|
|
|
Over the past year we have conducted hundreds of leadership assessments. We have found a prevalent gap in leaders' comfort with and ability to deal with ambiguity. They don't like gray areas or uncertainty. This phenomenon is troubling since we are in the middle of unprecedented uncertainty stemming from global competitiveness, economic pressures, and a new generation of workers who don't hold the same approach to work as the current leaders. In fact, I could fill a few pages with all of the conditions that are currently creating a very uncertain business environment.
Certainly traditional training and development will not address the issue. Comfort with ambiguity can be developed (to a degree) through several avenues. When we coach leaders facing this problem, we start with practical suggestions such as developing several scenarios concerning the future over which they have little certainty. We ask them to develop plans for each of the possible futures. For example, if the uncertainty pertains to the cost of raw materials, we would suggest that they generate several scenarios concerning how the costs could vary and how strategy could address the cost variations. Or perhaps the uncertainty is with forecasting sales. Once again we would suggest that they generate a series of scenarios concerning sales, factors that could affect sales and contingency plans for addressing each scenario. We have found that this process of constructing scenarios and devising strategies for each gives the leaders a greater sense of control of the uncertain future.
In addition to the practical scenario approach, we also use a deeper coaching process. We work with leaders around issues pertaining to courage, flexibility and the value of reflecting before acting. We have found that some leaders become paralyzed by uncertainty while others act without thinking in order to reduce their own anxiety. These deeper levels of coaching require our coaches to first diagnose the root causes of the discomfort and the likely behaviors of each individual leader. Once the diagnosis is made, the coach can tailor a plan to the unique needs of the leader. Yes this process can be intense and takes time. However the payoffs are great. And can your company really afford to ignore the issues? The question to ask when considering these coaching options is this: In these times of great uncertainty and ambiguity, what is the cost to the company when leaders cannot deal with it? What is the payback for moving leaders towards a more balanced reaction to uncertainty and a more productive approach to managing their discomfort with ambiguity? The results will justify the efforts. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
Times are tough and we all need connections with others to help us through the turmoil. Never has human touch been more important than now.
I ran across an article recently that reported the latest research on how people feel about attending meetings. The interesting conclusion was that people complain about too many meetings. However, when their attendance at meetings is reduced, they report feeling isolated and missing the meetings. The authors of the reports suggested that people underestimate their need for human interaction in this electronic world. How much we still need to connect with people face-to-face, share jokes, stories, make eye contact. Technology will never replace this need.
I would certainly agree with those who suggest that meetings can be very inefficient, use up resources, and generally waste a lot out time. However, I think that the suggestion that meetings should, therefore, be curtailed if not eliminated may be missing the point. The key to successful meetings is for those conducting them to know how to structure them appropriately, who to include, how to help people prepare, how to determine the meeting type,what to cover, and how to follow up afterword. Well-planned meetings can be unsurpassed for value. Not only can much work get done in a meeting, but people can strengthen the bonds that allow them to be more engaged in their work and collaborate better with each other when the tasks require it. Meetings solidify the ties that last long after the meeting ends. I find that people are much more likely to contact each other by phone or email when they have a question or a need after they have established relationships with each other face-to-face. Let's face it. No one really likes to make cold calls -- even within their own company.
I do a lot of professional and executive coaching. I carry out the coaching face-to-face and by phone. Most companies prefer that the coaching be done via technology because it is more convenient and cheaper. However, over the years I have discovered that the face-to-face coaching offers far more value for the money in comparison with the phone coaching. We can accomplish as much in one 2-hour face-to-face meeting as we would accomplish in weeks of phone coaching. Communication is clearer. Connections are stronger and commitments to the process are greater.
I'm not saying that people can make no progress in virtual meetings, one-on-one phone conversations, or through emails. All of these approaches to working together have their place and their advantages. I am saying that nothing will ever replace the face-to-face meetings that build human connections, trust, collaboration and engagement . Let's not give up on the necessity of the 'human moments' at work especially when times are tough and we are all feeling the stress of the challenges that we face. The human touch is critical to productivity and morale in organizations facing hard times. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
Leading an organization through tough times isn't for wimps! It is difficult to stay upbeat when faced with adversity. Anxiety and defensiveness are natural reactions to challenging phases of organizational life. And yet those we lead will be watching us. To a large extent the leaders' behavior will set the tone for the organization. I believe that self-awareness is the foundation for strong leadership any time, especially during crises. I base this assertion on a number of factors.
