How can your team deal with complex challenges ?

Most of the challenges facing leaders today are complex. Dave Snowden’s Cynefin model separates the types of situations leaders are confronted with into simple, complicated, complex and chaos, and indicates how each should be dealt with differently (HBR November 2007). A complex challenge requires leaders to probe, sense and respond. How can this model be applied to a team ?

When teams are invited to solve a problem or find solutions for a challenge, they nearly always intuitively move into solution mode very quickly. Each will mentally assess the situation, categorize or analyze the facts and then share which solution is the best and why this is so. “I think we should do this because I used to …”. Experts often save the day. Brainstorming helps to share as many ideas as possible in a short period of time so the team can respond quickly to the issue. Advocating solutions, expert input, brainstorming or sharing best practices works for simple or complicated problems where the Cynefin model prescribes the steps of sense, categorize, respond, and sense, analyze, respond respectively. Simple and complicated problems are prevalent in an “ordered” world where actions have predictable results. Approaching complex problems in the same way leads to half-optimized solutions at best and a team stuck in disagreement at worst; it is often up to the leader to decide what to do. So much for the team’s contribution !

How can a team work through the steps of probing, sensing and responding and tackle complex problems efficiently ?

That’s exactly what Action Learning does. Action Learning is a problem solving process where a small team works on a real and complex business challenge, takes action and learns as individuals and as a team while doing so. Rather than jumping into solution-mode, the ground rule “statements are only made in response to questions” helps the team focus first on what the real issue or challenge is. Perceptions and assumptions are put aside as the team asks questions about the different aspect of the problem. This corresponds to the probing step in the Cynefin model.

Based on the discussion and exchanges in the Action Learning session, each team member will decide what actions to take after the session. They can take action to test out an idea, confirm an assumption or talk to people to collect more information. This is the sensing step in the Cynefin model.

When the team reconvenes to continue their work on the challenge, each will share the result of their actions and what they learned from them. The team will take in this new information about the challenge, and continue to work on shaping the understanding of the situation through questions. This is the responding step in the model. 

For a leader, the Cynefin model describes how to deal with a complex challenge. When this leader wants to empower the team to learn, develop and come up with new ideas, the Action Learning process provides a clear structure and rules to avoid the pitfall of tackling complex challenges through the ubiquitous brainstorming-like “let’s find the solution” approach.

When do you start building trust and respect ?

In the leadership program I am currently running in a global company, managers share their challenges through Action Learning sessions. Most of the management issues that participants discuss are about their direct reports. Very often it is about a particular person in the team with who things aren't going so well. Performance may be below par, or the "behaviors" are not as expected. Although the managers don't use the word, it is pretty much about som

eone very different from themselves and "difficult" to work with.

The process of asking open questions (as opposed to fact-finding investigative questions or "let me share what I think you should do" discussions) often leads to the insight on the part of the manager that there is a genuine gap between themselves and this particular person. The manager can give plenty of examples of behavioral or performance issues. But when the questions are about how they work together, how well the manager knows the person and his or her challenges, what other work related things they talk about ... the manager often gets quite silent. He realizes that all they do with this direct report is work, talk about work and complain about the work that doesn't go well. They realize there is not really a "foundation" to their working relationship. There is only work and that's all they talk about. And that's (maybe ...) OK as long as things are going well.

But when they don't, the lack of genuine relationship, the lack of trust or mutual respect makes it very difficult to get out of the negative spiral. Without a solid personal foundation based on other things than "work" (which can cover KPI, job role and responsibilities. payment, benefits), difficult situation often turn sour.

As someone in a recent session shared at the end, "I realize that I need to start working on trust and respect right from day one, not when something starts to go wrong."

Where do you practice leadership ?

We have all been to numerous leadership development courses. We have read the classics from Lao Tzu, Drucker or Covey. And we also read the latest gurus who distill the "five things super successful people never do", thinking that there will be some new nugget of wisdom or a key trick that will help us (or more often, those around us) become the perfect leader.

