ARE WE PRESSURING OUR PEOPLE (TO QUIT) WHEN WE SHOULD BE IMPROVING THE SYSTEM (TO PERFORM)

WORKING FROM HOME / WORK Most companies are prepared to accept some hybrid work as a permanent change (66% of firms feel it is inevitable and 73% of people want it) — and a minority embrace remote work as the main workplace as they imagine all real estate costs will soon be dropping from their traditional place on the ledger to the profit line. Thoughts How can we continue flexible working that makes use feel part of a community, rather than an isolated nomad. Perhaps A regular tribal gathering, rituals and routines that bind us, and choosing one or two methods of communication to connect us. Example instead of many, many confusing ways to connect (Email, Social Media, Video, Meetings) we select 1. What we use for urgent (WhatsApp?) 2. What we use to call for help (Chat?) 3. What we use to find information (IntraNet?) BOSSES ARE OUT OF TOUCH A report by Microsoft’s reveals business leaders are out of touch. High productivity is masking what’s really going on. If high productivity is leading to burn-out and resentment it isn't good. Moreover if the effort is due to fear of unemployment that isn't a good motivator or sustainable. Time spent in Microsoft Teams meetings has more than doubled (2.5x) globally. The average Teams meeting is up from 35 to 45 minutes year-over-year. The average Teams user is sending 45% more chats per week and 42% more chats per person after hours There was a 66% increase in the number of people working on documents. Thoughts How can we do to balance our efforts between work and welfare, about supporting people as well as getting jobs done. Perhaps coaching, mentoring and other caring initiatives (mindfullness, check-in, pastoral care) might help. Also switching the flow of information: receiving feedback, listening to ideas, help people feel engaged and valued. EMPLOYEES FEEL OVERWHELEMED The barrage of communications is unstructured and mostly unplanned, with 62% percent of Teams calls and meetings unscheduled or conducted ad hoc. And workers feel the pressure to keep up: Despite meeting and chat overload, 50% of people respond to Teams chats within five minutes or less, a response time that has not changed year-over-year. Fifty-four percent feel overworked. Thirty-nine percent feel exhausted. The workday has elongated by at least an hour. People do more work after hours and more work on weekends. Flexible working has become 24/7 working and down-sizing, contracting, and the gig-economy demand a 24/7 alert for work. Thoughts More than ever we need a focus on purpose rather than productivity, of value rather than volume. What can we do to reconnect with our reasons, motives and joy of working. THEY WANT TO QUIT 41% of employees are considering leaving their current employer this year. This year! And 46% say they’re likely to move because they can now work remotely. Most companies couldn’t deal with 10% of their workforce leaving in the same year and the second largest impact of a mass exodus would be higher costs to retain employees or higher cost to train new employees, or contract-hire people. Thoughts How can some of the interventions above help retain and recruit people? What can we offer to make work either a career (3-5 year) destination (training, qualification, experience, expertise ) or a great place to partner/contract (pay, brand, reputation, innovation). CONNECTIVITY HAS MADE US MORE SILOED Collaboration trends in Microsoft Teams and Outlook confirm that interactions with our immediate team, or close networks, increased with the move to remote work but our interactions outside of that team have diminished. Inevitably this created in-groups and out-groups strengthening bonds with those we interact with regularly at the expense of different people and diverse views. And that spells more competition (between teams) and less collaboration (for organisational goals) Thoughts What can we do to mix groups, encourage diversity, create new routes and channels, break-up patterns and routines in a way that keeps things exciting, alive, thoughtful, challenging, innovative and thinking without it becoming messy, chaotic and confusing. How can we introduce just enough 'chaos' to keep us vibrant, without overwhelming us? IS CRYING A GOOD TREND? Microsoft talks about authenticity in the workplace, about what percent was comfortable crying in front of their co-workers. Whilst mindfulness may have put us in better contact with our thoughts and feelings i do not feel a workplace that makes us cry is a good thing. Indeed it seems that the work ethic and culture is becoming toxic rather than supportive, and people have become the tools of productivity rather than the architects of it. Thoughts We should sweat our systems and our processes not our people. Machines should work 24/7 not people. Our people should be the architects and the mechanics, not the machines. Tim HJ Rogers MBA Management Consultant + Change Practitioner ICF Trained Coach IoD Business Mentor Mob 447797762051 Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com We deliver projects and change, and improve the confidence, capacity, drive and desire of the people we work with. FOLLOW AdaptConsultingCompany https://www.linkedin.com/company/adapt-consulting-company #People, #Process, #Projects, #Change, #Consulting, #Coaching, #Mentoring, #Training

THE VALUE OF FEEDBACK, OR NEVER COMPLAIN; NEVER EXPLAIN

 THE VALUE OF FEEDBACK, OR NEVER COMPLAIN; NEVER EXPLAIN

Never complain; never explain. This pithy little maxim was first coined by the British politician and prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, and adopted as a motto by many other high-ranking Brits — from members of royalty, to navy admirals, to fellow prime ministers Stanley Baldwin and Winston Churchill.

Feedback is an interesting thing, most people are shy to give feedback, generally opting for satisfactory 6/10 to 8/10 rather than a shocking 0 or superlative 10. If all your feedback is satisfactory is that good enough? If one person in a hundred suggests a low score or a high score is this more or less important than all the satisfactory scores?

What about second-hand or late feedback, is this more honest because it has the merit of reflection than direct face to face feedback?

When we receive negative feedback to what extent can we use this to remedy the past, apologise or recompense. Or should we simply note it and move forward, taking the lessons and applying them in the future, but in the meantime never complain; never explain.

What about positive feedback, should we use past successes, accolades and praise to herald future performance? Any investment business will tell you that the past is not always a predictor for the future.

WHAT METHODS DO YOU USE FOR FEEDBACK?

There are many ways to get product or service feedback

1. Customer feedback surveys
2. Email and customer contact forms
3. Usability tests
4. Exploratory customer interviews
5. Social media
6. On-site activity (via analytics)
7. Instant feedback from your website

There are also lots of ways to get staff feedback

1. New employee surveys
2. Employee engagement surveys
3. Pulse surveys
4. Stay interviews
5. Review sites
6. Managers
7. Employee suggestion box
8. Exit interviews

PLEASE NOTE IN THE COMMENTS YOUR EXPERIENCE OF FEEDBACK METHODS

Read more on Never complain; never explain.

https://medium.com/lovesex/never-complain-never-explain-601dc20cc864
https://medium.com/@chasewritesmore/never-complain-never-explain-4c4ff9c0e181

Read more on 360 Degree Feedback: See the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/360-degree-feedback-information-1917537
https://hbr.org/2019/03/the-feedback-fallacy
https://www.qualtrics.com/experience-management/employee/360-feedback-survey-questions/

THE VALUE OF GOOD MEETINGS

Meetings should always have some form of structure so that people arrive prepared and engaged and feel there is a purpose the the meeting, value in their opinion and importance in the outcome. The structure should not compromise the debate or become too bureaucratic, indeed a good structure will ensure that all points are considered, all perspectives are discussed and consensus  (and dissent) it noted in agreeing the course of action.

The ten behaviours that generate the finest thinking, and have become known as The Ten Components of a Thinking Environment, are: Attention, Equality, Ease, Appreciation, Encouragement, Feelings, Information, Diversity, Incisive Questions, Place.

