Posts Tagged ‘human interaction’

A Culture of Heroism

Agile & Lean, Coping and Communicating, Musings | Posted by Doc
Feb 11 2010

A while back, I wrote about A Culture of Blame. As I’ve traveled around the US and to other countries, I’ve seen more and more evidence of this, which keeps me thinking. I’m always looking for patterns of behavior, and simple ways to describe them.

When talking about Agile teams as compared to Waterfall teams, one of the things that has become apparent is that Waterfall is also a Culture of Heroism. In fact, in many ways, much of Western culture is about heroism. We laud the star athlete, the exceptional business person, the standout author, and so on. In many cases, it seems to be recognition and acclaim for the individual over the group, or at least the individual separate from the group.

Agile teams foster a culture of collaboration and cooperation. That’s not to say that there’s not room for individual excellence, effort, and achievement. I would say that high performant teams tend to focus on the success of the team over the individual. Is Agile more socialist, while Waterfall is more capitalist? I’m not sure, but it seems that way.

Regardless, there are a number of side effects of a Culture of Heroism:

  • Ego-driven achievement
  • Unhealthy competition (although sometimes it’s quite healthy)
  • Rewards that – in recognizing the individual – discourage the others on the team
  • A focus on the individual rather than the group goals

This is an interesting thing for me, because I’m highly competitive, and am happy to have individual recognition. On the other hand, I believe strongly in subordinating my ego to the purposes and goals of the team, and that the success of the team is what’s important*. Since my ego still wins out at times, I recognize that this is not just a struggle for me, but for others as well.

We’re raised in a culture of individualism and heroism, then we are invited into the Agile fold, and asked to shift our focus and our energy from ourselves to our teams.

I’ll continue to explore this as I get the opportunity to work with more teams. I will say that I’ve seen the culture of heroism everywhere I’ve gone, in one form or another, and believe firmly that the change to a culture of collaboration must come from the leadership as well as the team.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

Consequences

Coping and Communicating, Facilitation | Posted by Doc
Aug 20 2009

I’m reading this book, and one character says to another “Everything has consequences.”

I swear I heard a bell go off in my head!

I’ve always said “Everything counts.”  And also “if I’m present, whether I’m active or passive, I have an effect on what happens.”

And then this fictitious characters says “Everything has consequences.” and it all comes together for me.

Everything you do, or don’t do, has consequences.

“Right, Doc. Like if I give my wife a gift, it has consequences?”

Yup. And sometimes unexpected ones. Maybe the gift is too expensive, or not expensive enough.  Maybe you thought she’d love it, but she sees it in a way you’d never think of.  Or maybe she just loves it, and feels warmer towards you for a while.

“Okay. How about if I do nothing?”

There’s no such thing as “nothing.” Being inactive is not nothing. Being silent or withdrawn is most definitely not “nothing.”

As always, since It’s All About Me, whatever you do or don’t do, I will interpret according to my context, my view of the world at that moment. And that’s my reality.

So “nothing” might be angry or hostile or sad or frustrated or… And, as they tell us in Crucial Conversations, I will then proceed to tell myself a story about how you feel, what it means, and how it affects me.  All as a result of you saying and doing… nothing.

I’m not suggesting that you either stop doing anything, or that you do something all the time.

I’m saying that it pays to be aware that Everything has consequences.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

I’m sorry

Musings | Posted by Doc
Aug 02 2009

I’m all in favor of saying “I’m sorry.” Not necessarily as an admission of fault or wrongdoing, of course. But because sometimes it’s the right thing to say.

“I had a really rotten day.” “I’m sorry.”

And then there are times that it’s just not the appropriate thing to say.

Mary and Bill were riding down in the elevator, on their way out to the store. They were chatting as usual, talking about this and that.

The elevator reached the ground floor. When the door opened, there was another couple standing right in front of the door, effectively blocking the way.

As Bill and Mary started to exit the elevator, Mary turned sideways to edge out, and said “I’m sorry.”

