Blog Archives - Page 8 of 13

Abdication, delegation, interference

How do leaders know if what they are giving their people is right?

This was the question that was exercising a leader I met last week. He was very aware of the strengths and weaknesses of his team and the challenges they had on . He was also very clear about his own management style and was well aware that he loved ‘doing the doing’ and was in danger of getting overly involved and potentially becoming an interference and a nuisance to his team

He’d also experimented with more delegation and talked fondly of a happy couple of weeks when he’d been able to go home at 5pm after off loading his project backlog. This had backfired slightly when he discovered his team straining to complete tasks and he’d concluded that his ‘delegation’ had actually become abdication.

This delicate balance is of course the stuff of ‘situational leadership’ – the fine art of judging the right degree of empowerment and autonomy. And art is is … if there was rule book on how to do this perfectly it would be a best seller. My leader was more than half way there as he understood that getting it wrong was normal and was willing to have conversations with his team about what he needed to provide them. How refreshing!

The elephant and the rider

I’ve recently finished reading Jonathan Haidt’s fascinating book the ‘happiness hypothesis’. Don’t let the title put you off – this is not pop self-help psychology but a well crafted and stimulating book about who we are and what makes us tick based on a mound of sound research.

Throughout the book Haidt uses an intriguing metaphor – the ‘elephant and the rider’ – making the case that we are not as rationally determined as we might like to think. Haidt argues that most of our functioning is governed by our instinctual, habituated and largely unconscious self (the elephant). Our rational conscious self is just like the rider on a elephant – allegedly in control but ultimately not … if our elephant wants to go a particular direction that is the way we go.

This has some interesting potential implications for change and personal development. If the elephant and the rider both want the same thing change is likely to be rapid and sustained. However if the two are at odds then change might be resisted or at best temporary. Think about all the times you (rider) have promised yourself (elephant) that you are going to get fitter/loose weight/cut back on red wine but failed to do so … that is the rider/elephant in action.

Some interesting implications for coaching … to be discussed!

Feeling in control – issues in coaching

It occurs to me that ‘feeling in control’ is another of those things that you can have too much of or too little. When I meet a coaching client that feels too little in control there is usually a sense of being overwhelmed, coupled with anxiety and powerlessness. Almost without fail, if I can encourage them to take back a bit of control in their lives — often in a very small symbolic way — this can be amazingly liberating and will often prove a turning point. One recent client gave himself permission to take a short lunch break and get out of the office — a simple act that did wonders for his sense of personal control and proved a springboard later on for greater changes in his life.

However, sometimes the problem is holding on to too much control… the client who won’t delegate or micro-manages their team to within an inch of their life to name two examples. I find this a tougher pattern to work with as there is often a bigger investment in existing behaviour. It is often a slow process of encouraging the client to progressively let go of whatever they are holding on to too tightly and test whether the sky actually does fall in. As one client said’ It’s a bit like a kite string … you let go of control a bit at a time’.

So how are things today – too much or too little control in your life?

Too much of a good thing – issues in coaching

Much of the development literature is fixated on uncovering weaknesses and finding fixes for them. “Do you lack assertiveness/ confidence/ the ability to delegate? ” the book titles cry and offer their pat solutions for overcoming such ‘deficits’. While important, in recent times I’ve become more convinced that it is our over-strengths that cause us as much problem in our dealings with others, as our weaknesses.

Daniel Ofman has an interesting take on this subject of ‘too much of a good thing’. He describes how our core qualities (our natural gifts) can tip in into becoming our pitfalls when used to excess. Thus helping can become meddling, decisiveness can become dogmatic, and assertiveness can become aggressiveness etc.

Taking this further Ofman suggests that we need to develop the positive opposite of our over strengths to counter balance our core qualities, rather than necessarily eliminate our over-strengths. Thus the assertive individual would do well to develop some responsiveness to others rather than attempt to eliminate their aggressiveness. Ofman believes that this form of compensation is likely to be more successful and productive … unless of course this too is taken to excess.

Here’s a short clip of Daniel Ofman introducing his ideas…sorry the image isn’t great

Newbies and cynics

What a refreshing week – working with a brand new team who oozed ‘can do’ and ‘get up and go’. Not that they were a bunch of Polyanna’s – far from it – they were very clear about the size of the challenge they faced and the difficulties of making headway. But somehow this didn’t seem to daunt them, and despite the complexities of their labyrinthine organisation they were up for making a difference.

Will this group be as positive in a year’s time? I hope so but wouldn’t be surprised if it were otherwise. So often weariness, negativity and scepticism seems to creep in, and before you know it today’s enthusiastic newbie is tomorrow’s down trodden cynic. Perhaps its the path of least resistance – when you’ve hit your head on the organisational wall too many times cynicism starts to look like the sane response. However, given most of us spend most of our waking hours at work we owe it to ourselves to remember occasionally the difference we too once wanted to make in the world.

