A Memo to Coach K
By Sean Miller
The 2016 Summer Olympic Games in Rio have arrived, and with them, my excitement for the three-weeks that will capture the hearts and minds of sports fans all over the world. Continue reading
A Memo to Coach K
By Sean Miller
The 2016 Summer Olympic Games in Rio have arrived, and with them, my excitement for the three-weeks that will capture the hearts and minds of sports fans all over the world. Continue reading
The Sue-per Women team weighs in on the impactful roles confidence and the desire for perfection play in achieving tangible results.
Three days ahead of his Feb. 4 session, Change Readiness Diagnostics: Assessing Change Readiness Through a Risk Management Lens, at the ACMP D.C. Virtual Symposium, Jim Wright, Evans’ International Account Director, provides insights into the need to be ‘Change Ready.’
By James Stakem
When I compare my Marine Corps and corporate experiences, one of the most striking differences is in the language used to describe individuals in the two environments. In the Marine Corps there is a lot of pride in being a Marine. To be a Marine is to be part of something special. In the corporate world, this level of connection to and pride in an organization is rare, maybe non-existent. To be fair, there are significant differences between the military and corporate world; however, there are lessons to be learned from the military about building a culture and team.
Many companies invest heavily in culture, but when leaders in these organizations refer to their employees as assets, resources, direct reports, and the like, they indicate a poor understanding of some of the basic tenets of building a positive team culture. What kind of culture is built when employees in an organization are referred to as resources? The first time I heard the term resource as a reference to an employee was in a job interview. It took me a few minutes to figure out that a “resource” was a human being. As a Marine, I can’t imagine an environment where someone says, “We need to get some ‘resources’ to charge that hill”; however, companies do the corporate equivalent all the time.
This is not to say that the only thing a company needs to do in order to build a culture is to come up with a slick name for the employees. There is a lot more to it than that, and in the case of the Marine Corps, the organization builds esprit de corps in a multitude of ways. That being said, when companies refer to their employees in an impersonal, transactional way, it’s hard to imagine they could build a strong team, regardless of other efforts.
Zappos is an example of an organization that gets it when it comes to culture. CEO, Tony Hsieh says in Your Culture is Your Brand:
“At Zappos, our belief is that if you get the culture right, most of the other stuff — like great customer service, or building a great long-term brand, or passionate employees and customers — will happen naturally on its own”
Unfortunately, some organizations believe that culture is a consequence of an organization’s outputs instead of the other way around. This approach leads organizations to focus on creating products and providing services, and culture becomes an afterthought to be developed in a ten-minute staff meeting exercise.
Other organizations, such as Google, have developed a culture around their people. Employees at Google are called “Googlers,” but building a culture goes much deeper than a simple name. The technology giant doesn’t have a Human Resources department – instead they have People Operations, and there is a reason for the difference. Google’s People Operations department states, “… we’re the champions of Google’s colorful culture.” Laszlo Bock, Google’s Senior Vice President of People Operations, says:
“Nurturing the people in your organization doesn’t require expensive perks or touchy-feely gimmicks. It’s about motivating, engaging and listening – and it can work for anybody”
How motivating and engaging is it when valuable employees are referred to as a resource or direct report? When thinking about joining a company which says, “Our employees are our greatest resource” listen closely to make sure the daily corporate interactions uphold this principle. If you are an organization that espouses to value employees, take some time to make sure your routine language matches the image you portray on the company website. Creating a culture in which employees routinely speak of each other in a way that emphasizes value, connection, and respect is a critical step in creating a positive corporate culture in your organization.
Please share your stories of corporate language in your organizations in the comment section below.
By Brit Nanna
Consider this scenario: You were asked to provide change management support for a sizeable international development effort for a foreign government. It entails implementing broad-sweeping reforms affecting multiple departments. You created a change management strategy and plan you believe will help your client realize its desired outcomes, taking into account every possible challenge you might confront. Like many client environments, you knew the local government was heavily siloed, lacking substantial cross-collaboration between departments. You consequently incorporated the use of cross-functional teams (CFTs) as a means of overcoming these organizational silos and leveraging team members’ diverse expertise as representatives of multiple governmental departments to improve organizational performance. Months pass and despite your efforts, you now find yourself in the implementation phase, and the CFTs are not delivering the expected benefits. Your change efforts seem to be languishing.
