Kategorie: Communication

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.

Two sides of feedback

Feedback is the result of the comparison between the target and actual state by a second person.

If the assessment of the state between actual and target is the same in the eyes of the second person, then the feedback is positive. The feedback recipient receives recognition and appreciation. The difference is that recognition refers to performance and appreciation refers to personality.

If the target and actual state do not match on the part of the feedback giver, the feedback receiver is criticized. We can learn from both. From the positive perceived feedback, we learn to conform.

From the negative perceived feedback, the criticism, we can learn where a second person sees improvements for us. Studies have shown that negative feedback, criticism, can lead to improved performance (Kluger & DeNisi 1996).

With any feedback, it is important to understand that the source of the feedback is the second person and their own construct.

If the feedback is given with good intentions and no hidden agenda, it is a fantastic resource for the feedback receiver to learn from.

However, feedback can also be part of:

  • Instrumentalization in the form of manipulation techniques, such as false compliments or in the worst case with the intention of humiliation.
  • Projection of one’s own behaviour, this happens unconsciously, the feedback giver’s own behaviour is transferred to the feedback receiver.

Examine the mindset with which feedback is given and consider whether you can learn from it or whether it is done in an instrumentalized way. 

In this way, the feedback receiver has the chance to learn twice:

  1. About the self: How others, especially the feedback givers, observe and evaluate feedback receiver own behaviour.
  2. About the feedback giver: With the feedback, the construct of the feedback giver will be uncovered.

For further information read this article Valence of feedback (positive vs. negative feedback)

Methodology „H-O-E-R“ to turn exception into daily behaviour

„H-O-E-R“ is an acronym and stands for deep listening a method of coaching, which is also helpful for systemic leaders or for self coaching. If you use it for self-coaching, replace employee through yourself.

H stands for hearing out to the exception (s)

O stands for make it more open / expand it. Ask the employee what is the positive exception to the challenge or problem. Ask the employee when and how the exception appear or what happened during or before the exception and which role the employee had.

E is empowerment and strengthen the employee stronger the success and own power. The main part of the leader is to observe and recognize. When the positive exception to the challenges happened, and give the employee natural compliments when the leader observes that the obstacles could be overcome.

R is to go back and reflect, through questioning the employee, what changed in a more positive way through the exception. The question is: „What else?“

This methodology is origin from Peter De Jong and Insoo Kim Berg from the book „Interviewing for solution“.

What is the reason of gullibility?

We all know that rumours and allegations are often long-lasting. False insinuations spread via spoken words or facial expressions and gestures persist in the organization for a long time, even if the facts and data refute them. Researchers discovered social and cognitive factors that explain the persistence of rumours and allegations.

These are here summarized:

Cognitive factors

1. Intuition („gut feeling“) through:

  • Little analysis
  • Less analytical thinking

2. Cognitive inaccuracy due to:

  • References to sources are neglected or forgotten
  • Own knowledge is not applied
  • Counter-evidence is neglected  

3. Illusory truth:

  • Familiarity of information
  • Fluency
  • Cohesion with own experience

Social factors

1. Credibility of groups through:

  • Hierarchies (elites)
  • Degree of attraction / attractiveness
  • Own social affiliation

2. World views through

  • personal views
  • Affiliation to a party

3. Emotions

  • One’s own emotional state
  • Information itself is presented emotionally

The whole study can be found under this link: Eckert et al.

The power of words, especially in a virtual conversation

In a virtual conversation, body language and facial expressions are limited. Especially since the cameras record us two-dimensionally, which does not correspond to our learned patterns. Evolutionarily, we have learned to read non-verbal signals on a three-dimensional person in order to build psychological safety and gain trust.

That’s why it’s important to focus on verbal (our words) and para-verbal communication (social sounds, e.g. „hmm“) in a virtual conversation.

Words evoke emotions and through these physical reactions.

Words that trigger emotions also lead to a physical reaction, just as facial expressions or sounds can. Words that are read or heard and associated with smiling, for example, lead to smiling in the perceiver.

Mirror neurons / resonance leads to the fact that emotions of observed persons are also physically comprehended. In cognitive tasks, physical change does not occur.

Some physical sensations coupled with individual emotional experiences are stored as somatic markers.

Somatic markers are emotional memory stores of experiences combined with body signals. These body signals emit evaluation signals, such as „positive, aim for“ and „negative, avoid“. Somatic markers express themselves with physical sensations and/or feelings. Immediately, when a signal reaches the person, these markers emerge, which are necessary to decipher

The somatic markers are activated through two pathways:

1. body loop: when the emotion is activated, the appropriate bodily state arises directly.

2. as-if-body loop: as-if-body loop, when memories, thoughts or ideas are evoked. These lead to the appropriate physical emotion arising (conversely, it is a physical anchor).

3. Words can trigger both loops. Accordingly, words influence behavior patterns/actions as well as emotions.

Since neuroception an co-regulation, which are biological process to reduce stress signals through the influence on autonomous nervous system (Polyvagal Theory from Stephen W. Porges), are only possible to a limited extent in a virtual conversation, the choice of words in a virtual environment is crucial, since words can trigger emotions. If words are increasingly chosen that evoke positive emotions, co-regulation can take place via this route.

„The Berlin Affective Word List Reloaded“ (BAWL-R) provides an overview of words that show emotional valence, imaginability, and emotional arousal. To learn more about the power of words, you find the BAWL-R under this link, https://osf.io/hx6r8/