New book publication

There is an interesting new book due out early 2012, that looks at coaching in high-stress environments.  'Market Mind Games, The Astounding New Psychology of Risk, Uncertainty and Complexity' by Denise Shull looks at the decision-making practices of city-traders.  We will be reviewing the book once we receive our copy in Feb.  Check out the Executive Lounge section of our website for further details of this and other books we have reviewed. 

Never in jest....?

I recently re-discovered this little gem in 'The Little Book of Management Bollocks' by Alistair Beaton (Pub. Pocket Books):

"The core values of an effective manager always reflect the core values of his or her employer.  Should your own core values be different from your employer's, ask yourself, 'whose core values are more important, mine or my employer's?'  If your answer is, 'well mine of course', then you urgently need to upgrade your core values."

Although obviously written to make us smile, do find an element of truth in this?  Have you ever worked in a company where you were required to do things that didn't 'sit well' or 'feel right' with you?  Much of the coaching work we do, when people are experiencing stress, has at its core a mis-match between personal and organisational values.  It never ceases to amaze me how something so intangible and invisible can have such an effect on behaviour.  Of course, the opposite is also true - getting a complementary match between organisational and individual values can lead to real engagement.

Steve Jobs

A friend sent me this today and it captures how this great innovator led his life - an inspiration to us all.

"Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything - all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.

Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma - which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice.

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle."

Does your goal setting measure up? Putting the 'M' in SMART

Read any book on performance management and you will soon come across a chapter on the importance of goal-setting.  A mnemonic that is familiar to students of this topic is SMART – making your goals Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic/Relevant and Timebound.  This article considers the importance of Measurement in the goal-setting process.  Two oft-quoted phrases around good management practice are:

‘If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it’ and, ‘You get what you measure’

So if it is so important, why is measurement of performance either neglected or just misunderstood?  Perhaps it is because not all measures are the same, and so we need to carefully select what type of measure is best for the particular task we are trying to manage.

Why do we need measures?  I think there are three main reasons:

• To give someone a target to aim for (That is telling them what a good job looks like)
• To have a system for tracking progress.
• To have a system for taking corrective action, when required.

To read our 7 key messages for effective measurement, visit our Executive Lounge at http://www.enthiostraining.co.uk/ and click on Downloads. 

Miles

Performance Management

We've been doing some really interesting stuff around performance management with a client of ours who is launching their new performance review process.  A few questions to ponder on:

What is the difference between a goal and motivation?  Sometimes 'SMART' is not enough, and sometimes we can be motivated by a goal which isn't well defined.

How should you measure success?  How do you do this in a busy world?

How do you give feedback which will change attitudes? 

When is it best to use a coaching style and when should you be more directive?

Over August, we will be putting up some of our own thoughts on these questions and performance management in general.

Feel free to add to the debate!

Talent Management by Attracta Mooney

This article appeared in the ILM news in June, announcing '1 in 3 workers not achieving their full potential'.  Who says that soft skills development doesn't deliver tangible, measurable performance - just look what people say when they are missing!

"A lack of communication between upper management and employees is leading to low motivation levels, a study from European Leaders shows.In total, 64% claimed they would work more efficiently if they were better motivated by management.

Bosses need to be more aware of the skills employees have and what expertise is being underused, the research also found.

Ashley Ward, director of European Leaders, said management needs to listen more to the views of their workforce and utilise their skills."A seemingly negligible investment can get teams much closer to their full potential performance, resulting in a happier workforce and significant financial benefits," he added.

A recent study by engagement specialist Peter Wilde for Activitymix found that employees are generally happy with their jobs, but their opinions of their bosses have worsened over the last couple of years."

Surely organisations cannot afford to stick their heads in the ground while such potential is going untapped?
Kate Peacock 

Happiness at work

Interesting article in the Guardian by Prof Cary Cooper & Stephen Wood on the importance of well-being at work and what makes happy workers.  The rules for creating positive working environments are quite simple, but often ignored.  You can also take a quick quiz to measure your own level of happiness.  Fascinating insight into the topic and how it links with the current drive for employee engagement.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/jul/15/happiness-work-why-counts
Miles

The Right Coach: Howard Morgan, Phil Harkins and Marshall Goldsmith

Executive coaching is a precision tool for optimising the abilities of leaders.  Most often, coaching focuses on the leader’s individual effectiveness.  In other cases, the coaching aims more at the leader’s effectiveness within a team environment or at this or her capabilities to drive organisational change.  Regardless of where coaching aims on the leadership spectrum, the executive coach works in close, trusted partnership with the leader.  The coach applies experience, know-how, and insight to key areas, and judiciously pushes the client beyond his or her comfort zone to reach levels of performance greater than the client would have achieved alone – all within an accelerated time frame.

