Trust: 3 Keys to Establishing Shared Purpose

“Purpose” is the reason for which something is done, so “shared purpose” means a “common” reason for which something is done.  When people strive to “win” by beating the other  person, they may share the purpose of winning, but they are actually at “cross-purpose” because both cannot achieve their desired outcome.  So how do you establish shared purpose?

1.  Define the purpose of each person.  Many times you and the other person already have the same or similar purpose in mind, but don’t know it.  Intentionally and candidly talking about purpose should bring to light both differences and commonalities.  For example, in a coaching relationship both parties need to desire the improvement of the person being coached and the feeling of appreciation for their contributions.  Bringing this to light can lead to increased awareness and trust on both sides.

2.  Determine where you have common purpose.  Once you understand each other's purpose you can now determine what you share and what you don’t.  Sometimes you may have both common- and cross-purpose, so you have to determine how you can capitalize on what you share and minimize what you don’t.  My wife and I recently went on a vacation and both shared the purpose of enjoying each other's company, getting some rest and engaging in personal interests.  Hers was touring gardens; mine was playing golf.  We had a lot of time to pursue the first two commonalities and we found opportunities for each of us to individually pursue our own personal interests by setting times for her to tour a garden while I was playing golf.

3.  Create common ground when necessary.  Sometimes shared purpose is either not present or not very obvious, so you have to create it.  This is where the term “creative” comes into play.  Many times you can find a higher order purpose if you look for it and other times you can combine purposes into a shared purpose. One afternoon on our vacation I wanted to play golf and my wife wanted to visit a garden.  Because we only had one car and the two facilities were too far apart, we had to find common ground.  We both decided that we really wanted to do something together (common, higher order purpose) and that was more important than either golf or touring a garden.  We looked around and found a golf course on our route that also was known for its natural beauty, so she rode with me in my golf cart and checked out the local flora while I chased around a little white ball that on more than one occasion ended up in the same flora she was observing.

Trust starts with knowing that you and the other person have the same purpose in mind and that both will be striving for the same end.

3 Essential Components of Mutual Trust

There is an old saying that “relationships are built on trust” and it goes without saying that trust must go both ways for a relationship to grow.  Effective supervisors know that there are three primary components to building trust.

1. Shared Purpose:  Both parties are interested in achieving the same thing in the relationship, and believe that the other person shares that purpose.  If either party thinks that the other is not interested in or actively helping with the achievement of a common purpose, then trust is diminished.  For example, if the employee perceives the boss as only interested in making him/herself look good and not in helping the employee to progress, then shared purpose does not exist and trust is diminished.
2. Mutual Respect:  Each person shows respect to the other.  Notice that we say “shows respect” not “likes” the other person.  While it helps, it is not necessary to like the other person; but it is essential that you show respect for the person as a person.  One of the primary ways that respect is demonstrated is by taking the time to listen to each other in an attempt to completely understand before giving advice.
3. Confidence and Confidentiality:  This is the willingness and ability to confide in each other and depend on the candid, truthful feedback from the other.  It is also the knowledge that each person can depend on the other to do what they say they will do.  Failure to maintain dependability and confidentiality are sure ways to diminish confidence and trust in a relationship.

Over the next three weeks we will examine each of these in more detail to determine how to go about executing each one.

Building Effective Relationships Through Mentoring & Coaching

In our last blog we discussed the importance of building relationship with employees so that you can more effectively motivate them to perform.  Now let’s talk about how to build that relationship.  

Supervisors play two basic roles with employees: Mentor and Coach.  So what is the difference?

Mentoring is a relationship in which one person facilitates the development of another by sharing knowledge, perspectives and insights from past experiences.  This is accomplished by helping the person being mentored recognize areas to improve, discover barriers to improvement, provide guidance by sharing knowledge, perspectives and insights from past experience, and helping the person adapt perspectives and insights to his or her specific circumstances.

Coaching is a relationship in which one person directs the personal/professional development of another by providing instruction and ensuring that the other effectively follows that instruction.  This is done by helping the person being coached identify areas to develop, discovering barriers to development, providing instructions for development and holding the other person accountable to following those instructions.

Both of these roles are based on trust through shared purpose and mutual respect.  As trust grows, the relationship grows and as the relationship grows, influence and the ability to motivate increases.  Best bosses know when and how to build relationships by mentoring and coaching.

A Best Boss Motivates Others

This series is about the Top 20 Characteristics that describe a “Best Boss”. You can follow the links below in case you missed any of the previous editions where we described how a “Best Boss”:

#1 -- Is a Good Communicator

#2 -- Holds Himself and Others Accountable for Results

#3 -- Enables Success.

