Blog Retirement

I have officially migrated all of my online activities to the new and improved www.sostrinconsulting.com. Please visit the site when you can.

You can still cruise this site for lots of archived posts.

Communication Perspective

Last month a record civil penalty was passed down in the West Virginia mining case where 29 miners were killed last year. The federal regulators investigating determined that the disaster “was the result of a workplace culture that valued production over safety .” In other words, the highest value or context for Massey Energy Co. was profit. While there may have been other priorities and perspectives within the organization’s management, it was the elevated context of production…over…safety that ultimately influenced the numerous critical decisions (in this case safety shortcuts) that were made in the course of doing business in a competitive industry.

Taking a communication perspective leads to some important and profound questions, namely: Could this disaster have been avoided if the company’s hierarchy of value had been challenged and ultimately shifted in some way toward the increased importance of safety? What if there was greater institutional support for whistle blowers who, in this case, experienced retaliation and disciplinary actions to their efforts to resolve safety-related issues effectively?

As the individuals and communities most affected by this tragic episode continue to search for a path forward, the next turn could understandably hold revenge and anger above all other priorities. What would happen, however, if the highest context for the surviving family members and their communities was to shift the conversation from one of retribution to one of changing values in corporate America? What would happen if those powerful voices united in advocacy for priorities such as improving the quality of conditions and ensuring safety measures for employees remain above the profit line?

Most Common Change Barriers

Change Does Not Feel Relevant
When some kind of change initiative comes down the pike, it will usually be rejected if it does not directly connect with people’s needs
“”
This change will not help me with my problems!
I have not been asked to participate in the process, so I’m not really invested in seeing it through!

Insufficient Margin
When a person experiences more demands than they have energy and resources to address them, new learning and performance activities cannot be implemented:
“”
Help, I’m overwhelmed and can’t manage what’s already on my plate!

Anxiety or Distraction from Information/Communication Overload
Too much information, or too much communication around issues, resulting in confusion, frustration, or saturation.
“”
We are too STRESSED to take on anything new!

Tampering
Attempting to implement new behaviors and practices without changing the system that keeps the old behaviors in place:
“”
We’re spinning our wheels because the same old issue keeps coming up!

Defensive Routines
Deflecting criticism, blaming other people or events, avoiding tasks, or behaving in ways that shift responsibility to others to prevent uncomfortable or embarrassing consequences:
“”
There is somebody or something to blame!

Clinging to a Fixed, Positive Organizational Identity from the Past at the Expense of Current and Accurate Organizational Assessments
“”
I wish it was like it used to be; that was so much better!

Too Many Changes over a Short Period of Time Leading to Fatigue and Resistance to Other, More Essential Changes
“”
I’m done; I just won’t change any more!

Performance Whitewashing
Treating all goals and outcomes the same thus diverting energy and attention from the most critical priorities
“”
I’ll put out whatever fire is in front of me, even though something more important may need to get done!

CMM Solutions - Top 5 in Sales

Just got word that the Danish translation of CMM Solutions has risen to #5 in the ranking of Top Ten Business Books in Denmark!

Jesse's New Article

I have a new article in the September edition of the International Society for Performance Improvement's journal.

The piece is titled "A Systemic Cause Analysis Model for Human Performance Technicians" and it features my latest research on methods of identifying barriers to learning and performance.

Here is the abstract of the article. Click here to read it online:

This article presents a systemic, research-based cause analysis model for use in the field of human performance technology (HPT). The model organizes the most prominent barriers to workplace learning and performance into a conceptual framework that explains and illuminates the architecture of these barriers that exist within the fabric of everyday organizational life. The model has broad implications for HPT scholars and practitioners.

We Are The Stream

While coaching a stressed-out executive several years ago, I shared a metaphor that I thought could be helpful during my client's exceedingly tumultuous time. Probably borrowed from zen tradition, I conjured an image of a smooth stone in a stream. The analogy of the roiling waters fit the description of the many challenges and demands of his daily work. And, like an edge-less stone in a stream, the water will naturally find a way around -- and eventually pass -- without undue resistance.

Well, the conversation proved helpful at the time, but I think I had it wrong. I don't think we are the stones, I think we are the water.

