Leadership Caffeine: Teach Your Team Smart(er) Decision Processes
Filed under: Leadership, Leadership Caffeine, Making Decisions, Performance
Nothing happens without a decision. Nothing good happens without the right decision. And, in case you doubt the need to focus on making better decisions, spend some time skimming the news.
If you’ve kept up with your health and fitness resolutions thus far this year, you know that even minor adjustments in diet and exercise pay big dividends. The same goes for our individual and group decision-making approaches.
A bit of deliberate effort to strengthen the decision-process goes a long way towards minimizing or mitigating the impact of personal and group biases. Translation, this might just keep you out of those less than flattering headlines in the news.
At Least 5 Questions We Need to Ask Our Teams Before They Decide:
1. “How are we going to make this decision?”
2. “What data do we need to objectively evaluate our options?”
3. “Before we decide, how can we frame this issue in neutral terms?”
4. “What would someone who doesn’t have history with this issue say about it?”
5. “If we were starting a business today, would we invest in this?”
While there are many and varying forms of decision-making traps and nearly countless combinations of cognitive biases that impact our discussion processes, the introduction of and follow-thru on these simple but important questions can clear much of the fog out of the way.
Improve Discussion Quality to Improve Decision-Making Effectiveness:
In working with under-performing management and project teams, one of the critical factors in improving results is in improving the quality of the discussions surrounding key decisions. Use the 5 questions above to strengthen processes and improve the quality of the dialogue and analysis.
Create a process to decide. The act of asking and then developing a process to decide is a powerful step in the right direction. This imposes both accountability and serves as a process guide to corral our all-too-frequent wide-ranging, overlapping and chaotic, emotion-packed dialogue around big issues. Another good practice for teams working on strengthening decision-making effectiveness, is for them to follow the “how should we” question with “What traps might impact our process here?” (See my related posts links below for more on this topic.)
Cut Through the Data Smog. Data is plentiful in today’s organizations, yet we tend to anchor on data that supports our perspectives and dismiss data as flawed when it refutes our case. Challenge the team to think through data needs…and particularly to evaluate confusing correlation with causation…or to avoid sampling on the dependent variable. And of course, don’t forget that in spite of massive advances in business intelligence and analytics software, the quality of the data should always be scrutinized before accepting it as gospel.
Frame for Fun and Profit. Positioning a situation as a gain or loss absolutely biases solution development. Spend time to carefully frame issues…and work to frame them as neutral if possible. Another approach is to invoke F. Scott Fitzgerald’s maxim that, “the sign of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” Consider framing the issue in different ways and developing solution sets based on those frames.
“Tell me again about your assumptions.” Always invite an outsider in for the big decisions. Someone who has no skin in the outcome can offer the candid perspective so often lacking in our politically turbocharged discussions. Instead of the tame or lame Devil’s Advocate, invite someone in and listen carefully if they tell you that your baby is really ugly.
Let’s Not Escalate this Commitment! Many of our issues resolve around past decisions and whether to carry on or not. Follow the above suggestions and ask and consider the very critical question of, “If we were starting a business today, would we invest in this?” If the answer is “no” put a stake in it. And remember, that the money you spent is a sunk cost…it’s gone. Beware the “with more time and money” discussions.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
This is a big topic with big implications for your firm and for your career. However, the best way to eat an elephant is still one bite at a time.
Starting today, teach your teams to strengthen their decision-making processes by asking the annoyingly appropriate questions highlighted above. Remember, we want to keep you and your firm out of the headlines…at least when it comes to lousy decisions. And the last time I looked, most bosses bestow things like responsibility, money and authority on those who they trust to make good decisions.
Deciding whether to put effort forth to improve how to decide may be the only “no-brain” decision you’ll encounter today.
–
Related Posts:
Management Excellence Toolkit, Part 1: Create a Decision Journal
Management Excellence Toolkit, Part 2: Mind the Decision Traps
Management Excellence Toolkit, Part 3: How to Frame Your Decisions for Success
Management Excellence Toolkit, Part 4: Improve Your Estimating and Forecasting Effectiveness
Management Excellence Toolkit: Better Design for Workplace Discussions
Leadership Caffeine: Frame Carefully to Improve Discussion Quality
Filed under: Leadership, Leadership Caffeine, Making Decisions, Your Professional Development "To Do" List
Decisions propel people, teams and organizations forward. Get more right than wrong…especially the big ones, and the only thing standing in the way of success is the critical issue of execution. And of course, most decisions start with a discussion.