Let’s look closer at #4 -- A “Best Boss” Motivates Others.

Two Types of Motivation

Best Bosses understand that there are two types of motivation and they use both types to motivate their employees.

Extrinsic Motivation

Extrinsic Motivation includes all factors external to the person that impact performance, such as praise, money, corrective action,  or termination.

We all need extrinsic motivation in our lives. If you don’t believe that then ask yourself if you would continue to work at your current job if you weren’t getting paid, or if you would file and pay your taxes if it were not compulsory (with legal consequences) to do so.

Intrinsic Motivation

Intrinsic Motivation is from within and is sometimes referred to as “achievement motivation” or “self-motivation”. This is the desire to succeed simply because you value succeeding. We often describe intrinsically motivated people as having a great deal of “personal pride” or as having a “competitive spirit.”

Motivation and Self-esteem

The workplace is not a rehabilitation center and the boss is not a therapist, but Best Bosses understand how critical the development of self-esteem is to their primary objective of getting results through the efforts of their employees. People have different levels of intrinsic motivation and it is highly related to the person’s self-esteem.

High Self-esteem

People with high levels of intrinsic motivation tend to have high self-esteem and are much more willing to take initiative. They are willing to “risk success” rather than “avoid failure”

Low Self-esteem

People with low intrinsic motivation tend to have lower self-esteem and are less willing to show initiative. They are more likely to “avoid failure” rather than “risk success”.

Leverage Extrinsic Motivation to Generate Intrinsic Motivation

Best Bosses understand the relationship between the use of extrinsic motivation and the development of self-esteem. Remember from our April newsletter that self-esteem (confidence) results from “meaningful accomplishment” followed by “recognition from a significant person”.

Best Bosses use extrinsic factors such as praise and money (pay raise for example) to recognize success which acts to increase self-esteem. They also understand that they are significant to their employees and, as such, their recognition and praise are crucial in the maintenance and building of self-esteem and thus intrinsic motivation.

4 Keys to Motivating Like a Best Boss

1.) Build the type of relationships with employees that allow you to understand what motivates at the individual level rather than trying to motivate based on hasty generalizations like which generation the person was born into.

2.) Learn to judge the self-esteem level of each employee.

3.) Engineer meaningful opportunities for successful accomplishment followed by positive feedback for success.

4.) At all costs, strive to protect self-esteem when giving negative feedback of any kind.

Best Boss Bottom Line

Best Bosses understand that communicating with each employee is crucial to knowing their aspirations, their likes and dislikes, their views of the various types of extrinsic motivators, and how they value various aspects of their jobs. This information can then be used to create meaningful opportunities for success and guide the types of recognition used to build self-esteem and thus intrinsic motivation.

Relationship: The Key to Motivating Different Generations

There has been a great deal of research and discussion about the differences between the various generations over the past several years.  Three generational groups make up todays workforce and while there is some disagreement as to what birth year ranges make up each, the following can be used for our discussion; Baby Boomers (1943 - 1960); Generation-X (1960 - 1981); Generation-Y (1982 - 2001).  While Baby Boomers have been the primary supervisory group for the last couple of decades, they are now retiring and Gen-X’ers and older Gen-Y’ers are moving into those positions in larger numbers.  So is understanding generations important? Research findings have not always been consistent, but in general, findings have indicated that Baby Boomers are motivated by money and title, Gen-X’ers by freedom to do their thing, and Gen-Y’ers by meaningful work.  We would argue that this information is particularly useful at the bigger, systemic level (HR policies and systems), but is less useful at the individual level.  Treating all members of a generational group as homogeneous - all motivated in the same way - would make us generally bad at motivating specific people.

The best supervisors treat their employees as individuals rather than members of a generational group, and establish relationships with each employee based on knowledge of the person.  We can all be motivated by money, title, freedom and meaningful work depending on the stage of life and the goals that we have set for ourselves.  Those good at motivating others understand this and attempt to “know” each employee’s desires and use this information to create a relationship that works to capitalize on what each individual hopes to accomplish.

Money may be more important as a person starts a family or approaches retirement.  Freedom and creativity may be more important as a person is attempting to define him/herself.  Meaningful work may be more important as a person is attempting to determine what occupation they will choose.   I am a “Boomer” who wants more money for retirement, likes the title that I have achieved, the freedom to do my work independently and I certainly want to do only what is meaningful to me and valuable to my company and my clients.  Best Bosses don’t look at employees as generational members, but as individuals who desire to be successful - and they make the effort to understand each employees’ definition of success.

Why Do I have to Tell Them Everything?

