Have you ever tried to start something new – going back to school, launching a business or starting a new project at work – only to discover shortly after beginning the effort that you did not have enough time, energy or skills to make it work?
Too often we find ourselves in a situation of inevitable failure. These false starts can wreak havoc on our confidence and diminish future possibilities. Often the problem is that we simply don’t have enough gas in the tank.
David McClusky called this “Insufficient Margin” and it happens when a person experiences more demands than they have energy and resources to match them. For example, if you have career, family and social responsibilities, as well as financial concerns and other day-to-day challenges, then you need to have an equivalent set of resources such as time, money, motivation and support from others to meet them.
When the pressures we face outweigh the resources we have to meet them, we might not have enough gas in the tank to take on something new. Before you take on the next exciting challenge, take an honest assessment of what’s on your plate and make sure you have the available skills, resources and motivation to match them.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Start Thinking Like A Mediator
Imagine, two sisters are bitterly arguing over a single orange, both claiming it is theirs alone. After intense bickering, their Mom enters the room determined to end the dispute and regain peace and calm in the house. She snatches the orange, takes a knife, and proceeds to cut it down the middle, giving half to one sister and half to the other. Following a stern reminder to keep quiet, Mom retreats back to her room leaving both of the sisters to pick up where they left off.
Problem solved? Not exactly, because the story doesn’t end there…
Before we see what comes of these two sisters and the controversial orange, think about a recent conflict you’ve been involved in. We’ve all been there – the point where communication breaks down, walls come up, and we spend more time blaming others for our problems than focusing on potential solutions.
Unfortunately, conflict can also be an expensive and damaging force that destroys even the best relationships and significantly reduces our overall effectiveness. Take a minute right now and consider the costs of unresolved conflict at work, at home and in your personal life. Some of the negative outcomes you’ve experienced may include: physical and emotional stress, reduced productivity, even safety concerns or expensive legal fees. In addition to these negative outcomes, the emotional wake that trails us when we are caught up in a conflict can put a wedge in our relationships and prevent us from being at our best.
Each of us could significantly reduce or eliminate these negative consequences if we began to “start thinking like a mediator”. Thinking like a mediator begins with an attitude shift, where conflict is seen not as a problem to be avoided, but as an opportunity to improve relationships and get more of what we want and need. Thinking like a mediator means you focus on future possibilities, not past mistakes.
How can you start thinking like a mediator? Consider the story of ‘The Orange and the Sisters’ again, which captures a simple lesson about what’s at the heart of conflict. We left off with Mom splitting the orange down the middle. One sister proceeds to juice her half of the orange and throw the peel in the trash. The other sister scoops out the fruit and throws it in the trash, then takes the zest from the peel and uses it to make a cake.
In this situation, if Mom had thought like a mediator she would have been able to help each of the sisters explain what they wanted, why it was important to them and what type of potential resolution they could both live with. Although each sister’s position was mutually exclusive (It’s my orange, you can’t have it), their underlying interests were much more compatible (I want the fruit; I just want the peel). If Mom thought like a mediator, she could have helped each sister achieve 100% of what they wanted, rather than 50%.
This story offers a simple analogy regarding the importance of understanding what’s going on below the surface of a conflict and it can be applied to any disagreement, large or small. The next time you find yourself feeling stuck in the middle of a conflict, remember the moral of the story and try to follow this roadmap to a successful resolution:
1) First, agree to have a conversation to explore the issues, assumptions and feelings involved. Relationships are built one conversation at a time. By agreeing to sit down and talk things out, you have the opportunity to chart a new course and a better direction for that relationship.
2) Next, take time to clarify the situation to get both perspectives squarely out in the open. It is important to acknowledge the impact of the conflict, then model new ways to make amends. Try to focus attention on identifying the substantial issues and then break those down into separate pieces. Remember; be hard on the problem and easy on the people.