One of your important jobs as a leader is to ensure that your team is engaging in the right discussions prior to offering a solution. Paying attention to how an issue is framed is an important part of monitoring discussion quality.
Framing-Beware of Splinters:
One of the constant contributors to less than ideal discussion processes comes from how leaders or team members frame a situation. Whether it’s described as a positive or a negative…a crisis or an opportunity…and the assumptions that are made, all serve as part of the frame for a situation. Framing drives the discussion and importantly, it steers and biases solution set development.
If the boss describes a situation as a problem in need of immediate repair, the discussion and solution set will focus on fire-drill type repairs. That’s OK if it’s a fire drill, but perhaps there are bigger issues that might be solved by reframing the situation as an opportunity to solve a systemic problem.
Management teams frame their strategic environment by assessing the current state and making assumption about the future. Consider:
Americans don’t care about quality..they are focused on style and will buy a new car every two to three years and, the threat from foreign automobile manufacturers is relatively small. (GM in the 1970’s)
Our biggest threat will be from a well-armed nation-state. (The U.S. Government up until 9/11, as they used the framing of the Cold War to drive thinking and preparation.)
Managers bias a decision discussion as soon as they open their mouths and offer their characterization of an issue and/or their perceived best solution. Again, that might be appropriate in some circumstances, but in others, it will preclude alternative idea development.
One of the most common issues many firms struggle with today is how to determine the role of social media in their business. I’ve participated in a number of these discussion with clients, and observed repeatedly that the managers and teams who view social media as a threat (a waste of time and a potential liability) develop restrictive policies, while those who see it as an opportunity (new way to engage clients and promote) develop policies that encourage experimentation.
Frames are powerful…and we offer them without thinking about the impact they have on others we’re looking to for input. However, with a bit of discretion and some deliberate practice developing good framing habits, managers can improve discussion quality surrounding decisions almost immediately.
Six Ideas for Improving Discussion Quality through Better Framing:
1. Manager Hold Back: ask others for their description of a problem/situation before you offer your perspective.
2. Frame like Switzerland: offer only neutral descriptions…neither positive or negative, and see how the discussion develops.
3. Develop Dueling Frames: for every situation, encourage team members to develop two completely different description (frames) of a situation. For the serious issues, frame the situation as both a crisis for one discussion and an opportunity for the other.
4. Prior Planning Prevents Poor Framing: teach your teams to frame first before solving. Their discussions should lead off with a description of the issue (the frame) and people should be encouraged to challenge these frames for validity.
5. Stop, Look and Clarify the Frame! Many discussions take on a life of their own and the frame gets lost in the emotions and politics. Regularly stop discussions to reaffirm or challenge the original frame.
6. Beware of Perfect Frames: things aren’t always neat and clean, especially when talking about strategic options in this fast-changing world. If your assumptions begin to sound GMish and too overwhelmingly supportive of your direction or investment, it’s time to look harder at your situation.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
For relatively little effort, you can achieve significant improvement in discussion clarity and decision quality. Starting today, watch how you and others frame issues and encourage everyone to put the time in early in the discussion to ensure good solution set development. Measure twice, cut once.
–
About Art Petty:
Art Petty is a Leadership & Career Coach helping motivated professionals of all levels achieve their potential. In addition to working with highly motivated professionals, Art frequently works with project teams in pursuit of high performance. Art’s second book, Leadership Caffeine-Ideas to Energize Your Professional Development, will be published in September of 2011.
Contact Art via e-mail to discuss a coaching, workshop or speaking engagement. Check out Art’s on-line “Professional Development Sprints,” designed for the busy professional.
July Leadership Development Round Table Challenge
Filed under: Leadership, Making Decisions, Middle Management, Talent Management
It’s time for the July Leadership Development Round Table Challenge!