We all want our employees to take appropriate initiative in their jobs because it makes our jobs a lot easier and makes the employees’ jobs more interesting.  Here are four critical factors in getting increased initiative on the job.

  4 Keys to Increasing Employee Initiative

 

1.)  Tell them that you want it.  Giving permission to show initiative can open the door to appropriate “initiative taking.”  Some people have been punished in the past for acting before being told and they are reluctant to step out again.  The first key is to let them know that you want them to take appropriate initiative.

2.)  Focus on confidence-building.  The key to building confidence is to give people meaningful activities to accomplish and then follow success with your recognition.  Remember that “meaningful” is in the “eye of the beholder”.  What you see as meaningful may not be seen the same way by the employee.  Take time to know your employees’ aspirations and engineer opportunities for meaningful success.

3.)  Reinforce initiative taking.  Certainly recognize success, but even when failure occurs you can recognize the effort.  You never want to recognize/reward failure because that creates confusion about expectations, but you can recognize that the person attempted something and that you want them to continue showing initiative.  For example, you might say, “Even though the result was not what was expected, I want to thank you for trying it on your own.  I appreciate your initiative.  Now let’s talk about how to get a better result.”

4.)  Redirect failure without reducing self-esteem.  Aways focus negative feedback on the result, behavior, or both, but never on the person as a person.  Blaming the person only serves to reduce self-esteem and reduces the probability of taking initiative in the future.

4 Meaningful Ways to Give Positive Feedback

Positive feedback strengthens performance and increases the likelihood of repeated success.  Really effective supervisors use more positive feedback than they do negative feedback.  Here are four ways to use positive feedback successfully.

1. Give positive feedback in front of peers, but make sure that it is done in a manner that is not embarrassing to the person.

2. Explain “why” you are pleased with their performance. Make sure the person understands the relationship between their performance and the success of the team when possible.

3. Place a “letter of commendation” in the person’s personnel file and make sure that the individual has a copy of the letter.

4. Note their successes as part of their performance review so that the person can see the connection between specific successes and your evaluation of overall performance.

A Best Boss Enables Success

In this series, we are looking at the list of Top 20 “Best Boss” Characteristics. So far we have seen that a Best Boss: #1 -- Is a Good Communicator

#2 -- Holds Himself and Others Accountable for Results.

Now let’s examine #3 -- A “Best Boss” Enables Success.

Defining Success

To understand how a Best Boss enables or creates the conditions for success, we must first describe what we mean by success. For our purpose, success and failure are measures of performance against clearly communicated expectations or standards.

This means we will need to look closely at what drives performance and how best to give feedback that will sustain excellent performance or make necessary improvement more likely.

Performance = Motivation + Ability

Ability and motivation are inextricably tied together and are both required for success. Best Bosses understand that:

Ability contributes to motivation through increased confidence Intrinsic (internal) motivation increases as self esteem (confidence) grows.

The Role of Motivation

Confident employees are more likely to show initiative and to achieve desired results, so what should a Best Boss do to build confidence in his or her employees?

First off, recognize these two steps for building self esteem:

Successful accomplishment of something meaningful to the individual Recognition for that accomplishment from a significant person. Bosses are significant to employees, so Best Bosses “engineer” situations that allow employees to be challenged (meaningful) but successful (accomplishment) and then follow that accomplishment with appropriate positive feedback (recognition by a significant person).

The Role of Ability

Delegation and training are tied directly to ability. Best bosses know the skill (ability) level of each employee and either provide...

Appropriate delegation to those who are able, or Training (usually on-the-job) for those who need more development. Best Bosses are constantly looking for new opportunities to provide meaningful challenges to employees, but are also aware that employees need success for development of self esteem and the motivation that comes with it. They use delegation and training to create an environment that enables success.

The Contribution of Feedback

After delegating or training, Best Bosses follow-up with the employee to ensure that the plan is continuing to work. The feedback the employee receives in that moment is going to impact their immediate performance and also their future performance.

Feedback for Meeting or Exceeding Expectations

If performance meets or exceeds expectations, Best Bosses give appropriate, positive feedback (a form of extrinsic motivation) to increase the chances that the same good performance will occur again in the future.

Feedback for Not Meeting Expectations

If performance is below expectations, Best Bosses re-direct to get performance back on track and reduce the chances of failure in the future.

Best bosses never set employees up for failure, but when failure occurs, they use it as an opportunity to evaluate what caused the failure without immediately blaming the person for the failure.

Best bosses don’t assume that failure is always the result of poor motivation, but take the time to look for other factors such as knowledge, skill, support, pressure from others, etc. Once they find the real reason behind the failure, they work with (re-direct) the employee to develop a plan for eliminating the failure in the future.

