Clarify Expectations
"Almost all conflict is a result of violated expectations." Blaine Lee
Do you agree?
The question is posed in this chapter, "How much 'poor performance' is really due to a lack of clarity around what is expected? And what is the effect of all of this on trust?" (p.193)
This trust-enducing behavior is based on the principles of clarity, responsibility and accountability. The opposite of clarifying expectations is to leave expectations undefined, assuming they are already known (or not having clarity on them yourself). There must be a shared vision of the desired outcome - and as we know from our leadership consultant friend Patrick Lencioni... communicate and over-communicate the desired outcome (mutual goals). You cannot over-communicate.
Remember, repetition is the mother of all learning, but there are other checks and balances to make sure that you are using the best communication method for the situation. If anyone is interested in this topic, let me know!
Does your team know what results are expected? Deadlines? Budget constraints? Expected behaviors on the job? Without accountability, all of our great education, communication, preparation, sales efforts, support structures and initial capital layout has gone to waste. The final results - including the excellent quality of those results - are too important not to clarify expectations.
Covey makes the very good point that communication is NOT easy. Just because you think you have communicated, doesn't mean you have. You may have just said something.
As Alan Greenspan so (clearly?) put it: “ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”
Why do we have to go to the trouble to clarify when we communicate? Because disappointed expectations are the underlying reason for most trust issues.
Marshall Thurber once said, "Clarity is power."
I found this point interesting, but not really surprising: The number one reason for unethical behavior at work is unrealistic expectations! The point is made that people have to be given the chance to push back against expectations in order to find a place that works from both points of view.
Covey's formula for clarifying expectations:
1) quantify everything! What results? By whom? By when? At what cost? How will we measure it?
2) honor the fast-cheap-right rule: You can usually pick TWO or else one will be compromised. Covey's proviso on this is that you can have all three only if you have high-trust! Something to think about!
Let's hear what you thought about this important behavior in teams!
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
BEHAVIOR #8 CONFRONT REALITY (pp. 185 - 191)
Confront Reality:
* Take issues head on, even the "undiscussables" (especially the un-discussables"?)
* Address the tough stuff directly.
* Acknowledge the unsaid.
* Lead out courageously in conversation
* Remove the "sword from their hands."
* Don't skirt the real issues
* Don't bury your head in the sand
To me, these admonitions are all one in the same: be courageous in conversation!
Confronting reality might be one of the hardest and most rewarding courageous acts of the leader.
In Jim Collins' seminal work Good to Great, he quotes U.S Admiral James Stockdale who gained true leader status as a POW in Vietnam: "You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end - which you can never afford to lose - with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."
Covey shares the story of Anne Mulcahy, CEO of Xerox, having to face hard decisions when debt was up, stock price and morale were down. She shut down a division, the changed the cost structure, resolved an accounting scandal (NBD, right?), and transitioned the product and service line. Mostly, she was admired for telling the unpopular truth. Of course, the opposite of CONFRONTING reality is to IGNORE reality - the path of least resistance, at least in the short-term.
When we do ignore the difficult issues, people see us in two ways:
1) lacking character or
2) lacking competence
I don't know about you, but I don't want my hard-won efforts to develop myself undermined because I was cowardly when facing hard issues. It's not worth the loss - or the net zero sum (they cancel each other out).
Confronting Reality does impact SPEED and COST. "First, it builds the kind of relationship that facilitate open interaction and fast achievement. Second, instead of having to wrestle with all the hard issues on your own while trying to pain a rosy picture for everyone else, you actually engage the creativity, capability, and synergy of others in solving those issues."
Popularity, comfort, saving face are all reasons why people don't confront reality. BUT, according to Covey, small problems only become big problems when not confront. Rip off the band-aid and do what you need to do, is the message. And we're reminded, we can confront reality and still never lose faith.
* Take issues head on, even the "undiscussables" (especially the un-discussables"?)
* Address the tough stuff directly.
* Acknowledge the unsaid.
* Lead out courageously in conversation
* Remove the "sword from their hands."
* Don't skirt the real issues
* Don't bury your head in the sand
To me, these admonitions are all one in the same: be courageous in conversation!