You could use 2 documents, an Agenda before then meeting and Minutes after the meeting. Or instead you could have one document only and simply update it with additional detail so that it records the Before, During and After elements of the discussion.

 

MEETING (Title, Location, Time)
SBC Co Ltd  Joint Venture  9am till 10am Wed 7 Apr at SBC  HeadOffice

ATTENDANCE (Required and Optional Attendance)

AIM (Purpose or Intended outcome of meeting)
The aim of the meeting is to .......

BRIEFING NOTES
(Any notes, data, to consider before the meeting)

Please read this document {link}
Please watch this video {link}
Please being your top ten priorities

AGENDA
(Key topics in priority order to manage time)

Initials Time Topic Aim
TR 10mins Update on ABC Projects, decision re go / no-go
AB 10mins Update on Recruitment, decide candidate
CC 10mins Update on Goals, note/agree

DISCUSSION
(Key discussion points 1.Whats Done 2. Issues/Options 3. Next)


DECISIONS / ACTIONS
(Decisions/ Actions: Who, What, When, How Much)



Find out more a about a Thinking Environment here
https://adaptcoaching.blogspot.com/2021/03/the-10-components-of-thinking.html

A MINI COMPENDIUM OF INFLUENCE AND PERSUASION

There are lots of models and theories out there. Here are some of the ones I like. There is nothing *new* these are not my ideas, although the comments and personal experience are. You are free to copy or comment, share or ignore.

Section 1 RACII

Section 2 POWER INFLUENCE

Section 3 NETWORK RELATIONSHIP MODEL - IT'S WHO YOU KNOW

Section 4 CIRCLES OF INFLUENCE MODEL- ITS WHAT YOU CAN IMPACT

Section 5 DISC - INFLUENCE MODEL

Section 6 THINKING AND BEHAVOUR STYLE AND INFLUENCE - MBTI

Section 7 TEAM NETWORKS, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFLUENCE

Section 8 HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE

Section 9 NANCY KLINE - TIME TO THINK

Section 10 COMMUNICATIONS CALENDAR

I hope I have attributed and named all the models correctly, and I have been careful to include all the links to the resources. I welcome comments or corrections and suggested additions.

If you are interested in Strategy, Projects, Programmes or Change please contact Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com or phone +44(0)7797762051

---

GoTop

RACII MODEL

Key Points

It is about communication, consultation, roles and responsibilities. There are many variations on this theme

• Responsible: People or stakeholders who do the work. They must complete the task or objective or make the decision. Several people can be jointly Responsible.
• Accountable: Person or stakeholder who is the "owner" of the work. He or she must sign off or approve when the task, objective or decision is complete. This person must make sure that responsibilities are assigned in the matrix for all related activities. Success requires that there is only one person Accountable, which means that "the buck stops there."
• Consulted: People or stakeholders who need to give input before the work can be done and signed-off on. These people are "in the loop" and active participants.
• Informed: People or stakeholders who need to be kept "in the picture." They need updates on progress or decisions, but they do not need to be formally consulted, nor do they contribute directly to the task or decision.

Comments

I always use this when project planning roles, goals, consultation and stakeholders. There many variations on this theme, and you may want to add elements to suit the project or context.

Useful Links

https://www.solitaireconsulting.com/2020/07/stakeholder-management-using-the-power-interest-matrix/

https://www.24point0.com/ppt-shop/raci-matrix-powerpoint/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix

GoTop

POWER INFLUENCE MODEL

Key Points

It is about keepin the right stakeholders informed according to their power/influence

• High power, highly interested people (Manage Closely): you must fully engage these people, and make the greatest efforts to satisfy them.
• High power, less interested people (Keep Satisfied): put enough work in with these people to keep them satisfied, but not so much that they become bored with your message.
• Low power, highly interested people (Keep Informed): adequately inform these people, and talk to them to ensure that no major issues are arising. People in this category can often be very helpful with the detail of your project.
• Low power, less interested people (Monitor): again, monitor these people, but don’t bore them with excessive communication.

Comments

This is interesting because it is political and practical: it is ostensibly about lobbying for resources or canvassing for approval. There are implications with this model if you consider that the aim is not to satisfy people in each square, but to move them to the square where you want them to be.

• If they are LOW power but you want them to be HIGH power, give them a role, promote them, showcase them, give then formal authority (budget holder, expert, sponsor) or informal authority (rapporter, scribe, facilitator)
• If they are HIGH power but you want them to be LOW power, minimise their interest by distracting them with other tasks or overloading them with meaningless tasks, or simply excluding them from facts, conversations and meetings effectively marginalising them and making them inconsequential or discredited to the decision process.
• If they are HIGH influence but you want them to be LOW influence, minimise their interest by distracting them with something more important, assure them "there is nothing to see" or "nothing to worry about" either reduce their interest in the topic or reduce the topics interest to them.
• If they are LOW influence but you want them to be HIGH influence, maximise their interest by pointing out impact or implications, assure them "this is important" or "this is an opportunity" either increase their interest in the topic (briefings, meetings, data) or increase the topics interest to them (opportunity to advance, pay, prestige etc.)

Useful Links

https://www.solitaireconsulting.com/2020/07/stakeholder-management-using-the-power-interest-matrix/

https://www.improvementservice.org.uk/business-analysis-framework/consider-perspectives/powerinterest-grid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_analysis

GoTop

NETWORK RELATIONSHIP MODEL - IT'S WHO YOU KNOW

Key Points Six degrees of separation is the idea that all people on average are six, or fewer, social connections away from each other. Also known as the 6 Handshakes rule. As a result, a chain of "a friend of a friend" statements can be made to connect any two people in a maximum of six steps. When we understand this we realise how we can leverage our network of who knows who, so that when it comes to influence or persuasion where we might not have a direct affect we may, though use of the network have an indirect, but nonetheless profound effect.

Comments

When planning one project we spend a lot of time on who knows who, so that we could create a cascade of super-communicators. For example my telling Person A something we knew they would tell Persion 1,2,3,4,5,6 and my telling Person B something we knew they would tell Persion 7,8,9,10,11. By understanding the cascade network of influence you only have directly communicate with 10 to be able to influence up to 100 (or more).

Our choice was not solely based on Person A knows 10 people and Person B knows 10 other people. We noted for example that Person A had a style, authority, approach which would go very well with Persion 1,2,3,4,5,6 and Person B had a style, authority, approach which would work with Persion 7,8,9,10,11.

This approach of matching select messages with key messengers really helped our project and change delivery.

Useful Links

https://agileleanlife.com/relationship-circles/

https://www.thera.co.uk/content/uploads/2017/04/Safe-and-Secure-Worksheet-4.pdf

https://www.dis-sos.com/circles-of-relationships/

GoTop

CIRCLES OF INFLUENCE MODEL- ITS WHAT YOU CAN IMPACT

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.

Key Points

The CIRCLES OF INFLUENCE might be regarded in the context of the Serenity Prayer: Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.

However I am going to apply this model very differently. Persuasion and Influence can be very complex. Let's take buying a computer. You might think there are 2 people involved: seller and buyer. But careful thought tells us that the following people might be involved. Understanding their needs and communicating in their terms may have a profound effect on the outcome. Thus you can work to engage or disengage people's interest or concern or move things into or out-of their control by the way you approach your communications.

