Instant People Skills: Coach Yourself & Others

We Need To Change The Way We Multitask

By now you've read that multitasking isn't what people imagine and largely distracts us from effective work (Slashdot link, for instance). It's really switching quickly back and forth between two or more tasks and each switch wastes time as we struggle to re-orient to the next item. That's been well researched.

The problem is we all do it. And actually, if you think about it, a certain type of multitasking is necessary and worthwhile, though much isn't. We need to understand the difference.

What helps is if we pay attention to the one key multitasking that helps us to be most effective, a facet we often overlook. While doing anything, the key question is what its effect will be on other people - will they be more motivated and more capable of helping get things done as a result of what we do?

Everything we do connects with others - customers, co-workers, family members, even other drivers on the road. If we plough through task after task to get "things" done as quickly as we can, it's inevitable that we start ignoring people - the loud cell conversations in crowded places, the calls taken during meetings and dinners, the brush-offs of co-workers when we "absolutely" have to make something else a priority. No one learns from us, except that in future they'd rather have less to do with us.

The real multitasking requirement we all face is how our work can get done and at the same time people can be helped along the way so they, too, can be optimally productive, learn new skills, improve, grow and thrive. What else are we in business and in life for? And, by the way, some of that greater productivity and improvement will come back to help us get more things done faster ourselves. If we model helping, we will be helped in return. Reciprocity is our human link.

Dangerous Questions?

Do you get much out of webinars?  I hear people say if they got one thing it was worthwhile.  Is it any wonder Gen Xers prefer faster media like texting and short You Tube videos?  Often the best ideas come from very short comments. But you may not even notice them without context.

A webinar today on the subject of effective coaching from Bluepoint by the authors of their new book, Unleashed, suggested we can often benefit from the following question in lots of situations and expect many people to jump to answer this: "who knows a dangerous conversation we need to have?"

In context this is a brilliant observation.  If you're coaching someone it could be the dangerous conversation they need to have is with themselves or with some significant other - as spouse, a boss, a coworker or any of a dozen other possibilities.

Perhaps even more importantly, this would almost always seem helpful in team meetings.  Maybe change the wording slightly to "dangerous questions we need to ask?"  How many times have you been at a meeting, knowing people are sitting with concerns, but feeling unable to ask for speak up?

Another option: "Who knows a challenging question we should ask?"  The possibilities and the opportunities are endless.  Are there situations where you can apply this today?  Is there a dangerous question you can ask yourself?

5 Keys to Success via Audio Download

Multimedia is an up and coming way to get ideas across. Here's a link to a Internet radio interview in which I describe how my five key principles work - from ThatRadio.com, a Toronto Internet radio start up. If you prefer to save it or listen later, you can "right click" on the link, click "save target as" and make sure to pay attention to where you save it so you can find it later. This group impressed me with their business-like approach and the progress they're making. The show is about 50 minutes, but the advantage of an archived version is that you can skip around, stop and come back, all without much difficulty.

I was lucky that a friend, John Klotz, has expanded his TorontoTalks.org small business presenters line-up to this i-radio format. I think it really works and have listened to several earlier archived shows. I've found Internet radio to be so superior as a medium I find myself listening to far more than I ever expected I would. When you can't listen live, it's completely straight forward to download and listen later. That way you can access topics when you need them or even download them to listen to while commuting or working out via iPod or MP3. 

The point I'm trying make both in this blog and on the radio is that the same principles of success apply to every situation - work or personal, front-line worker, family member or executive officer. They also work in any medium and any business or non-profit. Sometimes it helps to read, hear, see and try out things in various ways so you get a complete overview. I wouldn't try to communicate solely by any one medium because each contributes things you can't get from the others.

What Works in HR: New McKinsey Research

Last week here consultants from McKinsey presented research on what makes Human Resources strategies succeed and produce better business results in organizations. More studies are being done in this area, in this case based on over 115,000 questionnaires from executives in 230 companies. Their original research is described by Forbes with a link to their write-up provided. To see their longer article you need a free membership as it will tell you at that link, but if you work in HR it's definitely a valuable newsletter to get.

I've long pointed out my objective isn't to do research myself. Several people, noting my interest, have suggested I start a PhD. Not for me, thanks. I love working with actual clients way too much. Their needs are usually short and easy compared to the time needed academic work. Besides there are others who enjoy it more and are probably better at it. I see my role as simplifying a lot of hot new findings and relating them to what produces results for individuals and organizations.

This relatively new (last year) McKinsey work deserves a much wider audience. It reinforces much of what we already know, but puts some solid proof behind it. And it simplifies quite usefully.

The take-away is this: you or your organization can get far better results from people by focusing on just two things. First, stop doing dumb things or using patently bad practices. Second, focus on three to five key practices that work together. Pursing practices that don't work together or choosing single "quick fixes" is one of the bad things you should stop doing.

That raises two questions. How do you figure out what's bad? Easy. Most people already know because others have told them many times, but they don't want to admit it. A sure-fire way is to ask others what you do that bugs them. Then stop it. At a company level, my old employer persisted with a bonus plan everyone laughed at. The biggest gainer each year was a guy who purposely set stretch goals and failed to meet them. The problem was his goals happened to be to reduce his sales to ease the company out of his line of business. Each year he didn't make the effort to reduce so his sales far exceeded the low target he set. Paradoxically that meant he beat people who set targets to raise sales and failed to make as much over target as he did. A simple fix could have made this logical, but senior management refused to change anything several years in a row. So the entire bonus plan became a joke... and a serious irritant. Similarly bosses have often been told not to yell at employees. These things aren't rocket science. Just stop. But many executives can't seem to grasp this.

Interestingly, the key HR practices that the McKinsey guys found reliably improve results turned out to be very close to the five I recommend at every level, for all size of situations from individual to total organization. In their findings, these boiled down to setting a clear, inspiring vision of the goals needed, then developing a culture of positive trust and openness (honesty) and finally helping each person see clearly what their own role is in achieving these goals. I would only add - keeping these factors in balance as you move forward. That's captured in their insistence that these only work if they work together. When one or two are allowed to dominate and aren't balanced with the others, things break down.

They go on to point out, as I do, that neither individuals nor organizations need to be perfect. Far from it they say. What's needed is consistent effort. And their stats show companies who do this versus those that don't end up with double the results financially (and every other way) over the courses of a year or two. You can see why I get a kick out of following such research. It consistently validates what I show people how to do. Pretty simple, but highly effective.

Isn't There Something Tough About Leading?

Yes. Learning to tolerate uncertainty. Once you have, you're home free.

We're finally beginning to understand complexity and it turns out to be simpler than expected. In virtually all complex situations a small set of principles makes you most successful... with one caveat: you can't predict the exact outcome or when it will occur. In all complex situations there are no guarantees. Some solutions will fail and some will succeed beyond anything imaginable when you begin.

The good news is that when working with people, we know the small set of principles and we know that successful outcomes outnumber failures by a vast margin - in the order of 99 to 1... if you stick to the principles that work most often. I've covered those before on my web site... here. http://www.crispstrategies.com/index.php?src=news&category=Articles+about+the+Five+Skills

The challenge is that you need to apply the five skills consistently for as long as it takes to succeed. You can't know for sure how long that is. You can't be absolutely certain it will work (although 99% of the time it will. This is astronomically better than the odds you get when gambling which are usually far more than 99% tilted toward losing. But the results of gambling are usually instant, which makes it the most appealing behavior on Earth, the most addictive and difficult to walk away from. This is the opposite. It can be very challenging for anyone to stick with a long, slow, uncertain process.

If nothing else, you may just feel stupid hanging in. That's a really bad feeling. I recall how difficult it was doing my first major search for a new job at age 33. I wanted to make a change from being a rank-and-file teacher/guidance counselor with no obvious management experience to a business-managerial role in some totally different industry where I had no experience. I had to sit at lunch ever day for a year with a bunch of other teachers who thought I was attempting something insane and impossible. Though few commented, I could feel the weight of their skepticism adding to my own every day. But I plodded along. As a result I ended up in a dream job that led to a dream career with results so far beyond what I could have achieved in my old role that it's hard to compare them in the same breath. Talk about tripling your results... and then some.

The neat thing is that you don't have to let yourself feel stupid. No one really knows or cares how you feel. It helps to use the five skills constantly in all sorts of situations. That way you soon see them working in one way or another. Confidence develops and you realize you can succeed at virtually anything more than 99% of the time if you just keep at these daily. After a while they become second nature and you do them without any conscious effort. They become habits you always apply automatically, not stressful, not time-consuming, easy to fit in with whatever else you want to do - in a word: EASY!

Leadership Isn't Tough

Gregg Thompson writes, in the newsletter for Tom Peters' spin-off "Blue Point Development" that we shouldn't believe all those articles we see promising leadership "secrets." He's right to point out there aren't really any secrets. We know what there is to know, but he goes on to explain why so we see so many of these articles by saying we know all about leadership, but, "It's just tough, and we'd like to find an easier way to do it." 

I beg to differ. I rarely found leadership tough at all. In fact, I often felt I had one of the easiest jobs in the world. What's tough is to struggle under bosses who don't let you do anything, who constantly dish out orders and keep you from leading or doing anything your way. I was lucky that most of my bosses over the years didn't exert that sort of strangling control. And I worked steadily on ways to get out from under that sort of supervision.

The key to leadership is that you have to have a clear point of view of your own, not someone else's. You need to pursue it steadily, not change directions constantly as many managers and companies do. Not everyone will buy in initially, so you have to persuade, convince people with small results demonstrating reliability along the way. And along with persistence, you have to listen and adjust to incorporate what others need to see along the way while still moving in your chosen direction.

The balance between stubbornly persisting along your own route and incorporating others' opinions is the big challenge. Fortunately you don't have to be perfect. There will be times when you annoy people by sticking to your way and other times when you accuse yourself of being wishy-washy because you gave in to easily on some key point. If you constantly pay attention and remember that you are stretching the envelope, you'll notice these and adjust continuously without ever giving up on your overall objective.

That probably sounds tough. It really isn't. It just takes focus - paying attention consistently and not forgetting where you're trying to get to. It becomes habit, pushing slowly, but steadily toward your goal while doing your best to take others along with you. At times progress will seem slow or non-existent. At others you'll be startled by major leaps forward. Either way, you mustn't give up your efforts to move forward step by step (I'd use the word "slogging," but that makes it sound hard and it isn't). Just persist steadily at a pace and pressure level you can comfortably sustain. Make sure you get distractions and relaxation in there to recharge your batteries. The end result belongs to those who keep going, not those putting in the greatest one-time effort. Enjoy the journey. You only pass this way once.

Two Questions That Change Lives

Coaching at its core depends on just two short questions. The first is "How can I...?" By asking this you not only take responsibility for getting something done, you frame it positively. Asking how you CAN, implies that indeed you CAN. You simultaneously open your mind and your thinking to look for new solutions by framing the question how. In just three words you've set up the most powerful, forward-oriented mental frame anyone can create.

The second question follows logically - "how's it going?" Once you've asked, your mind will inevitably answer the first question. It's geared to create answers and will do so based on what's happening and your past experiences and knowledge. Once you get an inkling of that first answer, you're 99% of the way to trying it out. Who can resist? After all it's your own theory. You'll want to see if it works.

And then it's natural, though more rare, to ask, honestly, how it went. The dynamic set up by just these two questions is powerful - create a plan, try it, evaluate... and then ask these questions again... and again. Unfortunately what often happens is a loss of momentum. After the original excitement of asking, answering yourself and trying out an answer or two, if there isn't success fairly soon, many people give up. That's why persistence and knowing how long and how intensely to persist is so critical that Winston Churchill is so often quoted as saying, "Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing, great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense."

If we can just encourage people to ask these two questions repeatedly until or unless it finally just doesn't make sense to ask again due to "honour or good sense" we can help them change their own lives and inevitably those of everyone around them.

What's the Power of Coaching

Realizing the word "coaching" pretty much sums up everything I know about leadership, managing people and succeeding at things got me digging back in memory for where I've noticed this in the past. I realize it's like the water fish swim in. It became so much a part of the environments I worked in that I didn't really notice that's what it was.

When you're new in leadership, you notice people come to you for all sorts of things, hoping you can solve their problems and give them what they think they need. If you fall into the trap of merely giving advice and answers (or at least giving these without also asking them what they want and what they're doing themselves), you soon slip further toward laying out for them exactly what they should do - ultimately giving direction and orders. It's an easy trap to fall into, especially if you got your new role by being the expert in whatever it is.

Naturally people ask for expert opinion and directions. Deadly. If you answer without involving them in the solution, you take responsibility. If they take your advice and it doesn't work, it doesn't become their fault, but yours.

The power of coaching is simply the opportunity for both of you to question each other and brainstorm and for them to choose the best direction based on their direct knowledge of what they're facing, something you may not be fully in touch with. Two heads really are better than one. So anyone can coach. Yet so many fall into the trap of making it only from their head that the answer emerges.

Coaching Communicates Across Our Differences

Sometimes a break from the routine is what's needed to clear one's thinking and gain perspective.

During a longer than usual summer layoff I spent tons of time reading and watching people. I looked at situations I usually don't have time to ponder. In stores, restaurants, service businesses and, yes, even occasionally in offices I happened to visit I constantly noticed how different we are... and yet how strangely similar. What we often have in common seems to be our lack of listening.

My reading was largely about coaching. I concluded the simple solution to the world's problems, especially business problems, is to build a culture in which everyone coaches. I wanted to survey what's out there on coaching yourself as well as coaching others. And I looked to see if I could see coaching-style leadership happening around us. Mostly I couldn't, though it certainly goes on. It's just lower key than the usual wrangling and grumping we see and hear everywhere from both bosses and staff. A great feature of coaching as a leadership style - it goes almost unnoticed when done as a matter of routine. There's virtually no resistance to it.

We learn at least as much ourselves while we're trying to coach others. A coaching point of view encourages us to think in terms of learning, changing and improving at the same time we urge it on others. That in itself encourages others to take it seriously because they see the coaches true interest includes learning for themselves as well as changing the coachee.

What's clear is that no one truly likes "advice." Coaching takes a different approach in which the coach encourages the individual to figure things out for themselves. The back and forth discussion actually allows both to air their concerns, their hesitations and begin to build new ideas for action... for themselves. Ultimately everyone's interests are served. The truth gets out on the table and it's dealt with in a highly constructive way without orders, fault-finding or threats. 

I loved the Henry Ford quote cited by Jim Clemmer in his newsletter: "No one is apathetic except those in pursuit of someone else's objectives." Coaching offers a chance for everyone to develop and begin the path to one's own objectives for oneself - a far more appealing road than orders or advice.

Is Leadership Hopeless?

We can keep asking why we haven't learned yet that leaders and employees applying EQ or emotional sense, identifying and meeting real customer needs, is the key ingredient for success. We can also feel hopeless about getting the message through. A vast number of companies and leaders can't seem to get this. But giving up would guarantee no progress... and we know that many, many individual leaders are capable of establishing an environment and modelling highly effective behavior for their people, creating highly effective business units within any organization and sometimes even throughout complete organizations.

If only we had enough of these magically skilled leaders. Can we create more? How do we identify them? That's the massive "talent" question everyone is asking. It can't happen overnight.

I was startled by an insightful article by a very articulate graduating student in Anthropology and International Development from York University in the ICA magazine "Edges: New Planetary Patterns." ICA is a Canadian-based international training and facilitation agency specializing in helping non-profits around the world become more effective. You can see the magazine information here (http://icacan.ca/Edges.cfm). She describes how her super university education has trained her to think so critically that is had made contributing effectively seem entirely hopeless. With everything "connected to everything else" and all of it open to severe criticism at every turn there is no way to intervene to improve the world, business or social structures. Everything is gloom. She concludes by saying, "...so I'll just do the best I can. Wish me luck" and her bio says "...still trying to figure out how to make a difference.

This is clearly one of our young leaders. This is a person our organizations are dying to hire and figure out how to keep. Now McKinsey's advice to "keep people motivated, provide meaning and purpose and leaders who model and coach" (in the last post) comes into stark perspective. It's a truism in management development that "leaders teach leaders." The problem is how do we get more if we have only a very small number now who know what to do.

The answer has to be a slow, but constant support building a program within every organization of growing leadership skills little by little, knowing all we now do about what that takes. If we don't.... The good news is that people in senior roles don't have to be good leaders themselves (or they may be). What they need to do, though, is ensure that a great development program is put in place. Future generations, both inside and outside their organizations will thank them.