Focus On Teams

“If you could get all the people in an organization rowing in the same direction,” writes Patrick Lencioni in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (Jossey-Bass, 2002), “you could dominate any industry, in any market, against any competition, at any time.” The notion and importance of having healthy teams and dealing with dysfunctional teams is nothing new in the world of leadership and organizational change. Most authors have documented this within various books and research. The challenge is that when dealing with this wicked problem, most leaders are not aware of two problems that have a tendency to become malignant and cause significant problems when dealing with a situation of this nature.

Ram Charan in his book, Leadership in the Era of Economic Uncertainty: The New Rules for Getting the Right Things Done in Difficult Times (McGraw Hill, 2009), points out that during periods of uncertainty, which often happen when we are dealing with a wicked problem, teams can become “frozen in analysis paralysis.” And as a result, there is a reduction in horizontal cooperation, which, from my vantage point, is critical to solving a wicked problem. 

Now, the natural next step, given Charan’s observations about teams during challenging times, is to implement a team development strategy, which will empower them to tackle this wicked problem. This course of action would aid teams in overcoming the common problem of being frozen in analysis paralysis. At the exact same time, this strategy could also focus on generating superb horizontal cooperation. 

However, most team development strategies that focus on empowering teams are focused on intra-team development, rather than a combination of intra-team development and inter-team development. In particular, we need to recognize that inter-team development is mission critical to generating effective short and long term solutions to this wicked problem. But to do this level of work, we need to explore the subject of empowerment in greater detail. 

Brene’ Brown in her book, Dare To Lead: Brave Work, Tough Conversations, Whole Hearts (Random House, 2018), reminds us that there are three elements to empowerment, namely, power with, power to, and power within. “Power with has to do with finding common ground among different interests in order to build collective strength. Based on mutual support, solidarity, collaboration, and recognition and respect for differences, power with multiples individual talents, knowledge, and resources to make a larger impact.” 

From my vantage point, I don’t think we discuss the concept of “power with” at a team level often enough. I think we mostly define power within the scope of positional power, i.e. the role and responsibility of the leader. However, Brown’s definition of “power with” requires the team leader, and the team as a whole, to have a particular mindset and skill set in order to generate “mutual support, solidarity, collaboration, and recognition and respect for differences.” This is heavy lifting for people who are expected to do this kind of work, because they may not have the ability to do it, or a framework or process for doing it. Therefore, we are setting the team leader and the team up for a predictable failure. 

Next, “Power to translates to giving everyone on your team agency and acknowledging their unique potential. It is based on the belief that each individual has the power to make a difference, which can be multiplied by new skills, knowledge, awareness, and confidence.” 

This second key point about empowerment links directly to Gallup’s research on strengths based leadership, and the seminal work of Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman in their book, First, Break All The Rules: What The World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently. (Simon & Schuster, 1999). From my experience, in order to achieve this understanding, there needs to be a tremendous amount of education, common language, and regular coaching plus weekly check-ins, all of which are not normally part of a team development strategy. It is the combination of these factors that has the potential to empower a team to deal with a wicked problem.

Third, “Power within is defined by an ability to recognize differences and respect others, grounded in a strong foundation of self-worth and self-knowledge. When we operate from a place of power within, we feel comfortable challenging assumptions and long-held beliefs, pushing against status quo, and asking if there aren’t other ways to achieving the highest common good.” 

This is an important point in Brown’s writing, and it needs to be thoroughly unpacked at a team level. In particular, the notion that we recognize differences and respect differences is integral to the DEI work that many organizations are doing at this time period. However, this overall corporate strategy is rarely explored and implemented at the team level, most of the work is done at the individual level. In particular, the idea of people “challenging assumptions and long-held beliefs, pushing against status quo, and asking if there aren’t other ways to achieving the highest common good” is rarely supported at a team level, because most team leaders feel threatened by this course of action. The outcome of these feelings is that many team leaders will transform their team into a single leader work group in order to maintain control and limit the feeling of chaos or messiness that the team is experiencing. 

