Had just posted my comments about receiving difficult feedback positively, when I was pointed to this by a colleague, Dr John Kenworthy - thanks, John.
Just watch this - it is quite long - 15 minutes, but great story and you can all work out the message for yourself! You can get the gist in the first 5 minutes, but if you are like me, you will have to watch it right through!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbk980jV7Ao
Steve
Monday 15 December 2008
Shoes, Pizzas, and Well Aimed Feedback!
In the week that President Bush had shoes thrown at him by an Iraqi journalist and a delivery man was saved by a pizza, I was prompted to reflect on the learning potential of feedback.
To explain, George Bush had shoes thrown at him in Baghdad, although he was agile enough to avoid both missiles. He then showed presence of mind and even statesmanship by defending the man's right to protest in a free society and pointing out to journalists that his assailant had succeeded in getting people talking about his protest.
The other story relates to how a Florida pizza delivery man was challenged by armed robbers in the city of Miramar, but got in first with his own weapon - a large pepperoni pizza. Eric Lopez Devictoria, flung the piping hot pizza at the gunman, then turned on his heels and ran, making a safe getaway, despite one shot being fired as he fled. Police later arrested three teenage suspects, who have been charged with armed robbery.
I came across these two stories as I was thinking about how some people still cower in their comfort zones, avoiding risk and change. If you want to develop, you need to step out of your areas of competence and confidence, and challenge your fears.
Children have few fears and often explore the world with wild abandon. As they mature they are taught and learn to respect and even fear experiencing some life situations and activities. While this is useful learning in some potentially dangerous situations, they can develop the unfortunate idea that to try anything new and failing is embarrassing and uncomfortable and should be avoided.
This learned fear of failure can become stronger as we grow older and severely limit our development. One way of learning is to invite, contemplate and act on feedback. If we don't ask for it, or worse still ignore it or even punish the giver, we lose that learning channel. As leaders we need to encourage feedback, even if delivered in awkward or rude ways. A mature learner will filter out the insult and listen to the kernel of truth in what has been said. In the same way that George Bush ducked the shoes, but respected the journalist's right to criticise him!
Remember that feedback is not the absolute truth, but someone else's perception.
To accept feedback constructively you need to:
To explain, George Bush had shoes thrown at him in Baghdad, although he was agile enough to avoid both missiles. He then showed presence of mind and even statesmanship by defending the man's right to protest in a free society and pointing out to journalists that his assailant had succeeded in getting people talking about his protest.
The other story relates to how a Florida pizza delivery man was challenged by armed robbers in the city of Miramar, but got in first with his own weapon - a large pepperoni pizza. Eric Lopez Devictoria, flung the piping hot pizza at the gunman, then turned on his heels and ran, making a safe getaway, despite one shot being fired as he fled. Police later arrested three teenage suspects, who have been charged with armed robbery.
I came across these two stories as I was thinking about how some people still cower in their comfort zones, avoiding risk and change. If you want to develop, you need to step out of your areas of competence and confidence, and challenge your fears.
Children have few fears and often explore the world with wild abandon. As they mature they are taught and learn to respect and even fear experiencing some life situations and activities. While this is useful learning in some potentially dangerous situations, they can develop the unfortunate idea that to try anything new and failing is embarrassing and uncomfortable and should be avoided.
This learned fear of failure can become stronger as we grow older and severely limit our development. One way of learning is to invite, contemplate and act on feedback. If we don't ask for it, or worse still ignore it or even punish the giver, we lose that learning channel. As leaders we need to encourage feedback, even if delivered in awkward or rude ways. A mature learner will filter out the insult and listen to the kernel of truth in what has been said. In the same way that George Bush ducked the shoes, but respected the journalist's right to criticise him!
Remember that feedback is not the absolute truth, but someone else's perception.
To accept feedback constructively you need to:
- LISTEN - and ask for clarification if necessary
- DON'T ARGUE
- DON'T DEFEND
- REFLECT
- ACCEPT IT OR REJECT IT - whichever you choose, try to identify the learning.