This paradigm shift occurred to me while using the CMM Solutions consulting model to address a workplace conflict. After exploring the ways in which the patterns of communication were "making the conflict" for these two colleagues, I immediately thought of the smooth stone in the stream as a possible metaphor to help ease the emotional tension/burden that the conflict was producing for them. Then it hit me: one of the core causes of the conflict was their effort to stay in one place, continuously engaging in the same pattern of communication that produced the friction.

So I shifted the metaphor. Staying in the moment, I described the stream and invited them to consider how the quality and character of the water is forever-changing with the contours of the rock, soil, and wind. We are the water. We never stop moving. We never stop flowing. We endlessly make and re-make the patterns of interaction that shape our experience. When we think of ourselves as fixed (like the stone), surrounded by the circumstances of life that constantly ebb and flow around us, we get stuck. We miss out on the creative freedom that comes with knowing we will not be the same tomorrow, as we are today.

For me, this shift has implications in other arenas as well. For example, in leadership and career coaching, one of the most common challenges I face is helping clients deal with the gap between their desired quality of experience and the one they are actually living. This frame is based on "being the stone." An empowering shift here is to ask them what it would be like if they were "the stream." In other words: "If you weren't motionless, dwelling on the circumstances that continuously rush your way, how would your focus change?" "If you were ever-flowing and rock-shaping water, never reaching a plateau, never quite arriving at the same place twice, would that invigorate you to see something new and different?"

In the right moment, these could be powerful questions. They certainly offer an opportunity to change the way we think about our oreintation toward "problems" and to think about our influence in shaping the experience we live in.

Perhaps the simplest way to put this is: are you the stone, or the stream?

“Do you know how fast you are going?”

Driving down highway 1 in California, the only thing that can distract from the world-class vistas is the threat of a CHiP ready to say hello by asking the dreaded question “do you know how fast you were going?”

That is why I was surprised when a lonely radar speed sign showed me that I was driving 72 in a 55 zone. There it was, flashing in bright orange “72!” Just below the legal speed limit, it was there in real-time, objective, straight by the numbers -- a surprising, but healthy warning to take stock and evaluate the current pace of my travels.

In the corridors of work we could benefit from this kind of in-your-face, objective assessment. Indeed, one of the leading explanations of speeding violations is that the driver “wasn’t paying attention” and “didn’t notice their speed.” How often does this type of dangerous distraction happen to us in the break-neck pace of the modern workplace?

To decrease distraction and avoid the unwanted outcome of an accident or citation, we can create our own version of radar speed signs at work. A major value of these is that they can provide space for self-correction and alignment of priorities and actions without punitive consequences. If we follow this metaphor, it becomes a straightforward process of deliberately placing these “sign posts” in front of us so that we can catch a glimpse of how we’re doing in the precise moments when and places where we may lose sight of the quality of our progress.

Whether it is a request of a colleague/mentor, a post-it note on your desk, an automatic reminder in your email system, I am referring to the kind of questions that we can ask that will provide this objective feedback:

- How fast am I going right now?

- Considering the conditions, is this the ideal speed?

- Am I tuned into the landscape, or is it just a blur?

- Do I know where I’m headed (what I’m seeking to accomplish)?

- Am I too far back, or too far out in front of the people I need to be working with?

The vendor, Radarsign, claims that their machines offer an effective and affordable traffic-calming solution for reducing speeding drivers on city streets and highways, in neighborhoods, school zones, and more. Let’s look at these kind of anchor-questions as our own traffic-calming solution to finding the right rhythm and pace of work.

Health Affairs Article

This post references a June, 2011 article that I co-wrote for Health Affairs. The piece was listed in the top three most read GrantWatch Blog Posts online.

The July print addition of the Health Affairs journal will publish the piece about the groundbreaking ACA Education project conducted by AmericaSpeaks.

Here is an excerpt:

To explore the key factors that influence support and opposition to the law, including ways to better educate the public about the actual provisions of the law, AmericaSpeaks (referred to as CaliforniaSpeaks in this project) conducted seven community dialogue sessions with more than 220 participants, total, at all sessions across California during January and February 2011. The sessions assessed how the general public responds to the core elements of the ACA when they are presented in a variety of formats. These forums, supported by a grant from the Blue Shield of California Foundation (BSCF), were held in Fresno, Pasadena, Riverside, Sacramento, San Diego, San Leandro, and San Luis Obispo. This project built on the BSCF’s prior support of CaliforniaSpeaks in 2007 when the state was debating a major health reform proposal. Both projects were designed to educate and inform the public about efforts to expand health coverage for Californians.

