Book Review: Why There is Something Rather Than Nothing, Leszek Kolakowski

This is a wonderful and very readable book. It is a long way from the dry and jargon ridden books on philosophy that I had to endure at college. It is written with the general reader in mind and with beautiful economy, clarifies questions raised by the great philosophers. I found it a particularly useful resource to understand philosophical approaches to human motivation.

As the book is divided neatly into chapters for each great philosopher, it is easy to skip the material you don't find as relevant and move on.

It is a book that promotes thoughtful reflection and that has to be a useful thing in this day and age.

What's it all about?

Book Review: Psychology of Executive Coaching, Bruce Peltier

Surely one of the best books on Executive Coaching and a milestone in coaching literature for providing an integrative approach to psychotherapy and business coaching. While most coaching literature tries to show how they're different, Pelitier successfully argues that psychotherapy and psychodynamic approaches have an important application in coaching.

There are important and very practical sections on defensiveness, avoidance, etc, useful to all business leaders, I think. I reflected that few of us realize our debt to Freud when we use phrases in the everyday such as "He's defensive"; "She has a big ego"; "Look at how he projects himself".

What attracted me was his criticism of lightweight coaching approaches that have no basis in how personality is formed and developed and as a result lapse into glib superficialities. At the same time, he recognizes the danger of introducing psychotherapy to the coaching and business arena:"The trick is to integrate "analytic" or dynamic thinking into coaching without pathologizing the client relationship".

As he makes clear, executive coaching is the perfect vehicle to do this. Executive coaches are trained to produce results while recognizing the independence and autonomy of the client.

A good read and a useful reference.

Happy New Decade! Time for the Teenies

Congratulations. You made it through the Noughties. Twin Towers; two wars, Afghanistan and Iraq, both with terrible aftermaths; Hurricane Katrina; The Tsunami; floods in India; two major economic crises, Enron to Lehman; two epidemics, Bird flu and Swine flu; and urban terror, 7/7, and Madrid; and the double shame of Abu Grahib and Gitmo. The past decade is not likely to be mourned by many, struck as it was by a series of paired misfortunes. We have to feel happy at least that we got through this.

And yet, we also need to enter the Teenies with a sense of optimism, even pride. Beneath the calamities, the worst decade since the 1940s taught us is how to work together. The last two years have seen a major global depression avoided by unprecedented and successful coordination. China weighed in and threw itself behind global stability, ironic given its continuing ideological allegiance to communism.

Poland and other new entrants to the EU tangibly brought Europe together again, in a fashion not seen since medieval times. Hundreds of thousands of young East Europeans sought jobs and experience abroad, returning cash and knowhow to their home countries in the process.

The Tsunami brought a coordinated global response and on-the-ground activism in a way that contrasts strongly with the indifference towards Rwanda and Sarajevo in the 1990's.

India and China emerged as major economic forces with the ability to lift tens of millions out of the poverty trap.

The decade finished with the highly imperfect but significant Copenhagen agreement. Again in pairs, the Lisbon Treaty came into force, which will enable much higher levels of European integration to take place.

The role of women in public life and business took huge strides. Women lead countries and corporations; and they now account for about half of all entrants into the accounting professions. In developing countries, women are benefiting from service jobs resulting from globalization. Yet, think back twenty years to the times when many men and women argued that a male dominated society was an natural order of things. The rise of women shows that change can and does happen. Things are not going to be always the same. We can make conscious decisions about how we organize society.

If there's one thing all of the above showed, it was how these events were seen and felt around the world. Globalization is not just a function of the expansion of corporate structures, it is a mindset reshaping the way we think about the world. Media too, both official and unofficial, is becoming more global and real-time. Social media is at the cutting edge of this. We look at Iran on the bring of a revolution, we see videos and read tweets from the streets.

President Obama was elected saying "Yes, we Can." What has he achieved, people ask? Well, aside from stabilizing the economy and passing historic health care legislation in year one, I believe he has made us all feel differently. The proud Iranians patriots fighting injustice in their country are not not necessarily pro-American, but the changes they are attempting to bring about are going to be a lot easier to achieve with a thoughtful and conciliatory Obama as President, rather than the instinctive and abrasive Bush.