Sunday 7 December 2008
Staff want more responsibility but Managers don’t trust them
Nearly half (43%) of employees would like more responsibility in their current role, but a fifth of managers do not trust their staff to deliver.
According to research of 2,452 employees by YouGov for Investors in People, 43% of managers think staff would be concerned about the extra workload of more responsibility but only 8% of employees thought it would have a negative impact on their performance and only 4% felt it would make them less motivated.
In fact if staff were not given more responsibility 59% say they would become demotivated and 58% would be frustrated.But 53% of staff have never asked their manager for more responsibility and 29% do not think there is an opportunity for them - with 15% believing their manager to be too controlling.Simon Jones, chief executive of Investors in People, said: "By taking everything on themselves, managers can leave almost two-thirds of their people feeling demotivated and two-fifths could end up looking for a new job. In other words, giving employees the right level of responsibility is vital to driving the productivity of organisations through their people."
This headline, which may come as a surprise to some, strongly reflects the opinions I often hear on management programmes. Whether this is fear of being let down, a fear of letting go, or fear of somebody doing a better job than them, this a familiar theme. Managers need to learn to delegate more and one of the keys to effective and confident delegation is learning to trust. Leaders may be slow to trust, but need to learn that leaders lead - and that often means being the first to do something and this is certainly true of showing trust! If you want trust, be trustworthy and trusting. Richard Branson has said that if you have high expectations of your people, they will live up to them.
According to research of 2,452 employees by YouGov for Investors in People, 43% of managers think staff would be concerned about the extra workload of more responsibility but only 8% of employees thought it would have a negative impact on their performance and only 4% felt it would make them less motivated.
In fact if staff were not given more responsibility 59% say they would become demotivated and 58% would be frustrated.But 53% of staff have never asked their manager for more responsibility and 29% do not think there is an opportunity for them - with 15% believing their manager to be too controlling.Simon Jones, chief executive of Investors in People, said: "By taking everything on themselves, managers can leave almost two-thirds of their people feeling demotivated and two-fifths could end up looking for a new job. In other words, giving employees the right level of responsibility is vital to driving the productivity of organisations through their people."
This headline, which may come as a surprise to some, strongly reflects the opinions I often hear on management programmes. Whether this is fear of being let down, a fear of letting go, or fear of somebody doing a better job than them, this a familiar theme. Managers need to learn to delegate more and one of the keys to effective and confident delegation is learning to trust. Leaders may be slow to trust, but need to learn that leaders lead - and that often means being the first to do something and this is certainly true of showing trust! If you want trust, be trustworthy and trusting. Richard Branson has said that if you have high expectations of your people, they will live up to them.
Monday 1 December 2008
Why Conflict Can Be Useful
When talking about barriers to effective teamwork, one issue that is often raised is conflict. Many of us dislike and avoid conflict, but of course a complete lack of conflict can be an even bigger problem for teams with people reluctant to rock the boat, not daring to think differently and so falling into the "groupthink" trap.
A recent article in the Financial Times addresses the issue thus:
The Challenge of Straight Talking
By Stefan Stern
Lawyers, bankers, accountants and consultants are all after the same thing. No, not cash. That goes without saying. What they dream about is achieving a special status with their clients: that of the Trusted Adviser.
It is lonely at the top, people say. You cannot count on colleagues to give you the unvarnished truth. Professional services firms can make good that shortfall in trust, and give you the brutal facts when others are unwilling or unable to do so.
Some bosses claim to have created a slightly less lonely environment for themselves. Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, has met business leaders who say that they have done just that. “They tell you that you’ve always got to have at least one close colleague who will tell you the truth,” Mr Dimon said at the Harvard Business School centennial conference last week. “Well, if you’ve only got one guy in 10 who will tell you the truth you should fire the other nine!”
Mr Dimon is right. There should be zero tolerance for mealy-mouthed, flannelling, equivocating co-workers. And yet the evidence suggests that there is not enough straight talk at work. Fearing disruptive conflict and bust-ups, we muddle through, bite our tongues, zip the lip.
