5 Lessons from the Ryder Cup - getting a group of individual experts to team

5 Lessons from the Ryder Cup  - getting a group of individual experts to team

Coaching a sales leader this week, the conversation turned to how he could get more out his sales team, each of whom are a country manager for a different European country.

While recognising that they were focused on their own country, he wanted his team; to think about the collective regional target; to go the extra mile on their results if one of the other countries was having a bad quarter to make up the collective gap; to share best practice and to support each other; to work together without him, the leader, having to always make it happen.

It all sounded great but like many organisations each team member is compensated on their own country and not on any regional achievement. And naturally they focused on their number and their country and found a lot of the aspired behaviours above a distraction from that already challenging task. The sales leader said “they are playing the same sport but facing different conditions and opponents”

We could be talking about any group of experts – sales people, engineers, developers, or accountants.  Driven and measured on individual success, how could a leader get them to team more and why would they bother?

The Ryder Cup this weekend involves 24 muliti-millionaires (Rory McIlroy won $11.5 million last weekend alone) who spend their careers trying to beat each other in pursuit of personal glory and fortune.

And yet every two years they divide into two teams (one of which, Europe, is not even a strong identity in any sport, never mind in politics), play for free, and talk and act as if it really is one of the biggest occasions in their careers.

Scott Tannenbaum, an expert in team science   (see a great talk he did for NASA at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibBtQG5Thxc ) emphasises that all teams do not need the same level of teamwork and that interdependcy is the key influence on how much teamwork your team needs.

For example a sales team or a gymnastics team may prepare together, cheer each other on but they perform solo and adding up all the individual scores gets you the team score. This is low interdependency.

Medium interdependency involves some members needing to coordinate, some of the time. Like a relay race.

A high interdependent team is like a soccer or basketball team where all members coordinate consistently and they need a shared mental model of how to defend and attack.

The sales leader is not looking for a high interdependent team as that would serve no purpose but he is grappling with seeing if his team of sales managers can leverage better and more consistent results through some combination of low and medium interdependency.

What can my sales leader learn from the successful captains of Ryder Cup teams in how they get their teams to gel and succeed when the concept, the skills and behaviours, and the rewards of being in a team are the opposite of what these golfers do their whole careers. Can they help him increase the level of interdependency among his country managers?

I looked at the strategies and tactics of the last winning captains of both teams, Paul McGinley (2014) and Paul Azinger (2008), to see if any commonalities and lessons exist for us in organisations ( see book references below)

The key five themes that emerged are as follows;

1. Create teams based on personalities:

The Ryder Cup captains don't actually need to create a team of 12 – the competition requires 12 games involving pairs and then all player play against another player on the final day.  Getting the 12 pairings right is key to success.

Azinger used personality tools to group his team into three pods of four (one pod for example was made of the more aggressive players, one pod was of the more steady players etc) and he got these pods to focus on being a team by stating that the pairings would always be from a pod. Don't worry about the other 8 guys – focus on the 3 you might be paired with.

The sales leader could look at getting the sales leaders for tier 1 countries like France and Germany being more of a team while maybe pairing up the leaders from central European countries. Or creating pods based on similar personalities. He doesn't have to get all his team teaming if there is no value or meaning to it.

2. Stay on message:

Both McGinley and Azinger drilled into their team to stay on message. McGinley’s message was that the USA Captain Tom Watson was a hero and to talk up the USA team.  He wanted his team to play on perceived US arrogance. Azinger got his team to keep saying they were the underdogs.

Interestingly, this week the 2016 USA Captain Davis Love stated that he had maybe the greatest team ever assembled – a claim that has created more pressure on his team and attracted scorn in the US and in Europe.

The sales leader could create a common message for himself and his team that could be communicated to all employees and /or to corporate teams , about their region. “As  a region we want to achieve x. Be part of our success!”

3. Motivation is individual:

Common sense but not common practice. The sales leader I spoke with has not been having 1 to 1’s and when he does talk to his team members it is only about the numbers.

After a poor performance at the end of day 1, Anthony Kim was challenged directly by Azinger to step up and play better. Kim was one of the aggressive pod members and Azinger knew that that kind of challenge would work for Kim in a way that would not work for say one of the steady pod.

Before the 2014 Ryder Cup, Martin Kaymer was not playing well. McGinley arrived a day early to a tournament in the US in order to play a few holes with Kaymer to encourage him. Kaymer reflected later that McGinley being respectful and supportive really helped him. McGinley took a different approach with Lee Westwood when he publically stated that Westwood would need to do more to get a place on the team. Both Kaymer and Westwood made the team and contributed key wins towards winning the cup.

