Category Archives: Developing as a leader

Simple tools for stepping up to the next level in your new job

Developing as a leader,

Finally, you’ve got the job you were after.  Your (current, or maybe new) employer has seen in you the characteristics they are seeking for the next level of senior management.  Now, you need to work out what those characteristics are.

Maybe you have the support of a mentor or an HR department – of someone who can offer you a clear job description and behavioural competencies.  Maybe not.  Either way, you can do worse than use the consultant’s old favourite – the two by two grid – to take stock of where you’re starting from on your path to establishing yourself as an effective player in your new job.

It works like this.  You create a two by two grid and, along the top, you write (left hand column) “senior managers do” and (right hand column) “senior managers don’t”.  On the left hand side you write (top row) “I do” and (bottom row) “I don’t”.  Then you can brainstorm, taking care to think about which box each behaviour belongs in.  The resulting grid highlights four areas:

  • Strengths you can leverage in your new job (top left).  These are the behaviours you have already developed that are well matched to your new role;
  • Areas for development (bottom left).  These are behaviours which, if you invest in developing them, will  help to position you in your new role and to increase your personal effectiveness.  As it happens, some of them may be quite simple for you to develop – unrealised strengths.  Others may be less natural to you;
  • Behaviours to let go of (top right).  These are things you do and which may have served you well in previous roles.  Now though, it’s time to let go of them or to convert them into strengths in your new role.  Converting existing behaviours into strengths happens when you are able to take a behaviour to the next level and in this way to adapt it to the needs of your new role;
  • No go areas (bottom right).  These are things you don’t do and which people in your target role don’t do either.  You can ignore them for now – unless they hold some kind of attraction to you.  If they do, you may need to find new ways to meet the needs these behaviours have met for you in the past.

Overall, your answers in the grid offer the basis for a quick-view assessment of your readiness to excel in your new job as well as the basis for more detailed developmental planning.  I offer an example below – and I wish you success in your new role!
Senior Managers Do
Senior Managers Don’t
I do
·        Establish clear and challenging goals for the area under their control
·        Provide clear responsibilities to staff and hold them accountable for results
·        Put in place clear processes for managing risk in the team
·        Do things themselves that they could delegate to their staff
·        Get lost in the detail of individual initiatives and lose sight of the overall agenda
·        Let staff ‘delegate upwards’ and determine the agenda
I don’t
·        Influence effectively – socialising ideas individually before presenting them at meetings
·        Establish a clear vision for their area and communicate it to staff
·        Think about who’s best placed to do what in the team and allocate roles or tasks accordingly
·        Celebrate success with their staff
·        Take the credit for the work of their staff
·        Hang out in the pub with their staff – except on carefully chosen occasions

If you don’t play your music, who will else will?

Developing as a leader,

Amongst life’s many pleasures is lunch with friends, sometimes professional friends.  And sometimes one thing leads to another as it did last Friday.

Let me tell you first of a series of synchronicities that have taken place over time.  In 2008 I found myself sitting next to a man at a seminar.  He didn’t stay for the full duration but we spoke briefly and exchanged cards.  I had no idea at the time that this man, Len Williamson, would go on to become a trusted and valued friend.  Via Len I went on to meet some of his trusted friends, including Emma Chilvers (look out for mention of Emma in the coming days) and Cees Kramer.

Over time I have come to realise that Cees’ work with an organisation called Dialogos in many ways chimes with my own interest in aspects of communication.  On my recent trip to New York I finally bought William Isaacs’ book Dialogue and The Art of Thinking Together:  A Pioneering Approach To Communication in Business And In Life and I’m looking forward to reading it soon.  Meantime, I was curious about Cees’ invitation to an evening on Friday with long-time contributor in the field of leadership, Canadian Michael Jones.  I accepted the invitation gladly.