Unquestionably, the world faces great challenges. The troops will need to come home from the Middle East, while maintaining stability in these countries. The debts incurred while stabilizing the economy will need to be paid off through taxation or cost-cutting, while not triggering a global recession. The world will actually need to cut its emissions and mitigate the effects of environmental erosion on people already at the economic margins.

But I for one start this decade in a cautiously optimistic mood. There is a new global alignment around the need for economic and banking reform; for environmental action; for fairer policies governing global trade. There are disagreements about how to do this, and who should pay for what. But, we are leaving behind much of the thoroughly neo-conservative and nationalistic baggage that has so constrained the debates in the last decade. The Teenies will see solutions to these problems.

One thing stands out for me as the defining theme of the coming decade: The need to change patterns. Alignment and awareness are not enough. Individually and collectively we need to reduce our dependence on debt; live sustainable and balanced lives; be prepared to give more to those injured by global changes that they cannot control. This requires us to think and act differently. We need to rediscover our ethical sense and work pride - we do it because it is the right thing to do, not just because we are incented that way. Yes, Thiery Henri might be right that most footballers would commit handball as he did. Yet, neither Bobby Charlton nor Franz Beckenbauer would and they achieved greatness because of this.

So, I think the Teenies will be about a decade of change. Reform of business and financial institutions has to occur. Businesses and banks will have to account for the social cost of what they do and the broader societal risk that they incur.

Business will need to be authentic and honest. They will need to appeal to a young generation of employees and consumers who feel they have been lied to. Just like the Ayatollahs of Iran no longer have a monopoly of information within their country, corporate bosses need to understand the revolutionary nature of Web 2.0 and how social media empowers individuals and communities.

The beginning of the decade is a good time for each of us to think about how these broader patterns will shape us, because shape us they will. People who succeed in this decade will be the ones who will sense the changes taking place and embrace it, rather than fight it.

The hackers who broke into the servers of the University of East Anglia Environmental Science department, revealing as they saw it the falsehood of climate change, are a metaphor for what we have to overcome: the saboteurs in our own minds. When change seems difficult, our mental sabateurs start telling us that "We don't need to change; no one else is changing; change is a trick; what do these experts know anyway; let's just stay the same until we're really, really sure". All these mental "saboteurs" will be present in our minds over the next decade. Being aware of them, and staying committed to changing dysfunctional or too-risky patterns of behavior will be the key to avoiding a personal and collective calamity in the coming decade.

So, I have chosen the image of a door into the next decade to represent a sense of new beginning, opportunity and relief. It is up to us to walk through it.

Even Tiger Woods has a coach, right...

Yes, it won't just be Accenture who has to rework its favorite tag line. Business coaches everywhere will be scratching their heads to think of some easy way to convey the role they have in coaching successful people. Tiger's enduring success presented an icon, an ideal: Someone who had actually "self actualized". He'd really done it. Athlete of the decade, model wife, kids, billion dollar contracts. With Tiger around, we all knew that with enough practice and a winning smile, anything was possible.

Now we are all faced with a hard landing back to Planet Reality. Life is full of painful choices and trade offs even for successful people and in some cases, particularly for successful people.

We are reminded of the fact that (according to Psychologist, Dr. Steven Ungerleider) within 5 years, 40% of Olympic medalists undergo psychotherapy or counseling in some form. Success itself creates its own dilemmas. As one motivational driver is satisfied, others remain unmet. They surface from our unconscious to remind us of their continued existence at inconvenient moments.

So what's going on? And, why can't we have it all?

In my view, it all relates to the key elements of our Mind: our Values, Motivation and Goals. There are other things going on in there of course, but these are the elements that I observe as a coach being most significant in shaping how we live. Keeping these three elements in some sort of balance is what I think life is all about. We function best when our goals are routed in our values and are driven by our motivational needs. For instance, if a successful person has very high Achievement motive, they might value the continued striving. It is not just about winning, its the struggle itself that they enjoy. It is this value that keeps them going on to keep winning. The goal to be #1 can therefore be grounded in real psychological needs. We achieve success in some aspect of our life, be it sports, work or in our social networks, as a result of this alignment.

Yet, just when we think we have it sorted, other motivational needs start to surface, under-nurtured and unmet. The need for freedom, independence, control, can assert themselves. My guess, it that this did so in Tiger's life, with disastrous consequences. The freedom to "be like other guys", and do what they do. With a life and family, and billion dollar promotional contract, Tiger's downfall brings to sharp relief just how "irrational" and self-destructive we can become when our motivational and value system collide.

