Unstuck

1/6/2016

It’s easy to get trapped, stuck, locked in an argument with passions running high on both sides. The harder you push, the stronger the push back. The issue escalates and so does the mood. Lots of heat, not so much light. Where do you go from here? Who’s going to blink first? If this scenario sounds familiar, if like me it’s something you have witnessed or experienced, this piece is for you!

I got stuck in an organisation when a different team tried to impose new systems and processes without consultation or explanation. It created extra work for my team and it felt cumbersome, bureaucratic, over-engineered and pointless. I felt annoyed and frustrated and my instinct was to challenge, to resist, to rebel. Instead, I took deep breaths and tried a different approach.

I arranged to meet with the leader of the team who had introduced the changes. My first question was to do with goals: ‘What’s important to you that you’re trying to achieve?’ She explained the legal and regulatory rationale behind the changes, what was driving them and why they were necessary for the organisation. It also provided her with space to articulate her own vision.

My second and related question focused on values: ‘What matters most to you in this?’ After a moment, she explained her team needed accurate, accessible information in order to ensure accountability. It opened the door for us to explore different methods to ensure they had the information they needed whilst, at the same time, to reduce the burden on other teams.

The simple approach I’ve outlined here can help build awareness, collaboration, mutuality and trust: ‘This is what’s important to me that I’m trying to achieve…what’s important to you?’; ‘This is what matters most to me in this…what matters most to you?’ It brings goals and values to the surface and creates a useful platform for conversation, negotiation and win-win solutions.

86 Comments

Carl Bishop

1/6/2016 02:04:10 pm

Understanding intent is paramount to change; execution is best left to the executioner. In other words if you explain the intent to the people expected to make the changes they will make it happen. Sometimes you might need to offer specific guidance as to action; more often though the change will be best received when those most affected implement it own their own terms.

Excellent read; thanks Nick.

Nick Wright

1/6/2016 02:12:37 pm

Many thanks Carl. I agree that the issue of intention is very important; that is, being clear and congruent in terms of our own intention and taking steps to understand the other person's intention. We often assume or infer a person's intention on the basis of their actions, the tricky part being that our inference is an interpretation (and therefore a projection and potential distortion) based on our own beliefs, values, expectations, culture etc. Checking this out can make all the difference to a healthy relationship and successful outcome. All the best. Nick

Gauhar Husain

1/6/2016 09:45:23 pm

With all due respect I look at such matters from a different angle. My first question is, why in the first place such a thing occurred. Who was/is the responsible person, the one who had approved or planned this. Is there an SOP in place and does it need to be updated. If everything is right with the SOP, then why it was not followed. Things should be done right, in the first attempt, or at least should be tried to. This should be the rule if we consider youself to be professionals. My last point, is Learning, from both good and bad experiences. By learning I emphasise to bring out some 'action points', hence minimizing the chances of reoccurrence.

Nick Wright

1/6/2016 09:52:31 pm

Thank you, Gouhar, for posing such a good and fair challenge. You demonstrate well how there are different ways of looking at and approaching the same situation. The example I offered aims to show how seeking to share and explore one-anothers' perspectives (including goals and values) can build a bridge of empathy and understanding which can, itself, provide a basis for working to address wider organisational issues together. I like your attention to other factors that could contribute to the situation and your emphasis on learning for the future. Your insights reminded me of a short article that may be of interest: http://www.nick-wright.com/what-is-really-going-on-here.html All the best and thanks again. Nick

Shanti

2/6/2016 07:40:12 am

Nick, i really like the way you blend OD work and spirituality... i have been following your blog for the past few years.
My comments on this - there is an assumption that all the team members are self aware and are capable of engaging in a meaningful dialogue/ conversation. The challenge is when the team members don't completely understand the intentions of their leader. This is the case in several organisations that i work with. The point is how to create a space for conversations at various levels. Or else, it just becomes a top-down approach

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 12:37:08 pm

Thanks for your kind feedback on the blog, Shanti - you have greatly encouraged me! :)

I think you are right in saying that this approach assumes people have a degree of awareness and capability to engage in meaningful dialogue. I see my role as a coach and OD practitioner as modelling that, raising awareness and supporting and challenging people, teams and organisations to move in that direction attitude and capability-wise.

