Archives: Blogs

Several words can be used to describe what “successful leadership” is, including influence, power and authority.  That said, I agree with the definition that successful leadership is the extent to which a leader can “build and maintain highly effective teams”. No matter how charismatic or influential a leader is, what counts is the know-how to interact with and help teams operate efficiently.

This concept is central in Relational leadership. Here, the focus is placed on the ability of the leader to develop meaningful professional relationships, which help create useful alliances as well as fruitful collaborations. However, achieving collaboration doesn’t just happen. According to Prof. Robert Hogan, it requires a leader to be highly skillful at getting along with others as well as getting ahead by receiving the support needed by teams and the wider organization. For these reasons, leaders greatly benefit from knowing the eleven personality traits that define aspects of interpersonal behavior detrimental to collaboration. To sustain a stable career, it is essential to understand how the eleven traits negatively impact the ability to interact with others and hinder chances of being chosen for senior leadership positions.

In this article I introduce the eleven derailers as presented by Prof. Robert Hogan and explain how they can be managed effectively. Each type of derailer is typified by a manipulative strategy and an unconscious message which directly impacts their teams. Identifying the differences between these is crucial to understanding and then moving beyond the derailer, as I will show.’

Excitable

Excitable describes an emotionally volatile person, one that is highly energetic and intense one day, then disappointed and demotivated the other – one that is optimistic about a project now, then pessimistic and skeptical later on. Typically, leaders who score high on the excitable scale can be perceived as very moody and temperamental. For this reason, people often feel they have to hold back with them.

As Prof. Robert Hogan once stated, the manipulative strategy they use to lead and the unconscious message they send out when levels of stress are high is: “Do what I want or I’ll throw a fit”. And the most common questions colleagues ask when dealing with them is “What mood is he/she in today”.

Leaders who score high on the excitable scale, can benefit from emotional management techniques. These include learning to recognize the signs that they are about to lose control and leave the room for a while. Pausing helps them remain calm and clearheaded. It is vital to recognize that emotional volatility can upset colleagues, reducing their motivation and, eventually, their productivity.

Skeptical

Skeptical describes a person who tends to doubt others and assumes they have bad ulterior motives. Although leaders who score high on the skeptical scale have high political awareness, are astute and perceptive, they often act with mistrust of people and institutions. They can be consumed with what can go wrong instead of looking at solutions and taking decisions.  They believe that “you can’t trust anyone but yourself”.

The manipulative strategy and unconscious message they send out when under pressure is: “Don’t defy me or I’ll retaliate”.

 Leaders who score high on the skeptical scale, can experiment with acting in a more friendly and engaging way.  It also helps them to identify two to three key people in the workplace and begin collaborating with them. While collaborating, they should practice holding doubts and assumptions to themselves. After all, not everyone is a traitor or a wrongdoer.

Cautious

Cautious typically describes a person who is reluctant to take risks and requires second and third opinions before going ahead with something. Essentially, cautious leaders are afraid of failing and would rather not make any mistakes for fear of being criticized. They can be indecisive and even hesitant to express their point of view. They can come across as unassertive and often avoid taking controversial positions in public. For these reasons, they may delay decisions and prevent teams from progressing as fast as their competitors.

When under stress, a common manipulative strategy and unconsciousness message is…Do what I want or bad things will happen to you.

First of all, leaders who score high on the cautious scale, would benefit from describing the learning opportunities associated to the mistakes they make. Secondly, they could experiment with providing spontaneous suggestions and solutions rather than always offering carefully considered answers. Last, having the courage to stand up for themselves and their teams when needed is something they would need to practice more.

Reserved

Reserved describes a person who comes across as independent and detached.  Reserved leaders generally value one’s private time and space and would rather be working from their own private office than from an open plan floor. These are the type of leaders that withdraw at times of intense stress. Essentially, they give the impression of being tough – focussed on tasks rather than people.

The manipulative strategy and unconscious message they send out when levels of stress are high is “Do what I want or I’ll never speak to you again”.

The first coaching tip I would give leaders like this is to engage with their teams one hour every day, be it because of a meeting or an informal lunch. The second one is to practice recognizing the expression of positive or negative feelings others may show during interactions. The third is to practice observing other people’s reactions and discern whether they have been demotivated or encouraged by what has been said or done.

Leisurely

Leisurely describes a person who often come across as co-operative and pleasant to deal with but covertly procrastinates and puts off unwanted tasks. Essentially, leaders who score high on the leisurely scale show passive-aggressive tendencies.  The behavior you see is in fact opposite from what they think inside. In a meeting they may promise one thing but eventually do another.

Their manipulative strategy and the unconscious message they send out when under pressure is: “Do what I want or you’ll be sorry.”

One way to mitigate high leisurely tendencies is to begin to make less promises but ensure that they are fulfilled and followed up. Another exercise I recommend doing is to identify two people within the team each week and practice giving honest feedback. No need to give lip service: say what you think, say it transparently.