Empowering intra-teamwork and inter-teamwork can be part of implementing a team development strategy. But, from my vantage point, there is not enough work done with the three, aforementioned concepts described within Brown’s research. If we seek to focus on teams and recognize that they are mission critical to solving this wicked problem, then we need to take the time to create a short and long term strategy that generates a work environment where people can role model power with, power to, and power within.

One other component related to implementing a team development strategy is to sit with teams and ask the following question: If this team works exceptionally well with each other and with other teams, what is the outcome that will take place? This question is similar to Brene’ Brown’s famous question, “What does done look like?” If a team can not define it’s core purpose and desired outcome from the work it is doing, then no matter what kind of team environment is created, especially one with high levels of functional and emotional trust, the team is not on track to being successful. If we want effective teams that are able generate sustainable outcomes, then implementing a team development strategy must be carefully designed, defined and then delegated to people who have the capacity to execute it in a timely and efficient manner. 

FYI: To be continued next Monday. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Implement A Relationship Building Strategy

Here is where to start when dealing with the current wicked problem related to recruitment and retention. First, implement a targeted relationship building strategy. Building on the important insight that Margaret Wheatley shared years ago, namely that “People are the solution to the problems that confront us,” those involved in dealing with this wicked problem also need to remember something John Kotter wrote about in his book, The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations (Harvard Business School Press, 2002). As he explained, "... those who are most successful at significant change begin their work by creating a sense of urgency among relevant people.” In particular, I would add that they consciously choose to create clarity and focus amongst these same key people. 

Putting together the two aforementioned insights of Wheatley and Kotter, we need to understand that certain people, who may or may not have positional authority, have the respect and influence amongst certain groups of people. Their commitment to lead and/or participate in change related to this problem, and their ability to communicate a new way of working together can significantly influence the outcome of a variety of proposed solutions and interventions related to this wicked problem

Furthermore, as Gallup research notes, people rarely quit a company. Most of the time, they quit their boss or their team due to some level of dysfunctionality. When there is no trust, poor communication and/or burnout, employees quickly exit their job. 

Retention, on the other hand, happens because of healthy relationships. When people at work feel like their supervisor knows them and respects them, they stay. When people feel like their job matters and that they are able to make progress on a daily basis, they stay. As Patrick Lencioni reminds us in his book,  The Truth About Employee Engagement: A Fable About Addressing the Three Root Causes of Job Misery, formerly The Three Signs of a Miserable Job: A Fable for Managers (and their employees) (Jossey-Bass 2007): “People want to be managed as people, not as mere workers.”

With this important choice in mind, I am reminded of a key point from Jim Collin’s book, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap. . . and Others Don't (HarperBusiness, 2001). As he explains, “The good-to-great leaders began the transformation by first getting the right people on the bus (and the wrong people off the bus) and then figured out where to drive it.” As he continues, “The key point … is not just the idea of getting the right people on the team.  The key point is that "who" questions come before "what" decisions - before vision, before strategy, before organization structure, before tactics.  First who, then what - as a rigorous discipline, consistently applied.”

The challenge with this particular wicked problem is that we are not asking the “who questions” before we focus on the “what decisions” and actions. Therefore, now is the time to think deeply about the following two questions: Who are the key people in the company who will help us deal with this wicked problem? And are we building the right kind of relationship with these people to help solve it? From my vantage point, it is the lack of healthy relationships that is causing the retention problems we are having. And we all know that retention and recruitment issues are interconnected, i.e. one is constantly influencing the other and vice a versus. 

Once we have figured out the answer to the “who” questions, then we need to implement the relationship building strategy. This is a proactive choice to build better relationships with certain key people. But, from my vantage point, we must do this work within a framework of understanding three concepts, i.e. supervision, coaching, and check-ins. First, we need to recognize that supervision is necessary and important. It is not secondary when dealing with this particular wicked problem. Good supervision is based on the the ability to observe, direct, and/or oversee the execution of a task, project, or activity.  