My approach stems from my beliefs and values base. I've learned over the years to focus more on my intention, presence, empathy, curiosity, quality of contact with the other person(s) - which I summarise as 'stance' - and less on technique. This often results in greater connection, openness and influence than I have experienced previously.

Having acknowledged scepticism towards this kind of approach in some people and organisations, one of my colleagues, Sue Powell, poses a great appreciative question: 'What is possible if we do this well?' I encourage people consider deeply what their life is about, what stance they want to take, and how that might influence how they perceive and engage with their work and with other people.

In my experience to date, this is often enough to start to create attitude and behaviour change. I pray for the leading of God's spirit in this and I believe that makes a difference too. I encourage people to own their own power and influence so that, for instance, if they don't know what someone's intentions are, to approach them in an open spirit and to inquire.

Let me know if that resonates with any of your experiences too? I'd love to hear more from you and to continue the conversation. All the best. Nick

Shanti

3/6/2016 02:20:36 am

I completely agree with modeling behavior and/or stance one takes. What is most important is behaviors/actions congruent to one's intention - in short, complete integrity. I have learnt and considered self as an instrument of change.
However, most of my work involves engaging with multiple stakeholders and surpassing bureaucratic hurdles. Change is slow in these contexts. And often, the sceptic in me wonders if adhering to bureaucracy is a way to avoid taking ownership and responsibility (by team members)...... as a change facilitator, i am aware of what i introject and project but it is not the case with others. It takes time, patience and most importantly, a deep trust that change is possible.
And lastly thank you ... i will continue to engage in these conversations and share my experiences too.

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 10:37:13 am

Thanks again, Shanti. I agree that some cultural environments are more naturally supportive of the kind of approach I've outlined and others less so. A macro challenge is sometimes to find or create a forum within which to hold up a proverbial mirror that exposes the bureaucracy and what may lay behind it in order to create awareness and opportunity for change. Another way can be to explore, using appreciative inquiry, what is going well and what it would take to be more like that, more of the time. Again, easier said than done in some cultural environments. All the best and thanks again for contributing such honest and insightful comments to the conversation. All the best. Nick

Nidhi Aggarwal

2/6/2016 12:57:19 pm

That's like a true coach!

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 12:59:03 pm

Thanks Nidhi. :) Can you say a bit more about any experiences have you had of enabling a client to move through stuck-ness, or perhaps where you have felt stuck too? What ways have you discovered to move through it? I'm keen to hear more. All the best. Nick

Monty Padmanagara

2/6/2016 12:59:44 pm

Thank you for sharing.

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 01:00:15 pm

You are very welcome, Monty. All the best. Nick

Stephan Collins

2/6/2016 01:01:35 pm

Am not sure to get the full picture: what exactly was or is your role with regard to the first team? In what capacity were or are you working together?

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 01:05:01 pm

Hi Stephan. I was leading a team. The other person was leading a different team in the same organisation. I'm curious: what's the question behind your question..? All the best. Nick

Ian Henderson

2/6/2016 01:05:44 pm

I like that Nick. I find that 'chunking up' questions always provide insight for me as a coach and for the client. It usually provides the higher purpose behind someone's activities. Asking why something is important to them elicits their values and motivation, listening out for towards or away from clues.

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 01:09:10 pm

Thanks Ian. Yes, I agree. It can help to surface someone's purpose, values and motivation. I've heard it said that we tend to judge others by their actions and ourselves by our intentions. Creating opportunity to explore intentions can itself resolve many tensions and misunderstandings, or at least create sufficient clarity and empathy for a constructive conversation. I also find the 'towards or way from' motivations insight very helpful. All the best. Nick

Jill Letts

2/6/2016 01:13:01 pm

I like this approach. It allows for a non-confrontationable approach, yet gives you the information you need in order to proceed.

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 01:15:01 pm

Hi Jill and thanks for the note. Yes, we could think of it as gentle rather than hard confrontation, confronting the issue in an attitude and approach that demonstrates curiosity and a desire to find a win-win solution. All the best. Nick

Todd A. Kauffman

2/6/2016 03:45:27 pm

Love this ...

