Jul. 12, 2017 "Get to the root of your problems": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail. I like this picture:
It requires careful observation and step-by-step problem-solving, not guessing, to unearth the source of your complex issues
Stop Guessing
By Nat Greene. Berrett-Koehler, 142 pages, $27.95
In solving problems, we tend to fall back on experience. We might brainstorm. We might seek out consultants or advisers – sometimes many of them – or we might rely on intuition.
Nat Greene, a consultant who tackles technical problems around the world, says all that amounts to guesswork.
We are essentially going with hunches rather than hard-nosed research that digs into root causes. And while guesswork gambits can work with the simple and familiar issues we often face, they will fail when applied to complex problems.
A simple problem might have a few possible causes. A more complex problem could have 20, or 200, or 2,000. When a machine breaks down, usually there are some obvious possibilities to check.
But when those aren’t the issue – a time when Mr. Greene is often called in – it requires careful observation and step-by-step problem-solving to unearth the source. Guessing doesn’t help.
But when those aren’t the issue – a time when Mr. Greene is often called in – it requires careful observation and step-by-step problem-solving to unearth the source. Guessing doesn’t help.
The first step is to study the problem in detail – or, as he likes to say, smell it. Focus on the pattern of failure. “Where possible,
understanding where the problem does and doesn’t happen,
when the problem started,
and how often the problem occurs will generate critical insights for the problem-solving effort,” he writes in Stop Guessing.
understanding where the problem does and doesn’t happen,
when the problem started,
and how often the problem occurs will generate critical insights for the problem-solving effort,” he writes in Stop Guessing.
What does the problem look like? If you look closely, is it consistently the same?
When did you first see the problem?
What pattern do you notice if you look at the problem over time?
Where might you expect to see the same problem, but don’t?
He’s like Sherlock Holmes: studying, observing and piecing things together. He never guesses.
When did you first see the problem?
What pattern do you notice if you look at the problem over time?
Where might you expect to see the same problem, but don’t?
He’s like Sherlock Holmes: studying, observing and piecing things together. He never guesses.
Embrace your ignorance. Mr. Greene says in many cases we know 90 per cent of what is required to solve the problem, so we tend to start from that base of knowledge.
“People are asking you to solve the problem because of what you know, rather than what you don’t.
However, it is the last 10 per cent that lies between you and an elegant solution,” he writes. So don’t be afraid of your ignorance – or displaying it to others. Keep learning.
“People are asking you to solve the problem because of what you know, rather than what you don’t.
However, it is the last 10 per cent that lies between you and an elegant solution,” he writes. So don’t be afraid of your ignorance – or displaying it to others. Keep learning.
Define the problem in an accurate and precise way. With technical problems he looks for a measurable variable.
He cites as an example a friend who tells you he wants to be in better shape. Great goal, but very fuzzy. Is he measuring better shape by losing weight and reducing body mass or increasing strength and muscle mass? Or something else?
He cites as an example a friend who tells you he wants to be in better shape. Great goal, but very fuzzy. Is he measuring better shape by losing weight and reducing body mass or increasing strength and muscle mass? Or something else?
Dig into the fundamentals of the problem, learning how things work at a basic level.
Figure out what variables control the primary variable you are intent on improving.
Figure out what variables control the primary variable you are intent on improving.
Don’t rely on experts, who may feel pressed to give rapid answers and often face conflicts, such as the supplier who opts automatically for a newer model of your machine. And their knowledge can be a curse, not a blessing, if it leaves them blinkered, unable to handle unusual problems.
That doesn’t mean avoiding experts altogether, but knowing how to use them.
Get their help understanding how things work. Ask them where in the process to look to find the information you need.
Get their help understanding how things work. Ask them where in the process to look to find the information you need.
Recruit their help removing roadblocks. But stay in control.
He suggests choosing a problem-solving method that doesn’t rely on guessing, as you are trying to determine the root causes – which means eliminating most of the common ones, unfortunately – and instead pick one that starts by focusing on the problem.
He also warns methods that mostly concentrate on choosing the right people or getting buy-in are useful for political problems but not technical ones.
He also warns methods that mostly concentrate on choosing the right people or getting buy-in are useful for political problems but not technical ones.
He says the good news is that that still leaves you with a number of possible techniques and briefly shares his favourite form of variable analysis, which leads you step-by-step into understanding what you are dealing with until the source of the problem is revealed.
Readers might want more tools of that sort but it is a brisk book that instead concentrates on illuminating a common trap in our problem analyses and urges you to stop guessing.
Readers might want more tools of that sort but it is a brisk book that instead concentrates on illuminating a common trap in our problem analyses and urges you to stop guessing.
Harvey Schachter is a Kingston, Ont.-based writer specializing in management issues. He writes Monday Morning Manager and management book reviews for the print edition of Report on Business and an online column, Power Points.
My opinion: I like this article because it's about problem- solving. It seems very analytical and I like that.
Jul. 24, 2017 "Retool your approach to be a better coach": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail:
If you want to be an effective coach at work, throw away the mental images you carry of coaches from the world of sports. It’s not just their emotional outbursts and other theatrics that can lead you astray.
