Categories
OD explained

OD Blog

Here we will try and give you a flavour of the work that we do and the thinking and activity that underpins it.

Please bear with us while we assemble this material from various journals, notes and other miscellany, as time permits.

OD Explained

It’s all just:

Leadership Essentials

Video Resources

These short videos are intended to complement workshops that we deliver either in person or online. They cover generic topics such as leadership, culture, strategy, planning and other phenomena we encounter in organisational life. Making them available ‘on demand’ frees up more time in-session for us to make sense of how they apply to us in our particular contexts.

Other Things

Categories
Video resources

Video Resources

Here are some videos to support online learning programmes that we offer. We have found it better to present theories and concepts separately from our live workshop sessions, so that participants can view them in their own time. This also frees up more time and energy for interaction when we are working together online.

We will add more themes over time.

By the way, these videos are neither TED-talk-slick nor Instagram filtered. They are pretty raw but a true indication of how we are when Zooming along with the clients.

Leadership

Introduction to some concepts of leadership.

Culture

Some thoughts about how organisational culture manifests and can be influence.

Strategy

Some thoughts on strategic planning models and perspectives.

Planning

Some thoughts on planning tools and perspectives.

Categories
Leadership Essentials

Leadership in Groups

Group Activity

Humans are social animals. Much to my chagrin (as a confirmed introvert), I have to accept that we are healthier when engaging with each other, happier when associating and more effective when sharing a task. We need each other.

When we join a group, we strive to fit in, we seek membership, we position ourselves as part of the in-group, we fear being cast in the out-group. This simple process of fitting in causes us to change our behaviour; we hide certain aspects of ourselves that do not assist us in membership, we adopt behaviours that will reassure others. This can be the basis of personal growth; we learn to do things that we wouldn’t have attempted or accomplished alone. It can also be the basis of difficult compromise; we might find ourselves enjoined to behaviours that conflict with inner motivation and values.

Groups have a mind of their own, distinct from that of any individual member. It is suggested that groups may even make shared use of the neurological resources of their members, brains somehow combining their perceptual and processing powers, each communicating nervelessly with the others.

Groups seek leadership. If you doubt this, or yearn for pure and utopian social equality, seek out one of the many experiential exercises that place individuals together without rules, without direction and without a leader and observe what happens. This is great learning, also somewhat challenging.

When leading a group, you are going to be subject to the forces of expectation, dissent, obsequious compliance, forced unanimity (groupthink) and much else besides. Whatever relationships you may have forged with individuals, you must also engage with group dynamics. Knowing this is enough to start with, finding out how to do it is a life’s work.

Categories
Leadership Essentials

Leadership of self

You are no good to others if you are not good to yourself.

Fit your own oxygen mask before helping others.

Here are some simple things that you might find out about yourself that will be useful to you in leadership:

Your preferences, the things you do intuitively, automatically; how you typically respond to what you see going on around you.  There are lots of ways of diagnosing your preferences: personality type questionnaires, psychometric instruments, the observations of others, coaching conversations, constructive feedback.  Many of these have labels and trade names: MBTI, 16PF, Margerision-McCann, Insights, Belbin; some of them are disputed by social scientists, some discredited.  Ancient peoples asked how much they were guided by the elements: Air, Water, Fire, Earth or by their bodily fluids: Blood (sanguine), Phlegm (phlegmatic), Black Bile, Green Bile. Perhaps neuroscience will soon wire us up with a swimming cap and provide another set of lenses on this age-old question.   The point is we all know that we differ from one another in our temperaments and preferences, even if we cannot agree why.  We can all benefit from doing the work that helps us appreciate who we are. 

Your style, the way you interpret your role as leader; how you come across to others.  You might lead from the front, by example, using personal power (warrior); you might build a system or rules and processes to make things fair and consistent (organiser); you might focus on the morale and well-being of those around you in the hope that they will shine (nurturer) or you might focus on ideas, imagination, creativity, combining resources to make new and better ways of doing things (innovator). Ideally, you should be aware of your style and wary of overplaying it or applying it in all situations (especially the wrong ones).  Wise leaders develop skill in areas that are not primarily their chosen style.  We appreciate leadership that flexes its style to meet the situation in front of it.

Your impact, the way others experience you as leader.  You might be transparently consistent with a particular preference or style; you might demonstrate skills that others admire (self-presentation, empathy, vision, clarity of thought, humour).  You might be experienced as a blend of characteristics, perhaps able to choose the right ones for the right occasion (adaptive). You might be seen to be true to yourself and/or to the needs of others (authentic).  The challenge is to find out how others find us as leaders.  As Robert Burns said “a wad some pow’r the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us!”

Your narrative.  We all know the endless conversation about whether we are born or made, nature or nurture.  However, there is another dimension to this conversation that is yours to influence; your narrative.  What stories do you tell others about you and leadership?  What stories do you tell yourself (your inner script)?  Are you diffident, bold, confident through experience, have you overcome great challenges?  Your narrative is an important part of you.  With the help of a coach or a critical friend, who might challenge your version of the story, you can work on discovering more about you as a leader, what made you, what inhibits you and what you could become.

