tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-75843193038049196682024-03-12T14:26:50.559+05:30Simplicity @ the other side of ComplexityPrasad Oommen Kurian's blog on Human Capital Managment and Organization DevelopmentPrasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.comBlogger155125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-78598685098461819162023-07-24T23:37:00.008+05:302023-07-27T10:32:05.712+05:30Of Leadership Development, Business Schools and Consulting Firms<p>“Our professors bring in the latest
academic research to the program delivery. Based on their deep understanding of
the topic, they can facilitate first principles thinking which can lead to profound insights. We don't want our faculty members to become trainers!", remarked
the executive education lead in a reputed business school.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">“To what extent the professors are able to bring
in actionable insights for the practitioners based on academic research is
debatable. The professors who have a teaching style that is similar that of trainers often get the best feedback scores from the participants. Deep expertise
coupled with an accessible kind of program delivery facilitates skill
building and makes the program content easier to understand and implement!”, observed
the leadership development lead of a large firm. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">“We need the leadership development
programs to be customized to our context. We prefer to partner with consulting
firms as they do a much better job on customization as compared to business
schools. It is not that the business schools don’t do a diagnostic study. It is
just that the professors often end up teaching whatever they originally wanted
to teach irrespective of the findings from the diagnostic study!”, remarked the Chief Learning Officer of an Indian Business Group.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">“Why should we try to customize the
leadership development programs? We should partner with the best of the
business schools and let them teach what they think is the best. We should
even look at open programs as they help our people to get a much better exposure because they provide the opportunity to interact with leaders from other companies.
Leadership development programs at the top management level are more about
helping our leaders to expand their mental horizons and not about skill building!”, said a senior business
leader. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">I often hear statement likes these in the
context of leadership development. They bring my attention to a question that
people who are responsible for leadership development in organizations
frequently grapple with - "when it comes to leadership development
programs for senior leaders, is it better to partner with reputed business
schools or with reputed leadership development consulting firms?" There are many perspectives here – that too along multiple
dimensions. Let's look at some of them here. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Customization <o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">In general, consulting firms can offer
highly customized executive education programs tailored to the specific needs
and challenges of an organization. They can develop bespoke content and case
studies that directly address the context-specific learning needs. Business
schools tend to have less flexibility in customizing their programs to meet the
specific needs of an organization. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Incorporating insights from research<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Business schools can bring in the most empirically
validated research findings. While the consultants do have some understanding of
the latest research findings, they are unlikely to have the deep understanding
that can come from a systematic literature review or a meta-analysis. One key challenge in incorporating the
latest research into executive education programs is that of keeping up with the pace
of change in the business world. Some research findings may become outdated
relatively quickly, especially in fields that are rapidly evolving. Of course, ensuring
that the research is communicated in a way that is accessible and practical for executives is indeed challenging. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Business
schools must work to translate the research findings into practical insights that
executives can apply in their day-to-day work.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Domain expertise</span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Premier
business schools typically have a strong foundation in academic research and
theory, which can provide a solid base for executive education. They have
faculty with deep expertise in various management disciplines. Consulting firms
often bring in domain expertise derived from practice. The best results are obtained when the faculty/facilitator can 'stand at the intersection of theory and practice' though it is indeed a tightrope walk (please see <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/treating-hrs-multiple-personality.html" target="_blank">'Treating the Multiple Personality Disorder of HR professionals' </a>for a related discussion).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Industry knowledge<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Consulting firms often have extensive
experience working with clients in various industries, which can enable them to
provide industry-specific insights and best practices. They also have a better
understanding of the paradoxes and dilemmas that senior leaders face in the context of
their jobs and this enables the consulting firms to be more helpful in equipping the
leaders to cope with these paradoxes and dilemmas (please see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/02/problems-that-refuse-to-remain-solved.html" target="_blank">Problems that refuse to remain solved'</a> for a related discussion). Professors also do some
amount of consulting work. Of course, if the professor has written a case study
on one of the most reputed companies in the industry that the firm operates in
and leverages the same for the program for the participants from the firm, it
can be perceived as highly valuable. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Application focus<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Consulting firms generally have a stronger
focus on practical application and problem-solving. This can lead to more
actionable insights and strategies that the senior leaders can implement in their organizations.
Business schools, particularly premier ones, often emphasize theoretical
knowledge and research-backed learning. These schools also provide case studies
to practice leadership skills. Leadership training firms, alternatively, are
often more focused on practical, real-world application, with a heavy emphasis
on experiential learning. Consulting firms may also provide better support in facilitating
transfer of learning. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Bringing in outside experts/industry leaders<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Consultants often can bring in top industry
leaders through their contacts. The top academic institutes can also do this to
some extent. Senior business leaders tend to value the opportunity to interact with top industry leaders very much. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">'Zeitgeist'(Intellectual atmosphere)<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">When the programs are delivered on the
business school campus, it often puts the participants in a frame of mind that is
more conducive for learning as compared to what happens when the program is
organized in a hotel. Many of the participants consider the professors as ‘gurus’
and that might further enhance their openness to learning – especially in those
cultures that put the teachers on a pedestal. This works even in the case of participants who are senior business leaders. Facilitators from consulting firms
do get the respect they deserve from the participants for their expertise. However,
the participants might still look at them more as ‘service providers’ as opposed
to ‘gurus’. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Prestige
<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Top business schools have a strong
reputation and brand value. Hence the participants often attach great value to
the program certificate issued by the premier business schools. A certificate
from a leadership training firm may not carry the same weight, unless it is a
certification based on a proprietary methodology of the consulting firm (e.g., certification
on the proprietary Job Evaluation methodology). However, such certifications from consulting firms tend to be less relevant in the case of senior business leaders. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-IN">Cost/investment</span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Customized executive education programs at
the top business schools can be relatively more expensive. However, based on
the teaching methodology used (e.g., case studies) they might be able to support larger batch sizes and thereby bring down the per participant cost. As
compared to this, leadership development consulting firms tend to use a more
interactive and practice-oriented methodologies that work better with
relatively smaller batch sizes. Yes, it is often possible to engage the
professors directly (without going through the business school). However, the
institute brand/ certification won’t be available in such cases. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-IN">Best of both worlds?<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There
are consulting firms that have close tie-ups with premier business schools. In
those cases, the consulting firms do the business development and the
diagnostic study, and they bring in the professors at the program design and delivery
stage. Here the key success factor is the extent to which the data and insights
from the diagnostic study are incorporated by the professors in the program
design and delivery. This is often a problem area.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Business schools also have ‘Professors of Practice’
who often have significant industry experience before they moved to academics. Whether they end up bringing in the ‘best of both words’ or the ‘worst of
both worlds’ or ‘something in between’ in the context of a particular
leadership development program is quite unpredictable!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-IN">In lieu of a conclusion <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Let’s go back to the question that we
started this post with- "when it comes to leadership development programs
for senior leaders, is it better to partner with reputed business schools or
with reputed consulting firms who focus on leadership development?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">As we can see from the discussion above, both
the options have their own advantages
and disadvantages and hence the answer becomes highly context specific. The best
choice depends on the specific goals of the organization and the factors (e.g., from
the list above) are relatively more important keeping those goals in mind. This is complicated by the fact that capability building programs (including leadership development programs) serve many purposes - including those that are not directly related to capability building (please see <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-many-lives-of-capability-building.html" target="_blank">'The many lives of capability building programs' </a>for the details). Yes, the return on the learning investment is most important. The point is just that this 'return' need not be only in terms of increase in capability and change in on-the-job behavior/the business impact of the change in behavior. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Also, all
the premier business schools and all the leadership development consulting firms
are not created equal. There are business schools that have a special focus on executive education. They tend to have teams that focus on diagnostic studies and instructional design in addition to the professors who focus on program design and delivery. There are also professors who invest time in doing a detailed diagnostic study. Similarly, there are specialized leadership development consulting firms that conduct primary research in the domain of leadership development. This brings in an additional set of considerations that are entity specific. In addition to the entity-specific aspects, there are also individual-specific aspects. Afterall, program delivery is a 'performance art'. There are also the aspects of the depth of the partnership between the organization and the learning partner and that of the 'chemistry' between the particular individuals involved. Having said this, we can still make a couple of general
observations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">If customization is less important as
compared to domain expertise, premier business schools often have an advantage
over the consultants especially in the case of ‘standalone instructor-led programs'.
In the case of highly customized and application-oriented programs, consultants
often have an advantage especially in the case of ‘learning journey programs’
(that integrate multiple program components like instructor-led learning,
executive coaching and action learning and require extensive program management and transfer of learning support). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Any comments/ideas?<o:p></o:p></span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-34744343710553146772023-06-09T20:18:00.015+05:302023-06-12T08:38:54.982+05:30Selling ice to Eskimos? - Leadership development in very successful organizations<p>How do we sell leadership development solutions to an organization that has been very
successful without having invested in leadership development? Should we even try to do that? Wouldn’t tinkering with the
leadership capability and/or style of such an organization risk ruining the 'alchemy of the magic' of the organization’s success? If an organization has been
very successful, shouldn’t we be learning from it instead of trying to change it? </p><p>These questions are very important both for external consultants and for internal learning partners. They can also be quite tricky to answer, though many answers are indeed
possible. Let’s look at seven of them.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>“What got you here won’t get you there”</b> kind of answers – They
argue that the game is changing and hence you need a different set of
leadership capabilities or at least a much higher level of the current set
of leadership capabilities to achieve your vision or even to sustain the current position. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>"Good to great" </b>kind of answers <b> - </b>This is more of a 'there is always room for improvement' kind of argument, while fully acknowledging the consistent record of success so far. While the customer is unlikely to disagree with this philosophically, it might not be compelling enough to prompt action on the part of the customer, especially when the customer is already 'great' (or quite close to it) in their own opinion. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>“Success sweeps a lot of things under the carpet”</b> kind of answers – Here the basic argument is that while the organization has been successful there are still
a lot of things to fix in terms of the leadership capability and/or
leadership style. For example, the leadership style might not be aligned
to the espoused values or the target culture of the organization. Warning : If this is not done very skillfully, it can degenerate into an unpleasant conversation with the customer very quickly (unless the customer has a very high levels of self-awareness and humility or has masochistic tendencies)! </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>“A few great men and women”</b> kind of answers – They argue that the
success of the organization has been because of a particular set of
leaders and that the others in the organization can benefit from
leadership development inputs. If the person who buys the leadership
development solution considers himself/herself to be part of the ‘a few
great men and women group', it works even better!</li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>"We are just making you scalable" </b>kind of answers - In this case, the argument becomes more like 'we are just helping you to decode your own success so that it becomes scalable'. This argument works best when the organization is growing rapidly. The advantage of this answer is that it avoids the concern related to tampering with what made the organization successful. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>“Let good thoughts come to us from all sides”</b> kind of answers – They argue that while the organization might not need the skill building
aspect of leadership development, just listening to the latest
ideas/thinking can be useful or at least entertaining. It can also give
the satisfaction that “we have implemented all these ‘latest’ ideas a
million years ago”!</li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>“Leadership development serves many purposes”</b> kind of answers – Here the essential argument is that leadership development interventions serve many other
useful purposes in addition to building leadership capabilities. Please
see <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-many-lives-of-capability-building.html" target="_blank">‘The many lives of capability building programs’</a> for a comprehensive
list of the ‘alternative uses.</li></ul><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Of course, many more such answers are possible. The all-important question is: How will a
particular organization respond to a particular answer/a particular line of argument? To a great extent, the
response will depend on 'what the organization attributes its success to' and 'if the
answer is in alignment with that attribution'.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, where
do all these leave us?</p><p class="MsoNormal">It is indeed possible that an organization has got many pieces of the leadership development puzzle right, even if they haven't formalized them as 'leadership development solutions'. For example, they might be using 'action learning projects', 'crucible roles' and 'on the job coaching' even when they are not using these terms. Therefore, a bit of '<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appreciative_inquiry" target="_blank">Appreciative Inquiry</a>' won't hurt. Afterall, humility is as relevant to the learning partners (internal/external) as it is to their clients! We must also remember that leadership development is not mainly about 'leadership training programs' though they are the most visible part. I would even say that, in some instances, <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/09/of-leadership-training-and-corporate.html" target="_blank">leadership training efforts are more like 'corporate rain dances'</a>!</p><p class="MsoNormal">Logically speaking, the most important aspect here is the 'perceived net value' that the leadership development solution can add - in the short term and in the long term. This perception of value need not necessarily be purely rational (See '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-reasons-and-rationalizations.html" target="_blank">Of reasons, rationalizations and collective delusions</a>' for details). However, the point remains that 'what is valuable is defined by the customer'. Similarly, unless the customer acknowledges the 'need' or the 'opportunity' the discussion on the solutions (including leadership development solutions) can't really start. Of course, while highlighting the 'net value' that the leadership development solution can add, it is equally important to anticipate/address any stated or unstated concerns the customers might have about the leadership development solution or its implementation. </p><p class="MsoNormal">Organizations, especially the successful organizations, have a tendency to think that they are unique and that they have figured out a unique way to be successful. Yes, it is possible that an organization has been successful
because of, irrespective of or even in spite of the leadership capability it
has. Also, attribution errors are quite common (for example, attributing success to internal factors and attributing failures to external factors). Yes, ‘time will tell’ – but it might be too late for the people who are
trying to sell leadership development solutions to a particular organization! </p><p class="MsoNormal">Chris Argyris in his seminal article ‘<a href="https://hbr.org/1991/05/teaching-smart-people-how-to-learn" target="_blank">Teaching smart people how to learn’</a>,
argues that people who have been consistently successful tend to become very
good at ‘single-loop learning’ and that they don’t develop the capability for
‘double-loop learning’ which becomes essential when the fundamental assumptions
they have been using for problem solving/responding to the environment are no
longer valid. I guess, it applies to organizations too! Therefore, '<a href="https://hbr.org/1977/09/double-loop-learning-in-organizations" target="_blank">facilitating double-loop learning</a>' kind of approaches do have their place in this context also! In the case of internal consultants, 'acting as some sort of a 'court jester in the corporate context' can also be helpful in this endeavor (See '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-organization-development-managers.html" target="_blank">Organization Development Managers as Court Jesters</a>' for details)!</p><p class="MsoNormal">Can you think of any other answers to the question that we started this post with?</p><p class="MsoNormal">Any other comments/ideas? </p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-39730646482451509782023-02-11T20:22:00.009+05:302023-02-13T10:39:16.645+05:30Of Atlas, Munchausen and the pursuit of relevance at the workplace<p>“I create problems, and then I solve them. That is my
style!”, declared the department head smugly.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I heard
this statement a long time ago. At that time, I didn’t take it too seriously as
I thought that it was the peculiarity of one rather ‘strange’ individual. After
having spent a couple of decades in business organizations, I have come to
realize that this was not an isolated incident. It prompted me to
think more deeply about the underlying factors and led me to the all-important topic of 'relevance in business organizations' and the various ways in
which we try to achieve and maintain/enhance relevance. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-IN;">Relevance
is the central theme in organizational life. Relevance comes from
‘value addition’. What is valuable and how much it should be valued is always
defined by the customer. The term 'customer' includes internal customers also. The
most pragmatic definition of a ‘value added activity’ that I have come
across is that ‘it is an activity that the customer is willing to pay for adequately’.
