The challenge of leadership development

This article appeared in Commerce, the magazine of the Netherlands-Thai and Belgian-Luxembourg/Thai Chambers of Commerce in November 2013.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not me, it's them !

In one of the most memorable Seinfeld scenes, George Costanza, trying to break up with his girlfriend, explains to her "It's not you, it's me !". It turns that out this funny line holds quite a bit of wisdom that many managers are still struggling with.

Managers rarely come to see me and indicate they need help. In fact, they explain their team needs help. They explain what is not going very well, and ask me if I can help them, by organizing a workshop or a training session ... Basically, they are saying "it's not me, it's them !".

A lot of information is published these days around employee engagement or disengagement. The much-discussed Gallup poll shows that 13% of employees are actively engaged, the other 87% or either disengaged or even actively disengaged. Dramatic levels of disengagement look like a gold mine for consultants who can then prescribe "engagement workshops" or - still in the style of prescribing a medicine - engagement clinics. As if engagement happens in a training session !

Other research, by the Corporate Leadership Council, shows that of all the elements impacting employee motivation and engagement, the behavior of the employee's manager accounts for 72% of the total level of engagement. In other words, it is what their manager says or does with them, or doesn't say or doesn't do with them, that impacts to what employees are engaged. As a manager, your style or personal preference is not an automatic fit for everyone in your team. The exchanges that motivate you may not have the same impact on others. Adjust the way you communicate depending on the individuals you deal with. That will go much further to creating engagement than a re-engagement program !

So think for a whether it really is your team that needs a visit to the clinic ? Or is the ball maybe in your camp, and maybe it is time to change your approach if this is not working as you expect it to ?

Managing your team: the basics

I often come across entrepreneurs who successfully grew their idea into a real business, and they realize their one-man organization has grown to 20,  50 or even more people. They can no longer do everything themselves. They have grown their team but they cannot afford to hire managers whose only job it is to manage others, as they are still very much relying on each individual’s contribution to help grow the top line and keep the bottom line in check. They need to start to act as managers themselves.  But where to start … ?

Based on my experience and what I have seen some entrepreneurs struggle with, here are the basics to put in place. These are the basics only, but they are often incomplete.

1. A few basic indicators visible to everyone

No need to have walls full of charts. A few indicators (start with one !), critical to the business, that employees get to see regularly and understand. And for which it is clear their effort contributes to the indicator moving in the right direction. Ideally, the indicator shows both company performance and the direction of their variable compensation.

2. A regular one-on-one meeting with each key player

This can be informal, over breakfast or lunch, but it must be clear it is a working meeting, and it takes place every 2 weeks at a minimum. This is the opportunity to clarify what is going well and what is not going well, to be clear and explicit when there are performance issues that need to get addressed (or else …). No need for an agenda or minutes, but do come prepared knowing what needs to be discussed or what needs to be followed up from the previous meeting. This is also where the personal relationship between the entrepreneur and the key players are developed and maintained.

3. A regular team review

This is where everyone is together, and the priorities of the company – including the indicators described earlier – are reviewed. This is the team working together, helping each other out. Individuals who are lagging are not put on the chopping block in front of everyone, that’s one of those things that doesn’t go down well in Asia. Those issues are addressed in the one-on-one meetings (by you !). The team meeting focuses on the team effort and synergies to be found.

This is not a list in which to pick one or two … These 3 elements are linked and need to exist together. You can’t have only individual meetings (where talk often moves to whining about the people that are not in the room) or only indicators on the wall (without a team review of the progress).

These are rather simple steps, that don’t take up too much of time, and they go a long way in giving direction, basic structure and follow up to your management team.

There is an i in team

There is an i in team. I am referring to the i of innovation. When we think about innovation, we like to think about those individual geniuses that have entered into the history books. Archimedes in his bath tub (an invention, not an innovation, I admit) or Steven Jobs with the latest i-something. Innovation seems to be the realm of extra-ordinary people, and so there are books and training courses to think like Steve Jobs. I am not sure how many innovations occur thanks to training courses in innovation …

A whole different view of innovation was presented in a recent blog by Samuel Bacharach, summarizing an interview with Jef Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon. Bezos describes his innovation process as follows: "In my experience, the way invention, innovation and change happen is [through] team effort. There's no lone genius who figures it all out and sends down the magic formula. You study, you debate, you brainstorm and the answers start to emerge. It takes time. Nothing happens quickly in this mode.”

Three critical elements to innovation, that are in fact in direct opposition of the stereotypes.