In this scenario, like many others, CFTs are not a panacea to the change management challenges of achieving targeted development outcomes in the public sector. Their successful implementation faces a variety of obstacles. The 2012 article by Niall Piercy, Wendy Phillips and Michael Lewis discusses a variety of these challenges, arguing that the successful implementation of a CFT can hinge on a variety of factors, including the support of organizational leadership, as well as organizational culture and structures conductive to cross-functional integration. Successful CFTs also depend on adequate funding support along with the ability to break the status quo and overcome resistance to change. These dependencies expose key challenges to effective CFT implementation discussed below.
When these challenges are addressed during the planning phase, CFTs can be integral to driving transformative and sustainable change necessary to realizing targeted development outcomes both at headquarters and in the field.
Stove-Piped Organizational Structures:
Many governments around the world, at all levels, have a stove-piped public sector, characterized by marked division of labor and tasks with minimal interaction across departments. When attempting change in these environments, it is often difficult to use CFTs successfully, but it is not impossible. In these organizational structures, it is imperative to overcome what may be overarching unwillingness toward CFTs due to potential differences in knowledge and views, which can lead to differing opinions. Furthermore, departments are often working at cross purposes. This goal incongruity is also likely in such siloed environments, resulting in variances in decision criteria and timelines.
Lack of Critical Buy-In from Leadership:
Command-and-control organizational structures and environments lead to a marked dependency on senior leadership for successful change. In these command-and-control environments, senior leadership often struggle to heed advice from the CFT and/or ensure the required structural processes are in place to support the CFT’s work. Senior leadership’s buy-in is critical and the motivation and performance of CFTs will likely suffer without a clear and inspirational vision and agenda from senior leadership. CFTs will also struggle to impact organizational performance and service delivery without sufficient team-building, training and recognition in these top-down organizational structures. CFT members often contend with balancing their day-to-day responsibilities with the additional CFT duties, requiring senior leadership to release staff from certain responsibilities in order to allow them to focus on successfully implementing change within the organization.
Cultural Resistance to Change
In both domestic and international settings, cultural resistance to change can be found among staff, management, and political resistance born out of frustration and pure opposition. For those lower-level employees often removed from the politics of the organization, it may be a challenge to identify the proper modes of motivation for members of the CFT (especially in situations where there are too many consultants, people, papers, reports etc.). Apathy and uncertainty also pose a challenge to motivating lower-level employees to participate in CFT’s as they might have seen too many attempts at change fail. Furthermore, in the public sector, one might encounter those employees that are so entrenched in their positions that it is difficult to remove those that are not on board as they are willing to wait it out and wait for the next change. For management, some senior leadership might perceive they have a lot to lose from the anticipated impacts which may influence their openness to change. Power, control and status concerns also dictate the senior leadership’s level of buy-in and investment in change. At both levels it is critical to identify for each member, “what is in it for me?”
Also in these command-and-control organizations, change is often implemented from the top down and it can be difficult to put forward different ways of thinking especially in terms of productivity that lack that grassroots buy-in. Piercy, Phillips and Lewis (2012) note that if change is not communicated effectively it may promote the traditional view that change is done to lower-level employees by the corporate center.
Conceptualizations of Change
The success of CFTs is also dependent on the conceptualization of change and how it is perceived in that particular environment. Like in various organizations across the United States, the idea of change in international settings can also be just as unsettling. Whether it is redefining change as “business readiness” or finding other angles from which to approach it, the concept of change and how it is communicated to CFTs or otherwise is another critical consideration. How the members of the CFT understand change will also dictate their level of investment and efficacy in their work to implement the change.
In sum, while the implementation of CFT’s and change efforts may be done with the best of intentions, there are a number of considerations to take into account when seeking to implement them successfully. This is not to detract from the value of the CFT’s as they stand to strongly benefit any change effort and there are opportunities for overcoming these challenges, which include:
When working to achieve key development outcomes it is important to understand that delivering the right technical solution is never enough as human factors also have to be considered. In doing so, cross-functional teams provide an opportunity to achieve transformative and sustainable change. What are your thoughts on establishing a successful cross-functional team?