Bold

Bold describes a person who is unusually self-confident, feels entitled and unwilling to admit mistakes. Despite the fact that leaders with high scores on the bold scale are assertive, energetic and fearless when facing challenging tasks, they are at risk of too much self-promotion and unhealthy competition for the simple purpose of getting ahead. Essentially, their ego causes them to be dominant and, at times, intimidating. They believe that they deserve special treatment and when things go wrong, it is never their fault.

When levels of stress are high, the unconscious message they send out is: “I demand you do what I want. Do it now because I am who I am”.

What helps leaders who score particularly high on the bold scale, is to begin sharing credit with their teams when projects are completed successfully. Naming, thanking and rewarding team members who have helped them achieve their targets is a good practice.  Being competitive within the organization may not be the healthiest way to relate to colleagues, especially because the real competition is outside the organization. And last, use self-confidence and energy to motivate not only themselves but others too.

Mischievous

Mischievous defines a person who is charming and, therefore, fun to be with. However, leaders who score high on the mischievous scale are at risk of manipulating others to serve their own agenda without showing remorse for doing so. They are those who take risks and often test the limits without considering the consequences of their actions.

When pressure is high, the unconscious and manipulative message they send out is: “If you do what I want, I will love you”. 

Leaders with strong mischievous tendencies would first benefit from partnering with a colleague who is humble and down to heart. Second, they would do likewise from learning to apologize to those they may have used for their own purpose without hiding behind overelaborated excuses.  Third, recognizing that a successful and stable career depends on relating to others with authenticity and honesty, would also have a positive impact. Mischievous tendencies can only create a reputation of being a selfish and unscrupulous leader – a reputation that, long term, is highly detrimental for any type of career.

Colorful

Colorful describes a person who is sharp-witted, expressive and attention-seeking. A drama queen would be the appropriate description of a person who scores high on this scale.  Although leaders with a high tendency to be colorful make a strong first impression, they often run the risk of monopolizing attention at the expense of others. They are those people who tend to dominate meetings by constantly speaking, interrupting and even talking over others. What is more, they need constant stimulation and get bored easily.

The manipulative strategy and the unconscious message they send out when pressure is high is: Do what I want, and I’ll entertain you further.”

 Leaders who score high on the colorful scale would benefit from practicing active listening, asking questions and paraphrasing what others say during meetings. What can help them as well is to write daily to do lists with clear tasks and specific objectives to increase their focus.

Imaginative

Imaginative refers to a person who thinks highly creatively and, at times, in odd ways. Although leaders who score high on the imaginative scale are very bright and innovative, they have the tendency of throwing millions of ideas on the table that they eventually can’t or don’t execute. The leaders who typically launch several initiatives without following them up. For these reasons, they are at risk of being perceived as eccentric.

When levels of stress are high, the manipulative strategy and unconscious message they send out is: “Do what I want and you will be amazed at the result”.

The first coaching tip I usually give to leaders who are highly imaginative is to partner with a mentor they trust to ensure their ideas are practical and executable before they make them public. The second tip is to work only on those ideas that seem to be well received by the board, their teams and mentors. The third one is to collaborate with a colleague who is good at implementing ideas and has a practical and pragmatic approach to it.

Diligent

Diligent refers to a person who is hard-working and highly compliant. Although leaders who score high on the diligent scale have high standards of performance for themselves and others, they find it hard to delegate tasks and often micro-manage their staff. What is more, they can be inflexible about schedules, rules and procedures.

When under pressure, the manipulative strategy and unconscious message they send out is: Do what I want because there are rules. And when rules are not respected, there are serious consequences.

The first coaching tip for such leaders is to practice delegating tasks and leaving teams to work on their own for some time, allowing space for mistakes. The second is to focus on completing projects rather than working on delivering perfection. And the third one is to regularly book one day off in the diary to experiment with creative activities away from the workplace.

Dutiful

Dutiful describes a person who is ingratiating and always eager to please. Although managers who score high on the dutiful scale are excellent team players and supportive of corporate decisions, they are those who struggle to say “no”, especially to their boss. They are always preoccupied with keeping the boss happy at the expense of their teams. Dutiful leaders over-rely on the guidance of advisers before making decisions.

When pressure is high, the manipulative strategy and unconscious message they send out is: “Do what I want because I am in charge. Be loyal to those who are in charge”.

 Leaders who score high on the diligent scale would benefit from showing independent thinking, even when it is not aligned with their boss’ thinking. The practice I recommend here is to begin to say “No” to requests that are unreasonable, no matter whether or not they come from a team member or the boss.

Learning to manage “derailers’ can make a significant difference in the professional life of managers and leaders alike.  As an executive coach, I can say that successful leaders take good care of the way they relate to and are perceived by others, inside and outside the organization.  At bCoached we work closely with our clients to uncover their derailers and support them in their leadership journey.  For more information on how we can support you, contact us directly: silvia@bcoached.org

Let’s admit it: posing questions is not how we usually help others find solutions. Often as leaders we adopt the role of ‘being the expert’ and provide direction on the ‘how to’ – how to solve a problem; how to overcome unexpected challenges etc. This is undoubtedly a valuable skill and indisputably one which leaders are highly regarded for. However, is this giving of advice and providing direct answers the most effective course of action? Are we truly supporting innovative thinking and decision-making processes for our counterparts?