3) As issues surface, generate options that can potentially satisfy the underlying needs of both people. You don’t always have to have something brilliant to propose; just start getting supportive ideas on the table.
4) And finally, as agreements begin to form, commit to a resolution and discuss how the solution can be implemented quickly and effectively.
This road map can take you from avoiding problems to achieving solutions. Imagine what’s possible if we all started thinking like mediators!
Problem solved? Not exactly, because the story doesn’t end there…
Before we see what comes of these two sisters and the controversial orange, think about a recent conflict you’ve been involved in. We’ve all been there – the point where communication breaks down, walls come up, and we spend more time blaming others for our problems than focusing on potential solutions.
Unfortunately, conflict can also be an expensive and damaging force that destroys even the best relationships and significantly reduces our overall effectiveness. Take a minute right now and consider the costs of unresolved conflict at work, at home and in your personal life. Some of the negative outcomes you’ve experienced may include: physical and emotional stress, reduced productivity, even safety concerns or expensive legal fees. In addition to these negative outcomes, the emotional wake that trails us when we are caught up in a conflict can put a wedge in our relationships and prevent us from being at our best.
Each of us could significantly reduce or eliminate these negative consequences if we began to “start thinking like a mediator”. Thinking like a mediator begins with an attitude shift, where conflict is seen not as a problem to be avoided, but as an opportunity to improve relationships and get more of what we want and need. Thinking like a mediator means you focus on future possibilities, not past mistakes.
How can you start thinking like a mediator? Consider the story of ‘The Orange and the Sisters’ again, which captures a simple lesson about what’s at the heart of conflict. We left off with Mom splitting the orange down the middle. One sister proceeds to juice her half of the orange and throw the peel in the trash. The other sister scoops out the fruit and throws it in the trash, then takes the zest from the peel and uses it to make a cake.
In this situation, if Mom had thought like a mediator she would have been able to help each of the sisters explain what they wanted, why it was important to them and what type of potential resolution they could both live with. Although each sister’s position was mutually exclusive (It’s my orange, you can’t have it), their underlying interests were much more compatible (I want the fruit; I just want the peel). If Mom thought like a mediator, she could have helped each sister achieve 100% of what they wanted, rather than 50%.
This story offers a simple analogy regarding the importance of understanding what’s going on below the surface of a conflict and it can be applied to any disagreement, large or small. The next time you find yourself feeling stuck in the middle of a conflict, remember the moral of the story and try to follow this roadmap to a successful resolution:
1) First, agree to have a conversation to explore the issues, assumptions and feelings involved. Relationships are built one conversation at a time. By agreeing to sit down and talk things out, you have the opportunity to chart a new course and a better direction for that relationship.
2) Next, take time to clarify the situation to get both perspectives squarely out in the open. It is important to acknowledge the impact of the conflict, then model new ways to make amends. Try to focus attention on identifying the substantial issues and then break those down into separate pieces. Remember; be hard on the problem and easy on the people.
3) As issues surface, generate options that can potentially satisfy the underlying needs of both people. You don’t always have to have something brilliant to propose; just start getting supportive ideas on the table.
4) And finally, as agreements begin to form, commit to a resolution and discuss how the solution can be implemented quickly and effectively.
This road map can take you from avoiding problems to achieving solutions. Imagine what’s possible if we all started thinking like mediators!
Monday, March 16, 2009
Whitewashing
Let’s face it; everything is not created equal in the workplace. One of the most common mistakes managers and leaders make is to treat all outcomes the same. This is often called whitewashing because everything is made to look the same on the surface.
When we treat all goals and outcomes the same, we inadvertently divert our energy and attention away from the most critical priorities. In a challenging business environment, this distraction from essential priorities can be a fatal flaw.
Although it can be important to consistently check tasks off your to do list, if your efforts are focused on the easier, but less critical priorities, then you risk leaving the more difficult challenges left undone. This requires us to be brutally honest about what matters most and to make hard choices about goals that we may not succeed at initially.