1. It’s about a team, not a genius. It’s a group process.

2. It’s a process (not a light bulb) with debate, brainstorming,  and playing with alternatives.

3. It takes time. You can’t force creativity by scheduling an innovation meeting on Tuesday morning (or any other day).

That is exactly the reason the Action Learning process very often delivers innovative and creative ideas to complex problems. In an Action Learning session, the team asks questions to understand the problem in all its aspects, not to jump to (incomplete) solutions. Action Learning is the perfect team process as it includes reflection on the learning that is taking place. And in fact, although innovation cannot be sped up, the Action Learning session’s structure and intensity ensures that within a couple of 2 hour sessions, significant breakthrough solutions have been developed.

Introducing the team Trust-o-Meter

The Thai women volleyball team recently became champions of Asia and the pride of the nation (at least for a while). The Bangkok Post interviewed Wilavan Apinyapong, team captain for seven years. She does not talk about hard training or the star players, but about trust, saying that her managing style is based on establishing trust among the players. "As a team leader, we have to make followers believe in us an that contributes to fellowship. When the foundation for trust is loosened, the followers may not accept your leadership."


Trust is also one of the key ingredients for a successful team Patrick Lencioni describes in his best-seller "The five dysfunctions of a team". In fact, he describes it as the foundation, the first condition that needs to be fulfilled if a team is to become successful. The four other conditions of a successful team are constructed on the basis of trust.

Why is trust so important in a team ? In a team with a solid trust level, team members feel free to ask questions, and even make mistakes, as they are not concerned they will be looked down upon or gossiped about by other team members (research by Amy Edmondson). And asking questions, looking for feedback, and making mistakes are the hallmarks of a team that learns. Learning so that tomorrow's challenges are addressed more effectively than today's. A team that is stuck in routine and does not try out new approaches is standing still. A team that is learning grows and enhances its capabilities to deal with future challenges.

Trust in a team should not justy be addressed in the "blindfolded-person-crosses-obstacle-course-guided-by-team-mates-vocal-instructions" during the annual team building exercise. Trust (or the lack thereof) happens in the everyday interactions and exchanges between team members.


How is your team doing ? How high is the trust level ? Send me an email and I will send a simple Trust-o-Meter test for your team: 3 minutes per person, Thai/English completely anonymous, for teams up to 15 people. A snapshot of the overall level of trust in your team, and the spread of the results, can give you a good indication of where your team stands, and how solid your team's foundation is.

Did Fergie get it wrong ?

Sir Alex Ferguson recently retired after 26 years as coach of Manchester United and one of the most successful reigns as coach, with numerous trophies and even a statue to prove it. He has become some sort of an icon for what a leader is supposed to do, and is the subject of a Harvard Business School case study. The October edition of the Harvard Business Review continues the adoration with a long article where Ferguson shares the "secrets of the worlds' greatest coach". He is now the new role model that business leaders should look up to.

His resume as coach is impeccable. But is he really such a great leader, and an example for leaders business ? A lot is written about his management style. But what about the team he has left behind ? Isn't a great leader supposed to leave behind a great team ? It is too early to say how the new season will work out for Manchester United, but the start has been everything but impressive. Now, this is not because the new coach tried to change things around. In fact, it is quite the contrary: David Moyes tries his very best not to change anything to the winning formula that Sir Alex has left behind. But for some reason, things seem to be anything but smooth.

Was Sir Alex a leader who put his team in front, who created trust between his players, delegated and made the players commit themselves fully ? Or was it all about himself; making every decision, micro-managing and seeing his solution as the only possible option ? I was never in the dressing room so I can not tell for sure.

Steven Jobs has left an impressive legacy of innovative products and services (I'm using several of them). But has he left behind a sustainable company and a strong team at Apple ? Or was it really all about him ? Here again, we probably need to wait for a few years, but if the only thing Apple can come up with is bigger/smaller/thinner/thicker/different colored versions of its existing products, the company's innovative image and luster will quickly fade.

A great leader should be judged by the results, but also by how his team or company (or football club) fares after he is no longer at the helm. When a team continues to excel during 2 or 3 years after the charismatic leader has left, then the claim of greatness - greatness of creating an enduring enterprise - can be made. Otherwise, we maybe were enjoying a one-man show.

David Gill, the former CEO of Manchester United, is quoted in the introduction to the HBR article, as saying "Steve Jobs was Apple; Sir Alex Ferguson is Manchester United." So what is Apple when Jobs has passed away ? And what is Manchester United when Ferguson retires ? Good questions indeed.

