Viewing entries in
Leadership

Comment

New ideas vs. Old Practices: Getting employees to accept change

 

Introducing new ideas where there are old well-established practices can be difficult.  You need to remember that there are reasons that the processes and systems were created. They were the best thinking of their time. But, even the best practices need to be updated, tweaked, or eliminated. Suggesting changes can be tricky. Asking employees to leave a "safe port" for the uncharted waters of a new idea can be looked upon, at best, as a dubious suggestion; at worst, it can look like a "suicide mission." Mistakes will be made and from the process, hopefully, learning will emerge.

Consider Jillian and Tom.  Jillian is a senior executive, and supervisor of Tom, who wants to change the process they use to prioritize the team's work and avoid last minute crises--where the team has to drop everything else it is doing to get an urgent project done.  Tom is the supervisor that has to carry out the work with the employees he supervises.  

The Story

Jillian: Tom, we need to find a better way to track our projects.  Last week we had to "drop everything" to get that order out the door and we can't keep having that happen!

Tom: That wasn't our fault. The customer didn't commit to a firm date when they made the order then called and demanded it get done immediately.

Jillian: True, but we have had several projects that almost "slipped through the cracks" and I'd like to have a better system.

Tom: "Our system is not the problem! Besides we've tried other ways to track our projects and we always come back to this. It isn't perfect but it works.

Jillian: Well, I think we could create a system that helps us avoid these problems.

Tom: Are you ready for the team to fight you on this one? They're not going to be happy about a new manager messing with a system that has been working just fine!

Managers often face "resistance" when introducing new ideas.  When met with resistance it is easy to blame employees for not being flexible, team players, or just label them as unwilling to change. This can be especially challenging for new managers or managers whose orientation is to try and build their team through collaborative processes--especially if the leader wants to avoid conflict.

Often managers have no training at all in how to approach these conversations. Thus they wind up in "power struggles," conflict, and win-lose scenarios.

Consider the following conversation and how it differs from the scenario above . . .  then we'll outline steps leaders can take to increase the likelihood of successfully introducing new ideas.

The Story (Revised)

Jillian: Tom, what do you think about our system of tracking projects?

Tom: (Wearily) I guess it's okay.  It works.

Jillian: What is it that about the system that works well?

Tom: We generally know what is coming up. We can assign projects so that customers don't have a long wait for their products.

Jillian: I agree. The systems is useful for assigning the  work and the team really cares about getting the projects to the customers. Is there anything about the system that isn't working well?

Tom: No. I think it works well.

Jillian: I'm not trying to find fault with what we do. I am just wondering if there are any times that the system is not working optimally.

Tom: Only when customers don't give us firm delivery dates.

Jillian: Interesting. What happens when we don't get a firm date for a project?

Tom: Well, you know . . . it just kind of "hangs out there" until we get the date.

Jillian: Is that what happened with that project last week?

Tom. Yes.

Jillian: It's my understanding that we had time to do this project earlier when we were "slow." Do you agree?

Tom: I suppose so. But we were refining the projects that were due . . . they had priority.

Jillian: Right. That's our process . . . to work on projects that have a confirmed due date. If the customers always gave us a confirmed due date when they ordered would that help us avoid the "all hands on deck" crisis we had last week?

Tom: Well, yeah! But customers aren't always going to give us a commitment to a date.

Jillian: True. What do you think about us assigning a target date for projects where customers have not committed to a delivery date?

Tom: Some of those don't turn into orders. We could waste time on a project that never becomes an order.

Jillian: That's true and I certainly don't want us taking away time from actual orders to work on "iffy" projects. During busy times the confirmed dates should take precedence. But do you see any problems with setting the dates and during slow times working on these projects? Even if a few "fell through" would it be worth it to avoid emergency days like last week?

Tom: I dunno. Maybe. 

Jillian: What impact does an emergency like last week have on our team?

Tom: Well, the guys weren't happy about it, I know that. They grumbled all day about the customer . . . and it's always the same customers!

Jillian: I know it wasn't my favorite day. I'm happy to jump in and help when we have a crisis, I just wonder if there is a way to reduce the number of times this happens?

Tom: What are you suggesting?

Jillian: Well, I've been wondering how it would work to tweak our system to set dates for all projects. We would still have to be clear on which projects were actually orders and which ones are our priorities but I think you have a good handle on that already.  I am wondering if setting dates would help us use slow times to work on these "uncommitted" projects and avoid the emergency "fire drill" days.

Tom: I see where you're going . . . 

Reframing! Steps toward change.  