Coaching is not just for problems anymore.  Ten years ago, coaching primarily concentrated on people with performance issues.  A coach came on board because a leader’s personal style had a negative impact on peers and reports, or because his or her skill set was inadequate – conditions that were leading to derailment.  Today the impression has turned 180 degrees.  As the marketplace has become increasingly competitive and fast-moving, organisations now realise they must work with speed and precision to enable key people to achieve critical business objectives.  In response, coaching has embraced a whole new focus: how to take good people and make them the best they can be, positioning them to work more effectively and cohesively in their environments, and making the most of their capabilities.  In other words, coaching is now most often applied to top performers whose leadership and growth potential are highly valued by the organisation.

To define what coaching is, let’s examine what it isn’t.  Coaching often differs, for example, from consulting.  As outsiders, neither coach nor consultant is likely to understand the client’s business environment as well as the client does.  Both coach and consultant rely on data gathering to interpret the organisation’s or individual’s challenges.  However, although the consultant uses that data to prepare a path for others to follow, the coach uses it to build the critical capabilities of key people so that they themselves can forge their own paths.  Unlike the consultant, the coach works in partnership with the client to discover solutions together, finding them through careful listening, provocative questioning, enlightened guidance, and the right level of prompting at the right time.  To a great degree, the coach’s goal is to enable the client to find the right answers by him- or herself.

Although coaching may sometimes feel like something halfway between the couch and the confessional, coaching is not therapy.  The orientation is very different.  The coach may use some of the listening and analytical tools of therapy to build connection, trust, and openness.  But although personal issues or deeper problems are likely to arise in the course of working together, the coach is not meant, and is usually not qualified, to provide more than supportive, confidential advice in those matters.  A coach will maintain the focus of the engagement on moving the client forward, in line with business objectives.  The coach is not a substitute colleague or fellow executive.  Many coaches have been successful in business in earlier incarnations.  This provides a sense of comfort and familiarity in the client’s world, allowing him or her to communicate in the same language.  It also provides key insights into the complex and competing pressures of the client’s work environment.  The coach’s stay in the organisation is meant to be short.  A best practice coach, by design and ethic, is not in the business of creating a dependent relationship.

Thanks to Simon Whitehouse for finding this article! Kate Peacock

Kings Fund Publishes NHS Leadership & Management Report

The King’s Fund set up a commission on leadership and management in the NHS with a brief to:

• take a view on the current state of management and leadership in the NHS
• establish the nature of management and leadership that will be required to meet the quality and financial challenges now facing the health care system
• recommend what needs to be done to strengthen and develop management and leadership in the NHS.

The Commission has found that high-quality, stable management to be key to high-performing health services - no surprise I hear you cry! 

Taken from an except of NHS Innovation and Improvement the report says 'across the NHS, the average chief executive spends just 700 days in post. In part, this reflects a culture where ‘heroic’ leaders grapple with problems only from the top of the organisation, or are ‘parachuted in’ to replace individual managers and ‘turn around’ troubled NHS services. The report advocates a new type of ‘shared leadership’ involving leaders at different levels of the workforce working collaboratively with all those involved in patient care to lead change and improve services, rather than only tackling problems inside specific institutions.'

This brings me to one of my favorite quotes (thanks Chris) from Bob Nelson, head of Corporate Management Development, BBC who said, " Some leaders are at the top of their organisations, although the behaviours of leadership can be exercised at any level.  Where ever we are in an organisation, most of us are leaders, subordinates and colleagues.  Resent research has also found paradoxically, that there is more freedom to act at lower levels in organisations than at higher, where constraints and other influences can be more complex.  The knowledge and skills necessary to make organisations work are decentralised - so power is decentralised and leadership is needed at all levels.  An organisation that permits people to manifest and develop these kinds of power without regard to their official status is nurturing leadership."

It's quite disturbing that even now it appears it needs to be pointed out that there is talent throughout our organisations and more than ever we need to tap into it and give people the responsibility and recognition that they deserve.

Kate Peacock

For the full report http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/nhs_leadership.html

All watched over by machines of loving grace

Have you been watching the BBC 2 series, 'All watched over by machines of loving grace'  (BBC 2, Mondays, 9pm)?  If not you can catch up by clicking on the following link and watching through iPlayer:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/search?q=all%20watched%20over%20by%20machines

It is a fascinating exploration of the rise of machines (computers in particular), how humans have come to create and use them, but also how we have been influenced in turn, by growing networks of advanced technology.  The first part explored the influence of technology on financial markets (and their role in the current economic crisis).  The second looked at how technology was supposed to help in creating more egalitarian societies.  Why write about this on a blog which is about leadership and human development?  Well, what the series makes clear is that introduction of new technologies were based on changing philosophies, new world views and radical thinking of various groups.  Each new technology was an attempt to 'realise' what had been created in thought. 