Second, good coaching is a structured dialogue and development process to improve the professional competence to execute the aforementioned task, project, or activity. It is not a routine period of time where I solve all the problems you do not want to deal with or an hour long period of venting. Instead, it is a structured improvement process. Along this line of understanding of the differences between supervision and coaching, it is essential that leaders recognize that coaching is not supervision, and that supervision is not coaching. Still, elements of both are within each action. 

But, I believe the third concept is the most important one when implementing a relationship building strategy. Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall in their book, Nine Lies About Work: A Freethinking Leader’s Guide to the Real World (Harvard Business Review Press, 2019), call it a “check-in.” Here a person engages in “a frequent, one-on-one conversation about near-term future work between a team leader and a team member.” During this check-in, the leader asks the team member two questions: “What are your priorities this week? How can I help?” As Buckingham and Goodall explain, “This leads us to one of the most important insights shared by the best team leaders: frequency trumps quality…. The data reveals only that those team leaders who check in every week with each team member have higher levels of engagement and performance, and lower levels of voluntary turnover.” And improved engagement and lower turnover is one of the desired outcomes when dealing with this particular wicked problem. 

Therefore, I believe a relationship strategy based on weekly check-ins with key people is a great place to start. Furthermore, when all involved receive a combination of excellent supervision, coaching and weekly check-ins, we are then building a foundation for healthy relationships. As Patrick Lencioni reminds us in his book, The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else in Business (Jossey-Bass, 2012), a healthy work environment is one where there are “minimal politics and confusion, high degree of morale and productivity, and very low turnover among good employees.” And this a solid first step to dealing with the current wicked problem we are experiencing. 

FYI: To be continued on Friday. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

How Leaders Deal With Problems

Now, the typical leadership response to a technical problem is to define the problem and the solution. They make sure the right people do the work that needs to be done in order to create order and predictability where a problem may be creating some degree of chaos. In essence, they focus on maintaining already established norms, and using already established systems and processes. 

On the other hand, the typical leadership response to an adaptive challenge is to identify the adaptive challenge and to frame up the key questions and issues related to it. These same leaders resist having certain people in their existing roles be the only ones involved in solving the problem. They recognize that new voices and new perspectives may need to be involved to solve the adaptive challenge. The outcome of this leadership choice is that it may expose conflicts within the company or certain departments or teams. It also may result in more disruption to certain company norms, processes, or systems. In short, the process to find a solution to an adaptive challenge may cause numerous other problems to surface compounding the original challenge. 

With these differences in mind, we must again remember that a wicked problem is multidimensional and extremely complex. It also is filled with incomplete and contradictory information that is constantly changing. First, as I noted earlier this week in this blog, people, who have worked on these kinds of problems before us, break down the big wicked problem into multiple smaller problems, defining which ones are technical and which ones are adaptive. Next, they establish a structure for the problem-solving process, which includes defining time frames, decision architecture, and clear role assignments. Furthermore, they slow down the process of challenging certain company norms, processes, or systems in order to reduce the feeling and amount of internal organizational chaos. Finally, they implement multiple solutions at the exact same time, hoping that the aggregate of the solutions will itself achieve a degree of solution focused, accelerated convergence within the company, generating something that will transform the wicked problem. 

FYI: To be continued on Thursday. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Understanding A Wicked Problem

The term, a wicked problem, was first used by Horst Rittel, a design theorist, in the mid-60’s. Rittel coined the term to describe a problem that was multidimensional and extremely complex. A wicked problem is a social or cultural problem that is difficult or nearly impossible to solve because of its complexity and interconnected nature. It is filled with incomplete and contradictory information that is constantly changing, i.e. dynamic. 

Solving a wicked problem requires a deep understanding by all involved and an innovative approach to defining the problem. From people who have worked on these kinds of problems before us, they have learned that it is best to break down the big problem into multiple problems and then to implement multiple solutions at the exact same time.

Over the course of my career, I have worked with a variety of companies who have encountered staffing shortage problems. I remember working with a large company who was struggling with this issue, and they asked me to share my perspective. I said to them, “you live or die by the quality of your front line supervisors and middle managers, not by your senior team.”

