Tag: MCEC

  • How To Use 360-Degree Feedback For Executive Coaching

    Executive coaching has been on the rise for decades as a strategic investment in human capital. When well-designed and delivered, coaching has been found to be one of the most effective approaches for developing senior leaders and enhancing the performance of their teams and organizations.

    One of the most important components of executive coaching is the 360-degree feedback that the coach gathers for coaching participants about their strengths and development needs, how they are perceived, and what they need to do in order to achieve a higher level of performance and positive impact. Feedback can be gathered via automated online surveys or one-on-one interviews.

    The first decision for coaching participants, their managers, and the coach is whether to collect data online or through in-person, video conference, or telephone interviews, or some combination thereof. Online 360s are more convenient and less costly, but, if correctly formulated and well-structured, interviews can help provide additional context and information. Sometimes an executive coach can use both, and follow up on a previous online 360 or performance review by interviewing designated feedback providers, in-person when possible, and via video conference or phone for those who are traveling and/or who work in different locations.

    Once the approach has been decided on, the next decision is who should participate. The list of feedback providers should generally include anyone who has enough familiarity with the coachee’s work to be able to contribute useful observations and suggestions. The list should also be inclusive rather than exclusive, and should include all of the coachee’s direct reports, peers, and managers. It’s important to take organizational politics into account when drafting the 360 list: internal or external constituencies, such as customers or counter-parties, may also have helpful feedback to provide, and inviting them to participate can send a positive message, indicating that the coachee cares about their views and feedback. In order to ensure that the feedback providers will have a balanced perspective, there should be no sample bias, wherein only those who have positive (or negative) things to say are invited to participate. As far as process is concerned, it’s generally best to have coachees draft the initial list, and then run it by their boss, and possibly even HR, for refinement and approval.

    In advance of doing the online 360 or conducting the interviews, it’s important to define who will see the feedback reports, either in full, edited, or summary form, and to clarify whether comments will be given “verbatim” in the feedback providers’ own words, or whether the coach will offer filtered/paraphrased feedback. Generally, we recommend that verbatim comments get shared in the report in order to include the most direct feedback. However, it should be clear to everyone who participates in an online or interview 360 that their verbatim comments will be shared, and in the case of an online 360, it’s useful to provide feedback providers with a sample report so they can see how their comments will be reflected in the report. We also suggest that the online or interview-based 360 should be shared in full, but only with the coaching participants themselves, as this increases the comfort that people have in being open and honest in the feedback that they provide without concern that tough feedback and/or specific criticism will somehow end up in the coachee’s “file.” However, once participants have received the full report, they should be willing to share a summary of insights gained, and/or developmental plans made, based on the feedback in order to ensure that they will be (and feel) accountable for making progress based on the report. Regardless of which option is chosen, the choice needs to be made and communicated before the interviews are conducted, so that parameters are fully clear in advance to all participants, and they know exactly how, and with whom, their feedback will, and will not, be shared.

    Once a consensus has been reached about the list of 360 providers, and who will see the report, the next step is drafting the questions that will be asked. If a standard online 360 will be used, it can be helpful, at times, to include a few additional context-specific questions, including open-ended questions, to gather more relevant information for the coachee. The boss and the coaching participant will likely be interested in each other’s preferred additional open-ended questions, as these questions will reveal their respective priorities and goals for the coaching program. If the boss wants to ask questions about executive presence or presentation skills, that is a signal to the coachee that the boss believes that those areas are relevant and improvable. If the coachee wants to ask what he or she needs to do in order to get promoted, that informs the boss that getting a promotion is a current goal or expectation for the coaching participant.

    It’s important to achieve consensus between the boss and the coachee about how broadly or narrowly to focus the questions, whether or not to include questions about the individual’s role and organizational constraints, whether to ask about potential future roles for the coachee, and whether or not to ask the same, or different questions to different people. Every question will also send a signal to participants about the coaching participant’s (and potentially the boss’s) coaching concerns and priorities, so it’s important to also consider organizational politics in drafting the questions in order to make sure that they are conveying the right messages. As with the participant list, we recommend that the coaching participants first draft the list of questions and then ask their boss (and possibly HR as well) for any edits, additions or changes.