Scientists and innovative thinkers lead with questions to generate breakthrough ideas. Sales people lead with questions to qualify potential clients. Asking questions is indeed a powerful way of discovering facts and data in order for us to take informed decisions. However, often we are afraid of appearing foolish amongst our peers or perhaps simply uneasy on the type of questions to ask. And when exactly should we pose our questions?

In this article, I introduce a simple and yet powerful framework that highlights four types of questions, their intent and the likely outcome. This framework is based on the work of Karl Tomm, Professor of Psychiatry at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and director of its Family Therapy Program. In the field of coaching this is called “systemic questioning”.

Four Types of Questions and their Function

LINEAL QUESTIONS: these represent the ABC of asking questions and their function is to find out the facts. Simply put, they are the “Who, Where, What, When” of asking questions. They are factual based and aimed at discovering more about any situation or dilemma presented. Asking lineal questions is a viable and straightforward practice for gathering information that will assist us in reaching a fairly neutral picture of the reality being discussed.

Lineal questions can be asked at the beginning of a conversation to build rapport, when we need to become aware of specific details or when we want to pull apart a complex scenario during a brainstorming session. Here are some basic examples of lineal questions:

Who contacted the client first?

What did you propose to the client?

Where did the meeting take place?

When is your deadline?

 CIRCULAR QUESTIONS

Circular questions are those we draw upon when we want to find out what relationships exist between people or entities. Their function is to discover the connections and dynamics between two or more parties, including their differences, possible agreements/ disagreements etc. When it comes to circular questions, the same question may be concurrently asked to multiple people to find out what discrepancies or commonalities lay between different people. We typically ask circular questions during debates that involve people who work interdependently, such as team members, and variables that are mutually dependent. Here are some examples of circular questions:

Who intervenes more in the board meeting, the chairman or the CEO?

How is it that we have the same results when we chose two different strategies? Who else has the same results?

Has it always been done this way? Who else agrees that it has always been done this way?

How would that differ from how it is now? Would it more or less than it is now?

How does the compliance team differs from the legal team? If the two teams were in the same office, would they work more effectively?

STRATEGIC QUESTIONS

With strategic questions we enter the realm of directive questions that are aimed at influencing our counterparts. The intent is to lead and prompt the other part to make adjustments. Strategic questions often embed a suggestion and because of their instructive and somehow corrective nature they can be provocative. Their function is to encourage counterparts to consider new possibilities as well as to take ownership of the new options they have discovered. We typically ask strategic questions when our counterpart is at a crossroads, or when doubts of which course of actions to take. For instance, when the counterpart is entirely oblivious of the impact of their decisions and actions. Here are some examples of strategic questions:

What can you do now to acknowledge that your objectives have to be aligned with the organization’s objectives? (A directive and instructive question. The intent here is to prompt the counterpart to take action).

Have you always disregarded the recommendations of the marketing team?

Is the habit of keeping your team in the dark during the decisional process and old habit or a new one?

Why don’t you brief your team on what is being discussed at the management meeting? (A directive question containing a suggestion)

How come you are not willing to share with your team some of the point discussed at the management meeting? (A provocative question)

Strategic questions have to be used with consideration, especially when they are corrective and posed in a provocative way. Although they can be very effective when we notice our counterpart is in need of encouragement or even persuasion, we have to ensure we have created a safe enough and non-judgmental conversational space for them to accept our suggestions or quasi-lecture instructions. Otherwise, we risk to run into resistance.

REFLEXIVE QUESTIONS

Reflexive questions have a facilitative intent, which means they help explore deeper levels of fact, data beliefs, ideas and situations. These questions elicit answers in which the counterpart will be expected to re-evaluate their point of view. There are several reflexive questions which Karl Tomm presents in his research (Interventive Interviewing: Part III. Reflexive Questioning as a Means to Enable Self-Healing) and they would deserve a separate article. For the sake of clarity, here is the original classification and a brief explanation of their functions:

Future-oriented question

The intent of these questions is to project the counterpart into a future scenario and stimulate their imagination. The aim is to prompt our counterpart to visualize without setting those boundaries that are normally imposed by our limiting beliefs or pre-conceptions.

How will things be different between you and your boss once you will start inviting her to your clients’ meetings?

Observer-perspective question

These are questions which invite the counterpart to put themselves in the shoes of someone else to think and behave as if they were the other person.

How do you think the head of Sales team would react once she is informed of the adjustment in the commission structure?

Unexpected context-change questions

The intent of such questions is to propose a chance of scenario that your counterpart is not able to envision or hasn’t thought about.

What would it be like if you could offer your sales team a two-week negotiation training once a year?

Embedded-suggestion questions

These questions are real suggestions that help the counterpart consider another option, precisely the one we are suggesting.