Robert McHenry, chief executive of OPP, the Oxford-based business psychology consultancy, says that some organisations may be suppressing conflicts that should in fact be allowed to burst out.
“Clients sometimes tell us that their biggest problem is the lack of conflict in their organisations,” he says. “They say that autocratic senior leaders create a culture where people prefer to ‘keep their head down’ and not offer feedback or ideas; the anticipation of conflict inhibits performance.”
This does not mean there never are rows at work – far from it. In fact, conflicts are usually messier because they have not been brought to the surface soon enough. Indeed, we should probably brace ourselves for more not less conflict at work as the world slides into recession. “Der Dalles schlägt sich,” as they used to say in Vienna. “Those who are struggling beat each other up.”
OPP recently surveyed 5,000 employees in Europe and America to discover their attitudes to (and experience of) conflict at work. They found that, on average, each employee spends 2.1 hours a week – roughly one day a month – dealing with conflict in some way.
Managers struggle with this. Some receive training in the kind of communication and mediation skills that can help defuse tension. Others – 7 per cent, according to OPP – turn in desperation to the last resort of the 21st-century manager, the internet.
It’s not all bad news. According to another piece of new (and ongoing) research, a burst of internal aggro might offer the chance to improve your company’s fortunes. Early findings point to the vital role of successfully managed conflict in the development of effective corporate strategy.
In their work with international businesses, the London-based consultancy Cognosis has found that managers can be a little bit daunted by the concept of “challenge”. But those who manage conflict will win greater engagement from their staff and much more “buy-in” as far as strategy is concerned.
How can you use disagreement to your advantage? Conflict should be managed formally rather than in an ad hoc way, Cognosis has found. You don’t want to encourage “water-cooler whingeing”, or a complete free-for-all where barrack-room lawyers with the loudest voices dominate.
In open corporate cultures employees feel able to challenge senior managers. Indeed, their critical views will be actively and regularly sought. “One of the defining characteristics of strategically effective leaders is their commitment to challenge, and their ability to both challenge others and be challenged themselves in a positive and constructive way,” says Richard Brown, managing partner at Cognosis.
On the flight home from a recent trip to the US, I explored at length the musical entertainment options that my carrier had kindly provided. After some uplifting Bach and some satisfying Beatles, I have to admit that my finger hovered momentarily over – I am not proud about this – the “Easy Listening” channel. Reader, I pressed that button. But after one glorious burst of Petula Clark’s timeless “Downtown” –
When you’re alone
And life is making you lonely
You can always go downtown
– I realised that this channel had nothing else to offer me.
And then it struck me. I had made exactly the same mistake Mr Dimon had warned against a day or two earlier. I had opted for Easy Listening, when I should have stuck with the robust truthfulness of Lennon and McCartney or the challenging polyphonics of JS Bach. Tiredness was no excuse. The soft option was all wrong.
In the difficult months ahead managers are going to have to lead by example, and not flinch from conflict. “In bygone days,” the British politician Jo Grimond once said, “commanders were taught that when in doubt, they should march their troops towards the sound of gunfire.” Tin hats on, everyone. By the left, quick, march.
A recent article in the Financial Times addresses the issue thus:
The Challenge of Straight Talking
By Stefan Stern
Lawyers, bankers, accountants and consultants are all after the same thing. No, not cash. That goes without saying. What they dream about is achieving a special status with their clients: that of the Trusted Adviser.
It is lonely at the top, people say. You cannot count on colleagues to give you the unvarnished truth. Professional services firms can make good that shortfall in trust, and give you the brutal facts when others are unwilling or unable to do so.
Some bosses claim to have created a slightly less lonely environment for themselves. Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, has met business leaders who say that they have done just that. “They tell you that you’ve always got to have at least one close colleague who will tell you the truth,” Mr Dimon said at the Harvard Business School centennial conference last week. “Well, if you’ve only got one guy in 10 who will tell you the truth you should fire the other nine!”