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course, the payment (especially in
the case of internal customers) need not be a direct payment. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-IN;"><o:p> </o:p></span>When we
talk about value addition, it includes the ‘perceived’ value addition in
addition to the ‘real’ value addition. Again, when we look at the perceived
value addition, there are multiple aspects like ‘what one thinks his/her value
addition is’, ‘what others think one’s value addition is’, ‘what one thinks
others think to be his/her value addition’ etc. This indeed can degenerate into
a ‘mind game’ and that is where characters like Atlas and Munchausen come in. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Munchausen Syndrome
is named after Baron Munchausen, who became famous for telling
exaggerated tales about his exploits in the past. </span>Munchausen syndrome refers to a mental
disorder in which someone tries to get attention and sympathy by falsifying,
inducing, or exaggerating an illness. This is very different from ‘hypochondria’
because a person with hypochondria really believes that he/she has a serious illness, which
is not true in the case of the Munchausen Syndrome. </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-IN">Closer to our topic is the so
called ‘</span>Munchausen by proxy’, in which a caregiver exaggerates,
fabricates, or induces illness in another person in order to get praise for
then helping the victim. In the workplace context, this takes the form of employees
creating or inventing organizational problems and then solving them, all in the
hope that it would make them more important in the eyes of the leaders and
coworkers. This pattern of behavior, called Munchausen at Work (MAW) does waste time and resources though it might be quite hard to detect. </p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In business organizations, MAW is also employed as ‘survival tactics’ or
even as ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/03/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-11-ir.html" target="_blank">IR tactics'</a>. Ultimately, this is a deliberate attempt to maintain/enhance
their relevance in the organization. I have seen people trying to keep their
job/highlight the importance of the job by creating problems/letting
preventable problems occur and then solving them. In its milder form, MAW manifests as a tendency to 'overcomplicate' things, in an attempt to demonstrate one's expertise or to create a need that would require one's expertise. Obviously, they have no appetite for the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/u-curve-and-simplicity-at-other-side-of.html" target="_blank">simplicity on the other side of complexity</a>. </p><p class="MsoNormal">Of course, no one will admit
that they are doing this. Skilled operators at MAW (the sort who survive in
organizations) will cover their tracks well. Therefore, studying/diagnosing
this and/or addressing this becomes difficult. This puts people who proactively prevent problems from occurring at a 'double disadvantage' as their efforts (and the value they have added) are not visible. The solution to MAW could be in terms
of building trust, skills and psychological safety so that such behavior is not
required in the first place.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s look at the Atlas Complex now. The name Atlas Complex comes from the Greek myth of Atlas, who is supposed ‘to carry the weight of the world on his shoulders’. Similarly, a person with Atlas Complex tend to think that he is carrying the weight of 'his world' on his shoulders, and it will collapse unless he continues to do so. This can happen in the case of personal life ('personal world'), work life ('work world') or both. </p><p class="MsoNormal">At the workplace, the Atlas Complex comes from
the pursuit of relevance at work. A person who has the Atlas Complex tends to
think that he/she is very critical to the team/organization and that if he/she
is not around everything will fall apart. This leads to the person working very
hard and unwilling to let others take the responsibility. This goes much beyond
‘busy-ness’ (acting busy to gain importance). Sometimes, this does work, and the person is able to generate/maintain a sense of importance. However, sometimes it just makes him/her an object
of scorn or even ridicule, even when he/she has been putting in a super-human effort at the expense of his/her health and personal life. In such cases, Atlas Complex can also lead
to '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2022/04/smiling-depression.html" target="_blank">silent depression</a>'.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unlike MAW, Atlas Complex is quite visible to the coworkers
and leaders and hence easier to diagnose. However, it might not be so easy to remedy, especially in those cases where the pattern of behavior has become deep-rooted.
Addictions are hard to cure! Again, unlike that in the case of MAW, people with
Atlas complex might indeed be adding significant value to the organization and
to coworkers. Afterall, if someone takes extra responsibility and consistently delivers
on the same, it can indeed make life easier for people around him/her.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Here,
the solution could be in terms of helping the person (in a non-threatening manner) to recognize his/her pattern of behavior and
its consequences and to enable him/her to gradually switch over to a more
appropriate pattern of behavior. <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/08/the-paradox-of-manager-as-coach.html" target="_blank">Coaching</a> can be very helpful in this context. Of
course, the most important thing in such a situation is to enable the person to
feel that he/she can add sufficient value (and hence maintain relevance in the
organization) without having to resort to Atlas-like behavior. </p><p class="MsoNormal">It is interesting to note that the Atlas Complex and
Munchausen at Work (MAW) have similarities with what <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck" target="_blank">Scott Peck</a> refers to as the two fundamental types of 'disorders of responsibility' – ‘<span lang="EN-IN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-IN;">neuroticism’ and ‘character disorder’. People with neuroticism tend to assume
too much responsibility (like people with Atlas complex) and people with
character disorder tends to assume too less responsibility/look after only their
self-interest (like people with MAW) in any given situation. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal">Atlas Complex and MAW are dysfunctional ways to seek relevance in organizations. There are indeed functional ways to pursue relevance, like enhancing one's capability, understanding of the organization, alignment to team/organization goals and hence enhancing one's contribution (value addition). However, these dysfunctional ways are quite common. It is possible that certain organizational contexts and leadership styles increase the probability of these dysfunctional ways occurring/becoming entrenched in the organization. </p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Atlas Complex and MAW are by no means the only psychological disorders found at the workplace. Workplace pathologies are quite widespread both at the individual
level and at the group/organization level. It can even be argued that many
groups are held together by <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-reasons-and-rationalizations.html" target="_blank">Convenient Collective Delusions</a>. Maybe, part of these
problems come from the fact that workplaces are still not the ‘natural habitats’
for most humans!</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Any comments/thoughts?</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-48136458127733546632022-12-07T12:55:00.013+05:302022-12-13T19:17:26.539+05:30Of writing, intellectual DNA and immortality<p>This post was triggered by the interaction I have had with
friend of mine based on the article he had written on why we want to be
‘liked’ and ‘shared’ on social media.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To begin with, it made me think more about the fundamental
issue of ‘why we want to write’. It has been argued that the legitimate way of achieving 'immortality' is through children, and this includes 'intellectual
children' (like posts, articles, books etc.) in addition to biological children*. Writing enables one to transcend
the limitations of time and space (as one's views can be read by people on
the other side of the world, that too many years after it was written).
Therefore, writing allows one to spread one's ‘intellectual DNA’ far and
wide, and it might persist indefinitely, especially in the digital world with increasing information storage capacity.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Human motivations are complex (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2009/08/power-of-carrot-and-stick.html" target="_blank">The power of carrot and stick'</a>), and people indeed have different reasons for writing. There are relatively obvious ones like writing to make a living, writing to highlight one's expertise etc. There are also reasons that are a bit more subtle. Let’s
look at 15 of them: </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><b>Writing as self-expression</b>:
‘I write to describe the world in the unique way I see it and react to it’. </li><li><b>Writing to clarify and develop
thoughts</b>: ‘My fingers seem to have an intelligence which is different from
that of my brain – writing is thinking on paper! When I try to write down my
thoughts, they become much clearer – writing allows me to develop an inkling
into an insight'. </li><li><b>Writing as sense-making:</b> ‘Life makes more sense in retrospect – especially when I try to pin it down on
paper. Writing gives me a handle to get a good grasp on life - it allows me to
impose structure on the world’! </li><li><b>Writing to create own world</b>:
‘The real world is often a disappointment – writing allows me to construct a
world of my choice. It allows me to live in world that is better than what I
find myself in’! </li><li><b>Writing as alchemy</b>:
‘Writing allows me to transform my leaden emotions to golden ones - to
transform sadness into longing and to transform solitude into remembrance’! </li><li><b>Writing as therapy</b>:
‘Writing serves as some sort of mental house-cleaning for me – it helps me to
get stuff off my chest and to relieve stress – it has a cathartic effect on me’.</li><li><b>Writing as a spontaneous act
of generosity</b>: ‘My writing is my special gift to the world and to the
people who inhabit it. The words I write form during those beautiful moments when
life touches me deeply- like pearls get formed in an oyster when an external
object hurts its skin’! </li><li><b>Writing to be understood</b>:
‘Writing not only helps me to understand but also to be understood’. </li><li><b>Writing as advocacy</b>:
‘Writing allows me to secure a hearing for things that I strongly believe in’!</li><li><b>Writing to influence</b>:
‘Writing is my way of try to influence the thinking of others – my attempt to
shape the world’. </li><li><b>Writing as thought experiment:</b> “Writing enables me to create and to mentally playout/test the
different possibilities - this is especially useful in those situations where the actual 'experiment' is difficult/ risky/ costly'! </li><li><b>Writing as shadow work</b>:
‘Writing allows me to speak to my repressed emotions and to integrate them’! </li><li><b>Writing as self-discovery</b>:
‘Writing allows me to make the unconscious conscious and to discover parts of
myself that I never knew existed’. </li><li><b>Writing to be more objective</b>:
‘Putting my thoughts in writing allows me to put some distance between me and
my thoughts – it changes my relationship with my thoughts and allows me to me
more objective’. </li><li><b>Writing as ‘exorcism’</b>: ‘Writing
allows me to exorcise the ghosts in my mind that came into existence because
of thoughts/issues in my mind that were not properly processed/buried’! </li></ol><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 18pt;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now, let's come back to the article that triggered this
post. Yes, it is true that a social media 'like' or a 'share' need not necessarily mean that the reader has understood/agreed with or will act on the content of the post. As we have seen above, writing serves many purposes. Sometimes,
when one posts something on social media, one doesn't necessarily want to
influence the readers (in terms of driving behavior change) - sometimes, one just wants to be heard.
‘Liking’ and ‘sharing’ can give one a sense of being ‘heard’ or ‘appreciated’. </p><p class="MsoNormal">Sometimes, one just wants to trigger thinking/discussion on an issue-
without trying to propagate a particular point of view. There are indeed people who
are remembered for the questions they raised and not for the answers they
provided! 'Liking' and 'sharing' can enable more reach and discussion! Again, if a reader 'likes' or 'reshares' a post (even without getting influenced by it), it might reach
someone else who might resonate much more strongly with the post - a highly connected world increases the probability of serendipitous encounters! <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">In a way, writing involves creating something new - it is a creative process. A creative process has its own intrinsic rewards! It can make us feel intensely alive. It is indeed possible to experience the '<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)" target="_blank">flow state'</a> while writing. Sometimes, we might even get the feeling that something is written through us and not by us. This state of 'enthusiasm' (in the original meaning of the word) also has spiritual implications/associations. Anyway, we can definitely say that writers not only shape their words - they are also shaped by their words and the process that brings about the words! </p><p class="MsoNormal">* This does raise a question on why the quest for immortality is relevant. In a way, the quest for immortality is a very human response to the fear of death. <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/03/remarkable-encounters-part-2-fear.html" target="_blank">Fear</a>, including the fear of death, has survival value. Of course, if one believes that humans are immortals to begin with, such a quest might become superfluous for him/her! </p><p class="MsoNormal">Any comments?</p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-82118541024037363362022-06-19T13:55:00.014+05:302022-06-23T11:29:01.373+05:30Of learning and legitimacy<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Almost all the organizations say that they ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/of-values-and-competencies.html" target="_blank">value</a>’ learning.
Some of them even claim to be a ‘<a href="https://hbr.org/1993/07/building-a-learning-organization" target="_blank">learning organization</a>’. The trouble
starts when we look at the extent to which this ‘proclaimed importance’ of '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-paradox-of-unlearning.html" target="_blank">learning</a>' gets reflected in the ‘actual way of working’ or the ’decisions made’
in the organization.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The answers to the following questions can throw some light
on the importance (or lack of it) of learning in an organization:</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top: 0cm;" type="disc"><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Is ‘learning’ supposed
to be something that one should do only when one is ‘free’ (from the demands
of other work activities)?<o:p></o:p></span></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Are the capability building
programs conducted on regular working days or on holidays/ weekends? <o:p></o:p></span></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Do the senior leaders
participate in capability building programs? Do they 'teach' in the capability building programs that their team members attend? Do they ensure that their team members don’t get pulled out of
the capability building programs when some important work comes up? Do they demand/facilitate/track the transfer of learning/newly learned behaviors to the workplace? <o:p></o:p></span></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Is learning considered to be mainly a 'cost' or an 'investment'? Do the learning budgets get cut at the 'slightest provocation'?</span></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0cm; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Is ‘learning’ a
‘cherished presence’ in the organization or is it is just a ‘tolerated
presence’? <o:p></o:p></span></span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of
course, the answers to these questions are not binary – they are indeed a
matter of degree – with each organization finding their equilibrium point
between the two polar opposites.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This
choice of the equilibrium point does have implications. For example, it is one thing to make world class anytime
learning (e-learning) solutions available to the employees. It is entirely a
different matter to make it ‘culturally acceptable’ to do an anytime learning
course during office hours. Hence, even when two organizations in the same
industry make the same set of anytime learning solutions available to their
employees, how the employees perceive them (and the utilization of those
programs) can be very different. Similarly, if two organizations, with one
working Monday to Friday and the other working Monday to Saturday, nominate their employees
to a capability building program that takes place on a Saturday, the employees might perceive it quite differently. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p> </o:p>I must say that I have had a very lucky start when it comes
to this aspect. Before I made the ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2011/08/daydreams-of-od-mechanic.html" target="_blank">quantum jump</a>’ to the management domain with my MBA, I had started my working life as an Aerospace Engineer/Scientist with
the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre
(VSSC). VSSC had very big library with books/journals/magazines on a wide range
of subjects and we (the employees of VSSC) were encouraged to spend as much time as possible in the library during office
hours. Since this was my first job, I assumed that this is how all organizations
(at least organizations in knowledge-intensive industries) work and I was
promptly proved wrong once I started my career in management. Of course, this
was not the only wrong assumption I had made while I made this transition (please see <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-why-of-book-life-in-organizations.html" target="_blank">'The why of a book: Life in Organizations - Paradoxes, Dilemmas and Possibilities</a>'). However, my '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2008/07/influence-of-early-career-experiences.html" target="_blank">early career experience' did have an impact </a>of my definition of '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-what-good-looks-like.html" target="_blank">what good looks like</a>'. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Now let’s come back to the title of this post. <b>Does the organization consider 'learning' to be a legitimate 'business activity'?</b> 'Business activities' can be defined as activities that a business engages in for the primary purpose of making a profit. Hence, the core issue here is <b>whether learning is considered to be an activity that adds substantial net positive value to the business and hence worth investing in</b>. If the answer is a clear
‘yes’, then prioritizing and investing in learning should happen naturally. If not, investment in learning is more of a 'necessary evil' or a requirement for the 'license to operate' or a 'nice to do (and not a must do) thing'. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course, 'learning' is not just about ‘structured capability
building programs’ or ‘anytime learning’. Learning indeed happens in many ways
and as per the ‘legendary’ 70:20:10 model, about 70% of the learning happens ‘on
the job’ and only about 10% of the
learning takes place through ‘structured learning programs'.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I do agree that most of the learning happens through job
experiences. It does become problematic when
this finding is used as an excuse for 'cutting capability building budgets without
establishing any concrete mechanism for facilitating the learning through job
experiences'. Since 'job experiences' are
outside the traditional domain/mandate of the Learning & Development
(L&D) function, it is easy (and very convenient) for the organization to
jump to the conclusion that 'the entire responsibility for ensuring that this
type of learning happens lies with the employees and their managers. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Unfortunately,
this type of learning (learning through job experiences) often does not happen automatically. <span style="color: #20124d;"><b>Just doing a relevant project/activity need not necessarily lead to learning the target capability. It requires multiple cycles of ‘deliberate practice' and 'reflection' (ideally with help from a coach) to derive and assimilate learning from the on-the-job experience</b>. </span>Therefore, there is a
need to put in place mechanisms to structure, facilitate and track this type
of learning (please see ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/04/truths-stretched-too-far-part-ii-let.html" target="_blank">Truths stretched too far</a>’ for details).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p> </o:p>Another interesting aspect here is that capability building
programs mean different things to different people and that the alternative
(unstated) purposes of the capability building programs could be very different (and much more important) from the ‘textbook’ purpose of capability building programs - building the targeted capabilities (please see ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-many-lives-of-capability-building.html" target="_blank">The many lives of capability building programs</a>’ for details). For example, if the capability building programs are mainly meant to be ‘fun' or 'pleasant distractions from unpleasant work realities', then conducting
them on holidays makes a lot of sense!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any
comments/ideas?</span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-54413388747591790992022-06-05T19:30:00.019+05:302022-06-16T15:56:49.701+05:30The many lives of capability building programs<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Technically speaking, ‘capability building programs’ are
meant to do exactly that – to build the targeted capabilities. However, after
spending two decades in business organizations, I have come to realize that
capability building programs serve different purposes in different contexts,
including those that are very different from the original purpose. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Let’s take a
look at some of the 'uses' of capability building programs (starting with those that are closer to the original purpose and then moving on to those that are quite different): </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as ‘Crossing the Rubicon’</u>:
Here the implication is that capability building programs create ‘sustainable
change in behavior’ (which is the behavioral definition of ‘learning’). Of
course, most capability building programs fail to achieve this.</span></li><li><u><span style="font-family: inherit;">Capability building programs as ‘Invitation to learn</span>’:</u><span style="font-family: inherit;"> This
is based on the philosophy that ‘you can lead a horse to water; but you can’t
make it drink’.</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as ‘Training’:</u> <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here the implication is that it is something
that is done to the participants. While some people do say that ‘training is
only for animals’, this philosophy is very much ‘alive and kicking’ in many