Just like new frames on a person's glasses or a new frame on a picture the context in which we are seeing issues will be different if the context changes. Many of our conflicts are due to different ways in which we frame problems. Is a teenager "disrespectful" or "trying to figure out life?" Is the parent "uncaring" or "tired and confused?" We all approach problems with a framework that limits what we see as possible.

Below, are six steps you can follow to try and help your employees move toward reframing issues from "can't do it" to "okay, let's try it."  From "we have always done it this way and it works" to "maybe it is time to re-think it and try something else."  Of course there is nothing magical about this "formula>" It is just a good reminder of "best practices" that you can use as a guide. (Memory Pneumonic?  MTIFPR)

  1. Get a Map. Take a aurvey of their view (See free eBook on Engaging Your Team). To help employee embrace changes you need to understand how they currently view the territory. Their views are based primarily on real data (not emotions although they can be involved) that you need to understand. The change will have an impact both good and bad. Leaders need to take time to understand the Map the employee is operating from.

  2. Select a Target. Pick an area or argument for reframing. Making changes takes time. Abrupt shifts are called "natural disasters" and "trauma." Sometimes large changes have to happen quickly--if the existence of the organization or people's jobs are threatened--but most of the time big changes are best accomplished in a stair-step gradual process. If the change is important it is worth the time to help it grow to be a strong component of the company.

  3. Gather Intelligence. Collect detailed information about that area to aid in a reframe. Leaders who want to make changes need to really be interested in the details of the employee's map. Here the leader "drills down" into the details of the area that he or she wants to try and change. You need to be able to anticipate where resistance is likely to occur and why. What are the real concerns of employees? Will the change have negative affects? What will they not want to give up for the new idea?

  4. Float the new idea and listen for resistance. Before introducing the "whole reframe" it is good to float a "test balloon." This is usually in the form of a question, "Have you ever wondered what would happen if . . . " or "Do you think we could tweak the process to keep X (the benefits) but eliminate Y (the targeted problem)? Pay special attention to any objections at this point. If the objections remain strong then you may need to drop the idea for now, spend more time surveying the territory, gathering more data, or even come up with a different idea altogether.

  5. Outline the Plan. This is where you introduce the Reframe. If you sense that the employee was open to the "trial balloon" then you can move forward to introduce the reframe. This is usually couched in the form of a proposal: "Given what you are telling me, why don't we try a trial run of setting dates to the "uncommitted projects?" We can then revisit in in three months and see if it has helped or not." At his point you are "armed" with all the information to help the employee see the benefits of your plan. You know the problems the old system has created. You know how the new plan could help the team. You've gained a "conceptual agreement" with your trial balloon that changes could be helpful. And, finally, the employee knows that you have done your homework.

  6. Respond to feedback. Sometime despite your best efforts resistance can re-emerge when the reframe is introduced. It this happens then the reframe is not likely to work. However, often you may get a wary, "Well, I guess we can try it." Which can be responded to with a comment like, "I appreciate your willingness to give it a try. I know this has the biggest effect on you and your team. You've done a really good job with the old system and I hope this might help make it better for everyone. But if not, we'll do something different."

Common pitfalls that lead to failure: . .

  1. Telling not listening. Surveying the territory cannot be rushed. Make sure to map it thoroughly. Be “quick to listen” and “slow to speak;” doing the latter only when you know, really know, the terrain.

  2. Statements not questions.  Telling employees what you know . . . "Come on, you know we can do this!" -- instead of asking for their wisdom, ideas, and support often backfires.

  3. Anger not understanding.  Anger often conveys judgement and is seen, at times, as a means to control others. A patient supervisor who takes the time to understand and guides the employees to new ways of thinking and operating will truly be valued. No one likes a bully..

  4. Quick fix not daily effort.  Real changes take time  . . . and effort.  Rarely are quick fixes to real problems successful.  Leaders have to give daily effort to engaging employees in the change process. Don't let impatience or frustration drive your actions.

  5. Power not humility.  Leaders often lose when they have to play the "power card." Yes, there are times when a leaders has to exert the responsibility of his or her position and use the power of their office to prevent harm to others, the company, or customers. But leaders who rely on power tactics have already lost the war. Employees will respond to poser tactics but only as long as you have the ability to exert that power over them. If you lose that control the "peasants" will revolt and you will be thrown down.

  6. “Preaching the walk” not leading the walkers; or“You first!” It should be obvious that no one wants to follow someone’s directives if they believe that the leader themselves would not put themselves in the same situation or expect the same performance themselves. Even a leader who “listens” rather than “tells” will be judged, by those with insight and wisdom, by what they actually do not what they say.

Resources

Engaging Your Team: A framework for leading "difficult" people.