You can get to the article here.

Book Review by Dr. Stephen W. Littlejohn

Thought I would share this review that Dr. Littlejohn published last month:
----------------------------------------------

CMM Solutions Field Guide and companion Workbook for Consultants
By Barnett Pearce, Jesse Sostrin, and Kimberly Pearce (Lulu Press, 2011)

CMM Solutions, a two-part package of tools and practices for consultants, is designed to help practitioners apply the theory of the Coordinated Management of Meaning in their work with clients. Since its inception in the 1970s, CMM has been employed in various social situations and organizational interventions, including, for example, community dialogues, conflict resolution, counseling and psychotherapy, and spiritual practice. As a practical theory, CMM is powerful in helping consultants think about and act into client situations and problems, and practitioners familiar with the theory seem hungry for guidance on how to use the theory in this way. CMM Solutions was written to fill this gap.

The package consists of two booklets. The first, CMM Solutions: Field Guide for Consultants provides an overview of a CMM process that can guide any kind of intervention in which a consultant is presented with a problem or challenge experienced by a dyad, group, organization, or community. This first booklet features a realistic scenario and transcript of an intervention using this method. The second part, entitled CMM Solutions: Workbook for Consultants is a practical guide to CMM tools with templates and directions on how to use and adapt them.

The program features a five-part model for intervention, which the authors call SEAVA—(1) storyboarding, (2) enriching, (3) analyzing, (4) visioning, and (5) acting. SEAVA is described in detail in the first booklet, the Field Guide, and its use is illustrated by an annotated narrative “transcript” of a fictional intervention constructed as a composite from various actual consultations. Each stage of the consultation model features particular aspects of CMM carefully arranged for building awareness of the communication perspective, creating client insight into participants’ patterns of interaction, and consideration of how those patterns might be changed. The method is wholly collaborative in approach and relies heavily on the clients’ own constructions and insights. As such the method is heavy on process and light on judgment and consultant-centered problem solving. The consultant is aided at each stage of SEAVA with a set of tools designed to help build awareness of the communication process, choices made, and levels of meaning and action. These tools and forms are detailed in the Workbook.

CMM Solutions works within the communication perspective, aiming to help clients look at their process of communication, rather than through the process to some other content. Indeed, the fictional consultant, Larry, uses a card to remind himself that “we get what we make, we make it through communication, [and] if we get the pattern of communication right, the best possible things will happen.” CMM Solutions does not require prior familiarity with the theory. Many sources are available for readers who want to know more about the theory itself, several of which are listed in the resources at the end. I personally recommend Barnett Pearce’s book Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective (Blackwell, 2007).

For those familiar with the theory, CMM Solutions provides a method of storyboarding as a way of helping participants identify episodes and the punctuation of interactional sequences. A template for the LUUUUTT model can be used to help clients explore their stories, and a “daisy” template can help identify groups and conversations outside the immediate situation that influence or inform what is going on. The participants’ hierarchies of meaning and action can be probed using the hierarchy template, which can also be used in conjunction with a form for analyzing logical force. Tools are also available for uncovering unwanted repetitive patterns, strange loops, and bifurcation points. The practitioner can use any combination of these as part of the SEAVA process, and the Workbook provides guidelines for using and adapting each tool, including suggested time and resources required along with the process steps and examples. The CMM Solutions approach may appear formulaic at first glance, and it does present the method as a pre-formed and sequential model. However, the authors are clear that the model is presented in this way for clarity and completeness, but that experienced consultants will use it in innumerable creative and adaptive ways.

The CMM Solutions Field Guide at 134 pages is available for $35.00, or $19.99 for a downloadable version. The CMM Solutions Workbook at 31 pages is available for $24.95, or $14.99 downloadable. Both are can be purchased from Amazon or Lulu. The Field Guide can be used as a stand-alone, but I do not recommend the Workbook without the Field Guide.

