Kategorie: Communication

Historic role models: Napoleon Bonaparte role model of modern leadership?

Letting beside the cruel and interessting psychological dimension of Napoleon Bonaparte, his leadership style was astonishing modern and systemic.

In a way, he was ahead of his time.

Many of today’s leaders could learn from Napoeleon’s leadership style.

 His leadership principles were:

  1. „Never ask others what you are not prepared to do your self
  2. Be courageous
  3. Plan everything
  4. Establish clear objectives
  5. Be diplomatic
  6. Secure alliance and be loyal
  7. Search for facts and truth
  8. Intelligence is vital, set high standards
  9. Be fair, firm and flexible
  10. Maintain personal discipline
  11. Concentrate on primary objectives
  12. Stay in touch with your team
  13. Keep your promises
  14. Give credits for success
  15. Take responsibility for failure
  16. Prepair for victory and anticipate failure
  17. Be passionate, energetic enthusiastic
  18. Maintain „integrity“

Such thinking, principles and approaches can be found in the literature on leadership today.

(Source: https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1389&c… )

Overcome difficulties of change

Change is on everyone’s lips and ears. Nothing seems to be as important as this word, this activity. When reading job descriptions, one of the most important skills is to be change-affine. Change is something natural, we change all our lives without pressure. It is the normal changing development from baby to child, to teenager and to adult and finally to senior. Some people seem to change only physically. They then get stuck at certain points in, for example, childhood.

If one wants to change an organisation, this is just as natural as the environment often changes. The tricky thing about change in an organisation is that everyone is expected to change in the same direction at the same time. The top leadership decides that the organisation should change in a certain direction. These leaders themselves develop the desired changes at their own pace and to fit their thought patterns. Often, they do not consider that everyone in the organisation has their own thought patterns, beliefs, and assumptions. In this way, they are one step ahead of the rest of the organisation, having worked on these changes months or years before the others. The lower hierarchies then must adapt their beliefs, thinking patterns and thus their behaviour in a much shorter period, mostly expected to happen ad hoc. This is almost impossible because they are only told the reasons and purpose behind the change and could not figure them out themselves. They are expected to follow the implementation rather than understand it. To use the above image, it is like being a baby and having to transition from that directly to adulthood. This is not possible because the necessary developmental steps would be missing.

Change is necessary to survive in the VUCA world, that is clear. Change alone is not enough, in my opinion. Only if everyone wants to change and everyone is given the same time to change, as is currently lived more at senior level, then sustainable change takes place, because everyone in the organization could take the small development steps.

Idea for implementation: To use the entire organization and its expertise, the sustainable method would be to invite all members of the organization (participative change). This is often impossible. To still hear, take along and „use“ the various areas and departments, ambassadors could be sent from each area. These ambassadors are not sent by the executives or apply independently. They are elected by the area or department, through the colleagues. Through this critics will be more likely to entering the „development group“. One rule should be, that the „development-group“ is a judgmental-free space. Such an approach of working participatively changes the basic assumptions at the lowest level of Edgar Schein’s culture model. This takes courage and a perceived loss of power from top management, but it is worth trying as the intelligence and willingness of the entire organization will drive change and not just a „handful“ of people chosen for their hierarchical level.

#changemanagement #organization #VUCA #Idea

The power of feedforward

Employees are familiar with the construct of feedback, developed with good intentions, but not always used with them.

Some of you may have experienced feedback being misused to express opinions, assumptions and prejudices about the feedback recipient. The feedback giver tends to project their own behaviour, or the behaviour they are forbidden, unwilling or unable to see, onto the feedback recipient. Even if the feedback is given with good intentions on the part of the feedback giver, the issue is that we are talking about the past. This in turn reinforces the image that the subconscious mind has created of the feedback giver towards the feedback receiver. Which leads to a „vicious circle“ as the feedback giver wants to have his perception confirmed and only perceives the nuances of the feedback receiver that fit the perception of the feedback giver and wants to perceive.

One hurdle is that, I suppose, none of us has a time machine, to change the past. The other hurdle is that sometimes feedback comes as a real surprise to the feedback receiver, who has already forgotten the situation or behaviour to which the feedback giver is referring. Memories are never identical or logical. This leads to the uncomfortable and sometimes helpless feeling when we have to go to a feedback meeting. Perhaps there is a satisfaction in the feedback giver telling a person ‚the truth‘, forgetting that this is only the individual perception. As each of us constructs our own truth/reality based on the experiences we have had. 

