Difficult conversations - Managing Professional relationships
This session focused on leadership dilemmas - conflicts that highlight the uncomfortable territory leaders often encounter between concern for maintaining, changing or improving organisational goals and concern for maintenance of good collegial relationships. Strategies of how to deal with these situations, in particular communication skills, were discussed and the Triple I (information, illustration, inquiry) model presented as a framework from which to operate in a mode of productive reasoning. This was presented as the opposite to defensive reasoning, perhaps a more 'natural' reaction or easy place to stand for many.
Fear was highlighted as the main obstacle to engaging in difficult conversations and avoidance of interpersonal communication a major contributing factor. This area of difficult conversations is one that I have given a great deal of thought to and hold fairly strong views about. I totally subscribe to fostering as open as possible communication in both the classroom and meeting room and do so in practice by asking for and giving candid feedback and feedforward. I am confident that most of the time I am approachable and open to discussing issues and any interpersonal differences in a collegially supportive manner. I admire leaders who 'say it as it is' and tend not to respect leaders who do not deal with 'people problems' directly. My 'natural game' (and cultural disposition) tends towards direct communication but in various situations I have had to adapt that as it can come across as too assertive. My ultimate work environment would be somewhere that promotes a culture that fosters open (but not too navel gazing) discussions about how we each operate in a group and allows space and time for upfront exchanges to talk through issues and to resolve these with no residual bitterness (or potential comeback). It would be a space where colleagues can feel both supported and hungry for input on their performance, attributes and operation as part of a team. This requires a lot of trust and may just a be a tad idealistic!
Triangulating the learning from Carol Cardno's session and ideas in her article Making a Difference by Managing Dilemmas had me consider a difficult conversation about communication with a colleague that I had been avoiding. My usual strategies of upfront 'lets sit down for a conversation', inviting an opportunity to discuss communication between me and the colleague evaded me because i was fearful of potential comback. I was also feeling responsible for others' unhappiness around communication issues with this colleague. While I have not yet had the most direct difficult conversation, seeking advice from a colleague from another area, taking time to step back (not a usual trait of mine) and approaching this from a less direct angle has achieved some improvement for the time being. I am not 100% satisfied with this though and will deal with it in the future.
My learning here: it can wait (even although that sometimes feels a bit weak), subtle interaction can sometimes work, smaller direct responses at the time can address and diffuse tension
Getting back to my ultimate work environment... Interestingly I saw a real positive in a conversation yesterday with a colleague and leader in my area. Pending cut backs will create timetabling groupings of staff where we are aware some interpersonal tensions exist. I steered the conversation re strategies to deal with this to a conversation about the importance of recognising and talking about how we operate in a group/team situation and how as leaders we can enable staff to feel comfortable to discuss this. I modelled a description of how I would do that and perhaps (hopefully) took a small step towards creating a 'safe' space for such discussions across a broader platform. It's an area that will be important in a much reduced staff where building trust to enable frank, productive conversations will be vital. The real positive was to hear an endorsement of such an open approach coming from a leader who has previously (in my opinion) avoided any such discussions.
Going back to the Making a Difference by Managing Dilemmas article and the session:
The article emphasises appraisals as time for difficult conversations however I disagree with this. The time for difficult conversations is all the time and, usually at or close to the time. If things are delayed until appraisals, situations can escalate, become distorted and misinterpreted.
Some of the language in Carol's examples appeared to present a structure with a touch of 'blame' attached, particularly around the use of the word 'you'. I believe "I" statements to be key in any difficult conversation (personal or professional) and although that can be read as diminishing a leadership position, or position of authority, I find it enhances authenticity in conversation and opens up space for resolution. I also believe, placed with tact and an acute and informed reading of the situation, humour and empathy can be very useful tools.
No comments:
Post a Comment