Instead of thinking that your boss is uncooperative, what if you thought he is overstretched? How might you approach him instead?

Normative-comparison questions

They have the purpose of prompting the counterpart to make an accurate comparison, especially in those contexts in which they have not carefully compared two or more samples.

Do you think consumers in the Middle East are more inclined to buy online compared to consumers in Europe?

Distinction-clarifying questions

Do you think his decision to leave the firm is about x, y or may be z?

Questions introducing hypothesis

The intention of these questions is to project the counterpart into a hypothetical scenario that may or may not happen. It helps thinking ahead about the possible solutions to adopt in case the assumed situation becomes a reality. Asking such questions is an excellent exercise when, for instance, a team is asked to put in place a contingency plan.

What do you think your team can do to prepare in case of a third lock-down?

Process-interruption questions

When you see that you directions lead you to the wrong place, what do you do next?

Today I have introduced to you four key question types to practically help sharpen the reflexive ability of your teams, to help with idea generation and to help anticipate needs and analyze complex scenarios. I wonder if your perception about questioning has changed? And if it has, in which way. I have endeavored to transition thought from a position in which the asking of questions is viewed as a sign of weakness and vulnerability to one in which is an indication of skillful leadership, to guide and to get the best from your teams.

Do you want to know more about systemic questioning and desire to experience it yourself to enhance your leadership awareness and decision making process? I invite you to contact us at bCoached by using the link below.

Or you can contact me directly silvia@bcoached.org

References

Silver, E. (1991). Should I give advice? A systemic view. Journal of Family Therapy, 13(3), 295-309.

Tomm, K. (1988). Interventive interviewing: Part III. Intending to ask lineal, circular, strategic, or reflexive questions? Family process, 27(1), 1-15.

Saying “No” in the workplace is an essential part of ensuring you communicate your intentions comfortably, clearly and without wasting words or unnecessary time.

After all, you would agree that a true and authentic “ no” comes from a person who understand where the boundaries are.

A person that is wise when judging her actual ability, capacity and desire to deliver.

A person that doesn’t end up promising what she can’t or won’t be able to deliver.

 This said, not everyone finds the courage to say “no” when interacting with colleagues.

In this article we discuss how to say “no” from a position of a mature, responsible and assertive person.

The case

During the first two coaching sessions with my client Aneeta, a middle-aged marketing manager working for a consulting firm, I have the perception Aneeta is one of those people driven by the desire to please others.

A desire that often drives her to take on board tasks and roles against her will.

When I invite Aneeta to identify some of the scenarios and motivations that move her to be agreeable beyond the acceptable limits, her answer is:

“I mainly take on board additional requests from my boss and her colleagues.   

 I accept them with the intent to please people and ensure they are happy.  

 The truth is that I don’t like disappointing people, especially if they work with me.

 Deep inside, I am afraid to confront those people who I find particularly dominant.

 Those with whom I would probably end up having a disagreement if I said “no”.

 To avoid unpleasant confrontations, I find myself accepting undesirable tasks or give an in-between answer, which is never to the point and as direct as “no” would be.

 As I prompt Aneeta to recognise the unwanted consequences of her behavior, she admits:

“I resent my boss.

I feel used.

 I’m the victim of my own choices.

 I end up compromising the quality of my work.

  I run the risk of missing important deadlines”.

If you were Aneeta, what would you do differently?

Here are three steps that help you stand up for yourself and set healthy boundaries in the workplace.

1)    Recognize the Need and Desire of the other

 When you recognize the need and desire of your counterpart you understand and acknowledge her perspective, position and motivation.

This said, you don’t have the obligation to align yourself with her position let alone accept it.

Scenario A

I am aware that producing 3000 copies of your presentation helps you finalize your work faster…

Scenario B

I understand that for you it is important to promote John to the position of Finance Director.  I understand that by doing so, you recognize his effort throughout the past four years…  

2)    Express your Preference and Decline the request of your counterpart

 Express your position and perspective and state clearly where your boundaries are.

Scenario A

…right now I am working on our latest marketing campaign.  This task takes  priority in my agenda.

Scenario B

…I personally believe that John is not ready to face the imminent expansion of the company and needs one more year to prepare himself for the role of Finance Director. For this reason, I neither approve nor support his promotion.

STEP 3: Resist the temptation to justify your position

Stay truth to your position.

Keep your final answer.

By staying firm on your answer your counterpart will understand that she can’t persuade you any further.

Ignore any second thoughts you may come up with.

Return to the place and the activity you have defined as your “priority”.

Silvia Bottini is the founder of bCoached, an international coaching practice helping executives and their team strengthen their Performance, Presence and Professional Reputation.

Fo Leadership coaching, HOGAN Assessments & Team coaching contact: silvia@bcoached.org

Do you keep getting into the same situations many times over? You could be bound to your “life script”.

EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT LIFE SCRIPTS

Very early in our lives, we learn to build a narrative that informs how we make decisions, how we think about ourselves, and what we think of other people and the world around us.  In psychology, precisely in the branch of Transactional Analysis, this narrative is referred to as “life script”.

