|
Greetings!
In this issue we continue to explore how organizations can tap into the Diffuse Leadership that exists within them so they can fulfill plans, accomplish more, create new possibilities, while doing so faster and with greater ease.
When we begin work with clients, we are often met with mild skepticism about the process we recommend they follow to achieve the goals they are looking for. They usually want to focus on solutions right away.
Yet every assignment we complete confirms to us that it is only by establishing common ground, creating clarity of purpose and freeing the inititiative of individuals that organizations can break from the limitations of their past ways and reach new levels of success.
There is no doubt in our minds that by rushing to conclusions, and forcing solutions selected by leaders alone, organizations condemn themselves to repeating the same disappointing results, and the same frustrations about being stuck.
Sincerely,
Alain Bolea |
From Discouragement to Clear Action...
in 4 hours |
A non-profit organization recently called us to help revitalize itself and return to a sound financial footing. For months, the staff and board of directors had struggled to define a new path of action. With limited time available, we organized a half-day retreat using our Rapid Team Awareness Turnaround process. Coming into the retreat the team's mood was heavy and frustrated, with a sense of impending doom. Participants were also locked into divergent positions.
After a couple of tense hours, breakthough occurred. The group came to see their reality in the same way, conflicts diminished and solutions for action became clear. It happened because we changed their basic approach to issues in 2 ways:
-
Everyone must be heard and considered. At the beginning, senior, more experienced staff and board members dominated the conversation with their explanations of why things weren't working. The facilitator stepped in to change this pattern and asked permission to make space for all voices to be heard and acknowledged as valid input. Until then senior managers had been oblivious to their monopoly over the conversation while the remaining staff and board members had visibly withdrawn. The breakthrough did not come from the seniors but from the youngest board member, who had sat silent till then. In the new safe space, she put forth an impassioned view of the situation. By reconnecting to what really matters, she broke through the confusion and the fear in which the group held their problems. The shift in perspective released new energy and ideas from all members.
-
Problems have to be considered in the context of the whole system. Most of the early team conversation centered around whether the organization had the right people. Only by examining aspects of their system they had previously overlooked, did it become apparent they had divergent views on their core purpose; the lack of deep agreement on purpose in turn impacted how they presented themselves to the outside world both for marketing services and fund-raising. Through a guided review of ALL the critical dimensions of the organization, the team found clear agreement on the fundamental issue of purpose and was able to rapidly envision a path of action that everyone supported enthusiastically.
Why did better listening and using a systems approach ignite such a rapid turnaround for a group unable to make progress just a couple of hours before? First, most individuals on teams or groups come to believe that their personal experience IS reality. Because they operate in the same organizational context they assume that everybody sees things the same way. In fact they do not. Without establishing common ground it is not possible for teams to construct solutions that can be implemented and have a chance to last.
When everyone's voice is heard it allows the different aspects of the situation to appear and be considered. No one person sees it all. When one conversation is dominant, it can seem there is progress. In truth what typically happens is that the people who disagree, but don't express their views, do not buy into and commit to the proposed solution.
The temptation is to race to solutions from the get-go. We've found that the 'natural' time it takes for genuine shared reality to emerge is about 1.5 to 2 hours. It takes this long for minority viewpoints to come out strongly and dissipate the illusion that there is only one way to see things. It is critical that leaders who in meetings want traction right away prepare themselves for a bit of patience. Because the "obvious" can be so easily mistaken for reality, the risk is high that "obvious" solutions will only perpetuate the same situation: an incomplete airing of issues and options, and a disillusionment of the people who are to support the implementation.
Scott Brumburgh and Alain Bolea |
| What Keeps You Up at Night? | |
Could you take a few seconds to rank the challenges that your organization faces currently. This will help us make our articles more relevant to your needs. Your answers remain anonymous.
|
|
© Business Advisors Network 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rewards of
Diffuse Leadership | |
|
In his speech at Boston College's commencement, GE's CEO, Jeff Immelt, encouraged new graduates to become problem solvers, to find solutions to the challenges facing society. A recent survey of CEOs reveals that it is creativity that they value most in their employees. Studies on what makes disaster relief efforts successful point to the ability of team members to improvise.
Problem-solving, creativity, improvisation are all traits of leadership that leaders are looking to their team members to display. Leadership is no longer about telling people what to do; leadership is about the ability of everyone to assess issues, create solutions and decide on their application. It is about all individuals being able to function at their highest potential.
Yet awakening what I call "diffuse leadership" does not happen so readily. Even the best educated, most willing often fail to respond to the exhortations of their leaders to step forward, take initiative.
Leaders often complain that individuals behave like they don't care. Yet when interviewed, team members usually demonstrate that they do care, but also admit that they hold back. Why? Because they protect themselves.
Where does the need for self-protection come from? From 4 common experiences:
-
they were berated in the past for having failed,
-
they were micro-managed into apathy,
-
they are confused and insecure about what is expected from them, or
-
they are overwhelmed by the demands placed on them.
The interactions between leaders and team members often get into a vicious cycle. Instead of dealing with the emotional barriers to engagement, leaders try to use rational argument and convince their teams into taking initiative. When team members don't respond, leaders begin to display more of the behaviors that initially caused the employees' limited initiative. Leaders become increasingly frustrated; as they grow more impatient, they also become more directive and peremptory. The negative cycle firmly takes root. To the leader's complaint "They behave like sheep; they need to be treated like sheep" echoes the employees' complaint "They treat us like sheep; we'll behave like sheep."
Creativity and initiative are born in the way leaders and team interact in every day exchanges to face challenges, find solutions and create new opportunities to deliver better value to clients together. The role of the leader is to make sure the conditions of safe space are present. Is trust present? Are individuals able to express themselves, make decisions without being second-guessed? Are they able to learn from their mistakes?
If management might be about telling people what to do, leadership, on the other hand, is definitely about creating conditions for individuals to find by themselves what they need to do to accomplish the common mission.
|
 |
|
|
