Influence plan, LEAD 1102

CAL outcome #4: Set personal, team and organization goals and align processes and strategies to achieve results.

The aim of my influence plan is to develop a new model whereby hiring decisions are made in a shared manner inclusive of middle managers. The current state is that decisions are largely made at the senior level, though they are carried out by and affect managers at the mid-level. This plan connects to the organization’s aspirational workplace values (trust and respect) and to the  organization’s strategic plan goal to “create an exceptional workplace environment”.

I hope to persuade my audience to engage in a discussion that will result in a new model of decision making.

My idea has a number of benefits that will resonate with different individuals in the organization: it increases transparency regarding budget decisions, increases buy-in for and understanding of newly created positions, raises awareness about operational issues, allows for exploration of different approaches to getting work done, develops internal opportunities, allows for shared accountability, and decreases “silo-ization”. The decision-makers my plan will affect are the senior management team. I think some of the team will be receptive and others would prefer to keep the status quo and will not be enthusiastic. I believe the benefits of my idea for them are the above benefits plus the practical input they will receive from managers. Aside from those who will not be receptive, most will not need much information about why the change is desired. The stakeholders are the middle managers who will likely be enthusiastic about this idea as they will appreciate the opportunity to have a voice in the process. They won’t need much information. The influencers include the….They will be enthusiastic as this process supports a collegial governance
approach.

In terms of the levers of influence, I think I can draw on reciprocity, authority, and liking.

The logical benefits of my idea are that giving managers a bigger role in decisions about which positions get approved across the organization would help them to understand, support and
communicate these decisions, manage operational impacts, and offer clarification to senior management in hiring discussions rather than relying on their director’s knowledge of the position. This will help to develop a learning organization focusing on models for developing internal opportunities. The inevitable concerns of the senior team will be around sharing the decision making and giving up decision making autonomy. These can potentially be addressed in a couple of ways: by piloting an approach for a defined period of time and then re-evaluating, and/or by phasing in an approach where the middle managers at first are simply consulted or are part of the discussion but aren’t involved in actually making the final decision.

Kraybill Conflict Style, CRES 1100

CAL outcome #8: Develop communication skills that establish clarity of intent and create shared meaning and understanding.

My Kraybill Conflict Style inventory reveals that my conflict style undergoes a shift from a preference for a directing style when issues first arise, to a cooperating style when things escalate or stress rises. The other style that is prominent for me in calm is harmonizing, and in stress is compromising. Avoiding is the style I use least regardless of calm or storm. I hadn’t realized my preference for directing was quite so pronounced, though after considering it and discussing with others in the class, it makes sense (I am the oldest of four children after all!) It was interesting to think about the shift from directing to compromising when I’m under stress, and about why this happens. After some thought, this makes sense to me as I’m a very pragmatic person and compromising often seems like the quickest/most efficient way to get something done. However, sometimes I may be too quick to offer a compromise, and can think of times when the result has been that no one is really happy, and in-depth discussion and the opportunity for consultation have been lost.

In addition to learning about my own preferences, I’ve found it very useful to learn about the various responses to conflict and to consider that different styles can be more or less effective in different contexts. I’m working on incorporating other styles into my repertoire and on accepting that conflict is just a part of life, but this will be a work in progress!

 

Decision making style, LEAD 1103

CAL outcome #5: Foster creative thinking and critical self-reflection to enhance problem-solving and decision-making skills.

I have always prided myself on my decisiveness, so it was eye-opening to realize that this style is not always appropriate. After some thought, this provided some useful context for a couple of recent decisions that in retrospect, I made much too quickly and would have done differently if given the chance. I have learned through observing others to adopt a more integrative decision making style, especially at work, but in general I clearly have a strong preference for decisiveness. I also prefer a satisficer/unifocus, often gathering a little information and then identifying one clear option (it feels overwhelming or frustrating to me to have too many options and I love the sense of purpose that comes with identifying a path).

The strengths of my style are that it allows me to give a quick response and that people generally know where they stand. However, I have learned that at work especially it is important to employ different decision making styles, especially to be more integrative because the context and politics really matter – when there are many factors it’s important to see the big picture.

 

Situational Leadership model, LEAD 1101

CAL outcome #6: Create and manage collaborative relationships to engage, influence and motivate individuals, teams and external partners within and across organizational boundaries.

I’ve applied the situational leadership model to examine how I might more effectively work with one of my team members, and in particular how I can work with him to improve his performance on a project for which he is responsible. On this project (and fairly consistently, in his performance overall) I would rate his competence as high and his commitment as medium. That is, he has the skills and knowledge to do the job very well, but doesn’t show much initiative and seems to wait for me to prompt him about next steps rather than anticipating. He does what is needed but seems to take the easiest route and rarely does more than the minimum that is required. His performance has been staying about the same for this project and over time. Because this model suggests that the right leadership style depends on the person being led, and that the leadership style should be driven by the competence and commitment of the follower, his development level could be characterized as high competence and variable commitment. This fits well both situationally and more generally: this person is experienced and capable but doesn’t seem to have the motivation to carry out the work well and quickly.

Based on this analysis the appropriate leadership style is a supporting one. However, the leadership style I have been using skews more towards delegating; this style works well when the  “follower” is able and willing, which is not really the case with this person. I will need to shift my leadership style to be more effective with this colleague and move the project forward more effectively. I don’t need to worry about showing him what to do, but should be more concerned with his seeming lack of motivation. In terms of how I can change my behavior, I plan to provide more frequent positive reinforcement as well as ask him to take part in higher level decision making about the project, schedule frequent check-ins, and generally to adopt a more facilitative role.

Photo by Beatriz Pérez Moya on Unsplash