Tag Archives: #LeadershipRules

Psychological Safety: Humor vs. Vulnerability

03 Tuesday Apr 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

humor vulnerability armor 550 px

As I move through life with my psychological safety-noticing glasses on, I’ve noticed a trend. These behaviors have probably been around forever, but I am looking at them with new eyes. What used to be funny is now a threat to psychological safety and the effectiveness of leaders and groups.

I first noticed in my leadership workshops that a few of the participants weren’t fully engaging in the activities. Instead of following instructions and practicing new skills, they were joking around. At first, I suspected that they were just being obnoxious. However, as I really looked at what they were doing, I realized that they were avoiding taking the risk of performing the skills incorrectly and looking silly.

In leadership workshops, we talk about the value of failure in learning. I have them sign their names with their dominant and nondominant hands to feel the difference. We are comfortable with our dominant hand, but signing with our nondominant hand is uncomfortable. We don’t do it all the time, and we aren’t good at it.

I warn participants that the uncomfortable feeling will come up as they practice new skills and that it’s OK. Actually, it’s required because if they don’t try anything new, they leave my workshop exactly as they walked in, and our time together has not been used well. Even with all that prep, some people in the group were not engaging and going all in.

Creating psychological safety so that people feel comfortable trying, and perhaps failing, is partially my responsibility as the group leader. I ensure that no one makes fun of anyone else. I call out any derogatory comments. I remind the group of the ground rules that they came up with and agreed to. I encourage and applaud them when they give something a shot. However, it’s still up to the participants to take that final leap to vulnerability, to show their true authentic selves, and to go all in on the exercises that we do to practice new skills. I was seeing a lot of joking around that was keeping them “safe.” They were using humor as armor to protect themselves

Instead of playing the role laid out in a conflict-resolution scenario, they were being funny – and they were funny! Hilarious at times, but the hilarity was keeping them and their fellow participants from experiencing the discomfort of trying and mastering new skills. Simply, they were refusing to be vulnerable.

Right after noticing the use of humor to avoid vulnerability in workshops, I noticed the behavior in a meeting that I attended. It was a weekly meeting where there was a great sense of camaraderie. The people knew and liked each other. However, when they got up to speak, they worked to get laughs from their friends. They got those laughs by making fun of each other and guests. One speaker actually got a laugh at the expense of a visiting high school student. No one else in the crowd looked fussed, and I was appalled.

By comparing my reaction to everyone else’s, I deduced that my sensitivity level around behaviors that damage psychological safety is much higher than most people’s. The comparison also let me know why psychological safety and high-performing teams are so rare; the damaging behavior didn’t register to most of the group. It was normal, acceptable behavior in their eyes. They didn’t see a thing wrong with the situation because it’s what they are used to.

It seems that the need for laughs came from a bit of insecurity when standing up in front of the group. The group’s norm included making fun of each other. The speakers must have felt vulnerable and were trying to hide it by picking on others to get a communal laugh that made them feel good and like they were part of the group. They felt the need to get armored up to ensure that they were not vulnerable.

Vulnerable. There is that word again. When you want research on vulnerability, you go to Brené Brown, a well-known author and YouTube star who talks about shame, vulnerability, and bravery. I thought that her book Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead was the place to start.

Brown opens the book with this quote from Theodore Roosevelt’s 1910 “Citizenship in a Republic” speech:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.

The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again,

because there is no effort without error and shortcoming, but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause;

who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly…”

Brown shares her reaction when she first read the quote. She thought, “This is vulnerability. Everything I’ve learned from over a decade of research on vulnerability has taught me this exact lesson. Vulnerability is not knowing victory or defeat, it’s understanding the necessity of both; it’s engaging. It’s being all in.”

There cannot be great victories or joy without great risk. We must put our hearts on our sleeves and fully engage in order to achieve the goals in life that matter to us. Of course, we also face the possibility of failure and maybe embarrassment, but those things aren’t fatal. They hurt for sure! However, the best of us have shoulders broad enough to carry that risk and set an example for the rest.

In Kathy’s Ideal World, we all risk failure – and great success. We go out in the arena and fully engage in life. We allow people to see what matters to us.

We also all cheer each other on from the stands through both. We create psychological safety for every person who we come in contact with by applauding their efforts and never, ever getting a laugh at their expense.

Psychological safety helps to create exceptional teams, and it requires vulnerability and bravery. Psychological safety in life requires the same, but it’s how we begin to lead exceptional lives.