Questions in action

Need inspiration for asking questions that help your team members think for themselves and take ownership of the issues ? Take a look at how Meg Whitman (CEO at HP) challenges her team ... with questions.

Meg Whitman has questions (from Forbes Asia June 2013)

Chasing monkeys

I often come across business leaders who explain how unhappy they are with their team's or with some individual's performance. When I ask for an example, the reply is typically of the same nature. They describe a situation or event, and explain how the team member either didn't react/reply/propose at all, or reacted/replied/proposed in a way that was considered wrong (by the business leader). And invariably, the next step they describe is the same: they explain to the team member what he/she should do or should have done, and demonstrate it to be sure the message is clearly received.

So let's reflect now on what the team member is taking away from this ... For one, it confirms that the leader has the answer, and the correct answer at that. Second, the team member thinks that the issue has been resolved in a rather satisfactory way, because the leader is getting the result he wants. Lesson learned ? Next time, don't do anything (the leader will take the issue on) or ask the leader what to do (he will demonstrate for sure what to do). Win-win !

Business leaders often think they "teach" or share their knowledge by showing what should be done. Leading by example is great but leading by handing out the "right" solutions is not helping your team. What to do instead ? Ask them questions ... Not questions like "Why don't you do  it this way ?" which is an implicit solution, but genuine questions that make your team member think. And once they start thinking ... stop ! Let them think, and react, and adapt what they are doing. If they don't act on their thinking, they are not learning, and you are probably wasting your time with them (as they are with you). If they do, they are learning and they will address future issues with a higher level of experience.  

Stop chasing the monkeys. You may think you are solving problems (and you are) but you are stopping your people from thinking, learning and growing. And there's too many monkeys to fit on your shoulders, however broad these are, anyway !

There ARE stupid questions

I like to hand out the key ring in the picture when I organize a workshop around asking questions. In these workshops, we discuss the types of questions there are and how they can be applied in different situations. There are the closed, or yes-or-no questions (not really good). And the open questions, that allow a creative and genuine exchange (very good !). And on the top of the pyramid is the "why ?" question, the Mother of All Questions. The "why ?" question probes for depth and helps to unveil the real reasons behind whatever is being discussed.

But here's a few "why ?" questions I hear quite often: "Why have you done it this way ?" and "Why are you late again ?". They are open questions probing for depth, but are very strongly opinionated. So what is a real "why ?" question and what is a fake one ? I was struggling with this until very recently, when I learned in a webinar the "You idiot" rule from Roger Schwartz. Roger Schwartz is a management thinker and author and his recent book on team functioning is Smart Leaders Smarter Teams (my copy is on the way from Amazon !). His very simple "You idiot" rule allows to separate questions that really look for an answer from those that are fake (whether they are open, closed or why questions).

His "You idiot" rule goes as follows. When you are about to ask a question, think of this question and add "You idiot" at the end of it. If the meaning of the question still makes sense, you are about to ask a rhetorical or fake question and not a real one. Try it. Add "You stupid" to the two example questions above: the questions still make very much sense (you are actually adding some "punch" to them !).

Now what about "What would be the other options ?" or "What do you think about this ?" Not in the league of the Grand "Why ?" question, but if you add "You idiot" at the end of each, the question no longer makes sense. This is a genuine question.

This is a very simple rule, but since I picked it up a few weeks ago, it has stuck in my mind and I realize I am actually using it. And it works. So try it out for yourself ! Tip: check the "You idiot" rule before you ask the question ...

Talking with meaning

I have been in numerous meetings. When there’s a majority of non-Asians in the room, it often comes down to who talks the most. Those that do most of the talking are seen as the most knowledgeable, or the most assertive, and the rest either struggle to keep up or switch off. I used to do this for quite a while,  making sure my voice was heard. But as I moved up in the organization, I realized that when I did all the talking, I was not getting a lot from the team that works with me. So what’s the solution ? Say nothing at all ? No, the solution is to consider the quality of your interventions, rather than the quantity. I have two tips I picked up along the way worth sharing. The first I heard from someone somewhere, I don’t remember where. The second is something that grew as an awareness over the years.