You may recall from last month’s inaugural event, this is where we put forth a vexing situation and a number of regular contributors plus one guest take the opportunity to share their best thoughts on how to handle it… in 200 words or less. You vote with your comments and with your actual vote, and after one week of fierce but professional debate, a winner is announced.
This was great fun for all parties involved last month and it’s nice to get everyone involved in solving what are most definitely real-world challenges. We appreciate your active contributions and votes!
This month’s contributors:
1. Dan McCarthy, from Great Leadership
2. Art Petty, from Management Excellence
3. Mary Jo Asmus, from Aspire-CS Note from Art: as of this writing, Mary Jo is still without power from the storms that hit the Midwest this week. She encouraged us to proceed on schedule sans her post.
4. Steve Roesler, from All Things Workplace
5. Jennifer Miller, from The People Equation
6. Scott Eblin, from The Next Level
and our esteemed Roundtable Guest this month is:
7. Sharlyn Lauby, from HR Bartender
OK, it’s time for the case. Fair warning, I’m the host this month, and it was my job to write the case. While a bit longish, I erred on the side of wanting to paint a picture for you to work with. It’s a real situation that is looking for a real solution. With no further adieu, here’s the July Challenge:
–
The Set-Up:
A case in a widely read publication once used the label, “Brilliant Problem-Child” (BPC) to describe the high-potential/high-performance employee who manages to tick everyone off while stomping on toes in pursuit of results. Certainly, our culture is filled with descriptions of leaders who are “less than nice” in the workplace, however, the situation gets complicated if your name isn’t Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison and if you’re operating somewhere in the middle layers of an organization.
Just about everyone knows or has worked around someone like our character, Joe, below, and if you’ve been Joe’s manager, you’ve dealt with the dilemma of “What price, brilliance?” From “results at any cost,” to “why can’t we all get along?” there are a myriad of approaches with varying costs to teams, environment and careers.
Here’s a chance to help Joe’s manager, Pat, (finally) get this one right.
The Situation:
Pat Paulsen, the Director of Product Management for Apex Inc., sat for a few moments and stared out the window after the project team left her office. She was disappointed that her employee, Joe, was once again, the topic of discussion and complaint.
Apparently, Joe had yet again stomped on some toes and bruised some egos on the project team. He had shared his disdain for what he viewed as a slow and overly bureaucratic process to gain approval for the feature specifications for the next version of Apex’s flagship product. When the project team resisted his efforts to ram through the specifications, Joe had used his considerable pull with the overseas head of engineering to bypass the team completely. His response to the protests from team members was, “I’ll get this done with or without you.”
Joe:
Joe was a widely acknowledged brilliant product manager who had worked hard since the business unit’s inception 7 years ago to translate customer needs into product ideas and programs that solved problems and kept competitors off-balance and chasing Apex.
Additionally, customers and industry partners respected Joe’s industry knowledge and his zeal for supplying them with products that helped them run their businesses more effectively. They even overlooked his propensity to tell them how to run parts of their business, because he was most often right. “One partner summed it up best, “Joe has a horrible bedside manner, but he knows his stuff.”
Pat and Joe
Pat, as Joe’s manager, had been on the receiving end of a number of these types of complaints over the years. The conversations typically started with, “I know Joe is brilliant, but… .” The group that just left her office didn’t include any references to “brilliant” this time.
Pat genuinely believed that she had gone beyond the call of duty trying to remedy the problem and support Joe’s development. In addition to documenting, discussing and offering ample feedback and guidance over the past few years, Pat had invested in Joe attending several workshops on improving interpersonal skills. And just last year, Pat, with her superior’s blessing, had invested in sending Joe off to the prestigious Institute for Leadership Excellence, for some focused and very expensive coaching.
Perhaps the most perplexing part of the situation was that Joe seemed to genuinely take the feedback and coaching to heart. He worked hard on modifying his behavior after receiving feedback, but eventually he would become frustrated when project team members or groups ignored his guidance or moved too slowly on an issue that he viewed as critical.
The Environment:
The values at Apex were clearly posted in every conference room and they clearly implored people to “Break Down Walls,” “Challenge the Status Quo” and “Serve Customers First.” Taken literally, Joe’s behavior matched those values perfectly. He did do great things for the firm, and he was a thorn in everyone’s side in the process.