Get out there, and go all in! Be vulnerable and willing to fail magnificently! I am cheering for you from the stands!

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: Fact and Feeling Parts

27 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in #Communication, Feelings, Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

fact and feeling 550 px

It’s important to know that every message has a fact and a feeling part. One must identify both parts in order to deal with a conflict effectively or to communicate clearly.

This is a Kathy Observation, not researched fact, but I’m pretty sure that you cannot create psychological safety and strictly stick to facts all the time. We are humans, and humans have feelings. As leaders, we don’t have the luxury of ignoring them. I learned this lesson late in life, and it would have saved me some time and trouble if I’d known about it sooner.

For 20 years, I led volunteers as an Army spouse. In one group that met monthly, there was one young woman who always sat at my right hand and objected to everything that the group proposed. She objected on a factual level – logistics, budget, convenience. She slowed us down every single month.

If I’d been savvier, I would have figured out that it wasn’t the facts that she objected to. I had a vague notion that she was unhappy or resentful, but I had no idea why. There was a feeling component that I wasn’t dealing with at that time. If I’d asked and listened, I could have saved us a lot of time arguing over facts for no good reason.

Now I pay attention to everyone’s nonverbal communication and ask about any telltale signs of an emotion. People often agree with something or say that everything is fine while their nonverbals say exactly the opposite. Crossed arms, furrowed brows, and a lack of eye contact are all indicators that they don’t agree and everything is not fine. They will carry those unexpressed feelings out the door and stew in them if I don’t bring them out in the open by asking some questions.

It can feel scary to voluntarily dive into the ocean of emotions. The water is murky and deep, and you have no idea of what lurks down there. Take heart! First, leadership requires bravery – so take a deep breath, and go for it! Second, naming an emotion that you see and asking about it can create an uncomfortable situation, but it isn’t fatal. In the workplace, you generally get an explanation for the emotion that makes a lot of sense and gives you new information. The answers can be surprising – something that you wouldn’t have guessed.

We can only create psychological safety if we deal with both the facts and the feelings of individuals. The only way to identify the feeling part of a situation is to ask!

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: Open with a CAR

20 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I’ve talked with several people over the past few weeks about how to begin the difficult conversations that are the hallmark of psychological safety. Even if the group has norms in place that encourage people to challenge one another and to offer diverse ideas, it can feel intimidating to bring up a subject that is going to create some conflict.

A great way to start is with a CAR; it’s a feedback tool that includes Circumstances, Action, and Result. This format works well because it encourages us to talk about facts. Our discussions stay grounded in objective, observable behaviors.

CAR with outline

We begin by discussing the circumstances surrounding the action we want to talk about. We clearly outline when it happened and what was going on. For example, we might start with, “Yesterday when we were trying to get the order shipped for XYZ.” That tells the person or group what situation you are talking about.

Then we move on to the action or procedure that we want to discuss. We might say, “Fred followed our required procedures to get the order out the door.” It’s important to stick to observable facts and use no colorful adjectives or adverbs like “archaic” or “stupid” when describing the procedure or action – or a person, for that matter!

Then we explain the results of the actions. As much as possible, we want to make these business results – how the actions impacted the organization and group goals. If we continue with our example above, the results might have been that we did not get the shipment out on time because the required procedures include a lot of paperwork and time. We damaged the relationship with the customer, and our reputation for reliability was weakened. All of those results will make it more difficult to keep and gain customers.

After describing the circumstances, action, and result, we can offer an alternate action that would have been more useful. In our example, we might offer ways to streamline the process so that it takes less time. We could also ask for other people’s ideas about how to get orders shipped more efficiently.

It’s important to talk about the positive outcome that would happen with the new actions so that everyone stays focused on a positive business result. In our example, if we improve the shipment paperwork process, we can meet deadlines more easily, get more done faster, and maintain our reputation for reliability.

The beauty of the CAR format is that it helps to keep the conversation grounded in observable facts and desired business results. It keeps a group from blaming each other and going over past events. The focus is on achieving outcomes that help everyone.

Before we begin a discussion using the CAR format, it’s important to set our intention to create a positive, helpful environment for the conversation. Our purpose is to create success for the group and the organization, not to prove anyone wrong. We must maintain a helpful, positive attitude. We do not want to carry an adversarial attitude into the discussion.