Your resilience. Leadership can be tough and it can be lonely (although often it is neither of these things). Many job advertisements now specify that you must be resilient, as though it were some kind of character trait that you were born with.  Resilience isn’t that. It is the capacity to bounce back, to cope, to experience stressful change competently but it is a process rather than a trait (and something you can learn). Being resilient does not entail being emotionally cold nor naively positive; it is about being emotionally balanced.  It means being conscious of what you can control, what you can only influence and what you are rightly concerned about but can have no effect on.  Your resilience is enhanced by peer support and group cohesion; it depends on a collectively intelligent approach to risk, failure and “events”.  Resilience is both enhanced by and enhancing of your positive self-esteem and sense of purpose.

Your humanity.  Groups and organisations have a tendency to bend us into a particular shape.  Certain behaviours become the way we do things around here; we use jargon, we conform to rules, written and unwritten.  Sometimes people in organisations do extraordinary things that they could or would not do alone.  Sometimes, however, these things are extraordinarily perverse and inhumane.  From the inside this is just the way we do things; from the outside it starts to look odd.  A key feature of your leadership is your capacity to break out of the kinds of conformity that are corrosive and be able to identify and to do the right thing, against the grain if necessary but according to the standards and values of your humanity rather than just what is comfortable.  This is really hard.  It can cost you your membership of a group, or even your job.  But if you lose your humanity, what do you have left?

Categories
Uncategorized

Workhouse8: ten years on.

Ten years ago this week, I was invited to attend a planning meeting in Stirling.  The agenda was how to develop academic leaders in Scotland’s universities.  I had some experience of the topic, having worked with my own colleagues on this for some years.  At that time in my university, the terms “leadership” and “management” were used by us with caution, they were deemed inappropriate to the context by many, even rejected as offensive by a few.  Nevertheless, those with the purse strings and the influence over policy deemed it good for universities that they should develop leadership capacity.  It would make them more consistent and resilient, more efficient, perhaps.  It was an unarguable challenge that better leadership and management of people must be a good thing.  How best to do it was the issue we were discussing.

Not for the first time in my career, I drew a picture of what might be possible; a crude diagram of a process to develop leadership.  A couple of long-standing colleagues had the courtesy to ask me to talk them through it. By the end of the meeting I had been offered a sum of money and a short space of time to go and work up the idea.

I had already decided to move on.  I had a job offer from another university.  However, this meeting opened my mind to the idea that it might be possible to do something at the systemic level; for the sector, rather than just repeat the experience of developing a single organisation from within.   As there was no obvious structure from which to do this kind of work, I turned down the other job and went freelance, just like that.  For someone who had spent the previous 20 years in organisations that offered monthly salary, pension, holidays, sick pay, company and relative security, this felt like jumping off a very high cliff with just a business card in my hand.

My first client was the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, itself a very new organisation formed from the best of a lot of other efforts distributed around the Higher Education sector. I became an associate on 1st December 2005 and have been one ever since.  Other clients followed.  In ten years, Workhouse8 has propagated itself entirely by word of mouth and taken me to all corners of the UK and occasionally beyond.

The first “product” was a leadership programme for Scottish Heads of Department; we ran 10 cohorts of that before it was re-designed as a UK-wide offering.  Leadership programmes remain a core part of the work but they have spawned or have been complemented by other work on governance, process review, trouble-shooting, organisational development, big systemic collaborations, critical friendship and coaching.  Higher Education remains a big part of the landscape, but I have also worked extensively in Health, Social Care, Government, the creative sector and other types of organisations.

I feel a strong sense of privilege to be doing this kind of work.  I am entrusted with the deeper concerns and inspirations of individuals, teams and sometimes whole organisations.  Taken together, they give me a wide and deep view of a system at work, a rich and constantly changing complexity of autonomous organisations, public bodies, political pressures, resourceful behaviours, wild successes and traumatic blockages.

It is not possible to make complete sense of complex organisations; to claim such a thing would be arrogant and prescriptive and wrong.  It is possible (and necessary) to work with people within complex organisations to help them make sense of what they can influence and to do so knowingly and respectfully.

The work is endlessly fascinating, but that is not, in itself, the reason for doing it.  It is work that must have outcomes.  Frustratingly, these outcomes are often not known in advance, nor wholly visible during or after an intervention.  When positive changes do manifest, it is not always easy nor honest to attribute them wholly to a narrow intervention.  OD is not a controlled laboratory environment.  It is conducted in vivo, in the field, in real time, in the middle of chaos.

I never work alone; I work with the clients, I partner with other OD and learning specialists in the field and within organisations.  The use of “we” on the Workhouse8 website is conscious and deliberate; not a “royal we”, but a collaborative “we”, an engaged “we”.

I would like to thank all those who have participated in the first ten years of this escapade; the fellow consultants, the senior managers, the HR & OD teams, the participants, the coachees, the practical support (whose patience I know I test regularly), the critics (especially the ones who have been bold enough to speak out directly), the doubters and the enthusiasts.

