I already told him but ...

Giving feedback in an effective way is not easy, for sure not for folks in many Asian countries. After a training and practice session, most at least will give it a try. What I often hear a week later is "I already told him but ...". The most important part of giving feedback is not the actual moment in which you give the feedback ... It is what happens after that. There are two possibilities. Either the person will improve (even if only somewhat, or temporarily) or won't. And what you do at that point is more important that the actual feedback.

If the behavior/issue/performance has improved ... let them know ! There is nothing worse (really) than someone taking feedback for real, working hard to get better and then start to wonder if anyone really noticed it the improvement.

If the behavior/issue/performance does not improve ... the same goes ! Way to often I see folks give up after just one feedback. They conclude that the other person doesn't want to change, is not capable of changing or just doesn't get it. I already told him but ... Expecting things to change right from the first feedback is not realistic. Lack of follow up can be interpreted in different ways. It can be seen as "it wasn't really important after all" or "my manager is not courageous" all the way to a break in the relationship with both avoiding the deal with the lagging issue.

If you have children, and they don't do what they are supposed to do despite you telling them, you don't simply give up ! Repeat repeat repeat.

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."

The Power of Awareness

We often assume that people around us see and know themselves like we see or know them. When there are behaviors that are not appropriate or don't help the team, we assume that they are very well aware of these behaviors, but that they either don't want to or are not capable of changing. We "give up" and think it is hopeless to expect them to change their behavior.

I recently had a discussion with a manager as part of a leadership development program. This manager was well known by most around him as someone who just talks too much. Telling others what to do rather than finding out what they think. Using up air time that belongs to others (including answering questions that are asked to them). Never keeping this concise and just keeping on talking. This behavior is so obvious that it bothers everyone around him. He is otherwise a capable, hard-working and motivated young manager, but most around him just conclude there is no way he can change the way he is.

So I had a chat with him recently asking about his personal development as part of the leadership program. He told me he had simply divided by two the amount of talking, instructing and telling he does. He had gone "cold turkey". He simply changed his behavior very strongly from one day to the next. And those around him immediately noticed. So I asked him how he had done it ? What trick had he used ? It must be difficult to so fundamentally change an ingrained behavior. ? His answer ? For him, it simply was the first time he had become clearly aware of this behavior and the impact this had on his team. Nobody had told him, or even hinted to him. They just all assumed he was aware but that things were beyond repair. It was simple awareness that snapped him out of this negative behavior.

Simple lesson: don't assume all is clear for those around you. Tell them in a simple and clear way what is expected from them. No guarantee that all will be done accordingly, but at least they will be aware.

You have the team you deserve !

Somebody once said that populations have the politicians they deserve. In the same vein, your team is the one you deserve.

With the exception of a team leader inheriting a new team for the first couple of months, your team is the reflection of you as a leader. I often hear team leaders vent about their team. The team members don't have the needed skills. They don't take responsibility. They don't make decisions. They stay in their comfort zone. And there are old conflicts lingering that impact performance.

Well, no team is perfect, that is for sure. But what have you done about all this ? Have you coached, mentored, given feedback, acted upon the improvements or the lack of improvements ? Are there clear targets and a clear understanding of what happens when targets are not met ? If you have done all this and it does not bring the results you want ... what are you going to do different next week ? As for those issues you are not happy about, but you don't do anything about (other than vent your frustration), your inaction sends as much a message to the team of your priorities and your values.

Stop complaining about your team ! It is a reflection of how you are doing as leader.

Building trust ... where to start ?

A fellow facilitator recently contacted me to ask for ideas about an exercise around trust for a team session. And she specified that it shouldn't be childish or goofy (her words) like the famous "trust fall" exercise since this is a senior executive team.

Trust is a word we often use lightly. A key point to understand is that trust exists only at the level of two people. An easy way to think about this: if A trusts B and A trusts C, then this does not mean that there is trust in the team A, B, C. In fact, it is possible that B and C don't trust each other. So you cannot put 8 people in a circle and say "let's now build trust in this team". It starts at the level of the different pairs.

When I work around trust, I always start with the pairs. The trust between pairs will become the trust within the team as a whole.

