Home Who We work with how we work Services workshops blog Resources About us Contact

“Working with Eric was a pleasure. We developed a good rapport and established a level of honesty and trust. I valued his counsel and recommendations. I find Eric to be very competent in a variety of disciplines. He is able to correctly diagnose organizational problems and suggest solutions that are on point. I found Eric to be a professional with the highest levels of honesty, integrity, and ethical behavior. I would not hesitate to engage his services again in the future.”

Kathy Lueckert,
former Corporate Services Director,
Department of Planning and Development,
City of Seattle
(Kathy is now Director of Planning and Finance for Advocacy and Communications at World Vision.)

“I've worked closely with Eric on developing and presenting the Leadership Eastside community leadership program. He has that rare blend of extensive real-world experience along with a very strong background in theory and research. He moves easily between big picture strategy and the tactical details. Eric brings a superb ability to plan, execute and follow-through, both as a behind-the-scenes planner and as an upfront instructor and facilitator.”

Annalee Luhman,
founding board member,
Leadership Eastside

 

Conflict and change: The blog

 Subscribe in a reader

 

13 August 2008

Be the explainer

Do you understand the decisions that affect you? Do you wish you were better informed about decisions and why they were made?

Everyone wants to be better informed about what decisions have been made and why. Unfortunately, most leaders and managers fail to adequately inform people about decisions and rationales. I think they're missing a big chance to influence people. But that's not today's topic.

I think there is a role for you—the influence leader—someone who didn't make the decision but can help implement it. You can be the one to explain the decision to others. You help people get their arms around the decision, which makes them feel better about it.

And, of course, a decision that is explained stands a much better chance of getting implemented.

What's more is that people will feel respected when the decision is explained to them. Most folks care a lot about what happens at work and to them at work. That leads to an understandable expectation that they are informed about things that affect them and their work.

If you can deliver that explanation to folks when the boss hasn't, they will appreciate it, and your influence will grow. You can also help people avoid knee-jerk negative interpretations and getting angry with the boss for failing to close the loop.

Explaining other people's decisions can help you, your colleagues, and the organization.

 

12 August 2008

Manipulation vs. influence

Do you think it's OK to influence other people? Or does it feel like manipulation to you?

Surprisingly, a lot of people don't feel it's appropriate to be "consciously influential." They feel that crafting a strategy for approaching someone that increases the chances of getting a "yes" from them already crosses the ethical line.

I would suggest that it's OK to be influential, but not OK to be manipulative. There is a difference between the two, but how do you know? Here's how I define the boundary between ethical influence and unethical manipulation.

• It's influence if people are led willingly to something they want. It's manipulation if they are led to do something they later regret.

• It's influence if you are proposing something that serves the interests of both parties. It's manipulation if your proposal acts against the other person's interests.

• It's influence if you openly share all information, and it's accurate. It's manipulation if you withhold or distort information.

• It's influence if your intentions are transparent. It's manipulation if you must hide your true intentions. It's manipulation if "the gig is up" if they knew what you were really up to.

Your personal comfort level with influence may differ from someone else's, so it's worth deciding where you're own personal ethical boundary is.

However, leave yourself some room for ethical influence, because in most jobs you have an obligation to be appropriately influential. Behind every corporate debacle or government expose, there was someone who could have stopped it—someone who needed to be more influential. In other words, you have an ethical responsibility to be influential. Don't abdicate your responsibility!

 

5 August 2008

First mover advantage

You know the golden rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Basically, this is just common courtesy and common sense.

But, have you thought about how it gives you first mover advantage in situations where you are trying to influence someone?

What I mean by "first mover advantage" is that by doing something nice for people, you automatically set up a reciprocity expectation in the relationship. You do something nice, and they are now obligated to you.

So, instead of waiting until you need help and asking for it, offer your help and build up a supply of goodwill.

The desire to reciprocate is built into people. Thanks to that desire, people are automatically more inclined to help you out or do you a favor in return. Same goes when you need someone's support or approval for your project. If they owe you, they are more inclined to be influenced by you.

However, people vary in how they respond to owing a favor. Some folks want to quickly reciprocate to clear their accounts; others might be less concerned with immediately responding but will later if you ask them. And, it's true that some even will deny the obligation.

In general, the more helpful and supportive you are, the more inclined people will be to help you out when you ask. You don't usually have to keep close track of who owes whom favors; instead, try a policy of helpfulness that makes everyone more inclined to help you.