The CAR format can be used to give any kind of feedback. In leadership workshops, we practice using it to give positive and developmental feedback to employees. We can use the CAR format to let someone know the specific action that he or she took that helped the team and organization. Remember, we want to create positive relationships and comment on the good things that we see as often as possible.

The CAR format is great for giving positive feedback because it tells the person exactly what they did that was useful and the good effect that it had for the business. Whenever we see someone doing something that we’d like to see them do again, we should give them some positive feedback on it. Appreciation is one of the biggest motivators for people.

Printing the CAR .pdf and using the individual CAR formats to keep track of feedback that we’ve given is an excellent practice. You can download a copy under the “Free Stuff” tab on my website. It’s a good way to collect information that we will need when we give performance reviews. It can be difficult to remember the actions of all of our employees over time.

It’s also a good idea to use the CAR format to keep track of our own actions. Our supervisors might not notice everything that we do. If we take a minute to jot down things we do, both good and not so good, we have specific examples to offer during our performance reviews. We can say, “I think I’ve done this well, and here are some examples.” Be sure to date the CARs. When asked what we need to work on, we will have already identified areas that we want to improve. If by chance our supervisors say that they think we need to improve in a certain area in which we have actually had some success, then we have ready examples of specific circumstances and our actions in those circumstances.

Maintaining a fact-based conversation with a positive attitude supports an environment of psychological safety. The CAR format can keep us on track and give us courage to start difficult conversations.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: Danger of Indifference

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

psych safety danger of indifference 550 px

As I’ve been imagining what a psychologically safe environment looks like, I’ve seen it as animosity- and sarcasm-free. I felt like getting rid of active aggression would solve the problem and make people feel free to share their opinions and take risks. As I’ve watched the world around me, I’ve realized that another huge obstacle to psychological safety is indifference. Mostly, it shows up as not being fully present and attentive during a conversation.

The goal of a great leader is to create positive relationships. We know from Google’s Project Aristotle that exceptional teams have psychological safety, which does, in fact, create and foster positive relationships. One of the ways to create positivity in a relationship is to pay attention to the other person and actively listen to what he or she has to say.

We also know that positive relationships require a positivity interaction ratio of at least 5:1, which means that we must have about five positive interactions for every negative one. In one study, asking a student how homework was going turned out to be a negative interaction. For the purposes of maintaining the positivity ratio, a negative interaction doesn’t have to include animosity or anger; it just won’t be positive.

When we continue to type on the computer while talking to someone, we are having a negative interaction because we are not making the other person feel valued. We are sending the message that what they are saying is not as important as what we are typing. In workshops, I hear complaints over and over about bosses who don’t stop what they are doing to actively listen to what someone is saying.

Each and every interaction builds positivity and, hence, psychological safety, or damages it. Dr. John Gottman, a well-known researcher on successful relationships, calls them “sliding-door moments,” after a Gwyneth Paltrow movie called Sliding Doors. In the movie, Paltrow’s character decides to go home because she isn’t feeling well. We first see her miss a train in the London tube. She goes home and uneventfully climbs into bed. Then the scene replays, and she catches the train. She gets home earlier than she did in the first scenario and catches her boyfriend cheating on her with her best friend.

Gottman contends that we face sliding-door moments all the time in relationships. The dramatic difference in outcomes might not be as immediate as in the movie, but every interaction is a chance to turn towards a person and meet a need for connection. Each interaction is also an opportunity to turn away and ignore an emotional need. In The Science of Trust, Gottman writes:

“Failing to turn toward our partner in any one of these sliding-door moments may not have hugely negative consequences. However, when we add up many such choices to dismiss emotion instead of attuning to it, the result is two different trajectories leading to very different universes.”

If we pay attention to someone’s emotions and need for connection, we help to create psychological safety and a positive relationship. When we ignore or dismiss a person’s bid to connect, we damage the relationship because we damage trust. Each bid is really asking the question, “Can I trust you to respond to me as a person you respect and care about?” Make no mistake, leaders must care about the people who work for and with them.

Lately, what’s brought home the danger of not being fully present for me has been watching parents and children. I’ve noticed a lot of children staring off into space while a parent talks on the phone, reads a book, or plays a game. It breaks my heart. A charming child who makes bids for interaction with an adult is ignored. What conclusions is the child making about the parent? It is an accumulation of moments that leads to a certain outcome, so I’m not saying that we need to focus every moment on our children. However, if we are physically present with a child or adult and pay attention to something besides him or her, we are saying that the person is not as important as what we are doing.

