#74-9/29/08: I Have A Solution!
I Have A Solution!
“Updating in real time.”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, September 29, 2008
Hello everyone!
I received a comment from Dorothy McKinney regarding my last blog in which I didn’t say a lot of nice things about Myers-Briggs, DiSC, Enneagram, and other “systems” that purport to tell us who we are and how to manage others. (By the way, I really appreciate it when people make comments… I like the dialog and we all learn from each other.)
Dorothy’s comments centered on the usefulness of these systems to bring to our awareness the understanding that each of us does indeed have some programming that we can be aware of and that these systems can be useful in helping us to understand how others are different from ourselves.
She also indicated that when we are having some challenges with others we can refer back to these systems for guidance in what might work.
I agree completely with everything Dorothy posted in her comment. No disagreement there.
When I manage individuals or teams I always, or close to always, tell them never to bring me an issue, a question, or problem without having at least one, preferably two solutions that they think will work because if I don’t have a better solution, we’re going to use one of their solutions.
So what kind of facilitator would I be if I didn’t walk my talk? It is true that I complained about the short-comings of Myers-Briggs, DiSC, and Enneagram last week. But if I’m to walk my talk I had better have a better solution to present and that is what I’m doing this week. Dorothy’s comments are right on and she and I agree that while the systems I mentioned are useful they don’t provide prescriptive information. So here is the $64,000 question: “Is there a way to get prescriptive information?”
The answer is “yes”, and that is the solution I bring to the table. I want a system that allows me to adjust my management, leadership, influence, and communication processes in “real time”. For example, is there anyone reading this blog who would suspect that they might behave differently if they arrived at a company meeting having just had a flat tire on a freeway while it was pouring rain versus arriving at the meeting knowing they had just won a $20 million lottery? Of course. We all know from personal experience that context changes our processes. We all understand that context does make a difference.
Personality systems have a very difficult time taking into account context. And context changes in real time. One minute it’s this and the next minute it’s that.
These systems are also difficult to administer to your customers and to people who have no interest in taking a personality test.
Therefore, while these systems have benefits about which both Dorothy and I agree, they also have significant drawbacks. In response, I developed my own approach with the help of research that was conducted at the University of California, Santa Cruz.
The system I use and teach allows a person to determine, in real time, the communication and influence processes preferred by the person or people receiving the communication or influence. It allows a person to determine the decision strategies of people being influenced. All this can be done in a conversational mode. No written tests or questionnaires are required and it’s done in real time. And by the way, all this in about 5 to 15 minutes; max!
This approach, this system has been proven out over 20 years. It works. It’s respectful. It’s accurate and effective.
The other approaches I’ve talked about are similar to taking a snapshot of a fast moving event, like a car race or a mountain bike run. The approach I use is like riding along in the race car or being right there on the handle bars as the mountain bike is running the course. Why have a snap shot when you can have the movie, while it’s being recorded.
People and situations are constantly shifting, constantly changing. Any system that forces people to be static will be accurate only part of the time.
An approach that can elegantly keep up with the twists and turns of human communication and influence processes is going to be much more accurate and effective.
On more point. Engineers are notorious for not wanting to hear the psychological jargon of personality tests and emotional processes. The approach I take is all about “processing information”, not personalities. I haven’t had one engineer ever feel uncomfortable learning about their communication processes or about understanding how to better communicate and influence colleagues and customers.
Be well,
Steven Cerri
By the way. If you’d like to leave a comment, and I’d sure be interested if you did, I’ve changed the comments software. Only your comment and your name will show up at the end of the comment. I have modified the software so that your email address will not show up anywhere.
“What would it be like to be as successful with people as you are with your technology?” Steven trains, coaches, and facilitates engineers and technical managers to BE the answer to that question. More information can be found at the:http://stevencerri.com/index.php/Home/index/
Copyright©2008 STCerri International and Steven Cerri. You are free to pass this information on to others and to reproduce it. If you reproduce it in whole or part please give attribution to Steven Cerri. Thank you.