By Bob Etris
We all want a job where we can wake up each day and feel that immediate, energizing pull at the prospect of getting into the office. To look forward to our work and the challenges that lie ahead. For many of us, that feeling is not there nearly as often as we would like. Why is that?
Thinking of the working world as a whole, we can strip out certain parts of the population before we try to answer that question. First, let’s remove the parts of the population that are not afforded the educational or other resources needed to develop the careers they would like, and instead focus on those that have (all things being equal) a real chance to select the career of their choice. Taking it a step further, if we remove ‘exceptional’ circumstances that contribute to career discontent or low morale – a company buyout, layoffs, downsizing, terrible bosses, challenging clients, awful teammates, seasonally-driven workload or stressor events – we are left with some foundational questions that bear exploring.
How do you deconstruct the complex journey of finding a profession you love, into a simple and solvable problem? What goes into creating professional engagement, loyalty, satisfaction, and personal and professional development?
I believe that for any of us to find our space to exercise our professional and personal passions, we need to find an employer that not only allows, but intentionally seeks ways to marry up three distinct attributes. Figure 1 below illustrates how these attributes relate, and what follows explores how you can find yourself in the center as often as possible.
How do you find the kind of job that meets these criteria? You start by knowing what you are looking for. I hope this short piece has helped you to think creatively about your career, and to know how to measure the value of the path you’re on.
By Nicole Morrow and Omoefe Abugo
Establishing a lasting organizational culture of innovation takes time, dedication and encouragement. During a recent staff meeting, our very own Bob Etris made a statement that resonated with me. Etris said that reaching our desired state requires “creativity, patience and having a view of the long road ahead.”
Just as Rome was not built in a day, cultures of innovation are not established overnight. It is something all members of an organization must be committed to. It is a desired state that will come into fruition when all members feel empowered to contribute meaningful, positive ideas and actions to the organization’s mission.
Organizations must include all members to spark collective confidence. They must spark collective confidence to bring about repeated meaningful change. They must bring about repeated meaningful change to establish a culture of innovation.
Through our organization-wide training program, Evans University, we work to provide all staff members with a full package of tailored and agile training opportunities to meet their unique needs, and prepare them to handle all challenges or opportunities that may arise. Through out Discovering Individuals Styles of Communication training, staff members become more self-aware and continue to seek new, effective communication techniques based on their distinct traits. Our Strengths Finder Assessment has been a hit in the office. Through this assessment, staff members learn their five core strengths and are then provided guidance on how to develop, promote and use those strengths in the workplace and with our clients.
The Evans University stands as an invaluable tool in ensuring all members of the Evans Family reach their full potential every day.
Freedom to fail is the freedom to flourish. We learn from our successes, but we often times learn the most valuable lessons from our failures. Disappointment hurts, but it is crucial to not dwell on the negative aspects of our mistakes. If harnessed, our failures can act as springboards for growth and advancement.
When employees do not fear failure, they act boldly and creatively. We saw this at Evans during The Challenge, an internal competition rooted in building relationships, sparking creativity and rewarding innovation through social media engagement and online content building. The competition did not focus on a right way to participate. It encouraged staff members to channel their creativity toward an organizational cause. We did not fear failure or missing the mark. Instead, we boldly sought out new channels to express our individual and collective expertise.
We learn from our failures. We analyze. We adapt. We grow. Our collective and individual growth leads to the pivotal successes all organizations desire. As we continue to make breakthroughs and experience success, it is important to recognize the individuals who led the initiatives, braved the elements and saw to it that the race was won.
Our very own Iliana Alvarado outlined the importance of celebrating the successes of individuals in an organization. “By understanding what drives each person—and celebrating these drivers – I am able to discover their unique talents, skills, and interests,” Alvarado said. “This allows me to align them with the right role on our engagement and keeps them motivated to be successful.”
Creativity has no bounds. Organizations must realize this, and work to foster environments that nurture and encourage creative solutions to complex problems. Organizational leaders can accomplish this in various ways. Providing a workspace optimized for ingenuity plays a major part in the collective creativity of any company. Evans’ open concept office enables employees to easily collaborate with each other and explore various solution channels. When it’s time to hunker down and get the juices flowing, our staff members migrate to our closed-off meeting rooms.