To be more effective, efficient and sustainable, and to create team power, we need to reflect on our behaviour and attitudes before we follow up with actions or conversations. This is why Marshall Goldsmith’s ‚feedforward‚ approach is so powerful in making a real difference. In this setting, feedforward givers and takers focus on the future and suggest strategies for a better future, without focusing on the past, which only serves to consolidate. 

The following brings the difference between feedforward and feedback to the point:

Feedforward helps to understand before the activity what is expected, how one should behave and interact. Through such reflection it is clear what is required of each individual in order to achieve the goal and a change in behavior is possible as it comes from oneself.

Feedback provides insight into how the external view on a person is, regarding the interaction and behaviour towards others. This creates awareness, but often comes too late or can come from a person whom the feedback recipient does not trust. In addition, an imbalance can arise, since mostly only the perception of the feedback provider is heard.

Feedforward entails three key elements:

  1. Both must adopt a benevolent inner attitude and mindset: The attitude is like an inner voice. If we take the view that our opinion is the only right one and must be followed, then feedforward will not work. However, if we are open to the opinions of others in order to achieve a common goal together, then feedforward is an effective method. Feedforward ensures that all ideas are heard and that the goal is pursued with passion by all, because both parties feel accepted and valued. 
  2. Focus on the solution rather than the problem: To support this thinking, it would be helpful to eliminate the question word „why“ as it leads back to the past and not to the future. Instead, it would be better to use the question word „what“ to find a future solution. This is proven by Tasha Eurich in her studies on self-awareness. In combination with Prof. Dr. Otto Scharmer’s Theory U of intensive listening and imagining the future together (Presensing), leads to open up the mind and uncover opportunities for a better future.
  3. Developing specific solutions together: This is a resource-oriented method and looks at existing competencies and how they can be supported.

Idea for feedforward, when you feel safe:

  1. Describe your goal clearly and simply
  2. Ask for two suggestions and support creative ideas
  3. Listen carefully and write down the suggestions
  4. Just thank you without apology or defensiveness
  5. Roles are swapped regardless of hierarchy
  6. In larger groups, a new conversation partner is sought and the procedure is repeated

#feedback #feedforward #mindset #TheoryU #Selfawareness #unconciousness #psychologicalsafe #success

Spiral dynamics: Motives as basic of our behaviour and success in the VUCA world

n communication, it is a challenge to be seen and recognized as a partner. Conversations at eye level /as peers are a challenge, when different ways of thinking meet. Flexible thinking would be helpful in such moments. This requires a different attitude as well as a different level of consciousness than exists mainly in the Western world.

Clare C. Graves, evidenced by Don Beck and Chris Cowan, has found different levels of consciousness, which she distinguishes into eight different levels of existence with different patterns of thinking. These thought patterns are based on the motives that drive them. She called this Spiral Dynamics.

Most people in the Western world belong to the first levels / graves (Graves, C. W. (1974). Human Nature Prepares for a Momentous Leap. The Futurist, 72-87.). What they have in common is an egocentric attitude.

The levels of existence, also called Spiral Dynamics. The eight levels / graves are colour coded. They are referred to as WMem. WMem is defined as follows: „A WMem is expressed in a world-view, a value system, a psychological level of existence, a belief structure, an organizational principle, a way of thinking and living“ (Beck and Cowan, 2008, p. 64).

In addition, authors Don Edward Beck and Christopher C. Cowan distinguish between first and second Tier thinking. People with a first Tier mindset usually behave in an ego-driven manner with the main question in mind: „What is the benefit for me? What’s in it for me?“ The first Tier includes five different graves of consciousness with the colours beige, purple, red, blue and orange.

