I was recently asked by a law firm to come in and meet with one of their partners with a view to coaching him around his behaviour in the firm. I thought, “no problem”.
I then asked why they wanted him to be coached. “Well he has gone through 18 junior lawyers in the last 6 years, and the last one that worked with him almost had a nervous breakdown” was the reply. Mmmmmm the alarm bells went off! This could be a bigger challenge than I thought.
In preparation for my meeting I interviewed a number of people in the firm and they painted a unanimous and unfavourable picture of him. They all said he was the best technical lawyer they had ever seen, however he was the most controlling, impersonal, manipulative and critical person they had ever worked with. The interesting thing is that he was never aggressive, or yelled, or got angry – they said he was very passive, yet he subtly tore away at a person’s self worth and confidence. They even told me stories of how people are scared to send printing to the communal printer because he will pick up peoples printing that has nothing to do with him, go in to their office, tell them what is wrong with their work, and then tell them how to fix it.
I thought, “Gee cant wait for this meeting!!!”
I greeted him at the door. We had a very brief conversation about his background and what lead him to the firm. “Seems pleasant enough”, I thought.
We sat down and I cut to the chase: “We both know why we are here, it is to discuss the high turnover of staff you have had in your area. I would like to get your take on the situation.”
He then proceeded to go through the list of people and tell me what was wrong with “them”. The first one was a nut case, the second one was incompetent, and the third one was unstable. On and on he went telling me what was wrong with all these people. I was stunned.
I asked, “If they are all so hopeless why have some of them gone off to flourish in other parts of the firm?” To which he replied, “They aren’t going well, the other partners in the firm just say that to keep them happy and to make me look bad. None of these people are a lawyers boot lace.”
Part of me was thinking, “has someone set me up?” as I searched the room for a hidden camera. “Ok, ok, ok! Let me ask you this. What in your behaviour contributed to them not working out?” I was greeted with a stunned look. He said, “I don’t understand, I just told you the problem, they were incompetent, if they gave me good lawyers they would stay. What have I got to do with it?”
Getting him to admit his behaviour may have contributed to the situation was like trying to raise the titanic with a dingy. The most he gave me was he admitted that he does not suffer fools!
I asked him if he wanted to work on his behaviour and do a series of coaching sessions. He agreed. I said the first step is for you to identify a series of key stakeholders in the business to give you feedback on your behaviour. Specifically what you do well and what you need to improve on.
His response was, “No!!”
“No what?” I asked.
No, “I refuse to let anyone give me feedback on my behaviour.”
“But you will get to choose who gives you feedback”
“I don’t care”.
Still reeling I said, “Well how do you expect to be a better leader if you don’t ask any of the people you lead about how you can do it better?”
The next line was my favourite. “I am self aware enough to know what I need to improve on and what I don’t.” At this point I wrapped up the interview and left.
When I walked out I two things screamed out at me:
Number 1. How often do we come into a situation and think “Its not Me, Its You”. “I am not the problem, they are the problem”. All too often we are blind to how our behaviour impacts on our environment.
Number 2. How very few people actually get honest feedback from their environment about their behaviour. So what we can do to improve it?
In particular this second step is vital. There is wisdom in our environment; not asking for feedback is missing out on a massive opportunity. Also, don’t just get feedback from your co-workers, ask your clients as well. Ask them on a regular basis how you can serve them better, what they like about conducting business with you, and what you need to change.
I was recently talking to a CEO of a large company in Australia who said that their US office (during the GFC) told him that they needed to save 3 million dollars in one of their divisions, and this is how many people he needed to sack to save that much money. He asked for the opportunity to find a solution without having to sack anyone. He put it to the team they came up with a strategy, it was implemented and they saved 3.89 million dollars.
Obviously this example of the friendly lawyer I have given you is an extreme one, but how much do we have in common with this lawyer? 67% of leaders in this country rate themselves as good or excellent, however 61% of the people they lead rate them as poor or terrible. In fact 53% of people said they would sack their manager if they could. How we “Show Up” as a leader has a massive impact on our organisation. Gallup showed in a survey of 1 million people that the most common reason people left their last job was because of their direct manager.
My challenge to you is:
1. Stop your natural reaction to say “It’s not me it’s you”. First start with how your behaviour contributed to the situation.
2. Ask your environment for feedback on your behaviour. It doesn’t even have to be formal (such as a 360), survey your clients and your co-workers. Ask them what do you do well and how could you change your behaviour to get a better outcome.
Dr Adam's Blog
Watch this space for Dr Adams latest research findings and presentation topics
It's not me, it's you!