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 03:46:11 pm

Thanks Tod..! All the best. Nick

George Anderson MSW, BCD, CAMF

2/6/2016 03:47:39 pm

In skill enhancement coaching, there is no such thing as a client getting stuck. Each coaching client has his or her own learning style.

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 03:48:26 pm

Erm...say a bit more, George..? All the best. Nick

Gerhard Schwarz

2/6/2016 05:46:18 pm

I don't think of seeking clarification or understanding as confrontational. I believe it is one of the best ways to stop potentially confrontational issues. Once you have a better understanding of the desired/intended results then I believe you can have a reasonable discussion. These conversations can also change your own perspective on the changes and who knows you may even become a champion of them.

Nick Wright

2/6/2016 05:48:51 pm

Hi Gerhard and thanks for the note. Yes, I agree. I was using the word 'confront' to mean 'address' rather than, say, avoid. I agree that inquiry isn't confrontational - depending, of course, on the spirit of the inquiry! I agree too that, in this type of conversation, there is possibility for a change of perspective for either or both parties. All the best. Nick

Mike Hodkinson

3/6/2016 10:29:18 am

Great approach. Took step back from your perceptions and walked in other persons shoes to give you a completely different understanding then used this very effectively to collaborate and come up with with an even better workable and beneficial to all solution. Big like Best regards Mike H

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 10:39:57 am

Thanks Mike! Something I noticed in that experience was that I had to get past my own assumptions and feelings in order to approach the other person, approach the conversation, in a genuinely positive and open spirit. Thanks for the encouraging feedback. :) All the best. Nick

Sara Pearson MSc

3/6/2016 11:31:13 am

Hi Nick

In the past I have been stuck helping leaders to effectively translate strategy into tangible results, until I came across a very inspiring book written by Jim Hauden (CEO Root Learning) ‘The Art of Engagement’.

He uses a stimulating and motivating framework using metaphors, analogies, stories and pictures to help connect people to strategy. The book also provides a link to free learning applications that can be used to support educators to help organisations visualise and realise solutions to this problem.

He says that an organisations “reality is a canyon” and that people get stuck executing strategy because of the canyons that exist between ‘people and possibilities’. I also love the analogy of altitude that he uses to explain some of these huge gaps that exist between “leaders, managers and doers”.

If anyone is stuck with engagement and alignment and want to bring strategy to life, this book is a must!

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 11:36:42 am

Many thanks, Sara. The book looks and sounds great. I will order a copy for an organisation I'm working with that is about to embark on a strategy refresh. :) All the best. Nick

Sara Pearson MSc

3/6/2016 01:05:55 pm

I hope it inspires you and your organisation as much as it does me. It is one of those books thats never far away from Me. Good luck Sara

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 01:07:47 pm

Thanks Sara. From the write-up on Amazon, it sounds similar to some creative approaches we used when I worked with an international development organisation, World Vision UK. We achieved 'Best Companies to Work for' status which was a great encouragement too. All the best. Nick

Sara Pearson MSc

4/6/2016 10:57:54 am

Great accolade indeed!

Ramesh Sood

3/6/2016 01:54:48 pm

I liked the article and the thoughts shared. Worth trying...yes..

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 01:55:35 pm

Thanks Ramesh. If you try it, let us know what happens..! All the best. Nick

Ramesh Sood

3/6/2016 02:05:04 pm

Yes, will get back to you.. RS

Stephen Starkey

3/6/2016 01:56:29 pm

Wonderful! Curiosity unlocks all kinds of logjams. Defensiveness creates them. :-)

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 01:57:11 pm

Thanks, Stephen. I agree. :) All the best. Nick

Tom Fields

3/6/2016 03:54:59 pm

Nick, like this nice simple approach. Fortunately, the party you were dealing with actually had an explainable rationale to underpin your discussions. :-)

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 04:00:58 pm

Thanks Tom. My working assumption is that, in some sense, everyone has a rationale for what they are doing. Sometimes the rationale is subsconscious (if that isn't a contradiction in terms), or doesn't stand up to reason when explored and critiqued, or is a rationalisation for some other underlying goal that may be less personally or culturally acceptable. I once read, 'What passes for rationality is often irrationality in disguise'. I found that helpful to bear in mind! All the best. Nick

Bennett Ray

3/6/2016 07:20:09 pm

Nick, Very nice approach. I can tell by your words that going at the situation with guns blazing would have resulted in the other manager digging their heels in.