Once outside of the training room, the MBA lecture room or the retreat resort, and after all the great exchanges and practice we had, we get back to ... work ! Research shows that only 15% of participants in leadership courses really manage to implement the tools and methods they have learned and change the way they lead.

So what is missing ? Why is the world not full of inspirational leaders, with all those great books on leadership ? Individuals who are highly skilled have become so through endless practice. Sports and music teams spend most of their time practicing. We don't have opportunities to practice leadership. Practice during the training session or retreat is not practice. It is role play or "let's pretend".

We cannot really practice a customer engagement meeting. What could be the impact on the customer  if something unexpected happens ? We cannot really practice how to run a better team meeting. What will the participants think if things don't go well ? In the words of Peter Senge, we need to find "practice fields: opportunities deliberately created to practice and to reflect upon the results, rather than to take action. These are distinct from performance fields, where participants are typically expected to perform and learn at the same time."

In my experience, Action Learning is a great setting to create practice fields. With the explicit participation of all (including customers or suppliers), and the upfront clarification that the session is about learning, participants have the possibility to apply their leadership concepts, engage and learn individually and with the others. With all the investment in leadership programs, one wonders why this final step is all too often left out ...

the Action Learning Iceberg

How does your team react when you tell them there will be a team building or leadership session next month ? A session where they will learn how to communicate better, give better feedback, increase collaboration. Or build trust.
Some will pump their fists: "Yeah, a day away from the office !". Others will roll their eyes and think how to minimize the impact on their already heavy workload. In a few cases, someone will report a work emergency the morning of the session.
During the session, people are often distracted (phone, email, or other apps) by urgencies coming from their "real work". The session feels optional and work priorities need to be dealt with.

At the end of the session, reactions will vary from "That was fun. Now let's get back to work." at best to "What a waste of time." at worst. Time and money gone. Motivation, teamwork and collaboration enjoy a temporary blip, if at all.

Action Learning turns things upside down. Leadership and team development cannot happen disconnected from daily priorities. We bring a team together to work on a burning issue, a complex problem that impacts the whole organization. Top management gives the team the authority to work on this challenge, propose solutions and implement ideas. A number of sessions happen over 3 months or so, and the team takes actions between the sessions to collect information, test out ideas and validate assumptions. If we were to stop here, this would just be an enhanced form of project work or problem-solving.

The Action Learning coach looks at the part of the iceberg under the water. The coach observes the team dynamics and identifies learning moments - not teaching moments. Learning is anchored in the observable interactions between team members. The coach brings these dynamics to the team's awareness and invites team members to discuss what works well, what can be better and how the team wants to develop the dynamics further. There is no theory or 'here's what you should do' guidelines. The team is the context from which learning is created. From one intervention to another, and from one session to the next, the team and the individual members grow. Almost literally. Growing means taking the current situation as the reality and moving up one step. And then another.

The coach has a double role. Of course the team needs to be able to present their solutions for the business challenge to the top management at the end of the sessions. At the same time, the coach ensures that each individual, as well as the team as a whole, increases self-awareness, and takes steps to become better individuals and members of the team. I sometimes say that the business challenge the team works on is the excuse through which to bring in personal and team development.

Looking for real development in your individuals and teams ? Take a look at Action Learning www.wial.org.

Why working in a team is the best leadership development ...

Bringing a diverse group of people together and asking them to find solutions for a complex company-wide problem will push participants slightly out of their comfort zone. How they deal with this challenge will demonstrate their capability to learn and survive in the VUCA world in the future.

A recent experience with a services firm confirmed this. I worked with 11 high potentials during a couple of months. The organization's focus was to validate who from them were really high-potentials, ready for further development or promotion. At the end of the series of sessions, the team presented their conclusions and recommendations on the challenge they had worked on, and each team member presented separately to the top management team what they had learned, the insights they had discovered and how they evaluated the experience over all.

And it was during the individual presentations that things got interesting. Some of the people who were thought of as high-potentials confirmed or even exceeded their potential. Others who had in fact been a bit under the radar jumped out from the crowd and positively surprised the management team. And a few who were considered as top guns strongly disappointed.