• The sponsor may be interested in the cost or budget
• The finance person may be interested in the return on investment
• The technology person may be interested in compatibility and security
• The manager may be interested in functionality
• The end-users may be interested in ease of use
• The risk team maybe concerned about data and privacy
• The HR team may be interested in support and training
• The investors may be interested in market response

Comments

This is classic stakeholder management: understanding the "hot topic" for each group and managing the message content, media, style, timing to meet our plans for that person. This may be to influence or persuade positively or negatively. When we know who has formal power (because of hierarchy) or technical power (because of expertise) or persuasive power (because of like-ability) or resource power (because they control access to people, materals or funds) or approval power (because they sign-off eg risk or compliance) we can move them around the board like chess pieces based on message content, media, style, timing. This is how political campaigns are fought and won, knowing who is "for" who is "against" and what are the factors that will influence the critical "undecided"

Useful Links

https://www.abrahampc.com/blog/2020/3/16/what-can-i-do-the-circles-of-concern-and-influence

https://dplearningzone.the-dp.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/Covey.pdf

GoTop

DISC - INFLUENCE MODEL

Key Points

Much has already been said about matching the right communication style and content to each person. Understanding the DISC communication preferences helps us undserstand how people like to receive and process information and consequently how we might best persuade or influence.

• the DOMINANT type is also known as High D: Outgoing and Task-oriented Dominant Style: People who have both Outgoing and Task-oriented traits often exhibit DOMINANT and DIRECT behaviors. They usually focus on results, problem-solving, and the bottom-line.
• the INSPIRING type is also known as High I: Outgoing and People-oriented Inspiring Style: People who have both Outgoing and People-oriented traits often exhibit INSPIRING and INTERACTIVE behaviors. They usually focus on interacting with people, having fun, and/or creating excitement.
• the SUPPORTIVE type is also known as High S: Reserved and People-oriented Supportive Style: People who have both Reserved and People-oriented traits often exhibit SUPPORTIVE and STEADY behaviors. They usually focus preserving relationships and on creating or maintaining peace and harmony.
• the CAUTIOUS type is also known as High C: Reserved and Task-oriented Cautious Style: People who have both Reserved and Task-oriented traits often exhibit CAUTIOUS and CAREFUL behaviors. They usually focus on facts, rules, and correctness.

Preferred DISC communication styles of the D-Profiles

D-profiles often communicate in one direction. They talk and expect others to listen. D-profiles express their own opinions as fact; meaning their opinions need no further discussion. They may be blunt and they can often challenge others. Your interactions with the D-profile may feel like a competition. You will need to stand toe-to-toe. Since they want to move and complete tasks quickly, they may interrupt often and not ask for input from others.

If you want to interact more effectively with the D-profile then focus on tasks and results. Try keeping pace by moving quickly. Also, do not frustrate their desire to take action. They want to be in control so make them feel that they have power.

Preferred DISC communication styles of the I-Profiles

I-profiles communicate in an inspiring way. They will sell their ideas and visions. I-profiles will talk a lot. They prefer to look at the big picture and avoid details. I-profiles focus on the positive and tend to avoid unpleasant subjects. They are good at providing positive, constructive feedback, but they may not be direct.

When you are interacting with I-profiles, stay focused on the positive. Move quickly, but spend time chatting. Try to show interest when they are talking and talk about people over tasks. Try not to focus too much on details or focus on the negative.

Preferred DISC communication styles of the S-Profiles

The S-profiles, like the D-profiles, also prefer one directional communication. However, they prefer interactions in one-on-one settings. They answer when asked, but otherwise, they prefer listening to speaking. S-profiles tend to speak calmly and amiably. S-profiles look to create trust during the interaction. They prefer to talk about topics that they have mastered. In addition, they will explain things calmly and thoroughly.

Some tips for interacting successfully with the S-profile include slowing down and explaining in detail. Also, give them time to think and talk about it with others. Remember to warn them about any possible changes. Remember to focus on benefits to their team and people close to them. Last, but not least, focus on building trust.

Preferred DISC communication styles of the C-Profiles

C-profiles often prefer to use written communication, like emails. They don’t readily express disagreeing views. They want detailed, fact-based information to insure they make the correct decisions. Since C-profiles focus so much on details and data, they may miss the big picture. C-profiles prefer conversations where they don't have to focus on opinions or abstract matters. They can be extremely diplomatic.

Tips for improving interactions with C-profiles include giving them time to think and ask all of their questions. Then, when you are answering questions, make sure to explain carefully and give sound reasons and data whenever possible. Be patient with the details. Ideally, provide information in writing and ahead of time whenever possible.

Useful Links

https://discpersonalitytesting.com/free-disc-test/

http://blog.extendeddisc.org/disc-communication-styles

https://www.discprofile.com/what-is-disc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DISC_assessment

GoTop

THINKING AND BEHAVOUR STYLE AND INFLUENCE - MBTI

Understanding MBTI means understanding the following

• Favorite world: Do you prefer to focus on the outer world or on your own inner world? This is called Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I).
• Information: Do you prefer to focus on the basic information you take in or do you prefer to interpret and add meaning? This is called Sensing (S) or Intuition (N).
• Decisions: When making decisions, do you prefer to first look at logic and consistency or first look at the people and special circumstances? This is called Thinking (T) or Feeling (F).
• Structure: In dealing with the outside world, do you prefer to get things decided or do you prefer to stay open to new information and options? This is called Judging (J) or Perceiving (P).

Your Personality Type: When you decide on your preference in each category, you have your own personality type, which can be expressed as a code with four letters.

Key Points

The MBTI style suggests to us the communication preferences helps us undserstand how people like to receive and process information and consequently how we might best persuade or influence.

With ST people: Be specific, confident, well-reasoned demonstrate immediate advantages, profit provide examples; use visual aids.

With NT people: Be specific, well-reasoned; use visual aids, diagrams use concepts, theories appeal to intellectual capabilities give them a challenge show how the problem in hand or subject of communication fits into the "big picture"

With SF people: Be supportive, expressive, and confident provide examples; demonstrate immediate advantages, profit appeal to feelings and emotions

With NF people: Be expressive, well-reasoned use visual aids use concepts, theories appeal to their intuition give them a challenge show how the problem in hand or subject of communication fits into the "big picture"

Comments

I use this or a variation on all projects and change programmes and then link to communications plan of what gets said to whom, why, when and how. This is essential understanding for persuasion and influence in projects and change.

Useful Links

http://www.humanmetrics.com/personality/communication-strategies-for-different-types

https://www.verywellmind.com/the-myers-briggs-type-indicator-2795583

GoTop

TEAM NETWORKS, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFLUENCE

Key Points

It is important to understand that the bigger the team the harder it is to maintain communications essential understanding for persuasion and influence in projects and change.

Comments

I try to keep teams small 5 to 7 people. If there are more, have a sub-team. There is no reason not have have a team of teams.