Bill’s inclination had been to say “excuse me” until Mary spoke up, and then he was stumped into silence.

What did Mary have to be sorry about? There was no fault, and nothing to be sympathetic to. Rather, the people standing in front of the elevator should have said “I’m sorry” or at least “excuse me” and moved aside.

So why would Mary say “I’m sorry”?

My thought is that Mary has self-image issues. She behaves as though she somehow believes that other people are worth more than she is or more important than she is. I could be wrong, but I’ve seen this kind of behavior enough times to have a clue.

While I believe strongly in treating people with respect, I don’t believe in behaving with automatic subservience or submission.

You’ve gotta earn those, and you’d better have a BIG hammer!

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

I’m a warrior

Agile & Lean, Coping and Communicating, Facilitation, Musings | Posted by Doc
May 27 2009

A warrior acts as if he knows what he is doing, when in effect he knows nothing.

…Carlos Castaneda

I’m known as a man of confidence. In fact, my wife once said to me “You’re so self-confident, sometimes it’s hard to be confident around you!”

The thing is, I recognized a while back that I frequently sound far more assured and confident than I am. This – no doubt – came from years of actual insecurity in which it seemed effective to sound like I knew what I was talking about.

A warrior.

Of course, Castaneda is really talking about more than faking it.

I believe that Castaneda is talking about a real warrior recognizing that he has just scratched the surface of all that may be learned.  Like when my karate instructor said to me “the higher the mountain, the farther you can see.”

The more I learn, the more I realize there is to learn.

A true warrior acts strong and confident and able and in control, while recognizing that the reality is something else.

I see this in meetings all the time. There’s a common behavior (a pattern, you might say ;) ) in which the individual says everything as if it is so. This individual makes assertions in the face of disagreement and even hostility. And there are several possibilities “under the covers”:

  1. the speaker is completely convinced that she is right, regardless of what anyone else might think or feel
  2. the speaker speaks with conviction, in order to sway others, regardless of how the speaker actually feels, in order to achieve some goal (dominance, for instance)
  3. the speaker speaks with conviction knowing that she is not convinced of what she says, in order to provoke/elicit information from others

Warriors, all.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

“Influencer”, a must-read book

Coping and Communicating, Facilitation, Musings | Posted by Doc
May 01 2009

I’m not finished with it yet, and yet I can tell you unreservedly that you must read Influencer by the authors of Crucial Conversations and Crucial Confrontations.

While the first two books deal with holding conversations and dealing with issues, this third book addresses the challenges that are near and dear to my heart: how you get people to change their behavior. Thanks to my colleague Jason Yip, I started on this book, and haven’t been able to put it down (well, I do stop for things like work ;) ).

I wanted to share some of this with you, because it relates so nicely to what I’ve been thinking and writing about for a while now.

It turns out the all influence geniuses focus on behaviors. They’re inflexible on this point. They don’t develop an influence strategy until they’ve carefully identified the specific behaviors they want to change. They start by asking: In order to improve our existing situation, what must people actually do?

I love this. It’s not about how they feel or about their motivation. First and foremost, it’s about how they behave.

This is true whether I’m dealing with my family, my co-workers, or a client. Whether I want them to change their behavior, or I just want to understand the situation, I start with their behavior.

One of the vital behaviors consists of the use of praise versus the use of punishment. Top performers reward positive performance far more frequently than their counterparts. Bottom performers quickly become discouraged and mutter things such as, “Didn’t I just teach you that two minutes ago?” The best consistently reinforce even moderately good performance,…

This goes as far back, for me, as Ken Blanchard’s original One-Minute Manager series of books. It ties into how we relate to and teach our children. Every little accomplishment, every move in the right direction, and they get tremendous reinforcement. Then, as the authors say, we start to grow up and everyone gets stingy with their praise as if it’s only to be delivered when we do something exceptional.