    For interview-based 360s, here are some open-ended questions that we find helpful as a starting point:

    • How would you describe Jane’s leadership and management style?

    • How would you describe Jane’s communication and collaboration style?

    • What are Jane’s strengths?

    • What are Jane’s areas for development?

    • If you could give Jane one piece of advice, what would it be?

    • If you could make one request to Jane, what would it be?

    If the boss and organization are open to it, the coach can also ask contextual questions like:

    • What organizational factors or changes outside of Jane’s department present challenges and opportunities?

    • What organizational factors or changes inside of Jane’s department present challenges and opportunities?

    • What leadership suggestions do you have for Jane and her department to be more successful in the future?

    • What organizational suggestions do you have for Jane and her department to be more successful in the future?

    After all of the above decisions have been made, the next step is for participants to email their feedback providers about the upcoming interviews (or online 360). Sharing the questions in advance can have the dual benefit of giving people time to prepare their answers in advance, and also providing reassurance that everyone will be asked the same questions in the interviews. Furthermore, gaining alignment about the timing and logistics of the interview-based or online 360, including the list of participants, the questions that will be asked, and the confidentiality and reporting parameters can help set up the process for success. When the coach asks the most topical and timely 360 questions of the right sample of feedback providers, the answers will enable the coach to provide the most specific, relevant and useful feedback to coaching participants who can in turn utilize it to develop their skills and professional capabilities. Often, the process of selecting feedback providers, drafting questions, and deciding on timing, logistics and parameters can itself be an important learning opportunity within the overall coaching process. When it comes to 360-degree feedback, the questions (and the process of the coachee achieving consensus with his or her stakeholders about how the questions will be asked, of whom, and how and with whom the report will be shared) can be as important as the answers to those questions.

    In brief, although it can be laborious and complex to get it right, there is no better source of evidence for an executive’s reputation, and no better way to enhance their self-awareness, than through 360s.

    Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a Professor of Psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the Chief Talent Scientist at ManpowerGroup

    Resource: https://www.forbes.com/sites/discoverpersonalloans/2018/04/16/5-expenses-small-business-owners-face-and-how-to-cover-them/#7b2e98456fd5

  • 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.

  • The Surprising Value of Being Unattached

    The Surprising Value of Being Unattached

    Some people are naturally blessed with the powers of persuasion. Maybe you’ve seen them in action. They ask and they receive, and they make it look effortless, painless—even fun. For the rest of us, trying to persuade someone can be a maddening experience, and one that is definitely not fun. Maybe we’re trying to make a sale, recruit a partner or get the support we need to pursue a new idea—whatever our goal, and no matter our tactics, the other person stays resolute in “no.” We can push, beg and even manipulate, but he won’t budge. It soon becomes clear that if we keep pushing we might make things worse.

    In those moments, if we can step back and stop pushing, the situation is more likely to work out in our favor—perhaps with a result perhaps better than the one we sought. It seems counterintuitive, but something happens when we stop trying to force an outcome. And if we understand why this happens, we can use it to get the results we want.

    This is not a new idea. In the 14th century Japan it was shibui, while in 16th century Italy, it was called sprezzatura. Chinese Daoists call it wu-wei, and Hindu philosophers know it as ahamkara.

    In the North America, we think of it simply as cool. And if we remember anything we learned in junior high, it was that life was infinitely better for the people who were cool.

    It’s All About Attachment

    In New Age circles, people sometimes speak of a concept called attachment—which means when we’re caught up in something, we get attached to it. That’s when we lose sight of the big picture. We get tunnel vision on the outcome we want, so we don’t notice all that’s happening
    around us. We are blind to what’s really going on, and we are equally incapable of seeing the situation from another person’s perspective.