The success of the business unit over the past few years (much of which was due to Joe’s products), had led to a significant shift in the internal culture, from one fueled by entrepreneurial zeal to one that was building processes and relying more on teams. It was clearly a different environment and one where Joe’s approach was increasingly in conflict with the emerging culture.
What Next?
Pat shuddered to think what life would be like without Joe’s knowledge and expertise helping the company specify and launch great products. She pushed the momentary vision of him wearing a competitor’s badge at the upcoming industry trade show out of her mind.
Pat had no doubt about Joe’s brilliance, but it was clear that his approach engaging with others had more than worn thin. She sighed and pondered what to do next.
Help Pat. What should Pat do given the history and circumstances described in the case?
Advice from the Roundtable Members:
-From Art Petty, Management Excellence (note: as host, I’m honor-bound to write my answer before reading the answers from other members…thus my being first in the line-up. All other posts added in the order received):
Pat is in a pickle, and her options are not great. Joe is unlikely to change his spots with more coaching and counseling, and the”or else” discussion will begin moving Joe out the door. Leaders often have to make hard, unpopular calls, and this certainly feels like one of those.
The values describe an aggressive culture, and given the growth (on the back of Joe’s products), new people and new processes and teams are forming and feeling their way forward. While Joe seems to introduce significant task conflict and creative tension, it does not appear that his behavior is unethical, immoral or toxic. It does create task stress, which can contribute to improved performance.
Strengthen the team…provide coaching and training on team dynamics, conflict resolution and managing challenging team members. No one should have to walk on eggshells around Joe, and individuals and groups must be comfortable conducting robust dialogue with him and each other. If his behavior crosses the line from task to personal and the toxicity goes up, I would advise Pat to move him out. For now, I’m not willing to suggest she trade a visionary with an unquestioned ability to create value.
Leadership is often lonely.
-From Jennifer V. Miller, The People Equation
It’s time for Pat to level with Joe and let him know that if he doesn’t curb his atrocious bedside manner, he’ll be discovering his brilliance somewhere outside of Apex Inc. Allowing this behavior to continue tells other employees: “It’s ok to act like a jerk as long as you’re brilliant”. Lots of really smart people don’t leave bodies in ditches, so the “we tolerate it because he’s brilliant” argument doesn’t cut it.
Joe’s been acting this way for seven years, so he’ll push back, offering evidence of all his accomplishments. Pat should meet with Human Resources to review the existing documentation and develop a plan for the conversation with Joe.
The overall message should be: “Joe, we appreciate your efforts on behalf of Apex. Business conditions have changed and we now need team players, not hard-charging mavericks. Your behavior must change, or you will be fired.”
After that, it’s up to Joe to determine if he wants to change. He’s increasingly becoming a square peg in a round hole. Not only is Joe’s behavior damaging to other employees, it’s most likely stressful for him to continually be told to “change”. He may decide that it’s best to move on.
-From Sharlyn Lauby, H.R. Bartender
The thing that stood out to me was the environment. The scenario paints a disconnect between the stated company values and the actual internal culture. At some point, the company will have to reconcile this. That’s another post.
I’ve seen this situation many times. A person has creativity and produces at a high level but leaves body bags all along the way. Hopefully, Pat is able to recognize the good things Joe has done for the company while at the same time realize it might be time for him to move on.
If Pat continues with the status quo, there are two possible repercussions. (1) the remaining team members become completely disengaged creating an “us versus them” environment. (2) Pat’s credibility goes down the tubes because she failed to deal with the situation.
Pat needs to explore a way to have Joe exit the team in a positive way, allowing him to keep his dignity. At the same time, she needs to set new expectations for the remaining team members who will still be accountable for delivering results.
-From Dan McCarthy, Great Leadership
Joe is doing exactly what he was hired to do and you’ve allowed him to do. In fact, up until recently, it sounds like Joe’s values were a perfect match for your company culture.