Transforming Barriers - ODP Journal Article

This month's peer reviewed Organization Development Practitioner Journal features my latest article. The culmination of year's of research and practice, the featured article includes a full-length case study using the new RITE Model. Two of this articles critical contributions include: 1) A practical roadmap to navigate the hidden curriculum of work; and 2) A system of transforming everyday organizational barriers into pathways for sustained learning and performance. The RITE Model is effective because it works simultaneously in both of these directions. It resolves barriers while also enhancing the capacity for change. Implementing the RITE Model consistently over time will allow managers to pitch the external consultant and coach your own team to new levels of learning and performance success that impact the bottom line.

Here is an excerpt from the Introduction:

Whether their position of influence is internal or external, Organization Development practitioners are tasked with resolving a wide range of issues that threaten individual, team, and organizational success. Sometimes these issues are referred to as gaps or obstacles, or they can be alluded to in more creative terms like breakdowns, and blind spots. Whatever form they come in, collectively I call these impediments to the quality and outcome of work barriers to workplace learning and performance .

When left unresolved, barriers can take a considerable toll on the workplace at three fundamental levels, including:

• 1st Order Impacts on Workers may cause individuals to lose focus, disengage from their work and the greater organization, avoid or disabuse priorities, exhaust motivation, cause physical and psychological discomfort through stress, and reduce accuracy and quality of performance;

• 2nd Order Impacts on Work Teams can debilitate patterns of communication, prevent effective decision-making, reduce collaboration, erode morale, distract from priorities, and undermine the collective potential of team members to positively impact the organization; and

• 3rd Order Impacts on the Workplace will divert values, disrupt effective structures of interaction, reduce overall productivity, increase absenteeism, presenteeism and turnover, adversely impact the strategic implementation of goals, and more.

Considering these summary examples of the compounding affects of unresolved barriers, the mandate to comprehensively address barriers across the organizational spectrum is considerable. One of the strengths of the Organization Development field is the diversity of practice traditions that contribute an array of processes and interventions that can identify barriers such as these.

Successfully identifying barriers, however, is only one part of a larger process of resolving them. As the nature of work continues to evolve, Organization Development practitioners increasingly intervene in unstructured circumstances that require dynamic tools and resources to quickly and effectively assist clients in the full resolution of their organizational issues.

The purpose of this article is to provide a detailed description and case example of the RITE Model, a unique system of transforming individual and team barriers into pathways for sustained learning and performance. The remainder of this introduction summarizes two key concepts that form the foundation of the model.

Why Focus on the Negative

A client recently asked me about my Breaking Barriers brand and related programs that, in his words, "focus on the negative." After learning about several strength-based management strategies, including techniques like Appreciative Inquiry, he was right to recognize the frame of barriers. I appreciated his question and here’s how I responded and ultimately why I think it matters:

The reason for the focus on barriers is because they offer the most efficient path toward constructive improvement. This is based upon an inherent assumption that identifying and potentially reducing barriers may directly or indirectly improve the probability of successful workplace learning and performance. The primary foundation of this assumption comes from Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis. In Force Field
Analysis, one can either: 1) reduce the strength of the forces opposing a desired change (e.g. barriers); or 2) increase the enhancing forces that drive change so that both opposing forces are brought into balance. In other words, it is believed that for an individual, team or organization that wishes to improve upon learning and performance, the successful identification and reduction of barriers is a key factor that enables movement toward the desired change to take effect.

Perhaps what is most powerful about the focus on transforming barriers is that it works in both of these directions simultaneously. While a concerted effort is made to reduce the strength of the barrier (opposing force), the capacity to build learning and performance capacity is also enhanced.

The Burnout Pattern

Recently I worked with a very successful manager who was on the verge of burnout. He was experiencing a really uncomfortable pattern that seemed to lead him back to the inevitable conclusion that something had to give. After exploring the issues and circumstances, I helped him develop a visual image of the pattern – calling it the “Good Intentions” Pattern. After exploring the variables, the image was helpful to show how he kept ending up in the same place:


If you can’t see the image well, here are the four loops in the pattern:
- You develop lots of energy and excitement for accomplishing your priorities and goals…
- You put forth some effort, although you’re energy and resources are not very directed or consistent…
- You experience mixed results, the initial enthusiasm for the goals wanes and then frustration and negative self-talk set in…and then
- You lose focus and become distracted from your priorities and must spend time trying to rebuild your energy and excitement toward the goal.

