馬總統(tǒng)的“沖冠一怒”引起了人們的注意，看起來(lái)確實(shí)是一步好棋，但要想收到長(zhǎng)期的效果，還要看他他接下來(lái)的行動(dòng)。

????譯者：阿龍/汪皓

????After almost three years of President Obama's leadership, the economy is still dismal and Americans are angry. In a speech on unemployment and the national debt delivered from the Rose Garden last week, the president seemed fired up too.

????The president's tone was a marked departure from his usual, cool-headed demeanor. He sounded combative, and people noticed. The Huffington Post even recapped the speech in an article entitled "Obama Finally Grows a Pair."

????Anger, it turns out, can be a very useful emotion for leaders. But expressing anger during an event such as a public speech is a tricky tactic that, when executed poorly, can cause a backlash.

????But the worst-case response to a tone change like this one is to hear crickets, says Virginia Healy-Tangney, a lecturer at MIT's Sloan School of Management. After all, there's nothing more frustrating than getting no response when you're angry.

????Strong language can function as an effective wake-up call. Earlier this year, Nokia CEO Stephen Elop got the world to pay attention to his company again by the way he framed its current crisis. Elop said Nokia (NOK) was like a person standing on a burning platform and would have to jump into icy water to save itself.

????Leaders in crisis mode sometimes have to convey anger or aggressiveness to appear relevant, says Healy-Tangney. She remembers when Ronald Logue, then-CEO of State Street, her previous employer, spoke to the company about the massive layoffs he was forced to make because of the financial crisis. He was angry about the situation, and he conveyed it. Despite hearing tough news, employees responded well to the speech, Healy-Tangney says.

????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.

????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.

????"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."

????And staying angry for too long has its risks. For one, people can only stomach so much negativity. Secondly, when an audience listens to an emotional leader speak, they tend to interpret the message as personal, more about the leader's ego than the people they're addressing, says Healy-Tangney. While sharp words can be an effective call for attention, perceived selfishness is a huge turn-off.

????Of course, the president's tone has changed in the context of a complicated political balance. We're coming up on election time, and he has been repeatedly stymied by congress. Every move the president makes is extremely calculated, and a tone change is no different. This recent speech was a chess move, says Tom Davis, former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, and a pretty predictable one. Obama will oscillate between his stately, presidential self and a politician angered by the issues, Davis says. "It's easy to criticize him, sitting on the sidelines, but this is straight from a playbook."

????Now that people are listening, getting angry may look like a good move, but it will only pay off in the long run if he can execute.