Best Boss Bottom Line

The work place is not a feel-good, kids’ sports league where everyone gets a trophy for showing up. In reality, success and failure in the performance of our jobs have real consequences. That is why Best Bosses are intentional about creating the conditions where their employees can be successful. They understand how motivation and ability impact performance and they use appropriate feedback to influence future performance.

Help!! I'm tired of doing everything myself!

3 Steps to Make Delegating Less Risky Many of us find that we just can’t seem to get done in a day everything that needs to get done.  If we work alone, then this may be primarily a personal time management issue, but if we supervise a team, then it may well be a delegation and training issue.

Sometimes we fail to delegate tasks to our team members because we simply don’t trust them.  We have delegated to someone in the past and they have failed us, so now we are afraid to try it again.  The fact is that, as supervisors, our job is to get results through the efforts of our team members and if we aren’t delegating, we are not doing what we are getting paid to do.

So how do you develop enough trust so that you are willing to take the “risk” of delegating?

1.  Do an Ability Inventory -- The first step is to accurately understand the ability level of each team member with respect to each task for which they have responsibility.  An honest evaluation of ability will give you a starting point.

2.  Delegate with Support -- Once you have this information, then you can determine what and to whom you can give more responsibility.  Make sure that you provide enough support to ensure success without “looking over their shoulder” all the time.

3.  Develop “The Bench” -- Additionally, you need to determine an on-the-job training process to develop the skills needed by each team member so that they can be successful when delegated specific tasks.  This gives you more “bench strength” so that you have more options for delegation.

Balancing delegation and training will really help you manage your time and also help manage the time of your team members.

3 Keys to Building Confident Employees

Most supervisors want employees who are willing to show appropriate initiative in their work - employees who do things without having to be told to do them.  How many of you would like for your children to clean their room without being told?  OK, maybe that is a little far fetched, but you get the idea.  We know from a lot of research over the past 50-years that people with confidence are much more willing to take initiative.  With this in mind, really good supervisors do everything they can to instill confidence in their employees.  So how do they do it? There are three essentials to building confident employees (and children): 

1.  Evaluate strengths and weaknesses

2.  “Engineer Opportunities for Success” based on those strengths and weaknesses  

3.  Acknowledge success to increase confidence

First, you have to honestly evaluate what each employee is really good at and where they could use some improvement.  Second, “engineer opportunities for success” primarily for the areas needing improvement, but also for the areas that are already strengths.  Remember, while we can learn from failure, confidence is built primarily on successes.  Finally, “acknowledge the success”.  People need positive feedback from important people in their lives, and as a supervisor or parent, you are significant.  Be a confidence builder and you will find that things get done faster and with less of your effort.

What is Accountability Anyway?

One of the primary roles of a manager, supervisor or parent for that matter is to hold people accountable for their performance and the results that they either achieve or fail to achieve.  We hear over and over again that people must be held accountable if you want improvement.  We agree, but what is accountability anyway? Here are some real life examples of what accountability is NOT:

• Blaming a peer when they fail to meet an important deadline

• Making an example of an employee to discourage others from making the same mistake

• Threatening the team during a meeting to demonstrate that you won’t tolerate “poor performance”

• Sending out a memo to let everyone know that team members must have thick skins to keep standards from slipping

• Writing a “strongly worded” performance evaluation to reflect your sincere disappointment with an employee’s contribution over the last few quarters

• Giving your significant other the cold shoulder or withholding affection until they start paying attention to your needs, too

• Sending a child to his room when he doesn’t do what he is told

Here are the common themes with all of these accountability failures:

1. The disappointed party assumed that motivation was the cause and blamed the poor-performer for the results they observed, and
2. The disappointed party chose to punish the poor-performer into new behavior.

This simply isn’t what effective accountability is all about.  For us, accountability is a process and it includes two basic components:

1. Examination of the facts/reasons underlying a specific event/result -- We take the “accounting” in accountability seriously.  Without knowing exactly “why” the person didn’t meet expectations, it is virtually impossible to know how to do the next step.
2. Applying appropriate consequences for the actions and results -- These consequences must be logically tied to the real reason behind the result if you want improvement.

In our March newsletter we will be discussing how to effectively use these two basic components to effectively hold others accountable when they fail to meet expectations.

