Some key learnings in this blog from Cindy Turner.
Some key learnings in this blog from Cindy Turner.
Heidegger and the Digital Age
Originally posted on Philosophy for change:
It is early morning. A chorus of birds filters through an open window. A young woman lies in bed with her boyfriend. It is a quotidian scene, almost perfect, yet something is off. The boyfriend is checking his smartphone, a web-enabled device. In this moment, his attention is elsewhere. Cut to the outdoors: the couple are getting ready to go jogging. The boyfriend is still caught up with his phone. She waits while he chatters to a friend. Cut to the woman lunching with friends of her own. There is real social chemistry here, a buzz of laughter and conversation. But the others soon start thumbing through screens, engaging with their phones. The young woman has forgotten hers. Her expression, as she looks about the table, is worried as much as reproachful.
Where are you, my friends? Why can’t we just be together?
‘I Forgot My Phone’ is a gem –…
View original 1,384 more words
Thought- provoking piece, as always, from Tim Rayner.
Originally posted on Philosophy for change:
Ever stared death in the eye? If you’ve not had the pleasure, like Pfc. Don Doll here in this shot from Terence Malik’s Thin Red Line, I recommend a thought experiment. Imagine that, right now, you are teletransported to the heart of a military conflict. Ker-bang. One moment you are surfing the internet, next moment you are knee deep in the mud with bullets hissing through the elephant grass about you. An explosion thows you down. Shit is real. You could be dead in an instant.
You want to run, cry, call for your mother. But there is no escape. You crouch low in the grass, taking deep breaths. Yout heart is booming in your chest. You are alive – for the moment. This simple truth has enveloped your entire consciousness. How strange it is that you didn’t reflect on this before, you think. Why, all your life, you’ve…
View original 990 more words
Insightful piece by Tim Raynor, bringing together Kazuo Ishiguro and Sartre.
Originally posted on Philosophy for change:
Stevens was the butler’s butler. At Darlington Hall, where he’d worked his entire life, he exemplified the butler’s virtues of dignity and forebearance. Stevens’ self-identity hinged on his dignified façade. Over the years, he’d become so adept at maintaining this façade, he’d become it.
Stevens was the butler’s butler. Nothing less – and nothing more.
Stevens is the narrator of Kazuo Ishiguro’s Booker prize-winning novel, The Remains of the Day (1989). Anthony Hopkins owned the role in the Academy Award-nominated film adaptation of 1993. The story begins in the 1950s, when Stevens receives a letter from an old employee, Miss Kenton, who was the housekeeper at Darlington Hall in the years before the War. The letter rewakens old feelings in Stevens and stirs a sense of loss. Miss Kenton (played in the film by Emma Thompson) was an exemplary housekeeper. She and Stevens had an excellent professional relationship. At a…
View original 1,360 more words
A headline in the business section of a national newspaper recently caught my attention. It read: “Company reports rise in profits despite employee numbers increasing”. The inference seemed to be that the company employees had no role to play in the company’s success; in fact it appeared to suggest that company profits might have been even higher were it not for the increase in the number of employees. While one might be tempted to blame sloppy editing I think there is a lot to be considered in the thinking behind this type of narrative. Is the underlying motto “Maximise profits and minimise employees”? Think about this before answering. Some commentators might like to soften the language by replacing “minimise” with “optimise” but the tenet is basically the same.
I detect a worrying shift in business language since the onset of the recession. There has been a tendency to revert to a Command and Control view of management where employees are expected to be motivated by the fact that “at least they have a job”. This is hardly sustainable in the long run. Of course, companies need clear direction and tighter cost control in these circumstances but does this mean that employees should now be seen purely as costs? Does it have to be like this is a recession? I would argue that of course it doesn’t. In fact, during a recession, you need employees to be even more empowered, more committed and more engaged. In addition, you won’t want to lose them when things start to pick up and you really need them to grow the business. Your competitors, who will also be growing, will very happily take these experienced employees away from you (probably without even offering extra money, just a better place to work).
