WEBSITE: neilbakerconsulting.com Phone: 206-855-1140 EMAIL: [email protected]Copyright Neil Baker M.D., 2017 NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D. Page1 Institute for Healthcare Improvement 29 th Annual National Forum Articles and References for Workshop D11/E11 Managing the Risks of Power in Shaping Culture December 13, 2017 You will receive a handout at the workshop with specific tips on using concepts and skills mentioned in these references in situations when you have more power or less power. To receive free monthly resources and links to tools for subscribers only, click on Subscribe. Page Self-Management Are you leading from reactivity?—four steps to see your blind spots 2 Ladder of Inference 4 A Key Barrier to Making Our Leadership Transformational 6 Lost in the Swamp?—Three ways to find your True North 8 Dialogue Active Telling—the art of assuring people listen to you 10 In-the-Moment Reminders for Dialogue, Checking Understanding, Active Listening, Active Telling 13 How to Coach When You Have No Time 17 Decision Making Are flaws in decision-making processes causing conflict and poor alignment?—a quick diagnostic 19 Feedback and Accountability An Easily Missed Ingredient for High Team Performance 21 Five Barriers to Feedback and High Team Performance 23 Vulnerability, Leadership, and Results 24 Selected References Influencing upwards 25 On Leadership, Empowerment, Followership, and Power 25
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e2
Are you leading from reactivity or creativity? four steps to see your blind spots
In this article you will learn about a four-step practice for a major leadership challenge—seeing our own contribution to problems. I discovered this challenge in my first leadership position supervising a staff of doctors and nurses at a hospital. I was confident, having been
hired because of my skills developing teams. But, shortly after I started, the team began struggling with what I call “reactivity”—behaviors counterproductive for goals and collaboration. Examples included people getting stuck in arguments or withdrawing from communication in frustration. Also, conflict was provoked by people leaping to conclusions rather than checking things out with each other. The image on this page shows behaviors that are likely to be reactive along with behaviors more associated with creative and productive teamwork.
An unexpected cause of problems What I failed to see was my contribution to the problems by my frequently asserting strong views while quickly negating other opinions. Also, I would all too often leap to judgment and criticize the staff. When I finally realized the doctors and nurses were mainly angry and unhappy with me, I was shaken and worried about failing. Luckily, I discovered the work of the psychologist Albert Ellis.(1) He observed that all of us will, at times, become reactive and act in ways counter to our own goals and values. Neuroscience offers a helpful explanation for this normal but illogical behavior. Early in our evolution, brain centers developed which, for survival, make lightning fast assessments of the environment leading to flight or fight reactions. In modern times, even minor stress can activate these same pathways causing leaps to biased, faulty conclusions and emotions which drive reactive behaviors. This happens automatically and out of awareness. Since we can be blind to our reactivity, countering these tendencies requires conscious effort. We can’t rely on having previously mastered communication skills.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e3
Based on research and experience, I have developed a four-step practice to check for our own reactivity before and after key interactions. Through this process, we get better at catching ourselves in reactivity in-the-moment. At the end of this article you will find a set of questions for guidance through the steps.
1. The first step is recognizing our personal signs of reactivity. While knowing common indicators of reactivity helps, it takes time to connect them to our personal experience. Remember, this is about learning to see our blind spots. In that first leadership position, I gradually learned I am at high risk for reactive behaviors when I feel very certain about an idea along with an urgency to convince others.
2. The second step helps counter such an urge to action by pausing to remind ourselves of our goals and the type of teamwork we want to create. This invites our best skills and creativity to emerge.
3. The third step is to move out of judgment by trying to understand others with empathy. 4. Finally, we prepare for conversations by suspending certainty about our views and being
curious about what others have to say even if we disagree.
Using such practices with my hospital team, I learned to pause when I felt my tell-tale certainty and urgency. Then, I would remind myself of my desire for participatory teamwork. Usually my first action, instead of asserting my ideas, would then be to invite discussion and listen. When I eventually did express my views, I found I was less intense and provoked much less reactivity in others. After three years, I was one of the highest rated leaders in the hospital and teamwork was greatly improved. This process may sound straightforward or even easy now. But it was hard work and I have not yet cured myself of my reactivity. No one can. But we are in good company--the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman said that after a lifetime studying psychology he is still prone to reactive thinking with overconfidence and biases.(2) Even so, steady practice diminishes the frequency, intensity, and duration of our reactive behaviors.
Tapping into our own and others’ best skills Accepting reactivity as normal allows a reinterpretation of team problems. What looks like lack of skills or personality issues is more likely a reaction to stress. Better skills are usually there to tap into. The key is finding the courage to first look at our own contribution to problems with compassion.
A Four-Step Practice—Guiding Questions
1. Recognize reactivity.
How am I/are others in reactivity? (Consider thoughts, feelings, behaviors.)
What are the triggers?
How have I and they leapt to assumptions, judgment, blame, or interpretations?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e4
Where am I holding on to certainty about my views?
How am I contributing to the problem(s)?
2. Clarify your intentions for results and relationships.
What are my business/quality vision and goals? For the situation. For my next conversation in this situation.
What kind of relationship(s) am I trying to build? For the situation. For my next conversation in this situation.
3. Get in their shoes.
Why would well-intentioned, reasonable people act this way?
4. Prepare for dialogue.
Am I ready to let go of certainty that there is one way of looking at things?
Am I ready to both state my perceptions AND be curious about and seek out what others have to say?
