Am a big fan of Marshall Goldsmith's blogs - this one is a great reminder that "Truly great leaders recognize how silly it is to believe that a coach or a leader is the key to an organization's success. The best leaders understand that long-term results are created by all of the great people doing the work — not just the one person who has the privilege of being at the top."
Enjoy
Colm
Leadership Isn't About You
Friday, January 8, 2010
“Who’ll be my role model? Now that my role model is gone, gone ……….”
Two random events in a space of four days has got me thinking a lot about role models.
The first, which I am not proud about, involved me arguing with my wife on a Saturday morning in front of our three kids. As I stomped out of the kitchen in my best childish huff, my wife said sarcastically “… and a fine role model you are to these boys!”
Even after peace had broken out thirty minutes later, the significance of me now being a role model to these little boys stayed with me. What kind of imprint do I want to leave with them as they grow and face the challenges of a complex world?
Three days later and as I flick around the TV channels I come across a documentary on Joan Baez. While not a fan of her music I became absorbed in the bigger story of her consistent involvement in the civil rights and the peace movement from the early 60’s to today. It was never the standard celebrity “My accountant and I think peace is a good thing.” Joan Baez marched, got arrested, was spat at and insulted because she stood up for what she believed in and because she got involved.
The impact on her record sales didn’t matter. These were her beliefs and they reflect what she continues to stand for.
That documentary left me wondering again about this idea of a role model and the questions “what do I want to stand for?”
I did think about picking someone like Mandela or Martin Luther King and saying “I want to be like them” . I even went onto a role models website - its big announcement was that it was removing Tiger Woods from his role model status. It seems even role models get rifted.
But to be honest picking someone else, famous or not, did just not sit with me. How can you try to be like someone else when it is hard enough to be fully who are you yourself?
So my new role model is going to be….me.
And that means me stepping up and proving worthy of the role. So what might that look like?
Robert Kegan and Otto Laske have separately worked on defining the main stages of adult development. With stages 1 and 2 being focused on us as kids or teenagers, the next three stages are :
Stage 3 – Socialised Mind – being highly influenced by what I believe others want to hear with constant interpreting of how I fit in and overriding my gut in order to meet others expectations.
Stage 4 – Self Authoring – being able to step back and identify and act from my own authentic value system. Taking stands and challenging the status quo based on my beliefs.
Stage 5 - Transforming – being less attached to own solutions, able to handle complexity, knowing own limit and accepting of others regardless of their view point. A Zen Buddhist state of being.
I definitely know that I start 2010 in Stage 3 – so my role model is going to hit the gym and build some stage 4 muscle this year! It is not going to be easy but then again if it was easier where would be the development?
So what is your role model signing up to in 2010?
The first, which I am not proud about, involved me arguing with my wife on a Saturday morning in front of our three kids. As I stomped out of the kitchen in my best childish huff, my wife said sarcastically “… and a fine role model you are to these boys!”
Even after peace had broken out thirty minutes later, the significance of me now being a role model to these little boys stayed with me. What kind of imprint do I want to leave with them as they grow and face the challenges of a complex world?
Three days later and as I flick around the TV channels I come across a documentary on Joan Baez. While not a fan of her music I became absorbed in the bigger story of her consistent involvement in the civil rights and the peace movement from the early 60’s to today. It was never the standard celebrity “My accountant and I think peace is a good thing.” Joan Baez marched, got arrested, was spat at and insulted because she stood up for what she believed in and because she got involved.
The impact on her record sales didn’t matter. These were her beliefs and they reflect what she continues to stand for.
That documentary left me wondering again about this idea of a role model and the questions “what do I want to stand for?”
I did think about picking someone like Mandela or Martin Luther King and saying “I want to be like them” . I even went onto a role models website - its big announcement was that it was removing Tiger Woods from his role model status. It seems even role models get rifted.
But to be honest picking someone else, famous or not, did just not sit with me. How can you try to be like someone else when it is hard enough to be fully who are you yourself?
So my new role model is going to be….me.