organizations! </span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as an element of the 'Employee Value Proposition':</u> This typically happens when a company makes an explicit promise of 'x' days of capability building programs per year per employee as part of its </span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2008/10/in-search-of-sharp-employee-value.html" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">Employee Value Proposition (EVP)</a><span style="font-family: inherit;">. Yes, this works best when these capability building programs are conducted on regular working days! This approach can be extended to positively impact the company branding/business development efforts also (by highlighting the investment the company is making in capability building to improve the product quality/ to serve the customers better).</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as 'Knowledge management'</u>: When an expert is leaving an organization, the organization might ask him/her to conduct a capability building program to pass on his/her knowledge, even when that knowledge is not immediately relevant to the people attending the capability building program.</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as 'Enculturation'</u>: This typically happens during new employee induction/onboarding. Another variation here is 'culture building workshops'. </span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Capability building programs as ‘Reward’</u>: Some organization use capability building programs as a reward for high performance. It does raise some questions. For example, won’t the employees prefer to receive an equivalent amount of money in cash as opposed to attending an expensive training program?</span></li><li><u>Capability building programs as ‘Paid holidays’</u>: Capability building programs can provide ‘pleasant distractions from the unpleasant realities at the workplace’.</li><li><u>Capability building programs as ‘Detox’</u>: Some capability building programs can indeed be fun or even 'meaningful fun'. Some programs like ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/05/of-life-and-human-process-labs.html" style="font-family: inherit;">Human Process Labs’</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> can also provide some degree of emotional detox. Yes, this might highlight the implicit assumption that there is something toxic about the workplace. </span></li><li><u>Capability building programs as ‘Rites of passage’</u>: This
happens when training programs are linked to level transitions, Here the primary purpose is to enable the psychological transition required for the level change - in the participants and in the 'significant others' in the organization ecosystem (see ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2010/02/accelerated-learning-and-rites-of.html" style="font-family: inherit;">Accelerated
learning and rites of passage’</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> for details)</span></li><li><u>Capability building programs as ‘Team building’</u>: Here the message
is that the opportunity for facilitating interactions between the team members/cross-functional team members (and
the possible increase in connect between them and to the team/organization) is more important than the
program content. Yes, this could trivialize the concepts of '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2008/03/mysteries-of-being-good-team-player.html" target="_blank">teamwork</a>' and '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/07/employee-engagement-and-story-of-sky.html" target="_blank">employee engagement</a>'. </li><li><u>Capability building programs as ‘Importance signaling’</u>: If a
capability building is positioned (formally or informally) as ‘only for the most valuable people in the
organization’ (e.g., top talent, people who are being groomed to take up top management positions etc.), it can indeed serve as a way to signal the importance that the
organization gives to the concerned employees. Yes, some of the participants might promptly include this in their CVs/mention this during the interviews for jobs outside the organization. </li><li><u>Capability building
programs as ‘External benchmarking opportunities</u>’: This works best in the case of open
training programs conducted by prestigious institutes that attract participants
from across the world. Quite a bit of the learning in these programs comes from
interacting with the fellow participants and from knowing what the other
companies are doing.</li><li><u>Capability building programs as 'Corporate rain dance'</u>: This occurs when capability building programs are used as 'solutions' to organizational problems that are not related to capability gaps at the individual level. Yes, they do give the management the illusion that something is being done about the problems (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/09/of-leadership-training-and-corporate.html" target="_blank">Leadership training and corporate rain dance'</a> for details). However, they can make the participants feel 'victimized' (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/03/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-5.html" target="_blank">Training the victim</a>' for details). </li><li><u>Capability building programs as 'Sales hook'</u>: Here capability building programs are used as an opportunity to sell other products. </li><li><u>Capability building programs as 'Brainwashing'</u>: This happens when the focus of capability building is on '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-paradox-of-unlearning.html" target="_blank">unlearning</a> and relearning'. </li><li><u>Capability building programs as 'Golden handcuff'</u>: Here the idea is to send the employee for an expensive long duration learning journey program and also attach a retention clause/service bond. </li><li><u>Capability building programs as 'Immediate profit generation</u>': This typically happens when the monetary value of the improvements coming from the 'action learning projects' that are part of the capability building program is estimated to exceed the cost of the capability building program. While this enables the Learning & Development (L&D) function to position itself as a 'profit center' (as opposed to being a cost center), whether this 'profit' is real is often a point of disagreement between the HR function and the Finance function. Also, to maximize the 'profit generation potential' of the action learning projects, the link between the action learning projects and the learning objectives of the program gets overlooked. Yes, the capabilities built during the program can and should impact the business results (and this is very much aligned to the original purpose of capability building programs). However, they are usually more difficult to estimate/ happen over a longer period of time and therefore might not be very promising for showing immediate profit! </li></ol><p class="MsoNormal"></p>I am sure that more such 'non-standard' uses of capability building programs can be found. Also, a single capability building program might serve many of the uses mentioned above. This does raise an interesting question: "why do so many alternative uses of capability building programs exist, even when they are not the most efficient ways of achieving their 'unstated' objectives?". I guess, the word 'unstated' might offer a clue. In some of the organizations, spending money on some of those alterative objectives (or even attempting to achieve them directly) might not be 'culturally acceptable'. In many cultures, learning is considered to be a 'noble' activity and hence it is put on a pedestal. Hence, by achieving some of those alternative objectives through a capability building program, they can gain more respectability! <div><br /></div><div>Of course, the above discussion was from the points of view of the organizations and/or the participants. Since there are other stakeholders involved (like the facilitators, L&D team, vendors etc.) there are additional interpretations possible from their points of view. For example, for a facilitator, capability building programs can mean multiple things like a source of income, a calling, an avenue for self-expression etc. <br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any thoughts/ideas? Any other uses of capability building programs that you have come across?</span></span></div></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-38226255454334782772022-05-10T20:02:00.021+05:302022-05-16T14:48:16.992+05:30Do the CEOs get the CHROs they deserve?<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">“CEOs get the CHROs they deserve!”, said the
Senior HR leader when he was highly frustrated. This was my seventh ‘encounter’
with this gentleman (See </span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2008/04/passion-for-work-and-anasakti.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">'Passion for work
and anasakti</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> ‘, </span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2011/12/appropriate-metaphors-for.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">'Appropriate
metaphors for organizational commitment</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> ‘ ,‘</span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2014/09/to-name-or-not-to-name-that-is-question.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">To name or not to
name, that is the question</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">’ , ‘</span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2015/08/a-mathematical-approach-to-hr.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">A Mathematical
approach to HR’</span></a>, <span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-od-quest-part-7-integrating.html"><span style="text-decoration-line: none;">OD Quest’</span></a>
and ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2022/04/smiling-depression.html">Of
leaders and smiling depression</a>’ for the outcomes of my previous
interactions with him). Similar to what happened in the previous occasions,
this comment prompted me to think deeply about the topic</span><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Yes, a CEO can try to get the type of CHRO he/she wants by 'shaping' the behavior of the current CHRO, bringing in a new CHRO etc. The degree of success of this attempt will vary based on the context and the people involved. Of course, if a CEO is looking for a difficult to find set of capabilities in the CHRO and/or if the organization context is not suitable for attracting and retaining the type of CHRO the CEO is looking for, things can get complicated. The CEO-CHRO interaction is a human interaction and hence personality related factors, connect related factors and fit related factors (including that of the unstated definitions of '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-what-good-looks-like.html" target="_blank">what good looks like</a>') come into play. Sometimes, the perceived lack of alignment is just a matter of perception. For example, the CEO might think that the CHRO doesn't understand the business context and the CHRO might think that the CEO is too shortsighted! It can work the other way also. The CEO and the CHRO can form a 'mutual admiration society' and ignore problems that adversely affect organization effectiveness! </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">There is no doubt on the importance of the CEO-CHRO relationship, for them and for the rest of the organization. The CEO and the CHRO need to work very closely with each other on a lot of important and/or sensitive matters, and hence an effective relationship between them based on mutual respect and trust is critical. Lack of alignment between the CEO and CHRO, apart from creating a lot of frustration for both of them, can slow down decision-making, lead to suboptimal decisions, reduce response speed on critical issues and also lead to lack of commitment and <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2011/10/paradox-of-passive-resistance.html" target="_blank">passive resistance</a>. It can also give the impression to the rest of the organization that the leadership team is like a 'house divided against itself'. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Again, there is no doubt on whether the HR function (and the CHRO
as the head of HR) should be business-oriented/business-aligned. HR exists to support the
business and hence it should be aligned to the business needs/goals/strategy.
‘HR for HR’ (‘I want to do some HR interventions and I will get the business leaders to
agree’) is definitely not a good idea. The problem occurs when we look at how
exactly should HR demonstrate this 'business-orientation'.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">There are multiple possibilities here - each with its own
advantages and disadvantages. For example, the CHRO can agree to whatever the CEO
says on people related issues ('after all, we get paid to support the
business'). The CHRO can take this approach to the next level by trying to
‘guess’ what the CEO will be comfortable with and advocating that ('the CEO is our
primary internal customer and we should be anticipating customer needs'). The
CHRO can also avoid surfacing issues (or suggesting solutions) that he/she thinks
the CEO will not be comfortable with ('business leaders are already stretched
to the limits fighting for the survival of the company, how can we risk
annoying them at this point ?').</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This approach might help in reducing the number/intensity of
possible arguments/conflicts between the CHRO and the CEO and
the associated investment of time and emotional energy, leading to faster
decision-making and smoother relationships. In this case, the CEO might</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> ‘like’ the CHRO and will be
more likely to support the CHRO in the roll out of basic HR processes and less likely
to come down heavily on the CHRO when the CHRO/HR team makes a mistake. Hence, conflicts are avoided - making life easier for both the parties involved.
However, this can also lead to sub-optimal decisions (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/03/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-5.html" target="_blank">Training the victim</a>'
for an example).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The other option is to develop and articulate an independent
point of view – based on the HR philosophy of the organization, HR functional expertise and an assessment
of the context/situation.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Yes, this point of view might turn out to be different from what the CEO has in
mind/is comfortable with and hence this can create conflicts and lengthy
discussions/arguments and possibly delays in decision-making. The CEO might
feel that ‘HR does not understand the problems that the business is facing’,
‘HR is becoming a pain in the neck’ or that ‘HR is being too idealistic’. This
might lead to a situation where the CEO becomes very demanding – questioning
the rationale behind each of the initiatives that HR comes up with. Therefore,
this option can make life more difficult for both the parties involved. However, if
the conflict can be managed constructively, this option can lead to superior
decisions and also to the development of mutual respect and trust. Of course,
there is no guarantee that this can be achieved in all the situations.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is also possible that the CEO was more open than what the
CHRO had guessed. Maybe, the CEO wanted the CHRO to make an independent
recommendation. Again, it is possible that the CHRO’s ‘independent assessment’
of the business needs/constraints was totally off the mark, making his/her
point of view completely unrealistic. Maybe, the context is such that the
conflict of opinion can’t be resolved successfully quickly enough for the
matter at hand. Thus, there are many possibilities here.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It can be said that if we take a long-term perspective, if
both the parties are competent and open and if the conflict can be managed
constructively and quickly enough, the second option will give better results.
But that is too many ‘ifs’ (3 in the last sentence!). It can also be argued
that the two options mentioned above are just two extremes and that reality
lies somewhere in between. For example, a particular CHRO might adopt option 1
in the case of some issues and option 2 in the case of other issues – depending
on the context/nature of the issues. After all, ‘picking and choosing one’s
battles’ is supposed to be a key requirement for survival in the corporate
world!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">An important factor here is the credibility of the CHRO/nature of the relationship
between the CHRO and the business leaders including the CEO. It is possible that the CHRO hasn't paid sufficient attention to positioning of the HR function
appropriately, managing/shaping expectations,
building capability and consistently meeting commitments/delivering value,
enhancing the levels of mutual respect and trust etc. This can lead to serious problems because effectively managing the
relationships with the business leaders can be the most significant
enabler for demonstrating and sustaining the 'business-orientation' we have been talking about.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In this discussion about 'business-orientation'
we should not forget the other customers of HR- like the employees and line managers. There is an increasing tendency on the part of HR to give
less emphasis to the ‘employee champion’ role because of the increasing
importance given to the ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2008/11/in-wonderland-of-hr-business-partners.html" target="_blank">strategic business partner role</a>’. This can easily lead to situations where there is
not enough focus on ‘employee engagement’ (other than the cosmetic
efforts/peripheral initiatives – see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/07/employee-engagement-and-story-of-sky.html" target="_blank">Employee engagement and the story of the Sky maiden’</a> for details). Of course, there are 'special-cause variations' in the focus (or lack of it) on employee engagement. For example, in response to the 'great resignation', currently there is a lot of focus (talk?) on employee engagement. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">As it is widely known, employee engagement is a good
predictor/lead indicator of business results. Thus, if this 'business-orientation' (and being the 'strategic business partner') is achieved at the
expense of 'employee' engagement, the result might be 'strategic (long-term)
harm' to the business. This is not to say that when the business is under financial stress, the CHRO should ignore the boundary conditions set by the same. The point is just that the focus on employee engagement shouldn't be lost though the actual manifestations of this focus can be different under different circumstances (see <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/12/of-employee-engagement-and-survivor.html" target="_blank">'Of employee engagement and the survivor syndrome'</a> for details). </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is also interesting to model this situation using the
concepts of 'static' and 'dynamic' equilibrium (A chair has static equilibrium.
A bicycle in motion has dynamic equilibrium. In a state of static equilibrium
there is balance, but no change or movement that exists in the case of
dynamic equilibrium). A 'live and let live' kind of arrangement between HR and
business leaders (that avoids conflict) is similar to 'static equilibrium'. But,
a scenario in which HR and business leaders openly and clearly state their
independent opinions, followed by constructive debate/conflict leading to
decisions that both the parties are comfortable with is similar to 'dynamic
equilibrium'. This does not mean that the parties can't be passionate about
their points of view/express 'strong' opinions. The requirement is just that
they should not get too much attached to their opinions.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In general, dynamic equilibrium provides richer
possibilities. However, establishing dynamic equilibrium might not be
required or even feasible in all the cases. It requires more time, effort and skill
(as the equilibrium needs to be constantly reestablished) . It is also more
risky (you are more likely to have a fall from a bicycle as compared to that
from a chair - especially when you are learning to ride - which can be compared
to the 'establishing the relationship' phase that we discussed earlier!).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A key enabler for this dynamic equilibrium is for the CHRO to
work with the business leaders to crystallize the HR Philosophy/the basic
tenets of people management in the organization (</span>see ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/11/towards-philosophy-of-hr.html" target="_blank">Towards a philosophy of HR’</a> for details)<span style="font-family: inherit;">. This will also enable HR to
come with quick and effective responses to various issues/situations – based on the
people management philosophy of the organization, HR functional expertise and
an assessment of the context/situation. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">This
is not to say that the people management philosophy is cast in stone. The
people management philosophy can be revisited as the organization and its
environment evolves. Also, if there are extraordinary situations, extraordinary
responses are required!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, do the CEOs get the CHROs they deserve? ‘Probably, to a large
extent’ – is the best answer that I can come up with at this point. After all, the CEOs hire and fire the CHROs and are their direct managers (with the associated powers of <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2009/08/power-of-carrot-and-stick.html" target="_blank">'carrot and stick</a>'). Also, the CEOs want the CHROs to be aligned to them. This doesn’t
mean that the CHROs can’t influence the CEOs. A lot of CHROs manage to do this. Yes, this requires competence, deep business-understanding, courage <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-organization-development-managers.html" target="_blank">to speak truth to power</a>, and clarity on <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/of-values-and-competencies.html" target="_blank">values</a>. The CHROs </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">won't be earning their salary
if </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">they don't put forward their
professional opinion. If CEOs want someone who will just execute whatever they
ask without discussion, such a person can be hired at a much lower salary than what
CHROs are paid. Also, the CHROs are not trees - CHROs can move (to another organization with a different CEO)! If all these are true, why do the CEOs get the CHROs they deserve to
large extent?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">One possible factor here is the hierarchical nature of many of the organizations. In hierarchical organizations, if the CHRO disagrees with the CEO, it can very
easily get misinterpreted as 'lack business-understanding', ‘lack of competence’ or as ‘lack of trust in the judgment of the leader’. The <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/of-competencies-and-carbohydrates.html" target="_blank">relatively 'fuzzy' nature</a> of the HR domain (that makes it difficult to prove or disprove things conclusively) also contributes to this. Yes, the CHROs also realize that there are no perfect CEOs/ organizations that would exactly match their preferences and hence learn to adjust (to varying degrees). </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course, there are other factors. Let's look at one of them. I spent the first five
years of my career in HR in HR consulting. One of the things that amazed me was
how easy it was to into walk into any organization, do a diagnosis and find
many areas where there was potential for significant improvement. Why would the
CHROs (who were much more experienced than me) fail to identify and act on
those areas? Initially, I thought that this was mainly because of the ‘fresh
eyes’, specialized diagnostic tools and 'learning from other contexts' that the
external consultant brings in. Now, I am convinced that that there is much more
to this.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Many of the organizations are not optimized for
effectiveness. Organizations tend to gravitate towards a way of working that is
most comfortable for the people who run it – even if it takes away from the
effectiveness and efficiency. Of course, the leaders would like to believe (and
make others believe) that what they are doing is the best way of functioning.
Perpetuating this ‘convenient collective delusion’ (or at least not disturbing
it) is often one of the unstated expectations the leaders have from the CHROs.
