Schlagwort: behaviour

Different personalities in each of us?!

The quote of the week comes from Swami Sivananda and reads as follows: “Everyone has different personalities that come to the fore like actors in different situations.”

Personalities that we show are context bound. This includes the four dimensions, mentioned by Lutz von Rosenstiel, to show a special behavior. The four levels are:

1. „Can I show the behavior“, i.e. have I acquired the skills to do so in the first place.

2. „Am I allowed to show the behavior“, i.e. which norms and rules prohibit or allow me to show certain behaviors

3. „Do I want to show the behavior“, we can decide not to show a certain behavior for good reasons, because e.g. we expect more work as a result of the changed behavior.

4. „If I have the opportunity to show the behavior“, i.e. if I am very good at moderating, I may never be allowed to take on the role. For this reason alone, we can act differently in different contexts.

Another reason is whether we feel accepted and respected in the situation. We recognize this very quickly through micro-facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice and open or defensive gestures. Only when the autonomic nervous system calms down, we can act freely and authentically and not just reacting. This means that the atmosphere we create in a situation also determines the outcome.

A final third reason for these changed personalities lies in the past experiences and events that we have lived through. They lie in the subconscious and return to the conscious mind via emotions and feelings. Reactions based on past experiences that were successful at the time are always the first to be consulted by the brain as soon as similar situations arise. The feelings or emotions show us the way to the seemingly safe reaction we have learned. In the process, our own development and changes in personality are not “consulted”. This means that some reactions no longer fit, but still break through again and again and change the personality.

Yes, we have different forms of personality within us, depending on the situation and role. Something always emerges that belongs to the personality of the individual, sometimes it fits more with the past self, and sometimes it fits better with the present self.

Life goal: Reach your own inner summit

The quote of the last week from my calendar is from Edmund Hillary: „It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves.“

This reminded me of many hikes and some climbing routes that I have done in the past and will probably do in the future. I like to hike, even cross-country, as long as it’s allowed. The hikes that I personally found the most enjoyable were the ones where I had to force myself to keep going. Either because my body thought it can’t take any more, even though there were only a few hundred metres to go to reach the destination, the weather conditions were extreme, such as hiking at minus 20 degrees in the Elbe Sandstone Mountains, or hikes where I overcame my fear of heights, such as the climbing trail we took to the summit in Schladming.

Each time I overcame a fear, a limit within myself, and had a wonderful feeling after I had made it. Maybe my knees were still shaking a little, or I had unspeakable sore muscles the next day, but conquering myself brought me feelings of pride, confidence and self-assurance. The belief in the sentence „I can do it if I believe in myself, want to achieve it and have (trained) the skills to do so.“ In the context of others, the following dimension of what is allowed and desired in order to reach the set goal, the mountain top, also belongs.

This corresponds to Lutz von Rosenstiel’s behavioural model. (source: Rosenstiel, L. von 1998). Wertewandel und Kooperation. In E. Spieß (Hrsg.), Formen der Kooperation. Bedingungen und Perspektiven (S. 279-294). Göttingen: Verlag für angewandte Psychologie)

The model states that behaviour is influenced by:

  1. Individual volition, such as motivation and personal values,

  2. Social permissions and requirements, such as the norms and rules of the context/environment in which we find ourselves

  3. Situational facilitation, i.e. the conditions that can be conducive or inhibiting

  4. Personal ability, which includes skills and abilities. The four factors influence each other and together form the behaviour shown.

We conquer ourselves when we consider whether we want to try something different that we haven’t tried before, acquire the missing skills, abilities, and then actually put them into practice.

It doesn’t have to be a mountain. It could be also learning to play a musical instrument and then giving a concert, trying out a new sport in a competition or climbing a mountain summit.

Self-reflection is not only important at the end of the year

In many cultures, we are used to reflecting on the past year and making promises to ourselves for the coming year. This is something we often do too little of in our everyday lives. Without regular, everyday reflection, it is difficult to learn and change behaviours that are needed for the now and are not based on past success.

The lack of reflection can be caused by the following:
– Daily stress
– Fear of discovering blind spots or letting the repressed come alive
– Sudden circumstances that intervene
– Inability to be honest

Our interpretation is unique because we construct it based on past experiences. Therefore, the following reflection questions can help us learn from observation:

  1. What were the three most important moments/situations in the conversation that just took place?
  2. Which reactions of the dialogue partner were surprising and were not addressed? What triggered this behaviour/reaction?
  3. What would have been an even more successful course of the conversation?
  4. What behaviour would have made the conversation even more successful? How can I get there next time?

In order to actually be able to answer these reflection questions, it makes the most sense to do this directly after the interview. Reflection cannot be done on the side, but it is important to stop and think. Only when you stop and reflect on what has happened can you understand and change your interpretation of the situation. Because our interpretation causes our feelings, and our feelings lead to our actions and beliefs. If reflection is postponed until later, the nuances of the conversation are weakened by your own construct.

Make reflecting on your behaviour and conversation to your routine, and don’t just limit it to the turn of the year.

If you want to read more, see my book side 274 following: S.Voss Erfolgreich Gespräche im Berufsalltag führen Der Einfluss von Haltung, Deutungsmustern und Unterbewusstsein auf Gesprächssituationen 2023. XIII, 301 S. 31 Abb. Brosch. € (D) 49,99 | € (A) 51,39 | CHF 55.50 978-3-662-67787-2 € 39,99 | CHF 44.00 978-3-662-67788-9 (eBook)

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

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.

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“.