From a psychological viewpoint, the series contains numerous examples of how people can act together to complete a common goal, seemingly without direction or open communication between individuals.  What happens is something emerges which is bigger than the sum of the individuals involved.  But there do seem to be limitations. For example, while social networking was acknowledged as a key element in mobilising people in revolutions in the Ukraine (amongst other countries) it was also shown that it had not provided an effective alternative to the regime that had been toppled.

The second programme, in particular, showed the dangers of metaphor becoming 'truth'.  The idea of an eco-system that was self-regulating and balanced was 'de-bunked' and shown how it had led to ultimately unsuccessful attempts to create egalitarian communities.

The last part is next week (June 6th, 2011).  It's not just an insight into the influences of technology, it's a fascinating exploration of how we live and work together, the underlying assumptions that underpin our society, while also giving us a glimps of who really 'sets the rules'.

Miles

Making an Impact

Last night was the AGM of the Lancashire Branch of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD).  As I'm a committee member, I attended the meeting, part of which was a short presentation by Chris Kelly of Voiceworks.  His topic was 'Making an Impact' and Chris's background in acting and radio journalism gave him a unique slant on a well-established topic.  Often, effective training is not in what you say but how you say it, and Chris took some familiar aspects of presenting powerfully and provided new insights through his creative and engaging style.  Using a spectrum of 'expressiveness' he was able to highlight differences in presenting styles but also how the roles of presenter and audience move further apart over the course of a presentation - unless the presenter takes corrective action.  He dealt deftly with both internal factors and behaviours that can affect the impact someone is having.  A few simple exercises provided immediate benefits; for example an activity which required the talker to say out loud 'I pause and I breathe' at the end of each sentence, quickly showed how 'Ums' and 'Ahs' could be eliminated, sentences shortened and overall a more powerful impact could be achieved.  This was all done with great humour (and skill) and judging by the audience's reaction he was modelling what he advocated. 

Underlying his approach is the idea that if the impact of a presentation is constructed between talker and receiver, then it is more helpful for the presenter to think about the impact he/she wants on the audience, rather than the other way round (which is what leads to nervousness and stress).  You can find out more about Voiceworks at:

http://www.voiceworkslondon.com/

For more on CIPD Lancashire branch click on the following link.  They put on some really good workshops (Check the previous blog post about Tony Whalley of Achieve Dynamics).


http://www.cipd.co.uk/branch/lancashire

Miles


http://www.voiceworkslondon.com/

The role of HR in creating innovative organisations

'Charting the Territory for HR' a workshop on the role of HR in creating innovative organisations

20 May 2011, Innovation for Growth Project, Lancaster University Management School

Speakers:  Prof. Paul Sparrow, Centre for Performance-led HR, David McNerney, Executive Director of HR, Sellafield Ltd.

This was the first in a series of workshops exploring the people aspects of innovation.  It was a fascinating introduction into the macro and micro factors that need to be considered in attempting to construct innovative organisations.  The starting point is that innovation is a 'people-centric' issue.  Macro elements discussed included the requirement to move away from traditional business models, to consider different organisational structures and to 'institutionalise' innovation within a company.  Micro factors included training of leaders, creating climates to support innovation and recruiting (and supporting) innovative people.

Some interesting dilemmas facing organisations seeking to become innovative.  For example, organisations that have honed themselves to perfection/optimal efficiency may also be insufficiently flexible to cope with unforeseen, step-changes in the trading environment.  (Consider the current recession or the effect on the auto-trade and computer chip industries as a result of the tsunami in Japan).  Organisations seeking to increase their level of innovation have to find a balance between creativity and control, cost and risk (and the associated difficulties in managing an increasingly complex organisation), managing the conflict between pursuing innovation and other strategic imperatives, and effective resource allocation (innovation inevitably comes with a degree of failure).

Six business models for innovation were discussed briefly, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.  Delegates were invited to think about ways of remodelling their product offering.  This was linked to the idea of 'product service innovation'; the notion of product is changing from one of design and functionality to one where the consumer assesses it in terms of the access it gives to other services and technologies.  Consider the iPhone, for example.  It is well designed (aesthetically pleasing) has good functionality (and reliability) but also is a platform for other designers to distribute 'apps'.  The phrase, 'the democratisation of innovation' was used to describe how new technologies are changing the face of innovation from 'closed' to 'open' approaches.  (Read Chesburgh's book, 'Open Innovation' if you want to find out more).

At the micro level, some interesting research by Fiona Patterson was used to show that traditionally desirable personality traits such as 'agreableness' and 'conscientiousness' may not actually be high scoring traits in innovative people and as a consequence, organisations may be deselecting innovators by default.  Changing recruitment policies and adopting different development approaches for innovators may be necessary.  That implies organisations need to develop flexibility for managing diversity too.