Tip #1 When in a discussion or debate, think before you are about to say something, and answer the question: is what I am about going to say making a contribution in bringing this discussion closer to a solution or outcome, or is it helping the team forward ? If not, don’t say anything and continue to listen to the others. If you are sure that what you are about to say is helping the team, go ahead and say what you have to say. If you apply this rule, you will find out that you will be speaking much less often. This is because we often speak because we want to show others what we know about the issue at hand. Or we repeat what someone else has said, but in our words and with a slight twist. Or we disagree with someone and elaborate on why that person is wrong. We speak up to be heard, to be listened to, and we think that this is how we contribute. But what we are saying is quite often just filling the space, and not helping to solve the issue that is being discussed.

Tip #2 Listen for what is not being said, and fill that gap. In a team discussion or meeting, ideas and opinions fly left and right. Someone says something and the topic is taken up, twisted, reshaped or attacked. Somebody else will continue in the same direction or move the discussion in a different one. Very often a discussion builds on what is the last thing that was said. While all this is going on, try to become, for a few seconds, an observer to the meeting, and ask yourself the question: what is not being discussed ? What is the team not talking about ? A powerful question like “Have you guys thought about this or that ?” can change the course of a discussion and speed up the resolution.  

When in meetings or team discussion, think about the quality of your contributions and not of the quantity. When you speak less frequently, but with something meaningful to say, it carries weight and is seen as more positive than just filling the empty space. It is one of the qualities of becoming a leader.

No time to learn ?

I often hear that managers (at any level) are so busy they have no time for organizational learning or learning in general. They are loaded with back-to-back meetings. Or visitors they have to take care of. Urgent events keep them busy. And of course emails, and reports, and more emails. When you talk about learning, they refer to the training program  that was fixed during last year's budget period and which is probably very similar to the one the year before. There really is no time left, not at the end of the day, nor the end of the month. There is simply no time. Someone told me recently that it seemed there were fewer and fewer hours in a day (I checked, there aren't).




Reg Revans curve on learning vs change

Learning does not mean studying or going to a training course in a hotel room. Training is about discovering the solutions or best practices for yesterday's problems. Learning is about using the experience that exists in a team, asking questions about the situation and reflecting on how actions should be taken in the new and changed environment. Learning allows your team to develop solutions for tomorrow's problems. Reg Revans said that if an organization can learn faster than the rate of change in its environment, it will prosper. If the organization learns slower than the rate of change, the organization will eventually collapse.

Everybody is aware that changes are happening faster and more intense than ever. Technology, social media or supply chain models change faster than in the past. In the past, when changes happened more slowly, the way teams learned allowed the organization to stay ahead and develop new business opportunities. When changes accelerate exponentially, these ways of learning no longer work.

The way a team learned in the past, can no longer sustain the organization. If we cannot learn faster and therefore grow with these changes, failure is ahead.

If you don't manage to learn, as an individual, or a team, or an organization, it's only a matter of time until you are overtaken by the changes around you. Maybe it is urgent to think about when you will make time to learn.


Blind(folded) trust ?

At a recent workshop in a hotel, a large corporate group next door was organizing a seminar. At the end of the seminar, there was a trust building exercise where participants were blindfolded and, using only the verbal instructions from their team members, were to finish an obstacle course. This was to symbolize how we should trust our team members to achieve the goals. Great fun of course and hearing from the excited shouting and laughter, the levels of trust were skyrocketing !

So then what happens the next day in the office ? Of course, participants will be sharing/posting/liking loads of pictures about the great seminar. But I mean, what will happen about trust ? Will people talk about the learnings from the trust building exercise, or more about the choice at the buffet ? Will they refer to the lessons from the blindfold exercise next time there is a conflict between departments ? Will they look back at the pictures when contradictory department goals lead to tensions ? Will there be even the slightest learning about trust that will help to move the team to the next level of performance ? You know the answer.

You don't need obstacle courses or blindfolds to build trust. Or a hotel and a trainer. In fact, creating these completely artificial circumstances are pretty much a guarantee that the link with the work situation is non-existing. Trust is created when people dialogue with each other. One on one or in small groups or in larger groups. At work. Asking questions, really listening to what others bring into the conversation, building on ideas and working on a project within a team. Addressing issues when they arise. It takes a bit of time, yet it is simple. We really make it complicated by pretending an out-of-work play will have any impact.

It's great to have fun once in a while. But if you count on blindfolds to develop trust in your team, you'll be tripping and falling flat on your face !