Let me confess that I had not heard of Michael Jones (at least, not of the Michael Jones in question!) until I received Cees’ invitation.  I was intrigued to hear of someone who combines his own particular style of piano playing with talking about leadership.  Listening to Michael speak on Friday evening I was also struck by his gift for telling stories and in this way revealing some of the deeper truths of our lives.

One story had particular resonance for me.  Michael, a pianist from a young age, nonetheless found himself working in the field of leadership.  Playing the piano had taken second place.  At a business event when the hotel he was staying in was quiet Michael spotted a piano and spent some time playing – a mix of classical repertoire and his own creations.  After a while he became aware of an elderly man emerging from the not-as-empty-as-he-thought lounge, shuffling slowly towards him.

The man asked Michael what he had been playing and Michael listed the names of the composers whose music he had played.  “No, not that – the other stuff”.  It became apparent to Michael that the old man was asking him about his own music.  The old man quizzed him about his own music and, learning that this was something Michael played only for his own pleasure, encouraged him to share it with a wider audience.  “If you don’t play your music”, he asked, “who else will?”  This question stands as an invitation to us all and implies another invitation, too:  to recognise the music in our lives that only we can play.  If you don’t play your music, who else will?

As I write I am enjoying the feelings of gratitude to Cees for extending an invitation to join him in the intimate setting of Bridewell Hall to enjoy Michael’s talking and playing.  I wonder, what does this brief glimpse of Michael’s work evoke for you?

And in case you’d like to find out about Michael’s work you can learn more at www.pianoscapes.com.

The missing dialogue

Developing as a leader, Emotional Intelligence,

Just before I turned off my Blackberry at the beginning of my flight to New York last week I picked up a message from my friend Len Williamson about an article he is planning to write.  It’s called The Missing Dialogue.  I reply and ask him, can I share his thoughts on my blog?  I’m pleased to pick up his yes as I land at Heathrow on my return.

Len points to the work of a number of thinkers in this field – David Bohm, Bill Isaacs, Daniel Yankevich – and highlights the phrase from JMW (Len, who is JMW?) – “all that is ever needed is a conversation”.  He also notes how easy it is to fail to have those conversations we most need to have.  On a teleconference with clients he hears three missing dialogues being played out and reflects on the pain and expense of failing to hold the dialogue.

In his brief sketch for his article Len writes:


The missing dialogue is the one that has the most potential to reduce stress in your life, move you towards meeting your goals and help you to fulfil your potential.  Everyone has at least three missing dialogues and most have many more.  The three you will have will be at least one at home with your partner, one or more at work with your colleagues and at least one at play with your friends.  The dialogue is missing because you avoid it.  You avoid it to protect yourself and others from the assumed consequences of having the dialogue.  Paradoxically, this avoidance creates stress for you as you do not follow the path you want to take.  It also holds you back from progress towards your goals and it limits your potential.  This paper shows it is possible to have these missing dialogues in a way that does not lead to all the fears you have about the consequences of doing so.

This is a rich topic.  I agree that all sorts of people fear the possible outcomes from conversations and I notice how this keeps people from dialoguing with themselves – let alone each with other.  I notice how much people lack skills in this area and how, even when people have skills and choose to open up the dialogue, this offers no guarantee of a constructive response.  In my own life I increasingly put out the invitation even when I believe there will be unwillingness or lack of skill on the part of my partner in dialogue:  whatever the response I know more as a result of opening the dialogue than I did before.

One dialogue that is often missing in key relationships in the workplace and elsewhere is this:  how shall we dialogue with each other?  As a regular reader you already know how much store I lay by establishing ground rules for dialogue in a wide range of conversations.  Sometimes these are ground rules I follow myself and which help me to stay centred and on track in the most difficult of conversations.  In some relationships I have agreement to a shared set of rules – amongst fellow practitioners of Nonviolent Communication, of Neuro-Linguistic Programming and of the Skilled Facilitator Approach (and because I’ve written about all three on this blog I have created links to the library of postings in each area).