Are you a "Best Boss"

For the past 30+ years and with thousands of participants, we have been conducting an informal survey to determine the characteristics of those people deemed to be “best bosses”. While teaching supervisors how to manage the performance of their direct reports, we had them participate in an exercise where they listed the characteristics of the best boss they had ever had.  We noticed that there was a lot of consistency across groups and around the world.  We came to call the leadership style that emerged from the data “The Facilitative-Relational Leader” because these bosses used skills to create an environment that made it easier for their team members to express their ideas and achieve their objectives.  While there is some variance in the lists that were generated, there are 20 characteristics that always showed up, and they are:

1. Excellent communicator (Sends clear messages and listens effectively)
2. Holds himself and others accountable for results
3. Enables success
4. Motivates others
5. Cares about the success of others
6. Honest and trustworthy
7. Shows trust by delegating effectively
8. Fair and consistent
9. Competent and knowledgeable
10. Rewards/recognizes success
11. Leads by example
12. Loyal to employees
13. Friendly
14. Good problem solver
15. Team builder
16. Flexible and willing to change when necessary
17. Good planner/organizer
18. Good decision maker
19. Shows respect to others
20. Deals effectively with conflict

Over the next few weeks, we are going to address some of the key characteristics and delve into how the best actually express them, but for now, you may want to think about how you would be viewed by your employees.  How would you stack up against this list?  We have our class participant’s rate themselves on a scale of 1 to 10 (where 1 means “not at all” and 10 means “very accurately”) on how well each characteristic describes them as a manager/supervisor.  You may want to imagine how your team members would evaluate you.  This will give you an idea about what you should focus on to become more effective in your role as a leader.

Consequences of Not Speaking Up

What we learned upon completing a large-scale (3,000+ employees) study of safety interventions is that employees directly intervene in only about two of five unsafe actions and conditions that they observe in the workplace.  The obvious concern is that a significant number of unsafe operations that could be stopped are not, which increases the likelihood of incidents and injuries; but this statistic is troubling for a less obvious reason - its cultural implication.

The influence of culture on safe and unsafe employee behavior is of such concern that regulatory bodies, like OSHA in the U.S. and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in the U.K., have strongly encouraged organizations to foster “positive safety cultures” as part their overall safety management programs.

Employees are inclined to behave in a way that they perceive to be congruent (consistent) with the social values and expectations, or “norms,” that constitute their organization’s culture.  These behavioral norms are largely established through social interaction and communication, and in particular through the ways that managers and supervisors instruct, reward and allocate their attention around employees.  When supervisors and opinion leaders in organizations infrequently or inconsistently address unsafe behavior, it leads employees to believe that formal safety standards are not highly valued and employees are not genuinely expected to adhere to them.  In short, the low frequency of safety interventions in the workplace contributes to a culture in which employees are not positively influenced to work safely.

These two implications – (1) that a significant number of unsafe operations are not being stopped, and (2) that safety culture is diminished – compound to create a problematic state of affairs.  Employees are more likely to act unsafely in organizations with diminished safety cultures, yet their unsafe behavior is less likely to be stopped in those organizations.

(Look for the full-length article in the May/June 2011 edition of EHS Today.)

A "Best Boss" Holds Himself and Others Accountable for Results

To start this series we asked you to evaluate yourself against the list of Top 20 “Best Boss” Characteristics. Let’s look in more detail at #2 -- A “Best Boss” Holds Himself and Others Accountable for Results.

People often associate accountability with negative consequences, but in our definition there can be either positive or negative consequences that follow action. It is important to notice that a Best Boss doesn’t just hold employees accountable for results, but also himself.

This is what we mean by accountability:

An examination of the facts/reasons underlying a specific event/result (accounting) Then application of appropriate consequences for the actions and results.

Accounting for Results

Many bosses (not Best Bosses) assume that failure (and success) is determined by the person’s motivation and they then “hold them accountable” by trying to motivate them to perform better in the future. Remember, motivation is only one aspect of the individual and may have nothing to do with the results observed.

Best Bosses understand that people don’t try to fail and that performance and the results that follow don’t happen in a vacuum. This means that results need to be evaluated and understood in light of a complex environment that includes Others, Surroundings, Sytems, and Self.

We have used the term local rationality in some of our other articles to describe why it makes sense for a person to do something that may not seem logical to someone (including the boss) who is either observing performance or evaluating the result after the fact.

Best Bosses begin with the “account” component of accountability and gather all of the facts/reasons why the person's actions made sense in the moment. They ask questions to evaluate each of the contextual components (self, others, surroundings, systems) that might have impacted the person's actions and led to the results observed.

Once they determine why the person performed this way, then they can develop a plan (we call it the “Fix”) to help the person succeed in the future.

Applying Consequences

Here is where the consequence part of accountability comes into play.

The purpose of a consequence is to either:

Weaken an unwanted behavior through negative consequences or Strengthen a desired behavior through positive consequences. Best Bosses understand this and apply consequences accordingly.