A really fascinating workshop, and I haven't really done it justice here, but it provided real food for thought.  It was a challenge to HR professionals, in particular those who communicate the psychological contract to employees.  While the current narrative is a plea for trust and engagement, we were asked to be more honest in recognising the heightened levels of risk and uncertainty for employees and the need to drive for greater flexibility.  You can download a copy of the white paper, 'The Innovation Imperative:  Charting the Territory for HR' from the Centre for Performance-Led HR's website:

http://www.lums.lancs.ac.uk/research/centres/hr/WhitePapers/

There are three other workshops in this series:

1.  A HR strategy for Innovation (8th June 2011)
2.  Leading for Innovation  (15th June 2011)
3.  Innovative People  (22nd June 2011)

Contact ifg@lancaster.ac.uk for further details.  If you decide to attend, put up a summary on this blog.  Let's get the world inventing!

Miles

Making a sale despite the salesman

Here's a short story about the difference between selling and meeting customer needs.  One of our team bought a new car recently.  In the end she got the deal she wanted, but left feeling dissatisfied and uncertain about visiting that dealership ever again.  In truth the deal could have been done in about 15 minutes.  Our colleague had done her research, knew her budget and had identified a specific car she wanted to buy.  All the dealer needed to do was give her a test drive in the new car, give her a price for her current vehicle and then do the paperwork.  Job done.  The deal took nearly 90 minutes, 75 minutes longer than was necessary.  Much of this extra time was taken up with the salesman leaving to deal with other customers.  Sure, they may have been short-staffed, but the numerous 'Back in 5 minutes' promises soon started to wear thin when it became evident that '5 minutes' was a label for any time period longer than this.  Lack of product knowledge, inconsistent information and poor customer service, including after-sales support (which involved an extra trip back to the dealer to collect a missing part, plus attempts by the dealer to renegotiate on price and a correction to the money drawn from our colleague's account) all led to a feeling of frustration.   In addition, the salesman seemed intent on giving the buyer his 'sales script' rather than tuning in to the real needs expressed by the customer. 

How can it be that a customer can get the deal they want yet leave with a negative experience?  Two oft-quoted phrases in sales training are 'People buy people first' and 'A customer buys on emotion and justifies with logic'.  This story illustrates just how important it is for the sales person to pay attention to the relationship and the emotional impact of his/her behaviour.  Truly listening to the customer, making them feel valued and responding to their needs will cause the customer to leave feeling satisfied with the deal they have struck and with a good impression of their experience which they may pass on to friends and family.  You could argue that the salesman got what he wanted - a sale.  But what about all the add-ons?  Servicing?  Future sales? Recommendations to others? Or as in this case, recounting a less than positive story to others.  (People tend to tell many more people about their bad experiences than they do their positive ones). 

Selling is a skill not a technique.  Real selling is about identifying customer's needs, having the acuity to notice what the customer is responding to and then having the flexibility to adopt a complementary approach. 

Post up your stories (good or bad) of your own sales experiences!

Miles

Starbuck's Chief Exec Warns of the Risks of Success.

After stepping out of the day to day running of the Starbucks business, Howard Schultz famously wrote a critical memo in 2007 to his senior management team saying that "in the headlong rush for growth, Starbuck's had lost it's soul".  Schultz suggests that growth and success can cover up issues and that the arrogant feeling that may come with success is not good either for an individual or organisation.

Schultz stepped back into the running of the organisation, ( after Starbucks experienced a tough time with the market and adverse publicity) to now re-establish the view that the organisation wants to be 'invited' into where they do business, he says "to be thoughtful and respectful as a brand and to earn the respect and trust from a community".

To listen to the complete interview join this link at 30:45  http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010y30t  Schultz has just launched his business strategy book titled 'Onward'.

ILM reports Apprentices 'bring fresh ideas to businesses'

While much is being made about the cost of University education and how it will limit the ability to gain the appropriate knowledge which then contributes to our overall economy, spare a thought for the Apprentices and the schemes available to get our future leaders into work, (no I'm not talking about the Alan Sugar roadshow here!)  Not only do individuals gain key skills but the ILM reports that they can give a new perspective to the organisation they are working for - it's a win win if we make sure we listen to and value their feedback!   http://bit.ly/jVgMg5

Kate Peacock

The upside of conflict

Interesting article from Harvard Business Review by Nilofer Merchant, on why we need to address conflict and not ignore it.  Denial, 'sweeping it under the carpet' or 'hoping for the best' are ineffective strategies for dealing with conflict and will ultimately lead to a lack of organisational alignment.   You can read the full article at  http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/05/we_cant_agree_to_disagree.html

Miles Peacock

You don't need to do it on your own!