4. Leverage the wider system:

Azinger purposely involved the caddies, the player’s wives and the grounds men in certain decisions with the intention of them feeling involved but also in them supporting the players. He also purposely got the players to look directly at the crowd (golfers usually try to avoid interacting with the crowd) and to make sure each player carried extra hats and goodies to hand out to the crowd so that the US fans felt involved and would be more vocal.

McGinley made sure that any players not playing in day 1 or 2 had a clear role on the course to support their teammates.

Could the sales leader involve the marketing team, the presales people , the sales reps and global teams to be involved in making the region successful and in supporting his direct report?

5. Know your role and value as a leader;

The classic image of a Ryder Cup captain is of them in a golf buggy driving from hole to hole shouting encouragement. Sounds like a sales leader jumping from call to call, and deal to deal. 

Both McGinley and Azinger made it clear to their team that their role , to quote McGinley “ was not to be a cheerleader out there for the players and I told them that from the very first meeting. My job was to plot our next move as a team"

The sales director or any leader needs to share with their team where they can or cannot add value and to ensure they don't get in the way of the team. The leader needs to get out of the weeds and be plotting the next move.

But why bother with any of this teaming stuff if I can be a hero winning on my own?

For the golfers, it is the pressure and the joy of playing for others, of achieving something they cannot do on their own, of excelling with their peers…. and if they play well and win, it helps their personal brand and endorsements too. Could the sales managers get the same kick out of being more of a team?

Colm

References;

Showdown; the Inside Story of the Gleneagles Ryder Cup by Iain Carter

Cracking the Code – The Winning Ryder Cup Strategy: Make it work for You by Paul Azinger and Ron Braund

The curious incident of the leader who came out of his cockpit

The curious incident of the leader who came out of his cockpit

It happened last April. At the time it took me a few minutes to figure out what was different.

Its impact has stayed me since then. And I have told a few of my coaching clients the story to illustrate a point regarding their leadership.

It was about 7pm in a plane on the tarmac at London City Airport. All the passengers had the usual look of weariness from a combination of a day’s work and the usual battle required to get through airports in this day and age.

We were waiting for the  “final few passengers” or the plane was “going through its final checks or something” when the captain turned on the PA system and spoke to the passengers about the expected flight time, the flight path and the weather in Dublin.

Nothing strange in any of that. But it was not what he said that stayed with me but HOW he did it.

The pilot did something I have never seen before or since. He came out of the highly secured cockpit, picked up the phone that the steward/stewardesses use and he looked at us and we looked at him as he spoke.

This was the man you was going to take a 100 people and lots of fuel up into the air and down again safely and instead of a voice in the ether we got to see the leader.

And it made a difference. I paid more attention to what he was saying, I bizarrely felt safer because I got see him and he wanted to see us, and I felt respected after two hours of being treated like just another object moving through check in and security. It changed my mood.

Why do I tell the story to my clients – cause too many have got caught leading their teams through emails or from behind the “always busy” closed office door.

The pilot didn't have to stand there in front of his passengers. Am sure he could have found something else to do.

But it had a powerful impact on me.  Still does 4 months later.

So is it time you come out of your cockpit and be visible to your team and organization?

J is for Contemplation

Since the New Year has started we have been bombarded with media coverage about resolutions, goal setting and finding the new detoxed version of oneself.

Never mind the previous 11 equally suitable months we are told - it's January and you need to not only have a life changing plan but you better be acting upon it - so pay the annual subscription to the gym, swear off chocolate and alcohol forever and invite that mad spinster aunt you never visit over for Sunday lunch quick. 

 In 1994 James Prochaska published his research on how people successfully self changed which he had used to transform the success rates in New England in helping people give up smoking ( and his is the model still used in the NHS in the UK and by other bodies for addiction treatment).

His researched identified 6 key stages that we go through for successful self change to occur.

He emphasized that no one stage was more important than another and the success at any stage was dependent on completing the previous stage. Time spent on a particular stage could range from hours to years.

Prochaska also highlighted that successful change inevitably involved 3 to 4 attempts through the process and rarely happened in one attempt.

His six key stages are;

1. Pre- contemplation where the person kind of knows something needs to change but is not willing to think about change or deflects away the need to change through denial or rationalisiation.

2. Contemplation where the person accepts the possibility of changing but needs to complete the cost benefit analysis of the change and be convinced that benefit wins out before they move on to the next step.

3. Preparation where we get into planning, both for the start of something but also to surround ourselves with a more favorable environment for change to happen.

