A few of us attended the Benchmark for Business Event last week and I was sitting next to Roderick Miller from IEDP who summed up the event beautifully.. so thought I would share it with you all! Jude
EVENT: If you want to get something done and you need others to help you then some degree of persuasion skill is necessary; often this might be implicit and sometimes explicit. In business it ranges from the obvious sales and marketing functions through leadership and strategy implementation to behavioural activities like getting hotel customers to reuse their towels.
Benchmark for Business ran a workshop in Edinburgh earlier this week led by Steve J Martin who works closely with Robert Cialdini of the University of Arizona on this area of management psychology. Martin used the parable of a man walking down a sunny street when they pass a blind beggar with a sign that states baldly "I am blind" and nothing else, beside his upturned hat; taking out his pen the marketing executive writes three additional words on the card; returning an hour later the beggar recognises his footsteps and asks if he is the man who wrote on his card, as since then he has been much more successful. "What," the beggar asks "did you write?". "Nothing that is not true" says the man, "I just wrote the message differently - 'It is Springtime and I am Blind'".
This tale is not new, but Martin used it elegantly to show not only the power of tapping into people's emotional responses and creating a connection to them, but the necessity of doing so - and also the importance of creating the connection before the transaction was engaged in - his 'pre-suasion'.
Martin uses Cialdini's Six Principles of Persuasion that we have featured before. There is increasing awareness in management and also in government, with the power of individuals'emotional responses to yield greater performance in tasks and projects. The "how" you say things is just as importance as the "what" and the "why" of the things you say. We only have to look at the success of Thaler and Sunstein's Nudge and its influence in both the Obama and Cameron governments (infact Steve J Martin is working with the UK Prime Minsiter's Cabinet Office currently - and the Customs and Revenue department), and the rise of the behavioural economists.
Martin also highlighted the negative effects of well-intentioned advice and warnings, citing the study conducted in the 90's on visitors to a "Prehistoric Forest" in Arizona, where the parks authority asked people not to remove fossils they might find while walking around the area. The study removed the signs and then replaced them some time later and showed clearly that the when the signs were removed less loss occured; the signs merely acted as encouragement to tourists to remove the fossils; no signs - less losses. This is not because the idea would not occur to the visitors to remove the fossil fragments, but that it indicated that sufficient numbers of people were removing them to warrant the sign, and this idea of it not being unusual habituated the concept in people's minds to make it acceptable - even when they were explicitly being asked not to.
The increased influence that comes with greater understanding of how people respond to these triggers is very powerful - and it is important that leaders understand them.
Roderick Miller - IEDP - Executive Development Group.
Monday, 21 March 2011
Wednesday, 23 February 2011
The Importance of Trust in Leadership, Building Teams and Decision-Making
I recently had the privilege of visiting the remote islands of St Kilda. We travelled there from North Uist on an inflatable dinghy. In doing so, we placed our lives in the hands of our helmsman, who had vast experience of the seas. We trusted him absolutely.
In exploring this theme of trust, I reflect on my own journey from the adversarial processes of the courtroom where I practised for many years, to the world of mediation which I now inhabit. In a sense, the court system with its win/lose paradigm is founded on the loss or absence of trust, at least between the warring parties. As a mediator in over 200 disputes and differences across the public and private sectors, in boardrooms and contracts, HR and teams , I know that trust is critical: in me as mediator, in the process, in the outcome achieved and, as negotiations take place, among the parties involved. Trust is the central issue: building, regaining and maintaining trust is the glue which leads people to a resolution of their difficulties.
Loss of trust is the cause of much conflict, increased cost, decreased profitability, staff turnover, loss of morale, stress and anxiety. Why does trust break down? It’s a complex mix. Careless language - just one word - can trigger serious disputes; perceptions we have formed are often misplaced – 90% of errors of thinking are due to errors in perception, according to the lateral thinking guru, Edward de Bono; we jump to conclusions quickly (in a “blink” according to author Malcolm Gladwell) and these are often wrong, based on incorrect assumptions about others; fear of losing face is a key driver for many of us; and different cultures and diverse values can cause further difficulties. The American commentator, Meg Wheatley, once said that “it’s not our differences which separate us but our judgments about each other”.
So, how do we regain trust which, once broken, is hard to recover, but which is essential to resolution of conflicts, restoration of relationships, renewal of confidence and rebuilding of contracts?
To take an example, in a recent mediation, two senior business figures were able to look each other in the eye at the end and say “I trust you”, after a lengthy history of animosity.
What were the keys to this change? The opportunity to speak and be heard is vital. “I found my voice” is a remark I heard some time ago in a difficult workplace situation; the absence of effective communication leads, they say, to 80 per cent of business breakdowns. Allied to this is the ability to discover, understand and address underlying concerns, hopes, aspirations and fears.
Separating people from the problem is important, always showing respect to the former and being rigorous on the latter – rather than personalising the issues as so often happens. What else? Remembering to keep in mind the Big Picture, focussing on the overall objective and leaving crumbs on the table for others. Taking real care in the use of language, choosing words carefully. Developing a protocol or guidelines for future conduct and decision-making. All of these seem simple but are not easy in practice. This is where the structure of mediation, with the involvement of an impartial third party helping to provide benchmarks, can be so effective.