Train, train, train (repeat endlessly)

I recently came across a number of shocking bits of information around training:

• 50% of managers believe that employee performance would not change if their company's training program were eliminated (The Corporate Executive Board Company, 2012)
• only about 20% of managers are satisfied with the performance of their company's training function (Accenture survey, 2004)
• 85% of participants in training either never try to apply what they've learned, or try but give up (Mind Gym 2013)

Maybe these are data from other parts of the world, and not applicable in Asia. So what is happening in your organization ?

Has training become one of those "benefits" that the company feels more or less obliged to provide ? Is training seen as a few days "off" once in a while to keep the motivation going ? After all, participants' satisfaction is typically very high after a training session (maybe they're evaluating their satisfaction of not being at work ?). Maybe there is even the belief that training is a form of employee retention.
How are people identified for skill development training ? Is it based on an in-depth competency versus needs analysis ? Or is the selection based on completely meaningless factors like seniority, hierarchy or "we have to send X this time because last time we sent Y" ?
Is the training budget looked at with a zero-based budgetting approach ? Most often, companies increase (or decrease) the budget year on year simply based on evolution in headcount and inflation. Strategy or key development priorities hardly come into consideration when the detailed training budget is established.
Do you track in any shape or form the impact on your organization/department/team performance (in addition to the participants' satisfaction) ?

So does this meaning training is a complete waste of money ? I don't think so, but some serious changes are needed. I will describe in a next blog what I see as the key elements that are necessary to turn training sessions into building blocks of a development program. In the mean time, I would love to hear your opinions or experiences in the subject of training effectiveness ! Leave a comment in this blog, or in the LinkedIn or Facebook posts !

Whose values are these anyway ?

A manufacturing company has a strict rule about no alcohol on the premises. Makes complete sense if only from a safety point of view. The company handbook clearly states that infringement leads to immediate dismissal, without compensation. Yet the foreign technical expert visiting regularly is known to keep a few bottles of alcohol in his office, for after-hours unwinding (at the factory). This is widely known by everyone but (silently) accepted because "he has always done this and cannot change"
.

Fuji Xerox values

Less critical but in the same vein, a large "no motorcycle parking" in front of the office aims to ensure there is no clutter of bikes parked in an obstructive way. But this is also where the boss' motorcycle is parked every day.

Do you really think your teams need visions, missions or value statements ? They see (literally in the above examples) what the values or priorities are every single day, in what is being done, and more importantly, in what is being tolerated in the organization. Values are concept that is demonstrated by the company's top team, in interactions with people of all levels, including those external to the company. Values are tested in times of stress, conflict or upheaval.

Vision, mission and value statements can be powerful when they synthesize what already exists. It is a confirmation of what the company is and wants to continue to be. If these statements describe what should be, or worse still, are created because it seems they are the "in" thing, they do more harm than good, and it would be better to just do away with them all together. Don't expect people to be inspired by a poster on the wall while issues and conflicts remain unaddressed.

Writing your values statement is not a priority. The priority is to demonstrate your values by the way you lead your organization. Your people will get it.

The team's the limit

Not the sky. Although that may be what consultants will try and make you believe. In the end, the consultant will move on. If you need a consultant forever, then this is no longer a consultant but a fixed part of your organization (and expenses). So the consultant will move on. And leave you and your team behind. So the extent to which the processes, the culture or the knowledge will change following the consultant's intervention, depends on the team.

In my experience, a consultant hardly looks at the team in place. Typically, they will explain you all the great things that other companies out there achieve, the best practices, the state-of-the-art. And you'll be feeling pretty embarrassed that your organization has not yet achieved what everyone else out there has been doing for ages. Obviously all the other teams out there (and their leaders) are way ahead of you.

The consultant does not look at your team, and does not take into account how your team interacts and creates value for the organization. Of course, there will be a "change management" component included with the offer, with a great-looking gap analysis and a few training sessions. This analysis does not focus on the team or its members, their interactions and their experiences; it focuses on the processes, culture or knowledge (whatever the subject of the intervention is).

And that is why so many consultant interventions end up fizzling out or at the most do not deliver the black-and-white gains that were touted at the onset. An organization performs through its teams, not through the consultants that come in. Of course, consultants have their value in helping the organization move to the next level, and in bringing expertise and experience from other missions. But if your team is not the central part around which the change or improvement is built, then the disappointment (including frustration and finger-pointing) is guaranteed.

Fighting turnover ? Work your team.

There is no crisis in South-East Asia. Companies are growing and recruiting. Finding new staff is not a major issue, but keeping them is. Business leaders complain that employees have no loyalty to the company. And that is true to some extent: the era where people spent a whole career with a single employer is without a doubt behind us.

The old adage that employees join an organization because of the company’s reputation, and leave because of their direct boss, is also true in this part of the world. An employee who is put under (work) pressure or reprimanded for not performing, will think first about escaping the situation.  The issue the employee has with his or her boss will hardly be addressed in a direct way. There will be some gossip or anecdote-sharing with close friends in the company, but very few other alerts. Quite often the employee will just hand in the resignation notice and try to minimize the number of days he needs to stay around and face the boss (the one month notice period is rather theoretical !).

Yet in South-East Asia there is one more reason employees tend to stay with a company, despite a difficult relation with the boss. And that is their colleagues and team mates. This is very different from other cultures I have experience with. Thais for example can tolerate pretty well a so-so relationship with the boss (whom they will try to avoid as much as possible) as long as they can stay around with their friends.

Although turnover and employee engagement is a challenge for all companies doing business here, there is some comfort in knowing there is a real return in investing in your team’s overall coherence. Being friends at work is often seen in the West as superfluous and not relevant to the business. After all, in the office, work comes first. As a leader, let your team develop their office fun activities. Put your boss hat aside once in a while and participate. Your team can make the difference between the boss as boss and the boss as having fun with them. And it could just make the difference of someone deciding to stay after all.



(Very) excited to bring Action Learning to Thailand !

This is not another training course. This is a workshop to help you learn the skills of coaching your team. The process will help your teams zoom in on the root cause of the probems, and find solutions themselves. At the same time, the dynamic of asking questions will help the team members reflect on their own thinking as well as on that of their peers.

 

 

Efficiency. Again, and again, and again

While we were enjoying the cool winter weather in Chiang Mai a few months ago, the tap water stopped running. We quickly learned that the main water pipe leading into the village was broken. This water pipe was 15 years old and made of concrete. Within 2 hours, the Provincial Water Authority had mobilized the repair team, with digger and all. The leak was located, the old pipe dug up, a new 5 meter long plastic pipe was inserted and the hole filled. After flushing out the brown water for a few minutes, all was back to normal after half a day of minor inconvenience (the swimming pool was a useful backup !).

Until two days later, when the same happened. The concrete pipe had broken in another spot. Same digger, same team, and a new 5 meter long plastic pipe. And then, of course, it had to happen again. Three times in one week.

The repair crew was very efficient. They arrived quickly (once even on a Sunday), started digging, replaced the pipe and filled up the trench. When I asked why they did not replace the entire concrete pipe that was falling to bits little by little, they told me that their “rules” only allowed to put in a new pipe once the old one was broken. So even if the 100 meter long concrete pipe would continue to break, the only possible solution was to replace each 5 meter section at a time, and mobilize the crew a total of 20 times.

The Provincial Water Authority was so focused on executing their procedure in an efficient way, that the obviously more effective solution of replacing the entire pipe, and mobilizing the team for a day or so, could not even be considered

This story makes you want to chuckle at the absurdities in government services. But are these limited to government bureaucracy ? What happens in our businesses ? We put in place processes for some reason at some point in time, often to solve a problem situation (broken water pipe). We train people to execute the new process (mobilize, dig, replace, fill) as efficiently as possible. They get good at doing it, practicing over and over again (3 times per week if needed). The problem gets solved in a rather satisfactory way and complaints are limited (repair within half a day). But then the environment changes (pipe no longer breaks once a year)  – new customer segments, new technology, new competitors – and the old solutions – that worked so well for so long and that we’ve become so good at – have become ineffective.

It is not easy to take a step back and ask the dumb question “why are you doing things this way ?” about something you have been doing for ever. An external eye looking at your processes can probably help to ask a few of those questions. They often turn out not to be so dumb after all. 

More meetings please !

It is very trendy to be against meetings. At least once a week I read some blog that makes anyone who participates in, let alone organizes, meetings feel like a managerial dinosaur. Meetings are bad. They are a waste of time and they don’t do anything good. I once bought a book, “Death by meeting”, by Patrick Lencioni, just because of its title. Cool title but a complete waste of paper.

In my recent experiences, I found that the key ingredient missing for teams to work efficiently together, was the lack of … meetings. Meaningful meetings that is. Meetings where people actually talk. It seems that the only meetings that exist are like the old-fashioned (and out-dated) university lectures, where The One Who Knows All stands in front and teaches to the scribbling (these days iPad-ing) masses.

But what about the meeting where people sit around a table (or better still, stand up where the issue occurs) and talk intently and in a focused way about the organization’s problems, what to do about them, and who will do what to move forward. Meetings where opinions are exchanged, views are challenged and people work together to improve the way the organization functions. Meetings where people talk to each other (not about each other), look each other in the eyes and commit to actions. Meetings where problems and issues (the things the entire organization is gossiping about, but remain unaddressed) are tackled and ways are found – even by trial and error – to move forward. Meetings where a follow up is organized to evaluate the progress and readjust if needed.

What are the alternatives ? Emails ? Please, no more. Emails seem to have become a substitute for  people talking to each other. We now need apps to deal with the continuous useless flood of emails (the best app is called DEL). Coffee-machine or water-cooler conversations ? These are good for the “what’s-new-in-your-world” chatter but they often reinforce the gossip, are clique and not team-based, and rarely lead to action. Outside retreats ? Fun to do but you don’t generate team cohesion by working on a team twice a year.

If anything, I see too few meetings. Too few meetings like the ones described above. Meetings where people work in a focused way, make decisions and hold each other accountable for results and commitments. Something to think about before shooting off another email to ten people.

Leadership development on steroids

The most interesting session at the ASEAN Business Forum 2013 organized by TMA in Bangkok last week was entitled “Mobilizing talent in ASEAN”. A rightly chosen topic, because as Nick Sutcliffe (The Conference Board) mentioned, a survey of 300 CEOs in the region indicates that people development was their top challenge, and their greatest fear in relation to the opportunities around AEC 2015 is the shortage of leaders and managers.  

The high growth and economic dynamism in Asia requires companies to accelerate the way they develop their leaders. Apprenticeships that transfer skills and knowledge from an experienced professional to a new recruit take years. Steadily moving up in the organization, over 10 or 20 years, has been the model of people development in western companies. But companies don’t have that time comfort any longer. And Generation Y employees are not interested in taking a lifetime to grow up professionally !

So what is the solution ? Maybe more training courses ? None of the panelists even mentioned training. What about executive coaching ? Coaching is definitely gaining recognition in Asia, and the panelists indicated they were counting on it. But coaching is a significant investment and focuses on a single individual. Overseas assignments ? SCG and IBM referred to their company’s approach to offer opportunities for Asians to live and work abroad. This is maybe possible for the few multinationals, but less so for the majority of companies.  And even when overseas assignments are possible, volunteers (especially in Thailand !) are hard to find.

If all the solutions listed have a limited level of success, what is left ? Nick Sutcliffe mentioned action learning as a method that works for Generation Y and that creates a continuous learning environment. Action learning helps a team to (1) address real business problems, develop options and implement solutions, (2) allow leaders to practice and refine their leadership competencies continuously and (3) do all this actively involving the entire leadership team. The process of asking questions allows a team to explore all aspects of a problem, and often leads to breakthrough solutions that the organization had not thought about. Asking questions also challenges each individual’s mental models through the discovery of other patterns of reasoning and thinking.

You can send your people to training courses (they won’t mind !). Or you can remain frustrated why nobody is signing up for the job opportunity in Vietnam. But maybe it is time to create a continuum of learning and doing that helps your young managers to accelerate their knowledge and experience acquisition. Find out more about action learning !

Questions without answers

Peter Drucker once said “One does not begin with answers. One begins by asking “What are our questions ?” “

Asking profound questions opens up possibilities. Obviously, we are not talking about the yes-or-no questions or the “what-do-you-think ?” question that comes at the end of a long-winded here-is-what-I-think-and-given-my-expertise-that-is-probably-as-close-as-you-can-get-to-the-correct-answer.

What happens when you ask a question where there is no obvious or immediate answer ? Have you ever been in a situation where a difficult question was asked and you could “see people think” ? That is what happens when people are faced with tough questions. They think. And when people think, their brain gets to work, because the human brain is programmed to look for answers. If we are struggling with a really tough subject, the brain will even continue to work unconsciously (like when we’re showering or jogging, or even sleeping). Neurons will fire wildly and connections will get strengthened or new ones will get formed. New connections lead to new thoughts and we are bringing innovative insights to the problem (see Warren Berger who blogs on questions and innovation), either through conscious reflection or unconscious brain activity. This means our brain is learning !

Asking profound questions leads to thinking and learning.  There is an art is to asking the type of question that makes people think. Less artful but probably more challenging is to allow silence to reign while the thinking-learning takes place. The brain will not be able to focus on the question at hand if it is bombarded with other stimuli. In the fast-paced business environment, we are uncomfortable with silence because it seems it is a non-productive phase. The opposite is true. When a handful of brains are thinking and learning about a difficult problem, much more progress is being made than when people are rambling away and “sharing”  their “expert knowledge”.

