Apprentice week 8 analysis, RWA: Effective Collaboration

Summary: We know collaboration often brings greater benefits than competing or working alone. So how come we don't do it more often? The answer is simple: fear. This post reviews the combined episodes 8/9 of The Apprentice Australia and offers a Real-World Application (RWA) in how to overcome fearful states and promote effective collaboration.


Review of episodes 8 & 9
Taking both episodes together, we saw the remaining candidates exhibit many of their habitual behaviour patterns - with effects both good and ill.

Sabrina was fired in the first half of the episode for her poor conflict management ability and for the cardinal sin of fence-sitting. Faced with Mary-Anne and Heather's respective versions of self-assertion and the sparks that resulted, Sabrina seemed to just step back and keep herself out of the fray. Sabrina called them a pair of "bossy-boots" and stated that she found Heather "forceful" (with strong negative connotation) yet while the clear conflict and tension between her teammates had a negative effect on performance, she did nothing. Her response in the Boardroom on the conflict was: "I'm in the middle." To which Mark Bouris replied, "That's not a good place to be" and Sabrina exclaimed, "Oh!" in a small voice, unaware that her withdrawal and conflict avoidance would be her downfall.

This was a missed opportunity for her to engage with the other two authentically, perhaps to admit that she frankly didn't know what to do but that something needed to be done to address the conflict. It's hard to say what the result would have been, but often an honest admission and willingness to name the elephant in the room is enough to get people thinking differently. That Sabrina felt out of her depth was clear when in the Boardroom she added: "I think it takes character to step up and admit that you are not qualified to do something." She's right, and here I think we finally got a glimpse of the authentic Sabrina...but the timing was tragically too late and she paid the price.

Mary-Anne was this week's second departure, fired for a lack of collaboration and "mateship" with Morello on the Shopping Channel challenge. Having fair bowled Morello over to be Project Leader, her style as leader demonstrated poor judgement in product choice for him to sell and in failing to do for him as he had done for her: support a team member in a moment of difficulty.

Mary-Anne's strong focus on competence has in past weeks prompted her to put her hand up and take reponsibility straightaway when things have gone wrong (particularly on the Mudgee Pub Night challenge). This is to her credit, an example of her Pacesetting leadership style at work, with an expectation of competence and very high standards for performance. Where it falls down for her was shown this week, as Morello fell afoul of those same high standards by making a simple mistake, and was punished with laughter, isolation and embarrassment. For her intolerance, she got fired.

Heather was very assertive about how to do the band makeover in the first challenge in the all-girls team, then not assertive enough about how to run the teleprompting when paired with Gavin on second challenge, which invites consideration of just how well she works with female colleagues (from my recollection, most of her head-butting in past episodes has been in all- or majority-female teams). As I'd said in the week 8 preview, her take-charge, my-way-or-the-highway style produced conflict, which she showed she still has to learn how to manage. In the first challenge, having appointing herself the lead for two of the tasks, Heather once again overextended herself: she initiated a last-minute remix of the band's demo tape (the quality of which came in for harsh criticism by the music industry execs) and running dangerously behind schedule with the band's styling appointment.

Meanwhile in the Boardroom it took Heather a long time to back herself on the subject of her conflict with Mary-Anne. She practically needed to receive permission from Mark Bouris before stating her opinion on the matter. Based on the music execs' reaction to her presentation, I think she gets easily triggered by hearing advice and feedback (however constructive) and responds emotionally by trying to explain herself. In the final episode I think she'll place second; what costs her the victory will be inflexibly expecting things to be done her way, lack of awareness of her effect on others, and the combination of timidity at making a case for her value-add/reactivity towards advice that is actually meant to help her to develop and grow.

I looked to Gavin for some real changes this week and to my delight we were treated to a very different side of him in both of this week's challenges. After my plea last week for him let people in and be more genuine, I think he has shown us some authenticity. As with all new behaviours, it doubtless felt pretty strange for him and from the outside it looked a bit awkward, but full credit to him for stepping outside his comfort zone. The question for him in the final will be whether the pressure and the presence of previously-fired candidates will rekindle the old interpersonal dynamics and cause him to revert to game-playing. Even if he continues with his new-found authentic behaviour, it may be too little, too late to win the trust of the Boss and win the competition. A respectable third place and some invaluable and insightful life lessons will be his reward.

Throughout this competition it's been easy to think of Morello as the kind of guy you could easily work with: friendly, ethical, creative, practical and a cool head under pressure. Sure he's really high-energy and (as Gavin quipped this week) always needs to be the centre of attention, but for a guy his age those are unsurprising and not insurmountable traits. More to the point, we haven't seen from him either the shameless ego-tripping or the egoless "shrinking violet" behaviour that's been the downfall of other candidates.

To quote the saying again, people are most often hired on experience, fired on personality. I think Morello will be Australia's first Apprentice in what could be a case of someone hired for their personality in order to develop the needed experience. If so, well done to him for his perseverance and to his Boss for making a choice that's most likely to reap great developmental and performance results for them both.


Why it's so Hard to Collaborate: Three Kinds of Personal Fear

"We know the good...but do not do it."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche (attributed)

Throughout The Apprentice Australia series we've seen so-called "teams" tearing themselves apart during the challenges and particularly in the Boardroom. I've previously characterized this as a little more than a corporate dogfight pit.