First, in order to control our behaviors, we need to understand our emotions. For example, fear is likely to lead to defensiveness, sadness to withdrawal and so forth. Understanding our own feelings will help prevent self-destructive behaviors that could also harm our organizations.
Second, we must be in touch with our own feeling first before we can truly empathize with others. And empathy is critical to leading people through difficult times. I am not suggesting that all of our decisions should depend on the feelings of others. Sometimes we will need to make hard decisions that we know will affect others adversely. However, while making these decisions for the sake of the business, the strong leaders will implement them with empathy and sensitivity to others. His or her behavior will not be cavalier nor callous. We must avoid the mistake of hiding behind these self-protective styles. They will not serve us or our organizations well as we navigate through the turmoil.
Finally, self-awareness is the first step towards humility. Strong leaders never forget that they are human and must show their human faces if they are to be respected and followed. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
As leaders of our companies, all of us have our share of challenges these days. Lately I've been reflecting on what it takes to show strong leadership when times are tough. Over the past few months I have observed closely leaders who are effective and those who aren't. I believe that the differentiating factor is leadership presence. This somewhat elusive characteristic is more than mere charisma. It stems from deep self-knowledge that comes from reflection. It includes the ability to be in the moment, reach out, express yourself and connect with others. In their book entitled Leadership Presence, Kathy Lubar and Belle Linda Halpern define it as the following:
Being Present not pretentious.
Reaching Out not looking down.
being Expressive not impressive.
being Self-knowing not self-absorbed.
The concept is very simple. The embodiment of it is tough - especially in tough times! In my opinion, the real test of leadership is in how leaders act during hard times. My observation is that many are able to exude "presence" when times are good, but revert to defensive, self-protective if not narcissistic behaviors when times are tough.
So what are the behaviors that leaders can strive to exhibit during hard times? In my opinion, the leader who listens a greater percentage of the time than he or she talks demonstrates "being present not pretentious." The leader who communicates informally and invites people at every level of the organization to share their thoughts and concerns is "reaching out not looking down. " A leader who clearly communicates the good news and the bad with compassion and acknowledgment of his or her own feelings is "being expressive not impressive." The leader who takes time to assess, reflect and acknowledge his or her own strengths, weaknesses, hopes and fears and spends an equal amount of time considering how he or she can understand and respect the needs of others is "being self-knowing not self-absorbed."
While these qualities and behaviors are always important, during tough times they are pivotal to the morale as well as the productivity of the organization. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
Good news
In that last blog I described an organization which seemed to resist (deny) any organizational health problems in their current culture. Just as I was about to post that blog I learned that this organization did, in fact, decide to accept the data in our assessment and to begin addressing the problems in their present culture wherever issues exist. We are now in the process of working with them to fulfill this need. Soon thereafter - - perhaps simultaneously - - we will begin the second phase, which is preparing them for a future culture of enormous growth. This company and its senior management are to be commended for their willingness to look at what no company ever really wants to see: Unhealthy situations in their corporate culture. - - And not only did they take off their rose-colored glasses for a clear, realistic look, they have now begun to address those issues. Wouldn’t it be great if all organizations could follow their lead? |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
Why do organizations spend so much time and energy discrediting hard messages? We have just completed a culture assessment for an organization which is growing rapidly and needs to meet the challenge of change head-on. The growth they are experiencing requires them to move from a small family-like structure and culture to one that encourages innovation - - one that is ready and able to keep up with a quickly growing customer base exhibiting new demands and desires. Our plan was to work with them to assess the gap (if any) between their current culture and the future culture which inevitably will continue to show the additional demands and desires of their ever-expanding customer base.
Our first step was to assess the current culture. Prior to beginning, upper level managers had convinced us the current culture was healthy - - that employees were engaged in their work, respected one another, were familiar with and embraced the goals of the organization, communicated freely between departments, and operated with true "team spirit." The focus of our assessment was to be an analysis of the "big picture" of the changes needed to support their rapid growth, not an assessment of the health of the organization in its present stage.