I believe that trust is built on competence, which in turn depends on the acquisition of skills which can be learned. This may require training for individuals, installation of systems in organisations, early warning procedures and dispute resolution protocols.
What does all this mean in the context of building teams, embarking on joint ventures and enhancing boardroom performance? How can we build trust in the first place? Here are some suggestions:
Communication: “I am not sure you understand that what you heard is not what I meant”: a familiar refrain which can be avoided by listening, really listening to other people; being clear and specific in what you say – and about your objectives; showing courtesy and respect towards others; and asking questions throughout: “the more questions I ask, the more I find out”, as Einstein reportedly said.
Collaboration and Cooperation: rather than adopting antagonistic or positional poses. Co-opetition is a phrase used by de Bono to characterise building on the arguments of others - rather than knocking them down, in the familiar Western Aristotelian tradition, so wasteful and unproductive, says de Bono.
Convergence and Common Ground: there is more which unites us than ever separates us, whether at home, in business or in politics, but our whole culture is dependent on looking for division and difference. We need to seek out what we share, where our interests intersect.
Consistency and Congruence: Do as you say and avoid uncertainty, ambiguity and arbitrariness. This needs to be aligned with the keeping of commitments, and integrity is essential: “Be the change you want to see in the world” said Gandhi, whose life was “an indivisible whole”.
Compassion and Concern: we need to care and show that we care. Indifference, detachment and apparent lack of interest are all so easy to feel when we are busy: it is hard work to be really interested.
Courage: “the first of the human qualities”, said Churchill. Doing what it takes to build trust is not risk free: you may need to give something in order to gain more. Anwar Sadat, then President of Egypt, said: “He who cannot change the very fabric of his thought will never be able to change reality and will never therefore make any progress.”
Confidence: showing and having confidence in yourself and others, rather than
self-doubt and suspicion. In the words of Jim Meehan, a British psychologist and poet, quoted in the excellent book “The Speed of Trust” by Stephen M.R. Covey: “Having spent many years trying to define the essentials of trust, I arrived at the position that if two people could say two things to each other and mean them, then there was the basis for real trust. The two things were “I mean you no harm” and “I seek your greatest good”.
The Author of this Blog is John Sturrock QC who is a mediator and chief executive of Core Solutions Group www.core-solutions.com.
In exploring this theme of trust, I reflect on my own journey from the adversarial processes of the courtroom where I practised for many years, to the world of mediation which I now inhabit. In a sense, the court system with its win/lose paradigm is founded on the loss or absence of trust, at least between the warring parties. As a mediator in over 200 disputes and differences across the public and private sectors, in boardrooms and contracts, HR and teams , I know that trust is critical: in me as mediator, in the process, in the outcome achieved and, as negotiations take place, among the parties involved. Trust is the central issue: building, regaining and maintaining trust is the glue which leads people to a resolution of their difficulties.
Loss of trust is the cause of much conflict, increased cost, decreased profitability, staff turnover, loss of morale, stress and anxiety. Why does trust break down? It’s a complex mix. Careless language - just one word - can trigger serious disputes; perceptions we have formed are often misplaced – 90% of errors of thinking are due to errors in perception, according to the lateral thinking guru, Edward de Bono; we jump to conclusions quickly (in a “blink” according to author Malcolm Gladwell) and these are often wrong, based on incorrect assumptions about others; fear of losing face is a key driver for many of us; and different cultures and diverse values can cause further difficulties. The American commentator, Meg Wheatley, once said that “it’s not our differences which separate us but our judgments about each other”.
So, how do we regain trust which, once broken, is hard to recover, but which is essential to resolution of conflicts, restoration of relationships, renewal of confidence and rebuilding of contracts?
To take an example, in a recent mediation, two senior business figures were able to look each other in the eye at the end and say “I trust you”, after a lengthy history of animosity.
What were the keys to this change? The opportunity to speak and be heard is vital. “I found my voice” is a remark I heard some time ago in a difficult workplace situation; the absence of effective communication leads, they say, to 80 per cent of business breakdowns. Allied to this is the ability to discover, understand and address underlying concerns, hopes, aspirations and fears.
Separating people from the problem is important, always showing respect to the former and being rigorous on the latter – rather than personalising the issues as so often happens. What else? Remembering to keep in mind the Big Picture, focussing on the overall objective and leaving crumbs on the table for others. Taking real care in the use of language, choosing words carefully. Developing a protocol or guidelines for future conduct and decision-making. All of these seem simple but are not easy in practice. This is where the structure of mediation, with the involvement of an impartial third party helping to provide benchmarks, can be so effective.
I believe that trust is built on competence, which in turn depends on the acquisition of skills which can be learned. This may require training for individuals, installation of systems in organisations, early warning procedures and dispute resolution protocols.