I would like to thank those to whom I have turned for support: the supervisors, the course tutors, the critical friends, the quiet voices. The learning has been wondrous.

and the next ten years?  Well, that is a whole new adventure.

Categories
OD explained

It’s all just bollocks!

Tower Power

Well, there is some truth in that.  The degree to which organisations have been developed by people with heterogametic chromosomes is very substantial.  The church, the state, financial services, universities, technology sectors, engineering.  The rules (especially the unwritten ones) of these organisations have been developed to make sure that the people in them (mostly men) can feel they fit in and understand one another.  The context in which these organisations operate requires collective relational behaviours (competition, lobbying, patronage) that are also likely to be those that appeal to men.  What organisation has not, at some stage, devoted its wealth to erecting a huge phallus of a tower in amongst those of its neighbours?  Why choose to express yourself like that?

Of course, these organisations do not (any more) exclude women from membership.  But at their heart, they remain fundamentally male in their basic assumptions.  This, it is held, makes the process of integration and progression in such organisations much more of a compromise to women than it is to men.  Hardly surprising, therefore, that so relatively few women inhabit the positions of power in our organisations, despite legislation, goodwill, social engineering and protest.

Addressing this issue is a substantial challenge for organisational developers; not least because it requires a journey to the very basic assumptions of the organisation, the glue that holds it together.  If you succeed in changing one part of the organisation in this way, it begins to clash with the other parts; if you change the whole organisation, it grates against its wider context; you end up feeling you have to change the world. Not an easy thing to do if you’ve only got a couple of strategic away-days as your opportunity.

This is not a reason not to do the work, however.  Helping organisations to see for themselves how their shared assumptions might be laden with unconscious bias is an important contribution to their development.  Encouraging leaders and managers to look beyond their “common sense” view that this is just the way the world is and to embrace their responsibility for making it different is both a moral challenge and a practical task.  It is not right that women, or indeed any group of people, are under-represented in the distribution of organisational power on the basis of their characteristics rather than their competence; neither is it efficient to underuse 50 percent of the talent available to your organisation.

Categories
OD explained

It’s all just too simplistic!

A heuristic model of something or other

A fellow pilgrim in the world of learning and development has reminded me how much we depend on models to try to render comprehensible the challenges of leadership and organisations.

Read her blog here

She is quite right to point out that the model itself is not the place where meaning is stored.  It is the reflection prompted by the model, the interaction of hope and experience with the model, that may bring to the surface important learning, useful insight or just a sparky idea.

Some clients are keen to discredit the model, to find flaws in it, to challenge it.  That is all good fun.  Others might try to force a whole world view into its little boxes and circles and arrows.  That can lead to narrow outcomes.

I am a diagramatic thinker; I can see shapes and colours in sentences and words.  For me, models can usefully capture the ephemeral understanding of things, can grasp and fix a concept.  But like a holiday snap, whilst they might freeze the memory of a rich experience, in the end they don’t fully convey the real depth and variety of what was going on.

Categories
OD explained

It’s all just Plato!

Plato explains OD to Aristotle

A challenge for those of us engaged in Leadership, Management and Organisational Development, especially when working with academics, clinicians and other highly educated people, is that clients are sometimes disappointed that the subject matter is not more intellectually novel and challenging.

“It’s all just Plato!”, barked an exasperated Senior Lecturer in Humanities.  This put me on the back foot, because I wasn’t consciously aware of having read any Plato.  So I read The Republic to see if he was right, and, for the most part, he was. It seems possible, indeed, that there is nothing new under the sun.

Of course there have been advances in our understanding of human behaviour over the centuries and these continue.  We have shifted our conceptions of leadership from a fixation with the innate personality traits of (masculine) heroes to a more social/relational framework; through neuroscience we are discovering evidence of things that we could only previously hypothesise through behavioural psychology; we are opening our minds to the organisational implications of complexity theories.  Indeed, it may be possible to find applications of almost every academic discipline to our understanding of leadership, management and organisations.

Maybe the primary task, like that of a good story teller, is to find fresh metaphors for old wisdoms; new language to set out “what oft was thought, but ne’er so well expressed.”  Maybe, as illustrated in Gareth Morgan’s wonderful book Images of Organization, new metaphors can help us to learn new and important things about our working environments.

Or maybe it isn’t really about the intellect at all.  Surely, the purpose of Leadership, Management and Organisational Development is to stimulate changes in behaviour, away from what inhibits people and towards what releases their energy and skill.  Just as knowing the molecular structure of sea-water will not prevent us from drowning in it, merely understanding organisations does not necessarily make us any more competent at participating in them.

So we invite our clients to an experiential learning process, whereby they not only think and talk about leadership, management and organisations but they are stimulated to an emotional response and thereby to a behavioural response.  We try to find ways of experiencing the subject matter that resonate with them, that energise them, that stimulate in them a desire to do things differently.