However, when we analyzed the data from the assessment, we were almost as surprised as their managers were. The assessment indicated that senior leadership had a very different perception of the present culture from that of the rank and file employee! In fact, the data suggested that the company had some rather serious "organizational health problems" in certain areas. Some remedial action in those areas would be necessary in order to attain an accurate baseline of the company as a healthy organization. The remedies, of course, would precede any changes needed to support their growth plans.
As consultants, we aren’t exactly naïve. We didn't expect this to be good news to senior leaders. But we did believe they would want to address some of the problematic issues in the current culture just as soon as possible. We suggested that the assessment results could be - - should be - - viewed as valuable information, allowing them to address these issues before attempting change efforts which would be doomed by what they didn’t know. To our surprise, they simply defended against the information! They attempted to explain away the problems as "data collection errors."
Sad but true, this type of reaction is typical. Very often leaders would rather "not know," even though their success can be imperiled by lack of information about their vulnerable spots. When they do receive hard-to-hear feedback, they often ignore it until the problem becomes so great it can no longer be dismissed. And then, unfortunately, it may be too late.
So what can consultants do to "soften the blow" of hard messages? I’m still trying to figure that out! But I do know one thing for sure: Effective leadership means choosing to put aside defense mechanisms and accepting the information in hard messages for what it is - - a valuable piece of the picture. If they can do that, how much more likely they are to succeed!
|
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
.
Myth: Soft skills aren't really as important in running a business, heading a department, or leading an organization as hard technical skills.
By now one would think this myth would have been completely debunked. However, virtually every week or two of the year I run into persons in the workforce who are not effective leaders because they do not recognize the importance of interpersonal skills, communications skills, and emotional intelligence.
Over the past few months we have been engaged in several leadership development initiatives. Very often the projects have involved some type of assessment of the leaders or prospective leaders, followed by resources and activities to help them address their developmental needs. Recently we completed an assessment and met with each leader individually to discuss his/her individual evaluation. I was struck by one manager (let's call him Joe), who told me he felt like writing a book entitled "How to be Right and Lose." He admitted he had learned - - the hard way - - some difficult lessons about the importance of interpersonal style and sensitivity in achieving goals. He recounted several examples of times when he had had the facts on his side but couldn’t persuade anyone else. He believes his success as a leader has suffered, and that career opportunities have passed him by as a result of his neglect of "soft skills."
Over the years I have coached many executives as they try to come to terms with factors that are holding them back from achieving the successes they desire for their organizations and for themselves. My coaching style is to assist them in sorting out the variables that may be affecting their performance. More often than not, they have been held back by undervaluing the importance of factors such as sensitivity to others' perspectives. Unless they are willing to face up to their own shortcomings, they will continue to believe they should have earned the trust of their colleagues merely by virtue of their position of power.
I wish that I could take Joe with me to talk with all those other managers and executives who continue to ignore the soft skills. As a result, they are sabotaging their own potential for truly successful careers. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
What do you do when someone communicates a message to you that you find hard to hear? Most of us do not like to receive negative feedback or any information that will shake up our world and force us to move from our comfort zone (using the common term for any place other than where we feel competent and somewhat complacent.) Yet most of us know that we are in danger if those around us keep those messages from us. What if our managers don't tell us that they are displeased with our performance until the problems become so great that we lose our credibility? What if our direct reports fail to share their discontents or needs with us and leave the company instead? In our case, what if our clients fail to tell us when we aren't meeting their expectations and merely take their work elsewhere?
We all need to hear the hard messages. Of course the way we react to the sender will determine whether we continue to get valuable feedback. Through my coaching and consulting work, I have observed constructive and destructive responses from those who receive hard messages. Those who respond defensively are doomed to live with a lack of information in the future. Most "senders" of hard messages won't do it again if they are punished for it.
Not too long ago I met with a manager to discuss the report he had received from a 360 degree feedback process. Rather than carefully considering his raters' perceptions of his leadership style, he spent most of the time trying to figure out who had said what and why the comments came from the rater's own personal agenda with him rather than from valid issues that he should address.