This is a sad story. I don't know the chronology, but it might well be Tiger lost his bearings after the loss of his Father, who seemed unusually prominent in his adult life. Perhaps the child in Tiger hung around for just that bit too long. The impact on his wife and two young children can only be imagined.

The only lesson we can draw from this is coaches is to be reminded that its never just about the golf, anymore than it is ever just about work. Successful leaders bring their whole self into what they do, and their success impacts every other aspect of their life.

The sad part in all this is that Tiger was not able to change a habit before it was too late. Habits can be changed. He he is a young man with a lot to offer the world. He is a leader, icon, husband and parent, and what he does now will influence directly and indirectly many people.

Today, the message is that Tiger needs a real coach now more than ever. This is a distinctively different role and relationship from father or golf instructor. He needs someone with sufficient insight to spot the patterns, detachment to ask the tough questions and relational skill to build his self awareness. He needs someone who could bridge his public/private worlds and ensure the two were in alignment with each other.

And, let's face it, we all want to be inspired by the gods because they make us feel that we too, can rise above our complex, imperfect humanity.

Awareness, Motivation and Action

The Gestalt Cycle of Experience and the Law of Pragnanz are vital to our understanding of how we become aware and move to action, sometimes in different ways and at different times from each other(1). If we want people “on the same page” as us, we need to attend to this. A confrontation in a care park highlighted this for me. And, a 1999 medical research study(2) points the way as to how leaders can create and maintain heightened awareness, motivation and action-orientation in their teams.

A short while ago, I was driving into a shopping mall in Warsaw. As I drove around the upper stories looking for one of the very few places left, I saw the car in front of me stop in the roadway. To my disbelief, he got out, locked his car and began to walk into the mall itself. With oncoming traffic coming the other way, he blocked the road in front of me. I wound down my window, and in language a little unbecoming for a coach, I said, "Hey X$C%!, move your car!!!". What he said astonished me. I was expecting either compliant action, or an alpha male riposte, but instead he simply said "spokojne, Pan. Nie problemu." (Be calm, Sir, there's no problem). He then proceeded with his nonchalant walk into the mall. The oncoming traffic had cleared and I was able to maneuver around his parked car. Still mumbling "What an X$C%!", I parked nearby. Soon however, I was thinking about something else (food probably).

To put it mildly, he and I had experienced different "Gestalts", the figures or images that form in our mind. I saw his car as an obstacle, he saw an opportunity to fix to his parking problem. But I also saw someone breaking the rules. We are meant to park our car inside the white lines. It's obvious. Society deems it so. But...in actual fact I had lost perhaps one minute at most. I was able to maneuver around "the obstacle". Other drivers would probably have been able to as well. Weren't we both right? When he said there was no problem, he probably had a point. Perhaps we can tolerate a bit of flexibility in society. After all, Britain, where I come from, is one of the most heavily policed societies in the world and this has its costs, too.

But more important to the point of this article, my attempt to achieve a resolution to this affair was wholly a failure. Why was this. Let's deconstruct this event:

> I had sensed the presence of an obstacle,

> I become aware that I was stuck and I saw a "rule breaker" ahead of me

> I became charged, and mobilized sufficient energy to deal with the crisis at hand

> and, I moved to action by winding my winding down and delivering my verbal assault.

> I had arrived at the action stage with a need-for-closure attitude

He on the other hand, had not even sensed the same things that I had. He saw that there was plenty of space to move round his car, once the traffic had cleared. And, he saw someone yelling at him. His lunch date was probably more figural to him at this stage(3).

I had moved from awareness, through motivation, to the action phase without ensuring my counter-part had any idea of what I was experiencing. Had I got out of my car, used some EQ to engage him in a conversation and said respectfully but firmly that I felt it was important that we all abide by the rules (and asserted my values), he might perhaps have been more accommodating. We might even have engaged in some joint problem solving, scanning our eyes for alternative spaces.

I wish I had my Wife next to me at this point. A third party perspective often helps.

But, isn't this just what happens all the time in leadership situations. In the moment, leaders see actions, results and behaviors which do not fall into the "white lines" they expect. Right/wrong imagery comes to their mind. Different levels of energy and motivation come to the fore. They're energized and excited by things, but it's hard to get peoples attention or energy focused on the same place. Often, leaders have to put up with grudging compliance rather than active energy behind shared goals.