In a recent post, Charles H. Green talked about Why it's so hard to collaborate, concluding that personal fear undermines collaboration. When you think about it, this makes sense and in this way The Apprentice rings true: with a format designed to foster infighting and trigger candidates into fearful, limbic responses, it reminds us in the audience of behaviour we've all experienced before in organizational setting. With this twinge of recognition (and the safe distance of impersonally watching it happen to someone else) the program hooks its viewers.

I want to suggest there are three main kinds of fear at work here:

1. Knowledge is power - triggered by strong feelings and emotions, intrusive/demanding people or situations, being surprised, broken confidences, dishonesty, out-of-control situations, and feeling inadequate or powerless, one fear response is, "I'll keep all the cards to myself, then I'll be the expert and everyone will have to rely on me." An example of this behaviour in the series was Lynton - nonemotional, positioning himself as the expert and being unwilling to collaborate with others. There were moments when Carmen displayed this behaviour ("I'm in it for me," power's all that matters, no team focus) and Mary-Anne too, for example when she was hard on herself for lacking the knowledge she thought she needed and displayed intolerance and impatience toward Sabrina and Morello when she thought they were incompetent.
   
   
2. Distrustful/What if...? - triggered by feeling helpless, out of control, in danger or potential harm, subject to pressure, and/or experiencing a lack of commitment, this second fear response is to constantly ask oneself "What if this happens? What if that happens?" while trying to keep oneself safe from entanglements or commitments - which looks from the outside like hanging back, being guarded and disconnected from others. We saw this behaviour primarily from Blake, totally hanging back and seeming noncommittal about most tasks, getting fired in the end because he was unable or unwilling to come forward. As discussed last week, Gavin and Sabrina have also at times hidden their genuine selves behind masks and game-playing.
   
   
3. Difficult/painful situations - triggered by frustrations, restraints, limitations, painful situations or feelings, boredom or routine, feeling dismissed, not taken seriously or unjustly criticized, this fear response seeks to avoid the situation entirely by shifting focus or substituting some other topic. Heather has demonstrated this by consistently avoiding feedback, by being unaware to come to grips with the negative effect her assertive (forceful) behaviour has on others and being unable to deal constructively with conflict. Similarly, Morello's laughing/joking personable style has the benefit of helping him avoid hardship, steering clear of tough situations.
   

Real-World Application (RWA): Effective collaboration

Charles Green's piece on collaboration ends with the following observation:

There are two simple approaches to lowering fear. One is to mitigate risk. The other is to stop being so fearful. The first one is getting most of the press; we need more of the second. [emphasis added]

To address each of the three most common fear reactions listed above, here are a few pointers:

1. Offer well-researched and detailed content, specific and fact-based; strive to reduce the emotional charge of content and depersonalize/be objective; conduct meetings and make announcements in appropriate, agreed-upon venues; make sure you include an open Q&A session for people to request clarification and details.
   
   
2. Build rapport before moving into content, then use clear statements of goals and intent with concrete specifics; give reassurance about the exact magnitude of problem to help people avoid catastrophizing/assuming the worst; create opportunities for people to play devil's advocate and challenge authority (don't dismiss this as "resistance" because there's often useful information to be gained from differing perspectives); communicate the underlying motives and reasons for changes; provide assurances of support and ongoing communication; where possible offer people options from which to choose; give suggestions early on to help people foresee positive outcomes.
   
   
3. Offer executive summaries and "quick overviews"; allow for expression of people's creative input (even if not strictly-speaking on track with the subject matter at hand); affirm people's competence and use a strengths-based approach to any training/developmental requirements; offer a variety of communication modes/channels (fast-paced, visual, interactive); validate people's experiences and perspectives; don't "pull rank" and try to enforce a change through command-and-control.
   

Building Bridges of Collaboration

People in organizations must continually deal with change. As a leader/manager, your challenge is two-fold: to face your own feelings and reactions to change and then to effectively lead your team through their own reactions (fear, anger, etc.)...and all this while doing your "day job" and delivering the tangible results that you're paid to make happen.

Managing fear and promoting collaboration requires you to know what to say and how to say it. When leaders add this to their already long list of tasks, it can seem a bit overwhelming.

That's where tmc can help.

As you build the bridge that will take you and your team from where you are to where you need to be, tmc can act as an invaluable support. You'll gain peace of mind knowing that structures and processes are in place to address the people issues associated with your change project. With this assurance, you'll be free to concentrate on delivering the work required of you, benefitting from the high performance and increased productivity that comes from a positive team environment.

To find out more contact me directly. We can have a conversation to explore your particular situation and context, helping you achieve clarity on where you are, where you need to be, and how to build the bridges that will get you there.


Note: For those of you outside Australia who wish to view the episodes of The Apprentice Australia that I'm discussing in this series of posts, you can find them on YouTube here. Meanwhile if you're in Australia you can see not only the episodes to date but also post-episode video diaries on the Nine website here.