As the country manager said (at the end of the session): "We now know where people really stand ... and in some cases that is not where we thought they were standing !".

We could have decided on some leadership training. And I am sure the participants would have liked it. And learned a lot. But working in a team, not being in their area of expertise and having to progress together really highlighted the strengths some had, and brought to the fore the gaps others were struggling with.

It is tempting to identify HIPOs and future leaders by looking at each of your team members individually. But it is by having them work in a team that you really will see how they stack up !

What will you learn next year ?

The new year is (again) just around the corner ... As usual, time to reflect on what is behind and make plans for what is ahead. You can think about what you did last year, or didn't do, and how good or not that was. And you can make lists of what to do and places to go in the next year. Or even commit to doing things you never did and you know you will not do !

What about thinking not about what you have done or not done, but instead about what you have learned last year ? What did you learn about yourself ? About the people around you. What do you do better thanks to what you learned compared to the past ? The same goes for next year. What will you learn next year ? What will you do to help others around you learn next year ? Looking at learning opens up a more positive and empowering view on your development and of those around you. There is always learning and yet learning is never completed. When you frame what you do as learning, you are never at zero and you are never fully done. When you are supporting others, see not just what they do or what they don't do. See what they are doing as learning.

We do what we do thanks to what we learned, starting all the way from childhood. We are what we are in life and in work because of what we have learned in the past. And we will be more successful in the future if we can continue to learn.

Happy learning next year !

When the cat's away ...

What happens to your team when you are not around ? My experience with different teams in Asia is not so much that people will start to play or muck around. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Rather than getting together and doing all the stuff you maybe do not allow when you are around, most of the time, when the cat is away, the mice will go in hibernation !

That "team" that you often think of as the group of your direct reports will more or less fall back to its components. The HR manager will go and focus on the HR stuff and the marketing person will quietly keep on working on the marketing assignment you handed out. The team ceases to exist.

When an issue comes up where collaboration or joint action is needed, and when you are not around, does your team huddle together, come up with solutions and decide on the best way forward ? Or do they get lost in arguments and turf wars ? Or - and I think this is what happens most often - is the issue put on the 'pending' list until your return. Whichever of these two extremes, it seems that anything but routine work gets done when you are not around.

What is the solution ? You cannot expect a team to grow by itself if you are involved in every decision. Step back ... even when you are around, and refrain from intervening while at the same time asking for progress to be made. In fact, if the mice start playing when you are not around, that would be a pretty good sign. If however they go into a comatose state, you need to reflect on how you can change the way you work to start building a real team !

When self-awareness hits home

I was positively surprised in a team Action Learning session some time ago. Two very high-potentials, extremely sharp and well-spoken, contributed heavily in the first half of the session. Not to say they pretty much monopolized the discussion. Their peers sat and nodded most of the time. But then again, their contributions were really top notch.

As the session progressed, and the Action Learning coach invited the team members to share their personal reflections and learning, both spoke out to say they "had to be more quiet" and "give more chance to others to participate". Now, that happens quite often. What happens more rarely though is that they actually changed their own habit without much prompting.

They were both more quiet but explicitly encouraged others to share. Even if they had some great ideas, they refrained from expressing them. They encouraged the entire team to contribute and share. The dynamic of the team changed from one with two dominant figures to that of a team working together.

During the reflections at the end of the session, one of the initially dominant ones shared a well-known quote, which was poignant because she had just demonstrated how to apply this wisdom, rather than just being able to rattle off the quote. "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together."

High-potentials are often those of who the organization thinks they are a level above the other, today and in the future. If this potential can be combined with a genuine self-awareness and actions to work on their own shortcomings, then you have in your hand a few gems. Rare but really valuable.

Using Action Learning to accelerate the development of team psychological safety

Click on the link here or below the picture to read my blog post published online in the CLO Chief Learning Officer magazine !

http://www.clomedia.com/2016/06/09/action-learning-can-accelerate-team-psychological-safety/

Where do you practice management ?