And that means me stepping up and proving worthy of the role. So what might that look like?
Robert Kegan and Otto Laske have separately worked on defining the main stages of adult development. With stages 1 and 2 being focused on us as kids or teenagers, the next three stages are :
Stage 3 – Socialised Mind – being highly influenced by what I believe others want to hear with constant interpreting of how I fit in and overriding my gut in order to meet others expectations.
Stage 4 – Self Authoring – being able to step back and identify and act from my own authentic value system. Taking stands and challenging the status quo based on my beliefs.
Stage 5 - Transforming – being less attached to own solutions, able to handle complexity, knowing own limit and accepting of others regardless of their view point. A Zen Buddhist state of being.
I definitely know that I start 2010 in Stage 3 – so my role model is going to hit the gym and build some stage 4 muscle this year! It is not going to be easy but then again if it was easier where would be the development?
So what is your role model signing up to in 2010?
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Change is tough
Change takes longer than we think and the process is difficult.
Acknowledging these facts can make your attempts more successful.
Marshall Goldsmith, one of my favourite coaches, researched why people give up on their goals.
He discovered that there are five common reasons. Understanding these roadblocks will help you apply some preventive medicine — and increase the odds that you and your reports won't fall into the same old traps.
See his findings below.
Colm
1. Ownership"I wasn't sure that this would work in the first place. I tried it out — it didn't do that much good. As I guessed, this was kind of a waste of time."The classic mistake made in leadership development, coaching, and self-help books is the promise that "This will make you better!" After years of experience in helping real leaders change real behavior in the real world, I have learned a hard lesson. Only you will make you better. To have a real chance of success, you have to take personal ownership and have the internal belief that "This will work if, and only if, I make it work. I am going to make this work."
2. Time"I had no idea that this process would take so long. I'm not sure it's worth it."Goal setters have a chronic tendency to underestimate the time needed to reach targets. In setting our goals for behavioral change, it's important to be realistic about the time we need to produce positive, lasting results. Habits that have taken years to develop won't go away in a week. Set time expectations that are 50% to 100% longer than you think you will need to see results — then add a little more.
3. Difficulty"This is a lot harder than I thought it would be. It sounded so simple when we were starting out."The optimism bias of goal setters applies to difficulty as well as time. Not only does everything take longer than we think it will, but it also requires more hard work than we anticipate. In setting goals, it's important to accept the fact that real change requires real work. Acknowledging the price for success in the beginning of the change process will help prevent the disappointment that can occur when challenges arise later.
4. Distractions"I would really like to work toward my goal, but I'm facing some unique challenges right now. It might be better if I just stopped and did this at a time when things weren't so crazy."Goal setters have a tendency to underestimate the distractions and competing goals that will invariably appear throughout the year. A piece of advice that I give all of my coaching clients is: "I'm not sure what crisis will appear, but I'm almost positive that some crisis will appear." Plan for distractions in advance. Assume that crazy is the new normal. You will probably be close to the reality that awaits.
5. Maintenance"I think that I did actually try to change and get better, but I have let it slide since then. What am I supposed to do — work on this stuff the rest of my life?"Once a goal setter has put in all of the effort needed to achieve a goal, it can be tough for him to face the reality of what's needed to maintain the new status quo. When one of my high-potential leaders asked his boss, the CEO, "Do I have to watch what I say and do for the rest of my career?" the CEO replied, "You do if you plan on ever becoming a CEO!"
Here are the cold, hard truths. Real change requires real effort. The "quick fix" is seldom a meaningful one. Distractions and things that compete for your attention are going to crop up — frequently. Changing any one type of behavior won't solve all of life's problems. And finally, any meaningful change will probably require a lifetime of effort.
Acknowledging these facts can make your attempts more successful.
Marshall Goldsmith, one of my favourite coaches, researched why people give up on their goals.
He discovered that there are five common reasons. Understanding these roadblocks will help you apply some preventive medicine — and increase the odds that you and your reports won't fall into the same old traps.
See his findings below.