I believe that managers may be tempted to avoid the people management aspects of their jobs in favour of task management. In other words, a return to the comfort zone. But, here’s the point, it’s during the tough times that the real leaders emerge; leaders who can deliver the bad news but still bring their staff with them, provide clear vision and actually increase loyalty. Unfortunately we may have to wait for the recession to be over before we will be able to see the fruits of their labours.
In a nutshell, you should grasp the opportunity to be the leader that your employees deserve. They will stand by you in the good times if you stand by them in the bad times. Tough decisions have to be made but that doesn’t mean you have to be tough on people. Treat them as assets, not costs.
Ok, it’s important that I begin by saying that I believe meetings (in general) to be important in business. And, just to be clear, I’m not looking at the usual one to one meetings here; I’m dealing with the larger (team) meetings that are now part of everyday organizational life – usually punctuated by Powerpoint presentations and minute-taking. Meetings are there to provide an opportunity for teams to share knowledge, to strengthen interdependencies and, overall, to have better informed decision-making. In practice however, many meetings are unproductive, seen as time-wasters and generate more conflict than synergies. I’m not going to look at how to make meetings more effective – there is sufficient, although generally ignored, advice on this topic. What I really wanted to look at briefly is the decision-making process we use when deciding to have a meeting and press the “Invite” button.
It’s important to have the right meetings, with the right people, dealing with the right issues. Otherwise you might be responsible for wasting a lot of valuable resources in the form of people’s time. Even those regular meetings that are are in your calendar, the monthly/weekly/daily(!) update meetings should be sanity checked at regular intervals to ensure that they are still fulfilling a need. Regular scheduled meetings can often remain long after their “best before” date. They can remain in place when all of the original meeting members have been replaced over time, the original focus is lost and the meeting seems to be there for reasons that no-one can really articulate (Skinner might well give a wry smile). Meetings with titles such as “Strategic Review” can become entirely operational with the agenda being no more than an aspirational list of to-do items.
It’s important therefore to take a long hard look at the meetings you arrange and confirm that they are not just there by force of habit or a remnant of how some previous management team ran the business.
The next time you are about to set up a meeting, stop first and ask yourself a few questions.
Sanity checking your meeting should be an ongoing activity. The hidden cost of meetings can be enormous if they are unproductive so, before you even start, make sure you know what you’re meeting will deliver.
As for the efficient running of meetings – that’s another day’s work!
I like the quote attributed to Einstein as it highlights for me one of the two difficulties with “Goals” that I have seen clients fall foul of. The other difficulty is that of action planning. But first, a few comments on goal-setting.
In the traditional world of Performance Management, many managers focus on SMART goals when they are looking at the year ahead. While there are undeniable benefits in having goals that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time bound, there is also an overarching constraint imposed if the goals are rigidly tied to this formula. In particular the short-term focus on goals that have only a twelve-month horizon. Where is the long term vision? What desired long-term change is being overlooked? Maybe it’s time to include some goals that are “non- smart”.
Task-oriented goals are the easiest ones to fit into the SMART goal framework. Now, if you happen to be in a business where many managers are naturally task-focused there is a very comfortable fit between the manager’s style and task-oriented goals. But there is an unfortunate casualty, people. People goals are rarely so task-focused. The upshot of this is an environment where little attention is paid to important people factors like motivation and engagement. These people factors have real bottom-line impact but are often overlooked in goal setting because they don’t fit as easily within the SMART goal framework.
For that reason I propose that managers should have, in addition to the task-based goals, a “Non-smart” goal that is people focused. I suggest the following criteria for this goal.
Action plans – the missing link
Translating goals into results can be a challenge. For some managers, goal-setting is an exercise that is rooted in the performance management process. Goals are set at the beginning of the year, reviewed mid-year and given a final review at year-end. The periods between reviews can be taken up by the busy day-to-day activities, leaving the reviews as mere reminders of what has been forgotten in the urgency. This happens when there is no link between the annual goals and the weekly activities.
Working with a coach, or peer, as part of goal-setting is a very practical way of improving goal achievement and performance. The first question that a coach might ask a manager about a goal is “why is this important”? This usually results in the manager internalising the goal or, in some cases, deciding that there are other more important goals to be achieved. The main thing for the manager is to really take ownership of their goals before moving onto action planning. If the manager doesn’t own the goal then there is little chance of her achieving it.