A life script can be described as a template we use to organize what we think and do and shape our self-image.  Although life scripts helps us make sense of the world around us, especially at a young age, they can prevent us from making choices which are aligned with who we are deeply and can limit us in a number of ways, personally and professionally.  And yet we seldom realize where they comes from or even know that they exists at all.

Unless we uproot our unconscious stories, we can spend our entire lives rehearsing and performing our life scripts.  In this article, we explore in further depth what life scripts are, how we can recognize our own, and how we can work with them to change our thoughts and actions.

WHAT ARE LIFE SCRIPTS?

Between the ages of 0 and 7, our perception of the world around us and our understanding of the future is based only on our experiences to date.  Our emotional (or limbic) brain starts to form a non-verbal and often limited understanding of how life works based on our actions and the consequences family and society show us.

We may learn that if we cry, an adult gives us attention or that if we throw a tantrum, they become frustrated and withdrawn. We recognize that in order to be safe (and therefore loved) there are certain things we need to do; we also learn attributes about ourselves.

For example, if a boy frequently knocks things over, he will eventually be told that he is clumsy.  If people regularly tell him this while laughing at his blunders, he may draw the connection that “being clumsy makes people laugh” or, on a more negative note, “people don’t care when I’m hurt.”

Life scripts have a particular use, especially when we are children: they help us make sense of the world that surrounds us. They provide us with a template we can use over and over again to give meaning to the recurring situations and events we experience.

THE ROLE OF CAREGIVES

All script messages received by a child have been shaped by their caregivers. As such, they will contain the parent’s fears, unmet needs and unresolved conflicts. For instance, if a mother has anxiety about taking care of her child as a result of being told growing up that she was careless, she may frequently tell the child it needs to be more careful.  As a result, the child will inherit that same script message: “I am careless. In order to be loved, I need to get everything right.”

While script messages can be both positive and negative, it’s important to outline that the intentions and thought processes of our caregivers often have no correlation with the script messages we form.  If a mother is very busy, for example, and cannot give full attention to her child when it is crying, she may seem distracted.  Though she may be saying “I love you,” the child may receive her distance as a message that they are unwanted.

HOW ARE SCRITP MESSAGES FORMED?

We create a script when we experience an event that forces us to make a specific decision or act in a certain way. We then produce the same decision or behavior many time over in future situations, even when they are no longer appropriate.

Script messages are conveyed verbally and nonverbally; nonverbal messages can actually be more powerful when they show a mismatch between words and actions. For instance, if a mother tells a child she is listening to them but does this while cleaning the house, the child can interpret “I am unwanted” or “I am too much.”  Picking up on these non-verbal cues is critical to a child’s survival in an evolutionary sense, but can prove damaging when they are unable to understand the situation entirely.

Across verbal and nonverbal cues, there are a few main ways in which script messages are imparted and strengthened.

COMMANDS

Direct instructions can have a big impact on our life scripts, especially when accompanied by non-verbal cues.  For example, if the mother in our previous example was to say “leave me alone” and “don’t pester me,” as well as showing physical signs of unavailability, the child would be even more likely to receive messages like “I am unwanted.”

MODELING

Children learn by copying other people’s behavior; ideas about how one should act are learned by watching the results of what others do.  For example, if a child’s mother often gets what she wants by giving the silent treatment to the father, the child will learn to ignore others in order to get a reaction from them.

ATTRIBUTIONS

If children are regularly told something about themselves, they will most often decide that it is true and act in a way that affirms it.  For example, if a daughter is often described as “the caring one,” she may find herself paying less attention to her desires and needs and put the ones of her younger siblings first.

These attributions can be even more powerful when stated to a third party.  For instance, if a boy’s mother tells a friend that their son is “a troublemaker,” they may be more likely to live up to this idea.

If she tells other family members that their first child is “the golden child”, it is likely that they feel they can’t make mistakes or mess up.   Children are often given family roles to play, and this can heavily impact upon their life scripts.

TRAUMA

While often script messages take a few repetitions to become embedded, a single traumatic event can construct a significant part of a life script.  The death of a parent or loss of a sibling, for instance, can lead the child to feel profound desolation and a sense that life is not worth living

Emotional abuse, for example, can lead a child to feel shame, distrust for others and a sense that life is innately cruel.

HOW CAN LIFE SCRIPTS IMPACT US AS ADULT?

Whether we had mostly positive or negative script messages imparted on us (and for most of us it was mixed), life scripts will continue to impact us as adults unless we stop to observe them.

When it comes to our career and professional life, we may find ourselves following ambitions that are not ours, for example, or trying to hone qualities that we have been told we have that may not actually come naturally to us.

For example, if a child is told that they are a lot like their father Marcus, a successful lawyer, they may find themselves becoming articulate and well-spoken, and even following the same career path of their father until they realize that it doesn’t actually interest them.

They can also, of course, impact us in a number of negative ways.  We may find ourselves chasing relationships that do not fulfill us based on messages we absorbed as a child, for instance.  If we feel that we are “too needy” for example, we will unconsciously seek people who affirm this belief and who may be unable to meet our needs.

