Category: organizational quicksand

Leadership Begins with Managing Performance and Matures into Manifesting Purpose

on By

For decades, organizations have defined “good leadership” through the language of competencies. They build models that specify what leaders should know, say, and do – how to give feedback, how to manage conflict, how to make decisions. These models create consistency and a sense of fairness. They make it possible to assess, promote, and design training programs.

But competency models also do something else, something unintended. They imply there’s a single, correct way to lead. They teach people to manage leadership rather than to manifest it.

Early in a leader’s journey, managing is essential. New leaders need guidance, structure, and standards. They need to understand how to set expectations, how to hold people accountable, how to ensure that work gets done safely and ethically. Managing performance is the foundation of effective leadership.

As leaders mature, they discover that management alone doesn’t inspire excellence or adaptation. When environments change, when uncertainty rises, when teams face complex and ambiguous challenges, leaders can’t rely on checklists. The competencies that once provided confidence start to feel confining.

This is the turning point where leadership matures, when it shifts from managing performance to manifesting purpose. When early-career leaders focus on managing performance, they tend to emulate their role models. When leaders mature, they need to connect who they are to how they lead, that might mean reframing competencies as foundational, not aspirational.

From Competencies to Conditions

Manifesting purpose means creating the conditions in which people and organizations can thrive. It’s not about whether leaders have mastered the right behaviors; it’s about whether their leadership is producing the right organizational climate.

Think of leadership outcomes not as what leaders do, but as what people experience when leadership is working as intended.

  • Do people understand how their work connects to a larger purpose?
  • Do they feel safe to raise concerns, take risks, and innovate?
  • Do they see decisions being made transparently and collaboratively?
  • Do they believe their contributions matter?

If those conditions exist, leadership is functioning. If they don’t, it isn’t – regardless of how well a leader performs against a competency checklist.

And who is best positioned to determine whether those conditions exist? Not the leader’s manager. Not an HR algorithm. The people being led. The most direct way to know whether leadership outcomes are being achieved is to ask the people impacted by them.

There’s No One Right Way to Lead

Every organization’s strategy calls for different conditions. Every team’s context is unique. And every leader’s personality, history, and strengths shape how they bring those conditions to life.

Organizations exert control by establishing structures. Yet when it comes to professional development, there’s no one right way to lead. If we’re not careful, we can end up treating leaders like widgets on an assembly line. Competency models turn into quality assurance standards, and facilitating leadership workshops feels like teaching to the test.

What organizations really need are leaders who can translate purpose into experience. Some will do that through storytelling and inspiration. Others will do it through systems and structure. Still others through empathy, inquiry, or relentless problem-solving. What matters isn’t the method, it’s what the method manifests.

Rethinking Leadership Development

If organizations want leaders who manifest purpose rather than just manage performance, their development practices need to evolve. That means shifting from competency-based instruction to outcome-based reflection.

Instead of asking:

“Has this leader demonstrated effective communication?”

Ask:

“Do people on this leader’s team feel informed, heard, and aligned?”

Instead of designing programs to improve discrete skills, design experiences that help leaders experiment with new ways of creating the conditions their teams need. Replace competency assessments with outcome conversations. Replace one-size-fits-all workshops with real-time reflection, feedback, and coaching tied to strategic outcomes.

The question isn’t whether leaders know what good leadership looks like. It’s whether people around them can feel it.

Unclench Your Brain; Hold Thoughts Lightly

on By 1 Comment

In her 2021 bestseller, Peak Mind, professor of psychology, Amishi Jha recounts an epiphany she had about the powerful ways our worldviews grip and constrain our thinking. Dr. Jha and her family had been attending a birthday celebration for her mother. It was a milestone birthday and her mother’s house was packed with friends and relatives, many of them Indian men and women in their sixties and seventies. Dr. Jha and her sister took charge of serving food and drinks. Here’s how Dr. Jha describes what happened next.

When the time came to serve the cake, I was at a loss – my daughter was nowhere to be found, and my sister was busy cutting and plating the cake while I ran frantically back and forth with two plates, trying to get to all the guests. Finally, I felt a hand on my arm. My husband, Michael, was standing there with our son and my nephew

Can we help you?

Husband, son, and nephew jumped in and efficiently distributed the plates. Everyone enjoyed cake, problem solved.