My favorite exercise is the "hot seat". Each person takes turn sitting in the hot seat, and the others, one by one, give feedback about this person. Round one follows the "I appreciate that you do/say this or that and I suggest you continue doing it" structure. Round two is "I think it would be great for the team if you could start/stop doing/saying this or that". The person receiving the feedback can only say "Thank you" and not react in any other way. If done consciously, this can go quite fast and it is typically well received by all participants. There is sometimes laughter and sometimes genuine reflection and appreciation.

You won't build trust in a single session. But there is a way to get started.

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.

What questions were not allowed ?

Samsung's debacle with the Note 7 caused a loss in profit of more than 2 billion US$ and the company's image will be dented for a long time to come. Who will rush out to buy the Note 8 ??

The official cause for the batteries catching fire has not yet been communicated and there will undoubtedly be technical explanations about the reasons the phones overheated and started to melt. And maybe a few engineers will be shamed (publicly, undoubtedly) and for sure a good part of the blame will end up in the lap of the suppliers who built the batteries.

But very likely, someone, at some point, at Samsung or at the supplier, had raised questions about the stability or safety of the new generation batteries that were being rushed through production to meet the deadlines. Maybe it was an engineer or technician who thought that some test results were too borderline to allow for the next phase in design and production  ... And they were probably told that the impact on the timely launch would be too important. The Challenger and Titanic disasters are examples where people had raised questions and concerns but been overruled or ignored.

These are dramatic examples. For sure your company will not end up in the headlines to this extent. But just wonder how difficult questions are dealt with in your organization ? Are they written off as disconnected with the business priorities ? As a disturbance ? Or are they looked upon as a way to challenge current practices and do better in the long run ? The impact may not be as dramatic as in Samsung's case, but the way you deal with questions will definitely impact how your organization grows ...

There's no app for that !

Human beings are social creatures. We crave interaction with others. In the workplace, we spend most of our time amidst colleagues, bosses and subordinates and most of what we do is connected to what others are doing, either through direct contact or through any form of communication. 

I am amazed at how little time managers have (or rather ... find) these days to really communicate with their team members. They are swamped by meetings, visitors, reporting, budgets, forecasts or management retreats. They solve problems, monitor action plans and send out and read tons of emails each day. 

Amidst all these priorities they struggle to carve out meaningful time and engage in real conversations with those who report to them. They often feel that sending emails is a valid substitute for exchanging views. I once had a manager asking if he could send the developmental or improvement feedback to a subordinate by email since this was so much easier  and faster ... ! The fact that the real meaning of giving developmental feedback is in the dialogue that happens between the boss and the team member was for him probably an inconvenience pushing him out of his comfort zone.

In so many organizations I get to work with, the annual performance review is the only time a manager sits down with a team member to look at and discuss past performance and future development. The once-a-year ritual becomes stressful and time-consuming for both parties.

Having regular conversations along the year about how someone is doing takes some practice and self-discipline but it is the minimum necessary when thinking of employee engagement. There is not really an alternative for one-on-one dialogue. I am afraid someone (maybe a busy manager ... ?) will one day come up with an app for giving feedback and having conversations with others !

Changing others ...

In the team sessions I run, participants share management challenges and learn from each other through a questioning process. 100% of the challenges are about someone who is not in the room. The difficult colleague. The demanding boss. A team member who is not doing what is asked. Or another who is talking behind your back. The context and specifics are different, but it is always about them. And how to change them.

The presenter explains to the colleagues in the team session all he has tried, all the tricks in his management tool kit that have been tested. And how all these attempts were not successful and how the issue is still there. Once the explanations about the situation are complete, the presenter eagerly listens to what the colleagues will come up with, in the hope they will have a magic trick in the tool box that is brand new and untested and will be the secret to dealing with this management challenge. Alas, after a few minutes, the discussion often turns into "I have tried that too and it doesn't work" or "This solution is not possible in this case because ...".

The exchange quickly grows stale when the focus is solely on what other or innovative tricks exist to change the other person's (peer, boss, team member) behavior. The real insight comes when the presenter realizes that he or she can only change his or her own behavior ... and then see what impact that has on the other person. This seems pretty basic for some but it is only when this awareness has grown that the presenter can come up with real steps of what he can do himself to deal with the challenge.

How do you rate yourself ?

