“Manipulating” is an action on others that is certainly bad. Is it so safe? Using examples from the world of commerce and industry, business consultant Pierre d'Elbée deciphers the different meanings of the word “manipulation”.
New York, 1920s. Women who smoke are still stigmatized. The American Tobacco Company entrusted advertising executive Edward Bernays with the mission of breaking this ban to increase sales of Lucky Strike among women. Bernays will imagine transforming the cigarette into a symbol of freedom. In 1929, he took advantage of the Easter parade to organize a parade of elegant women where each one would ostentatiously light their cigarette. He warns the press, and makes this parade a media and feminist coup: at the same time as it illustrates the power of the press on social behavior, this clever manipulation will cause a spectacular increase in tobacco sales to women. Nicknamed “torch of freedom”, the cigarette is a sign of their emancipation.
Management according to Lou Gerstner
1990s. To save IBM from the crisis, its president Lou Gerstner chose to transform its culture: in addition to selling products, IBM will now offer global solutions to its clients. To anchor this change, Gerstner is launching an internal campaign focused on collaboration and adaptability, and he is rewarding these new expected behaviors. In a few years, its strategy united employees and restored IBM's competitiveness, thus illustrating that a vision shared by staff can fundamentally reshape an organization.
Can we talk about manipulation here? If we consider that Lou Gerstner influenced the behavior of his employees without necessarily making his intentions completely explicit, the answer is “yes”: disoriented by the crisis in their company, the employees were easily receptive to a promising message of a better future. Faced with the vision of a “new IBM” that is agile and collaborative, some will say that it is strategic, we can always interpret it as a form of subtle control, suitable for disguised manipulation. However, Gerstner's manipulation is not of the same nature as that of Bernays. His approach was based on benevolent intention and a certain transparency. It was not a question of deceiving employees or imposing on them a vision contrary to their values, but of bringing them together around a common objective: saving the company and therefore guaranteeing their future, thus creating a “win-win” dynamic. “. Furthermore, unlike manipulation which often relies on dissimulation, Gerstner encouraged the voluntary commitment of everyone by presenting them with a clear course. A leadership that could be said to be inspiring and unifying.
Is there such a thing as “good handling”?
The linguist Alain Rey locates the word manipulation from medieval Latin manipulation which first meant “to lead by the hand”. By extension, manipulate has taken on the meaning of “handle and transport”: nothing perverse in that. It was in the 19th century that the figurative meaning “to arrange by occult and suspicious means” and more generally, “to influence someone without their knowledge” appeared: in this sense, to manipulate took the place of handling.
However, there is a “beneficial manipulation”: the physiotherapist who does you good by manipulating your back without necessarily giving you an explanation, the teacher who arouses the curiosity of his students… without their knowledge, the public health campaigns which use marketing techniques (slogans or strong images) to encourage healthy behavior… Finally, the manager who adjusts his speech according to his employees to push them to overcome their own blockages and reveal their potential. Nothing but very ethical in all of this!
Towards respectful handling
Manipulation becomes ethical when it comes from a benevolent intention: to help, protect or inspire people, without ever harming their interests. Even if the details are not explicit, it is transparent on the essentials. Finally, it ensures a common good: all those interested derive a real benefit from it. If these three conditions were not respected by Edward Bernays, they were much more so by Lou Gerstner.