We combat the challenge of indifference by being fully present in each moment when we are with others. We pay attention to them, to what they are saying, to their emotions, to their body language, and to their message. We show them that they are worthy of our time and attention, and in that moment, we are focused on them.

I heard the retired CEO of Campbell Soup Company, Douglas Conant, talk about his book TouchPoints: Creating Powerful Leadership Connections in the Smallest of Moments. He said that he used to view interruptions by his employees as annoying intrusions. He felt like he couldn’t walk down the hall without being pestered to pieces. Then he made a mindset shift and looked at each one of those moments as an opportunity to reinforce company values and provide encouragement. In other words, each interaction was a sliding-door moment, and he got to choose how to act and react. Conant advocates for pausing and being fully present instead of hurriedly brushing the person off.

Seriously, wouldn’t the world be a great place if we inhabited each moment and turned towards the people around us? In her work on increasing positivity, Barbara Fredrickson found that micro-moments of positivity with complete strangers can increase our own feelings of positivity. We get something out of paying attention to others! I’ve had some great and brief conversations while waiting in line at the grocery store when I’ve chosen to look at the people around me instead of at my phone.

Psychological safety, trust, and positivity are things we create one moment at time, but only if we intentionally choose to fully inhabit those moments and give the gift of our time and attention to others when it is asked for.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: You first!

27 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

psych safety you first 550 px

I’ve noticed a trend as I’ve been talking with people about psychological safety, trust, and Negative Sentiment Override (NSO). Overwhelmingly, the first thing people ask me is “How can I get someone to realize that they are negative?” Hmmm. They don’t realize it, but that’s a loaded question.

First, it’s important to remember that each of us can only change one person, and that is ourselves. We cannot force other people to change their behavior. I mean, let’s think about it. How would any of us react if someone walked up and said that we were negative and needed to change? If you immediately thought, “Oh, I wouldn’t mind. I might be negative sometimes,” you probably aren’t negative. If you immediately thought, “Well, I’m not the one that needs to change here,” chances are pretty good that you are in NSO. At the very least, you are not seeing the other person as someone with needs, dreams, rights, and ideas that are equally important as your own.

We must start with ourselves. The question we need to ask is, “How can I invite the behavior that I want to see in others?” We can’t force another person to behave better, but we can influence others’ behavior by our own.

For example, let’s say that I have a significant other who comes home late all the time, and it really annoys me. I mean, I manage to get home on time! I’ve talked with my significant other about it and told him that it really bugs me when he doesn’t get home when he says he is going to be there. He says that he understands my irritation and will try to do better.

The next day he gets home 10 minutes later than he planned. I am angry, AND I have choices. I could yell and berate him for being 10 minutes late. What behavior am I inviting from him with that action? Am I creating motivation for him to come home on time – or at all? OR I could greet him at the door with a smile and say that I appreciate his effort and that he was only 10 minutes late. What behavior am I inviting from him then?

So before you go all outraged on gender stereotypes here and ask why I, or you, should have to pander to a significant other who is late, let’s look at this from a leadership perspective. As a leader, I want certain behaviors from my employees that will guarantee their success and mine. It’s important that they finish projects on time and work with a professional attitude. If someone is late turning in a project, I have choices.

I could yell, or at the very least make him or her feel really bad about the lateness. What are the effects of that? Am I creating more positivity in our relationship or less? Am I motivating the person to do better? Maybe, in the sense that they don’t ever want to go through the experience of being shamed again, but that’s a negative motivation that usually results in the person looking for another job. Remember that for the most part, people quit their bosses, not their jobs.

So, as the leader, I need to pause and consider the outcome that I want from our conversation. The first thing that an exceptional leader always wants to do is enhance or maintain the relationship. I don’t want to damage the relationship if I can help it.

Does that mean that I just let everyone slide and break the rules? Not at all! However, it does mean that I don’t get to yell, berate, or shame anyone. It means I see everyone as a person with needs, dreams, and obligations equal to my own. This concept is explained with a story in the book Leadership and Self-Deception.

First, I want to get curious and ask what’s going on. (Honestly, if the project is more than a day late, I should have been checking on it already and asking what was going on.) I want to know what caused the lateness, but not from a blaming perspective. I need to know what happened, so I can work with the employee to make sure it doesn’t happen again. I want to ask how I can help in the future and what the employee can do to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

The outcome I want is for the employee not to be late with a project again AND to maintain a positive relationship. If lateness is a chronic problem, we have a coaching issue that we need to focus on, but when someone is trying, it’s a leader’s job to provide support and remove obstacles, not humiliate.