Whenever a team needs to perform, it spends lots of time to practice. Sports team train and practice 90% of the time to be ready for a single performance once a week. Orchestras or music groups spend hours practicing and aligning with one another to make sure the performance they will give in front of paying clients will be perfect. All this is normal and expected. People would be shocked if a sports team or a music band arrived for the performance and looked at one another saying "OK, how will we do this thing ... ?".

And what about a management team ? A management team needs to perform as well. Pretty much all the time. When do we train or practice as a team to get better at solving problems, dealing with customers, introducing new products or growing the business ? Do you do that in training courses ? Not really. Or once a year in the annual retreat ? Obviously that is not enough to develop a real way of working together. Maybe the team-building session ? Great fun but this is not really where we talk about solving problems as a team or dealing with conflicts that may arise.

Practice is the key to moving to a better performance. Yet when it comes to practice to be more effective as a management team, we cannot find the time or, more likely, the way to go about practicing. Management teams need to look for new ways to deal with their challenges, try out new ideas and see what works and what doesn't work, and then practice practice practice to get routines established.

Action Learning sessions are a way for management teams to practice becoming better while dealing with real business challenges. Team members explore new ideas, try some of them out on a small scale and report back to the group how things turned out and what they have learned. Over time, the team gets more aligned and stronger as unit !

About questions and onions !

When a team experiences Action Learning through a first discovery session, the questions they ask can be a bit haphazard. It sometimes feels like there is a competition for asking as many questions as possible. This can frustrate the problem presenter who might think that this “great new tool” that would help with the problem feels more like an inquisition ! And indeed, not all questions are created equal. Team members are aware during the session what questions are really powerful and helped the problem presenter, and which ones were not really helping that much. So after debriefing about what they learned, they sometimes ask me “But how should we ask more of these great questions ?”.

I prefer to avoid any attempt to “teach” which questions are great and which questions are average. After all, it is the person who receives the question who determines whether that question helped to open up new thoughts, or whether it felt more like a burden to answer. There is no such thing as “the one great question” that works in any situation !

It is not really a matter of great questions versus average ones, but more about the extent to which the questions help the problem presenter think. I use the metaphor of an onion (see the picture) before we start the session. I explain that there is no harm in asking the questions that are at the level of the outer peel of the onion. When exploring a new issue, team members need to get basic information. These questions are useful for the team members to start to know about the problem, but they will not really help the problem presenter develop new ideas. For new ideas to be explored, team members need to try and move “towards the center of the onion”.

The team typically gets this concept very well. In a recent session, I asked the team what they thought about the kind of questions that were asked. One team member replied “We are asking questions at peel of the onion !”. The team immediately picked this up and confirmed that they would have to try and move to the center of the onion if they wanted to help the problem presenter. A similar intervention when I feel a team is asking rather superficial questions is “Team, from the questions we have been asking so far, have you seen the problem presenter having to think a lot or not ?”. The metaphor of the onion comes up almost immediately.

Avoid to teach what a great question looks like. Invite the team to think about questions that help the problem presenter … think !

Looking for A-Ha: what neuroscience tells us about creativity

That was the title of my talk at ASCIM 2016 in Bangkok recently. I really enjoyed preparing for this talk. It took me probably a full 4 days of researching, reading, putting pieces together and then changing them all again. The best reward for this kind of effort is double. First of all, I learned a lot by preparing for this. The reactions from participants during the talk, and from those that came up to me after the talk, confirmed that they had learned some valuable new things as well. Nice visual summary made by the conference drawer to remember the key points !

What insight looks like

One key objective of an Action Learning session is to help a colleague get a better understanding of his or her problem. A better understanding leads to better solutions ! Asking questions helps a leader explore possibilities he or she had not thought of before. This takes time, and simply telling someone what should be done does not work. To come to a genuine insight, our brain requires questions and explorations.

We often ask team members to write out in a full sentence their understanding of the underlying problem. Sometimes, the leader sharing the problem insists that he understands the problem very well, and that there is not really a need to write it out.  Yet the different rounds of asking questions to one another and evaluating different perspectives can sometimes lead to real insights. When the "light bulb is switched on" leaders immediately see their challenge - and the solutions - in a whole different way.