Have I reframed my goals and intentions in a way that can promote dialogue?
Have I reviewed how roles and power differences may impact dialogue and decision making?
Am I prepared to be unconditionally constructive? References
1. Ellis, Albert The Road to Tolerance Prometheus Books 2004 2. Kahneman, Daniel Thinking Fast and Slow Farrar, Straus and Giroux 2011
Ladder of Inference
As humans, we are hard-wired to leap to assumptions in ways which create tension with others, especially under the pressure of stress and complex problems. This hard-wiring derives from ancient parts of the brain which evolved early on to generate automatic survival reactions--flight, fight, or freeze.
Difficulties in modern social situations can activate these pathways and drive us in
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e5
nanoseconds, outside of our awareness, to faulty interpretations not infrequently accompanied by strong emotions. This happens to everyone. We cannot stop our brains from this quick process. But, we can modify it. One way is through stopping, even for a few seconds, to observe the mind. The Ladder of Inference (1, 2) is a tool to make visual these rapid movements of the mind and help us pause for reflection before we take action. The bottom rung of the ladder represents all the observable data in a situation. Our hard-wiring leads to rapid selection of part of the data, then "up the ladder" to judgments or assumptions, and finally to conclusions and action at the highest rung. Such actions are at risk for being unproductive or counterproductive for work relationships and problem solving. The Ladder can be divided into as many as 7 or more steps to represent schematically the brain's information processing. There is not one right number of steps. I use four because that is all I can remember in the midst of conflict which is when I use the tool to mentally orient myself. In the example shown above, my brain causes me to get very negative about a colleague, Chris.
At the bottom rung is all observable data I could consider from my working relationship with Chris or even just for this one day.
At the next higher rung, the brain selects data out of this pool. This day, Chris is late to a meeting and does not apologize. Because this has happened before and/or because I am particularly sensitive that day, my brain immediately focuses on that one piece of data.
From selected data, the brain moves to judgments, assumptions, and opinions--i.e. making meaning out of the selected data. In this case, I assume Chris is totally disengaged and not committed to the team.
At the highest point of the ladder are conclusions and actions. I am gripped by my interpretations to the point that I don't think I can work with Chris. Or, I might withdraw from him, disrupting the flow of work between us. Or I might publicly attack him for his "bad attitude" (an interpretation which has not been checked out).
If we keep the ladder in mind in the midst of conversations, we can step back to observe our own thinking. We can shift to asking ourselves questions which move our thinking back to data and experience opening us to more choices for communication and action. We can ask:
What am I thinking? What interpretations and judgments have I made? On what data am I basing these conclusions? What is my reasoning? What other data am I not considering? What else could be going on? What other interpretations are possible here?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e6
I can then use these same questions with others if I sense they have moved up the ladder. Research from Gervase Bushe (3) suggests that about 80% of conflicts at work occur because people have not checked out their experiences with each other--i.e. moving down the ladder with each other to share observed data and experience. When such sharing does occur, the conflict often either goes away or the issues are entirely different from what was expected. Though simple in concept, asking questions and sharing experience in this way can be demanding because we may be gripped by strong emotion or the stakes may feel high or we might have a strong need to be "right" at that moment. Then it can be hard to own our contribution to the tension. Slowing down to reflect can require a good deal of self-regulation of emotion and thought. The Ladder of Inference reminds us to treat our strongest conclusions as just theories to be tested. Our first conclusions are all too likely to put us at risk for becoming part of the problem. References
1. Attributed to Chris Argyris and Donald Schon. See a brief history of the development of the Ladder of Inference in Smith, Diana Mclain The Elephant in the Room 2011, pgs. 275 - 276
2. Thanks to the American Academy on Communication in Healthcare for the Ladder of Inference image.
3. Bushe, Gervase Clear Leadership, Davies-Black, Nicholas Brealey Publishing 2010
A Key Barrier to Making Our Leadership Transformational
An executive in a recent workshop I led pulled me aside to privately say: “I know I need to reflect on the way I am thinking, feeling, and acting to be a better leader but I don’t know how.”
I was taken aback by his honesty. This was clearly hard for him to reveal. He chose not to ask in front of the group. Reflection seems so straightforward. But is it?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e7
It turns out the executive who pulled me aside is not alone. Of 420 healthcare leaders I surveyed at talks on leadership, almost all indicated they face one or more barriers to reflection. Two of the most common, each checked by nearly half of the leaders, were “uncertainty about how to do it well” and “lack of time.” The majority of written comments were about struggles with prioritizing and taking the time for reflection. Some of this was attributed to being “caught up” in issues such as “lack of trust in the organization” or “lack of political capital to get anything done.” One leader attributed his difficulty reflecting to “weakness.” Another wrote that it is “hard to change habits.”
What brain science says about reflection… At the heart of things, creating a reflective practice is creating a new habit. We all know changing habits like diet and exercise is hard. But I think reflection is much harder. In reflecting, we work to shift from being “caught up” in our thoughts and feelings to looking at them to expand our understanding of situations and open to more creative and effective options. Brain science has indicated that experiential information we take in is coupled to automatic, habitual ways of explaining events. Our brains are hard-wired for us to leap to conclusions from limited data in nanoseconds. It takes work to “decouple” ourselves from such automatic processes. But, even brief reflection such as taking 15 minutes to write down lessons learned from experience can yield more objective understanding of events and better options. (1 – 2)
Hard-wired to avoid transformation Transformation involves getting to new perspectives. Because our brain hard-wiring can easily trap us into biased conclusions, we benefit from developing a regular practice of questioning our own thoughts. This is not easy for the ego. It is humbling. The tendency is to jump quickly to feeling “right” rather than leaving ourselves open to uncertainty. Think about how easy, common, and seductive it is to be sure other people are “the problem” rather than looking at our own contribution to problems.