If you know anything about training dogs (no, I’m not equating co-workers and family to dogs, just learning where I can), you know that you do the same thing – reward them if they make a move in the right direction, and keep encouraging them until they get it.

It’s so easy to say “well done” or “good job” or even just “thanks”. These things provide reward way out of proportion to their cost.

And it’s so easy to do these things as a facilitator, which many folks don’t get. It’s not about being insincere or ingenuous. It’s about rewarding and encouraging the behaviors we want to develop, and finding ways to reduce or eliminate the behaviors we don’t want.

Read this book. If you are a parent, manager, facilitator, professional, consultant, teacher,… okay, if you’re a human being, read this book.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

Inside or Outside?

Coping and Communicating, Musings | Posted by Doc
Mar 29 2009

I found Liz Strauss’s blog today, and particularly this post (there’s lots more – this is just the basics):

Two weeks ago, I wrote about finding your voice when the tribe has spoken. Losing a job is a sure a way to feel we’ve lost our tribe, but it’s not the only one. A relocation, a divorce, a huge setback of some sort, or some way of thinking can make us feel apart.

Lots of folks have lots of reason for feeling we’re on the outside.

It’s almost overwhelming. The world can seem to be one huge tribe and we can seem to be the only one who’s not a part. Of course, that’s flawed thinking. Ever met a group of people who could agree on anything huge for very long? The whole world is too big to hold a meeting about who belongs.

via How to Find Your Tribe in One Word – Liz Strauss at Successful Blog – Thinking, writing, business ideas … You’re only a stranger once..

It got me to thinking, once again, about where we live and how we relate to others.

As I’ve said before, we live in our own heads. Everything we think we know about the world around us is really inside us.

And yet, somehow, we form bonds and join tribes. Multiple tribes. For instance, I belong to the husbands tribe and the fathers tribe and the photographers tribe and the specialized tribe of fathers with multiple children. I belong to a technical professionals tribe and a facilitators tribe.

Isn’t it odd that that belongingness is really all in my head?

Admittedly, it’s reinforced by the behavior of the other members of my tribes. They treat me as a fellow tribe member. At least I interpret their behavior that way.

What happens when I no longer feel like a member of a particular tribe? What happens to me when I lose that sense of belonging?

I feel isolated, maybe lost, scared, and I wonder whether I’ll ever belong to a tribe again.

That leads me to think about how important it is for me to treat other members of my tribe.

Like an agile team is a tribe. Like my family is a tribe.

It’s that Golden Rule again.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

The two faces of “It’s all about me!”

Coping and Communicating, Facilitation, Musings | Posted by Doc
Feb 22 2009

When you hear me say “It’s all about me!” (IAAM), do you think “How horribly selfish and self-centered!” or “How aware and evolved.”?

There are certainly more than just two faces to the concept, and yet these are the two extremes, in my mind.

Ego-Driven, Self-Centered “It’s all about me!” (IAAM-)

As I write about facilitation antipatterns, it’s clear that I’m focusing on the self-centered, ego-need-driven side of “It’s all about me!” Look at Professor Moriarty or the Orator or the Dominator. For each of them, they want – perhaps need – the focus and attention of the group.

IAAM- (the negative IAAM) clearly is driven by the needs and desires of the speaker/actor, rather than a focus on improving communications or teamwork or anything else. While the person exhibiting IAAM- may convince themselves that they’re doing it “for your good” or “for the good of the group”, I believe that their reality is quite different – that they’re doing it because they need it to feel better about themselves. They may start from a position of low self-esteem or insecurity, as surprising as that sounds.

There are many common behaviors, for those who don’t feel good about themselves. Two that come to mind here are “pay attention to me” and “make you feel bad so you’ll recognize my power”.  Both of these are instances of IAAM-.

I did it a lot, in the earlier days of my marriage. Having to be right, as opposed to having a dialogue with my wife. Explaining how she didn’t understand, instead of finding common ground. Taking the center stage, rather than participating and allowing others to participate. These are examples of IAAM-.