Here are two examples from actual sessions.

The leader's understanding of the problem at the start of the session:
"How can I improve the employee engagement score related to the department's leadership ?"

The leader's insight of the problem at the end of the session:
"How can I develop trust between myself and my leadership team ?"

And the second one ...

At the start:
"How can I improve the relationships between myself and the team ?"

and at the end:
"How can I control my emotional reactions to minimize the impact on the team ?"

Maybe it is time for you to take a fresh look and the challenges you are facing ?

Teams are more complex - and powerful - than you think

Look up any clipart representation of the word "leadership" and chances are you will come across something looking like the first picture. The leader is always shown in the middle, with his or her team members in a neat circle around. And the secret to being an effective team leader is shown through the different arrows. These represent the trust the leader creates with each of his members, how he or she communicates with them, what targets or goals they are given. That is the neat representation of team leadership.

The reality looks more like the second picture. Of course the relationships of the leader, still shown in the middle, with each of the team members is important. But in reality, there are not 8 but in total 35 connections and therefore relationships going on in this team. So as a team leader, you may excel in the 8 relationships you are a part of, but the reality of the team, and how it performs, is much more complex. You may have a trustworthy relationship with each of the people in the outer circle, but does that automatically mean all these team members have an equally trusting relationship with one another ?

There are two ways to look at the second picture. The first is to say, "Wow, this is way too complex to even try to do anything about it". The second is to say "Wow ... look at all the potential there is in this team if all 35 connections and relationships are working optimally".

Way too much leadership tools, blogs and books focus on the person in the red in the middle. The real power of teams lies as much in the other 27 connections and how well these sync. I continue to be amazed how little effort leaders put in the actual development of their team, in other words, in the 27 relationships that make up the team connections. So here is a question to you: what can you do, as the leader in red in the middle, to optimize these 27 connections that you are not directly part of ? I am interested to read your thoughts !

Meetings that work !

I was lucky to be able to deliver the first public workshop on Action Learning in Vietnam last week. At the end of the session, all participants confirmed they really saw the value of the approach and they would apply it in their organizations. As a facilitator, it feels good to get this kind of feedback but I am also aware that very often, reality (with deadlines, emails, presentations to do ...) sucks us up very quickly.

So I was really excited to receive an email from one of the participants of the Vietnam branch of a global FMCG company sharing his very first - and innovative - application of the principles of Action Learning !

His sales team had scheduled the annual Joint Business Meeting with a key customer the day after the workshop. In the past, this Business Meeting was a full day of Powerpoints where each team shared their views, their objectives, results and challenges. And the hours were spent in discussing, explaining, debating, resulting in some agreements and some disagreements. Pretty much a long day for everybody involved, with hours of time spent up front to create the Powerpoint slides.

So my participant, in charge of the sales team for the global FMCG in Vietnam, decided to try and apply the principles of Action Learning in this annual Joint Business Meeting. Out with the laptops, and out with the Powerpoints. The sales manager adapted the standard WIAL Action Learning script to fit his need for this meeting, maintaining the core ground rule of "Statements are only made in response to questions". Participants asked questions to one another to dive into the challenges their respective businesses were facing. Quite a difference from stating your point and trying to convince the other side yours is the right view. Both teams followed the Action Learning approach and achieved a high level of consensus on the key challenges they faced. At the end of the meeting, next steps were jointly identified to work towards and solve the challenges. Participants rated the session 8.5 out of 10 !

Next step: do the same with 2 other major customer teams.

Now that's what I call Action Learning ... in action !

Is Action Learning the secret key to self-management ?