So, the first question to ask ourselves is, “Am I acting in a way that invites others to produce the outcome that I desire?” If you still call that pandering, you are missing the point of great leadership. It’s our job to bring out the best in others, and we don’t do that with anger, shaming, and humiliation. We do it with curiosity, compassion, and respectful enforcement of necessary rules.

The bottom line is that we see people as people and treat them as we would like to be treated if we made a mistake.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: Zero-Sum Game Mindset and Trust

13 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

psych safety zero-sum game 550 px

In the analysis of psychological safety, we’ve discussed the importance of creating a foundation of trust, but it was a superficial discussion based on personal experience. I wanted to find some research on trust, and the first person I turn to when I want research-based recommendations is Dr. John Gottman. Gottman is known for his work on marriage and relationship analysis through direct scientific observations.

He offers up a lot of good information on trust, but the first concept that I want to discuss is zero-sum game theory. In game theory, an underlying assumption is that we are all rational and want to maximize our own gains. In a zero-sum game, everyone wants to get the biggest payoff for themselves and also wants their opponents to get as little as possible. In a zero-sum contest, I’m happy if you get nothing!

I have worked with leaders who have a zero-sum game mindset. They want power, money, and promotions. They also don’t want anyone else to get these things. These leaders are nightmares to work with. Sometimes they experience success, but it’s at the expense of their organizations and everyone who works with them.

It’s key to understand that someone who lives in a zero-sum game mindset tries to win while getting you to lose AND believes that you are doing the same thing. This was a bit of a revelation to me. I know people who only look out for themselves, and I accept that about them. I didn’t realize that they believe that I am doing the same. Knowing they expect me to try to take advantage when I can explains a lot of behavior that was a mystery to me before. Of course, this is an accurate description of a negative relationship devoid of trust.

To me, this is an emotionally exhausting scenario. If I am working with someone who is trying to take me down, I am constantly watching my back and documenting every conversation. Neither one of us is focusing on work or organizational goals. We are wasting a lot of time and emotional energy.

In his research, Gottman found that in relationships without trust, partners did not feel joy in each other’s happiness and did not get particularly fussed when the other was upset. As a matter of fact, their emotions were only in sync when they were both in a negative or angry state.

I see professional relationships like this all the time! I am often called in to work with organizations when this scenario of distrust is present because the zero-sum game mindset keeps people from being productive. The team, group, or organization flounders because no one is focusing on organizational goals; they are all focusing on themselves.

Ok, zero-sum gaming is not good and is rife with distrust. Neither person is taking the other’s well-being into consideration. Let’s take a look at what Gottman says a trusting relationship looks like. Here is his definition of trust in What Makes Love Last?:

“Trust is not some vague quality that grows between two people. It is the specific state that exists when you are both willing to change your own behavior to benefit your partner. The more trust that exists in a relationship, the more you look out for each other. You have your beloved’s back, and vice versa. In a trusting relationship you feel pleasure when your partner succeeds and troubled when he or she is upset. You just can’t be happy if achieving your payoffs would hurt your significant other.”

He goes on to say that each partner doesn’t have to put the other’s needs first all the time – that is probably not healthy. However, their happiness is interconnected. Each will change his or her behavior to increase the gains and happiness of the other.

If we look at this from a leadership perspective, we cannot get a person’s best performance when we act from a zero-sum game mindset. To be a successful leader, we must do what we can to improve other people’s happiness and well-being. An exceptional leader helps to create success for the people he or she works with, as well as for the organization. I often use the truism “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” So when an employee or peer is upset, we need to feel some empathy.

In Gottman’s research, he had people watch the video of an argument that they had with their partners. They had a dial in front of them that they used to register the feeling that they had in each moment of the discussion. They turned the dial all the way to the left when they had been experiencing a negative emotion and all the way to the right when they had been feeling a positive emotion.

Gottman categorized the feelings into three boxes: Nasty, Neutral, and Nice. The Nasty box included negative behaviors like anger, criticism, belligerence, bullying, defensiveness, sadness, disappointment, fear, tension, whining, disgust, stonewalling, and contempt. The Nice box included positive emotions and behaviors like interest, amusement, humor, laughter, excitement, joy, validation, and empathy. Any sort of blah reaction in the middle, he put in the Neutral box.

