Tag: coaching supervision

  • High-Performing Teams Need Psychological Safety. Here’s How to Create It

    “There’s no team without trust,” (….”and no tribe without trust and direct feedback” cb) says Paul Santagata, Head of Industry at Google. He knows the results of the tech giant’s massive two-year study on team performance, which revealed that the highest-performing teams have one thing in common: psychological safety, the belief that you won’t be punished when you make a mistake ...”or speak your truth”…cb). Studies show that psychological safety allows for moderate risk-taking, speaking your mind, creativity, and sticking your neck out without fear of having it cut off — just the types of behavior that lead to market breakthroughs.

    Ancient evolutionary adaptations explain why psychological safety is both fragile and vital to success in uncertain, interdependent environments. The brain processes a provocation by a boss, competitive coworker, or dismissive subordinate as a life-or-death threat. The amygdala, the alarm bell in the brain, ignites the fight-or-flight response, hijacking higher brain centers. This “act first, think later” brain structure shuts down perspective and analytical reasoning. Quite literally, just when we need it most, we lose our minds. While that fight-or-flight reaction may save us in life-or-death situations, it handicaps the strategic thinking needed in today’s workplace.

    Twenty-first-century success depends on another system — the broaden-and-build mode of positive emotion, which allows us to solve complex problems and foster cooperative relationships. Barbara Fredrickson at the University of North Carolina has found that positive emotions like trust, curiosity, confidence, and inspiration broaden the mind and help us build psychological, social, and physical resources. We become more open-minded, resilient, motivated, and persistent when we feel safe. Humor increases, as does solution-finding and divergent thinking — the cognitive process underlying creativity.

    When the workplace feels challenging but not threatening, teams can sustain the broaden-and-build mode. Oxytocin levels in our brains rise, eliciting trust and trust-making behavior. This is a huge factor in team success, as Santagata attests: “In Google’s fast-paced, highly demanding environment, our success hinges on the ability to take risks and be vulnerable in front of peers.”

    So how can you increase psychological safety on your own team? Try replicating the steps that Santagata took with his:

    1. Approach conflict as a collaborator, not an adversary. We humans hate losing even more than we love winning. A perceived loss triggers attempts to reestablish fairness through competition, criticism, or disengagement, which is a form of workplace-learned helplessness. Santagata knows that true success is a win-win outcome, so when conflicts come up, he avoids triggering a fight-or-flight reaction by asking, “How could we achieve a mutually desirable outcome?”

    2. Speak human to human. Underlying every team’s who-did-what confrontation are universal needs such as respect, competence, social status, and autonomy. Recognizing these deeper needs naturally elicits trust and promotes positive language and behaviors. Santagata reminded his team that even in the most contentious negotiations, the other party is just like them and aims to walk away happy. He led them through a reflection called “Just Like Me,” which asks you to consider:

    • This person has beliefs, perspectives, and opinions, just like me.
    • This person has hopes, anxieties, and vulnerabilities, just like me.
    • This person has friends, family, and perhaps children who love them, just like me.
    • This person wants to feel respected, appreciated, and competent, just like me.
    • This person wishes for peace, joy, and happiness, just like me.

    3. Anticipate reactions and plan countermoves. “Thinking through in advance how your audience will react to your messaging helps ensure your content will be heard, versus your audience hearing an attack on their identity or ego,” explains Santagata.

    Skillfully confront difficult conversations head-on by preparing for likely reactions. For example, you may need to gather concrete evidence to counter defensiveness when discussing hot-button issues. Santagata asks himself, “If I position my point in this manner, what are the possible objections, and how would I respond to those counterarguments?” He says, “Looking at the discussion from this third-party perspective exposes weaknesses in my positions and encourages me to rethink my argument.”

    Specifically, he asks:

    • What are my main points?
    • What are three ways my listeners are likely to respond?
    • How will I respond to each of those scenarios?