The Gestalt Cycle of Experience (Figure 1) is therefore not just a personal process, but is a shared experience(4). It is our interaction with the outer world, and often with people that forms our experience. The more a leader can help people move through this cycle together, the more likely it will be that everyone will be "on the same page" and "pulling in the same direction".

Closely associated with the Cycle of Experience, is the Law of Pragnanz, the drive to complete the cycle and return to a point of equilibrium. In other words, we need closure. And, once we achieve closure we are often reluctant to re-open the cycle of experience, which is one reason we are resistant to feedback.

We can therefore look at the Gestalt Cycle as a linear pattern which is shared by different members of a team, with attention and engagement fluctuating over time and resulting in closure. Figure 2 shows the ideal situation, where the Cycle of Experience of each team member flows in a similar way. This tends to occur when a leader has allowed each team member to see, hear and experiment with an object or idea; and, through questioning and interaction, come to form a shared view about it. Big picture, coaching, affiliative or democratic styles can all do this well. They encourage people to be more open to feedback, to accept other peoples "Gestalts", and to listen to contrary views. Closure is achieved in business terms in various ways, such as problem resolution, decision, clear accountabilities, supporting processes, technical competence, and so on, all enabling the leader to psychologically "move on" and address other burning issues.

Figure 3, shows us a situation that often occurs, where the leader is exercising higher awareness and energy (usually negative) than others around them. Rather like myself in the Shopping Mall parking lot, leaders stuck in this place tend to use either the directive, "tell" , or pace setting "show" styles which results in compliance or replication, but which does not generate the same level of awareness or energy. One reason for this effect is that a "telling" style can more often lead to D3, denial, deflection and diminishing responses to feedback (See Feedback Coaching). When we are resistant to feedback, we have achieved a premature closure and withdrawal on an issue. Our mind is literally "set". New information contained in feedback is treated as inaccurate, irrelevant or malevolent. We stop listening and hold on to out-of-date images of ourselves and the situation around us.

How else can we explain failures of banks and other financial institutions, led by apparently successful and intelligent people who clung for too long to images of themselves "turning things around".

And, also in Figure 3, we see the real danger in "stuckness": A failure to reach completion or closure on an issue. The matter continues to bug you; cause arguments; distractions; procrastination takes hold; ineffective repetitive strategies are formed; failed execution results. People feel drained and fatigued. Without a shared awareness and common understanding, team members will interpret ambiguities in different ways.

A life and death situation illustrates the Gestalt Cycle of Experience in action. In 1999 a medical research study in Boston, USA, looked into the wide variation in the effectiveness with which sixteen public hospitals had introduced radically new ultrasound technologies for cardiac surgery. The key measure was time, as the duration the patience was under operation had a large effect on survival rates and post-operation recovery. Yet, the average time taken to complete the new procedures varied significantly. A wide number of variables were looked into. One of the most obvious was the knowledge and experience of the surgeon. Naturally, we'd expect that the more qualified and experienced the surgeon, the more effective and expert was the implementation of the new procedure. Well, not so. The study showed a negative correlation between "world class" surgeons and the time efficiency in adopting new procedures. "Average" surgeons performed the new procedures better.

How could this be. Well, direct quotes from the authors illuminate the reason:

"The ability of the surgeon to allow himself to become a partner, not a dictator, is critical."

The procedure was introduced more effectively when there was " a free and open environment with input from everybody"; and,

"An atmosphere of information sharing" was key to the more rapid adoption of the procedure.

World class surgeons, grown up in the older methods, had used a dictating style in the operating theatre. They saw that the success of the new procedure depended on their judgment. What was most figural to them was their own expertise. They were therefore reluctant to take on board the ideas of others. The support staff were not made to feel that they had anything to contribute, and therefore they simply saw this procedure like any other. They were professional, but detached.

"Average" surgeons, perhaps because they were not invited to give speeches at international conferences, were less prone to see themselves alone as the instrument of success. They saw the new procedure as a an "organizational issue" and not merely a technical challenge. They therefore actively sought after the opinions of assistants. And, these surgeons saw the value in building up a dedicated team so that knowledge could be built up and shared. Team members felt part of something. They invested energy. It was this team specialization that accounted for the biggest variation in operational effectiveness of the new procedure.