Useful Links

https://brainleaf.com/blog/development/planning-for-complexity-in-project-scoping/

GoTop

HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE

The book HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE is a classic

Key Points

Six Ways to Make People Like You

• Become genuinely interested in other people. "You can make more friends in two months by being interested in them, than in two years by making them interested in you."[6]:52 The only way to make quality, lasting friendships is to learn to be genuinely interested in them and their interests.
• Smile. Happiness does not depend on outside circumstances, but rather on inward attitudes. Smiles are free to give and have an amazing ability to make others feel wonderful. Smile in everything that you do.
• Remember that a person's name is, to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language. "The average person is more interested in their own name than in all the other names in the world put together." People love their names so much that they will often donate large amounts of money just to have a building named after themselves. We can make people feel extremely valued and important by remembering their name.
• Be a good listener. Encourage others to talk about themselves. The easiest way to become a good conversationalist is to become a good listener. To be a good listener, we must actually care about what people have to say. Many times people don't want an entertaining conversation partner; they just want someone who will listen to them.
• Talk in terms of the other person's interest. The royal road to a person's heart is to talk about the things he or she treasures most. If we talk to people about what they are interested in, they will feel valued and value us in return.
• Make the other person feel important – and do it sincerely. The golden rule is to treat other people how we would like to be treated. We love to feel important and so does everyone else. People will talk to us for hours if we allow them to talk about themselves. If we can make people feel important in a sincere and appreciative way, then we will win all the friends we could ever dream of.

Twelve Ways to Win People to Your Way of Thinking

• The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it. Whenever we argue with someone, no matter if we win or lose the argument, we still lose. The other person will either feel humiliated or strengthened and will only seek to bolster their own position. We must try to avoid arguments whenever we can.
• Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never say "You're wrong." We must never tell people flat out that they are wrong. It will only serve to offend them and insult their pride. No one likes to be humiliated; we must not be so blunt.
• If you're wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically. Whenever we are wrong we should admit it immediately. When we fight we never get enough, but by yielding we often get more than we expected. When we admit that we are wrong people trust us and begin to sympathize with our way of thinking.
• Begin in a friendly way. "A drop of honey can catch more flies than a gallon of gall." If we begin our interactions with others in a friendly way, people will be more receptive. Even if we are greatly upset, we must be friendly to influence people to our way of thinking.
• Start with questions to which the other person will answer yes. Do not begin by emphasizing the aspects in which we and the other person differ. Begin by emphasizing and continue emphasizing the things on which we agree. People must be started in the affirmative direction and they will often follow readily. Never tell someone they are wrong, but rather lead them where we would like them to go with questions that they will answer "yes" to.
• Let the other person do a great deal of the talking. People do not like listening to us boast, they enjoy doing the talking themselves. Let them rationalize and talk about the idea, because it will taste much sweeter to them in their own mouth.
• Let the other person feel the idea is his or hers. People inherently like ideas they come to on their own better than those that are handed to them on a platter. Ideas can best be carried out by allowing others to think they arrived at it themselves.
• Try honestly to see things from the other person's point of view. Other people may often be wrong, but we cannot condemn them. We must seek to understand them. Success in dealing with people requires a sympathetic grasp of the other person's viewpoint.
• Be sympathetic with the other person's ideas and desires. People are hungering for sympathy. They want us to recognize all that they desire and feel. If we can sympathize with others, they will appreciate our side as well and will often come around to our way of thinking.
• Appeal to the nobler motives. Everyone likes to be glorious in their own eyes. People believe that they do things for noble and morally upright reasons. If we can appeal to others' noble motives we can successfully convince them to follow our ideas.
• Dramatize your ideas. In this fast-paced world, simply stating a truth isn't enough. The truth must be made vivid, interesting, and dramatic. Television has been doing it for years. Sometimes ideas are not enough and we must dramatize them.
• Throw down a challenge. The thing that most motivates people is the game. Everyone desires to excel and prove their worth. If we want someone to do something, we must give them a challenge and they will often rise to meet it.

Be a Leader: How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment

• Begin with praise and honest appreciation. People will do things begrudgingly for criticism and an iron-fisted leader, but they will work wonders when they are praised and appreciated.
• Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly. No one likes to make mistakes, especially in front of others. Scolding and blaming only serve to humiliate. If we subtly and indirectly show people mistakes, they will appreciate us and be more likely to improve.
• Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person. When something goes wrong, taking responsibility can help win others to your side. People do not like to shoulder all the blame and taking credit for mistakes helps to remove the sting from our critiques of others.
• Ask questions instead of giving direct orders. No one likes to take orders. If we offer suggestions, rather than orders, it will boost others' confidence and allow them to learn quickly from their mistakes.
• Let the other person save face. Nothing diminishes the dignity of a man quite like an insult to his pride. If we don't condemn our employees in front of others and allow them to save face, they will be motivated to do better in the future and confident that they can.
• Praise every improvement. People love to receive praise and admiration. If we truly want someone to improve at something, we must praise their every advance. "Abilities wither under criticism, they blossom under encouragement."
• Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to. If we give people a great reputation to live up to, they will desire to embody the characteristics with which we have described them. People will work with vigor and confidence if they believe they can be better.
• Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct. If a desired outcome seems like a momentous task, people will give up and lose heart. But if a fault seems easy to correct, they will readily jump at the opportunity to improve. If we frame objectives as small and easy improvements, we will see dramatic increases in desire and success in our employees.
• Make the other person happy about doing what you suggest. People will most often respond well when they desire to do the behavior put forth. If we want to influence people and become effective leaders, we must learn to frame our desires in terms of others' desires.

Comments

The book How to Win Friends and Influence People is a classic, must read book. Highly recommended. i actually have a summary of the points above on a card that I keep in my diary. Often before a meeting I try and read it to remind me composure, confidence, context and conversation. I am far from perfect, but at least I am aware of my imperfections!

Useful Links

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People

GoTop

NANCY KLINE - TIME TO THINK

Coaching is a method to influence or persuade. This opens up a whole range of tools, models and approaches to influence or persuasion. However I will suggest one model only and perhaps make coaching, facilitation and mentoring a separate compendium of tools, models and approaches. The model I have selected is NANCY KLINE - TIME TO THINK, and below are the key factors to creating a thinking environment.

Key Points

• ATTENTION: listening with palpable respect and genuine interest, and without interruption. The quality of our attention determines the quality of other people’s thinking.
• EQUALITY: treating each other as thinking peers; giving equal turns and attention; Everyone is valued equally as a thinker.
• EASE: offering freedom from internal rush or urgency. Ease, an internal state free from rush or urgency, creates the best conditions for thinking.
• APPRECIATION: practicing a 5:1 ratio of appreciation to challenge. Because the brain requires appreciation to work well, our thinking is often specious.
• ENCOURAGEMENT: giving courage to go to the cutting edge of ideas by moving beyond internal competition. Competition between thinkers can be dangerous, replace it with a wholehearted, unthreatened search for good ideas.
• FEELINGS: allowing sufficient emotional release to restore thinking. We think that when feelings start, thinking stops. Instead, when people show signs of feelings, we relax and welcome them, good thinking will resume.
• INFORMATION: supplying the facts; recognising social context; dismantling denial. Accurate and full information provides the path to good independent thinking. Dismantling denial is often the first step to independent thinking.
• DIFFERENCE: welcoming diverse group identities and diversity of thinking. The greater the diversity of the group, and the greater the welcoming of different points of view, the greater the chance of accurate, cutting-edge thinking
• INCISIVE QUESTIONS: removing untrue assumptions that limit our ability to think for ourselves well. Challenge or remove untrue limiting assumption, lived as true.
• PLACE When the physical environment affirms our importance, we think more clearly and boldly. Thinking Environments are places that say back to people, ‘You matter.’ People think at their best when they notice that the place reflects their value.