Taking Responsibility, Connection-Focused “It’s all about me.” (IAAM+)

In my writing (and talking and talking and… ;) ) about communication, I tend to focus on a movement away from IAAM- and toward IAAM+ as an understanding of human behavior and interactions.

In IAAM+, it’s two-sided: understanding that my behavior expresses who I am, what I believe, how I feel; and understanding that your behavior expresses the same things about you. As I embrace and internalize that understanding, my behavior changes, because my focus changes. And sometimes, by changing my behavior towards what I would like it to be, I change my feelings and understanding.

Communication and Facilitation and Participation

It all comes together in many places and times. Including in meetings. When I find myself thinking “he always…” or “she’s doing that because…” and I assign motivations and assume what’s going on inside someone else’s head, I push myself back from IAAM- toward IAAM+.  At least, I try.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

Letting go

Coping and Communicating, Musings | Posted by Doc
Feb 15 2009

Watching the movie “Taken”, I was struck by the tenaciousness of Liam Neeson’s character. I was also struck by the character’s attitude, which was both pesonal (”you/they took my DAUGHTER”) and impersonal.

It got me to thinking about carrying grudges, and the way we label and categorize each other.  Okay – I don’t know for sure that you do it too, I just know that I’ve done it and that your behavior leads me to think you do it too.

You always…

Do you find yourself saying that to someone you know? Do you find yourself behaving in a way that is based on what you expect them to do, rather than what they’re doing?

Perhaps you’ve labeled them. They’re afraid, insecure, rude, lax, mean, silly, absurd, too friendly, not friendly enough, too outgoing, too inhibited, careless, thoughtless, inattentive, self-absorbed,…

How will you know when they change?

If you hold onto the image you hold firmly in mind, you won’t.  Not only that, you will inhibit their ability to change.

If you won’t give me a chance, then who will?

I’ve certainly heard words like that – from my wife, and from my children. Even recently, as I’m on my endless journey towards evolution and perfection.

If I keep an image, an identity, a label in my mind as though that’s who you are, then I may be unable to recognize that you are no longer that person.

Forgiving is not forgetting

I’ve heard too many people say “I can’t forgive that.” I disagree.  You can, you just don’t choose to. You’re holding onto the pain, the anger, the hurt for some reason that seems to make sense. Why? What’s the value in hanging onto it.

Sure – I can learn from sticking my hand in a fire, and yet realize that the fire doesn’t care about me at all. Which is not to say that someone who does something that leads to you feeling hurt doesn’t care about you.  But if you believe, as I do, that their behavior is about them, then it’s possible to forgive, to let go, without letting go of the lesson. You can learn how someone has behaved and base a certain – hmm – caution on that.

But it’s not necessarily who they are.

Let go, let…

In the twelve step programs for families and friends (Al-Anon, Co-Anon, Nar-Anon), they teach “Let go, let God”.

Since I don’t know whether there is or is not a sublime, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient entity, here’s what it means to me:

It’s done. It’s not within the scope of my control. Perhaps I’ll be happier, or at least have more peace, if I just let it go and worry about me.

I’m responsible for me, for my behavior. Beyond that, I do the best I can for my family. Outside of that?

You’re up to you.

Let it go.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

Facilitation Antipattern: Dominator

Facilitation, Musings | Posted by Doc
Feb 15 2009

dominatorMotto: It’s all about me!
Belief: I have a lot to say, it’s important, and so I’m justified in taking the time and attention to say it.
Behavior: Turns the discussion to whatever is important to him.  Talks loudly, forcing his way into any discussion, and then turning it again.
Characteristics: Loud, forceful, relentless, determined, sincere, focused.


The Dominator dominates. Obvious, eh?

What’s not so obvious is that Dominators are not always egocentric or glory loving or outgoing. Frequently, Dominators have learned that the only way that they can get people to hear what they have to say, and to make their points, is by steamrolling everyone else. Outside of meetings/discussions, they may be timid or quiet. but get them into a meeting, and they will just take over.