    4. Replace blame with curiosity. If team members sense that you’re trying to blame them for something, you become their saber-toothed tiger. John Gottman’s research at the University of Washington shows that blame and criticism reliably escalate conflict, leading to defensiveness and — eventually — to disengagement. The alternative to blame is curiosity. If you believe you already know what the other person is thinking, then you’re not ready to have a conversation. Instead, adopt a learning mindset, knowing you don’t have all the facts. Here’s how:

    • State the problematic behavior or outcome as an observation, and use factual, neutral language. For example, “In the past two months there’s been a noticeable drop in your participation during meetings and progress appears to be slowing on your project.”
    • Engage them in an exploration. For example, “I imagine there are multiple factors at play. Perhaps we could uncover what they are together?”
    • Ask for solutions. The people who are responsible for creating a problem often hold the keys to solving it. That’s why a positive outcome typically depends on their input and buy-in. Ask directly, “What do you think needs to happen here?” Or, “What would be your ideal scenario?” Another question leading to solutions is: “How could I support you?”

    5. Ask for feedback on delivery. Asking for feedback on how you delivered your message disarms your opponent, illuminates blind spots in communication skills, and models fallibility, which increases trust in leaders. Santagata closes difficult conversations with these questions:

    • What worked and what didn’t work in my delivery?
    • How did it feel to hear this message?
    • How could I have presented it more effectively?

    For example, Santagata asked about his delivery after giving his senior manager tough feedback. His manager replied, “This could have felt like a punch in the stomach, but you presented reasonable evidence and that made me want to hear more. You were also eager to discuss the challenges I had, which led to solutions.”

    6. Measure psychological safety. Santagata periodically asks his team how safe they feel and what could enhance their feeling of safety. In addition, his team routinely takes surveys on psychological safety and other team dynamics. Some teams at Google include questions such as, “How confident are you that you won’t receive retaliation or criticism if you admit an error or make a mistake?”

    If you create this sense of psychological safety on your own team starting now, you can expect to see higher levels of engagement, increased motivation to tackle difficult problems, more learning and development opportunities, and better performance.

  • Leading with the Power of Humility

    by Dan Rockwel

    View original publication on LeadershipFreak

    The seductions of arrogance wreck leaders, demoralize teams, and destroy organizations.

    “The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance.” (Attributed to Albert Einstein.)

    Everything good in leadership begins with humility.

    Subtleties of arrogance:

    1. Taking offense at slights. A thin skin points to pride. “You deserve better.”
    2. Judging others by unspoken expectations. The “humble-arrogant” are better than others because they hold people to high standards that they don’t meet themselves.
    3. Searching for self-justification. Arrogance circles back on problems – not to find solutions – but in search of reasons it didn’t do wrong.

    The brother of arrogance is disdain.

    All you can do is coerce those you look down on.

    Practice humility:

    Humility is a practice not a destination.

    #1. Acknowledge the subtlety of arrogance.

    Humility begins when you acknowledge arrogance.

    You have puddles of humility and oceans of arrogance, but you judge yourself by the puddles. My own arrogance makes me skeptical of any other option.

    #2. Pursue growth.

    “An arrogant person considers himself perfect. This is the chief harm of arrogance. It interferes with a person’s main task in life – becoming a better person.” Leo Tolstoy

    Everyone who develops their leadership knows what they’re working on.

    What leadership behavior will you practice today?

    Practice is intentional repetition that includes reflection and course adjustment.

    #3. Pick up the trash.

    Don’t simply tell people to pick up the trash. Pick it up yourself.

    No job is menial to the humble.

    Ray Kroc, the founder of McDonald’s, was famous for picking up trash. “Every night you’d see him coming down the street, walking close to the gutter, picking up every McDonald’s wrapper and cup along the way,” former McDonald’s CEO Fred Turner told author Alan Deutschman. “He’d come into the store with both hands full of cups and wrappers.” (Daniel Coyle in the Culture Code)

    What are the subtitles of arrogance?

    How might leaders practice humility?