Workplace environments should never inhibit creativity. Instead, the environment should nurture ingenuity and innovation. However, we must know when to rest, refuel and return to work recharged. Working to our highest creative potential involves constant renewal. Spending time away from work not thinking about tomorrow’s tasks allows us to come to the workplace with fresh perspectives we can use to tackle the day’s undertakings.
In a recent TED Talk, Harvard University professor Linda Hill reminded us of the power of creativity. To spark meaningful innovation, “you have to unleash the talents and passions of many people, and you have to harness them into a work that is actually useful,” said Hill. Unleashed creativity creates innovative solutions. More importantly, unleashed creativity spurs a collective organizational confidence.
Design is everything. It is all around us. It shapes the way we see the world. When working with clients, it is important to design with the client’s end in mind. One of the major tenants of Design Thinking is implementing human-centered problem solving. All innovative solutions must be tailored around the needs the client. This enables you to understand your clients, recognize their strengths and weaknesses, and build a solution that meets them at their needs.
The call for innovation is tremendous, but it is not something that can be developed at one’s convenience. We must focus on what is important, prioritize our goals and focus on delivering products and services of exceptional value. Most importantly, we must realize that it is a team effort. Once everyone is on board, an organization can move confidently toward its desired state.
By Margit Jochmann
Have you ever found yourself in a meeting where everyone present dives right into discussing the subject matter at hand, without introducing the new folks in the room? Or, have been part of a project team where some members are clearly experts in a field, but for others you are not quite sure how they relate to the mission at hand? Then you, or your team, may be missing out on some of the valuable knowledge available at your fingertips or may take longer to find the solution needed.
Teams are typically comprised of a diverse set of team members, with different expertise, skills and specialized domains. For example, a project team developing a new IT automation platform may include staff with project management background, various engineering disciplines, business representatives, user representatives, etc. – all together representing a wealth of knowledge available to the team to effectively design and deliver a solution. However, making use of this knowledge pool and its benefits requires knowing who knows what and who is good at what.
So, How Do You Tap Into Your Team’s Knowledge?
The underlying mechanism: In 1985, Wegner introduced a concept that is an important mechanism to understand in this context – “transactive memory.” He discovered that people in close relationships are much better and faster at remembering certain information and solving certain tasks than two people that do not know each other – due to a division of labor and specialization taking place over time. This happens because we are aware of our mental strengths and limits, and we are good at understanding the abilities of others. Hang around a workmate long enough and you begin to realize that while you are terrible at remembering your corporate meeting schedule, or how long a kilometer is relative to a mile, they are great at it. You begin to subconsciously delegate the task of remembering “that stuff” to them, treating them like a notepad or encyclopedia.
Shared remembering: In a transactive memory system, we share the work of remembering, which makes us collectively smarter and expands our ability to understand the world around us. Each person in a team doesn’t need to remember everything the team needs to know, remembering who knows what and how to access that information is what matters. Thus, a transactive memory system can provide teams with more and better knowledge than any individual could access on his or her own.
Teams Benefitting Most
… all features typical for many project teams.
Transactive memory may not be helpful for all kinds of teams or work though, for example, when little specialization is required.
Developing a Strong Transactive Memory System
Communication and interaction. Team members learn about each other’s expertise through sharing knowledge and seeking information from others.
Joint training on the task supports the development of transactive memory. The interactions taking place during joint training allow for learning about team members’ skills or the lack of knowledge in certain areas and help to assess the accuracy and reliability of this information.
Sharing relevant documentation. While face-to-face interaction is most effective, transactive memory can also be fostered without interaction, for example, by sharing documentation on task-relevant information regarding team members’ knowledge, skills, and domains of expertise.
Contributing to Team Success
A strong transactive memory system within a team contributes to its success, both at a task and (inter)personal level, through providing:
So, Are You Making the Most of Your Team’s Knowledge? Do You Know Who Your Knowledge Experts Are?
 Introduced by Wegner, Giuliano, and Hertel (1985) and Wegner (1986)
By Lauren Thomas
I am often asked whether coaching can really change a leader’s behavior, or transform the way they lead. Sometimes the question arises from people who are considering coaching. Others have a personal interest in discovering more about the coaching relationship. Sometimes the question stems from someone with a challenging relationship with a leader who may possess stronger strategic, operational or technical skills than interpersonal skills. Occasionally the people asking the question are very confident in their own abilities to lead, generally dismissive of the idea of coaching, and assert that they cannot see any benefit! Asking whether a coach can change someone’s behavior is a bit like asking how many psychologists it takes to change a light bulb. Of course, the answer is that the light bulb has to want to change – as does the leader being coached. Interestingly, I find that the reason why people ask about coaching in the first place can provide valuable insight into their motivation and willingness to change.