Okay – there are also Dominators who do it because they do love to be the center of everyone’s attention. For these Dominators – the ones you probably thought of first – it’s not so much which point they make as that they make a point by overwhelming everyone else’s defenses. Their joy comes from the act and experience of being dominant.

Dominators have found that if they speak more loudly than everyone else, everyone else will be quiet and listen to them.

Dominators have found that by the force of their presence (similar to the Gladiator) they can achieve their goals.  But distinct from the Gladiator, the Dominator doesn’t want us to fight back. The Dominator achieves victory by shutting everyone else down.

The Dominator is happy when we say “Okay – whatever you say” as a sign of capitulation.  They’re happiest when we say “Oh, you’re SO right!” as a sign of recognition of their rightness, along with capitulation.

To deal with a Dominator, you have to break their pattern. This is hard, because they’re relentless.

Techniques that either involve the group without discussion (Starfish, Timeline) or that enforce a structure that gives everyone equal time and attention (Circle of Questions, The Margolis Wheel).

Note that Robert Chambers, in Participatory Workshops: A Sourcebook of 21 Sets of Ideas and Activities, has an exercise he calls Dominator (pages 168-9), which he describes thus: “A lively activity to heighten awareness of verbal and non-verbal dominant and submissive behaviour and of the effects of physical position on relationships.”

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

You don’t know me…

Coping and Communicating, Facilitation, Musings | Posted by Doc
Feb 14 2009

Okay – the song lyrics won’t get out of my head. I love that Michael Buble is singing all these “oldies”.

You give your hand to me
Then you say hello
I can hardly speak
My heart is beating so
And anyone can tell
You think you know me well
But you don’t know me

Relevance? Ah – well – I’ve mentioned that we all live in our own heads. Our understanding of the world, including the people in it, is all internal. So when I say “I know…” what I really mean is “I believe…”

There is no knowing, especially when it comes to others. The only things we can “know” are others’ behavior, because it’s the only thing we can see/experience directly. Even so, our experience/vision is colored and filtered by our own brains and our past experience, our current emotions, and so forth. There are times when my “reality” is entirely generated within my own head.

What does that mean? It means, first of all, that I must question all my assumptions about other people. Especially when I say things like “you were angry” or ” I know what you meant”. After all, I can’t really know these things, now can I?

Rather I can say “I think you were angry” or “I wonder if you were angry” or “Did you mean…?”

I’m back, once again, to the work of Patterson et al in Crucial Conversations. Because what I think I know is really my story – what I tell myself as a result of experiencing your behavior.

Lest you think I’m only talking about personal relationships, let me assure you once again that this applies to all relationships. It applies when I’m in meetings with people I hardly know (”What a jerk!”), when I’m having a conversation with a co-worker (”Why is she always…?”), or having coffee with a close friend (”He must be angry with me.”). All we know of each other is behavior – the observable stuff.

And what we think we know is really our perception of what happened.

I know that there have been many times when my wife and I have been in the same place at the same time, and remembered things differently. Everything from our first meeting (I say her outfit was mustard colored, she says it was greenish) to a conversation we had yesterday.

In police work, it’s ironic that so much weight is placed on eye witnesses, given the evidence that eye witnesses are incredibly unreliable. Consider the implications: all of us are unreliable when it comes to what we believe we saw or heard, and yet we generally remain convinced that we are right – that what we remember is reality, truth.

I’m with Descartes – the only thing I know for sure is that there is some entity doing the thinking (cogito ergo sum – I think, therefore I am). Everything else is subject to reasonable, rational doubt.

The next time you find yourself saying “Oh, I know her, and what she meant was…”, stop, think, and perhaps phrase it as a question or as a guess.

“I wonder if…”

“Do you think…”

“If it were me, I would mean…”

And then, ASK.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts

Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.6.1, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.