Much is spoken of team work and now more than ever relying soley on top performers and exeptional talent is not enough.  Collaboration is the way forward and builds ever further on the active development of our social networks. People Management Magazine suggests "HR has been obsessed with high performing individuals for too long.  The real engine of creativity and organisational success is to be found in internal networks of friendship and collaboration" http://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/pm/articles/2011/03/organisational-learning-the-social-network.htm

This may sound a twee concept but think about it, would you share an idea or proposal with someone you didn't trust.  How many of us use our trusted colleagues and networks as a sounding board to try things out before putting them forward to the board or our manager?  What this means is that the concept gets improved and honed to the point of commercial/business reality.

Steve Jobs was asked by Business Week what was the "seed" of innovation at Apple Inc he said "Innovation comes from people meeting up in hallways or calling each other at 10.30pm with a new idea.  It's adhoc meetings of six people called by someone who thinks he has figured out the coolest thing ever and wants other people to think of his idea".  Apple seem to be getting it right we could take a leaf out of their book?

Kate Peacock

Can we achieve perfection (or should we just settle for excellence)?

On first encounter it sounds like one of those ‘eight pint debates’ that mates have down the pub -  ‘What’s the fastest a human could ever run?’ , ‘Could a human lift a truck above his/her head?’, ‘Who would win a race in a straight flat 50 swim, Michael Phelps or Mark Spitz?’.    However, when you really start to analyse these questions, some interesting challenges immediately become apparent.

                                                                     

I’ve just been reading ‘Perfection Point’ by John Brenkus (2011, MacMillan), in which the author attempts to answer such questions. It’s a fascinating read. Covering a number of different sports, including sprinting, swimming and weight –lifting, he aims to establish the absolute perfect performance by a human-being, one that can never be surpassed because to do so would go beyond the limits of human potential.  His search becomes a difficult one surprisingly quickly.

Here are a few of the problems associated with such an endeavour:

1.        Social  – over what distance do you decide to run your race?  Who decides?  Why is it that people can perform better in competition with others than when alone?  If this is the case, can a record truly be held by an individual or should it be jointly held by all participants?  Think about the use of pace-makers in distance running, for example.  Even more sophisticated examples are given by Brenkus.  For example, the setting of a minimum reaction time for a sprinter to react to the gun is an arbitrary number set by the sport’s governing body – who is to say that someone cannot learn to react faster than this standard? (Or put it another way, is an athlete potentially being adversely affected by the rules?)

2.       Environmental – there is an advantage to being placed in the middle lanes of a sprint or a swim.  Some of this is tactical advantage, some of it is to do with the forces of nature.  For example, water temperature and the ability of a pool to dissipate wave energy have an effect on speed.  What about wind resistance, track surface etc?

3.       Technological – sports equipment is constantly being refined, improved and updated.  At what point do advances in equipment overshadow any performance improvements in the athlete?  Consider how technical advances in golf clubs, for example, have made drives from the tee much longer.  Swimming is an example where ‘speed suits’ have been banned as providing an unfair advantage.  In essence, the assumption about sport is that everyone starts from a level playing field.  Technological advances require research and that means money.  If two Olympic swimmers stand next to each other on the starting blocks but one has the benefit of millions of pounds of research behind him, while the other has got there on his own merits, are they the same?  Is it fair?  (And is it inevitable that inequalities like this will always be present?).  Brenkus has a really interesting chapter on the use of performance-enhancing substances.  Although he comes out firmly against the use of drug-taking, he highlights the ambiguities and inconsistencies involved in deciding what can be considered ‘legal’.  Caffeine? (Doesn’t occur naturally in the body, but easily available by drinking coffee), ‘Testosterone? (Naturally occurring, levels vary between athletes, but can also be injected). 

4.       Finally there is the psychological – firstly top athletes need saving from themselves.  The will to win is so strong that they will do anything including potentially self-damaging activities in the pursuit of coming out top dog.  Again Brenkus highlights inconsistencies in what we (as the public) find allowable.  Why is it OK to watch two boxers beat the living daylights out of each other, but steroid use is not?  What about genetic enhancement?   He also makes a very interesting point about the power of psychology.  If all the science points to an absolute minimum time for say, a 100M sprint, one that cannot be surpassed because of the physical limitations of the human frame, if that time is near to a ‘round point’, then it still may be beaten.  Consider the 4 minute mile for example.  The sheer compelling nature of this ‘round point’ as a target inspired athletes to try to beat it, despite it being described as impossible.  And of course, once one person had done it, others quickly followed.  The natural conclusion of this type of thinking is that perfection can never be achieved, simply because of the power of an individual to think ‘I can beat that’.