Negativity in groups – issues in team coaching

We’d had a great day – the group were humming with creativity and the outputs from their discussions covered the walls. I was bringing it to close when a voice piped up from the back. “What’s the point?” he asked, “Nobody’s going to listen us- even if they did, what we’ve come up with is never going to work!”. The mood in the room plummeted and several members of the group rounded on the dissenter – why hadn’t he raised his concerns earlier in the day, why was he being so negative? Some of the group even made fun of him “Trust you to see the dark side, keep us grounded why don’t you!”

Dealing with negativity can be a real challenge as a group facilitator. You want all perspectives to be represented and know that sometimes it is the ‘marginal voice’ that brings fresh perspective and guards against group think. However the negative voice often isn’t interested in solutions so much as proving to others that their pessimistic views are right and realistic – ” We’re all doomed and I predicted it”. Its therefore sometimes a fine line between supporting difference and keeping productive work flowing. All in a days work…

Cycling with the brakes on

Working with a coaching client recently I had the privilege of watching what happens when someone gets fully ‘behind themselves’. Instead of putting his mental energies into what might go wrong in the future and how he might fail, my client started to articulate, with clarity and passion, what he wanted to lead for and the changes he wanted to see in the world. The problems and pitfalls were still there, but he had crossed a threshold and there would be no turning back and certainly no stopping him. Very exciting!

I reckon I have a choice as a coach – exploring the negative or exploring the positive. Do I spend my time helping my client to face their fears and dismantling their blocks, or connecting my clients with what is fundamental and core to them, and let their own energy take hold. Both are legitimate conversations but I do find that while people are often very skilled at defending their anxieties and maintaining their worries, they are less adept at trusting themselves and committing all their resources to their aspirations. Its like they’re riding a bicycle with the brakes on.

‘As soon as you trust yourself, you will know how to live’ – my second favourite von Goethe quote.

The too helpful leader

We’ve all heard of the ‘micro-manager’ – the guy/gal who is always hovering on your shoulder and deep down doesn’t really trust us to get on. However just as common, but less acknowledged, is the ‘too helpful manager’. These are the well-intentioned folk who can’t help taking other people’s problems on themselves, and define leadership in terms of the number of issues they’ve managed to fix in the day. Throw in a soupçon of control freakery and you’ve got a wonderful recipe for dis-empowerment.

For these managers coaching is often a struggle, as they see their role as the expert who has to provide all the answers. Coaching someone else to learn for themselves can therefore come as a bit of a shock, and more than the odd leading question is known to creep into the dialogue.

While of course problems must be fixed, the too helpful manager deprives their team of the opportunity to find their own way and make their own mistakes ie. grow and develop. Net result – the too helpful boss perpetually has to keep helping out and becomes a bottleneck on their own team performance.

Perhaps time for a redefinition of what is helpful?

Thanks to Jock McNeish for the wonderful cartoon.

Selective hearing – issues in coaching

Having delivered a lot of 360 feedback to people over the years I’ve noticed how often people seem to selectively pick out the messages they want to hear and reject or rationalise away the rest. Not too surprising at one level, but given the intent of 360 feedback is (in part) to puncture our self-delusions not reinforce them, this form of selective hearing seems worth paying attention to.

William Swann*, US psychologist, talks about two competing motives that tend to preserve and reinforce our view of ourselves: the self-consistency and self-enhancement motives. Those with a stronger self-consistency drive need to see themselves as essentially unchanging – even if it means clinging to a poor self-image. So when faced with good feedback they will often diminish or minimise it, whilst lapping up the bad news. A stronger self-enhancement motive shows up as people wanting to enhance their view of themselves – so guess what – the good news gets heard and the bad news gets rejected. This makes it tough work for the coach trying to increase a client’s self-awareness but understanding these motives does help.

So what do you find harder – the good new or the bad news?

* Swann,W.B. et al (1999) The cognitive-affective crossfire: when self-consistency confronts self-enhancement, in: Roy F. Baumeister (Ed.), The self in social psychology, Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Click here for a link

Coaching vs Therapy – issues in coaching

When I’m asked by new coaches about the differences between coaching and therapy, I’m often tempted to ask them whether they want the two minute explanation or the two hour version. The two minute version goes something like this – coaching is about the future, its about work performance, its about people who are functioning well but who could function better, its about finding solutions not fixing history. Therapy isn’t any of these.

The two hour version points out the generalisations in these statements, the impossibility of compartmentalising ourselves, and the similarity in skills. Experienced business coaches know that the whole human shows up for coaching – and that, often, the roots of present day performance issues lies in the past. Like it or not we are dealing with human psychology when we coach… and that includes our own not just the client’s.

Like learning to swim, we need to be clear about when we are getting into ‘deep water’ as a coach and either head for the ‘shallows’ or learn to improve our technique. We do our clients no service if we take them into waters where we are out of our depth. Equally perpetually swimming in the shallow end is unlikely to make a real difference in the lives of our clients. OK enough watery metaphors.