Missing the true level of our accomplishments Another challenge is that our automatic responses can make it surprisingly easy to miss the true level of success we have had. Seeing our successes accurately is crucial to changing habits. For example, in the middle of a longer conversation, almost as an aside, a leader mentioned she had resolved a conflict with a team. I said “Wait! At the start of this conflict, what would you have estimated for the chances of achieving this level of success?” She replied “No more than a 20% chance.” Suddenly, this event became one worth reflecting on. How did she pull this off?
Three steps forward you can take right now I guarantee you have already had multiple experiences of “decoupling” yourself from automatic thinking. The challenge is to turn such experience into an intentional and systematic practice.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e8
There is no way around carving out time. But, you can start small. For example, carve out one half-hour a week to reflect on a past or current situation. Next, start trying out a consistent set of questions for guidance. Be willing to change them over time to find out what works for you. Here is a quick set to work from: What happened?; What were my thoughts, feelings, and actions?; What did I do that was helpful and unhelpful?; Where did I leap to conclusions?; How did I contribute to the problems?; What options might I consider?; What will I try next?; What do I hope to accomplish? Finally, be sure to keep the goals for actions small to build confidence. For that leader who resolved the team conflict, her first step was to simply listen to the team and explore their concerns. That was transformational for her instead of needing a solution in one meeting.
Consider engaging an extra set of neurons The journey of developing a reflective practice also benefits from episodes of coaching and consultation. In the wild complexity of organizational life, two brains can sometimes be better than one.
References
1. Di Stefano, Giada et al Learning by Thinking: How Reflection Aids Performance, Harvard Business School Working Paper 14-093, March 25, 2014
2. Siegel, Daniel J. Mindfulness training and neural integration: differentiation of distinct streams of awareness and the cultivation of well-being, SCAN 2, 2007
Lost in the Swamp?—Three ways to find your True North.
At one of my recent leadership workshops, a participant said: “When I came here I felt my problems were unsolvable. Now, I see solutions to try.” What happened is that she had gotten lost in The Swamp of everyday complexity, volatility, uncertainty, unexpected crises, and a million items on her to-do list.
In organizations, this can happen to anyone at any time. The stress of The Swamp tends to narrow and constrict our thinking. Problems can feel impossible. Or, the solutions we do come up with seem driven by pressures of the moment and don’t feel quite right.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e9
It is common for leaders to feel at such times like they lack sufficient knowledge and skills. But, I find leaders almost always know a good deal about what to do; however, their knowledge is obscured within the entangled vines and mud of the swamplands. The first step is to let go of the push for solutions and look for their own personal “True North” for guidance. For all of us, finding True North involves clarifying ways of doing things (our principles and values) that feel most important to us--what we care most about--in a certain situation. Once we find this True North, creative solutions start to flow. Below are three methods to get back in touch with True North. The methods work best when done with a colleague or coach who is not caught up in the situation.
1. Nine Whys (1)
Ask "Why is that important to you?" around five to nine times consecutively. Example A manager of a staff working on financial reports for outside clients came to me very frustrated. His staff kept missing due dates. He felt trapped into being a micro-manager or giving corrective actions. But neither action seemed right to him. When first asked why due dates were so important, he said “so the reports get done on time.” To the second “why,” he said “to make the clients happy.” At about the ninth "why," he found what he cared about most—enabling sufficient time to discuss reports to assure learning and development for staff and clients. Instead of feeling trapped, he was inspired to talk with his staff about this vision and ways to make it happen--including due dates.
2. Put yourself in their shoes and ask “How would I want to be treated?” This method is particularly useful for feedback and performance management situations. Example An executive felt pressured by her senior leaders to fire one of her managers who was making everyone feel very frustrated. Her impulse was to just get rid of him but she did not feel quite right about it. By asking how she would want to be treated if she were the manager, she was able to quickly identify what she cared most about—what a value-driven performance management process would look like. She could then easily see that the manager had not received explicit feedback and there had been no plan or timeline for making changes. She felt strongly she needed to develop a rigorous feedback process with a timeline before considering termination. Also, she felt confident presenting this plan to her senior leaders.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e10
Being lost in The Swamp commonly gets us into complaining about people. It is hard to feel good about actions coming out of that state. But, behind complaints is a lot of passion that means we are highly committed to something. The task is to find that underlying, positive commitment. Example An executive was quite angry that her boss made a decision which cut money from her budget. He had informed her via email. The only options she could see were to quit, tell him off, or just push down her feelings and accept the situation. None of these options felt very good to her. By reframing her reactions into positive commitments, she could see how much she cared about involving people for input prior to making decisions whenever possible and talking in person. She also rediscovered her strong commitment to not assuming bad intentions--e.g. attributing to her boss the intention to be disrespectful--just because she felt badly. This helped to calm her anger. Grounded in these principles, she felt able to enter into a nonjudgmental, mutual conversation rather than just venting anger. She planned to talk to her boss to find out how he came to the decision. If this went well, she would ask if he was willing to get her input in the future about decisions which impacted her directly.