The CEO responded, “But we have a great senior team.”

“I agree,” I responded, “but the core business of the company is happening at the local level more than at the national level. And national solutions are helpful. But you are paid for the local services, not for having a national infrastructure.”

This perspective was challenging for the senior team to hear on that sunny afternoon during their annual retreat. Yet, upon reflection, they knew it was right. The national group needed to focus on mission support and the local groups needed to focus on mission fulfillment. So, the solutions for this wicked problem had to happen at the local level and the national level. But in the end, the moment of truth, the place were the mission became real, was local. And that local experience was highly influenced by the quality of the front line supervisors and middle managers. 

When working with a wicked problem during hard times, we need to understand two terms, namely technical problems and adaptive challenges. The former is a problem where the solution exists within the current problem solving expertise within the company. Therefore, a technical problem is one where the actual problem is clearly defined and there is a known solution. Then, as leaders, all we need to do is connect the right person with existing resources and processes to create the right solution. 

The later, namely an adaptive challenge, requires a new way of thinking, i.e. a new perspective, expertise, or solution. One of the issues with an adaptive problem is that defining the problem may require learning, and it often calls into question fundamental assumptions and beliefs.  Furthermore, a solution can only be found through changes in people’s priorities, beliefs, habits, and loyalties. 

For me, a wicked problem is an adaptive challenge on steroids for the simple reason that it is both complicated and complex. On one hand, certain elements of the problem are complicated, but they have a clear problem definition and a clear solution can be implemented. For example, we do know how to recruit people and we do know how to hire people. This is a known level of expertise within a company. It also is a process that takes time, because we need to follow set processes and systems to make it happen. 

Yet, at the exact same time, other elements of this wicked problem are complex for the simple reason that they are highly dynamic and unpredictable. For example, the moment we think we have recruitment and hiring figured out, we have to also focus on retention where we have a mix of certain employees choosing to retire early due to their age, burnout from a global pandemic, and lack of desire to want to deal with more change. Simultaneously, other employees are choosing to leave the company and work for someone else due to a wide variety of different factors over which it appears the company has little or no ability to control or to influence. 

FYI: To be continued on Wednesday. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Working With A Wicked Problem During Hard Times

During the last six months of executive coaching sessions, I have been asked the same two questions over and over again: 

- What do I do about the on-going problem of not finding the right people, or, for that matter, finding anyone to apply for an open position?

- And what do I do about not being able to keep our people because someone is willing to pay them more and/or offer them a different configuration of hours or benefits plus a signing bonus?

Numerous leaders and HR professionals are frustrated and stumped by this situation. Staff are troubled by the constant turnover and lack of new people being hired into these open positions. In short, the problem is getting worse and there is no end in sight. 

Initially, I struggled with these questions as an executive coach. I had no quick and easy answers. From my vantage point, the questions reflected not a singular problem but, instead, a multitude of problems. Upon much reflection, I began to comprehend what was going on and a unique pathway through these numerous problems. 

The Role of Accelerated Convergence

There is a term in the world of consulting called “accelerated convergence.” This happens when two or more problems come together to form a larger and more complex problem. One can also frame up accelerated convergence when a mix of solutions come together to form a better solution. For example, in the world of technology, a positive example of accelerated convergence happened when the cell phone, a camera, and some form of digital organizer all became part of the same mobile device. Think the iPhone. But right now in the area of recruitment and retention, accelerated convergence has a created a problem that is very difficult to solve. 

First, recognizing that accelerated convergence around the problem of recruitment and retention has and is taking place, I think we need to give this problem a name. To me, this problem is more than just an adaptive challenge, a technical problem, or a crisis. I would call it a “wicked problem.”

FYI: To be continued on Tuesday. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Stand On Solid Ground

As we move forward each day through the diverse, and ever-growing collection of adaptive challenges and technical problems before us and our organizations, remember that what ever happens, we do not need to go through it alone. Some days, we will feel alone. Some days, we will feel we are the only one who is struggling. Some days, we will feel ashamed of being challenged and we will feel vulnerable in the midst of our struggles. Still, we must understand that feelings may not always be the true perception of reality. 