Later, Dr. Jha reflected on the experience. Why hadn’t she asked her husband for help? Why was her first thought, “where is my daughter?” Shockingly, she realized that she had fallen under the spell of a deeply ingrained worldview: Men don’t serve food in Indian households!

As a woman, a scientist, and a psychology professor, Dr. Jha is acutely aware of the casual, implicit biases that regularly harm women. For example, it’s not unusual for her to receive emails addressed to “Sir.”

After her mother’s birthday party, she wanted to shout, “But I’m not sexist!” The reality, she came to realize is that “…if sexism exists in the world, it exists in my lived experience of the world.”

What Would it Take for you to Change your Mind?

Mental models are internal representations of external reality. They are the stories we tell ourselves to help us make sense of the world. Mental models help us process information, reason, make decisions, and make predictions. The key word in the definition is, “representation.” Alfred Korzybski, a Polish-American philosopher and mathematician pointed out that mental models are representations of reality in the same way that a map is a representation of a territory.

Mental models are useful precisely because they simplify reality. Like maps, mental models leave out a lot of detail. Also, like maps, unless a mental model is updated, new realities can make our rigidly held models less useful.

We can hold maps at arm’s length. It’s much harder to put daylight between ourselves and our mental models. Consequently, we confuse our models with reality, we accept our certainties as truth. What’s worse, because the mental model dictates how we process information, it can change the brain’s ability to notice information that’s not part of the model. Dr. Jha literally didn’t notice her husband, son, and nephew when she scanned her mother’s house looking for someone to help serve cake.

Noticing Stale Assumptions

Developmental psychologist, Robert Kegan writes about the transformational changes people experience throughout their lives. His subject-object theory of development differentiates between our internal assumptions about the way the world works (subject) and aspects of the world we can examine independently (object).

Kegan often asks, “Do you have the idea, or does the idea have you?” If you have the idea, you can examine it objectively. If the idea has you, you are unconsciously gripped by the idea.

Before her epiphany, Dr. Jha was unwittingly gripped by the idea that men don’t serve food in Indian households. After her epiphany, the idea no longer controlled what Dr. Jha could notice and think about her situation. She became cognizant of the relationship between an old story and its impact on her behavior. She can hold the thought lightly and decide how it will inform her worldview going forward.

Jay’s Story

I clearly remember how disoriented I felt after pitching my book to Steve Piersanti, founder of Berrett-Koehler Publishers. He pointed out that most people don’t read non-fiction books, they don’t even buy them. Bestselling non-fiction books are purchased in bulk and handed out during corporate events, conference key-note presentations, or as part of training programs. He didn’t care about my writing chops or my research. He wanted to know if I had a platform and a following. A lot of deeply held assumptions and a few fantasies about being an author lost their hold on me that day.
Lisa’s Story

Like many people, I was drawn into a professional role because it suited my personality and skills. I didn’t plan to work in sales leadership and account management, I discovered a knack for it. As I experienced success, I started thinking of myself as a sales professional. Unconsciously, I adopted a mental model that many of my coaching clients share: What I do is who I am.   Since co-founding Unstuck Minds, I’ve given myself permission to reinvent my role. I’ve learned to loosen my grip on how I see myself. I recently pursued an ICF coaching certification. Now I have a portfolio of capabilities to contribute.  

Loosening the Grip of Stale Assumptions

Stale assumptions don’t just grip people. Many businesses suffer from calcified assumptions about what customers want. It’s easy to imagine the proclamations below animating strategy meetings at three, once dominant companies:

  • The experience of scanning the shelves of a physical store is an irreplaceable part of what customers love about Blockbuster.
  • Quality, consistency, and value make Kodak film the best choice for all photographers and cameras.
  • Business professionals are obsessed with the Blackberry keyboard.

Noticing and potentially revising a mental model isn’t easy. Unstuck Minds has developed tools and thought exercises to help you pull back the curtain on influential thoughts. Here are two of our favorites:

Brainstorm terrible Ideas

Imagine you work for a retail clothing company that prides itself on personalized customer service. In a meeting someone suggests closing all the stores and selling your apparel through a third-party, online e-commerce site. It would be easy to picture people angrily reacting to the idea because it violates a core assumption about the company’s business model. Now that the assumption is out in the open, you can challenge it or recommit to it. Read our story about using “terrible ideas” to help a client identify assumptions and worldviews.