Overall, if we continue to revert to our life script, which we will inevitably do when we cannot recognize it, our ideas of what we can expect from other people and the world are limited to the experiences we had as a child.

HOW CAN WE RECOGNIZE AND CHALLENGE OUR LIFE SCRIPTS?

When we understand the concept of life scripts, we can explore which ones are active within us. This way, we can decide to re-write a particular script and, most importantly, change its outcome. While it is impossible to ever get rid of our life scripts, we can learn to unearth and challenge them.

One way to revisit our life scripts, especially when we have a good reason to think that they are at play in our professional or personal life, is to seek the support of a professional coach.

Coaching gives us the opportunity to create space between our adult selves and the stories that repeat from our childhood.  With the support of the coach, we can recognize when stressed or triggered that these narratives come up, and decide to create and consider instead other beliefs about the world, ourselves and others. This gives us the autonomy to act other than our script messaging.

If you feel you could be bound to your life script, professionally or personally, I invite you to reach out and discover more in a fully confidential chemistry call. Use the link below to get in touch

https://calendly.com/silvia-executivecoach/30minutes

Or write directly to silvia@bcoached.org

References:

Steiner, C. (1990). Scripts people live: Transactional analysis of life scripts. Grove Press.

Lapworth, P., & Sills, C. (2011). An introduction to transactional analysis: Helping people change. Sage Publications. Do you keep getting into the same situations many times over? You could be bound to your “life script”.

One of the sentences that has stayed with me since I began working in the field of leadership development is “who you are is how you lead”.  Not by chance, the author is Dr. Robert Hogan, an American psychologist internationally known for his innovative research on personality assessments and how personality impacts leadership and organizational effectiveness. Before we enter the domain of personality assessments, I would like to take a step back to consider the meaning of personality and what it implies for organizational performance.

A widely accepted explanation of what personality refers to is “the long-standing traits and patterns that drive individuals to consistently think, feel, and behave in specific ways. Our personalities are thought to be long term, stable, and not easily changed”. When this is the understanding of what personality is, it would be common sense to take personality into account when we hire and develop leaders within organizations. As a matter of fact, personality is as important as job competence in predicting and measuring job performance.

In spite of the good news that job competence and personality can be tested, we find that the only aspect being thoroughly examined by organizations today is the first, at the expense of the latter. Furthermore, personality is often limited to desirable qualities listed on a job offer and assessed during job interviews or reviewed during annual 360 evaluations without specific scientific criteria or instruments.

If we all agree that we wouldn’t hire a civil engineer for a cardiologist position within a hospital, would we recruit a Finance Director with the behavioral tendency to become moody and excitable within an auditing firm?

The Hogan Assessment Systems are testing measures created by Dr. Joyce and Dr. Robert Hogan to assess normal personality for business that are widely used by Fortune Five Hundred organizations. They use well researched inventories, informative and customized reports and expert consulting services.

Let’s examine how these systems acknowledge and measure normal personality within the business community and what advantages they bring to leadership and overall organizational performance.

The Hogan viewpoint on Personality

 According to Drs. Joyce and Dr. Robert Hogan personality has two dimensions: personality from the inside and personality from the outside.

Personality from the inside is the way we describe ourselves to the external world; basically this is the person we think we are and is what Dr. Hogan defines as “Identity”.  Precisely, ‘Identity” is the story we tell others about ourselves and is based on our self-representation.  It is important to note that when we speak about our identity, the personality traits we attach to ourselves are often overestimated and based on personal hopes, dreams and ambitions. Here are some examples of how we may tell the story about ourselves: “I am a multi-tasker”; I can definitely show empathy”. “I am well organized”.  “I have a good sense of humor”.

Personality from the outside is the way others describe us; basically this is the person external observers think we are and is what Dr. Hogan calls “Reputation”.  Precisely, “Reputation” is the story several other people, not just one person, tell about us. When we refer to reputation, our personality traits are evaluated by several external people after they have observed our behavior when interacting with others numerous times, not just once. Here are some examples of how they may tell the story about us: “She’s a people person”. “He’s an empath”. “She’s the expert when it comes to time management”. “He’s a Yes Man”.

 What the Hogan Assessment Systems measure is Reputation. As quoted by Dr. Robert Hogan “Freud would say the you that you think you are is hardly worth knowing, because you made it all up”. It is your own perception of the person you think you are, without having asked several others what person they think you are instead.

 In an interview a candidate may re-iterate to be highly ambitious but if you were to ask several of his/her former colleagues they may tell how little interested the candidate normally is in competing with peers.  As a matter of fact, there may be discrepancies between the way we describe ourselves and the way others describe us.

According to Dr. Robert Hogan, knowing personality, alias reputation, is an important element for both the individual and the organization alike. On one side, it allows the individual to become aware of how his or her behavior is perceived by the observers, so that he or she can make behavioral adjustments in order to enhance the quality of his or her interactions.