Confronting reality might be one of the hardest and most rewarding courageous acts of the leader.
In Jim Collins' seminal work Good to Great, he quotes U.S Admiral James Stockdale who gained true leader status as a POW in Vietnam: "You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end - which you can never afford to lose - with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."
Covey shares the story of Anne Mulcahy, CEO of Xerox, having to face hard decisions when debt was up, stock price and morale were down. She shut down a division, the changed the cost structure, resolved an accounting scandal (NBD, right?), and transitioned the product and service line. Mostly, she was admired for telling the unpopular truth. Of course, the opposite of CONFRONTING reality is to IGNORE reality - the path of least resistance, at least in the short-term.
When we do ignore the difficult issues, people see us in two ways:
1) lacking character or
2) lacking competence
I don't know about you, but I don't want my hard-won efforts to develop myself undermined because I was cowardly when facing hard issues. It's not worth the loss - or the net zero sum (they cancel each other out).
Confronting Reality does impact SPEED and COST. "First, it builds the kind of relationship that facilitate open interaction and fast achievement. Second, instead of having to wrestle with all the hard issues on your own while trying to pain a rosy picture for everyone else, you actually engage the creativity, capability, and synergy of others in solving those issues."
Popularity, comfort, saving face are all reasons why people don't confront reality. BUT, according to Covey, small problems only become big problems when not confront. Rip off the band-aid and do what you need to do, is the message. And we're reminded, we can confront reality and still never lose faith.
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
BEHAVIOR #7: GET BETTER (pp. 177 - 184)
This chapter is really the essence of what a growth mindset is all about...and incidentally, what the Ebco Learning Initiative is all about. We are seeking ways to be intentional about continuous learning at work, whether that is through learning practical skills or new ways of thinking and being that impact Ebco culture. I appreciate each of you that takes time to read, reflect and try out some of these recommendations from research and practitioners. Every small change can lead to big impact.
Alvin Toffler, American writer and futurist, is best known for his musing on how technology is changing the face of communication. He said, "The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn. You've got to think about big things while you're doing small things, so that all the small things go in the right direction. Knowledge is the most democratic source of power."
I love what Toffler implies about needing to continually reinvent ourselves. If you're like me, I feel like even keeping up to date in my industry is like trying to drink out of the firehose. Not only do we need to consume large amounts of information, we need to be considering how our skills meet the demands of the 21st century company. As soon as we rest, we are becoming outdated. I suspect you can each relate to this pressure!
Bryan Dodge emphatically challenged us to read and to read a lot. Covey agrees with this leadership practice. Jack Canfield (author of Chicken Soup for the Soul) is known to read one book a day! Bill Gates, Fred Smith and Mary Kay Ash have remained relevant throughout the course of long successful careers by staying current.
"'Get Better' is based on the principles of continuous improvement learning and change." (p. 178)
How are we doing as a learning organization?
I think there is a case for learning incidentally (as job challenges demand that we react and solve problems) as well as learning intentionally (setting aside time to think about particular areas of study and improvement that we should be learning). Is your personal learning strategy proactive or reactive?
This chapter brings us full circle to what we have already agreed is a critical component of becoming a highly effective organization: seeking feedback!
Covey states, "Seeking and effectively utilizing feedback are vital to quality improvement...Appropriately seeking feedback and acting on it is the hallmark of learning, growing, innovating company." (p. 181)
There are a few companies that have been implementing a cultural framework called DDO = the Deliberately Developmental Organization. They create structures and processes that make sure they are always challenging themselves from within and acting on the feedback they receive. You will remember that the Desire for Competence is one of the 8 core human motivators. These organizations are tapping into that desire to leverage the innate beauty of what people bring to work.
"Deep alignment with people's motive to grow means fashioning an organizational culture in which support to people's ongoing growth and development is woven into the daily fabric of working life, visible in the company's regular operations, day-to-day routines and conversations." (Kegan, Lahey, Miller, Marcus, Fleming). I am including a link to an insightful overview of this approach to organizational learning: http://www.vizenllc.com/wp content/uploads/2015/07/TheDeliberatelyDevelopmentalOrganization.pdf
Here are three principles related to the DDO approach:
Home - the secure environment that allows employees to communicate honestly.