Our True North never really goes away. Our True North is always there. It just gets repeatedly obscured by day-to-day work pressures. By consistent practice, we can gradually improve our ability to rediscover the True North which helps us create strategies to navigate the inevitable swamplands of organizational life. References (1) From Keith McCandless and Henri Lipmanowicz Liberating Structures 2014 (2) From Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey in How We Talk Can Change the Way We Work 2002
.
Active Telling: the art of assuring people listen to you
The worst mistakes I made over 24 years as an organizational leader were how I told things to people. I know excellent leadership depends on great listening—I was a natural with that. Each moment of listening is a step forward in building commitment.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e11
But, early in my career, my way of telling too often led to pushback or withdrawal into silence—it was like three steps backwards with commitment.
A recipe for people not really listening At that time, my strong need for success led to a need to convince people of my ideas. So, I worked hard to present ideas in a powerful and inspirational way, minimizing weaknesses and flaws. I was well-prepared to quickly counter any perceived limitations or risks. The trouble was that people almost always had concerns—few organizational actions are risk-free. Too often, my quick retorts made them feel not listened to. This would provoke debate we could not resolve well or silent discontent which slowed or blocked the actions I wanted.
A paradox of skillful telling As I sought research and advice about telling, I discovered that even the most inspirational speech is lucky if it gets even 20% of people on board! (1) The large majority of people have to talk their way toward commitment in multiple conversations. Paradoxically, people are more likely to pull together around an idea if they are able to freely express and explore concerns. Also, people need to be able to talk things over to figure out how an idea connects to what is important to them. I even had to face the humbling reality that my best ideas had holes and flaws. In complex systems, no one person has the full picture and everyone has a perspective to learn from. It was very hard, but I gradually learned to link success with actually seeking out negative reactions.
A method for skillful telling To tell effectively I first prepare myself by remembering “My best ideas are just theories to be tested and improved upon.” Then I proceed with a cycle of Ask-Tell-Ask (2):
• Ask: In a way appropriate to the situation, I ask permission to give my point of view. This is surprisingly powerful in facilitating openness and I have never had anyone refuse.
• Tell: I am careful to use "I" statements (i.e. "This is the way I am seeing things." as opposed to "This is the way things are.")--another very simple but powerful method to convey there is not One Truth and that I will be interested in any reactions.
• Ask: I ask people what they heard me say through some form of summarizing or repeating back. Because this can feel awkward, I may explain how easy it is for us all to misinterpret each other. Also, I ask for reactions and summarize what I heard.
Several cycles of Ask-Tell-Ask get a lot out on the table. People are more likely to feel taken seriously. Concerns can get then converted into issues for problem solving and action.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e12
I call this approach active telling because, like active listening, it is two-way—the goal is to assure mutual understanding and exploration of ideas even if there is disagreement. I have experienced first-hand several risks and traps. Watch out for the inevitable lure back into convincing others. Also, I have learned to be careful that helping others feel heard does not lead to premature abandonment or revision of my ideas. The reverse can happen--dealing with negativity can easily pull us all, at times, into getting more rigid and discounting feedback. Human affairs are never perfect. There is no guarantee these methods mean people will really listen to you. But, the chances for getting to true commitment are much higher. References (1) Baker, Neil The Impact of a Visionary Speech. (2) Adapted from multiple sources including Miller, William R., Rollnick, Stephen Motivational
Interviewing The Guilford Press 2012. See the tool on active telling for full list of references.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e13
In-the-Moment Reminder for Dialogue
Adapted and synthesized from: Fisher, Roger et al Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In 2011; Isaacs Dialogue: the art of thinking together 1999; Patterson et al Crucial Conversations 2002; Stone et al Difficult Conversations 1999; Yankelovich The Magic of Dialogue: transforming conflict into cooperation 1999
Definition A conversation designed to set aside coming to decisions, answers, or final solutions in order to:
discover what is important to each participant; find mutual definitions of problems, mutual goals, creative solutions, and shared
commitment for action; maintain feedback about what is working and not working in teamwork and
communication.
Key methods
Use cycles of active listening, active telling, and checking understanding. Explore complex issues by getting many points of view on the table. Assure wide, balanced participation.
• View and explore disagreements together, not debate them (agree to disagree).
• Mutually explore the data and observations which are the basis for viewpoints.
• Suspend certainty about right vs. wrong.
• Sustain a perspective of mutual contribution to problems as opposed to blame.
Patterns which can undermine dialogue • Sequential telling (e.g. idea after idea) without checking for understanding. • Silence among some participants. • Arguing for or against, right or wrong--defending views instead of mutually exploring. • Jumping to decisions early without sufficient time for exchange of views. • Excluding certain positions from discussion. • Those with authority dominating the conversation and not soliciting differing opinions. • Those without authority falling into silence or aggressively pushing viewpoints.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e14
In-the-Moment Reminder for Checking Understanding Note: Understanding the Ladder of Inference is recommended.
See the brief article: The Ladder of Inference.
To check understanding, use powerful questions.
Definitions of powerful questions and examples
A selection of powerful questions for multiple different situations can be found at Questions that drive change.
Criteria for powerful questions from John Whitmore Coaching for Performance 2009: o Powerful questions…
…elicit a higher order awareness than usual. ...are descriptive vs. judgmental. ...are open vs. closed. ...use what, where, when, how often, how many, who as opposed to why.
Criteria from Marilee Adams Change Your Questions, Change your Life 2009: o Powerful questions come from a learner stance and facilitate learning.