I think the dial and emotion boxes are useful tools for leaders. When an employee is upset, our dial should move to the Negative box to show concern and sadness. We definitely don’t want to move our dial to the Nice box and be gleeful about the employee’s plight. We can check in mentally on where our dial is pointing during conversations to ensure we are acting appropriately.

We can only create positive, trusting relationships if we link our happiness and well-being to the happiness and well-being of others. Our friends, peers, family, and employees must believe that we have their best interests at heart.

Gottman teases out a difference between trust and trustworthiness. He says that trustworthiness indicates a partner’s willingness to sacrifice for the relationship. It means sometimes putting our own needs on the back burner because the partnership matters most.

As leaders, we can’t put the individual needs of everyone in the organization above organizational requirements. Our main goal is the organization’s success. However, that does not mean that we can’t take them into consideration, feel empathy, and make what accommodations that we can.

Gottman goes on to say that it is important to let the other person know that the relationship is unique and irreplaceable. In other words, we want to let the other person know that we value the relationship and that he or she is valuable. How great would the world be if we did that one thing in every relationship that we have?

Research on motivation shows that people respond to appreciation and want to know that what they do makes a difference. When we are trustworthy, we act in a way that increases trust, motivation, commitment, and productivity. We also increase the confidence and well-being of others.

We know from Project Aristotle that the presence of psychological safety helps teams excel. We know that trust and trustworthiness increase a person’s feeling of safety and confidence. We can create success for everyone by avoiding the zero-sum game mindset and truly creating win-win scenarios for everyone, including the organization.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: We Are All Naturally Creative, Resourceful, and Whole

30 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by in Leadership, Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

loving kindness cropped 600 px

In the examination of psychological safety, we’ve talked about a need to be trusting and trustworthy. We’ve also discussed the importance of having the courage to let people express their opinions and feelings – standing bravely in the lion’s roar. I’ve discovered another big reason why we have trouble creating psychological safety, and it’s inspired by the best of intentions.

We want to protect other people from disappointment, annoyance, and anger. We want to make their lives smoother and easier. It is definitely a feeling of protection – and it’s not helpful, even though that is our intention.

As I look at my own parenting and the parenting of others, I see a lot of protection going on. We don’t want our children to experience crushing feelings of disappointment or failure. However, we aren’t helping our children or any adult by keeping them from facing and managing unpleasant feelings.

In fact, we are viewing them as too weak to handle a difficult situation. We are telling them that we don’t trust their abilities to overcome a challenge and manage their emotions. It’s a terrible message to send.

We are also robbing them of the opportunity to grow emotionally. Each time we overcome a difficult situation, we get stronger and better at it. When the next challenge comes along, we think, “I totally got through something similar before, so I know that I can do it again.” Facing and overcoming challenges builds resilience and confidence. We don’t want to steal those opportunities from people.

One phrase helps me when faced with the urge to protect someone from difficult feelings. In coaching, we consider people to be naturally creative, resourceful, and whole. We trust that every person can face and manage the experiences in their lives. It is true! We are all naturally creative, resourceful, and whole. It’s important that we trust in the ability of others to weather the storms of life and that we have enough courage to stand beside them in those storms.

I’ve volunteered with the Military Child Education Coalition (MCEC), where a team of facilitators would spend a couple of days educating community leaders on the unique challenges that military kids face. The one concept that struck me was how they explained what a military child, or anyone else, needs in order to overcome huge challenges and disappointments.

MCEC says that the adage “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is not always true. A person can experience overwhelming psychological damage if two things are not present during the struggle. Those two things are hope and support. MCEC doesn’t advocate keeping a child from experiencing grief or change; we can’t anyway. They say we must offer hope and support.

That’s what we can offer others when we see that they are facing a situation that creates strong negative feelings. We shouldn’t try and keep them from experiencing disappointment or anger. We want to offer support and hope for a better future.

Seeing someone as naturally creative, resourceful, and whole is a tremendous gift. We show confidence in their abilities to handle life. When we allow people to feel difficult emotions and overcome difficult situations, we are giving them the opportunity to grow stronger and build confidence. What we can do is stand beside them and offer support and hope. Helping someone build resilience is helping them create success in life.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: Foundation of Trust

16 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

psych safety trust 550 px

Psychological safety is the topic that I am dissecting in 2018, and I’m taking it in very small steps because it is a very complex concept. If it doesn’t make sense to you yet, hang in there! All will be revealed.