4. Action - doing it, giving it a go, the stuff of Nike slogans

5. Maintenace by turning the change into a habit and embedding it into everyday life by re shaping the plan or refining the original goal.

6. Termination which is when the risk of going back to old ways is minimal regardless of the existence of stress or stimulus.

Circling back up to the January hype, the focus on Preparation and Action is flawed because most of us have not spent any time in Contemplation reviewing the costs and benefits of our plans. Hence the gyms around the world are full in January and empty in March, and the self help experts and organic yoga holistic therapists can go on holidays in Spring with the money we have paid over and wait till another January frenzy comes about.

Spend January in Contemplation, use the chilly days and nights to reflect, to  do your cost benefit, to build your commitment;  and then go do your plan and spring into Action with the arrival of lambs, brighter evenings and 6 Nations Rugby.

Ready to health check your team?

How healthy is your team?

Most of us get our car checked once a year; we should be getting our bodies checked every few years;  and more and more leaders are being "encouraged" to do 360s regularly so they know how their leadership is perceived. 

So what about a health check of your team? You know, that group of people you and your organisation are relying on to do more with less.

What would a team health check look like?

Using 1 to 1 interviews (ideally) or an online survey, the whole team is asked for feedback on 

- the team's Purpose ( How clear is it? What is it? Is everyone going in the same direction? Is it compelling and aligned to the business? Do we have team goals that get reviewed regularly?)

- the team's Talent ( Does the talent match the purpose? Are individuals' skills being fully used? Are roles and responsibilities clear?)

- the team's Norms  (What are the conscious or unconscious rules of being in this team eg can the boss be challenged? How are decisions made? Are these norms productive or unproductive?)

- the team's Commitment ( Are individuals really committed to the team and it's success? What is the one team jersey people wear - of this team or some other team? Is the work of the team energetic and vital?)

- the team's Dynamics ( How is conflict dealt with? What are the patterns of energy in the team? What is the level of trust in the team?)

-the team's Core Learning ( How does the team learn from its successes and failures? Do team members give each other feedback?)

and of course, the life blood of any team; 

- the team's Performance/Results ( What are the team's performance measures? How are they assessed? Does the team get recognised?)

The individual team member responses are compiled through one to one interviews or via a survey, analysed, and then shared with the whole team, ideally as a one day workshop with the morning focused on the results (the range of scores within the team being as important as the average score) and the rest of the day focused on key gaps to develop and action planing. 

What are key conditions for a successful team checkup?

1. The whole team, not just the leader, needs to be up for it (nothing worse than having a blood test done when your veins don't want to be there) so it needs team commitment.

2. The leader needs to be prepared not to take anything personally - easier said then done sometimes as there may be implied criticism in the scores.  The leader needs to be able to role model the openness and courage it takes in having their team reviewed.

3. The leader is part of the team and definitely part of the diagnostic and debrief (I would have concerns if the leader didn't want to be involved or the rest of the team didn't want them involved - that's A&E material straight away for any team)

4. Teams don't exist in a vacuum - they are co-missioned by key stakeholders who have expectations of the team and who ultimately define team success or failure. Why not involve these stakeholders in the survey process so that their perceptions and expectations of the team are explicit and can guide the team.

Finally, self examination has its obvious challenges as we can be blind to certain things or not have the skill to explore issues.
An experienced team coach can bring the expertise and the external view that makes this a safe yet challenging process for any team, be they a new team, a stuck team  or even a perceived high performing team.

Health checks are about awareness - what is working, what needs to be improved. Isn't it time for your team to look in the mirror?

Televising your Team Meetings - what would the show be called?

The ideal is that Team Meetings are platforms for getting work done. A way for a group of people to deliver on their Common Endeavour, a demonstration of what they can achieve together as opposed to separately. Performing is key.

Everyone is engaged, excited to be there, stretched, challenged and challenging.

Yeah right!

I believe in everything I have written above and I work to help my team coaching clients to get there but practical experience shows that most team meetings are more likely to fall into the following categories;

Antiques Roadshow
Each meeting and every agenda is about the past - last week, last quarter, last year. What we did, why we did it, what worked, what didn't.

There is of course value in review and reflection but teams don't thrive and get energised on the past - teams perform on the now and for the future.  Death by looking in the rear view mirror


Winning Streak
I better give some context. This is an Irish tv show (but I am sure every country has one like it) where members of the public win, via a scratch card, a place on a TV show with the chance to win ten to fifty thousand euro via a spinning wheel and other random non skill related games.