Colm
1. Ownership"I wasn't sure that this would work in the first place. I tried it out — it didn't do that much good. As I guessed, this was kind of a waste of time."The classic mistake made in leadership development, coaching, and self-help books is the promise that "This will make you better!" After years of experience in helping real leaders change real behavior in the real world, I have learned a hard lesson. Only you will make you better. To have a real chance of success, you have to take personal ownership and have the internal belief that "This will work if, and only if, I make it work. I am going to make this work."
2. Time"I had no idea that this process would take so long. I'm not sure it's worth it."Goal setters have a chronic tendency to underestimate the time needed to reach targets. In setting our goals for behavioral change, it's important to be realistic about the time we need to produce positive, lasting results. Habits that have taken years to develop won't go away in a week. Set time expectations that are 50% to 100% longer than you think you will need to see results — then add a little more.
3. Difficulty"This is a lot harder than I thought it would be. It sounded so simple when we were starting out."The optimism bias of goal setters applies to difficulty as well as time. Not only does everything take longer than we think it will, but it also requires more hard work than we anticipate. In setting goals, it's important to accept the fact that real change requires real work. Acknowledging the price for success in the beginning of the change process will help prevent the disappointment that can occur when challenges arise later.
4. Distractions"I would really like to work toward my goal, but I'm facing some unique challenges right now. It might be better if I just stopped and did this at a time when things weren't so crazy."Goal setters have a tendency to underestimate the distractions and competing goals that will invariably appear throughout the year. A piece of advice that I give all of my coaching clients is: "I'm not sure what crisis will appear, but I'm almost positive that some crisis will appear." Plan for distractions in advance. Assume that crazy is the new normal. You will probably be close to the reality that awaits.
5. Maintenance"I think that I did actually try to change and get better, but I have let it slide since then. What am I supposed to do — work on this stuff the rest of my life?"Once a goal setter has put in all of the effort needed to achieve a goal, it can be tough for him to face the reality of what's needed to maintain the new status quo. When one of my high-potential leaders asked his boss, the CEO, "Do I have to watch what I say and do for the rest of my career?" the CEO replied, "You do if you plan on ever becoming a CEO!"
Here are the cold, hard truths. Real change requires real effort. The "quick fix" is seldom a meaningful one. Distractions and things that compete for your attention are going to crop up — frequently. Changing any one type of behavior won't solve all of life's problems. And finally, any meaningful change will probably require a lifetime of effort.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
“You’ve allowed me keep my job. Now give me back my dignity!”
Type “dignity in work” into Google and you get a number of hits mostly dealing with how organisation can best implement redundancies while treating those been asked to leave with respect and dignity.
But what dignity for those who are being retained by companies? How dignifying are your methods in retaining talented employees?
Lets use George as an example.
George is a coaching client of mine - he was identified as a high potential director by his company 10 months ago.
Yet last month George and his four peers were told that they each had to do a twenty minute presentation as a part of an overall one hour interview to justify why they should be retained for one of them would be let go.
George did a good presentation and interview and in fact got put into a higher profile role but a month latter he is still raising in our coaching sessions the questions “Did my successes and commitment of the last 8 years mean nothing?” He resents the X-factor nature of fighting for his career – one hour of show time to demonstrate his worthiness.
And the extra kick in the arse – none of the management level above George were forced to go through a similar exercise – they all retained their roles automatically.
George continues to feel anger at the hypocrisy and continues to struggle with his 8 plus years of commitment to a company that have made that commitment null and void.
Take Ann as one more example.
Her function also went through redundancies - she has been retained and actually presented with a new role that has been described as putting her into her “sweet spot”
The following 3 months have seen Ann move from feeling appreciative, valued and excited to now feeling devalued, demotivated and micromanaged as her “sweet spot” role has resulted in her bosses focusing, not on her great strengths, but on things she doesn’t like doing and knows she does not do well.
Ann is losing her self belief as she is forced to be what she is not.
George and Ann are talented people. Considered good enough to survive aggressive redundancy programs. And yet both are questioning how the organisation is treating them as a survivor.