If we are to become a veritable feedback-seeking culture, we have to create an environment where it is acceptable and common practice to give honest feedback. This is why we are examining the topic of trust in relationships.
Edge - the developmental changes that employees push each other to recognize & achieve.
For instance, one practice these organizations have is to continually rotate employees to different positions once they get comfortable. This is so counterintuitive, that we balk at creating intentional change. DDO's believe disruption promotes growth.
Groove - the range of practices that consistently reinforce the safety of "home" and the push toward the edge. Groove is institutionalizing processes that make continual change an every day part of the organization, not just a teaching or good idea or one-time speech by an executive. How are we ensuring that we hold ourselves accountable to getting better?
Learning from mistakes and encouraging risk-taking are natural parts of an organization that has adopted learning as a lifestyle. Mistakes are encouraged, not discouraged. As Covey says, "Most often, in fact, it is the failures that bring about the breakthroughs and insights...Smart leaders create an environment that makes it safe to make mistakes."
What about you? What do you take from this chapter?
Alvin Toffler, American writer and futurist, is best known for his musing on how technology is changing the face of communication. He said, "The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn. You've got to think about big things while you're doing small things, so that all the small things go in the right direction. Knowledge is the most democratic source of power."
I love what Toffler implies about needing to continually reinvent ourselves. If you're like me, I feel like even keeping up to date in my industry is like trying to drink out of the firehose. Not only do we need to consume large amounts of information, we need to be considering how our skills meet the demands of the 21st century company. As soon as we rest, we are becoming outdated. I suspect you can each relate to this pressure!
Bryan Dodge emphatically challenged us to read and to read a lot. Covey agrees with this leadership practice. Jack Canfield (author of Chicken Soup for the Soul) is known to read one book a day! Bill Gates, Fred Smith and Mary Kay Ash have remained relevant throughout the course of long successful careers by staying current.
"'Get Better' is based on the principles of continuous improvement learning and change." (p. 178)
How are we doing as a learning organization?
I think there is a case for learning incidentally (as job challenges demand that we react and solve problems) as well as learning intentionally (setting aside time to think about particular areas of study and improvement that we should be learning). Is your personal learning strategy proactive or reactive?
This chapter brings us full circle to what we have already agreed is a critical component of becoming a highly effective organization: seeking feedback!
Covey states, "Seeking and effectively utilizing feedback are vital to quality improvement...Appropriately seeking feedback and acting on it is the hallmark of learning, growing, innovating company." (p. 181)
There are a few companies that have been implementing a cultural framework called DDO = the Deliberately Developmental Organization. They create structures and processes that make sure they are always challenging themselves from within and acting on the feedback they receive. You will remember that the Desire for Competence is one of the 8 core human motivators. These organizations are tapping into that desire to leverage the innate beauty of what people bring to work.
"Deep alignment with people's motive to grow means fashioning an organizational culture in which support to people's ongoing growth and development is woven into the daily fabric of working life, visible in the company's regular operations, day-to-day routines and conversations." (Kegan, Lahey, Miller, Marcus, Fleming). I am including a link to an insightful overview of this approach to organizational learning: http://www.vizenllc.com/wp content/uploads/2015/07/TheDeliberatelyDevelopmentalOrganization.pdf
Here are three principles related to the DDO approach:
Home - the secure environment that allows employees to communicate honestly.
If we are to become a veritable feedback-seeking culture, we have to create an environment where it is acceptable and common practice to give honest feedback. This is why we are examining the topic of trust in relationships.
Edge - the developmental changes that employees push each other to recognize & achieve.
For instance, one practice these organizations have is to continually rotate employees to different positions once they get comfortable. This is so counterintuitive, that we balk at creating intentional change. DDO's believe disruption promotes growth.
Groove - the range of practices that consistently reinforce the safety of "home" and the push toward the edge. Groove is institutionalizing processes that make continual change an every day part of the organization, not just a teaching or good idea or one-time speech by an executive. How are we ensuring that we hold ourselves accountable to getting better?