Self-awareness is a key element of leadership growth and development. And self-awareness often starts with rating/comparing yourself against a number of criteria. Many tools used in leadership development are based on self-assessment. In fact, most are based only on self-assessment because 360 degree assessments are more complicated to set up and administer, and maybe riskier to the individuals.

So the start to self-awareness is rating yourself, identifying where you are in comparison to a benchmark or just in general which areas are your strengths and which need more work. But how honestly can one really rate oneself ? When it comes to concepts such as "transparency" or "honesty" or "ethics", it gets quite hard, doesn't it ? Who would rate themselves as "average honest" or "not really very ethical" ?

I came across an article in Rotman Management magazine recently where an interesting study was mentioned. When comparing self-assessment with the assessment made by peers, colleagues and team members, about 70% of us overestimate the strength of character that others see in us. And what is even more interesting is that those leaders who are seen by their peers as most in need of development, are the ones that overestimate their character the most. In short: those who could most benefit from real self-awareness don't see themselves in a balanced way.

That is why I try to avoid using profiling tools based only on self-assessment. The mirror that OTHERS can show you is really much more meaningful. So first step in building your self-awareness: go out and ask for feedback !

The 4 things successful leaders never do at 7:30 in the morning

Well, sorry to have tricked you with the title. I don't have a clue what successful leaders do, or not do, at 7:30 in the morning. Or at any time during the day for that matter. Yet I see about a dozen blogs or postings left and right every day that seem to promise instant gratification if only we mere mortals could copy this or that habit that successful leaders apparently have. And guess who writes these blogs and postings ... Do you think it is the successful leaders who sit down and share their secrets to success ? Hmm ... most often it is not.

I have studied the history of leadership extensively for an executive leadership program. Over the years, a lot of interesting models and views about leadership have been developed. Yet none of these leadership models have been universally validated as holding the secrets to sustained and successful leadership.

For those who are interested in developing their leadership and who are in search of the holy grail, the following reality check is the best advice I can share:

"The search for the universally correct leadership style is doomed to failure because of cultural variation by country, by industry, by occupation, by the particular history of a given organization, and, most importantly, by the actual task to be performed." from Edgar Schein in Organizational Culture and Leadership (4th edition), page 166.

So rather than try and find out what you are supposed to do or not to do at 7:30 in the morning, work with what you have: yourself and the people surrounding you. Try and improve something you do every day. Ask for feedback and reflect honestly on how you are doing. That is probably going to take you further than digging for secret leadership formulas will !

What does Google see as the MAIN characteristic of an effective team ?

I am sure that if you ask leaders what the key characteristics of an effective team are, they would come up with a list of great and noble words. Trust. Diversity. Shared goals. Appreciation. Focus. And many more like this. Team psychological safety will probably not be on that list. And yet that is what Google says contributes most to the effectiveness of a team, click here for the original article. Google lists 4 more characteristics, but Team Psychological Safety beats the other 4 by a long way !


In my discussions with leaders in Asia, I found out it is a description that scares people to some degree. Psychological and safety are words with a lot of interpretations. Amy Edmondson's definition of Team Psychological Safety is "a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking". Not just risk taking, but interpersonal risk taking. This means telling others when you made a mistake. Or asking for help from one of your peers. Or speaking up when someone else has made a mistake. Doing this means taking a risk with respect to your peers. It requires some courage to do this. But when you create a climate where people can take this can of interpersonal risks with one another - in a safe way - the foundation for a great team is laid. And all the other characteristics will grow on that fertile foundation.



You don't develop Team Psychological Safety over night. It grows over time. And it can also disappear over time. But the reward of a team that continues to grow is really worth the effort. So think about how you work with your team, and what you can do to increase the "shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking".

Learning ... one KISS at a time

KISS Keep It Simple Stupid was originally coined by the US Navy to emphasize the importance of keeping things as simple as possible. The target the navy commander had given to his mechanical design team was to ensure that a ship's engine system could be repaired by a mechanic with limited experience or specific training. The idea was never to refer to that mechanic as stupid. In fact, the original KISS was written without a comma, meaning that things needs to be kept simple AND stupid (without writing the 'and'). Since then, many have changed the original meaning and added a comma to read Keep It Simple, Stupid ... Written that way, the 'stupid' becomes an insult to whoever the message is addressed to.