For the organisations involved, they are freezing talented individuals – freezing them with fear for the next round of redundancies, freezing their loyalty to organisations that they have given so much to, and freezing their instinct and talents.
Organisations need to plan and demonstrate a lot more empathy and support to those they retain – for these are the people who will get companies out of this current situation.
But what dignity for those who are being retained by companies? How dignifying are your methods in retaining talented employees?
Lets use George as an example.
George is a coaching client of mine - he was identified as a high potential director by his company 10 months ago.
Yet last month George and his four peers were told that they each had to do a twenty minute presentation as a part of an overall one hour interview to justify why they should be retained for one of them would be let go.
George did a good presentation and interview and in fact got put into a higher profile role but a month latter he is still raising in our coaching sessions the questions “Did my successes and commitment of the last 8 years mean nothing?” He resents the X-factor nature of fighting for his career – one hour of show time to demonstrate his worthiness.
And the extra kick in the arse – none of the management level above George were forced to go through a similar exercise – they all retained their roles automatically.
George continues to feel anger at the hypocrisy and continues to struggle with his 8 plus years of commitment to a company that have made that commitment null and void.
Take Ann as one more example.
Her function also went through redundancies - she has been retained and actually presented with a new role that has been described as putting her into her “sweet spot”
The following 3 months have seen Ann move from feeling appreciative, valued and excited to now feeling devalued, demotivated and micromanaged as her “sweet spot” role has resulted in her bosses focusing, not on her great strengths, but on things she doesn’t like doing and knows she does not do well.
Ann is losing her self belief as she is forced to be what she is not.
George and Ann are talented people. Considered good enough to survive aggressive redundancy programs. And yet both are questioning how the organisation is treating them as a survivor.
For the organisations involved, they are freezing talented individuals – freezing them with fear for the next round of redundancies, freezing their loyalty to organisations that they have given so much to, and freezing their instinct and talents.
Organisations need to plan and demonstrate a lot more empathy and support to those they retain – for these are the people who will get companies out of this current situation.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Transforming Employee Morale – a case study
Background:
Twelve months ago 70 people in a localization department in a multinational IT company based in Dublin completed an internal employee survey in which the majority said they would not recommend their department and employer as a place to work.
Average tenure was above five years, the department had seen its numbers reduced from 110 to 70 in the space of a year and the leader of the department described the culture at the time as “stale”.
The same internal employee survey, 12 months later in April 2009, and 75% of the department say they would highly recommend their department and employer to a friend. The department is “buzzing”.
What happened in twelve months? What is the business impact and how can you apply the lessons to your department or organization?
What happened?
Dynamic Leadership Development (DLD) began working with the leader and the management team in June 2008, just after the poor scores from the survey were published.
There are many aspects and components to the extraordinary turnaround in employee satisfaction but to summarise a few key success factors:
The Leader’s vision – the leader had a vision of a new culture within his department but more importantly his commitment to that vision was crucial. Hiring an external consultant such as DLD was an early signal of this commitment to the vision.
The Guiding Coalition – an early insight was the need for the full management team to be given the opportunity to become more involved, more of a decision maker and hence more engaged. There was no longer just one internal champion but seventeen, as managers and supervisors were brought into the coalition of change.
Discovering people’s strengths and passions – in a series of one to ones with all management and staff, DLD created an inventory of everyone’s strengths and passions, as well as their views on the current and desired culture. They were asked whether they were currently experiencing a “career best” in their role and, if not, what was missing for them. These interviews ensured all staff contributed to the key initiatives required to build the new culture.
Being in the middle of something – by knowing people’s strengths and passions it became easier to identify the right people to drive the right initiatives and hence employees at all levels began to be ‘in the middle of something’. As one person framed it, “we inverted the pyramid” so that the base began to lead and take action as opposed to just the management team.
So what?
Research in Sear’s in the mid 90s demonstrated that a 5% increase in employee satisfaction resulted in a 1.3% increase in customer satisfaction which in turn resulted in a 0.05% increase in revenue. Happy employees treat customers better who in turn buy more from you.