  • What blasphemous yet plausible idea would elicit a gasp or an eye roll in your organization?
  • What does the reaction say about your organization’s assumptions?

Consult future you

When facing decisions that will play out over time, we assume that the person who makes the decision (Present-Me) will think and feel the same way as the person who will live with the decision (Future-Me). It’s easier to recognize the fallacy when we retrospectively evaluate past decisions. When we look back on consequential choices we made in the past, it feels obvious that our current selves, faced with the same decision, might consider different criteria or make a different choice. Here’s a trivial example that might be relatable. It’s the middle of the afternoon and someone has brought a tray of rich, decadent cookies into the breakroom from a meeting that just ended. Present-You knows what it wants. How will ‘10-Minutes-From-Now-You’ feel about the decision to mindlessly devour the cookie?

In a lot of ways, a life gripped by our mental models is a bit like living in a dream-like state. We don’t question the strange logic of our dreams. The first moments of waking up feel disorienting.

If you no longer believe that a jolly bearded resident of the North Pole delivers gifts to deserving children on Christmas, you understand the experience of revising a mental model. And yes, letting go of a cherished mental model might be accompanied by a sense of loss. On the plus side, when you hold thoughts, assumptions, and conclusions lightly, you create space for surprising ideas to present themselves for your consideration.

Jha, Amishi P. Peak Mind: Find Your Focus, Own Your Attention, Invest 12 Minutes a Day. New York: HarperOne, 2021.

Warning! Mental Quicksand Ahead

on By

We help people adopt an unstuck mindset. An unstuck mindset is a healthy mode of operating when things become overwhelming. It’s an orientation to complexity and uncertainty that invites breakthrough insights and novel options. We’re like mental and emotional fitness coaches conditioning people to thrive in a world that feels out of control.

But what if you’re stuck and you don’t realize it?

We find ourselves in mental quicksand when conditions have changed, but our approach remains the same. Instead of rethinking when we don’t get the outcomes we want, we use our tried-and-true strategies even more diligently. Like struggling to escape quicksand, the more effort we apply, the more stuck we become.

If any of the thoughts below feel familiar, you may already be caught in mental quicksand.

I’m right. They’re wrong.

Being right or being wrong makes sense when dealing with math problems, documented facts, or testable predictions. Thinking that there’s a right or wrong answer to a complex issue is just a trick your brain is playing on you. Brains like simplicity because simplicity conserves energy. With a bit more mental and emotional stamina, our brains can learn to tolerate nuance and creativity.

If you find yourself framing an issue as a choice between mutually exclusive alternatives, pause and ask yourself: How do we achieve the best of both?

I’m one purchase away from happiness.

You know that feeling of anticipation when you’ve splurged on a purchase that hasn’t been delivered yet? Or maybe you’ve decided to take up a new health regimen or hobby that you imagine will improve your life. If the new item or practice has become vital and transformative, congratulations!

More often, the item you coveted is now just another bland possession. The new practice has become a half-hearted routine or something you’ve abandoned. You’re back to scanning catalogues and considering the hot new life hack.

If you find yourself eager to bring something new into your life, pause and ask yourself: What need am I expecting this thing to meet?

I don’t know what came over me.

We are often surprised by our reactions. When triggered, an emotional energy can escape that makes us unrecognizable to ourselves. That out-of-proportion response is useful information. We may need the help of a therapist or coach to identify the source. Attempts to rein in our extreme reactions or write them off as the result of a temporary malady just gets us more stuck.

When you’re surprised by your own over-the-top reaction, pause and ask yourself: What does this reaction say about my unfulfilled aspirations or aspects of my life I have yet to make peace with?

Why am I getting the opposite of what I want?

A strange thing happens when we try too hard. Sometimes we put so much effort into achieving a goal, we create conditions for the opposite of our goal to take root. Let’s say Devon is eager to feel included. He adopts a strategy of helping whenever there’s a conflict or issue. He expends a lot of energy inserting himself into situations to fix problems. Devon’s efforts to be of service end up complicating matters. Over time he develops a reputation for being meddlesome and disruptive. Eventually people start avoiding, rather than including Devon.

If you feel a sense of dissatisfaction with your situation because of the extreme gap between what you want and what you’re getting, pause and ask yourself: How might I challenge the assumptions responsible for my choices?