Related previous posts:
Analysis of episode 1, RWA: Foundation & Force
Preview of episode 2, RWA: Conflict Management
Apprentice week 2 analysis, RWA: Giving/Receiving Feedback using Head & Heart
Apprentice week 3 analysis, RWAs: Team Leadership and Setting a Team Culture
Apprentice week 4 analysis, RWA: Coaching for high performance
Apprentice week 5 analysis, RWA: "The Relationship is the Customer"
Apprentice week 6 analysis, RWA: The FIT model
Apprentice week 7 analysis, RWA: Authentic Emotional Intelligence
Apprentice episode 8 preview: double trouble


Photo credit: Bridge

Apprentice episode 8 preview: double trouble

Preview of week 8: double-episode/double-firing

This week's two hour double-episode on Monday 16 November (21h30-23h30) will see two contestants get fired. At this stage I'll dare a few observations/predictions about how things might unfold.

I've already spoken about Gavin and Sabrina in a previous post - they need to come out from behind their masks before it costs them whatever connection they still have with others, notably Mark Bouris.

Of the two I think Sabrina is most at risk; while Gavin is fresh from his latest tongue-lashing in the Boardroom and will seek in week 8 to make amends, Sabrina may have gained false assurance as Team Eventus' victory last week papered over the real conflict between her, Heather and Mary-Anne and did not compel her to examine her own shortcomings as project lead. Either one could end up fired in week 8 - I think most likely Sabrina.

Mary-Anne
In a post early in this series of reviews I mentioned that Carmen and Mary-Anne shared a forceful directness:

Mary-Anne [...] was shut down peremptorily by Carmen during the first team meeting. [...] she will need to rein in her high-energy competitive nature to win people over rather than confronting them. Her intolerance for what she perceives as incompetence may also be a significant trigger resulting in punitive behaviour, even bullying. The early clash with Carmen (who shares a similar disposition) is a sign of things to come. Triggers: injustice, skirting the issues, others not taking responsibility for their behaviour, being blindsided, lack of truthfulness, feeling weak/vulnerable/uncertain/dependent, losing regard of people she respects.

With Carmen now gone we're seeing more of Mary-Anne's stroppy behaviour: seemingly convinced that hers was the one right way to do things, she showed both doubt and impatience towards Sabrina's competence as project lead during the art task. If she fails to rein in this aggressivenes and intolerance, she'll be fired in week 8.

Heather
On several occasions in projects now Heather has been quick to assert herself but looked panicked and almost wild-eyed whenever there she felt a (real or imagined) need to explain and defend herself. The result is she's often overextending herself and, when caught out, tries to skate through. Again, I'd previously written of her:

[...] the challenge will be for her to keep her energy focused and face difficult situations without getting thrown off course. If she does get triggered, watch for her to flip into quite punitive behaviour with a clear expectation of compliance with her rules for conduct. Triggers: dislikes difficult situations or painful feelings, mundane tasks and constraints or limitations, feeling dismissed or not taken seriously, unjust criticism - also, blaming/criticism, violations of team norms, lack of follow-through, lack of commitment (by her standards), deception and lack of integrity.

While these are unhelpful patterns, they've not yet been career-threatening for her. At this point I think she's begun to learn the lesson of not biting off more than she can realistically chew, though she's still got some development to do on things like difficult conversations and being willing to occasionally say, "I don't know."

The danger zones for her in week 8 will be a) getting caught up in a conflict which she fails to manage or b) ending up in the Boardroom and not presenting a convincing case for what value she can add as Mark Bouris' Apprentice. If she avoids these or, as has happened to date, other people mess up worse than she does, I tip her to make it into the final. I have trouble predicting that she'll win because I don't think we've seen enough ability yet; perhaps she'll be the dark horse who makes a last-minute charge for the post.

Morello
In contrast to Gavin and Sabrina, I think Morello's got authentic EQ and a lack of egocentricity that enables him to make a genuine connection with people. People are willing to forgive a lot because they genuinely like the guy - which has saved him thus far. Early on I wrote:

his approach seemed less focused on tangible results and more on being personable - essentially "hire me, I'm a good bloke and I'll do right by you." [...] In weeks to come he must show substance behind the warm personality. He may fall down on more strategic tasks if he fails to channel his abundant energy and good cheer into productive output. Triggers: dislikes difficult situations or painful feelings, mundane tasks and constraints or limitations, feeling dismissed or not taken seriously, unjust criticism.

To date none of these pitfalls has caused him serious dramas and I think both tasks in week 8 will favour his personable nature and huge ability to adapt on the fly. Though his age and inexperience mean he lacks the wisdom required for senior leadership, his people management and relationship-building skills are exceptional.

Were I to recommend him for a role, it would be to lead a team of people implementing a strategic plan - ensuring he has close guidance from a senior leader to act as internal mentor to build his grasp of strategic thinking, and a coach to help him develop his particular management style. (On the difference between coaching and mentoring, see here.) Of the remaining candidates, I think he would benefit most from the opportunity to be The Apprentice and I'm tipping him to not only be in the final but possibly win.

Let's see what happens!


Note: For those of you outside Australia who wish to view the episodes of The Apprentice Australia that I'm discussing in this series of posts, you can find them on YouTube here. Meanwhile if you're in Australia you can see not only the episodes to date but also post-episode video diaries on the Nine website here.
.

Apprentice week 6 analysis, RWA: The FIT model

Summary: Today's post reviews episode 6 of The Apprentice Australia and offers a Real-World Application (RWA) in the area of emotional self-management using the FIT model.

In business it's common to discuss rational and behavioural dimensions of day-to-day activity, yet what often gets overlooked is the emotional component. The past 2 weeks have demonstrated what a crucial part emotions can play, making the difference between success and failure.