What the Hogan Assessment Systems help highlight, are those aspects of our interpersonal behavior that need improvement and that we often are unconscious of.  For this reason, they provide highly efficient and reliable ways to highlight these issues, so leaders can learn to manage them.

On the other side, they help organizations in their talent selections process, so that they can predict what kind of employee they will be employing during a recruitment process.

The Hogan Leadership Forecast Series

 As a leadership development consultant, there are three Hogan assessments I highly recommend using for leadership development and talent management. They are called the “Leadership Forecast Series”.

ogan Personality Inventory – HPI –  This test measures “the bright side of personality”, which comprises the aspects of our personality that others see in us when we are at our best. It is also referred to as our ‘day-to-day personality’ or ‘productive behavior’. These are behavioral tendencies that can be seen in a person every day and that tell us how we react under pressure, relate to and collaborate with others, approach our work and solve problems.

 Essentially, the HPI measures normal personality and interpersonal characteristics that are essential for career success and progression. It reveals important aspects of an individual interactional style that the individual may not have self-awareness of and that can cause personal or occupational challenges.

This gives an objective and comprehensive portrait of an individual strengths and weaknesses. It is important to note that the Interpretation of HPI results is job specific. Scale scores that are more successful or effective in one job may be detrimental in another job.

Hogan Development Survey – HDS – This test measures “the dark side of personality”, which comprises the personality traits that others see in us during time of increased stressed or when we have a bad day. Precisely, these are behavioral tendencies that are only seen in situations when a person is not managing his or her public image, the so called reputation, such as high stress, change and transformation, multitasking, task saturation or accomplishment. Essentially, it defines as “the dark side of personality” or our “counterproductive behavior”.  This dark side is characterized by interpersonal behaviors that are strengths but, when overused, can cause problems at work or in life. Strengths that are overused are referred to as “de-railers” and are real personality risk factors that can hinder and, at their worst, destroy careers. Two examples of overused strengths are self-confidence that turns into arrogance and influence that turns into manipulation.

Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory – MVPI – This test measures “the inside side of personality”, which comprises an individual profound values, motives and interests which drive career choices and eventually bring job satisfaction. They are at the core of what we believe in and determine our choices before, during and after our working life.

The MVPI test is extremely useful to determine the fit between individual and organizational culture. The MVPI assessment helps a hiring manager establish compatibility between a candidate and organizational culture as well as helping a manager motivate his or her team members according to each individuals’ MVPI results.

As a leadership development consultant I highly recommend using the HPI, HDS and MVPI for talent selection and leadership development. I strongly believe that finding the strengths, limiting the risks of personality derailment and discovering the values of your most precious employees is a must for improving organizational performance.

Whether you are a leader or work in talent management, reach out for an initial conversation on how my team and I can support you in using the Hogan Assessment System. Contact me directly: silvia@bcoached.org

In our everyday life where much of our mental energy is consumed by interacting with people who have a variety of perspectives and cultural backgrounds, understanding what drives human behavior is a competence leaders can no longer ignore. The best place to start is the concept of “Behavioral Driver,” created by the American psychologist Taibi Kahler and used worldwide in Transactional Analysis.

Behavioral drivers are essentially mental forces which tell us how things should be done for us to be aligned with our culture and accepted as members of the system we live in.

Their function is to make us act in such a way that we feel ok and validated by others. We internalize these drivers during our childhood, when our parents  give us indications about which behaviors they would either praise or reproach.

There are five drivers:

·      Be Perfect!

·      Try hard!

·      Hurry up!

·      Please others!

·      Be strong!

Let’s explore each and understand how they influence the way we act.

Be perfect: this driver is the internal force telling us to be faultless, flawless and impeccable.   Those who act under this driver are the so called “perfectionists”, who set high standards of performance, pay attention to details and maintain an immaculate exterior. In the attempt to achieve perfection, “perfectionists” risk becoming highly critical of themselves and find it difficult to accept their mistakes. The internal voice they are unconsciously motivated by is “you should be better”. 

 Try hard: what matters to those motivated by this driver is the amount of effort put into what they do, regardless of results.  They focus on their own attempts rather than on putting the right amount of energy into completing a task or a project.   The internal voice they unconsciously hear is “you are not working hard enough”. Hence, they often turn small tasks into huge ones for the fear of being criticized for not trying.

 Hurry up: for those motivated by this driver, everything is urgent and time is limited.  They speak, move and work fast, often disregarding valuable pieces of information in order to complete their current tasks and move to the next. It is not unusual for such people to be double if not treble booked and make demands on others to hurry up as well. The internal message they are motivated by is “you are not good enough when you don’t hurry”, which often leaves them with a hectic agenda to manage and no time to think.

Please others: with this driver we step into the territory of those who feel compelled to meet the demands of others, including their unexpressed desires.   Those who act under the pressure of this driver tend to prioritize the needs of others at the expense of their own.  The internal voice that unconsciously motivates them is “you are good enough only when you take care of others”. Since they feel pressured to create good relationships and get on well with others in order to feel accepted, they find it difficult to deliver criticism and to turn down those requests they know they can’t meet.