How did we end up with the same strategy if we agree that our world has changed?

If you’re part of an organization that periodically reassesses their strategic priorities, you may have noticed that this year’s strategy could be summed up as, “Do what we’ve been doing… better.” Of course, there’s nothing wrong with staying the course if things are working and you know how to navigate “the course.” But why would you stick with a familiar strategy if the environment in which your organization operates starts to feel unfamiliar.

Whatever process you use for setting direction and prioritizing resource investments, pause and ask yourself: What opportunities or disruptions are emerging that deserve our attention?

The Case for Reinventing the Wheel

on By

It’s probably just my reflex when told not to do something.

Whenever I hear the advice, “don’t reinvent the wheel,” I think, “why not?” I presume the subtext is: don’t waste resources solving a problem that’s already been solved. If nothing else, solving a problem as if it weren’t already solved is educational. In fact, the simple act of re-imagining solutions can raise useful questions about the effectiveness of the status quo.

“Reinventing Wheels” Reveals Hidden Assumptions

In 1997, I was part of a cross-functional “change team” at Pizza Hut. We had been asked by Mike Rawlings, the CEO at the time, to identify ideas for reducing overhead costs by 10% (in a previous blog post, I’ve described the change team experience in more detail). We came back to Mike and his executive team with recommendations that would cut expenses by 30%, a recommendation that Yum! Brands later adopted with savings they projected would amount to $300 million by 2019.

I didn’t recognize it at the time, but I see now that the change team had adopted a “reinvent the wheel” approach to our challenge. Rather than look for inefficiencies in the existing structure, we started by asking, “what do restaurant general managers need to satisfy their customers?” If a savvy restaurant manager acting like an owner wouldn’t require the support, it raised the question: why does this function exist? The ensuing discussion revealed a set of operating assumptions that had become invisible.

The SCAN Framework

The SCAN framework (Structures, Context, Assumptions, and Needs) is designed to reveal hidden influences that may be keeping us stuck. When we introduce the SCAN framework to our clients, people struggle the most with the ‘Assumptions’ dimension. Once we define our terms, it’s easy for people to grasp the differences among underlying structures, surrounding context, and human needs. Assumptions, on the other hand, are hard to recognize because noticing what governs the way you notice feels unfathomable.

A thought experiment like reinventing the wheel provides an indirect look at assumptions that might be worth challenging. Instead of trying to name your assumptions, reinventing the wheel invites you to justify the status quo.

Maybe you have a sinking feeling that something fundamental about your business or organization needs to change. Perhaps you don’t trust the typical problem-solving approach your leadership team would take if you raised the issue.

Before calling in the consultants, reinvent your wheel by starting with the questions below.

Reinvention Questions

  • What does your organization offer that people will continue to benefit from in the future?
  • Who are the people that benefit from what your organization will continue to offer?
  • What has changed about them since the time you set up the current systems and distribution channels designed to meet their needs?
  • What has changed about the competitive landscape? How else can they get their needs met?

You don’t have to literally reinvent your business. It’s enough to expose hidden assumptions so you can make informed choices about what to keep and what to change. Sometimes, when it comes to getting unstuck, even if “it aint broke,” break it. Then, reinvent how you fix it.

Jay G. Cone is the author of The Surprising Power of Not Knowing What to Do; Discovering Creativity and Compassion in a Time of Chaos. He is the co-founder of Unstuck Minds.

The Odyssey of Change: Anticipating the Four Hidden Forces of Organizational Transformation

on By 1 Comment

Homer’s epic poem, The Odyssey, tells the story of Odysseus’ journey home after the fall of Troy. Odysseus and his crew spent ten years at sea. Some of their encounters along the way were fortuitous, others were fatal.

While organizational transformation is less perilous, it can feel just as daunting. It is unrealistic and possibly counterproductive to expect smooth sailing if the goal is to undergo a transformation. By paying attention to four hidden forces of organizational transformation You can, however, improve your chances of a successful journey.

To remember the four forces, we use the acronym SCAN, which stands for Structures, Context, Assumptions, and Needs.

Keep an eye out for entrenched STRUCTURES

I worked for a restaurant chain that was looking to improve its customer service. Because the company did a lot of delivery and take-out business, the main customer interactions occurred during the phone call to place an order (this was in the 1990s, before online ordering).