Oh sure, you’ve spent a bundle on executive coaches and fancy charm schools, and for a while, he may have been ready and able to change. However, when push came to shove, you continued to let him get away with it because he got the results you craved. To make matters worse, it sounds like you’ve been so dependent on Joe that you’ve ignored the development of the rest of the team.
Managing an employee like Joe is like having a drinking or gambling problem – we deny there’s a problem until it’s a crisis.
It’s time to sit with Joe and spell out your behavioral expectations. More importantly, it’s time to lay out the consequences – this has been what’s missing in order for him to change.
If he does not change, then you need to follow-up on those consequences. I’m betting he will once he sees you’re serious. That’s when you earn your stripes as a leader!
-From Scott Eblin, The Next Level
In considering Pat’s dilemma about Joe, two quotations come to mind. The first is from the former French president and general Charles deGaulle. “The cemeteries, he said, are full of indispensable men.” Pat is feeling trapped because she’s allowed herself to believe that Joe is indispensable. She will eventually have to deal with his behavior in a definitive way. It’s just a question of whether it’s sooner or later. Either way, she needs to start working on building the company’s talent pipeline now so that when Joe leaves she’s not left with a gaping talent hole in the organization.
That leads to the second quotation. Paraphrasing Karl Marx (yes, that Karl Marx), the good of the many outweigh the good of the few. As talented as they are, people like Joe ultimately stifle their organizations because the really good people leave because they don’t want to work with a pain in the butt. If Pat lets this play out much longer, she’s going to be left with a lot of mediocre people and Joe. Not a great competitive situation to be in. She might have one more “You’ve got to change or else,” conversation with Joe, but she has to be prepared to let him go.
-From Steve Roesler, All Things Workplace
Indeed, we’ve probably all dealt with high-performing/low-collaboration types. The last client situation with which I was involved saw the real-life “Pat” character follow the same steps described ( I was “Joe’s” coach). After being involved with a number of these, here are my thoughts. 200 words probably won’t do it justice.
- Joe works for a profit-making company that rewards revenue generation and will go out of business without it. (Note the Apex well-publicized values). So, the question to ask is, “While this huge pain in the butt is ringing up business, what behaviors can we all learn to live with?”
- Pat has introduced developmental activities to impact Joe’s behavior. In fact, Joe has actually exhibited desired behaviors. It seems that the smell of victory puts him into high gear and, like a profit magnet, he goes for the gold.
- Bypassing people and procedures is normally a no-no. But look at the bestselling books that tell you to be a Maverick or use the Fire-Ready-Aim approach to business. If you’re a high achiever, what are you supposed to believe?
One last possibility: team meeting with Joe to let it all hang out. Could it hurt?
It’s Your Turn…What Say You?
Vote in the poll below for your favorite answer, and please share your own professional perspectives with a comment.
Leadership Caffeine: 4 Ideas for Navigating Organizational Politics
Filed under: Career, Leadership, Leadership Caffeine, Leadership Skills, Making Decisions, Management Education, Middle Management
Overheard: “I don’t have the stomach for the political games around here.”
4 Universal Rules of Organizational Politics:
1. You ignore organizational politics at your own peril.
2. You engage in the politics of your organization at your own peril.
3. All organizations are political.
4. You need to get over #3
Wherever humans are involved, some form of what we reference as politics will emerge and dramatically influence how work gets done, who does what work and how people advance.
Much of the leadership and management writing in books and on blogs tends to ignore the political environment of the organization, yet it is the leader’s or manager’s ability to understand, adapt to and ultimately guide the political discourse that determines how successful he/she will be.
Taking Some of the Dirty out of Politics:
Much like the notion of “pursuing power,” the idea of “playing politics” conjures up dirty images of questionable behind-the-scenes machinations and a vision of toes or faces being stepped on by those engaged in a series of less than noble games. And while those environments exist, it’s been my experience that the political environment in most firms is a bit more collegial than the television-type drama we often associate with organizational politics. Having said that, don’t confuse collegial with noble or even nice.
It’s important for all of us to tune-in to the political environment of our organizations and learn the unwritten rules of success. The four ideas below were prompted by my observations while running a long-term project inside a very successful and aggressive large company.