Posted by Steven Cerri on 09/29 at 10:18 PM (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
#73-9/22/08: Generational Profiling
Generational Profiling!
“Forget generations X, Y, and Z.”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, September 22, 2008
Hello everyone!
There is no doubt that we can put “groups” of people into certain “groups”.
The simplest group, of course, is Homo sapiens. We are all part of that group.
Then there are the groups of men and women. We can go further, such as male child, female child, female adult, male adult.
In business management these distinctions are less useful and even less acceptable than the Myers-Briggs categories, or the DiSC categories, or the Enneagram categories. Many people find Myers-Briggs, DiSC, and the Enneagram useful in providing a false sense of how people move through the world, how they want to be treated, and what management approach is best. They all work, to varying degrees, in varying situations. But then again, sometimes they don’t.
These “systems”, Myers-Briggs, DiSC, Enneagram, and others, are all attempts to allow the grouping categories to supersede thinking and to assist managers who don’t really know how to manage well, to feel they can manage. I’m not saying these systems are not useful for broad, general management decision-making. They are… just not for day-to-day management.
You see, if a manager knows that a direct report is a Myers-Briggs “INTJ” then the manager can treat the direct report in a certain way and abdicate their responsibility as a good manager.
For example, if the direct report is an INTJ and the manager treats him or her accordingly and the direct report doesn’t respond the way an INTJ is “supposed to”, or if the direct report responds in ways that are “in addition to” INTJ behaviors, it’s now the direct report’s fault. The manager is off the hook. “I thought you were a INTJ and you just didn’t respond like a good INTJ is supposed to”, is the managers position.
Of course the latest categories to hit the “management street” are represented by Gen-X, Gen-Y, and Gen-Z (I’ll stop there). These are all attempts by demographers and others to figure out “broad implications” of certain large populations. It makes perfect sense in the grand scheme of things. I’m all for it.
However, what do I do if I’ve got a team of ten people. Lets say five are baby boomers, two are of Gen-X and three are of Gen-Z. Now what do I do? How do I manage the team? Do I treat each “group” differently? Do I “expect” conflict between the groups?
If I use the current, generally accepted descriptive behavioral information provided for each group, I’m going to be in big trouble. Hence, why many managers have difficulty managing people in generations not their own. If you want to be successful managing teams across generations you must treat everyone as an individual, not tied to any specific generation. There is probably as much variation between people WITHIN generations as there is BETWEEN generations.
By treating each person based on his or her behavioral traits, the generational generalizations disappear. They vanish. And if you know how to manage people based on their behaviors, maps of the world, and focuses of attention, then cross-cultural, cross-generational, and cross-gender management becomes a much easier process.
My suggestion, if you are a manager, forget whether you have baby-boomers, Gen-X, Gen-Y, or Gen-Z on your team. Start treating them as individual people and your management process will be much easier and much more successful. I’ve done it. It works.
Be well,
Steven Cerri
By the way. If you’d like to leave a comment, and I’d sure be interested if you did, I’ve changed the comments software. Only your comment and your name will show up at the end of the comment. I have modified the software so that your email address will not show up anywhere.
“What would it be like to be as successful with people as you are with your technology?” Steven trains, coaches, and facilitates engineers and technical managers to BE the answer to that question. More information can be found at the:http://stevencerri.com/index.php/Home/index/
Copyright©2008 STCerri International and Steven Cerri. You are free to pass this information on to others and to reproduce it. If you reproduce it in whole or part please give attribution to Steven Cerri. Thank you.
Posted by Steven Cerri on 09/22 at 08:48 PM (1) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
#72-9/15/08: Drop the Schedue!
Drop the Schedule!
“Working in today’s environment.”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, September 15, 2008
Hello everyone!