What was the outcome? Was your team bale to use the system? Was your team allowed to use another system?

Just curious as I was in a similar situation and because of the cost of the implemented system, the team was still required to use despite all of the reasons you mentioned in your initial post.

Ben

Nick Wright

3/6/2016 07:24:56 pm

Hi Bennett and thanks for the note. Yes, I have seen similar outcomes too, as if persisting with a system or course of action helps to post-rationalise the cost or investment made in it. In this case that I posted here, the system was discontinued and a different process adopted by the team that had introduced it. It was clear that the team was acting with good intention but, having received similar expressions of concern from other teams, the team that had introduced it decided it was inflicting more pain and causing more work than it was worth. :) All the best. Nick

Mandy Worrall

4/6/2016 10:53:44 am

I ask them to list what they gain from being 'stuck', in positive terms. Then compare and list again with the comparison of what they truly desire. Sometimes they don't need a different road, just better transport, a different speed, or different fuel.

Nick Wright

4/6/2016 10:56:44 am

Thanks for the note, Mandy. Yes, when working with a client who feels stuck, asking what they gain is a similar question to, 'Who benefits from this and how?' in Transactional Analysis when exploring games and pay off. It sometimes reveals systemic as well as personal (often subconscious, in my experience) drivers. I love your analogy of road, transport, speed and fuel! All the best. Nick

Phillipus Jacobus Blignaut

4/6/2016 10:59:18 am

Hi nick I to started a new site were the history off the company was not that good due to accidents & incidents were by the company sustained major loses. New management arrived and we as a team had to find a solution to integrate the old and the new. My first aprouch was to go back to the basics and assist the safety department rewrite all SOP so I to could fully understand the direction as well as the reasons for change. We as a team have been successful in our quest and have changed the company for good. We as a team have reduced incidents & accidents by 80% and achieve a monthly production target of 94-96% consecutive this is only achieved by teamwork and change sometime is a good thing. Training and Safety departments are the life blood of organisation and its our responsibility to copy with change.

Nick Wright

4/6/2016 11:04:07 am

Hi Phillipus and thanks for sharing such a positive story of change. It sounds like the company had become stuck in ways of working that were resulting in accidents. You identified a way to break the stuckness, change the situation and its outcomes, by reviewing, rewriting and reapplying standard operating procedures. You have worked as a team to implement them and it has shown great results. Have I understood that properly? Thanks and best wishes. Nick

Gerfried Reis

4/6/2016 12:34:53 pm

Hi Nick, since I'm usually the one imposing systems and processes on others, I appreciate the view from the other side. I only wish more people were eager to positively contribute in the way you describe. Many seem to prefer resisting and rebelling.

Nick Wright

4/6/2016 12:44:30 pm

Hi Gerfried and thanks for posting such an interesting perspective. I'm wondering if it's worth exploring the idea of 'imposing'. What we experience as resistance or rebellion is sometimes (although not always) a reaction to the way in which something has been developed or implemented. I'm reminded of Martin Luther King's observation that, in some situations, 'Violence is the voice of the unheard.' I once attended a psychology of leadership seminar with Professor Michael West who introduced the idea of 'negative brainstorming'. The idea is to invite key stakeholders into a meeting at the ideas stage and, after proposing the idea (e.g. new system or process) invite/encourage participants to think of as many ideas as possible why it will not work. This can be quite playful - ideas can be wild and creative as well as serious. :) This enables people to voice their concerns up-front without feeling as if they will be portrayed as negative for doing so. The next stage is to invite the group to identify which reasons are most important to pay attention to, then to work together on, 'OK, in view of that, what would it take to make this work?' It can transform resistance into collaboration, building solutions that may otherwise have been missed. Does anything like that sound like it could be useful in your context? I'd be interested to hear more! All the best. Nick

Gerfried Reis

4/6/2016 01:07:05 pm

Well, we try as much as we can, but the situation is a little difficult. It's not like processes are defined in secret and then rolled out. When I speak of imposing processes, those are global processes for a group of over 50, loosely-knit companies spread all over the world, each with slightly different goals and interests. There is no way to get all of them at the same table and have a productive discussion. We try to do it step-by-step, but due to the large-scale, once you've discussed an issue with the first half, there'll be staff fluctuation and you could start over. There are a couple of companies with stable staff and these are totally on-board (and due to their history of productive contributions are always in the loop as far as changes are concerned), but there are also always a couple who resist and don't like the "stupid headquarter rules".