What are the facts? What outcomes do I want? What is possible? What responsibilities do I and others have? Am I coming from a judger place?
o Questions that come from a judger stance impede learning. How can I prove I am right? Who is at fault? What’s wrong? What’s wrong with me? What’s wrong with them?
Powerful questions to check understanding with active telling
Can you tell me what you heard me say?
What am I missing? Where could I be wrong?
Does my reasoning make sense?
What different or opposing views do you have?
Powerful questions to check understanding with active listening Here is what I heard you say. Did I get that right?
What observations and assumptions are you basing that on?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e15
In-the-Moment Reminder for Active Listening Definition of active listening Listening that focuses attention on the speaker and assures that the speaker feels understood.
Key methods • Be like a journalist: ask who, what, where, how, when, how often (avoid "why"). • Repeat back, reflect back, teach back, paraphrase, summarize. Ask "Did I get that right?" • Ask about feelings. Empathize. • Provide appreciation for the way they have met challenges. • Offer positive regard and respect. • Validate and legitimize concerns and feelings (e.g. “Anyone would feel that way in this
circumstance.”). • Help the speaker to put his/her best case forward even if you disagree. • Ask questions to explore the data and observations on which conclusions are based.
Key barriers and traps • Quickly offering one’s own opinions, feelings, agenda, experiences. • Judging or assuming bad or negative intentions without checking them out. • Avoiding sensitive topics. • Jumping to solutions.
Listener thoughts which impact active listening Adapted from: Schein, Edgar Helping Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc. 2011; Whitworth, Laura, Kimsey-House, Henry, Sardahl, Phil Co-active Coaching Jaico Publishing House, 1999
Listener thoughts which can interfere with active listening
adapted from Whitworth et al
Listener thoughts which facilitate active listening
adapted from Whitworth et al and Schein
What am I concerned about? What are my goals? What is my agenda? What do I think the person should do? What would I do in this situation? What advice should I give? What do I feel? What effect is the speaker having on me?
What is the speaker concerned about? What are the speaker's goals and agenda? What does the speaker think he/she should do? What options is the speaker thinking about? Is the speaker ready to act? In what ways? What does the speaker feel? What effect am I having on the speaker?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e16
In-the-Moment Reminder for Active Telling Adapted from Isaacs Dialogue: the art of thinking together 1999; Miller et al Motivational Interviewing 2000; Patterson et al Crucial Conversations 2002; Stone et al Difficult Conversations 1999.
Definition Telling that assures the speaker is understood and minimizes defensiveness and/or withdrawal.
Key methods (For more details, see Active Telling: the art of assuring people listen to you.) • Use the cycle of Ask-Tell-Ask.
– Ask permission to give your point of view. – Tell using "I" statements (i.e. "This is the way I am seeing things." as opposed to
"This is the way things are." Avoid presenting ideas as the one truth.) – Ask listeners to repeat/teach back to check understanding and for reactions and
concerns. • Additional tips:
– Share the basis of your perceptions: specific words, behaviors, and data. – Ask for questions to assure listeners understand the rationale for your ideas. – Elicit and acknowledge negative feelings about your views. – Seek differing and opposing views.
Key barriers and traps • Exaggerating by using strong terms such as "always" or "never." • Abandoning or revising positions to placate or win over others. • Rigidly holding onto positions and not incorporating accurate and important feedback. • Assuming negative or bad intentions of others instead of asking about them. • Trying to control the discussion, persuade, or win an argument.
Thoughts which impact active telling
Thoughts which can interfere Thoughts which can facilitate
I have to get them to decide. This is easy to understand. I do not need to check understanding. They should just get this. This is the way things are. I am right. If people express negative feelings about my ideas, I will lose. No one has anything to teach me. I have to minimize weaknesses and flaws in my position if I am to win the argument.
They have to choose. I help put all the data and reasoning on the table. What seems easy to understand can be easily misunderstood. I need to check understanding. This is the way I am seeing things. Each person can only know a piece of the reality in a complex system. People are more likely to pull together if they are able to express negative feelings. Everyone in the room has an important perspective from which I can learn. I must ask others for strengths and limitations of my position if we are to get the best solution.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e17
How To Coach When There Is No Time
In this article you will learn why coaching is so important to effective leadership and how to coach when it feels like there is No Time. John Whitmore in his book Coaching for Performance defines coaching as “unlocking people’s potential to maximize their own performance.”
Fulfilling potential requires that people work because of intrinsic motivation—when they come to a task because they have enthusiasm for it, because it is important to them, and not out of compliance with someone else’s direction. Intrinsic motivation is also facilitated by bringing one’s own ideas to a situation.
The heart of coaching This is why the heart of coaching is asking questions—an astonishingly simple but very powerful method. After all, only through asking questions can we know what is important to others and what ideas they have for taking action. This very simple approach is incredibly difficult to pull off regularly and effectively due to the stress and complexity of work. These factors quite often narrow range of thinking and diminish creativity and genuine curiosity in everyone. This leads to a strong tendency to just want to get to the answers or just give direction. Also, our diminished creative powers can make it feel that any benefits from the type of exploration that is part of coaching will require a lot of time. In fact, any time you can take to ask people questions instead of giving direction—even for five or ten minutes—will raise the chances for increased motivation and engagement.
Tips for when there is No Time Here are tips to keep in mind when you feel there is No Time and your impulse is to provide answers.
1. Create a habit prior to meetings of checking on your sense of pressure. Remind yourself of your desire to maximize other’s potential.
