It doesn't cost anything to meet us
Harvey Schachter's article in the Globe and Mail gives three great tips to improve your listening skills.
As coaches, we cannot emphasize enough how important it is to listen, at different levels, to what is said and what is not said. This listening is the key to asking powerful questions- which is the best way to develop people, and to develop business.
Take a minute to give this a read, and think about how you can show others you're listening.
Here's a great overview for anyone who is interested in actively coaching their peers.
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/02/cultivate_your_coaching_networ.html
From Harvard Business Review
Posted by Sandra Oliver on February 27, 2012
Coaching, Leadership, Leading Teams, Team Effectiveness
By Vince Lombardi:
You rely on them. You ask them to help you. It is amazing how much this brings people together. Our IMPACT team has always been great. We get along. We like each other. We help each other.
In the past several weeks we have become closer. Why? We have a common goal. We are working on a project that requires all of our expertise. I knew that I couldn’t tackle this project alone. I asked the team to help and, true to form, they stepped up. Guess what? Each day we work through this project, we are more of a team than we were the day before. It makes it all worthwhile.
Our son plays hockey. Last week he had a lackluster game. He was tired. He floated around the ice and made no impact. I was ready to provide feedback! My husband, also a hockey player, turned to me and said, " A great coach once told me, "After the game is not the time for feedback.” I suggest you congratulate him and move on."
Today our son had a great game. I'll do the same, congratulate him and move on.
Sometimes if makes sense wait to give feedback and sometimes it's good not to give feedback. More often than not they already know how they did.
We are always preaching feedback everywhere, at work, at home and at school. Sometimes we just need to let them think about it and decide for themselves how they did.
I recently employed two different people in the same contract job.
I followed the same orientation process with both young women. I spent a couple of days orienting them to their new job and to their new surroundings. I shadowed them for the first few days making sure I was available for questions and then I let them run with their new roles.
One employee was beyond our expectations. She did everything she was asked and more. If she thought something should be done, she did it. If she had a suggestion, she made it. When her term was over we knew we missed her but it took a few weeks before we realized how much she added. She was the perfect employee for us and honestly I was lucky.
The other employee was also good. She did mostly what she was asked and yet did it well. She didn't do much extra. We had a few issues, nothing major but each time we had to have one of "those" conversations. We liked her and certainly missed her after she left. After all she did her job and she was a lovely young girl. She made less of an impact. I was not as lucky.
Our third contract employee is coming next week. I have learned from the first two the importance of setting expectations both on the expected job duties and on how we want the nature of employment relationship to be. You cannot leave this to chance. When you do, it forces many more negative conversations then are necessary and those conversations are not fun for either party.
This year I have added to my orientation process. I have put my expectations clearly in writing.(People who know me will be shocked by the detail. I hate process and detail. So when I take the time to be detailed, it is because I think it is really important!)
Our new employee will now have a document to refer to when she is unsure. I will also have something to refer back to so there is no confusion if we need to have a tough conversation.
(By the way, I will not just hand her the document. We will sit down over a leisurely coffee and go through it together discussing details and clarifying all points.)
I used my experiences from the first two contract positions to build this written document. I have been refining it over the past week or so. I am happy that is clear on duties and on the nature of the relationship. The nature of the relationship is important because it tells her things like "we like initiative" or "we expect you to become part of our team". Understanding both the duties and the nature of the relationship helps her better understand how to approach her role.
I will let you know how it goes but I am convinced that spending the extra time on writing out my expectations will mean that our third contract employee will start more effectively than she would have without the extra work. I am determined to rely less on luck this time. I think she will also appreciate the clarity. After all, new jobs are tough sometimes.
A 6 minute video (ish) that describes the marshmallow experiment. It promotes the idea of using a prototype approach to teamwork and design (build it, get feedback, refine, build again…). I think teams can take the same approach to building a meeting format that works for them. Try it, see if it works, refine it, and try again.
Posted by Claire Carver-Dias on June 1, 2011
Communications, Engagement practice skills, Strategy Development & Execution, Team Effectiveness, Workplace Issues
What is “overfunctioning”? I looked it up and came up with nothing in the dictionary. It is not an official word. Even though it is not a word, is a word I use a lot.