This works even better if the CHRO is someone with impressive credentials –
with best of the qualifications and prior experience in reputed MNCs and with a
reputation for having done transformational work in those organizations. If
such a person is the CHRO and he/she is not doing any transformation in the
current organization, then the organization must be perfect – without any need
to change!!!!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course, there is a positive side to 'CEOs getting the CHROs they deserve'. Progressive CEOs get (hire/retain/develop) progressive CHROs. There are indeed a lot of CEOs who push their CHROs to focus on building an effective organization that is a great place to work, and also support the CHROs in this endeavor. These CEOs also set an example by role modeling the right behaviors. Again, we have no reason to believe that there are more 'good' CHROs in the industry than 'good' CEOs! </span></p><p class="MsoNormal">We must also remember that there is a larger organization ecosystem that both the CEO and the CHRO are part of and it has expectations and/or influence on the CEO, CHRO and the CEO-CHRO relationship. Also, the strength and tone of the relationship that the CHRO has with the other CXOs in the company might have an indirect influence on the CEO-CHRO relationship. In MNCs and in companies that are part of a business group, the CHRO is likely to have an additional reporting manager (apart from the CEO) and this also influences the CEO-CHRO relationship/power balance! Yes, the strength of this influence will depend on the strength/nature of this additional reporting and the personalities involved. Therefore, the power that the CEO has over the CHRO (and on the decisions related to the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2010/12/architects-of-meaning.html" target="_blank">CHRO role</a>) will not be an absolute one! Also, CEOs are often people who have spent many years in organizations and hence learned to live with some degree of 'imperfections' in organization life. Hence, they might not have the compulsion to get exactly the kind of CHRO they want!</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-67151157470348108242022-04-24T13:26:00.007+05:302022-04-27T08:56:01.505+05:30Balancing our intellectual pH!<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> "Listening to him for five minutes a day might help you to balance your intellectual pH", I blurted out during a conversation with a friend of mine. We were having a conversation on a topic on which my friend had a very strong point of view and I was trying to encourage him to listen to an expert who was known for having a different point of view. My friend was refusing to do so and that was when I blurted out the statement at the beginning of this post.</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">The above discussion with my friend was inconclusive, and it left me feeling a bit uneasy. These kind of <span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">unresolved incidents (the undigested thoughts and feelings arising from those incidents, to be precise) can create 'ghosts' in our field of thoughts that can 'haunt' us for a long time. The ideal way to exorcise these 'ghosts' is to listen to them, revisit those incidents and thoughts and deal with them adequately to ensure that those thoughts are properly digested/absorbed/integrated. In a way, it is very similar to the 'chewing the cud' behavior of some animals (called 'ruminants'). Blogging has given me the opportunity to exorcise quite a few of such ghosts (see </span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/of-competencies-and-carbohydrates.html" style="background-color: #fefdfa; text-decoration-line: none;">'Competencies and Carbohydrates'</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"> for an example) and hence I thought I will attempt the same in this case also!</span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">After I had done some reflection on the interaction that I have had with my friend, I became increasingly aware of the paradoxical nature of this issue. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">A paradox is a situation with an inherent contradiction. A paradox occurs when there are multiple points of view on an issue, each of which are true and essential, but they appear to be in conflict with one another. Therefore, </span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">let's look at few of the perspectives on 'intellectual pH' and its implications for what we should read/view/listen to:</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Just like a chemical pH balance is important for healthy functioning of the body, an intellectual pH balance is important for <span>he healthy </span>functioning<span> of the mind and for i</span>ntellectual wellness (effective participation in scholastic and community activities). Intellectual curiosity/openness and lifelong learning are essential for intellectual wellness. After all, it is our intellect that makes us different from other animals. </span></span></li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">There is nothing like 'one right pH balance'. Even in the human body, the optimal pH value differs for different parts of the body. Similarly, our intellectual equilibrium point should be different for different issues. Moreover, while the pH balance in the body is in terms of acid-base balance, the intellectual pH can have multiple dimensions (e.g. conservative-liberal, communist - capitalist etc.). </span></span></li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is always better to listen to multiple perspectives. It enables us to broaden our intellectual </span>horizons<span style="font-family: inherit;"> and to better informed decisions and more nuanced positions on issues.</span></span></li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">We have only limited time and energy. Hence, we should be selective in what we </span></span>read/view/listen to. Moreover, we don't know if what we read/view/listen to is accurate/valid. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>If we try to be selective, the selection is likely to be influenced by our current point of view/biases. So, we might just end up confirming/strengthening our current point of view. While there is indeed a lot of 'fake news' out there, we can reduce our chance of being misled by focusing on those sources that are widely regarded to be reliable and that follow a rigorous validation process. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>One has to take a position and stick to it. 'If you don't stand for anything, you will fall for everything'!</li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>It is very much possible to have strong opinions and to hold them loosely at the same time. Remember, the nature of 'truth' in science is always 'provisional'. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Not everything is a matter of scientific truth and philosophy of science. Some things are a matter of personal values and beliefs. Also, just because something confirms to the most widely held opinion, it need not be true. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Intellectual balance is essential for making good judgements which is essential for being effective individuals and effective members of the society. While we do have personal values and opinions, 'no man is an island'. </li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>One can't look at the world (or listen to ideas/perspectives) in a truly objective manner. All observation is theory-laden, even though we might not be aware of the theories in our mind. Since each of us have our own unique ways of looking at the world, it will be impossible to be completely intellectual balanced.</li></ul><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>If we are deeply aware of our point of view we can watch out for the possible biases that can creep into our thinking because of that.</li></ul><div><br /></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Where does this leave us? We cannot resolve a paradox in the way we solve a typical problem. We cannot choose one of the options over the others without oversimplifying the situation. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">What is possible is to struggle with the paradoxical situation for a sufficient period of time so that we can reach a higher level of awareness and deeper understanding of the context and the issue, that will enable us to come up with the most effective response at a given moment.</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"> I guess, that is direction we should go on this particular issue also.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Yes, being 'intellectually honest' (in terms of honesty in the acquisition, analysis and expression of facts/ideas and in terms of the willingness to accept the possible limitations of one's point of view) is very important to have a fair conversation (with others and with oneself). It is often possible that being open to other perspectives might enable one to better understand ones' perspective better (or make it more nuanced) even if one doesn't change it ("We shall not cease from exploration and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and to know the place for the first time" - in the words of T S Eliot). </span></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Humans are 'territorial' like many other animals and in our case the 'territory' includes our 'intellectual territory' and 'psychological territory' in addition to 'geographical territory'. Hence, we do have a tendency to get defensive when someone criticizes us or our points of view (as we tend to perceive it as a violation of our psychological/intellectual territory. One can (and should) definitely have personal beliefs and points of view. The requirement is just to ensure that one's personal beliefs don't interfere with one's pursuit of truth and with the quality of one's interactions with others! Yes, we look at the world (and ideas/opinions) through our own lenses. But, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to clean those lenses and to keep them as distortion-free as possible! </span></div><div><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span></div><div>Any comments/ideas?</div></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-75092213972760504642022-04-11T18:51:00.011+05:302022-04-14T18:04:07.730+05:30Of leaders and 'smiling depression'<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">“The ability to suffer in silence is a key requirement for
senior leaders, though you will not find it in any leadership competency framework”,
said the Senior HR leader when he was in a reflective frame of mind. This was my sixth <span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">‘encounter’
with this gentleman (See </span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2008/04/passion-for-work-and-anasakti.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">'Passion for work
and anasakti</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> ‘, </span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2011/12/appropriate-metaphors-for.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">'Appropriate
metaphors for organizational commitment</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> ‘ ,‘</span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2014/09/to-name-or-not-to-name-that-is-question.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">To name or not to
name, that is the question</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">’ , ‘</span><a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2015/08/a-mathematical-approach-to-hr.html"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); text-decoration-line: none;">A Mathematical
approach to HR’</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> and the ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-od-quest-part-7-integrating.html"><span style="text-decoration-line: none;">OD Quest’</span></a> for the
outcomes of my previous interactions with him). Similar to what happened in the
previous occasions, this comment prompted me to think deeply about the topic
and the underlying assumptions.</span></span></p>
<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">It can be argued that leaders are at high risk for stress and depression. Leadership positions often come with very high expectations. Also, 'the buck stops with you' in a leadership position. <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/02/when-new-doesnt-outperform-old.html">Bringing in new leaders is often the preferred response</a> for many organizations when they are in trouble. </span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"> It is possible that </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">that problems at the organization strategy, structure or policies level get misdiagnosed as individual capability issues of leaders down the line. If that is the case, unless the new leaders have the empowerment to change/ influence those upstream factors/issues, they have no chance of being successful. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Also, there is more at stake for the leaders. The higher you are, the harder will be the fall (and the harder it will be to get up and move on to another assignment).</span></span></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"> In a way, leadership is primarily about
achieving the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2014/01/polarities-of-leadership.html" target="_blank">optimal balance between the various polarities</a> in organizational
life.</span> One of those balancing acts is between ‘appearing to be confident and
making a vulnerable connection’. Yes, leaders have to convey the confidence
that they as a team/organization will be successful and that they are going in
the right direction. However, leaders are also human and they, if they are honest
with themselves, have their own share of doubts, fears, hopelessness, loneliness
and sadness. However, many of the leaders try to live up to the ‘great man’
image and this makes any expression of negative feelings (to themselves or to
others) a symbol of weakness or incompetence. This often leads to what is known
as ‘smiling depression’ where leaders hide behind a smile to convince other
people that they are happy and confident.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Leaders are often very successful in maintaining
this façade as they are able to maintain a high level of functionality/effectiveness
on the job despite their inner turmoil (this is the reason why smiling
depression is also known </span> <span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">as ‘high-functioning
depression’). It is not that they suffer less because they manage to smile. On the contrary, the strain of keeping up appearances can significantly add to their stress and suffering. Yes, it seems strange to think that someone can be very depressed, yet manage to hide that, even from their friends and family. Yes, this would also make seeking help (or others proactively
reaching out to help) near impossible and could lead to perpetuation of a
vicious cycle till some sort of breakdown happens. The 'high-functioning' aspect of smiling depression could also mean that the likelihood of suicide is much higher for those with smiling depression (as they have a higher level of ability to plan and execute the suicide as compared to those who are totally exhausted/ immobilized by depression). </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Yes, smiling depression does
have physical manifestations like changes in eating habits and sleeping
patterns. But these can easily be misattributed or even glorified as part of the
way of the corporate warrior. </span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">It is very easy to believe what we want to
believe. Let me give a personal example. My parents told me that they named me ‘Prasad’
as I was smiling almost always as a child -that too often without any reason
they could understand (‘</span><i style="font-family: inherit;">prasadam</i><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">’ in my mother tongue Malayalam means expression
of happiness on the face). This ‘smile on the face’ continued as a pattern in my
life and I (conveniently) assumed that it was because I was happy almost all the time. It was
during one of the ‘</span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/05/of-life-and-human-process-labs.html" style="font-family: inherit;">Human
Process Labs’</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;"> that I suddenly realized that I use smile not only to express
joy but also to hide discomfort. After that, when I catch myself smiling, I often
ask myself the question “what am I happy about?” and this has helped me quite a
bit to discover any possible discomforts that I am overlooking and to use smile
as an expression of joy. Yes, this does mean that I smile a bit less than what I used to earlier; but, the loss of the smile can sometimes be a blessing!</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Now, let’s come back to the statement made by
our Senior HR Leader. Yes, the responsibilities and expectations associated with leadership roles can put tremendous load on the incumbents and it can definitely take a personal toll, including high stress levels, anxiety, feelings of loneliness or even burnout. Yes, it is often an unstated expectation in many
organizations that a leader ‘puts up a brave face’. Some organizations might even want their leaders to be viewed as a
bit ‘super human’ (this could be one of the reasons why some organizations have
separate lunch rooms and toilets for senior leaders – so that others won’t see them
doing these very human activities). The problem is just that this way of
functioning might not be helpful, either to the organizations or to the leaders,
if it becomes a compulsion. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Leaders should have the behavioral flexibility and
the freedom to strike the appropriate balance between appearing to be confident
and making a vulnerable connection. Authentic human interactions are a key
requirement for both organization and personal effectiveness. This would also
make it easier for the leaders suffering from silent depression to admit it to
themselves and to reach out and ask for help – which is the necessary first step out of silent depression. Yes, if leaders invest in building a culture of open communication and relationships based on trust, it is likely to help them when they are going through stress and depression. Addressing smiling depression can also enable the leaders to respond better to/benefit more from leadership coaching and leadership development - as it helps the leaders to become 'unstuck' /'avoid the 'glued feet syndrome' where the positive pull generated by leadership development initiatives get negated to a large extent because the leaders are psychologically stuck or because of their inner turmoil is already taking up a very large part of their mental bandwidth. .</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-27840911501367420862022-02-27T22:32:00.004+05:302022-10-12T14:57:32.797+05:30What 'success' looks like - Exploring the inner world of leaders in transition<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">One of my all-time favorite books is ‘<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance">Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance</a>’ by Robert M. Pirsig. This book begins with the lines
“And what is good, Phaedrus, And what is not good, Need we ask anyone to tell
us these things?". When it comes to the domain of Leadership and
Organization Development, it is very important to have a clear understanding of
‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-what-good-looks-like.html" target="_blank">what good looks like</a>’, because we are often dealing with the inner world of
individuals and groups that tend to be quite ‘subjective’. This is especially
true when it comes to leadership transitions. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Leadership transitions, those involving new leaders moving
into the organization in particular, are important and risky at the same time,
from both the individual leaders’ and the organization’s points of view.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">From the organization's point of view, leadership
transitions are high-stake situations as the level of effectiveness of the new
leader will have a significant impact on the team, the organization, and the
other stakeholders. This becomes even more important when the new leader has
been hired with the mandate to drive organizational transformation.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Similarly, from the individual leader's point of view,
moving to a new organization might imply high risks, as a leader's
effectiveness is often quite context-specific and as the leader is making the
transition decision based on limited information. Also, how the leaders
approach the job change process and how they look at the degree of ‘success’ in their job changes can
vary from leader to leader. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I have had the opportunity to observe many such leadership
transitions and their impact closely. Please see ‘<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/02/when-new-doesnt-outperform-old.html">When the new doesn’t outperform the old’</a> for some ‘unorthodox’ perspectives on this
fascinating domain that also include suggestions for the leaders in transition
like</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">considering a bit of 'exorcism’,</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">validating 'what good looks like.</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">being politically aware without
'playing politics', and </span></li><li>‘alignment, alignment, alignment’.</li></ul><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Now, let us come back to the inner world of leaders in
transition - their ‘lived experience’ of job transitions and their tacit
definitions of success (i.e., the factors that affect the perceived degree of
success in job changes made by leaders, as perceived by the leaders
themselves). In a way, success in transitions is a construct that exists in the
minds of the individual leaders in transition, and it has no clear boundaries.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is possible that the above factors that affect the
perceived degree of success are different for internal job changes and external
job changes. Similarly, these factors that affect the perceived degree of success
in job changes might vary based on the nature of job change (e.g., that for lateral
moves as compared to moves involving a level change, moves within the job
function as compared to cross-functional moves, moves involving relocation as
compared that moves that don’t involve relocation etc.). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is also possible that these tacit definitions of success
change as the leaders spend more time in their jobs. For example, it is
possible that when accepting a new job, the tacit definition of success is more
in terms of 'objective' factors (e.g., salary and job description). Then
transition-related factors (e.g., how smooth was the transition process), fit
related factors (e.g., person-organization/person-team fit, person-job fit, and
the fit between assumptions made by the leader while making the job change
decision and the experienced reality), and progression related factors (e.g.,
capability and career development) get added on.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Again, there could be variations in the factors that affect
the perceived degree of success in job changes based on personality related factors. gender,
age, job function, job level, type of organization, national culture etc.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I guess, what makes this domain fascinating to explore is the
interplay of individual and context related factors apart from the very fact that we
are we are exploring the inner world of leaders in transition. The inner worlds
tend to follow ‘their own rules’ and sometimes they might even refuse to follow
any rules!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Having said this, I must also add that there is a strong 'business case' for exploring the inner worlds of leaders in transition and their tacit definitions of success.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span>Such an exploration can help the </span>leaders
to be more intentional about job changes and to make better-informed decisions and
actions that can enhance their perceived level of success in job changes. Also, it can help the organizations to make better selection decisions by
probing the tacit definitions of success the candidates for leadership
positions have and comparing them with what the organization offers. Again, it
can inform interventions like executive coaching, leadership induction, new
leader assimilation, and leadership development. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-8917999059534830812021-12-24T18:15:00.000+05:302021-12-24T18:15:23.655+05:30Remarkable Encounters – Part 3 : Contented <div style="text-align: left;"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);">It is said that we discover some parts of
ourselves only in the context of our interaction with others. Some of these
interactions are so enriching that they leave us feeling more complete,
integrated, alive and human. Similarly, some of the interactions prompt us
to think more deeply about the underlying aspects, instead of just floating on
the surface of life. In this series of posts, we have been looking at the
impressions from some of the remarkable encounters that I have had. </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); font-family: inherit;">In the first post, we looked at my impressions
from my encounter with a remarkable teacher (See </span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/7584319303804919668/891799905953483081" style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: #FEFDFA;">Remarkable Encounters – Part 1 : Teacher</span></a><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250); font-family: inherit;">). In the second post, we looked at a constant companion
to many of us – fear (See <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/7584319303804919668/891799905953483081">Remarkable
Encounters -Part 2: Fear</a>). This post is based on an encounter that I have
had a long time ago, that stayed with me all these years. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">My first job, after I made the ‘</span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-why-of-book-life-in-organizations.html" style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">quantum
jump’</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;"> to the management domain, was with a global management consulting
firm. Management consultants, in general, tend to lead stressful lives. Some of
them even glorify their high-stress fast-track lifestyles that also involve
frequent business travel. Of course, since the business travel is often
billable to the clients, the consultants often get to stay in the best of the hotels
with a wide range of food options. One of the ironic things that I noticed was
that, even among the consultants who ordered very highly-priced dishes, only a
small percentage of them ate the food mindfully/enjoyed the food (as their
minds were often preoccupied with other ‘more important’ matters). </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">There was one exception to this in the office –
though not among the consultants. This was provided by the elderly security
guard in the office who always used to greet everyone, employees and visitors
alike, with a warm smile. He was also very effective in his work and he could
resolve tricky situations (that would have got the other security guards agitated)
with a large degree of grace and ease.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">He used to eat his lunch from the roadside
food stall just outside the office. His lunch was always the same – a plate of
rice with some gravy poured on it accompanied by two pieces of '</span><i style="font-family: inherit;">dal vada'</i><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">.