After the training programs and updated processes failed to improve service ratings, we decided to investigate. We discovered that restaurant managers were instructing their team members to ignore the phone if the restaurant was getting overwhelmed with orders.

The managers received bonuses for getting food out quickly. The point-of-sale system tracked how long it took from an order being placed until the order was plated or packaged. If too many orders came in, things backed up in the kitchen, and the managers’ bonuses suffered. If you don’t want orders backing up, don’t answer the phone.

Before initiating an organizational transformation, spend some time identifying systems, habits, and routines which will preserve status quo priorities and behaviors.

Pay attention to CONTEXT

On paper organizational transformation provides an illusion of control. Leaders imagine that clear goals and a well-designed plan will create the reality they envision. In the same way that weather matters to the success of an outdoor wedding, an organization’s business context matters to a change effort. The best laid plans are still subject to unpredictable and uncontrollable conditions.

Given the relentless headlines about the lingering impacts of the pandemic, disruptive technological innovation, and deteriorating trust in institutions and governments, context has become hard to ignore. Still, you may want to give some thought to contextual factors closer to your organization’s operating environment. If it’s outside your control and could have an influence on the success of your transformation efforts, it’s worth your attention.

Consider, for example, the potent combination of social trends and demographics. Baby boomer executives are retiring. Millennial and Gen Z workers are less interested in staying put and moving up the corporate ladder to fill the vacancies. HR leaders would be well-served by keeping these generational shifts in mind as they develop new talent strategies.

As you think about transforming the business, how will you keep an eye out for changing environmental factors that might become sources of both opportunities and threats?

Challenge out-of-date ASSUMPTIONS

After decades of decline, the Eastman Kodak company filed for bankruptcy in 2012. In 1976, Kodak had an 80% market share in camera sales and a 90% market share in film and film processing. It would be tempting to conclude that the company failed to notice the emergence of digital photography.

Kodak knew about digital photography. In 1975, it was a Kodak engineer who invented the digital camera. People unfamiliar with the company’s history are surprised to learn that The Eastman Kodak company held the first patent for digital cameras.

Kodak executives couldn’t recognize the significance of their changing context because they were blinded by their assumptions about the business. Digital imagery wasn’t simply a novel version of photography, it redefined the way people share the stories of their lives.

In the 1990’s IBM’s bread and butter, the mainframe computer, was being threatened by the rise of personal computers and the introduction of the client-server model. In 1992, IBM posted a $8.1 billion loss. In 1993, IBM brought on a new CEO, Louis V. Gerstner Jr., to return the company to profitability.

Lou Gerstner was able to challenge assumptions about IBM’s business in a way that the Kodak executive team could not. Gerstner was not blinded by an emotional attachment to IBM’s business model, products, or culture.

Before you transform the business, undertake a clear-eyed assessment of the deeply held assumptions being challenged by your vision of the future. How will you help people adapt?

Prioritize people’s NEEDS

In 1985, Coca-Cola introduced a new formula for its flagship soda, which was widely known as “New Coke.” The company spent $4 million on market research and taste tests, which suggested that consumers preferred the taste of New Coke over the original formula.

However, the introduction of New Coke was met with widespread backlash from consumers, who had a strong emotional attachment to the original formula. The company was unprepared for the negative reaction, and sales plummeted. The company received thousands of letters and calls from angry customers, and some even boycotted the brand.

Needs are manifestations of emotions. Leaders often underestimate the role of emotion in the success of an organizational transformation. Understanding needs requires empathy, not survey data.

Think about the people who matter most to the success of your transformation. What matters to them? Think about the people who are most often excluded from the conversations about an organizational transformation, what can you learn from their lived experience that would never have occurred to you?

Any significant organizational transformation with bump up against fixed structures, unpredictable context, embedded assumptions, and unmet needs. Conducting a periodic SCAN will help leaders navigate the uncharted waters during the voyage from current realities to a desired future.

Jay G. Cone is the author of The Surprising Power of Not Knowing What to Do; Discovering Creativity and Compassion in a Time of Chaos. He is the co-founder of Unstuck Minds.

Ready or not…You’re in Charge

on By

The state of the economy is unstable and tumultuous. Do you know what is steady and predictable? Demographics. The Pew Research Center estimates that since 2011, the number of Baby Boomers retiring has been growing year-over-year by about 2 million, and that number is on the rise. In 2020, over 29 million Boomers left the workforce.