World class surgeons merely retained the existing nursing rotational system. They were not open to new experience. Their Gestalt Cycle was closed. They had equilibrium, confident in their image of themselves as truly world class. Although perhaps a read down of their effectiveness rankings might have prompted a sudden re-opening.

The case study points to the uncomfortable fact that it can be our very success that can stop us sensing and becoming aware of the value of those around us. If business leaders sit in a room and see others as rivals, threats, juniors, women, ethnically or nationally different, less smart, rather than as people they will miss vital sensory information that can lead to disconnection, dissonance and "stuckness" later on.

Taking more time early on to prompt dialogue, exchange and reflection is the surest way of achieving a common Gestalt Cycle and a common sense of closure and equilibrium. Carefully listening for meaning; deep questioning, resolving differences and being transparent in ones own thought and feelings might take more time initially, but will produce higher levels of awareness, greater motivation and more effective action.

1.Organizational Consulting, A Gestalt Approach. Edwin C. Nevis

2.Use of Ultrasound Technology in Cardiac Surgery in 16 public hospitals in the Boston, Mass area, 1999. A Edmondson; R Bohmer; G Pisano: HBR

3.Skills in Counselling & Psychotherapy. Phil Joyce & Charlotte Sills.

4.Organizations Get Stuck Too. Bill Critchley & David Casey (Leadership & Organizational Development Journal)

Eric Schmidt on Why Everyone Needs a Coach

Thank you, Eric. This is a succinct business case for coaching. He nicely describes the normal reaction a successful and senior leader would go through when being presented with the option to work with a coach. He goes on to describe how a coach can help you understand how you are seen by others.

Feedback Coaching

This article will discuss how a leader can use simple coaching tools to lessen the risk of meeting defensiveness when delivering behavioral feedback to other leaders. Creating a culture of feedback is synonymous with building a high performance organization. Yet, delivering feedback remains problematic. We lack the tools to do this well. Standard feedback instruments rely too much on a telling style. My view is the answer lies in integrating coaching and feedback. I am suggesting a model based upon Questioning-Sensing-Observation-Suggestion.

Defensiveness

None of us really like receiving feedback, even though we often say it's a gift. In fact, as humans we have quite sophisticated defenses to guard us against harmful feedback. We all carry around with us a self image of who we are. Mostly, this is favorable. And this is probably a good thing. This allows us to feel good about ourselves for most of the time. So getting information from others that forces us to confront reality, rather than reinforcing the mental image we have of ourselves can be disconcerting.

Even positive feedback can fall short of our emotional needs: "You're one of the best people on the team" can land as "...so there are others better than me?". Achievement driven people are particularly prone to be hard on themselves when receiving feedback. They tend to dwell too much on "negative" feedback which points out the gap between the reality and their expectations of themselves.

D3: Deny, Deflect, Diminish

To defend ourselves from reality, we have an integrated defense mechanism that I call D3: Denial, Deflect; Diminish. For instance, when receiving 360° feedback we can simply deny the data is valid: "The competency model does not apply to me!". We can deflect the feedback: "Yeh, you know I was expecting this. This data comes from these guys Jeff hired. They just won't change." We can diminish it's importance: "Look, I know this HR-thing, report, whatever, makes me look bad, but I have to manage in the real world to get results. That's what counts!".

In fact, the examples above are quite obvious examples of defensiveness. Our D3 games can be even more sophisticated. I sometimes meet the High Agreer, who very quickly agrees with the data and then rushes on to identify a comforting solution, all to avoid confronting and reflecting on data that deep seated facets of their personality. There is the Confessor: "Oh my god! I'm so awful. How can I do this to people (head in hands)". By falling on their sword and becoming a victim, they similarly hope to avoid any reasoned discussion about what the data means and try to head off the possibility of agreeing a rationale personal change strategy.

Rather than receiving the feedback as information that might help us perform better, we interpret it through a mental prism: Our mindset.

Feedback to Leaders

So, into this mix the leader steps with the duty to deliver information that the other person doesn't want to hear. Even in highly measurable and well defined junior to middle management jobs this is tough. But, it gets even tougher at leadership levels. Here, the ambiguity, inter-connectedness of everything gives people plenty of scope to play games: For instance, "I'm taking the fall for the fact the company has no strategy" is a common deflective response used by leaders.