2. Keep in mind a simple series of steps to guide rather than direct problem solving through asking questions. My sequence of steps are to ask about:
a. the current state or problem; b. the desired state or goals; c. options for action—expanding beyond one option to 3 or 4 helps with creativity; d. and what option will be chosen for action.
The emphasis with others is on their goals, their ideas, and their choices of action.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e18
When time is very limited, you can focus on just one part of the problem solving approach. For example, just ask questions about the current state and then ask the person to come back later with thoughts on their goals and a couple of options. I also keep in mind a few questions about intrinsic motivation that can facilitate engagement in problem solving. For example, when exploring the desired state or goals, I might ask “What would you be most enthusiastic about accomplishing here?” You can obtain a tool to help with this coaching process along with additional questions by following the instructions below. Of course, there are times you have to provide direction instead of coaching but there are different ways to do that which can facilitate or inhibit future efforts at coaching. For more information, see the article on Active Telling.
Enable creativity to emerge The good news here is that the time pressures and stress of work tend to have such a strong negative impact on creative thinking that just taking time to ask a few questions can be surprisingly effective in helping others to bring forth their best thinking. Reference Whitmore, John Coaching for Performance Nicholas Brealey Publishing 2009 Questions Tool for Coaching Obtain the tool by subscribing for free monthly articles at Subscribe. On subscribing you will receive a link to a page for subscribers only with a variety of tools including this one on coaching. You may unsubscribe at any time.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e19
Are flaws in decision-making processes causing conflict and poor alignment?—a quick diagnostic
Barriers to progress like lack of alignment or conflict that are difficult to resolve are fairly common. One seemingly quite logical interpretation is that the primary cause of such barriers is the way people are communicating. But, problematic communication could be secondary to--a result of--flaws in decision-making processes. Such flaws may not be recognized as an important source of relational
problems. When people then dive into discussions, they are at risk for having unexpressed concerns, differing views, and assumptions about how decisions will be made. As a result, it is more difficult to sustain dialogue—a process of eliciting and assuring mutual understanding of differing ideas, opinions, and perceptions. Instead, due to the prevailing uncertainties, people are more likely to fall into debates, arm-twisting, coaxing, and pressuring which disrupt efforts to achieve alignment. Identifying flaws in decision making and doing something about them can help significantly to shift a murky, entangled debate into a clear, effective process of dialogue. Common decision-making errors include lack of clarity about: who has the authority to make the call; the type of decision being used; whether there will be input before and after decisions are made in order to address concerns; or if those impacted will be involved in the design of the implementation plan. A quick diagnostic for flaws in decision making process (to support high quality dialogue):
In this situation, is it clear who (person or group) has the authority to make the decision?
Has that person or group identified the type of decision making to be used? (see brief descriptions below)
Is there a clear timeline for the decision? Do people who are impacted and those who can contribute expertise have
opportunities to give input? Have they been involved in creating a mutual definition of the problem?
Has there been high quality dialogue prior to the decision with consideration of different options and the benefits and risks of each?
Will there be opportunity to express reactions and address concerns about a decision after it is made?
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e20
Will people be involved in designing the implementation plan for the decision? Will the person or group who made the decision engage in regular review of the quality,
clarity, and effectiveness of decision-making processes?
Types of decision making: (1) The following two decision types mesh best with the objective of promoting high quality dialogue.
In consultative decisions, a leader with the authority to do so makes the call after obtaining input through dialogue from those who will be impacted and those who have key knowledge and expertise.
In consensus, a group of people make the call together. Consensus does not mean that the decision is everyone’s first choice but that everyone can live with the decision and commit fully to its success.
Additional decision types:
In authoritative decision making, a leader with authority makes the decision without input. Dialogue about the decision after it is made is crucial to promote alignment and participation in implementation.
Majority vote decision making, except where required in by-laws, is not generally recommended except in decisions of low importance (e.g. “Will we have lunch during the meeting?”)
Maintaining high quality dialogue while also maintaining clarity and quality of decision making processes is an important and nuanced balancing act. It takes art, skill, and ongoing, deliberate practice by individual leaders and by teams. Reference (1) Special thanks to Robert Crosby. See his book Walking the Empowerment Tightrope 1992.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e21
An Easily Missed Ingredient for High Team Performance.
One of the worst teams I’ve been part of was comprised of experts on facilitating teams. Our meetings were chaotic and unproductive as some experts got into intense debates without really listening to each other while some fell into silence. I am embarrassed to say I participated in the mess. When we finally stopped to actually apply our
team expertise to ourselves, we transformed and had great results. We did not eliminate all problems but we managed them much better.
What helped most in turning this team of experts around? It became clear to us that we had overlooked defining and using team norms. Norms are ground rules or guidelines for how members communicate and behave with each other—like really listening to each other, exploring ideas instead of debating them, giving feedback without blame, assuring everyone’s involvement, and being clear about how decisions will be made. Even if, like my experts, team members bring a lot of prior experience with norms, every team has to create them yet again. Norms gain their power through development in conversation.
Why are team guidelines about communication and behavior so important? Team which do not define and use norms are at higher risk for falling into mediocre performance or failure. In a study of 120 senior leadership teams, only 21% were high performing and the factor most strongly associated with high performance was clarity and use of team norms—not brilliance in things like strategy, quality, or efficiency.(1) Defining and using norms leads to better communication, problem solving, and conflict resolution all of which lead to both better results and higher quality work relationships. The latter enhances sustainability and team resilience.
Why is it so easy to overlook establishing adequate team norms?