I just read an article in the August 25-September 1, 2008 issue of BusinessWeek, that summarizes the next wave of work environments as follows:
1. People want more flexibility in their work processes.
2. People don’t want to come in to work as often to save gas.
3. People who think they are “leading edge” are saying that schedules and face-to-face work environments are no longer necessary. Work should be broken into “deliverable packages”. And work can be done anywhere.
I agree with numbers 1 and 2 above. But I’ll be laughing as people try to get number 3 into practice.
Here are my management tips.
Nearly every task a worker performs can and is broken down into a deliverable package. So breaking tasks into discreet units is nothing new. I’ve been doing it for years. I’ve always managed my direct reports to deliverables. Nothing new there.
So what is new? What is the new paradigm for managers?
First: Whether the product is being delivered by an employee down the hall, or in a city down the road, or in a country half way around the world, the deliverable must be quantifiable; clearly, unambiguously quantifiable. That requires specifications and requirements defining the deliverable so that a Martian reviewing the delivered product against the requirements would be able to determine if it is indeed what was expected. This is a challenge for some managers, but not all. The mistake most managers make is that they don’t go far enough in defining expectations. My process is to define expectations so clearly, where possible, that, as I stated earlier, a Martian would be able to tell if the product is delivered.
Second, the process by which the deliverable will be developed ought to be discussed clearly. This is an assessment of the competence of the employee(s) doing the work. Most managers handle this pretty well because they often rely on the repeatable experience of the employee or employees who will be doing the work.
Finally, the monitoring of the process between the beginning of the task and the delivery of the product must be clearly understood by all parties. This is where much of the current management discussion is going on, and frankly, it seems to be conducted often, by people who haven’t managed many projects or many people. It all gets back to what I call “Contextual Definition©”, which means that different situations require different management approaches.
I have a client who is working with several contractors, most of whom are in the United States but a few are over seas. Current management theory would have us think that my client can just ask for what he wants, trust the contractors to deliver, and let them do the work and deliver the project.
He hired me precisely because this approach wasn’t working. It’s just ridiculous to think that because people can communicate from anywhere in the world, that management is just breaking the tasks into quantifiable pieces and waiting for their delivery.
What saved my client with his contractors was, are you ready for this, managing them! That’s right, he resorted to good old management. Regular meetings and contact, by phone, by email, by internet. Deadlines. Estimates. And requirements documents and rigid change processes. And real communication.
The real key to management in this day is not abandoning schedules and milestones. It’s knowing when to use which management approach in order to be effective. My process of Contextual Definition© leads to the use of eight different management styles. Each management style is best suited to a specific situation. How can it work any other way? One management style can’t fit every situation, especially in today’s environment.
So perhaps, if I’m dealing with a very creative task, one that doesn’t seem to bend to a schedule, I might suggest a very loose work process, such as; “Go to the beach for a week and come back with the answer. And the answer ought to look like ‘this’. Are you on board with that approach?” On the other hand, I’d hate to try to send a satellite into orbit without milestones and schedules.
To all the technical managers out there… my bet is that if you adopt the latest management theory 100%, you’ll adopt another within a short time, and none will prove to be the answer. The answer is that to be an effective manager in a wide variety of situations requires flexibility, across a broad spectrum. You want many tools in your tool box not just the latest.
Be well,
Steven Cerri
By the way. If you’d like to leave a comment, and I’d sure be interested if you did, I’ve changed the comments software. Only your comment and your name will show up at the end of the comment. I have modified the software so that your email address will not show up anywhere.
“What would it be like to be as successful with people as you are with your technology?” Steven trains, coaches, and facilitates engineers and technical managers to BE the answer to that question. More information can be found at the:http://stevencerri.com/index.php/Home/index/
Copyright©2008 STCerri International and Steven Cerri. You are free to pass this information on to others and to reproduce it. If you reproduce it in whole or part please give attribution to Steven Cerri. Thank you.
Posted by Steven Cerri on 09/15 at 09:53 PM (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