Although this is a book on sports, I think it has relevance for those of us who work in more mainstream areas.  If you are managing people, you are probably also being held accountable for their performance.  If you apply the above influences (social, environmental, technological and psychological) to your followers, how much of what they achieve can be attributed to their individual endeavours?  Are there things that you could do that might help them perform better?  Even more bluntly, are there things you are doing that might actually be stopping them from performing to the best of their ability?  Sometimes just getting out of the way is the finest piece of leadership we can display!

It is these types of challenges which have led to appraisals being a combination of evaluation of results achieved and behaviours used to achieve those results, the latter being more in the control of the individual.  (For more on this approach, see our earlier blog post on goal setting).  Perfection, therefore, may be an impossible dream, and the pursuit of it, can paradoxically lead to inferior results, by placing too much pressure on the person or by creating inflexibility.  ‘Settling for excellence’ is a better mantra – it retains the compelling nature of aiming for the best possible, while retaining room for creativity and flexibility.

Can you teach business nous?

BBC Radio 4 is running a series of discussions about Women in Business with leading business entrepeneurs commenting on various topics.  Having seen Michelle Mone of MJM International (lingerie business) speak at Lancaster University it was no surprise that in this interview she attributes success to having determination, passion, a fire in your belly and the ability to take risks.  Having left school at 15 due to family pressures and therefore not completing her education I see a familiar pattern with successful business people I've come into contact with.

Michelle's co-interviewee Carol Savage of My Dish (an online internet business) attributes her business nous to something that wasn't planned and she fell into while on maternity leave.  Business she says is common sense and learning by experience.  Carol did undertake an MBA in Business once in business and again this is something which we tend to find, entrepeneurs underpinning their personal experience later in life in order to challenge and confirm they way they have become successful.

One thing both agree on is to employ people that are better than yourself for areas that are not within your own expertise, we certainly agree with this advice and aim to create an environment where our team want to work with us.  For the whole debate listen here http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00zt4gv#p00g3ldm

Leadership and forgiveness - Part One

Forgiveness might be a strange topic to be talking about in the context of leadership (and perhaps especially so in the private sector).  However, we argue that this is a crucial quality required of leaders today.  Let's put this into a practical perspective, that of problem solving.  There is lots of interesting research around this topic and the processes involved in solving problems at work (Check out the work of Professor Keith Grint and also David Snowden).  It's not the aim of this blog to go into the detail here, but essentially there is a type of problem classed as 'complex'.  In a complex problem (as opposed to a 'simple problem' which can be solved with reference to previously tried and tested procedures), there is often no obvious link between cause and effect.  There may be several factors impacting on the situation, it feels novel (like being on 'new territory') and there is little past experience to which to refer for guidance.  Complex problems typically do not have 'one right answer', the operators and restrictors can also be only vaguely defined.  When facing problems like this, some degree of experimentation is required.  This may include some 'thinking out loud' with others (trusted friends and colleagues who know how to accept a whacky idea without judging the person).  Experimentation also implies an acceptance of failure and this is where forgiveness comes in. 

What the leader does in those moments, where the actual outcome is not as desired, is crucial.  To chastise the person for trying something will make them (and everyone else) reluctant to put their head above the parapet again in the future.  An organisation that fails to innovate, to try out new things will be an organisation that 'always gets what it always got'.  Ultimately this leads to extinction.  Of course, knowing about forgiveness and actually forgiving are two very different things.   As a leader, it is one thing to know that it is 'good' to encourage experimentation in your followers, but it is quite another to actually practise it, when the outcome is 'failure' and the costs in terms of time, money and relationships can be high.

Unsurprisingly, much of the information on forgiveness comes from religion but it is neither the sole commentator, nor do all religions take the same view.  One writer (Tilby, 1985) describes forgiveness as a human virture which is  'more or less unique to Christianity'.  Forgiveness appears to transcend the idea of 'reciprocity', where we will stick with a relationship if there are rewards coming the other way.  This raises the question, is it ever possible to forgive unconditionally?  For the leader, who may be affected by the actions of others and who has responsibility for protecting shareholders' interests, this can be particularly difficult.  Tilby adds that forgiveness 'involves the end of our normal expectations' and that this can be a painful experience.  It means accepting that we feel we have be wronged and even betrayed yet not letting it dictate subsequent behaviour.  This acceptance also extends to a valuing of the self, and in doing so ceasing criticism and self-punishment.  Much is written of the importance of the Emotionally Intelligent leader (see the work of Daniel Goleman for an introduction to this wide and varied topic).  Again, a question, can a leader who is not sufficiently self-aware and comfortable with who they are, truly forgive?  Forgiving the self is on the pathway to forgiving others.

This is meant to be an introduction to the topic of forgiveness.  I aim to put up more in the near future, but for now the aim is to stimulate discussion and add to the debate.  Your comments are welcome and if you have any suggested resources in addition to the ones below, please make your own contributions.