This post will assess how poor emotional self-management cost Carmen her place in the competition. In the next post I'll discuss the emotional component of Gavin's defeat and how the continuing pattern of his emotional inauthenticity is costing him the confidence and trust of others.


Review of episode 6: Microsoft commercial

In brief, Carmen's team was derailed by chronic interpersonal conflict. Though they managed to make a good quality commercial and approximated some kind of celebration at the end of production, it was clear that a lot of unprocessed conflict remained.

The toxic residue of this tension was so evident during Team Eventus' presentation to the Microsoft executives that the latter simply concluded they could not work with them. The client's reaction to Team Pinnacle, by contrast, was "whilst the ad's not perfect, we can work with them." Emotional conflict buried Team Eventus in the end.

If you've ever been exposed - directly or after the fact - to this kind of conflict you know how draining it can be. The phrases used by Gavin and Carmen that I've summarized below will sound drearily familiar:

• I want to try to smooth things over
• You were grandstanding!
• You're paranoid.
• What's your problem?
• You need to calm down!
• You need to leave your ego at the door!
• That's just throwing some words to shake me up, I've dealt with people like you before, you won't let me finish, interrupt, no respect for me, no regard for my authority...

End result:

• "She's had a hissy fit...she clearly can't control her emotions."
• "I just can't work with him."

Gavin's style when under pressure (whether in conflict with other team members or under scrutiny from Mark Bouris in the Boardroom) is to put on a mask of attentive sincerity. It's a largely non-emotional stance; it's like he transforms into a social chameleon, saying and doing the things he thinks others want him to do and coming across like a performance/achievement robot. (In the review of episode 6 I discuss in more detail how I think this is hindering his performance and what he might usefully do about it.)

Carmen, meanwhile, was unable to manage her emotional reactivity and lost her cool in dealing with both Gavin and Sam and as a result her leadership was rated a failure. Mark Bouris' summary: "There's a huge difference between being passionate...and losing it."


Real-World Application (RWA): The FIT model*

Given the chance to offer Carmen some counsel on how to handle the clash of personalities and working styles in her team, I would have suggested The FIT model as a way for her to gain useful insight on the situation and decide how she wished to proceed.

FIT stands for Feelings, Intentions and Thoughts. The FIT model is a means to develop self-awareness of your own state in order to better self-manage, and is particulary helpful in situations that may provoke strong emotional responses.

I've lamented before that we have become quite sloppy in our use of language, and nowhere is that more evident than our misplaced statements about feelings. People routinely say "I feel you disrespected me" or "I feel very strongly that my option is the way to go."

The problem is, these aren't feelings. The first is a perception and the second an opinion or judgement. By labelling them "feelings" we mix them up with our emotions and, not surprisingly, make it practically impossible for other people to comment on these statements without taking it very personally.

It's vital to distinguish between thoughts and feelings and to get clear on what outcome you're actually seeking from a conversation or situation. So that smart question becomes: how FIT are you to have that conversation or address that situation?

Here are the useful distinctions that the FIT model introduces for you to consider:

Feelings/emotions - essentially: Mad, Sad, Glad or Afraid (as distinct from Thoughts, below)

Intentions - Wishes, hopes, wants, goals, desires, needs, expectations, requests, demands

Thoughts - Inferences, conclusions, judgements, evaluations, beliefs, assumptions, opinions, perceptions

While behaviour can be observed and thoughts explained by what we say, much of what happens emotionally for us cannot be readily observed by others. If you don't have any awareness of your emotional state and likely reactive points then heaven help the person you're interacting with, for whom these things are invisible!

The FIT model is therefore a ready-reckoner to work through the tangled mix of feelings, thoughts and intentions - both for yourself and what you imagine might be happening for the other person.

Used effectively it helps to defuses tensions, as you clarify your intent and realize where opinions and judgements may carry excessive (and unacknowledged) emotional charge.

I've written previously about a highly effective language style that helps depersonalize such tense situations and get better outcomes that everyone feels good about.

When I've worked with teams where deep-seated and longstanding conflict was stinking up the room like a dead cat under the table, I've made good use of tools and models like these to get just the shift in perception that was needed to help people make real progress.

Self-awareness is key to self-management and once people used the FIT model to separate out the feelings from the thougths and intentions, they were able to better manage the strong emotional reactions and bring some really useful, adult behaviour to what had previously been like a bunch of quarrelling kids in the boardroom.

tmc can help your team manage interpersonal tension as your people clarify their intentions, their thoughts, and the language they use to talk about them. The result: a team that achieves the high performance you expect, on a sustainable basis.

To find out more today, contact me directly and let's have a conversation about your situation.

Note: For those of you outside Australia who wish to view the episodes of The Apprentice Australia that I'm discussing in this series of posts, you can find them on YouTube here. Meanwhile if you're in Australia you can see not only the episodes to date but also post-episode video diaries on the Nine website here.

Related previous posts:
Analysis of episode 1, RWA: Foundation & Force
Preview of episode 2, RWA: Conflict Management
Apprentice week 2 analysis, RWA: Giving/Receiving Feedback using Head & Heart
Apprentice week 3 analysis, RWAs: Team Leadership and Setting a Team Culture
Apprentice week 4 analysis, RWA: Coaching for high performance

Apprentice week 5 analysis, RWA: "The Relationship is the Customer"

*FIT model adapted from Fontaine/Bauman, John Wallen & Miller, Nunnally, Wackman and Saline.