Comments

I like NANCY KLINE - TIME TO THINK because it emphasises the context of communications (environment and attitude) is critical to the content of communications and this has to be a factor in better thinking, better decisions and influence or persuasion.

Useful Links

https://www.timetothink.com/

https://www.customerinsightleader.com/books/book-review-time-to-think/

GoTop

COMMUNICATIONS CALENDAR

When	Who	Hot Topic	Message	For / Against	Intention (Why)	Method	Done	Feedback
Planning	People		Key Topic		Gain Support	Email
Pilot	Teams				Reduce Resistance	Phone
Approval	Media				Get Decision	Zoom or Teams
Start	Union				Placate	Coffee Chat
Middle	Shareholders					Website
End	Customers					Intranet
Review	Clients					One-to-One
	Investors					Team Meeting
	Public					Appraisal

When	Who	Hot Topic	Message	For / Against	Intention (Why)	Method	Done	Feedback
Planning	Shareholders	Money	Return on Investment	For +1	Gain Support	Team Meeting	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Planning	Customers	Price	Benefits	For +2	Gain Support	Website	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Planning	Union	Jobs	Opportunities	Against -1	Gain Support	Coffee Chat	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Planning	Teams	Work	Skills	Against -1	Gain Support	Team Meeting	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Pilot	Shareholders	Money	Return on Investment	For +1	Gain Support	Team Meeting	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Pilot	Customers	Price	Benefits	For +1	Gain Support	Website	Yes dd/mm/yy	Key concerns, issues, actions
Pilot	Union	Jobs	Opportunities	For +1	Gain Support	Coffee Chat	In Progress dd/mm/yy	Pending
Pilot	Teams	Work	Skills	For +1	Gain Support	Team Meeting	Planned dd/mm/yy	TBC

Key Points

The key point is, as noted above, managing the message content, media, style, timing to meet our plans for that person or group. Sometimes the order in which you tell people can be critical to success which is why leaks can be so troublesome. The above table is very simplistic, in truth you may have many people or representatives (more than simply customers, suppliers, staff, management, public and media), and many methods or media (more than simply emails, meetings, presentations, commercials, posters) and many stages or phases (more than simply start middle, end)

Comments

I always do this for every project or change and it is often quite a bit more complex than this. For some large-scale public sector change this can include hundreds of stakeholders and thousands of messages. When working on messages we took the following approach to appeal to those who like brevity and those who like detail. We took effort to match the right message and level of detail to each person or group according to their preferences.

For each topic

• One PHRASE or sentence that you can say in a lift, or as a sound-bite for TV or media
• One PARAGRAPH or summary that you can say to offer more information, context or detail, usually a follow-up to the above.
• One PAGE or detail that you can explain to demonstrate thinking, feeling, consultation, usually a follow-up to the above.
• One PACK or similar data-bundle or report to detail thinking, feeling, consultation, usually a follow-up to the above

GoTop

---

---

A MINI COMPENDIUM OF TRUST BY ADAPT CONSULTING

There are lots of models and theories out there. Here are some of the ones I like. 

Section 1 Kantar Model for Trust
Section 2 Tripod Model for Trust
Section 3 Trust Equation
Section 4 The leader–member exchange (LMX) theory of Trust
Section 5 Blanchard ABCD of Trust
Section 6 Iceberg Model of Trust
Section 7 Wendy Hirsch Model of Trust
Section 8 Covey Matrix Model of Trust
Section 9 Head Heart Gut Model of Trust

I hope I have attributed and named all the models correctly, and I have been careful to include all the links to the resources. I welcome comments or corrections and suggested additions.

If you are interested in Strategy, Projects, Programmes or Change please contact Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com or phone +44(0)7797762051

---

KANTAR MODEL FOR TRUST

Kantar's BrandZ has developed a new model of trust to reflect the drivers of trust among today's consumers. ... Traditionally, consumers trusted well-established brands based on two factors. First is proven expertise, the knowledge that the brand will 'do it well,' reliably and consistently over time.

• Integrity
• Identification
• Inclusion

Comments on this model

It is interesting to think about trust in the context of people, things and concepts. To think about what we would expect from a trustworthy person (eg a good boss or leader) a trustworthy product (eg a good car or watch) a trustworthy concepts (eg a waiting list or test or measure). This model which is about brand uses IDENTIFICATION as a key model of trust (I identify with BMW car or Rolex watch) and also INCLUSION (I am a member of this exclusive club, brand, social set). The INTEGRITY ostensibly appears to be about quality.

However the INCLUSION is always balanced by what is excluded. If you are included then someone somewhere must be excluded for inclusion to have any value or meaning. The IDENTIFICATION is also awkward since not everyone will identify with a person, watch, car or waiting. The INTEGRITY is also subjective because in a brand there is a trade-off between price and quality and there are good functional cars and watches that are not BMW or Rolex just as there are people with integrity who may not be Nelson Mandella or Martin Luther King.

Overall this model of Trust appears to appeal to our sense of self. If it mirrors how we see ourselves then we will trust. If it does not then we will not. So the logic appears to be: If I am part of the gang, and the gang is like me, and consistent with what I value then I will trust.

This logic means some people will trust KKK or Hitler or Communism or Religion whereas others will not. This is perhaps a flawed model and is more like Cult. I suspect there are very close parallels between Cult and Trust.

TRIPOD MODEL FOR TRUST

Mapping multidimensional models of trust antecedents into the Affective and Cognitive dimensions.

• Predictability
• Ability
• Benevolence
• Integrity

Comments on this model

This model is interesting the the comparaison and link between COGNITIVE trust and AFFECTIVE trust. This is useful because some people are trusted because of what they say and think and others for their approach and actions. I may trust Nelson Mandella for his words despite no personal experience of his deeds. I may trust by carer for their ability without necessarily talking to them or even understanding them.

The ABILITY to do something BENEVOLENT driven my moral or professional INTEGRITY does seem to be an appealing formula to which many would subscribe or follow. The idea that is reliable, congruent and timely makes it PREDICTABLE and compelling.

TRUST EQUATION

Credibility has to do with the words we speak. In a sentence we might say, “I can trust what she says about intellectual property; she’s very credible on the subject.”

Reliability has to do with actions. We might say, “If he says he’ll deliver the product tomorrow, I trust him, because he’s dependable.”

Intimacy refers to the safety or security that we feel when entrusting someone with something. We might say, “I can trust her with that information; she’s never violated my confidentiality before, and she would never embarrass me.”

Self-orientation refers to the person’s focus. In particular, whether the person’s focus is primarily on him or herself, or on the other person. We might say, “I can’t trust him on this deal — I don’t think he cares enough about me, he’s focused on what he gets out of it.” Or more commonly, “I don’t trust him — I think he’s too concerned about how he’s appearing, so he’s not really paying attention.”

Comments on this model

I do like this model because it acknowledges the observers focus, values, attention and priority. What is in it for me? Or What are the implications for me? Will be a key factor for many people.

THE LEADER–MEMBER EXCHANGE (LMX) THEORY OF TRUST

The leader–member exchange (LMX) theory is a relationship-based approach to leadership that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship between leaders and followers.Previous research shows that better LMX results in more resources being available to subordinates and restricted information. Employees in a mobile phone company with better LMX, characterized with a high degree of mutual trust, were more willing to share their knowledge

Comments on this model

In simple terms the more we work with people and the closer we work with people (both proximity and values) the more we trust them. We tend to put more trust to people we know more and mistrust people we do not really know or have less experience of.