Organizations are frantically searching for competent executives to replace the retiring Boomers. Finding replacements for senior executives seems to be the area where the need is most pressing. If you need an illustration, think about who is in charge of the Senate and the White House right now.

A lot of senior executives are retiring or should be retiring. As a result, HR professionals responsible for talent planning must pull off a magic act. They must find a way to conjure 20 years of experience out of 10 years of experience. Consequently, many of our clients are asking us to help them accelerate the readiness of high potentials to take on bigger roles.

You could make a case by taking the glass-half-full perspective. Less seasoned leaders can bring fresh ideas and structural change to our organizations. Yet according to a recent McKinsey analysis, 50% of the CEOs in the study are seen by others as having failed in their early tenure, and 90% of the CEOs wish they had handled their transition better.

Take a moment to consider how framing the issue as a need to “accelerate readiness” directs our efforts. When I hear the phrase “accelerate readiness,” I picture using a microwave instead of an oven to prepare food. The hidden presumption is that there exists some outcome called “readiness.” Ding, now you’re ready.

Just ask any new parent – you can’t ready someone for a transition that changes their life. We can prepare, but what new leaders really need is structural support, a social network, and coaching.

Structural Support

We shouldn’t simply plug a new executive into the void created by a tenured leader’s departure. The previous leader had undoubtedly shaped the routines, processes, and norms to serve their personal needs and style. New leaders should consider their preferred involvement strategies. They should be clear about how they like to communicate. They should understand their preferred methods for analyzing and synthesizing information. Knowing what it takes for new leaders to do their best work, makes it easier to establish new structures to help them perform at their best.

Social Network

Both inside and outside the organization, new leaders need to establish trusted relationships. They may need to reassess their existing relationships in light of their new role. The bigger the role, the more difficult it becomes to obtain unfiltered information. New leaders will benefit greatly from cross-boundary relationships with other new leaders. Think of it as a networking club for any senior leader in their first year on the job. For small and medium-sized businesses, it might mean joining an external networking group.

Coaching

Many executives get coaches. Typically, coaches get pulled in only when a perceived problem is undermining the executive’s effectiveness. A leadership transition coach understands the unique demands of stepping into a more challenging role. Especially when people have gotten used to the way the previous leader operated in the role. A transition coach can provide objective guidance untainted by political agendas. Most organizations don’t want freshly promoted executives to broadcast their doubts and vulnerabilities. A transition coach can lend a sympathetic ear.

Maybe we’ve been asking the wrong question, or perhaps an inadequate question. It makes sense to prepare people for bigger challenges and larger roles. We should frequently review the effectiveness of our training and development efforts. At the same time, let’s think about preparing the organization not just the incoming leader. While we figure out how to accelerate the readiness of our high potentials, we should also consider how to accelerate the readiness of our organizations to support their success.

Jay G. Cone is the author of The Surprising Power of Not Knowing What to Do; Discovering Creativity and Compassion in a Time of Chaos. He is the co-founder of Unstuck Minds.

Organizational Quicksand, Part 2: Getting Unstuck

on By 1 Comment

Last week’s blog post introduced differences in the way organizations turn thinking into action. I organized the distinctions by contrasting two attributes of an organization’s culture: The organization’s tolerance for ambiguity and the organization’s preferred influence style. In this post, I want to flesh out the distinctions a bit more and then consider how becoming attentive to your preferred mode of turning thinking into action can help you get unstuck.

The mode of turning thinking into action characterized by a low tolerance for ambiguity and a preference for influence by persuasion, I call “operate” mode. Operate mode moves to action quickly and discussions often feel like competitive sales pitches. Operate mode eschews process and structure. Rule following is seen as time consuming. Operate mode has a bias for trusting the judgment of a passionate, forceful leader who will bend the future to his or her will. Operate mode sees little value in taking the time to build consensus through processes that tap into the organization’s collective wisdom. When in operate mode, introducing nuanced distinctions among options will be judged as unproductive “navel gazing.”

Operate mode serves an organization well when it produces something customer’s value. As long as there is a market for an operate mode organization’s products and services, moving fast and selling hard works. When the value proposition changes because customers’ needs have evolved, operate mode can get an organization stuck.