Adam Fraser - Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Why should I be engaged at work? Give me one good reason!
Adam Fraser - Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Recent research out of the US has shown that workers are becoming more disengaged during the economic challenges we are experiencing. One of the reasons for this disengagement is that many are feeling angry with their company for firing their friends or cutting benefits. Their reaction is to take power into their own hands and say I will get back at them by not working as hard and being disengaged at work.
Sounds logical, but are they hurting themselves more than the company?
There are 3 types of workers:
Engaged worker – has a strong connection to their job and the company. Constantly looking to improve their performance and move the organization forward. Are enthusiastic at work and boost the culture.
Not Engaged Employee - have “checked out”, do the job but don’t have any enthusiasm, energy or passion into their work. You could say they have quit but haven’t had the decency to resign.
Actively Disengaged – not just unhappy at work but they are “busy” sharing that unhappiness with other people in the work place. They undermine the company and engaged workers.
Currently in Australia only 18% of workers are engaged, a whopping 62% of workers are not engaged and 20% are actively disengaged (Gallup). This costs our economy 32 billion dollars in lost productivity alone.
Focusing on the wrong thing!
If you look at all the literature around engagement it always talks about how the company suffers if employees are disengaged.
A company that has 4 engaged employees to each actively disengaged employee, grows 2.6 times faster than an organisation with 1 engaged to one actively disengaged employee. In addition, companies in the top quarter of engagement out earn companies in the bottom quarter by 18%.
You can’t argue with those numbers, it is obvious that a company needs to have engaged workers.
What about the individual?
Rather than only focus on the company lets look at the impact of disengagement on the individual.
Among actively disengaged employees, 54% of them said that work stress caused them to behave poorly with family or friends (aggression, verbal abuse), while only 17% of engaged employees reported that work stress had caused them to behave poorly.
An English study followed a group of healthy men over 10 years. What they found is men who were engaged at work were 30% less likely to suffer from coronary heart disease than employees who were disengaged at work. The findings remained consistent even when the researchers controlled for age, ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, socio-economic position, cholesterol level, obesity, hypertension, smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity. What this means is that work attitude was the defining variable.
Engagement is also beneficial for your mental health. When you are engaged all you are thinking about is the present moment, you are paying attention to each detail and thinking “Can I do this better, faster more efficiently?” Research by prominent psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, found that people with chronic depression and eating disorders feel a predominance of negative emotions and negative self-talk. However when given a task to do that they are engaged in, their emotions and thoughts are indistinguishable from those of people free of these conditions.
In addition they found that the worst thing for people with depression and eating disorders is for them not to be engaged as their mind becomes occupied by depressing thoughts and their consciousness becomes scattered.
This is true for all of us, disengaged people in the work place often say that they are bored and disinterested. Pause for a moment to think what happens when you put two children in the back of a car and go for a long drives. After 15 minutes, what do you hear? “She hit me!” “He’s on my side of the car!” “He teased me!” A disengaged worker is similar to these children in the back of the car because when not engaged their thoughts drift and they start looking for trouble. Office gossip, turf battles and in fighting is a fall out from a lack of engagement.
Can we start to choose to be more engaged in the work place?
For most people engagement is conditional, if my team are in a good mood I will be engaged, my boss didn’t thank me for doing a good job so I wont be engaged. Obviously having a supportive and fun work environment makes it easier to be engaged. However research shows us that highly engaged people don’t necessarily work in the best work places.
Start to think: what is your lack of engagement costing you?
Sounds logical, but are they hurting themselves more than the company?
There are 3 types of workers:
Engaged worker – has a strong connection to their job and the company. Constantly looking to improve their performance and move the organization forward. Are enthusiastic at work and boost the culture.
Not Engaged Employee - have “checked out”, do the job but don’t have any enthusiasm, energy or passion into their work. You could say they have quit but haven’t had the decency to resign.
Actively Disengaged – not just unhappy at work but they are “busy” sharing that unhappiness with other people in the work place. They undermine the company and engaged workers.
Currently in Australia only 18% of workers are engaged, a whopping 62% of workers are not engaged and 20% are actively disengaged (Gallup). This costs our economy 32 billion dollars in lost productivity alone.
Focusing on the wrong thing!
If you look at all the literature around engagement it always talks about how the company suffers if employees are disengaged.
A company that has 4 engaged employees to each actively disengaged employee, grows 2.6 times faster than an organisation with 1 engaged to one actively disengaged employee. In addition, companies in the top quarter of engagement out earn companies in the bottom quarter by 18%.
You can’t argue with those numbers, it is obvious that a company needs to have engaged workers.