Photo credits: Carmen's photo from her corporate website.
.

Apprentice episode 2 preview, RWA: Conflict management

Summary: This second post in the series on The Apprentice Australia completes the review of episode 1 and offers a preview of what to watch for among the remaining 11 candidates in episode 2 (airing in Australia 21h30 Monday on Channel 9 - for those who missed it, you can watch episode 1 online here).

My previous post in this series argued that a successful team must strike a balance between what I call Role (taking the time to set the roles, goals and expectations at the outset) and Reward (driving forward to achieve those ends with practical action).

On The Apprentice, the drive for results in a stressful, time-limited setting, along with the cut-throat competitive nature of this show, strongly biases the team interactions in favour of fast action over setting clear expectations. In other words, for Force over Foundation.

Now that what Mr. Bouris labelled "shrinking violet" behaviour has been punished with week one's elimination of Jane, that will only increase the drive to more and faster actions.

Real-World Application - Managing Team Conflict

As a "reality" TV series The Apprentice is an artificial environment. In the real world of course people face just as many pressures: to hit the numbers, increase the billing, reduce costs, meet tough timelines or any number of other factors. The end result is the same bias for rapid action in a team.

This bias for rapid action often creates an environment full of people talking past one another and varied (and vying) expectations of the what, how, who and when within the teams. The result is widespread miscommunication and, rather than all pulling together in the same direction, each team runs the risk of devolving into a tug-of-war.

In episode 1 this clash of egos was already evident in the girls' team as Carmen and Mary-Anne butted heads straightaway, there was little consultation by the project leader and, rather than bringing up and resolving differences of opinion, there was a lot of muttered grumbles and second-guessing. These conflicts only came out belatedly in the Boardroom, where there was much finger-pointing and "blamestorming" to make the team's failure someone else's fault. By this stage it's already far too late to manage this conflict effectively.

In a real world team there may not be any Boardroom where team members can to have it out. Instead the conflict seeths and festers, becoming the "dead cat under the table" that everyone can smell, but no one talks about. This underlying conflict in a team is poisonous. More to the point: it has a real and negative effect on team productivity - and the bottom line.

Conflict scenarios produce threats (real and perceived) that trigger people's survival strategies. Once again it's the Battle inside your Brain, as the emotional limbic system takes hold and knee-jerk reactivity fuels the conflict to ever-greater intensity.


How do you manage conflict in your organization?

Effective conflict management in a team means:

• knowing your own survival strategy and hot buttons - those things that trigger an emotionally reactive, knee-jerk response - so you can effectively self-manage during crisis and high-pressure situations
  
• learn (or at least have a best-guess at) what your fellow team members' survival strategies and hot button issues are as well
• during team interactions, be mindful of these hot buttons and, respectful of their fast-acting and deeply instinctual nature, communicate and interact with each other in ways that minimize any potential triggers to an emotionally reactive, knee-jerk response
• when (not if!) despite all efforts people DO get triggered, ensure there's a way to handle the conflict quickly - one that's been agreed upon in advance and can be effectively deployed even in the heat of the moment
  

People are complex, adaptive beings and so, as with all situations where people are interacting, the process of conflict management too will be complex. Handily, there are ways to give yourself the advantage.

1. Learn the nine most common survival strategies that reliably predict the majority of emotional limbic behaviour (I presented the nine of them briefly toward the end of a previous post). This is not about pigeonholing people; quite different and unique individuals will, faced with the same stimulus, react in ways that are consistent enough to be grouped together as a survival strategy style. Use them a lens to view and better understand both your own behaviour that of others too.
   
   
2. Engage in a facilitated process in which each person can talk about their own survival strategy, what triggers them to reactive emotional behaviour, and how they want to be interacted with when they have been triggered. Using tools like the Pinch/Crunch model, this creates the foundation of an agreed way to manage conflict in the team when it happens. Done well, it actually encourages people to have a laugh about their own reactive behaviours, lightens the subject of conflict and removes any taboos and fears attached to discussing sensitive topic of conflict. It gets the "dead cat" out from under the table and helps clear the air!
   

To find out more about effective conflict management and how tmc can help your team or organization benefit from this Real World Application, contact me.


The remaining 11 on The Apprentice - what to watch for:

In what follows I adopt the perspective of what counsel I might offer to Mr. Bouris assuming his job was to develop people to their full capacity and invite them to realize the best in themselves, rather than (as is the avowed intention of the Apprentice format) finding reasons to fire one of them each week.

In the weeks to come, then, here's what to watch for as contestants' mettle is tested and their personality preferences and reactive styles come to the fore - as the Battle inside their Brains continues to be waged. I've also included thoughts on each contestant's likely triggers or hot buttons - the things that may provoke emotionally reactive behaviour as outlined above.

(Caveat: These represent my best-guesses based on what's been shown of them so far. I want to reiterate: people are complex, adaptive beings and, in keeping with my stated intention to avoid pigeonholing, I remain willing to modify my hypotheses on the availability of new data.)