So here is my definition of “overfunctioning”. It means doing more for another person than they actually need. It means doing so much that the other person really doesn’t have to do anything. If someone asks you for help and you do more than help, you actually do that work then you are overfunctioning.
What is wrong with this? In the short run and in certain situations it isn’t too harmful. Let’s face it, overfunctioners make great employees. They are thorough, reliable, and conscientious. The work of an overfunctioner is usually impeccable.
In the long run, there is a lot wrong with overfunctioning. Eventually the overfunctioner gets tired and frustrated and feels under appreciated. By their very nature, overfunctioners get very little recognition for their toil. Even more importantly overfunctioners create underfunctioners. Underfunctioners are people who learn to do less. Why would an underfunctioner do more when they can rely on the overfunctioner to do it for them? Underfunctioners regress and become less effective and less engaged. They lose their skills. Everyone loses.
It’s a lengthy video, but well worth watching the whole thing. A very engaging way of presenting research results about what truly motivates us.
A fitting article since Claire just posted a blog on handling healthy disagreements in the workplace.
From Harvard Business Review
The last IMPACT blog dealt with the downward spiral of those never-ending arguments, but let’s be clear: disagreement in the workplace is not a bad thing. Conflict can be good if it is done in a non-harmful way—with the parties involved disagreeing without being disagreeable. In fact, conflict is often an essential part of good team interaction and good decision-making. A team environment in which team-members sit around simply nodding their heads in synchronization is often an unhealthy one.
According to Team Management Profiles, one of the psycho-metric assessments we like to use with teams we work with, “innovating is a key aspect of teamwork and involves challenging the way things are currently done.” This does not mean that teams should regularly reinvent every process, it just means that effective teams sometimes need to challenge the status-quo. And doing so can often lead to some tough and tense discussions or fights.
Further, when a team is making an important decision, considering disparate viewpoints and allowing space for the team to challenge conventional thinking can help the team arrive at a better final decision.
Whether the conflict is in a one-on-one or team situation, the important part is to fight fair. It may be a cliché, but it’s one worth repeating. Here are a few tips to help ensure constructive, rather than divisive, conflict:
So next time you sense a conflict brewing within the team, don’t throw up the white flag. Let the disagreement unfold, adhere to the ground rules and see where it leads.
Below is a great article from the Globe and Mail newspaper. The article focuses on women and how women increase the “collective intelligence” of the team – not because women are more intelligent but because they tend to be better at teasing out and listening to diverse opinions. I am thrilled that this has been proven by research. I have personally seen it in action.
The best team I have worked with is incredibly diverse – all different personalities, different genders and different backgrounds. I know they were diverse not just because they looked different but because we measured it – we did personality profiles on all of them. They are the best team in my opinion because they actually drove change through their organization – they got results. Diverse teams are often harder to manage– there is often more conflict and more discussion. Everyone does not agree easily. This is what makes them better.
“Being aware of and celebrating differences and rewarding people for their contributions will go a long way to making sure that ensure that your team will be supportive even in a crisis.”
Read more about my views on the controversy over France’s national Football team in today’s Globe and Mail.
A very few leaders I know really know how to create lasting change in their organizations. I can think of only two or three who have really been successful at completely transforming their organizations. When I think about these leaders, there are two things that they all do.
One, they get the right people on the team.
Results speak and they put people on their team who have proven in the past that get where the organization needs to go in future and that they can inspire a large number of people to get there. The people they choose are not always the popular choices.
Why is this important? Change is complex and change is about leverage. These leaders know they need a team to help them think through the change and to “spread the word” through the organization.
Two, they persevere. In the middle of change, results dip, the team becomes unfocused and the whole organization can become disheartened. The leaders who are successful at change persevere through this malaise.
They work with the individuals on their team. They work with their whole team. They work with the whole organization. The pressure to “change back” is often immense. Through this, they persevere.
Once change happens, people look back and think it was easy. It wasn’t.
Posted by Sandra Oliver on March 9, 2010
Leadership, Managing Change, Strategy Development & Execution, Team Effectiveness
Yet another great resource from Marshall Goldsmith: http://www.marshallgoldsmithlibrary.com/docs/articles/Team-Building.doc