All of us, especially managers and leaders must distinguish good successes from okay successes in order to instill “top of mind focus” on the most essential priorities. When we do this, we’ll stop whitewashing and the true colors of our goals and objectives will shine through.
When we treat all goals and outcomes the same, we inadvertently divert our energy and attention away from the most critical priorities. In a challenging business environment, this distraction from essential priorities can be a fatal flaw.
Although it can be important to consistently check tasks off your to do list, if your efforts are focused on the easier, but less critical priorities, then you risk leaving the more difficult challenges left undone. This requires us to be brutally honest about what matters most and to make hard choices about goals that we may not succeed at initially.
All of us, especially managers and leaders must distinguish good successes from okay successes in order to instill “top of mind focus” on the most essential priorities. When we do this, we’ll stop whitewashing and the true colors of our goals and objectives will shine through.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Change Your Routine
If you’ve ever tried to break a habit at work or in your personal life, then you know how difficult it can be to get out of a pattern and start a new routine. Despite this difficulty, there are some routines that are worth changing. In prior posts I have written about ways in which we sometimes project outward attitudes that are then contradicted by our behaviors. In this vein, defensive routines are important habits to examine.
As Chris Argyris defines them, defensive routines are like mixed-messages, which over time blind people to their contradictory nature. Over time, we accept these mixed messages as simple truth. This welcomed conundrum is a sort of double-bind, which is maintained as a means of preventing embarrassment, avoiding a perceived threat or awkward situation, maintaining the status quo and avoiding unwanted change. As these messages are institutionalized over time, they can take on the force of a cultural taboo, making an honest dialogue about them off limits.
It is important to note that these defensive routines represent dynamic and complicated behaviors and require a certain level of what Chris Argyris calls "skilled incompetence”. Essentially, even though one individual may know that another person is also aware of an issue that is a problem of mutual concern, they both choose to act as though neither of the parties knows anything. They both may do this in a skilled manner in order to perpetuate a believable cover-up. The very attitudes and behaviors that support these cover-ups are an example of a defensive routine and over time they serve to prevent the learning that is necessary to bring about both individual and organizational changes for improvement. If you think you are experiencing a defensive routine, answer these four questions to see what is happening at a deeper level.
1. Are you or others sending a message that is inconsistent?
2. Are you or others acting as if the message is not inconsistent?
3. Are you or others in any way making this inconsistency undiscussable?
4. And, are you or others making the pretense that there is no inconsistency, or that it is discussable?
If you answered yes to one or more of the above questions, perhaps you are in the midst of a defensive routine. If you discover the presence of a defensive routine, it is critical to fully understand what it is and then devise a way to address it. No individual, team or organization is immune to developing defensive routines and it is important not to let responses to them include simple quick fixes or band-aid solutions. As a way to avoid developing or sustaining such routines, individuals can begin to practice more open communication by making it acceptable to freely and respectfully question interpersonal dynamics or business practices.
Once an environment of openness is established, there is an activity that can promote discussion about the nature of the defensive routine. Often called the “left-hand/right-hand column”, individuals focus on the identified problem, and then use a blank page to reveal things that they say and things that they think about the issue. After writing a brief description of the defensive routine as they see it, they begin in the right-hand column where they write down exactly what they have said about the situation. Then, in the left-hand column, they write down things that they think but do not say or act upon. The following questions can be discussed in order to contrast the difference between the two columns:
1. What factors have led me to think and feel this way?
2. What was my intention and what was I really hoping to accomplish?
3. How might my comments have contributed to the difficulties?
4. Why didn't I say or act upon what was in my left-hand column?
5. What assumptions might I be making about the other person or people involved?
6. What are the costs of operating this way? What are the payoffs?
7. How can I use my left-hand column to improve my communication and behavior on this issue?
Although it can take time and energy, identifying and addressing these defensive routines can accelerate the learning process and help us achieve our goals more consistently. Imagine what’s possible when we drop our defensive routines and take risks to learn the very things that can help us discover new kinds of success.