Amy - Thus far Amy has been cool, calm, detached and analytical. She's likely to have an excellent mind for details and numbers and be slow to anger or feel provoked. Her gift is to fulfill the Auditor/Organizer function in a team and as project lead will demonstrate a Tactical leadership style. When it comes to task accomplishment her disciplined, objective approach will offer calmness and clarity to the team. On the people side, she may struggle with managing the relationships and personalities. The key to her success will therefore be to tap into her ability to see the best in people bring it out with encouragement and positive feedback. Her strong achievement focus may cause her to overcommit and set goals that cannot be delivered; if this happens she will find it very difficult to deal with failure. She's also admitted to being nervous around successful people and will feel anxious being questioned by those she secretly fears are better/smarter/more successful than she is. Triggers: failure of any kind - particularly not achieving goals, inactivity and slow pace, anything that distracts from achievement/performance focus, losing face/reputation or being overshadowed by others, put in position to fail, being blamed for poor work of others, not getting credit for work done, feeling like a fraud.

Andrew "Morello" - The project lead for the boys in episode one was in his element generating sales, yet he lost his first pitch to the girls because his approach seemed less focused on tangible results and more on being personable - essentially "hire me, I'm a good bloke and I'll do right by you." Andrew needs to tap into his gift to be a Practical Problem Solver with a Democratic leadership style. In weeks to come he must show substance behind the warm personality. He may fall down on more strategic tasks if he fails to channel his abundant energy and good cheer into productive output. Triggers: dislikes difficult situations or painful feelings, mundane tasks and constraints or limitations, feeling dismissed or not taken seriously, unjust criticism.

Blake - Did not hear much from this quarter in week one either, but at first glance Blake seems entrepreneurial, happy to get stuck in and highly focused on results and winning. His gift could be the Driver/Completer role, energizing the team with a Commanding/Coercive leadership style. He is by times energetic and other moments reserved and withdrawn so I think that how he manages the energy levels of his emotions will be worth watching. Triggers: being left out, ignored, told what to do, unsupported, being taken advantage of, distruptions to group harmony, rudeness in others, overt hostility and confrontation - also potentially abuses of authority, pressure, feeling helpless/out of control.

Carmen - I wrote a fair bit about Carmen in my last post and I think what to watch now is how she applies the experiences of episode one and whether she tempers her behaviour in team interactions. Mr. Bouris seems to have a lot of faith in her ability to deliver results. The question now is whether she can do so as a productive member of a team.

Gavin - Suave and smooth, Gavin is the consummate charmer and diplomat. His natural focus is on people and relationships and his gift as Promoter/Strategist is to put the right people in place to get the job done with an Affiliative leadership style. The intangible nature of these vital "soft" skills mean that he risks being in charge of successful projects in which he's well liked, gets results...but at the end of the day cannot tell Mr Bouris in hard practical terms what exactly he's done to help make it a success. Like Amy, he's also at risk of overpromising and failing to deliver; such a threat to his reputation could move him to ill-considered action. Triggers: failure of any kind - particularly not achieving goals, inactivity and slow pace, anything that distracts from achievement/performance focus, losing face/reputation or being overshadowed by others, put in position to fail, being blamed for poor work of others, not getting credit for work done, feeling like a fraud.

Heather From the outset Heather has used words like ethical and integrity so we know there's a strong focus there. Her gift is to be the Explorer/Motivator with a Mentoring leadership style. Her passion, discipline and dependability will mean she can put in hard work and model the integrity and high standards she holds so dear. This will, in turn, provide a clear sense of mission and straight dealing between team members. As with Andrew, the challenge will be for her to keep her energy focused and face difficult situations without getting thrown off course. If she does get triggered, watch for her to flip into quite punitive behaviour with a clear expectation of compliance with her rules for conduct. Triggers: dislikes difficult situations or painful feelings, mundane tasks and constraints or limitations, feeling dismissed or not taken seriously, unjust criticism - also, blaming/criticism, violations of team norms, lack of follow-through, lack of commitment (by her standards), deception and lack of integrity.

Jon - Probably the quietest team member so far, look to Jon to deploy his gifts as Visionary Planner with an Authoritative/Visionary leadership style. His will be a solid presence offering the team clear sense of direction in the pursuit of the vision's end goal, a calm certainty about the outcome and will fosters stability and security even in the face of widespread and disruptive change. He'll work well with Gavin and Sam and possibly Sabrina; where it could fall over is if there's disagreement about the norms or there's excessive discord or disorder. Then Jon may revert to quite an inflexible adherence to the original plan even though circumstances have shifted, leaving the team vulnerable and unprepared to handle the new situation. Like the recently-departed Jane, Jon is also be maladroit in playing Boardroom politics and may get ambushed. Triggers: mistakes being made, blaming/criticism, violations of team norms, lack of follow-through, lack of commitment (by his standards), deception and lack of integrity.

Lynton - In the first boys' team meeting Lynton took charge straight off, coming up with the name Pinnacle and essentially appointing Andrew as team leader. This is characteristic of the Explorer/Motivator's gift, stepping in to set the course and foster confidence in the chosen direction with a Mentoring leadership style. His demeanour is otherwise highly detached, however, and he may unwittingly put people off by seeming aloof, distant and cold. This directive but distant approach may make it difficult to foster a connection with others - leaving him to fend for himself when the knives come out in the Boardroom. If he is able to get closer to others he could be a quite capable leader, but his aversion to conflict (and presumably to strongly-expressed emotions) may make that difficult for him to do. Pushed too far, he will become curt, vengeful and ruthless. Triggers: strong feelings especially fear, intrusive/demanding people or situations, being surprised, dishonesty, out of control situations, overwhelming tasks, feeling inadequate.