What does all this mean in the context of building teams, embarking on joint ventures and enhancing boardroom performance? How can we build trust in the first place? Here are some suggestions:
Communication: “I am not sure you understand that what you heard is not what I meant”: a familiar refrain which can be avoided by listening, really listening to other people; being clear and specific in what you say – and about your objectives; showing courtesy and respect towards others; and asking questions throughout: “the more questions I ask, the more I find out”, as Einstein reportedly said.
Collaboration and Cooperation: rather than adopting antagonistic or positional poses. Co-opetition is a phrase used by de Bono to characterise building on the arguments of others - rather than knocking them down, in the familiar Western Aristotelian tradition, so wasteful and unproductive, says de Bono.
Convergence and Common Ground: there is more which unites us than ever separates us, whether at home, in business or in politics, but our whole culture is dependent on looking for division and difference. We need to seek out what we share, where our interests intersect.
Consistency and Congruence: Do as you say and avoid uncertainty, ambiguity and arbitrariness. This needs to be aligned with the keeping of commitments, and integrity is essential: “Be the change you want to see in the world” said Gandhi, whose life was “an indivisible whole”.
Compassion and Concern: we need to care and show that we care. Indifference, detachment and apparent lack of interest are all so easy to feel when we are busy: it is hard work to be really interested.
Courage: “the first of the human qualities”, said Churchill. Doing what it takes to build trust is not risk free: you may need to give something in order to gain more. Anwar Sadat, then President of Egypt, said: “He who cannot change the very fabric of his thought will never be able to change reality and will never therefore make any progress.”
Confidence: showing and having confidence in yourself and others, rather than
self-doubt and suspicion. In the words of Jim Meehan, a British psychologist and poet, quoted in the excellent book “The Speed of Trust” by Stephen M.R. Covey: “Having spent many years trying to define the essentials of trust, I arrived at the position that if two people could say two things to each other and mean them, then there was the basis for real trust. The two things were “I mean you no harm” and “I seek your greatest good”.
The Author of this Blog is John Sturrock QC who is a mediator and chief executive of Core Solutions Group www.core-solutions.com.
John will be contributing on the subject of Mediation and Conflict Management on the forthcoming MSC in Advanced Leadership commencing in April 2011.
This Article was first published in the IOD Magazine in October 2010.
Wednesday, 9 February 2011
You cannot learn to swim by reading a book!
VIEWPOINT: From Charles Edwards, Director, Edinburgh Institute of Leadership and Management Practice, Edinburgh Napier University.
If I write about or talk to you about swimming, will you be a better swimmer afterwards? If business leadership is to be improved, we need to redress the imbalance between talking about leadership and developing leaders. Too much energy is spent talking about what leadership is and what great leaders did. Interesting stories yes, but it is a patently flawed approach to believe that hearing about what one person did with their abilities in their unique context will make someone else with different abilities in a different context become an equally great leader. Also limited in developmental terms is assessing people against leadership competency frameworks. These often divert them away from what they are good at to what they aren’t, to the detriment of both them and their business.
Instead we need to use the practice of leadership as the principal development vehicle. And set emerging leaders with leadership tasks and projects, providing them with coaching, feedback and signposted resources and readings relevant to their context. This is not as straightforward as it sounds: the project has to be right for the individual and the business. The process of capturing the practice and the learning has to work well. The coaching, resource provision and feedback have to be of high developmental quality and integrated with each other. The learning leader, the employing business and the provider of the leadership development intervention all have important roles to play in making practice-based leadership development work.
World-class swimmers train every day to better their performance – both in the water and out. Just as not every swimmer will become a Michael Phelps, not every manager will become a world class business leader. But there are times and places in business where most of them will need to both practice and exercise leadership – and the more confident and capable that leadership is, the more the business will benefit.
The Edinburgh Institute of Leadership and Management Practice at Napier University conducts research on practice-based-learning and builds its executive education programs on practice based foundations.
If I write about or talk to you about swimming, will you be a better swimmer afterwards? If business leadership is to be improved, we need to redress the imbalance between talking about leadership and developing leaders. Too much energy is spent talking about what leadership is and what great leaders did. Interesting stories yes, but it is a patently flawed approach to believe that hearing about what one person did with their abilities in their unique context will make someone else with different abilities in a different context become an equally great leader. Also limited in developmental terms is assessing people against leadership competency frameworks. These often divert them away from what they are good at to what they aren’t, to the detriment of both them and their business.
Instead we need to use the practice of leadership as the principal development vehicle. And set emerging leaders with leadership tasks and projects, providing them with coaching, feedback and signposted resources and readings relevant to their context. This is not as straightforward as it sounds: the project has to be right for the individual and the business. The process of capturing the practice and the learning has to work well. The coaching, resource provision and feedback have to be of high developmental quality and integrated with each other. The learning leader, the employing business and the provider of the leadership development intervention all have important roles to play in making practice-based leadership development work.
World-class swimmers train every day to better their performance – both in the water and out. Just as not every swimmer will become a Michael Phelps, not every manager will become a world class business leader. But there are times and places in business where most of them will need to both practice and exercise leadership – and the more confident and capable that leadership is, the more the business will benefit.
The Edinburgh Institute of Leadership and Management Practice at Napier University conducts research on practice-based-learning and builds its executive education programs on practice based foundations.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)