Concerning this attitude, I've found that it works well to refer the rebels towards the productive contributors. "Look, I know you're sceptical, but talk to e.g. Spain, they've been doing this for 2 months, and they're getting good results from what I've heard". Not only does it free up my time (and I don't have to go through the same discussion 517 times), it also creates the kind of environment where productive discussion is going on amongst equals, taking the "annoying headquarters" out of the equation. There's also a little peer pressure, e.g. "oh, Spain is doing that successfully? I can't fall behind!".

Nick Wright

4/6/2016 01:17:40 pm

Thanks for such an honest response, Gerfried. In my experience of working with global organisations, there is often a tension between centralisation and local autonomy. Where local business entities have a strong sense of local identity and weaker sense of corporate identity, intiatives from the headquarters are often seen as imposed, often with the objection that, 'they (i.e. head office staff) don't understand the realities of our situation'. Sometimes posing this central/local polarity openly and the challenge it represents as a global organisation can be enough to open a different kind and quality of conversation. It's a bit like holding up a mirror to say, 'This is what I'm noticing/aware of (i.e. the polarity)...and I'm interested to work together to build on what works and address what doesn't'. You may be interested in some of the ideas in my latest blog: Dissent: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/dissent which touches on some similar issues. I like your idea of drawing peers into the conversation - it's often where the greatest power lays for motivating and engaging with change. I think social media can play a new and exciting role in this...although many organisations are still at the early stages of working out how best to approach this and what 'spirit' and culture is needed to do this well. Thanks again for sharing such useful and real insights and ideas. All the best. Nick

Gerfried Reis

6/6/2016 09:29:55 am

Thanks Nick, will have a look at your blog :)

Dave Smith

4/6/2016 07:32:30 pm

This isn't about "things get stuck", this is about the project manager not understanding proper stakeholder analysis and engagement - or poor communication to affected parties.

It created extra work for your team because your input wasn't considered prior to deployment.

But your entire post is *really* about how you took it onboard and decided that finding solutions rather than highlighting problems were the only way to drive things forward. I hope the PM you dealt with appreciated the way in which you assisted her project failures to influence her next approach.

Nick Wright

4/6/2016 07:37:10 pm

Thanks Dave. That's an interesting perspective. Yes, it highlights the value of stakeholder engagement to avoid or minimise the risks and potential impacts of stuck-ness, avoidance or resistance to change. In this case, the I think the PM had wrongly, albeit innocently, assumed that others would naturally see and appreciate the system and processes as a good idea rather than something that would create frustration and extra work. The fact that she was approaching the issue with positive intent made it easier for me to talk through and resolve the issue with her in the way I described here. All the best. Nick

Dave Smith

7/6/2016 10:55:36 am

"Others would naturally see and appreciate the system and processes as a good idea rather than something that would create frustration and extra work" - if it's anything I've understood about change, it's that the scope includes a change in product and process, but the third P (people) are overlooked.

The change itself may bring great benefits, but if people aren't considered important enough to be trained on the change then it's unsurprising their segregation won't turn to immense pleasure and awe-struck admiration overnight.

Most changes are done to benefit people, and yet the people aspect is often overlooked in many projects - to the inevitable failure. The NHS4IT project is a good example.

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 10:59:09 am

Thanks Dave. Your comment about, 'immense pleasure and awe-struck admiration' really made me laugh! :) I think the people aspect is where change/transitions leadership alongside project/change management is so important. I find Rosabeth Moss-Kanter incredibly helpful on this aspect, e.g: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/change-leadership-principles All the best. Nick

Albert Smith

6/6/2016 09:30:27 am

That was not only a great read, it provided a blueprint for me going forward. Thank You for sharing!