This suggests simply spending time with people will build trust as much as actually doing something. A regular coffee and catch-up may be more powerful than a favour done. If that coffee and catch-up include social chat about common interests that may be more powerful than a decisive action.

This can be so powerful that we trust people we know way beyond what is logical according to their skills, qualification or experience. We may trust a friend to advise on something over which they have no expertise simply because we trust them. This is how tricksters and con-men work and how some top jobs go to people who appear to manifestly unqualified for the role, but nonetheless trusted by the people who put them there: eg electing an actor (Regan) or TV celebrity (Trump )to be President of the USA.

BLANCHARD ABCD OF TRUST

According to Blanchard, there are a number of common elements that decide what trust is. He calls this the ABCD model, in which each letter stands for a word: Ability, Believability, Connectedness and Dependability. Based on these elements, the status of mutual trust in a relationship between people can be determined.

Comments on this model

The ABCD model has the merit of being simple to remember. It does reflect many of the elements already discussed with the other models. I like this because it is practical and transactional: it is instructive of what you can actually do to create trust.

ICEBERG MODEL OF TRUST

To explore the idea of trust as an actual but intangible structure, let’s consider the iceberg metaphor. When you look at an iceberg, only the tip is visible; the greater mass lies out of sight below the surface.

By looking “beneath the surface” of daily events in your organization, you can determine the structures that influence people’s behavior. If we apply this metaphor to understanding trust, the tip is our daily interactions in which we experience varying levels of trust or mistrust (see Peter Senge “The Iceberg Model of Trust” on p. 2).

These interactions, a series of seemingly unrelated events, are the concrete results of an organization’s climate of trust, which exists in the patterns and structures “below the waterline.”

One unpleasant encounter may not lead us to feel an overall sense of mistrust. But if the behavior continues over time, it’s likely to undermine relationships and erode trust throughout the organization. (Note that certain events, such as layoffs, are significant enough to be “trust busters” the first time they occur.)

To determine the degree of trust being transacted during an interaction, you can take the following elements into consideration:

• The history of interactions between individuals and/or groups (What has happened between them in the past?)
• The literal meaning conveyed through the interaction (What words are being expressed?)
• The inferential meaning conveyed through the interaction (What voice tones, facial expressions, and body language are being used?)
• The result of the interaction (Did one party gain an advantage over or “hurt” the other in some manner?)

Comments on this model

Whilst the ABCD model discussed elsewhere is practical, this Iceberg approach is useful since it references the emotional, sub-conscious elements that influence trust, particularly the daily events or lived experience.

The alignment of what we say and what we do, or what people say and what happens is powerful, whether or not there is a direct or causal link. The meaning or sense-making is in the mind of the follower and so trust may be created or broken simply by the sequence of events, how they are interpreted, understood and their relatedness, irrespective of the historical facts.

Spin-doctors and tabloid story tellers use this phenomena to great affect and it is how an emperor may parade with no clothes, but not be naked: Because emotional or sub-conscious needs, belief, hope tells us they must be clothed. We trust them because we need to, we want to, to [have a hero (trust) or villain (mis-trust)]. The trust (or mistrust) is projected onto them rather than earned by them.

WENDY HIRSCH MODEL OF TRUST

Some researchers differentiate between trust, and the things that may inspire or support it, as follows (Colquitt, 2007) :

• Trust: One’s willingness to accept some vulnerability based on expectations of a positive outcome.
• Trust Propensity: One’s general disposition towards relying on others.
• Trustworthiness : Characteristics that inspire or inhibit trust.

There are a variety of ways to look at what makes us trustworthy, but I will focus here on the model put forth by Roger Mayer and colleagues (1995), the merits of which have been supported by a meta-analytical study (Colquitt, 2007). Mayer reviewed other models of trust and identified three characteristics that people often use to evaluate trustworthiness. I’ve adapted them below.

• Ability: Are you “good” at what you do? (Skills, competencies, technical knowledge)
• Benevolence: Are you looking out for my best interests? (Caring, openness, loyalty)
• Integrity: Do you uphold principles that are important to me? Do you do what you say? (Consistency, reliability, fairness)

Colquitt, Jason A., Brent A. Scott, and Jeffery A. Lepine. "Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance." Journal of Applied Psychology 92.4 (2007): 909-27. Web.

Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.

Mayer, R. C., J. H. Davis, and F. D. Schoorman. "An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust." Academy of Management Review 20.3 (1995): 709-34. Web.

Comments on this model

There is a good blend of the theories in this model. I like Trust Propensity: One’s general disposition towards relying on others, as this builds upon the idea that trust is not earned (by the boss/leader) but gifted (by the follower).

See earlier comments on those that are trusted by the people who put them there: eg electing an actor (Regan) or TV celebrity (Trump )to be President of the USA. Or those we trust because we have a propensity to trust a policeman in uniform, a surgeon in scrubs or a pilot with braiding or a researcher with a clipboard.

COVEY MATRIX MODEL OF TRUST

• Talk Straight
• Demonstrate Respect
• Create Transparency
• Right Wrongs
• Show Loyalty
• Deliver Results
• Get Better
• Confront Reality
• Clarify Expectation
• Practice Accountability
• Listen First
• Keep Commitments
• Extend Trust

Comments on this model

The value of this model is that it suggests the many elements that might make-up trust. If trust were a wall of bricks it is possible that some bricks could be missing but the wall would still serve its purpose. However WHAT is missing and WHERE could be a window, a door or the cause for collapse.

HEAD HEART GUT MODEL OF TRUST

Comments on this model

I like the heart, heart and gut considerations of trust because as we have seen in the discussion of the previous models it is not about logic, emotion or instinct, it is not about action, attitude or need, it is not about behaviour, style or desire but a complex synthesis of all of these factors and as much about the follower (trustee) as the leader (trusted).

CONCLUSION

I suspect TRUST is heavily linked to our ability to INFLUENCE and people's experience of what we DELIVER

7 WAYS TO INFLUENCE
Do it…

• Because you like me, and you’re like me
• Do it to reciprocate, repay past or future debt or promise
• Do it because everyone else is doing it
• This offer is good for a limited time only
• Do it to be consistent, with past, with values, with type
• You can believe me, I’m an authority
• Do it or else

7 WAYS TO AVOID NEGATIVE INFLUENCE
No, because...

• I like you, but I don’t like this proposal
• Is this a favour? Are you looking for something in return?
• Just because everyone else is doesn’t mean..
• If I don’t have time to think, I don’t have time to buy
• I need to think about what I want, and be consistent with that
• If I were you I might, but I’m not you
• Please explain the “or else” slowly so I fully understand

WHAT MANAGERS OR LEADERS SHOULD DELIVER

The following six questions should be answered YES (and if they are not, your job is to do whatever it takes to make the anser YES)

• I know what is expected of me at work
• I have the materials and equipment I need to do my job right
• I have the opportunity to do what I do best every-day
• In the last 7 days I have received recognition or praise for doing good work
• Someone at work encourages my development
• At work, my opinions count

I think TRUST exists in the delivery of the above

Further Reading References or Resources

https://www.brandz.com/articlenew/new-models-of-trust

https://trustedadvisor.com/why-trust-matters/understanding-trust/understanding-the-trust-equation