The basic motifs and world-view of the first Tier are:

– Physiological stability (beige),

– Security (purple),

– Domination and power (red),

– Sense and order (blue),

– Autonomy and manipulation (orange),

– Equality and community (green)

The second Tier includes two different graves of consciousness. The second Tier world-view enables the person to respond flexibly to change, to take interconnected, comprehensive perspectives, and to recognize the dynamics of the whole earth, enabling macro-level action. This mindset is consistent with ecosystem and empathic relationship. People with the second Tier mindset tend to behave in an eco-oriented way, asking the most important questions, The questions in their mind are: „What is the benefit of the system in which I am involved? What is the bigger picture and impact on the earth / my environment?“ This second Tier includes two different consciousnesses with the colours yellow and turquoise.

The basic motifs and world-views of the second Tier are:  

– Flexibility and natural flow (yellow),

– Life and harmony (turquoise)

Most people are mixed types with different degrees of expression of the first or second level.

The transition from the first to the second level is crucial for the transition from ego-system to eco-system, which is necessary in the VUCA world (Voluntil, Uncertain, Complex, Ambigue) and to evolve to a „Learning Organisation“.

Because of the attitude and mindset of flexibility and harmony, there are no biases, prejudices, or other hierarchical challenges to overcome. The focus is on solving a problem together and developing a process, not on who gets the credit.

Rethink linear causal-logical communication and move to effectuation communication

Effectuation comes from Sara Sarasvathy and means to think and act independently by using available resources with like-minded partners and stakeholders. The key is to use uncertainties and difficulties successfully and flexibly for one’s own ideas and tasks. This approach was developed for entrepreneurs to find solutions and making dessisions.

We all have learned to believe that communication is more linear causal logically as Schulz von Thun suggested with the „four sides of a message“ or Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver wth the „sender-receiver-modell„. This was in a traditional world with clear markets and hierarchies functional and effective.

Today knowledge is not only a privilidge of hieracical higher levels, as in the VUCA world (VUCA = volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) everyone has the possibility to be expert. Nothing is clear and structured, which makes a linear causal logically thinking of communication is in my eyes not efficient to drive big changes or to transfer the orgainisation into a learning organization. Communication has other dimension, which are not considerd in the traditional models. These factors are for example mindset, thinking patterns, mindfulness and past situations, influence the outcome.

Perhaps the dynamic effectuation approach can be inspirational used for a „VUCA communication“, like I tried to illustrate in the picture:

To be aware in a communication that our own biases, assumptions and beliefes influence all of our communication and as well our own personal character and abilities has an influence in how we lead a conversation and what outcome will appear, we can interact with curiosity and open mind with others. It´s an adventure to listen to people with curiosity what you can discover from the person self. As this deep understanding will lead to an better outcome of the communication as more perspective will influence the solution.

Leading in the VUCA world

To become a true learning organization, it is important to give employees the opportunity to contribute their knowledge and share it within the organization. To do this, the current leadership style should be looked at critically.

Two leadership principles are readily applied in the VUCA world (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity). These are the laisse faire and the self-management-team leadership style (see speadsheet). These two styles are very close and have many positive aspects, but they can create confusion and force micropolitical behavior.

Micropolitics: employees strive to increase their own power/influence in the organization in their own interest. This leads to informal rules of the game, social structures that can lead to informal power, and change behaviors in organizations.

My favorite model for leadership that fits best to the VUCA world is the systemic approach SANTIAGO (an acronym) by Prof. Dr. phil. Dr. h.c. Rolf Arnold. The basis of the leadership style is dialogic leadership with a humanistic, subject-oriented and systemic mindset. The attitude of the leaders is not to think they know or can do everything, but to develop solutions with the employees.

To lead in this way, eight principles are important:

  1. Surrogant (deputy) leadership: employees are trusted to lead themselves. Leadership is a dialogue in which individual human resources are developed. In this approach, leaders are more facilitators and motivators.
  2. Autopoiesis: this means that human beings are self-sustaining and self-organized. Leaders bring employees out of their own „autopilot“ by questioning, via further development. This moving out of the comfort zone must be accompanied and moderated.
  3. Never short-term (sustainability): through this approach, managers focus on the development of employees. This leads to medium and long-term effects on the organization and overall development.
  4. Transformation of interpretive patterns: Leaders in this approach understand their employees‘ interpretive thinking patterns that we have all built from our past experiences. Leaders guide employees to break and change these patterns and transform them into more appropriate interpretations, which means development for the employee.
  5. Interpretation: interpretation is individual and based on each person’s past. The leader must ensure that the different interpretations lead to successful cooperation and promote the development of the organization.
  6. Arrangement: In this approach, the leader creates a two-way teaching and learning environment (leader <=> staff). Employees are empowered, motivated and take responsibility for their development and business results. The basis for this kind of leadership is trust and regular dialogue, as well as an open-minded curiosity for the individual.
  7. Go with serenity: The leader needs a lot of serenity with this approach, because the acceptance and implementation of this leadership approach takes time and contradicts the learned patterns of traditional leadership. It is necessary to break through the patterns of interpretation.
  8. Organizational learning: Through staff development, the organization can learn. Organizational learning happens through the employees as part of the organization. The organization influences the employees, but it also works in the other direction. The behavior of the individual employee influences the organization.