    This is when the Law of Attraction kicks in, according to New Age Thought. When we’re attached to the outcome, we’re afraid that the thing we want won’t happen. We become attached to that negative thought pattern and then, under the Law of Attraction, we begin attracting more of that negativity. In other words, we begin to imagine the person saying no to us, and eventually he really does say “no.”

    In the Western paradigm—inherited from the thinking of Dr. Sigmund Freud—we end up clinging to our egos. This ego-centered way of related to the world (and to ourselves) traps us in behaviour patterns that don’t meet our needs but which, maddeningly, are hard to see in the moment.

    Effortlessness + Effectiveness = Success

    All of this happens because we’re merely repeating old patterns. We’re like a car that’s stuck in the mud. The harder we try, the more we spin our wheels and make our situation worse.

    Over years of repetition, we have unintentionally trained ourselves to react this way. Just like an athlete who uses repetition to instill muscle memory, we’ve trained our mind to immediately apply that approach. When we become frustrated or desperate, we instinctively revert to these ways. It’s an unconscious, knee-jerk response. If we want to avoid it, we have to consciously change how we react.

    Early Chinese philosophers believed the ideal state of being was when a person was not actively thinking and was not exerting effort. They believed that this is the state in which the person is most able to achieve his goals.

    But retraining yourself so that you can get to that state most definitely requires conscious effort.

    The first step is simply to be aware of your patterns. Catch yourself in that moment; try to talk yourself out of pushing harder. And it’s a paradox, but trying too hard to stop trying too hard is not going to help you break the habit. Mencius, a Chinese philosopher in the fourth century B.C., advocated an approach similar to gardening: Do the planting and monitor the progress, but mostly just sit back and let the plants grow.

    Mencius’ approach isn’t much different from what New Age thought leaders call “the mindset of the witness.” They argue that, when we find ourselves caught up in these frustrating ineffective patterns, we should try to think like a witness. Because a witness is watching the event, not participating and not invested in the outcome.

    Consider the detective shows you’ve watched on TV: A witness comes in and impassively tells the detective what she saw. She wasn’t harmed by the crime and wasn’t involved in the action. She simply watched it all go down. Taking on the mindset of the witness means not getting emotionally engaged in what is taking place.

    As the witness, we notice what is happening but have no expectations about what will happen. We may intend a certain result, but we are not attached to it.

    Still not convinced? Think about insomnia. The harder you try to fall asleep, the less likely it is to happen. Stop trying and…zzz.

    Non-attachment feels unnatural to us in the West. It’s a hard practice to follow. From birth, we’re trained to desire, act and expect positive results, and we’re taught that the harder we work, the greater our reward. It feels strange to let go of an outcome in order to succeed. It’s especially difficult to practice in the moment, when we are trying to persuade someone and our stress levels begin to rise.

    But, by consciously practicing a more passive approach, we can establish new patterns and get our cars unstuck from the mud. We can train ourselves to let go. Whether we call it sprezzatura, shibui, wu-wei, ahamkara or just cool, we’ll be able to remove the tension from the interaction, tension that is keeping the other person from saying “yes.” With that tension gone, we may find ourselves getting a bigger “yes” than the one we imagined.

    AUTHOR: Beverly Benwick

    ABOUT BEVERLY: https://acec.mgmcsolutions.com/directory/bev-benwick-mal-pcc-cpcc/

    CONTACT INFORMATION:
    Ste. 30, 6488 – 168th Street
    Surrey, BC  V3S 8Z1 Canada

    TEL:  604.576.4970
    TOLL FREE: 1.866.95COACH or 1.866.952.6224
    E-MAIL: bev@advanceyourleadership.com
    WEBSITE: http://advanceyourleadership.com/
    LINKEDIN: www.linkedin.com/in/bevbenwick
    FACEBOOK: www.facebook.com/advanceyourleadership