But this program is so bad that despite the chance of winning big money most people I know would say that if they won the opportunity to be on the show that they would ask someone else to represent them as the personal shame and humiliation of appearing on it  would be too much. Even the presenters (large L for light, small e for entertainers) don't want to be there.

I see lots of Winning Streak meetings - no one wants to be there (watch the body language and the volume of email done during the meeting) or they keep sending someone else in their place. The kinder team members say things like "its only an hour a week", the less kind add up those 52 hours a year and day dream (while in the meeting) about how they could have been better spent.

The format is dull and unimaginative, no one knows the purpose of the meeting and no real work is done so there is no value.

The Apprentice
It is all about me showing everyone how clever I am and maybe, as a bonus, showing how clever you are not. People grab every opportunity to hold the microphone and convince themselves and others how great they are.

While one person is talking, everyone else is preparing their own speech or looking for attack points in what is being said.

Being visible to the boss is the key objective of a few while the silent majority are ....silent...either because they don't want to play the game or the risk of being stabbed in the back is too high. And the boss - they are either blind or get a kick from the fake hero worship.

Concepts such as common purpose, common accountability, common responsibility flee after the first meeting.

Shooting Stars
This is a comedy game show populated with celebrates. And from there it just descends into chaos and madness with the resulting look of confusion and nervousness on the faces of the celebs.

I love it as a show but as a team meeting nothing is ever achieved in the chaos of is the meeting on or not, who is or is not attending, will the boss turn up and what will be today's crisis or key imperative compared to the different crisis and key imperative of the week before and the week before.

No team norms, no acceptable or unacceptable behaviour and often just turns into a bitching and moaning session.


So which tv shows do the meetings you attend resemble?

In or Out of the Swimming Pool

We have been trying the find the right swimming class for our young boys  - a class where they will obviously learn, have fun and of course be safe.

And after trying out a number of options and talking to other parents, a key differentiator has emerged and it is this - does the instructor get into the pool or not.

I have been amazed at the number of classes where the teacher stays at the edge of the pool and tells the kids in the water what to do. In or Out? - it seems a no brainer which would be most effective and that is what we have found in terms of which classes helped the boys learn and have fun.

So it got me thinking about whether we in our roles as leaders and managers perform our roles in or out of the pool.

Do you stay out of the pool?- spend a lot of time in your office, lot of time in meetings that are not at the coal face, find yourself giving lots direction and instructions through email? All important and justifiable (but then I am sure the swimming instructors have their good reasons for not getting into the pool too).

What would being in the pool more look like for you?

• Attending customer meetings with your team?
• Attending meetings with the customers of your internal customers?
• Shadowing a key stakeholder for a morning?
• Walking around the factory or office floor and making time to talk to the team?
• Committing to and doing 1 to 1's?
• Having skip level meetings with the folks a few levels below you?
• Have lunch with your people as opposed to at your desk?

Does this make a difference?  It sure did for my kids and their swimming (they have made leaps and bounds since moving to a class with the teacher in the water with them). But in business?

The Sales Executive Council published research that a sales team performance went up 17% just from 2 hours a month of coaching from their manager.

So Summer is here (kind of) - why not pull on your leadership speedos (no one will see them I promise) and get into the water with your people.

Resurrecting your career by following the rules of the stock market

It's resurrection time as mother nature comes back to life after the Autumn and Winter recess.

So let's look at a common coaching challenge I often see - resurrecting one's career in your current organisation.

The fact that one's career needs help can often catch you unawares, like the lobster not noticing the rising temperature of the water around it in the pot.The awareness that there's an issue often comes from some form of comment or feedback from a boss or senior stakeholder  through a process like a 360. 

The analogy I use with clients who find themselves in this situation is that of their personal stock price. Historically they have experienced career advancement,  their stock price consistently rising. But now suddenly we discover that people are selling as opposed to buying the individual's stock.

Here are the steps I advise my clients to follow to get their career growing again

1. Get to the issue.

Be relentless in finding out what the perceived problem is - why is your stock price falling. Even if you have feedback, go back and get even more specific feedback. The more data you have on why people have a specific perception of you and your career, the more focused you can be in addressing the perception.

2. Identity the institutional investors in your career.

Stock prices are not based on individuals like you and me trading - its all about the pension funds and the big institutional shareholders - their decisions move the market. So as opposed to convincing the whole organization how great you are, identify who the big institutional investors are in your career. This may or may not include your manager depending on how senior they are. Very often it is some key folks a couple of levels above you in the company.

3. Get a sponsor to help you demonstrate value to the institutional investors. 

Companies need intermediaries to get them in front of investors and venture capitalists. So do you. Who is going to get you in front of the senior people while also selling your worth to them when you are not in the room. This is were a supportive boss or mentor can really help you.

4. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate.

Wall Street does not support a stock just because they like you or think that you may have value - they buy based on stated intentions, follow through on those intentions, demonstrated results and constant communication of all these. You need to start broadcasting to your sponsor on a regular basis so they can both sell you and challenge negative perceptions about you that come up in senior leadership meetings. And you need to broadcast, on an appropriate basis, to the big investors in your organisations to show them your impact and value. This is not PR over results - it is visibility into your results.

The four steps above have helped my clients get focus and leverage to rebuild their personal stock price.

But! But if the above steps represent plan A, I always encourage my clients to start building a plan B no matter how tentatively. Sometimes the perception is so ingrained with very senior people that at some point one needs to be able to cut ones loses and go elsewhere. In other words, you need to think about refloating your stock in a new market.

PS: the other bit of resurrection going on here is with my blog which has been dormant for over a year. I want to try and make it a more regular process for me

Two lessons I learnt last month from Mai and Dave;

1. Don't write for perfection - just put your thoughts out there i.e. let the writer me, not the editor me, own this process.

2. Write for a few mins every day - something will come out of the simple discipline. 

The Steve Bennett Leadership Basics - what Symantec can expect

The recent appointment of Steve Bennett as CEO of my former employer Symantec has got me reaching for one of my favourite books on the software industry – “Inside Intuit – How the Makers of Quicken beat Microsoft and Revolutionised an Entire Industry

Steve Bennett was CEO at Intuit for eight years . In that time he grew Bennett left Intuit in December 2007 after serving as president and CEO for eight years. revenue grew to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2007 from less than $1 billion in fiscal 2000. He also led Intuit to being in Fortune Magazine’s “Best Companies to Work For” list for six consecutive years.

One chapter in “Inside Intuit”, called The Bennett Basics, may give Symantec employees a clue to what to expect from their new leader.

Leveraging his 23 years at GE under Jack Welch, the chapter identified Bennetts key leadership principles;

Set A Tone – a leader’s personal intensity determines an organisation’s intensity.

Maximise an Organisations Intellect – take everyone’s best ideas and transfer them to others.

Put People First and Strategy Second – getting the right people in the right seats is crucial to the success of any strategy

Foster Passion – winners care more than anyone else

Reach For More Than What Seems Possible – when the leader stretches, the whole organisation stretches.

The Steve Bennett Basics of Leadership - what Symantec can expect

The recent appointment of Steve Bennett as CEO of my former employer Symantec has got me reaching for one of my favourite books on the software industry – “Inside Intuit – How the Makers of Quicken beat Microsoft and Revolutionised an Entire Industry"

Steve Bennett was CEO at Intuit for eight years . In that time he grew Bennett left Intuit in December 2007 after serving as president and CEO for eight years. revenue grew to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2007 from less than $1 billion in fiscal 2000. He also led Intuit to being in Fortune Magazine’s “Best Companies to Work For” list for six consecutive years.

One chapter in “Inside Intuit”, called The Bennett Basics, may give Symantec employees a clue to what to expect from their new leader and his playbook.

Leveraging his 23 years at GE under Jack Welch, the chapter identified Bennetts key leadership principles while at Intuit;

Set A Tone – a leader’s personal intensity determines an organisation’s intensity.

Maximise an Organisations Intellect – take everyone’s best ideas and transfer them to others.

Put People First and Strategy Second – getting the right people in the right seats is crucial to the success of any strategy.

Foster Passion – winners care more than anyone else.

Reach For More Than What Seems Possible – when the leader stretches, the whole organisation

Review of "Creating a Coaching" by Peter Hawkins

The concept of a coaching culture existing within an organisation has become a hot topic in recent years as the suppliers and buyers of coaching seek to move beyond the historical 1 to 1 coaching format and explore how coaching can impact the many as opposed to the select few.   However much of the discussion I have seen on coaching culture has lacked research and practical case studies and hence it has begun to take on the characteristics of other Holy Grails within organisational development that have come with great fanfare and gone with an embarrassed silence.   Peter Hawkins has taken the concept on in this book (Creating a Coaching Culture)and, through a combination of a well-structured framework, numerous case studies and his usually high standards of research and practical experience, has given CEOs, HR Directors and external coaches lots of practical ideas and models about creating a culture of open and honest dialogue within teams, functions and organisations and beyond to customers and stakeholders.   I personally really enjoyed the excellent deconstruction in the final chapter of coaching culture down to its rawest and most meaningful form  - that of better quality dialogue in day to day situations, be it in team meetings, performance reviews or in the corridor. My corporate clients will see more tangible value in the idea of better dialogue than they will in a something called coaching culture.   The book is an easy read and very engaging and has challenged me as an external coach to add more value to my corporate customers. I will be sharing the book with clients as they look to move beyond coaching being often one off engagements. I will also be recommending it to participants on the postgraduate programme on executive coaching that I lecture on as the best discussion and analysis of what coaching culture is and can be out there so far.   I finished the book feeling excited about the possibilities of coaching in organisations. Peter Hawkins has moved the discussion on coaching cultures from one of aspiration to one of possibility.

