This past Sunday was the Academy Awards for Motion Pictures or the Oscars. Did you watch? I did for the fashions since most of the shows I have never seen due to the language or content. Content subjects don't deter me, but nudity and vulgarity does.
Anyway, for the Oscars it was very different than years past. It was an intimate affair of 200 people practicing social distancing and mask wearing at small tables in a small venue. The audience was made up of groups of people at tables not more than four people that had something in common - a film. They were the nominees and there by invitation only.
The greater difference other than the setup of the audience was the film subjects. It was the most diverse cast of actors and presenters, and the most diverse cast of films. More than the English language was spoken and more than Angelo-Americans were participating and winning. Heralded as the "most diverse year in Oscars history" by NPR, they stated,
According to UCLA's bi-annual Hollywood Diversity Report, which for 2021 is subtitled "Pandemic In Progress," Hollywood made enormous strides last year with regard to inclusion for women and people of color both in front of, and behind, the camera. The report usually covers only theatrical releases, but (like the Academy Awards) this year it also includes streaming to account for the way audiences saw movies in 2020. Among its findings: women and people of color gained ground in each job category it tracks (lead actors, total cast, writers and directors). In the top 185 films released, the report finds that people of color made up 39.7% of leading roles, a marked improvement from 2014, when UCLA launched the study, when people of color represented just 10.5%. Women had 47.8% of film leads, as opposed to 25.6% in 2011. And that diversity appears to be what audiences are looking for. The report found that on average, films with between 41-50% minority casts fared best at the box office, while films with less than 11% minorities fared worst (www.npr.org).
Why the change? I like to think that people were finally SEEN.
In an article, Be Seen as Leader, from the Harvard Business Review, "Social scientists have spent decades studying how individuals achieve status within organizational groups—that is, how they gain respect, prominence, and influence in the eyes of others. We know, for example, that demographics matter: People of the historically dominant race and gender and a respected age (white men over 40 in the western corporate world) are typically afforded higher status than everyone else.
Appearance also plays a role (the tall and the good-looking are favored over those less genetically blessed), as do personality (confident extroverts win out) and formal rank (the boss is the boss).
Thankfully, we also use more legitimate measures to size up new teammates. These include expertise, competence, and commitment—all good indicators of whether a person will command others’ respect. But although educational and professional credentials may testify to these assets, they can be difficult to assess immediately. So at first, as a shortcut, we often revert to using the aforementioned easily observable characteristics to determine who is worthy of leading the group" (https://hbr.org/2013/12/be-seen-as-a-leader)
In my opinion, the first impression of being truly seen is an inward expression of the outward appearance.
While it may be their outward appearance, personality, or formal rank that suggests they are a leader, I would argue its their leadership skills that will prove they are. Skills such as,
Patience
Empathy
Active listening
Reliability
Dependability
Creativity
Positivity
Effective feedback
Timely communication
Team building
Flexibility
Risk-taking
Ability to teach and mentor
So the next time you want to be seen, try out one of these skills above. You might not win an Academy Award for it, but you will certainly win a follower in your leader-follower relationship.
What She Said ~ Beverly
Comments