Mary-Anne We heard the least from Mary-Anne on the girls' team after she was shut down peremptorily by Carmen during the first team meeting. Mary-Anne's likely to shine as a Creative Change Agent and her Pacesetting leadership style will depend on getting quick results from a highly motivated and competent team. Lacking team experience from her job, to get this to happen she will need to rein in her high-energy competitive nature to win people over rather than confronting them. Her intolerance for what she perceives as incompetence may also be a significant trigger resulting in punitive behaviour, even bullying. The early clash with Carmen (who shares a similar disposition) is a sign of things to come. Triggers: injustice, skirting the issues, others not taking responsibility for their behaviour, being blindsided, lack of truthfulness, feeling weak/vulnerable/uncertain/dependent, losing regard of people she respects.

Sabrina Beautiful and smart, Sabrina has so far demonstrated a highly advanced sense of her own self-worth, bordering on narcissism. Her forceful confidence bowls others over, as when she stated that Eventus should be the team name as it's "Latin for success." In fact it's not (except in the most obscure usage of it) and while no one could have known this, it is an example of how easily she can persuade others to do the wrong thing. Sabrina more than anyone else will react strongly to any perceived threat to her reputation and self-image. If her smiling and charming exterior starts to crack, expect to see wildly erratic emotional reactions from her and a willingness to stick the knives in anyone and everyone else to ensure her own survival. At this point it's so hard to get past the facade she's presented that I can't make any prediction of her likely team role gift and leadership style. I agree with Mr. Bouris' assessment: there's a risk she'll seem to be "All show, no go". Whatever happens, to be a serious contender she'll need to get over herself and focus her undeniable talent and intelligence on being a productive member of the team - rather than continually self-referencing every situation with "me, me, me". Triggers: failure of any kind - particularly not achieving goals, inactivity and slow pace, anything that distracts from achievement/performance focus, losing face/reputation or being overshadowed by others, put in position to fail, being blamed for poor work of others, not getting credit for work done, feeling like a fraud.

Sam - Sam is thus far a largely unknown quantity. What we have heard, apart from the teenage bravado and buzzwords, has focused on the team and people working together. Sam's gift is therefore likely to be a Promoter/Strategist, one who brings people together with an Affiliative leadership style. Sam also seems very rules-focused and will tend either, as in week one, to readily comply with the views of more forceful team members or to act strongly to enforce the rules and create order. Rule-enforcing behaviour like this will cause his perspective to narrow and create blindspots that may prevent him from tapping into his natural gifts, so how he manages challenges to his conception of the rules and how things should be will be something to watch. Triggers: mistakes being made, blaming/criticism, violations of team norms, lack of follow-through, lack of commitment (by his standards), deception and lack of integrity.

Enjoy the show, look for more analysis and insight soon!

Note: For those of you outside Australia who wish to view the episodes of The Apprentice Australia that I'm discussing in this series of posts, you can find them on YouTube here. Meanwhile if you're in Australia you can see not only the episodes to date but also post-episode video diaries on the Nine website here.
.

Change, innovation & global opportunities

In the run-up to the workshop I’m running next Tuesday that asks, “Is your organization change-ready?” a bit of recent research suggests a growing realization among global senior leaders that their organizations are not as change-ready as they would like.

The “Global CEO study” by IBM is based on interviews with 1,130 CEOs, general managers and senior public sector and business leaders from around the world.

Here are some highlights:

• Eight out of ten CEOs see significant change ahead, and yet the "change gap" between expected change and the ability to manage change has almost tripled since the last Global CEO Study in 2006.

• Nearly all CEOs are adapting their business models and two-thirds are implementing extensive innovations. More than 40 percent are changing their enterprise models to be more collaborative. (And I would suggest this is not just with customers as the IBM study suggests, but also with employees as the Mercer Workplace 2012 report has persuasively argued.)

• CEOs are moving aggressively toward global business designs, deeply changing capabilities and partnering more extensively; organizations of all sizes are reconfiguring to take advantage of global integration opportunities.

An increasing number of senior leaders are coming to the realization that a different approach is required if they are to successfully manage change, develop sustainable innovation and succeed in a global context.

How does your organization compare?

According to the IBM report, the predicted Enterprise of the Future is change-ready, radically innovative, accesses active (not reactive) creativity and is comfortable with the realities of global business across cultures, able to work virtually and beyond the constraints of traditional “9-to-5” thinking.

So how does your current organization measure up to this predicted future?

Are there structures in place to manage the inevitable conflict created by change? Is there a healthy corporate culture in your own organization, let alone the expertise to manage the cross-cultural challenges of global business?

If not, what steps are being taken to foster the development of trust relationships? Is it a project devised by an external consulting firm and done TO your people, or process created collaboratively and interactively WITH your people – who are after all the ones who will have to carry on long after the consultants pack up and head out?

Does your organization have the management capacity to deal with complexity, the leadership ability to guide through change and – crucially – the transformational skills to overcome natural resistance to change by channelling that energy into engagement to produce positive growth and development of people, teams and organizations?

Useful questions to consider, whether you are a senior leader making your way in the current global business climate or a staff member making decisions about the sort of company where you want to spend the majority of your productive waking hours.