Goals are only achieved though actions. Time has to be set aside each week to review the week that has passed and to identify important actions for the week ahead. The actions may be small but, cumulatively, chart out steady progress. The question the manager must ask herself is “what single action can I take this week that would have the greatest impact on achieving this goal”. This reflection can bring focus and intent to the pursuit of any goal.
The three step process below is simple if followed.
Again, working with a coach or peer can help a manager with action planning and review.
Remember, the longest journey begins with a single step.
In a previous role I worked as a senior executive coach within a large organisation, dealing primarily with senior level managers. Working as an internal coach was extremely rewarding. However, the role provided challenges that needed reflection. Here are the main learnings that I took away and which are of general consideration for anyone who is working as a coach in their own organisation.
The Advantages for Internal Coaches
Coaches who work within their own organisations have a number of advantages over external coaches. They understand the overall context of coaching in the company. They understand the politics of the organisation, “how things get done”. They know the language and norms, the cultural artefacts, of the organisation. This knowledge allows them to have a solid business and organisational context within which coaching is placed.
However, some commentators argue that building trust is more difficult for an internal coach, the primary reason being the potential conflict of loyalty to the organisation versus loyalty to the client. While I agree in general with this view, my experience has led me to posit that there are more complex issues at play. I have categorised these into three challenges.
The Coachee Challenge
The Internal Coach generally has a role, other than their coaching role, within the Organisation and, in many cases, coaching is only a small part of their day to day work activity. This issue of ‘role duality’ has implications for the Coachee as it may be a source of misunderstanding or conflict.
The Coachee must be able to trust the Coach and be confident that issues discussed within the coaching relationship do not find their way into other organisational settings, either directly or indirectly. It may be a challenge for the Coachee to be able to identify the coach in the coaching role while acknowledging that the coach may have to operate in a different role for other interactions. If the Coachee has any doubts about confidentiality then they may perceive breaches of trust even if no actual breach has occurred.
To demonstrate this, consider a hypothetical example. A Coachee is unsuccessful in a promotion competition and the feedback is that he was weak in the area of influencing. If the Coachee had confided with a coach that influencing was a weakness for them, then the coachee may be suspicious that the Coach has input this information to the promotion process. This is less likely with an external coach who is removed from such processes.
The other side of role duality is that there may also be a temptation on behalf of the Coachee to project a more favourable persona to the coach in the hope that it might be noticed by the coach and fed back to the organisation. In other words, the Coachee may try to use the Coach as a conduit into the organisation through which they can influence their careers.
The Organisational Challenge
The Organisation has a duty to acknowledge and support the confidentiality of the coach-client relationship without question. If the Organisation were to attempt to use the Coach as a source of information on clients then this would totally undermine coaching in the Organisation. Thus there is a need for clarity in Organisations with regard to protecting the confidentiality of the coaching relationship with internal Coaches. The Organisation is entitled to be briefed on ‘Themes’ that emerge from coaching but this must never be individualised.
The Coach needs to have an overarching Contract with the Organisation which goes beyond the individual coaching Contract for a particular Client and Coachee. This has particular application in the area of Talent and Succession Management where information on High Potential candidates is gathered in order to make judgements on job assignments and management rotation. The Coach cannot be asked to bring information on Coachees to these discussions.
The Coach Challenge
The Internal Coach also has to be aware of organisational bias, in other words, any limiting beliefs that they have as a result of working within the organisation, rather than being external to it as is the case with an external coach. The Coach must have sufficient self-awareness to be able to acknowledge and deal with any organisational biases that they may bring into the coaching relationship. For example, a Coach may have heard about the Coachee or be aware of some details that could cause the Coach to pre-judge the Coachee. This is far more likely with an Internal Coach who spends their working time in the organisation and is privy to these conversations
The Coach must be able to maintain separation between their role as a Coach and any other roles that they may have to fulfil, ensuring that information received in a Coaching relationship does not find its way out into other conversations in the organisation. This requires a high level of self-awareness and self-monitoring.
The Internal Coach must also ensure that they do not personally benefit from information they receive in the coaching relationship.
Having examined the potential challenges I would put forward some potential solutions that Internal Coaches could bring to their coaching practice.