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Ethical-Leadership-and-Leader-Member-Exchange-(LMX)-%C5%A0ejla/16df3857529a7cfc0fb3f7d0caf6e05620637c18

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leader%E2%80%93member_exchange_theory

https://www.kantar.com/inspiration/brands/can-trust-carry-brands-through-good-times-and-bad/

https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/leader-member-exchange.htm

https://www.kenblanchard.com/Products-Services/Building-Trust

https://www.advancewithava.com/avaaid

http://bioss.com/gillian-stamp/the-tripod-of-work/

https://thesystemsthinker.com/trust-as-a-systemic-structure-in-our-organizations/

https://wendyhirsch.com/blog/how-to-build-trust-on-your-implementation-team

https://www.leadershipnow.com/CoveyOnTrust.html

There are hundreds more... if you find a particularly good resource let me know! Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.Com

GoTop

---

---

CONTACT

If you are interested in Strategy, Projects, Programmes or Change please contact Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com or phone +44(0)7797762051

Tim HJ Rogers MBA CITP
CONSULTANT MENTOR COACH
Mob 447797762051
Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com


Adapt Consulting Company
Consult CoCreate Deliver
#People > #Process > #Plans > #Progress > #Performance

GoTop

---

---

THE 10 COMPONENTS OF A THINKING ENVIRONMENT

 

 THE 10 COMPONENTS OF A THINKING ENVIRONMENT – NANCY KLINE

The quality of everything we do depends on the quality of the thinking we do first

The quality of our thinking depends on the way we treat each other while we are thinking

The ten behaviours that generate the finest thinking, and have become known as The Ten Components of a Thinking Environment, are: Attention, Equality, Ease, Appreciation, Encouragement, Feelings, Information, Diversity, Incisive Questions, Place.

1. Attention: listening with palpable respect and genuine interest, and without interruption
2. Equality: treating each other as thinking peers; giving equal turns and attention; keeping boundaries and agreements
3. Ease: offering freedom from internal rush or urgency
4. Appreciation: practising a 5:1 ratio of appreciation to challenge
5. Encouragement: giving courage to go to the cutting edge of ideas by moving beyond internal competition
6. Feelings: allowing sufficient emotional release to restore thinking
7. Information: supplying the facts; recognising social context; dismantling denial
8. Difference: welcoming diverse group identities and diversity of thinking
9. Incisive Questions: removing untrue assumptions that limit our ability to think for ourselves well
10. Place: creating a physical environment that says back to people, ‘You matter’

Source:
https://www.resultcic.com/Downloads/resources/Kline_10_Components_of_a_Thinking_Environment.pdf


ATTENTION
Attention is an act of creation

The quality of our attention determines the quality of other people’s thinking. Attention, driven by the promise of no interruption, and by respect and interest in where people will go with their thinking, is the key to a Thinking Environment. Attention is that powerful. It generates thinking. It is an act of creation.

Attention: listening with palpable respect and genuine interest, and without interruption

EQUALITY
Even in a hierarchy people can be equal as thinkers

In a Thinking Environment everyone is valued equally as a thinker. Everyone gets a turn to think out loud and a turn to give attention. To know you will get your turn to speak makes your attention more genuine and relaxed. It also makes your speaking more succinct.

Equality keeps the talkative people from silencing the quiet ones. And it requires the quiet ones to contribute their own thinking. The result is high quality ideas and decisions.

Equality: treating each other as thinking peers; giving equal turns and attention; keeping boundaries and agreements

EASE
Ease creates; urgency destroys

Ease, an internal state free from rush or urgency, creates the best conditions for thinking.

But Ease, particularly in organisations and through the ‘push’ aspect of social networking, is being systematically bred out of our lives. if we want people to think well under impossible deadlines and inside the injunctions of ‘faster, better, cheaper, more,’ we must cultivate internal ease.

Ease: offering freedom from internal rush or urgency

APPRECIATION
The human mind works best in the presence of appreciation

In life we learn that to be appreciative is to be naïve, whereas to be critical is to be realistic.
In discussions, therefore, we focus first, and sometimes only, on things that are not working. Consequently, because the brain requires appreciation to work well, our thinking is often specious.

The Thinking Environment recognises the right ratio of appreciation to challenge so that individuals and groups can think at their best.

Appreciation: practicing a 5:1 ratio of appreciation to challenge

ENCOURAGEMENT
To be ‘better than’ is not necessarily to be ‘good’

To compete does not ensure certain excellence. It merely ensures comparative success. Therefore, competition between thinkers can be dangerous. It can keep their attention on each other
as rivals, not on the huge potential for each to think courageously for themselves.

A Thinking Environment prevents internal competition among colleagues, replacing it with a wholehearted, unthreatened search for good ideas.

Encouragement: giving courage to go to the cutting edge of ideas by moving beyond internal competition

FEELINGS
Unexpressed feelings can inhibit good thinking

Thinking stops when we are upset. But if we express feelings just enough, thinking re-starts. Unfortunately, we have this backwards in our society. We think that when feelings start, thinking stops. When we assume this, we interfere with exactly the process that helps a person to think
clearly again.

If instead, when people show signs of feelings, we relax and welcome them, good thinking will resume.

Feelings: allowing sufficient emotional release to restore thinking

INFORMATION
Full and accurate information results in intellectual integrity
Recognising our collective social context creates psychological safety
Facing what we have been denying leads to better thinking

We base our decisions on information all of the time. When the information is incorrect or limited, the quality of our thinking suffers. Whereas, accurate and full information provides the path to good independent thinking.

Similarly, dismantling denial is often the first step to independent thinking.

Information: supplying the facts; recognising social context; dismantling denial

DIFFERENCE
The greater the diversity of the group, and the greater the welcoming of different points of view, the greater the chance of accurate, cutting-edge thinking

Reality is diverse. Therefore, to think well we need to be in as real, as diverse, a setting as possible.

We need to be surrounded by people from many identity groups, and we need to know that there will be no reprisal for thinking differently from the rest of the group.

Difference: welcoming diverse group identities and diversity of thinking

INCISIVE QUESTIONS
A wellspring of good ideas lies just beneath an untrue limiting assumption
An Incisive Question will remove it, freeing the mind to think afresh

The key block to high-quality independent thinking is an untrue limiting assumption, lived as true. To free the mind, therefore, we need to know how to construct an Incisive Question, a tool of unbelievable precision and power.

Incisive Questions: removing untrue assumptions that limit our ability to think for ourselves well

PLACE
When the physical environment affirms our importance, we think more clearly and boldly
When our bodies are cared for and respected, our thinking improves

Thinking Environments are places that say back to people, ‘You matter.’ People think at their best when they notice that the place reflects their value to the people there and to the event.

And because the first place of thinking is the body, it needs to be in a condition that says to us as thinkers, ‘You matter’.

In these ways, Place is a silent form of appreciation.

Place: creating a physical environment that says back to people, ‘You matter’

Source:
https://www.timetothink.com/thinking-environment/the-ten-components/

WHAT MAKES A HIGH PERFORMING TEAM?

WHAT IS A TEAM?

Is it your peer-group of equals? Is it the people for whom your are the leader, manager, boss? Is it the community, club, clique, company, or profession to which you belong or identify?  This may be a simple answer, or you may find you have several relationships with different teams with similar or dissimilar aims, objectives and expectations. Example: You might be a member of the Accounts Team, the Leadership Team, the Change Team and feel pulled in different directions as a result.