Norms seem so basic and simple. For my team of experts, needing to create and apply norms felt like being demoted from grad school to grade school. But, impressive credentials don’t protect anyone from the way our brains are hard-wired. At times, in anyone, stress activates ancient brain pathways for survival—for flight or flight. Socially, such activation may lead to strong emotions and fixed opinions or withdrawal into silence. Norms remind us we are human and we all make mistakes.
Teams with problems can appear to be doing just fine.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e22
Not all teams are like my team of experts in which lack of sufficient norms led to “noisy” signs like difficult conflict. It is not uncommon to see teams claim in meetings that they are getting along just fine. But, there are hallway conversations outside of meetings with complaining about problems that never get adequately addressed or about people some members feel are not behaving well. Yet these concerns are not raised in meetings. This is exactly what guidelines for communication and behavior should be designed to address.
Developing and using team norms is like learning a new language. People have less confidence and experience talking about communication and behavior compared to technical issues like strategy or quality. Developing and using norms takes practice and trial and error as a team. In particular, it takes time and practice to define norms with enough behavioral specificity so that people can check to see if they are being followed. For example, compare “We need to feel safe.” to “When someone offers an idea we will always check understanding to make sure they feel heard.” Or, “When we give feedback we will avoid negative labels and be specific about the situation and behaviors we have observed. We will own observations as perceptions and not The Truth and check out each other’s perceptions.”
Ongoing feedback is required for making progress and it is uncomfortable. Some teams, like my team of experts, turn around very quickly once they define and use norms. More often it takes ongoing feedback to steadily improve alignment of communication and behavior with those norms. Naturally, this raises concerns about embarrassment--feedback is uncomfortable. But it gets less so with steady and frequent practice. Feedback is facilitated by making explicitly clear that it is not about “bad behavior.” Getting off track from norms can happen to anyone at any time no matter how long a team has worked together. Feedback is about helping people be at their best. Leaders help greatly by modeling feedback including inviting it about themselves.
Changing habits of behavior is hard. Team norms are not useful unless they are used. And that requires changing habits which is usually hard no matter how simple the new behaviors seem to be. For example, in my team of experts, we had to work hard to assure time at the end of meetings to ask: “What is working and not working in our communication based on our norms?” Also, we had to work to remember to check in during meetings to ask about specific norms--e.g. “Do you feel heard?”
Transform team problems into learning and creativity. Strong evidence links quality of team experience to better results, resilience, and sustainability. Norms are the rudder to maintain the desired team experience. I am humbled by how easy it is, even for experts, to neglect norms. By remembering this aspect of our humanness, I am better at helping myself and others transform team problems into learning and creativity.
Get the resource In-the-Moment Reminder for Team Norms by subscribing for free monthly resources at Subscribe.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e23
Five Barriers to Feedback and High Capacity for Transformation
A common concern of even very successful leaders I work with is lack of sufficient confidence about giving and receiving feedback in the midst of day-to-day work. This is not surprising because feedback is inherently uncomfortable and risky. But, timely effective feedback is unavoidable if we are after the highest team capacity for transformation. Confidence in taking this on is enhanced by working with the following five barriers.
1. Lack of a motivating, compassionate purpose for feedback.
To counter discomfort, it helps to have a motivating, compassionate purpose. For example: “Feedback is not about correcting bad behavior. Under stress, everyone will, at times, act in ways counter to norms. The purpose of feedback is to help everyone be at their best.”
2. Lack of sharing and assuring mutual understanding of different perceptions. Relational problems usually set off the nearly automatic tendency to leap from limited data to strong but often flawed conclusions. Effective, respectful feedback depends on stepping back from such certainty. Instead of just “giving feedback,” the initial aim should be to stay open and elicit and assure mutual understanding of each person’s view even if in disagreement.
3. Lack of exchange of information specific enough to enable problem solving. Feedback is too often given in global generalizations. Then, the chances are high for provoking defensiveness and not getting to specific information which enables problem solving. For example, a client of mine was told “You are a very negative person.” Resisting her impulse to just react, my client was able to ask for a specific example and was told: “When I asked you for help yesterday, you said ‘No’ and walked away.” Such “negativity” had not happened before. My client apologized and they agreed not to use quick hallway conversations to ask for help.
4. Lack of shared norms for feedback. Shared norms promote helpful feedback. Examples are: (a) Avoid global generalizations; (b) Use "I" statements and offer feedback as perceptions, not as The Truth; (c) Give descriptions of words and behaviors from specific work situations; and (c) Seek each person’s perception.
5. Lack of sufficient leadership vulnerability. A key objective is to develop feedback-rich team interactions. To do so, leaders must model giving and receiving feedback--especially receiving it. Do you often ask how others have experienced interactions with you? All leaders make mistakes. Do you acknowledge them? Effective, timely feedback is not easy. It requires reformulating what feedback is all about. It requires universal respect and compassion. It requires constant practice. Working with the five barriers increases confidence and helps to embed feedback within daily leadership practice.