Lessons Learned Around the World: People-centered leadership,A. Keith Miller, Major, U.S. Airforce (Retired)

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Private Practice Contracting: A path away from insurance dependency.

Comment

Comment

Management by fear!

Management by Fear

It happens more often than most managers think. After all, we are not talking about unskilled or uneducated people. Most of us intuitively know, or have learned through experience, that to make decision "based on our fears" leads to poor outcomes. So, it is rare that you will find any leader who acknowledges that at the present moment they are managing out of fear. If they realized it they would probably do something different. But, in truth, if you listen careful to leaders, it is often done anyway.  Often it inflicts some of the "best and brightest"--those who truly care about the affects their decisions will have on the the people in their organization. Often they are trapped by the fear or attempting to avoid the fear.

What do I mean by "trapped?"  I mean that these leaders begin to make decisions based on what they are afraid will happen if they make a different, or wrong, choice.  I have experienced it at all levels and across industries.  It happened in the case of one executive who wouldn't leave meetings when they talked about his position because "nothing good ever comes from it." It was there in the meeting with a group of senior managers who admitted that the new manufacturing emphasis on "getting out the most product" had, in fact, driven up the waste costs when minor problems were not fixed and the entire machine was scrapped . . . but they had not communicated or addressed the problem with the owners.  

It has been present in many senior leadership teams or individuals whose rational for not doing something different has been "it might make things worse." while admitting that things were already trending toward "worse" in most cases. While fear has it's place (After all it helps us run very fast if we encounter a threat) it can move quickly from being a useful "friend" . . . to being a powerful enemy. It may have started as a warning us about approaching danger.  But it may have become a road block, stopping us from removing the thorn that is the source of our pain or frustration.

Fear and Acting

I came home one night years ago and when I entered the house I heard what I can only describe as a "wailing."  I followed the sound to my 10 year old son's bedroom.  There sat my wife holding my son who had a toothpick protruding from his heel. My son had driven it deep enough that my wife could not extract it.  She told me that she had called her father and he was on his way over and there they sat waiting for help.

Help had arrived. I told my son that I would remove the toothpick. "No!," he pleaded. "I can just walk on my toes!" he argued.  "I don't mind it," he retorted to my firm insistence that it must be removed.  Fear.  Pure fear. But I, of course, persisted. Sadly, it took not only my strength but a pair of pliers to remedy the situation. But, as you might suspect, things improved greatly with the plank removed.

Moving toward Fear

We've all done it. Let our fears stop us. Taking away our best tools . . . reason, risk-taking, learning by doing, asking for feedback or advice. We've all kicked ourselves later for not facing it sooner. How can a leader protect themselves from managing by fear? Part of the answer is in having good "collegial checks" to your management decisions.  This can be a spouse, a board, a mentor or friend, and yes, it can be a "hired gun"--a consultant or coach-- whose primary concern is to help you keep on track. It's also helpful to plan for the time, and participate in events that encourage you, to do a little self-reflection about what is motivating your decisions.

What situations is your organization avoiding? What will happen if you continue to avoid dealing with them? Will you be "kicking yourself" for not acting in spite of the fear?

The best articles of the month on management, consulting, churches, and some fun/curious items can be found on out Toast & Jam posts.  Check out one here!



Comment

Comment

May Toast and Jam

May's Toast and Jam . . . looking forward to fresh strawberry freezer jam! 

May's Toast and Jam . . . looking forward to fresh strawberry freezer jam!

 

In April I started a monthly series to provide "the single best article I have found" in the past month.  The idea is to share one influential article that you can read while you make toast . . . and, of course, add a little Jam. It's fun to find and share other's work that is insightful (or challenging) and that, I hope, will help you as well.  Please recognize that inclusion in the monthly Toast and Jam does NOT mean I agree with the author's opinions! In fact, sometimes it is quite the opposite! I plan to include cogent articles that challenge the current thinking and that, I hope, will get you asking "better questions" yourself.

So here is MAY's Toast and Jam . . .

Organizations and Business:

An interesting summary on supervising millinneals called "Kids these days" by Sergeant Darren Neal of the Arkansas State Police.

Should companies start offering voluntary benefits? (Entrepreneur)

Consulting:

Personnel Today focuses on the benefits of workplace counseling.

People Analytics?  How businesses are starting to try and measure the importance of their human assets.

Churches:

The debate about "seeker-sensitive churches" goes on . . . here is a little different "take."

Like small churches or not?  Either way, the reasons may be the same!

And the Jam: Fun and Curious:

Here's what your 2015 income taxes are buying.