What about the individual?
Rather than only focus on the company lets look at the impact of disengagement on the individual.
Among actively disengaged employees, 54% of them said that work stress caused them to behave poorly with family or friends (aggression, verbal abuse), while only 17% of engaged employees reported that work stress had caused them to behave poorly.
An English study followed a group of healthy men over 10 years. What they found is men who were engaged at work were 30% less likely to suffer from coronary heart disease than employees who were disengaged at work. The findings remained consistent even when the researchers controlled for age, ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, socio-economic position, cholesterol level, obesity, hypertension, smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity. What this means is that work attitude was the defining variable.
Engagement is also beneficial for your mental health. When you are engaged all you are thinking about is the present moment, you are paying attention to each detail and thinking “Can I do this better, faster more efficiently?” Research by prominent psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, found that people with chronic depression and eating disorders feel a predominance of negative emotions and negative self-talk. However when given a task to do that they are engaged in, their emotions and thoughts are indistinguishable from those of people free of these conditions.
In addition they found that the worst thing for people with depression and eating disorders is for them not to be engaged as their mind becomes occupied by depressing thoughts and their consciousness becomes scattered.
This is true for all of us, disengaged people in the work place often say that they are bored and disinterested. Pause for a moment to think what happens when you put two children in the back of a car and go for a long drives. After 15 minutes, what do you hear? “She hit me!” “He’s on my side of the car!” “He teased me!” A disengaged worker is similar to these children in the back of the car because when not engaged their thoughts drift and they start looking for trouble. Office gossip, turf battles and in fighting is a fall out from a lack of engagement.
Can we start to choose to be more engaged in the work place?
For most people engagement is conditional, if my team are in a good mood I will be engaged, my boss didn’t thank me for doing a good job so I wont be engaged. Obviously having a supportive and fun work environment makes it easier to be engaged. However research shows us that highly engaged people don’t necessarily work in the best work places.
Start to think: what is your lack of engagement costing you?
Intention vs. Behaviour
Adam Fraser - Thursday, March 31, 2011
Why do I offend people with my behaviour when my intention is good?
I have never met a CEO whose intention was to drive down share prices, create a bad culture, or lose market shares. However, I have met many who have done this unintentionally!
I have never met a manager who wanted to disengage their staff, destroy team cohesion, and ‘drop the ball’ on projects. However, I have met many who have done this by consequence.
I have never met an employee whose intention was to create trouble in their team, undermine their manager, and bitch about their co-workers. However I have met many who have fallen into this trap.
I recently spoke at a conference for a large organisation that was implementing a new strategy whilst moving into a very bold and exciting new area of business. In fact, I was very excited to talk to the employees of this organisation because what the company was trying to achieve was ground breaking. Before I presented, the GM of that area got up and spoke to the team about this new venture.
It was a disaster! He came off bullish, gruff, and his sentiment was, “We are going in this direction and you better get on-board or else”. After he finished I asked him (very carefully) what his intention was for that presentation. He replied, “I wanted to show them how important this move is for the company and how I am 100% on-board, as they should be. They are such a great bunch of people, and I wanted to motivate them and show them how passionate I am about this”. I was amazed that his intention was so pure, yet his behaviour conveyed anything but.
From this, I realised that intention is very different to behaviour. This is a problem because we judge our own behaviour on our intent, yet we judge others on their behaviour. We find that if we say something with good intentions to someone and they get offended, our internal response is, “Why did that person become offended? I was just trying to help!”
Perhaps someone in our team is curt with us and we think, “Why are they being so horrible to me?” when really they just have a lot on their minds and their intention is only to be efficient in their response. Why does this mismatch happen? Because we know our intent, yet all others see is our behaviour.
I brought this up during a workshop I was running with a leadership team. It had a profound impact on the mood of the room and you could see them take a collective sigh of relief. Following this people were far more open to talk about some of the behaviours they were displaying that may have a detrimental impact on the team. In addition, the atmosphere lightened and they didn’t take offense when other people mentioned some of their personal behaviours that were challenging for the team. It was one of the most non-judgemental interactions I have ever seen.
There are two things to learn from this:
1. We need to be more self aware about our behaviour because it may not be aligned to our intent. How do we do this?
a. Have greater consciousness about your behaviour and its possible impact – think about how you ‘show up’.
b. Ask for feedback from people about your behaviour.
c. When they give you feedback on your behaviour, put your ego to the side and don’t take offense. Remember that behaviour is different to intent.
d. Set up a culture around yourself where others find it ok to give you feedback on your behaviour. Don’t create an internal ‘black book’ whenever someone feeds back anything that you don’t like.