Nick Wright

6/6/2016 09:31:16 am

Many thanks, Albert. Let us know what happens! All the best. Nick

PRAKASH KR GHOSH

6/6/2016 09:34:36 am

Best way to sit with the group to discuss & implement the best system as per suitability of the Organization, combination of both ideas. Trainer is responsible to give theoretical inputs in class room in most effective way, suitability of the group. The result after the training are developed during theoretical training in shop floor, mentored by the Supervisors & Managers in the Shop floor. If there are lack of combination of both, desired results can not be achieved.

Nick Wright

6/6/2016 09:35:35 am

Thanks Prakash. I like your emphasis on a collaborative approach at every stage. It's about doing-with rather than doing-to. All the best. Nick

Sekararajan Balagurunathan

6/6/2016 09:37:06 am

I will assess the reason I will seek necessary help i will impart the need of the task to be completed i will re initiate the process and will find the result.

Nick Wright

6/6/2016 09:42:36 am

Hi Sekararajan and thanks for the note. What you describe sounds like some of foundations of a project management approach. It can sometimes be useful to invite others, especially those who have an interest in or are affected by what you are doing, to share their perspective on what they are trying to achieve that's important to them and what matters most to them in it. This creates an opportunity to work together, find synergies and address any tensions that otherwise may arise. What do you think? All the best. Nick

Piper Purdon

6/6/2016 09:46:36 am

Those two questions are always gold!

Nick Wright

6/6/2016 09:47:49 am

Thanks Piper! I certainly find them useful to bear in mind and, when it seems appropriate, to approach a conversation from that place. All the best. Nick

Andrew Vernon

6/6/2016 03:49:12 pm

Why would a trainer feel the need to resist? Your purpose to communicate changes and/or goals not to make them. A training professional must seek always seek to align his or her self with the needs of business or left behind. A trainer must always be seen as a change agent. It doesn't matter if we agree with the change or not. You can voice your concerns to the decision makers but once the decision has been made; let it go.

Nick Wright

6/6/2016 03:56:39 pm

Hi Andrew and thanks for posing such a stimulating response! It begs lots of questions including the role of a trainer in his or her own right; the trainer's role in relation to a wider system; what it means to be a change agent; cultural values around accountability, responsibility, decision-making etc. In the cultural environment that you describe, I imagine stuck-ness could arise if, for instance, the trainer or training participants do strongly disagree with a change - where to go from there and how to navigate towards a positive solution. All the best. Nick

Gerfried Reis

6/6/2016 05:31:17 pm

Andrew, I'd just like to add that there are changes that directly affect the trainers' work, and trainers are people as well. So when they're directly involved in changes, they may not like them, they may fear them, and they may resist them.

Terrence H. Seamon

7/6/2016 10:41:47 am

Great story, Nick. Thanks for sharing.

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 10:42:16 am

Thanks Terrence. :) All the best. Nick

Jose Santiago

7/6/2016 10:43:22 am

I have to agree that i uses a similar aprisco but atapetes with the values first perhaps as que where competing for the same Resources but Managed to get to cooperativos by using the shared values to get our goals aligned.

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 10:45:19 am

Thanks Jose. I think that's an interesting point. Whether to start from values and work towards goals or vice versa. In my experience, it can work both ways. Perhaps it depends on the cultural context and the passions, interests or concerns of the parties involved? All the best. Nick

Wendy Jenkins

7/6/2016 10:48:06 am

I ask the question when someone says run a course or out the person on a course to change something - I want to know from that manager or director what they want to be different and how will they know when success has been achieved - usually means that person has to really think and often find its often not about training but other things but as trainer & coach I can support and work with teams and managers to make the differance.

