Leading change: Start by acknowledging the comfort zone

Executive coach and author Marshall Goldsmith wrote, “Feedback is a gift that only other can give.”  So, if feedback is a gift, why do so many of us struggle with giving and receiving it?

I had a couple of experiences this summer that made me realize that there are actually many types of feedback.  Perhaps we need more words for the many types – just like the Eskimos have many words for all of the different types of snow.  Here are some possibilities:

Evaluation Feedback:

This type of feedback is probably the most common in the world of work.  It’s also the least helpful.  Evaluation feedback comes at the end.  The end of the performance year.  The end of the week-long class.  The end of a project.  Sure it’s helpful for all us to gauge how we did, and we may use evaluation feedback to improve next time.  But why not give and get feedback when we can learn from it real time?

Performance Feedback:

This type of feedback generally comes from a boss or someone whose own success depends on you.  While it may be couched as an observation or something for you to think about, when someone shares performance feedback, they intend for you to change your behavior.

I remember getting performance feedback from a boss years ago who said, “it bugs other people on the staff when you multi-task and work on your day planner during staff meetings.”  Meaning – stop it!

When you sense that someone is trying to give performance feedback, it may help you both to get very clear.  Try asking, “what exactly would you like me to stop or start doing?”  Once you’ve gotten the feedback, make the change!

Fine-Tuning:

This feedback comes from people who think you are generally doing a good job, but they see an opportunity for you to get even better by tweaking a behavior or two.  One of the best examples of fine-tuning feedback  ever received was from a course participant.  She told me she enjoyed my course and then asked if she could share some feedback.  She then went on to explain that when I nodded my head while she and others were talking she felt rushed.  WOW!  This blew me away because I had no idea that my behavior was having this negative impact.

The key to fine-tuning feedback is offering what impact someone’s behavior is having on you.  The giver is not necessarily trying to control or change you.  By sharing how your behavior is impacting them – they give the receiver the opportunity to change or not.

Feed-Forward:

Goldsmith came up with this one years ago.  It means giving someone suggestions in advance about how to behave rather than waiting for them to fail and beating them up afterward.  Years ago my husband was about to present to his company’s executive leadership team for the first time.  His boss gave him great feed-forward about how to dress, when to speak, how much detail to go into, etc.

Slap Upside the Head:

Two years ago, a colleague who is also a great friend sat me down and said, “You are making yourself and others miserable.  What’s going on?”

This is the kind of feedback that only great friends can give.  It consists of observations about you, that people share with you because they care about you. In his book, Who’s Got Your Back, Keith Ferrazzi gives some great examples of this feedback along with the assertion that we all desperately need people in our lives who care enough to give it.

The person who gives slap upside the head feedback isn’t trying to control you or change you for their sake.  They speak up because they know where you want to be and see that you are getting in your own way.

Summary

Feedback Givers: Before you give feedback, think through your intention and the type of feedback that fits best.  Remember that if you are not in a position of authority, evaluation feedback is not appropriate.  You can lead a horse to water . . .

Feedback Receivers:  We all suffer from a lack of self-awareness at times and feedback is the only way we can learn what our blind spots are.  Even when you don’t agree with it, view feedback as a gift.

After the 30 or so of us signed in with the Court Clerk, we were shown a video.  I admit to bracing myself for something preachy and boring. However, 30 seconds into watching “The Colorado Juror” I was digging in my bag for a pen and paper to capture notes on how good the video was!  I thought it was an effective example of the order in which to cover points when dealing with a resistant, skeptical, or hesitant audience.

#1: Start with empathy for the emotions people are feeling.

The video started with clips of four past jurors talking about how anxious and annoyed they were when they received their summons.  As people chuckled and nodded along, the tension in the room started to dissapate.

#2:  Appeal to a sense of purpose

Following the four clips, the narrator said, “I’ll bet you are thinking that someone else with less important things to do should be here instead of you.”  This got a good laugh as we all realized that we all thought our agendas were more important than everyone else’s. After empathizing, the narrator then came on to say, “We know you might not be thrilled to be here, but you are playing an import part in the process that makes our country great.”  The video went on to talk about the role that juries play in giving people a fair trial and how important each juror is to the process.

#3: Provide details of the plan.

Only after relating to what people were feeling, and appealing to a higher purpose, did the video go inot the nuts and bolts of how the process would work.  This stage a) gave the jurors information about the types of juries, the selection process, etc. and b) helped us know what to expect for the rest of the morning.

What struck me most was the fact that if the information in this video had been covered in a different order it would not have been nearly as effective.  Whoever wrote the script realized that starting with emotion, then moving to purpose, and finally getting into details/plans/information would fit the psychological state we jurors were in. If the video had started with information – I have no doubt that we would have rolled our eyes and felt unappreciated. 

All in all, a great example of how a well crafted message can turn resisters into supporters.