Current Models: Situation- Behavior - Impact

My view is that we are poorly equipped at leadership levels to address this. The Center for Creative Leadership developed their Situation - Behavior - Impact1 model to provide leaders with an analytical tool for delivering feedback to subordinates. A Leader coach first describes the situation that took place - what they saw. Next they describe the behavior the feedback receiver appeared to be using. Finally, they describe the impact this behavior had. So, "In the meeting yesterday, I saw you interrupt in the middle of Mary's presentation several times. I noticed this caused her to become annoyed. I could see it in her face".

The CCL model is something of a workhorse in the leadership development industry and has it's place. It is designed around the assumption of objectivity. However, my view is that it is too based upon a Tell position from the leader coach to their subordinate. I believe an alternative model is needed at senior levels in an organization. At this level, the hierarchy no longer supports a Tell positioning around feedback. In fact, if one leader is telling another using the S-B-I model, it is likely to trigger defensiveness no matter how correct the observations happened to be.

How WE trigger defensiveness in others

So often we describe people as being defensive unaware of how our own behavior and actions might have contributed to this. Listen around you in the office and try to notice how often we phrase feedback in either the accusative form: "You kept interrupting Mary's presentation yesterday"; or the coercive form: "You really need to listen more...". And, we often lapse into negative and implication laden questioning:"Why don't you listen more?". All of these interventions are likely to stimulate a person's defense mechanism as we inadvertently call into question their competence or independence.

We get even further stuck when we tried to prove that our feedback is "right". Feedback sessions can often become Attack/Defense sessions in which two highly achievement driven individuals try to win the outcome. We try to get the other person to "accept" the feedback i.e. admit they were wrong. Conflict can often ensue.

Feedback in once-per-year Attack / Defense Mode

One of my most common observations in which as an external coach is how many organizations lack a culture of feedback, where feedback can be freely given and easily received. Because feedback is so often conducted in the Attack/Defense mode, delivering feedback is often avoided by leaders until the mandatory once-a-year feedback form-filling session dictated by HR, and dreaded by most of those involved.

Towards A New Model: Questioning - Sensing - Observation - Suggestion.

At the leadership level, I urge clients to use more of a coaching approach to the deliver of feedback. It's not perfect, but experience and feedback to me from clients is that it does lessen defensiveness. I have formulated a simple process for doing this: Questioning - Sensing -Observation - Suggestion. The key point here is that rather than a Tell position, the alternative I'm suggesting is based more on questioning.

Questioning

A step so often missed but crucial to the feedback process is asking if you may deliver feedback to the other person. In a hierarchical setting the manager just presume he or she can. Yet, on a leader-to-leader basis or at senior levels the delivery feedback without permission will risk triggering D3 right away.

Once permission is granted, often asking a simple neutral question can prompt reflectiveness in the other leader: "What do you think about Mary's presentation yesterday?". "Fine. But I think I interrupted too much". By doing it this way you can save hours of argument and open up a coaching opportunity.

Even if you don't get it so easy, questioning allows you to fully understand the mindset of the other person, and you get information on what they were trying to do: " Fine, I just hope she took my comments on board, that's all"; or "You know, I've told her about these things before and I was just so frustrated to hear it coming again". You may pick up openings from this, such as frustration and explore these feelings more.

And, important early warnings can be revealed about their D3 mechanisms. "Oh yeh, I always like winding Mary up, don't you?" (diminishing defense).

Sensing

As soon as we start asking questions, we begin picking up vital sensory information.

We listen for the content and context of the information from the feedback receiver. We listen for what is being said, and what is not being said. We listen for how it is being said, in terms of key words, imagery and phrases. We notice what we say has an impact on their verbal and non-verbal responses.

We observe their body language and the extent to which it is relaxed and open. We notice how as we change our posture, we prompt a change in theirs.

Through our touch and body posture we can create rapport with the other person. Double handed handshakes, hand on shoulders, hand gestures, and sitting/standing location vis-a-vis the other person (i.e. I understand 65° is supposed to work best, but I'm checking on that), can all help build the trust needed to deliver feedback.

Being aware of our own "umming" and "aarring" as the other person speaks. What is this doing? Is it making the person more relaxed or more defensive?