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 10:52:52 am

Hi Wendy and thanks for the note. I agree that the kind of conversation you describe can be very useful. When the 'trainer' steps into 'coach/consultant' mode, perspectives can really shift. In my experience, it can be valuable and energising to pose similar questions in training groups too, e.g. 'This is what we are here to do...what do you want to be different...what will success from this look and feel like to you?' It calls the group into dialogue and co-creation rather than as attendees or passive participants. This means that stuck-ness is less likely and, if it does arise, may signal something important that needs to be addressed. Does that make sense? All the best. Nick

Veronique Beauprez

7/6/2016 11:00:25 am

We all have to deal with human resistance in our daily trainingen. I use humour to go through RESISTANCE :-)

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 11:03:06 am

Thanks Veronica. Yes, humour can certainly help to release stuck-ness sometimes. I think that links to being human with the group - seeing and relating to people in the group as people, not simply as objects to be trained. Humour can also help to shift perspective and the group dynamic if things get stuck. Does that make sense in your experience too? All the best. Nick

Caroline Peelo

7/6/2016 11:04:17 am

Not all managers understand the most effective way to communicate change, and this is where a trainers understanding of learning theories can help in this process.
Any change to be successful needs a collaborative approach.
My approach is 'help me to help you' and ensure all relevant stakeholders are engaged. It is the same for any managed change in a team.
There is a difference between implementing a change and implementing a change effectively, and it comes down to the most appropriate method of how it is communicated. This is where a trainer helps in the method of communication.

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 11:06:27 am

Thanks Caroline. Yes, I agree that working collaboratively on change is likely to prove more effective. This is where questions at the outset such as, 'What are we here to do?' and 'How shall we do this?' can create a useful and respectful platform to build on. All the best. Nick

Helen Harrison

7/6/2016 01:15:23 pm

Doesn't it make a difference to ask questions with an open and clear mind!

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 01:16:30 pm

Hi Helen. Yes...and when in the best emotional state to handle it well! All the best. Nick

Kim Leong Wong

7/6/2016 04:21:31 pm

Great wisdom on the engagement process! Thanks for initiating this discussion!

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 04:22:17 pm

You are very welcome, Kim! And thanks for your kind words too. All the best. Nick

Danielle Ware

7/6/2016 08:18:08 pm

I know first hand that being in OD teams and as the people who know this sort of thing inside out; sometimes we do just need to take stock, a deep breath and think through what the best question is to start with! Not always easy to do but simple and effective every time - 2 fantastic questions to start with Nick :)

Nick Wright

7/6/2016 08:20:19 pm

Thanks Danielle. Yes, well said! I try to start with an assumption that the other party is acting with a positive intention and to start from a not-knowing stance. Then...as you say...breathe, step in and see what happens next! All the best. Nick

Lindsay J.Berry

8/6/2016 08:45:12 pm

Last month I wrote a blog on here (for my research project) based on promoting women into construction 'managerial positions' with the use of emotional intelligence in this field as women are known statistically to have a higher eq than males.

What are your theories on this?

I did try to private message you in regard to this.

Nick Wright

8/6/2016 08:45:52 pm

Hi Lindsay. I'm not sure how far this speaks to your question, but have a glance at some of the comments under this piece..? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/the-gender-agenda All the best with your research. Nick

Ravi Krishnamurthy

8/6/2016 08:47:45 pm

That approach you took is a great one Nick. Although I would have taken the same route, coming from a communications management background I would initiate a communication process in consultation with all concerned so no one has to feel frustrated. A good communication process implemented here would bring in that much more understanding between all the people concerned.

Nick Wright

8/6/2016 08:50:56 pm

Thanks Ravi. Yes, it shows the importance of stakeholder engagement during design stages rather than simply communicating the changes once things have been decided and implemented. I think it also demonstrates the need for grace - we all make mistakes from time to time so offering to work together to create remedial solutions is better than simply getting frustrated. As Greenpeace said in one of its slogans: 'The optimism of the action is better than the pessimism of the thought'. All the best. Nick

Marita Jane Laxa

9/6/2016 07:24:24 pm

Great stuff, Nick! I think as trainers or coaches, challenges like this is part of our role. Our responsibility is to communicate with stakeholders and get feedback, input, and anything to ensure positive collaboration. I've been there too, and resistance is simply a way of telling me that I need to find other strategies help the individual or group, get what they need to make their job effective and their business successful.

Nick Wright

9/6/2016 07:26:28 pm

Thanks Marita! Yes, paying attention to what others need to be and feel successful is very important. Intrinsic to that is showing respect for others, the issues they face and the contribution they bring. All the best. Nick

Unstuck

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Unstuck

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives