G.R.O.W. Your Capacity to Deliver Results

John Whitmore's GROW framework enables us to focus on what we are trying to accomplish and the context within which we are operating before determining a solution or strategy.

It helps mitigate common leadership traps such as:

• Trying to control outcomes or people
• Solving the wrong problem
• Going for decision speed over understanding
• Discussing being perceived as agreement
• Explaining, blaming or justifying low performance
• Ignoring, complying or protecting the emotional state of stakeholders
• Defaulting to limited solutions
• Focusing on the future without consideration of the past or present
• Wasting time second guessing decisions

Slow down to go fast and focus on what you can influence by clarifying 4 things:

G-Goal Seek clarity and alignment on the what and why

R-Reality Discuss and name context or what is going on (vs. what is wrong) including constraints, barriers, perceptions, experiences, environment, marketplace, what is working, what is not, etc. 

Do not go to O until you are clear and aligned on G and the stakes are lowered or acknowledged regarding the R. You may need to change the G.

O-Options Explore alternatives or the how based on G&R

W-Way Forward Identify the who, when, where and support needed

The more time you spend on G&R the better and faster the O&W. Try it to find out!

Thank you Amy for the resource.

Feed Forward instead of Back

Providing helpful feedback is a challenge for many leaders and teams. Why? We:

1. Limit it to a once a year annual review
2. Believe we will hurt someone's feelings 
3. Focus on the past vs. the future
4. Judge (what is wrong) instead of share an observation (what is)
5. Don't have feedback protocols or permissions in our team agreements
6. Discuss behavior only and miss impact
7. Muddle the communication for fear of reaction
8. Forget that we need others to help us see our blindspots 
9. Don't align feedback with desired results
10. Give one-way feedback instead of dialogue 
11. Wait too long to provide it

Feedback is a key practice on high-performing teams and not just from leader to team member. To address #3, shift your approach from feed "back" to feed "forward".  Instead of pointing out "what is wrong" (that often has a pinch of punishment energy to it) explore "what might be".  Instead of looking back at what can't be changed, look forward to what is possible.  

Try it for yourself with a direct report or colleague:

• Ask, "What is a behavior you would like to change or grow in? Why? And what difference would it make to goal achievement?"
• Brainstorm ideas and discuss solutions together 
• Invite him/her to select 2 ideas that most resonate to practice
• Discuss ways you can support

You may experience this as a generative, energizing experience and actually enjoy it. For more on FeedForward check out Marshall Goldsmith's research. Thanks to Liz for the discovery! 

Unspoken Rules?

Teams tend to implicitly follow the rules of a dominant operating system but rarely discuss what that structure is and if it is serves their goal achievement. David Kantor's research illuminates the structural dynamics in human systems. One element he asks us to consider is the unspoken rules (or ways of operating) that influence team performance. They are:

Closed: Prescriptive. Stability through control. Clearly defined roles. Strong, formal leadership. Emphasis on planning & execution. Top-driven decision making. Policy-oriented. Leader centric. Think Military.
Open: Freedom within Structure. Egalitarian participation. Everyone making a contribution. Shared leadership. Emphasis on collaboration. Process-oriented. Self-Directed. Think Montessori. 
Random: Generative. Exploration through improvisation. Lack of formal structure/process. Autonomy & individuality. Spontaneous bursts of energy. Emphasis on innovation. Transformation-oriented. Think Chaos Theory.

Which operating system do you prefer? What is the dominate system on your team? In your organization? Does each align or clash? How do these archetypes help or hinder results delivery?

Try not to judge or make one structure better than the other, as each has a time and place. Seek first to understand then consciously choose what system is optimal!

Source: Kantor Institute, Natarsha Hearn

Change vs. Transition

The pace of change is accelerating. Doing more with less is the norm. Teams must learn to welcome change and work with constraints to deliver winning results. One of the key differences in successful companies is the ability to anticipate and execute team changes as quickly and efficiently as possible.

How can you remain competitive when team membership constantly changes, new leaders come and go, initiatives change daily, mergers are on the horizon, revenue pressures are persistent, etc. etc.?

Transition expert William Bridges states, "It isn't the changes that can do you in, it's the transitions. Change is not the same as transition. Change is situational: the new boss, the changing team members, the new policy, the new law, the layoff. Transition is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with the new situation. Change is external. Transition is internal" 

We tend to spend our time on what's next and miss the opportunity to close out the past consciously and address the 4 D's of an ending; Disengagement, Dis-identification, Disenchantment, and Disorientation. 

Next time your team is in the midst of a transition (large or small), start with these questions to move from an ending, to the neutral zone and your new beginning:

1. What is changing?
2. What will actually be different because of the change?
3. What are you going to lose (or believe you will lose)?

4. What do you need to grieve, resolve, thank or let go of to move into the neutral zone?

5. What do you believe is possible now?

From Dysfunction to Cohesiveness

If you want to cultivate team excellence, where do you start?

Patrick Lencioni has recently renamed the 5 Dysfunctions of a Team to the 5 Behaviors of a Cohesive Team. It is more than semantics because teams that operate as a unified, synergistic whole do outperform those that don't. And what we put our attention on grows!

Begin by considering 5 fundamental areas of influence. Does your team:

• Trust in a transparent, honest and vulnerable manner?
• Engage in unfiltered dialogue around ideas and different perspectives? 
• Commit to and align fully with decisions (even when they disagree)?
• Hold each other accountable to team agreements?
• Deliver quality results on time and in budget with enthusiasm?

We've found that high levels of trust, conflict competence, commitment, accountability and results-orientation do in fact contribute to team excellence if we focus on what we do want (cohesion) instead of what we don't (dysfunction).

Do You Hear What I Hear?

Communication is a key indicator of high performance on teams. If you have the courage to say what needs to be said in service to a team goal or agreement, take the time to verify your communication. Was what you verbalized heard? Was the meaning of your words captured? Did the receiver pick up the entire message?

Listening is different than hearing so it's important to check for understanding. Try the following and notice what happens with your impact at work:

• May I check my communication...? 
• What did you hear me say?
• Just so we are aligned, may I check out what you interpreted?"
• To help me be sure I communicated clearly would you let me know what you heard?
• Since it was hard for me to say that, would you share what you picked up?

Coaching Pays Off

If you watched the US Open Tennis final my bet is you were in awe. I was rooting for Murray because he was close to the top but never quite there. He had the talent and drive but something was missing. Then he hired a new coach (Ivan Lendl) and it payed off. He won his first major!

It makes me wonder why in business we don't invest more in coaching. I've had a coach for years and without her I wouldn't be able to do the work I do in the way I do it (or have the life I have).

Is it because coaching in business seems less tangible?  Is it that the ROI isn't as obvious? Is the need for coaching perceived as a weakness or a "performance problem"? Is it because not all coaches are good? Is it scary to go for mastery? It seems to be the first thing cut when budgets tighten, yet is it the very thing that can build capacity and passion for work during tough times.

Leadership and team effectiveness have a direct correlation to business success. Whatever game you are playing, find a good coach. It will payoff if you are willing to practice!

If you need some inspiration, Click here for US Open Final Highlights