Success

When success occurs Best Bosses apply appropriate positive consequences. This may involve a simple “thank you” for the result, or it may involve some form of public commendation or reward. This should be determined for each result as appropriate.

Failure

When failure occurs, the form of negative consequence should also fit. Many times the process of accounting and determining a fix will be consequence enough to change performance in the future. If failure continues, then some form of formal discipline may be required. This should be determined in concert with your organizations policies and with guidance from internal Human Resource professionals. As we will discuss later on in the Top 20, Best Bosses are also fair and consistent, so make sure that the consequences you apply are both fair and consistent.

Best Boss Bottom Line

Finally, Best Bosses also hold themselves accountable for results. They are constantly evaluating the impact of what they do on those around them and on the organization. They question themselves to determine the impact that various contextual factors are having on their own performance and adjusting decisions as appropriate. If they fail, they are quick to admit that failure, determine why and step up to the consequences. When success occurs they are usually also quick to pass the positive consequences on to their team.st time we listed the Top 20 “Best Boss” characteristics and asked you to evaluate yourself against the list.

A "Best Boss" is an Excellent Communicator

Last time we listed the Top 20 “Best Boss” characteristics and asked you to evaluate yourself against the list. Now let’s look at #1 -- a “Best Boss” is an Excellent Communicator.

By excellent communicator we mean that “Best Bosses”:

(1) Send clear, understandable messages to others (2) Listen to understand the meaning behind the messages sent by others.

So, how do they do it?

Communication Roles

It is helpful to think about effective communication in terms of roles.

Talker

The talker is attempting to communicate some intended meaning to the listener with:

(1) What is said (words) (2) How it is said (tone of voice, body language, etc).

What is said

Best bosses use words that are easily understood by the listener or are effectively defined to allow for understanding. They don’t leave room for misunderstanding because they know that misunderstanding can lead to failure.

How it is said

Best Bosses know that how you say something may be even more important than the words that are actually used. The way words are said communicates much of the intent of the message.

Interpretation of intent can impact motivation, so Best Bosses try to help the listener interpret by:

- Showing energy - Maintaining appropriate eye contact - Using appropriate facial expressions.

Listener

Excellent communicators take the time to listen so that they completely understand others. This is especially true when:

- Helping another person solve a problem - Giving an assignment.

Best Bosses want to make certain that their instructions have been clearly understood so that the employee has the best opportunity to succeed. They don’t make the assumption that all of the message got through to the listener.

Do you Validate?

Really good communicators always “validate” that the message is clear. They don’t just ask “Do you understand?”. Most of the time the listener will say “yes” whether they really understand or not. They might think they understand or they may know they don’t and don’t want to look foolish in the moment.

Best Bosses may say something like:

“I want to make sure that we have covered everything so can you review for me what you are going to do, please?”

This simple question will communicate respect and either:

- Validate understanding or - Clarify what the employee didn’t hear or didn’t understand.

Best Bosses want to make sure that they are not inferring that the listener has failed but rather to communicate that their primary desire is success for the listener.

Tools for Listening

“Best Bosses” attempt to understand the real meaning behind what others are saying by:

(1) Showing interest through appropriate eye contact, posture, facial expression, and other aspects of body language. (2) Not interrupting the speaker to judge what they are saying, but only to ask clarifying questions. (3) Paraphrasing to better understand and also to communicate a desire to understand exactly what the person is saying and, when appropriate, why they are saying it. Using empathic reflection to gain understanding of emotions that could be part of the talkers message.

In other words, “Best Bosses” and good listeners in general do what is necessary to respectfully understand the meaning and the intent underlying the talker’s message.

The “Best Boss” Bottom Line

Through the use of these communication skills “Best Bosses” attempt to facilitate discussions rather than dominate them. This leads to greater success for their employees and more caring relationships with those around them.

What is a Best Boss?

In our December newsletter we announced that we would be discussing the characteristics of a “Best Boss” throughout 2012. Our data comes from 30 years of asking course participants to tell us about the best boss they ever had. A picture of an individual who facilitates rather than dictates and builds lasting relationships emerged as a best boss. Beginning in this edition of The RAD Group Newsletter and continuing in upcoming editions, we will look at the skills and characteristics of this type of boss. Let’s begin by listing the top 20 characteristics of a best boss. 1. Excellent communicator (Sends clear messages and listens effectively) 2. Holds himself and others accountable for results 3. Enables success 4. Motivates others 5. Cares about the success of others 6. Honest and trustworthy 7. Shows trust by delegating effectively 8. Fair and consistent 9. Competent and knowledgeable 10. Rewards/recognizes success 11. Leads by example 12. Loyal to employees 13. Friendly 14. Good problem solver 15. Team builder 16. Flexible and willing to change when necessary 17. Good planner/organizer 18. Good decision maker 19. Shows respect to others 20. Deals effectively with conflict