The mode of turning thinking into action characterized by a low tolerance for ambiguity and a preference for influence by alignment, I call “regulate” mode. Regulate mode is methodical and consistent. Discussions in regulate mode feel formal and predictable. Regulate mode places a high premium on years of experience in the company. If a process or methodology doesn’t dictate how best to handle a situation, the organization will follow a leader who has dealt with the situation in the past. In regulate mode, people want information before they act. In regulate mode, influence takes the form of presentations with a lot of detail about what is happening and how it will happen. New ideas don’t get surfaced casually when in regulate mode. One needs to prepare carefully before suggesting something new, provide evidence that the idea is workable and a business case that demonstrates the idea is worthwhile.

Regulate mode serves an organization well when the customer value proposition includes risk mitigation. As long as a regulate mode business is seen as a trustworthy option, customers will pay a premium for its products and services. When innovations provide customers with faster or cheaper yet equally good alternatives, regulate mode can get an organization stuck.

The mode of turning thinking into action characterized by a high tolerance for ambiguity and a preference for influence by persuasion, I call “debate” mode. In debate mode, skill, expertise and intellect are highly valued. Discussions in debate mode feel stimulating to those who want a rigorous exploration of a topic. Taking action in debate mode feels less important than considering every angle. Authority in debate mode is correlated with expertise. Debate mode embraces ambiguity because it allows every situation to be analyzed and litigated anew.

Debate mode serves an organization well when the customer value proposition is based on superior product quality or service excellence. As long as minor adjustments or extensions to existing products and services continue to be seen as valuable, there will be customers for debate mode businesses. When new market needs require agile responses, debate mode can get an organization stuck.

The mode of turning thinking into action characterized by high tolerance for ambiguity and a preference for influence by alignment, I call “relate” mode. In relate mode, collaboration is highly valued. Discussions are characterized by a desire for shared understanding; leaders seek alternative points of view and include people with diverse backgrounds and beliefs. Opportunities to act emerge when something looks interesting. In relate mode, people put their trust in their colleagues’ ability to marshal resources to get the job done. Because relate mode requires empathy and curiosity, relate mode organizations have long standing affiliations with customers, clients and other strategic partners along their supply chain.

Relate mode serves an organization well when customer loyalty is paramount. As long as customers and business partners value their relationship with the organization, the relate mode business will be presented with new opportunities. When customers and business partners retire, change jobs or otherwise reorient their priorities, relate mode can get an organization stuck.

When your thinking to action mode becomes a trap

Like many overused skills, your organization’s default thinking to action mode can turn counterproductive when you fail to notice that the usual response to challenging situations fails to make things better. For example, if you prefer to work in operate mode and your customers have become disenchanted with your offer, thinking up new ways to persuade your customer to make a purchase signifies being caught in a thinking to action trap.

The Unstuck Minds Compass™ is comprised of four strategies for changing the way you think with others about persistent problem or daunting opportunities. The strategies introduce questions about your situation that you may neglect to ask if you have been trapped by your preferred mode.

  1. Contextual inquiry helps a stuck team zoom out by introducing questions about what is changing in the environment.
  2. Critical inquiry helps a stuck team zoom in by introducing questions about interrelationships within an organizational system.
  3. Collaborative inquiry helps a stuck team by directing their attention to informal social networks and the thoughts and feelings of diverse stakeholders.
  4. Creative inquiry helps a stuck team by questioning assumptions and focusing attention on insights about unmet needs.

Each strategy provides a helping hand when you notice that the usual mode of turning thinking into action has started to feel like being mired in quicksand.

For organizations stuck in operate mode, collaborative inquiry comes to the rescue by providing missing perspectives. To get unstuck, operate mode leaders will have to learn how to be influenced by what they hear when talking with stakeholders and they will need to develop the capacity to remain open to additional input even if it means postponing action.

For organizations stuck in regulate mode, creative inquiry comes to the rescue by providing novel options. To get unstuck, regulate mode leaders will have to get comfortable letting go of the need to see a business case for every idea someone wants to raise. Regulate mode teams will need to spend time openly questioning the assumptions behind existing routines and methods.

For organizations stuck in debate mode, contextual inquiry comes to the rescue by providing a way to prioritize the big picture over getting all the details right. To get unstuck, debate mode stakeholders will have to learn how to question whether settling a point of contention or getting additional input will make a meaningful difference in terms of choosing a course of action.