Be strong: this driver is the internal force telling us to detach ourselves from our emotions and desires, so that we can face the hardship and pressure of everyday life. Those who act under the weight of this driver hardly show physical and mental fatigue and often put up with tough working conditions.  The unconscious internal voice that motivates them is “I am good enough only when I don’t show weaknesses”.  Although they often display strong nerves and are good negotiators in a crisis, they risk bottling things up and overwork until they burn out.

Knowing what the five drivers are and the type of behaviors they generate, allows us to become conscious of how we tend to act when we are under pressure. Eventually this knowledge and awareness gives us permission to adopt strategies that can mitigate these strong driver forces, when needed. Also, it becomes easier for us to recognize these forces in others, e.g. our colleagues and team members, and eventually adjust our interactions to form more effective relationships.

Principally, we have two dominant drivers and one weak.  For this reason, I always encourage my clients to complete the “Driver’s Questionnaire” to understand what their dominant forces are.

To identify your two dominant drivers, I invite you to complete the “Drivers’ Questionnaire”, which I can share with you personally.  Contact me directly: silvia@bocached.org

References

Kahler, T. (1975). Drivers: the key to the process of scripts. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 5(3), 280-284.

Interpersonal conflicts in the workplace are unavoidable.  However, when they become a recurring scenario, it is crucial to go to their cause and find a way forward.

Conflict in the workplace can often come down to an interchange call The Drama Triangle.

The drama triangle is a model of social interaction which describes a power game between three personas: Persecutor, Rescuer, Victim. Consciously or unconsciously, we can find ourselves playing one of the three roles depending on the context.

The triangle was first introduced by psychiatrist Stephen Karpman in 1968 and is also known as the Karpman Triangle.

In the workplace, the dram triangle often occurs when roles, reporting relationships and division of tasks are neither clear nor owned by stakeholders. In such circumstances, a sense of confusion steps in.

This goes hand in hand with the emotions that people feel and their unspoken needs of validation, affiliation, security and professional identity. Needs that people may not fully be aware of.

Moreover, we know that separating emotions from the real issue can be a challenge, especially when things are taken personally.

It is at this stage that we risk getting entangled in the Drama Triangle by adopting one of the personas described.

In this article I explore how the triangle shows up in conflicts and and how you can challenge it.

THE THREE PERSONAS

The Persecutor

The persecutor is the persona that is perceived as critical and self righteous; the one that keeps the other person down (the victim). The persecutor acts like a “critical parent”, a very strict father/mother who is rigid and controlling.

Such a persona often blames the the victim without giving any solution or guidance and can, at times, turn into a bully by oppressing the victim.

The persecutor thinks “It is all your fault.”

The Rescuer

The rescuer is the persona that always feels compelled to rescue the other (the victim) even when he or she deep inside doesn’t want to. The one that is well intentioned but with his love for help keeps the other person constantly dependent.

The rescuer can’t stop thinking “Let me help you” and by doing so neglects his/her own issues.

The Victim

Here we are talking about the persona that has the tendency to depend on someone else’s support and is often stuck in a codependent relationship. The one that feels helpless, hopeless, powerless and is inevitably seeking and attracting the attention of the Rescuer as well as the Persecutor.

The victim thinks “Poor me”.

EXAMPLE OF DRAMA TRIANGLE

John (Head of Sales): Have you submitted my expense report?

Cathrine (John’s secretary): not yet. I was up until late last night trying to complete the Sales forecast.

John: sigh…I thought we had agreed that my expense report is to be submitted well in advance and before the deadline.

Cathrine: I know…I’m sorry. It’s the third night in row I spend on the Sales forecast.

John: well, when you get your priorities wrong, there’s nothing I can do to help you.

Maria (Sales co-ordinator): how many expense receipts do you have to submit on behalf of John?

Catherine: about 300

Maria: let me take it over from you. It shouldn’t take me long to complete and submit the report.

John: thanks Maria. If it wasn’t for you, I would find myself in caos.

THE SOLUTION

What to do if you ever get tangled in the Drama Triangle?

Transitioning to the Empowerment Triangle is the answer.

In the empowerment Triangle the three roles shift to:

Persecutor to Facilitator: The one that respectfully approaches and treats her as a competent and professional adult without the needs of belittling. The ones that moves from a position of arrogance to the positon of humility.

Rescuer to Coach: the one that waits for the other person to ask for support. The one that asks questions and helps the other party to independently come to a solution. The one that empowers instead of rescuing all and give the opportunity to learn and grow.

Victim to Creator: the one that articulates and clearly explains the situation/issue. The one that owns her feeling of uncertainty and takes responsibility for doing things differently and find a way forward with the help of the coach and the facilitator.

Want to know more about conflicts in the workplace and how to manage them? You can contact me directly for an initial consultation by using the link below:

https://calendly.com/silvia-executivecoach/30minutes

References

Karpman, S. (1968). Drama Triangle Script Drama Analysis. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 7(26), 39-43.