I recently came across another meaning of KISS I had never heard before. A business leader told me his team always ended their meetings and working sessions with a "KISS" ! KISS in this context stands for:

Keep: what did we do well in this meeting that we should keep doing ?
Improve: what did we do that was so-so and we should think about improving next time ?
Stop: what did we do that didn't work and we should commit to not doing again ?
Start: what was missing and we should add or start doing for our next meeting ?

A simple way to remind yourself and your team that learning happens all the time. There is no need to make things complicated. The only requirement is to spend a very small amount of time to reflect together on a key number of questions and create a shared commitment on making sure the next meeting, project, session or retreat is better than the last one.

What if they have no idea ... ?

A key principle in coaching is to let the coachee - quite often the subordinate - come up with ideas for making progress on a particular issue him or herself. This goes a long way towards ownership and accountability: acting on one's own ideas and suggestions is more meaningful than doing what the coach or boss suggests. In workshops where young managers are practicing their coaching or feedback giving skills, they often share "Well, I tried to ask them for their ideas, but they said they don't have any."

Well, thinking and developing ideas is one thing that separates humans from animals, so when someone says they "cannot think" or they "don't have any idea", they are looking for a quick way out of what is for them an uncomfortable situation ! In some countries in Asia, in Thailand in particular, many people have not been brought up in family or educational circles with a focus on developing their own ideas. You will need to help them learn again ... or rather learn for the first time. Here are three tips I have found to work rather well.

1. Give them some time. Don't stare them down or have them sit in front of you "until an idea comes out". Give them anything from five minutes ("I am going for a break and will be back in five minutes to give you some time to think") to one day ("Let's talk about your ideas again tomorrow at 9 AM"). This releases the pressure of having to come up with something right now or else ....

2. Ask them for three. If you ask for one idea, this is often interpreted as if there is somewhere one correct answer, that you expect them to come up with. This increases the pressure and often blocks people from sharing anything. Asking for three or five sends the message that there is no single perfect answer. 

3. Approve right then and there. Experienced managers often have the tendency to take someone's idea or suggestion and modify/improve/complete it. This sends the message that the manager anyway knows better or more. Refrain from this temptation. Approve their idea, or part of their idea, and encourage them to implement it and get back to you in x days to discuss the result. The ownership and learning will be far more powerful.

We all know how to think but sometimes, a bit of help is needed !

Getting feedback ... 2 tales ...

There is no doubt that feedback helps organizations progress. But your approach to how you obtain feedback can in itself send a powerful message. In the same day in Singapore, I had 2 very different experiences, on the subject of getting feedback.

In Changi airport, I walked through check-in, immigration and got to the gate in 6 minutes. But that's kind of standard there. In these 6 minutes, I got 2 times the chance to give feedback: on the service of the immigration officer, and on the guy who keeps the restrooms clean (see one of the touch-screen images). One tap of the finger, each time. While I was sitting at the gate using the free WIFI that is everywhere available, an elderly lady approached me and asked if she could ask a few things about my satisfaction with the airport. In about 8 minutes, we cruised through probably 60 questions. Using her iPad, sweeping through different screens, she very deftly noted my answers with her iPad notetaker. I discovered questions about things I didn't know existed at the airport. When we were all done, she gave me a free pen.

A global organization I worked with that same day told me about the mega-employee-satisfaction-project that was going on. It looked like this was the single and only priority for the HR folks I met. It also seemed to be seen as a pain for everyone else. The previous satisfaction survey had been done 4 years ago. There seemed a lot of stress, hour-long phone calls with global teams, tight schedules and deadlines. Each country seemed to say that they needed something different than the global team was imposing. Strangely, nobody expressed interest or anticipation for the actual result, either from 4 years ago, or for the same for this survey. In fact, the focus and energy all turned towards the only KPI the management has fixed to the project team: a 100% employee participation. There was a sense of dread for those country managers who would not be able to get feedback from each employee, and therefore not show a 100% score !

When I finished with the old lady at Changi airport, I jokingly told her: "Don't change anything, everything is perfect already !" She replied: "That's why keep on asking you ...". Changi airport is ranked #1 in the world. I have a suspicion that their approach to getting feedback ... constant, simple, friendly, smooth ... is part of the reason.