What caught my attention was the slow and mindful way in which he used to eat
this simple lunch that too with a great deal of enjoyment.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;">Initially I thought
there was something special about this apparently very basic meal. I was even tempted to try it myself. But, since
I didn't see the same level of enjoyment on the faces of others who ate the
same food from the same food stall, I came to the conclusion that it was probably more
to do with him as an individual. Maybe, he had learned how to enjoy his food.
Maybe, this was part of something larger – like being comfortable in one’s
skin/being comfortable with where one was in one’s life. This did prompt me to
explore some of the definitions of/approaches to ‘personal excellence’ that go beyond
the traditional measures of success. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">One such idea is the Greek concept of areté. Though this word is often
translated as 'virtue', it actually means something closer to 'being the best
you can be', or 'reaching your highest human potential'. Areté is frequently
associated with bravery, but more often, with effectiveness. The man or woman
of areté is a person of the highest effectiveness; they use all their faculties
to achieve real results. Areté involves all of the abilities and potentialities
available to humans. Thus, being one's best self and realizing one's human potential
is a key part of this approach towards excellence.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Another relevant concept here is that of '<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)">flow</a>' or 'being in
the zone' – especially the aspect of ‘being fully immersed in an activity and
enjoying the same’. One of the defining features of ‘flow’, that is particularly
relevant in the context of our exploration here, is that ‘flow’ can be achieved
at various levels of skill, so long as the level of skill and the level of
challenge are in sync. This enables an individual-specific approach towards
achieving the ‘flow’ (at one's current level of skill). <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Yet another such concept is that of 'shibumi'. While there are many
interpretations on what shibumi means, I am using it here mainly in the sense
of 'great refinement underlying commonplace appearances'. The other
interpretations of shibumi that appeal to me include 'simple, subtle and
unobtrusive beauty', 'articulate brevity', 'understated beauty', 'tranquility
that is not passive', 'being without the angst of becoming', 'authority
without domination, 'harmony in action', 'invisible excellence', 'effortless
effectiveness', 'beautiful imperfection' and 'elegant simplicity'. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">From this
discussion, the similarities between shibumi and '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/u-curve-and-simplicity-at-other-side-of.html" target="_blank">simplicity on the other side of complexity</a>'(which is the primary theme for this blog) are quite obvious. No wonder I
like the concept of shibumi very much! This does highlight the role of
‘resonance’ in the perceptions of excellence – the resonance of a particular thing with one's (subjective) self - that go beyond any
absolute/objective factors!<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Apart from areté, ‘flow’ and shibumi, another key underlying theme for
the kind of excellence we are talking about here could be the emphasis on
'presence of value' rather than on 'absence of defects'. Thus, 'goodness and
authenticity' are preferred over 'correctness'. One interesting aspect that is
common across all the three underlying themes mentioned above is that they all
imply internal benchmarks. Maybe, that is the way it should be since here we
are talking about 'personal excellence'! <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="background: rgb(254, 253, 250);"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In this context, the Zen concept of 'personalization of enlightenment'
also comes to mind. It says that your work does not finish once you attain
enlightenment (otherwise, there is no point in living any longer !). Actually,
your true work begins only then. The real work is to personalize the
enlightenment that you have attained by bringing in your unique
gifts/perspective/life context. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Now,
let’s come back to my encounter with the gentleman that triggered all these
thoughts/prompted this exploration on personal excellence. I don’t remember his
name. However, I still remember him, his quiet efficiency, the relish with which he
was eating his simple lunch and his state of 'being at peace with oneself' – even
after almost two decades since I moved out of that office. Come to think of it,
what I noticed in him also has similarities with some aspects of ‘<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei">wu wei’</a> , especially those
related to ‘unconflicting personal harmony’, ‘effortless action’ and ‘perfect
economy of energy’ ('Nature does not hurry, yet everything is accomplished').<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of
course, I am in no way suggesting that the challenges and rewards associated
with various jobs are comparable or that less stressful jobs are better. I am also not trying to glorify the job of a security guard in any way. I guess what made this encounter remarkable was that I saw something in
his behavior that stood out (beyond what can be attributed to job-specific factors) and that it was something that was missing in the
behavior of most of the consultants including myself. So, in a way, the experience served as a mirror to me. Yes, it did prompt me to
examine some of the unexamined parts of my personality, my beliefs and my behaviors, apart from prompting me to explore the concept of ‘personal excellence’ in some
depth. Hence, going by the definition that we had started this post with, it
definitely qualifies as a 'remarkable encounter' for me!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p> </o:p>Any
thoughts/comments?</span></p></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-11585463487704127042021-08-08T17:58:00.008+05:302021-08-11T10:00:20.124+05:30The paradox of 'manager as coach'<p style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">Coaching the team members is one of the basic responsibilities of a people manager. It is difficult to find an individual development plan that doesn't include 'coaching by the manager' as a key development action. So, what is paradoxical about 'manager-as-coach'? </span></span></p><p style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A paradox occurs when there are multiple perspectives about something, each of them are true, but they seem to contradict one another. Let's look at some of those perspectives on 'manager as coach'</span></span></span></p><p style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; text-align: left;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Every manager should be a coach and every conversation should be a coaching conversation</span></li><li>Managers are supposed to achieve predefined results through their team members. Since coaching in its true sense is supposed to be non-directive, there is a fundamental contradiction in managers trying to act as coaches. </li><li>Because they work with the team members very closely, managers are in the best position to coach their team members.</li><li>Coaching is essentially future-focused, having too much knowledge about the coachee's past behavior can make it difficult to start the coaching with a 'clean slate'</li><li>Coaching by the manager can significantly improve the performance of the team member, that too very quickly</li><li>Coaching is a time-consuming activity. Coaching is often 'hard work' for both the manager and the employee. Sometimes, there are faster or more effective ways to improve employee performance (like giving direct advice, training, shadowing a high-performer etc.) </li><li>Coaching is a natural part of the manager's role</li><li>Coaching requires skills that many of the managers haven't developed (though the managers might not be aware of this/might consider themselves to be excellent coaches)</li><li>Coaching can be a great way to increase employee connect and trust</li><li>For coaching to work, there should be a very high level of trust and psychological safety. This could be an unrealistic expectation in many contexts. </li></ul><div>So, how do we resolve this? One possibility is to look at the tacit definitions of coaching that underlie these varying perspectives. There are indeed a wide range of interpretations possible when it comes to 'coaching' (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/10/metaphors-for-coaching.html" target="_blank">metaphors for coaching</a>' for some of the interpretations of coaching). Coaching is an 'unregulated industry' - there can be as many interpretations of coaching as there are coaches. </div><div><br /></div><div>The ICF (International Coaching Federation) interpretation of coaching is perhaps the most widely accepted one. ICF defines coaching as 'a partnering with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their personal and professional potential'. Yes, if one explores the ICF coaching competencies in detail, it becomes clear that coaching is meant to be 'non-directive' endeavor.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, on the other end of the spectrum, there are interpretations of coaching that looks at coaching essentially as a 'feedback and insights sharing process'. Of course, there are many other definitions of coaching that lie in between these two extremes. </div><div><br /></div><div>It is indeed true that the manager-employee interactions (including the coaching interactions) are happening in the context of the organization hierarchy and the work related goals/deliverables. It is also true that coaching works best when there is no power imbalance in the coaching relationship. However, to what extent the power-hierarchy seeps into particular interactions between particular sets of managers and employees can vary significantly. The organization culture can also be a key factor here, apart from individual-specific factors. </div><div><br /></div><div>Yes, it can be argued that 'while the manager is paid to get defined work outcomes through the employees, this doesn't mean that the manager can't take a non-directive approach'. On the other hand, it can also be argued that so long as outcomes are defined by the manager/organization (and not by the employees), it is only a matter of semantics whether the manager is 'inspiring the employee' or just 'motivating the employee through rewards and punishment' (see '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2009/08/power-of-carrot-and-stick.html" target="_blank">the power of carrot and stick</a>' for more details) to achieve those defined goals/outcomes. </div><div><br /></div><div>Non-directive coaching is an invitation to explore and not a compulsion to do a particular thing. Since the managers are accountable for the results (even when they have delegated the task to their team member), if the employee fails to achieve the desired results it will be viewed as failure on the part of the manager also. So, the managers often have more 'skin in the game' (as compared to an external coach) and this might prompt them to switch to more directive ways of functioning when the non-directive ways don't seem to be working well enough (or fast enough). </div><div><br /></div><div>Yes, helping the employee to arrive at his/her own solutions is better from the point of view of building ownership and building capability. Sometimes, this can also lead to better solutions. This works best when the employee has the necessary expertise/can arrive at an effective solution within the constraints imposed by the situation.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, sometimes, the employee needs 'direct advice' and it is much simpler (and easier on both the manager and the employee) if the manager makes a suggestion to the employee that he/she can consider a particular course of action, as opposed to facilitating a long process of exploration that leads the employee to the same answer! Similarly, there could be crisis situations that require immediate response and such situations might force a manager to switch from a more facilitative style to a more directive style.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also, if the employee lacks specific skills or resources to do the job effectively, attempting to fix it through coaching is guaranteed to fail. Yes, helping the employee to develop the skills and get the resources required to be effective on the job is very much part of the manager's job. The point here is just that coaching is not the right way to make this happen! Coaching is no 'silver bullet' and it is not the panacea for all problems!</div><div><br /></div><div>Maybe, we can take some sort of a '<a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-situational-theory-of-leadership-2795321" target="_blank">situational leadership</a>' kind of perspective and say that managers need to adopt various styles/definitions of coaching depending on the context. Maybe, what is required is to find the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2014/01/polarities-of-leadership.html" target="_blank">right dynamic equilibrium between polarities</a> like ''telling and exploring', 'directing and facilitating', 'interests of the organization and interests of the employee', 'authority and partnership', 'defined outcomes and possibilities', 'performance and development' etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>However, all these require a very high level of skill and awareness on the part of the managers. It also calls for a very high degree of trust and openness on the part of the employees. Else, this can be highly confusing and frustrating for both the parties involved. Of course, if the employees perceive the 'facilitative' approach of the manager to be a tool for manipulation, it can lead to loss of trust!</div><div><br /></div><div>Coaching is indeed a learnable skill though it requires a significant amount of effort/practice. It makes sense for the organization to adopt a particular model/framework for manager-as-coach and train the managers on it. These manager coaches should also be provided mentoring by experienced coaches so that they can improve their awareness and coaching skill and also develop the flexibility to switch between the various styles of coaching based on the context. Yes, creating positive examples for the managers, that will convince them that there could be alternatives to the more directive ways of functioning, can put the managers in the right frame of mind that will make the manager training and mentoring efforts mentioned above more effective! </div><div><br /></div><div>'Pure' non-directive kind of coaching is easier to do for an external coach as compared to a people manager. Even in the case of external coaches, it is important to clarify and agree on what can and what can't be expected from the coach. The need the employee has might not neatly fit into what can be fully addressed within the domain of coaching. Hence there is always the risk of the coaching conversation drifting into the domains of mentoring, teaching or even therapy. This is not necessarily bad so long as it is not 'disguised as coaching'. </div><div><br /></div><div>Employees tend to put the coaches (including managers in the coaching hat) on a pedestal. They might even want the coach to do the thinking for them. While many of the people managers might be very happy to fulfill such roles/expectations, it might take them further away from the 'facilitative' nature of coaching!</div><div><br /></div><div>Any ideas/comments? </div><p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-47783537345235641922021-07-31T12:39:00.005+05:302021-08-01T12:58:56.976+05:30Of trophies and battle-scars<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">This post was triggered by the conversations that I have had with Human Resources (HR) leaders who had played a leading role in 'workforce restructuring'/'workforce right-sizing' efforts in their respective companies. What struck me the most was the wide variation in the manner in which those restructuring efforts impacted these leaders. This was most evident in the way those leaders remembered those experiences, in the way talked about their role in those restructuring efforts and in the marks (residual emotions) it seems to have left on them as individuals. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">On one end of the spectrum were leaders who were 'deeply scarred' by those experiences. It was quite painful for them even to speak about it. On the other end were leaders who proudly displayed those experiences as 'trophies'. Most of the HR leaders fall somewhere in between these two extremes. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">After the restructuring was done, there were leaders who organized lavish 'victory celebrations' for the restructuring team and there were leaders who found a way to avoid such celebrations. Some of them immediately updated their CVs/LinkedIn profiles to highlight this expertise (or even positioned themselves as 'restructuring experts') while the other leaders didn't do anything of that sort. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">The interesting thing was that the above variations were not really a matter of how successful those restructuring efforts were or how significant/effective were the roles of the leaders in those restructuring efforts! </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">One of the factors that makes this issue complex is the dual role played by HR leaders - as they are both the facilitators and the survivors of restructuring!</span></p><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Survivors of restructuring/downsizing exercises often suffer from the so called ‘workplace survivor syndrome’ with symptoms like anxiety, depression, decrease in performance, poor morale and increased propensity to leave. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">At the heart of the survivor syndrome lies two emotions- guilt (“I didn't deserve to survive when my friends didn't”) and fear (“Next time, it could be my turn”). Being employees (and human beings) themselves, the HR leaders are not immune to these emotions/reactions!</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In the case of the HR leaders, since they were also facilitators of restructuring, the feeling of guilt can get accentuated. This usually happens in those cases where the HR leaders take their 'employee champion' role as seriously as their 'business partner role' and for some reason they feel that they haven't done all they should have done in the given context. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span>Usually<span style="font-family: inherit;">, the HR leaders are not the final decision-makers on whether to initiate restructuring/whether restructuring is the best option to enhance organization effectiveness in a given context. B</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">eing part of the leadership team they are expected to contribute to/<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-paradoxical-importance-of-people.html" target="_blank">influence the </a></span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-paradoxical-importance-of-people.html" target="_blank">decision</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-paradoxical-importance-of-people.html" target="_blank">-making</a> process and to implement the decision once the decision has made. Yes, how early they get involved in the decision-making process and the degree of influence they have on the same will have a bearing on the level of conviction and ownership they feel. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Also, the HR leaders often play a very important part in deciding how exactly the restructuring should be carried out, how to balance the organization and employee interests/perspectives, how to ensure fairness and <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/12/of-employee-engagement-and-survivor.html" target="_blank">how to </a></span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/12/of-employee-engagement-and-survivor.html" target="_blank">minimize</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/12/of-employee-engagement-and-survivor.html" target="_blank"> possible adverse impact</a> on the employer brand, employee engagement and productivity. Yes, they do understand that sometimes 'surgery' is required. Even in those situations, they feel the responsibility to use a 'surgeon's blade' (not a 'butcher's knife') and to provide sufficient post-operative care!</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Depending on how true the HR leaders have been to their own convictions during these actions, the level of guilt or satisfaction can vary significantly. Yes, it also depends on the personality of the HR leaders involved - some of them tend to assume too much responsibility and some of them tend to assume too little responsibility (or even psychologically distance themselves from the actions, sometimes using humor for doing so). </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Some of the HR leaders look at restructuring as 'just another task to be done' (something that 'comes with the terrain') and some of the HR leaders look at look at restructuring as something that can potentially create a conflict with their personal <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/of-values-and-competencies.html" target="_blank">values</a> or their belief systems (one HR leader told me that 'he accumulated a lot of bad karma' through his involvement in a particular restructuring exercise!) or with their <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/01/truth-and-beauty-motivations-and.html" target="_blank">motivations for a career in HR</a>. From a larger perspective, it can be said that the very <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2009/10/paradox-of-business-orientation-of-hr.html" target="_blank">topic of 'business-orientation of HR' is indeed a paradoxical one.</a></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;">Many of the HR leaders felt that communicating the job loss to the impacted employees individually was the most difficult part. Here also, the degree of conviction the HR leaders had about the need for the restructuring, the fairness of the process followed and the adequacy of the transition support provided to the impacted employees, drove the psychological impact on the HR leaders. Another important factor here (for the psychological impact on HR leaders) was whether these difficult conversations with the impacted employees were entirely 'outsourced' to HR or it was jointly owned and carried out by the line managers and the HR leaders. Yes, the 'axe-man' or 'executioner' personas are difficult to integrate for most of the people! </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is also interesting to look at the </span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2010/12/architects-of-meaning.html" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">sense-making process</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> in the context of restructuring. Often, the </span>restructuring<span style="font-family: inherit;"> process is interpreted/</span>positioned<span style="font-family: inherit;"> as an important enabler for organization transformation and it is referred to by highly positive-sounding terms like 'organization renewal', 'workforce refresh' and 'top-grading'. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">There is nothing inherently wrong with these terms (the organization reality is socially constructed to large extent and these terms can serve as 'generative metaphors' in that social construction of reality) so long as they mirror the true intent. Also, from the point of view of the psychological impact on the HR leaders who are facilitating the change, this kind of positive positioning of the change can be very beneficial, if they are convinced about the positioning. Yes, <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/09/of-change-progress-and-kaizen-story.html" target="_blank">whether or not these actions/changes make a net positive difference to the organization</a> is often difficult to determine in the short-term. It can be very much psychologically damaging for the HR leaders to feel that they are in some sort of a '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/08/career-planning-and-myth-of-sisiphus.html" target="_blank">Sisyphus-like' situation</a> where the years of work they have done in the organization to build employee engagement and the employer brand is getting ruined because of the restructuring! </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, where does this leave us? Whether their involvement in facilitating a restructuring/downsizing effort becomes more of a 'trophy' or more of a 'battle-scar' for the HR leaders involved depends on a wide range of factors that go beyond the 'success' of the restructuring effort (seen in the context of its stated objectives). Yes, these two (trophies and battle-scars) need not necessarily be mutually exclusive. It can also be said that while our discussion here focused on the HR leaders, most of it applies to the Business Leaders also (i.e. the psychological impact of leading restructuring efforts in the case of business leaders).</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Battle-scars' need not necessarily be a bad thing. In a way, they make us 'battle-hardened' and more ready for future battles! By the way, it has been said that in some of the ancient </span>societies<span style="font-family: inherit;"> <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/07/choosing-leader-battle-scars-way.html" target="_blank">'counting the number of battle-scars' was used as the method for selecting leaders!!