I wonder, what are the missing dialogues in your life at present?  I encourage you to take time to identify and reflect on them and, if you feel bold enough, to share one or two of them here.  I also wonder what this subject evokes for you and what more you’re interested to know.  Please leave your comments as a way of supporting Len in writing his article.

How well are you listening to your customers?

Developing as a leader,

Yeah!  Today I’m flying to New York! I’ll be flying out with members of the London Symphony Chorus to sing in two concerts this week at New York’s Avery Fisher Hall before flying back after our concert on Sunday.  I’ll be back at my desk in time for work on Monday!

Along the way, I had an experience I still find very strange.  And I must confess, it concerns one of my favourite organisations – First Direct.  Over the years, I have regularly taken out travel insurance with them so it seemed quite straightforward to phone them up again, to get put through to their insurers and to renew my insurance.  But no – this is roughly the conversation I had when I spoke to a representative at Aviva:  What’s the purpose of your visit?  I’m going to New York as a member of an amateur chorus to sing in a couple of concerts.  So it’s a professional trip?  No, we’re amateurs – we’re not being paid.  But it’s not leisure…  Well, yes, in my eyes it is – singing is something I do as a hobby.  Quite quickly, I was asked to approach a specialist insurer for this trip.

I found it hard to get any clear explanation about why I would not be insured as a member of the LSC.  I have been insured for business trips under the same policy in the past so even if they were classing this as a professional trip why would this policy not cover it?  I asked the person on the phone what risks he saw that would not also apply on any other leisure trip and he didn’t have an answer.  I decided to let the team at First Direct know I wasn’t happy.  They gave me another number and encouraged me to phone and try again.  The explanation was clearer this time, though I didn’t enjoy it very much.  We don’t class this as a leisure trip because of your singing commitments.  And yes, we do insure people for business trips, but only for work in administration.  I asked if I could check my understanding, expecting to get a simple, yes, that’s right.  Instead, I got another explanation, which seemed to me to be a little longer and still, essentially, the same as the first one.  I could see the risk that we might go round in circles without ever getting to the point where the person talking to me would say, yes, that’s right, these are the reasons why we won’t insure you.

After talking to a few members of the choir (has anyone else had an experience like this?  Who are you insured with for this trip?) I visited my local Post Office, picked up a leaflet for their travel insurance and made a call.  I made sure to check that they really would cover me on my singing trip and the representative seemed rather amused when I told her about my experience with Aviva.  Yes, we’ll cover you for this and other singing trips.

As I sit here and write I am wondering what I needed from Aviva that I didn’t get – recognising that it wasn’t just insurance.  I know I wanted a clear explanation that I could understand – not just that I could understand the words but also that it would make sense to me in a way that the explanation I received just didn’t.  Also I wanted the representatives of the organisation to stand behind their explanation – to act as if it made sense to them.  When I checked my understanding and didn’t get to a clear, yes, that’s right… I found myself wondering if the reasons for the no made sense to the person I was talking to.

And why does this matter?  It matters to me as a customer.  It also matters to Aviva, because customers have a voice – they tell their friends about their experiences, they put it on the internet.  One man, after his guitar was broken in the hands of America’s United Airlines, and having exhausted all the possibilities for raising the issue with them without gaining compensation, wrote a song about it and posted it on YouTube under the heading United Breaks Guitars.  At the time of writing, Dave Carroll’s song has received close to 11,000,000 hits on YouTube.

Mmm… maybe I should write a song about Aviva…

As a leader are you “judge and jury”?

Developing as a leader, Emotional Intelligence, ,

On Monday, after spending four years in jail, the young American Amanda Knox was dramatically cleared of the murder of British student Meredith Kercher after her initial conviction was over-turned.

Knox’s original conviction was based on DNA evidence which was later found to be unreliable.  As I write, an article in the New Scientist has highlighted that even before the trial that led to the conviction of Knox and her then boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, there were questions about the strength of the DNA evidence on which the case against the pair rested.