Mr Dimon is right. There should be zero tolerance for mealy-mouthed, flannelling, equivocating co-workers. And yet the evidence suggests that there is not enough straight talk at work. Fearing disruptive conflict and bust-ups, we muddle through, bite our tongues, zip the lip.
Robert McHenry, chief executive of OPP, the Oxford-based business psychology consultancy, says that some organisations may be suppressing conflicts that should in fact be allowed to burst out.
“Clients sometimes tell us that their biggest problem is the lack of conflict in their organisations,” he says. “They say that autocratic senior leaders create a culture where people prefer to ‘keep their head down’ and not offer feedback or ideas; the anticipation of conflict inhibits performance.”
This does not mean there never are rows at work – far from it. In fact, conflicts are usually messier because they have not been brought to the surface soon enough. Indeed, we should probably brace ourselves for more not less conflict at work as the world slides into recession. “Der Dalles schlägt sich,” as they used to say in Vienna. “Those who are struggling beat each other up.”
OPP recently surveyed 5,000 employees in Europe and America to discover their attitudes to (and experience of) conflict at work. They found that, on average, each employee spends 2.1 hours a week – roughly one day a month – dealing with conflict in some way.
Managers struggle with this. Some receive training in the kind of communication and mediation skills that can help defuse tension. Others – 7 per cent, according to OPP – turn in desperation to the last resort of the 21st-century manager, the internet.
It’s not all bad news. According to another piece of new (and ongoing) research, a burst of internal aggro might offer the chance to improve your company’s fortunes. Early findings point to the vital role of successfully managed conflict in the development of effective corporate strategy.
In their work with international businesses, the London-based consultancy Cognosis has found that managers can be a little bit daunted by the concept of “challenge”. But those who manage conflict will win greater engagement from their staff and much more “buy-in” as far as strategy is concerned.
How can you use disagreement to your advantage? Conflict should be managed formally rather than in an ad hoc way, Cognosis has found. You don’t want to encourage “water-cooler whingeing”, or a complete free-for-all where barrack-room lawyers with the loudest voices dominate.
In open corporate cultures employees feel able to challenge senior managers. Indeed, their critical views will be actively and regularly sought. “One of the defining characteristics of strategically effective leaders is their commitment to challenge, and their ability to both challenge others and be challenged themselves in a positive and constructive way,” says Richard Brown, managing partner at Cognosis.
On the flight home from a recent trip to the US, I explored at length the musical entertainment options that my carrier had kindly provided. After some uplifting Bach and some satisfying Beatles, I have to admit that my finger hovered momentarily over – I am not proud about this – the “Easy Listening” channel. Reader, I pressed that button. But after one glorious burst of Petula Clark’s timeless “Downtown” –
When you’re alone
And life is making you lonely
You can always go downtown
– I realised that this channel had nothing else to offer me.
And then it struck me. I had made exactly the same mistake Mr Dimon had warned against a day or two earlier. I had opted for Easy Listening, when I should have stuck with the robust truthfulness of Lennon and McCartney or the challenging polyphonics of JS Bach. Tiredness was no excuse. The soft option was all wrong.
In the difficult months ahead managers are going to have to lead by example, and not flinch from conflict. “In bygone days,” the British politician Jo Grimond once said, “commanders were taught that when in doubt, they should march their troops towards the sound of gunfire.” Tin hats on, everyone. By the left, quick, march.
Saturday 29 November 2008
Business Jargon now called "Buffling"
All those jargon terms that we love to hate are now being referred to as buffling. An interesting article about the most hated ones appeared in today's press, with few surprises. I have to admit I do use some of these and wonder if the survey spoke to the wrong people. Most of these terms are, in my view quite reasonable in the right context and with the right audience.
Like any jargon or abbreviations, they can be useful common language as long as everybody understands them. However beware of using to impress or baffle....
Like any jargon or abbreviations, they can be useful common language as long as everybody understands them. However beware of using to impress or baffle....
Thursday 27 November 2008
What Type (MBTI) is Barrack Obama
I have been fascinated by debates on American websites to answer this question. I have not heard enough from him to be sure myself, but the thoughts of the respondents may provide some useful tips and insights for your own type-watching and predicting.