</a></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-9553473828143711592021-07-18T00:10:00.147+05:302021-07-21T10:18:37.243+05:30The tale of two SMEs<p>The stream of thoughts that resulted in this post was triggered by the interactions that I have had with a number of Subject Matter Experts(SMEs) across companies some time ago, when we were trying to put together a set of capability building solutions in a particular domain. </p><p>All these SMEs were highly valued and respected in their respective organizations. Yet, I found them to be different in their orientation and their approach. Two of those SMEs represented the two ends of a spectrum (hence the title of this post!). The other SMEs were in between these two 'poles' in terms of their orientation. </p><p>One of the SMEs had a deep understanding of the theories and principles underlying the domain, in addition to the knowledge of the models, best practices and tools. He had done a PhD in that domain and had worked in other reputed companies before he joined this organization. While he also had good understanding of the business, he tended to look at the business problems primarily through the lens of his expertise in the domain.</p><p>The other SME had a very good understanding of how things work in that domain in that particular organization. This was gained through working very closely with a wide range of people in that organization (including senior business leaders) for many years. While he was knowledgeable about the models and tools in the domain, it was mostly learned on the job. He had spent most of career in that particular organization and had grown rapidly in his career in the organization. While he was aware of the underlying theories and principles, he tended to consider them as a bit 'theoretical'! </p><p>Now, both of them were considered to be high performers in their organizations (i.e. both of them were effective in their own way) and hence it was apparent that there were many ways to be an SME. In a way, these two SMEs represented what <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Pirsig" target="_blank">Robert Pirsig</a> refers to as the the 'classical understanding' (looking at things in terms of their underlying form) and 'romantic understanding' (looking at things in terms of their immediate appearance). Of course, both of these ways of understanding are valuable. </p><p>We must also remember that 'value' is defined by the customer (the business leaders in this case). The fact that both these SMEs were highly valued by the business leaders in their respective organizations was also a reflection of the organization culture (or at least their definitions of '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-what-good-looks-like.html" target="_blank">what good looks like</a>' in the case of SMEs) to a large extent. Yes, it is very much possible that the first SME might not be considered to be so valuable in an organization that worships speed of response and prefers 'trial and error' method of working. Similarly, it is very much possible that the second SME might not be as effective if he moves to another organization (till he develops deep contextual understanding and great working relationships). </p><p>Yes, from the point of view of developing capability building solutions that can work across organizations, the first SME was more helpful - as he could easily take a step back and look at look at the challenges/problems in the domain through a more abstract lens and hence could come up with useful generalizations that can hold good across situations. But, in terms of helping new employees in that domain to be successful in his particular organization, the second SME was very effective (especially in terms of providing success tips and dos and don'ts). There was also another interesting difference. In terms of identifying key areas for capability building, the first SME tended to focus more on functional/technical skills whereas the second SME tended to focus more on behavioral skills. </p><p>Typically, an SME (or a '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/12/of-deep-specialists-and-jumping-around.html" target="_blank">deep-specialist</a>') is defined as a person with deep understanding of a particular domain(area/subject) who can help others to develop expertise in that domain and to solve complex problems in that domain. Usually, the SMEs have developed their expertise over a long period of time though a combination of advanced studies and professional experience. Many of the SMEs contribute to advancing the knowledge in the domain through publishing articles/books. For being effective as an SME, being able to share their knowledge with others, being able to work/collaborate with others and being able to coach/mentor others are very important, in addition to possessing deep expertise in that domain. </p><p>Now, if we look at our two SMEs, both of them match many of the aspects of being an SME mentioned above, with the first SME coming a bit more closer to the 'text book definition' of an SME. However, as we have seen above, both of the SMEs have been very effective (and considered to be valuable) in their respective organizations. </p><p>Yes, the ideal SME should have a perfect mix of these two orientations (hence achieving the most effective '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/treating-hrs-multiple-personality.html" target="_blank">integration of theory and practice'</a> and combining the 'top down and bottom up' perspectives). But, we (and the SMEs!) live in the real world and such perfection should be looked at as a '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/02/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-3.html" target="_blank">vision</a>' and not necessarily as a 'target'. It is very difficult to find such a species of 'perfectly balanced SMEs'.</p><p>In real life, some combinations tend to be 'unstable'. Maybe, they call for different orientations that find difficult 'peacefully coexist' at high levels of intensity. We find such impossible/unstable combinations in role-specific <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/of-competencies-and-carbohydrates.html" target="_blank">competency frameworks</a> also! The other option is to develop some sort of <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/02/hr-professionals-and-multiple.html" target="_blank">'split-personality'</a> and switch back and forth between the two orientations!</p><p>There are indeed <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/01/competency-frameworks-intermediate.html" target="_blank">many ways of being successful</a> in business organizations. Yes, an awareness and appreciation of the 'other style' can make the SMEs more effective!</p><p>Any comments/ideas? </p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-30410149673862298182021-07-13T20:00:00.079+05:302021-07-15T15:36:52.995+05:30The paradox of 'free time'<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' is something that all of us are very keen to have. So, what is paradoxical about it? </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">A paradox occurs when there are multiple perspectives about something, each of them are true, but they seem to contradict one another. Let's look at some of those perspectives on 'free time'</span></p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">We should actively try to find 'free time'</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">There is nothing really like 'free time'; activities or even 'work expands to fill the time (as per the famous Parkinson's law)</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' is essential for creativity and for recharging mentally</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' is just a waste of time</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' is 'me' time</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' doesn't have to be 'me' time - it is better to spend it with people you cherish being with</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Free time is enjoyable. It gives also us something to look forward to after work. </span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">Different people react to 'free time' differently. 'Free time' makes many people uncomfortable - they get very jittery . Yes, there is indeed something like the 'fear of freedom'. </span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Free time' gives us the much needed flexibility - especially when unexpected things come up</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">We can get possessive about our 'free time'. We might feel resentful if there is an unexpected demand on our 'free time'. </span></li></ul><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">How do we resolve this? Since 'free time' is difficult to define, let's look at some of the possible synonyms for 'free time'. Synonyms for free time include spare time,
leisure time, time off, rest time, idle time, one's own time, 'unstructured time', recreation,
leisure, downtime, recess, interlude, intermission, let up and break. It is interesting to note that many of these synonyms convey different (or even </span>conflicting<span style="font-family: inherit;">) meanings - somewhat similar to the different perspectives on 'free time' that we saw earlier. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Scheduling 'free time' in our calendar can have many 'profound side effects'. In a way, s</span>cheduling 'free time' it is an act of independence and it allows us to feel more in control of our lives (it sets us free!). Also, it is much easier to say no to unwanted requests on our time when we have something else scheduled. Scheduling 'free time' allows us to be more intentional in living our life and to put the various activities we do in perspective. Feeling busy all the time is not conducive to mental health. </div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Yes, 'nature abhors vacuum' and it is very difficult to keep 'free time' free. What is indeed possible is to proactively fill some part our 'free time' with activities that we enjoy doing so that other activities or work can't expand into that. Yes, 'sitting alone quietly' or even 'thinking six impossible things before breakfast' qualifies as activities. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course, we can invest our 'free time' to create a 'pocket of excellence' in some aspect of our life. Experiencing excellence (as per our own definition of excellence) in at least one aspect of our life can significantly enhance our 'self-image' and even the manner in which we respond to life in general. It can be argued that what we remember are the key moments in our lives and that having more such remarkable moments during a given period of time (e.g. by experiencing excellence) can make us perceive that period of time to be 'fuller' and even 'longer'. So, invested wisely, 'free time' can 'create' more time for us, apart from making our lives richer! </span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-68086983789897455262021-04-17T21:22:00.032+05:302021-04-22T10:27:40.043+05:30The 'paradoxical importance' of people<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> <span style="background-color: white; color: #212121;">"</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121;">Show me whom should I fire", said the global business leader to the HR Head. T</span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #212121;">he global business leader and the HR Head were reviewing the performance of the company operations in the country they were visiting. During the review, some complex issues were highlighted and that was when the global business leader made the above statement.</span></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #212121;"> <br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #212121;">After two decades in the domain of people management, if there is one thing I have understood about the domain, it is that the domain of people management is inherently paradoxical. While the above statement made by the business leader seemed like a knee-jerk reaction (and </span><span style="color: #212121;">reflecting</span><span style="color: #212121;"> a 'not so people-friendly' philosophy), it also highlighted the underlying belief that people make all the difference (and that just by changing some of the people the company performance issues can be fixed). </span></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #212121;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #212121;">Yes, in some cases, the cause of business performance issues can be traced back to particular individuals. But, in many cases the </span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">main problem might not be related to the capability level of the individual employees at all. The problem could mainly be at the strategy, structure, policies or processes level. However, it is relatively difficult/inconvenient for the business leaders to address the issues/make changes at those levels. So, there is a temptation to jump to the conclusion that it is an employee capability issue that can be fixed just by replacing the people involved.</span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">Yes, it is highly tempting to 'throw people at problems'. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">This becomes even more of a concern in <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/03/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-8-type-n.html">organizations that worship 'newness</a>'. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">These organizations go through repeated cycles of trying to improve company performance by firing a large number of employees and replacing them with new employees. Even when there is no evidence to prove that the newly hired employees did any better than the employees they replaced, this gives the leaders the satisfaction that they took quick and decisive action. It can also create an illusion of progress, by <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/09/of-change-progress-and-kaizen-story.html" target="_blank">wrongly equating 'change' with 'progress'</a>. </span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">Sometimes, these people changes can trigger a chain reaction. There is often explicit or implicit pressure on the newly hired leaders to demonstrate their commitment to the change agenda by replacing the team members they have inherited. 'Infusing new talent from outside' appears to be much more progressive and decisive as compared to just 'recycling the existing talent'. T</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">his can snowball into large number of people changes with the associated disruption/ripple effects (and an absolute bonanza for recruitment consultants)!</span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">In a way, what we have here is an 'irony'. Irony is the paradox of consequences. </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">Irony occurs when what
actually happens turns out to be completely different from what was intended. In the particular example that we started this post with, an action that was based on the belief in the importance of people and the impact people can create, led to a consequence that was not at all people-friendly! </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"> </span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">Another paradox here is that the global business leader asked the HR Head to show him the people to be fired. While HR is very much expected to 'know the pulse of the organization', line managers are often in a much better position to diagnose and address business performance issues. This also raises interesting questions on the role of the HR function and what exactly should be the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2009/10/paradox-of-business-orientation-of-hr.html">right type of 'business-orientation' that HR function should demonstrate</a>. </span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div style="background: white; color: #333333; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #201f1e;">The domain of people management is rich in paradoxes, dilemmas and ironies. My new book 'Life in organizations - Paradoxes, dilemmas and possibilities' explores many of those </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">paradoxes, dilemmas and ironies in more detail. T</span><span style="color: #201f1e;">he book is available on </span><a href="https://www.amazon.in/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon India</a><span style="color: #201f1e;">,</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon UK</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">and</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon US</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">in both paperback and Kindle versions.. </span></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #333333;"><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Would love to to hear your comments/thoughts!!!</span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; font-family: inherit;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYRsk8lRfBrlEKmO_Vn5hzXWbdWy2MfpUO7vedymCnxHH-3N8994M7ziy9ZZUlm-W2y9kBy5Nkc6zBTm2TX0Mf9vqYBTh5v6n5T0jCEf0WWwSu2wFbkfiyeFZgo9zYUp6b4j0Y55drL8w/s1200/PrasadBookFC.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYRsk8lRfBrlEKmO_Vn5hzXWbdWy2MfpUO7vedymCnxHH-3N8994M7ziy9ZZUlm-W2y9kBy5Nkc6zBTm2TX0Mf9vqYBTh5v6n5T0jCEf0WWwSu2wFbkfiyeFZgo9zYUp6b4j0Y55drL8w/s320/PrasadBookFC.png" /></a></div><br /><p></p></div></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-26609273969988365622021-04-13T11:52:00.042+05:302021-04-13T21:25:43.851+05:30Stuck at the right level?!<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"> "But, you are stuck at the right level", protested the direct report to the CXO. The direct report was having a conversation with the CXO on the career progression opportunities (or the lack of it, to be more precise). During the conversation, the CXO had claimed that he was in the same boat as he was also stuck in his role (because he had no real chance of becoming the CEO). That was when the direct report came up with the statement that we started this post with. It did prompt me to think more deeply about if there is really something like 'being stuck at the right level'.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">There is indeed some merit in the argument that if one has to get stuck in one's career, it is better to get stuck at as high a level as possible, because it implies a higher salary and the associated benefits and perquisites. The problem is just that all these money and other advantages of being at a senior level might not eliminate the psychological feeling of being stuck. I guess, there is something in the human psyche that 'demands' progress! Yes, this 'progress' need not necessarily be only in terms of climbing the corporate ladder. However, if one has spent so many years climbing the corporate ladder, it is highly probable that one's (unstated) definition of 'progress' got colored by all that climbing!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course, one can try to become unstuck by moving to a 'bigger' role in another organization. However, narrowing of the organization pyramid when one moves to more senior levels is a reality and a lot of people will get stuck sooner or later. So, this problem can't be wished away and finding an opportunity to get stuck at the right level might not be such a bad idea!!!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">We do see an increasing number of mid-career professionals taking up </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">consulting/freelancing</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"> kind of options. The trouble is that majority of those mid-career professionals are unlikely to earn at least as much as they were earning in their regular job. Yes, there are a few who make it really big. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">There are also quite a few who use this opportunity to reinvent themselves and configure some sort of </span><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/victoriastefanakos/2013/06/14/why-i-love-having-a-portfolio-career-and-you-could-too/#3fb41dddba95" style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;">‘portfolio life and career’</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"> that is more aligned to their higher calling or more conducive to their self-actualization journey.</span> Based on my interaction with a large number of people who have transitioned from corporate careers to coaching/</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="color: #333333;">consulting/freelancing, I can confidently say that making such transitions for the right reasons and with the right expectations is very important for personal happiness, professional effectiveness and and indeed for experiencing a sense of freedom and progress!</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">In domains like HR, there is an even more basic question that we need to look at – ‘’</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">Do organizations have many HR jobs that would require a level of expertise which would take more than 20 years to develop?</span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;">”. If the answer is “No”, then it creates a fundamental issue for the bulk of the HR professionals who are in the 20+ years’ experience range. </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"> Yes, </span></span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: inherit;">there will be many senior HR professionals who will continue to grow in their career within business organizations. But, here we are talking about career options available to bulk of the population - HR professionals with 20+ years’ of experience working in </span><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: inherit;">business organizations. </span></p><p><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: inherit;">In this context there are also dimensions like motivation and meaning, apart from that of just being gainfully employed (Please see ‘</span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/01/truth-and-beauty-motivations-and.html" style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #171e7d; font-family: inherit; text-decoration-line: none;">Truth and Beauty: Motivations and Elegance in HR</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: inherit;">’ and ‘</span><a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/05/if-you-hang-around-in-hr-for-too-long.html" style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #171e7d; font-family: inherit; text-decoration-line: none;">If you hang around in HR for too long</a><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333; font-family: inherit;">’ for more details). After all, work is as much about finding the daily meaning as it is about finding the daily bread!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-57282212335116290452021-02-27T14:00:00.008+05:302023-07-26T14:23:39.579+05:30Problems that refuse to remain solved : Life in Organizations - Paradoxes, Dilemmas and Possibilities<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">After my book on <a href="https://www.amazon.in/dp/1637816170" target="_blank">'Life in Organizations - Paradoxes, Dilemmas and Possibilities'</a> got published, I received multiple queries on how to correctly identify paradoxes in business organizations. This is a very important question, as n<span style="color: #201f1e;">ot all the problems that we face in organizational life are paradoxes.</span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Many of the problems that we find in organizational life can be solved using regular problem-solving methods. Categorizing a simple problem as a paradox can complicate our lives unnecessarily. Some problems are to be solved, some problems are to be swamped out (by putting them in the broader context) and some problems are to be approached through paradoxical thinking. </span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">To me, the easiest way to spot a paradox is to look for problems that refuse remain solved. If an organizational problem is indeed a paradox, it cannot be solved in an algorithmic or prescriptive manner. If such a solution is attempted, it will create new problems. There are many fundamental problems in management that have not yet been ‘permanently solved’ - even after decades of efforts by managers, consultants and management gurus. So, when you encounter such a problem that refuse to remain solved, you are likely to be in the presence of a paradox. </span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span>The domain of people management is rich in such paradoxes. </span><span>A paradox occurs when there are multiple points of
view on an issue, each of which are true and essential, but they appear to be