I think that Seth Godin's book Tribe sets a neat way to encapsulate the key elements of a team, as a tribe.

A tribe is a group of people connected to one another, connected to a leader, and connected to an idea.
A group needs only two things to be a tribe: a shared interest and a way to communicate.
Tribes need leadership. Sometimes one person leads, sometimes more. People want connection and growth and something new. They want change.

It should be possible to create a tribe that has its own....

1. Stories and Myths
2. Rituals and Routines
3. Symbols
4. Control Systems
5. Organisation Structures
6. Power Structures

Be aware however that what unites a team (goal, values, location, education, profession culture) also divides or separate it from others. So whatever we do to unite against a foe, enemy, rival may create an unhealthy simplification, conflict and personalisation against the other team(s) even within the same organisation.  For example Microsoft versus Apple may be seen as healthy team rivalry but Sales and Marketing Team versus Compliance Team may not!

PICK THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND CULTIVATE DIVERSITY

Having 5 Accountants and nobody from IT, HR, Sales and Marketing, Operations, Compliance is bound to compromise the strength of the group. When two people always agree, one of them isn't necessary. So the strongest teams have diversity and some challenge, they can debate and reach consensus and play to each-others' strengths. This is the value of Belbin Team Types and a good mix of DISC or MBTI personality types.

Belbin Team Types

The Monitor Evaluator (thought-oriented)
The Specialist (thought-oriented)
The Plant (thought-oriented)
The Shaper (action-oriented)
The Implementer (action-oriented)
The Completer/Finisher (action-oriented)
The Coordinator (people-oriented)
The Team Worker (people-oriented)
The Resource Investigator (people-oriented)

MAKE THE TEAM THE RIGHT SIZE AND KEEP THEM CLOSE

We know from the Dunbar Number that small teams work well, and beyond a certain size teams will fragment into sub-teams. We also know that 5 people in a team have 10 relationships (each with each-other in various combinations) but 7 people in a team have 21 relationships. So it is clear smaller teams are better for communication, cohesion and collaboration. Add to this the Allen Curve that predicts that proximity is the key (you get on with people closest to you, and whom you see the most) and it is clear that team size and location (or connectedness) is critical

CREATE THE ENVIRONMENT WHERE SUCCESS IS INEVITABLE

I have long been a fan of the saying, "We create the environment where success is inevitable" which apparently was written on poolside where Adrian Moorhouse was training as an Olympic Swimmer, and which we has carried into his consulting business Lane4.

This motivated me when I was Athlete Representative for the 2014 Commonwealth Games. I started thinking about how do I create an environment where athletes can excel. I based my ideas around Robert Dilts model "I can do that here"

I – Is about me, myself, my core belief, my talent. (Individual)
Can – Is about capability, competence, and capacity. (Belief)
Do – Is about action, permission, freedom, responsibility. (Capability)
That – Is about values, culture and behaviour. (Behaviour)
Here – Is about place, environment and timing. (Environment)

My approach being that by setting up the right Environment (space, kit, sights, sounds, access, privacy) and modelling the right Behaviour (habits, routines, mottos, greetings, language) we can set-up the right conditions for people to focus on Capability (practice, drills, functions, supported by data, video, feedback) and Belief (coaching, mentoring, psychology). And all this will inform, support, nurture and liberate that person to be the very best they can.

CHECK PEOPLE HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO PERFORM

6 Questions to determine successful leadership: your job is to make sure that the answer to each of these questions is YES

I know what is expected of me at work
I have the materials and equipment I need to do my job right
I have the opportunity to do what I do best every-day
In the last 7 days I have received recognition or praise for doing good work
Someone at work encourages my development
At work, my opinions count

HELP PEOPLE BE AND STAY IN THE ZONE

In positive psychology, a flow state, also known colloquially as being in the zone, is the mental state in which a person performing some activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by the complete absorption in what one does, and a resulting transformation in one's sense of time. Schaffer (2013) proposed seven flow conditions:

Knowing what to do
Knowing how to do it
Knowing how well you are doing
Knowing where to go (if navigation is involved)
High perceived challenges
High perceived skills
Freedom from distractions


SO WHAT GOES WRONG? WHAT UNDERMINES A HIGH PERFORMING TEAM?

Absence of Trust: When team members are unable to show their weakness, resulting in being reluctant to be vulnerable and being open with one another. Team members will be afraid of admitting their mistakes and will be unwilling to ask for help.

Fear of Conflict: Lack of trust results in fear of conflict which in turn results in team members incapable of engaging in debates or openly voicing their opinions. The team completely avoids conflicts which results in inferior results.

Lack of Commitment: Fear of conflict results in lack of commitment. As team members have not bought into the decisions, they don’t feel committed to the same which resulting in an environment where ambiguity prevails.

Avoidance of Accountability: Lack of commitment results in team members not making each other accountable. If one has not bought into the decision, they won’t make their peers too accountable.

Inattention to Results: If the team members don’t feel accountable, they put their own needs [ego, recognition, career development etc.] ahead of the team goals. This results in team loosing sight and the company suffers.


IF THERE IS ONE MAGIC INGREDIENT - WHAT IS IT?

Google Spent Years Studying Effective Teams. What matters isn't so much who's on your team, but rather how the team works together. So what was the most important factor contributing to a team's effectiveness? It was psychological safety - TRUST

Google describes it this way: In a team with high psychological safety, teammates feel safe to take risks around their team members. They feel confident that no one on the team will embarrass or punish anyone else for admitting a mistake, asking a question, or offering a new idea.

Key Elements

1.    Listen first.
2.    Show empathy.
3.    Be authentic.
4.    Set the example.
5.    Be helpful.
6.    Disagree and commit.
7.    Be humble.
8.    Be transparent.
9.    Commend sincerely and specifically.

HOW BEST CAN YOU INTRODUCE TRUST

You can introduce psychological safety through Coaching and Mentoring. Creating a safe environment for people to think and feel. For people to express ideas and share thoughts. Coaching is a process that aims to improve performance and focuses on the 'here and now' rather than on the distant past or future. Good coaches believe that the individual always has ideas and opportunities to resolve whatever is holding them back but understands that they may need help to define their goals, set their path, and achieve their success. Coaching is about listening, reflecting, asking questions and unlocking people and teams potential.


Tim HJ Rogers MBA CITP
PROJECTS, PROGRAMMES and CHANGE /  CONSULTANT MENTOR COACH

Adapt Consulting Company
Consult CoCreate Deliver
Mob +447797762051 Tim@AdaptConsultingCompany.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/timhjrogers/
https://www.adaptconsultingcompany.com/


References

Flow
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)

Leadership Series - How To Create The Perfect Team And Circumstances For Project Success
https://adaptconsultingcompany.blogspot.com/2020/01/leadership-series-how-to-create-perfect.html

 Building Team Jersey – thoughts for Commonwealth Games 2014
https://projectspeoplechange.blogspot.com/2014/01/building-team-jersey-thoughts-for.html

Belbin Team Types
https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/belbin-team-roles

 DISC or MBTI personality types
 https://blog.discinsights.com/disc-profile-compared-to-the-myers-briggs-test
 
Allen Curve
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_curve

Group-size and Relationships
https://slideplayer.com/slide/7286963/24/images/15/Group+Size+and+Relationships.jpg

Dunbar Number
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number