  • What CEOs Get Wrong About Vision and How to Get It Right

    By Dan Ciampa

    View original publication on MIT Sloan

    When a leader must implement a new strategy, especially one that requires new systems, processes, and perhaps people, it is the start of a new era. Success requires more than the right combination of capital and technology; it also requires a critical mass of employees to adopt new behaviors and ways of thinking. But too often, CEOs and boards in these situations think through the capital and technology issues much more carefully than those involving behavior and attitudes. That imbalance is a primary reason new strategies fail. And, in addition to disrupting a company, failure can derail a promising executive career — especially if a CEO took over to guide the company in a new direction.

    When new behavior and new ways of thinking are required, an essential step is for the CEO, the board, and key managers to have an image in their minds of what the organization will look and act like after achieving its strategic goals. Just as great athletes are guided by a mental picture of the perfect jump shot or golf swing, key players in the organization need a consistent picture in their minds of what success will look like. That’s where a vision comes in.

    The term “vision” is used often in business; companies frequently talk about “our mission, vision, and values.” The trouble is that most of the time, the word “vision” is used incorrectly. When CEOs say they’ve defined their company’s vision, I ask them to explain it to me. Many respond with something like, “Our vision is to be the most innovative, agile company in our industry.” To which I reply, “That’s a mission, not a vision.”

    In cases like these, the so-called vision merely repeats what is already in the strategy, and, worse, does nothing to emotionally engage the people who are being asked to implement it. A leader’s vision — particularly if that leader needs to bring about significant change in the organization — should start as a vivid, credible image of an ideal future state. The clearer a CEO is about what people should do differently to achieve new, challenging objectives, the greater his or her chances of achieving the changes necessary for success. New behavior doesn’t come from missions, however aspirational, but from deep, emotional commitment to doing things differently.

  • Coaching the Uncoachable Executive

    How do you help leaders who don’t want help?

    by Steve Albrecht

    View original publication on Psychology Today

    If we take the idea that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink to the business arena, how do companies help their leaders improve their performance or behavior, through coaching, when they don’t think they need it?

    I work with two types of employees when it comes to coaching; pick the one you’d rather be in the room with. One says, “I’m so glad you’re here! I know I’ve got some rough edges, some blind spots, and I need to improve the way I communicate with my staff and my boss. We have a lot to talk about and I want to get right to work.” Chance of success: high.

    The other type says, “I don’t know why you’re here or I’m here. It’s probably because one of my team got hurt feelings and complained. Maybe my style is a bit rough, but I get things done. Besides, the clients love me and I make this place a lot of money. Can we get on with whatever this is? I have a lot of work to do.” Chance of success: poor to middling.

    For help with this thorny issue, I spoke with Jordan Goldrich, COO of the San Diego-based executive coaching firm, CUSTOMatrix. He holds an LCSW license and the Master Certified Executive Coach (MCEC) designation, from the Association of Corporate Executive Coaches. Jordan is also a Talent Management Executive with Executive Core, an international Executive Coaching firm.

    When it comes to coaching the executive who doesn’t want to participate in the process, Jordan says, “Most executives who don’t want to be coached are referred by their managers for coaching for several reasons. They’re very valuable because of their technical knowledge or business expertise, but their interpersonal style creates a negative impact on their key stakeholders, direct reports, and superiors. Or, they are part of a leadership development program, where everyone must have coaching, and they don’t want it because they are legitimately too busy, don’t trust or respect the coach, or don’t believe it will be valuable for them.”

    He also sees them having either a lack of insight or a skewed view of their impact on their firm and the people in it. “They’re genuinely not aware of the impact they’re having on others,” he suggests. “Or they recognize they’re having a negative impact but can’t believe their impatience, frustration, anger, and even sarcasm with others is more of a problem than the lack of production, late deadlines, fuzzy thinking, and lack of accountability of the people who are complaining. In addition, many don’t believe they can control their behavior.”

    It’s interesting to note the mindset that Jordan Goldrich sees in these executives and senior leaders who are seen as abrasive. They believe they are like warriors, achieving a level of success in overwhelmingly complex strategic roles.  He says, “They believe they are not being recognized for their contribution. They may even feel they are being disrespected.”