It’s hard to imagine the experience of Meredith Kercher’s family members following her death.  We can barely understand the depth of grief and loss, the yearning for answers (Who killed her?  Why?), the desire for justice for their daughter.  It’s a little easier to understand the pressures that members of the police face to get to the answers to those questions.

There is a risk that, for all sorts of reasons, the police respond to the pressures they face by seeking not so much to uncover the truth as to construct some credible “truth” that will lead to a conviction.  A point comes when evidence is met not so much with open curiosity (what is this telling us?) as with a clear intention to convict (can we use this to support our case?).  After a while, the detective is blind to the very truths he has uncovered because they no longer support him in his aim to convict.  Perhaps the original case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito was built in this way.  Perhaps it was not.

All this is a long way from the workplace of my readers and still, I wonder if there is some message here for you as a leader.  I wonder if, at times, it seems easier to you to make a case against a member of your team or a colleague in the board room, in order to meet some needs of your own.  Perhaps, for example, it’s easier for you to judge your team member as “lazy” or “incompetent” than it is to see how much s/he is struggling in a new job and to recognise how much you, as manager, have failed to provide the guidance and developmental support s/he needs.  Perhaps, in the Boardroom, it’s easier to dismiss your colleague with a few swift judgements than it is to wonder, “what are his real concerns?” and to explore together what needs you both have that need to be met if you are to come to an agreement that works for your department as well as hers or his.

The signs that you are doing this are easy to spot.  Maybe you are looking for the evidence that supports your case, for example, and dismissing any evidence that might tell another story.  Perhaps you are more concerned with being “right” (and proving that the other person is “wrong”) than you are in building mutual understanding.  Perhaps you are rooted in a single truth rather than open to new information and the possibility that you may, in time, come to a new perspective.

As a leader are you “judge and jury”?  Do you want to be?  If you do, I recommend you ask yourself why and explore your answers fully.  Maybe, in time, you’ll come to a new perspective.

Working as a team to handle objections

Developing as a leader, Emotional Intelligence, ,

Recently, I wrote a posting about handling objections, in which I pointed to a number of resources that are available to the leader who is learning to handle objections in negotiations.  I also asked colleagues about their experiences and fielded an interesting example from someone who, like me, is interested in what Roger Schwarz calls a ‘mutual learning approach’.

Using this approach an objection is not taken as some kind of tactic to achieve the best outcome for the person raising the objection.  Rather, it’s seen as a statement of genuine concern.  By understanding the concern that sits beneath the objection, the person negotiating can think about whether he (or she) can adjust his approach in order to meet the needs of the person objecting, whilst still meeting his own needs.  This is negotiation with the aim of creating outcomes which meet everyone’s needs – a “win, win” outcome.

My colleague’s example speaks for itself so, with his permission, I share it here:

Recently, I had an experience that may be relevant.  When I work with clients I use a charge sheet for different services with different rates for non-profits and for commercial organisations.  I show this to clients on the first business development meeting and I am transparent on how I come to the figures and engage in discussions about the costs and numbers involved.


In a recent discussion with a client there was an objection to the amount listed in the invoices.  I kept the discussion open through my choice of questions.  Originally I didn’t understand his needs with regards the objection.  I also had a need that I didn’t want to have to manage a unique costing structure for this client and potentially for every client.


Exploring the need to modify the amount listed on the invoices, I learned it related to the charge rates of another consultant who happens to be the former MD within my client’s company.  My rates were considerably higher.  Now that was a potentially embarrassing, risky situation!  I can remember the slight glow in my cheeks as I realise the comparison and how my client explained that “Head Office” would see these rates.


In exploring the rates using the mutual learning style, we were able to accommodate and resolve this issue through increasing the transparency of the documentation to show the time I spent on planning and documentation.