If you don't know much about MBTI and Type, read the brief explanations on my website.
What's Obama's Type?
A selection of responses:
Ø I'll start off by saying that I think he's a big NT. I've really appreciated his 'big picture' orientation and the logical approach he seems to bring to his decision-making.
Ø Recent email newsletters I have received from venture to guess he's an INFP. Their guess for John McCain was ESTP. Before seeing this newsletter my own guess for Obama was ENFP and my guess for McCain was ISTJ. For whatever its worth since we don't have much unguarded information: Obama has a clear preference for N.
As one who is an attorney, has consulted with the profession for some 25 years, and studied the (very clear) legal profession data, the odds are very strong that he prefers T. One really has to start with that assumption until proven wrong. [Editor of the Law Review at Harvard would tend to confirm NT, though could not rule out NF.] He shows very few signs of preferring E, though not enough data to be really sure...too much focus, unlike Clinton who obviously strongly prefers E). Have not read his books which almost surely would settle the issues---so have to be reserved about my thoughts without that fairly comprehensive source of information. [My wife who has been a practicing trial attorney for more than 30 years and an INTP (very close to the middle on T/F) says he is most likely INTP and perhaps close on J.] ENFP almost surely not. An INTP with good training in community organizing, political advocacy and trial work often appear on the surface to be INFP, but he appears too cool and analytical for an F preference, even compensating for the effect of a preference for I (which often confuses the surface appearance). Again, his books would probably settle the T/F question quite easily. Finally, we have seen people confuse an NT who is a strong advocate for particular values with an NF because of the way some of the MBTI literature misinterprets the nature and role of empathy, sympathy, etc. and subjective valuing (especially negative valuing).
Ø I don't think we can guess (unless his books reveal) his I/E preference. He has to extravert often, and excels at it, but he may prefer taking it all in. N seems fairly clear, T seems almost as clear. So NT Temp is likely. Guess is J although the other comments make P possible.
I would agree with all those that said his type included the NT. I think he's ENTP or INTP. He clearly prefers Introverted Thinking which would lead to the P at the end of the type code. He's very intentional and deliberate about what he says and at times you can see him thinking. I think the campaign would have been very difficult to maintain if he wasn't extroverted. He has a natural charisma and engagement with others. I think he's close in the I/E preference however.
Ø I think that Barack Obama is an ENFP. He gets his energy from people. He uses his intuition and focuses on future possibilities. He cares about how other people feel and listens to both sides when making a decision. The NF makes him an idealist/inspirer. Finally, he admitted that his desk is very disorganized. John McCain and George W. Bush are probably ESTP’s.
Ø I too would go for definite N, with probable T and a Perceiving preference also. With the strong N that would push me toward E giving his Dominant function as Extraverted Intuition. My own type is ENFP but with tough-minded and methodical clusters from T and J and I often get confused for an ENTP (by MBTI professionals). He doesn't need to be NF to be an idealist. He clearly has strong values from his upbringing and I think people misinterpret this as NF. So...ENTP
Ø I know of an INFP who entered Law because of wanting to work in ethics and human rights... far from typical of the profession, but he felt it was worth the 'pain' for what he wanted to achieve. Obama comes across as strongly idealistic to me, with a well developed T as well. Americans often seem Extravert to the British as they are taught from childhood to express themselves, but Obama comes across to me as very self-contained and self-controlled as one would expect from an I. Something drives every politician... Obama “seems” more driven by his ideals or a vision for humanity than by a desire for power or need to be right, and also seems very natural at working with other people in a consensus manner. So I'm opting for INFP (or maybe INFJ) with a well-developed use of T as the 3rd or 4th function.
Hmmm - I am leaning towards agreeing with the last prediction, INFP. What do you think?
Steve (ENFP)
If you don't know much about MBTI and Type, read the brief explanations on my website.
What's Obama's Type?
A selection of responses:
Ø I'll start off by saying that I think he's a big NT. I've really appreciated his 'big picture' orientation and the logical approach he seems to bring to his decision-making.