As Chris Argyris defines them, defensive routines are like mixed-messages, which over time blind people to their contradictory nature. Over time, we accept these mixed messages as simple truth. This welcomed conundrum is a sort of double-bind, which is maintained as a means of preventing embarrassment, avoiding a perceived threat or awkward situation, maintaining the status quo and avoiding unwanted change. As these messages are institutionalized over time, they can take on the force of a cultural taboo, making an honest dialogue about them off limits.
It is important to note that these defensive routines represent dynamic and complicated behaviors and require a certain level of what Chris Argyris calls "skilled incompetence”. Essentially, even though one individual may know that another person is also aware of an issue that is a problem of mutual concern, they both choose to act as though neither of the parties knows anything. They both may do this in a skilled manner in order to perpetuate a believable cover-up. The very attitudes and behaviors that support these cover-ups are an example of a defensive routine and over time they serve to prevent the learning that is necessary to bring about both individual and organizational changes for improvement. If you think you are experiencing a defensive routine, answer these four questions to see what is happening at a deeper level.
1. Are you or others sending a message that is inconsistent?
2. Are you or others acting as if the message is not inconsistent?
3. Are you or others in any way making this inconsistency undiscussable?
4. And, are you or others making the pretense that there is no inconsistency, or that it is discussable?
If you answered yes to one or more of the above questions, perhaps you are in the midst of a defensive routine. If you discover the presence of a defensive routine, it is critical to fully understand what it is and then devise a way to address it. No individual, team or organization is immune to developing defensive routines and it is important not to let responses to them include simple quick fixes or band-aid solutions. As a way to avoid developing or sustaining such routines, individuals can begin to practice more open communication by making it acceptable to freely and respectfully question interpersonal dynamics or business practices.
Once an environment of openness is established, there is an activity that can promote discussion about the nature of the defensive routine. Often called the “left-hand/right-hand column”, individuals focus on the identified problem, and then use a blank page to reveal things that they say and things that they think about the issue. After writing a brief description of the defensive routine as they see it, they begin in the right-hand column where they write down exactly what they have said about the situation. Then, in the left-hand column, they write down things that they think but do not say or act upon. The following questions can be discussed in order to contrast the difference between the two columns:
1. What factors have led me to think and feel this way?
2. What was my intention and what was I really hoping to accomplish?
3. How might my comments have contributed to the difficulties?
4. Why didn't I say or act upon what was in my left-hand column?
5. What assumptions might I be making about the other person or people involved?
6. What are the costs of operating this way? What are the payoffs?
7. How can I use my left-hand column to improve my communication and behavior on this issue?
Although it can take time and energy, identifying and addressing these defensive routines can accelerate the learning process and help us achieve our goals more consistently. Imagine what’s possible when we drop our defensive routines and take risks to learn the very things that can help us discover new kinds of success.
Monday, March 2, 2009
What’s Your Formula For Success?
For many people, the reasons behind our success or failure in managing the day-to-day demands of life feel mysterious and difficult to understand. Not only are there the everyday challenges to contend with, but often we experience emergencies that require additional energy to address. When you take these demands and consider the added dimension of our goals and aspirations for the future, it can feel overwhelming to find a path forward.
When coaching a person or consulting with an organization that is having a hard time meeting the on-going demands of their circumstances, I invite them to make an honest assessment of their formula for success. Borrowing from the psychologist and researcher Howard McClusky’s theory of margin, we can identify the fundamental variables that influence their success. If they are not achieving at the level they want, the simple formula indicates what changes could be made to improve results and create greater satisfaction.