Presence - you have one but what is it? A Two Minute Blog

The context
A coaching client was told by his boss that he needed "more presence" in order to get to the next level of the organization.In this situation I had a suspicion that "more presence" was code from the boss for "be more like me". However there is no doubt we all individually bring something of ourselves every time we walk into a room, or attend a meeting, or interact with another person. We provoke some form of reaction in others. Peter Bluckert sees presence as "bringing who you are to what you do".

So what?
So what impact do you have on others? Do you bring energy or suck it away? Do you draw people towards you or put them off approaching you? Do you seem open or closed? One of us or apart from us?

Most of us will have two responses to the above questions. The first is that we kind of know the answers about our presence but are not 100% sure. The second is that how we are will depend on the situation.

The call to action
To really get a handle on your presence you have to ask others about it. You may know 70% but by asking others you will get validation on what you know and you will also probably hear a few things you are not fully aware of (nice things too!)

So go find 3 or 4 people you trust and ask yourself and them the following questions (borrowed from Dr. Geoff Pelham):


What is my presence?

What do I evoke in people?

What would extend my range?

Only by learning about how we impact others can we be intentional about how we show up to different people in different situations. It allows the possibility of range and repertoire while still being authentic to ourselves.

Be curious, be brave!

What is your manager identity? Is Coaching part of it?

What is your manager identity? Is Coaching part of it?

Time – let’s face it – none of us have enough time!

So then it comes down to a case of prioritising as best we can.

And so much of our conscious and subconscious prioritisation as a manager is based on what is important to our self-image.

So how do you see yourself as a manager? What do you value about your role?

If I see myself as a “doing manager”, I will prioritise action and tasks over everything else – but in my experience this approach often ends in tears – the manager becoming overwhelmed and frustrated by their workload, their reports disengaged and bored because their manager is doing their work, and the manager’s boss disappointed that the manager is not….well…managing.

If I see myself as having to be the “expert manager”, the source of all answers, then I will prioritise telling and solving the problems of others over everything else. The problem is you cannot maintain the expert stance long term as knowledge and expertise is so fluid - and if you do try to hold and protect your expertise you just end up suffocating your reports and creating an unhealthy dependency.

However if I see my identity as “the one who helps other do”, suddenly the importance of making time to connect and be with my reports rises up my “to do” list.

Coaching is not the primary task of a manager but nor is being the doer or the expert – its about a blend and it is about a manager integrating coaching into their routines so that people don’t even necessarily label it as coaching.

It’s is not about lengthy one to one coaching meetings. It’s is not about have a degree from the University of Buffalo in amateur psychology.

It’s about having a coaching mind-set so that you seek coaching moments with your reports.

When people are asked to describe a manager who really helped them develop, they say the manager did the following:

- Gave them a challenge
- Believed in them
- Asked the right questions as opposed to telling the “right answer”
- Trusted them, especially in high profile assignments
- Gave feedback – positive and critical – in a respectful way
- Seemed to be interested in them as a human being


It’s not rocket science – it never is unless you build rockets – it’s being a manager who really wants to be “the one who helps others do “– and then making the space in the calendar for that shift of focus to happen.

Brian O'Driscoll and Employee Engagement

" You come to work to learn don't you!"

These are the words of a professional rugby player called Brian O'Driscoll in an interview this year.

If you don't recognise the name, some of his many achievements include being voted European Player of the Decade in 2010 and he is the all time top try scorer in the 5/6 Nations Championship ( it started in 1883). He also, last weekend, led Ireland to a shock victory over Australia.

Maybe I was surprised to hear a professional sports person talk about learning being so important to their sense of job satisfaction and engagement.

Maybe I was surprised to hear it from one of the greats of rugby as he comes to the end of an amazing career.

But I was most surprised about how simple a concept it is of enjoying your job - that you get up each morning in order to learn something.

It got me asking myself and others;

Are you learning from your job?