So far I’ve defined psychological safety here and talked about noticing it in my personal life here. When I’m playing around with a new topic, I like to look at the personal applications first. For me, those are easiest to see and grasp because I’m analyzing familiar situations and people.

However, the concept of psychological safety comes from a study of work teams done by Google called Project Aristotle. Some of Google’s teams were doing better than others, and after years of research they discovered that psychological safety was the main component of the high-performing teams.

Of course, I’ve come across many places that lack psychological safety in my years as a leadership trainer. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen many organizations or teams with psychological safety, which is why this concept intrigues me. It’s obviously not easy to create, or everyone would be doing it.

The best example I’ve seen is in a fictional workplace described in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. The book is in story format and worth looking at as a positive model for creating psychological safety. I highly suggest reading it. It’s been one of the books in my leadership series for a decade.

In the story, Kathryn comes in as CEO of a floundering business. We meet her team at a series of meetings that Kathryn leads. The book never uses the term “psychological safety,” but it is exactly what Kathryn is creating. She encourages disagreement with respect. She calls out one sarcastic team member on her eye rolls at other people’s comments. She creates a safe environment for people to speak their minds and teaches them how to do it in a professional way.

Here is a diagram of the five dysfunctions of a team.

five_dysfunctions pyramid

We will talk about the entire pyramid as we go along, but let’s just look at the foundation first. The success of a highly functioning team is dependent on trust. That makes sense. I don’t feel free to share my ideas with you unless I trust you to listen with an open mind. I must also trust that you won’t belittle me or plot behind my back. A team cannot function well if team members aren’t sharing information and working to achieve team and organizational goals.

There are entire books about trust. It’s also a complex concept. Let’s start simply. First, I don’t trust you if you don’t trust me. Ok, that sounds simple, but it isn’t really. Can you see the chicken and the egg problem that we face? I must trust you before you will trust me. However, I don’t want to trust you until you trust me. Ack!

Fortunately for us all, we humans generally extend a small level of trust to someone when we first meet them. We then have an opportunity to build that trust or destroy it. Creating and maintaining a high level of trust is a difficult thing to do. I trust people who are dependable, who do what they say, who respond reasonably, and who don’t make me feel small or stupid. The people I trust most are consistently reasonable and kind – which doesn’t mean that they must be pushovers. A person can give me developmental feedback that strengthens our relationship if it is done with respect and kindness.

So, if we are all consistently respectful and kind, we can create psychological safety – and maybe world peace. Sounds easy. It would be easy if we weren’t dealing with other humans who have their own fears, beliefs, and bad days. Easier still if we didn’t have our own fears, beliefs, and bad days.

Humans! Our humanity and flaws can really get in the way of creating trust and psychological safety. In my experience, our egos and the need to be right are two of our biggest stumbling blocks to consistent respect and kindness.

So, that’s enough for this week. We know that psychological safety is dependent on trust. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team is an excellent model for creating trust and psychological safety. If those topics interest you, I’d recommend reading the book. It’s a quick read, and we will be discussing it further.

As you go out in the world, analyzing your level of trust is a good exercise. When you interact with people at home, work, or during your volunteer activities, ask yourself if you trust them. Then ask why or why not. What specific behaviors have they done that build or destroy trust? It’s also a good idea to assess whether you believe people trust you. Do they feel free to share ideas and failures with you? What actions have you done that would make those people trust you more or less?

We are defining the first foundational pieces of creating psychological safety. I can hear you thinking, “Some people are not trustworthy, and I could never have psychological safety around them.” I hear it all the time in workshops. One step at a time! First we raise awareness, and then we decide what to do about it. Patience, Padawan! We will get there. And patience is also a trait we are going to need to create psychological safety.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Psychological Safety: My Focus for 2018

02 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by in Psychological Safety, Uncategorized

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

psych safety intro 600 px

At the beginning of each year, I pick one concept or behavior on which to focus. One year I explored and practiced the various pieces and parts of emotional intelligence. Another year I examined compassion and encouragement. This year it is psychological safety. Frankly, as I look back over my life, I have failed at this one in many ways.

I talk about behavior that creates psychological safety in my leadership workshops and writing but have never named it as the reason for the behavior. However, the concept is one that it took Google three years to pin down, so I don’t feel too bad about not seeing it clearly. I am proud that if you take my online class called Boot Camp for New (and Lightly-Trained) Supervisors and do what it says, you create psychological safety for you and your employees without knowing its name.