While these characteristics are not in any rank order, all are viewed as important and the first four are seen as critical to successful leadership. For this reason in our next four newsletters we will focus on each of the first four characteristics individually. But for now, we recommend that you do an evaluation of yourself. You can do this by evaluating how you think other people that you work with (direct reports, coworkers, etc.) would rate you on each item. You can use a 10-point scale where “1” means “doesn’t describe you at all” and “10” means “describes you very accurately”. Items on which you score 5 or below indicate areas that could be impacting the results that you get as a supervisor. If you are not already a supervisor, then these would be areas that you might want to focus on in case you do get the opportunity to become someones “boss”. Our hope this that this ongoing discussion of best boss characteristics will help you as you attempt to get results through the efforts of other people.

Managing From a Distance

Have you ever called a direct report on the phone and given him precise instructions, only to find later that he did not follow through on what you requested? Or have you endured a “30-minute” video conference meeting that lasted two hours, only to close with no resolution? If so, then welcome to the exciting world of remote communication and management. Virtually anywhere you can find people communicating and managing from a distance.  You can also find missed information, poor accountability, a lack of follow-through and a good deal of frustration.

Advances in communication technologies over the past decade have had a significant impact on the oil and gas industry. To date, however, most of us have been slow to acknowledge that effective remote management requires not only communication technologies but also a special set of skills and an understanding of how communication works when it is conducted through teleconferencing, videoconferencing, e-mail and the like.

The oil and gas industry is trying to resolve this problem by training employees to recognize and respond to the challenges of communicating and managing remotely.

Remote communication carries many inherent challenges, not the least of which is the challenge of accurately conveying the intent of your message. The little ways that you communicate your intent in face-to-face communication are often so subtle and habitual that you are not even aware of them. A slight twist of the lip transforms a harmless comment into a sarcastic criticism. A momentary glance in one direction indicates the object to which you are referring. But when communication takes place over telephone or e-mail, these critical expressions aren’t there.

All too often, we go about our business communicating as normal, unaware that an essential part of our message will never reach our audience. And we wonder why that direct report failed to do exactly what we told him over the phone.

Are we doomed to sacrifice the clarity of our messages for the operational benefits of managing from a distance? Fortunately, the answer is no, but it will require specialized training, which can pass on lessons learned by observing some of the best remote communicators and identifying best practices. For example, when the best communicators need to clarify the intent of their words while communicating from a distance, they take care to state in sufficient detail why they are saying what they are saying.

The value of this best practice was made apparent during a classroom exercise to teach participants how to communicate effectively using e-mail. Each participant was given one piece of a larger problem, then told to communicate with one another to solve the whole problem. The catch, however, was that they could not speak; rather, they had to use pens and sticky notes to communicate.

One participant, after finishing her portion of the problem, approached her co-worker and scribbled the note, “What’s your problem?” to which the co-worker responded with an offended expression on his face.

“Nothing! What’s your problem!” Obviously, the intent of the original message was not conveyed. If she had written instead, “What’s your problem? I would like to see how it fits with the one I’m working on,” the co-worker would have understood her intent. Explaining why you are saying what you are saying is one of many things that the “best” do when communicating remotely.

Clearly, there are many other challenges and best practices that must be addressed during training to bring about the desired results. In general, a three-part solution is recommended when training people to handle the challenges of remote communication: (1) provide personnel with a clear understanding of the way that face-to-face communication works so that they can (2) identify the specific barriers posed by the remote communication media that they use daily, which sets the stage for them to (3) acquire the appropriate skills that will allow them to overcome those barriers.

This approach not only enables employees to diagnose problems that arise in their daily communications, it also equips them with skills to overcome those problems quickly and effectively.

Complexity and Local Rationality

Why do people - like employees and children - decide to break the rules?  Do it their way?  Resist change?  It doesn’t make any sense!  Or does it? It can be frustrating and often perplexing when employees fail to adhere to company policies and procedures, especially when those policies and procedures are in the employees’ best interest. Filing a required document can legally protect managers, but they don’t file it.  Locking out a machine that is being serviced can keep a technician safe from pain, injury and even death, but he regularly services the machine without locking it out.  Your children “know” the rules, but sometimes break them anyway. There is a useful way to think about this issue:  What employees and children do makes sense...to them.

We live, work, play and make decisions in complex environments. It helps to think of our environments as systems with overlapping and interacting components - including people, things, rules, values, knowledge, etc. - which are, in turn, complex sub-systems. One of the principles of complex systems is that the “people” component tends to be driven by the limited information that is available to and impressed upon those people within their local contexts. We make decisions based on our knowledge of what makes sense at the local level, at any given moment.  We call this the principle of “local rationality.”  In other words, our decisions are rational to us because they are based on the information available within the local context (which includes knowledge residing in our brains) at a particular point in time.

As supervisors and parents, we observe behavior that is driven by the principle of local rationality, but we only have limited information about what factors the individual is using to make their decision.  Why did it make sense to the employee to do such a dangerous thing?  Why did it make sense to the child to break the curfew rule?  After all, they know the rules and we have rules to make it clear how they should behave, don’t we?

Rules are only one component of the complex environments that we live and work in.  There are also pressures from other people - including superiors, peers and even you - to make a decision to act in a certain way.  Knowledge of past successes and failures, availability of resources needed to be successful, time pressures, workplace layout and numerous other kinds of factors make it ‘make sense’ for the person. Consider for a moment the last thing you saw a person do that “irked” you.  What kinds of factors could have led the person to do what he or she did?  Why would it have made sense...or did you assume it was because the person was lazy, rude, selfish, or in some other way had poor personal motivation?

As humans, we have a tendency to assume that people do what they do because of personal motivation , and then we treat their “failures” as an opportunity to motivate them to change and make better decisions in the future.  Research shows, however, that actions are often the result of the person’s evaluation of complex input from the environment and may have nothing to do with personal motivation.  For example, we tell employees to work safely, but at the same time push them for productivity, sometimes beyond their ability. The trade-off for the employee is to “cut corners” to be productive because he thinks in the moment that safety is really not at risk and showing you how productive he can be is what is really important.  Your teenager decides to come home late because her date had a couple of drinks and she didn’t trust him to drive safely...and her cell phone was dead, so she didn’t call. It makes sense in the moment, given the information that she had at her disposal.  It doesn’t make sense to you while you sit at home worried sick and imagining all kinds of terrible things.  It doesn’t make sense because you aren’t making decisions in her context!

As parents and supervisors, we need to ask a simple question before we punish undesired behavior: “Why did making that decision make sense to the person making it?”  Why was the decision “locally rational”? If we find out it was motivation, then we can deal with that; but if it is some other factor or combination of factors, then simply motivating won’t work. Look for which contextual factors actually are at play in the decision before you try to change the person’s behavior, and you will be much more successful at creating sustained change.

The Anti-Undercover Boss

By now you’ve probably heard about the hit reality TV show, Undercover Boss. If you haven’t, the concept involves a Chief Officer of a company infiltrating a few locations within the organization, disguised as a newly hired employee. The objective is to find out “what’s really going on out there”. During the 1-hour show, real problems that are inherent in the organization and the effect those problems have on employees, are discovered. At the end of the show, the executive brings in the people that he/she interacted with and pulls back the veil, so to speak. They then talk about some key strategies for overcoming the problems that were identified. It makes for great TV, but is it the right method? Understanding your organization is critical, but our experience is that how you do it matters. The RAD Group has been successfully helping organizations assess their cultures, and the problems inherent in them for many years. So here is a simple review of how we do it? First, we interview the executive team to gain an understanding of the culture that they view as their ideal. We then head to all levels of the organization, including the front-line and interview a cross section of employees. We conduct one-on-one interviews and all information is completely confidential. It is critical that the employees feel that they can trust us so that they will be candid in their comments, so we spend time building trust with each person that we interview. We have specific questions that we use to start the interviews, but when issues within the culture are discovered we investigate. Once the data is gathered we then analyze all of the information and evaluate it in light of the ideal culture that was identified by the executives. Invariably there are gaps between the actual culture and the desired ideal. With these gaps identified, we can then devise strategies to close those gaps.

So what’s the difference? In Undercover Boss, we see two glaring issues. First, the executive is only exposed to a very small sample within the organization. It could be likened to a doctor simply taking the blood pressure of a patient and declaring that the person has heart disease. There are many more tests that must be run before an accurate diagnosis can be made. Secondly, in the TV show the data is gathered by tricking the employees into trusting the new hire, only to find out later that it was an executive all along. With our method transparency is crucial and employees know exactly why they are being interviewed, that they are safe from repercussions, and that the information gathered will be used to make their organization better. Since they know that they are anonymously participating in a diagnosis designed to identify both what is working and what is not they are more willing to contribute and help give us a clear picture of the organizational culture as it actually is. Since they are involved in identifying issues, they are also more willing to accept changes that will inevitably follow.