With headcount and resources limited, now is a period when organizations need to maximize the productivity of all existing staff. Tom Rath of Strengthfinder stated that people who get to ulitize their strengths are 20% more productive.
The improved employee morale and productivity in the localization department has resulted in it being asked to only make very moderate cuts in staff numbers over the last 12 months compared to other groups because it is now considered a vibrant productive department.
Are you interested in learning more and seeing the possible applications to your organisation?
A 90 minute workshop has been created by Dynamic Leadership Development to provide you with more detail and insight on this case study plus allow you and your team to start to identify direct comparisons and applications to your organisation.
Call Colm Murphy on +353868304033, email at info@dynamicleadership.ie or visit us at www.dynamicleadership.ie.
Twelve months ago 70 people in a localization department in a multinational IT company based in Dublin completed an internal employee survey in which the majority said they would not recommend their department and employer as a place to work.
Average tenure was above five years, the department had seen its numbers reduced from 110 to 70 in the space of a year and the leader of the department described the culture at the time as “stale”.
The same internal employee survey, 12 months later in April 2009, and 75% of the department say they would highly recommend their department and employer to a friend. The department is “buzzing”.
What happened in twelve months? What is the business impact and how can you apply the lessons to your department or organization?
What happened?
Dynamic Leadership Development (DLD) began working with the leader and the management team in June 2008, just after the poor scores from the survey were published.
There are many aspects and components to the extraordinary turnaround in employee satisfaction but to summarise a few key success factors:
The Leader’s vision – the leader had a vision of a new culture within his department but more importantly his commitment to that vision was crucial. Hiring an external consultant such as DLD was an early signal of this commitment to the vision.
The Guiding Coalition – an early insight was the need for the full management team to be given the opportunity to become more involved, more of a decision maker and hence more engaged. There was no longer just one internal champion but seventeen, as managers and supervisors were brought into the coalition of change.
Discovering people’s strengths and passions – in a series of one to ones with all management and staff, DLD created an inventory of everyone’s strengths and passions, as well as their views on the current and desired culture. They were asked whether they were currently experiencing a “career best” in their role and, if not, what was missing for them. These interviews ensured all staff contributed to the key initiatives required to build the new culture.
Being in the middle of something – by knowing people’s strengths and passions it became easier to identify the right people to drive the right initiatives and hence employees at all levels began to be ‘in the middle of something’. As one person framed it, “we inverted the pyramid” so that the base began to lead and take action as opposed to just the management team.
So what?
Research in Sear’s in the mid 90s demonstrated that a 5% increase in employee satisfaction resulted in a 1.3% increase in customer satisfaction which in turn resulted in a 0.05% increase in revenue. Happy employees treat customers better who in turn buy more from you.
With headcount and resources limited, now is a period when organizations need to maximize the productivity of all existing staff. Tom Rath of Strengthfinder stated that people who get to ulitize their strengths are 20% more productive.
The improved employee morale and productivity in the localization department has resulted in it being asked to only make very moderate cuts in staff numbers over the last 12 months compared to other groups because it is now considered a vibrant productive department.
Are you interested in learning more and seeing the possible applications to your organisation?
A 90 minute workshop has been created by Dynamic Leadership Development to provide you with more detail and insight on this case study plus allow you and your team to start to identify direct comparisons and applications to your organisation.
Call Colm Murphy on +353868304033, email at info@dynamicleadership.ie or visit us at www.dynamicleadership.ie.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
What next for Leadership?
What a 12 months it has been!
Financial institutions that once swaggered now stagger. Governments are saving banks that still dish out massive bonuses to their executives. Politicians call for us all to tighten our belts while using taxpayers’ money to maintain their expense driven life styles. Once mighty employers shed staff every hour of every day.
And the concept of leadership in the last 12 months? What leadership?!
The 2009 model of leadership is not winning too many awards right now and the brand of being a business leader is tainted in a way that the role of clergy has in the recent past – not to be quite trusted.