In Reinventing Organizations, Frederic Laloux describes the way Buurtzorg (Netherlands, nursing home care, total 7000 employees) functions on the basis of self-managed teams of 10-12 nurses. On page 70, the author lists the key principles around which teams in Buurtzorg are organized:

- it's okay for tams to struggle: from struggle comes learning, and teams that have gone through difficult moments build resilience and a deep sense of community;

- the coach's role is to let teams make their own choices, even if she believes she knows a better solution;

- the coach supports the team mostly by asking insightful questions and mirroring what she sees;

- the starting point is always to look for enthusiasm, strengths and existing capabilities within the team; the coach projects trust that the team has all it takes to solve the problems it faces.

Anyone who has ever participated in an Action Learning set immediately recognizes these principles: this is exactly what develops when a team embraces Action Learning as a way to collaboratively solve problems. Asking questions to one another creates powerful connections. Team members take actions and share the results and their learning with their peers. The team learns and moves from strength to strength. Engagement and ownership is guaranteed when teams can create and put in place their own solutions.  

Buurtzorg is a fascinating organization: there are no managers, no quality departments, no central structures. Teams of nurses manage everything related to their profession. And the results are extraordinary. 

Leaders often feel the need to thoroughly change their organization's culture (the way things are done), but are not sure about how to get started. You cannot dictate a culture change and we all know the probability of a corporate change initiative being successful ! Getting teams to use Action Learning to solve their own problems is definitely a solid start.

Walls in the open space

I recently worked with a group who were all working in an open space office layout. This was an ideal open office layout in the sense that each single work station was identical. That is not always the case in Thailand ... In another group I work with, there are 3 'grades' of open space working areas: the higher someone is up in the organization chart, the higher the partitions separating his particular work space from the one next to it !

So in the first group, the situation was really ideal. Open space. Frequent exchanges and interactions. A habit of asking one another if any help was needed. But when we started an Action Learning session to find a solution for an important shared challenge the team is facing, members very quickly realized that although they were sitting next to one another, and chatting all the time ... none of them really understood what the others were doing, or what challenges they were facing, or what help they really needed. The open space creates part of the context. This context can be conducive for collaboration, but it is not enough just to put people next to each other, and then assume (or hope) that they will collaborate.

This reminded me of a recent quote from Stefan Lindegaard, the Open Innovation guru. When it comes to getting innovative ideas from your team, Lindegaard says "People First, Processes Next. Then Ideas". In other words, ideas will come when you focus on your teams and put in place processes to allow them to share their ideas. I extrapolate this to my open space situation. You cannot create collaboration by putting people in a certain environment, however colorful and encouraging these surroundings might seem. Collaboration happens when people WORK together, share challenges, share successes and help each other to learn from failures. That is built through developing a mindset of really helping each other out, and establishing processes where cross-functional teams work on shared tasks. A nice open space is cool, but that is not the end of the job !

Trust ... between others !

I recently had an interesting conversation with a business leader about the importance of creating trust with the people working with you. This director has a real coaching mindset, and sees it as his job to help his direct reports with their professional development. He always comes back to the issue of trust, how you create it by what you say and do with your team members ... or how you lose it by doing the opposite.

This exchange made me think ... This expat manager will be the leader of the team for maybe 4 years, and will then be posted at another assignment. His successor could be very similar, or very different from him. So what will happen with all that trust that he has built up, over 4 years, with each of his direct reports ? Will the team transfer all this trust to the successor ? Probably not. At best, the successor will start with a blank page and maybe some credit based on his or her experience. At worst, the successor could start with a handicap. And what happens next depends on what the successor does with the team. 

Should a team start from scratch every time a new leader shows up ? Obviously not ! So what is missing ? What is missing is the extent to which trust has been built up BETWEEN team members, and that is not something you can dictate. This level of trust depends obviously a lot on how the leader works with each team member, individually and collectively. But it is not sufficient. Trust is not something that by capillarity or osmosis affects everybody that comes in touch with it. Trust exists between 2 people: A can trust B and B can trust C, but that does not mean that A trusts C automatically.

Developing trust with your team is great. Developing and nurturing trust BETWEEN team members is what ensures that the investment pays off even after the leader has moved on. Action Learning is one method that creates this level of trust: team members build on others' ideas, ask questions and collaborate to put in place the solutions they created. The level of trust that is built up within a team working like this, remains for a very long time !