    These internal challenges can manifest in significant hurdles for Jordan as a coach. He says of the abrasive leader as a coachee, “They believe that the request to change is part of a politically-correct culture where, as one executive said to me, ‘Kids are not allowed to play tag because being it will harm their self-esteem.’”

    Their coach must help them uncover their own intrinsic motivation to change. In other words, find a reason they would change this behavior even if they were not getting pressured to change. If the coaching is successful, they conclude that they should change because they want to be more consistent with their own core beliefs and values. He says, “Many I have met are sincerely religious people. Or, they may change because they recognize they want to win or achieve even greater things than they already have.”

    In many situations, Jordan finds self-assessment instruments can help coachees with their insight. He says, “Assessment instruments provide a wealth of information to coachees in an economical way. Their self-ratings on specific items deepen their understanding of their own motivations, personality style, communication style, decision style, and influence style. The assessment reports and our debriefs can combine to create new options for behavior changes. I typically use two self-assessments, plus a 360 evaluation, which may include my interviews with key stakeholders. Since I’m certified in these assessments – Myers-Briggs, FIRO-B, California Personality Inventory, Workplace Big 5, Conflict Dynamics Profile, DISC, and the Hogan Personality Inventory – they are part of my coaching tool kit as well.”

    So, with serious internal and external obstacles in the coachee’s path, how does he prove success? Coaching, like other soft-skills improvements, may not have an obvious immediate benefit, but more of a behavioral and performance shift, which could appear over a span of weeks or months. Obviously, business owners and C-level executives don’t always have a lot of patience for the slow-and-steady route to the improvement approach. Jordan uses subjective evaluations, like feedback from internal customers, peers, superiors and other stakeholders; if the coachee is achieving goals and meeting deadlines; and even employee turnover is a measure.

    Poorly-performing employees sometimes leave under the coachee’s “new and improved” leadership approach because they can no longer hide behind the formerly abrasive behavior of their manager.

    The coaching process is going to benefit those who participate fully. The challenge in all behavior and performance change is getting coachees to leverage their own intrinsic motivations to change. Then they are able to see the wisdom of good ideas, positive suggestions, and the need to embrace them, whether they initially like the coaching intervention or not.

    Dr. Steve Albrecht is a keynote speaker, author, podcaster, and trainer. He focuses on high-risk employee issues, threat assessments, and school and workplace violence prevention. In 1994, he co-wrote Ticking Bombs, one of the first business books on workplace violence. He holds a doctorate in Business Administration (DBA); an M.A. in Security Management; a B.S. in Psychology; and a B.A. in English. He is board certified in HR, security, coaching, and threat management. He worked for the San Diego Police Department for 15 years and has written 17 books on business, HR, and criminal justice subjects.

  • Defy Gravity

    Defy Gravity

    How to break from convention and lead in an ambiguous business world

    by Susan Gilell-Stuy, Executive Coach, Trusted Leadership Advisor and Host of “Lead With IT“ podcast

    A reliance on conventional wisdom limits your ability to act in an ambiguous business world. A new generation of employees has redefined their expectations for top leaders and global organizations. And I’m going to tell you something your employees won’t: if you aren’t meeting their needs, they’ve already decided to jump ship and find a new team or company that will.

    Their lack of loyalty is a sign of your neglect. It’s a clear message that you can’t continue to tackle today’s challenges and opportunities with yesterday’s approach. You’ve got to change or lose them.

    It’s time you defy the gravitational pull for doing for what’s conventional: after all the only other option is staying stuck in the past.

    Here are 4 ways you can defy gravity:

    Raise the Bar for Everyone

    Everyone you add to the team should raise the bar for everyone else. That includes you. Only hire people you could see yourself working for one day. The goal is to constantly boost the talent pool, create ongoing intellectual diversity, and learn from each team member’s knowledge and ability.

    Give Up “Kitchen Sink” Meetings

    Stop holding catch-all weekly team meetings. Instead, switch to meetings driven by subject matter. For example: Mondays are project meetings, Wednesdays are budget meetings, and so on. Invite only the key players to keep things simple. A focused meeting makes for quicker and better decision-making.