To make sure that you are as a leader on the right way, ask your team anonymously, if these elements are lived by you. Have you every tried to get honest feedback from your employees regarding your leadership style?

How to show appreciation, our quiet power?

Appreciation of a person is always focusing on personal behavior. It has nothing to do with performance or success. Appreciation is close looking at the individual nature character in each of us. Appreciation only works when other elements of the interaction are already done. 

  1. You need to have shown attention for the whole situation where the person you want to appreciate is in; 
  2. This only works when you are in the moment and mindful in the situation. 
  3. Towards the individuum to show respect and personal attention is needed. 
  4. Then acknowledgement for the performance or success, which mean for the results of the behavior is needed. 
  5. Only with this previous elements appreciation will work, as the appreciation taker find the apprechiative words natural and creates not the feeling that the apprechiation is used for the sace of a (hidden) goal.

(inspired by: Das Wunder der Wertschätzung from Dr. Reinhard Haller)

Appreciation does not need grand gestures or materialistic things. Like wild-flowers, appreciation is fragile and small, but strong. They need only a few nutrients, to develop to the whole power. Wild-flowers can penetrate and destroy concrete. Honest and genuine appreciation can have a similar effect and create a blossom relationships, which leads to trust.

How do I show appreciation in everyday life?

  • Appreciative look at eye level.
  • Interested listening.
  • Benevolent nod of the head.
  • Sympathetic smile.
  • Discreet pat on the back.
  • Curious question.
  • Small surprise.
  • Short e-mail with thanks or congratulations.
  • Request for advice.

What are your little things you show your appreciation to people surrounding you?

Interesting background of the quote: „No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth.“ (Plato)

Studies have been able to prove that people would like to shoot the bearer of bad news and find the person unsympathetic.

The researchers suspect that this is related to the desire to find a sense / meaning in change. In order to this suggestion, bad news awakens the desire to bring things together, that do not have the same origin. As a result, the bearer of the bad news is disliked.

Solution: To reduce this dislike, as the studies showed, it helps to create awareness about the benevolent motives of the bearer of the bad news.
(source: https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fxge0000586)

Modification of the „Agile Manifesto“ as a blueprint for general change

The values of the agile Manifesto, focusing on humans and less on process. Which doesn’t mean that processes or plans are not valued, but they are, accordingly to the agile manifesto, less valued than human interactions. 

Here are the four principles:

„Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan“ 

(source: Manifesto for Agile Software Development (agilemanifesto.org))

With minor modifications, this can be used as a blueprint for all the changes we face, including organizational development.

One transfer-idea outside the software industry could be like this:

  1. Individual expertise and interactions versus processes and tools. 
  2. Speaking and deep listening like peers across all hierarchical levels versus one-sided analysis in a select group
  3. Collaborating across hierarchies instead of lonely guidance from a select few 
  4. Welcoming all ideas and changes instead of following a fixed and predefined plan.

In my eyes it would be good to use the „prophet in the own county“ as this person is part of the culture, knows better than anyone else, where the weaknesses are. With these four principles, we would turn those affected into involved, with the result that all changes are supported in the implementation and lived sustainably.

To summarize the above transfer-idea of the agile manifesto to the point: 

The wisdom of changes lies in the organization and the people of the organization and not outside. 

Therefore, listen to the people in your organization, observe the way of interactions during meetings on the corridor. Listen to the unspoken words and the signals in your organization, and focus less on documents and processes. Documents and processes are needed and important, but they are in my eyes not the holy grale, it’s more the question of balance.