If in your opinion the answers to those questions fall short of the mark, the good news is that there is a way forward: an integrated, holistic approach to improved business performance that offers people a common language to structure their experience of change, helps to effectively engage stakeholders cognitively, emotionally and behaviourally, and enables organizations to communicate in a structured, effective, managed and phased way to enhance strategic alignment and produce high-performance cultures.

Email me for details.

TM

What motivates you to grow…?

A colleague of mine once offered a line that’s stuck with me ever since: “In life, most of us turn our fundamental character flaws into careers.”

You may know someone who grew up in a dysfunctional home and later became a social worker, mediator or psychologist (or even a cop) in an effort to bring order and harmony to the world around him or her.

The kid who’s allergic to chlorine becomes a superhuman swimming champion while the painfully shy kid becomes class clown and then an internationally famous comedian and actor.

Or as my talented and insightful friend Andrew once exclaimed: “Sometimes I don’t know why I work in 'change management' – personally, I hate change!!”

Similarly, when I train teams and coach individuals on conflict resolution I often ask: “So…is there anyone here who likes conflict?” I can tell you, not many hands go shooting in the air.

That’s the point at which I feel comfortable admitting that I am frankly terrified of conflict – and that’s precisely why I’ve made a career out of learning about human interaction and offering that expertise in my work training and consulting.

Homeostasis

The human need to achieve homeostasis is hardwired into our brains, and so we strive to compensate for and correct perceived imbalances in ourselves and our surroundings.

In everyday language we have the metaphor of the swinging pendulum to describe how one extreme often produces a movement in the opposite direction. Newtonian physics tells us that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In philosophical terms, think yin-yang and the eternal dance of counterbalancing opposites.

This tendency can also have pernicious effects, as the drive to compensate tumbles into pathos. Pacifists become militant, right-to-lifers commit murder, communists become fascists. Men of a certain age buy red sportscars or Hummers and women inflate some body parts while deflating or de-wrinkling others.

So how do you know if you’re on the track to a successful career or just kidding yourself?

Motivation and growth

Clearly the compensatory drive behind the quest for homeostasis is a powerful motivator. And as I’ve described above, it also needs a reality check to keep from becoming absurd and overshooting the mark into extreme compensation.

In a previous post I talked about the concepts of change vs. growth. Since then many people have told me how useful they’ve found that distinction, since there’s no quicker way to get someone’s back up than by telling them, “you really need to change,” while by contrast most people are interested in – indeed quite enthusiastic about – personal growth and development.

What I would therefore suggest as a useful corrective is to ask the question, “Am I heading away from something I don’t want, or toward something that I do want?”

"What do you want...?"

Put another way: answering the fundamental question “What do you want?” is a great way to develop insight and ensure you are on the path to positive growth rather than engaging in a dodgy process of resisting change.

This question encourages a frank assessment based on its four component parts:

What – be specific about exactly what you’re after

Do – think of what you do want as opposed to what you don’t; when you state your outcome in the positive it triggers the brain’s creativity and drive

You – ensure that your goal is something that you actually want, not what you think other people think that you should have/do/be

Want – as opposed to what you’d like, if someday maybe it were possible…this needs to be an act and expression of your will if you are going to successfully harness your willpower and motivation to get what you want

I invite you to take a moment today to think about whence you derive your motivation and whether its based on a desire to survive...or to be fully alive. Raw survival is driven by the fight-flight-freeze response of the emotional or limbic brain, while being true to yourself and creating the life that you actually want means you need to tap into everything that is best in yourself.

It's a challenge not everyone is willing to undertake; if you're going to be truly happy in this life, it's one you need seriously to consider.

TM

tm adds NeuroPower to consultancy model

Do you ever wonder what makes you tick?

Do you ever muse over what is going on inside your brain that gives you a sense of individuality both intellectually and emotionally?

When you see someone clearly performing at his or her personal best – a charismatic leader, a loving parent or an outstanding athlete – do you wonder: What does that person do differently from everybody else? What drives such people and how do they access resources that seem to give them an almost unlimited confidence and excellence in whatever they are doing?

Well, the good news is that we are beginning to understand the inner workings of the most mysterious organ in the body – the human brain. The application of fMRI brain imaging has provided neurobiologists with new insights into how the mind develops and operates. We are discovering NeuroPower.

NeuroPower is a paradigm-changing system which integrates recent scientific findings on the brain with the latest understanding of developmental psychology.

Intelligence centres in the brain combine to create very clear behavioural patterns associated with various manifestations of adult personality. These six intelligence centres form the basis of everything we communicate and everything we do.

NeuroPower is a profoundly simple, yet profoundly practical means of understanding of yourself and others, making it possible to improve the quality of the interactions you have in all kinds of life situations.

NeuroPower and organizations

toddmontgomery consultancy is pleased to add the NeuroPower framework (developed by author and strategist Peter Burow) to its consultancy toolkit. The NeuroPower learning development approach has practical application to creating strategically aligned high-performance teams and cultures. Broadly speaking, NeuroPower has application to any situation where people are working together and using their brains to achieve some outcome.

Its more specific applications include:

• sales training
• conflict resolution
• problem solving and creativity/innovation
• creating high performance teams
• executive coaching
• team performance coaching
• culture change
• strategic planning
• change management
• organizational transformation

TM