    Think Big and Let Them Call the Cadence

    As the leader, paint the big picture for your team. Share with them where you’re heading, tell them that you expect them to get there the quickest way possible, and assure them that you’ll clear the speed bumps if need be. Then step back and let your trusted team members call the cadence, approach, and path they’re going to take to get there.

    Kill the Annual Review

    Only one thing matters when it comes to connecting with your people: putting them first. Spend more time focused on them and less time worrying about technical aspects of the business. Don’t wait for an annual review to share what you’re thinking; coach and develop them in real-time. Your investment in them will pay big dividends over the long-term.

    Once you’ve chosen to defy gravity and finish your transformational journey the organization and those around you have no option but to transform too. Fostering real change in those you lead and the organization itself makes you an unstoppable force as a leader.

    Susan Gilell-Stuy, Executive Coach, Trusted Leaderhip Advisor and Host of “Lead With IT” podcast

    Susan is a top-tier corporate executive coach, leadership strategist and speaker who helps millennial leaders and executives tap their genius by discovering the distinct skills and abilities that empower them to map out a plan for success – one that is perfectly suited to them. She is an executive coach for The Wharton School – University of Pennsylvania, a member of the Association of Corporate Executive Coaches and host of the Lead With IT™ podcast. If you’re wondering what your sweet spot is as a leader get your free copy of Susan’s Lead With IT Kit© at susangilellstuy.com and find out what you lead with.

  • Association of Corporate Executive Coaches (ACEC): Position Regarding Coaching Supervision

    Association of Corporate Executive Coaches (ACEC): Position Regarding Coaching Supervision

    Coaching Supervision

    Corporate Executive Coaches and Executive Coaches who join ACEC are at the mastery level in their career and are therefore well qualified to select the correct tools to use with their clients. They are supporters of life-long professional learning, have agreed to abide by ACEC’S code of ethics and ACEC’S high moral standing requirements.

    ACEC does not take the position of knowing what is the best tool or that there is only one way for our members to support their client’s needs/goals as we are not intimately part of the client/coach relationship. ACEC’s focus is on the growth and/or the sustainability of our member’s practice and supporting our coaches in reaching the level of “enterprise-wide business partners©”

    ACEC prescribes to “humility” and “sharing” to foster this tenet of membership—supporting each other. We strongly encourage each member to reach out to other members. Each member has their specialities listed on their web page (see http://acec-association.org/directory/)as well as their contact information we encourage you to reach out to each other in areas where brainstorming is wanted/needed. We also encourage members to take advantage of our “Rapid Cycle Peer-to-Peer Coaching” program (contact Eileen Broer ebroer@humandimension.org) where real-time case studies are presented and discussed.

    Because our membership model respects all methodologies that are heathy for the coach and the client (including “coach consulting”) we feel that there is no need for ACEC to make coaching supervision a mandate for meeting our ethical requirements, qualifications for practice, requirements for certification, requirements for recertification and/or membership. Instead we will let each member make this a personal decision based on their professional goals/portfolio.

    CB Bowman, CEO
    MBA, CMC, BCC, MCEC
    Association of CorporateExecutive Coaches

     

    HERE IS THE LINK TO ICF’s POSITION:
    https://coachfederation.org/the-case-for-coaching-supervision

     

  • Coaching Supervision, A Tool or a Mandate?

    By CB Bowman, MBA, MCEC, BCC, CMC

    CEO, Association of Corporate Executive Coaches

    http://acec-association.org March 29, 2015

    Here is a radical  question, is “coaching supervision” much to do about something, or much to do about nothing with regard to its possible infestation  into coaching in the United States?

    The concept of coaching supervision is swimming its way to the U.S. from European waters, where by law it is mandatory.  The law requires that, executive coaches have  coaching supervision.