The first solution is to have a very clear overarching confidentiality agreement, supported from the top of the Organisation and communicated widely. This should be part of the company’s Coaching Policy and is a contract between the Coach and the Organisation.
Secondly it is important to contract properly with each Coachee and Client and to be explicit in highlighting the practical steps that are taken to ensure confidentiality. I believe the Internal Coach needs to be sensitive to any of the identified challenges and to re-contract if the coach feels that the initial contracting has not been properly accepted by the coachee.
Coaching Supervision also has an important role to play in supporting the Internal Coach. It can provide a safe environment for the internal coach to discuss the coaching relationship and the wider organisational context. The challenges identified can be brought into the supervision space and worked through with an experienced coach.
Internal Coaches have an important role to play in the development of capability within organisations. To be really effective they need to be aware of the specific challenges they face and to take steps to avoid issues that would undermine them as coaches or even undermine coaching in general. The steps outlined above should provide a good starting point.
“Today, for the first time in history, many peoples daily default is to be wired into at least one personalised form of media…… If we are to get the most out of both the world around us and each other, we need to recognise that we have two fundamentally different ways of being. Our wired and disconnected states each represent a different set of possibilities for thought and action”.
– Tom Chatfield “How to thrive in a Digital Age”
If you think about the above quote from Tom Chatfield, then you realise that we all need to consider our Wired and Disconnected states. By default we are wired into email, phone, blackberry, iPhone etc. Nowadays we must consciously decide and take action to be “off line” rather than decide to go “on line”. This is a relatively new phenomenon and is fundamentally different to how we operated in the past.
So, there are enormous advantages to having instant access to information and to have high speed communication at our fingertips twenty-four hours a day. However, there is still a need for uninterrupted “disconnected” time in order to plan, prepare, strategise, review, consider and think. Thinking is rarely mentioned in management literature and yet the quality of one’s thinking has an enormous impact on one’s performance as a manager and the decisions one makes.
The question is – what is the quality of your thinking if you are never disconnected?
How can you actively manage your Wired and Disconnected states? Here are a few suggestions.
• As a starting point, schedule some Disconnected time in your weekly calendar. Block out some diary slots when you can switch off your computer, phone, blackberry etc. Choose a location that is away from distraction. Don’t try to do this at your normal desk location. Moving to another location or office will help you to switch out of Wired mode. It also removes the ever tempting presence of your computer screen. Use this time wisely: plan to work on items that have a medium to long term focus.
• When working at your desk, Reduce the amount of Interruptions from email. In your email settings, switch off the “email alert” so the email “envelope” does not pop up when an email arrives. Ensure that your email notification alert sound is also switched off. Even this simple change will improve your attention and focus.
• Schedule email time morning and afternoon. Deal with email in dedicated time slots. This might be an hour in the morning and one in the afternoon. This is something that you will need to communicate to your team so that they don’t expect instantaneous responses. You should agree with them that if they need to send you an email that requires urgent attention, then they should let you know that by calling you. Email should not be used for short urgent queries that could be answered on the phone.
• When you open your Inbox, Categorise your emails. Look at each one and decide how to deal with it in one of the following four ways:
You cannot create Time, but by adopting some of these suggestions you will help avoid losing time through inefficiency and will improve the quality of your thinking and the focus on longer term goals.
The quote above was Gary Player’s response to an onlooker who dismissed Player’s ability as luck; Player was hitting shots out of a bunker next to the practice green and had just holed three bunker shots in a row. For Player, it wasn’t about luck. The champion golfer understood the importance of practice. The odds were shortened by the amount of the practice he put into difficult shots.
The very best sports people, actors and musicians practice or rehearse. They work on areas that need improvement and keep tuning those elements of their sport or art that they do well. They also visualise what they are trying to achieve. The reason? Because it works! So if this is so obvious, why do managers and leaders, by and large, spend little or no time in rehearsal. If there are aspects of their job that they need to work on, then why do they “wing it” and avoid putting in some practice. Just being a manager day in day out is not practice. It certainly will develop certain skill areas but what about the weak spots? Top Golfers spend a lot of time practicing. But they don’t practice by just playing more rounds of golf. They break the game into components and practice these separately. Take for example bunker shots; a nightmare for the amateur “Sunday golfer”. Professionals practice their bunker shots, their ability to float the ball out of a bed of sand and onto the green.