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e24
Vulnerability, leadership, and results
It may seem strange to link vulnerability with results because vulnerability is so often associated with weakness. As defined by Brene Brown through her research, vulnerability is inherent in life--we cannot avoid "uncertainty, risk and emotional exposure." Our choice is how we "own and engage with our vulnerability." (1) "To be vulnerable with others" means choosing to
say what we really think and feel. It is about engaging in open, honest, and transparent communication. This means taking risks: of showing imperfection; of being wrong; of losing popularity; of losing status. In organizations, an "open and trusting environment" has been linked with financial performance--"fostering trust among managers and employees so that they are open to sharing information, providing and receiving honest feedback, and having difficult conversations." These are factors which enhance an organization's ability to "align, execute, and renew." (2) Vulnerability does not mean "letting it all hang out" or emotional catharsis. (1) It demands appropriate openness that does not provoke defensiveness and withdrawal but builds partnership. An organization will likely have a difficult time establishing group norms for safe conversation unless leaders "go first"--that is, unless leaders are active participants. Taking the lead in being vulnerable is hard to do but "the best cure for the fear of being burned is opening yourself up to being burned. Sometimes it's even okay to get burned because you realize it's not fatal." (3) How safe is it to be vulnerable in your workplace? One indication is the way leaders talk. Listen for statements like: "I don't know; I need help; I am not sure but I feel we need to take the risk; It failed but I learned a lot; I made a mistake; I apologize; My idea may be completely off-base but I want your reactions; What can I do better next time?; I played a part in that." (1) These statements may seem like weakness but this kind of vulnerability actually "sounds like truth and feels like courage...Truth and courage may not be comfortable but they are not weakness." (1) References (1) Brown, Brene Daring Greatly, Gotham Books, 2012 (2) De Smet, Aaron et al The Missing Link: Connecting Organizational and Financial Performance McKinsey and
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e25
Co., February 2007 (downloaded at McKinsey.com) (3) Lencioni, Patrick The Five Temptations of a CEO Jossey-Bass, 1998
Selected References
Influencing Upwards
Bellman, Geoffrey M. Getting Things Done When You Are Not in Charge Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. 2001
Cohen, Allan R., Bradford, David L. Influencing Up John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 2011
Crosby, Robert P. Solving the Cross-Work Puzzle VIVO! Publishing, 2010
Daly, John A. Advocacy Yale University Press 2011
Ryan, Kathleen D., Oestreich, Daniel K. et al The Courageous Messenger Jossey-Bass Publishers 1996
On Leadership, Empowerment, Followership, and Power
Argyris, Chris Teaching Smart People How to Learn Harvard Business Review Press 2008
Blanchard, Ken, Carlos, John P. et al Empowerment Takes More Than a Minute Berrett-Koehler Publishers 1996
Buckingham, Marcus, Coffman, Curt First Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently Simon and Schuster, 1999
Bushe, Gervase R. Clear Leadership: sustaining real collaboration and partnership at work Davies-Black, 2010
Crosby, Robert. P. Cultural Change in Organizations: A Guide to Leadership and Bottom-Line Results VIVO! Publishing, 2011
Deci, Edward L., Flaste Richard Why We Do What We Do: Understanding Self-Motivation Penguin Books 1996
Detert, James R., Edmondson, Amy C., Implicit Voice Theories: Taken-For-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work Academy of Management Journal Vol. 54, No. 3, 461 - 485, 2011
Edmondson, Amy C. Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy John Wiley and Sons Inc., 2012
Gittell, Jody Hoffer Paradox of Coordination and Control California Management Review. Soring 2000, Vol. 42, No. 3, 101-117
Gittell, Jody Hoffer High Performance Healthcare: using he power of relaitonships to achieve quality, efficiency, and resilience McGraw Hill, 2009
Goleman, Daniel et al Primal Leadership: unleashing the power of emotional intelligence Harvard Business Review Press 2013
Hackman, J. Richard Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances Harvard Business Press, 2002
Heifetz, Ronald Leadership Without Easy Answers President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1994
NEIL BAKER CONSULTING AND COACHING LLC Neil J. Baker M.D.
Pag
e26
Heifetz, Ronald, Grashow, Alexander, et al The Practice of Adaptive Leadership Harvard Business Press, 2010
Janss, Rozemarijn, Risperns, Sonja, Segers, Mien et al What is Happening Under the Surface? Power, Conflict, and Medical Teams Medical Education 46: 838 – 849, 2012
Kellerman, Barbara Followership: How Followers are Creating Change and Changing Leaders 2008
Kornacki, Mary Jane and Silversin, Jack Leading Physicians Through Change: How to Achieve and Sustain Results 2nd Edition ACPE 2012
Kim, W. Chan, Mauborgne, Renee A. Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy Harvard Business Review January 2003
Rock, David Your Brain at Work, HarperCollins Publishers 2009
Sinclair, Amanda Leadership for the Disillusioned: Moving Beyond Myths and Heroes to Leadership that Liberates 2007
Tannenbaum, Robert, Schmidt, Warren H. How to choose a leadership pattern Harvard Business Review, May 1973
Tost, Leigh Plunkett, Gina, Francesca et al When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance Harvard Business School, Working Paper 11-087, 2011, downloaded from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/topics/communication.html
About Neil Baker M.D.
Neil Baker M.D. works with healthcare organizations to enhance leadership and team impact through In-the-Moment Leadership Strategies. This means using any work situation, even the most complex and difficult, as an opportunity to achieve immediate impact on quality of work relationships and on progress toward results. He has developed these approaches as a leader, speaker, consultant, and executive coach for 30 years. Past positions include serving as Director of Psychiatric Inpatient Services at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center in Denver, Colorado; Medical Director of Clinical Improvement at Group Health Cooperative in Seattle, Washington; and faculty and improvement advisor for ten years for the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) in Cambridge, Massachusetts. You can learn more and see client testimonials on his website at neilbakerconsulting.com.