Are you maximising the learning opportunities?

As a manager are you ensuring your direct reports can and do learn?

Not More Delegation - its about More Effective Delegation

“I need to delegate more!” is a statement I hear a lot from my coaching clients. Its often seen as the solution to trying to do too much with too little time.

But the issue is not about more delegation but more effective delegation. Some situations will need you less involved than you are currently. And some situations will need you more involved than you are currently

Marshall Goldsmith has the following suggestions if you want to become a more effective delegator:


1) Have each direct report list her or his key areas of responsibility. Schedule one-on-one sessions with each person. Review each area of responsibility and ask, "Are there cases where you believe that I get too involved and can let go more? Are there cases when I need to get more involved and give you some more help?" When leaders go through this exercise, they almost always find that in some cases, more delegation is wanted, and in others it is not. In fact, more help is needed.

2) Ask each direct report, "Do you ever see me working on tasks that someone at my level doesn't need to do? Are there areas where I can help other people grow and develop, and give myself more time to focus on strategy and long-term planning?" Almost invariably, direct reports will come up with great suggestions. For example, for several of my C-level clients, team management has emerged as an area where letting go can both free up executive time and help develop direct reports. Too many top executives feel a need to schedule team meetings and then act as traffic cop during the meeting to ensure that the time schedules are met and that agendas are completed. This meeting management task can usually be delegated on a rotating basis to direct reports. This helps direct reports understand the agendas of the peer team members and allows them to develop their skills in building collaboration and reaching consensus.


Ask yourself these tough questions. Then ask the people who are working with you. The answers may save your time and increase your team's effectiveness.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Cabinet

Week one into the life of the new Irish Government and they are facing into intensive pressure from France and Germany on our beloved Corporation tax rate, the increased likelihood that the Banking stress tests will highlight the need for many more billions of euro and hence a renegotiated IMF bail-out and continuing fears about the house repossession monster.

So much to deal with and respond to. Yet the new Cabinet is a brand new team and so needs to also stay focused on ensuring it has in place the key ingredients that make any team a success or a failure. After all, they are the most important team in the country!

So what should Enda Kenny and co do about ensuring they work well as a cohesive successful team?

Patrick Lencioni highlighted 5 dysfunctions of a team that I believe are even more crucial based on a coalition of two political parties:

1. Absence of Trust – the key building block for successful teams is trust. Failure is guaranteed if ministers are not genuinely open with each other about their mistakes and weaknesses. Sound familiar – I doubt our previous Cabinet of FF and the Greens scored too high on trust as a team.

2. Fear of Conflict – no trust in a team leads to guarded comments, veiled discussions and whispers outside of meetings. Successful teams have lively meetings, get ideas from all the members and keep it real. Cabinet meetings need to hear what Ministers are really thinking and not just what is the right thing to say.

3. Lack of Commitment – no healthy conflict means no full commitment. Instead team members feign agreement and say one thing and do another. A clear set of common objectives can keep this Cabinet focused. Its about defining what winning is

4. Avoidance of Accountability – no commitment means no accountability and actions promised never happen and mediocrity and passing the buck prevails. This starts with the leader and needs to stay with each team member

5. Inattention to Results – the four previous dysfunctions result in a team where individual needs and glory come before the collective goals of the team and indeed the country.

So while its great to hit the ground running, I hope the First 100 Days plan includes time for this new team to start at the key first step and build trust with each other. Time to connect; learn about each other in terms of experience and strengths; and creating personal relationships with fellow team members.

The huge challenges of any government will always be there – that makes it even crucial that the Cabinet learns how to start being a team as quickly as possible.

Confusion, fear mongering, death-by-delay, or ridicule and character assassination

Confusion, fear mongering, death-by-delay, or ridicule and character assassination.
Another day, another meeting and another idea shoot down. John Kotter has just written a book called “Buy-In” and includes the list below of the 24 most common forms of attack. The responses to each attack which will not silence valid criticism, but will help stop verbal bullets from killing good ideas.

Let me know your thoughts on the list or any additions you have to it.

Colm

#1 "We've been successful, why change?!"
Attack:
We've never done this in the past and things have always worked out OK.
Response:
True. But surely we have all seen that those who fail to adapt eventually become extinct.

#2 "The only problem is not enough money."
Attack:
Money is the issue, not _____ (computers, product safety, choice of choir songs, etc).
Response:
Extra money is rarely what builds truly great ventures or organizations.

#3 "You exaggerate the problem."
Attack:
You are exaggerating. This is a small issue for us if it is an issue at all.
Response:
To the good people who suffer because of this problem, it certainly doesn't look small.

