How to Energize People in a Round Table Discussion

I have been preparing to facilitate some round table discussions at a Leadership forum next Tuesday. 

Participants rotate through twenty-minute discussions with three different knowledge specialists. It's like speed dating for executive learning.

I have facilitated similar sessions and they are fun, loud and shorter than you would like. Staying focused in a carnival environment is a key success factor.

The forum is branded "Recharge" and this session is guaranteed to deliver. My topic is Leading Through Ambiguity and Change. I want to over-deliver on the experience. What can I do to super-charge the Recharge?

As a facilitator, you have many ways to set the mood. Your tone, body language and energy level directly effect people's thinking, feelings and behaviour.

Here are the approaches I will be taking to ignite my groups:

• Set energized expectations with my welcome
• Demonstrate open body language—hands open, good eye contact, facing people directly, smiling a lot
• Ask everyone to stand in a circle—it's easier to be energized when more mobile
• Start with a quick energizer activity: "Shake hands with the person beside you and say, "'I feel great' like you mean it!"—there is neuroscience behind this one, really 
• Add humour through stories
• Ensure everyone participates
• End with a crescendo!

We have a lot of influence on the environments in which we work. One way to recharge is to work with like-minded people who are energized by what they do. Just thinking about these energized discussions is already recharging me.

Phil

Does saving old work files lead to opportunity or threat?

Last week, I was in a meeting when someone said, "I have something I did in the past that will be perfect here." It didn’t sound right although I have had similar thoughts. 

I am an archivist by nature and have always backed up all of my files on discs, and more recently, external hard drives. You never know when it will come in handy, has been my motto.

Although I have amassed a large collection of files, I have opened only a few of them since they were saved. Why not more often, I thought? After all, doing so has benefits:

• Provides a draft plan
• Saves time
• Leverages good practice

On the other hand, there are drawbacks:

• Created with dated thinking 
• Not aligned with current circumstances
• Skipped thinking process 

For me, the drawbacks far outweigh the benefits. Other than using tested processes and lessons learned, using old material produces inferior results. 

When I did review old files there was nothing I could use. I went through the Powerpoint presentations and found a few things of interest but not of use. I felt like I was looking through a photo album: revisiting memories, but not reliving them.

This week, I reviewed my archive and found files from the early 2000's. Why was I keeping them when they weren't being used? Perhaps there is a sense of security from having access to past work. The experiences are less likely to be forgotten by keeping proof that they existed. Also, they may inspire confidence to tackle new challenges; we have succeeded before and therefore we can succeed again.

I am adopting a new approach to archiving. After each project, I will focus on capturing new approaches and lessons learned. They lead to opportunities; the other stuff leads to a threat of not being your best.

Phil

Can you change people with a free t-shirt?

Years ago, I facilitated a workshop on a new approach to creating commercial strategy. It had just been launched globally and the North America leadership team was reviewing it for the first time.

The leader, who had just joined the company, sarcastically said, "Ya, I have already got that t-shirt." Unsurprisingly, he didn't support the initiative and it wasn't fully adopted.

The leader's point was that he had seen similar initiatives in his career and had reservations about the implications of the new rules around strategy. It didn't make sense for his region.The free t-shirt comment referred to a typical promotional item given out during project launches. The posters and mugs didn't sway his views.

I wondered if other people felt that way. Did people value the promotional material that accompanies big change initiatives? Did the free stuff make them more open to new concepts and ways of working?

I thought of these questions last Sunday when I ran the Bang & Olfsen 5K Yorkville run. It is common for charity races to offer a race t-shirt and free samples as a perk for signing up and paying the admission fee. 

This year, The B&O 5K team offered the best kit I have ever seen including a pair of B&O PLAY Form 2 headphones, sport-fuelling starter kit from Vega, premium tea package from David's Tea, voucher to download free professional race photos and a New Balance technical t-shirt. Incredible!

I wondered whether the t-shirt +++ kit encouraged interest in the race, perhaps over other races. Did the kit make a difference? 

I think the kit piqued interest about the race, however, it wasn't the deciding factor to sign up. People signed up for what the race offered: a chance to see the fastest 5K runners in the country as part of the Canadian 5K Road Race championship, a course that is flat and fast, a very professionally organized race for five years running, fun after-race festivities and the ability to fund raise $200,000 for local charities. This is an excellent race.

The same holds true for promotional materials associated with organizational changes: they can create excitement and interest in the change, but won't sway people's views if it doesn't make sense for the business or its employees. 

So, should you offer promotional items to support change initiatives? Yes, it helps the initial engagement process. Is it more important to effectively communicate the change so people understand how it will benefit the organization and its employees? Absolutely. If not, then people will already have that t-shirt.

Phil

What to do When Leaders Don't Lead Change Well

There are many studies that cite change leadership as the most important factor contributing to successful transitions. Over the the last three years in consulting, I have had the opportunity to test this assertion by observing how different organizations view the roles of change leaders.

Progressive organizations define the change leader's role and ensure that all leaders are aware of the activities they must perform. The best ones define specific roles for senior leaders and managers that match their levels of seniority and spans of influence. Change capability is valued, invested in and rewarded.

Other organizations have a laissez faire approach to change leadership. The change leader's role is defined by individual leaders based on their mindset and abilities. There is an unspoken organizational belief that leaders will know how to manage change challenges because of their senior roles and assumed skill set. Change capability is assumed, not an area of focus and not rewarded.

Unsurprisingly, the "they will know what to do" approach doesn't work. Leaders act and behave based on their personal styles and skill sets, and therefore act inconsistently to challenges with varying levels of success. Mixed messages are communicated and confusion ensues, which leads to distraction, loss of focus and lower performance.

So, what do you do when leaders don't lead change well? There are three options:

• Build your leader's desire and ability to take on the change role
• Get another leader to take on the change role
• Take on the change role yourself

Build your leader's desire and ability to take on the change role
The upside of this approach is that leaders perform the leadership change role themselves. As long as they buy into the rationale for the roles and  perform the activities, their abilities will improve and benefits will be gained.

The downside of this approach is that mindsets are difficult to change and the leader my not value your rationale enough to change their behaviour. If so, there still is value in negotiating with them to perform some activities such as communication and removal of obstacles.

Get another leader to take on the change role
The upside of this approach is that another, well-skilled and motivated leader will effectively perform the leadership activities and produce immediate results. Natural change leaders understand the importance of change leadership and take pride in taking on the leader activities.

The downside of this approach is that you need to position the request in a way that avoids personal politics among leaders. Also, it can be difficult to convince a leader to take on a significant commitment that maybe outside their mandate.

Take on the change role yourself
The upside of this approach is that you have the most control of how the role will be fulfilled; you will guide how communications are made, obstacles are escalated and active and visible support is provided.

The downside of this approach is that you are not the best person to take on the change role and its support activities. Benefits will be realized but you may not have sufficient influence to manage issues and get problems resolved. You will also need to position your activities in a way that avoids personal politics.

Gaps in change leadership are common and contribute to many change failures. You have options to address when leaders don't lead change well so that transitions are successful. The upside of all of them is they give you the opportunity to demonstrate your change leadership skills.

Phil