After assessing the pattern and spending a few weeks noticing where it showed up, we worked together on identifying the trigger and then replaced that with a new commitment. In this instance, a negative trigger that reinforced the burnout pattern was the mixed results and frustration he experienced with a particularly challenging project. He decided to make a commitment to positively explore that frustration and to use it as a teachable moment and inspiration to re-focus on "what he could influence." This turned out to be a sufficient course correction to get him out of the burnout pattern. He reported that, although it wasn't easy, it opened up new ways of thinking about other difficult aspects of his working life.

The Problem with Solving Problems

Here is a brief excerpt from the CMM Solutions Field Guide for Consultants. CMM Solutions is a two-book set for consultants and managers that want to use sophisticated communication techniques to address pressing organizational learning and performance challenges. The clip provides a feel for what the book is all about:

"The Problem with Solving Problems - There is nothing wrong with solving problems! When the supply room catches on fire, you want to put it out quickly and effectively. Forget the organization chart, whoever is closest to the extinguisher, grab it! Problem solved, and then life moves on.

But when the supply room keeps on catching fire day after day, your best response might be to change something more fundamental than replenishing the extinguisher and reducing the response time needed to activate it. A better world would be one in which fires don’t happen so frequently, if at all.

If the goal is to solve a problem, then the “problem” has been given tremendous power. The “problem” (however we construe it) organizes our efforts to “solve” it. And so the problems we face become the generative force in organizing our relationships and organizations, not our highest hopes or deepest values. In addition, the problem creates the criteria by which we will recognize “solutions.”

We become de-sensitized to all of the other things in our environment that are “not-solutions” but which may well be of great value. We might say that every “solution” to every problem has “collateral damage” – as everyone knows who has had to clean up a sodden store room after the fire has been extinguished. In one way of putting it, problems are holes in the ground and their solutions fill those holes, but when they are solved, we’re just back at level ground. Nothing has been gained, just put back where it was. Until next time…"

The Challenge of Change

Considering the time of year, the concept of change is something to be looked at carefully. The purpose of this column is to explore some of the most common learning & performance barriers that we experience in a time of change.

As John Reh said, “Nothing is as upsetting as change…Nothing has greater potential to cause failures, loss of production, or falling quality than change...Yet nothing is as important to the survival of your organization as change.” Clearly, change matters. However, when the only day-to-day constant is change, it can be difficult to sustain focus and forward progress on true organizational priorities. If change fatigue sets in, our teams can experience reduced morale and important client services and projects can stall.

The good news is that a climate of change is also conducive to continuous learning and performance improvements. In order to capitalize on the opportunities for growth however, we have to identify and address the common Change Barriers. I have identified more than 250 of these in my research and work, but I picked out a few of the most common ones that I see in a time of change:

1. Change Does Not Feel Relevant – When some kind of change initiative comes down the pike, it will usually be rejected if it does not directly connect with people’s needs:

[This change will not help with my problems! I don’t see the relevance of this change to my own situation! I have not been asked to participate in the process, so I’m not really invested in seeing it through!]

2. Insufficient Margin - When a person experiences more demands than they have energy and resources to address them, new learning and performance activities cannot be implemented:

[Help, I’m overwhelmed and can’t manage what’s already on my plate!]

3. Anxiety or distraction from information/communication overload:

[We are too STRESSED to take on anything new!]

4. Tampering - Attempting to implement new behaviors and practices without changing the system that keeps the old behaviors in place:

[We’re spinning our wheels because the same old issue keeps coming up!]

5. Defensive Routines - Deflecting criticism, blaming other people or events, avoiding tasks, or behaving in ways that shift responsibility to others to prevent uncomfortable or embarrassing consequences:

[There is somebody or something to blame!]

6. Inability to successfully cope with or bounce back from adversity

[People are close-minded and feel too defeated to rise to a new challenge.]

7. Clinging to a fixed, positive organizational identity from the past at the expense of current and accurate organizational assessments:

[I wish it was like it used to be; that was so much better!]

8. Too many changes over a short period of time leading to fatigue and resistance to other, more essential changes:

[I’m done; I just won’t change any more!]

