For fairly obvious reasons, a major part of the process is
to challenge the members, to make sure that they drill down into an issue to
establish the root cause and then to help the group to offer their opinions as
to the solution which is the bit they enjoy the most.
This can, however, be a painful process for the presenter of
the issue because while they know, deep down, the solution they do not like the
answer and would prefer not to take that action.
We realise that the whole rationale for joining a peer group
like Vistage is to learn from each other and to have someone to listen to them
in a safe environment. However, when the
chips are down, it can be difficult to absorb and to accept.
A wonderful word borrowed from colleagues in the USA is:
Carefrontation
which neatly
encompasses all that is good in a business relationship.
So how does it
work? In essence it emphasises that challenge
is essential; not, you will accept, on the basis of reprimand but rather in the
mode of questioning and constantly searching, as Thomas Edison said, for a
better way to do things.
However, the human
psyche being what it is, there is always a possibility and sometimes a
probability for defence mechanisms to be unleashed whenever an idea or a method
is challenged.
There is nothing
worse than the defensive rebuttal to challenge.
It slows everything down, promotes argument which is usually
unproductive, and generally drains energy from the situation.
The question to ask,
then, is why do people become defensive when they are challenged? In some cases it can be a matter of pride, even
a matter principle, in some a fear of seeming inadequate and under certain
conditions, even a feeling if rejection, none of which add to the effectiveness
of the individual.
The whole carefrontational approach means that
although the team member is challenged (and why not in a go-ahead business?),
it is done in a way which maintains respect and that, to my mind, is an
essential in all working relationships.
My friend, mentor
and top Vistage speaker, Lynn Leahy taught me long ago that there is a major
difference between being assertive and being aggressive although it can be a
short step from one to the other.
Lynn says that being
aggressive implies top-down authoritarian management whereas being assertive
means that while a point can be made in a forthright way, it will always be
made with respect to the feelings of the other person.
In other words,
people can be challenged in a confrontational way but still showing that combination
of care, understanding and respect that is the right of everyone to expect.
The result is far
less likely to be defensive and is more likely to be positive and productive,
an outcome always to be desired.
Visit www.vistage.co.uk
Author of "Leading to Success" on Amazon Kindle
No comments:
Post a Comment