So, what is psychological safety? Psychological safety exists in a relationship when the people in the relationship feel free to say what’s on their minds or make a mistake. No one fears angry yelling, being made fun of, or people saying mean things behind their backs. There may be consequences for a mistake or an action, but there is no punishment for speaking your mind or taking a risk. The essence of psychological safety for me is the phrase “feels free.”

I first got the name, the handle for this thing, from a friend of mine named George. George is an old PR guy who does an amazing job of keeping up with the current world. He read an article about  Project Aristotle, which is a massive research project done by Google, and insisted that I read it.

Google had studied management and managers and had a list of successful characteristics of leaders, but still there were some teams that outperformed others. Now, everyone at Google is smart and motivated, so you would think that all the teams would do equally well. However, some teams definitely did much better than others, so they decided to figure out why.

It took three years for the research team to figure it out. Their first discovery was that the best teams’ success had something to do with group norms. Then, they worked to determine the exact group norms. In the end, they found that the groups with the highest performance were the ones that had psychological safety.

The leaders of the exceptional groups created an atmosphere of openness and acceptance. The members of the team felt that they could disagree and not be punished for it. An honest disagreement and discussion were acceptable – even encouraged. Taking intelligent risks was also encouraged. The team could try innovative ideas without fear of being belittled or punished.

I see a lack of psychological safety in lots of relationships outside work. I hear people talking all the time about not telling a spouse about a purchase or mistake because they don’t want the hassle of their partner questioning them and making them feel bad. When anyone feels they must hide things or keep secrets for fear of reprisal, there is no psychological safety. I believe most of us feel that way in at least one or two relationships in our lives. The more important the relationship, the more psychological safety is needed.

I, for one, am tired of hiding who I am, what I think, and what I do. This year, I plan to master the communication and leadership skills needed to ensure that I and everyone who I am in a relationship with don’t feel those needs. I think exploring and mastering the creation of psychological safety could be a turning point for me in my life.

I am so grateful to my friend George for insisting that I read the Project Aristotle research. It’s a new lens through which I am choosing to view life. You are welcome to join me – or not. No repercussions here, only psychological safety.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.

Final Words of Wisdom: Finish Strong

19 Tuesday Dec 2017

Posted by in Emotional Intelligence, Uncategorized, Words of Wisdom

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

snail finish line 550 px

If I was going to tell my granddaughter one essential quality that helps create success in life, I would say it’s the ability to see a job through to the end. It’s difficult, and it takes some self-discipline. For example, when we finish a project in the house, we want to be done and move on. We don’t want to clean up the area and put all the tools away. However, it’s important that we develop the self-discipline to see every task or goal to its completion.

Successful leaders are finishers. In fact, great leaders finish strong. One of the key pieces to finishing strong is starting tasks that are worthwhile and in alignment with your short- and long-term goals. One of my goals is to maintain an organized home and work environment, which means I focus on putting away files and keeping things in their places. For work, I have a marketing schedule, a weekly blog, coaching clients, and classes. Each area requires a set of tasks, and the tasks must be completed for the actions to have an impact.

A lot of worthwhile activities are not that much fun. Scheduling social media posts is not my favorite thing to do, but it leads to more clients and more coaching, which I love. I keep the end goal in mind while I’m working.

Self-discipline is like a muscle. The more you use it, the stronger it gets. It’s hard in the beginning to see a project through to the very end. However, the more you do it, the easier it gets.

Employers and employees value the ability to finish strong. Family members are also fans of project follow-through. The ability to finish strong can have an enormously positive effect on work and home life.

If we don’t finish, we’ve wasted the time that we invested. We’ve also damaged our confidence and invited negative self-talk.

A good practice for finishing strong is doing the laundry from beginning to end. That may sound like a silly challenge, but I’ve learned through leadership workshops that almost everyone struggles with getting clothes clean and put away. Most of us end up with loads of laundry hanging out in the dryer or piled on a flat surface. Make the commitment to move the laundry from the washer to the dryer quickly, and then get the clothes out when they are dry. The hard part is folding them and putting them away – right away!

We are building self-discipline and confidence when we finish what we begin. Those are definitely qualities that I want for my granddaughter –  and you.

For a little bit of fun leadership development, join 53 Leadership Challenges at KathyStoddardTorrey.com.

Want to go further with your professional development? Check out the courses offered at PositiveEffectLeadership.com.

If you are interested in taking your career to the next level quickly, contact me for a sample coaching session at KSTorrey@tapferconsulting.com.