I love hash browns, and grits, and sweet tea . . . it's my southern heritage.  Making crispy hash browns in just 3 minutes!

Questions?  Contact us!

Available eBooks:

Private Practice through Contracting: Decreasing dependence on insurance.

Engaging Your Team: A framework for managing difficult people.

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Comment

Comment

A Team . . . of Teams: How's that work?

Who, in most organizations, is the one person who really understands what it means to operate as a "team of teams?"  Who is responsible for the health of the teams and the organization?  I know who I expect it to be . . . the senior leader of the organization.  The Executive Director, President CEO, Owner . . . they are the visionaries that we often expect to have the magic touch to make an organization function dynamically and smoothly.

If you are fortunate enough to have someone who really excels at this, having a vision of how the organization can operate, the next challenge is how well are they able to communicate that vision to others.  Often I have worked with leaders who, I think, have a clear vision. But often, as I interview their staff, I find problems that interfere with the communication and operations of carrying out that vision.

Understood or not, the "team of teams' construct is one of the new fashions in leadership and organizational design circles. (In fact, this has been identified as a trend for 2016. Here's a good and recent article on this trend from Deloitte University Press

When a team of teams, or one might call it a human system of subsystems, works . . . it is a thing of beauty--like an professional orchestra--the violin section and percussion-- playing with effortless harmony and beauty. Employees are engaged (see our infographic on engagementi), they give of their discretionary time and effort to help the organization succeed, everyone pulls together and conflict is minimal. But when it doesn't work, the resulting discordant din of struggle rises and falls, filling the air with a tension that leaves it's audience, those working in the organization, contemplating the closest and most acceptable escape route.

Notice the "Skull and Crossbones" flag? First time I've seen that one!

Notice the "Skull and Crossbones" flag? First time I've seen that one!

 

Maybe I'm in the minority when I think that most organizations have only a superficial understanding of their human systems.  I know that most are aware of the impact of their human "element."  I hear senior manager's concerns about the impact of the business on their employees. But most see these elements in a simple "cause and effect" lens that leads, often, to assessing blame and limiting the options to address the problem.

Trained at the height of the systemic age of human sciences (I even had a course on cybernetics of cybernetics or the science of systems of systems!) theorists and researchers found that the "easiest way out leads back in" when you are talking about a system (mechanical or human). In other words, a simple approach to a systemic problem invariably does not change the system itself and thus the problem will persist. (When I was young people talked about putting saw dust in a transmission to "fix" a problem. It did not stop the transmission from failing!)

I often wonder, when I am beginning work with a new organization,  just how well prepared are the managers to understand the systemic dynamics of the people they are responsible for overseeing?  Often senior managers are tasked with casting a vision and creating policies and procedures (or culture) to avoid (or if necessary to "fix") any problems.  

But where do leaders develop their vision for leading a team of teams? My experience tells me their training will not have addressed it in depth and most of their practical models come from the success stories and personal contacts the leader or manager is exposed to in their professional contacts--or from the latest article or book on leadership.  Others recognize a need for a support system to guide them and adopt the trend of hiring an organizational behavioral consultant or executive coach.

Thus leaders chase the elusive "right mix" that will unleash the potential of their human systems and drive the success they envision. Yet, often it is largely the context itself--the industry, economy, or point-in-time--external factors, of those organizations, that determines if the team approach is working well or not. (Can you create another Pixar when one already exists?

Others may founder, not because of a lack of understanding their own organizational system, but because of the context in which their organization exists.  Leaders and organizations who enjoy a rich medium of growing markets, fat profit margins, and new research and development opportunities often have teams and a team of teams that are robust and "healthy" in their functions. Many of those same organizations however "get exposed" when adversity hits--with leaders "bailing," employee morale sinking, and public opinion declining. A system in a growth mode needs different things than one in a maintenance or declining industry.

Leaders need to understand the external context and then focus on the needs of their unique system; maximizing the contribution of the system through removing barriers, providing support, or challenging them to live up to the best vision of themselves and the organization. This often yields better results.

So, who is tasked with creating a "team of teams" in your organization?  Do you have a clear vision?  Is the communication of that vision being adopted by others?  Do you constantly have to encourage others to act inline with the organizations values?  Are teams really focused on what is best for the whole organization? If this is the model you are interested in trying to create or if it is one you have adopted but with limited success, then ask yourself, "Within our context, who has the experience, knowledge, vision and time to help us focus on operating as a true "team . . . of teams?" 

Available eBooks:

Private Practice through Contracting: Decreasing dependence on insurance.

Engaging Your Team: A framework for managing difficult people.

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Comment

Comment

"Five for Five" or "Old Dog Rebellion!"