in conflict with one another. </span><span>That is why basic aspects of people management like hiring, employee engagement, performance management and rewards have become </span><strong>renewable resources, </strong><span>where solutions to the problems will create new problems to solve, and they will continue to provide opportunities for 'management' and 'thought leadership'. The good thing is that this phenomenon has sustained an entire ecosystem of ‘HR Professionals, People Managers, Consultants and Thought Leaders’ for many decades!</span></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span>Paradoxical thinking is not about about endless analysis. In organizational life, decisions have to be taken, and often quickly. </span><span color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.9)" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Paradoxical thinking is just about enabling better decisions - by developing a more nuanced understanding of the conflicting perspectives, wrestling with them for a while and taking a decision based on that higher level of awareness. Yes, it is highly context-specific, as the attempt is essentially to find the best possible equilibrium point of the conflicting forces (pushes and pulls) acting on us at that moment in the given context!</span></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.9)"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;">Yes, </span></span><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;">managers are</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;"> paid to </span></span><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;">manage, and</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;"> paradoxes can indeed be managed, if we use the term 'manage' the sense of 'to cope with effectively</span></span><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;">' instead</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="white-space-collapse: preserve;"> of 'to fix it permanently'. If </span></span></span><span><span style="font-family: inherit;">we approach paradoxes with the respect they deserve, they can reveal profound truths, spur creativity and help us to actualize the immense possibilities that come along with the inherent contradictions in </span>organizational<span style="font-family: inherit;"> life.</span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.9)" style="font-family: inherit; white-space: pre-wrap;">Yes, it is this very process of identifying, understanding, wrestling with and responding to the paradoxes that opens up possibilities for creative living at the workplace (and in life)!</span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fefdfa; color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background: white; margin: 0cm; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #201f1e;">The book is available on </span><a href="https://www.amazon.in/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon India</a><span style="color: #201f1e;">,</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon UK</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">and</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon US</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">in both paperback and Kindle versions. It is also available in other eBook formats like Kobo and Google Books. </span></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #333333;"><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Would love to hear your comments/ideas!!!</span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizWyB8ppyUG2Orh7QByjGEHR-Sbm9phTFRrl72OKqUQ4COyVUx5bsSkjfk-T-oqv6Oy5MC0881TpG8MUvw33yOfEpRuTxh5uGGZASUuzsaHFvRgJh7x3ae0Qlbq-QbCy3hGImc7N6g59A/s1200/PrasadBookFC.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizWyB8ppyUG2Orh7QByjGEHR-Sbm9phTFRrl72OKqUQ4COyVUx5bsSkjfk-T-oqv6Oy5MC0881TpG8MUvw33yOfEpRuTxh5uGGZASUuzsaHFvRgJh7x3ae0Qlbq-QbCy3hGImc7N6g59A/s320/PrasadBookFC.png" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><p></p></div><p><span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="color: #201f1e; font-size: 11pt;"></span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-40532139932214856442021-02-21T20:45:00.005+05:302021-02-21T21:00:30.031+05:30Judging a Book by its Cover : Life in Organizations - Paradoxes, Dilemmas and Possibilities<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">One of the most frequent questions that I have received on the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-why-of-book-life-in-organizations.html" target="_blank">book</a> is related to the image of a gyroscope on its front cover. What is a rather scientific looking image doing on the cover of a book about the paradoxes, dilemmas and possibilities in organization life?</span></p><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Let me make an attempt to explain the thought process that led to this. </span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Managing paradoxes in organizational life is more about achieving the right dynamic equilibrium or</span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'dynamic balance' between the conflicting forces (the opposing pushes and pulls acting on us at that point in that particular context) as opposed to regular problem solving. A gyroscope is an example of dynamic equilibrium and it was further shown to be balanced on a person's finger to bring in the human element.</span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The primary attempt
in this book is to take a closer look at the some of the key paradoxes,
dilemmas and polarities that we encounter in business organizations, and, to wrestle
with them for a while. This can help us to reach a higher level of awareness
that makes it possible for us to respond creatively to the contradictions in our
specific context and to actualize the possibilities for living a
more fulfilling and effective life in business organizations.</span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Paradoxes are divergent
problems. While convergent problems should be broken into pieces and solved,
divergent problems should be approached differently. They should be transcended
using a higher awareness and scope. This
often involves arriving at a higher plane where the diverging forces converge. While
this is indeed more challenging, wresting with divergent problems often lead to
breakthroughs. Creative leaps and integration are made possible by the presence
of divergent problems and simultaneous opposites. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black;">Without
the ability to hold competing perspectives in mind simultaneously, we risk
losing sight of the wisdom and opportunities that emerge when we pursue paradoxical
thinking. Holding contradictory ideas in the mind is not easy, as it creates
cognitive dissonance, stress and anxiety. However, it is a very valuable skill
in a world full of contradictions. While it is said that eastern cultures more naturally
embrace opposites, it is indeed a learnable skill. It will also help us to
resist the temptation to oversimplify the situation and to wish away the
paradox. As organizations and individuals work though higher and higher levels
of uncertainty and change, paradoxical thinking can enable us to differentiate
ourselves</span><span style="color: red;">. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black;">Dealing
with paradoxes need a high degree of openness, mental flexibility, intellectual
honesty and humility. It also calls for some sort of ambidexterity and
tolerance for ambiguity at the organizational level, to live with conflicting
perspectives. This is what differentiates paradoxical thinking from the typical
management approaches that worship clarity, predictability and control. </span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black;">A
paradox cannot be solved in an algorithmic or prescriptive manner. If such a
solution is attempted, it will create new problems and do more harm than good.
This is the reason why many of the fundamental problems in management have not
been ‘permanently solved’, even after decades of efforts by managers and
consultants. However, if we approach them with the respect they deserve,
paradoxes can reveal profound truths, spur creativity and help us to actualize
the immense possibilities that come along with the inherent contradictions in
organizational life! </span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #212121;">Now let us come back to the image the gyroscope that was used to represent the concept of dynamic </span><span style="color: #212121;">equilibrium or dynamic balance. While a gyroscope is indeed an excellent example of dynamic balance. </span><span style="color: #212121;">a bicycle in motion could also have conveyed the same idea. But, the gyroscope looked like a more profound metaphor!</span><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #212121;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span><span style="color: #212121;">I guess, I have a soft corner for gyroscopes as they are also used to stabilize/</span><span style="color: #212121;">orient</span><span style="color: #212121;"> satellites in space, and I started my career with the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) as an engineer. Yes. this is a rather curious mix of </span></span><span style="color: #212121;">rationality and emotions! Maybe, that is the way most of the human decisions are!!</span></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #201f1e;">The book is available on </span><a href="https://www.amazon.in/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon India</a><span style="color: #201f1e;">,</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon UK</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">and</span><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" style="color: #171e7d; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Amazon US</a><span style="color: #201f1e;"> </span><span style="color: #201f1e;">in both paperback and Kindle versions. It is also available in other eBook formats like Kobo and Google Books. </span></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><p class="xmsonormal" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: #333333;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Would love to to hear your comments/ideas!!!</span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicI_PjBCYiicTq_TAWk9JQ-wbIZynmeM3VzR4kodzDccWN-hQPTZ_AF8Dda9GiCMX9CSjuyvBGdZqO5q9QvNtuUd5yPEw4Ujupxq7qvjTa2QzDLLmNFN8grAnoV9fy3aUClTLidTQir6I/s1200/PrasadBookFC.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicI_PjBCYiicTq_TAWk9JQ-wbIZynmeM3VzR4kodzDccWN-hQPTZ_AF8Dda9GiCMX9CSjuyvBGdZqO5q9QvNtuUd5yPEw4Ujupxq7qvjTa2QzDLLmNFN8grAnoV9fy3aUClTLidTQir6I/s320/PrasadBookFC.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><p></p></div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-78817058439975261422021-02-21T10:16:00.005+05:302021-02-21T10:22:08.068+05:30The Why of a Book : Life in Organizations - Paradoxes, Dilemmas and Possibilities<p><span style="color: #201f1e; font-family: inherit;">I started my career as an Aerospace Engineer at the
Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre of the Indian Space Research Organization.
Engineering is essentially about problem solving. Yes, it also involves
creativity, optimizing within constraints and making design trade-offs.
However, the core reality remains that the problems in engineering are meant to
be solved. After I made the ‘quantum jump’ from engineering to management, I started
becoming more aware of another type of ‘problems’ – problems that cannot be,
and even should not be, ‘solved’ in the engineering sense.</span></p><p></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Slowly, it occurred to me that these kinds of problems are probably the norm, as opposed to being exceptions, when it comes
to life in business organizations, especially in matters related to people and
people management. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A
paradox is a situation with an inherent contradiction. A paradox occurs when
there are multiple points of view on an issue, each of which are true and
essential, but they appear to be in conflict with one another. This implies
that that we cannot resolve a paradox in the way we solve a typical problem. We
cannot choose one of the options over the others without oversimplifying the
situation. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">What is possible is to struggle with the paradoxical situation for a
sufficient period of time so that we can reach a higher level of awareness and
deeper understanding of the context and the issue, that will enable us to come
up with the most effective response at a given moment. These responses are not
necessarily solutions in the normal sense of the word ‘solution’. Sometimes,
these are effective ways of coping with the situation. Sometimes, these
responses involve totally reframing the situation and opening up radically new
possibilities. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;">
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #201f1e;">Here,
we are using the term paradox and paradoxical thinking in a broad manner.
Therefore, it will also involve dilemmas, polarities and dialectic, though
strictly speaking, they are not necessarily paradoxes. A dilemma occurs when
one has to make a choice between two mutually exclusive options, neither of
which is clearly better than the other one. If these options are polar
opposites, then we have a polarity.</span> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #201f1e;">A dialectic is a pattern that begins with a thesis followed by
an antithesis and resolved by a higher synthesis. This synthesis can be
followed by another antithesis and the pattern can repeat, though at a higher
level, as one point of view teaches the other point of view instead of
invalidating it! Another term that is
relevant here irony. Irony occurs when what actually happens turns
out to be completely different from what was expected. In a way, irony is the
paradox of consequences. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This book is the outcome of my struggle with these paradoxes,
contradictions, dilemmas and possibilities over the last two decades. While this struggle can indeed
be very frustrating, it also holds the key to achieve a higher level of
awareness and more nuanced understanding that can open a wide range of
possibilities for us – possibilities for responding creatively and effectively
to the paradoxical situations that we face at work and in life.</span></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This book is an expedition through the paradoxes, dilemmas, polarities and
possibilities in the various aspects of organizational life. Our focus will be
on ‘real world paradoxes’ that impact our effectiveness in business
organizations, as opposed to ‘logical paradoxes’ that are more like logical
riddles. The book is organized in a manner that anyone who works
in business organizations should find it interesting. If you are a people
manager or business leader or if you work in the Human Resources domain you
will find many additional insights. I do not promise any algorithmic solutions
or to do lists. However, I do promise a lot of triggers for insights!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The book is available on <a href="https://www.amazon.in/dp/1637816170" target="_blank">Amazon India</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" target="_blank">Amazon UK</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Life-Organizations-Paradoxes-Dilemmas-Possibilities/dp/1637816170" target="_blank">Amazon US</a> in both paperback and Kindle versions. It is also available in other eBook formats like Kobo and Google Books. </span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Would love to to hear your comments/ideas!!!</span></span></p><p class="xmsonormal" style="background: white;"><span style="color: #201f1e;"><br /></span><span style="color: #201f1e;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCkmWHelh8T_k2dvvH2kl_0wYX_1vPevAmCN0H-pG3T0R3hrS_gehsyX9V036eLbuoeHHYlrVzV4r94KT3aJXJuc6oxOSMu8WhS-6uNUqyMQ3ZjpAwd-877p8jfR4Vm3YJeHRZTPrKuPI/s1200/PrasadBookFC.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCkmWHelh8T_k2dvvH2kl_0wYX_1vPevAmCN0H-pG3T0R3hrS_gehsyX9V036eLbuoeHHYlrVzV4r94KT3aJXJuc6oxOSMu8WhS-6uNUqyMQ3ZjpAwd-877p8jfR4Vm3YJeHRZTPrKuPI/s320/PrasadBookFC.png" /></span></a></div><br /><p></p><span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="color: #201f1e;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"></span></span><p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-11398555052699848172021-02-01T21:59:00.058+05:302021-02-02T21:23:10.928+05:30Of espoused values and enacted values<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">"This slide has a spelling mistake", remarked one of employees attending the 'corporate values workshop'. "Sorry, I can't find it", said the puzzled facilitator. "The problem is with what is shown as <b>renewal</b>. The correct spelling should be <b>removal!</b>", replied the employee. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">We come across these kinds of tragicomic situations when there is a significant difference between the 'espoused values' (the values that an organization publicly states that it believes in) and the 'enacted values' (the values that the organization actually exhibits) of an organization. The enacted values get reflected in the manner in which the organization treats its stakeholders, including the employees. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">In the particular incident that we started this post with, the employee did have a point. The organization had gone through repeated cycles of trying to renew itself by firing a large number of employees and replacing them with new employees. While there was no evidence to prove that the newly hired employees did any better than the employees they replaced, it did give the management the satisfaction that they took quick and decisive action. It also created an illusion of progress (or even an illusion of renewal). So, 'renewal' in this organization actually meant 'removal' though it was referred to by means of more progressive terms like 'workforce refresh' and 'top-grading'!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is indeed 'fashionable' to have well-articulated set of corporate values. Also, how can we even think of (let alone work with) an organization that doesn't have any values? However, the most essential thing about values is that they should be 'valued'. <span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">To me, </span><b style="background-color: #fefdfa;">something should be called a value only if it is so important</b><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"> <b>(so valuable and so core to the organization)</b> that the organization will exhibit it even when it leads to competitive disadvantage or results in a loss to the organization. Also, values are about 'who you are' as an organization and hence the values are 'discovered' (not 'designed'). </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Unfortunately<span style="background-color: #fefdfa;">, many organizations trivialize values and hence the values 'safely' remain in corporate presentations and on the walls of the organization. The arduous journey from the walls to the head to the heart and to the hands is never even seriously attempted. Ironically, this lack of congruence between the espoused values and the enacted values of the organization creates the highest amount of 'cognitive dissonance' and 'disengagement' in the case of those sincere employees who take the organization and its stated values seriously.</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: #fefdfa;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments?</span></span></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-16766864439512359472020-12-04T22:30:00.167+05:302020-12-07T14:25:03.024+05:30The silent organization<span style="font-family: inherit;">"I noticed something surprising during my induction program. While I met many employees from the various functions and levels in the organization, no one told me any stories about the organization. This has never happened to me in any of the organizations that I have worked before!", said the newly hired employee with a puzzled expression. </span><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">The first thing
that came to mind when I heard the above exchange was the Sherlock Holmes story</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">‘Silver Blaze’. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">The following exchange takes place in the story: </span><div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Scotland Yard detective: "Is there any other point to which you would
wish to draw my attention?"</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Holmes:
"To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Scotland Yard detective<span style="font-family: inherit;">:
"The dog did nothing in the night-time."</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Holmes:
"That was the curious incident."</span></p>Typically, employees like to tell stories (from the 'glorious past' of the organization) to a newcomer. These stories could be about a great leader who architected a turnaround in the organization, about a team that managed to accomplish a difficult goal in the face of overwhelming difficulties, about something that the organization did that made big impact on the society, about an amazing example of customer service, about a significant innovation or technological breakthrough made by the company, about outsmarting the competition etc. The stories also could be about something in which the employee was personally involved like an accomplishment, a great manager or team member or mentor, an incident where the company went out the way to support the employee during a crisis etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>Telling these stories to a newcomer allows the employees to 'relive' the incident and feel proud and energized. These stories can help the newcomer to connect to the heart and soul of the organization better than any facts and figures presented during the induction. It is said that a social group (including an organization) constructs its reality through the stories and legends. These stories embody the culture and values of the organization and serve as an effective enculturation tool. Also, the connect between the new employee and the organization (a key component of employee engagement that impacts the motivation and retention of the new employee) happens mainly through the connect the new employee forms with the current employees (and their stories!). So, this kind of storytelling is highly beneficial for the newcomer, the existing employees and the organization. </div><div><br /></div><div>If these stories are absent, it can be a sign of potential trouble for the organization and a useful 'early warning' for the new employee. Silent or 'story-less organizations' tend to be devoid of 'identity' and 'soul', and, hence it becomes impossible for the stakeholders, including the employees, to connect to it at an emotional level. After all, what is there to connect with?! </div></div><div><br /></div><div>Hence, typically, these kind of 'silent situations' occur when the employees are unable to connect emotionally to the organization or when they don't feel proud about the organization, their function or their job. While it is possible that 'nothing worth mentioning has happened in the organization', it is more likely that the employees 'didn't feel the connection and ownership' to what has indeed happened. </div><div><br /></div><div>These situations are more likely in organizations that take a more transactional approach to people management and don't pay sufficient attention to <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-curious-case-of-object-and-subject.html" target="_blank">employee engagement</a>, <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2010/12/architects-of-meaning.html" target="_blank">sense-making</a> and creating a <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/04/of-owning-and-belonging.html" target="_blank">sense of belonging</a>. Another possibility is that the organization has done something trust-destroying (or even 'soul damaging'), like a '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/12/of-employee-engagement-and-survivor.html" target="_blank">mismanaged restructuring</a>' or 'acting in a manner that very much at odds with the <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/05/of-values-and-competencies.html" target="_blank">espoused values of the organization</a>'. </div><div><br /></div><div>The difficult thing here (for the organization) is that the situation can't be remedied just by getting the internal communication function to hunt for/write a large number of stories and do an intense campaign based on those stories. It is because the problem is with the 'emotional connection' to the stories and not with the absence of stories. In a way, it is a like the type of diabetes that occurs not because of lack of insulin but because of the loss of sensitivity to insulin! </div><div><br /></div><div>At the most fundamental level, this is exactly the way it should be. Storytelling is an intensely human activity and unless the human side of the organization is given adequate importance and nurturing, storytelling (and culture building and employee engagement/retention based on the same) would be an impossible dream! </div><div><br /></div><div>Stories come alive (for the storyteller and for the listener) only when they come 'straight from the heart' and that can happen only if the employees can connect with the story (and the organization) emotionally (and not just rationally). So, in an organization that doesn't invest in building and sustaining an emotional connect with the employees, employees are unlikely to connect with 'corporate-sponsored stories' and they are even more unlikely to tell those stories to newcomers. Yes, the employees might derive some pleasure in ridiculing the 'corporate-sponsored storytelling' attempt! </div><div><br /></div><div><b>Postscript</b>: <span style="font-family: inherit;">One of the queries that I have received in response to this post is whether this kind of storytelling can happen without face to face interaction (as virtual working is the norm in the current pandemic situation). I think that storytelling and the connect through the same can take place through virtual interactions also. These days, even psychotherapy is being done effectively through
virtual meetings. It has been said that one of the advantages of virtual
meetings is that one can observe the other person very closely without making that
person feel uncomfortable. Of course, it works the other way around also!</span></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p><div>Any comments/ideas?</div>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-85561283460808562682020-10-26T22:45:00.082+05:302020-11-10T12:15:55.031+05:30Metaphors for coaching <p><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Over the last ten years, the company assigned six high-profile executive coaches to develop me. But, none of them could change me!", declared the business leader triumphantly. This was my third encounter with this gentleman (See '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-organization-development-managers.html" target="_blank">Organization Development Managers as Court Jesters</a>' and '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2013/02/of-reasons-and-rationalizations.html" target="_blank">Of reasons, rationalizations and collective delusions</a>' for my earlier encounters with him).</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This
conversation came to mind again when I was thinking about metaphors for
coaching.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Metaphors
create new understanding. Also, a new understanding merits a new metaphor!
