How Leaders can Influence Through Language

Over two decades ago, Jay Conger argued that persuasion — not authority — had become the essential language of business leadership. He emphasized that effective persuasion required more than good arguments; it demanded credibility, emotional connection and a collaborative mindset. Today, in a more fragmented and fast-moving workplace, the stakes for effective leadership communication have only increased.

In response, scholars Jacqueline Mayfield, Milton Mayfield and William Sharbrough have modernized the conversation. Their 2015 article, Strategic Vision and Values in Top Leaders’ Communications, expands Motivating Language Theory (MLT) to the organizational level. This model gives leaders specific language strategies for expressing vision and values across diverse stakeholder groups.

Credibility as the Foundation of All Influence
Conger begins with credibility, the bedrock of persuasion. Leaders must earn trust through demonstrated expertise and authentic relationships. He warns that even the most compelling ideas will fail if the speaker lacks credibility in the eyes of the audience.

Mayfield et al. reinforce this view through the MLT lens. Their dimension of empathetic language, which includes expressions of appreciation, understanding and moral concern, is a linguistic pathway to credibility. Leaders who regularly use empathetic speech are perceived as more trustworthy and emotionally attuned.

Consider the example of Satya Nadella’s early days as CEO of Microsoft. Rather than impose immediate change, Nadella focused on listening tours across departments. He emphasized humility, openly referenced personal struggles and expressed admiration for employees’ past efforts, even as he began guiding the company away from its Windows-centric strategy. His credibility was not built through technical mastery alone but through empathetic communication that signalled mutual respect.

This aligns with Conger’s view that credibility must be built before persuasion can succeed, and shows how Mayfield et al.’s empathy-focused model gives leaders a tangible method to do so.

Framing the Message for Shared Meaning
Conger’s second persuasion step — framing for common ground — requires leaders to present their ideas in terms that stakeholders already care about. Leaders must build bridges between organizational goals and employee concerns.

Mayfield et al.’s meaning-making language expands this with structural clarity. It calls for leaders to embed values and strategic direction into language that resonates via storytelling, metaphors and public recognition.

A clear example comes from Alan Mulally’s tenure at Ford. When he took the helm during a period of steep financial losses, he framed Ford’s recovery not just as a business turnaround but as a mission to “build great products that people want and value.” His weekly business plan review meetings included open praise for honest reporting and cooperation, reinforcing a culture of shared purpose.

Through framing the turnaround as a values-based journey — one grounded in quality and integrity — Mulally applied both Conger’s framing principle and Mayfield et al.’s meaning-making construct. His messages were specific, consistent and culturally relevant to his audience.

Supporting Arguments with Evidence and Clarity
Conger’s third tenet is that persuasive leaders don’t rely on ideas alone. They offer vivid evidence and speak with precision, making abstract goals actionable.

Mayfield connects this principle to direction-giving language, which calls for leaders to reduce ambiguity by clearly articulating expectations, performance goals and consequences. Direction-giving isn’t about micromanaging. It’s about anchoring vision in concrete terms.

A strong example comes from Mary Barra, CEO of General Motors (GM). After GM faced major safety scandals, Barra instituted clear, organization-wide safety protocols and created the Speak Up for Safety initiative. She didn’t just declare a cultural shift — she detailed what behaviours were expected, how employees could report concerns and what changes would be made. Her communications were not just aspirational; they included mechanisms and metrics.

Emotional Connection as the Catalyst
Conger’s final principle is emotional connection. Persuasion works best when leaders can resonate with the hopes, fears and values of their audience.

Mayfield et al.’s model incorporates this at every level, especially through empathetic language, but takes it further by showing how this connection can scale across an organization.

Consider Tim Cook’s communications following the passing of Steve Jobs. Cook consistently acknowledged Jobs’ legacy while emotionally inviting employees to carry it forward. He connected present action to past meaning and made space for collective sentiment during a time of organizational grief. His language was inclusive and purpose-oriented, helping to stabilize the company’s emotional climate.

This is what Mayfield et al. call organizational-level empathy, and it demonstrates how emotional connection, when embedded in strategic messaging, helps secure stakeholder confidence and commitment.

A Unified Approach to Persuasive Leadership
Conger taught that persuasion is a process of learning, compromise and emotional resonance. Mayfield et al. builds on that foundation by showing how language, when crafted with intent, can carry that persuasion across teams, time zones and business units.

The future of leadership communication is not about charisma. It is about structure and sincerity, clarity and care. Leaders who understand how to blend vision with credibility, direction with empathy, and goals with meaning will not only communicate better, they will lead better.

Tyler Holt is the editor of Wood Industry magazine. He has a master’s degree in literature and publication, and years of experience in the publishing and digital media industry. His main area of study is the effect of digital technologies on industrial and networked production.