9. Performance Whitewashing - Treating all goals and outcomes the same thus diverting energy and attention from the most critical priorities:

[I’ll put out whatever fire is in front of me, even though something more important may need to get done!]

As you consider the diverse list above, it is clear the challenges of change can come from every direction. If you or your team is having difficulty overcoming one or more of these challenges to change, here are three very practical suggestions:

1. Locate the Resistance – What we are unaware of controls us, but what become aware, we can influence. That said, it is critical to locate the resistance to change and understand what it is and why it persists. Asking the question- what is this about - can start a valuable process of clarifying the situation. If one particular change barrier resonates with you, spend some time thinking about it and exchange perspectives with the team to explore what is going on.

2. Simplify the Equation – As greater awareness about the nature of resistance is developed, it is important to simplify the situation in order to identify effective ways to address the change. Examining what is in/out of your control and finding “pockets of influence” can be helpful because it allows you to stop worrying about what you can’t control, and to instead invest energy into the things that can be influenced by your response and action.

3. Respect Others’ Speed Limits – Each person has a pace of change the represents their comfort zone. It is important not to push others too hard toward change, but it is also critical not to ignore the need for change. This balancing act requires respectful discussion and engagement with colleagues about their speed limits for change. Pushing when needed and slowing down when helpful is a constructive give and take that facilitates productive change.

If you need support implementing these three approaches, or if you would like to discuss a specific situation in more detail, the door is always open.

FALL BREAK

We're still taking a break for the fall. Please plan to resume your visits to the blog in January with the launch of a fresh new series on "Hope in a Time of Barriers."

While you're here, feel free to catch up on old posts and pod casts.

Archaeology at Work

As a consultant who works regularly with clients dealing with strategy gaps, unresolved conflict and a wide range of personnel and performance issues, my first instinct is to help them look ahead rather than dwell in the past. However, sometimes digging into the past is necessary to find a durable, forward-looking solution. I call this archaeology at work and here is a quick framework that offers a guide to learning from the past:

Determine the “Archaeological Horizon” – This is the sum total of all artifacts at a site and it can be used to distinguish between episodes or periods of time. In the world of work, this is the equivalent of putting useful parameters around what is being discussed and considered. Re-tracing the roots of a presenting problem can sometimes lead down the rabbit hole, so delineating the horizon is important. It helps people see where other issues start/stop and what is “in-bounds or out-of-bounds” in a given situation.

Begin the “Excavation” – Many people take too narrow a view of excavation. It is not just bringing in the bulldozers and seeing what is dug up. In archaeology, excavation has three phases: exposure, processing and recording. In the workplace, these three phases are essential. Exposing issues and old wounds can be delicate, however, if a basic structure is used to process people's perspectives, feelings and ideas, then the findings can be recorded and made useful in the subsequent problem-solving phases. When thorough excavation is skipped, the wealth of critical information and data is left inaccessible just below the surface.

Discover the “Numismatics” – Numismatics refers to the study of currency. In the workplace, rather than coins and shells as the system of currency, we need to understand what values, beliefs and sources of power act as the currency for the people involved. Only by understanding the underlying drivers (what matters and to whom) can the details from the excavation be put into accurate and useful context. This can be accomplished with values clarification exercises or simply through discussion.

Ensure the “Preservation of Meaning” – Preservation of meaning is the total understanding of spiritual, psychological and perceptive values that people within a culture have toward artifacts and systems. By creating a shared sense of meaning – even when there is diversity among perspectives – it becomes possible to ensure that what people truly value can be preserved. This is a defining moment because developing and implementing problem solving strategies require commitment and buy-in. The best way to generate this is to connect solutions to what matters most for people: their core values and beliefs about priorities.

Used together, these lessons from the world of archaeology can help you discover important information buried in your own workplace.