Is your team complete ?

You know a great team when you are part of one. You can feel it. And you also know when you are in a team where people prefer to be somewhere else. Managers who inherit a team often conclude, after a few months, that Mr X or Mrs Y would better be replaced. Sometimes it's not just one person, but a few, or even a handful. The temptation is great to think that, if only I could replace these people, then all the rest will be great, and my team will perform fabulously.

This judgment is often based on differences. Those who are direct, aggressive or pushy will likely appreciate those in the team who are similar. And they will think that those that are keeping to themselves or are more concerned about what others are thinking, are weak and unfit for a tough business environment.

Yet research has shown that the most effective teams are those with a balance of 'types' of team members. Just imagine a bunch of pushy and aggressive managers trying to work together ! You'd probably spend your time fighting fires and atoning conflicts. 

So where to start ? Belbin Team Roles is a simple tool that identifies team members' preferred roles, as well as those that are far out of their comfort zone. It does not pretend to figure out "who you are" but rather looks at what you do (behavior), and what others see you do at work. The profile is based on a combination of self-assessment and observer assessments. Since the observations are about behaviors (and not values, personalities, or motivations), they are 'safer' as a feedback approach.

There are a total of 9 Belbin Team Roles. None is better than another, and everybody embodies these 9 roles in a different way: some roles are the top preferred roles (strengths) and others are very much out of the comfort zone (weak team roles). Belbin Team Roles allows team members to have meaningful discussions about their own and others' profiles, and these dialogues go a long way in seeing the strengths of each member, however different they may seem.

So who is insane ?

I always get chuckles when I show Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results. Most executives in the room get it immediately and can think of a boss/peer/team member who indeed keeps on doing the same thing and expects or hopes for a different outcome. The executives don't really think about themselves ... and understandably so because to identify yourself as insane does sound a bit extreme.

But then we go into a bit more detail. And we analyse that boss who keeps on doing the same thing that drives us crazy. And of course it is so clear that the boss should stop doing that and do something different. "I don't understand he/she just keeps doing that while it is clear for everybody it does not work !". Substitute boss with peer/team member as you wish. So we declare the boss/peer/team member completely insane based on Einstein's definition !

Once those others have been declared insane, the conversation goes

Me "OK, so the boss (peer/team member) is crazy for doing this or that. And what about you ?"
Them "Me ? What do you mean me ? The problem is not with me, the problem is that he/she (boss/peer/team member) doesn't change !"
Me "OK sure, he needs to change what he is doing ... But what are YOU doing differently when it comes to interacting/challenging/motivating/talking with him ?"
Them "Well, I have told him 100s of times that he needs to stop doing what he is doing, and change what he is doing !"
Me "And does it work ?"
Them "Well no, obviously he doesn't get it !"
Me "So you keeping on telling him the same thing over and over again ..."
Them "Yes, yes I do !!"
Me "... and you expect a different result ?"
Them "Euh ... but ..."

It's easy to pinpoint where others need to change. We can talk about them until the cows come home (most often when they are not around). Think rather what YOU can do relative to that person to help them: whatever you have been doing, or something different ? You might in the end help two people from becoming insane !

Hesitant to praise

In a recent workshop, a few participants shared that they were hesitant to give praise or positive feedback because doing so would send a message to the recipient that no further improvement is needed. “If I tell them they are great, they will think they have nothing more to develop.”  So positive feedback often turns into “you did great on this aspect of the project but you should also try to …” and the feedback is in fact turning corrective. Or positive feedback is left unsaid. That is the problem when feedback is kept too general. Giving comments that judge the entire person is not effective, whether it is about negative or positive feedback.

You don’t tell someone they “are not a team player”, since this describes the whole person and gives the impression the situation is beyond repair. Similarly with positive feedback, keep the feedback concrete and specific. “You did a great job on the project XYZ because you …”. Encourage the person to repeat what he did. Don’t tell him that he “Is a fantastic asset to have”. By being explicit about what exactly deserves praise, you leave the door open to further development in other areas or at other occasions.

Imagine a culture where people are afraid to praise because they are afraid it will mean the end of improvement! The benefit of getting a smile and lit up face go a long way when you want to keep your folks engaged ! So keep it short and stick to the specific facts.