I'm not sure how we might use our sense of smell, but perhaps in some subtle way we do pick up subtle changes in scent.

The key point here is that we need to be fully aware and in-the-moment and not too caught up with our own thinking process. By being aware of what is going on within ourselves and between us we can provide learn vital intelligence about their mindset and behavior and ours.

For instance, do they interrupt you while you're talking? What impact does this have on you? What does this suggest about a pattern of behavior and the impact on their other relationships?

Observation

Stating your observations simply and neutrally can itself overcome defensiveness. "I noticed you intervened a lot during Mary's presentation yesterday. She might have seen that as an interruption. What do you think?" (cycle back to question).

There are several key points about Observation:

State the observation from yourself, rather than refer to the third person (We, the strategy, the report, etc). This is counter to a lot of the Biz-speak books that say we should use We all the time. "I" speaks from a sense of openness. The more directly personal you can make the connection the less D3 you are likely to incur.

Express your observations in the language of perception - which is all the statements can be: "I saw...; I felt that...; I noticed...; My view of what happened is that....". This suggests that we can never be sure. We can modify our position if new information comes from the other person and we are less likely to appear judgmental.

Observations can be feelings, also. "I'm concerned that your interruptions may have left Mary feeling annoyed."

By talking from the self, you are less likely to be contradicted. It is illogical to say "no you didn't feel or perceive that". The language of perception is unfamiliar in the hard thinking fact-based business world and for this reason it can signal that this is a different type of conversation.

Once you have shared your can loop back to Sensing: "I'm sensing you're finding hearing this feedback difficult. How are we doing here?".

Suggestion

When the feedback receiver is ready to listen, it is often helpful to make a suggestion about what they can do differently in future: "What I suggest for next time is that you wait until a natural pause in the flow of the presentation before speaking up". A suggestion should be relevant to your observations and actionable in behavioral terms: "I suggest you change your attitude" is not really a suggestion at all but an implied accusation.

One of the most effective suggestions is to disengage the feedback session with the simple "I suggest you just think this over and decide what you want to do". We do not need to win an argument. Our purpose in delivering feedback is to stimulate the other person to think about their behavior. This does not have to happen in the moment. Sometimes, leaving the person to mull it over is the most effective thing. It is their decision how to act. By leaving them accountable you are far less likely to trigger the defensiveness than for example: "So, you commit to doing things differently next time, right?". Remember, sullen compliance is merely a sophisticated deflection strategy on the part of the feedback receiver.

Be there for the person. A suggestion such as "I can watch out in the next presentation and give you feedback afterwards, if you'd find that helpful", can make the person feel supported.


Behavioral Feedback

The real focus of this approach is to concentrate on behavior. This is what we can observe and it is what the other person can change. However, behavior does not exist in isolation from either the mindset that shapes behavior nor the results that flow from it. So, if we have expertly conducted ourselves as above, and yet we still meet defensiveness and that this defensiveness seems to be a recurring pattern in the other person, we may want to state our observation, with a question attached: "I've noticed that you often seem to react defensively when receiving feedback from me. For instance, I hear you say things that seem to deflect the issue on to someone else (behavior). How are you feel when you receive feedback?". Or alternatively, "How valuable do you think this feedback is?", (mindset, searching for thoughts and feelings ).

Another way into deeper feedback conversation is by looking at the results from the behavior. "What do you think the impact of yesterday's presentation will be on your relationship with Mary?". By looking nat feedback from the perspective of outcomes you can help the feedback receiver become more reflective. And, the more you can encourage them to do the reflection, the better.


Coaching and Feedback

I am really suggesting that feedback is best delivered in a coach-lite mode. Asking deep coaching questions ("How does this fit into your life plan?") does not exactly help when the feedback receiver is absorbing uncomfortable and disconcerting information. At the same time, being too telling or instructing will choke off the other persons capacity to listen. My suggestion on this is for the feedback provider to stick to What & How questions, alternating with I/My statements while focusing on perception and observation.

Conclusion

I realize that this approach will contradict much of the literature on feedback which states that we need to be objective. The assumption of objectivity and being fact-based is the very reason we get into such a mess over feedback. If we approach feedback with the mindset that we are doing no more than sharing our perception and impressions and starting a dialogue about this, we are far more likely to encourage reflection in the feedback receiver.

©Andrew Atter