Getting Those Disagreements Resolved

A colleague of mine asked me to write about a few simple steps that can be used to navigate the proverbial "difficult conversation." I've written about this in past posts, but here is a helpful recap of a simple three-step process I use, including a self-guided preparation activity at the end:

Step 1: Initiate the Dialogue
Agree to have a conversation to explore issues, feelings and potential next steps.
- Opportunity to clear the air
- Understand how this conflict affects each of us
- Outline the values and needs at stake for each of us
- Uncover assumptions we each have

Step 2: Clarify the Situation
Communicate and clarify the important issues in order to elicit both perspectives on the situation.
- Tell “our stories” and goals for resolving the issue
- Clarify the issues in a productive manner
- Build a shared understanding of the important issues
- Identify what each person needs in order to move forward

Step 3: Brainstorm, Evaluate and Choose Solutions
Talk out loud about how to meet each other’s expectations.
- Focus the conversation on ways to meet or revise expectations
- As agreements form, give them the “Monday Test:” What will happen when we both come to work on Monday; will this help both of us move on?”
- Write down or verbally summarize the new expectations in a realistic and specific format
__________________________________________________

Preparation Activity:

- Think about a current or recent “unmet expectation” that either did or could possibly turn into a conflict at work
- Identify which of the 10 ineffective conflict management styles you used (or may be inclined to use) in this circumstance
- Review the three steps of conflict management and “script out” your approach to proactively address the situation
- Find a partner and practice working through each of the three steps

“Manage Like There Will Be A Tomorrow”

We’ve all heard the inspiring call to action “live like there’s no tomorrow.” While this urgent directive can be helpful to get us out of our comfort zone for some things, it is decidedly unsound for the long term. I think something very different is required of those that manage and lead organizations in today’s volatile business economy. We have to manage and lead like there will be a tomorrow. To some, this may sound like the bar has been lowered to a plane just above survival. However, taking on this confident mindset is a prerequisite for surviving and thriving in the downturn.

In trying to sum up the impact of the collective change that I see managers and leaders experiencing across industries, I’ve described it as an “elegant disintegration of all things grasped for.” In practical terms, it means we don’t know which way is up…everything that we thought we knew now seems to be in question…and it doesn’t feel like much of anything can be counted upon. In fact, over the last six months most of my coaching and consulting clients have had one major goal in common – they want to establish at least some predictability during these incredibly uncertain times. More specifically, they are striving to establish meaningful strategies and action plans that can carry them through.

The first step in creating these strategies and plans is to make the conscious choice that the future can be shaped. I have always believed that today is the best preview of tomorrow. The attitudes that influence our thinking and inform the total set of adaptive choices we make and actions we take today are the best prediction of what tomorrow will hold. Therefore, making this subtle, but very powerful shift in thinking – we are managing like there will be a tomorrow – is the start of confidently putting one foot in front of the other. This is the surest way to get a foothold into a productive path forward.

All Leaders Have a Vision Problem

All leaders have a vision problem, not because it is a unique barrier that leaders alone face, but because it is a human concern amplified by the specific role that leaders play in organizations. The vision problem is this: leaders are prone to see what they expect to see, and avoid what they don’t want to see.

Most conventional definitions of leadership include an aspect of ‘seeing the big picture’ and ‘charting a vision for the future.’ Both of these dictums imply the ability to observe, assess, and synthesize complex and often ambiguous inputs in order to make sense of the changing landscape in which the business or enterprise operates. In short, leaders have to see clearly in order to objectively strategize, collaborate, and decide on the organization’s course. But how can leaders effectively fulfill this aspect of their role with impaired vision?

The roots of this leadership vision problem are both biological (primarily cognitive) and cultural. Much has been written about the brain and business so I won’t revisit the pop science description of the brain’s need to take survival-enhancing short cuts via assumptions and pre-formulated mental shortcuts that reduce risk. Of course the problem with this lizard brain stuff is that the shortcuts often short-change our ability to see a bigger (more accurate) picture. As a result we often miss critical information and data that can help us to arrive at better all around conclusions.

In addition to this cognitive and developmental pattern, the rest of the vision problem stems from cultural norms. In the US, business schools around the country and much of the associated business media constantly reinforce a reactionary frenzy around the concept of “the rapid pace of business.” I have been guilty of this one too; often feeling justified to rush because the pace and depth of demands on my working life unfold at a speed and intensity that requires short cuts, brilliant strokes of insight in real time, and the necessary sacrifice of reflection and patience.

This cultural norm, which I call the “cult of right now,” fits the natural biological function of the brain seamlessly. However, when these cognitive and cultural factors combine they cause vision impairments for leaders that reduce performance in both the short and long term.