Sign #1:  From Richard Hackman

In the May issue of Harvard Business Review, Diane Coutu interviewed Richard Hackman, Professor of Social and Organizational Psychology at Harvard University and a leading expert on teams.  While the article is titled, “Why Teams Don’t Work,”  Hackman does offer insight into why and when teams do work.  One surprising finding of Hackman’s research is that every team needs a deviant.   According to Hackman,

Hackman argues that deviants open up more ideas and are a great source of innovation.  Of course, the problem is that these very people are often seen as resistant and as troublemakers.

Sign #2:  From Warren Bennis

A month after Hackman’s article, HBR published a piece from Warren Bennis on the topic of transparency.  While the article is worth reading in and of itself, there on page 60 was a sign.  Bennis writes:

The lesson, according to Bennis, is “reward contrarians”.

Sign #3:  Jack and Suzy Welch

The last sign came in the June 8 edition of Business Week.  Jack and Suzy Welch devoted their weekly column to what they call, “The Power of Pushback.”   They write:

Conclusion:

As a driver myself, I recognize that it’s easy to get annoyed when people disagree and it’s tempting to squash dissension.  I think the universe (and business experts) are telling me and other leaders to reframe resistance and appreciate it when people care enough to disagree.  The result will be better in the long run!

I think we often confuse convincing people that change is needed with convincing people to accept a specific change. 

Convincing people that change is needed is a pivotal first step in any attempt to lead change.  John Kotter calls this step “creating a sense of urgency.”  Rick Maurer refers to it as “making a compelling case for change.” 

There are certainly many things that leaders can do to convince people that change is needed. Kotter and Maurer both have books on the subject.  In addition, in his book, The Leadership Engine, Michigan business professor Noel Tichy provides a great list of suggestions, including communicating about:

• External threats and opportunities
• Technologies which are causing quantum changes in your business
• Customers or suppliers which are concentrating or integrating
• Competitors which are growing in strength and aggressiveness

Unfortunately, many leaders I speak with want to skip step #1 and move right on to convincing people that the specific solution they have in mind is the right one and that it should be accepted, embraced, and implemented with no questions and no complaints.   

Convincing people that change is needed and convincing people that your solution should be accepted are two dramatically different intentions.  Consider the example of wanting to convince your spouse to go on a vegetarian diet.  You’ll have a much harder time and encounter far more resistance if you announce a “no meat in the house” policy out of the blue than you will if talk to your spouse first about how he/she feels about both of your health, weight, eating habits, etc. 

The same idea holds true for change inside an organization.  Before you charge ahead with attempting to get people on board with the specifics of your new compensation approach, start with educating people about why change is needed in the first place.  Is your company’s current approach outdated?  Are you losing key employees to your competitors?

So, if you want to convince people to change – focus first on conveying the context for change, why your organization needs to adapt, and how change will help you remain competitive.  There are lots of great examples and quotes out there that will help you support your point – like this one from Larry Bossidy, former Chairman and CEO of AlliedSignal:

“Show me a great company, and I’ll show you one that has radically changed itself and is looking forward to the opportunity to do so again.”

And certainly, we change consultants can help you create and communicate messages that help people see a need for change.  Just remember, helping people move to a state of being open to change is different from convincing people that your solution is the answer.  The best way to get to acceptance of a specific solution is still the active involvement of people in coming up with the answer together. For more on that topic, check out my blog post: Want Buy-In? Roll Out Imperfect Plans.

While I agree with Kotter, I do want to offer a word of caution about this approach.  Leaders who come into an organization and attempt to implement change without understanding the new company’s culture are likely to create more problems and pain. 

I recently consulted with a company with a legacy of having a very strong “people” culture.   This particular company has brought in new executives from other industries that have more a “profit” focus.   The new executives are doing their jobs by bringing in best practices and attempting to implement new systems and procedures.  The problem is that the way some are going about it is ineffective. 

When managers are used to being involved in decision-making, the worst thing a new leader from the outside can do is institute new programs, policies, and procedures without involving and engaging other leaders.  Yes, it may be true that the change is a) needed and b) an improvement.  But none of that matters if the change is resisted and if the new leader develops a reputation for steamrolling over anyone with questions or concerns. 

In his seminal book, Communicating for Change, Roger D’Aprix writes, “Because corporate culture is an undeniable influence on what works in a given organizational environment, your task is to pick and choose those practices that are most likely to succeed in your own organization.” 

In other words, you may have been hired to bring changes to your new company, but the way you go about making those changes has got to take the culture into account!

In my view, too many leaders make the mistake of believing that they are driving change. (See my previous post, Who is Really Driving Change?) These leaders often get frustrated by the roadblocks and speed bumps they encounter, and they attempt to steamroller right over anyone who resists their change initiative.

In reality, overpowering resistance doesn’t reduce problems, it simply hides them. And hidden problems are like time bombs just waiting to explode and destroy all the work that has gone into your change effort. So today’s phrase is:

Leaders Who Act Like Tanks Create Land Mines!