So next time you ask a question, and you see the person in front of you think … Shut up !

Forget about team building !

Team building is very popular in Asia. Companies will send their teams a few days up-country doing bungee jumps, going down on rafts or building structures from plastic straws. These exercises are about teams and trust and sharing responsibilities. And there are a lot of pictures to be shared with friends and family (and Facebook).

Are these team building exercises fun ? For sure. In fact, they are so much more fun than spending a day at work ! Are these exercises helpful ? If you are in the business of building structures from plastic straws, your team might indeed pick up interesting insights. But will the team members refer to the bungee experience next time they are facing a stressful deadline to finish a project ? Will they think about the raft when there are conflicts in the organization ? Will they look back at the consultants’ teaching material that was supposed to be the backbone of the team building exercise ? I think you know the answer.

You don’t build teams by taking them out of their context and doing things that are opposite to their role in the organization. You build teams by helping people to learn together.

 

I lead workshops, using a question-based approach, where team members discover new knowledge about each other and themselves.

Learning about each other. Asking questions is a great way to get to know newcomers to the team, but also to discover unknown dimensions of someone you have worked with side-by-side for several years. Some conversations go deep, others bring bursts of laughter !

Learning from each other. Rather than learning from a guru or a consultant, team members have  conversations about their practical experiences and bring interesting insights. They learn from one another and they teach to one another. “I never thought about this issue in the way the other person described her experience and she gave me a very easy way to deal better with it in the future” was one testimony from a workshop participant.

Learning with each other. Using the input decided by the company (customer feedback, company objectives or areas for improvement), the team creates and develops anything from a one-month action plan to a 2-year roadmap. The level of team ownership, and therefore commitment, is very different from sitting into the boss’ yearly “here’s our plan” meeting sessions !  

If you want to reward your team or take some relaxing time off, by all means have fun in the outdoors doing crazy things. Enjoy the pictures. But don’t fool yourself thinking this will help your team work differently together. That is something that needs to be learned …

The missing link

brand new sign in parking lot

Thank you to those who expressed their opinion on the question of Thailand's top priority around AEC 2015, but no, I still don't think the mastery of the English language is the number one priority for Thailand. I have to admit (see at right) that it is sometimes discouraging to see the basics hopelessly missed !  

I think that the key competencies that nearly all Thais are struggling with are problem analysis/solving/proposing and standing up for and expressing their ideas. Both competencies are not developed through the educational system and cultural upbringings, and it makes for Thai employees being not good at them and not comfortable with them.

With problem analysis/solving/proposing, I mean the different steps of logical analysis, comparing possible options to progress, thinking about the what-if scenarios or the next steps, and finally proposing a path to resolution. As a young engineer, it is quite OK and normal to wait for and follow that the manager is proposing as the next step. But growing up in the organization means new competencies are required. Taking the lead in solving problems and defining the direction to be taken is what is required of a leader.  

Standing up for and expressing one's ideas is something most ASEAN professionals have no issue with. In fact, some even go to other extremes and talk a bit too much about all the good stuff they are doing: debating or expressing opposing ideas is enjoyed as a creative outlet for their thinking. For most Thais however, situations where ideas are opposed, even if that is the normal course of problem solving, are avoided, even more so with people in authority or with experience. Yet the people in authority these days expect their managers to be more upfront and open with ideas and input.  Thais prefer to stay on friendly terms with everybody at work. The line between work and out-of-work relationships is blurred, and professional friction or simple disagreement at work is for most seen as impacting the out-of-work relationship.

There is no magical solution. There is no single training course or team building session that will compensate for the years of education and cultural fundamentals. The first step towards solution is for the expat manager to be aware of the root causes of this situation. Even if Thais are willing to improve, they simply are not open to be out of their comfort zone. It is only exposure and experience that will allow some to be more comfortable in problem analysis and expressing freely their ideas. Participating in Toastmasters sessions is a good method to make progress.

In my experience in Asia, I have seen professionals from other countries in ASEAN very comfortable with these skills, and I think this is the real area where Thai managers need to step up if they want to compete in the new economic ASEAN that will be created in 2015. This is more critical than a few mistakes in the English language.

Wishing everyone a year of excellence !

Wishing everyone a year where you can strive for excellence, in your business and private endeavours ...