Ø Recent email newsletters I have received from venture to guess he's an INFP. Their guess for John McCain was ESTP. Before seeing this newsletter my own guess for Obama was ENFP and my guess for McCain was ISTJ. For whatever its worth since we don't have much unguarded information: Obama has a clear preference for N.
As one who is an attorney, has consulted with the profession for some 25 years, and studied the (very clear) legal profession data, the odds are very strong that he prefers T. One really has to start with that assumption until proven wrong. [Editor of the Law Review at Harvard would tend to confirm NT, though could not rule out NF.] He shows very few signs of preferring E, though not enough data to be really sure...too much focus, unlike Clinton who obviously strongly prefers E). Have not read his books which almost surely would settle the issues---so have to be reserved about my thoughts without that fairly comprehensive source of information. [My wife who has been a practicing trial attorney for more than 30 years and an INTP (very close to the middle on T/F) says he is most likely INTP and perhaps close on J.] ENFP almost surely not. An INTP with good training in community organizing, political advocacy and trial work often appear on the surface to be INFP, but he appears too cool and analytical for an F preference, even compensating for the effect of a preference for I (which often confuses the surface appearance). Again, his books would probably settle the T/F question quite easily. Finally, we have seen people confuse an NT who is a strong advocate for particular values with an NF because of the way some of the MBTI literature misinterprets the nature and role of empathy, sympathy, etc. and subjective valuing (especially negative valuing).
Ø I don't think we can guess (unless his books reveal) his I/E preference. He has to extravert often, and excels at it, but he may prefer taking it all in. N seems fairly clear, T seems almost as clear. So NT Temp is likely. Guess is J although the other comments make P possible.
I would agree with all those that said his type included the NT. I think he's ENTP or INTP. He clearly prefers Introverted Thinking which would lead to the P at the end of the type code. He's very intentional and deliberate about what he says and at times you can see him thinking. I think the campaign would have been very difficult to maintain if he wasn't extroverted. He has a natural charisma and engagement with others. I think he's close in the I/E preference however.
Ø I think that Barack Obama is an ENFP. He gets his energy from people. He uses his intuition and focuses on future possibilities. He cares about how other people feel and listens to both sides when making a decision. The NF makes him an idealist/inspirer. Finally, he admitted that his desk is very disorganized. John McCain and George W. Bush are probably ESTP’s.
Ø I too would go for definite N, with probable T and a Perceiving preference also. With the strong N that would push me toward E giving his Dominant function as Extraverted Intuition. My own type is ENFP but with tough-minded and methodical clusters from T and J and I often get confused for an ENTP (by MBTI professionals). He doesn't need to be NF to be an idealist. He clearly has strong values from his upbringing and I think people misinterpret this as NF. So...ENTP
Ø I know of an INFP who entered Law because of wanting to work in ethics and human rights... far from typical of the profession, but he felt it was worth the 'pain' for what he wanted to achieve. Obama comes across as strongly idealistic to me, with a well developed T as well. Americans often seem Extravert to the British as they are taught from childhood to express themselves, but Obama comes across to me as very self-contained and self-controlled as one would expect from an I. Something drives every politician... Obama “seems” more driven by his ideals or a vision for humanity than by a desire for power or need to be right, and also seems very natural at working with other people in a consensus manner. So I'm opting for INFP (or maybe INFJ) with a well-developed use of T as the 3rd or 4th function.
Hmmm - I am leaning towards agreeing with the last prediction, INFP. What do you think?
Steve (ENFP)
Train Your Way out of Recession
Well I would say that wouldn't I? Of course - I am in this business because I believe in the value of developing people, but in these hard times a lot of organisations are cutting back on training and it is encouraging that articles like this appear to fuel the debate and hopefully encourage people to think carefully before making potentially counter productive cutbacks.
The full article can be accessed by clicking on the blog title, but highlights follow:
Investing in your staff will improve productivity and save you money
Britain’s employers are being urged to “grow their own” after researchers at Cranfield School of Management discovered that investing in training not only saves money but is more effective than shopping around for talent.