#4 "You're saying we've failed??!!"
Attack:
If this is a problem, then what you are telling us is that we have been doing a lousy job. That's insulting!
Response:
No, we're suggesting that you are doing a remarkably good job without the needed tools (systems, methods, laws, etc) which, in our proposal, you will have.

#5 "What's the hidden agenda?"
Attack:
It's clear you have a hidden agenda and we would prefer that you take it elsewhere.
Response:
Not fair! Just look at the track record of the good folks behind this proposal! (And why would you even suggest such a thing?)

#6 "What about this, and that, and that (etc.)?"
Attack:
Your proposal leaves too many questions unanswered. What about this and that, and this and that, and...
Response:
All good ideas, if they are new, raise dozens of questions that cannot be answered with certainty.

#7 "No good! It doesn't go far enough" (or, "It goes too far")
Attack:
Your proposal doesn't go nearly far enough.
Response:
Maybe, but our idea will get us started moving in the right direction, and do so without further delay.

#8 "You have a chicken and egg problem."
Attack:
You can't do A without doing B, yet you can't do B without doing A. So the plan won't work.
Response:
Well actually, you can do a little bit of A which allows a little bit of B which allows more A which allows more of B, and so on.

#9 "Sounds like 'killing puppies' to me!"
Attack:
Your plan reminds me of a thing disgusting and terrible (insert totalitarianism, organized crime, insanity, or dry rot...)
Response:
Look, you know it isn't like that. A realistic comparison might be...

#10 "You're abandoning our values."
Attack:
You are abandoning our traditional values.
Response:
This plan is essential to uphold our traditional values.

#11 "It's too simplistic to work."
Attack:
Surely you don't think a few simple tricks will solve everything?
Response:
No – it's the combination of your good work and some new things that, together, can make a great advance.

#12 "No one else does this!"
Attack:
If this is such a great idea, why hasn't it been done already?
Response:
There really is a first time for everything and we do have a unique opportunity.

#13 "You can't have it both ways!"
Attack:
Your plan says X and Y, but they are incompatible. You can't have both!
Response:
Actually, we didn't say X or Y—although, I grant you, it may have sounded that way. We said A and B, which are not incompatible.

#14 "Aha! You can't deny this!"
Attack:
I'm sorry – you mean well, but look at this problem you've clearly missed! You can't deny the significance of this issue!
Response:
No one can deny the significance of the issue you have raised, and, yes, we haven't explored it. But every potential problem we have found so far has been readily solved. So in light of what has happened again and again and again, I am today confident that this new issue can also be handled, just like all the rest.

#15 "To generate all these questions and concerns, the idea has to be flawed."
Attack:
Look at how many different concerns there are! This can't be good!
Response:
Actually, many the questions mean we are engaged, and an engaged group both makes better decisions and implements them more successfully.

#16 "Tried it before – didn't work."
Attack:
We tried that before and it didn't work.
Response:
That was then. Conditions inevitably change [and what we propose probably isn't exactly what was tried before]

#17 "It's too difficult to understand."
Attack:
Too many of our people will never understand the idea and, inevitably, will not help us make it happen.
Response:
Not a problem. We will make the required effort to convince them. It's worth the effort to do so.

#18 "This is not the right time."
Attack:
Good idea, but it's the wrong time. We need to wait until this other thing is finished (or this other thing is started, or the situation changes in a certain special way).
Response:
The best time is almost always when you have people excited and committed to make something happen. And that's now.

#19 "It's too much work."
Attack:
This seems too hard! I'm not sure we are up for it.
Response:
Hard can be good. A genuinely good new idea, facing time consuming obstacles, can both raise our energy level and motivate us to eliminate wasted time.

#20 "Won't work here, we're different!"
Attack:
It won't work here because we are so different.
Response:
Yes it's true, we're different, but we are also very much the same.

#21 "It puts us on a slippery slope."
Attack:
You're on a slippery slope leading to a cliff. This small move today will lead to disaster tomorrow.
Response:
Good groups of people—all the time-- use common sense as a guard rail to keep them from sliding into disaster.

#22 "We can't afford this."
Attack:
The plan may be fine but we cannot do it without new sources of money.
Response:
Actually, most important changes are achieved without new sources of money.

#23 "You'll never convince enough people."
Attack:
It will be impossible to get unanimous agreement with this plan.
Response:
You are absolutely right. That's almost never possible, and that's OK.

#24 "We're not equipped to do this."
Attack:
We don't really have the skills or credentials to pull this off!
Response:
We have much of what we need and we can and will get the rest.