    What is “Coaching Supervision”?  According to the Coaching Supervision Academy, coaching supervision will provide coaches with the following

    •  Clear Contracting  – multi-party contracting where appropriate.
    •  Ensuring that standards and ethics are maintained.
    •  Establishing good boundaries.
    •  Enhancing reflectivity – working with content and process.
    •  Attending to the Coach’s Personal Development.
    •  Creating the Working Alliance.
    •  Deepening Coaching Presence.
    •  Building the Internal Supervisor.
    •  Offering new perspectives to the coach.
    •  Increasing the coach’s interventions and tools.
    •  Being sensitive to the coach’s Learning and Coaching Style.
    •  Teaching about Coaching Psychology.
    •  Working with Parallel Process.
    •  Developing systemic thinking.
    •  Giving constructive feedback.
    •  Providing the coach with new tools.
    •  Creating experiments through which the coach can learn.
    •  Offering educative and restorative support to the coach.
    •  Working systemically – with coach, client and the wider field.
    •  Opening up new areas of competence for the coach.

    It occurs to me that any Executive Coach who cares about their profession consistently ensures that the above actions take place as part of their annual professional development criteria; much of this occurs through being a member of a trade association. In fact, in many fields the above list is the reason that professionals belong to a minimum of two associations annually.

    There are many non-supporters of coaching supervision in the United States, as well as some supporters. It seems, though, that more and more of the non-supporters are raising their hands against this concept, especially as the discussion becomes more vocal and heated.

    This is probably due to the fact that in United States we are kindly referred to as the as the non-confrontational giant, except when freedoms are threatened. Americans also are known for their ability to strike back, strike hard, and strike accurately when their freedom is questioned or jeopardized.

    This surely appears to be the case here, especially for veteran Executive Coaches, when the freedom of self-determining how they will maintain the quality of their professionalism is at risk.

    It is clear that if given a choice verses a fait accompli of requiring the incorporation of this new aspect of coaching requirements into their professional standing, coaches might experience it as less of an infringement on their freedom or sense of dignity.

    Having said all this, there may be a greater opportunity amongst us who actually do care about the quality of our work and the quality of  our profession. I present to you an option that lays within our ability to move out of the role of Executive Coach and  move into the space of Corporate Executive Coach; however, let’s not stop there. I also present to you the opportunity to move from Corporate Executive Coach to Enterprise Business Partner―which is not the same as a Business Coach or a Business Consultant.

    My personal thought is that now is the time to focus our attention on how to become a Enterprise Business Partner to our clients. If we agree that the Corporate Executive Coach is quite different than the Executive Coach in that the Corporate Executive Coach has to walk the fine line between coaching and consulting—which is something that’s not necessarily taught or embraced traditionally by those involved with Executive Coaching, then it gives us the opportunity to incorporate a paradigm shift by presenting ourselves as business partners.

    I imagine that I will receive a great deal of negative responses from those who are traditionalists. That is, before they really take a close look at why the likes of Marshall Goldsmith, Gary Ranker, John Maxwell, Mike Myatt and Johanna Rothman are successful— they are business partners to their clients.

    In truth there really is no need to object; what is being presented is simply a conceptual thought of a different color. It states, if we want to be respected at a different level than we are currently, for the tremendous work that we do, perhaps it’s time to elevate how we are perceived in the boardroom. If we want to move from simply being see as a remedial solution to performance behavior concerns then we need to present ourselves as an integral part of our client’s business.

    How many of us can identify the challenges that are currently in play for the CXO’s as related to human capital? Basically there are three areas, as we are now in the predicted era of  the war-on-talent. This is the result of retiring baby boomers, the recent recession, business growth in countries to which we have outsourced, and zero population growth. These three things are called RRI:

    1. Recruitment
    2. Retention
    3. Investment Dollars

    The critical question is, “How do we get to the boardroom to make a difference in these areas?” Once we figure out the answer, executive coaching will elevate itself from the arena of being depicted as the “Wild Wild West” by Harvard Business Review to the level of respect that we so much desire and deserve. The question of coaching supervision may well become a moot point.

    Is it possible that the focus on coaching supervision provides a golden opportunity to expand our vision to areas that will elevate us and where coaching supervision will become just a tool and not a raison d’être or discourse? …CB