So will a new perspective of leadership emerge from the rubble? Will “followers” place different demands based on what has and is happening around the world? What flavour of leadership might we be heading into? Below is a sample of leadership styles that I am hearing more and more about in recent months
The idea of “servant-leadership” is more and more visible in blogs and HR magazines. It sees great leaders as being those motivated by the desire to serve others. Its success is measured by the growth of those being served by the leader, in terms of their development, their autonomy and their wisdom. It seeks to combine two opposite notions of leadership a and service. Simply put, if you lead people, are the growing under you or not?
“Authentic leadership” seems to be referenced in every second email I get from leadership consultant these days. It can mean a lot of different things to different people. The Authentic Leadership in Action council state that when we are authentic and true to “our internal compass” we get the most out of others. So are you truly yourself when you are with your team?
One of my favourite leadership books, “The Extraordinary Leader” by Jack Zenger and Joe Folkman now has a follow up called “The Inspirational Leader”. While initially claming that no one of the sixteen leadership competencies identified in “The Extraordinary Leader” was more powerful that an others, the authors have now identified “Inspiring and Motivating Others” as the one competency that separates good from extraordinary. Do you inspire and motivate your people? Have you asked them this recently?
One of my mentors, Pete Bluckert, has identified the combination of strategy and intimacy as the next focus for leaders with the intimacy element being about the heightened connectedness of a leader to themselves as well as others. Are you capable of real intimacy with your team?
Much more will be heard about these and other visions of leadership but at the core of each of them is the growing importance of connecting with people at an individual and group level through the leader’s use of self.
I am in no doubt that our concept of what it is to be a leader in the 21st century has been changed by the revelations of the last 12 months. Leaders can never again expect their word to be taken blindly without proof of character and deed.
Welcome your comments and thoughts!
Colm Murphy
Financial institutions that once swaggered now stagger. Governments are saving banks that still dish out massive bonuses to their executives. Politicians call for us all to tighten our belts while using taxpayers’ money to maintain their expense driven life styles. Once mighty employers shed staff every hour of every day.
And the concept of leadership in the last 12 months? What leadership?!
The 2009 model of leadership is not winning too many awards right now and the brand of being a business leader is tainted in a way that the role of clergy has in the recent past – not to be quite trusted.
So will a new perspective of leadership emerge from the rubble? Will “followers” place different demands based on what has and is happening around the world? What flavour of leadership might we be heading into? Below is a sample of leadership styles that I am hearing more and more about in recent months
The idea of “servant-leadership” is more and more visible in blogs and HR magazines. It sees great leaders as being those motivated by the desire to serve others. Its success is measured by the growth of those being served by the leader, in terms of their development, their autonomy and their wisdom. It seeks to combine two opposite notions of leadership a and service. Simply put, if you lead people, are the growing under you or not?
“Authentic leadership” seems to be referenced in every second email I get from leadership consultant these days. It can mean a lot of different things to different people. The Authentic Leadership in Action council state that when we are authentic and true to “our internal compass” we get the most out of others. So are you truly yourself when you are with your team?
One of my favourite leadership books, “The Extraordinary Leader” by Jack Zenger and Joe Folkman now has a follow up called “The Inspirational Leader”. While initially claming that no one of the sixteen leadership competencies identified in “The Extraordinary Leader” was more powerful that an others, the authors have now identified “Inspiring and Motivating Others” as the one competency that separates good from extraordinary. Do you inspire and motivate your people? Have you asked them this recently?
One of my mentors, Pete Bluckert, has identified the combination of strategy and intimacy as the next focus for leaders with the intimacy element being about the heightened connectedness of a leader to themselves as well as others. Are you capable of real intimacy with your team?
Much more will be heard about these and other visions of leadership but at the core of each of them is the growing importance of connecting with people at an individual and group level through the leader’s use of self.
I am in no doubt that our concept of what it is to be a leader in the 21st century has been changed by the revelations of the last 12 months. Leaders can never again expect their word to be taken blindly without proof of character and deed.