The formula looks something like this: LOAD/POWER = MARGIN. Load represents the total internal self and external social demands that must be met in the course of living (i.e. family and career obligations as well as goals and personal expectations, etc.). Power is equivalent to the resources we have at our disposal to meet those demands (i.e. financial resources, time, supportive relationships, accumulated skills, resiliency, etc.). Margin is the excess of power at our disposal that can be utilized to meet both expected and unexpected challenges that arise.
Obviously, a person with a high margin of excess power is in a better position to successfully adjust to emergencies that arise, as well as to apply their surplus power to new areas of growth and development. When a person or organization’s load is much greater than the available reserve of power, the inverse margin can create tremendous stress and limited success. The question becomes how can we increase our power or decrease our load so that our margin for success grows?
After taking an inventory of all the factors pertaining to their load and power, I then ask the client to create a start doing and stop doing list. This list becomes a guide for selectively reducing the load factors and intentionally surrounding them with power factors to get their margin into better balance. The conversation could go something like this:
Client: I have way too much on my plate right now to be successful at the things that matter most!
Coach: Okay, let’s take a look at everything on your plate and prioritize your commitment to these things. This will give you the chance to let go of responsibilities that are negotiable.
Client: Okay, as much as I would like to hold on to this, I guess I need to let go of activity x.
Coach: Good, now that you’ve looked at the LOAD factors, let’s look at ways to shore up resources and increase your POWER. What available or easily acquired resources could we add to help you in your everyday experiences?
Client: I never ask my colleagues for advice and they are much more experienced than me. Also, I forget that I have paid time off that I never take – maybe I should give myself some down time between big projects.
Coach: Great, what else?
As this conversation progresses, ideally the MARGIN gets into a better balance and the client is now aware of a tool they can use to identify and improve their formula for success. Imagine what’s possible when you adjust your formula for greater success.
When coaching a person or consulting with an organization that is having a hard time meeting the on-going demands of their circumstances, I invite them to make an honest assessment of their formula for success. Borrowing from the psychologist and researcher Howard McClusky’s theory of margin, we can identify the fundamental variables that influence their success. If they are not achieving at the level they want, the simple formula indicates what changes could be made to improve results and create greater satisfaction.
The formula looks something like this: LOAD/POWER = MARGIN. Load represents the total internal self and external social demands that must be met in the course of living (i.e. family and career obligations as well as goals and personal expectations, etc.). Power is equivalent to the resources we have at our disposal to meet those demands (i.e. financial resources, time, supportive relationships, accumulated skills, resiliency, etc.). Margin is the excess of power at our disposal that can be utilized to meet both expected and unexpected challenges that arise.
Obviously, a person with a high margin of excess power is in a better position to successfully adjust to emergencies that arise, as well as to apply their surplus power to new areas of growth and development. When a person or organization’s load is much greater than the available reserve of power, the inverse margin can create tremendous stress and limited success. The question becomes how can we increase our power or decrease our load so that our margin for success grows?
After taking an inventory of all the factors pertaining to their load and power, I then ask the client to create a start doing and stop doing list. This list becomes a guide for selectively reducing the load factors and intentionally surrounding them with power factors to get their margin into better balance. The conversation could go something like this:
Client: I have way too much on my plate right now to be successful at the things that matter most!
Coach: Okay, let’s take a look at everything on your plate and prioritize your commitment to these things. This will give you the chance to let go of responsibilities that are negotiable.
Client: Okay, as much as I would like to hold on to this, I guess I need to let go of activity x.
Coach: Good, now that you’ve looked at the LOAD factors, let’s look at ways to shore up resources and increase your POWER. What available or easily acquired resources could we add to help you in your everyday experiences?
Client: I never ask my colleagues for advice and they are much more experienced than me. Also, I forget that I have paid time off that I never take – maybe I should give myself some down time between big projects.
Coach: Great, what else?
As this conversation progresses, ideally the MARGIN gets into a better balance and the client is now aware of a tool they can use to identify and improve their formula for success. Imagine what’s possible when you adjust your formula for greater success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