Learning from mistakes and encouraging risk-taking are natural parts of an organization that has adopted learning as a lifestyle. Mistakes are encouraged, not discouraged. As Covey says, "Most often, in fact, it is the failures that bring about the breakthroughs and insights...Smart leaders create an environment that makes it safe to make mistakes."
What about you? What do you take from this chapter?
BEHAVIOR #6 DELIVER RESULTS (pp. 172 - 176)
And...we're back!
The next few behaviors are based on a leader's competence. For this week, we're reflecting on the ability to deliver results and getting better.
Delivering results may very well be the area of business activity that business owners fixate on more than any other. After all, if we are not setting and regularly achieving our intended goals, we are a business lost at sea. Covey makes the important distinction between "activity" and "results". And this is critical. In his experience, he learned to look for people who were "short on talk, long on delivery".
Covey gives the example of the business division of the Covey Leadership Center that was not really contributing revenue to the bottomline. He took a hard stance and set a difficult but achievable goal to make the division profitable within 6 months. However, after a bit of time, the team responsible for the results protested that the goal was unachievable. Covey did not waver. He held his ground and inspired his team to meet the stated goal. And they did!
Many times we need an outside force or entity to hold us to that higher standard of delivering results.
In some cases, we get fatigued from the number of problems we have and we dilute our energy across many goals so that none get accomplished. In other cases, we simply need the pressure of a deadline to force our brains to be more creative in solving problems. And in another case, (as Lencioni shared with us in ELI about his social influence theory) we simply need the pressure that others are watching and observing us and expecting us to produce.
And important point that Covey makes is his own personal definition of leadership = getting results in a way that inspires trust. With this qualifier, I think he would say that getting results at the expense of relationships or by compromising integrity is not appropriate. Insults, ignoring people or issues, coercion, lying, minimizing another person and other tactics may well get results - but not in a way that inspires trust.
Covey's summary of recommendations for this trust-building behavior:
* Establish a track record of results
* Get the right thing done (not just some things)
* Make things happen (be the change catalyst, take initiative and responsibility)
* Accomplish what you're hired to (be accountable to your job description, team, manager)
* Be on time and within budget (these are two standing constraints for all professionals)
* Don't over-promise and under-deliver
* Don't make excuses for not delivering results
What was significant to you in this section?
The next few behaviors are based on a leader's competence. For this week, we're reflecting on the ability to deliver results and getting better.
Delivering results may very well be the area of business activity that business owners fixate on more than any other. After all, if we are not setting and regularly achieving our intended goals, we are a business lost at sea. Covey makes the important distinction between "activity" and "results". And this is critical. In his experience, he learned to look for people who were "short on talk, long on delivery".
Covey gives the example of the business division of the Covey Leadership Center that was not really contributing revenue to the bottomline. He took a hard stance and set a difficult but achievable goal to make the division profitable within 6 months. However, after a bit of time, the team responsible for the results protested that the goal was unachievable. Covey did not waver. He held his ground and inspired his team to meet the stated goal. And they did!
Many times we need an outside force or entity to hold us to that higher standard of delivering results.
In some cases, we get fatigued from the number of problems we have and we dilute our energy across many goals so that none get accomplished. In other cases, we simply need the pressure of a deadline to force our brains to be more creative in solving problems. And in another case, (as Lencioni shared with us in ELI about his social influence theory) we simply need the pressure that others are watching and observing us and expecting us to produce.
And important point that Covey makes is his own personal definition of leadership = getting results in a way that inspires trust. With this qualifier, I think he would say that getting results at the expense of relationships or by compromising integrity is not appropriate. Insults, ignoring people or issues, coercion, lying, minimizing another person and other tactics may well get results - but not in a way that inspires trust.
Covey's summary of recommendations for this trust-building behavior:
* Establish a track record of results
* Get the right thing done (not just some things)
* Make things happen (be the change catalyst, take initiative and responsibility)
* Accomplish what you're hired to (be accountable to your job description, team, manager)
* Be on time and within budget (these are two standing constraints for all professionals)
* Don't over-promise and under-deliver
* Don't make excuses for not delivering results
What was significant to you in this section?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)