Welcome your comments and thoughts!
Colm Murphy
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
"No Alarms and No Surprises"
“with no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
Silent silence.”
For many of my clients its coming up to annual appraisal time. And despite the mantra from HR and senior management that a process of regular feedback means that the annual review meeting should not include any surprises for the appraisee, I would feel safe in betting money that for many the annual review is still akin to going to the dentist every five years – there is going to be some unexpected bad news and its likely to be painful.
For me its very clear – it is a manager’s job to provide constant feedback (positive and negative) and support throughout the year, and those who save 364 days worth of feedback for that once a year review are failing their people, failing their organization and failing themselves.
People deserve to get feedback on a timely basis so that they can recognize what they do well and appropriate adjust not so good behaviour if required.
Organisations deserve managers who will earn their salary and actively manage performance.
Managers deserve a team of performers but how can that happen if the manager doesn’t give feedback on what is working or not working?
The authors of Crucial Conversations (a book I highly recommend, that takes the concepts of emotional intelligence and puts them into tools and tips) talk about “Suckers' Choice” being often behind a managers inertia when it comes to feedback.
“Suckers Choice” is about setting the brain a false either/or situation. For example
“I can be liked by my team OR I can be honest”
“I can give tough feedback OR not hurt their feelings”
The point being that this choice makes it simple for the brain to do one or the other.
However can a manage be “liked by my team AND honest” ?– of course but it takes more effort, more preparation, more energy.
We all create “Suckers’ Choices” – but they are short time in value and the easy choice now often results in even tougher conversations down the line.
Never more than now, with the risk of RIFs and redundancies hanging over so many organisations and people, is the need for regular honest feedback required.
Making someone redundant, without ever having given that person the appropriate feedback and the time to address the feedback, is more than a question of fairness or poor management – it’s a human rights violation.
So if you are a manager and you are doing an annual appraisal soon, ask yourself “Have I done enough to ensure there are no surprises for the individual in this review?”
Welcome your comments, and thanks to Radiohead for the title and quote.
Colm
no alarms and no surprises,
no alarms and no surprises,
Silent silence.”
For many of my clients its coming up to annual appraisal time. And despite the mantra from HR and senior management that a process of regular feedback means that the annual review meeting should not include any surprises for the appraisee, I would feel safe in betting money that for many the annual review is still akin to going to the dentist every five years – there is going to be some unexpected bad news and its likely to be painful.
For me its very clear – it is a manager’s job to provide constant feedback (positive and negative) and support throughout the year, and those who save 364 days worth of feedback for that once a year review are failing their people, failing their organization and failing themselves.
People deserve to get feedback on a timely basis so that they can recognize what they do well and appropriate adjust not so good behaviour if required.
Organisations deserve managers who will earn their salary and actively manage performance.
Managers deserve a team of performers but how can that happen if the manager doesn’t give feedback on what is working or not working?
The authors of Crucial Conversations (a book I highly recommend, that takes the concepts of emotional intelligence and puts them into tools and tips) talk about “Suckers' Choice” being often behind a managers inertia when it comes to feedback.
“Suckers Choice” is about setting the brain a false either/or situation. For example
“I can be liked by my team OR I can be honest”
“I can give tough feedback OR not hurt their feelings”
The point being that this choice makes it simple for the brain to do one or the other.
However can a manage be “liked by my team AND honest” ?– of course but it takes more effort, more preparation, more energy.
We all create “Suckers’ Choices” – but they are short time in value and the easy choice now often results in even tougher conversations down the line.
Never more than now, with the risk of RIFs and redundancies hanging over so many organisations and people, is the need for regular honest feedback required.
Making someone redundant, without ever having given that person the appropriate feedback and the time to address the feedback, is more than a question of fairness or poor management – it’s a human rights violation.
So if you are a manager and you are doing an annual appraisal soon, ask yourself “Have I done enough to ensure there are no surprises for the individual in this review?”
Welcome your comments, and thanks to Radiohead for the title and quote.
Colm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