No matter what is happening around us, we all have the capacity to support each other. When we choose to offer support and to receive it, we can and will be resilient beyond just surviving the hard times we are experiencing. As Rachel Naomi Remen, M.D. reminds us, “What we do to survive is often different from what we may need to do in order to live.” And during hard times, we need to survive and we also need to live. 

“So often, when we feel lost, adrift in our lives, our first instinct is to look out into the distance to find the nearest shore.”, writes Brene’ Brown in her book, Atlas of the Heart. “But that shore, that solid ground, is within us. The anchor we are searching for is connection, and it is internal. To form meaningful connections with others, we must first connect with ourselves, but to do either, we must first establish a common understanding of the language of emotion and human experience.” 

When we choose to connect with ourself, we must understand that hope and adversity are interrelated. We must realize that faith is foundational to this connection. We also need to remind ourselves and others that we, as leaders, are constantly sending a message whether we are speaking or not speaking. These meta-messages build culture at the team and organizational levels. Therefore, we need to be conscious of our non-verbal actions. We also need to  proactively engage in strategic level dialogue, and build on the strengths of all involved. Next, we need to create habits that maintain perspective when we are struggling and practice receiving as much as giving. Finally, we need to remember the advice and counsel of my late mother-in-law who said “We must wear belts and suspenders.” Creating inner stillness and creating broad networks of support are interconnected. Each one supports the other. 

Finding and then standing on our own, internal solid ground is hard work. Connecting with ourselves is the precursor to leading others through hard times. But with a common language, and a common understanding about our emotions and our experiences, we can be resilient in the midst of hard times.  For when we do this level of work, we then can conduct ourselves with the utmost integrity, and lead others through the difficulties before us all. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Wear Belts And Suspenders

During hard times, I am reminded of a phrase my late mother-in-law, who grew up in southwest Kansas during the Dust Bowl and the Depression, often said, “We must wear belts and suspenders.” This old saying implied that with “belts and suspenders,” one was always supporting the other. 

Yet, during hard times, we as leaders routinely get caught in a cycle of seeking perfection, trying to please others, proving we are always right, and pretending that we have it all together when in reality we are as confused and stressed out as everyone else. This pattern of living and working yields significant difficulties on an on-going basis. It is not a pathway to being resilient. 

However, there are two unique solutions in these kinds of situations and each supports the other. First, we must learn to be still. As we all know, leadership requires great patience, very focused attention, careful decision-making, and thoughtful execution. Leadership is most often defined by action, i.e. “Don’t just stand there, do something!” We are to get things done, and move quickly  on to the next problem on the list.

Stillness, on the other hand, is a unique choice. John Paul Lederach in his book, The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul Of Building Peace (Oxford University Press, 2005), writes, “The paradox is this: Stillness is not inactivity. It is the presence of disciplined activity without movement….It is that platform that generates authenticity of engagement, for it is the stage that makes true listening and seeing possible.”

When we choose inner stillness, we create the capacity to think deeply before action, rather than to react quickly and think later. As Ryan Holiday explains in his book, Stillness Is The Key (Portfolio/Penguin, 2019), inner stillness give us the opportunity to “Think about what’s important to you. Think about what’s actually going on. Think about what might be hidden from view. Think about what the rest of the chessboard looks like. Think about what the meaning of life really is.” All of these elements of reflection strengthen our ability to make wise decisions, and better choices. 

Second, we need to build broad networks of support in conjunction with creating inner stillness. Herminia Ibarra in her book,. Act Like A Leader, Think Like A Leader (Harvard Business Review Press, 2015) writes that we need to have three kinds of networks in our life, namely operational, personal, and strategic. As she explains, “The first helps you manage current internal responsibilities, the second boosts personal development, and the third focuses on new business directions and the stakeholders you must get on board to pursue these directions.” In particular, “… your strategic network - is made up of relationships that help you to envision the future, sell your ideas, and get the information and resources you need to exploit these ideas…. A good strategic network gives you connective advantage: the ability to marshal information, support, or other resources from one of your networks to obtain results in another.”