2. That we shouldn’t be so quick to judge peoples’ behaviour because their intent may be pure.
a. Be honest and ask people what their intent was.
b. Tell them what the impact of their behaviour was on you and ask yourself if matched their intent.
c. Cut the people around you some slack and realise their intent may be good.
I have never met a CEO whose intention was to drive down share prices, create a bad culture, or lose market shares. However, I have met many who have done this unintentionally!
I have never met a manager who wanted to disengage their staff, destroy team cohesion, and ‘drop the ball’ on projects. However, I have met many who have done this by consequence.
I have never met an employee whose intention was to create trouble in their team, undermine their manager, and bitch about their co-workers. However I have met many who have fallen into this trap.
I recently spoke at a conference for a large organisation that was implementing a new strategy whilst moving into a very bold and exciting new area of business. In fact, I was very excited to talk to the employees of this organisation because what the company was trying to achieve was ground breaking. Before I presented, the GM of that area got up and spoke to the team about this new venture.
It was a disaster! He came off bullish, gruff, and his sentiment was, “We are going in this direction and you better get on-board or else”. After he finished I asked him (very carefully) what his intention was for that presentation. He replied, “I wanted to show them how important this move is for the company and how I am 100% on-board, as they should be. They are such a great bunch of people, and I wanted to motivate them and show them how passionate I am about this”. I was amazed that his intention was so pure, yet his behaviour conveyed anything but.
From this, I realised that intention is very different to behaviour. This is a problem because we judge our own behaviour on our intent, yet we judge others on their behaviour. We find that if we say something with good intentions to someone and they get offended, our internal response is, “Why did that person become offended? I was just trying to help!”
Perhaps someone in our team is curt with us and we think, “Why are they being so horrible to me?” when really they just have a lot on their minds and their intention is only to be efficient in their response. Why does this mismatch happen? Because we know our intent, yet all others see is our behaviour.
I brought this up during a workshop I was running with a leadership team. It had a profound impact on the mood of the room and you could see them take a collective sigh of relief. Following this people were far more open to talk about some of the behaviours they were displaying that may have a detrimental impact on the team. In addition, the atmosphere lightened and they didn’t take offense when other people mentioned some of their personal behaviours that were challenging for the team. It was one of the most non-judgemental interactions I have ever seen.
There are two things to learn from this:
1. We need to be more self aware about our behaviour because it may not be aligned to our intent. How do we do this?
a. Have greater consciousness about your behaviour and its possible impact – think about how you ‘show up’.
b. Ask for feedback from people about your behaviour.
c. When they give you feedback on your behaviour, put your ego to the side and don’t take offense. Remember that behaviour is different to intent.
d. Set up a culture around yourself where others find it ok to give you feedback on your behaviour. Don’t create an internal ‘black book’ whenever someone feeds back anything that you don’t like.
2. That we shouldn’t be so quick to judge peoples’ behaviour because their intent may be pure.
a. Be honest and ask people what their intent was.
b. Tell them what the impact of their behaviour was on you and ask yourself if matched their intent.
c. Cut the people around you some slack and realise their intent may be good.
1
Recent Posts
- Leadership Has not changed in 20 years
- Why everything you thought you knew about happiness is wrong!
- You're better off smoking pot than multitasking!
- Work-Life Balance
- It's not me, it's you!
- How to set up your day for better productivity!
- How to Maintain your energy levels
- How do we stick to making a change?
- How to avoid burnout in a world where work-life balance is dead!
- Workforce Dynamics: The Greater Fallout from the Global Financial Crisis
Tags
productivity Behaviour Change Change culture stress performance emotion high performers workplace culture concentration high performance social networks well-being brain multitasking focus mental health self awareness high performer work place performance work place productivity Flow productive creativity goals wellness happiness increase workforce productivity work performance mental performance Third Space Relationships attention work life balance energy
- attention (2)
- Behaviour Change (7)
- brain (10)
- Change (3)
- concentration (2)
- creativity (3)
- culture (3)
- emotion (3)
- energy (1)
- Flow (1)
- focus (4)
- goals (3)
- happiness (1)
- high performance (4)
- high performer (2)
- high performers (1)
- increase workforce productivity (2)
- mental health (4)
- mental performance (2)
- multitasking (4)
- performance (10)
- productive (3)
- productivity (11)
- Relationships (1)
- self awareness (3)
- social networks (1)
- stress (6)
- Third Space (1)
- well-being (2)
- wellness (5)
- work life balance (5)
- work performance (2)
- work place performance (3)
- work place productivity (4)
- workplace culture (4)