For organizations stuck in relate mode, critical inquiry comes to the rescue by providing a way to set standards for objectively evaluating opportunities. To get unstuck, relate mode teams will have to learn how to say, “no” even when something looks interesting. To get unstuck, relate mode leaders need to analyze options to determine what makes the most sense for the future and then invest in executing on the strategy better than anyone else.

Organizational Quicksand: Four modes of thinking together they may be holding you back

on By 7 Comments

Getting stuck in the way we are thinking is like finding ourselves in quicksand; applying our habits and routines just makes things worse.

I want to describe four categories of organizational quicksand. Each category represents a routine mode of translating thinking into action. The four modes emerge from comparing and contrasting two dimensions of an organization’s decision-making culture: An organization’s tolerance for ambiguity and an organization’s influence style.

The first dimension describes the organization’s tolerance for ambiguity. An organization has a low tolerance for ambiguity when it sees ambiguous situations as threatening or stressful. An organization with high tolerance for ambiguity prefers situations with multiple and sometimes contradictory interpretations. A low tolerance for ambiguity culture seeks a concrete answer and sticks to it. In a high tolerance for ambiguity culture one often hears people say, “it depends.”

The second dimension describes the organization’s preferred influence style. The influence style dimensions represent a continuum of receptivity to the opinions of others. I refer to low receptivity to the opinions of others as a “persuasive” style. I refer to high receptivity to the opinion of others as an “alignment” style. Exchanges of strongly held viewpoints characterize persuasive cultures. Listening, questions and high involvement characterize alignment cultures.

For the last several years, I have been paying attention to how ambiguity tolerance and influence style characterize the way people in organizations think together. I want to describe four of my client organizations, each one emblematic of one of the four categories. Like many habits that have become traps in times of change, it’s easy to see how the modes of translating thinking into action served each organization well. Now, the modes of thinking have become a type of quicksand making it hard for each organization to adapt.

Org Quicksand Traps

Operate Mode

The “Operate” mode influences by persuasion and has a low tolerance for ambiguity. The operate style describes well a global technology company that I have been working with for over ten years. The company prides itself on having an entrepreneurial culture despite its size and scope. Leaders in the company think fast and act fast; weighing alternatives just slows things down. Leaders in this company don’t engage in dialogue about ideas, they “pitch” ideas to each other and make deals in order to move things forward. The operate mode turns to quicksand when leaders need to question their assumptions and collaborate in new ways with their employees and customers.

Regulate Mode

The “Regulate” mode influences by alignment and has a low tolerance for ambiguity. The regulate style aligns through systems, rules, regulations and procedures. I have a long-standing relationship with a multi-national engineering and construction company. Leaders in this company tend to have backgrounds in civil, mechanical and chemical engineering. There are clearly delineated ways of doing things, which has made the company reliable and a safe bet for customers who are making big investments in complicated projects. The regulate mode turns to quicksand when leaders resist experimenting with innovative ideas.

Relate Mode

The “Relate” mode influences by alignment and has a high tolerance for ambiguity. The relate style values inclusion and involvement, diversity is seen as strength and success often emerges organically by leveraging opportunities. I work with a global retailer that has a distinctive buying model, which mirrors its distinctive culture. Leaders in this company listen to each other and to their customers and suppliers. They avoid codifying procedures preferring to stay attentive to opportunity. The lack of routine makes it hard for relate-mode organizations to develop key talent. The relate mode turns to quicksand when becoming distracted by new possibilities competes with a need for strategic focus.

Debate Mode

The “Debate” mode influences by persuasion and has a high tolerance for ambiguity. Spending time in a debate mode culture often feels like being at an academic conference. I work with a materials science company that manufactures a variety of products, which feature various applications of their proprietary materials. The organization values expertise while rejecting authority as a basis for decision making. The most compelling point-of-view supported by the best logic and data wins the day. The debate mode turns to quicksand when circumstances require a rapid response without making time to consider everyone’s opinion.

Each of these organizations has been successful because of their respective cultures. Today, each of these organizations senses the need to adapt to changing market conditions and an unfamiliar competitive landscape. Applying comfortable modes of translating thinking to action can be counterproductive when the ground that once provided a firm foundation for decision making starts to shift under our feet.