 

4 August 2008

Keep on truckin'

In the late 60s and early 70s, an R. Crumb illustration Keep on Truckin' showed three men in a row walking with outstretched front legs. It inspired people to keep going in spite of setbacks. (Or, at least, that's how I interpreted it.)

I think about that phrase Keep on Truckin' when it comes to changing a work relationship or an organization. It takes hard work. And there are setbacks. And, to make matters worse, you have to keep working at it over time.

It's not easy, and it requires you to stretch yourself in ways that don't always feel good. You have a part in creating every situation you're in; changing the situation means changing your behavior.

The payoff for all that effort rarely comes when you expect it, and often not in the way you expect it. But it usually comes—if you keep at it.

In Good to Great, Jim Collins calls this pushing on the flywheel. Imagine a massive cast iron wheel that you can move only an inch or so at a time. You keep pushing, again and again, until it starts to rotate. Keep at it over weeks and months and years, and it starts to gain momentum. Then, and only then, will you start to experience the breakthroughs. They come because you kept pushing on the flywheel.

Many of us expect results too soon and give up on pushing the flywheel too early. Actually, if it is the right thing to push, we should probably expect to be pushing it forever. So, pick your flywheel carefully!

What is the flywheel you're pushing on?

 

25 July 2008

Listen to your body talk

Have you ever been in a conversation with someone and noticed that something strange was happening in your body?

Maybe you had a sinking feeling in your gut, or it felt like hot lead was running through your veins.

Maybe you noticed that your hands were in fists or that your toes were curling. Or, your heart was suddenly beating faster. Or, your palms were sweaty.

As we take in what's happening around us and interpret it, conscious thoughts and ideas are not the only result. Our body also acts as a receiver and transmitter of our interpretations and resulting emotions.

And, many times, your body reacts more quickly and more precisely than your brain. There are several physiological and psychological reasons for this, but that's not the point.

The point is, if you ignore the signals you're getting from your body, you'll miss important information. Your body might be telling us to be afraid or wary of someone's intentions. That you need to tread very carefully. That you are avoiding a big decision.

And, you might end up getting into a fight you don't want to have. You might end up saying or doing something that proves to be "career limiting." You might set back your progress toward some goal or objective. You might end a relationship.

For most of us, it is mighty difficult to tune into the body. But, it is an important source of insight into how we are reacting to what's going on. So, the next conversation you're in, even if it's low-key, try turning your attention to your body and practice listening. Take a breath and look around. It only takes a second, but it might yield valuable insight.

 

24 July 2008

Skip the branding

How many change initiatives have you seen that are branded with a snappy name, logo and even special graphics? I've seen more than my share, and none of these "newslettered" (or "websited") programs seem to go anywhere.

I ran one of these much-heralded programs years ago. We enjoyed a national reputation for it, but those of us on the inside would shake our heads in bewilderment when we compared our national reputation to our puny results.

These days, I avoid from branded initiatives, because I suspect that they are simply "flashes in the pan" that will not last or have any measurable impact on the organization. And, I urge my clients to skip the fanfare and simply get to work.

Because the fanfare is not the change. Not even close. The real work is looking at personal and organization patterns that constantly recreate the status quo and figure out how to shift them to produce the results you want. The branded approach tends to reinforce old patterns, not spawn new ones; it works against the change.

This is not to say you can skip the hard work of communication and implementation when it comes to change. That's essential. What I am suggesting is to stop thinking about it as a short-term, flashy program and instead treat it as a lifetime commitment.

It's kind of like dieting. Diets don't work for long, but long-term changes in habit do.

 

23 July 2008

The magic quarter second

Ever been amazed at how quickly you've reacted to something someone said. In just a split second, you heard them say something, you interpreted it, and you acted on that interpretation. Boom! That fast.

We tend to notice how quickly we react when we end up acting badly, losing our cool, ranting, making a scene and hurting someone else.

Coined by psychotherapist and teacher Tara Bennett-Goleman, the "magic quarter second" refers to that instant during which it is possible for a thought to be "caught" before it turns into an emotional reaction.

The most centered people I know have the capacity to catch thoughts and briefly "noodle" on them—before they let the thought start to churn out emotions. For the rest of us, this is quite difficult. It is definitely one of those things that's worth doing that is worth doing badly. It takes a lot of practice. A lot—years and years.

As I heard in a recent workshop, practice makes permanent. Not perfect but permanent. After all, even Buddhist nuns and monks lose their cool sometimes.

The hardest sell I have when I train people on how to have high-stake conversations is that we manufacture our own emotions. If we can learn to look at someone's behavior, entertain a couple of different interpretations, and therefore experience a variety of emotional responses, we might be able to stretch out that magic quarter second, and change our behavior.

In doing so, we are more likely to get what we want...good working relationships and the business results we're after.

 

22 July 2008

Anything worth doing is worth doing badly.

Have you ever hesitated to try some new approach to a person or problem because of fear of failure? A fear that it wouldn't work out and might even go poorly. Not to worry. Do it anyway. The chances that it will go perfectly are minute. Might as well get the first attempts out of the way—and learn how to do it better. After all, you can't learn to skate/bike/ride a horse, etc. without falling down.

The phrase "Anything worth doing is worth doing badly" came from my colleague Wally Wilkins (www.take-risks.com). He uses it to remind people that when you try doing something new it's not going to go perfectly (or even well) the first time. But, that doesn't mean you give up. If it's worth doing, you've got to keep after it.

I was working with a client in a difficult situation. She tried some new things, and got a lot of pushback from senior folks. Yet, she is clear that she must try these new tactics because it's a matter of critical importance for the organization. As we debriefed, she identified several areas where she might refine her approach, but she remained very committed to keep trying.

This was not a situation of someone on a fool's errand, banging their head against the wall. She's remaining both focused and flexible. And, the goal is important. (After all, there are many things you can do badly that are NOT worth doing.)

Instead, she is focused on achieving significant results for the organization using a variety of different strategies and tools. She's adjusting her strategy as she learns more. And, some things have gone badly. She even thinks a few might prove to be "career-limiting."

And, yet, she is still trying. She has fallen down, got up, dusted herself off and gotten back on the horse. She knows that anything worth doing is worth doing badly.

Next time you are thinking about doing something risky, don't expect it to go perfectly or even well. Just try to give yourself space to do your best and see what happens—and plan to try again. Things rarely work out magically the first time you try them. If it's worth doing, keep trying!

 

13 July 2008

Deadwood

Have you ever regarded someone as a "deadwood"? People often use this term to refer to people they consider absolute lost causes—folks who don't care, frustrate others' efforts, and often make things worse.

When a team or work group is stuck, often someone gets labelled as deadwood, but usually upon closer examination, you find that the label is way too blunt and brutal. There is almost always more to the story.

There are a myriad of patterns and problems that can undermine someone's motivation and performance. A lot of those patterns can be changed with some concerted effort on the part of the person and their boss. If you don't make the effort though, there is little reason to expect that anything will change.

The first step is always to lay out clear expectations for performance and interpersonal behavior. In writing. Then you keep those expectations front and center, constantly refer to them, and address problems that arise.

By the way, the usual shortcuts of reorging or reassigning rarely do the trick, in part because they create so much confusion for the employee and their boss about performance expectations. Reorgs to address "personnel problems" are a clossal waste of time, resources and goodwill.

I often tell clients, "No one enters the workforce in their 20s planning to 'get by' until retirement." Somehow, somewhere, the spark, the motivation, that innate desire to do a good job and make a difference got snuffed out. Often, there is something in the person's past work experience that explains it. Whatever the reason, I believe that, in most cases, spark can be reignited—but it takes focused effort.

 

3 July 2008

15% or 40%--you decide

"In 1976 one study estimated that up to 30% of a manager's time was spent dealing with conflict. Twenty years later another study found 42% of a manager's time is spent resolving conflicts." (Source: www.bizforum.org/whitepapers/ifwi.htm)

In a workshop a while back, I dared to suggest that 15% of people's work time should be devoted to maintaining and enhancing work relationships. Out of that mythical 40-hour workweek, that amounts to six hours of time. My comment met with stunned silence. Imagine the reaction: "Are you kidding me? I haven't got six hours a week to work on relationships! That's simply not realistic!"

Recently, I was reminded of the studies referenced above in which supervisors' and managers' were surveyed about how they actually spend their time. They found that 30-40% of bosses' time went into resolving conflict. Yikes! That's 12-16 hours a week! Two full days!

And, that just counts the time they spent dealing with conflict—not time preventing conflict by, say, building relationships or teambuilding. Moreover, it doesn't count time spent dealing with the downstream effects of conflict, like lower productivity, missed deadlines, and low quality.

Starts to make that 15% figure look a little more reasonable, eh? (Incidentally, that 15% figure has come out of decades of research in small group effectiveness. I didn't make it up.)

How much time are you spending on maintaining work relationships? Too much or too little? How much of your workweek is eaten up resolving conflict? Are you doing enough to reduce the conflict?

It's worth pondering.