On the other hand, recently I conducted a 360 feedback process through personal interviews. Several of those I interviewed had some tough things to say about my coaching client. When I shared the information with her, rather than showing great distress or anger at what she was hearing, she acknowledged that many of the comments were valid. She described the circumstances that tended to lead to her less than exemplary behavior. Together we explored ways that she might control either the circumstances and/or her behavior. She is planning to discuss her commitments to address their concerns with her direct reports.
My guess is that the manager who was willing to "hear" and act on the feedback will be able to become a stronger, more effective leader. The manager who dismissed the feedback and sought to punish those who gave it won't last long in his position.
Of course not all feedback is valid. Some who give it may be functioning from the standpoint of their own personal agendas. I am not recommending that any of us become reactive to negative messages. I am recommending that we attempt to control our defensiveness and consider the feedback carefully. We might ask ourselves why the senders might have the opinions that they expressed. We might look for patterns in the feedback to assess the consistency or lack of consistency in the messages. When we find inconsistencies, we might ask ourselves whether we act differently with different people, and if so, why. Perhaps we have good reasons for the inconsistencies, perhaps not.
Finally we should value and reward those who were courageous to give us honest feedback. When we are given the chance to learn how others see us, we have been given a gift. Treat it with care.
|
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
How do you ever know when to give up, throw in the towel and walk away from a client, a project, an employer, an organization? What do you do when you believe that hidden agendas are in play? No one has an easy answer to this question. I was confronted with this dilemma recently. I have been consulting for 27 years, yet I still lose sleep over client engagements from time to time. I almost walked away from this one. Here is what happened.
I was about to begin an organizational culture assessment when I began to suspect that the underlying but unspoken agenda was to get rid of one of the leaders in the company. The stated purpose of the audit was to find the strengths and weaknesses in the organization (including those of the leader) and to make recommendations for addressing the weaknesses while fulling leveraging the strengths. However, as I prepared for the assessment, I began to pick up on cues that led me to believe that something might be amiss. I did my best to determine how or whether to proceed. I decided that my path forward should be to confront my misgivings directly with my clients. (Of course this is always the best approach!)
My clients and I had several very frank discussions in which we set our boundaries with each other and reached consensus on how we would proceed and how our data would be used (e.g. who would see it, how and what decisions would be made based on it.) The discussions were not always comfortable, yet we did not back away from them.
We did carry out the organizational assessment. While our clients heard some hard messages from the data, they handled the feedback professionally and without defensiveness. They seemed to have concluded that we did do a professional job of collecting the data even though some of it was hard to hear.
Now we are in the process of helping them address the issues that we uncovered. We don't always agree on interpretations of information nor on preferred actions. Nevertheless, we seem to be making progress in moving towards goals that are clearly on the table and desired by most if not all of the stakeholders.
This is one time when I am really glad that we did not walk away. However, if we had not had the frank discussions upfront with our clients, the entire process could have led to nothing - or worse could have led to results that would have tarnished our credibility and could have hurt people within our client organization.
This was a tough one that seems to be turning out ok. However, at other times we have been confronted with situations where the clients were not willing to communicate directly with us. In these cases, we did walk away. The key is in knowing when to stay the course and when to choose to leave. And, of course, we must always have the courage to confront the hard issues from the start. |
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
How do you react when your manager asks you to do something that you are fairly certain will not address the problem he or she is trying to fix? Do you follow orders or do you first provide feedback to the manager about your concerns? This dilemma is widespread and complex. I know -- I have been in the consulting field for 27 years and have been in a similar position with my clients many times.
I have found that managers tend to be impatient when they discover performance problems - especially if the problem involves an entire team. They want quick fixes and who can blame them? After all, they are accountable for achieving results. Nevertheless, their impatience can lead them to waste time and money on solutions that don't address the real causes of the problems.
I believe that those of us who proceed with implementing 'solutions' when we know that they won't work share the blame with the requesting manager for the failed attempts. Frequently all we need to turn a lose-lose scenario into a win for all is the guts to push back -- at least a little! Collect some data (quickly when necessary) on the real causes of the problems. Organize the results and prepare your feedback for the manager carefully.
I respect managers' rights to make the final calls on how to handle the problems that fall under their charge. At the same time, I am committed to providing them with the best information I can gather in a practical format to increase the probability of their really fixing the problems.
|
| MORE >> |
|
| Posted by Kathy Miller at | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