Here is some of what I'm working on . . . soooooo slowly!

Okay, I'm an old dog.  I remember the 60's . . . although barely. Now I'm part of the group disparaged by that oft-repeated adage, "You can't teach an old dog new tricks." Fortunately, I come from stock that didn't listen to such dour predictions. Both my mother and my father were still engaged and working into their 80's. So, to carry on that tradition . . . I thought it would be fun to share "5 new things I've learned in the past 5 years" and to hear what others have learned in the past few years as well.

In the past five years I have learned . . . 

1. to read music (and improve my fingerstyle guitar playing)

2. to drive on the left side of the road (thank you New Zealand!)

3. the proper way to make face-frames for cabinets

4. to use apps, like Trello, to deliver consulting services

5. what Kombucha is and how to spell it

There's my list. Obviously not all of these things happened in one-year's time so things like "reading music" could still be on my list next year but I'm hoping to add five new items for 2017.

Come on, the rest of you "old dogs," what did you learn in the past five years?

Available eBooks:

Private Practice through Contracting: Decreasing dependence on insurance.

Engaging Your Team: A framework for managing difficult people.

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Comment

Comment

Downtime

A favorite spot on the north island. Tauranga, New Zealand

A favorite spot on the north island. Tauranga, New Zealand

Balance? What Balance?

If you read much about being an effective leader you will undoubtably run across the siren's call to have balance in your work-life.  Many have ballyhooed the need for, and the benefits of, regular downtime . . . yes, regular, scheduled, time away from the frenetic activities of your business or career.

I must admit this goes against everything I have been conditioned to do.  You see I come from Northern European stock, I live in the agricultural midwest, from a small town, from parents who grew up on a farm and lived through the depression.  I was taught, although not explicitly, that you "work first then play."  I also learned to always ask myself the question, "Am I working hard enough?" The catch, of course, in this doctrine being that their is always more work that could be (should be?) done. In addition, I am an "overly-socialized" eldest son. I am inclined to, and in fact often relish, the practice of doing too much not doing too little.

I subject you to all this personal self-assessment to help you appreciate the impact of this next bit of news . . . . I am writing this while enjoying the sea-side pleasure of the Bay of Plenty in lovely, Tauranga, New Zealand.  Why is this relevant?  Well, first of all, I can tell you I haven't entirely escaped my conditioning. I am working.  Partially. Partially working that is. Oh, about half the time more or less. I'm here to teach--which I dutifully do each week. But, I am also here to be free from the demands of my average life and work.

I have noticed, maybe you can relate, that since I started this mini-sojourn into balance that many of the niggling "ailments" that are with me daily at home simply "did not make the trip" . . . those small physical maladies, anxious thoughts and worries, the daily irritations of pressing matters that are not getting resolved to my satisfaction or timetable.  It's a nice reminder, once again, that we need rest. Emotionally and physically.

Yes, soon I'll be back home and the toils of life will be resumed. Soon I may have some of those niggling ailments to battle. Still, I have a sneaking suspicion that if I was "forever on holiday" I would somehow, step by step, turn it into the same "daily grind" from which I am currently sensing such relief.

But . . .

But for now, I have the pleasure of a walk on the beach, a nice supper, and good companionship to look forward to.   Tomorrow, it may be a trip to Hobbiton. Or a visit to Wairere Falls.  I can feel my creativity, my curiosity, my joy of life--all the "pleasant humors of my soul" stretching out, loosened from their bounds, and leaping into the vast blue sky.

So, yes, count me in . . . I guess downtime is a good thing.

Bryan

Available eBooks:

Private Practice through Contracting: Decreasing dependence on insurance.

Engaging Your Team: A framework for managing difficult people.

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Comment

Comment

When a leader needs help . . .

Leaders have problems. Others in the organization have to figure out how to help them. It can be difficult. Do they need more training? Perhaps a referral to the Employee Assistance Program (EAP)? Is this simply a disciplinary issue? Or perhaps a complex personality trait? Maybe it's none of the above, it is simply a business problem.

It is not uncommon for leaders to wrestle with "what to do" when one of their managers or senior leaders is struggling. Below is a decision chart designed to help clarify your thinking and give you a direction to pursue. (You can download the file off our resources page.) I hope you find it helpful.

Please note: Every situation is unique and the chart is meant only to help you with your thought process. It should not be used as a final determinant as each individual person deserves a fair and thoughtful consideration of their unique situation.

Available eBooks:

Private Practice through Contracting: Decreasing dependence on insurance.

Engaging Your Team: A framework for managing difficult people.

Family Legacy: Protecting family in family business.

Comment