I was genuinely trying to be transparent, curious about the client’s needs.  I explained my reasoning, understanding that we both had information that was different – me and my client.  We were doing our best to be mutual learners.

Revisiting our sense of identity

Developing as a leader,

Tuesday evening.  As I write my alarm is set for a 5am start tomorrow, when I’ll be packing my bags to go to Glasgow as a member of the London Symphony Chorus.  We’ll be singing in our fourth out-of-town concert in just two weeks, performing our third work – James MacMillan’s St. John’s Passion.  This is the opening concert of the new season for the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra and will be broadcast live on BBC Radio on the evening of Thursday 29th September 2011.

For a few weeks now I have been aware of how busy we’ve been as a choir and this feeling has been all the more intense in recent days as I struggle to find time for the most basic tasks and make jokes about the risk that I shall soon run out of clean underwear.  Today though, I notice something else:  how strong is my sense of identity as a singer right now.

Of course, we all have multiple identities, related to all sorts of activities and relationships in our lives.  At home we may be parents, children, spouses.  At work we may be professionals of some sort, as well as managers, leaders, team members.  Our hobbies confer additional layers of identity.  And then there is the sense of identity that comes with our gender, sexuality and much more besides.

Often, there is an interplay between our sense of our identity and additional layers of truth, so that it’s hard to say with confidence “Yes, this is who I am”.  If we hold too tight to our sense of identity we miss the opportunity to learn and grow.  Our identity as parent becomes stuck at a time when our children were still children, for example, and we miss out on the joys that can come when we allow our relationship to develop as we and our children develop.  At the same time, our sense of identity supports us in the world, acting as a compass or guide.

As we move through our careers there will be times when our sense of identity is one or two steps behind the role we inhabit.  A promotion often leaves us with a sense that, somehow, we don’t belong.  My title is Director of X, Y, Z but who am I to be in this role?  We find ourselves looking over our shoulders and wondering who will be first to notice the incongruity.

The sense of discord (no musical pun intended) is a healthy one because it invites us to explore who we really are.  Is this the right role for me, and if it is, who am I becoming in this role?  And if it’s not, who am I and what role might be right for the person that I am?  At the same time, we may find that layers of identity that were laid down when we were very young – perhaps even laid down by our parents when they were very young and handed down to us – are still in the mix, long after they relate to any objective reality.

It’s time to explore who we have become and who we want to become.  It’s also time to uncouple those things we confuse with who we really are, such as behaviours borne of habit, or the labels we place on ourselves (or others on us).

Is it “accountability” when senior heads roll?

Developing as a leader,

24 September 2011.  Just days after the shock announcement that UBS has identified and arranged the arrest of “rogue trader”, Kweku Adoboli, the news came through that UBS CEO Oswald Gruebel has stood down from his post.  The Bank’s chairman, Kaspar Villiger, said that Gruebel “feels it is his duty to assume responsibility for the recent unauthorised trading incident”.

I notice that my heart sinks when the response to failures in the public domain (in politics, or amongst public servants, or in highly visible senior roles in the commercial sector) is to let some senior head roll.  What does it mean to assume responsibility in this context – and others like it?  There are, clearly, two ways in which someone takes responsibility.  The first is to acknowledge some error that has enabled failures to happen.  This is taking responsibility for what has happened in the past.  There is also the question of who will address the underlying causes of an issue that has happened in the past or the systemic weaknesses that allowed it to occur.  This is taking responsibility for sorting out what happens in future.

It seems to me that when heads roll the people concerned perform a rather strange double face.  On the one hand, by falling on their swords, they appear to say “mea culpa” and others have the option to say “quite right, too!”  At the same time, they tend to say nothing about what it is, precisely, that they take responsibility for so that even as they say “mea culpa” they walk away from any real responsibility they may have.  Equally, even as they say “mea culpa” they may be walking away from holding others to account by whose acts an error occurred.  And of course the man – or woman – who leaves their job in this way does nothing to address the underlying issue, leaving this to a successor who comes in unsullied to the role.