4 Ideas for Effectively and Cleanly Engaging in Your Organization’s Politics:
1. Study and learn how decisions are really made in your organization. While you might assume that decisions flow from hierarchy, more often than not there’s an informal decision-making process that occurs somewhere other than at the highest points on the organizational chart. Top-level approval might be required somewhere along the way, but most projects, resource decisions and spending decisions occur elsewhere. In the case of my client, no one person typically holds Yea or Nay decision rights. While this ambiguity is at first a bit disconcerting, once you plug into the culture, you realize that the “Networking” and “Give to Get” approaches described below heavily influence decision-making.
2. Follow the fast-trackers. Assess what’s important to the most visible and aggressive climbers, and you gain valuable insight into the political environment.
Whether there’s a fast-track or not in your organization, some people are moving faster than others. Pay attention to how these people work and cultivate an understanding of what’s important to them in terms of support, visibility, involvement and information. Your knowledge of who these fast-trackers are and what’s important to them will help you engage in the political discourse from an informed perspective.
3. Learn to be a network connector. The importance of cultivating a strong internal network is a major issue in most organizations, and especially so in larger firms. In my client’s case, personal network strength equals power, and the pursuit of connecting is part of everyone’s daily routine. While my initial reaction was to be concerned over the massive investment in time that goes into this overt bridge building, I learned that the pursuit of being connected to the power-brokers and fast-trackers was a core part of the organization’s communication flows. The talk is typically laser focused on improving the business, although the individual motivation to gain sponsorship and support for an idea (thus potentially gaining resources, visibility and budget) is a visible driver for all to see. To the most persuasive go the spoils of responsibility. It might not be perfect, but it is perfectly clear.
4. Give to get: more lessons from my networking-obsessed client company above. The rules for connecting typically involve bringing something of value to the relationship. Talk is nice, but ideas are the coin of the realm, and actionable big ideas the gold. The most successful networkers are those bringing actionable ideas to solve big problems. To the firm’s credit, there’s a huge appetite for consuming big ideas and, those moving ahead and gaining more responsibility (and power) are the ones who are most successful in gaining sponsorship for their ideas.
The big ideas are golden, however, people actively trade in other denominations of political currency, including invitations for involvement, opportunities for visibility and the provision of resources, including budget and gray-matter.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
While the notion of “office politics” is often perceived as less than clean, all four of the ideas above are hygienic and healthy. Cultivating an understanding the flow of and currency of power in your organization is simply part of learning how to get things done. Engaging in the process is table-stakes for success. Of course, we all have the choice to engage above-board and for the right reasons or, we can use the same knowledge and system to assert ourselves by stepping on and over others. Make the right choice in how you will participate and be on the lookout for those who choose the seamy side of the political process.
The June Leadership Development Roundtable Challenge
Filed under: Leadership, Making Decisions, Management Education
If you like a good leadership challenge, take a few moments and click over to Dan McCarthy’s Great Leadership blog and check out the first in a new monthly program: The Leadership Development Roundtable Challenge.
This new program, conceived by Dan and wildly supported by a number of leadership writers and coaches (likely because Dan was doing all the heavy lifting to get it started!), presents a vexing leadership dilemma for a group of regulars and a guest to solve in 200-words or less.
Readers have two opportunities to participate. Dan has nefariously included a polling tool, so you get to vote for your favorite answer, leaving the rest of the contributors to sulk a bit and sharpen our skills for next month’s challenge. You also can share your own and likely much better ideas by responding with your own answer to the challenge.
Great fun, something to help sharpen our collective leadership problem-solving skills and participatory democracy all at the same time!
The Challenge will rotate every month, and I have the honor and challenge of hosting and creating the “vexing dilemma” for next month’s episode.
Check it out, cast your vote and share your informed opinion about how you might handle this Leadership Challenge!
(And for those of you wondering why I have a funny hat as a graphic, that’s the Deerslayer style worn by Sherlock Holmes as he chased down villains and solved his own vexing problems!)
-
Chosen by Guy Kawasaki's Alltop.com as a top site in the Leadership category.
Podcast
Available Now!
Practical Lessons
e-book
e-book-Leadership and the Project Manager - Developing the Skills that Fuel High Performance