Further reading:

1. Marie by Gordon Wilson - an inspirational read by a father who lost his daughter in a terrorist bombing.

2. If you need to apologise, have a look at our 7 April post for some hints and tips.

3. A Course in Miracles - a sometimes difficult read but the exercises are powerful.  It takes a different view on forgiveness, following the idea that if you can see things as they really are, then what is there to forgive?
4. http://www.forgivenessweb.com/ - lots of inspirational stories and guidance on the act of forgiving.
5.  Tilby A (1985) Won't you join the dance?
6.  Rowe D (1994)  Breaking the bonds

Need to say ‘Sorry’? Then consider your victim

Recent research has shown that apologising might be a more sophisticated process than just blurting out the word, ‘Sorry!’, however well-intentioned that may be.  Ryan Fehr and Michele Gelfand of the University of Maryland have identified three forms of apology; ‘compensation’, ‘empathy’ and ‘acknowledgement of violated rules’. 

·         ‘Compensation’ is attempting to make good for the misdemeanour (Eg ‘Im sorry I broke your ornament, I’ll pay to have it replaced’). 

·         ‘Empathy’ is more to do with aligning yourself with how the other person is feeling (Eg ‘I’m sorry we went to the party without you, you must feel rejected right now’). 

·         ‘Acknowledgement of violated rules/norms’ makes explicit the nature of the transgression (Eg ‘I’m sorry I interrupted you just then as we had agreed that everyone should have their say in this meeting’).

What is interesting is that the researchers found that the effect of the apology made had more to do with how the ‘victim’ sees themselves rather than the size of the transgression.  People who were more individualistic in nature preferred an apology based on compensation, whereas people who define themselves in terms of their relations to others preferred a more empathetic apology.  Acknowlegement of violation of rules/norms was most effective with people who see themselves as part of a larger group or a collective.  (It would be interesting to see if there are cultural differences, for example, between individualistic and collectivist cultures).

The message seems to be, then, that if you have to say ‘Sorry’ you need to consider the type of apology that the other person is looking for and then structure your response accordingly.  And if you don’t know or you have to make an apology to more than one person? (Think about BP for a moment!)  Then the suggestion is that you should make a carefully constructed, multi-faceted apology so that you cover all the possible preferences of those you have aggrieved.

Source:

A digest of the research can be found in ‘The Psychologist’, Oct 2010, Vol 33. No10. The research is published in the September issue of ‘Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes’.  You can download it from:

http://www.ryanfehr.com/research.html

Goals and goal setting

I have an interest in sports psychology.  More accurately, I have a fascination in what makes people excellent at what they do, and sports is a good field in which to explore this topic.  There is also a strong and well-established link between sports and business, with sporting achievement often being used as a metaphor with which to inspire employees to greater heights of performance. 

One very inspirational read is 'Personal Best' by the multi-medal winning Paralympic swimmer, Marc Woods.  (He is also a very entertaining conference speaker http://marcwoods.com/  ).  I read the book a few years ago and it is his finishing notes that have stayed in my mind.  He concludes by asking us to consider at the time when we look back on our lives will we ask ourselves 'I wish I had... ' or 'I could have, but....'.  He wants us to live our lives without regrets, but what I find really interesting is the distinction he makes between people who say either the first or second of the two 'regret' statements.  The 'I wish... ' group he finds sad, but can empathise.  But for the second, 'I could have, but..' group he is less forgiving.   His response to people who tell him that they could have been a great athlete but they discovered beer/women/men (you fill in the reason!) is short and to the point.  Quite simply he says, 'Look - if you could have been, you would have been.  It's as simple as that.'

His point is clear.  The world of sports is a hard place in which to achieve.  It is brutal and there are many other people out there who are desperate to get what you want too.  Gold medals don't come easily.  Talent is not enough; it takes hard work and perseverance.  Woods also stresses the need to set goals, to keep them constantly in mind and to work towards them every day.

Research from the world of sport suggests that three types of goals are important when working towards long-term performance achievement.  Firstly there needs to be an outcome goal. This is the long-term goal that is the desired end-result of all that hard work.  For example it might be 'To win a gold medal at the Olympics in 2012'.  This should be positive, have a 'towards focus' and be compelling in nature.  However, while it is good for maintaining motivation and direction, it has its weaknesses too.  It is not entirely within the athlete's control; other people want that medal too!  An over-focus on outcomes can also lead to the athlete experiencing unhelpful levels of stress and rigidity in training.

So, a more effective strategy is to supplement the outcome goal with performance and process goals.  An example of a performance goal might be to achieve a specific time during training.  A process goal is more directed towards the athlete focusing on key elements/skills which ultimately lead to good performance.  Using performance and process goals allow the athlete to keep attention on the things that matter in the short term and to work on things that are entirely within his/her control.  They also allow greater flexibility during the training phase to allow for temporary setbacks.