The report, Nurturing Talent, is the first to compare the impact of recruiting externally with that of developing employees. Three quarters of the 1,189 companies involved in the study felt that training their own staff was more beneficial to their business than recruiting people from outside.
Half the companies discovered that training staff made them more likely to stay. One-third found it increased staff motivation, and almost half actually saved money in the process.
Half the companies discovered that training staff made them more likely to stay. One-third found it increased staff motivation, and almost half actually saved money in the process.
Much of this may be obvious, but useful to have some hard facts to go with the strong feelings!
Poor Managers Bad For Your Heart!
The latest thing to blame your boss for - now Swedish researchers are claiming that poor management, or more specifically leadership increases the risk of serious heart disease and heart attacks among employees. How long before we see the first lawsuit?
Health and Safety, Stress, Performance, and Productivity are all areas that have been part of a manager's responsibility for some time. Some managers will throw their hands up in despair that they now have to look after the health of their workers, but the better ones will know this has always been the case implicitly, if not explicitly. Stress is a good example of how awareness has increased in recent years and most leaders now realise that they need to understand its causes, symptoms and how to reduce it - for themselves and their teams. Unfortunately a large part of this increased awareness is due to the ever more litigous society we live in, not because managers have become more sensitive!
General health is just an extension of this - healthy workers are more productive and motivated, so we should be concerned about it. There is a business case as well as a humanistic one. There are many ways we can help people to be more healthy and wise. We can bring in life coaches, personal trainers and work-place massage therapists, all of whom are becoming more common in many organisations. Or we can learn to be better leaders and role models ourselves.
As with so much of leadership, this starts with how you manage yourself. As my old school motto put it - "Mens Sana in Corpore Sano" or a healthy mind in a healthy body. Look after yourself and then look after others. Or as Stephen Covey puts it in the "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" - "Sharpen Your Saw".....
Health and Safety, Stress, Performance, and Productivity are all areas that have been part of a manager's responsibility for some time. Some managers will throw their hands up in despair that they now have to look after the health of their workers, but the better ones will know this has always been the case implicitly, if not explicitly. Stress is a good example of how awareness has increased in recent years and most leaders now realise that they need to understand its causes, symptoms and how to reduce it - for themselves and their teams. Unfortunately a large part of this increased awareness is due to the ever more litigous society we live in, not because managers have become more sensitive!
General health is just an extension of this - healthy workers are more productive and motivated, so we should be concerned about it. There is a business case as well as a humanistic one. There are many ways we can help people to be more healthy and wise. We can bring in life coaches, personal trainers and work-place massage therapists, all of whom are becoming more common in many organisations. Or we can learn to be better leaders and role models ourselves.
As with so much of leadership, this starts with how you manage yourself. As my old school motto put it - "Mens Sana in Corpore Sano" or a healthy mind in a healthy body. Look after yourself and then look after others. Or as Stephen Covey puts it in the "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" - "Sharpen Your Saw".....
Tuesday 25 November 2008
Living and Learning and Leading.
Hello, I am Steve Goodwill, founder and Managing Director of Goodwill Training. I formed my training company in 1989 and incorporated in 2004. We design and deliver learning and development events to help people to become more effective, confident, liberated, and motivated so that they can contribute more to the organisations they serve.
A key aspect of our training is the title of this blog - "Learning Through Experience". Training can be, and I believe should be enjoyable and memorable, but the key is applying the learning in our lives. On our programmes we use a lot of experiential activities to make this happen - but we encourage participants to consider, analyse and learn from all of their experiences, not just those on the programme.
There is an old saying that "We live and learn." If only this was true! Too often we fail to recognise the lessons or apply them to our lives. We try to address this on our events, but recognise that only the individual can do that, all we can do is try to show and model the way.
It has often been said that you cannot manage others until you can manage yourself. This is just as true for Leadership. While not wanting to debate here the difference between Managing and Leading, I am trying to make a point about learning. An update of that old saying might be:
"We Live and Learn and Lead."
.... but only if we work at it consciously and deliberately.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