As we build these broad networks of support, we can leverage their vast experience, insights, and perspectives in order to gain fresh, new insights and perspectives about what is happening all around us as well as what is going on within us. And when we choose to create inner stillness and to listen more from this place of inner stillness, we come to better understand an old Chinese proverb: “It is not the size of the mountain that obstructs our way. It is the pebble in our shoe.” By removing the metaphorical pebble from our shoe with the assistance of our different networks and our capacity to create inner stillness, we can then work better with others to create the right solutions at the right time for the right reasons. For in hard times, this level of self-care, the sum of our inner stillness and our three healthy networks, is a force multiplier, i.e. it gives us the capacity to create better outcomes with our limited resources of time and energy. And that is a powerful choice during hard times. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Practice Receiving

It was the end of the day, and I had just completed my first, full day of in-person training after two years of pandemic living. I was exhausted and worn to my core from the stress and anxiety around the whole thing. 

After weeks of careful planning and much coordination with the hotel where the training was to take place, the big day arrived. Our training space was 2/3’s of an extremely large ball room. The room was set up in a classroom style with tables in rows and chairs facing the front. There were 6 foot aisles and 2 people to a table with 4 plus feet of space in between each person. The hotel’s air handling system was on full blast mode, attempting to keep a constant source of fresh and filtered air moving into the room. 

My podium was 15 feet from the front row so I could speak and not wear a mask. I also was given a cordless lavalier microphone so the people in the back of the room, some 40 feet away could hear me. 

Everyone else, who was participating in the training, needed to wear a mask. Hand sanitizer stations were placed at every door. All involved were suppose clean their hands before entering the room. And everyone was to stand or sit an appropriate distance during large and small group sessions. 

As the day progressed, I was trying to teach important leadership and organizational change strategies, and, at the exact same time, cope with my own worries and fears about getting COVID. I also was worried that someone coming to the training might give it to someone else. 

So, as the first day came to a close and people headed out, I was running on empty. I had done my best, but it had taken so much energy to manage my own feelings, the teaching material, and the general anxiety of the group. For many participants in the training, this also was their first time to be in a room with non-family members. 

As I gathered up my teaching notes, two women came up to the front of the room and one of them said, “Thank-you for having the courage to teach in-person during this stage of the pandemic. It was hard, and yet important that we begin to do in-person things again. I can tell it took a lot out of you, but you did it, and you did it well. We both appreciate your willingness to take the first step.”

I thanked them for their support and understanding. It had taken a lot out of me. 

Then, one of the women asked me a question, “Can we pray for you?”

I was stunned, and said “yes.”

She approached me, and given I was much taller than her, I got down on one knee. She put her hand on my shoulder and began to pray. I don’t remember the words she said, just the feeling of deep, unconditional love, support and kindness. My eyes filled up with tears. 

When she was done praying, there was a long moment of silence. The three of us just paused and let it all sink in. And then, I thanked them for this gift. It was heart warming and very meaningful for me. 

During hard times, we are so focused on getting things done. As a result, we become check list people, marking things off and moving on to the next item on the list. Some days, we do not even recognize we feel drained until it is too late. Burn-out is real and can be inevitable during hard times. 

Still, there are people in our lives, at work and at home, who want to support us. They want to appreciate us. But we, as leaders, often think of receiving their support as unprofessional or a sign of weakness. 

Furthermore, we do not even make time or space to receive care and support from others. Instead, we define leadership as a one way street, where we do everything for everyone else. In simple terms, we only serve them. 

And yet, I have learned and relearned that it is in the receiving that we honor the notion that caring and support is a two way street. We can give as leaders and we can receive. In essence, leadership is a mutual relationship, not a unidirectional relationship. 

On that Tuesday afternoon, their prayers made a world of difference. It did not eliminate my physical exhaustion, but it did recharge my heart and soul. It gave me hope and uplifted my spirit. It gave me the strength to keep moving forward. 

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257