After more than 10 years of work in conflict mediation and executive coaching, my experience has confirmed that as leaders wrestle with their most significant challenges, vision correction (enhancement) is a critical and consistent factor of their success as they work through their concerns and advance on their highest goals.

Tools for vision correction must begin with two simultaneous efforts -- one of them internal to address the cognitive-developmental patterns that compel us to cheat on our process of seeing and considering all available input -- and the other one is external as it addresses leaders’ wrongly rooted conviction and related set of practices that enforce the “cult of right now.”

Implementing these tools requires attitude and behavioral modification, which this blog alone cannot achieve. However, let me offer two very clear starting places for those managers and leaders who recognize the importance of this kind of vision correction.

Regarding the external piece, there is a question tree that can be pursued that can challenge our innate assumptions and force us to at least expand the horizon and peripheral observations we include in our analysis. You can customize these questions to suit your specific role and/or industry practice, but the general flow goes like this: what are the current limits I have set around the problem/issue/idea I am considering; in what areas could I stretch those limits to include new and different input; who could I present my thinking to in order to get a different take on things; now that I’ve stretched the parameters and gotten some contrary views, what are two or three potentially reasonable answers or conclusions; of these somewhat diverse possibilities, which one is preferred…

These questions can be asked in rapid succession, though ideally they can be sequenced over a few days to allow for substantial echoes and insights. Following this line of inquiry can help to take the blinders off and promote healthier vision.

Now, regarding the external need to confront popular business culture’s “cult of right now,” my suggestion is to immerse yourself in the contrarian mindset on this one. Model it in your attitude and in your behavior. When a colleague says: “look at me, I’m doing the job of three people,” you know that he’s likely just doing less with less and that the miracle of doing more with less is actually a myth. When your CEO screams that she wants an answer yesterday to one of your biggest challenges, push back and create the space you need to get the right answer even if it requires more reflection and extended analysis.

Know that when demands increase but resources to meet them do not grow, it is paramount to hone the discipline of choice. To avoid getting caught up in rash decisions and compromises, choose to slow down and absorb the bigger picture in order to make the best decision with available information. Get used to the initial disappointment of false instant accomplishment and instead embrace the imperfection of not getting it all done.

Focusing on accurate information and realistic priorities in this way requires us to be brutally honest about what matters most and to make hard choices about which goals are just not that important right now. In the end, you’ll get more of what matters most done and establish a precedent of reflection and patience that is welcome in any business climate.

Some Collaboration is Wrong…Even When It Is for a Good Reason

There is not simply one kind of collaboration. It is a gross over simplification to speak about collaboration in homogenous terms because it takes on diverse implications every time a collaborative initiative is put into effect.

The goal of collaboration is to get better results and while not everyone practices the same degree of discipline in their choices about when, where, why and with whom to collaborate – there is general agreement that there is a “right time and a wrong time and a right way and a wrong way” to collaborate.

A very common breakdown in effective collaboration occurs in organizations of every size when the wrong kind of collaboration is used, even if it is applied for a good reason.

One very good outcome of successful collaboration is the social capital that is built through exercising effective communication, mutually exploring interests and ultimately developing stronger relationships (that are quite useful when difficult circumstances arise). This is important and it should be recognized as a legitimate by-product of successful collaboration. However, this good will and social capital is not the end goal of collaboration and when it is over utilized, it inadvertently distracts us from the right kind of collaboration.

The right kind of collaboration is often quite challenging. By definition, if an individual could get a better result themselves, they would pursue that path because it is more efficient. True collaboration is plural and often challenging because of communication incompatibility, differences of opinion, and uncertainty of outcome. We tend to do less of this kind of collaboration, despite the fact that it holds the most potential for achieving better results.

When it is easy and it feels good to connect, communicate and problem solve with another person we tend to do more of that kind of collaboration. The paradox which undermines our overall effectiveness is that we could benefit more from challenging collaboration, yet we do less of it because it is time consuming and susceptible to an uncertain outcome.

The lesson here is to confront this paradox when it emerges. Choose opportunities for collaboration when they represent the right reasons. When it feels easy and good to collaborate, question the motive and make sure the end goal of a better result can be achieved.