Hence, as my understanding of coaching evolved, I have tried to develop new
metaphors to capture that new understanding. There are many types of
coaching. Here, I have focused only on my evolving understanding of
'non-directive coaching' and the metaphors corresponding to that .</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">My initial
metaphor for coaching was that of a plane mirror, because I looked at the coach
as someone who listens deeply and plays it back to enhance the self-awareness
of the person being coached. Rhetorically, the thought was something like this: </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">"May be,
if the coach can 'hold a mirror to' the coachee, the coachee himself will
'speak to the man in the mirror, and ask him to change his ways"! </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Then, I started
feeling that the role of the coach is a more 'active' one - someone who helps
to convert the abstract thoughts and feelings in the mind of the person being
coached to a more concrete form that would make it easier for him/her to
understand and analyze his/her thoughts and feelings. This brought to mind the
metaphor of a musical instrument (e.g. a piano) that can convert abstract
'music notation' into music that can be heard and enjoyed. This is very useful, because, while the music notation contains the music, most of us can understand music only when it is instrumentally
interpreted</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">!</span></p><p></p><p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">After that, I
started feeling that the above 'musical instrument' metaphor was 'too active'
as different musical instruments convert the abstract music ('thoughts and
feelings') differently. That is when the metaphor of the concave mirror, that
not only reflects without distortion but also focuses reflected light, sounded
more appropriate to me (as the coach focuses the discussion so that the person being
coached is able to work towards solutions more effectively)! </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A concave mirror
can magnify when it is close enough, like what a shaving mirror does (similar
to a coach who is fully present in the moment being able to help the person
being coached to 'see' things that are not apparent to him/her). However, if
the concave mirror is moved too far away (or when the coach doesn't stay in the
'here and now' of the person being coached) the image can get inverted (or the
coaching can go topsy-turvy)! </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">There were
other metaphors also that came to mind:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">an 'electric
charge' which creates a field around it, like as a coach 'creates a field of
learning' or 'holds the space' so that exploration, solutioning and change
becomes easier for the person being coached</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">a 'positioning
system' that helps you to figure out where you are without telling you where to
go</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">the 'Socratic
method' that enables you find your own answers though a series of questions,
like a coach who asks questions without giving answers etc.)</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">a 'stock
option' which is an option but not a compulsion to exercise the option to buy
the stock, just like coaching is an invitation and not a compulsion to explore</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">a 'cartography'
where the coach enables the person being coached to create/revise his/her
mental maps so that he/she can navigate better towards the desired state</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">an 'alchemy'
that transforms 'base' metals (thinking) into 'gold' (or refined thoughts)</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">a 'catalyst'
that makes it easier for a chemical reaction to take place without actually
participating in the chemical reaction, like a coach enables the person being
coached to find and implement his/her own solutions without offering any
solutions/getting involved in the implementation.</span></li><li><span style="font-family: inherit;">the 'Cheshire
cat' who engages in amusing and insightful conversations without actually
giving an answer :)</span></li></ul><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It also gave
rise to compound metaphors for coaching like 'Socrates holding a concave
mirror'!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I am sure that
as my understanding of coaching (and I as a coach) evolves, I will
find better metaphors. This is even more appropriate because metaphors are also
a great tool for coaching, as the unconscious mind prefers to speak in the
language of metaphors. Yes, we must explore what a particular metaphor means to
the person being coached as the same metaphor can mean different things to
different people. Again, 'generative metaphors' are immensely valuable for the
person being coached, because they enable him/her not only to crystallize the desired new reality, but also to generate the energy to work towards it!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">To me, coaching at its core is a deep human connect and joint exploration that changes not only the coachee but also the coach. While the processes and tools are useful in coaching, the 'super power' that the coach brings is his/her presence, being completely there in the 'here and now' of the moment with the coachee without judgment. To me, the most important consideration during the coaching interaction is simply 'what would be most helpful to the coachee at that particular moment, keeping in mind the objectives agreed with the coachee'. This also requires a very high level of self-awareness and awareness of the context on the part of the coach. In a way, coaching is more of a 'state of being' than 'doing'. </p><p class="MsoNormal">Now, let's come back to the conversation at the beginning of this post. What the business leader was really saying was that "if six high-profile executive coaches couldn't bring about any change, then it proves that there was nothing that required changing in the first place!". This brings us to a very important point : no change will take place unless the person being coached wants to change. This is especially true for non-directive coaching. </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">To me, the coaching works best when it is the coachee who feels the need for coaching and pays for it, because, both the conviction and commitment of the coachee are highly probable in such a scenario. It is true that
in most of the cases, the coaching is
paid for by the employer of the person being coached. In that kind of a
situation, we get the best results when the employee is offered coaching as an option
(and not a compulsion)! Also, this works better if the coaching is offered as
an investment that the organization is willing to make to enable the employee
to accelerate his/her development or to realize his/her full potential (as
opposed to the coaching being remedial measure). Again, confidentiality has to
be assured and the employee (the person being coached) should be empowered to
drive the 'direction' of coaching. After all, coaching is an invitation, and
not a compulsion, to change!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any comments/ideas?</span></p><p></p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-41810396423923392992020-09-18T19:51:00.037+05:302020-10-12T13:08:32.715+05:30Of change, progress and a kaizen story<p><span face="Arial, sans-serif">Let’s start
with a kaizen story, that I heard a long time ago. A particular organization
had rolled out kaizen (continuous improvement). An incentive scheme was also
launched to reward the employees who make any such improvement in any part of
work. So, one person successfully claimed a ‘kaizen’ for putting some
flowerpots in the work area and thereby ‘improving the work environment’. </span><span face="Arial, sans-serif"> </span><span face="Arial, sans-serif">After sometime, another person successfully claimed
a kaizen for removing those flowerpots and thereby ‘improving the flow of
people and materials in the work area’. So, we were back to square one though
it counted as two kaizens (making the organization appear ‘continuously
improving’) and both the employees received their incentive payout!</span></p><p><span face="Arial, sans-serif">While the above
story might come across as a caricature (and not a portrait) of what actually
happens in business organizations, it has more than a grain of truth. The
biggest source of waste in many business organizations, that so deftly escapes even
lean six sigma and productivity improvement efforts, is that results from frequent
changes in direction and the tendency to equate ‘change’ with ‘progress’. Yes, rapid
changes in direction, including fast U-turns, helps in creating some sort of
illusion (or even a convenient collective delusion of) progress and of taking 'decisive
action'. The point here is not that one shouldn’t change the direction when it
is required or that one shouldn’t correct one’s mistakes. It is just that one
should have some accountability for one’s decisions and the organization and
human costs associated with them.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span face="Arial, sans-serif">This works well in Human Resource Management (HR) also. One of the great ‘advantages’ of being in HR is that one can get
credit for both hiring and firing the same person, that too in rapid
succession. Similarly, we can get credit for adding a reporting layer to ‘integrate’
and also for removing that layer to ‘increase efficiency’. Yes, this leads to
the HF</span><sup style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">2</sup><span face="Arial, sans-serif"> model of HR, where HR is reduced to Hire (sourcing), Feed
(payroll) and Fire (exit). Of course, one can have other (more ‘fashionable’)
functions in HR. But they are more of ‘show horses’ than ‘plough horses’!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><u style="font-family: inherit;">Postscript</u><span style="font-family: inherit;"> : This post, especially the 'kaizen story' at the </span>beginning<span style="font-family: inherit;"> of this post, generated quite a bit of discussion on social media. </span></span><span color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.9)" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">It left me wondering why such an old story could connect so well. Now, I realize that it is because the story almost perfectly matches the definition of a 'myth'. A <a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2006/12/myth-and-truth-so-true-that-it-cant-be.html">myth</a> is a story that keeps on happening again and again in various forms, because it contains a deep truth (a deep truth about the nature of reality in organizations, in this case)!</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">Any comments/ideas?</p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7584319303804919668.post-19047832600332111382020-09-06T22:59:00.113+05:302020-09-14T11:19:57.772+05:30Talent's progress<p>Is there a perspective that can throw light not only on the progress of employees, but also on the effectiveness of people management in the organization? Tracking the changes in the positioning of employees on the talent grid over a period of time can be an excellent option!</p><p>There are many ways in which the progress of an employee ('talent') in an organization can be depicted. The most concrete one is in terms of the roles the employee takes up in the organization. Then there are aspects like compensation, responsibility level etc. that can also be used to track the progress of an employee in the organization.</p><p>In this post, let's look at the progress of employees in the organization in terms of a more abstract (though very widely used) representation - in terms of the changes in the mapping of the employee to the performance-potential grid. This grid, often called the talent grid, is typically a 9-box one, with box 9 corresponding to high performance coupled with high potential. </p><p>If we track the changes in the positioning of the employees on the talent grid over a period of time, say for 3-5 cycles of talent review process that lead to the mapping of the employees on this grid, the trends emerging from the same can give us very interesting insights on the effectiveness of Talent Management in the organization. </p><p>Ideally, employees should shift right and/or up on the grid. This would mean that the Talent Management in the organization has managed to help the employees to improve their performance and/or potential. Similarly, if the general trend in an organization is that employees would shift left and/or down and then out of the grid (and the organization!) it can be an indicator of lack of effectiveness of people management in the organization. </p><p>Of course, these movements are also dependent on the employees (their performance and demonstrated potential). However, the overall trends in the movements on the grid (for a group of employees) can provide valuable indications on the effectiveness of people management in the organization. These employees went through the selection process of the organization before they started featuring in the talent grid and hence the organization can't easily disown them or their movements on the talent grid! </p><p>Yes, there could be other factors at play. For example, if the organization has imposed some sort of normalization on <a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2012/05/performance-ratings-and-above-average.html">performance ratings</a> and/or on <a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/11/paradox-of-potential-assessment.html" target="_blank">potential ratings</a>, this would limit the percentage of the employees who can be in box 7, 8 and 9 (the boxes in the talent grid that denote the best talent positioning). Also, if 'long term' performance (and not recent performance) is what drives the positioning on the performance axis of the grid, the degree of 'fluctuation' along the performance axis of the grid is likely to be lower. </p><p>There is also this interesting phenomenon of s<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-sticky-case-of-stickiness-of.html" target="_blank">tickiness of the ratings, especially potential ratings</a>. The extreme case is when the organization takes the stated or unstated position that the 'potential' is a non-modifiable factor, in which case no movement on the potential axis would be possible. Mercifully, most organizations consider potential to be some sort of a <a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.in/2007/01/of-competencies-and-carbohydrates.html" target="_blank">combination</a> of ability, aspiration and leadership and somewhat modifiable. </p><p>All this assumes that the definition, the rating scale and the calibration norms for performance and potential (that lead to the positioning on the talent grid) remains consistent over the years/over the period used for trend analysis. Else, there is a possibility of scenarios similar to that of 'reducing poverty by redrawing the poverty-line'! </p><p>There could also be deeper factors like the tacit definition of '<a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-what-good-looks-like.html" target="_blank">what good looks like</a>' and the unstated assumptions regarding people management in the organization (e.g. 'we hire a person based not only on the fit to the current role but also on the fit to the future roles' or 'we hire people mainly to solve a particular problem at a given point in the organization's journey'). </p><p>As we have seen in '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/03/unorthodox-concepts-in-hr-part-8-type-n.html" target="_blank">Type N and Type O Organizations</a>', in the case of 'Type N' organizations, the relatively new employees have a great advantage over the other employees, though this advantage vanishes quite quickly as they become 'old' (tenured)! This can lead to rapid changes in the grid positioning as the employees tend to get over-positioned on the grid initially and then shift left and down (and out!) very quickly. This creates a lot of action (and an <a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/08/appropriate-metaphors-for-organization.html">illusion of progress</a>) on the people management front, though over a period of time it might become apparent (if the organization is open to see it) that quality of talent in the organization hasn't improved and that '<a href="https://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2020/02/when-new-doesnt-outperform-old.html" target="_blank">the new is not really outperforming the old</a>'!</p><p> So, where does this leave us? Though Talent's progress (or lack of it) on the performance-potential grid is a rather abstract way of capturing the Talent trajectory', it can indeed provide very useful insights on the effectiveness of people management in the organization! While the movement of a particular employee on the grid is mainly a function of the performance and demonstrated potential of the employee, the trends in these moves at the group level points to the effectiveness (or lack of it) of people management in the organization. These organization level trends can also be very useful in unearthing the <a href="http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/11/towards-philosophy-of-hr.html">unstated assumptions that the organization has made</a> on people and on people management!</p><p>Any comments/ideas? </p>Prasad Kurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00392000963081576320noreply@blogger.com0