There is, of course, the question of appearances.  Who knows what conversations UBS Chairman Kaspar Villiger may have had with CEO Oswald Gruebel about the need to appease shareholders with decisive action.  I wonder, are shareholders, journalists and other interested parties really so naive?

For my part, I’d like to see a more robust form of accountability in the public domain.  At the very least, public statements would say more about what it means to “take responsibility” in cases such as these.  Perhaps Kaspar’s statement would say “Gruebel was concerned that such a thing could happen on his watch and realised he had not been doing all he needed to to ensure robust risk management in the bank” or “whilst Gruebel is proud of the work he has done for the bank he realised it needs somebody else to get to the bottom of what happened and to make sure it can’t happen in future”.  Then, at least, we would have some insight into what “responsibility” means in this context.  Personally, I find that responsibility – accountability – comes when there is a level of detail in the public statement which makes meaning transparent.

I realise that I am standing on my soapbox right now and I am ready to step down from it – for now.  I wonder how you respond to the rolling of Oswald Gruebel’s head?

When peace breaks out in the workplace

Developing as a leader, Emotional Intelligence, , ,
UN International Day of Peace

The United Nations’ (UN) International Day of Peace (also known as “Peace Day”) is celebrated on September 21st each year to recognise the efforts of those who have worked hard to end conflict and promote peace.  The International Day of Peace is also a day of ceasefire – personal or political.  But what, you may ask, does Peace Day have to do with your life in the workplace?  The answer is easy to determine.

As you reflect on this question, I invite you to reflect on any relationships you have in the workplace with people around whom you feel less than comfortable.  Perhaps you’ve had an unfortunate experience or experiences in relation to that person, group, team or department.  Perhaps you’d like to enjoy greater ease in your communication with them.  Perhaps the mere thought of them stimulates emotion in you.  You are not at peace.

In all likelihood, your life at work (and maybe at home) is just a little bit harder as a result.  Thinking about that person stimulates thoughts and feelings in you that you don’t enjoy.  Working with them seems to be a real grind.  The tiny impacts accumulate over time, using energy that you could otherwise put to good use and without any real return on your mental, emotional and physical investment.

What would your life be like if you were at peace in relation to that person or people?  How would it be different for you – mentally, emotionally, physically…?  I invite you to imagine how your life would be different and how your experience of life would be different if only you were at peace.  I invite you to take time to imagine this more peaceful life and even to try it on for size.  What does it feel like to be truly at peace?

And here’s a harder question:  what would it take for you to be at peace with that person or people, no matter what their behaviour?  Because here’s the rub:  if you are thinking that your experience is only down to them, you’re giving away your power to make a difference in your own life and, as a result, you’re missing the chance to be truly at peace.  Meantime, the nagging unease, the frustration, maybe even the anger and the fear, continue to eat away at you.  Your ease, your effectiveness and your well-being are all affected.

There’s something more.  As a leader, you need to know how you can achieve peace when faced with behaviours you find difficult because you need to be a role model in this to those you lead.  Your personal Peace Day is an example to your staff.  It also provides the basis for you to coach and support them when they’re finding it tough to get along with their colleagues.

I wonder, what do you take away as a result of reading this posting?  And what are your personal next steps towards living your life in peace?

Photo copyright, iStockphoto.com, Sue McDonald


Go to the funeral – it means more than you think

Developing as a leader, Emotional Intelligence, ,

Hospitals and funerals are two places we rarely want to go. Even when we feel genuine love and concern for the person involved or his/her family, we’re distracted by how going to those places makes us feel – awkward, afraid for our own health or mortality, guilty, sad or a whole host of other emotions that may arise.


Alan Dobzinski describes how this situation came up for two of his clients – both leaders in their respective organisations. Click through to Alan’s blog to learn how skipping a funeral had huge repercussions for one leader.