Why is practice so important? Well, for golfers, if they are playing well, they won’t end up in the bunker very often so they won’t get a lot of opportunity to play these shots during a competition. Also, if they have this as a weakness in their game then they will have this negative image of landing in a bunker whenever one is in sight. The mind can be very effective in translating “avoid the bunker” into “go for the bunker”. Likewise, musicians spend hours practicing the very basics of their musicianship, the scales and arpeggios that lay the foundation for all music. So it pays to practice and rehearse. One might argue that there is an important aspect of developing “muscle memory” in practice but there is more to it than that. There is a deep psychological benefit in being highly competent in a skill area. It allows one to move beyond sheer competence and into higher levels of accomplishment. A world class musician is not just someone who gets all the notes correct! There is more to being a top actor than remembering all the lines.
The power of denial
So, why is it that managers feel that they can do the equivalent of playing no golf for six months and then expect to get around eighteen holes of a course in level par? Based on my experience in leadership development, the following are typical reasons that managers put forward as reasons for not practicing or rehearsing.
Don’t get me wrong, managers aren’t lazy. I’ve spent the most of my career in management roles and know the commitment that managers bring to their work. They have a lot of competing pressures; setting aside time to practice a skill seems like a luxury. But surely it’s important enough to make it a priority.
It reminds me of the Stephen Covey story of a man who was walking through a forest when he came across a frustrated lumberjack. The lumberjack was trying to cut down a tree with and was swearing and cursing as he laboured in vain.
“What’s the problem?” The man asked.
“My saw’s blunt and won’t cut the tree properly.” The lumberjack responded.
“Why don’t you just sharpen it?”
“Because then I would have to stop sawing.” said the lumberjack.
“But if you sharpened your saw, you could cut more efficiently and effectively than before.”
“But I don’t have time to stop!” The lumberjack retorted.
Rehearsal is a great example of “Sharpening the Saw”. In the short term it is an investment of time but it pays long term dividends in terms of effectiveness. Let’s take it as a given that most of us aren’t “born leaders”, even if we leave aside the debate that such mythical creatures exist. We have to work at being leaders or managers. If we identify areas for development then the next step is to have an active rehearsal plan. Common areas of development that seem to feature regularly are influencing, giving feedback, active listening and motivating others. All of these can be broken down into smaller components, rehearsed and then improved.
The basic elements of rehearsal
In order to be effective, the following basic elements should be part of your rehearsal:
A low risk environment (the practice ground). In other words, don’t try something new during a presentation to the chief executive. You might pull it off but more than likely you’ll crash and burn. Try it out in a situation where there is less pressure. Repetition (a bucket of golfballs). To really ingrain a new skill you need to practice it regularly. This won’t happen unless you set yourself reminders to do it. Acknowledge it as important and then it will get into your diary. The very fact of even thinking about it regularly will help you to improve.
Feedback (a target to measure against). You don’t see golfers just hitting balls aimlessly if they are trying to practice. They have a target to aim at so they can see their progress. You may be able to get feedback from others such as a coach or colleague and this is probably the best type of feedback, someone who observes what you are doing and is skilled and trusted enough to give you constructive feedback. You can also assess yourself if you define a clear objective up front. For example, if you are working on your listening and influencing skills you can keep track of how many open questions you ask, adding a point for each open question and deducting a point for each closed question. Set yourself a target number of points for a specific interaction and see how you do.
Adjustment (trying different things to find what works best). If something isn’t working then you have to find out what needs to be changed. So, how can find this out? Well, look for someone who you know has a highly developed ability in the particular area. Observe them. Try to identify what makes them so capable. Talk to them. Ask them to mentor you. The main thing is to come up with ideas that you can help you improve. Always have a notebook handy or, if you prefer, keep notes on your phone. Watch for tips and learning. You’ll be surprised with how much you see once you are tuned in to observing with purpose.
Here are a few practical tips to finish.
Remember, practice may not make perfect, but at the very least it will improve your capability as a manager.