Someone who is already considering a coaching relationship may already have a degree of self-awareness, understand that there are areas where they could enhance their performance, and be motivated to discover more. This attitude is often found among those who understand that leadership is human-centered. Sustaining a vision, delivering a major change, or leading an investment program are all important leadership activities. Yet the very best leaders manage to achieve these accomplishments indirectly, through other people. These leaders often engage in self-reflection to gauge the extent to which they can fine-tune their performance. In such instances, coaching the leader is like coaching a sporting champion. The performance gains are likely to be incremental, but once a new technique is mastered, it can have a marked impact, not just on the leader, but on the people led. While the tweaks and adjustments may be small, when they are intentional and deliberate, consistent and visible, they can help refine a leader’s performance. In these cases, coaching is really about maximizing personal effectiveness and interpersonal influence.
Leadership for technical experts
For the second group of people, the gains from coaching can be more dramatic. We have all worked with challenging leaders – leaders who may lead in name, rather than by example, and who don’t seem to understand our perspective. So how do leaders who are not “people-people” get into leadership roles? Organizations often need to promote technical and operational specialists to management and leadership positions. Some experts welcome the progression, while others feel they have to take the role when it is offered, because not to take it would send the wrong message. Such progressions are not always supported with adequate and appropriate training and education. Even where development opportunities are provided, there may be little encouragement or incentive for a new leader to try new approaches. Many technical specialists who struggle with the human element of leadership do not see the value of people management until difficulties arise. For leaders who value competence highly, as most technical specialists do, coaching may have negative connotations. It may be viewed as remedial support or performance management, rather than as a positive intervention to help them become even more effective in their roles. In these situations, coaching can help leaders see themselves as others see them and develop their own strategies and style for dealing with the people issues that they find most challenging to handle.
For the third group of people, I wonder whether their direct reports share their confidence in their own ability to lead. Sometimes their self-confidence is more than justified, but sometimes it is not. How many of us would readily challenge someone who repeatedly told us they were a wonderful leader? Most people would be reluctant to directly respond, especially if that person was in a more senior role. Would we be more likely to smile, and say something positive about one of their strengths? Or possibly even change the subject and let them believe what they want to believe? There are many reasons why people may prefer to not provide their leaders with feedback:
Even where a leader’s confidence in his or her people’s management abilities is accurate, it can sometimes be rooted in opinion rather than objective feedback. It can be challenging for senior leaders to obtain objective, honest feedback on their own leadership style. Much depends on being able to ask in an appropriate way, the nature of their relationships with direct reports and peers, and the organizational culture. This problem is compounded by the “Whispers” game that occurs in organizations, where people can be somewhat reluctant to pass negative information to senior management. We often filter what we say to our leaders, especially when that information relates to their interpersonal style. In these instances, coaching can serve as a mirror, allowing leaders to see where their confidence is justified, and where there may be a mismatch between their beliefs and what others see.
Seeing yourself as other see you
Whatever the motivation for asking about coaching, there can be few leaders who are not interested in what people really think about them. There are many tools a coach can use to support leaders. One instrument valuable for its focus on leadership competencies is the CPI260. This self-completion questionnaire provides a view of the leader as seen by others, in key competency areas of self-management, organizational capabilities, team building and teamwork, problem-solving and sustaining the vision. The CPI260’s design does this without needing to use 360° feedback from other people. The CPI260 can be used with established, high-performing leaders and with emerging leaders seeking promotion from more operational or technical roles. Its valuable insights into leadership style enable the CPI260 to win over leaders who are initially skeptical about the benefits that coaching can deliver. Coaches like the way it supports personal insights for clients. However, whether change really results from coaching, with or without the CPI260, depends on a number of factors. It depends on the reasons and motivations for seeking coaching, the nature of the coaching relationship, the skill of the coach, and ultimately, by how much the leader really wants to change.