Looking for a-ha's ?

In a recent HBR article (November 2014), Mohanbir Sawhney and Sanjay Khosla indicate 7 areas where people or organizations can look for new insights and new ideas for products or processes or improvements in general. They define insight as an “imaginative understanding of an internal or external opportunity that can be tapped into to improve efficiency, generate revenue, or boost engagement.” A more simple term is “the a-ha moment” that we have all experienced at some point. The authors list different areas where individuals or teams should be looking for such insights, like  anomalies in customer data or evaluating the frustrations customers (internal or external) have with your organization’s services. They explain clearly WHERE to look, but the key of HOW to look is a bit buried and not made really explicit. They end each of their 7 sections by giving examples of how to actually find these insights, and the how in this case is ... the question ! The authors each time highlight the potential discovery by examples such as “ask yourself … is this or that possible ? what would happen if … ?” And this part ... the HOW ... is really the key to creating insights, because you can apply this to any situation, way beyond the 7 proposed by the authors.

Asking questions to yourself, and hoping that some of them will generate an insight, is possible but limited by our own mental models. It is difficult to pull yourself out of your comfort zone and questions that you ask yourself would probably be limited in depth or degree of innovativeness. So that’s why it is useful to put a group of people around a table, and instead of brainstorming for solutions or answers to a given problem, ask each to come up with questions. The rule is that people can only state questions, and nobody will be answering them. The questions are there to stir up ideas. Just like in brainstorming, no questions are off limits, and nobody can react and judge what others are saying.  At first it will be a bit awkward, and some of the questions will be very basic. But keeping the practice up for some time, you will create a dynamic where certain questions trigger other questions. Don’t be discouraged by sometimes long periods of silence. Thinking is not a bad thing when it happens !

You can hope for a-ha moments while in the shower or doing your favorite sport. Or you can teach your team to create them by asking each other questions … Give it a try !

Seeing the same elephant

In the Indian parable of the six blind men and the elephant, each is very convinced about what he is facing from the way he is interacting with it. Yet when they share with each other what each thinks the strange creature they are facing is, it is clear there is no cohesion in their views.

This often happens in organizations. A team is asked to deal with a challenge, but people are hesitant to ask questions for fear of looking incompetent or unsure. After all, we are paid to solve problems, so when we are given one, we need to deal with it. A few days or weeks or months later, gaps and cracks start to appear. The solutions are not really working. What HR thought is not really compatible with what the production or the finance team has in mind. A lot of bickering appears about whose solution is better and why this or that won't work. Very rarely does the team go back to the starting point: what is the problem we are dealing with ?

That is a critical phase we spend a lot of time on when we apply the Action Learning methodology with a team facing a challenge. In fact, we will not talk about or suggest solutions, until the team has reached a shared understanding of what the problem is, and has written it down. Only then will the team go into looking for appropriate solutions. Spending time to reach this key point has clear advantages, as was demonstrated again in a recent experience.

The team had already spent 2 sessions (1/2 day each time) to work on the challenge, to look at it from different angles. Asking questions and identifying actions each of them took after the session, to try and get a better understanding. A better understanding of the problem the organization is facing, not a better understanding of solutions. And when, during the 3rd session, the team came to a consensus about what the real root cause of the problem was (and wrote it out in full, see the picture), two things happened:

(1) there was a real sense of achievement and of having made progress ...
(2) with a clear agreement of the problem, the solutions became almost obvious - although maybe not easy to implement.

The first point about sense of achievement is really critical. After all, the team had "only" reached a shared agreement of the problem ! They hadn't even solved it yet !! However, the positive energy that had built up in the earlier sessions, and the clear consensus of where the root cause lay, ensured that the team could quickly come up with a very comprehensive list of proposals (in the 4th and final session) that was proposed to management. And it was a clear team effort, with everyone feeling 100% at ease with the solutions.

When you keep on dealing with the same problem year after year, ask yourself the question: is my team really seeing the same elephant ?