It’s that they are managers – highly judgmental bosses, who control the livelihood of their charges, making decisions about whether to play or even turf the individual, which is not a coaching style. They are also experts in their field – a baseball coach knows the game intimately – and ironically that isn’t a requirement for a coach at work either.
It’s that they are managers – highly judgmental bosses, who control the livelihood of their charges, making decisions about whether to play or even turf the individual, which is not a coaching style. They are also experts in their field – a baseball coach knows the game intimately – and ironically that isn’t a requirement for a coach at work either.
Gregg Thompson, a Canadian-born coach to executives at major U.S. corporations and author of the book The Master Coach, says that when you are coaching, you are not acting as a manager, contradictory as that might seem. “You are not giving advice – that’s the No. 1 mistake,” he says in an interview.
He shares a coaching impact model, with the following continuum:
Directing,
advising,
teaching,
mentoring
and coaching. The first four are quite different from coaching.
Under pressure, leaders tend to move toward directing and advising, which can undercut their coaching efforts because the focus becomes the manager’s goals, not the individual’s needs. “The coaching relationship is all about the other person. The coach is a catalyst for learning, advancement and change,” he says.
Directing,
advising,
teaching,
mentoring
and coaching. The first four are quite different from coaching.
Under pressure, leaders tend to move toward directing and advising, which can undercut their coaching efforts because the focus becomes the manager’s goals, not the individual’s needs. “The coaching relationship is all about the other person. The coach is a catalyst for learning, advancement and change,” he says.
A coach helps the individual learn about themselves and their relationship with others. When Mr. Thompson asks people who was instrumental in their careers, they inevitably mention someone who acted in a coach-like manner.
That person saw something in them they didn’t recognize and challenged them to be better. It’s adult learning, and the individual being coached needs to be self-directed.
That person saw something in them they didn’t recognize and challenged them to be better. It’s adult learning, and the individual being coached needs to be self-directed.
You can’t force your insights on somebody else. They have to want your help. They have to be intent on learning and developing. It’s often assumed some people are uncoachable, but he is dubious: “It’s not that they are uncoachable. They just don’t want to be coached by us. We haven’t earned the right.”
How do you earn it? He says you must display “noble intention” – that you are truly interested in helping the other person.
Not fixing the other person.
Not turning the other person into a miniature replica of yourself.
But helping.
Not fixing the other person.
Not turning the other person into a miniature replica of yourself.
But helping.
“You need to feel good about yourself so you can subordinate yourself and make the coaching conversation about the other person. We’re really transparent. People can tell if your intentions are noble. Unless the person being coached is a willing participant, it’s not coaching, it’s something else,” he says.
He highlights three dimensions of coaching: Character, connection and conversation.
Character is the most essential dimension of coaching, earning you the right to coach. Trust is essential. You may have great relationships with friends but those connections are different from the tie to someone you coach.
It’s a peer-to-peer relationship, caring and challenging at the same time, nurturing growth. The coach must establish this connection before the effort can begin.
Character is the most essential dimension of coaching, earning you the right to coach. Trust is essential. You may have great relationships with friends but those connections are different from the tie to someone you coach.
It’s a peer-to-peer relationship, caring and challenging at the same time, nurturing growth. The coach must establish this connection before the effort can begin.
Conversation refers to the dialogue you have together. It will involve things that don’t come up with others – touching on goals and dreams, entering risky areas that put both people on the edge, discussing uncomfortable issues.
The senior executives he coaches are highly talented and intelligent. “I have nothing to bring to them in knowledge or advice. My role is to have a conversation that can
test their thinking,
challenge their beliefs,
and help them to see differently so they can act differently,” he says.
If nothing changes, he stresses, that’s not coaching, it’s just a nice conversation.
The senior executives he coaches are highly talented and intelligent. “I have nothing to bring to them in knowledge or advice. My role is to have a conversation that can
test their thinking,
challenge their beliefs,
and help them to see differently so they can act differently,” he says.
If nothing changes, he stresses, that’s not coaching, it’s just a nice conversation.
While he is an outsider with those top executives, you may be coaching a subordinate. But you need the same perspective. You must accept that the other person is fully capable of running their life and managing their career.
You’re just a catalyst for change, helping them to open their eyes to new insights – and then helping them to grapple with the difficulties of change. “It’s not soft. It’s tough. You hold them accountable,” he says.
You’re just a catalyst for change, helping them to open their eyes to new insights – and then helping them to grapple with the difficulties of change. “It’s not soft. It’s tough. You hold them accountable,” he says.
It’s crucial to suspend judgment. Sometimes, that may mean turning on a dime. You tell someone their performance is inadequate. You offer to help. And from that moment, you suspend judgment, embrace noble intention, don’t see them as an underperformer, and help them to be their best.
Coaching is optimistic. “Good coaches are a purveyor of a better today and tomorrow,” he says.
Coaching is optimistic. “Good coaches are a purveyor of a better today and tomorrow,” he says.
And good coaching, he believes, is within the reach of all of us. It’s not easy, but if you follow his guidelines you will have a better chance of success.
No comments:
Post a Comment