But with goals comes sacrifice, and this leads us back to Marc Woods' original claim,  'If you could have, you would have'.  The existential view of goal setting is that when you make a choice, by definition you begin to exclude other options.  So part of goal setting is knowing what you are prepared to give up in order to achieve your goal.  (This is why we talk about SMART goals and Well Formed Outcomes).

Interestingly, much of the early work on goal-setting came from the world of business and then was applied to sports.  (Usually the information moves in the other direction).  The role of the leader can be to provide followers with an inspiring and compelling vision, but that still needs to be translated into meaningful and manageable goals, which can be acted on day-to-day, by the people responsible for turning that dream into reality.  This takes great skills of communication, a personal and sincere commitment to the organisational goal and the willingness to constantly be present and accessible to your followers.

Miles

References

Williams J.,M. (2010)  Applied Sport Psychology: Personal Growth to Peak Performance.  McGraw-Hill:  New York

Woods M (2006)  Personal Best.  Capstone: Chichester

Facilitation and Conflict Management - Tony Whalley of Achieve Dynamics

I spent yesterday attending a CIPD (Lancahsire) event on Facilitation and Conflict Management.  It was delivered by Tony Whalley of Achieve Dynamics Ltd (You can find him on Linked In).  Tony's approach to facilitation utilises the principles and techniques found in Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP), particularly the underpinning presuppositions. (Useful beliefs to hold when working with others.  If you are not familiar with them a good summary can be found at  http://www.changingstates.co.uk/nlp_presup.html). NLP is not everyone's cup of tea, but it does hold some useful ideas for working with people.  The good thing is as a facilitator you never need to mention NLP, you just have to help people work towards an outcome.  As long as they are making progress, they won't be interested in how you are actually working.

I'm not going to outline Tony's materials and exercises - it's his material after all, but he managed to cover a lot of ground in a short space of time.  Instead I want to pose a few questions and thoughts as a result of attending the day.

One of the fascinating things about working as a facilitator is knowing when you are working in 'Process' and when you have joined the group in working on 'Task/Content'.  An extension of this is noticing when you have become attached to an aspect of the group's work.  For example, Tony asked us to think about what our reaction would be if we felt we had facilitated a good session, yet the group failed to deliver on its outcome.  To ignore the result might be to deny your own shortcomings as a facilitator, yet to take responsibility implies that you somehow got involved in the task.   Many of these things are much easier to say than to do, and my own experience of facilitating  is that as a facilitator you are continuously peeling back successive layers of awareness.  Just when you think you've got to a point where you believe you are working in an objective, detached and process-oriented way, something happens which hooks you right back and reveals something of your own personal 'hot buttons'.

The importance of developing a heightened sense of awareness was illustrated in the second main them that Tony got us to experience.  This was to demonstrate just how much the thinking and unconscious processes of the facilitator can influence the output from the group.  Limiting expectations, projecting unhelpful thoughts and feelings on to the group etc can all be detrimental to the final outcome.

We explored a couple of techniques, particularly the NLP technique of 'chunking up/down' as a means of working towards agreement and cooperation.  One of Tony's skills is he can make subtle interpretations of classic NLP work, which make it more relevant to the context of the day.  The general rule on chunking is that you should 'chunk up for agreement'.  (Basically this means if you get two people who are in conflict to think about the situation at a higher level of abstraction they are more likely to find areas of commonality).  Tony's take on this is 'To get people to consider more options, start from more agreement' and 'At higher levels of purpose people are more open to being influenced'.  I like this take on the idea of chunking because it leaves the recipient with more autonomy.  Chunking is no longer a technique to be used 'on' people but one which invites them to consider more choice.

One final thought that Tony left us with was ' Just because a group is uncomfortable with the process doesn't mean to say that they will be uncomfortable with the outcome'.   A good summary for the day - good facilitation is about helping the group to meet their outcome - that's the prime objective, but in the process of doing so the facilitator is constantly learning about him/herself and there may be moments where he/she needs to be courageous.
Miles 1/4/11

Giving and receiving feedback

@stephenfry put up the following link on Twitter today
http://booksandpals.blogspot.com/2011/03/greek-seaman-jacqueline-howett.html

A great example of what happens when feedback goes bad!  If you track the conversation, you can also map out the typical process of how a difference in opinion can quickly move to all out conflict, where the facts are no longer being disputed and instead personalities are being challenged.  Prevention is always better than cure, but if you were asked to mediate in this case from this point,

What would you do?
What would you want as your outcome?

It's a bright new dawn!

Welcome to our new blog!  We will be posting up articles on what's new in the world of training and development, plus a few thoughts of our own on how you can be effective at work.